LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 2001, Page 146

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

146

RESOLUTIONS

ployment?” The second is “Why aren’t tenured faculty members subject to job performance reviews just like other
workers?” The second level of discussion is the legal level.
There have been a number of highly publicized lawsuits
brought by faculty because they were denied tenure, and
given that our culture is becoming increasingly litigious, the
probability is that such lawsuits will become more frequent.
Institutions have responded to this discussion about
tenure by tightening up the processes of screening, selecting, and granting tenure and reviewing the work performance of faculty who have been granted tenure. The key to
the granting of tenure and the review of the performance
of tenured faculty is the nature of the process used in assessing job performance and the possible consequences of
that assessment.
At the same time these changes have been occurring relative to tenure, another movement has been gathering momentum, often in the same institutions that have tenure.
This is “contract hiring.” Contract hiring can take many
forms ranging from annual or even one-semester appointments with no assurance of any renewal to four- or fiveyear rollover contracts in which there are annual extensions of the rollover period. A contract system can provide
faculty with more job security than a tenure system, depending on how the two are structured.
At one extreme, the two approaches are quite different.
At the other, they show considerable overlap. Words that
have such broad, overlapping meanings can and do have
the potential to create a good deal of misunderstanding and
unnecessary semantic bickering.
Recognizing this, the task force chose not to make its
recommendations in terms of supporting one or the other
of these by name. Rather, it decided to establish a set of
guidelines that, in combination with what is already in the
synodical Handbook, would create a system that combined
the protection of faculty rights emphasized in tenure systems with the increased accountability demanded by contract systems. The major difference in what the task force
is proposing is the mandating of more frequent and formal
performance reviews of faculty. The primary purpose of
these reviews is to help faculty not only see where they
need to improve their performance, but also see what they
do well and think about how they might capitalize on those
strengths. A secondary purpose of a system of formal performance reviews is to identify those faculty who, for whatever reason, probably need to find some other area of service. Nonrenewal of the appointment of such faculty would
be done only after every effort was made to help them improve their performance, but if that does not work, the institution has little choice but to terminate the appointment.
An underlying assumption in all of this must be that the
process strike as good a balance as possible between the
needs and rights of the individual and those of the institution. Above all, it is to be carried out in a way that recognizes our institutions are not just another group of colleges,
universities, and seminaries, but are Christian institutions.
The task force discussed the implications of the “call”
commonly extended to “called workers of the church.” However, it was determined that the “call” rightfully should be
part of the broader discussion of ministry, which the task
200l Convention Proceedings

force understands is part of a study presently under review
by the CTCR.
Resolved, That the Bylaw changes presented below be
adopted; and be it further
Resolved, That the BHE/CUS Board evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation of these Bylaw changes
prior to the 2004 convention and report to the convention
their findings.
PRESENT/PROPOSED WORDING
6.21 Members
a. These Bylaws establish two levels of faculty appointments:
1. Initial level, where the appointment can be terminated with no formal requirement for a show of
cause.
2. Continuing level, where termination requires a
formal show of cause.
b. Institutions are free to decide for themselves what
names to apply to these two levels of appointment.
a. c. The regular faculty of each synodical institution
shall consist of the president, the full-time faculty (instructors, assistant professors, associate professors,
professors, or full-time faculty without rank), and parttime or temporary nonvoting members distinguished by
an appropriate prefix or suffix (“visiting, guest, adjunct,
emeritus”) or the term “graduate assistant.”
b. d. Any part-time or temporary faculty members
shall hold nonvoting membership on the faculty.
c. e. At each school the president shall propose creation, modification, or abolition of administrative positions to the Board of Regents for its approval. The
Board of Regents at each school shall maintain clear
policies for filling and vacating administrative positions.
d. f. Administrative appointments shall be made by
the Board of Regents on recommendation by the president of the institution. The Board for Higher Education
shall periodically review the internal administrative organization of the Synod’s institutions.
e. g. Each Board of Regents shall maintain a clear
plan of succession of administration to assure that the
institution continues to function effectively in the case
of incapacity or lengthy absence of the president.
6.23 Appointment of Members
a. The Board of Regents on recommendation of the
president of the institution shall appoint all full-time
members of the faculty. The Board for Higher Education shall require certification of theological and professional competency. All initial appointments to seminaries and to college/university theology faculties shall
require the prior approval of the Board for Higher Education. All other initial full-time appointments shall require prior approval of the Board of Regents and shall
include a thorough theological review involving the District President and selected members of the Board of
Regents.
b. The terms and conditions of every appointment
shall be stated in writing and be in the possession of
both the institution and the prospective faculty member before the appointment is consummated. Limitations of academic freedom because of the religious and
confessional nature and aims of the institution shall be
stated in writing at the time of the appointment and
conveyed to the person being appointed.
c. Ordinarily candidates for full-time teaching positions shall be rostered members of the Synod. When
laypersons are employed in full-time teaching positions,
they shall pledge to perform their duties in harmony
with the Holy Scriptures as the inspired Word of God,