By-Laws (Revised and Approved by Faculty Vote, November 2022) Faculty Definition The faculty of the Department of Chemistry of The University of Georgia consists of all tenured and tenure track professors, associate professors, assistant professors, and instructors having appointments in the Department (including members of other University of Georgia departments with partial appointments in the Chemistry Department) as well as such ex officio members as may be designated by the Statutes of The University of Georgia and the By-Laws of Franklin College of Arts and Sciences. Adjunct or Courtesy Appointment As per university policy, adjunct appointments are only offered to non-UGA employees. Adjunct appointment provides a means by which non-UGA scientists can form relationships with the Department of Chemistry. The Department offers courtesy appointments as a means of establishing a relationship with UGA faculty that have appointments in other Departments. Many reasons are possible for establishing an adjunct or courtesy appointment; most common is the desire of the faculty candidate to participate in graduate training of students in the Department of Chemistry as a major research advisor. A candidate for adjunct or courtesy appointment shall submit as part of the appointment dossier a statement setting forth the contributions which the candidate proposes to make to the departmental programs. Decisions concerning initial adjunct or courtesy appointment shall follow the same evaluative procedures as for regular appointment with substantial weight being given to this statement. As defined by University policy (sections 1.04-7 and 1.04-8 of https://provost.uga.edu/policies/academic-affairs-policy-manual/1-04-other-terminology/), adjunct and courtesy faculty do not have voting rights in faculty meetings. In determining the desirability of a given adjunct or courtesy appointment, the Department of Chemistry considers the contribution to the Department missions (in research, instruction, and service) offered by the faculty candidate. Often, this involves contributions to the instructional mission by teaching a course in the Department on a mutually agreeable schedule. In each case, a letter of agreement will be formulated that explicitly describes the contributions expected by the Department from the adjunct/courtesy appointee. The procedure for consideration of a faculty candidate for adjunct or courtesy appointment is as follows: Application for adjunct or courtesy appointment may be initiated by the faculty candidate or a Department of Chemistry faculty as a nominator. Regardless of the method of initiation, a file must be created to contain updated curriculum vitae and at least two letters of support from Department of Chemistry faculty members (one of which can be the nomination letter). The CV and letters should explicitly indicate the qualifications of the candidate in the field of chemistry. The file should also contain a letter from the candidate requesting consideration for an adjunct or courtesy appointment and specifying the benefit expected from association with the Department and the contribution that the Department can expect from the candidate. Negotiation of these contributions may occur during the consideration process. The file is maintained in the Department Head's office and is made available to the entire Department of Chemistry faculty for review prior to consideration of the candidate. After the file has been completed, the candidate will be invited to give a seminar in the Department, which must be advertised to the entire Department indicating that the speaker is being considered for adjunct or courtesy appointment. Subject to availability of the candidate, this seminar should be scheduled within three months of the date of completion of the candidate's file. After the candidate's seminar, a vote will be taken at the next Department faculty meeting on the acceptability of the candidate for adjunct or courtesy appointment in the Department. Within two weeks of the faculty vote, a letter of agreement detailing the results of this vote and the conditions of adjunct or courtesy appointment will be sent from the Head to the faculty candidate. The appointment dossier will be forwarded to the Dean's office for approval. Unless otherwise stated, the normal term of appointment is three years. Reappointment of adjunct or courtesy status is initiated at the request of the appointee, and requires a vote by the faculty. The decision on the adjunct or courtesy appointment should be expedited to the degree possible, and in no case should take longer than six weeks from the date of the seminar. Research Professionals Full-time research professional positions in the Department of Chemistry are usually titled Assistant Research Scientist, Associate Research Scientist, and Senior Research Scientist. Research scientists are usually supported from grants or contracts, making renewal of appointment and salary level dependent on the successful renewal of outside support and the level of funding. Appointment and promotion follow the UGA Guidelines for Appointment and Promotion of Research Scientists