AACSB International Continuous Colleg… · AACSB International Continuous Improvement Review Carol Martin Gatton College of Business and Economics University of Kentucky Academic

AACSB International Continuous

Improvement Review Carol Martin Gatton College of Business and

Economics University of Kentucky

Academic Years 2011/2012 – 2015/2016

Appendices

David W. Blackwell, Ph.D. Dean, Gatton College of Business and

Economics

Nicole Thorne Jenkins, Ph.D. Executive Associate Dean, Gatton College

of Business and Economics

February 2017

List of Appendices

APPENDIX A: GATTON COLLEGE ADVISORY GROUPS

APPENDIX B: RESEARCH CHALLENGE TRUST FUND- FUNDED ACTIVITIES

APPENDIX C: EXECUTIVE EDUCATION CENTER HIGHLIGHTS

APPENDIX D: RESEARCH CENTERS

APPENDIX E: AACSB ACCEPTANCE LETTER

APPENDIX F: PARTICIPATING AND SUPPORTING FACULTY CRITERIA

APPENDIX G: GATTON COLLEGE 2015-2020 STRATEGIC PLAN

APPENDIX H: TABLE 2-1 - FIVE-YEAR SUMMARY OF INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS

APPENDIX I: PH.D. GRADUATE PLACEMENT

APPENDIX J: MBA GRADUATE PLACEMENT

APPENDIX K: OPERATING RULES AND PROCEDURES

APPENDIX L: PROCEDURES FOR FACULTY APPOINTMENT, REAPPOINTMENT, PROMOTION

AND THE GRANTING OF TENURE

APPENDIX M: DEPARTMENT HIRING

APPENDIX N: DEPARTMENT OPERATING RULES AND PROCEDURES

APPENDIX O: FACULTY AND STAFF AWARDS

APPENDIX P: GATTON COLLEGE RESEARCH EXCELLENCE INITIATIVE APPENDIX Q: TABLE 15-1 - SUMMARY OF FACULTY SUFFICIENCY AND QUALIFICATIONS

APPENDIX R: TABLE 15-2 - DEPLOYMENT OF PARTICIPATING AND SUPPORTING FACULTY

APPENDIX S: ACADEMIC PROGRAM CURRICULUM MAPS

APPENDIX T: SAMPLE ASSESSMENT REPORT TEMPLATE AND ASSESSMENT RUBRIC

APPENDIX U: SAMPLE DISSERTATION ASSESSMENT FORM

APPENDIX V: GATTON COLLEGE TEACHING EXCELLENCE INITIATIVE

Dean's Advisory Council The Dean's Advisory Council (DAC) includes leading business executives from throughout the Commonwealth and successful College alumni at major corporations. DAC members provide advice and counsel to the Dean of the College.

Craig J. Andreen Senior Managing Director, NXT Capital Nashville, TN

Gerald R. Benjamin Partner, Atlanta Equity Investors, LLC Atlanta, GA

Michael W. Bowling SVP Corporate Strategy, AT&T Dallas, TX

Gregory L. Burns President, Burns Consulting Group

David P. Calzi Principal, Ernst & Young LLP Louisville, KY

Paul W. Chellgren Partner, SnowPhipps Group LLC Villa Hills, KY

Ruth Cecelia Day Advisor, Landstar System, Inc. Vice President for Administrative Services (retired), Landstar System, Inc. Jacksonville Beach, FL

Luther Deaton, Jr. Chairman, President and CEO, Central Bank & Trust Co. Lexington, KY

Carol Martin “Bill” Gatton Owner, Gatton Chevrolet-Cadillac Bristol, TN

James E. Geisler Senior Operating Executive, Cerberus Lexington, KY

Appendix A: Gatton College Advisory Groups

J. Douglas Gerstle Vice President and Assistant Treasurer, The Procter and Gamble Company Cincinnati, OH

John L. Gohmann Regional President, PNC Bank Lexington, KY

Catherine K. Jacobs Lexington, KY William J. “Bill” Herkamp Consultant, Mount Vernon Partners, LLC Cincinnati, OH Richard J. Huxley Owner, Richard J. Huxley, LLC Fort Myers, FL Howard L. Lewis Founder, Chairman Emeritus, Family Heritage Life Insurance Company of America Broadview Heights, OH

Elizabeth Griffin McCoy President and CEO, Planters Bank Hopkinsville, KY W. Rodney McMullen Chairman and CEO, The Kroger Co. Cincinnati, OH

Samuel J. Mitchell, Jr. CEO, Valvoline Lexington, KY

Nate Morris CEO, Rubicon Global Lexington, KY Kenneth N. Robertson Senior VP (retired), ExxonMobil Company, USA Houston, TX

Ronald L. Robinson CEO & Owner, LCP Transportation LLC Indianapolis, IN

Donald C. Rogers Chairman, Rogers Petroleum, Inc. Morristown, TN

Paul Rooke Chairman and CEO, Lexmark International, Inc. Lexington, KY Geoffrey H. Rosenberger Owner, DAC CHAIR, Lily Pond Ventures, LLC Pittsford, NY James A. Seale President, Seale & Associates Mc Lean, VA Mr. Gary A. Smith, Sr. President and CEO, Kentucky Trailer Louisville, KY

Sean S. Smith Chairman, Stratose Jupiter, FL Mr. Charles M. Sonsteby CAO & CFO, Michaels Stores, Inc. Dallas, TX

James W. Stuckert Chairman and CEO (former), Hilliard Lyons, Inc. Prospect, KY

Nancy E. Thomas Managing Partner - Greater China Group, Global Business Services, IBM Panama City Beach, FL Dr. M. S. Vijayaraghavan (Viji), MD President, Resources International, Inc. President, Alpha Resources International Ltd. LLC Chairman, Vass Enterprises Ltd. LLC Lexington, KY Douglas J. Von Allmen Chairman, Von Allmen Capital Partners Fort Lauderdale, FL

John A. Williams, Sr. Chairman , Computer Services, Inc. Paducah, KY

University Representatives David W. Blackwell Dean, Gatton College of Business & Economics University of Kentucky Lexington, KY

D. Michael Richey Vice President for Development and Chief Development Officer University of Kentucky Lexington, KY

Von Allmen School Advisory Board 2016 Fall 2016

Tom Aaron Michael E. Baker Grant Thornton LLP

Jeffrey T. Barber PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP (retired)

Ashby T. Corum KPMG

Nick L. Cross Goldman, Sachs & Company

Kevin M. Doyle Congleton-Hacker

Gene Ewing Deeper Water Consulting

Frank Farris, Jr Mountjoy Chilton Medley LLP

J. David Flanery Consultant, J. David Flanery

Penny Gold Kentucky Society of CPA's

Gregory H. Greenwood EY

Paula Hanson Dean, Dorton, Allen & Ford PSC

Steve Jennings Crowe Horwath

John S. McGaw, Jr. EY

Steve McKinley

Michael Mountjoy Mountjoy Chilton Medley LLP

Gregory C. Mullins Blue & Company LLC

David O'Bryan Blue & Company LLC

Ann Puckett BKD LLP

Robert Ramsay Von Allmen School of Accountancy (retired)

James A. Rose III

Edgar C. Ross Office of the Controller - Kentucky

J. Michael Schlotman Kroger

Brad Smith Mountjoy Chilton Medley LLP

David E. Tate BKD LLP

Dominic Walker PwC

Allan Zachariah Pathstone Family Office

College Representative David W. Blackwell Dean, Gatton College of Business University of Kentucky

Deloitte Cincinnati

MBA Advisory Council

Robert A. Brewer Raymond James, Branch Manager Lexington KY 40507 Jessica Green MG Coaching & Consulting, CFO Lexington KY 40511 Jerry Hale Keeneland, Director HR Lexington KY 40510 Linda Hollembaek Lexmark, VP & GM Global Services Operations Lexington KY 40511 Beth Lakes Central Bank VP Enterprise Risk Management Lexington KY 40588 Brad Patrick Shearer’s Snacks EVP & Chief Human Resources Officer Tony Puckett Ashland, President Lexington KY 40509 Jody Shoup Fifth Third Bank, VP, International Origination & Client Coverage Lexington KY 40515 Randy Siever Novlntu Software, Co-founder Florence KY 41042 John Vidal Brown-Forman Corp., Director Product Innovation Project Officer Louisville KY 40201 Ed Quinn RJ Corman, President & CEO

Appendix B: The Research Challenge Trust Fund

Endowed Chairs B&E CHELLGREN CHAIR GATTON ENDOWMENT FACULTY DEVELOPMENT B&E J.HENNING HILLIARD CHAIR VON ALLMEN ACCOUNTANCY CHAIR Enrichment GATTON FACULTY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT KNAPP ENDOWMENT CENTER FOR REAL ESTATE

Lectureship CHELLGREN LECTURER Centers FINANCIAL SERVICES RESEARCH VONALLMEN CENTER FOR ENTREPRENEURSHIP SPORTS MARKETING VON ALLMEN RESEARCH SUPPORT Scholarships GATTON GRADUATE SCHOLARSHIP

Professorships C.F. RANSDELL PROFESSOR WHIDBY PROFESSOR BLOOMFIELD PROFESSOR GATTON PROFESSOR REAL ESTATE PROFESSOR PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPER PROFESSOR

B&E CHELLGREN PROFESSOR B&E KAUFMAN PROFESSOR FORESTER PROFESSOR ARTHUR ANDERSEN PROFESSOR ERNST & YOUNG PROFESSOR KPMG PROFESSOR DELOITTE FOUNDATION PROFESSOR

Fellowships ROBERTON ENDOWMENT LUCKETT ENDOWMENT SMITH FELLOWSHIP STUCKERT ENDOWMENT FUND

VONALLMEN ACCOUNTANCY FELLOW SMITH FELLOWSHIP SHOUSE FELLOWSHIP

Appendix C: Executive Educational Center

The Don and Cathy Jacobs Executive Education Center Mission The Don and Cathy Jacobs Executive Center provides high quality Executive, Managerial, Professional and Organizational Development programs that support the outreach initiatives of the University of Kentucky and the Gatton College of Business and Economics.

Executive Education Center Overview

The University of Kentucky's Gatton College of Business and Economics Executive Education Center is dedicated to providing a forum that allows attendees to broaden their knowledge base while providing an opportunity to strengthen their managerial skills. The Executive Education Center is Kentucky's premier executive education source and provides companies and individuals tremendous learning opportunities. The Executive Education Center (EEC) draws on the outstanding University of Kentucky distinguished faculty and engages community leaders to provide attendees a cutting-edge and highly engaging learning environment.

The EEC works with organizations to design and develop professional executive education programs that address specific performance or strategic needs. The length of these programs can vary from two days to one week to one year.

The EEC also provides a series of public programs, including certificate programs that cater to the emerging needs of the community and the evolving economic times. The value to participants is the cross section of attendees and the very nature of the programs.

Executive Education Center Customized Offerings

Healthcare Professional Development o Graduate Certificate in Improving Healthcare Value

The Graduate Certificate in Improving Healthcare Value is an inter-disciplinary program led by a small team composed of senior faculty members from UK's College of Public Health, Gatton College of Business and Economics, and College of Engineering. This certificate is intended to create educational opportunities for UK graduate students in a range of disciplines, for UK HealthCare staff, and for other healthcare workers to enhance their knowledge and skills related to improving the value (quality and cost) of health care services provided by hospitals, health systems, and academic medical centers.

The Finance and Business track of the Graduate Certificate in Improving Healthcare Value encompasses five healthcare-specific courses (Healthcare Accounting, Economics, Finance, Marketing, and Systems and Organization) within the Professional MBA Healthcare Concentration. You can take these courses as a stand-alone certificate over the course of three semesters, or complete the seven additional MBA courses to achieve your Professional MBA.

o Professional MBA Healthcare Concentration The Professional MBA (For Leaders in Healthcare) program has been

tailored to accommodate the fast-paced, demanding schedule of the working healthcare professional, so you can choose the pace that works best for you. The curriculum is offered in two different tracks: a two-year plan of study, or a

three-year plan of study. The five healthcare-specific courses are Healthcare Accounting, Economics, Finance, Marketing and Health Service and System Organization.

o Executive Healthcare Leadership Program

This Executive Healthcare Leadership Program helps build a solid business knowledge foundation across multiple disciplines focused on applying these skills to the contemporary healthcare work environment.

Topics include:

Project Management Healthcare Economics/Public Policy & Leadership Decision Making Quality and Safety Negotiations Healthcare Financial Decision Making Tools Benchmarks of Effective Governance in Nonprofit Hospitals and Health

Systems Population Health Management Managing Epidemiology Organizational Change in a Healthcare Setting Managing the Value Chain Managing Ethical Challenges Conflict Management Communications Supply Chain Management Strategic Management Strategic Marketing Customer Service Team Development Lean Management/Value Mapping Healthcare Finance/Revenue Employee Engagement Employee Coaching

This program can be conducted in ten sessions or tailored to meet an organization’s needs by choosing the topics and timeline that fits the organization’s specific requirements. Each attendee receives a non-credit certificate of completion.

A more customized program focused around teams that can be tasked with your healthcare organization’s project needs can also be developed. The teams can be created to be cross-functional and optimized using personality assessments, such as their DISC profiles.

Executive MBA Program

Professional Development o Supply Chain Forum o Economic Outlook Conference o Certificate in Business Administration

The Certificate in Business Administration (CBA) is designed for individuals with limited business backgrounds who want the general knowledge and skills necessary to meet the challenges of today's business world. Each certification may be taken separately or together. The CBA will sharpen your skill set and allow you to become a world-ready person.

o Leadersmark This e-learning course will introduce the roles and responsibilities of leaders in managing people, to explain business goals and an organization's strategic goals, and how to manage time and multiple priorities.

o Kentucky Institute for Economic Development The Kentucky Institute for Economic Development offers intensive training in the basic principles of economic development. The Institute's objective is to meet the needs of persons working in the development field as professionals or volunteers in both the public and private sectors.

o School Financial Management Institute A collaboration between the Gatton College of Business & Economics and an advisory board of education professional in Kentucky, the School Financial Management Institute prepares participants to take the Certified School Financial Manager exam.

Custom Programs Many issues facing businesses today are unique and can only be properly

addressed through a customized solution. By sponsoring a Custom Program, you will have the benefit of one-on-one specialized instruction that will be tailored to your company's training needs within your facilities and without the distraction or hassle of leaving the premises.

One of the other advantages to sponsoring custom programs is the accessibility to the University's faculty, and the ability to bring together industry practitioners and consultants to provide the best solutions possible. Listed hereunder are a few of the Professional Development Courses offered by the EEC and if your company has a specific need not listed below we would be glad to assist in finding the resources necessary to further your business training goals.

Appendix D: Research and Outreach Centers Research Centers Center for Business and Economics Research (CBER) The Center for Business and Economic Research is the applied business and economic research branch of the Gatton College. CBER is housed within the Department of Economics and is headed by Dr. Chris Bollinger. CBER conducts many applied business and economic research projects throughout the year, serves as the main storehouse of business and economic data and information on Kentucky, and provides consultation services to government agencies, businesses, media outlets, and the public. CBER also performs contract research for a variety of public and private sector clients, including many Kentucky government agencies. CBER maintains the Kentucky Economic Information Service, produces the Kentucky Annual Economic Report, and provides economic and public policy information to the public, businesses, and media across the Commonwealth. CBER has undertaken projects for such clients as the Appalachian Regional Commission, Kentucky Department of Parks, Kentucky Tourism and Development Cabinet, Kentucky Governor’s Office of the State Budget Director, Kentucky Finance and Administration Cabinet, Kentucky Cabinet for Workforce Development, Blue Grass Airport, National Science Foundation, U.S. Agency for Health Policy Research, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, U.S. Small Business Administration, and Toyota Motor Manufacturing. LINKS: International Center for Research on Social Networks in Business The International Center for Social Network Research or the LINKS Center was founded in 2007 and is the newest research center in the Gatton College. The mission of the LINKS Center is to bring together scholars from different academic disciplines who share a common interest in social network research and application. The primary goals of the Center are: (1) to conduct and publish cutting-edge research in the rapidly expanding field of social network analysis; (2) to enable others to do the same via seminars, workshops and training materials; and (3) to apply social network theory to real world organizational problems. The Center is home to the prestigious annual ION Conference that brings together top scholars to present the latest research on social networks and management. Additionally, the Center hosts a series of presentations by well-known scholars on network topics. University of Kentucky Center for Poverty Research (UKCPR) The University of Kentucky Center for Poverty Research was established in October 2002 as one of three federally designated Area Poverty Research Centers with core funding from the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The UKCPR is a nonprofit and nonpartisan academic research center housed within the Gatton College of Business and Economics, Department of Economics. The Center’s research mission is a multidisciplinary approach to the causes, consequences, and correlates of poverty and inequality in the United States, with a special emphasis on the residents of the South. The primary research region is the 16 states that form the Southern Governor’s Association and the Southern Legislative Conference, including Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia. It is expected that the Center's emphasis on the challenges facing low-income populations in the South, as well as the market and non-market-based opportunities for economic and social mobility, will greatly aid local, regional, and national policymakers in the design of antipoverty programs and policies. UKCPR staff and faculty affiliates reflect the cross-disciplinary emphasis of the research agenda, with representatives from economics, political science, public health, public policy, rural sociology, social work, and sociology.

Kentucky Research Data Center The Kentucky Research Data Center (KRDC) is a restrictive-access research data center that offers access to at least twenty datasets. The Center represents a partnership between the U.S. Census Bureau and the University of Kentucky and was made possible through a grant award from National Science Foundation and significant contributions from the Gatton College and the University of Kentucky. The inaugural consortium members include The Ohio State University, Indiana University, University of Cincinnati and the University of Louisville. The KRDC offers interdisciplinary collaborations. John H. Schnatter Institute for the Study of Free Enterprise The John H. Schnatter Institute for the Study of Free Enterprise was created to engage the university community and the public in a serious and sustained examination of the impact of private enterprise and entrepreneurship on society. The institute will expand upon the work begun by the Gatton College’s BB&T Program for the Study of Capitalism, established and funded by BB&T in 2003. In part, the institute will support hiring new faculty; faculty research; graduate student fellowships; undergraduate education; research; entrepreneurship programs; and speakers, conferences, and executive education programs to enable public discussion of free enterprise concepts and issues. Outreach Center Von Allmen Center for Entrepreneurship The Von Allmen Center for Entrepreneurship is the nexus for startup companies at the University of Kentucky. The Von Allmen Center provides ongoing support and services for UK faculty, clinicians, staff and students – and community entrepreneurs – who want to start a business based on their research and ideas. Services include market research, commercialization assessment, assistance with business plans and marketing strategies, connections to vetted service providers, and access to federal, state and private funding sources. Working closely with our local, state, federal, and private partners, the Von Allmen Center helps build an entrepreneurial culture at UK and in the community. The Von Allmen Center is part of the Bluegrass Business Development Partnership with the Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government and Commerce Lexington, and co-sponsors the Lexington Venture Club, the premier-networking event for entrepreneurs, service providers and investors. Our campus Bench-to-Business forums foster cross campus communication among entrepreneurial faculty and students. Von Allmen Center workshops and seminars provide educational opportunities to learn from successful entrepreneurs and business experts. The Bluegrass Angels and Bluegrass Angel venture funds provide early-stage capital and mentoring.

The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business 777 South Harbour Island Blvd Suite 750 Tampa, Florida 33602-5730 USA

813-769-6500 Tel 813-769-6559 Fax www.aacsb.edu

January 15, 2013

David Blackwell Dean University of Kentucky Carol Martin Gatton College of Business and Economics 550 South Limestone Lexington, KY 40506-0034

Via Email: [email protected]

Dear Dean Blackwell,

It is my pleasure to inform you that the peer review team recommendation to extend maintenance of accreditation for the undergraduate, master’s and doctoral degree programs in business offered at The University of Kentucky is concurred with by the Maintenance of Accreditation Committee and ratified by the Board of Directors. Congratulations to you, the faculty, the students, the staff, and all supporters of the school.

One purpose of peer review is to stimulate further continuous improvement of quality programs. As noted in the team report, the University of Kentucky is to be commended on the following strengths and effective practices:

1. The Global Scholars Program provides a transformative experience for a select group of students and isa strength that aligns with the School’s mission.

2. The Scholars in Engineering and Management (SEAM) program provides students unique opportunitiesto work in cross discipline teams and interact with external businesses.

3. Leadership Exploration and Development (LEAD) is a unique program that helps undergraduatestudents formally prepare to business leaders.

4. As an effective practice, the Gatton College has a Faculty Council to provide a bridge and liaisonbetween the faculty and the College administration. The Council provides a conduit for communicationto the administrative structure on issues important to faculty such as faculty governance, merit-baseddecision making, resource allocations, and other relevant issues that are not necessarily addressed inother committees or processes.

Additionally, in the interest of continuous improvement, the University of Kentucky should closely monitor the following items and incorporate them in your ongoing strategic planning initiatives:

1. As the Gatton College is involved with a strategic planning process during 2012- 13, we urge theCollege to ensure that mission and vision statements are created consistent with the resources of boththe University of Kentucky and the Gatton College. (Standard 1: Mission Statement)

2. Continue to focus on maintaining or improving the student to faculty ratio relative to comparable peersand bringing the ratio closer to the ratios of other comparable academic units at the University ofKentucky. (Standard 9: Faculty Sufficiency)

Appendix E: AACSB Acceptance Letter

http://www.aacsb.edu/�

mailto:[email protected]�

3. While progress has been made it is essential that the Gatton College maintain its focus on hiring and retaining faculty who meet the Academically and Professionally Qualified definitions. (Standard 10: Faculty Qualifications)

The University of Kentucky has achieved accreditation for five additional years. The next on-site maintenance review occurs in the fifth year, 2016-2017. A timeline specific to your visit year is attached. Please note that your Maintenance Review Application will be due on July 1st

, two years prior to your review year. This application initiates the maintenance process. In this application you will be expected to provide an update on progress in addressing the concerns stated above in addition to other relevant information for initiation of the next maintenance review.

Please refer to the Maintenance of Accreditation Handbook

for more information regarding the processes for maintenance of accreditation. The handbook is evolving and will be updated frequently to provide the most current process improvements. Please monitor the website to make certain that you have the most current version.

Again, congratulations from the Accreditation Council and AACSB International - The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business. Thank you for participating in the maintenance of accreditation process and for providing valuable feedback that is essential to a meaningful and beneficial review.

Sincerely,

Joseph DiAngelo, Chair

Board of Directors

cc: Lynne Richardson, Team Chair Raghu Tadepalli

, Team Member

http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/process/documents/Maintenance_Accreditation_Handbook.pdf�

Attachment A

SCOPE OF ACCREDITATION Maintenance of Accreditation December 2012

Name of Institution: The

University of Kentucky

Name of Business Academic Unit:

Carol Martin Gatton College of Business and Economics

List of Degree Programs Reviewed: Undergraduate

• BBA in Decision Science and Information Systems • BBA in Management • BBA in Marketing • BBA in Finance • BSBE in Economics

Master’s

• MBA • MS in Economics

Doctoral

• PhD in Business Administration • PhD in Economics

Attachment B MAINTENANCE OF ACCREDITATION TIMELINE - Visit 2016-2017

12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 • Review and Refine

Strategic Management Plan

• Review and Refine Strategic Management Plan




• Complete Key Data and Accreditation Data Sections of the Business School Questionnaire for prior academic year





• July 1 - Submit Maintenance Review Application with signed cover letter requesting maintenance review and preferred visit dates.

• Accreditation Coordinating Committee rules on exclusions and the scope of the accreditation visit

• Submit Fifth Year Maintenance Report

• Submit List of Degree Programs including Catalogs

• Work with AACSB to select Peer Review Team from peer and aspirant groups

• Submit Policies for Faculty Management, including Non-Tenure Track Faculty

• Submit request for exclusion of degree programs including justification for the request

• Work with AACSB to set the visit date

• Submit Executive Summary including effective practices

• Submit List of Comparison Groups (Peer, Competitive, and Aspirant)

Previous four items to be submitted together.

• Accreditation Statistical Reports available by request to applicant and team members from AACSB

• Work with Peer Review Team to prepare the Visit Schedule

• Peer Review Team Visit

University of Kentucky Gatton College of Business and Economics Faculty Qualification Policy

9/29/2015

1

Research Doctorates(PhD)

At least a Master’s Degrees in teaching related discipline

Scholarly Academics (SA) Practice Academics (PA) Scholarly Practitioner (SP) Instructional Practitioner (IP)

Status granted to: • Faculty receiving a research

doctorate within the last 5 years

Status maintained within 5 year review period by:• At least 1 peer reviewed

intellectual contributionOr

• Competitive research grant recipient

AndAt least one other significant scholarly activity including, but not limited to:

• Scholarly books/textbooks• Research center director• Academic journal editor• Active editorial review board

member• Academic association officer• Academic fellow designation• Invited presenter• Research award recipient

*Faculty Administrators• SA if qualified at time of

appointment• SA for an additional 3 years upon

expiration of administrative duties

Status granted to: • Initial SA appointment granted to

faculty receiving a research doctorate within the last 5 years

Status maintained within 5 year review period through activities of professional engagement activities including but not limited to:• Consulting activities• Board memberships• Faculty internships• Earning or maintaining professional

certifications• Sustained professional work

supporting qualified status• Publications relevant to discipline

(including, but not limited to articles in practitioner publications, articles on pedagogy, textbooks, etc.)

• Development and presentation of executive education programs

Status granted to: • Faculty with at least a masters

degree related to teaching assignment in addition to current professional experience that is clearly linked to teaching assignment and substantial in terms of duration and level of responsibility

Status maintained within 5 year review period by:• At least 1 peer reviewed intellectual

contributionOr

• Competitive research grant recipientAnd

At least one other significant scholarly activity including, but not limited to:

• Scholarly books/textbooks• Research center director• Academic journal editor• Active editorial review board

member• Academic association officer• Academic fellow designation• Invited presenter• Research award recipient

Status granted to: • Faculty with at least a masters

degree related to teaching assignment in addition to current professional experience that is clearly linked to teaching assignment and substantial in terms of duration and level of responsibility

Status maintained within 5 year review period by:• Consulting activities• Board memberships• Faculty internships• Earning or maintaining professional

certifications• Sustained professional work

supporting qualified status• Publications relevant to discipline

(including, but not limited to articlesin practitioner publications, articles on pedagogy, textbooks, etc.)

• Development and presentation of executive education programs

Rev 2 – 9‐18‐2014

Appendix F: Participating Faculty Criteria

G a t t o n C o l l e g e o f B u s i n e s s a n d E c o n o m i c s S t r a t e g i c P l a n | 1

University of Kentucky Gatton College of Business and Economics

Strategic Plan 2015-2020

Mission

The Gatton College of Business and Economics prepares principled leaders for the global economy, produces influential research, and supports economic growth in Kentucky and beyond.

This mission is the foundation of everything we do in the Gatton College. We prepare our graduates with the skills and knowledge they need to compete globally with the utmost integrity and professionalism. Our research meets the highest standards of quality and demonstrably influences the thinking of scholars, business leaders, and policy makers. And through teaching, research, and outreach, we not only support economic growth, but have a direct, tangible influence on the lives of Kentucky’s citizens and people around the world.

Values

In achieving our mission, we are guided by the core values of the University of Kentucky and the Gatton College:

• Integrity and honesty• Excellence• Mutual respect and human dignity• Diversity and inclusivity• Academic freedom• Personal and institutionalresponsibility and accountability

• Shared governance• A sense of community• Work/life sensitivity• Civic engagement• Social responsibility• Transparency

Objective

The overall strategic objective is to elevate the quality and impact of the Gatton College’s educational, research, and outreach activities to compare favorably with those of the very best public research universities in the United States. The Commonwealth of Kentucky deserves no less from its flagship, land-grant, and leading research institution.

The accomplishments listed below will define our success:

We are recognized among the top 30 public university business colleges in the UnitedStates according to published rankings of academic programs and faculty researchproductivity and impact.

Appendix G: Gatton College 2015-2020 Strategic Plan


Our research is rigorous and influential as measured by the number of times Gatton faculty members and students regularly appear in the most widely-read and highly-cited academic journals and by its impact in academics, industry, and public policy.

As a vibrant and welcoming learning community, we retain, professionally develop, reward and promote our highest performing faculty and staff members.

Surveys of our community members reflect strong satisfaction with our learning and work environment.

Our graduates achieve rewarding professional positions in major organizations with a global reach and are leaders in their fields.

Our outreach efforts influence the development of new businesses, the attraction of new businesses to Kentucky, and the growth of Kentucky businesses.

We will reach these goals through five Strategic Objectives: Academic and professional home Create an engaged, inclusive, and diverse academic and professional home for students, staff, and faculty. Elevating all of our people and maintaining a collaborative, collegial, and supportive environment is essential to achieving all elements of our mission. Learning and career outcomes Improve the learning and career outcomes of our students through more rigorous and relevant academic programs, meaningful enrichment activities, and improved academic and career advising. Research with impact Attract and support excellent scholars who produce rigorous, influential research at the forefront of business and economics. We will demonstrate the impact of our research and contribute to the University’s profile as a leading research-intensive institution. Economic growth and engagement Promote economic growth in Kentucky and beyond. We will translate our research and educational activities into practice by cultivating and strengthening mutually beneficial external partnerships and by supporting the entrepreneurial ecosystem within the Gatton College, the University, and our region. Operational excellence Achieve operational excellence. To accomplish our ambitious mission, Gatton College’s internal operations will exemplify an efficient, transparent, flexible, and fiscally sound organization.


Strategic Objective: Create an academic and professional home.

Create an engaged, inclusive, and diverse academic and professional home for students, staff, and faculty. Elevating all of our people and maintaining a collaborative, collegial, and supportive environment is essential to achieving all elements of our mission. Strategic Initiatives

Create or enhance opportunities for students, staff, and faculty to develop new skills and realize professional aspirations.

Recruit, retain, and reward a diverse and accomplished community of students, faculty members, and staff members who are committed to learning, intellectual growth, and discovery.

Foster a supportive, accepting, and vibrant workspace for collaborations among students, staff, and faculty.

Action Steps

Promote and facilitate hiring practices for faculty and staff that improve diversity.

Increase the quality and number of students in the College through an aggressive student recruitment program.

Implement direct freshman admission to the Gatton College and a transfer program to enhance student success.

Enhance co-curricular support and enrichment programs to aid in retention and student success.

Align private scholarship awards with Gatton College goals for student success.

Engage with the business community to promote learning and professional opportunities.

Create a weekly common free period to support social and professional development. Metrics

Diversity of the Gatton College community relative to appropriate benchmarks

Turnover rates among faculty and staff members

Enrollment growth with improved academic success indicators for entering classes

First-to-second year retention

Graduation rates

Achievement gap between under-represented minority students and non-minority students

Results of an annual engagement survey of members of the Gatton College community


Strategic Objective: Improve student learning and career outcomes.

Improve the learning and career outcomes of our students through more rigorous and relevant academic programs, meaningful enrichment activities, and improved academic and career advising. Strategic Initiatives

Increase rigor and academic integrity.

Promote, support, incentivize, and reward teaching excellence among all faculty members and graduate teaching assistants.

Create or enhance enrichment activities to support intellectual, social, and emotional development of our students.

Provide innovative academic advising.

Provide innovative career advising.

Increase integration of academic and career advising.

Expand international focus.

Action Steps

Guide and champion a Gatton Code of Conduct for students, faculty, and staff that fosters professionalism, classroom behavior, ethics, civility, social responsibility, and academic integrity.

Establish a new honors program in Social Enterprise and other selective departmental honors programs that complement the new Lewis Honors College at UK.

Develop research opportunities for undergraduates and provide venues for presentation of their work.

Invest in academic and career advising, emphasizing innovative integration of both types of advising.

Initiate departmental and college teaching awards.

Expand internship opportunities, international experiences, and other enrichment activities.

Metrics

First-to-second year retention

Graduation rates

Improved results in the assessment of learning outcomes

Student employment outcomes

Rate of student participation in international opportunities


Strategic Objective: Attract and support excellent scholars.

Attract and support excellent scholars who produce rigorous, influential research at the forefront of business and economics. We will demonstrate the impact of our research and contribute to the University’s profile as a leading research-intensive institution.

Strategic Initiatives

Enhance the support, incentives, and rewards for faculty and doctoral student research on the basis of rigor, quality, impact, and external funding.

Identify, promote, and support areas of research excellence that distinguish the Gatton College.

Expand the number of research-active faculty members. Action Steps

Provide competitive salary and research support for recruiting new research-focused faculty members.

Provide competitive support packages for doctoral students take steps to improve the profile of entering students and the career outcomes of graduates.

Provide strong incentives for external research funding.

Proactively review compensation for research-active faculty members and preemptively respond to the market.

Increase summer research funding and improve procedures for allocating it.

Increase funding for conferences, workshops, and other investments in the human capital of our faculty and doctoral students.

Initiate departmental and college research awards for faculty and doctoral students.

Support visiting scholars and scholars-in-residence programs. Metrics

Number of publications in leading academic journals by faculty and doctoral students

Presentations at prestigious academic conferences by faculty and doctoral students

Number of citations, impact factors, h-indexes, or other appropriate measures of research quality and impact

External research recognition

External research funding

Time-to-degree of doctoral students

Quality of doctoral student placements


Strategic Objective: Increase external engagement and promote economic growth in Kentucky and beyond.

We will translate our research and educational activities into practice by cultivating and strengthening mutually beneficial external partnerships and by supporting the entrepreneurial ecosystem within the Gatton College, the University, and our region. Strategic Initiatives

Enhance marketing communications of the Gatton College to promote engagement with and among the faculty, students, alumni, donors, employers, and other stakeholders with whom we partner.

Engage with businesses, governments, and non-profit organizations to improve their operations by sharing the expertise of our faculty and creating experiential learning opportunities for our students.

Promote and support an entrepreneurial ecosystem in the Gatton College, UK, and the region as an engine for economic growth.

Action Steps

Create an alumni relations program.

Create a structured network of alumni and friends to develop internship and employment opportunities.

Increase faculty involvement in developing corporate partnerships for research, engagement, and employment opportunities for students.

Promote and disseminate faculty research in a format accessible to students, alumni, and external partners.

Increase internal and external promotion of Gatton College achievements.

Develop a network of investors and mentors to facilitate commercialization of UK technology and to assist economic development in Kentucky.

Encourage and support student participation in business plan or case competitions.

Develop a speaker series of successful entrepreneurs. Metrics

Revenue growth from external engagement activities

Marketing and brand awareness performance analytics

Employment outcomes of our students

Employment in start-up companies assisted by the Gatton College


Strategic Objective: Achieve operational excellence.

To accomplish our ambitious mission, Gatton College’s internal operations will exemplify an efficient, transparent, flexible, and fiscally sound organization. Strategic Initiatives

Develop and execute an internal communications plan to align each department toward fulfilling the Gatton College mission.

Implement best practices in organizational structure, management practices, funding mechanisms, and the services we provide to our stakeholders.

Be transparent with all stakeholders on the amount of investible resources and decisions to deploy them.

Action Steps

Conduct a comprehensive review of the current structure and processes in the College and reorganize and streamline as appropriate.

Regularly communicate with the college to ensure that everyone is aware of the structure, new processes, and their role in the strategic plan.

Use technology to enhance productivity and efficiency in research, teaching, administration, and engagement through the automation of business and academic processes where feasible.

Regularly communicate with the college to convey everyone’s role in increasing the amount of investable funding.

Metrics

Reduced administrative expense as a percentage of overall revenue

Improved cycle-times for key processes

Client satisfaction with Gatton College services


Implementation and Accountability The strategic plan for the Gatton College of Business and Economics contains additional supporting materials, including an implementation plan with specific operational measures, timelines and accountabilities related to each action step. Under the leadership of the Dean’s office, the Gatton College is committed to continually monitoring implementation of this strategic plan and making appropriate revisions on a periodic basis. In addition, a representative group of faculty, staff, and other stakeholders will gather annually to assess the extent to which implementation has been accomplished and propose any necessary revisions to this strategic plan. At appropriate times, the Dean will meet with the Provost, the Gatton College Strategic Planning and Quality Improvement Committee, the Gatton College faculty and staff leadership team, and the Dean’s Advisory Council to review the progress being made in achieving the College’s mission.

Conclusion This strategic plan guides the fulfillment of the Gatton College’s mission. Our focus on promoting engaged learning communities throughout the College underpins our work and supports the broader strategic goals of the University of Kentucky. We promote economic growth throughout Kentucky and around the world, and the principled leaders we graduate personify our success. Our focus on the rigor and influence of our research is also central to the broader contributions we make to Kentucky and the world. And the Gatton College promotes these efforts through an efficient, transparent and flexible organization devoted to operational excellence and accountability. As guided by this plan, our faculty and staff, our students and alumni, our partners and benefactors will all work together for our mutual betterment and for the good of the Commonwealth.

Appendix H: Table 2.1 Five-Year Summary of Intellectual Contributions

Table 2-1 Intellectual Contributions

Part A: Five-Year Summary of Intellectual Contributions

Faculty Aggregate and summarize data to reflect the organizational structure of the school’s faculty (e.g., departments, research groups). Do not list by individual faculty member.

Portfolio of Intellectual Contributions Types of Intellectual Contributions

Percentages of Faculty

Producing ICs

Bas

ic o

r Dis

cove

ry

Scho

lars

hip

App

lied

or

Inte

grat

ion/

App

licat

ion

Scho

lars

hip

Teac

hing

and

Lea

rnin

g Sc

hola

rshi

p

Peer

-Rev

iew

ed J

ourn

als

Aca

dem

ic/P

rofe

ssio

nal

Mee

ting

Proc

eedi

ngs

Aca

dem

ic/P

rofe

ssio

nal

Mee

ting

Pres

enta

tions

Com

petit

ive

Res

earc

h A

war

ds R

ecei

ved

Text

book

s

Cas

es

Oth

er T

each

ing

Mat

eria

ls

Oth

er IC

Typ

e Se

lect

ed b

y th

e Sc

hool

Perc

ent o

f Par

ticip

atin

g Fa

culty

Pro

duci

ng IC

s*

Perc

enta

ge o

f tot

al F

TE

facu

lty p

rodu

cing

ICs*

Accountancy 456 157 6 75 11 240 13 28 6 10 236 100.00 96.26 Economics 668 22 70 171 13 424 10 3 1 12 126 100.00 81.74 Finance and Quantitative Methods 381 3 0 90 9 175 15 16 0 4 75 100.00 100.00 Management 363 7 0 99 3 132 1 6 0 21 108 100.00 100.00 Marketing and Supply Chain 277 7 7 66 9 110 11 2 1 7 85 100.00 100.00 *After each grouping of faculty by organizational structure and/or discipline, in the two columns on the far right, please indicate the percentage of participating faculty and the percentage of total FTE faculty producing ICs.

Part B: Alignment with Mission, Expected Outcomes, and Strategy Provide a qualitative description of how the portfolio of intellectual contributions is aligned with the mission, expected outcomes, and strategy of the school. The mission statement of the Gatton College guided the criteria used in the selection of intellectual contributions. Since the College has a strong commitment to research, emphasis was placed on the production of peer-reviewed exchange. Preference was also given to research grants, monographs, books, chapters, seminars, editorial board membership and academic journal reviews. The Gatton College overall strategic objective is to elevate the quality and impact of the Gatton College’s educational, research, and outreach activities to compare favorably with those of the very best public research universities in the United States. Regarding this, our faculty are recognized among the top 30 public university business colleges in the United States according to published rankings of faculty research and impact.

Notes: Please add a footnote to this table summarizing the school’s policies guiding faculty in the production of intellectual contributions. The data must also be supported by analysis of impact/accomplishments and depth of participation by faculty across disciplines. The data presented in Table 2-1 should be supported by faculty vitae that provide sufficient detail to link individual citations to what is presented here. Interdisciplinary outcomes may be presented in a separate category but the disciplines involved should be identified.

Part C: Quality of Five-Year Portfolio of Intellectual Contributions Provide evidence demonstrating the quality of the above five-year portfolio of intellectual contributions. Schools are encouraged to include qualitative descriptions and quantitative metrics and to summarize information in tabular format whenever possible. Members of Gatton faculty and students regularly appear in the most widely read and highly cited academic journals, with its impact shown in academics, industry, and public policy. The Intellectual Contributions table indicates that the majority of our faculty are research active, with at least one peer-reviewed article published in the last five years. A little more than 80 percent of our faculty have published and 100 percent have engaged in some form of intellectual contribution over the review period. Ninety-two percent of tenured faculty in the College have published in a peer-reviewed journal. Over 90 percent of the tenure track faculty—100 percent in Finance and Marketing—are research active on this dimension in every department except for Accounting, which is at 81 percent. The apparent lag in the Accounting faculty is primarily driven by there being a tenured teaching faculty member and two additional faculty who spend their intellectual effort on publishing textbooks. During the accreditation report’s timeline, Gatton faculty have published 42 articles in journals listed on the UT Dallas Journal list. Additionally, Gatton was ranked #76 out of all schools in North America during this period. Among Accounting Scholars, Kentucky is tied for #64 for number of citations through 2016. In terms of research productivity in accounting, Gatton ranked 38th overall and 19th in audit research from 1990 to present. Gatton’s Economics department is currently ranked #79 among Labor Economics researchers based on productivity by ECONPhD.net. Gatton’s Finance department ranked #84 for research productivity in the four major finance journals. Our Management department is viewed as one of the strongest social network groups in the world. Part D: Impact of Intellectual Contributions Provide evidence demonstrating that the school’s intellectual contributions have had an impact on the theory, practice, and/or teaching of business and management. The school is encouraged to include qualitative descriptions and quantitative metrics and to summarize the information in tabular format whenever possible to demonstrate impact. Evidence of impact may stem from intellectual contributions produced beyond the five-year AACSB accreditation review period. The College identifies a number of exemplary practices, each designed to move the College closer to achieving its mission and preparing qualified professionals. These include The Global Scholars Program, the Social Enterprise Scholars Program, Scholars in Engineering and Management, business education opportunities abroad, Lab for Economic and Accounting Proficiency, tutoring for Corporate Finance, 11-Month MBA Program, and the Don and Cathy Jacobs Executive Education Center. In addition, academic departments within the Gatton College hosts speaker series where both internal and external researchers are present. Within a given year, over 60 research related workshops are held in the College. In addition, several of our academic departments and centers hold academic conferences. Economics, Finance and Management (LINKS and ION) hold academic conferences on an annual or biannual basis. As a College, we have engaged in 2,145 contributions to scholarship include 501 peer reviewed articles and 55 textbooks in the last 5 years. Our faculty have made 1,081 academic presentations and received 50 competitive awards. 62 cases and other teaching materials have been designed by the faculty. One of our faculty testified before Congress on matters related to food scarcity. Our Poverty Center co-organized a conference on the 20th anniversary of welfare reform with the Brookings Institute. Research of our faculty has been presented to the Public Company Oversight Board and has been cited by this body. Faculty research has been cited in the financial and popular press and has been discussed on NPR.

Ph.D. Graduate Placement

First Last Program Placement Graduation Year

Henry Alewine Accounting U. of Alabama Huntsville 2011

David Barrus Economics Brigham Young University 2011

Aziz Berdiev Economics Bryant University‐RI 2011

Jason Bergner Accounting U. of Central Missouri 2011

Hulda Black Marketing Illinois State U 2011

Steven Brigham Accounting U. of Wisconsin Oshkosh 2011

Laura Coogan Economics Nicholls State U 2011

Johnny Ducking Economics North Carolina A&T 2011

Bradley Hardy Economics American University‐School of Public Affairs 2011

Mary Holbrook Accounting Eastern Kentucky University 2011

Bo Jiang Economics Southwestern University of Finance and Economics 2011

Cheong Park Accounting U. of Michigan Dearborn 2011

Darshak Patel Economics Roanoke College 2011

Wei‐Cheng Shen Accounting U. of Alabama Huntsville 2011

Xiaofei Wang Economics Bloomsburg University 2011

Sunayan Acharya Finance Murray State 2012

Tanmoy Bhattacharya Economics Bowling Green State University 2012

Rishav Bista Economics Marshall University 2012

Dennis Chen DSIS Belmont 2012

Longjin Chen Economics Southwestern University of Finance and Economics 2012

Tonmoy Islam Economics University of Wisconsin‐Green Bay 2012

Joshua Marineau Management North Dakota State 2012

Biniv Maskay Economics Loras College 2012

Priyanka Meharia Accounting Eastern Michigan U 2012

Monika Rabarison Finance Towson University 2012

James Saunoris Economics Eastern Michigan University 2012

Scott Soltis Management U. of Missouri St. Louis 2012

Candace Witherspoon Accounting Valdosta State 2012

David Yaskewich Economics Southeast Missouri State 2012

Salma Begum Economics North South Univ. (Bangladesh) 2013

Appendix I: PhD Graduate Placements


Sarah Burns Economics Institute for Defense Analyses 2013

Marcus Doxey Accounting U. of Alabama Tuscaloosa 2013

Travis Grosser Management U. of Conn. 2013

Jonathan Hasford Marketing Florida International U 2013

Hongmai Jia Accounting Louisiana Tech U 2013

Virginia Kidwell Management U. of Texas Dallas 2013

Stephen Locke Economics University of CA‐Los Angeles 2013

Jonathan Ross Accounting Binghamton Suny 2013

Chris Sterling Marketing Fresno State 2013

You Yu Economics Capital University of Economics & Business‐China 2013

Maria Apostolova Economics University of Mary Washington 2014

Preston Brashers Economics Pricewaterhouse Cooper (CA) 2014

Robert Farmer Marketing Mississippi State U 2014

Theresa Floyd Management U. of Montana 2014

Xin Hong Finance Zhejiang U 2014

Derrick Jenniges Economics Bureau of Economic Analysis 2014

Di Kang Finance Zhejiang U 2014

David Marshall DSIS Eastern Michigan U 2014

Brandon Ofem Management U. of Missouri St. Louis 2014

William Richerson Marketing Salisbury State U 2014

Timothy Riley Finance Securities & Exchange 2014

Pei Xu DSIS Auburn U. 2014

Casey Brasher Economics Abraham Baldin Agricultural College 2015

Yu‐Tzu Chang Accounting National Chengchi U. Taiwan 2015

Liang Chen DSIS Miami of Ohio 2015

Chelsea Dowell Economics Upper Iowa University 2015

Zackary Edens Management Univ. of KY ***Graduated UK 2014/Started UK Fall 2015 2015

Soohyung Kim Finance U. of Wisconsin‐Lacrosse 2015

Sarah Magnotta Marketing Towson University 2015

Emily Marshall Economics Dickinson College 2015

James Mead Marketing U. of Houston‐Clear Lake 2015

Dennis Pearce DSIS Lexmark 2015


Sandeep Rangaraju Economics Weber State 2015

Jamie Sharpe Economics Berry College (GA) 2015

Teguh Wicaksono Economics Survey METER‐Indonesia 2015

Zhiquo Yang DSIS Missouri State 2015

Sun Ki Choi Economics St. Lawrence University 2016

Phillip Chung Accounting Christopher Newport University 2016

Robert Ewing Accounting New Mexico State University 2016

Nathaniel Graham Finance Trinity University 2016

Shih‐Huh Hsiao DSIS Lawrence Technological University 2016

Steve Muchiri Economics Eastern Connecticut State University 2016

Simeon Nanovsky Economics University of North Florida 2016

Jae‐Young Oh DSIS Eastern Kentucky University 2016

Mihai Paraschiv Economics University of New York‐Oswego 2016

Matthew Sooy Accounting Western University (CA) 2016

Lewis Warren Economics US Census Bureau 2016

University of Kentucky – Gatton College of Business and Economics

Full‐Time MBA Employment Statistics 2011‐2016

Class of 2011 Class of 2012 Class of 2013 Class of 2014

Class Size 68 60 77 66

Average Yrs. Experience 2.5 1.1 1.2 0.75

Number Seeking 52 51 58 52

First Offer by Graduation 52% 62.7% 46.6% 53.8%

Accepted by Graduation 50% 54.9% 36.2% 48.1%

First Offer by 3 mo. Post Graduation 75% 80.3% 72.5% 75%

Accepted by 3 months Post Graduation75% 78.4% 69.0% 71.2%

Source of Acceptance—School related activities44% 45% 37.5% 56.8%

Base Salary Average $55,926 $54,811 $51,167 $56,980

Salary High/Low $120,000 / $30,000 $78,000 / $30,000 $75,000 / $37,000 $85,000 / $40,000

Signing Bonus Average $6,867 * $5,750 *

JOB FUNCTIONS Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean

Consulting 2.6%* 5.0%* 0%* 2.7%*

Finance/Accounting 10% | $61,667 7.5% | $46,667 17.5% | $47,700 8.1% | $61,000

General Management 18% | $44,000 15% | $60,000 17.5% | $58,833 13.5% | $57,323

HR 0%* 0%* 0%* 0%*

Marketing/Sales 27% | $55,770 25% | $50,857 20% | $52,115 29.7% | $49,100

MIS 2.6%* 7.5% | $59,000 2.5%* 10.8% | $62,000

Operations/Production 33% | $58,423 27.5% | $56,018 32.5% | $49,500 18.9% | $60,529

Other 8% | $45,000 12.5% | $48,375 10% | $43,804 16.2% | $55,717

INDUSTRIES Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean

Consulting Services 5%* 5%* 2.5%* 8.1% | $54,331

Consumer Products 23% | $60,222 17.5% | $55,286 12.5% | $55,000 10.8%*

Financial Services 10% | $66,875 10% | $57,667 15% | $50,375 8.1% | $48,667

Government 0% 2.5%* 5%* 8.1% | $48,796

Manufacturing 20.5% | $58,813 17.5% | $55,500 20% | $50,571 27% | $57,113

Appendix J: MBA Graduate Placements

Class of 2011 Class of 2012 Class of 2013 Class of 2014

Class Size 68 60 77 66

Media/Entertainment 3%* 0% 0% 2.7%*

Petroleum/Energy 8% | $66,000 2.5%* 7.5% | $54,333 8.1% | $71,667

Pharma/BioT/Health 8% | $42,333 10% | $60,500 12.5% | $43,250 5.4%*

Real Estate 0% 5%* 0% 0%

Technology 5%* 10% | $58,167 5%* 5.4%*

Non‐Profit 0% 2.5%* 0% 0%

Other Services 18% | $52,200 17.5% | $50,083 20% | $49,592 16.2% | $61,667

GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean

Northeast 0% 0% 0% 5.4%*

Mid‐Atlantic 3%* 5%* 7.5%* 0%

South 77% | $53,041 75% | $53,304 72.5% | $50,581 64.9% | $61,027

Southwest 3%* 2.5%* 2.5% 0%

Midwest 13% | $69,800 12.5% | $57,400 15% | $53,800 27% | $49,988

West 5%* 5%* 2.5%* 2.7%*

UNDERGRAD MAJOR Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean

Technical 13% | $56,800 32.5% | $59,183 22.5% | $55,889 40.5% | $58,886

Business 59% | $57,805 37.5% | $51,708 35% | $49,800 35.1% | $56,772

Other 28% | $51,773 30% | $53,250 40% | $49,425 21.6% | $52,100

YEARS EXPERIENCE Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean

One year or less 64% | $48,592 70% | $53,488 77.5% | $49,908 64.9% | $54,386

More than 1, up to 3 13% | $53,300 25% | $57,750 10% | $55,250 21.6% | $57,259

More than 3, up to 5 10% | $77,250 2.5%* 5%* 5.4%*

More than 5 13% | $53,300 2.5%* 7.5%* 8.1%*

+++A new data collection survey from MBACSC was utilized for 2010 data. A few fields such as Source of Acceptance were not required fields as

they have been before. The tracking of first offers was different than in years past and this field is likely not comparable to previous years

where this information was tracked more aggressively. We are not able to customize the survey wording or required fields.

* Not enough points of data – need at least three points of data to calculate means (per MBA CSC Standards for Reporting MBA Employment

Statistics)

University of Kentucky – Gatton College of Business and Economics

Full‐Time MBA Employment Statistics 2015‐2016

Class of 2015 Class of 2016

Class Size 71 48

Average Yrs. Experience 1.01 0.87

Number Seeking 53 44

First Offer by Graduation 57.00% 70.50%

Accepted by Graduation 32.00% 56.80%

First Offer by 3 mo. Post Graduation 70.00% 90.90%

Accepted by 3 months Post Graduation 63.00% 79.55%

Source of Acceptance—School related activities 42.00% 71.40%

Base Salary Average $58,119 $56,332

Salary High/Low $80,500 / $40,000 $80,000 / $36,000

Signing Bonus Average $3,650.00 $4,600.00

JOB FUNCTIONS Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean

Consulting 22% | $57,688 0% | *

Finance/Accounting 14% | $61,000 9% | $49,707

General Management 6% | * 20% | 63,214

HR 0% | * 0% | *

Marketing/Sales 17% | $53,833 22.9% | $56,100

MIS 0% | * 0% | *

Operations/Production 22% | $55,598 17.1% | $53,810

Other 19% | $53,875 31.4% | $54,999

INDUSTRIES Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean

Consulting Services 20% | $61,286 0% | *

Consumer Products 0% | * 0% | *

Financial Services 11% | $59,625 0% | *

Government 5% | * 11.4% | $50,752

Manufacturing 31% | $58,364 17.1% | $51,833

Media/Entertainment 0% | * 0% | *

Non‐Profit 0% | * 0% | *

Petroleum/Energy 0% | * 0% | *

Pharma/BioT/Health 14% | $56,000 0% | *

Real Estate 0% | * 0% | *

Retail** 3% | * 8.6% | $66,667

Technology 8% | $62,667 11.4% | $57,701

Other 8% | $53,500 51.4% | $57,347

GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean

Northeast 7% | $64,667 2.9% | *

Mid‐Atlantic 3% | * 11.4% | $54,840

South 67% | $58,209 62.9% | $53,429

Southwest 6% | * 0% | *

Midwest 14% | $54,257 20% | $63,982

West 3% | * 2.9% | *

Class of 2015 Class of 2016

UNDERGRAD MAJOR Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean

Technical 39% | $59,643 48.6% | $60,975

Business 25% | $53,643 34.3% | $53,442

Other 36% | $59,577 17.1% | $46,678

YEARS EXPERIENCE Percentage / Mean Percentage / Mean

One year or less 81% | $56,407 100% | $56,332

More than 1, up to 3 14% | $67,300 0% | *

More than 3, up to 5 5% | * 0% | *

More than 5 0% | * 0% | *

* Not enough points of data – need at least three points of data to calculate means (per MBA CSC Standards for

Reporting MBA Employment

Statistics)

** Industry fields expanded to include “Retail” in 2015

Gatton College Operating Rules and Procedures, April 2016

OPERATING RULES AND PROCEDURES GATTON COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS

UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY

These rules and procedures are intended to be consistent with the Governing Regulations and Administrative Regulations of the University of Kentucky and the laws of the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the United States of America. In the event these rules and procedures are inconsistent or contrary to the above-mentioned regulations and laws then those regulations and laws control.

1. The faculty of the Gatton College of Business and Economics shall consist of its dean,assistant, and/or associate deans and full-time personnel having the rank of assistantprofessor, associate professor or professor in the regular, special title, or extension series, andlecturers. Membership, with or without voting privileges, also may be extended by Collegefaculty to any other person assigned to it for administrative work, teaching or research. Anindividual may be assigned to more than one faculty; in this instance, one assignment shall bedesignated by the Provost or dean as the primary one.

2. The Dean may call a meeting of the College faculty whenever it seems advisable, and shalldo so whenever requested by at least one-fourth of the faculty, and must call at least twomeetings during each academic year. In addition to the faculty of the College, students whohave been elected to the University Senate from the Gatton College of Business andEconomics are invited to attend as visitors and may request the privilege of the floor. Amajority of the College faculty shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Thedean shall be responsible for the preparation and distribution of the minutes of all facultymeetings.

3. The College consists of five academic units: School of Accountancy, Department ofEconomics, Department of Management and Information Systems, Department of Marketingand Supply Chain, and Department of Finance and Quantitative Methods.

4. The standing committees of the College shall include the following:

a. Operating Committee. This committee is an advisory committee for the Dean. Itsfunctions include the dissemination of operating information to faculty and staff,discussion of problems common to the units, the nomination for membership on Collegecommittees, and such other functions as are considered appropriate. This committee willconsist of the Dean, Associate Dean(s), the Directors and Chair of the academic units inthe College, and whomever else the Dean sees fit to include.

b. Undergraduate Studies Committee. This committee has the primary responsibility forcontinuous surveillance of the undergraduate degree programs of the College. Inaddition, it must review and approve all course and program changes and the new courseapplications dealing with courses numbered 599 and below and new undergraduateprograms, following the procedures outlined in (7) below. This committee shall be

Appendix K: Operating Rules and Procedures


chaired by the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Affairs, and include the Director of Undergraduate Studies in each academic unit and an undergraduate student representative.

c. MBA Policy Committee. This committee’s responsibilities include those issues relevant

to the administration and operation of the MBA program, including admission, curriculum and placement. The committee must review and approve all course and program changes and new course applications dealing with the MBA program following the procedures outlined in (8) below. The committee serves the same responsibility for the MBA program, as does the Graduate Committee for all other graduate programs in the Gatton College. This committee shall be chaired by the Director of Graduate Studies with responsibilities for the MBA program and include a representative from each of the academic units in the College and a student representative. Appointments will be made by the Director of Graduate Studies in consultation with the Dean and the academic unit heads. Terms of the appointments will be for one year. Reappointment for additional one-year terms is possible.

d. Graduate Studies Committee for the PhD in Business and the MS in Accounting. The

committee’s responsibilities include continuous surveillance and improvement of the PhD in Business Administration and the MS in Accounting programs. This committee must review and approve all course and program changes and new course applications dealing with courses in these programs numbered 400G and 500 and above and new graduate programs, following the procedures outlined in (8) below. This committee shall be chaired by the Director of Graduate Studies for the PhD in Business Administration and MS in Accounting, and include the Associate Dean of Academic Programs, a member of the graduate faculty from each academic unit in the college except Economics, and a graduate student representative. Appointments shall be made by the Director of Graduate Studies for the PhD in Business and MA in Accounting in consultation with the Dean and the academic unit heads.

e. Graduate Studies Committee for the PhD and MS in Economics. The committee’s responsibilities include continuous surveillance and improvement of the PhD and MS in Economics programs. This committee must review and approve all course and program changes and new course applications dealing with courses in the graduate program in Economics numbered 400G and 500 and above and new graduate programs, following the procedures outlined in (8) below. This committee shall be chaired by the Director of Graduate Studies for the PhD in Economics, and include the Associate Dean of Academic Programs, selected members of the graduate faculty from the Economics Department, and a graduate student representative. Appointments shall be made by the Director of Graduate Studies for the PhD in Economics in consultation with the Dean and the Chair of the Economics Department.

f. Faculty Advisory Committee on Promotion and Tenure: The committee is an advisory committee to the Dean. In line with the University’s Administrative Regulations, the Dean will obtain a written recommendation from this committee whenever an assistant, associate or full professor in considered for promotion and/or tenure. The committee


shall consist of a tenured full or associate professor from each academic unit in the College. The Dean, Associate Dean(s) and academic unit heads are not eligible for membership. Faculty members from each academic unit will elect their representative to the committee. If an associate professor is chosen to serve on the committee, then the unit will also choose a full professor to serve as an alternate for all promotions and/or appointments to full professor. As stated in the University Administrative Regulations a member of the advisory committee is excluded from any participation in the committee’s consideration of a recommendation initiating from the academic unit in which the faculty member holds a primary academic appointment.

g. Diversity Advisory Committee. This committee has the responsibility to provide ongoing review of issues of diversity and multiculturalism affecting the college, to advise the Dean accordingly and to facilitate the implementation of diversity goals set by the administration with regard to faculty, staff and students. The committee is chaired by an Associate Dean for Faculty, Administration and Research of the College and consists of a faculty member from each of the academic units in the College, an appointee from each of the Exempt and Non Exempt Staff and a selected student representative from both Graduate and Undergraduate programs in the Gatton College of Business and Economics.

h. Strategic Planning and Quality Improvement Committee. This committee is responsible for strategic planning, monitoring data necessary to gauge success in achieving strategic objectives, revising plans as needed and updating the plan on an annual basis, and assisting the Dean in preparing an annual report. More specific responsibilities include: 1) developing short and long-term strategic plans for the College with budget implications, 2) reviewing, developing and overseeing the implementation of quantitative and qualitative measures for use in program assessment, 3) incorporating data assessment results into the strategic planning process and making recommendations for program modifications to appropriate committees or administrators, and 4) overseeing the Annual Progress Report and periodic Program Reviews that are requirements of each academic unit by the Provost. This committee is chaired by the Associate Dean of for Faculty Administration and Research and will consist of a faculty representative from each of the academic units in the College.

i. Learning Outcomes Assessment Committee. The primary responsibility of this committee is to provide oversight for the student learning outcomes assessment process. The committee will review the continued relevance of identified goals, objectives, learning outcomes, assessment methods, and assessment data collection procedures. The committee will be chaired by the Associate Dean for Academic Programs and shall consist of at least one faculty representative from each of the College’s academic units in addition to the College’s Assessment Director and he Associate Dean for Undergraduate Affairs. Meetings occur at least twice per academic year, once during the Fall semester and again during the Spring semester.

j.


k. Faculty Council. The Gatton College Faculty Council provides a formal mechanism for providing faculty input to the College Administration, acts as a voice for the College faculty in University-level matters and provides a venue for dialogue regarding academic issues and other concerns of the faculty of the College. The Faculty Council will consist of one member from each of the academic units in the College with members being elected by their respective academic units. All members of the Gatton Faculty (as defined in the College’s bylaws) are eligible to serve on the Council. However, faculty members serving as Dean of the College, Assistant Deans, Associate Deans, Department Chairs and School Directors are not eligible to serve as members of the GFC nor to vote in the elections of members to the Council. Election: Members are chosen by vote of the faculty in an annual election. All members of the Gatton Faculty eligible to serve on the Council are eligible to vote.

Term of Membership: Members are elected to two-year terms beginning on September 1. Representatives from the Department of Economics and School of Accountancy are held in alternating years from elections for representatives from the other units. The elections are held in August. There are no term limits for GFC members.

Responsibilities:

a. The GFC’s primary responsibilities are to advise College faculty and to represent

College faculty to the administration on matters of collective interest, problems, and professional well-being. The GFC will seek faculty opinion and, where deemed appropriate, will speak on behalf of the faculty. For matters requiring full faculty action, the Council will make recommendations to the faculty, but the ultimate action will depend upon full faculty consideration.

b. The GFC will consider matters that need to be brought before the faculty, make recommendations, and call for action by the entire faculty as deemed appropriate by the GFC. At any meeting of the faculty called by the Council, the Chair of the Council, or another member designated by the Council, will preside. In addition, the GFC will have a standing place on the agenda at all regular faculty meetings.

c. The GFC will place issues brought to it by the faculty that lie within the scope of its responsibilities on its regular meeting agenda, and its meetings are open to all faculty eligible to serve on the Council. While administrators cannot attend GFC meetings unless invited, they may petition to place issues before the Council; however, it is ultimately up to the GFC to decide which issues become agenda items.

d. The GFC will serve as a liaison between the faculty and the Dean and provide a representative opinion or recommendation on matters brought before the Council.

5. University Senate Election Procedures

Election of members of the University Senate from the Gatton College shall be conducted each spring by the Associate Dean for Administration and Academic Affairs in the following manner:


The Associate Dean shall provide a list of faculty eligible to serve on the University Senate and solicit nominations by e-mail. Each faculty member may nominate one or more individuals up to the number of vacancies to be filled for that year. After determining if those nominated are willing to serve, a ballot is distributed to the faculty for a vote. The persons who receive the largest number of votes for the open positions shall be declared elected. The person who receives the next-largest number of votes shall be designated an alternate, who shall be available for one year to take the place of any University Senate member who is unable to serve or to complete his or her term. All ballots shall be tallied and other procedures carried out in such a way as to ensure confidentiality of the voting process.

6. The standing committees of each academic unit shall include an Undergraduate Studies

Committee and a Graduate Studies Committee (or masters and doctors policy committees) with the size and term determined by each administrative unit head. Each of the committees will have the same responsibilities at the department level as their counterparts at the College level.

7. Changes in the undergraduate degree program of an academic unit are to be made as follows:

a. Faculty member submits proposal to the chairperson of the unit Undergraduate Studies Committee. The unit Undergraduate Studies Committee then presents the proposal to the academic unit faculty for approval.

b. The academic unit head forwards approved proposal to Associate Dean of Administration

and Academic Affairs who forwards proposal to the College Undergraduate Studies Committee.

c. College Undergraduate Studies Committee forwards approved proposal to the Dean.

d. Dean either calls a faculty meeting to consider the proposal or circulates proposal to

faculty for approval or disapproval. A faculty meeting must be called if disapproved by five or more faculty members.

e. Dean forwards approved proposal to the faculty of the University and appropriate

University Councils and Committees. 8. Changes in graduate degree programs are to be made as follows:

a. Faculty member submits proposal to the academic unit’s Graduate Studies Committee (or masters or doctors policy committee). The academic unit’s Graduate Studies Committee presents proposal to the academic unit faculty for approval.

b. The academic unit head forwards approved proposals to the Associate Dean of

Administration and Academic Affairs who forwards proposal to the College Graduate Studies Committee.


c. Appropriate College Graduate Studies Committee forwards approved proposal to the appropriate Director of Graduate Studies.

d. Dean either calls a faculty meeting to consider the proposal or circulates proposal to

faculty for approval or disapproval. A faculty meeting must be called if disapproved by five or more faculty members.

e. The appropriate Director of Graduate Studies forwards approved proposal to the faculty

of the University and appropriate University Councils and Committees. 9. The Undergraduate Resource Center provides advisors for all lower division students;

academic unit faculty members serve as advisors for all upper division and graduate students pursuing degrees or programs in their respective departments.

