Bylaws

EEB has no formal substructure, but can be organized by faculty interests and graduate student education programs into subunits of appropriate sizes and configurations (both formal and ad hoc) to coordinate function, promote discussion, and facilitate consideration of relevant issues. The number and composition of such subunits will be flexible to meet departmental demands as they arise.

The offices of EEB consist of a Chair and an Associate Chair.

(a) Chair

The Chair is appointed by the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences after consultation with EEB, and normally has a term of 3–5 years. The Chair directs day-to-day and longer-term departmental activities of EEB, and officiates at EEB meetings (except as noted below).

(b) Associate Chair

The Associate Chair is appointed by the Chair with approval of EEB. Normally the term is 3 years, and appointment is renewable. The Associate Chair officiates at EEB meetings when the Chair cannot attend, assumes the responsibilities of the Chair as circumstances require, and carries out other duties as directed by the Chair.

Faculty members may share appointments in other units of the University such as the Department of Molecular Biosciences, the Biodiversity Institute, the Kansas Biological Survey, and the Environmental Studies Program.

(a) Adjunct Faculty

Persons whose interests and expertise are within the range of research and teaching of EEB but who are not salaried by the University of Kansas may be granted Adjunct status in EEB at appropriate rank. Adjunct status may be held by persons who (1) have a potential long-term active association with EEB and (2) have an active research and/or teaching program. EEB may use adjunct positions to comply with the policies of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences regarding spousal accommodation when salaried positions are not available. Qualifications for consideration for Adjunct status include: (1) an earned Ph.D. degree in an appropriate field, (2) evidence of an active research and/or teaching program, and (3) interest in participation in EEB activities. Adjunct appointments carry no provisions for tenure or sabbatical leave. However, if appropriate, Adjunct appointees can be considered for promotion via the same rigorous assessment by peers experienced by salaried faculty through the normal protocols of the University. Promotion within the ranks of Adjunct faculty carries with it the same expectation of strong scholarly standing and long-term commitment to EEB. EEB expects Adjunct appointees to take an active role in EEB (e.g., research, teaching, co-advising graduate students, and serviceon committees). Any overhead accruing from an Adjunct appointee’s grants will be allocated to EEB (divided appropriately with another unit if the person holds another adjunct appointment).

(b) Courtesy Faculty

Persons whose interests and expertise are within the range of research and teaching of EEB, but whom are salaried by the University of Kansas in another unit or other units, may be granted Courtesy status in EEB at appropriate rank (i.e., equivalent to their rank in the University unit that holds the FTE). Courtesy appointees are expected to take an active role in EEB. If an appointee desires to take an even more active role in EEB, s/he should seek a joint appointment between his/her other unit and EEB.

(c) Emeritus Faculty

In recognition of many years of service to EEB, a retired tenure-track faculty member may be appointed as Professor Emeritus through normal University procedures.

(d) Term Appointees

Colleagues (including those who also hold Adjunct status) whom are hired into non-tenure-track positions (e.g., part or full-time lecturers) to teach particular courses for a circumscribed period of time are considered as term-appointments.

(e) Visiting Scholars

Persons who do not hold a salaried position at the University of Kansas, but who may be spending a period of time (for instance, while on a sabbatical leave from his/her own institution) conducting research in collaboration with EEB faculty members (primarily on the Lawrence campus, but in special instances perhaps elsewhere) may be granted Visiting Scholar status.

(f) Associates

Persons who do not hold a salaried position at the University of Kansas, but who demonstrate a need (e.g., a professional address) to have an affiliation with EEB may petition the Chair in writing for appointment as an Associate.

(g) Affiliate categories in EEB do not include:

     (i) Professional biologists from other institutions who are appointed to the Graduate Faculty of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences to serve on a specified Ph.D. committee for a specified period of time; or

     (ii) Postdoctoral researchers who are working with an EEB faculty member, unless that person has applied for and been granted Adjunct status.

Committees will be appointed by the Chair of EEB and each will have a student member elected by the Graduate Student Organization except as noted.

(a) Executive

Chair appointments to committee must be approved by supermajority (2/3) vote of faculty members in attendance at the meeting. Membership comprises all faculty ranks and represents a diversity of faculty research and teaching interests. The committee works with the Chair to coordinate departmental activities, review plans and departmental goals, to develop charges to other standing and ad hoc committees, to consider reports from committees, and to establish agendas for Department meetings. The Executive Committee vets the Chair’s appointments to other standing committees.