https://research.uga.edu/docs/policies/research/Research-Scientist-Appointment-Promotion.pdf. Research scientists: cannot act as major advisors, but can serve on Advisory Committees; can submit grant proposals as principal investigators; are not eligible to vote at faculty meetings; and are not eligible for tenure. The University has no obligation to support the salary of a Research Scientist. Department Head The Department Head is the chief administrative and fiscal officer of the department and is responsible for the equitable and effective use of the department's resources and for providing leadership and focus for the department. The Department Head will appoint the Graduate Coordinator and the Undergraduate Coordinator. Performance of the Department Head will be evaluated as specified in the Statutes of the University of Georgia. Faculty Meetings Regular meetings shall be held as required by the Statutes of the University and the By-Laws of Franklin College; the agenda of these meetings shall be distributed to the faculty not less than two days in advance of the time of the meeting. Faculty meetings concerned with initial faculty appointment, promotion, and tenure will be conducted in accord with the applicable University guidelines. Other faculty meetings will be conducted as specified in these By-Laws. In addition, emergency meetings of the faculty can be called in those situations in which an issue must be discussed and it is not possible to distribute the agenda one calendar week in advance of the meeting. Special meetings: may be called by the Department Head as deemed necessary, or shall be called upon petition by not less than one-third of the faculty. In all special meetings, discussions and actions shall be limited to specific items enumerated in the agenda distributed no less than two days in advance. The number of faculty constituting a quorum is 50% of the number of tenured and tenure track professors, associate professors, assistant professors, and instructors whose primary affiliation (50% or greater) is with the University of Georgia Chemistry Department. Post-Tenure Review Purpose The purpose of post-tenure review (PTR) is to examine, recognize, develop, and enhance the performance of tenured faculty members at the University of Georgia. The review process will focus upon career development by identifying opportunities for faculty to reach their full potential in teaching, research, and service to the University. Relationship to Other Reviews Once tenure is granted, faculty performance is reviewed annually as well as during consideration for promotion to higher academic rank, consideration for special professorships, and consideration for special faculty awards. PTR is designed to provide a longer-term perspective than is usually provided by the annual review, but can take advantage of information available through annual and other reviews as part of the process. PTR provides both retrospective and prospective reviews of performance, taking into account that a faculty member probably will have different emphases at different points in his/her career. It emphasizes career development and provides the perspective of multiple years of accomplishments and plans for development. Coverage All tenured faculty members in the Department of Chemistry are required to be reviewed every five years, starting five years after the most recent granting of tenure or promotion to associate or full professor, and continuing at five-year intervals unless interrupted by a successful review for tenure or promotion to associate or full professor. A faculty member who is on leave during the year he/she would ordinarily be reviewed will be reviewed the year after returning from leave-of-absence. The Head of the Department is subject to a separate administrative review policy and will not be included in the normal schedule of faculty PTR. Criteria for Review The criteria used for PTR reflect the three-fold mission of the Department in research, teaching, and service (both within and outside the University). These criteria and their application shall not infringe on accepted standards of academic freedom and their application must remain flexible enough to accommodate faculty with differing responsibilities. Each faculty member's assigned research and instructional EFT should be considered when applying the criteria. The review shall be carried out free of bias or prejudice by factors such as race, religion, sex, color, national origin, sexual orientation, ethnicity, age, disability, political affiliation, or veteran status. Specifics to be considered in evaluating research accomplishments may include (but not be limited to): Publications (peer-reviewed, invited, books, and patents), funding (federal, industrial, private, and state), invited presentations (seminars at peer institutions, national and international meetings), citation impact, awards and honors associated with research accomplishments, and participation in the organization of scientific meetings. Specifics to be considered in evaluating teaching accomplishments may include (but not be limited to): peer review (both by faculty members inside the Department and