Article 16.5 of the CBA states that faculty will be formally reviewed for reappointment in the third and fifth year and for tenure in the seventh year, not “annually” as stated here.Reference

While the CBA does state (16.5) that “faculty will be formally reviewed for reappointment in the third and fifth year and for tenure in the seventh year” it has been practice at the Institute to allow for “early tenure.” Indeed, such language is enshrined within the guidelines of the department-level Peer Committees. Depending on the department, these documents may suggest that applications for tenure are welcome at any time, and evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Peer Committee documents may include language such as “candidates for tenure are are normally expected to serve for seven years on the tenure track,” but “normally expected” should not be interpreted as a one-size-fits-all “prescribed term.”Reference

Re: Final determination of what constitutes equivalence to a given degree or appropriate to a given rank. I’m concerned that what is written here
goes beyond what is present within the CBA, and unclear if the scope applies only to initial hiring or later ARPT action. If a statement on equivalence is needed, iI suggest that it should be negotiated as part of collective bargaining and appear within the CBA.Reference

I am unaware of language in the CBA that reinforces the statement that “each part-time faculty member has an obligation… to serve as a department or school advisor.” If you cannot provide a citation to the terms of employment in the CBA, this “obligation” should be re-evaluated.Reference

Bravo. Long overdue. I would suggest inclusion of a statement such as “These constraints will be communicated broadly across the Institute prior to class scheduling and registration.”Reference

STRONGLY suggest that a sentence is added to explain that every department’s Peer Committee has crafted its own set of standards in accordance with CBA XVI, and these department-generated documents should be consulted. (The departmental ARPT criteria are— or should be— all online at the Pratt Faculty Union website, and each department should have a faculty ARPT chair who can respond to questions.)Reference

Two business days after the last class for the specific course section, or two business days after the last date on which Institute classes are scheduled? Judging by the academic calendar— which lists only one final grade deadline for each semester— it seems that current practice is the latter. I suggest revising the language to more obviously reflect current practice.Reference

A missed opportunity to mention faculty responsibilities under the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), e.g., safeguarding identifiable student information.Reference

See comment below. The language here obscures the fact that each department’s peer committee has articulated its own criteria under CBA XVI. (In other words, faculty need to consult the department-created documents; the language for “administration approval” in this Handbook is not sufficient.)Reference

Can you be more specific regarding where this is within the CBA? Sections 16.6 and 23.1(b) seems to be relevant, but “process” in these location seems limited to chair review of student evaluations, only. If there is a larger “evaluation process,” where is it described?Reference

PRATT MWP should be mentioned as well.Reference

I think this section is an ideal place to provide a link to the Academic Freedom and Responsibility clause of the the CBA (Article III), which reinforces and expands on some of the language included here.Reference

I believe this is also where directors come into play. They are sometimes hied by chairs and sometimes by deans. The roles vary and could use clarification. But the key here is that if one is faculty, they cannot hire faculty. This should be Institute wide for anyone who is faculty first, and coordinator or director second.Reference

Should the number of search committee members be odd in order to prevent a tie vote?Reference

It might be good to indicate how subs will be recorded, paid, at what rate, and if this compensation will appear automatically within their normal pay cycle or if it will be a separate payment paid out within 30 days, etc.Reference

Can you strike the ‘All’ in this first sentence? Library faculty don’t receive student evaluations. “Faculty participate in the process of student evaluation of courses.”Reference

This seems like good policy that is being taken out here. Why wouldn’t the chair consult with the faculty about course offerings?Reference

use of caps for “VIce President” appears inconsistent–first quick look, more laterReference

in committeesReference

..in equal amounts distributed over each pay period during…Reference

Xv and XVIReference

Is the reference to “equity and inclusion” here out-dated? Hasn’t this area been moved under the VP of DEI?Reference

Glad to see this inclusive feedback process as well; can’t wait to see it implemented.Reference