(b) Merit Evaluation

The Merit Evaluation Committee examines procedures used to determine merit salary increases and provides evaluations and recommendations to the Chair for merit salary increases. Membership is composed of tenured professors who reflect the diversity of departmental research and teaching interests. University policy prohibits a student member on this committee.

(c) Promotion and Tenure

This committee examines procedures for promotion and tenure of EEB faculty members. It assists applicants in the preparation of materials, evaluates applications, and makes recommendations to EEB for tenure and promotion of faculty. Membership is composed of tenured professors who reflect the diversity of departmental research and teaching interests. University policy prohibits a student member on this committee

(d) Sabbatical Leave

The Sabbatical Leave Committee assists EEB faculty members in the preparation of materials for sabbatical leave. It evaluates applications and forwards recommendations for sabbatical leave to Chair. Membership is composed of tenured professors that reflect the diversity of departmental research and teaching interests. University policy prohibits a student member on this committee.

The Chair shall appoint such committees as the business of the Department may require. In the case of Search Committees for joint appointments, the Chair will coordinate the committee selection with representatives of the sharing units.

Baccalaureate degrees offered by EEB and the curriculum elements required to achieve them are described in the current University of Kansas Undergraduate Catalog. Members of EEB actively participate in the KU Undergraduate Biology (KUUB) Program by teaching appropriate courses and mentoring undergraduate students.

Master’s and doctoral degrees offered by EEB and the curriculum elements required to achieve them are described in the current University of Kansas Graduate Catalog and the Graduate Regulations of EEB. (See Section 6.01 of these bylaws.) For a Ph.D. degree to be granted by EEB, at least three EEB faculty members must sign the candidate’s dissertation and the chair of the student’s committee must be an EEB faculty member.

(a) Meetings will be held at regular intervals during the regular academic year, normally monthly, but more often when needed.

(b) Announcement of a meeting will be made at least 2 weeks prior to a meeting date, except in emergency situations.

(c) An agenda will be provided prior to each meeting.

Meetings are open to all EEB faculty members, professional staff, graduate students, and affiliates.

(a) Decisions will be made by simple majority vote (except where otherwise indicated).

(b) Salaried and Adjunct EEB faculty members present at a meeting may vote on departmental matters, except as noted below or in cases of familial or other relationship that presents a conflictof-interest or the perception of a conflict-of-interest.

(c) Proxy votes will not be accepted.

(d) Votes on hiring of new faculty members will be accepted only from salaried EEB faculty members; salaried faculty will be excluded from such votes in cases of familial or other relationship that presents a conflict-of-interest or the perception of a conflict-of-interest. A 2/3 majority vote is required in decisions concerning the hiring of new faculty members.

(e) Votes on promotion and tenure decisions are limited to salaried EEB associate and full professors.

(f) Decisions will be determined by secret ballot if requested by any single individual permitted to cast votes on a given decision. All personnel decisions will be determined by secret ballot.

(g) A quorum for a vote will be 25% of the number of current faculty members in the Department.

(h) A number of votes equal to 25% of the number of faculty members present will be accepted from the graduate students, except in personnel matters, on which graduate students may not vote. That is, the graduate student vote will be no more than 20% of the total votes cast.

(i) Under extraordinary circumstances, votes can be cast via e-mail. A quorum for an electronic vote is as defined above. Votes cannot be cast via e-mail from voting members in absentia when regularly scheduled departmental meetings are held.

Graduate student admissions, curricula, examinations, etc., will be governed by the Graduate Regulations that are maintained by the Graduate Committee. (See Graduate Student Handbook.)

The Chair is responsible for initiating all decisions regarding the assignment of space in Haworth Hall. These decisions will be made in accordance with the goals and mission of EEB.

(a) The first recourse for disputes involving faculty members, staff members, and students is the Chair of EEB.

(b) In the event the Chair cannot resolve the grievance informally, the complainant will be referred to the appropriate higher authority as stipulated in the Grievance Procedure for the College. At the time these bylaws were adopted, that was the Judicial Board (see College Grievance Procedure dated September 1999).

All faculty members (Full, Associate, and Assistant professors), affiliates, and graduate students may participate in department-level discussion of bylaws amendments except in cases of familial or other relationship that presents a conflict-of-interest or the perception of a conflict-of-interest.

Persons unable to attend meetings at which bylaws amendments are discussed may submit letters that relate their opinions; these will be read during the discussion.