by those at peer institutions); student evaluations (both numerical scores from questionnaires and written comments); letters from previous students (both undergraduate and graduate); copies of course syllabi; documentation of curricular development; scholarly publications including textbooks and laboratory manuals; participation in the organization of scientific meetings; funding of educational grants; invited presentations on instructional topics; and awards and honors associated with teaching accomplishments. Specifics to be considered in evaluating service to the Department, College, University, community, state, country, and faculty member's profession may include (but not be limited to): participation on committees (as Chair or member), initiation of service-related actions, outreach efforts, and awards and honors associated with service. Documentation Documentation of the performance of the faculty member being reviewed should include (but not be limited to): Up-to-date curriculum vitae Copies of the faculty member's annual performance review for the years under consideration Copies of the faculty member's annual activity reports for the years under consideration Measures of teaching effectiveness, e.g., peer review reports (individual and collaborative), course teaching portfolios, classroom observation reports, and student evaluations A summary prepared by the faculty member of his/her accomplishments for the period under review and projected goals over the next five-year period (not to exceed two pages) Any other documentation that the faculty member under review considers to be important to the review process It is the responsibility of the faculty member under review, with help and documentation from the Head of the Department, to assemble the necessary documentation and provide it to the PTR committee. At the discretion of the faculty member under review, documentation collected for other major reviews (e.g., for special professorships or awards) since the last PTR may be substituted for newly generated documentation. Procedures for Conducting Review For each faculty member scheduled for PTR in a given year, a three-member PTR committee of tenured faculty members in the Department (not including the Head) will be selected from those tenured faculty not scheduled for PTR that year. The following confidential PTR committee selection process will be applied by the Head to each faculty member scheduled for review in a given year, one at a time in a randomly selected order. Eight available tenured faculty members will be selected at random and the faculty member up for review will choose the three he/she prefers for his/her PTR committee. Each committee will then elect its own chair. No faculty member shall serve on more than two PTR committees in any given year. All members of each PTR committee are expected to contribute to the review. By the end of fall term of the academic year during which a faculty member is undergoing PTR, the faculty member must supply his/her PTR committee with the documentation specified above addressing the criteria specified above. The PTR committee must review the documentation for completeness and inform the faculty member by 15 January of additional documentation required, which must then be provided to the committee by the end of January. If requested by either the faculty member under review or by the PTR committee, an interview of the faculty member by the committee shall be scheduled. By the end of February, the PTR committee must provide informed and candid feedback in a draft report on the quality of the faculty member's performance, accomplishments, and contributions. The PTR committee may also offer guidance on improving performance, and must do so if any aspect of the faculty member's performance is deemed unsatisfactory. This report must specify the faculty member being evaluated and the names of the chair and members of the PTR committee, and should discuss the faculty member's performance in all three areas (research, teaching, service), providing a rating (unsatisfactory, acceptable, or outstanding) in each area. The draft report is sent directly to the faculty member under review (by the end of February). Within ten days of receipt of the draft report, the faculty member under review may request to meet with the PTR committee, a request that must be honored in a timely fashion. Alternatively, the faculty member under review may provide a written response to the PTR committee based on the draft report. The PTR committee must then submit a final report by 20 March. This report is provided to the Department Head for transmittal to the faculty member under review. The Head will also meet with the faculty member to discuss the contents of the report. The faculty member under review has the opportunity to prepare a written response to the final report of the PTR committee. A copy of the PTR committee's final report and any written response to that report by the evaluated faculty member is then sent to the Dean's office by 5 April, and a copy kept in the personnel file of the evaluated faculty member, along with all documents that played a substantive part in