Yes, agreed, emphasis is in the wrong places. Unfortunately, I realize the Senate can’t rewrite the mission statement. ( . . so, sorry to go on about it! but I’ve never felt this mission statement hits the right notes. I hope students will be responsible citizens, but civic responsibility isn’t the what makes Pratt distinctive. In part, we contribute to culture . . . making and thinking . . . .
.. . they can’t literally all be leaders in their fields . . . some may be lying low as interesting mavericks . . . “technical expertise” sounds like a trade school . . .”challenging them to achieve their full potential” feels like an anticlimax . . . etc.)Reference

Very good paragraph re dedication to shared governance and all that follows.

A period is needed after “as need arises”Reference

“Most go on to rewarding careers in business, industry, government and the professions, their lives having been changed positively by their Pratt experiences.” Pretty sure this too is not the Senate’s language either but . . . much as with the mission statement, the priorities seem off . . .business and industry and government referred to, but not creative work and design, other than as “the professions.” . . . Is painting, for example, a profession? Is filmmaking a profession? Maybe they are, but it wouldn’t be my word for them.Reference

Style re initial caps for titles? A few samples — “director of academic budget and operations” –no initial caps.
“The vice president for Finance and Administration” — some initial caps.
“Executive Director of Student Financial Services” . . . all initial caps.
These cases may not be entirely parallel but some seem inconsistent.Reference

I should know what CIO stands for but don’t — a quick scan doesn’t show it above– good to spell out the first time but maybe I missed it. (Also, “and” used in heading but ampersand used in first sentence of paragraph. . . )Reference

Or maybe just delate “being responsible for” . . . and just write “providing leadership for the academic . . . . .Further down, delete “being responsible for” and just make it “reviewing performance of department chairs. . .”Reference

“ability to support the educational progress of [DELETE students of] a broadly diverse array of students.Reference

I agree..
this language feels a bit neoliberal.

In addition to leading artists, architects and urban planners, designers, and librarians and information professionals scientists, — might we also include researchers which might be a more broad term that cuts across disciplines?
Im not sure what information professionals are..Reference

Agreed !Reference

Copy edit: Reporting to the Vice President for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion are the Office of Diversity,…

So “of” instead of “and”

Also Black Lives Matter, Pratt reports to the VPDEIReference

Also – is there a way by which SLAS might be involved? Perhaps adding something about scholars and researchers…?Reference

“Departmental Curriculum or Other Recommendations” — does this heading fit what follows, which are simply provisions about coordinators? The heading more or less relates, in the sense that coordinators are involved with curriculum . . . but what are the “recommendations” referred to?
Maybe this used to contain other material?Reference

Sorry! Feel free to delete this comment… I see my question answered below.Reference

Since, there is so many programs identified why not mention the programs that focus on management of the built environment (CM<FM<REP)..Reference

Should there be a link directing the reader to the HR Policy on Intellectual Property?Reference

We need to add all industry professionals such as: built environment professionals, writers. Thank youReference

The name: director of Security no longer exists. It is now: director of Public Safety.

The Executive Director of Facilities is called: Chief Facilities OfficerReference

Does this mean teaching is more heavily weighted then research or service ? is this in accordance with the CBA? does this criteria supercede dept guidelines? I am curious as this prioritization of teaching “as the most important attribute” is not clear in our dept PART guidelines. I welcome clarification. thank you !Reference

I second that. It’s important to have multiple mentions of the institute’s policy on hand.Reference

I support this concern. As a part time instructor, I have several obligations outside of my appointment at Pratt. I rely on the department meetings in order to stay informed about curriculum changes, discuss technology upgrades, be notified about department resources, and address concerns. It would be good to know why this is being omitted.Reference

insert “to” . . . “according to the procedures below” — And I was unaware of this policy. Thanks.Reference

I’ve thought about this more: ‘academic assignments are verified by a letter of agreement prior to the start of each semester’. If you want to call it a ‘memoranda of agreement’.