Votes may be cast only by salaried EEB faculty members, except in cases of familial or other relationship that presents a conflict-of-interest or the perception of a conflict-of-interest. Votes will not be accepted from students. A two-thirds majority of the votes cast will be required to pass an amendment. The quorum for such a vote will be 25% of the number of current faculty members in the Department.

The Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology thoroughly reviews and evaluates the performances of tenured and tenure-track faculty members annually for decisions regarding tenure, promotion, and merit salary increases. Expectations described in this document are based on a standard 40-40-20 academic appointment (with numbers indicating percent effort in teaching, research, and service, respectively); joint appointments with other academic units (e.g., Natural History Museum/Biodiversity Research Center, Kansas Biological Survey, Environmental Studies Program) require appropriate modifications in expectations.

A. General departmental expectations for teaching, research and related scholarly activities, and service, including the weights assigned to each area indicating the distribution of effort expected by the Department to receive an average evaluation.

1. Teaching (40%): The teaching expectations of faculty in the Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology are those of the College of Liberal Arts & Sciences. Under normal circumstances, this translates into two three-credit courses per year or the equivalent. All faculty members are expected, under normal circumstances, to mentor graduate and undergraduate students (providing guidance in developing and implementing research and promoting career planning), teach graduate courses, and teach courses from the core undergraduate program. Faculty members with joint appointments in the Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology and other units (e.g., Kansas Biological Survey or the Natural History Museum/Biodiversity Research Center) have reduced teaching responsibilities relative to those with full-time department appointments.

2. Research (40%): Expectations, on an annual basis, for research include producing refereed publications, giving presentations at national and international professional meetings/conferences, and making application for extramural funding by submitting grant proposals to appropriate funding agencies. The appropriate number of publications varies across subdisciplines in the Department, and the level of funding necessary to accomplish research goals should similarly match subdisciplinary norms.

3. Service (20%): Faculty members in the Department of Ecology & Evolutionary Biology are expected to participate cooperatively in the administrative duties of the Department, as well as to serve periodically on College and University standing and ad hoc committees. Faculty members also should be involved in professional societies and provide peer reviews of scholarly papers and grant proposals. Service may also include advising undergraduate students about coursework and degree completion.

B. Specific departmental criteria used to judge an overall acceptable level of performance that meets faculty academic responsibilities.

The following criteria assume that the faculty member has a normal activity profile of 40% teaching, 40% research, and 20% service. If performance is judged by the department Chair and the Merit Evaluation Committee to be “below normal expectations”, the reason for the “below normal expectations” designation will be conveyed to the faculty member in writing at the time of the annual faculty evaluation. The Chair and the faculty member will then develop a plan to address any areas of deficiency.

Contributions of a faculty member to the teaching mission of the department are judged on the basis of a number of teaching-related activities, such as the number of classes and students taught each year, course development, and student and peer evaluations. Because measurement of teaching success can vary from year to year and may depend upon the nature of a particular course, it is important that judgments be broadly based on performance over the most recent 3-year period, with an emphasis on the year of evaluation. The evaluation should include some discussion of the quality of the teaching effort.

(The following is from the report of the Task Force on Evaluation of Teaching, 2008)

High quality teaching and scholarship have long been recognized as the two hallmarks of a productive faculty member. Teaching is serious intellectual work that is grounded in deep knowledge and understanding of a field, and it includes the ability to convey that understanding in clear and engaging ways. The conduct of courses is the central feature of our teaching responsibilities at KU, and it has priority among the many kinds of teaching activities that take place. Our identification of teaching should not be limited to formal class performance, however, and a broader menu of teaching activities provides additional ways to demonstrate quality in teaching.

There is more to quality instruction than making one’s knowledge and understanding accessible to students; effective education successfully generates understanding, knowledge, and skills among students. People acquire more skill in teaching over time, and as in research, that success comes from thinking about the results of prior efforts and identifying ways to improve future results. Quality in teaching will include self-evaluation of how well students are learning and inquiry into how to improve learning in each class.

The measurement of any human activity is never perfect, whether it is teaching or research. The proposed guidelines offer a framework from which faculty can choose elements that may improve the measurement of teaching beyond current practices. It is intended to increase flexibility by offering many different ways that teachers can show their work and demonstrate what they are learning from its results.

It is not expected that any single faculty member would engage in all or even most of the activities listed below, but they should be recognized as part of teaching when they occur across the full duration of a teaching career.