10. Work Load Policy Guidelines

a. Introduction

Consistent with the Faculty Workload Statement of the University of Kentucky, Gatton College faculty are involved in and responsible for the discovery, creation, and transmission of knowledge and skills. In meeting these responsibilities, Gatton College faculty perform a complex combination of duties and responsibilities. Included are student teaching responsibilities for undergraduate, masters, and doctoral students, research and creative thinking, including mentoring of graduate students and service to the University community, the University’s external constituencies, and the greater national and international academic community. Faculty workload is defined as faculty member responsibilities across all of these areas. Such responsibilities vary for Gatton faculty based on the position held, work focus, and special assignments arising from the need to fulfill the College’s program and administrative responsibilities and College efforts to fulfill its mission and enhance its regional and national stature in a manner consistent with the University of Kentucky’s Top 20 Business Plan. To account for the diversity of responsibilities and to clarify expectations for reappointment, promotion and tenure, and merit reviews, workload responsibilities are clarified by the distribution of effort agreement that summarizes a faculty member’s work schedule.

b. Workload Factors

Faculty workload includes classroom instruction (undergraduate through postdoctoral), which may be measured by semester credit hours, laboratory time and efforts, and informal non-classroom teaching responsibilities. Research workload includes those activities associated with scholarly production whether unsponsored, sponsored or associated with specific extramural funding. Service workload includes activities performed by Gatton faculty for the College, the University of Kentucky, or external constituencies of the University and professional activities, including service on association boards, editorial boards and other academy service assignments and responsibilities. The management and monitoring of such diverse and often integrated faculty workloads is facilitated by the


University’s Differentiated Distribution of Effort form or DOE. The DOE has been designed to permit the department chair or unit director, with the approval of the dean or the appropriate administrative officer, to insure fairness in the distribution of responsibility among faculty members. The merit evaluation system should reflect the reality of the distributions and the amount of time and effort that constitutes a full load equivalent.

c. Standard Teaching Loads

The University of Kentucky Faculty Workload Administrative Regulations indicate that a teaching-only, regular-title-appointment faculty member’s assignment is twelve semester hours of coursework per semester. However, due to research and service responsibilities, few Gatton faculty members have a teaching-only assignment. The Gatton College’s standard teaching load of six hours per semester reflects the research expectations associated with the University of Kentucky’s goal of becoming a top 20 public research university and the varied service responsibilities of its faculty.

d. Teaching Work Load by Rank and Adjustment Factors

As noted, the standard teaching load for full-time regularly appointed faculty members in the Gatton College is six semester hours per semester (undergraduate or graduate) or twelve semester hours per academic year. Deviations from the standard load include adjustments for newly appointed assistant professors and Chaired Professors, reductions in teaching load assignments for administrative roles, and teaching load adjustments associated with research grants and contracts (referred to as released time assignments). The Gatton College guidelines for such teaching load and DOE adjustments are as follows:

Tenured, Non-Administrative Professors: The standard teaching load for regular-title

tenured and non-administrative faculty members of the Gatton College is twelve hours per academic year. While class size and associated workload may vary for majors and undergraduate and graduate programs, the College does not differentiate between undergraduate and graduate teaching load responsibilities as faculty teaching loads typically include both undergraduate as well as graduate courses and classes of variable sizes. Consequently, all three credit hour semester classes are considered equivalent for DOE and associated faculty workload calculations. The standard DOE for regular-title faculty is 40% for instruction; 50% for research; and 10% for service. An exception to the standard teaching load is for large lecture classes where faculty members are granted credit for six semester hours of teaching for a three-credit hour course. Also, the standard teaching load may be appropriately adjusted upward for research inactive faculty (as shown on the table which follows). While the six semester credit hour teaching workload standard applies to undergraduate and most graduate program teaching responsibilities, the day MBA program is offered in a modular fashion that does not fit the normal teaching responsibility assignment guideline. Consequently, a separate section of this policy summary provides guidelines for the assessment of teaching responsibility equivalence and for DOE purposes.


Tenured Non-Administrative Faculty Standard Assignment

Courses Research Teaching Service 4 50% 40% 10% 6 30% 60% 10% 8 10% 80% 10%

Non-Tenured Associate Professors: A teaching load of nine credit hours per academic year for the first two years is typical for non-tenured associate professors. After two years, a regular teaching load of twelve hours per academic year will be implemented.

Assistant Professors: Typically, new regular title, tenure track assistant professors

have teaching load assignments of nine semester hours of teaching equivalence per academic year for two academic year periods. After the two year period, these assistant professors will assume the standard six hour teaching load per semester. Assistant professors with reduced teaching loads will have their DOEs reflect their teaching assignment. While normally such teaching loads include three three-credit courses per academic year, such assignments may be adjusted due to participation in the day MBA program as described in a later section. The standard DOEs for assistant professors with a three course teaching load is 65% research, 30% teaching and 5% service.

Assistant Professors Standard Assignment Courses Research Teaching Service Duration

3 65% 30% 5% First two years 4 55% 40% 5% After two years

Chaired Professors: Teaching loads (reflected in DOEs) for Chaired Professors are three three-credit courses per academic year. Such assignments may be adjusted due to participation in the MBA program in the manner described in the next section or by release time for the conduct of grants and contracts. The standard DOE for a Chaired professor is 60 % research, 30% teaching and 10 % for service.

Administrative Assignments: Administrative assignments for Chairs, Directors,

Associate Deans, and Center Directors shall be determined by the agreement determined by the Dean and the holder of that position. DOEs for regularly appointed faculty are determined by the nature of the administrative assignment except that no faculty member (other than the Dean) can have a teaching plus research DOE weight of less than 20%.


Research Grant/Contract Released Time: Teaching load adjustments for the conduct of grant or contract research shall be determined upon the receipt of the grant or contract and the DOE shall be adjusted accordingly.

Research Productivity Release Time Awards: The College will from time to time

recognize and reward exceptional research productivity efforts by granting release time from teaching (reduced from 12 hours to 9 hours of teaching effort equivalent per academic year) upon nomination of the Chair or Director and the approval of the Operating Committee. The awards, which are subject to resource availability, are for one academic year and are not renewable. Chaired professors, assistant professors and newly hired senior level professors with reduced teaching loads are not eligible for such awards. Likewise, faculty members with reduced teaching loads due to administrative appointments are not eligible for these awards. Normally, faculty receiving research productivity release time awards will have their DOEs adjusted to 60 % research, 30% teaching and 10 to % service.

e. MBA Program Teaching Equivalence

The immersive one-year MBA program was introduced in 2005 with a modular structure

to meet the new program goals of an immersive, integrated, and experience-based learning environment. The program includes an immersive module, a business fundamentals module, a new product development module, a supply chain module; a mergers and acquisitions module, and an advanced learning bundle. The 44 hour program includes several 1, 2 and multiple credit courses—often offered by multiple faculty members. The program’s 880 classroom hours are split between traditional class activities and clinical learning laboratories and supplemental learning experiences including “Project Connect.” The unique teaching structure, which involves faculty from various disciplines of the College offering sub-components, requires an alternative process for determining teaching load equivalency with regularly offered undergraduate and graduate courses.

Teaching Equivalence Calculations: As noted, in addition to traditional teaching roles

and responsibilities, Gatton faculty involved in the day MBA program are involved in a variety of auxiliary or supplemental activities as part of their teaching responsibilities due to the unique nature of the immersive day MBA program. Consequently, while teaching efforts or “contact equivalence” between the day MBA program and other Gatton teaching load responsibilities suggests that 40 plus or minus hours of contact time in the day MBA program would be approximately equivalent to a 3-hour course at the undergraduate or graduate level (15 weeks at 2.5 hours per week plus final exam), the additional responsibilities associated with the day MBA program including laboratory or clinical teaching responsibilities suggest a modified equivalence calculation for the day MBA to assure equitable teaching load assignments for Gatton faculty involved in the MBA and other programs of the College. Therefore, the following teaching equivalence guidelines for the day MBA program are provided:


Contact Hours Equivalence: The Gatton College guideline regarding contact hour teaching equivalence for the day MBA program is that 40 plus or minus contact hours of “in-class” presentation time (including a final exam) shall be deemed equivalent to a 3-hour regular semester teaching assignment. For day MBA teaching load assignments of less than 40 contact hours or a full course equivalent, the Operating Committee, with advice and input from the MBA Policy Committee, shall assign teaching load equivalencies. For such calculations the following guidelines apply:

i. Teaching a 12 to 14 hour MBA module component will be considered

equivalent to a 1 academic credit hour teaching assignment. ii. Teaching loads of 25 to 27 hours will be considered equal to a 2 academic

hour teaching load equivalent.

Laboratory or Experiential Learning Equivalence: The Gatton College guideline for faculty involved in laboratory or experiential components of the day MBA is that faculty directly responsible for such activities shall be as follows:

i. Faculty responsible for day MBA modules which include computer or other

laboratory components will receive one hour of contact credit for each hour of time that the faculty member is present and actively involved in laboratory based instructional activities.

ii. Faculty who teach in day MBA modules that include laboratory components but are not actively involved in instructional activities in a laboratory setting do not receive equivalent contact hour credit.

Managing Faculty Teaching Workload with Equivalence Calculations: The MBA Policy Committee will recommend to the Operating Committee, for approval, the teaching load equivalents of the various modules and module components of the day MBA program. The MBA Committee will adjust program contact time of modules and module components so that the teaching assignments will have 1, 2, or 3 teaching load equivalencies (based on the contact hours and teaching equivalent guidelines). The teaching load equivalence calculations will be made available to College faculty so that faculty members teaching or contemplating teaching in the day MBA program will know the teaching load credit they will receive for their participation in the day MBA program.

Accumulation of Equivalence: With agreement of the faculty member’s Chair or

Director, a faculty member may accumulate teaching load credit, which can be redeemed for a one course teaching load reduction. On the other hand, if a faculty member’s accumulated contact hours are less than a full 3 hour course equivalent, that faculty member will be responsible for additional teaching load contact hours in the future.

Overload Compensation: When Department or School teaching load needs do not

permit a faculty member to use module teaching credits for a reduction in teaching


loads, overloads may be paid with approval of the Chair or Director and Associate Dean.

11. The courses taught by the College are to be staffed according to the following priorities:

Graduate courses (numbered 500 and above) a. by full-time faculty who are full or associate members of the Graduate Faculty; then b. by full-time faculty with terminal degree; then c. by part-time personnel with terminal degree; then d. emergency.

Undergraduate courses (numbered 400-499) a. by full-time faculty with terminal degree; then b. by full-time personnel who are currently ABD; then

c. by full-time personnel; then d. by part-time personnel with terminal degree; then e. emergency.

Undergraduate courses (numbered 300-399)

a. by full-time faculty with terminal degree; then b. by full-time personnel who are currently ABD; then c. by full-time personnel; then d. by qualified doctoral students; then e. by part-time personnel; with terminal degrees, or are ABD, or have relevant professional

academic qualifications; then f. emergency

Undergraduate courses (numbered 0-299)

a. by full-time faculty with terminal degree; then b. by full-time personnel who are currently ABD’s; then c. by full-time personnel; then d. by qualified doctoral students; then e. by part-time personnel; with terminal degrees, or are ABD, or have relevant professional

academic qualifications; then f. by part-time personnel with master’s degree; then g. emergency

12. The scholastic standards applicable to students in the Gatton College of Business and

Economics are determined by the faculty and are stated in the UK Bulletin.

13. Chaired Professors and Research Professorships: Appointment and Reappointment Policies

a. Background: The Gatton College of Business and Economics enhances its national academic and research reputation by recruiting national academic leaders as Chaired Professors and by recognizing and supporting internal excellence by naming Chaired Professors who have excelled in their academic careers and are nationally recognized


scholars and leaders in their academic discipline. Gatton also recognizes outstanding research, teaching and service achievements of Gatton faculty by awarding Research Professorships to senior faculty. Faculty members that are awarded Research Professorships receive salary and/or research supplements while Chaired Professors receive summer grants and research support funding. The salary and research supplements are derived from gifts from corporations, businesses and individual supporters of the Gatton College which have, sometimes, been matched with “bucks for brains” or RCTF funds provided by state appropriations. The faculty recognition categories and appointment and reappointment processes for Chaired Professors and holders of Research Professorships are described in the following sections and criteria for review of holders of Chairs and Research Professorships follow in Appendix B. A form to summarize achievement and activities for renewal of a chair or professorship since his/her initial appointment or since the last appointment renewal may be found in Appendix C. In addition to chair and professorship appointments, the College provides assistant and associate professors recognition as research fellows. Recipients of this recognition receive stipends which may be used for salary supplements and/or summer research support.

b. Chaired Professors: In the Gatton College, Chaired Professor appointments are made for

individuals who have established national recognition for their research and leadership in their academic disciplines. The appointment of a Chaired Professor may be made for current faculty who have distinguished themselves in their academic area or for new faculty following a national search. Chaired Professors are expected to be actively involved in the College’s doctoral programs as instructors and mentors, to be research leaders in the College and in the Professor’s academic area, and to maintain national recognition through professional service as association officers, journal editors or by other means.

(1) Initial Appointment: As noted, the initial appointment of a Chaired Professor

requires a specified funding source and normally, although not exclusively, follows a national search. The conditions of the appointment will specify, in addition to compensation, expectations associated with the appointment as a Chaired Professor, details regarding Chair supplements including summer stipends and research and professional activity financial support.

(2) Continuing Appointment: Chaired Professors will be reviewed periodically for a

continuing appointment as a Chaired Professor. This review will take place at least once every eight years after the faculty merit review process has been completed. New appointees can be reviewed sooner than eight years in order to get them on the eight year review cycle. Based on the outcome of the faculty merit review process, reviews can occur sooner than eight years at the request of the Department Chair, Associate Dean or Dean. The reviews will be conducted by a Chaired Professor Review Committee consisting of the Associate Dean of the College responsible for Faculty, and the Chairs/Directors of the academic units in the College. At its discretion, the Review Committee may request evaluation letters from senior faculty at benchmark universities. The Committee shall review


the Chaired Professor’s research productivity since the previous review, the Professor’s record of obtaining external research funding, the Professor’s record of leadership in his or her academic or professional area, the Professor’s involvement in the College’s graduate programs and the faculty member’s involvement in external engagement and College and University service. The Committee’s recommendation to renew or not to renew as well as the period of renewal will be forwarded to the Dean. The Dean will then make the final recommendation, which will be forwarded to the Provost for action by the Board of Trustees.

c. Endowed Professorships: In the Gatton College, Endowed Professorship appointments

are normally restricted to current full professors in one of the academic units of the Gatton College who have established distinguished research and professional contribution records in their academic disciplines. An award of a Endowed Professorship to an Associate Professor requires an exceptional research record or may recognize a faculty member’s successful record of acquiring grants or research contracts which support the College’s programs. Faculty members holding Professorships are expected to be active researchers and have achieved excellence in teaching and service. Professorship appointees are expected to be involved in the College’s graduate programs as mentors and instructors and to be involved in their profession as association officers, journal editors or by other means. (1) Initial Appointment: The appointment of a Gatton College faculty member to a

Professorship requires a specified funding source, a recommendation to the Dean from a committee consisting of the Associate Dean of the College responsible for Faculty, and the Chairs/Directors of the academic units in the College. Professorship appointments are based on the faculty member’s research record (including publications and/or success in attracting research grants) and teaching excellence as well as College and University service.

(2) Continuing Appointment: Research Professors will be reviewed periodically for a continuing appointment. This review will take place at least once every four years after the faculty merit review process has been completed. New appointees can be reviewed sooner than four years in order to get them on the eight year review cycle. Based on the outcome of the faculty merit review process, reviews can occur sooner than four years at the request of the Department Chair, Associate Dean or Dean. The reviews will be conducted by a Professor Review Committee consisting of the Associate Dean of the College responsible for Faculty, and the Chairs/Directors of the academic units in the College. The assessment includes an evaluation of the faculty member’s research productivity, academic program involvement and external service to the faculty member’s professional area. The Committee’s recommendation to renew or not to renew as well as the period of renewal will be forwarded to the Dean. The Dean will then make the final recommendation which will be forwarded to the Provost for action by the Board of Trustees.


d. Research Fellows: In the Gatton College, Research Fellow appointments are restricted to assistant and associate professors in recognition of research excellence. Research Fellow appointments are based on merit subject to special guidelines established in endowment statements or extramural gift agreements supporting the fellow award.

(1) Appointments: The appointment of a Research Fellow is for four years and requires a specified funding source and a recommendation to the Dean from a committee consisting of the Associate Dean of the College responsible for Faculty and the Chairs/Directors of the academic units in the College. Previous holders of a Research Fellow are eligible to be re-appointed, although there is no guarantee of reappointment.

14. All non-tenured faculty are reviewed each year while tenured faculty are reviewed every other year consistent with University review procedures. The faculty review process is administered by the Dean and follows the guidelines set forth in AR II – 3:10 (date effective 12/16/00). The calendar and specific instructions for each annual review are distributed to all faculty in the fall of each year. Any substantial changes in the review process must be approved by the faculty.


Appendix A Gatton College of Business & Economics

Merit Review Appeals Process

Gatton College faculty members have the right to appeal their merit reviews to the Gatton College Merit Review Appeals Committee which is appointed annually. The schedule for completion of the merit review process as well as the deadline for appealing merit reviews is specified by the University of Kentucky Provost’s Office. The following procedures provide guidelines for the appeals process and the deliberations of the Gatton College Appeals Committee.

1. A faculty member sends his or her merit review request to the Associate Dean forAdministration and Academic Affairs and a copy to the faculty member’s Chair orDirector by the deadline established by the Provost’s Office.

2. The Associate Dean acknowledges the appeal request and indicates whether additionalinformation regarding the appeal is required (such as the area or areas of the facultymembers merit review that is being appealed or the grounds for the appeal).

3. The Associate Dean requests from the faculty member’s Chair or Director the followingmaterials related to the appeal:

The original copy of the faculty member’s performance review with attachments

The faculty member’s teaching portfolio (if teaching is the area of appeal)

The Department Chair or School’s Director rationale for the merit review ratingbeing appealed

A copy of the average merit scores for the faculty member’s academic unit4. The Associate Dean contacts the Gatton College Appeals Committee and informs them of

the appeal and schedules the appeal.5. The Appeals Committee selects a Chair who will arrange for individuals, deemed

appropriate by the committee, to appear before the Committee such as the Appellant, theDepartment Chair or School Director, and a member or members of the Department orSchools faculty Merit Review Committee.

6. The Committee deliberates regarding the materials provided and the information obtainedduring the discussions with the Appellant and others, renders a recommendation anddrafts a letter to the Dean of the College.

7. The Chair of the Committee sends the letter to the Dean.8. The Dean makes a decision on the recommendation based on the Appeals Committee’s

recommendation and its rationale (including materials accompanying therecommendation) and communicates the decision, in writing, to the Appellant with acopy to the Appeals Committee Chair and the Appellant’s academic unit head.


Appendix B Standards of Performance for Chaired Professors

and Endowed Professorships

1. Chaired Professors are expected to demonstrate achievements in several, but not necessarily all, of the following areas of a faculty members performance:

Continuing record of scholarly publication in top, academically recognized journals In his or her academic discipline

Pursuit of activities that enhance the reputation of the university as evidenced by such activities as editing or co-editing major journals, election or appointment to professional association offices, or election or appointment to key public policy-making bodies.

Generation of external grants, contracts or donations.

Innovative leadership and mentoring of students and junior faculty as evidence by such

outcomes as the placement of Ph.D. students and successful development of junior faculty through promotion and tenure.

Involvement in activities culminating in the attraction of high quality students to the

area’s Ph.D. program as evidenced by measures of incoming GMAT or GRE scores and student backgrounds.

Leadership and collaborations with scholars within as well as external to the university as

evidenced by such activities as chairing major university committees, chairing program committees of national conferences or professional committees concerned with educational standards or professional development.

Leadership in efforts to build relationships with important external constituents as

evidenced by outreach activities including special seminars held for practitioners, use of guest speakers in courses, presentations at business and professional meetings and the like.

Evidence of activities that have elevated the quality of life for Kentuckians. Such activities might include, but are not limited to consulting services or research outcomes that lead to enhanced economic opportunities for Kentuckians.

2. Endowed Professorship holders are expected to demonstrate achievements in several, but not

necessarily all, of the following areas of a faculty members performance:

Continuing record of scholarly publication in top tier academically recognized journals in his or her academic discipline


Continuing record of involvement in activities that enhance the reputation of the

university as evidenced by such activities as editing or co-editing major journals, election or appointment to professional association office, or election or appointment to key public policy-making bodies.

Continuing record of efforts and success in attracting external grants, contracts or

donations.

Continuing record of excellence in graduate and undergraduate teaching.

Continuing record of active mentoring of graduate students.

Continuing record of excellent service in the College and University.


Appendix C Endowed Chair and Professorship Activities Report

Purpose: The purpose of this form, which is similar to but supplementary to the Faculty Activities Report (FAR), is to provide a format for Endowed Chair holders and holders of Endowed Research Professorships to summarize their achievements and activities for renewals of their Chair or Professorship. The form includes the categories of academic and professional achievement that holders of these appointments are expected to pursue in their role as a Chair or the holder of an Endowed Research Professorship. This form is intended to cover the period since their initial appointment or since their last appointment renewal. For Chair holders, the renewal period is for up to 5 years while the renewal period for Professorships is normally for two years.

A. Scholarly Publication

Please provide a list of referred journal articles, books and book chapters published over the review period. Refereed Journal Articles: Refereed Book Chapters: Books: Invited Book Chapters:

B. Reputation-Enhancing Activities

Please provide a description of any reputation-enhancing activities undertaken over the review period. Such activities include, but are not limited to editing or co-editing major journals, election or appointment to professional association office, or election or appointment to key public policy-making bodies.

C. Institutional and Professional Leadership

Please provide a description of any institutional or professional leadership activities you engaged in over the review period. Such activities include but are not limited to chairing major university or college committees, chairing program committees of national conferences, or professional committees concerned with educational standards or professional development.

D. External Funding

Please provide a list of the source and amount of any external funding you obtained over the review period. Include grants, contracts and private donations.

Project Funding Agency/Organization Amount _____________________________ ________________________________ ________ _____________________________ ________________________________ ________


_____________________________ ________________________________ ________ E. Attracting High Quality Students: Please provide a brief description of the activities you engaged in over the review period to attract high quality students to the College’s programs, especially the Ph.D. program. This might include recruitment of specific students, curriculum redesign, or development of promotional material. F. Mentoring of Students and Junior Faculty Students

Please provide a list of the Ph.D. students whose dissertations you chaired over this period, the year they graduated, where they got their first job and their current job if different from their first position. Graduate Student Mentoring: Student Year First Job Current Job _______________ _____ _________________ _______________________ _______________ _____ _________________ _______________________ _______________ _____ _________________ _______________________ _______________ _____ _________________ _______________________ _______________ _____ _________________ _______________________ _______________ _____ _________________ _______________________ Junior Faculty Mentoring: Please provide an account of the junior faculty you have mentored over the review period. What were your key mentoring activities and how has your mentoring impacted junior faculty? G. Impact on the Commonwealth of Kentucky

Please provide a brief description of how your efforts over the review period have helped elevate the quality of life for Kentuckians.

H. Other Information

Please provide any additional information you believe is important to the evaluation of your performance over the review period. Such activities might include, but are not limited to, the development of consulting services or research outcomes that lead to enhanced economic opportunities for Kentuckians

Page 1 of 14

Administrative Regulation 2:1-1

Responsible Office: Provost

Date Effective: 8/20/2016

Supersedes Version: 7/01/2011

Procedures for Faculty Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and the Granting of Tenure

Index

Introduction

Entities Affected

Sources of Procedures and Criteria for Appointment and Advancement

Faculty Appointment Types

Comprehensive Tenure Review

Terminal Year Tenure Review

Early Tenure Review

Procedural Steps Educational Unit

Standard Personnel File

College

Provost

Board of Trustees

Appeal of Negative Recommendation

Appendices

I. Introduction

A university capable of educating its students for work and citizenship in the twenty-first century must have an outstanding faculty. These procedures and criteria have been developed for the purpose of continually improving the quality and performance of the faculty in order to enhance the quality of the University's programs and permit the University to achieve its multiple missions.

The review required for promotion and granting of tenure is a summative evaluation of both the candidate’s accomplishments over the entire probationary period and the candidate’s future scholarly potential. It is based on the criteria set out in the Administrative Regulations, which require a consideration of information (e.g., the evaluations of external reviewers) that might not be available for the annual performance and tenure progress reviews.

Appendix L: Procedures for Faculty Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and the Granting of Tenure

Page 2 of 14

Faculty appointments are in educational units and shall be of three types: (1) tenure-ineligible appointments; (2) tenured or tenure-eligible appointments; and (3) post-retirement appointments. (GR Part X, section B.1) Before appointing a faculty employee, the educational unit must ensure that it has followed the established hiring policies and practices of the college, as codified in the college rules and unit rules, and all Governing Regulations and Administrative Regulations on appointments. II. Entities Affected

This regulation applies to all faculty and educational units of the University. III. Sources of Procedures and Criteria for Appointment and Advancement

A. Procedures

The procedures to be used in each educational unit for preparing recommendations for appointment, reappointment, promotion, and granting of tenure shall be those established by the University, the college and the faculty of the educational unit (GR Part VII, section B). The University procedures are those established in the Governing Regulations, the Administrative Regulations and as may be further elaborated by the Provost. In addition to the procedures prescribed here, college-level procedures may be established by the dean in consultation with the college faculty (GR Part VII, section A.4). Additional procedures at the level of the educational unit (hereafter referred to as “the unit”) are established jointly (GR Part VII, sections A.5 and 6) by the faculty of the unit and by the department chair, graduate center director, school director or the dean in a college without departments or schools (all referred to hereafter as the “educational unit administrator”).

B. Criteria and Evidences of Activity

1. The University-level criteria and evidences of activity to be used in evaluations for appointment, reappointment, promotion, and tenure for the various faculty title series are specified in various sections of the Administrative Regulations as indicated below:

(a) Regular Title Series (see AR 2:2-1 and 2:2-2)

(b) Extension Title Series (see AR 2:3) (c) Special Title Series (see AR 2:4) (d) Research Title Series (see AR 2:5) (e) Clinical Title Series (see AR 2:6) (f) Librarian Title Series (see AR 2:7) (g) Adjunct Title Series (see AR 2:8) (h) Emeritus Faculty (see sub-section III.C.4 below)

(i) Lecturer Series – Unit criteria and evidences of activity, and procedures for appointment, reappointment, promotion, and merit review of Lecturer Series Faculty shall be developed by the faculty of those educational units that employ Lecturer Series faculty and submitted to the dean of the college for approval (see AR 2:9).

Page 3 of 14

(j) Voluntary Title Series – Criteria for academic ranks of voluntary faculty shall be developed by the faculty of those educational units that employ Voluntary Series faculty and submitted to the dean of the college for approval. (see AR 2:10).

2. In addition to the above, each unit’s faculty shall develop policy statements describing the evidencesof activity in instruction, research and other creative activity, and service that are appropriate to theirfield(s), for use in guiding evaluations for promotion and tenure. The departmental statement isoperative in the unit upon approval by the dean (GR Part VII section A.6.c). If no such statementsare approved for a unit, then only the specifications of the University-level regulations shall be usedfor evaluation.

C. Other Faculty Appointments

1. Joint Appointments – The constituent appointments relating to a joint appointment may be processedsimultaneously or at different times; however, each appointment shall be processed independentlyand shall be considered on its own merits. An individual's academic rank, though usually the same,may differ in the constituent appointments (see GR Part X, section B.1 (a) (ii)).

2. Faculty Employee Assignments at the Veterans Affairs and other academically affiliated non-UKhospitals and clinics – There are occasions when a regular faculty employee may be assigned to workat the Veterans Affairs or another non-UK hospital or clinic pursuant to an academic affiliationagreement. In such cases, salaries may be paid partially or totally by the University, or reimbursed bythe affiliated institution. Faculty employees so assigned shall retain all the rights and privileges ofregular faculty employees as described in the Governing Regulations and Administrative Regulationsand are subject to all applicable University policies and procedures. Salary funding arrangementsshall be defined by contract.

3. Named Professorships – Individuals appointed to named professorships shall meet all criteria for therank of Professor and shall have acquired national recognition for excellence in instruction, researchand other creative activity, or service in their disciplines. While normally reserved for exceptionalprofessors, a named professorship may be granted to an exceptional associate professor. Eachnamed professorship will provide specifically identified resources for program support of a professor,and it is ordinarily expected that a significant portion of the compensation and program supportallocations will come from endowment income or extramural gifts (see AR 8:4). In exceptionalcircumstances (e.g., the recruitment or retention of a member of the National Academy of Science)named professorships may be submitted by the President to the Board of Trustees for approval forwhich funding may derive from revenue sources other than endowment income or extramural gifts.

4. Emeritus/Emerita Faculty - Upon retirement, tenured faculty members shall retain their titles with thedesignation of “emeritus” or “emerita” (e.g., Professor Emeritus). Faculty employees withemeritus/emerita status are entitled to the following rights and privileges: to be included in faculty listsin University bulletins and, upon request, to be provided a mailbox in the appropriate educational unit;to be assigned office and/or laboratory space and furnished supplies for creative work (upon request,subject to availability and approval of the concerned educational unit); to have faculty library privileges;to apply for research grants and publication subsidies funded by the Office of the Vice President forResearch; to receive University identification cards; to receive parking privileges as specified inUniversity parking policies; to participate, upon invitation by the respective unit faculty, as non-votingmembers of departmental or college faculties; to use University recreational facilities uponpresentation of suitable identification; to purchase tickets to athletic events with previous priority status;to hold membership in the University of Kentucky Federal Credit Union; to make purchases at theUniversity Bookstore at the employee discount rate; to participate in academic processions; to beappointed to represent the University at academic ceremonies at other institutions; to receive noticesof University events; and to take part generally with the faculties in all social and ceremonial functionsof the University.

Page 4 of 14

5. Temporary Faculty Employees - An individual whose assigned duties and responsibilities should becompleted within one year or less may be appointed as a faculty employee on a temporary basis.Temporary appointees are not eligible for tenure; however, time spent in a full-time faculty appointmenton a temporary basis at the University of Kentucky may be counted as a part of the individual’sprobationary period should the individual subsequently be appointed to a regular, full-time position ina tenure-eligible title series. Temporary faculty employees are not eligible for University contributionstoward employee benefits, but may participate at their own expense in certain University benefitprograms.

(a) Visiting Faculty - The designation "visiting" before an academic title indicates that the individual who holds an appointment at an academic institution or research center has been offered a temporary appointment for an academic year, semester, summer session, or other specified term not to exceed one year. The visiting title used should be appropriate to the appointee's home base academic rank (i.e., Visiting Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, Visiting Assistant Professor, or Visiting Instructor). Where the usual academic rank or title does not appear to be suitable, the title "Visiting Lecturer" shall be used. The final decision on such an appointment is made by the Provost upon recommendation of the educational unit administrator and the dean without reference to an Academic Area Advisory Committee. A visiting appointment is typically full-time, either salaried or unsalaried. The appointment is temporary, by definition, and the visitor is not eligible for faculty benefits. A visiting faculty employee with a salaried full-time appointment is not eligible for University contributions toward employee benefits, but may participate at their own expense in certain University benefit programs. A visiting faculty with total 0.75 or above FTE is eligible to receive the University contribution toward health plan coverage. Visiting faculty are not eligible for membership in the University Senate, but faculty membership, with or without voting privileges, may be extended to visiting faculty by the faculty of the educational units to which they are academically appointed. Visiting faculty are not eligible for tenure; however, time spent in a full-time appointment on a visiting basis at the University of Kentucky may be counted as a part of the individual's probationary period should the individual subsequently be appointed to a regular, full-time position in a tenure-eligible title series.

(b) Part-time Faculty - Part-time faculty employees have an official faculty appointment, receive a salary, and participate substantially, but less than full-time, in the program of an educational unit. The dean makes the final decision on appointments of part-time faculty employees at any rank. The appointment shall be for one year or other stated period not to exceed one year, subject to renewal. Appointees are not eligible for tenure, sabbatical leave, or membership in the University Senate. Appointees are not eligible for University contributions toward employee benefits, but may participate at their own expense in certain University benefit programs. A part-time faculty with total 0.75 or above FTE is eligible to receive the University contribution toward health plan coverage. Faculty membership, with or without voting privileges, may be extended to part-time faculty employees by the faculty of educational units to which they are academically appointed.

IV. The Comprehensive Tenure Review

In a comprehensive tenure review, a dossier is reviewed at multiple levels of the University (educational unit, college advisory committee and dean, academic area advisory committee and Provost), irrespective of the judgment, favorable or not, at the previous level of review. Considerable deference in tenure cases shall be shown by the Provost to the judgments emanating from the college, especially in cases where the Provost has determined that those college-level judgments (unit faculty, educational unit administrator, college advisory committee and dean) are nearly unanimous, either for or against the granting of tenure. The responsibilities of the Board of Trustees in tenure cases are codified in section X of this Administrative Regulation. The exercise of a comprehensive tenure review shall not affect a faculty person’s right to appeal a tenure decision on the grounds of procedure, privilege and/or academic freedom, as provided below (see section XI.B below), or to appeal as provided in the Governing Regulations (GR I.F).

Page 5 of 14

A tenure-eligible faculty employee is entitled to one (1) comprehensive tenure review, which shall be completed no later than the end of the next-to-last year of the probationary period. A comprehensive tenure review shall also be extended to a new faculty employee whose initial appointment at the academic rank of Associate Professor or Professor proposes immediate tenure. In addition, a comprehensive tenure shall be extended to a new faculty employee whose initial tenure-eligible appointment stipulates Professor (without tenure) and whose educational unit initiates a tenure review, and not a non-renewal of appointment, in the first year of service (see section VII.A.6 below).

V. Tenure Considerations during the Terminal Contract Year

A. By waiving his or her right to a comprehensive tenure review in the next-to-last year of the probationary period (see section VII.A.4 below), a faculty employee forfeits his or her right to a comprehensive tenure review. However, the possibility of consideration for tenure during the terminal contract year, subject to the terms stated in section V.B, immediately below, is not abridged.

B. After consultation with the unit faculty, an educational unit administrator may initiate a request to the dean

for tenure consideration on behalf of a faculty employee who was placed on terminal contract either after a comprehensive tenure review or after waiving his or her right to a comprehensive tenure review (see section VII.A.4 below). If the dean finds insufficient evidence to warrant a new tenure consideration, the dean shall deny the request and notify the educational unit administrator that a terminal year consideration of tenure shall not be initiated. If the dean determines that the evidence in support of a favorable tenure decision has substantially strengthened, the dean may grant the request and authorize the educational unit administrator to initiate the review.

Once initiated, the terminal year tenure review shall be conducted in accordance with the procedural steps enumerated in sections VII-XIII below, except that the review process shall be stopped and the specified parties notified, if the dean renders a negative judgment on the tenure proposal. Prior to making his or her judgment, the dean and Provost shall obtain a written recommendation from the specified faculty advisory committee (see sections VIII.B.2 and IX.B.1 below).

