Policy on Appointment, Reappointment, and Dismissal of Unit Chairs or Directors (Revised 2010, 2011, 2013, 2015)
The strong tradition of faculty governance within the College includes a role in the selection of chairs or directors of programs, centers, and institutes with affiliated faculty. Chairs and directors assume responsibility for the day-to-day business of their units, and act as the leading representatives of their units in interactions with the College. Chair and director appointments and reappointments are the prerogative of the Dean, but by tradition and practice they are made after discussion with the faculty, in concert with Article II, Section 2.2.B of the Bloomington Faculty Council Constitution: "appointments of faculty to . . . the chair of the unit, should be made only after consultation with the members of the unit."
Procedures for Appointment of Chairs or Directors
All units should employ a written policy specifying procedures for expressing their preference for appointment or reappointment of their chair or director. The process must include a faculty meeting for faculty discussion and a secret ballot, although the precise methods for selections of candidates and the practices for ballots and voting will vary among units. In units in which the chair or director oversees procedures regarding tenure, candidates for chair or director must be drawn from among the tenured faculty. In all other units, non-tenure-track faculty may be candidates for chair or director and may vote for chair or director. By way of a parallel with the University Faculty Council Policy on Clinical and Lecturer Appointments, the role of non-tenure-track faculty (including clinical faculty, lecturers and professors of practice) in governance within the unit shall be determined by vote of the tenured and tenure-probationary faculty of the unit, provided that where non-tenure-track appointees have voting privileges , their voting participation must be structured in a way that reserves at least 60% of voting weight to tenure track faculty. The academic integrity of the school and its programs ultimately is the responsibility of tenured and tenure-probationary faculty.
In all units, staff may be consulted during the process, but do not vote for chair or director. The process must provide an opportunity for individual statements regarding the basis for support of individual candidates and these statements must be conveyed to the Dean. It is rare that the Dean will not appoint or reappoint a candidate preferred by a clear majority of the faculty for the position of chair or director, and it is reasonable to expect some explanation under such circumstances. However, in instances when opinion is closely divided, the Dean's prerogative holds sway. When the position of chair or director is filled by a new hire, faculty preference is expressed in the recommendation for appointment to the Dean. The typical term of appointment of a chair or director is three or four years, and consultation with the faculty within the department or unit in accordance with procedures described in the preceding paragraph should occur prior to the reappointment of a chair or director, or any extension of the term of service.
Annual Departmental Review of Chairs and Directors
Every year each unit should submit a report to the Dean that reviews its chair's or director's performance in research, teaching and service, with special consideration of his/her effectiveness in the execution of the responsibilities of a chair or director. An appropriate departmental faculty committee that is not appointed by the chair or director, such as an elected policy committee or a merit review committee, should undertake this task. In units in which the chair or director oversees procedures regarding tenure and promotion, the members of this committee must be drawn from among the tenured and tenure-track faculty. The committee must inform (e.g., by a general e-mail solicitation) all faculty in the department of the opportunity to offer comments on the chair's or director's performance and must ensure that their report to the Dean both describes and considers the full spectrum of substantive faculty views that they receive. It is expected that the Dean will respond to the committee in the rare instance that serious concerns with the chair's or director's leadership are expressed.
Procedures for Dismissal of Chairs and Directors
Dismissal of a chair or director occurs when a chair or director is asked to leave office prior to the expiration of the negotiated term of office. Under exceptional circumstances members of the faculty within a unit may collectively ask that a chair or director be dismissed as an expression of faculty governance through articulation of explicit reasons pertaining to questions of leadership. The annual departmental review of a chair or director provides one mechanism for such a request to be made to the Dean; alternatively, it may be based on a majority vote of no confidence using a protocol similar to that adopted in expressing a preference for a chair or director. In such rare instances it is expected that the Dean would consult with the faculty further to ascertain the basis for the request, the extent of support for a change in chair or director, and to determine the expressed preference for a new Chair or Director. Only in exceptional circumstances would the chair or director not be replaced when a substantial majority of the faculty requests dismissal.
A chair or director may also be dismissed or not reappointed on the Dean's authority. The Dean must consult with the College Policy Committee before dismissal or non-reappointment. The dismissal or of a chair or director does not in and of itself constitute formal suspension of faculty governance as such (see Policy on Suspension and Restoration of Faculty Governance in Departments and Other Units), and normal procedures for faculty to express their preference for appointment of a new Chair or Director should be followed as soon as possible thereafter.