the review process, other than publications or other documents that are readily available elsewhere. A faculty member under review may request reconsideration of an unsatisfactory evaluation by the PTR committee by submitting a letter and additional documentation to the Department Head within fifteen days of receipt of the written report. A faculty member under review may appeal in writing a PTR committee action or decision within fifteen days of the final action of the committee. The appeal will go to the Faculty Post-Tenure Review Appeals Committee, a seven-member faculty committee elected by the University Council for two-year staggered terms. Faculty Development PTR is an important opportunity for all faculty members as they seek to develop to their potential and perform at their full capacity. The Department Head should discuss with faculty members undergoing PTR opportunities for faculty development as a result of PTR with advice from the PTR committee. Outstanding Performance Any faculty member that receives an outstanding rating in multiple areas should be especially considered in decisions on merit salary increases and research leave arrangements. Unsatisfactory Performance If a faculty member's performance in one or more areas is deemed unsatisfactory in the PTR, once all requests for reconsideration and appeals have been exhausted, the Department Head, the faculty member, and the chair of the PTR committee, must establish a formal Faculty Development Plan. This Plan must then be approved by a majority of the PTR committee. The plan should Define specific goals or outcomes to be achieved Outline activities that will be undertaken to achieve the goals or outcomes Set appropriate times within which the goals or outcomes should be accomplished Indicate appropriate criteria by which the faculty member will monitor progress The Department Head will forward the Plan to the Dean. The Department Head, the Dean, and the appropriate Vice President, will jointly be responsible for arranging suitable resources for carrying out the Plan, if required. During the annual evaluation interview with the faculty member, the Head will review progress toward achieving the goals or outcomes. A progress report will be part of the annual evaluation that is forwarded to the Dean. After three years, the Head and a PTR committee (selected again as described in Procedures for Conducting Review) will determine whether the Faculty Development Plan has been successfully completed. The Head will report that finding to the Dean, who will proceed in accordance with University and Board of Regents' policies. Committees The standing committees of the department are the Executive Committee, the Promotion and Tenure Committee, the Graduate Curriculum Committee, the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, the Faculty Awards Committee, the Graduate Admissions and Recruiting Committee, the Instructional Instrumentation Committee, the Research Instrumentation/Facilities Committee, and the Safety Committee. The Department Head may appoint, with the advice of the Executive Committee, such ad hoc committees as may be needed. Executive Committee The Executive Committee acts in an advisory capacity to the Department Head on matters of policy, faculty recruitment, promotions and tenure, budget, student relations, curriculum, space allocation and planning, and awards. The Executive Committee consists of five or six faculty members (not including the Head, who chairs the committee) elected for staggered two-year terms. Elections: members shall be elected for two-year terms and may succeed themselves; the Head shall nominate candidates to be voted upon by the whole faculty of the department. The Executive Committee shall meet with the Department Head on a regular basis. Promotion and Tenure Committee The Promotion and Tenure Committee shall consist of tenured Professors on the faculty appointed by the Department Head. The Promotion and Tenure Committee shall advise the Head and the Department faculty on faculty promotion and tenure cases. Tasks that this entails include: recommendations to the Department faculty on putting candidates forward for promotion or tenure; suggesting names of external evaluators and providing biographical material on them; participating in dossier design and review. Curriculum Committees The Curriculum Committees shall consist of members of the faculty appointed by the Department Head. A non-voting graduate student member of the Graduate Curriculum Committee is selected by the graduate students of the Department. The Curriculum Committees shall advise the Department Head on all matters of curriculum and shall annually recommend to the Department Head a schedule of course offerings and teaching assignments after consultation with the faculty involved. The recommendations of the Curriculum Committees are advisory to the Department Head. Faculty Awards Committee The Faculty Awards Committee is composed of members of the faculty appointed by the Department Head. The Faculty Awards Committee actively promotes the faculty of the Department for local, regional, national, and international awards. The duties of the