JOURNAL OF THE FACULTY SENATE
The University of Oklahoma (Norman campus)
Regular session – January 11, 1999 - 3:30 p.m. - Jacobson Faculty Hall 102
office: Jacobson Faculty Hall 206 phone: 325-6789 FAX: 325-6782
e-mail: email@example.com web site: http://www.ou.edu/admin/facsen/
The Faculty Senate was called to order by Professor Alexander Holmes, Chair.
PRESENT: Agrawal, Badhwar, Beasley, Benson, Bert, Blank, Brown, Butler, Cline, Durica, Edwards, Eliason, Emery, Engel, Ferreira, Fleener, Gilliland, Greene, Gross, Holmes, Joyce, Karriker, Knapp, Kudrna, Kunesh, Kutner, Lancaster, Leigh, Mau, Murphy, Newman, Okediji, Osisanya, Pailes, Patterson, Scherman, Schwarzkopf, Sutton, Van Gundy, Watts, Weston, White
Provost's office representative: Mergler
PSA representatives: Wakefield
ABSENT: Abraham, Deming, Houser, Norwood, Ratliff, Rosenthal, Russell, St. John
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Announcement: New senator 1
Health care 2
Promotion vote 2
Copyright policy 3
Research professor position 3
APPROVAL OF JOURNAL
The Senate Journal for the regular session of December 7, 1998, was approved.
Prof. Cesar Ferreira (Modern Languages, Literatures, and Linguistics) was elected to complete the 1996-99 term of Prof. Catherine Hobbs (English) on the Faculty Senate, representing the College of Arts and Sciences.
Prof. Holmes reported that on December 17, the Employment Benefits Committee (EBC) approved a recommendation identical to the Faculty Senate’s: the first choice for a health care plan for next fiscal year is the current plan (Option A), second choice is Blue Cross/Blue Shield as the provider (Option B), and Prudential as the provider (Option C) was rejected (see 12/98 Senate Journal, page 6). He explained that the Senate Executive Committee had met with a variety of people to advocate the position of the Faculty Senate on health care.
Prof. Sutton added that the Senate Executive Committee was trying to schedule a meeting with President Boren prior to the Regents meeting to make sure nothing gets changed. The EBC heard presentations from Prudential and Blue Cross/Blue Shield (BC/BS) on December 10 and decided afterward to reject Prudential as the sole provider. On December 14, the Staff Senate sponsored a forum, where the general consensus was to stay with our current system. At its December 17 meeting, the EBC upheld its previous vote to reject Option C and listed reasons for that decision. The EBC also listed positive and negative considerations of Options A and B. At worst, the employee might have to pay about $8 per month more than they currently are paying for BC/BS single coverage. However, the numbers are spurious. Right now, employees with Prudential are paying $2 more per month than people with BC/BS coverage. The proposed BC/BS rate increase is due mainly to last year’s shortfall of $270,000 and is not aberrant in terms of other insurance plans. Prof. Sutton noted that he liked the idea of the forum held by the Staff Senate and might try to do something similar for faculty next time. He reminded the group that the Faculty Senate had talked about conducting a survey, so he is looking into on-line options. Prof. Holmes noted that last month’s estimate indicated an increase of about $1 million for the current plan, but that figure has been revised to about $700,000, and it includes all the campuses. The increase for the Norman campus would be about $200,000-$300,000. He thanked Prof. Sutton for the time and energy he had spent on this issue.
When the Senate reviewed the question of providing the numerical result of the tenure decision to the candidate, it was suggested that it might make sense to look at promotion votes also (see 12/98 Senate Journal, page 3). The following revision in the Faculty Handbook concerning departmental promotion votes was approved on a voice vote with no discussion (additions underlined):
18.104.22.168 PROCEDURE FOR PROMOTION DECISIONS
(d) All recommendations must be in writing and, with the exception of a recommendation based on any polling of the unit's faculty members, all must include a statement of reasons for the recommendation made. Notification of all such recommendations made above the level of the academic unit, up to and including the recommendation of the Senior Vice President and Provost, must be provided to the unit's chair. The numerical result of the formal secret ballot polling of the unit's faculty members shall be provided to the candidate if the candidate makes a request.
The proposed Copyright Policy was developed over the last several months by a faculty committee. Last month, new language was added in sections 2 and 3.1 (see 12/98 Senate Journal, page 2). Prof. Pat Weaver-Meyers, chair of the task force, and Mr. Kurt Ockershauser, Associate Chief Legal Counsel, were present to answer questions. There was no discussion. The revised policy (Appendix I) was approved on a voice vote.
RESEARCH PROFESSOR POSITION
Prof. Barbara Greene (Educational Psychology) chaired a task force of faculty and administrators that recommended the creation of a new position called research professor (Appendix II). For background information, see 12/98 Senate Journal, page 3.
Prof. Bert asked whether individuals would have to be funded for five years before they would be eligible for one year's salary and whether one year would be the maximum (under "Salary, Promotion, and Raises"). Prof. Greene said that it would be the limit for bridge funding. Prof. Fleener said the language in bold suggests that someone who had been here ten years could get two years of bridge funding. Prof. Greene said she did not read it that way. Provost Mergler said she thought the intent was they could get two years of funding. Prof. Holmes remarked that the previous sentence was a binding constraint that would limit funding to one year. The sentence in bold is a formula by which that one year of funding would be created. Prof. Bert suggested that the word, "every," be deleted. Prof. Greene accepted that as a friendly amendment. Prof. Beasley commented that "For example" defined something that had not been defined yet. Prof. Leigh suggested that "For example" be omitted. Prof. Gross suggested that the word, "thus," be substituted. Prof. Beasley said he thought it would be tough to limit the total amount of bridge funding to half of the indirect costs. He said he did not see how the issue of one year’s salary for every five years of service was related to the question of indirect costs. Prof. Lancaster asked whether the intent was that research professors must have funding for five years before they are eligible for bridge funding. Prof. Sutton pointed out that they could get funding from sources that did not generate indirect costs. Prof. Van Gundy suggested that the different situations--with and without full indirect funding--be spelled out.
Prof. Engel said he had questions about the University establishing budgetary procedures for bridge funding. Most money will come from federal sources that are strictly regulated, and these sources will not let us store this money. Prof. Greene explained that Dr. Eddie Smith, Vice President for Research, wanted it to be very clear that the University, as opposed to departments, would take care of the bridge funding. Prof. Engel noted that departments could find they do not have any discretionary funds because they are all being used to bridge the gap. Prof. Van Gundy suggested that the language be rephrased to provide a transition. Prof. Sutton commented that the professors would have to generate the funds if their external funding had no overhead. Prof. Cline asked whether indirect funding was supposed to fund the bridge funding. Prof. Holmes said that was a budgetary issue that Vice President Smith would have to address. The concern was that departments or colleges would not be obligated. Prof. Engel responded that departments would not be obligated directly, but they could be indirectly. Prof. Beasley asked about using SRI money for this. Prof. Greene said that was one of the reasons why it was important to state in the document that departments would decide whether they wanted to take advantage of this new position. