Bylaws of the
Department of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering
Adopted December 6, 1985
As amended December 5, 2000
Preamble
To provide a structure through which it may effectively discharge its responsibilities in the development and conduct of the Department’s programs of instruction, research and service, the Faculty of the Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering Department of the University of Tennessee agrees to govern itself according to these By-laws.
These By-laws are intended to facilitate the internal operation of the Department, and shall not supersede any existing University of Tennessee regulations or University of Tennessee Senate By-laws.
Article I
The Department
A. The Faculty
- The Faculty of the Department of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering is defined as those members of the academic staff of the Department who have academic rank at the three professorial levels, instructors and lecturers, including those holding visiting, temporary and part-time appointments.
- The Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering Professorial Faculty is comprised of those members of the academic staff of the Department who have academic rank at the three professorial levels.
B. Voting Members
All members of the Professorial Faculty with full-time and tenured part-time appointment in the College of Engineering shall be voting members of the Department. Other part-time and adjunct members of the Departmental Faculty may attend and participate but collectively have one vote in Departmental meetings. Only professorial faculty may vote in matters of promotion and tenure as outlined in the faculty handbook. Only professorial faculty have proxy voting rights by prior notification of the department head.
C. Meetings
There shall be at least one Professorial Faculty meeting during each regular term of the academic year. All meetings shall be called by the Department Head, by his appointee or at the request of 20 percent of the voting members of the Department. A quorum for meetings is defined as one-half of the full-time Professorial Faculty in residence.
D. Agenda
Meetings shall be conducted in accordance with a written agenda circulated to appropriate faculty members by the Department Head’s office at least two days prior to the meeting. Under exceptional circumstances this requirement may be waived by the department head.
E. Minutes of Faculty Meeting
A record shall be maintained of each Faculty Meeting Proceedings. Copies of these proceedings shall be maintained in a Permanent Departmental File. Responsibility for this shall reside with the Department head.
F. Functions
The Department shall receive at its meetings a report each year from each Departmental Standing Committee and shall have the right to review the work of these committees. The approval of the Faculty shall be required for all major academic policy decisions – including new Departmental and inter-departmental programs and substantive revisions of existing programs – that may be submitted to it by the appropriate committee or faculty members. It shall also have the power to initiate such proposals. All decisions shall be by majority vote of the voting members present at the meeting and proxies except as noted in article VI below.
Article II
Committees of the Department
A. Standing Committees
The following standing committees shall be established to aid the Faculty in the execution of its academic and related responsibilities. The Department Head or his appointee shall be a member ex-officio of all standing committees. The tenure of all but ex-officio members of all standing committees shall be two years, renewable with staggered terms. Regular appointment or election as specified herein shall take place before the end of the Spring Semester and terms shall begin with the succeeding academic year. Each standing committee shall inform the Department of its substantive decisions and recommendations.
- Undergraduate Committee
This committee’s function is to initiate, consider and review curriculum matters and degree requirements as initiated by the Faculty or any of its members.
The committee shall be composed of a Chairman and at least two other members appointed by the Department Head.
- Graduate Program Committee
This committee shall be responsible for the Department’s Graduate Program including:- Degree requirements;
- Comprehensive Exams;
- New graduate courses;
- Review of policies for admission of graduate students; and
- Review of the graduate support program.
The Committee shall be composed of a Chairman and at least two other members appointed by the Department Head.
- Facilities and Safety Committee
This committee shall consider ways of more effectively utilizing available space and facilities for the advancement of research in the department. It shall also be responsible for periodic reviews of the Department’s Safety Program. The committee shall be composed of a Chairman and at least two other members appointed by the Department Head.
- Strategic Planning Committee
This committee shall be responsible for development and improvement of the department’s strategic plan. The committee shall be composed of a Chairman and at least two other members appointed by the Department Head.
B. Other Committees
- Faculty Graduate Advisory Committees
These committees shall be appointed consistent with the Graduate School regulations. Each such committee shall report to the Professorial Faculty at the conclusion of its assignment.
- Ad Hoc Committees
The Department Head may appoint ad hoc committees as the need arises. The responsibilities and membership of these committees shall be established at the time of the announcement of their creation.
Article III
Faculty Responsibilities, Retention,
Promotion And Tenure
A faculty member’s responsibility is to inspire excellence in others and to strive to maintain and improve the academic quality of the Department, College and University. In return, he or she merits trust and recognition from the University being manifest in tangible form by retention, promotion and, ultimately, tenure. The overriding criterion in all deliberations regarding retention, promotion and tenure is evidence of commitment to superior intellectual attainment. Demonstration of achievement in areas of teaching, research and scholarship, including the exercise of professional expertise, is an indispensable qualification for promotion and tenure. For retention, a reasonable potential for achieving these criteria must be evident. Effective participation in University and Professional service is a necessary component of a faculty members activities. Insistence on the highest attainable standards for faculty members is essential for the maintenance of the quality of the University as an institution dedicated to the discovery as well as the assimilation and dissemination of knowledge. Maintaining these standards throughout a faculty member’s working lifetime is also necessary. To this end, annual reviews and a periodic thorough re-evaluation of a faculty member’s contributions must be carried out in accord with University Regulations.
A. General Procedures
- The Retention, Promotion and Tenure Committee (RPT) shall consist of all tenured/tenure track faculty.
- A chairperson of the committee shall be elected at the first General Faculty Meeting of each fall semester.
- All tenured faculty above the rank of assistant professor will vote on retention matters.
- All tenured faculty who are at and above the proposed professorial level of each candidate will review and vote on promotion matters.
- All tenured faculty will discuss and vote on tenure matters.
- A sub-committee of two will be appointed to report back to the full committee on each formal action. One member, the advocate, will be chosen by the candidate.
- It is the responsibility of each candidate to ensure that all required documentation is submitted to the sub-committee in a timely manner.
- All formal actions for tenure and promotion will require letters of recommendation from outside authorities.
- A formal meeting of the RPT Committee will be held at an appropriate time to meet the deadlines set by the College for forwarding the results to the College RPT Committee.
- The order of business of the formal RPT Committee Meeting will be as follows:
- Retention of assistant professors
- Promotion from assistant to associate professor
- Retention of associate professors
- Tenure of associate professors
- Promotion from associate professor to professor
- Tenure of professors
- The chairman of the RPT Committee will submit a report to the Head of Department on each candidate. The Head of Department will submit his report to the College Committee and the Dean of Engineering with the RPT Committee report as an appendix.
B. Specific Procedures
Review of Performance
The Department Head shall, each year, review the teaching, research, thesis and dissertation supervision, committee assignments, publication record, scholarly contributions, and University and public service activities of each faculty member. The Department Head and the faculty member will discuss plans for the future and individual goals and objectives. How these goals and objectives relate to the Department’s long-term objectives and strategic plan will also be discussed. The review will culminate in a narrative describing strengths, weaknesses and expectations of the faculty member and a rating of the faculty performance on the following scale:
| EXCEEDS EXPECTATIONS FOR RANK | consistently strong contributions to program |
| MEETS EXPECTATIONS FOR RANK | meets basic faculty responsibilities and makes important contributions to program |
| NEEDS IMPROVEMENT | underachieving, not reaching potential |
| UNSATISFACTORY | unacceptable |
In accord with the directives of the UT Board of Trustees, each tenured professor will undergo a post-tenure review by his or her peers approximately every five years. This review is intended as an aid to the individual in assessing his or her performance and the determination of changes that need to be made to improve it. In cases where the performance is deemed to be unsatisfactory with respect to teaching, research and service, this review may serve as a basis for initiation of termination procedures for adequate cause. In cases where the annual reviews by the Department Head have resulted in unsatisfactory reviews for a period of not less than two successive years, the Department Head shall ask the tenured faculty to review the faculty member’s performance in teaching, research, and service and to vote on the question of whether termination proceedings should be initiated for adequate cause. Termination proceedings may also be initiated for (a) misconduct, (b) due to financial exigency or program discontinuance, or (c) due to an unauthorized leave of absence, as defined in the University of Tennessee publication entitled "Policies Governing Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Tenure" and in the Faculty Handbook.
Retention
Annual informal retention reviews are conducted by the Department Head. A formal retention review will be conducted by the RPT committee for untenured assistant professors during their third or fourth year, the particular year to be recommended by the Department Head. Untenured associate professors and professors will be reviewed formally no later than their third year. For assistant professors whose first formal review uncovered problems serious enough to make ultimate tenure doubtful, a second formal review will be conducted one year later. Such a procedure, well documented, allows the individuals concerned adequate time to correct deficiencies and credits the individual with progress made.
In instances of unsatisfactory performance, the Department Head may, at his or her discretion, ask the committee to vote on whether to recommend that termination proceedings be initiated for the candidate.
Promotion
The normal times at which promotion will be awarded to appropriate individuals are the seventh year for assistant professors and the fifth year for associate professors. Early promotion can be awarded to suitably qualified individuals, especially when prior service has occurred at equivalent institutions. Years spent in full time administration will not be included in the time period except at the request of the candidate. Documentation on the case is to consider, at a minimum, the following four areas: (a) teaching, (b) research, (c) scholarship, (d) University and professional service. Evidence appropriate to each area is listed in a separate section.
As stated in the preamble, a commitment to superior intellectual attainment is of overriding importance and is manifest through excellence in teaching, the education of graduate students, authorship of texts and refereed articles all corroborated by peer review. Although success in obtaining research funding and authorship of refereed articles explicitly involve peer review, individual overall assessments by authorities in a candidate’s chosen area of specialty are essential. After consultation with the faculty member, the Department Head will seek the advice of at least three and preferably four to six persons not on the faculty of the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, whose expertise is close to that of the candidate and who are willing to provide thoughtful evaluation of the candidate’s written work or other suitable evidence of scholarly and/or creative research performance. None of these references may be the former thesis advisor, postdoctoral mentor, or a collaborator.
After having been denied promotion from associate professor to professor, an individual may request reconsideration of the case for promotion after a period of no less than two years.
Tenure
Granting of tenure is regarded as the University’s most critical personnel decision and will not be considered for assistant professors. Whenever possible, tenure will be granted on promotion to associate professor status, but it will entail a separate decision. The award of tenure is in response to an individual’s demonstrated achievements in teaching, research, and scholarship. It involves a strong assumption that those standards will be maintained or surpassed in future years. Accordingly, documentation must cover the areas of (a) teaching, (b) research, (c) scholarship, and (d) University and professional service. Five letters of recommendation will be required, two referees being suggested by the candidate. These must conform to the restrictions described under the paragraph on "promotion."
C. Documentary Evidence
Teaching
Ability to teach effectively, at both the undergraduate and graduate levels is required of all faculty. Appropriate sources of documentation include student evaluations, peer review by colleagues and exit interviews of graduates. Demonstrated ability to develop courses and participate effectively in curriculum design is essential.
Research
Participation in both personal research and direction of graduate student research is recommended. All faculty should serve on graduate supervisory committees and chair some of those committees. The ability to direct research is manifest in the production of undergraduate and master’s theses and doctoral dissertations by supervised students. The following are all forms of recognition of research ability: (a) publication of research papers and patents, (b) the award of research funds by organizations using peer review, (c) active participation at research meetings of professional societies, (d) presentation of seminars and invited lectures, and (e) reviewing of journal articles and research proposals.
Scholarship
There are many forms of evidence of scholarly activities. These include: (a) awards and prizes, (b) fellowships in professional societies, (c) authorship of texts, (d) authorship of review articles and book chapters, (e) sole authorship of articles in peer-reviewed journals, (f) co-authorship of articles in peer-reviewed journals, (g) authorship of articles in conference publications.
Service
Two major forms of service indispensable to the University and the profession are (a) willing and active participation in committee activities at the departmental, college and university levels, and (b) participation in the activities of professional societies at the local, regional, national, and international levels.
Examples of the former include curriculum development, student advising, recruiting at all levels, service as safety officer, and active efforts to solve the various problems and concerns raised in routine committee assignments, service on the Faculty Senate, and service on the Undergraduate and/or Graduate Council, to name but a few.
Examples of the latter include such activities as serving as an officer of a professional society, development of symposia at regional, national or international meetings, and serving on professional society committees. Other examples of professional service include participation, as advisors, in local, state and federal government agencies as well as to national organizations,
D. Level of Performance Expected
Faculty are expected to perform at a level that will bring respect and honor to themselves, to the Department of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering and to the University of Tennessee. Such efforts will involve certain activities carried out at a level that is sufficient to maintain and grow both our undergraduate and graduate programs. It is recognized that faculty are a diverse group with some being more adept at teaching, while others may be more capable researchers. However, all tenure track faculty must engage in scholarly activities, teaching, research and service at a reasonable level. A typical faculty member is expected to continuously support and direct the research of 3-5 graduate students, teach two to four classes per year, publish three refereed journal articles per year, participate actively in appropriate professional technical societies (including presentation of papers at national and international meetings, holding offices, serving on committees, organizing symposia, etc.), and effectively serving on the Department, College, and University wide committees and governing bodies. While quantity of effort and output must be sufficient to maintain an active presence in the field of expertise, quality of teaching, research, scholarship and service are of the greatest significance in determining level of performance and qualifications for promotion and pay increase.