It is an agreement between the academic and chair. My experience and this may not happen in all the departments…The chair provides academics with letter of agreement concerning their proposed schedule and responsibilities PRIOR to the semester. At the beginning of the semester the academic gets their semester agreement verification letter from the Dean. To just call it a memoranda is to basic and it is not legally binding.Reference

It’s very good, however, to have it in writing that the department pays a sub, not the instructor.Reference

Wondering about requiring office hours of “maximum convenience to students”. . . in the case of an instructor who’s normally here just one day, for instance, is that feasible or reasonable?
Maybe “of maximum convenience to students, as permitted by the faculty member’s schedule” ? (But not sure what that would even mean, in effect . . .)
. . .and will consider students’ needs in scheduling those hours” ?
I don’t have the right words . . but just asking the Q.Reference

I concur with Sarah; some faculty are called “directors”.

‘as coordinators or directors of program’s curriculum, functions and matters’ or delete matters and just put ‘functions’ proposed you delete the phrase “of aspects of” – what aspects of, should be program functions.

in a sense the faculty do become project managers of these programs. the word in the last sentence “managerial capacity” should be more like ‘They do not function in an administrative managerial capacity’, they are managers of programs with out administrative responsibilities.

FYI: Many of faculty coordinators and directors interview, recruit and do student admissions acceptance. Are you going to add this or take it away as well?Reference

Third line down should read ‘many complex’ not “many and complex” operations.

8th line down: ‘governance body that relates’ directly to the president.

Relate is not the proper word: could it be governance body that ‘coordinates’, that ‘reports’; that ‘consults’ directly with the president (?); works together with the president’ collaborates with the president? Not relates…thank youReference

What about line 7: add ‘staff who teach’?Reference

What about the other standing committees?

Distinguished Teacher Award Committee

Faculty Development Fund Committee

Research Recognition Award (Special Committee)

Board Positions (Faculty Trustees & Committees)

Institute CommitteesReference

Faculty’s program head (?) you mean faculty department chair (?)

Should read ‘faculty’s program chair and/or dean’ ? I know School of IF has no chairs, but a program head? never heard of that, we have program chairs.Reference

It doesn’t make sense to ‘encumbrances exceed’ perhaps ‘encumbrances and or exceeds’ Senate salary budget, not salaries budget. It’s not salaries budget, it is salary budgetReference

I suggest adding the word “scholars”Reference

Add “scholars” pleaseReference

Add “scholars”

Assigning courses “in consultation with faculty” needs to be inserted.Reference

Delete: ‘etc.’

Could read: The Institute recognizes that artists and scholars must on occasion be absent from campus pursuing professional activities such as appearances, conferences, workshops, and other scholarly or professional obligations.

something like that. just delete etc. it leaves to mush ambiguity it what etc. really means.Reference

delete: ‘his/her and add: ‘their’.Reference

I agree with the comments of Eva and Eve. The full faculty of a department should be involved in planning course offerings (not only a curriculum committee).

Above, assigning courses “in consultation with faculty” needs to be inserted.

Classes to held off-campus can be communicated to the Department via the syllabus.Reference

Re “not want to wish to impose rigid body of rules upon members of faculty” . . .
I support this FHB language.
I read “rigid rules” as different from “structured policies.” This document is full of policies and procedures. But if certain rules were to get too specific, we might find one size really does not fit all. We have to watch that our policies and procedures are fair but not unnecessarily restrictive. That there’s no bright line would seem to be part of the point.Reference

That should preclude all future updates!

Seriously — “Since 1887” sounds good. Specific. This school has history.Reference

Should there be provisions for conflicts of interest for example for appointments when there is a close or personal relationship between appointer and appointee? i.e. should the person responsible for the appointment recuse themselves when a potential conflict exists, with either an equivalent or senior person designated to handle the matter instead?