VI. Tenure Review Prior to the Sixth Year

An educational unit administrator may initiate a tenure review prior to the sixth year of probationary service if, in the opinion of the tenured faculty of the educational unit and the unit administrator, the individual’s record of accomplishment across all areas of assignment is commensurate with the award of tenure. (The act of soliciting letters by the educational unit administrator from reviewers external to the University shall constitute the initiation of a tenure review.) The review shall follow the policies and procedures that govern the conduct of the sixth-year (tenure) review, as delineated in Section IV above and Sections VII-XIII below. However, unlike a tenure review conducted in the sixth year of the probationary period, a tenure review initiated prior to the sixth year can be suspended by the dean. The dean shall notify in writing the educational unit administrator of his or her decision to suspend the tenure review and indicate that the individual under review shall be entitled to an ordinary reappointment review at the appropriate time in that contract period and in subsequent contract periods. A faculty employee whose tenure review has been suspended by the dean shall not be eligible for a subsequent tenure review until the sixth year of his or her probationary period. A sixth-year comprehensive tenure review of an individual whose previous tenure review was suspended by the dean shall be conducted according to the policies and procedures delineated in Sections IV above and VII-XIII below. The educational unit administrator shall include in the sixth-year (tenure) dossier, in addition to the external letters solicited for the comprehensive tenure review itself, those evaluative letters from the previously suspended tenure review that were submitted by reviewers external to the University.

Page 6 of 14

VII. Procedural Steps Occurring at the Level of the Educational Unit

A. Initiating the Review Process

1. Recommendations for appointment, reappointment, terminal reappointment, joint appointment, post-retirement appointment, decision not to reappoint, promotion and the granting of tenure, concerning faculty of any rank or title series, shall be initiated by the educational unit administrator.

2. Reviews for reappointment or granting tenure shall be completed in time for the affected faculty

employee to be notified of the result in accordance with GR X, section B.1.e. Except for circumstances identified in GR X, sections B.1.f., a faculty employee being considered for the granting of tenure shall not be asked to sign a terminal reappointment contract prior to a final decision by the Provost to disapprove tenure.

3. During the second year at the rank of Instructor, the individual shall be considered for promotion or

terminal reappointment effective in the third year, unless the individual requests in writing that such not be done because of the intent to resign or willingness to accept a terminal reappointment.

4. An assistant professor shall be considered for promotion and tenure no later than the next-to-last year

of a probationary period, unless the individual requests in writing that such consideration not be done because of the intent to resign or willingness to accept a terminal reappointment.

5. An associate professor without tenure may be considered for tenure at any time prior to the next-to-

last year of the stated probationary period. However, a tenure-eligible associate professor shall be considered for tenure no later than the next-to-last year of a probationary period, unless the individual requests in writing that such not be done because of the intent to resign or willingness to accept a terminal reappointment.

6. A tenure-eligible professor shall be considered for tenure in the first half of a one-year probationary

period, unless the individual requests in writing that such not be done because of the intent to resign or willingness to accept a notice of non-renewal of appointment.

B. Consultations Conducted by the Educational Unit Administrator

Individuals who have defined or assigned administrative roles and participate in the decision-making at or above the level of educational unit administrator shall not be involved as consulted faculty employees in the educational unit in which they hold an academic appointment.

C. Consultation with Applicants and New Faculty

1. Either before or at the time of interview of an individual for a faculty appointment, the educational unit administrator shall inform the individual about those parts of the Governing Regulations and the Administrative Regulations that deal with appointment, reappointment, promotion and tenure and shall provide access to these regulations as requested. At the time an appointment is offered, an individual shall be informed of the criteria for academic ranks by the educational unit administrator.

2. The educational unit administrator shall inform all new faculty employees, including temporary faculty

employees, (within one month of the beginning of their employment) of the existence and locations of the following University documents: (a) the Governing Regulations; (b) the Administrative Regulations; (c) the Rules of the University Senate, in particular the Faculty Code; (d) the rules and procedures of their college; (e) the rules and procedures of their educational unit; and (f) the Student Rights and Responsibilities. Access to any of these documents shall be provided by the educational unit administrator as requested.

Page 7 of 14

D. Consultation with the Faculty Candidate for Promotion or Tenure

Prior to the initiation of a recommendation concerning tenure for an individual during the next-to-last-year of a probationary period, the educational unit administrator shall consult with the faculty employee as to whether the individual waives the exercise and thereby stops the consideration. Any such waiver shall be in writing to the dean and the dean shall offer the individual a terminal reappointment. An assistant professor or associate professor with tenure whose promotion to a higher rank has not been considered by an academic area advisory committee for a period of six years may request such consideration by September 1 of the seventh or a subsequent year. The educational unit administrator shall make the individual aware of the option to submit such a request.

E. Assembly of the Dossier

1. The educational unit administrator is responsible for the assembly of a dossier associated with a faculty personnel recommendation. The dossier is prepared from materials in the Standard Personnel File (see below) and from additional materials supplied by the educational unit administrator and faculty employee. The dossier contents necessary for most faculty personnel actions other than annual faculty performance review are specified in Appendix II (Dossier Contents). In the preparation of a joint appointment dossier, the educational unit administrator in the secondary department shall develop the dossier for the secondary appointment.

2. All written judgments from consulted individuals shall be obtained only through the request of the

educational unit administrator. 3. Pursuant to Kentucky Revised Statutes KRS 61.878(3), the written judgments of persons consulted in

connection with appointments, terminal reappointments, promotions, and tenure decisions shall be handled in a confidential manner but, upon request, the candidate has the right to review all letters placed in the individual’s dossier. The writers of such judgments shall be notified when their judgments are solicited that the candidate, upon his or her request, shall be granted access to all letters placed in the individual’s dossier.

4. No materials will be made part of a faculty employee’s dossier other than those described above and

specified in Appendix II (Matrix of Dossier Contents), except with the written permission of the faculty employee under review.

F. The Standard Personnel File

1. There shall be one Standard Personnel File maintained for each faculty employee. The Standard Personnel File contains the Notice of Academic Appointment and Assignment form, curriculum vitae, the teaching credentials certification form and, if appropriate, the teaching credentials justification form, and transcripts of academic work leading to advanced degrees. This personnel file also contains many of the crucial materials, particularly evaluation materials, needed for or taken from the dossier, which are defined below. The file contains Distributions of Effort forms, correspondence between the individual and educational unit administrator concerning academic employment conditions and salary, faculty merit or other evaluation reports, evaluations prepared by committees and those of educational unit administrators, and all other professional evaluation reports. The file shall also contain materials related to responsibilities that the faculty employee has to governmental or other agencies. The file contains regularly updated assessments of effectiveness in instruction, research and other creative activity, and service.

2. The Standard Personnel File shall be updated regularly and in particular completed by actions of the

educational unit administrator, and also actions of the faculty employee. The faculty employee shall update his or her curriculum vitae annually and such other documents as he or she deems appropriate. The educational unit administrator shall update files as necessary to keep them reasonably current.

Page 8 of 14

3. Unsolicited materials relevant to professional function may be included in the Standard Personnel Fileby the educational unit administrator provided the faculty employee sees them and is offered theopportunity to document his or her response to them. The faculty employee’s written responses shallbe placed by the educational unit administrator in the individual’s Standard Personnel File.

4. The Standard Personnel File shall be kept in the office of the educational unit administrator or in theoffice of the dean as deemed appropriate for each educational unit by the dean. No other StandardPersonnel File shall be kept. The Standard Personnel File shall always be available to the facultyemployee and to such other persons who he or she authorizes in writing to see that file. The StandardPersonnel File is always accessible to the educational unit administrator or higher administrativeofficer who is responsible for its maintenance and to such administrator’s superior to him or her whorequest access to the file.

5. The Standard Personnel File may contain communications to or from the faculty employee, solicitedor unsolicited letters or memos relating to professional function, which are not relevant to considerationfor promotion or the granting of tenure.

G. Consultation with the Faculty in the Educational Unit

1. An educational unit administrator shall consult with appropriate faculty employees of the unit inpreparing recommendations for appointments, reappointments, promotion and/or the granting of tenure, as delineated above, such consultation being in accordance with GR Part VII, section B.5. See also Appendix I (Matrix of Consultations and Written Judgments).

2. The following provisions apply to the solicitation of outside letters by the educational unit administrator:

(a) A promotion or tenure dossier shall include a minimum of six (6) letters of evaluation from qualified persons outside the University. These outside letters are crucial in promotion and tenure reviews.

(b) The letters from outside of the University shall be obtained by the educational unit administrator directly from appropriately qualified persons selected in part from, and in part independent of, suggestions of the individual being considered for promotion or tenure.

(c) At least four (4) of the letters from outside of the University shall come from reviewers selected by the educational unit administrator independent of the candidate for promotion or tenure.

(d) Outside letters from scholars at research-oriented universities shall be given the most serious consideration, except in promotion and tenure reviews involving faculty employees whose assignments do not include significant research responsibilities. Where deemed appropriate by the unit administrator, letters from persons affiliated with prestigious non-academic institutes, centers or specialized schools may be used.

(e) The letters from outside of the University shall be accompanied in a promotion and/or tenure dossier by a written statement by the educational unit administrator indicating for each letter whether or not the name of the respondent had been suggested by the individual under consideration and, if known, whether or not the respondent had been a previous faculty colleague of the individual.

3. The educational unit administrator shall notify the consulted faculty employees when the dossier isavailable for their review. All letters from outside of the University received shall be included in thedossier and made available to consulted faculty employees prior to their providing individual writtenjudgments to the educational unit administrator. The consulted faculty employees shall be expectedto read and consider the contents of the dossier, including the outside letters, on matters ofappointment, reappointment, promotion and/or the granting of tenure, before providing individualwritten judgments to the educational unit administrator.

Page 9 of 14

H. Recommendation of the Educational Unit Administrator to the College Dean

The educational unit administrator shall add to the dossier all written judgments received from the unit faculty, and his or her written recommendation, and forward that completed dossier to the dean. Where disagreement occurs between the educational unit administrator and the consulted educational unit faculty concerning a recommendation, the educational unit administrator shall report this difference with adequate documentation to the dean and also notify the consulted unit faculty regarding such action.

VIII. Procedural Steps Occurring at the Level of the College

A. Completeness of the Dossier The dean shall review the dossier for completeness (see Appendix II) and procedural compliance. If the dossier is not complete or procedurally compliant, the dean shall direct the educational unit administrator to secure the missing materials or procedural compliance and, as appropriate, to allow the consulted unit faculty to examine the new materials and contribute new consultative input to the educational unit administrator or to submit new written judgments.

B. Consultation with College Advisory Committee on Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure 1. Each college with at least two educational units (e.g., departments, schools and graduate centers)

within the college shall have a college advisory committee comprised of tenured faculty members from the college faculty, excluding educational unit administrators and assistant/associate deans. The college advisory committee shall be concerned with policy matters on, and individual cases related to, faculty appointment, reappointment, promotion and the granting of tenure. Its members may be elected by the college faculty, or appointed by the dean after consultation with an appropriate faculty body of the college as documented in the College Rules. Upon prior recommendation by the college faculty and approval of the dean and the Provost, a large college comprised of multiple departments representing a diversity of academic disciplines may establish multiple college advisory committees. Such an arrangement shall be documented in the College Rules.

2. Prior to making a recommendation or decision on terminal reappointments or decisions not to

reappoint, the dean shall provide the dossier to the college advisory committee, and obtain its written recommendation.

3. The dean shall also obtain a written recommendation from the college advisory committee whenever

an assistant professor, associate professor, or professor is considered for promotion and/or tenure. 4. A written recommendation from the college advisory committee shall also be sought for initial

appointments at the ranks of associate professor or professor. 5. A member of a college advisory committee or an academic area advisory committee shall be excluded

from any participation in that committee's consideration of a recommendation initiating from the educational unit in which the faculty employee holds a primary academic appointment. He or she shall participate fully in the unit-level evaluation of those candidates. Persons shall not serve at the same time as a member of both a college advisory committee and an academic area advisory committee.

C. Actions Taken by the Dean

1. The dean of a college shall make the final University decision to approve or disapprove a

recommendation for those actions specified in Appendix III (Matrix of Authority of the Dean) as being delegated to the dean’s final authority. The dean shall notify the candidate in writing of the action taken, with a copy of that notification to the educational unit administrator, and as specified in Appendix

Page 10 of 14

III the dean shall communicate the action taken through the Provost to the President to be reported to the Board of Trustees.

2. If a dean disapproves an educational unit administrator's recommendation for reappointment at any

rank and offers a terminal reappointment instead, but the tenured members of the unit faculty reaffirm their positive judgment by majority vote and the educational unit administrator reaffirms his or her positive recommendation for reappointment, the Provost shall refer the matter to the pertinent academic area advisory committee.

3. In actions for which the dean is not delegated final approval (see Appendix III), the dean shall obtain,

as appropriate, the written recommendation from the college's advisory committee, and then act upon the recommendation from the educational unit administrator. If the dean approves a positive recommendation or overturns a negative recommendation of the educational unit administrator, the dean’s written recommendation and the written recommendation of the college advisory committee shall both be added to the dossier and forwarded to the Provost.

4. In cases involving a comprehensive tenure review, the dean shall first obtain the written

recommendation from the college's advisory committee on the tenure recommendation of the educational unit administrator. The dean shall then reach a judgment on the recommendation from the educational unit administrator. Finally, the dean shall add to the dossier both the written recommendation of the college’s advisory committee and the dean’s written recommendation, and forward the dossier to the Provost.

IX. Procedural Steps Occurring at the Level of the Provost

A. Completeness of the Dossier The Provost shall ensure that the dossier is complete and procedurally compliant. (Appendix II) If the dossier is not complete or if there is procedural noncompliance, the Provost shall direct the dean to secure the missing materials or the procedural compliance and, as appropriate, to allow the consulted unit faculty, the educational unit administrator, the college advisory committee, and the dean to examine the materials and contribute new consultative input or to submit new written judgments or recommendations.

B. Recommendations from Academic Area Advisory Committee

1. The Provost shall forward the dossier to the appropriate academic area advisory committee for all cases involving appointment at, or promotion to the rank of Associate Professor or Professor, or the granting of tenure. In those cases that have not received near-unanimous support from all lower-level reviewers (external letter writers, unit faculty and educational unit administrator, college advisory committee and dean) the Provost shall require a written evaluation from the academic area advisory committee. The academic area advisory committee may elect to submit to the Provost a written evaluation on any case assigned to that committee. If the Provost is inclined to render a negative judgment on a case that has received near-unanimous support from all lower-level reviewers, but which has not been recommended on by an academic area advisory committee, the Provost shall first obtain a written recommendation from an academic area advisory committee.

2. For cases in which the Provost has received a dean’s recommendation for terminal reappointment of

an individual, in contrast to the majority vote of the tenured faculty and educational unit administrator’s concurrence for reappointment, the Provost shall refer the matter to the appropriate academic area advisory committee for an independent written evaluation. The committee in its deliberations shall address itself to the individual’s scholarly potential, ability as an instructor, and other professional qualifications indicative of a probable eventual tenured appointment and shall submit a written recommendation to the Provost.

Page 11 of 14

3. An academic area advisory committee may request the written advice of an ad hoc committee(appointed by the Provost) for further evaluation before returning the dossier with the ad hoccommittee’s written advice, and the academic area advisory committee's written recommendation, tothe Provost.

C. Actions Taken by the Provost

1. The Provost shall make the final University decision to approve or disapprove a recommendationconcerning Visiting Title Series faculty and promotion to Senior Lecturer. The Provost shallcommunicate approval through the President to the Board of Trustees and convey the substance ofhis or her final action (approval or disapproval) in writing to the dean. The dean shall notify thecandidate in writing with a copy of that notification to the educational unit administrator.

2. For cases in which the Provost has received a dean’s recommendation for terminal reappointment ofan individual, in contrast to the majority vote of the tenured faculty and educational unit administrator’sconcurrence for reappointment, the Provost shall refer the matter to the pertinent academic areaadvisory committee and request a written recommendation. After reviewing the dean’srecommendation, the material forwarded through the dean from the educational unit and the writtenrecommendation from the academic area advisory committee, the Provost shall either approve theproposal for terminal reappointment and report the action through the President to the Board ofTrustees and notify the dean in writing, or disapprove and stop the terminal reappointment proposaland notify the dean in writing of the Provost’s decision for reappointment. The dean shall notify thecandidate in writing of the Provost’s decision, with that notification by the dean being copied to theeducational unit administrator.

3. For proposals involving the consideration of initial appointment (with or without tenure), reappointment,promotion, or the granting of tenure in the terminal year of a probationary period, the Provost shallreview the dossier and all recommendations and either make a positive recommendation through thePresident to the Board of Trustees, which shall take final action, or disapprove, stop the personnelaction and notify the dean. The dean shall notify the candidate in writing with a copy of that notificationto the educational unit administrator.

4. In cases involving a comprehensive tenure review, the Provost shall first consider the writtenrecommendation, if any, from the appropriate academic area advisory committee (see sectionVIII.B.1). The Provost shall then reach a judgment on the recommendation of the dean and eithermake a positive recommendation on the tenure case through the President to the Board of Trustees,which shall take final action, or disapprove, stop the tenure review and notify the dean. The dean shallnotify the candidate in writing with a copy of that notification to the educational unit administrator.

X. Procedural Steps Occurring at the Level of the Board of Trustees

A. The Board of Trustees shall take final action on the proposal by approving or disapproving the Provost’s recommendation. The President, through the Provost, shall inform the dean in writing of the Board's action. The dean shall notify the candidate in writing with a copy of that notification to the educational unit administrator.

B. The Notice of Academic Appointment and Assignment form constitutes the official appointment record. With the exception of salary, the precise terms and conditions covering each appointment shall be stated in writing on that form. The appointment, including salary, becomes final when it is approved by or reported to the Board of Trustees.

C. Notice of reappointment for tenure-eligible faculty shall be processed in a timely manner, preferably at least three months before the renewed appointment begins. It shall be the responsibility of the Provost to ensure compliance with this regulation.

Page 12 of 14

D. The ending date of the probationary period in a tenure-eligible appointment shall be set by the dean prior

to signing the initial Notice of Academic Appointment and Assignment form and shall not exceed seven years from date of initial appointment, except as permitted in GR X, section B.1(c). Previous full-time service with the rank of Instructor or higher at another institution of higher learning may be counted as part of the probationary period as negotiated between the appointee and the dean prior to initial appointment. Time spent in a full-time faculty appointment on a visiting or temporary basis at the University of Kentucky may be counted as a part of the individual's probationary period, as negotiated between the appointee and the dean, should the individual subsequently be appointed to a regular, full-time faculty position in a tenure-eligible title series.

XI. Procedural Steps Involving a Negative Recommendation to

Reappoint, Promote, or Grant Tenure

A. Whenever a recommendation is disapproved at any level, this fact shall be reported back to the preceding level(s) and an opportunity provided for a thorough discussion of the recommendation among the concerned parties.

B. Any related formal appeal(s) to the President concerning procedural matters or privilege or to the

University Senate Advisory Committee on Privilege and Tenure concerning procedural matters, privilege, or allegations of violation of academic freedom shall be initiated in writing by the faculty employee within 60 days after being notified in writing by the dean of the disapproval of the recommendation to reappointment, promote or grant tenure. When such an appeal to the University Senate Advisory Committee on Privilege and Tenure has been initiated in writing by a faculty employee, the chair of that committee shall inform the appropriate dean and Provost of that development.

XII. Final Disposition of the Dossier

At the conclusion of processes leading to negative decisions about appointments, reappointments, promotions or the granting of tenure, the dossier shall remain intact during the sixty (60) day period for filing an appeal, or, in cases where a formal appeal has been filed, until such time that a final decision has been rendered. Thereafter, the dossier shall not be retained, although all evaluative letters and reports or reviews contained in the dossier shall be added to the faculty employee’s Standard Personnel File. Representative examples of research and other creative activity included in the dossier as it was developed shall be returned to the faculty member for his or her retention. The teaching portfolio, or teaching materials submitted by the faculty employee, shall also be returned to the faculty employee.

XIII. References and Related Materials

Governing Regulations: Part I: The University of Kentucky (Definition) Part VII: University Organization Part X: Regulations Affecting Employment Administrative Regulations: 2:2-1 Procedures for Faculty Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion, and the Granting of Tenure 2:2-2 Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion, and the Granting of Tenure in the Regular Title Series 2:3 Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion, and the Granting of Tenure in the Extension Title Series 2:4 Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion, and the Granting of Tenure in the Special Title Series 2:5 Appointment, Reappointment, and Promotion in the Research Title Series

Page 13 of 14

2:6 Appointment, Reappointment, and Promotion in the Clinical Title Series 2:7 Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion, and the Granting of Tenure in the Librarian Series 2:8 Appointment, Reappointment, and Promotion in the Adjunct Series 2:9 Lecturer Series Faculty 2:10 Voluntary Series Faculty; 8:4 Policies Governing Private Funding of Academic Positions 8:4 Policies Governing Private Funding of Academic Positions

Revision History

3/27/1991, 8/20/1992, 4/30/1993, 1/25/1994, 11/24/1995, 7/1/1998, 8/18/1998, 1/11/1999, 7/27/2000,

7/01/2008, 7/01/2009, 7/1/2011, 8/20/2016

For questions, contact: Office of Legal Counsel

mailto:[email protected]

Page 14 of 14

Appendices

A. Appendix I – Matrix of Consultation and Written Judgments

B. Appendix II – Dossier Contents

C. Appendix III – Matrix of Authority of the Dean

http://www.uky.edu/Regs/files/ar/ar2-1-1apx1.pdf

http://www.uky.edu/Regs/files/ar/AppendixII-DossierContents.html

http://www.uky.edu/Regs/files/ar/ar2-1-1apx3.pdf

AR 3:5 Page 1 of 1

Administrative Regulation 3:5

Responsible Office: Provost

Date Effective: 7/21/1994

Supersedes Version: No prior version

Statement for Recruitment and Selection of Faculty

I. Regulation

The University is a land grant institution with a threefold mission of instruction, research and service. It serves students and scholars across the Commonwealth of Kentucky and beyond its borders. The academic units, faculties, programs and students are heterogeneous. The aim of the University is to recruit and select outstanding faculty members.

Each educational unit of the University before selecting a faculty member must assure that:

1) A vacant position is identified and authorized subject to availability of funds.

2) The position is described, including minimum requirements.

3) The position is announced / advertised.

4) A screening process to select one or more finalists is utilized.

5) For finalists, employment and personal history inquiries are conducted.

6) One or more finalists are interviewed.

7) A recommendation for appointment is made, or, in the event that no recommendation is made, the

search is re-opened or terminated.

8) The candidate selected is offered the position.

Applicable University Governing and Administrative Regulations for appointments must be followed.

Revision History

AR II-1.0-10: 7/21/1994

For questions, contact: Office of Legal Counsel

Appendix M: Departmental Hiring

mailto:[email protected]�

OPERATING RULES AND PROCEDURES Von Allmen School of Accountancy

Gatton College of Business and Economics University of Kentucky

INTRODUCTION

1

These Rules of Procedure are intended to be consistent with the Governing Regulations and the Administrative Regulations of the University of Kentucky and the laws of the Commonwealth of Kentucky and of the United States of America. In the event that these operating rules and procedures are inconsistent or contrary to the above-mentioned regulations and laws, then those regulations and laws control.

· ARTICLE 1. ORGANIZATION AND MEETINGS

Section 1.1 SCHOOL FACULTY AND PERSONNEL

1.1.1 The Faculty of the Von Allmen School of Accountancy includes the Dean of the Gatton College, the Director of the Von Allmen School, and all Gatton College Faculty members who have been assigned regular, full-time duties in the Von Allmen School (GR VII.A.5(a)). The Von Allmen School Faculty also includes all full-time instructors and lecturers in the School.

1.1.2 Unless specified otherwise in these rules and procedures or unless prohibited by other University regulations, voting privileges are extended to all members of the Faculty of the School.

1.1.3 School Personnel includes all full-time and part-time personnel of the School.

1.1.4 The Von Allmen School of Accountancy limits the number of lecturers and senior lecturers to 40% of the tenured or tenure-eiigible faculty or 5, whichever is smaller.

Section 1.2 MEETINGS

1.2.1 Regular meetings of the School Faculty shall be held at least once each semester. Special meetings of the Faculty may be held at the call of the Dean, the Director, or on petition from one-fourth of the School Faculty. . · ·

1.2.2 Notification of all meetings of the School Faculty shall be given by memorandum to the members. Such notification shall be given at least one week in advance of the meeting and shall include

Von Allmen School of Accountancy - Operating Rules, revised October 2010

Appendix N: Department Operating Rules ad Procedures

2

the agenda of the meeting. Any change in School policy not previously listed on such agenda shall not be brought to a vote until the next meeting of the Faculty.

1.2.3 A quorum shall consist of a majority of the voting members of the School Faculty. In all parliamentary questions not otherwise provided for, Robert's Rules of Order shall apply.

1.2.4 The Director shall ensure that minutes of all meetings of the School Faculty are prepared. The Director may appoint a secretary for this purpose. Copies of the minutes shall be ·distributed to all members of the School Faculty and shall be made part of the School Record.

1.2.5 The Director will preside over all School meetings except as may be delegated by the Director or stipulated otherwise by these Rules and Procedures.

ARTICLE 2. ADMINISTRATION

Section 2.1 ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE AND STANDING SCHOOL COMMITTEES

2.1.1 The administrative organization of the School consists of the Director, the Directors of Graduate Programs, the Coordinator(s) of Undergraduate Programs, and the Chairs of the key committees within the School. The key committees are the Graduate Studies Committees and the Undergraduate Studies Committee.

2.1.2 The Director is the chief executive officer of the School. The authority of the Director is exercised with the assistance of the Directors, Coordinators, committees, and with the Faculty of the School. Subject to University policy and to School policy and rules as determined by the faculty, the Director is responsible for the administrative affairs of the School.

2.1.2. l The Faculty of the School shall be actively involved in the selection, review and evaluation of the Director according to the guidelines and procedures established by the University and those adopted by such Faculty.

2.1.2.2 The Director shall be assisted in carrying out administrative tasks by the Directors of Graduate and Undergraduate Studies and Program/Course Coordinators.

2.1.2.3 The Director is responsible for recommendations on the appointments, reappointments, terminal appointments, decisions not to reappoint, and post-retirement appointments of members of the School Faculty, as specified in GR VII B.5. The Faculty shall be consulted on such issues. (See GR VII B.5.)

2.1.2.4 The Director is responsible for recommendations on promotion and the granting of tenure. Procedures and criteria used in preparing the recommendations shall be those established by the University and the tenured Graduate Faculty of the School. The procedures must include consultation with the tenured members of the School with equal or higher rank. All recommendations on matters of promotion and tenute must include the written judgment of each consulted member of the School along


3

with the recommendations of the Director. All faculty members with tenure shall be consulted on recommendations for granting of tenure. Faculty members without tenure shall not be consulted on recommendations for ~anting of tenure. Faculty members on approved leave of absence or with a primary administrative, service, or other assignment outside the department may, but are not required to, provide written judgments on recommendations. ·

General guidelines of evidences to be used by the Von Allmen School of Accountancy in evaluations of faculty for appointment, reappointment, promotion, and the granting of tenure:

The portfolio of evidence used in the evaluation process has common characteristics but should also allow for individual evidence of excellence in research, instruction, and service to be assessed. Diverse areas of excellence, as well as common components, should be considered.

Promotion to Associate Professor and/or the Awarding of Tenure: 1) Teaching, Advising, and Other Instructional Activities

Evidences listed in the AR include: "(a) reports by colleagues qualified in the field; (b) evaluations by students and, if available, graduates; and ( c) when appropriate, the subsequent accomplishments of graduates whose major work has been supervised by the individual under consideration." Other evidence may include teaching awards, letters from graduates, and student performance on professional exams in the individual's area. Obtaining external teaching grant funding also indicates teaching proficiency. Continuous improvement might be demonstrated by improving student evaluations, use of innovative instructional methods, and staying current in the individual's area. Measurement of continuous improvement is ultimately determined by colleagues' letters. Consideration should be given to amount of teaching: course load (number of courses taught per year), course level (undergraduate, masters or doctorate), number of students,. and number of different courses taught. Many of the evidences are expected to be captured in the candidate's teaching portfolio.

Academic advising is normally not a priority for assistant professors; however, participation on doctoral advisory committees and other doctoral program activities should be considered positively.

2) Research and Other Creative Activity. An external reputation for excellence on a regional or national level is largely determined by outside letters from noted scholars . .Internal evaluations are based on publications in refereed journals in the individual's area, to include journals outside of accounting, but within the individual's methodological domain. "Publi<?ations ... should be evaluated, not merely enumerated1" Other factors that should be considered are invited presentations, regional or national awards, invitations to conferences, presentation at conferences or participation as a discussant. Serving as a journal reviewer, editorial board member, or editor also demonstrates evidence of a national reputation. Obtaining external research grant funding is uncommon in accountancy, but would certainly be viewed positively.

3) Professional, University and Public Service

1 University of California, Los Angeles Appointment and Promotion-Review and Appraisal committees. P. 6 ·· Von Allmen School of Accountancy- Operating Rules, revised October 2010

4

Scholarly service at the assistant professor level will be evidenced by participation in assigned committees, attendance at Von Allmen School, Gatton College, and University functions, workshops, brownbags as well as attending national and section accounting conferences.

Promotion to Professor 1) Teaching, Advising, and Other Instructional Activities

Evidences in the AR include: "(a) reports by colleagues qualified in the field; (b) evaluations by students and, if available, graduates; and ( c) when appropriate, the subsequent accomplishments of graduates whose major work has been supervised by the individual under consideration." In addition to formal student evaluations, these may include teaching awards or grants, letters from graduates, and student performance on professional exams in the individual's area. Excellence might be measured by teaching awards or grants, use of innovative instructional methods, textbook authorship. Measurement of excellence is ultimately determined by colleagues' letters. Mentoring and advising doctoral students is critical to the success of the Von Allmen School and is essential for promotion to professor. Accordingly, evidence of these activities include serving as a dissertation chairperson or research advisor, coauthoring with doctoral students, serving on dissertation committees, as w~ll as contributions to the general research environment through participation at workshops, brownbags, and other graduate student research events.

Research and Other Creative Activity Excellence is determined by publication in refereed journals, national awards, and appointment as editor or membership on editorial boards ofleadingjoumals. The influence of one's research is also considered, by referring to citations, participation on panels, authoring monographs or scholarly books. Primary evidence; however, consists ofletters from scholars at leading universities. Other evidence includes presentation at national, sectional, or other prestigious conferences, attainment of major awards, invited presentations at similar or more prestigious institutions, invitation to serve on editorial boards, to review manuscripts for leading journals, to review grant applications for national funding agencies, and to evaluate candidates from other institutions for promotion and/or tenure.

3) Professional, University and Public Service (adapted from University of South Carolina) The quantity of service to the School, College, University, and profession should increase with rank. Evidence of a candidate's conti:ibution to service across a broad spectrum of potential activities includes, but is not limited to, the following areas:

Service to the Von Allmen School: Leadership in performance on committees; cooperation with colleagues on research 'projects and teaching assignments; attendance and participation in workshops, faculty meetings, and other functions sponsored by the Von Allmen School; mentoring of graduate students and junior faculty. Service to the University and the State: Performance on committees of the Gatton College and the University of Kentucky; administrative responsibilities and functions; and special projects for the University and state government agencies.

Service to the Academic Community: Leadership roles in the administration of academic and professional organiz.ations; including AAA committees

Service to the Local and Business Community: Pro-bono consulting for, academicaJly based presentations to, and involvement with, community and business groups; testimony before

Von Allmen School of Acco~ntancy - Operating Rules, revised October 2010

5

governmental bodies. Appointment to prestigious national and regional boards, commissions, and governmental/regulatory .entities.

2.1.2.5 The Director is responsible for reaching agreement with each faculty member on the allocation of faculty time as officially.reported to the University via distribution of effort agreement, consistent with University, College, and School rules and policies.

2.1.2.6 The Director is responsible for the periodic evaluation of School faculty and for making recommendations on salaries and salary changes by procedures and criteria established by the University and the Faculty of the School. rhe Director is responsible for ensuring fair and equitable treatment of faculty.

Criteria and procedures for appointment, reappointment, nonrenewal of appointment, tenninal appoint, promotion, and faculty merit perfonnance review at the lecturer or senior lecturer rank will be consistent with the criteria and procedures employed for tenured and tenure-eligible faculty. Since lecturer and senior lecturer appointments rarely include research, the criteria and procedures will primarily focus on teaching and service.

The portfolio of evidence used in the evaluation process has common characteristics but should also allow for individual evidence Of excellence in research, instruction, and service to be assessed. Diverse areas of excellence, as well as common components, should be considered. Consistent with the evidences employed in evaluating tenured· and tenure-eligible, the appropriate evidences include (but are not limited taj: .

Innovative teaching methods Employment of higher learning approaches and activities Student evaluations Recognitions from students.and graduates Continued record of active involvement in the lecturer's academic area Student advising Faculty advisor to student organizations School and College committees Attendance at School and College functions Attendance at professional functions Professional involvement and activities outside the university

2.1.2.7 The Director is responsible for submitting budget requests for the School. The Director is responsible for administering the budget.

2.1.2.8 The Director represents the School. On all issues where the recommendation of the Director differs from that of the majority of the School's Faculty, the Director must communicate the School Faculty's recommendation as well as his/her own recommendation and state his/her reasons for differing from the School Faculty's recommendation. The Faculty of the School shall be given a copy of this

· communication (GR VII.B.5).


6

2.1.3 The Directors of Graduate Programs and Undergraduate Program/Course Coordinators shall be appointed by the Director after consultation with the faculty. The Director shall recommend the appointment of the DGS of the Master of Science in Accounting Program to the Dean of the Graduate School.

2.1.3. I The Directors of School Graduate Programs have the responsibility of coordinating all activities pertaining to graduate study in their respective program such as recruiting, admissions, course offerings, comprehensive examinations, etc. They represent their respective Programs on the College Policy Committees and Chair the School's Graduate Studies Committees (the Ph.D. and MSACC Policy Committees).

2.1.3 .2 The Directors of the School Graduate Programs have the responsibility for advising all graduate students who do not have an advisory committee. Advisory Committee Chairs advise all doctoral students whose committees they chair.

2.1.3 .3 The Coordinators of Undergraduate Programs are responsible for coordinating the advising for all students who are pursuing an accounting undergraduate major. The Director of the School may appoint additional advisors in an equitable manner to assist the Coordinators in advising duties. The Principal Coordinator will also Chair the Undergraduate Studies Committee of the School and serve on the College Undergraduate Studies Committee.