The following represent some guidelines that may be used to establish rankings in individual categories based on the above described scale. It is important to keep in mind that the final assessment is an overall determination, averaged over all the faculty member’s activities.
Teaching
Grades consistently below 2.8 out of 5.0 on the Chancellor’s Teaching Evaluation Program (CTEP) raise serious questions about the quality of teaching. In such cases the faculty member will be required to provide other evidence that their teaching is satisfactory. Possible other evidence includes other types of evaluation such as the Tau Beta Pi Evaluation Form, letters from students testifying to the quality of instruction, etc. Generally, faculty who rate between 2.8 and 3.3 will be categorized as "needs improvement," those who rate between 3.3 and 3.8 will be categorized as "meets expectations for rank," and those who exceed 3.8 will be categorized as "exceeds expectations for rank," with respect to teaching. Of course, other forms of evidence of quality teaching will also be considered in making the final evaluation. The CTEP ratings are only one readily available measure. Faculty are encouraged to find other means to show the quality of their teaching.
Research
Publication of research papers in peer reviewed journals is the primary measure of research accomplishment. However, the quality of the papers is as important as the quantity. As a minimum standard in this area, a typical faculty in Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering must publish one quality paper per year on average in a peer reviewed journal. Invited seminars and presentations at national and international meetings are also expected. In order to achieve "meets expectations for rank," a faculty member must typically also provide support for a minimum of two graduate students from externally funded research projects. Faculty who rarely publish and who do not contribute to the support of graduate students, will be categorized as "unsatisfactory" with respect to the research function. For a faculty member to be categorized as "exceeds expectations for rank" with respect to research, he or she must substantially exceed the above stated criteria for "meets expectations for rank."
Scholarship
Scholarship should be at a level which will be sufficiently recognized that the faculty will be asked to prepare review articles or will publish books, etc. Faculty will grow into this level of expectation. Early years will involve preparation of scholarly papers. Faculty whose primary activity is in teaching are expected to write textbooks and/or publish in educational journals.
University and Professional Service
Faculty are expected to accept and perform well in the various departmental, college and university-wide committees. A consistent absence of such efforts will constitute grounds for concern in the overall evaluation. Faculty are also expected to associate with appropriate professional societies consistent with their area of special expertise. They should seek leadership positions in these societies and, in particular, they should perform such service as developing symposia at national and international meetings, refereeing papers and proposals, etc.
Article IV
Recommendations for New Appointments
Recommendations for new appointments to the Faculty shall be prepared and forwarded by the Department Head to the Dean of Engineering when a majority of the voting members of the Department concur. No vote on a appointment shall be taken until all voting members of the Department have been notified of the candidacy.
Article V
Personnel Matters
Formal recommendation in matters concerning reappointment, promotion and tenure shall originate with the Department Head, and shall follow the guidelines of the University of Tennessee Faculty handbook. The Department Head shall make such recommendations on advice of the tenured Faculty members.
Article VI
Department Head
A recommendation to the Dean of Engineering concerning continuation of the appointment of the Head of the Department of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering shall be made every four years by the Professorial Faculty in residence; or at such other times when at least 2/3 of the voting Professorial Faculty in residence deem that such a recommendation is necessary.
Article VII
Teaching Assignments
Each semester, the department head shall distribute teaching assignments for future semester(s) before they are due at the university's course scheduling office. These teaching assignments are to have been arrived at by prior interactions with the faculty.
Article VIII
Amendments
No more than three years after adoption of these By-laws, the Department Head shall appoint a committee to review them and submit to the faculty for its approval any amendments it deems advisable. A vote of two-thirds of the professorial faculty of the Department shall be required to amend these By-laws. Any proposed amendment to the By-laws shall be circulated to the Professorial Faculty no less than ten days before the meeting at which it is to be introduced. No amendments shall be voted on at the meeting at which they are introduced.