committee include: monitoring the availability of award programs; recommending nomination of selected faculty as appropriate for given awards; gathering supporting information and assisting in preparation of application materials for awards; providing recommendations to the Department Head regarding nomination of specific faculty for a given award; and when necessary, acting as a selection committee to identify faculty for nomination. Student Awards Committee The Student Awards Committee is a faculty committee appointed by the Head. The Undergraduate Coordinator and Graduate Coordinator serve ex officio roles on the committee. In addition to faculty membership, the committee membership involves representatives from the Chemistry Graduate Student Organization and from the Student Affiliates of the American Chemical Society. In both undergraduate and graduate programs, the committee recommends and selects students for awards, coordinates award programs, and maintains records of student awards, both within and from outside the department. The Student Awards Committee carries out the following tasks: The SAC solicits and coordinates nominations of our students for outside awards or positions at the campus, State, regional, and national levels The SAC sets criteria and deadlines, advertises the availability, and selects recipients of department awards to our students The SAC schedules and organizes award events, including the spring Undergraduate Recognition Day and the graduate student award portion of the NEGACS Annual Awards Banquet The SAC maintains a database of student awards and prepares a report at the end of each academic year to be submitted to the Head describing student awards and awardees for that year The SAC may recommend the creation of new award programs using existing or new Foundation funds available to the department The current list of local awards to be coordinated is as follows: Undergraduate Awards and Positions Pamela Ann Henkel Award (for Outstanding Academic Achievement in Organic Chemistry) L. B. "Buck" Rogers Award (for Outstanding Undergraduate Scientific Research) Alfred W. Scott, Jr. Scholarship (for Outstanding Academic Achievement in Chemistry) ACS Outstanding Undergraduate Student of the Year Award (selection by NEGACS) Franklin College Student Ambassador Franklin College Student Advisory Board Who's Who any other undergraduate student awards or positions Graduate Awards Teaching Assistant of the Year Awards (selection by SAACS) K. W. Whitten Outstanding Teaching Assistant Awards University Outstanding Teaching Assistant Awards ACS Outstanding Graduate Student of the Year (selection by NEGACS) Henry L. Richmond Graduate Fellowships Martin Reynolds Smith Award for Graduate Research Publication UGA Hypercube Scholar nominations for university-wide Assistantships nominations for Presidential Graduate Fellowships nominations for Graduate School Outstanding Teaching Assistant Award nominations for Graduate School Excellence in Teaching Award nominations for Graduate School (Final Year) Doctoral Research Assistantship nominations for Graduate School Teaching Seminar Assistantship nominations for OISD TA Mentor program any other graduate student awards Graduate Recruiting and Admissions Committee The Graduate Recruiting and Admissions Committee is composed of faculty members appointed by the Department Head and is chaired by the Graduate Coordinator. A non-voting graduate student member is selected by the graduate students of the Department. The duties of this committee include: preparation of recruiting materials; recruiting of quality students; reviewing completed applications for admission to the graduate program and recommending admission to the Head; and administering placement examinations to identify deficiencies in students' previous course work. The Graduate Advisor, who may be a different person than the Graduate Coordinator, is responsible for advising and monitoring graduate students after their first year in the program. The duties of this post include: advising graduate students on Department and Graduate School policies and assuring that these policies are followed; reviewing and approving applications for changes in degree objective, Programs of Study, applications for Admission to Candidacy, and other Graduate School formal requirements; and advising the Graduate Curriculum Committee on potential changes to Department policies affecting graduate students. Instrumentation Committees The Research Instrumentation Committees and the Instructional Instrumentation Committee are composed of faculty members and academic professionals appointed by the Department Head. A non-voting graduate student member of each committee is selected by the graduate students of the Department. The duties of these committees are: the evaluation of instructional and research equipment needs in the department; generating long term plans for equipment acquisitions; preparation of proposals or other requests pursuant to equipment acquisition; development of procedures and policies related to the utilization of equipment by faculty and students, equipment maintenance and equipment repair. Safety