2.1.4 The following standing committees will be formed according to the provisions of these Operating Rules and Procedures. ·

a. Undergraduate Studies Committee b. MSACC Policy Committee c. Ph.D. Policy Committee

2.1.4.l The Undergraduate Studies Committee shall consist of at least three members of the School Faculty in addition to the Chair. The Committee shall also include one undergraduate accounting student, elected by a majority of the other Committee members. Faculty appointments to the committee shall be made by the Director for a term of one academic year. Reappointments for additional one-year terms are possible. Committee responsibilities include tho~e issues relevant to undergraduate instruction including approval, oversight and review of the undergraduate program requirements and courses.

2.1.4.2 The MSACC Policy Committee shall be chaired by the DGS of the MSACC Program and will be selected from the faculty that teach in the Program. The Committee shall also include one student in the MSACC Program, elected by a majority of the other Committee members. Faculty appointments to the committee will be made by the Director in consultation with the DGS. Appointments are for one year. Reappointments for additional one year terms are possible. Committee responsibilities include those issues relevant to the administration and operation of the MSACC Program including admissions, curriculum, and placement.

2.1.4.3 The Ph.D. Policy Committee shall be chaired by the Director of that Program and will be selected from members of the School Faculty who are actively involved in the Program. The Committee


7

shall include one, nonvoting student member who is enrolled in the accounting Ph.D. Program. The student representative shall be: (1) elected by a majority vote of the enrolled Ph.D. students who are not on academic probation and (2) approved by a vote of the faculty members:ofthe Ph.D. committee. The student representative shall participate in the policy deliberations of the committee that do not involve personnel decisions about; or resource allocations to, Ph. D. students. Faculty appointments to the committee shall be made by the Director in consultation with the Director of the Program. Appointments are for one year. Reappointments for additional one-year terms are possible. Committee responsibilities include those issues relevant to the Ph.D. Program including approv~l, oversight and review of the graduate program requirements and courses.

2.1.4.4 The Director shall be an ex officio member of all School committees (GR VII.A.5( c )).

Von Allmen School of Accountancy- Operating Rules, revised October 2010

8

Section 2.2 GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR COMMITTEES

2.2. l Notification of membership on committees sha11 be distributed to the Faculty within thirty days of the beginning of the Fall Semester.

2.2.2 Faculty members with one-half or more of their duties in College or University administration shall not serve as regular committee members for standing committees except as noted in the School Rules and Procedures. Such faculty may serve as ex-officio committee members.

2.2.3 Additional ad hoc committees may be established as necessary by the Director or elected by the faculty to carry out the activities of the School or advise the Director on issues.

2.2.4 Each standing committee shall meet at least once each semester.

2.2.5 All committee meetings shall be open to any member of the School Faculty unless otherwise indicated in the Operating Rules and Procedures.

2.2.6 All committee meetings shall be conducted in a democratic manner with each official committee member having one vote and passage of motions requiring a simple majority of the votes cast.

Section 2.3 POLICY

The Director shall be responsible for keeping a current compilation of the School's policies. These shall consist of all continuing School poHcy decisions which do not amend the School Rules and Regulations.

Section 2.4 ELECTIONS AND VOTING

2.4.1 All elections to elected positions shall be done by secret ballot by the eligible faculty members. If no candidate receives a inajority on the first ballot, a run-off of the two top candidates will be held.

2.4.2 Voting on issues may be by show of hand. However, a secret ballot may be called for by any member of the eligible voters.

2.4.3 Only faculty members who are present may vote; proxy voting is not allowed.

Von Allmen School of Accountancy - Operating Rules, revised October 20 I 0

9

ARTICLE 3 ACADEMIC PROGRAMS

Section 3.1 STATEMENT OF PROGRAMS.

The statements of the programs of the Von Allmen School of Accountancy are available in the current University of Kentucky Bulletins.

Section 3.2 CHANGES IN PROGRAMS, COURSE OFFERINGS OR COURSES.

3 .2.1 Changes to the undergraduate course offerings or degree programs are to be made as follows: Faculty member sponsoring the proposal submits the proposal to the School ·Undergraduate Studies Committee. The committee has thirty days to present the proposal, along with its recommendation, to the School faculty. The Faculty shall act upon the proposal within thirty days. If the proposal is approved, the Director forwards the approved proposal to the Dean's office for College committee and faculty approval and for distribution to the appropriate University Committee.

3.2.2 Changes to the graduate course offerings or degree program are to be made as follows: Faculty member sponsoring the proposal submits the proposal to the appropriate ·committee (MSACC or Ph.D. Policy Committee). The apprppriate committee has thirty days to present the proposal, along with its recommendation, to the School Faculty. The Faculty shall act upon the proposal within thirty days. If the proposal is approved, the Director forwards the approved proposal to the Dean's office for College committee and faculty approval and for distribution to the appropriate University committee.

3 .2.3 All course proposals or course changes for which graduate credit may be received must be approved by the appropriate Graduate Policy Committee( s ).

Section 3.3 SCHEDULING AND STAFFING OF COURSES

3.3.l The Director is responsible for scheduling classes after consultation with the Faculty on teaching desires and times. In the event of conflict in teaching assignments or schedules, priorities are to be based upon rank and then seniority.

3.3.2 Courses are to be staffed consistent with College procedures and policies.

ARTICLE4. PERTAINING TO THE OPERATING RULES AND PROCEDURES

Section 4.1 PRIORITY

No rule or procedure of these Operating Rules and Procedures shall be enforced in conflict with Co Hege or University Rules and.Regulations.'

Von Allmen School of Accountancy - Operating Rules, revised October 20 I 0

10

Section 4.2 PROCEDURE FOR AMENDMENT

4.2.1 Any member of the School Faculty may initiate an amendment by distributing copies of the proposal at·any regular meeting of the School Faculty. Such distributions shall constitute a first reading of the amendment. Proposals shall be clearly labeled as PROPOSED AMENDMENT.

4.2.2 · The amendment becomes part of the Operating Rules and Procedures if ratified by majority vote of the School Faculty attending the next regular meeting.

Section 4.3 REVIEW

The School shall formally consider the question of Operating Rules and Procedure review at intervals no greater than five years. At any time within such intervals the Director may appoint an ad hoc review committee, which shall make a report on the question to the Faculty.

Section 4.4 RATIFICATION

These Operating Rules and Procedures shall be considered ratified when accepted by a vote of the majority of the School Faculty at a regular faculty meeting. The document becomes effective upon

. ratification and with approval of the Provost of the University.

Section 4.5 UPDATING

Amendments to the Operating Rules and Procedures shall be included at their proper place in the document, rather than added serially at the end. All wording which has been removed from the document by Amendment shall be deleted from the updated copies. All wording added by amendment shall be so identified in updated copies of the document by being underlined, and the date of the amendment shall be indicated in parentheses following the underlined provisions.

Section 4.6 DISTRIBUTION

Each member of the Faculty shall be given a copy of the Operating Rules and Procedures. It shall be the responsibility of the Director of the School to keep the Operating Rules and Procedures updated. Updated versions shall be distributed to the faculty.

These Rules of Procedure have been created and approved by the Faculty of this School, pursuant to the authority granted by the Administrative and Governing Regulations of the University of Kentucky. These rules do not become effective until and unless approved by the Dean and Provost as indicated by their signatures below. Any modification to these rules must also be approved by the Dean and Provost before the modifications take effect. These rules contain a total of 8 pages, each of which are initialed and dated by the undersigned persons. A current copy of the approved rules for this School is available in the office of the area coordinator, the Director of the School, the Dean of the College, and the Provost's office.


oriCollege of Business and Economics

Provost of the University of Kentucky Date

Von Allmen School of Accountancy - Operating Rules, revised October 20 IO

Provost of the University of Kentucky

Jl

1//ro p

q \ -i- fl-[!_ 0 Date

fJzo/I_ Date

Von All men School of Accountancy - Operating Rules, revised October 20 l O

Department of Economics – Operating Rules and Policies, revised August 2015

August 2015

OPERATING RULES AND PROCEDURES

Department of Economics

Gatton College of Business and Economics University of Kentucky

These Rules of Procedure are intended to be consistent with the Governing Regulations and

the Administrative Regulations of the University of Kentucky and the laws of the

Commonwealth of Kentucky and of the United States of America. In the event that these rules

of procedure are inconsistent or contrary to the above-mentioned regulations and laws, then

those regulations and laws control.

ARTICLE 1. ORGANIZATION AND MEETINGS

Section 1.1 DEPARTMENTAL FACULTY AND PERSONNEL

1.1.1 The Faculty of the Department of Economics includes the permanent personnel of

the Department with the following ranks: lecturers, instructors and professors of all

ranks in the Regular Title Series, Special Title Series, Research Title Series,

Extension Title Series, and joint appointees of these ranks. Visitors and part-time

instructors are excluded from this definition of the Faculty.

1.1.2 Voting privileges on non-personnel issues are extended to all full-time members

of the Faculty of the Department. Voting rights on personnel matters including hiring

and promotion are described in 2.2.1.2. Joint appointees do not have voting rights

unless otherwise specified in the joint appointment agreement.

1.1.3 Department Personnel includes all full-time and part-time personnel of the

Department.

1.1.4 The Department of Economics limits the number of lecturers and senior lecturers to

twenty percent of the tenured or tenure-eligible faculty or four, whichever is smaller.

Section 1.2 MEETINGS

1.2.1 Regular meetings of the Faculty shall be held at least once each semester. Special

meetings of the Faculty may be held at the call of the Chair or on petition from one-

fourth of the membership.

1.2.2 Notification of all meetings of the Department Faculty shall be given by

memorandum to the members. Notification of meetings shall be given at least

one week in advance of the meeting (except in the case of meetings, such as on

recruiting, when prompt action is required) and shall include the agenda of the

meeting.

1.2.3 A quorum shall consist of a majority of the voting members of the Department

Faculty. In all parliamentary questions not otherwise provided for, Robert's Rules


of Order shall apply.

1.2.4 The Chair shall appoint a secretary for purposes of the recording, preparation,

and distribution of the minutes of Department meetings. Copies of the minutes

shall be distributed to all members of the Department Faculty and shall be made

part of the Department Record.

1.2.5 The Chair shall preside over all Department meetings except as may be delegated

by the Chair or stipulated otherwise by these Rules and Procedures.


Section 2.1 ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE AND STANDING COMMITTEES

2.1.1 The administrative organization of the Department consists of the Chair, the

Director of Graduate Studies, the Director of Undergraduate Studies, and the

Director of the Center for Business and Economic Research.

2.1.2 The Chair is the chief executive officer of the Department and is an ex- officio

member of all department committees. The authority of the Chair is exercised

with the assistance of the Director of Graduate Studies, the Director of

Undergraduate Studies, committees, and with the Faculty of the Department.

Subject to University, College and Department policy and to policy and rules as

determined by the faculty, the Chair is responsible for the administrative affairs

of the Department.

2.1.2.1 The Faculty of the Department shall be actively involved in the selection, review

and evaluation of the Chair according to the guidelines and procedures

established by the University and those adopted by the Faculty of the

Department.

2.1.2.2 The Chair with the advise of the Chair’s advisory committee is responsible for

recommendations on the appointment of new members of the Department,

reappointments, terminal appointments, decisions not to reappoint, and post-

retirement appointments, as specified in GR VII B.5. All tenured and tenure-track

faculty members shall be consulted on cases of appointment of all new members

of the Department. Lectures and Research Faculty are consulted on hires of all

faculty in the same title series.

2.1.2.3 The Chair is responsible for recommendations on promotion and the granting of

tenure. Procedures and criteria used in preparing the recommendations shall be

those established by the University and the tenured Faculty of the Department. The

procedures must include consultation with the tenured members of the Department

of equal or higher rank to which the candidate is being promoted. The Chair will

appoint a Promotion Advisory Committee consisting of at least two faculty members

of appropriate rank. This Committee will provide an oral summary of the candidate’s


record to the department at a meeting in the spring before the case is to be

considered. Following this, the Chair will provide feedback to the candidate on the

strength of the department’s support. This Promotion Advisory Committee will also

advise the faculty at a meeting in the fall once the candidate’s portfolio is complete

and the majority of external letters have been received. All recommendations on

matters of promotion and tenure must include the written judgment of each

consulted member of the Department along with the recommendation of the Chair.

All faculty members with tenure shall be consulted on recommendations for

granting of tenure. Faculty members on approved leave of absence or with a

primary administrative, service, or other assignment outside the department may,

but are not required to, provide written judgments on recommendations.

2.1.2.4 The Chair is responsible for reaching agreement with each faculty member on the

allocation of faculty time as officially reported to the University via the

Distribution of Effort Agreement. The responsibility lies in ensuring fair and

equitable allocation of effort for the individual in comparison with other faculty as

well as being in compliance with University and College rules and policies.

2.1.2.5 The Chair is responsible for the periodic evaluation of Department faculty and for

making recommendations on salaries and salary changes by procedures and

criteria established by the University, the College and the Faculty of the

Department.

Criteria and procedures for appointment, reappointment, nonrenewal of appointment, terminal

appointment, promotion, and faculty merit performance review at the lecturer or senior

lecturer rank will be consistent with the criteria and procedures employed for tenured and

tenure-eligible faculty. Since lecturer and senior lecturer appointments rarely include research,

the criteria and procedures will primarily focus on teaching and service as will their

Distribution of Effort (DOE).

The portfolio of evidence used in the evaluation process has common characteristics but

should also allow for individual evidence of excellence in research, instruction, and service to

be assessed. Diverse areas of excellence, as well as common components, should be

considered. Items that are commonly used and relied upon by the Department to evaluate

teaching are the following:

Information regarding student teaching evaluations. This includes numerical scores and,

where possible, summaries of students' written comments on course evaluations.

Comments by former students who have been selected to provide written letters of

testimony regarding the promotion candidate's teaching effectiveness.

The candidate's teaching may have been observed and evaluated by other faculty or

members of the Department and this evaluation will be considered.

Other evidence considered by the Department may include, but is not limited to:

Unsolicited comments from students about the candidate's teaching. Significant

mentoring and contribution to the professional development of students.

Supervising independent studies classes, internships or student independent research.


Selection for a significant outstanding teacher award. Scholarly publications about

teaching.

Receiving external grant support for teaching/learning projects.

Outside reviewers evaluations, where they are in a position to assess the candidate's

teaching skills.

Developing a new and/or novel course that fills an identified need in the curriculum or is

particularly noteworthy.

Invitation to teach at institutions of recognized excellence.

Outstanding performance as a departmental undergraduate advisor

Active involvement in doctoral committees

Successful participation at teaching workshops, conferences, or institutes.

Receipt of competitively-awarded internal funding for teaching.

Aspects of services that are frequently observed for evaluating service are the following:

Service on Departmental committees such as those dealing with undergraduate education

and other administrative and governance issues. Leadership in undertaking and

completing the tasks of a committee.

Service on College committees.

Service on University committees and in other capacities in University governance.

Other evidence of service includes, but is not limited to:

Serving as a program chair or organizer of conferences or sessions for conferences.

Serving as a member of a review panel for major organization.

Being an officer in a significant professional organization.

Serving on a major governmental commission, task force, board, or in related capacities.

Service on editorial boards, as editor, or associate editor of a journal as well as extensive

refereeing responsibilities.

These lists of items are intended to illustrate how candidates may provide evidence for

performance review and promotion, but the candidate is not expected to accomplish any

particular subset of them.

2.1.2.6 The Chair is responsible for submitting budget requests for the Department and is

responsible for administering the budget subject to guidelines established by the

University, College and Department.

2.1.2.7 The Chair represents the Department. On all issues where the opinion of the

Chair differs from that of the majority of the consulted faculty, the Chair must

communicate the consulted faculty's opinion as well as his/her own and stating

his/her reasons for differing from the consulted faculty's opinion. The consulted

faculty of the Department shall be given a copy of this communication.

2.1.2.8 The Chair is appointed by the Dean for a term not to exceed four academic years.

On the approval of at least a majority of the Department Faculty, the Chair may


be reappointed for up to an additional four years.

2.1.3 The Director of Undergraduate Studies and the Director of the Center for

Business and Economic Research shall be appointed by the Chair of the

Department after consultation with the Faculty. The Chair shall make

recommendations to the Dean of the Graduate School regarding the appointment

of the Director of Graduate Studies.

2.1.3.1 The Director of Graduate Studies has the responsibility of coordinating all

activities pertaining to graduate study such as recruiting, admissions, course

offerings, comprehensive examinations, etc.

2.1.3.2 The Director of Graduate Studies has the responsibility for advising all graduate

students who do not have an advisory committee. The advisory committee chairs

advise all doctoral students whose committees they chair.

2.1.3.3 The Director of Undergraduate Studies is responsible for coordinating departmental

faculty advising, that complements professional advising, for all students who are

pursuing an undergraduate major in Economics. The Chair of the Department, in

consultation with the Director of Undergraduate Studies, shall appoint additional

advisors to assist in advising duties. The Director of Undergraduate Studies will also

serve on the Undergraduate Studies Committee of the College.

2.1.3.4 The Director of the Center for Business and Economic Research is responsible for

the operations on the Center within guidelines established by the Department.

2.1.4 The Department shall have five standing committees: the Undergraduate Studies

Committee, the Graduate Studies Committee, the Center for Business and

Economic Research Advisory Committee, The Workshop and Seminar

Committee, and the Chair’s Advisory Committee.

2.1.4.1 The Undergraduate Studies Committee shall have no fewer than threeour faculty

members, including the Director of Undergraduate Studies, who serves as its

chair. It will also include an undergraduate student, who will be selected by the

committee and will have full voting rights. Appointments to the committee are

for a term of one academic year. Reappointments for additional one-year terms

are possible. Committee responsibilities include those issues relevant to

undergraduate instruction including approval, oversight and review of the

undergraduate program requirements and courses.

2.1.4.2 The Graduate Studies Committee shall have no fewer than three faculty members,

including the Director of Graduate Studies, who will serve as its chair. The

committee will also include one graduate student member who will have full

voting rights except on matters pertaining to the offering of financial awards.

Appointments to the committee shall be made by the Chair, in consultation with

the Director of Graduate Studies, for a term of one academic year.


Reappointments for additional one-year terms are possible. Committee

responsibilities include those issues relevant to graduate programs and instruction

including approval, oversight and review of the graduate program requirements and

courses.

2.1.4.2 The Center for Business and Economic Research Advisory Committee shall consist

of no fewer than three faculty members appointed by the Chair in consultation with

the Director of the Center for Business and Economic Research. The Director of the

Center will serve as Chair of the Advisory Committee. The function of the

committee is to provide advice to the Director and general oversight of the

operations of the Center.

2.1.4.3 The Chair’s Advisory Committee shall consist of not less than three tenured members of

the faculty appointed by the Chair. This committee also serves as the Merit Review

Advisory Committee. The committee's function is to meet with the Chair to discuss,

consult, and advise regarding the appropriate merit evaluation to be awarded for

each faculty member being reviewed for the biannual faculty performance review.

The only exception is that each committee member is recused when his/her review is

considered or when a potential conflict of interest arises. In the event that a

consensus on the merit evaluation for a faculty member is not reached, the Chair

makes the final determination.

2.1.4.4 The Seminar and Workshop Committee shall consist of not less than three faculty

members appointed by the Chair. The Chair will name one of these members as

chair of the committee. This committee is responsible for seeking suggestions for

seminars and workshops by external speakers, Department faculty, and other faculty

on campus whose research may be of interest to the Department.

2.1.5 When there is a faculty vacancy to be filled, the Chair shall appoint a recruiting

committee consisting of no less than three faculty members including the chair. The

Chair or his/her designee will serve as chair of the recruiting committee. The

recruiting committee will present a recruiting plan to the Department for its

approval. Positions will be advertised following University EOE policies and the

recruiting committee will screen applicants, interview applicants at professional

meetings and make recommendations to the Chair for inviting candidates for campus

visits. Candidates visiting the campus will present a seminar and the faculty will be

given an opportunity to meet with the candidates. The recruiting committee will

make recommendations to the Department Faculty regarding the extension of offers

to candidates.

Section 2.2 GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR COMMITTEES

2.2.1 Notification of membership on committees shall be distributed the Faculty within

thirty days of the beginning of the Fall Semester.

2.2.2 Faculty members with one-half or more of their duties in College or University


administration shall not serve as regular committee members for standing

committees, except as noted in the Department Rules and Procedures. Such faculty

may serve as ex-officio committee members.

2.2.3 Additional ad hoc committees may be established as necessary by the Chair or

elected by the faculty to carry out the activities of the Department or advise the Chair

on issues.

2.2.4 Each standing committee shall meet at least once each semester.

2.2.5 All committee meetings shall be open to any member of the Department Faculty

unless otherwise indicated in the Operating Rules and Procedures.

2.2.6 All committee meetings shall be conducted in a democratic manner with each official

committee member having one vote and passage of motions requiring a simple

majority of the votes cast.

Section 2.3 POLICY

The Chair shall be responsible for keeping a current compilation of the Department's policies.

These shall consist of all continuing Department policy decisions which do not amend the

Department Rules and Regulations.

Section 2.4 ELECTIONS AND VOTING

2.4.1 All elections to elected positions shall be done by secret ballot by the eligible faculty

members. If no candidate receives a majority on the first ballot, a run-off of the two

top candidates will be held.

2.4.2 Voting on issues may be by show of hand. However, a secret ballot may be called for

by any member of the eligible voters.

ARTICLE 3. ACADEMIC PROGRAMS

Section 3.1 STATEMENT OF PROGRAMS.

The statement of the programs of the Department of Economics are available in the current

University of Kentucky Catalogue.

Section 3.2 CHANGES IN PROGRAMS, COURSE OFFERINGS OR COURSES.

3.2.1 Changes to the undergraduate course offerings or degree programs are to be made as

follows: A faculty member sponsoring the proposal submits the proposal to the

Department Undergraduate Studies Committee. The Chair forwards the approved

proposal to the Dean's office for College committee and faculty approval and for

distribution to the appropriate University Committee.


3.2.2 Changes to the graduate course offerings or degree program are to be made as

follows: A faculty member sponsoring the proposal submits the proposal to the

Graduate Studies Committee. The Chair forwards the approved proposal to the Dean's

office for College committee and faculty approval and for distribution to the

appropriate University committee.

Section 3.3 SCHEDULING AND STAFFING OF COURSES

3.3.1 The Chair is responsible for scheduling classes after consultation with the faculty on

teaching desires and times and with the Directors of Graduate and Undergraduate

Studies.

3.3.2 The staffing of courses is to be staffed according to priorities established by the

College of Business and Economics as specified in the Rules and Procedures of the

College of Business and Economics.

ARTICLE 4. PERTAINING TO THE OPERATING RULES AND PROCEDURES

Section 4.1 PRIORITY

No rule or procedure of these Operating Rules and Procedures shall be in conflict with

College or University Rules and Regulations.

Section 4.2 PROCEDURE FOR AMENDMENT

4.2.1 Any member of the Department Faculty may initiate an amendment to the

Operation Rules and Procedures by distribution of copies of the proposal at any

regular meeting of the Departmental Faculty. Such distributions shall constitute a

first reading of the amendment. Proposals shall be clearly labeled as PROPOSED

AMENDMENT.

4.2.2 The amendment becomes part of the Operating Rules and Procedures if ratified

by majority vote of the Department Faculty attending the next regular meeting.

Section 4.3 REVIEW

The Department shall formally consider the question of Operating Rules and Procedures

review at intervals of no greater than five years. At any time within such intervals the Chair

may appoint an ad hoc review committee, which shall make a report on the question to the

Faculty.

Section 4.4 RATIFICATION

These Operating Rules and Procedures shall be considered ratified when accepted by a vote

of the majority of the faculty at a regular faculty meeting. The document becomes effective


upon ratification and with submission to the Provost of the University for approval for

consistency with University rules and regulations.

Section 4.5 UPDATING

Amendments to the Operating Rules and Procedures shall be included at their proper place in

the document, rather than added serially at the end. All wording which has been removed

from the document by Amendment shall be deleted from the updated copies.

Section 4.6 DISTRIBUTION

Each member of the Faculty shall be given a copy of the Operating Rules and Procedures. It

shall be the responsibility of the Chair of the Department to keep the Operating Rules and

Procedures updated. Updated versions shall be distributed to the faculty.

These Rules of Procedure have been created and approved by the Faculty o f this Department,

pursuant to the authority granted by the Administrative and Governing Regulations of the

University of Kentucky. These rules do not become effective -until submission to the Dean of

the Gatton College of Business and Economics and to the Provost for approval for consistency

with University rules and regulations. Any modification to these rules must also be approved

by the Dean and Provost for said consistency. A current copy of the approved rules for this

Department is available in the office of the Chair, the Dean of the College, and the Provost's

office.

8/18/2015

Chair (indicating approval by the Faculty) Date

Dean of Gatton College of Business and Economics Date

Provost of the University of Kentucky Date


Department of Finance & Quantitative Methods Gatton College of Business and Economics


INTRODUCTION These Rules of Procedure are intended to be consistent with the Governing Regulations and the Administrative Regulations of the University of Kentucky and the laws of the Commonwealth of Kentucky and of the United States of America. In the event that these rules of procedure are inconsistent or contrary to the above-mentioned regulations and laws, then those regulations and laws control.

ARTICLE 1. ORGANIZATION AND MEETINGS Section 1.1 DEPARTMENT FACULTY AND PERSONNEL 1.1.1 The Department Faculty includes all full-time personnel of the Department of Finance & Quantitative Methods having the academic rank of lecturer or higher. 1.1.2 Unless specified otherwise in these Operating Rules and Procedures or unless prohibited by other University regulations, voting privileges are extended to all members of the Department Faculty. Only tenured/tenure-track faculty can vote on the hiring of tenure-track faculty. Section 1.2 MEETINGS 1.2.1 Regular meetings of the Department Faculty shall be held at least once each year (may be held electronically). Special meetings of the Department may be held at the call of the Department Chair or on petition from one-half of the Department Faculty 1.2.2 Notification of all meetings of the Department Faculty shall be provided by electronic notice to the members. When possible, such notification shall be given at least four days in advance of the meeting and shall include the agenda of the meeting. 1.2.3 A quorum shall consist of a majority of the tenure-track voting members of the Department Faculty. In all parliamentary questions not otherwise provided for, Robert’s Rules of Order shall apply.

1.2.4 The Department Chair shall preside over all Department Faculty Meetings except as stipulated otherwise by these Operating Rules and Procedures.


Section 2.1 ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE AND STANDING DEPARTMENT COMMITTEES

2.1.1 The administrative organization of the Department consists of the Department Chair, the Director of Graduate Studies (DGS), and the Director of Undergraduate Studies (DUS).

2.1.2 The Department Chair is the chief executive officer of the Department. The authority of the Department Chair is exercised with the assistance of the DUS and DGS, committees, and Department Faculty. The Department Chair is responsible for the administrative affairs of the Department, subject to University, College, and Department policy and Operating Rules and Procedures as determined by the Department Faculty.

2.1.2.1 The Department Faculty shall be actively involved in the selection, review and evaluation of the Department Chair according to the guidelines and procedures established by the College, the University, and those adopted by Department Faculty.

2.1.2.2 The Department Chair is responsible for making recommendations on the appointment of new members of the department, reappointment, terminal appointments, decisions not to reappoint, and post-retirement appointments, as specified in GR VII B.5. All full-time non-tenured faculty members who have been members of the Department for two years and all tenured faculty members shall be consulted on such issues. (See GR VII B.5.)

2.1.2.3 The Department Chair is responsible for submitting recommendations on promotion and the granting of tenure. All recommendations on matters of promotion and tenure must include the written judgment of each eligible member of the Department Faculty along with the recommendation of the Department Chair. Eligible members are tenured Department Faculty of higher rank than the candidate. The Department Chair’s recommendation will include the majority opinion (obtained by secret ballot) of eligible faculty following a meeting of Department Faculty to evaluate candidates after faculty members submit their written judgements based on the candidate’s dossier (including external letters of evaluation). Candidates have the right, but are not required, to present their case to the faculty at such a meeting, but may not be present for evaluation and voting. Procedures and criteria used in preparing the recommendations shall be those established by the University and the tenured Graduate Department Faculty. Eligible faculty on approved leaves of absence, or with a primary administrative service or other assignment outside the department may, but are not required to, provide written judgments. Tenured faculty of higher rank in other departments in the University may, but are not required to, provide written judgments.

2.1.2.4 The Department Chair is responsible for reaching agreement with each faculty member on the allocation of faculty time as officially reported to the University via distribution of effort agreements. The responsibility lies in ensuring fair and equitable allocation of effort for the individual and in

comparison with other faculty as well as compliance with university, college, and department rules and policies. 2.1.2.5 The Department Chair is responsible for the evaluation of Department Faculty members and for making recommendations on salaries and salary changes by procedures and criteria established by the University and the Department Faculty. The Department Chair is responsible for ensuring fair and equitable treatment of faculty across academic areas. The Department Chair will consult with the Department Advisory Committee in all evaluations, but ultimately the Department Chair makes the decisions. 2.1.2.6 The Department Chair is responsible for submitting budget requests and for administering the departmental budget. 2.1.2.7 The Department Chair represents the Department to the College and University. On all issues where the Department Chair’s opinion differs from that of the majority of the Department Faculty, the Department Chair must communicate the Department Faculty’s opinion as well as his/her own and state the reasons for differing from the Department Faculty’s opinion. The Department Faculty shall be given a copy of this communication. 2.1.2.8 The Department Chair is appointed by the Dean for a term not to exceed four academic years. On the approval of at least a majority of the Department Faculty, the Department Chair may be reappointed for up to an additional four years. A person may serve as Department Chair or Acting Department Chair for a maximum of eight years out of any twelve consecutive years. 2.1.3 The DUS and DGS shall be appointed by the Department Chair. Their appointments are for one academic year and may be repeated. 2.1.3.1 The DGS has the responsibility of coordinating all activities pertaining to graduate study in the Department, such as recruiting, admissions, course offerings, comprehensive examinations, etc. The DGS represents the department on the College Graduate Policy Committee. 2.1.3.2 The DGS has the responsibility for advising all graduate students other than MBA’s who do not have an advisory committee. The advisory committee Chairs advise all doctoral students whose committees they chair. The staff of the College MBA Center is responsible for advising students in the MBA program. 2.1.3.3 The DUS will serve on the College’s Undergraduate Studies Committee. 2.1.4 The Department Advisory Committee will consist of three members of the Department Faculty elected annually by the Department Faculty. SECTION 2.2 GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR COMMITTEES 2.2.1 Notification of membership on committees shall be distributed to the Faculty within thirty days of the beginning of the Fall Semester.

2.2.2 Faculty members with one-half or more of their duties in College or University administration shall not serve as regular committee members for standing committees except as noted in the Department Rules and Procedures. Such faculty may serve as ex-officio committee members. 2.2.3 Additional ad hoc committees may be established as necessary by the Department Chair or elected by the faculty to carry out the activities of the Department or advise the Department Chair on issues. 2.2.4 Each standing committee shall meet at least once each year (may be held electronically). 2.2.5 All committee meetings shall be open to any member of the Department Faculty unless otherwise indicated in the Operating Rules and Procedures. 2.2.6 All committee meetings shall be conducted in a democratic manner with each official committee member having one vote and passage of motions requiring a simple majority of the votes cast. Section 2.3 POLICY The Department Chair shall be responsible for keeping a current compilation of the department’s policies. These shall consist of all continuing Department policy decisions which do not amend the Department Operating Rules and Procedures. Section 2.4 ELECTIONS AND VOTING 2.4.1 All elections to elected positions shall be done by secret ballot by the eligible Department Faculty members. If no candidate receives a majority on the first ballot, a run-off of the two top candidates will be held. 2.4.2 Voting on issues may be electronic or by show of hands or verbal acclamation. However, a secret ballot may be called for by any member of the eligible voters.

ARTICLE 3 ACADEMIC PROGRAMS Section 3.1 CHANGES IN PROGRAMS, CERTIFICATES, OR COURSES Changes to course offerings or degree programs are to be made as follows: The DUS or DGS submits the proposal to the Department Faculty for a vote. Upon approval, the Department Chair forwards the proposal to the Dean’s office for College committee and faculty approval and for distribution to the appropriate University Committee.

Section 3.2 SCHEDULING AND STAFFING ON COURSES 3.2.1 The Department Chair is responsible for scheduling classes after consultation with the faculty member on university/college commitments to the faculty member, faculty member’s disciplinary expertise, plus teaching desires and times. In the event of conflict in teaching assignments or schedules, priorities are to be based upon teaching needs, student enrollment, and disruption to student schedules. Intractable conflicts can be brought to the Department Faculty for voting as needed. 3.2.2 Courses are to be staffed according to established priorities and College guidelines. ARTICLE 4 PERTAINING TO THE OPERATING RULES AND PROCEDURES Section 4.1 PRIORITY No rule or procedure of these Operating Rules and Procedures shall be in conflict with College or University Rules and Regulations. Section 4.2 PROCEDURE FOR AMENDMENT 4.2.1 Any member of the Department Faculty may initiate an amendment. 4.2.2 If an amendment proposal is first distributed to the faculty at a department faculty meeting, it shall be clearly labeled as PROPOSED AMENDMENT. Such a distribution is considered a first reading of the amendment, and will not be voted on until the next faculty meeting. At that meeting, the amendment becomes part of the Operating Rules and Procedures if ratified by majority vote of the Department Faculty. 4.2.3 Amendments may also be initiated in between regular Department Faculty meetings through electronic distribution. Such distribution shall constitute a first reading of the amendment, and shall be clearly labeled as PROPOSED AMENDMENT. If the faculty chooses to unanimously approve the proposed amendment without debate through an electronic secret ballot, the amendment becomes part of the Operating Rules and Procedures. Lacking unanimity, it will be treated as a proposed amendment at the next faculty meeting as described in 4.2.2. Section 4.3 REVIEW The Department shall formally consider the question of Operating Rules and Procedures review at intervals no greater than five years, and at minimum when there is a change in Department Chair. At

any time within such intervals the Department Chair may appoint an ad hoc review committee that shall make a report on the question to the Department Faculty. Section 4.4 RATIFICATION These Operating Rules and Procedures shall be considered ratified when accepted by a vote of the majority of the Department Faculty. The document becomes effective upon ratification and with approval of the Provost of the University. Section 4.5 UPDATING Amendments to the Operating Rules and Procedures shall be included at their proper place in the document, rather than added serially at the end. All wording which has been removed from the document by Amendment shall be deleted from the updated copies. All wording added by amendment shall be so identified in updated copies of the document by being underlined, and the date of the amendment shall be indicated in parentheses following the underlined provisions. Section 4.6 DISTRIBUTION Each member of the faculty shall be given a copy of the Operating Rules and Procedures by email. It shall be the responsibility of the Department Chair to keep the Operating Rules and Procedures updated and available online. Updated versions shall be distributed to the faculty by email.