1. How does this teacher conduct courses?

Evaluation in this area should focus on some or all of the following factors:

  Clarity of course goals

  Relevance and appropriateness of course content

  Effectiveness of instruction in lecture, labs, discussion, studios, and other activities

  Appropriate relationship with students in which the instructor is available, challenges students, and supports their learning

  Measures of student learning

  Presentation of courses serving the mission of the unit or University

A faculty member could provide various forms of evidence to indicate success in achieving these aims, such as:

  Annotated syllabus

  Selection of course materials (readings, resources, demonstrations, grading standards, etc.)

  Ratings and/or written comments from students

  Peer evaluation of classroom performance, interaction with students, and/or course materials

  Samples of student work demonstrating student learning

  Trend data showing the impact of the teacher on measures of learning

  List of courses taught and explanation of their importance

  Explanation of special service in particular courses, such as large lecture courses

  Teaching awards or nominations for teaching awards

  Other materials that the faculty member believes indicate excellence in teaching

Faculty colleagues and or the department chair would evaluate the evidence provided by the faculty member to judge the degree to which he/she was attaining the aims cited above. Student perspectives of those properties of teaching they are in a good position to evaluate are reflected in “Ratings and/or written comments from students” shown above.

2. How does this teacher prepare for courses?

Evaluation in this area should focus on the following factors:

  Appropriate preparation of new courses or efforts to improve instruction 

  Continuing efforts to improve teaching

A faculty member could provide various forms of evidence to indicate success in achieving these aims, such as:

  Sample of course materials: learning activities, assignments, etc. for new or existing courses

  Plans for future course development; may include a journal or other reflections on teaching

  Examples of innovation in teaching including teaching practices, technology, etc.

  Seminars attended or conducted on teaching; include description of new approaches learned from workshops or description of how ideas have been incorporated into teaching (annotated syllabus or other notes)

  Student comments indicating changes in teaching, faculty observation supporting innovation based on workshops 

  Examples of collaboration with faculty at KU or elsewhere to support teaching

  Examples of work with KU offices (KU Libraries, Writing Center, Learning Communities, etc.) to support teaching

  Publication(s) or other research on teaching Awards or nominations for research, teaching, or service related to improving teaching

  Other materials that the faculty member believes indicate excellence in teaching

Faculty colleagues and or the department chair would evaluate the evidence provided by the faculty member to judge the degree to which he/she was attaining the aims cited above.

3. What teaching work has the faculty member done in addition to teaching courses?

Evaluation in this area should focus on some or all of the following factors:

  Coordinating courses within a program, or developing a new course

  Supporting teaching at the unit level by developing new materials for general use; creating infrastructure for labs, studios, or field work; seeking grant support for teaching; recruiting students

  Mentoring and supervising GTAs/GRAs

  Mentoring and supervising students in clinical settings or internships

  Working with student groups

  Mentoring new faculty members in their role as a teacher

  Mentoring students or directing research projects

A faculty member could provide various forms of evidence to indicate success in achieving these aims, such as:

  List of administrative or coordination activities, along with new materials developed and commentary from colleagues and students involved

  Observations and comments by students, colleagues, chair, dean on unit level contributions

  External funding of proposals/awards related to teaching, reviews of proposals

  Lists of those mentored and supervised in various roles (undergraduate, graduate, post-docs; research, teaching, clinical work)

  Unit records of GTAs/GRAs’ performance, comments from other students learning from graduate students, comments from community partners or clients

  Examples of student work completed under teacher’s supervision, along with descriptions of venues for presentation and any recognition

  Letters from students, reflecting on mentoring activities and effectiveness and indicating how the mentoring has influenced student work and success

  Faculty colleagues’ comments on mentoring activities; e.g., service on MA or MS/PhD committees

  Examples of any regional or national critical review or recognition of student work

  Time to degree, success in obtaining employment or other placement

  Lists of student groups supported, identifying unit or university level, along with student comments, awards or achievement by the group

  Lists of faculty colleagues mentored on teaching, with examples of feedback given or comments from colleagues about the impact of the shared work

Faculty colleagues and/or the department chair would evaluate the evidence provided by the faculty member to judge the degree to which he/she was attaining the aims cited above

4. Has this faculty member made contributions related to scholarship of teaching?

Evaluation in this area should focus on some or all of the following factors:

  Teaching related presentations at KU or elsewhere

  Attending or organizing teaching institutes

  Serving as a guest teacher at other institutions, for outside associations, or in the community