Committee The Safety Committee is composed of members of the Chemistry Department and includes the departmental Safety Representative. A non-voting graduate student member is selected by the graduate students of the Department. The duties of this committee include: evaluating the safety requirements of the department; providing advice and counsel to the faculty on matters of safety; acting as a liaison between the department and various safety agencies on campus. Faculty Appointment – Voting Procedure The search committee discusses the acceptability of individual candidates, presents their determination of individual candidate acceptability, and the eligible voting faculty vote on each candidate’s acceptability via secret ballot. A simple majority is necessary for a candidate to be deemed acceptable. For those candidates deemed acceptable, the search committee presents its ranking to the faculty at large. An open debate will be moderated by the chair of the search committee. Faculty members are encouraged to explain why they do or do not agree with the ranking. The search committee chair can choose (or not choose) to modify the ranking. Modification of the ranking can include either a re-ranking of candidates or the removal of candidates from the ranking. Anyone can move to vote on the ranking at any given time. An up/down vote on the ranking will be conducted by eligible voting faculty via secret ballot (The secret ballot mechanism is stipulated by the Office of the Senior Vice President of Academic Affairs and Provost). A 2/3 majority is required for the search committee’s ranking to pass, with consensus being the goal. If the ranking fails to pass, we will move back to step 3. This procedure will continue until either a clear top two ranking is produced or the Dept Head moves to discontinue the process. If the Head moves to discontinue the above process, then candidates will be ranked based on the following sequential voting scheme: (1) ballots will be distributed, and faculty will vote for his or her “top ranked candidate”; (2) the top ranked candidate will be determined by simple majority, and then the top ranked candidate will be removed from the list; (3) ballots will be distributed, and faculty will vote for his or her top choice from the remaining list of candidates; (4) the winner by simple majority will become the “2nd ranked candidate”, and the name of this candidate will be removed from the list; (5) this process will continue until all candidates are ranked. The initial search committee vote, the acceptability votes and the final ranking (and process by which this was determined) will be sent to the Dean, along with the Department Head's recommendation. Definition of eligible voting faculty: Eligibility for voting is specified by the Provost’s Guide for Appointment and Promotion of Academic Rank Faculty, https://provost.uga.edu/_resources/documents/Faculty_Affairs/faculty_hiring_and_appointments/guidenlines_revised_spring_14.pdf, the Guide for Appointment and Promotion of Lecturers, https://provost.uga.edu/_resources/documents/LecturerAppointmentPromotionGuidelines_FINAL2021.pdf, and the Guide for Appointment and Promotion of Academic Professionals, https://provost.uga.edu/_resources/documents/Faculty_Affairs/faculty_hiring_and_appointments/guidelinesapptpromotionacademicprofessionals.pdf. Only tenured/tenure track faculty are eligible to vote for the appointment of tenured/tenure-track faculty. For tenured/tenure-track appointments, all tenured/tenure-track faculty are eligible to vote, irrespective of their rank. For non-tenure track appointments, the eligible voting faculty is defined according to the type of faculty appointment. For the appointment of a Lecturer, all full-time regular faculty with teaching responsibilities are eligible to vote. For the appointment of an Academic Professional, the eligible voting faculty consist of the full-time tenure-track and non-tenure-track faculty at the position’s rank or above. The following are at or above the rank of Associate Academic Professional: Assistant Professor, Associate Professor; Professor; Associate Academic Professional; Academic Professional; Senior Academic Professional; Lecturer; Senior Lecturer; Principal Lecturer. The following are at or above the rank of Academic Professional: Associate Professor; Professor; Academic Professional; Senior Academic Professional; Senior Lecturer; Principal Lecturer. The following are at or above the rank of Senior Academic Professional: Professor; Senior Academic Professional; Senior Lecturer; Principal Lecturer. Please note that Research Scientists are forbidden from voting at faculty meetings, per the Department of Chemistry bylaws. Disclaimer Nothing in these bylaws should be construed to supersede the provisions of the Statutes of The University of Georgia, the Bylaws of the University Council of the University of Georgia, or the Bylaws of the Franklin College of Arts and Sciences. Amendments The faculty of the Chemistry Department shall have the power to alter, amend, or abolish these By-Laws or to adopt new By-Laws by majority vote by written ballot at any regular or special faculty meeting.