______________________________________ _____ Chair (indicating approval by the Faculty) Date

______________________________________________ ___________ Dean of the Gatton College of Business and Economics Date

____________________________________________ ______________ Provost of the University of Kentucky Date

September 2012


Department of Marketing and Supply Chain Gatton College of Business and Economics


These Rules of Procedure are intended to be consistent with the Governing Regulations and the Administrative Regulations of the University of Kentucky and the laws of the Commonwealth of Kentucky and of the United States of America. In the event that these rules of procedure are inconsistent or contrary to the above-mentioned regulations and laws, then those regulations and laws control. ARTICLE 1. ORGANIZATION AND MEETINGS Section 1.1 DEPARTMENTAL FACULTY AND PERSONNEL

1.1.1 The Faculty of the Department of Marketing and Supply Chain includes the Personnel of the Department with the following ranks: lecturers, instructors, professors of all ranks in the Regular Title Series, Special Title Series, Research Title Series, Extension Title Series, and joint appointees of these ranks. Visitors and part-time instructors are excluded from this definition of the Faculty. 1.1.2 Voting privileges are extended to all members of the Faculty of the Department with the following exceptions. Faculty members in the Research Title Series are not eligible to vote on matters relating to faculty appointments, retention, promotion, or tenure or to be elected to the University Senate. Lecturers have the same voting eligibility as those in the Research Title Series. Joint appointees do not have voting rights unless otherwise specified in the joint appointment agreement. 1.1.3 Department Personnel includes all full-time and part-time personnel of the Department.

1.1.4 The Department limits the number of lecturers and senior lecturers to 20% of the tenured or tenure-eligible faculty or, 4 whichever is smaller. Section 1.2 MEETINGS 1.2.1 Regular meetings of the Faculty shall be held at least once each semester. Special meetings of the Faculty may be held at the call of the Chair or on petition from one-fourth of the membership.

1.2.2 Notification of all meetings of the Department Faculty shall be given by memorandum (electronic delivery is permissible) to the members. Notification of meetings shall be given at least one week in advance of the meeting (except in the case of meetings, such as on recruiting, when prompt action is required) and shall include the agenda of the meeting. Any change in Department policy not previously listed on such agenda shall not be brought to a vote until the next meeting of the Faculty. 1.2.3 A quorum shall consist of a majority of the voting members of the Department Faculty. In all parliamentary questions not otherwise provided for, Robert’s Rules of Order shall apply. 1.2.4 The Chair shall appoint a secretary for purposes of the recording, preparation, and distribution of the minutes of Department meetings. Copies of the minutes shall be distributed to all members of the Department Faculty and shall be made part of the Department Record.

1.2.5 The Chair shall preside over all Department meetings except as may be delegated by the Chair or stipulated otherwise by these Rules and Procedures. ARTICLE 2. ADMINISTRATION Section 2.1 ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE AND STANDING COMMITTEES 2.1.1 The administrative organization of the Department consists of the Chair, the Director of Graduate Studies, and the Director of Undergraduate Studies. 2.1.2 The Chair is the chief executive officer of the Department and is an ex officio member of all department committees. The authority of the Chair is exercised with the assistance of the Director of Graduate Studies, the Director of Undergraduate Studies, committees, and with the Faculty of the Department. Subject to University, College and Department policy and to policy and rules as determined by the faculty, the Chair is responsible for the administrative affairs of the Department. 2.1.2.1 The Faculty of the Department shall be actively involved in the selection, review and evaluation of the Chair according to the guidelines and procedures established by the University and those adopted by the Faculty of the Department. 2.1.2.2 The Chair is responsible for recommendations on the appointment of new members of the Department, reappointments, terminal appointments, decisions not to reappoint, and post-retirement appointments, as specified in GR VII B.5. All tenured faculties shall be consulted on such issues. Also, all full-time non-tenured faculty members who have been members of the Department for two or more years shall be consulted on decisions regarding the appointment of new Department members. (See GR VII B.5.)

2.1.2.3 The Chair is responsible for recommendations on promotion and grants of tenure. The procedures and criteria used in preparing the recommendations shall be those established by the University and the tenured Faculty of the Department. The procedures must include consultation with the tenured members of the Department of equal or higher rank. All recommendations on matters of promotion and tenure must include the written judgment of each consulted member of the Department along with the recommendation of the Chair. All faculty members with tenure shall be consulted on recommendations for granting of tenure. Faculty members on approved leave of absence or with a primary administrative, service, or other assignment outside the department may, but are not required to, provide written judgments on recommendations. 2.1.2.4 The Chair is responsible for reaching agreement with each faculty member on the allocation of faculty time as officially reported to the University via the Distribution of Effort Agreement. The Chair should ensure fair and equitable allocations of effort across individuals and be in compliance with University and College rules and policies.

2.1.2.5 The Chair is responsible for the periodic evaluation of Department faculty and for making recommendations on salaries and salary changes using procedures and criteria established by the University, the College and the Faculty of the Department. Criteria and procedures for appointment, reappointment, non-renewal of appointment, terminal appointment, promotion, and faculty merit performance review at the lecturer or senior lecturer rank will be consistent with the criteria and procedures employed for tenured and tenure-eligible faculty. Because lecturer and senior lecturer appointments rarely include research requirements, the criteria and procedures will primarily focus on teaching and service as reflected in the Distribution of Effort (DOE). The portfolio of evidence used in the evaluation process has common characteristics but should also consider evidence of excellence in research, instruction, and service offered by individual faculty members. Items that are commonly used and relied upon by the Department to evaluate teaching are the following:

- Information from student teaching evaluations. This includes numerical

scores and, if available, summaries of students' written comments. - Comments by former students who have been selected to provide

letters of testimony regarding a promotion candidate's teaching effectiveness.

Other evidence considered by the Department may include, but is not limited to:

- Unsolicited comments from students about the candidate's teaching. - Significant mentoring activities and contributions to the professional development of

students.

- Supervision of independent studies, internships or independent research. - Receiving a significant outstanding teacher award. - Scholarly publications about teaching. - Receiving external grant support for teaching/learning projects. - Evaluations by external reviewers in a position to assess the candidate’s

teaching skills. - Development of new courses that fill a curriculum need. - Successful participation at teaching workshops, conferences, or institutes. - Receipt of competitively-awarded internal funding for teaching.

Evaluation of service commonly takes account of:

- Service on Departmental, College, or University committees. - Leadership in undertaking and completing the tasks of a committee.

- Service in other capacities in University governance.

Other evidence of service includes, but is not limited to:

- Service on the editorial board of a high-quality academic journal - Serving as a referee for a high-quality academic journal - Serving as a conference chair, program chair or organizer of conference

sessions - Serving as a member of a review panel for major organization

- Being an officer or committee chair in a significant professional organization - Serving on a governmental commission, task force, board, or in related capacities

These non-exhaustive lists illustrate how candidates may provide evidence for a performance review and promotion, but candidates need not accomplish any particular subset of them. 2.1.2.6 The Chair is responsible for submitting budget requests for the Department and for administering the budget subject to guidelines established by the University, College and Department.

2.1.2.7 The Chair represents the Department. If the opinion of the Chair differs from that of the majority of the consulted faculty on relevant issues and questions, the Chair must communicate the faculty's opinion along with his/her own and state the reasons for the difference in opinion. The Chair should provide a copy of this communication to faculty members.

2.1.2.8 The Chair is appointed by the Dean for a term not to exceed four academic years. On the approval of at least a majority of the Department Faculty, the Chair may be reappointed for up to an additional four years.

2.1.3 The Director of Undergraduate Studies shall be appointed by the Chair of the Department after consultation with the Faculty. The Chair shall make recommendations to the Dean of the Graduate School of the University regarding the appointment of the Director of Graduate Studies.

2.1.3.1 The Director of Graduate Studies has responsibility for coordinating all activities pertaining to graduate study such as recruiting, admissions, course offerings, and qualifying examinations.

2.1.3.2 The Director of Graduate Studies has responsibility for advising all graduate students who do not have an advisory committee. Once an advisory committee has been appointed, the committee chair advises the relevant doctoral student. 2.1.3.3 The Director of Undergraduate Studies is responsible for coordinating the advising for all students who are pursuing an undergraduate major in Marketing and Supply Chain. The Chair of the Department, in consultation with the Director of Undergraduate Studies, shall appoint additional advisors to assist in advising duties. The Director of Undergraduate Studies will also serve on the Undergraduate Studies Committee of the College.

2.1.4 The Department shall have three standing committees: the Undergraduate Studies Committee, the Graduate Studies Committee, and the Merit Review Advisory Committee.

2.1.4.1 The Undergraduate Studies Committee shall consist of no fewer than two faculty members, including the Director of Undergraduate Studies, who serves as its chair. It will also include at least one undergraduate student to be selected by the committee who will have full voting rights. Appointments are for a term of one academic year. Reappointments are permitted. Committee responsibilities include all issues relevant to undergraduate instruction, such as approval, oversight and review of the undergraduate program requirements and individual courses. 2.1.4.2 The Graduate Studies Committee shall consist of at least two faculty members, including the Director of Graduate Studies, who will serve as its chair. The committee will also include at least one student member appointed by the DGS who will have full voting rights except on matters pertaining to the offering of financial awards. Appointments to the committee shall be made by the Chair, in consultation with the Director of Graduate Studies, for a term of one academic year. Reappointments are permitted. Committee responsibilities include

all issues relevant to graduate programs and instruction, such as approval, oversight and review of the graduate program requirements and courses.

2.1.4.3 The Merit Review Advisory Committee shall consist of three tenured members of the faculty appointed by the Chair. The committee's function is to meet with the Chair to discuss, consult, and advise on the appropriate merit evaluation score to be awarded for each faculty member under scheduled or optional review. A committee member will be excused when his/her review is considered or when a potential conflict of interest arises. In the event the committee and chair fail to reach a consensus on an individual’s merit evaluation, the Chair makes the final determination. 2.1.5 In the event of a faculty vacancy, the Chair shall appoint a recruiting committee consisting of at least three faculty members. The Chair or his/her designee will serve as chair of the recruiting committee. The recruiting committee will present a recruiting plan to the Department for its approval. Positions will be properly advertised according to University regulations. The faculty will screen applicants. The recruiting committee will interview applicants at professional meetings and make recommendations to the Chair on invitations for campus visits. Candidates visiting the campus will present a seminar and faculty will be given an opportunity to meet with the candidates. The recruiting committee, in consultation with the faculty, will make recommendations to the Chair regarding the extension of offers to candidates. Section 2.2 GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR COMMITTEES 2.2.1 Notification of membership on committees shall be distributed to Faculty within thirty days of the beginning of the Fall Semester. 2.2.2 Faculty members with one-half or more of their duties in College or University administration shall not serve as regular committee members for standing committees, except as noted in the Department Rules and Procedures. Such faculty may serve as ex-officio committee members. 2.2.3 Additional ad hoc committees may be established as necessary by the Chair or elected by the faculty to carry out the activities of the Department or advise the Chair on issues. 2.2.4 Each standing committee shall meet at least once each semester. 2.2.5 All committee meetings shall be open to any member of the Department Faculty unless otherwise indicated in the Operating Rules and Procedures. 2.2.6 All meetings shall be conducted in a democratic manner with each committee member having one vote and outcomes determined by a single majority rule.

Section 2.3 POLICIES The Chair shall be responsible for keeping a current compilation of the Department's policies. Section 2.4 ELECTIONS AND VOTING 2.4.1 All elections shall be conducted by secret ballot of the eligible faculty members. If no candidate receives a majority on the first ballot, a run-off of the two top candidates will be held. 2.4.2 Voting on issues may be by show of hand. However, a secret ballot may be called for by any member of the eligible voters. ARTICLE 3. ACADEMIC PROGRAMS Section 3.1 STATEMENT OF PROGRAMS. A statement of the programs of the Department of Marketing and Supply Chain is available in the current University of Kentucky Catalogue. Section 3.2 CHANGES IN PROGRAMS, COURSE OFFERINGS OR COURSES.

3.2.1 Changes to the undergraduate course offerings or degree programs are to be made as follows: A faculty member sponsoring the proposal submits the proposal to the Department Undergraduate Studies Committee. The committee has thirty days to present the proposal to the Department faculty along with its recommendation to the faculty. The faculty shall act upon the proposal within thirty days. The Chair forwards the approved proposal to the Dean's office for College committee and faculty approval and for distribution to the appropriate University Committee. 3.2.2 Changes to the graduate course offerings or degree program are to be made as follows: A faculty member sponsoring the proposal submits the proposal to the Graduate Studies Committee. The Graduate Studies Committee has thirty days to present the proposal to the Department faculty. The faculty shall act upon the proposal within thirty days. The Chair forwards the approved proposal to the Dean's office for College committee and faculty approval and for distribution to the appropriate University committee. Section 3.3 SCHEDULING AND STAFFING OF COURSES 3.3.1 The Chair is responsible for scheduling classes after consultation with the faculty on teaching subject matter and times and with the Directors of Graduate and Undergraduate Studies.

3.3.2 Courses are to be staffed according to priorities established by the Gatton College of Business and Economics as specified in the Rules and Procedures of the Gatton College of Business and Economics. ARTICLE 4. PERTAINING TO THE OPERATING RULES AND PROCEDURES Section 4.1 PRIORITY No rule or procedure of these Operating Rules and Procedures shall be in conflict with College or University Rules and Regulations. Section 4.2 PROCEDURE FOR AMENDMENT 4.2.1 Any member of the Department Faculty may initiate an amendment to the Operating Rules and Procedures by distributing copies of the proposal at any regular meeting of the Department Faculty. Such a distribution shall constitute a first reading of the amendment. Proposals shall be clearly labeled as PROPOSED AMENDMENT. 4.2.2 The amendment becomes part of the Operating Rules and Procedures if ratified by majority vote of the Department Faculty attending the next regular meeting. Section 4.3 REVIEW The Department shall formally consider the question of Operating Rules and Procedures review at intervals of no greater than five years. At any time within such intervals the Chair may appoint an ad hoc review committee, which shall make a report on the question to the Faculty. Section 4.4 RATIFICATION These Operating Rules and Procedures shall be considered ratified when accepted by a vote of the majority of the Department faculty at a regular faculty meeting. The document becomes effective upon ratification and with submission to the Provost of the University for approval for consistency with University rules and regulations. Section 4.5 UPDATING Amendments to the Operating Rules and Procedures shall be included at their proper place in the document, rather than added serially at the end. All wording which has been removed from the document by Amendment shall be deleted from the updated copies. Section 4.6 DISTRIBUTION Each member of the Faculty shall be given a copy of the Operating Rules and Procedures. It shall be the responsibility of the Chair of the Department to keep the Operating Rules and Procedures updated. Updated versions shall be distributed to the faculty.

These Rules of Procedure have been created and approved by the Faculty of this Department, pursuant to the authority granted by the Administrative and Governing Regulations of the University of Kentucky. These rules do not become effective until they are submitted to the Dean of the Gatton College of Business and Economics and to the Provost for approval for consistency with University rules and regulations. Any amendments to these rules must also be approved by the Dean and Provost for said consistency. A current copy of the approved rules for this Department is available in the office of the Chair, the Dean of the College, and the Provost's office. __________________________________ _________ Chair (indicating approval by the Faculty) Date _____________________________________________ ____________ Dean of the Gatton College of Business and Economics Date _____________________________________________ _____________ Provost of the University of Kentucky Date


Department of Management Gatton College of Business and Economics


INTRODUCTION These Rules of Procedure are intended to be consistent with the Governing Regulations and the Administrative Regulations of the University of Kentucky and the laws of the Commonwealth of Kentucky and of the United States of America. In the event that these rules of procedure are inconsistent or contrary to the above-mentioned regulations and laws, then those regulations and laws control.

ARTICLE 1. ORGANIZATION AND MEETINGS Section 1.1 DEPARTMENT FACULTY AND PERSONNEL 1.1.1 The Department Faculty includes all full-time personnel of the Department of Management t having the academic rank of lecturer or higher. 1.1.2 Unless specified otherwise in these Operating Rules and Procedures or unless prohibited by other University regulations, voting privileges are extended to all members of the Department Faculty. Section 1.2 MEETINGS 1.2.1 Regular meetings of the Department Faculty shall be held at least once each semester. Special meetings of the Department may be held at the call of the Department Chair or on petition from one-fourth of the Department Faculty. 1.2.2 Notification of all meetings of the Department Faculty shall be provided by electronic notice to the members. When possible, such notification shall be given at least four days in advance of the meeting and shall include the agenda of the meeting. 1.2.3 A quorum shall consist of a majority of the tenure-track voting members of the Department Faculty. In all parliamentary questions not otherwise provided for, Robert’s Rules of Order shall apply. 1.2.4 The Department Chair shall preside over all Department Faculty Meetings except as stipulated otherwise by these Operating Rules and Procedures.

ARTICLE 2. ADMINISTRATION Section 2.1 ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE AND STANDING DEPARTMENT COMMITTEES 2.1.1 The administrative organization of the Department consists of the Department Chair, the Director of Graduate Studies (DGS), and the Director of Undergraduate Studies (DUS). 2.1.2 The Department Chair is the chief executive officer of the Department. The authority of the Department Chair is exercised with the assistance of the DUS and DGS, committees, and Department Faculty. The Department Chair is responsible for the administrative affairs of the Department, subject to University, College, and Department policy and Operating Rules and Procedures as determined by the Department Faculty. 2.1.2.1 The Department Faculty shall be actively involved in the selection, review and evaluation of the Department Chair according to the guidelines and procedures established by the College, the University, and those adopted by Department Faculty. 2.1.2.2 The Department Chair is responsible for making recommendations on the appointment of new members of the department, reappointment, terminal appointments, decisions not to reappoint, and post-retirement appointments, as specified in GR VII B.5. All full-time non-tenured faculty members who have been members of the Department for two years and all tenured faculty members shall be consulted on such issues. (See GR VII B.5.) 2.1.2.3 The Department Chair is responsible for submitting recommendations on promotion and the granting of tenure. All recommendations on matters of promotion and tenure must include the written judgment of each eligible member of the Department Faculty along with the recommendation of the Department Chair. Eligible members are tenured Department Faculty of higher rank than the candidate. The Department Chair’s recommendation will include the majority opinion (obtained by secret ballot) of eligible faculty following a meeting of Department Faculty to evaluate candidates. Candidates have the right, but are not required, to present their case to the faculty at such a meeting, but may not be present for evaluation and voting. Procedures and criteria used in preparing the recommendations shall be those established by the University and the tenured Graduate Department Faculty. Eligible faculty on approved leaves of absence, or with a primary administrative service or other assignment outside the department may, but are not required to, provide written judgments. Tenured faculty of higher rank in other departments in the University may, but are not required to, provide written judgments. 2.1.2.4 The Department Chair is responsible for reaching agreement with each faculty member on the allocation of faculty time as officially reported to the University via distribution of effort agreements. The responsibility lies in ensuring fair and equitable allocation of effort for the individual and in comparison with other faculty as well as compliance with university, college, and department rules and policies.

2.1.2.5 The Department Chair is responsible for the evaluation of Department Faculty and for making recommendations on salaries and salary changes by procedures and criteria established by the University and the Department Faculty. The Department Chair is responsible for insuring fair and equitable treatment of faculty across academic areas. The Department Chair will consult with the Department Advisory Committee in all evaluations, but ultimately the Department Chair makes the decisions. 2.1.2.6 The Department Chair is responsible for submitting budget requests and for administering the departmental budget. 2.1.2.7 The Department Chair represents the Department to the College and University. On all issues where the Department Chair’s opinion differs from that of the majority of the Department Faculty, the Department Chair must communicate the Department Faculty’s opinion as well as his/her own and state the reasons for differing from the Department Faculty’s opinion. The Department Faculty shall be given a copy of this communication. 2.1.2.8 The Department Chair is appointed by the Dean for a term not to exceed three academic years. On the approval of at least a majority of the Department Faculty, the Department Chair may be reappointed for up to an additional three years. A person may serve as Department Chair or Acting Department Chair for a maximum of six years out of any nine consecutive years. 2.1.3 The DUS and DGS shall be appointed by the Department Chair. Their appointments are for one academic year and may be repeated but may not exceed six consecutive years. 2.1.3.1 The DGS has the responsibility of coordinating all activities pertaining to graduate study in the Department, such as recruiting, admissions, course offerings, comprehensive examinations, etc. The DGS represents the department on the College Graduate Policy Committee. 2.1.3.2 The DGS has the responsibility for advising all graduate students other than MBA’s who do not have an advisory committee. The advisory committee Chairs advise all doctoral students whose committees they chair. The staff of the College MBA Center is responsible for advising students in the MBA program. 2.1.3.3 The DUS will serve on the College’s Undergraduate Studies Committee. 2.1.4 The Department Advisory Committee will consist of three members of the Department Faculty elected annually by the Department Faculty. SECTION 2.2 GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR COMMITTEES 2.2.1 Notification of membership on committees shall be distributed to the Faculty within thirty days of the beginning of the Fall Semester.

2.2.2 Faculty members with one-half or more of their duties in College or University administration shall not serve as regular committee members for standing committees except as noted in the Department Rules and Procedures. Such faculty may serve as ex-officio committee members. 2.2.3 Additional ad hoc committees may be established as necessary by the Department Chair or elected by the faculty to carry out the activities of the Department or advise the Department Chair on issues. 2.2.4 Each standing committee shall meet at least once each semester. 2.2.5 All committee meetings shall be open to any member of the Department Faculty unless otherwise indicated in the Operating Rules and Procedures. 2.2.6 All committee meetings shall be conducted in a democratic manner with each official committee member having one vote and passage of motions requiring a simple majority of the votes cast. Section 2.3 POLICY The Department Chair shall be responsible for keeping a current compilation of the department’s policies. These shall consist of all continuing Department policy decisions which do not amend the Department Operating Rules and Procedures. Section 2.4 ELECTIONS AND VOTING 2.4.1 All elections to elected positions shall be done by secret ballot by the eligible Department Faculty members. If no candidate receives a majority on the first ballot, a run-off of the two top candidates will be held. 2.4.2 Voting on issues may be electronic or by show of hands or verbal acclamation. However, a secret ballot may be called for by any member of the eligible voters.

ARTICLE 3 ACADEMIC PROGRAMS Section 3.1 CHANGES IN PROGRAMS, CERTIFICATES, OR COURSES Changes to course offerings or degree programs are to be made as follows: The faculty member sponsoring the proposal submits the proposal to the Department Chair, who then seeks the department faculty’s approval no later than 30 days after submission. Upon approval, the Department Chair forwards the proposal to the Dean’s office for College committee and faculty approval and for distribution to the appropriate University Committee.

Section 3.2 SCHEDULING AND STAFFING ON COURSES 3.2.1 The Department Chair is responsible for scheduling classes after consultation with the faculty on teaching desires and times. In the event of conflict in teaching assignments or schedules, priorities are to be based upon teaching needs, student enrollment, and disruption to student schedules. Intractable conflicts can be brought to the Department Faculty for voting as needed. 3.2.2 Courses are to be staffed according to established priorities and College guidelines. ARTICLE 4 PERTAINING TO THE OPERATING RULES AND PROCEDURES Section 4.1 PRIORITY No rule or procedure of these Operating Rules and Procedures shall be in conflict with College or University Rules and Regulations. Section 4.2 PROCEDURE FOR AMENDMENT 4.2.1 Any member of the Department Faculty may initiate an amendment. 4.2.2 If an amendment proposal is first distributed to the faculty at a department faculty meeting, it shall be clearly labeled as PROPOSED AMENDMENT. Such a distribution is considered a first reading of the amendment, and will not be voted on until the next faculty meeting. At that meeting, the amendment becomes part of the Operating Rules and Procedures if ratified by majority vote of the Department Faculty. 4.2.3 Amendments may also be initiated in between regular Department Faculty meetings through electronic distribution. Such distribution shall constitute a first reading of the amendment, and shall be clearly labeled as PROPOSED AMENDMENT. If the faculty chooses to unanimously approve the proposed amendment without debate through an electronic secret ballot, the amendment becomes part of the Operating Rules and Procedures. Lacking unanimity, it will be treated as a proposed amendment at the next faculty meeting as described in 4.2.2. Section 4.3 REVIEW The Department shall formally consider the question of Operating Rules and Procedures review at intervals no greater than five years, and at minimum when there is a change in Department Chair. At

any time within such intervals the Department Chair may appoint an ad hoc review committee that shall make a report on the question to the Department Faculty. Section 4.4 RATIFICATION These Operating Rules and Procedures shall be considered ratified when accepted by a vote of the majority of the Department Faculty. The document becomes effective upon ratification and with approval of the Provost of the University. Section 4.5 UPDATING Amendments to the Operating Rules and Procedures shall be included at their proper place in the document, rather than added serially at the end. All wording which has been removed from the document by Amendment shall be deleted from the updated copies. All wording added by amendment shall be so identified in updated copies of the document by being underlined, and the date of the amendment shall be indicated in parentheses following the underlined provisions. Section 4.6 DISTRIBUTION Each member of the faculty shall be given a copy of the Operating Rules and Procedures. It shall be the responsibility of the Department Chair to keep the Operating Rules and Procedures updated. Updated versions shall be distributed to the faculty. ______________________________________ _____ Chair (indicating approval by the Faculty) Date

______________________________________________ ___________ Dean of the Gatton College of Business and Economics Date

____________________________________________ ______________ Provost of the University of Kentucky Date

Appendix O: Faculty and Staff Awards Recognition and Awards: Judith Milburn Haywood Staff Awards – CURRENT

Donor Intent: Provide two $500 Staff Awards annually One to the Gatton College of Business and Economics Professional (Exempt - Monthly)

Employee of the Year One to the Gatton College of Business and Economics Classified (Non-Exempt - Bi-

Weekly) Employee of the Year

Recipients should be full time, regular staff employees with at least one year of service in the Gatton College of Business and Economics

Nominations should be solicited from Gatton College staff and faculty in February for awards covering the previous calendar year’s performance.

Nominations should provide information on specific examples of nominated employee’s (a) dedication and positive attitude, (b) interactions with others, (c) competency and skills, (d) job performance in regular duties, and (e) service outside regular job duties.

Awards should be made to Recipients by the end of March.

2015-16 Matt Cosgrove and Shonta Phelps 2014-15 Michelle Lowe, Allo Petro, and Debbie O’Daniel 2013-2014 Melissa Huffman and Robby Martin-Curry 2012-13 Rita Booth and Jeannie Graves 2006-Shana Hall, Debbie Wheeler 2005-Patricia Krausman, Allo Petro 2004-Jason, Galyon, Beverly Kemper, Debbie Reed 2003-Michelle Baker, Connie Blakemore UK Outstanding Staff Awards – Hosted by the Office of the President and Staff Senate of the University of Kentucky Honorees: Judith Milburn Haywood Staff Awards: 2014-15 Michelle Lowe, Allo Petro, and Debbie O’Daniel 2013-2014 Melissa Huffman and Robby Martin-Curry 2012-13 Rita Booth and Jeannie Graves 2006-Shana Hall, Debbie Wheeler 2005-Patricia Krausman, Allo Petro 2004-Jason, Galyon, Beverly Kemper, Debbie Reed Staff of the Year Awards – Previous Award

1999-Sandy Hupp, Janet Lane 1998-Deborah Englert, Mary Williamson 1997-Connie Blakemore, Debbie Wheeler 1996-Steve Jacoby, Karen Rivera 1995-Donna Ballos, Marilyn Underwood 1994-Donna Ballos, Mary Wheeler 1993-Kenny Sublett, Veneida Cannon 1992-Scottie Kenkel, Phyllis Underwood 1991-Ralph Brown, Kay Scott 1990-Lynne Kelly, Ernestine Barnes 1989-Evelyn Buchanan 1988-Mary Hunter

Gatton College Teaching Excellence Initiative to Enhance and Support Teaching and Learning

Teaching Awards With a $10,000 award budget we decided to give out three faculty awards at $3,000 each and one graduate student award at $1,000. One faculty award will focus on innovative pedagogy and another on student community engagement connected to a course. A third faculty award will be based on student engagement and nominations will come solely from students. The graduate student award will be based on overall teaching success. In addition to our annual teaching awards, periodically we would like to select Gatton Teaching Hall of Fame Award for career long teaching service and achievement. This award is intended for current faculty later in later stages of their careers and emeritus and retired faculty. Awards will be made at a college-wide ceremony and publicized. Philosophically, team members believe that defining awards based on classroom innovation, community involvement and service, and student engagement/critical thinking is an approach consistent with our college’s mission and goals. We also plan to have students involved in this process in a variety of ways. More detailed descriptions of the awards follow:

Critical Thinking Teaching Award ($3000): This award will be given to a faculty member that promotes and engages students in critical thinking. Students will nominate and vote for a faculty member that they believe strives to create a learning environment that requires students to engage in higher order learning and critical thinking. This can be accomplished through a variety of learning approaches and requires students to apply course materials to challenging business problems.

Teaching Innovation Award ($3000): This award will be given to a faculty member that has developed a new approach or teaching method within one of their classes that significantly enhances student learning. A teaching innovation can include, but is not limited to, a new method of delivery, development of new assignments or instructional materials, or other developments that engage students and promote learning. Nominations for this award will come from faculty and the criteria used to select the winner will include a summary of the teaching innovation, course evaluations, and feedback from students.

Community Engagement Award ($3000): This award will be given to a faculty member that significantly incorporates engagement with the outside community in their course. This engagement with community can take on many forms including (but not limited to): student projects for the community partner, service learning assignments, classroom speakers, and/or mentor programs with outside business leaders. Faculty that engage with outside businesses and nonprofit organizations provide students with an invaluable learning experience where they can understand and appreciate the complexities of business problems that firms and nonprofit organizations face. Furthermore, value is provided to the community through the projects completed by students that can help shape the future strategy firms and other organizations. This engagement builds strong relationships between the Gatton College of Business & Economics and the business community surrounding the University. Nominations for

this award will come from faculty and the criteria used to select the winner will include a summary of the community engagement, course evaluations, and feedback from students.

Graduate Student Teaching Excellence Award ($1000): This award will be given to a graduate student based on excellent teaching performance in the classroom. Criteria that will be used in evaluating graduate students include course evaluation scores, DGS recommendations/input, and student feedback.

Gatton Teaching Hall of Fame Award (not monetary): This award recognizes and honors a faculty member who has exemplified the teacher- student traditions of the Gatton Business of College and the University of Kentucky for many years. The recipient can be currently active, emeritus, or retired. The awardee has made significant contributions to the daily mission of the college by educating our students and embodies and facilitates learning and expanding knowledge through scholarship and creative activity. The recipient taught their students to serve the global community by disseminating, sharing and applying knowledge. This faculty member will be the person who students talk about years later after the faculty member retires. This is not an annual award, but rather one only made when a clear honoree emerges.

Gatton College Research Excellence Initiative to Enhance and Support Research Research Awards

The goal of the initiative is to support the goal of the college to influence the thinking of business leaders, policy-makers and scholars around the world by providing insight and analysis of key topics critical to the business community. Specific Initiative Activities: The Research Excellence Team (RET) was formed in the fall of 2016. Committee members include one representative from each area in the college. Members serve a three-year term. The primary role of this team is to work toward achieving the previously stated initiative goals. For the 2016-2017 academic year the team is focused on establishing and awarding a series of awards designed to promote and recognize research achievements as outlined below within a $10,000 annual budget.

Research Productivity Award ($3500): This award will be given to a faculty member that is particularly prolific over the previous four-year period. Criteria for the award can include (but not limited to) the following: frequency of premier (e.g., UT Dallas) journal publications, high quality books/monographs, or volume of research output. The same faculty member may be recognized with this award no more than once every three years.

High Impact Research Award ($3000): This award will be given to a faculty member that published work that is particularly impactful after a five-year period. Criteria to establish impact can include (but not limited to) number of citations (e.g., Google Scholar), relative impact of citations (e.g., how many are in premier journals or meaningful impact the relevant field) and impact outside of the academic domain (e.g., media coverage, public policy impacts, etc.). The same faculty member may be recognized with this award no more than once every five years.

Junior Faculty Research Award ($3500): This award will be given to a non-tenured

faculty member and is intended to recognize early career achievements. This can be broadly interpreted by the committee to include a range of criteria from any of the previous awards, from high quality publications, research that creates impact upon publication, innovative research or research that creates particular impact within the graduate student population. This award cannot be awarded to a recipient of an award from any other category in a given year, and may only be awarded to the same faculty member two times during prior to the tenure decision.

Appendix P: Gatton College Research Excellence Initiative Gatton College Research Excellence Initiative to Enhance and Support Research Goals of the Research Excellence Team: Within the past years, the College has implemented a new Gatton College Research Excellence Initiative promote and support research. The third strategic initiative of the Gatton College Strategic Plan is to “Attract and support excellent scholars who produce rigorous, influential research at the forefront of business and economics”. Like the University’s strategic plan, we are committed to “expand(ing) our scholarship, creative endeavors and research across a full range of disciplines”. Superior research is paramount to the dissemination of knowledge within the Commonwealth and beyond and is at the heart of our College mission. The specific goals guiding this initiative include the following:

‐ Developing, administering and awarding all competitive research funding that comes into the College from the Vice President of Research or that is allocated by the College.