  Developing course materials, such as textbooks or websites

  Applying for and receiving grants in support of teaching or publishing articles related to teaching Participating in outreach to local schools (K-12) or other forums

A faculty member could provide various forms of evidence to indicate success in achieving these aims, such as: 

  Conference programs from presentations, letters, or other evaluations of quality of presentations; samples of presentation notes or published proceedings; programs from institutes or letters evaluating participation or impact

  List of service on department or University teaching committees or presentations at KU Summit or the Center for Teaching Excellence

  Letters attesting to impact of guest presentations in classes; formal evaluations if available

  Books, web addresses, or other materials generated, along with any letters attesting to the impact or quality of the materials

  Products developed for schools, feedback from organizers of presentations, statements from professional society or honors or awards for contributions

  Grant proposals, reviewer feedback on proposals, copies of articles submitted and published

Faculty colleagues and/or the department chair would evaluate the evidence provided by the faculty member to judge the degree to which he/she was attaining the aims cited above.

Contributions of a faculty member to the research mission of the department are judged principally on the maintenance of a productive research program, as evidenced by scholarly publications, communication of current research at appropriate professional meetings, and supportive funding. It is recognized that many of these activities can span more than a year. It is important that interdisciplinary contributions be included and fairly assessed where appropriate. The evaluation should include some discussion of the quality of the work produced.

The assessment of a faculty member's success in achieving satisfactory performance in research is multifaceted and to some degree will be governed by the percentage of the appointment in other academic units (e.g., Kansas Biological Survey, Natural History Museum/Biodiversity Research Center). Scholarly publication in refereed journals demonstrates that research is being performed and that it has passed peer review. Significant achievement in other areas, however, also may contribute to a satisfactory evaluation, depending on circumstances. Because research productivity sometimes varies considerably among years, the evaluation will include the three most recent years, with an emphasis on the year of evaluation. Activity is judged relative to the average of other faculty within the department at a level commensurate with their academic rank and assigned duties.

It is the responsibility of the department Chair and Merit Evaluation Committee to review the performance of the research activities of each faculty member. Information used to judge research productivity includes, but is not limited to, the following:

• Number of refereed journal publications and quality of journal
• Electronic publication in recognized and peer reviewed electronic media
• Books and monographs
• Notes, review articles, and shorter communications in appropriate journals
• Invited review papers
• Chapters of books, edited books, or proceedings
• Minor publications in technical journals
• Published book reviews, letters to the editor, instructional videos, manuals, articles in trade journals and society magazines, etc.
• Lectures, presentations, and posters presented at professional meetings
• Invited presentations at other institutions
• Application for grants from external sources
• Grants received (extramural and internal)
• Patents/technology transfer
• Development of computer software and research-related web sites
• Supervision and mentoring of graduate students

Performance in research will be assessed relative to that of peers. It is recognized that the assessment involves subjective judgment and must be supported by a written explanation.

Service contributions of a faculty member are judged principally on activities that provide service to the department, University, local community, state and federal governments, and to one’s professional and scholarly societies. These measures can vary from year to year, and it is important that judgments be based on performance during the past three years with an emphasis on the year of evaluation. The evaluation should include some discussion of quality. It is recognized that faculty members do not have control over their appointment to all committees and that the Department, Division of Biological Sciences, College, and University bear some responsibility for assuring that faculty members are regularly appointed to serve on committees.

It is the responsibility of the department Chair and Merit Evaluation Committee to review contributions of a faculty member’s service. Information used to judge service performance includes, but is not limited to, the following:

Service to profession

• Holding office or committee memberships in professional societies
• Serving as editor of professional journals
• Serving as reviewer of papers, proposals, and textbook manuscripts
• Editing conference proceedings
• Organizing conferences in professional societies
• Serving on review panels of funding agencies
• Serving as session chair at professional conferences
• Evaluating dossiers of colleagues for promotion
• Serving on evaluation teams and professional panels

Service to Department, Division, College, or University

• Serving on committees
• Undergraduate students advised
• Graduate students advised
• Serving as advisor or sponsor of student activities or organizations
• Serving in special appointments such as administrative positions

Service to the community and state

• Participating in university outreach programs
• Conducting workshops
• Giving public lectures
• K-12 science education activities
• Consulting
• Serving on local, regional, or state boards

Faculty members are expected to exhibit a level of service activities commensurate with their academic rank and with their assigned duties. Performance will be assessed relative to that of peers. It is recognized that the assessment involves subjective judgment, and the assessment must be supported by a written explanation.