‐ Develop and execute a process of awarding research awards on an annual basis. ‐ Other duties as assigned.

The goal of the initiative is to support the goal of the college to influence the thinking of business leaders, policy-makers and scholars around the world by providing insight and analysis of key topics critical to the business community. Specific Initiative Activities: The Research Excellence Team (RET) was formed in the fall of 2016. Committee members include one representative from each area in the college. Members serve a three-year term. The primary role of this team is to work toward achieving the previously stated initiative goals. For the 2016-2017 academic year, the team is focused on establishing and awarding a series of awards designed to promote and recognize research achievements as outlined below within a $10,000 annual budget.

Research Productivity Award ($3500): This award will be given to a faculty member that is particularly prolific over the previous four-year period. Criteria for the award can include (but not limited to) the following: frequency of premier (e.g., UT Dallas) journal publications, high quality books/monographs, or volume of research output. The same faculty member may be recognized with this award no more than once every three years.

High Impact Research Award ($3000): This award will be given to a faculty member that published work that is particularly impactful after a five-year period. Criteria to establish impact can include (but not limited to) number of citations (e.g., Google Scholar), relative impact of citations (e.g., how many are in premier journals or meaningful impact the relevant field) and impact outside of the academic domain (e.g., media coverage, public policy impacts, etc.). The same faculty member may be recognized with this award no more than once every five years.

Junior Faculty Research Award ($3500): This award will be given to a non-tenured

faculty member and is intended to recognize early career achievements. This can be broadly interpreted by the committee to include a range of criteria from any of the

previous awards, from high quality publications, research that creates impact upon publication, innovative research or research that creates particular impact within the graduate student population. This award cannot be awarded to a recipient of an award from any other category in a given year, and may only be awarded to the same faculty member two times during prior to the tenure decision.

Call for Submissions to the Research and Creative Activates Support Program Competitive Award

Process November 15, 2016

MEMORANDUM

To: Faculty, Gatton College of Business & Economics From: Research Excellence Team Subject: Research and Creative Activities Support Program Competitive Award Process – Gatton College

The Office of Research has revised its standard Summer Faculty Salary Research Support program and has elected to give these funds to individual colleges for allocation. The Office of Research has allocated $19,740 to Gatton and the Dean’s office has elected to match the award and bring it up to $40,000. The Research Excellence Team has been asked to manage a competitive award process for these funds. It is our intention to make several grants to faculty members to support high quality research. Eligibility & Process All fulltime faculty with a minimum of 10% effort in research on the academic year DOE. Funds are intended to support research/creative activities that do not include faculty salaries, travel that is unrelated to the research project, routine office equipment or laptop computers. Funding is available for one year (5/1/17 – 4/30/18). Any unspent funds will revert to the College and be used to offset research related expenses elsewhere in the College and will not carry forward into the next fiscal year.

An annual report that briefly describes outputs form support through this program for each faculty receiving an award is due to the Research Excellence Team by June 30, 2017.

By January 2, 2017; please submit a two-page proposal including the funds being requested and how these monies will be used to support high quality research. Requests may come from individuals or teams of faculty within the College. Preference will be granted to applications that meet the following criteria, though all are encouraged to apply:

1. Potential for the project described in the application to lead to publication in a high-quality peer-reviewed outlet.

2. Relative impact the funds can have on moving the project meaningfully toward publication.

3. Led by junior/untenured faculty with limited external funding opportunities. 4. Potential for the project to provide research opportunities for other members of the

Gatton community (e.g., by improving our research infrastructure, corporate engagement)

5. Relative publication track record of the person(s) involved in the project.

Awards will be announced by March of 2017. All submissions are to be sent via email to Rebecca Kegebein at [email protected] with the Subject Line Research Excellence Team – Competitive Award. Research Excellence Team: Russell Jame Joe Labianca Jeff Payne John Peloza Jim Ziliak Below is a list of the awards from the 2017-2017 academic year.

Title Funded

Crossing the Finish Line – Moving from Second Round to Publication (funded 3 separate projects)

$7,680

The Value Relevance of Managers’ and Auditors’ Disclosures about Material Measurement Uncertainty

$3,600

Prospects and Levers $3,000 Independent Venture Capital Firms $6,720

Demand Shocks and Labor Market Dynamics: Firm Level Responses to a Commodity Boom

$2,000

Director Networks during World War II $7,000 Determinants of Index Voting $8,000

Internal and external auditor responses to earnings management and the role of organizational identity.

$2,000

Total Funding $40,000

AccountancyFull, Associate, Asst.

Anderson, Urton 7/1/2013 Ph.D. 1985 289UT, MT, PhD,

RES, ED100

Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Bratten, Brian 8/16/2009 Ph.D. 2009 480 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Causholli, Monika 8/16/2009 Ph.D. 2009 339 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Clark, Myrtle 8/16/1977 Ph.D. 1978 874 UT, MT, RES 100 Textbook

Commerford, Benjamin 7/1/2015 Ph.D. 2015 477 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Dennis, Sean 7/1/2015 M.S. 2015 310 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Hulse, David 8/16/1993 Ph.D. 1993 480 UT, RES 100Joint appt. - Martin School,

Peer Reviewed Journals/Textbooks

Jenkins, Nicole 8/16/2012 Ph.D. 2002 294 UT, PhD, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Payne, Jeff 7/1/2004 Ph.D. 1995 333 UT, MT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Peffer, Sean 8/1/1997 Ph.D. 1996 423 UT, PhD, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Pope, Thomas 8/16/1984 DBA 1976 861 UT, MT, RES 100Academic

Presentations/Textbooks

Stone, Dan 8/16/2000 Ph.D. 1987 154 MT, PhD, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Vines, Cynthia 8/1/1998 Ph.D. 1986 492 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/

Editorial Board

Percent of Time Devoted to Mission for Each Faculty

Qualification Group5

Brie

f D

escr

iptio

n of

Bas

is f

or

Qua

lific

atio

n (E

nter

brie

f qu

antit

ativ

e an

d/or

qua

litat

ive

info

rmat

ion

corr

espo

ndin

g to

the

sch

ool’s

crit

eria

fo

r ea

ch c

ateg

ory.

)

Dat

e of

Firs

t A

ppoi

ntm

ent

to t

he S

choo

l

Hig

hest

Deg

ree

Ear

ned

Sup

port

ing

Fac

ulty

Pro

duct

ivity

(S

)2

Sch

olar

ly

Aca

dem

ic (

SA

)4

Pra

ctic

e A

cade

mic

(P

A)4

Sch

olar

ly P

ract

ition

er

(SP

)4

Inst

ruct

iona

l P

ract

ition

er

(IP

)4

Oth

er (

O)4

Faculty Portfolio

Nor

mal

Pro

fess

iona

l

Res

pons

ibili

ties3

Faculty Sufficiency (Credit

Hours)

Fac

ulty

Mem

ber's

Nam

e (L

ist

indi

vidu

ally

in

sect

ions

ref

lect

ing

the

scho

ol’s

fac

ulty

or

gani

zatio

nal s

truc

ture

an

d/or

dis

cipl

ine

(e.g

.,

depa

rtm

ents

and

res

earc

h

grou

ps)1

Yea

r E

arne

d

Par

ticip

atin

g F

acul

ty

Pro

duct

ivity

(P

)2

Metric Used - Credit Hours Taught during the 2015-2016 academic year (including summer 2016)

Appendix Q: Table 15.1 - Summary of Faculty Sufficiency and Qualifications



Brie

f D

escr

iptio

n of

Bas

is f

or

Qua

lific

atio

n (E

nter

brie

f qu

antit

ativ

e an

d/or

qua

litat

ive

info

rmat

ion

corr

espo

ndin

g to

the

sch

ool’s

crit

eria

fo

r ea

ch c

ateg

ory.

)

Dat

e of

Firs

t A

ppoi

ntm

ent

to

the

Sch

ool

Hig

hest

Deg

ree

Ear

ned

Sup

port

ing

Fac

ulty

Pro

duct

ivity

(S

)2

Sch

olar

ly

Aca

dem

ic (

SA

)4

Pra

ctic

e A

cade

mic

(P

A)4

Sch

olar

ly P

ract

ition

er

(SP

)4

Inst

ruct

iona

l P

ract

ition

er

(IP

)4

Oth

er (

O)4

Faculty Portfolio

Nor

mal

Pro

fess

iona

l

Res

pons

ibili

ties3


Hours)

Fac

ulty

Mem

ber's

Nam

e (L

ist

indi

vidu

ally

in

sect

ions

ref

lect

ing

the

scho

ol’s

fac

ulty

or

gani

zatio

nal s

truc

ture

an

d/or

dis

cipl

ine

(e.g

.,

depa

rtm

ents

and

res

earc

h

grou

ps)1

Yea

r E

arne

d

Par

ticip

atin

g F

acul

ty

Pro

duct

ivity

(P

)2

Wells, Jane 8/16/1989 M.A. 1986 1,569 UT 100Professional Certification

(CPA)

Xie, Hong 8/16/2009 PhD 1998 RES 100Sabbatical, Peer Reviewed

Journals/ Academic Presentations

Ziebart, David 7/1/2005 Ph.D. 1983 426 MT, RES, ED 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Lecturer/Instructor

Burgess, Raymond 8/16/2010 MBA, CPA 1986 1,150 UT 100Professional Certification

(CPA)

Cantzos, Costas 4/22/2014 Ph.D. 2008 48 MT 25Greek MBA, Peer

Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Miller, Cynthia 8/16/2009 MBA 1990 1,032 UT 100Professional Certification

(CPA)

Osborne, David 1/16/2014 MBA 1981 835 UT 100Professional Certification

(CPA)

Siebenthaler, Jennifer 8/16/2007 M.S. 2003 917 UT, MT 100Professional Certification

(CPA)

Smigla, John 8/16/2008 M.S. 1978 1,063 UT 100Professional Certification

(CPA)

Weissmueller, Stephen 8/16/2013 Ed.D. 2008 1,050 UT 100Professional Certification

(CPA)

Wilhelm, Jana 1/1/2013 MBA 1985 1,404 UT 100Professional Certification

(CPA)Ph.D. Students

Chung, Keun Ho 8/15/2014 MBA 2012 357 UT 50 Doctoral Student - ABD

Ewing, Robert 8/15/2013 M.A. 1996 354 UT 50 Doctoral Student - ABD

Rusli, Pinky 1/15/2015 MBA 2009 360 UT 50 Doctoral Student - ABD

Sooy, Matthew 1/15/2015 MBA 2009 354 UT 50 Doctoral Student - ABD



Brie

f D

escr

iptio

n of

Bas

is f

or

Qua

lific

atio

n (E

nter

brie

f qu

antit

ativ

e an

d/or

qua

litat

ive

info

rmat

ion

corr

espo

ndin

g to

the

sch

ool’s

crit

eria

fo

r ea

ch c

ateg

ory.

)

Dat

e of

Firs

t A

ppoi

ntm

ent

to

the

Sch

ool

Hig

hest

Deg

ree

Ear

ned

Sup

port

ing

Fac

ulty

Pro

duct

ivity

(S

)2

Sch

olar

ly

Aca

dem

ic (

SA

)4

Pra

ctic

e A

cade

mic

(P

A)4

Sch

olar

ly P

ract

ition

er

(SP

)4

Inst

ruct

iona

l P

ract

ition

er

(IP

)4

Oth

er (

O)4

Faculty Portfolio

Nor

mal

Pro

fess

iona

l

Res

pons

ibili

ties3


Hours)

Fac

ulty

Mem

ber's

Nam

e (L

ist

indi

vidu

ally

in

sect

ions

ref

lect

ing

the

scho

ol’s

fac

ulty

or

gani

zatio

nal s

truc

ture

an

d/or

dis

cipl

ine

(e.g

.,

depa

rtm

ents

and

res

earc

h

grou

ps)1

Yea

r E

arne

d

Par

ticip

atin

g F

acul

ty

Pro

duct

ivity

(P

)2

Wang, Chong 8/15/2015 M.S. 2009 360 UT 50 Doctoral Student - ABD

Williamson, Russell 7/1/2016 M.S. 2012 45 UT 50Doctoral Student -

Professional Certification (CPA)

Zhao, Xinlei 1/15/2016 M.S. 2011 267 UT 50 Doctoral Student - ABD

Full, Associate, Asst.

Bargeron, Leonce 7/1/2014 Ph.D. 2005 405 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Blackwell, David 3/1/2012 Ph.D. 1986 ADM 100College Dean, Peer Reviewed Journals

Childs, Paul 8/1/1994 Ph.D. 1995 2,317 UT, MT, RES 100 Peer Reviewed Journals

Clifford, Chris 8/16/2008 Ph.D. 2008 454UT, MT, ED,

RES100

Peer Reviewed Journals/ Competitive Research

Gerken, William 8/16/2012 Ph.D. 2009 285 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Hackbart, Merl 7/1/1973 Ph.D. 1968 ADM 25Sabbatical/Spec. Assign. With Martin School AY16

Hankins, Kristine 8/16/2006 Ph.D. 2006 27 MT, PhD, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Holsapple, Clyde 8/16/1988 Ph.D. 1977 6 PhD, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Jame, Russell 8/16/2013 Ph.D. 2010 162 UT, PhD, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Jordan, Bradford 8/1/1997 Ph.D. 1984 58 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/

Textbooks

Jordan, Susan 8/1/1997 Ph.D. 1986 382 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Finance and Quantitative Methods



Brie

f D

escr

iptio

n of

Bas

is f

or

Qua

lific

atio

n (E

nter

brie

f qu

antit

ativ

e an

d/or

qua

litat

ive

info

rmat

ion

corr

espo

ndin

g to

the

sch

ool’s

crit

eria

fo

r ea

ch c

ateg

ory.

)

Dat

e of

Firs

t A

ppoi

ntm

ent

to t

he S

choo

l

Hig

hest

Deg

ree

Ear

ned

Sup

port

ing

Fac

ulty

Pro

duct

ivity

(S

)2

Sch

olar

ly

Aca

dem

ic (

SA

)4

Pra

ctic

e A

cade

mic

(P

A)4

Sch

olar

ly P

ract

ition

er

(SP

)4

Inst

ruct

iona

l P

ract

ition

er

(IP

)4

Oth

er (

O)4

Faculty Portfolio

Nor

mal

Pro

fess

iona

l

Res

pons

ibili

ties3


Hours)

Fac

ulty

Mem

ber's

Nam

e (L

ist

indi

vidu

ally

in

sect

ions

ref

lect

ing

the

scho

ol’s

fac

ulty

or

gani

zatio

nal s

truc

ture

an

d/or

dis

cipl

ine

(e.g

.,

depa

rtm

ents

and

res

earc

h

grou

ps)1

Yea

r E

arne

d

Par

ticip

atin

g F

acul

ty

Pro

duct

ivity

(P

)2

Liu, Mark 8/16/2004 Ph.D. 2004 174 UT, PhD, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Pakath, Ramakrishnan 8/16/1987 Ph.D. 1988 678 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Pierce, Joshua 8/16/2013 Ph.D. 2007 504 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Lecturer/Instructor

Burr, Stephen 1/16/2015 MBA 2014 132 MT 25 Academic Presentations

Denison, Dwight May-10 Ph.D. 1997 63 M 25Martin School faculty, Peer


Deshpande, Pradeep 8/16/2005 Ph.D. 1969 48 M 25Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Hadden, Michael 1/13/2016 J.D. 1997 87 UT 100 Consulting Activities

Hankins, Scott 8/16/2008 Ph.D. 2006 1,239 UT, MT 100 Peer Reviewed Journals

Kakouris, Andreas 4/22/2014 Ph.D. 1986 105 M 25Greek MBA, Academic

PresentationsLiu, Wendy 7/1/2014 Ph.D. 2003 2,861 UT 100 Peer Reviewed Journals

Mitchell, Jonah 1/1/2008 Ph.D. 1991 171 UT 25 Other Teaching Materials

Sykianakis, Nicos 4/22/2014 Ph.D. 2001 102 M 25Greek MBA, Academic

Presentations

Zopounidis, Constantin 4/22/2014 d’ETAT 1986 51 M 25Greek MBA, Peer




Brie

f D

escr

iptio

n of

Bas

is f

or

Qua

lific

atio

n (E

nter

brie

f qu

antit

ativ

e an

d/or

qua

litat

ive

info

rmat

ion

corr

espo

ndin

g to

the

sch

ool’s

crit

eria

fo

r ea

ch c

ateg

ory.

)

Dat

e of

Firs

t A

ppoi

ntm

ent

to

the

Sch

ool

Hig

hest

Deg

ree

Ear

ned

Sup

port

ing

Fac

ulty

Pro

duct

ivity

(S

)2

Sch

olar

ly

Aca

dem

ic (

SA

)4

Pra

ctic

e A

cade

mic

(P

A)4

Sch

olar

ly P

ract

ition

er

(SP

)4

Inst

ruct

iona

l P

ract

ition

er

(IP

)4

Oth

er (

O)4

Faculty Portfolio

Nor

mal

Pro

fess

iona

l

Res

pons

ibili

ties3


Hours)

Fac

ulty

Mem

ber's

Nam

e (L

ist

indi

vidu

ally

in

sect

ions

ref

lect

ing

the

scho

ol’s

fac

ulty

or

gani

zatio

nal s

truc

ture

an

d/or

dis

cipl

ine

(e.g

.,

depa

rtm

ents

and

res

earc

h

grou

ps)1

Yea

r E

arne

d

Par

ticip

atin

g F

acul

ty

Pro

duct

ivity

(P

)2

Ph.D. Students

Farrell, Michael 6/1/2016 M.S. 2014 51 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Huang, Qiping 6/1/2016 MBA 2011 102 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Moore, David 5/1/2016 MBA 2012 159 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

ManagementFull, Associate, Asst.

Borgatti, Stephen 8/16/2013 Ph.D. 1989 39 PhD, RES 100Peer Reviewed

Journals/Textbook

Brass, Dan 8/16/2007 Ph.D. 1976 41 PhD, ED, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/

Journal Editor

Chung, Chen 8/1/2000 Ph.D. 1982 592 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Ferrier, Walter 8/16/2014 MBA 1995 714 M, ED, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Gladstone, Eric 8/1/1995 Ph.D. 2015 294 UT, MT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Halgin, Daniel 8/16/2001 J.D. 2009 378 UT, ED, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Huang, Zhi 7/1/1996 Ph.D. 2007 468 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Johnson, Nancy 7/1/2014 Ph.D. 1987 375 UT, MT 100Competitive Research

Award/Academic Presentations

Kim, Ji Youn 8/16/1986 Ph.D. 2014 237 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Labianca, Giuseppe 7/1/2016 Ph.D. 1998 150UT, MT, ED,

RES100




Brie

f D

escr

iptio

n of

Bas

is f

or

Qua

lific

atio

n (E

nter

brie

f qu

antit

ativ

e an

d/or

qua

litat

ive

info

rmat

ion

corr

espo

ndin

g to

the

sch

ool’s

crit

eria

fo

r ea

ch c

ateg

ory.

)

Dat

e of

Firs

t A

ppoi

ntm

ent

to t

he S

choo

l

Hig

hest

Deg

ree

Ear

ned

Sup

port

ing

Fac

ulty

Pro

duct

ivity

(S

)2

Sch

olar

ly

Aca

dem

ic (

SA

)4

Pra

ctic

e A

cade

mic

(P

A)4

Sch

olar

ly P

ract

ition

er

(SP

)4

Inst

ruct

iona

l P

ract

ition

er

(IP

)4

Oth

er (

O)4

Faculty Portfolio

Nor

mal

Pro

fess

iona

l

Res

pons

ibili

ties3


Hours)

Fac

ulty

Mem

ber's

Nam

e (L

ist

indi

vidu

ally

in

sect

ions

ref

lect

ing

the

scho

ol’s

fac

ulty

or

gani

zatio

nal s

truc

ture

an

d/or

dis

cipl

ine

(e.g

.,

depa

rtm

ents

and

res

earc

h

grou

ps)1

Yea

r E

arne

d

Par

ticip

atin

g F

acul

ty

Pro

duct

ivity

(P

)2

Mehra, Ajay 8/16/2006 Ph.D. 1998 306 M, PhD, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Soltis, Scott 8/16/2007 J.D. 2012 331 UT, ED, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Lecturer/Instructor

Davis, Rebecca 8/16/1981 Ph.D. 2001 1,896 UT 100Textbooks and Other Teaching Materials

Edens, Zackary 10/16/2003 Ph.D. 2014 1,233 UT 100 Invited Presenter

Gunther, Denotra 8/1/2015 J.D. 1996 240 UT 25Sustained Professional

WorkHolbein, Gordon 8/16/2011 Ph.D. 1996 3,468 UT, MT 100 Academic Presentations

Kirn, John 7/1/2014 MBA 2013 885 UT 100Sustained Professional

Work

Payne, Gary 8/16/2006 J.D. 1979 318 UT 25Sustained Professional

Work

Stavroulakis, Dimitris 4/22/2014 Ph.D. 1989 48 M 25Greek MBA, Academic

Presentations

Stevens, Randall 8/15/2015 B.A. 1991 90 UT 25Sustained Professional

WorkPh.D. Students

Ajit, Tejaswi Channagiri 8/15/2015 MBA 2011 87 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Fagan, Jesse 1/15/2016 M.A. 2011 120 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Sung, Wookje 1/15/2016 M.S. 2012 120 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Woehler, Meredith 1/15/2016 B.S. 2010 84 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD



Brie

f D

escr

iptio

n of

Bas

is f

or

Qua

lific

atio

n (E

nter

brie

f qu

antit

ativ

e an

d/or

qua

litat

ive

info

rmat

ion

corr

espo

ndin

g to

the

sch

ool’s

crit

eria

fo

r ea

ch c

ateg

ory.

)

Dat

e of

Firs

t A

ppoi

ntm

ent

to

the

Sch

ool

Hig

hest

Deg

ree

Ear

ned

Sup

port

ing

Fac

ulty

Pro

duct

ivity

(S

)2

Sch

olar

ly

Aca

dem

ic (

SA

)4

Pra

ctic

e A

cade

mic

(P

A)4

Sch

olar

ly P

ract

ition

er

(SP

)4

Inst

ruct

iona

l P

ract

ition

er

(IP

)4

Oth

er (

O)4

Faculty Portfolio

Nor

mal

Pro

fess

iona

l

Res

pons

ibili

ties3


Hours)

Fac

ulty

Mem

ber's

Nam

e (L

ist

indi

vidu

ally

in

sect

ions

ref

lect

ing

the

scho

ol’s

fac

ulty

or

gani

zatio

nal s

truc

ture

an

d/or

dis

cipl

ine

(e.g

.,

depa

rtm

ents

and

res

earc

h

grou

ps)1

Yea

r E

arne

d

Par

ticip

atin

g F

acul

ty

Pro

duct

ivity

(P

)2

Full, Associate, Asst.

Allen, Alexis 8/16/2014 Ph.D. 2014 470 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Craig, Adam 8/16/2013 Ph.D. 2011 381 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Dean, Tereza 8/16/2012 Ph.D. 2012 453 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Ellis, Scott 8/16/2010 Ph.D. 2007 417UT, MT, ED,

RES100

Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations,

No longer at UK

Garvey, Aaron 8/15/2012 Ph.D. 2012 327 UT, MT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Hardesty, David 8/16/2005 Ph.D. 1998 19 PhD, ED, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/

Research Award

Kelley, Scott 8/16/1989 D.B.A. 1987 142 UT, ED, ADM 100Peer Reviewed Journals/

Associate Dean

Lee-Post, Anita 8/16/1990 Ph.D. 1990 2,070 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Murtha, Brian 8/16/2008 Ph.D. 2008 228UT, MT, ED,

RES100


Peloza, John 7/1/2014 Ph.D. 2006 297 UT, ED, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Sheehan, Daniel 7/1/2015 Ph.D. 2015 372 UT, RES 100 Academic Presentations

Skinner, Steven 8/16/1982 D.B.A. 1983 RES 100Peer Reviewed Journal

Articles, Sabbatical

Sudharshan, Devanathan 7/1/2003 Ph.D. 1982 345 UT, MT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Marketing and Supply Chain



Brie

f D

escr

iptio

n of

Bas

is f

or

Qua

lific

atio

n (E

nter

brie

f qu

antit

ativ

e an

d/or

qua

litat

ive

info

rmat

ion

corr

espo

ndin

g to

the

sch

ool’s

crit

eria

fo

r ea

ch c

ateg

ory.

)

Dat

e of

Firs

t A

ppoi

ntm

ent

to

the

Sch

ool

Hig

hest

Deg

ree

Ear

ned

Sup

port

ing

Fac

ulty

Pro

duct

ivity

(S

)2

Sch

olar

ly

Aca

dem

ic (

SA

)4

Pra

ctic

e A

cade

mic

(P

A)4

Sch

olar

ly P

ract

ition

er

(SP

)4

Inst

ruct

iona

l P

ract

ition

er

(IP

)4

Oth

er (

O)4

Faculty Portfolio

Nor

mal

Pro

fess

iona

l

Res

pons

ibili

ties3


Hours)

Fac

ulty

Mem

ber's

Nam

e (L

ist

indi

vidu

ally

in

sect

ions

ref

lect

ing

the

scho

ol’s

fac

ulty

or

gani

zatio

nal s

truc

ture

an

d/or

dis

cipl

ine

(e.g

.,

depa

rtm

ents

and

res

earc

h

grou

ps)1

Yea

r E

arne

d

Par

ticip

atin

g F

acul

ty

Pro

duct

ivity

(P

)2

Lecturer/Instructor

Andersen, Mark 8/16/2015 MBA 1984 945 UT 100Sustained Professional

Work

Hapke, Jessica (Holly) 8/16/2007 MBA 1999 5,599 U, ED 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Lewis, Thomas 1/1/1910 J.D. 1992 1,152 UT, MT 100 Board Membership

Norris, III, John 1/13/2016 Ph.D. 2007 153 UT 25 Peer Reviewed Journals

Wilkinson, Harvie 2011 J.D. 1979 798 U, MT, ADM 100 Director of MBA Program

Zarkada, Anna 4/22/2014 Ph.D. 1996 51 MT 25Greek MBA, Academic

PresentationsPh.D. Students

Abdollahi, Niusha 1/15/2016 M.S. 2014 120 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Chase, Kevin 8/15/2014 MBA 2012 126 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Li, Wenjing 8/15/2014 M.S. 2012 243 UT 50 Doctoral Student - ABD

Ziegler, Alexander H. 8/15/2015 MBA 2014 93 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

EconomicsFull, Associate, Asst.

Ahn, Thomas 8/16/2009 Ph.D. 2003 402 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Bagh, Adib 8/16/2008 Ph.D. 2008 153 UT, RES 60Joint appt. with

Mathematics, Peer Reviewed Journals/

Benguria, Felipe 8/16/2014 Ph.D. 2014 414 UT, RES 100Academic Presentations/

Competitive Research

Blomquist, Glenn 8/16/1980 Ph.D. 1977 9 MT, RES 100Joint appt. with the Martin School, Peer Reviewed

Journals/Textbook



Brie

f D

escr

iptio

n of

Bas

is f

or

Qua

lific

atio

n (E

nter

brie

f qu

antit

ativ

e an

d/or

qua

litat

ive

info

rmat

ion

corr

espo

ndin

g to

the

sch

ool’s

crit

eria

fo

r ea

ch c

ateg

ory.

)

Dat

e of

Firs

t A

ppoi

ntm

ent

to t

he S

choo

l

Hig

hest

Deg

ree

Ear

ned

Sup

port

ing

Fac

ulty

Pro

duct

ivity

(S

)2

Sch

olar

ly

Aca

dem

ic (

SA

)4

Pra

ctic

e A

cade

mic

(P

A)4

Sch

olar

ly P

ract

ition

er

(SP

)4

Inst

ruct

iona

l P

ract

ition

er

(IP

)4

Oth

er (

O)4

Faculty Portfolio

Nor

mal

Pro

fess

iona

l

Res

pons

ibili

ties3


Hours)

Fac

ulty

Mem

ber's

Nam

e (L

ist

indi

vidu

ally

in

sect

ions

ref

lect

ing

the

scho

ol’s

fac

ulty

or

gani

zatio

nal s

truc

ture

an

d/or

dis

cipl

ine

(e.g

.,

depa

rtm

ents

and

res

earc

h

grou

ps)1

Yea

r E

arne

d

Par

ticip

atin

g F

acul

ty

Pro

duct

ivity

(P

)2

Bollinger, Christopher 8/1/1998 Ph.D. 1993 162UT, MT, PhD,

ED, RES100


Creane, Anthony 8/16/2012 Ph.D. 1991 384 UT, PhD, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Ederington, Josh 8/16/2004 Ph.D. 1998 216 UT, PhD, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Fackler, James 7/1/1978 Ph.D. 1977 605 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Garen, John 8/16/1985 Ph.D. 1982 213 UT, MT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Gillette, James Robert 1/1/1994 Ph.D. 1986 2,199 UT, MT 100Academic Presentations/

Textbook

Herrera, Ana 8/16/2012 Ph.D. 2000 231 UT, MT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Hoyt, Gail 8/16/1994 Ph.D. 1992 3,746 UT, PhD 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Hoyt, William 8/16/1986 Ph.D. 1986 48 MT, RES 100

Joint appt. with the Martin School, Peer Reviewed


Kim, Yoonbai 8/16/1991 Ph.D. 1989 189 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Lamarche, Carlos 8/16/2012 Ph.D. 2006 168 UT, PhD, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Ma, Lala 8/16/2014 Ph.D. 2014 243 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Malkova, Olga 8/1/2015 Ph.D. 2015 387 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Minier, Jenny 8/16/2004 Ph.D. 1998 209MT, PhD, ED,

RES100




Brie

f D

escr

iptio

n of

Bas

is f

or

Qua

lific

atio

n (E

nter

brie

f qu

antit

ativ

e an

d/or

qua

litat

ive

info

rmat

ion

corr

espo

ndin

g to

the

sch

ool’s

crit

eria

fo

r ea

ch c

ateg

ory.

)

Dat

e of

Firs

t A

ppoi

ntm

ent

to

the

Sch

ool

Hig

hest

Deg

ree

Ear

ned

Sup

port

ing

Fac

ulty

Pro

duct

ivity

(S

)2

Sch

olar

ly

Aca

dem

ic (

SA

)4

Pra

ctic

e A

cade

mic

(P

A)4

Sch

olar

ly P

ract

ition

er

(SP

)4

Inst

ruct

iona

l P

ract

ition

er

(IP

)4

Oth

er (

O)4

Faculty Portfolio

Nor

mal

Pro

fess

iona

l

Res

pons

ibili

ties3


Hours)

Fac

ulty

Mem

ber's

Nam

e (L

ist

indi

vidu

ally

in

sect

ions

ref

lect

ing

the

scho

ol’s

fac

ulty

or

gani

zatio

nal s

truc

ture

an

d/or

dis

cipl

ine

(e.g

.,

depa

rtm

ents

and

res

earc

h

grou

ps)1

Yea

r E

arne

d

Par

ticip

atin

g F

acul

ty

Pro

duct

ivity

(P

)2

Scott, Frank 8/16/1982 Ph.D. 1979 246 UT, PhD, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Troske, Kenneth 8/1/2005 Ph.D. 1992 86PhD, ED, ADM,

RES100

Peer Reviewed Journals/ Associate Dean

Wildasin, David 9/1/1993 Ph.D. 1976 27 PhD , RES 25Martin School Faculty,


Yelowitz, Aaron 8/1/2001 Ph.D. 1994 471 UT, PhD, RES 100

Joint appt. with the Martin School, Peer Reviewed


Ziliak, James 8/16/2002 Ph.D. 1993 RES 100Sabbatical, Peer Reviewed


Lecturer/Instructor

Asgari, Mahdi 8/15/2016 M.S. 2015 129 UT 25Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Dellachiesa, Alejandro 7/1/2016 Ph.D. 2010 186 UT 25Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Laub, Daniel 8/16/2012 M.S. 2006 330 UT 50 Part-Time Instructor

Patel, Darshak 7/1/2015 Ph.D. 2011 2,776 UT, RES 100Peer Reviewed Journals/ Academic Presentations

Yun, Changgeun 1/13/2016 MPA 2016 261 UT 50 Academic Presentations



Brie

f D

escr

iptio

n of

Bas

is f

or

Qua

lific

atio

n (E

nter

brie

f qu

antit

ativ

e an

d/or

qua

litat

ive

info

rmat

ion

corr

espo

ndin

g to

the

sch

ool’s

crit

eria

fo

r ea

ch c

ateg

ory.

)

Dat

e of

Firs

t A

ppoi

ntm

ent

to

the

Sch

ool

Hig

hest

Deg

ree

Ear

ned

Sup

port

ing

Fac

ulty

Pro

duct

ivity

(S

)2

Sch

olar

ly

Aca

dem

ic (

SA

)4

Pra

ctic

e A

cade

mic

(P

A)4

Sch

olar

ly P

ract

ition

er

(SP

)4

Inst

ruct

iona

l P

ract

ition

er

(IP

)4

Oth

er (

O)4

Faculty Portfolio

Nor

mal

Pro

fess

iona

l

Res

pons

ibili

ties3


Hours)

Fac

ulty

Mem

ber's

Nam

e (L

ist

indi

vidu

ally

in

sect

ions

ref

lect

ing

the

scho

ol’s

fac

ulty

or

gani

zatio

nal s

truc

ture

an

d/or

dis

cipl

ine

(e.g

.,

depa

rtm

ents

and

res

earc

h

grou

ps)1

Yea

r E

arne

d

Par

ticip

atin

g F

acul

ty

Pro

duct

ivity

(P

)2

Ph.D. Students

Acheampong, Samuel 5/15/2016 M.S. 2015 132 UT 25Doctoral Student -

Teaching with Faculty Allen, Kevin Michael 8/15/2015 M.A. 2014 174 UT 50 Doctoral Student - ABD

Barnett (Davis), Whitney 8/15/2015 B.A. 2010 129 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Bianco, Timothy 1/15/2014 M.A. 2015 27 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Chaudhary, Sookti 1/15/2016 MBA 2011 171 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Choi, Sueungjin 8/15/2015 Ph.D. 2016 120 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Choi, Sun Ki 8/15/2014 M.A. 2011 378 UT 100 Doctoral Student - ABD

Dirago-Duncan, Lauren 6/1/2016 M.S 2016 21 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Duncan, Daniel 8/15/2015 B.S. 2011 990 UT 100 Doctoral Student - ABD

Gordon, Steven 8/15/2015 M.A. 2009 87 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Ingram, Samuel 6/1/2016 M.A. 2015 105 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Jonelis, Andrew W. 8/15/2015 M.S. 2015 372 UT 50 Doctoral Student - ABD

Kim, Saerim 1/15/2016 M.P.P 2013 129 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Maximova, Anna 8/15/2015 M.S. 2014 237 UT 50 Doctoral Student - ABD

McCullough, Amanda R. 1/15/2015 M.S. 2016 186 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Muchiri, Steve 1/15/2015 MBA 2010 264 UT 50 Doctoral Student - ABD

Paraschiv, Mihai 8/15/2015 M.S. 2012 327 UT 50 Doctoral Student - ABD

Perez, Robert A. 8/15/2014 B.S. 2010 1,491 UT 75 Doctoral Student - ABD

Schendstok, Matthijs 1/15/2015 B.S. 2014 408 UT 100 Doctoral Student - ABD

Shah, Kara 6/1/2016 MBA 2010 51 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Toran, Katherine N. 1/15/2016 M.A. 2014 150 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Vaughn, Cody N. 1/15/2015 M.S. 2015 168 UT 25 Doctoral Student - ABD

Wallace, Benjamin 1/15/2014 M.S. 2014 336 UT 75 Doctoral Student - ABD

Warren, Lewis H. 8/15/2014 M.A. 2008 543 UT 100 Doctoral Student - ABD



Brie

f D

escr

iptio

n of

Bas

is f

or

Qua

lific

atio

n (E

nter

brie

f qu

antit

ativ

e an

d/or

qua

litat

ive

info

rmat

ion

corr

espo

ndin

g to

the

sch

ool’s

crit

eria

fo

r ea

ch c

ateg

ory.

)

Dat

e of

Firs

t A

ppoi

ntm

ent

to

the

Sch

ool

Hig

hest

Deg

ree

Ear

ned

Sup

port

ing

Fac

ulty

Pro

duct

ivity

(S

)2

Sch

olar

ly

Aca

dem

ic (

SA

)4

Pra

ctic

e A

cade

mic

(P

A)4

Sch

olar

ly P

ract

ition

er

(SP

)4

Inst

ruct

iona

l P

ract

ition

er

(IP

)4

Oth

er (

O)4

Faculty Portfolio

Nor

mal

Pro

fess

iona

l

Res

pons

ibili

ties3


Hours)

Fac

ulty

Mem

ber's

Nam

e (L

ist

indi

vidu

ally

in

sect

ions

ref

lect

ing

the

scho

ol’s

fac

ulty

or

gani

zatio

nal s

truc

ture

an

d/or

dis

cipl

ine

(e.g

.,

depa

rtm

ents

and

res

earc

h

grou

ps)1

Yea

r E

arne

d

Par

ticip

atin

g F

acul

ty

Pro

duct

ivity

(P

)2

Department Credit hr Credit hr P/(P+S) Total Faculty

Accounting P 11,963 S 5,434 68.76 31

Finance P 9,552 S 1,071 89.92 27

Management P 10,174 S 2,340 81.30 24

Marketing P 12,272 S 2,529 82.91 23

Economics P 13,770 S 7,716 64.09 52

Overall Sufficiency P 57,731 S 19,090 75.15 157

Department SA PA SP IP O A B C

Accounting 20 2 0 9 0 0.65 0.71 1.00

Finance 19 6 0 2 0 0.70 0.93 1.00

Management 16 4 0 3 1 0.67 0.83 0.96

Marketing 15 4 1 2 1 0.65 0.87 0.96

Economics 47 1 1 1 2 0.90 0.94 0.96

Overall Sufficiency 117 17 2 17 4 0.75 0.87 0.97

Faculty Sufficiency Indicators1: Faculty Qualifications Indicators1:

Category A - Minimum SA: (SA)/(SA +PA + SP + IP +O) > 40%

Category B - Minimum SA + PA + SP: (SA + PA + SP)/(SA + PA + SP + IP + O) >60%

Category C - Minimum SA + PA + SP + IP: (SA + PA + SP + IP)/(SA + PA + SP + IP + O) >90%

Overall: P/(P+S) > 75%

By discipline, location, delivery mode, or program: P/(P+S) > 60%

Accountancy Scholarly

Academic (SA)

Practice

Academic (PA)

Scholarly

Practitioner (SP)

Instructional

Practitioner (IP) Other (O) Total

Bachelor’s 35.02 9.13 55.85 100.00

MBA 100.00 100.00

Specialized Master's 59.71 32.23 8.06 100.00

Doctoral Program 100.00 100.00

Other (Specify) 0.00

Finance and Quantitative Methods Scholarly

Academic (SA)

Practice

Academic (PA)

Scholarly

Practitioner (SP)

Instructional


Bachelor’s 31.00 68.08 0.92 100.00

MBA 56.65 31.65 11.70 100.00

Specialized Master's


Other (Specify)

Management Scholarly

Academic (SA)

Practice

Academic (PA)

Scholarly

Practitioner (SP)

Instructional


Bachelor’s 26.92 59.16 13.10 0.82 100.00

MBA 90.81 9.19 100.00



Other (Specify)

Appendix R: Table 15.2 - Development of Participating and Supporting Faculty

TABLE 15‐2: DEPLOYMENT OF PARTICIPATING AND SUPPORTING FACULTY BY QUALIFICATION STATUS IN SUPPORT OF DEGREE PROGRAMS FOR

THE MOST RECENTLY COMPLETED NORMAL ACADEMIC YEAR

Percent of teaching by degree program (Indicate metric used, credit hours, contact hours, courses taught or another metric appropriate to the

school)

Metric Used ‐ Credit Hours Taught during the 2015‐2016 academic year (including summer 2016)

Marketing and Supply Chain Scholarly

Academic (SA)

Practice

Academic (PA)

Scholarly

Practitioner (SP)

Instructional


Bachelor’s 41.00 42.28 15.22 1.50 100.00

MBA1 41.29 12.88 7.95 37.88 100.00



Other (Specify)

Economics Scholarly

Academic (SA)

Practice

Academic (PA)

Scholarly

Practitioner (SP)

Instructional


Bachelor’s 86.45 9.25 0.65 1.32 2.33 100.00

MBA 52.90 47.10 100.00



Other (Specify)

1. Provide information for the most recently completed normal academic year. Each cell represents the percent of total teaching (whether

measured by credit hours, contact hours, courses taught or another metric appropriate to the school) for each degree program at each

level by faculty qualifications status. Peer review teams may also request faculty deployment by program location and/or delivery mode.

The sum across each row should total 100 percent. Provide a brief analysis that explains the deployment of faculty as noted above to

mission, expected outcomes, and strategies.

The above tables outline teaching for each academic department by faculty qualification status. Overall, the majority of undergraduate

students were taught by SA or SP qualification categories, except for Accounting students. A majority of Accounting undergraduate

courses were taught by professionals holding CPA degrees, justifying the high percentage in the IP category. The majority of Master's in

Accountancy and the MBA were taught by faculty who meet the SA or PA qualifications. The exception is one faculty member in Marketing

with a J.D. who taught a large number of students. Almost two‐thirds of this number inlcudes two internship courses. This issue has been

resolved for the 2016‐17 academic year and moving forward. All Ph.D. courses were taught by faculty holding the SA qualification.

1: The large percentage in the "Other" category is due to the Director of the MBA program teaching several courses. Almost 2/3 of this number is for two internship courses.This issue has been

resolved for 2016‐17 and moving forward.

The overall strategic objective of the College is to elevate the quality and impact of the Gatton College’s educational, research, and

outreach activities to compare favorably with those of the very best public research universities in the United States. Our expectation is

that all courses at all levels will be taught by faculty with the educational credentials or professional experience needed to provide high

quality learning environments for students. The above tables reflect these high expectations.

Appendix S: Academic Program Curricular Maps

Core Curriculum and Program Specific Learning Goals and Objectives for Bachelor of Science in Accounting:

GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Learning Goal

Critical Thinking

Identification of Ethical Issues

Multidisciplinary Competence

Structured Reasoning Skills

Communication Skills

PRE-MAJOR COURSES ACC 201 X ACC 202 X ECO 201 X COLLEGE CORE COURSES MGT 301 X MGT 340 X ECO 391 X CIS 300 X CAPSTONE COURSES MGT 499 X X

Learning Objective

Demonstrate the ability to

think creatively

and/or strategically b b i

Demonstrate an appreciation of ethical

and societal responsibilities

Demonstrate a multidisciplinary

and/or global perspective

Demonstrate analytical and/or logical reasoning

skills

Demonstrate strong written and/or oral

communication skills

*Note: X indicates where the assessment of the goal will occur.

GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Learning Goal

Accounting Skills Group Environment

A1A A2 ACC 301 X ACC 302 X ACC 403 X ACC 418 X

Learning Objective

A1: Demonstrate appropriate accounting technical knowledge, professionalism, and/or application skills for entry into the accounting profession

A2: Demonstrate the ability to work effectively in a group environment


Core Curriculum and Program Specific Learning Goals and Objectives for Bachelor of Business Administration in Finance:

GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Learning Goal

Critical Thinking





PRE-MAJOR COURSES ACC 201 X

ACC 202 X

ECO 201 X

COLLEGE CORE COURSES MGT 301 X

MGT 340 X

ECO 391 X

CIS 300 X CAPSTONE COURSES FIN 405 X

Learning Objective


think creatively

and/or strategically

b

Demonstrate an

appreciation of ethical and societal

responsibilities



Demonstrate

analytical and/or logical reasoning

skills




GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Learning Goal Finance Skills

F1 FIN 410 X

Learning Objective

F1: Demonstrate the knowledge and skills to identify, analyze, and/or solve finance-related problems


Core Curriculum and Program Specific Learning Goals and Objectives for Bachelor of Business Administration in Marketing:

GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Learning Goal

Critical Thinking





PRE-MAJOR COURSES ACC 201 X ACC 202 X ECO 201 X COLLEGE CORE COURSES MGT 301 X MGT 340 X ECO 391 X CIS 300 X CAPSTONE COURSES MKT 450 X X

Learning Objective


think creatively


b






skills




GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Learning Goal Marketing Skills

MK1 MKT 340 X

Learning Objective MK1: Demonstrate the knowledge and skills to identify, analyze, and/or solve marketing-related problems


Core Curriculum and Program Specific Learning Goals and Objectives for Bachelor of Business Administration in Management:

GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Learning Goal

Critical Thinking





PRE-MAJOR COURSES ACC 201 X ACC 202 X ECO 201 X COLLEGE CORE COURSES MGT 301 X MGT 340 X ECO 391 X CIS 300 X CAPSTONE COURSES MGT 499 X X

Learning Objective


think creatively


b






skills




GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Learning Goal Management Skills

MG1 MGT 410 X

Learning Objective MG1: Demonstrate the knowledge and skills to identify, analyze, and/or solve management- related problems


Core Curriculum and Program Specific Learning Goals and Objectives for Bachelor of Science in Business and Economics:

GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Learning Goal

Critical Thinking





PRE-MAJOR COURSES ACC 201 X ACC 202 X ECO 201 X COLLEGE CORE COURSES MGT 301 X MGT 340 X ECO 391 X CIS 300 X CAPSTONE COURSES ECO 499 X X

Learning Objective


think creatively


b






skills




GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Learning Goal Economic Skills

E1 ECO 401 X ECO 402 X

Learning Objective

E1: Demonstrate the ability to use microeconomic and/or macroeconomic theory to analyze real world economic issues

Note: X indicates where the assessment of the goal will occur.

Core Curriculum and Program Specific Learning Goals and Objectives for Global Scholars Certificate Program:

GOALS & OBJECTIVES Learning Goal Multidisciplinary Competence

LG1 MGT 499 X

Learning Objective LG1: Demonstrate a multidisciplinary and/or global perspective


Master Degree Programs Learning Goals and Objectives Student learning goals and objectives were developed for each of the following accredited master’s degree programs:

• Master of Business Administration (MBA)• Master of Science in Accounting (MSACC)• Master of Science in Economics (MSE)

These learning goals and objectives are specific to each program.

Core Curriculum and Program Specific Learning Goals and Objectives for Master of Business Administration

GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Learning Goal Critical Thinking

Identification of Ethical

Issues


Structured Reasoning

Skills


Business Skills

FIN 600, EMBA 616 X MGT 610, EMBA 650 X MGT 611, EMBA 606 X X MGT 612, EMBA 619 X MGT 699, EMBA 620 X DIS 651, EMBA 609 X

Learning Objective


think creatively


about business problems

Demonstrate an appreciation of ethical and

societal responsibilities



Demonstrate analytical

and/or logical

reasoning skills

Demonstrate strong written

and/or oral communication

skills

Demonstrate entrepreneurial

and business assessment

skills

*Note: X indicates where the assessment of the goal will occur

Core Curriculum and Program Specific Learning Goals and Objectives for Master of Science in Accounting

GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Learning Goal Structured Reasoning Skills Accounting Skills Research Skills Communication

Skills ACC 507 X ACC 603 X ACC 617 X ACC 624 X ACC 601 X ACC 621 X

Learning Objective

Demonstrate the ability to apply

analytical, critical and logical

reasoning skills to complex

accounting and accounting-related

issues

Demonstrate advanced accounting and/or accounting-

related technical knowledge and

application skills.

Demonstrate the ability to research complex

accounting and/or

accounting-related issues



*Note: X indicates where the assessment of the goal will occur

Doctoral Degree Programs Learning Goals and Objectives Specific student learning goals and objectives were developed for each of the following accredited master’s degree programs:

• Ph.D. in Business Administration • Ph.D. in Economics

The learning goals and objectives are assessed in the dissertation of the student. These learning goals and objectives are specific to each program.

Core curriculum and Program Specific Learning Goals and Objectives for Ph.D. in Business Administration and Economics

Ph.D. in Business Administration SLO Reporting Cycle- Assessed in Dissertation

Cycle Learning Outcome (LO) #

Stated Student Learning Outcome Academic Year

Reporting Year

Year 1

LO 1 Demonstrate the mastery of research methodologies. Demonstrate appreciation of philosophies of

2015-2016 31-Oct-16

Year 2

LO 2 Demonstrate the depth of understanding of theoretical foundations. Demonstrate the depth of

2016-2017 31-Oct-17

Year 3

LO 3 Demonstrate the ability to orally communicate research outcomes.

2017-2018 31-Oct-18

Course: Sections:

Term: Fall 2016 Instructor:

Assessment Report

Introduction

Total number of students enrolled in all term sections Number of students assessed in assigned sections: Students were assessed at the

Goals/Objectives

Learning Goal: Learning Outcome 3: Multidisciplinary Competence Learning Objective: Demonstrate a multidisciplinary and/or global perspective.

Learning Goal: Learning Outcome 4: Structured Reasoning Skills Learning Objective: Demonstrate analytical and/or logical reasoning skills.

Method Used

LG 3 & 4 Assessment Method: Using a series of embedded questions that align with the learning outcomes the course is oriented toward. (Appendix A)

Results

Assessment results are reported by problem, by student, and by major. Data must also be grouped into 3 categories: Exemplary (90-100%), Proficient (70-89%), and Deficient (<70%).

Appendix T: Sample Assessment Report Template and Rubric

Summary Statistics:

A 3-Point Scale Performance Statistics for ACCO Majors:

Performance # of students % of students Exemplary (90-100%) Proficient (70-89%)

Deficient (<70%)

A 3-Point Scale Performance Statistics for ANLY Majors:


Deficient (<70%)

A 3-Point Scale Performance Statistics for ECON Majors:


Deficient (<70%)

A 3-Point Scale Performance Statistics for FINA Majors:


Deficient (<70%)

A 3-Point Scale Performance Statistics for MANA Majors:


Deficient (<70%)

A 3-Point Scale Performance Statistics for MARK Majors:


Deficient (<70%)

A 3-Point Scale Performance Statistics for Non-Designated Business Majors:


Deficient (<70%)

A 3-Point Scale Performance Statistics for Non-Business Majors:


Deficient (<70%)

A 3-Point Scale Performance Statistics for Overall Results:


Deficient (<70%)

Findings

Improvement Action Plan

Reflection

This section is usually completed within 6-12 months after submitting the assessment report. We ask instructors to share with us the steps that have been taken to improve student learning since the assessment was completed. It is important to note that the reflection must directly link to the improvement action plan listed above.

Appendix A

ANNUAL SLO ASSESSMENT REPORT RUBRIC Office of University Assessment

University of Kentucky (Revised April 2016)

Yes No Student Learning Outcome Student Learning Outcome is provided and is measurable. Operational Outcome is present, and is not focused on

learning (i.e., course completion, event attendance, graduation rates).

Benchmark/Target/Goal Benchmark/Target/Goal is provided. Benchmark/Target/Goal is not provided.

Exemplary (3) Accomplished (2) Emerging (1) Beginning (0) Rationale for use of assessment tool and how tool aligns to the Student Learning Outcome

A clear description of the tool/activity/method is provided. And Tools used to measure student achievement of the student learning outcome are primarily direct measures. And An explanation is provided about how the assessment tool relates to the outcome being assessed. And Multiple tools are used to gather data for the outcome and/or assessment tool has been validated.

A clear description of the tool/activity/method is provided. And Tools used to measure student achievement of the student learning outcome are primarily direct measures. And An explanation is provided about how the assessment tool relates to the outcome being assessed.

An incomplete description of the tool/activity/method is provided. Or The explanation linking the assessment tool and the student learning outcome being assessed is superficial with no clear connection; while there may be alignment, the explanation is unclear. Or Assessment tools are primarily indirect, and include measures such as head counts and course pass rates.

No description of the tool/activity/method provided. Or No relationship is apparent between outcome and assessment tools.

Data Collection and Validation (Include time/semester and place, sampling process, population description, and data review process)

Complete explanation of data collection processes and protocols are provided such that the reviewer fully understands the data collection methodology (for example: time/semester and place, sampling process, population description, and/or data review process). And

Complete explanation of data collection processes and protocols are provided such that the external reviewer fully understands the data collection methodology (for example: time/semester and place, sampling process, population description, and/or data review process).

Limited information is provided about data collection (for example one of the following is missing: time/semester and place, sampling process, population description, and/or data review process). Or

No information is provided about data collection process or data was not collected.



If a rubric, grading scale, or scoring sheet was used, it is appropriate to the purpose, and a sample document is appended to the report. And Two or more reviewers are used in the data review process, or provide a secondary validation method (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha, validity survey, validating focus group).

And If a rubric, grading scale, or scoring sheet was used, it is appropriate to the purpose, and a sample document is appended to the report.

There appears to be a mismatch between data collected and the student learning outcome(s) being assessed.

Exemplary (3) Accomplished (2) Emerging (1) Beginning (0) Results Results are present, specific, and

disaggregated within the sample population (e.g., performance criteria, demographics, etc.). And Results are represented visually with a premium on clarity, simplicity, and ease of use by the external reviewer (e.g., tables and/or graphs).

Results are present, specific, and disaggregated within the sample population (e.g., performance criteria, demographics, etc.).

Results are present and provided in aggregate format only (e.g., 80% of the students met the target, or average score is 3.5).

No results are presented Or Results do not match assessment tool(s) or methodology (e.g., assessment method is a rubric; however graduation rates are provided as results).

Interpretation of Results Interpretation of results draw connections between the methodologies and results, and seem to be reasonable inferences given the outcome(s). And A narrative is provided that outlines the discussion of results by pertinent parties involved in data analysis. And

Interpretation of results draw connections between the methodologies and results, and seem to be reasonable inferences given the outcome(s). And A narrative is provided that outlines the discussion of results by pertinent parties involved in data analysis.

Interpretation of results is ambiguous or superficial, or does not refer back to the outcomes, benchmarks, methodologies, or results. (e.g., We met our benchmarks, or the students were successful)

No interpretation attempted. Or The analysis of results repeats what is stated in the Results category of the report. (e.g., 14 students received distinguished ratings, or the average score was 3.5)



The report identifies the person(s) involved in the interpretation of data (Names are not required), and the results were shared with the program stakeholders (e.g., faculty, curriculum committee). And The report discusses benchmarks/targets/goals, whether or not they were met, and why/why not. And An in depth interpretation is provided (e.g., discussion of limitations, trend data, validation and reliability tests, results from previous years, or references to targets/goals are provided).

And The report identifies the person(s) involved in the interpretation of data. (Names are not required.) And The report discusses benchmarks/targets/goals, whether or not they were met, and why/why not.

Exemplary (3) Accomplished (2) Emerging (1) Beginning (0) Improvement Actions Improvement Actions focus on

the improvement of student learning. And Description of intended improvement actions are provided. And There is a clear explanation of the link between the improvement actions and assessment findings. And Rationale of intended improvement action is tied to

Improvement Actions focus on the improvement of student learning. And Description of intended improvement actions are provided. And There is a clear explanation of the link between the improvement actions and the assessment findings. And The improvements are somewhat specific (e.g.,

Improvement Actions focus on the improvement of the assessment process. Or Description of intended improvement actions are minimal or nonexistent. Or The explanation of the link between improvement actions and assessment findings is not clear. Or The improvements are too general (e.g., we will add an

No improvements are provided.



empirical/research based evidence. And The improvement actions are specific, with a brief implementation plan (e.g., approximate dates of and person(s) responsible for implementation, and where in curriculum/activities and department/program they will occur

approximate dates, and where in curriculum/activities and department/program they will occur). Or If no improvements are planned, then the program has provided a justification or rationale, such as: 1) increase the benchmark, or explain why the benchmark does not need to be increased; 2) state plans to focus on another area of concern for future assessments, 3) and work to monitor and maintain the current level of success for this outcome (i.e., “because” statements).

assignment, we will do better next year). Or No improvements planned and no justification or explanation given.

Gatton College Doctoral Dissertation

Defense Assessment Form

Name of Candidate: ___________________ Discipline:_________________

Date of Examination: ___/___/___

Reviewer: (Circle One)

Internal Committee Member External Committee Member Outside Examiner

Please evaluate this candidate on a scale from 1 to 5:

0 = Not Rated 1 = Deficient 2 = Marginal 3 = Proficient 4 = Admirable 5 = Exemplary

Criteria:

Mastery of Research Methodologies: 1 2 3 4 5

Depth of understanding of the theoretical 1 2 3 4 5 foundations in the discipline:

Depth of understanding of the latest 1 2 3 4 5 research in the discipline:

Appreciation of the philosophies of academic inquiry: 1 2 3 4 5

Logical Consistency: 1 2 3 4 5

Ability to orally communicate research outcomes: 1 2 3 4 5

Quality of written communication: 1 2 3 4 5

Comments (Optional):

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Appendix U: Sample Dissertation Assessment Form

Appendix V: Gatton College Teaching Excellence Initiative Gatton College Teaching Excellence Initiative to Enhance and Support Teaching and Learning Goals of the Teaching Excellence Initiative: The second strategic initiative of the Gatton College Strategic Plan with regard to learning and career outcomes states that the college will, “Improve the learning and career outcomes of all students through more rigorous and relevant academic programs and meaningful enrichment activities. Our actions across the college will reflect our commitment to student success.” Likewise, the University’s strategic objective for undergraduate student success states our goal, “to be the University of choice for aspiring undergraduate students within the Commonwealth and beyond, seeking a transformational education that promotes self-discovery, experiential learning, and life-long achievement.” High quality teaching is paramount to student learning and academic success and is at the heart of the Teaching Excellence Initiative in the Gatton College of Business and Economics. The specific goals guiding this initiative include the following:

Enhance teaching quality in the college with subsequent enhancement of classroom effectiveness, student engagement, and student learning.

Provide teaching development and enrichment opportunities available to all faculty members. Provide teaching support and guidance for new faculty members to help improve teaching

success and efficiency so new faculty members can effectively achieve an effective teaching/research balance.

Encourage the incorporation of elements of community engagement and service learning into Gatton courses and support and guide instructors in these endeavors.

Provide teaching support and teaching-related job market preparation for graduate students. Form a Teaching Excellence Team with representation from each department and find systematic

ways for the college to benefit from presence of the many teaching specialists in the college. Provide training, support, and cohesive structure for adjunct instructors hired each semester. Work with college’s technology team to increase awareness and use of new classroom

technologies available in B&E. Increase awareness and facilitate use of university CELT resources and personnel by B&E

faculty. Encourage excellence in teaching by annually awarding teaching accomplishment in the college.

Specific Initiative Activities: The Teaching Excellence Team (TET) was formed in the fall of 2016. Committee members include one representative from each area in the college. Gail Hoyt (economics) is serving as chair and other members include Jack Kirn (management), Josh Pierce (finance), Leslie Vincent (marketing), and Jane Wells (accounting). Members serve a three-year term. Additionally, the Dean for Undergraduate Programs, Scott Kelly, serves as a permanent member of the committee. The primary role of this team is to work toward achieving the previously stated initiative goals. For the 2016-2017 academic year the team is focused on five specific areas of work: 1) establishing an annual teaching award process to acknowledge high quality teaching, 2) enhancing teaching-related faculty development through a brown bag teaching workshop series and other related speakers of note, 3) establishing and awarding teaching/curriculum enhancement grants on an annual basis, 4) enriching annual teaching dossier preparation to encourage individual reflection and innovation, and 5) coordinating new faculty teaching-related mentoring and development including an effective structure for classroom observation. 1) Annual College Teaching Awards: With a $10,000 award budget, we decided to give out three faculty awards at $3,000 each and one graduate student award at $1,000. One faculty award will focus on innovative pedagogy and another on student community engagement connected to a course. A third faculty award will be based on student engagement and nominations will come solely from students. The

graduate student award will be based on overall teaching success. In addition to our annual teaching awards, periodically we would like to select Gatton Teaching Hall of Fame Award for career long teaching service and achievement. This award is intended for current faculty later in later stages of their careers and emeritus and retired faculty. Awards will be made at a college-wide ceremony and publicized. Philosophically, team members believe that defining awards based on classroom innovation, community involvement and service, and student engagement/critical thinking is an approach consistent with our college’s mission and goals. We also plan to have students involved in this process in a variety of ways. More detailed descriptions of the awards follow:

Critical Thinking Teaching Award ($3000): This award will be given to a faculty member that promotes and engages students in critical thinking. Students will nominate and vote for a faculty member that they believe strives to create a learning environment that requires students to engage in higher order learning and critical thinking. This can be accomplished through a variety of learning approaches and requires students to apply course materials to challenging business problems.

Teaching Innovation Award ($3000): This award will be given to a faculty member that has developed a new approach or teaching method within one of their classes that significantly enhances student learning. A teaching innovation can include, but is not limited to, a new method of delivery, development of new assignments or instructional materials, or other developments that engage students and promote learning. Nominations for this award will come from faculty and the criteria used to select the winner will include a summary of the teaching innovation, course evaluations, and feedback from students.

Community Engagement Award ($3000): This award will be given to a faculty member that significantly incorporates engagement with the outside community in their course. This engagement with community can take on many forms including (but not limited to): student projects for the community partner, service learning assignments, classroom speakers, and/or mentor programs with outside business leaders. Faculty that engage with outside businesses and nonprofit organizations provide students with an invaluable learning experience where they can understand and appreciate the complexities of business problems that firms and nonprofit organizations face. Furthermore, value is provided to the community through the projects completed by students that can help shape the future strategy firms and other organizations. This engagement builds strong relationships between the Gatton College of Business & Economics and the business community surrounding the University. Nominations for this award will come from faculty and the criteria used to select the winner will include a summary of the community engagement, course evaluations, and feedback from students.

Graduate Student Teaching Excellence Award ($1000): This award will be given to a graduate student based on excellent teaching performance in the classroom. Criteria that will be used in evaluating graduate students include course evaluation scores, DGS recommendations/input, and student feedback.

Gatton Teaching Hall of Fame Award (not monetary): This award recognizes and honors a faculty member who has exemplified the teacher- student traditions of the Gatton Business of College and the University of Kentucky for many years. The recipient can be currently active, emeritus, or retired. The awardee has made significant contributions to the daily mission of the college by educating our students and embodies and facilitates learning and expanding knowledge through scholarship and creative activity. The recipient taught their students to serve the global community by disseminating, sharing and applying knowledge. This faculty member will be the

person who students talk about years later after the faculty member retires. This is not an annual award, but rather one only made when a clear honoree emerges.

All teaching award winners will participate in a brown bag session the following semester to present and disseminate to other faculty regarding their best practices for teaching. 2) Teaching Brown Bag Workshop and Speaker Series: As a part of our teaching initiative we plan to provide opportunities for faculty to engage in productive discussions to invigorate the teaching enterprise as it takes place within and outside of the classroom. This may be accomplished through programs presentations, guest speakers and workshops in the area of teaching in order to help ensure that faculty members approach mastery in their teaching. Workshops will expose faculty to innovations in pedagogical technique, experts in practice, and the effective use of classroom technologies. We plan to have workshops led by teaching experts in B&E, professional staff from CELT (our campus teaching and learning center), other appropriate units on campus, and occasional outside speakers. WE plan to work in conjunction with CELT to make workshops available to others outside of B&E when appropriate. For the fall 2016 semester two workshops were offered. The first was led by Professor Gail Hoyt and involved ways to increase student engagement in the classroom. A second workshop led by Professor Dan Stone focused on student distraction and helping students to be more mindful and engaged in the learning process. For spring 2017 workshops we plan to have one that helps faculty in our college work with our technology specialists in the college to more fully and effectively use our new classroom technologies. Someone from CELT will also be speaking with faculty about the development of teaching dossiers. Other workshops for the spring are still in the planning stages. Central to this workshop series is our goal to partner with CELT and our own technology specialists. 3) Teaching and Curricular Enhancement Mini-grant Awards The teaching initiative includes funds for the annual awarding of teaching-related mini-grants. These grants may be used for (but are not limited to) materials to enhance instruction, teacher development activity such as attending a teaching conference, support of curriculum development work, and things such as UK logo items as incentives for service learning courses. The Teaching Excellence Team is currently drafting a call for proposals with a December deadline and awards will be made for the spring 2017 and summer 2017 semesters. The Teaching Excellence Team will review applications and make awards. Recipients will be required to write a short report verifying how the funds were used once work is complete and in the cases of sharable products, recipients may be asked to share their experience in a brownbag workshop setting. The total amount we allocate will depend upon faculty interest and award sizes may vary. Below is a list of the awards for the 2016-2017 Academic year.

Topic Award Hybrid Learning Environment and delivery $1,400 Purchase Teaching Materials $580 Educational Research – Impact of relative performance feedback and scrutiny on student performance in large enrollment university classes

$1,000

Research on student engagement and participation in mindfulness exercises

$1,000

4) Enhancement of the Teaching Component of Promotion and Review Dossiers: A segment on teaching activity is a standard component of promotion dossiers and such materials are considered in the merit review process. The production of such a dossier has the potential to be an important opportunity for the faculty member to reflect and consider future growth and innovation as a teacher, yet often that potential is not achieved in the process. It is the hope of college administrators and the Teaching Excellence Team that his process meet the administrative objectives for which it was intended, but also serve as an opportunity for true reflection and growth for the faculty member. While TET is still in the process of considering the best structure, Associated Dean Jenkins and team chair, Gail Hoyt met with representatives of CELT to begin a discussion of dossier process revision and this will be central to TET’s work in the spring 2017 semester. After initial discussion, TET members agreed that for dossiers, rather than having a formal teaching philosophy and teaching portfolio, a series of guiding questions that force reflection, development and innovation will be more effective.

5) Coordination of new faculty teaching-related mentoring and development including an effectivestructure for classroom observation: TET members will nurture beginning faculty members as they learn to effectively incorporate innovative strategies, technologies, formats and best practices. Mentoring will involve a variety of activities such as the following:

Work with new faculty one on one to deal with classroom issues, questions, etc. Help connect new faculty with appropriate CELT staff for additional observation and advice

when appropriate. Help new faculty administer and process results of midsemester and end-of-semester evaluations. Prepare annual formative teaching summary for new faculty discussing strengths, area of

emphasis for improvement, and progress. Help new faculty members develop teaching portfolio materials for tenure and promotion Provide department chairs with teaching-related information to use as support in new faculty

member’s tenure packet and for review. Serve as a safe – neutral – third party to help with teaching-related issues. Observe new faculty members once each semester and provide formative feedback.

While it is our plan for our committee to eventually assist in all of these areas, as it is our first year in formation, we are focusing especially on the classroom observation process. We are developing a peer classroom observation rubric and instituting a constructive classroom observation process in the college that is summative and formative in nature. While in some instances TET members will observe faculty, in other instances, when more appropriate, another colleague might visit a class. For an instructor, a classroom visit by another instructor can be unnerving. TET is currently formulating a clear plan for how observation will take place, who will observe, and how the commentaries will be used. We want to create a process mindful of both the summative and formative aspects of peer observation.

Graduate Students and Adjunct Faculty: Certainly the results of all teaching initiative activity designed for full time faculty will be available to our graduate students and adjunct professors. They will be invited to teaching workshops and other development activities. Additionally, TET will be involved with helping to prepare graduate students for the teaching aspect of the job market as they are guided in teaching portfolio design. We also hope to provide a cohesive structure for adjunct instructors hired by the college to ensure that they feel a sense of connection and receive the appropriate training and support.

Documents

AACSB International Continuous Colleg… · AACSB International Continuous Improvement Review Carol Martin Gatton College of Business and Economics University of Kentucky Academic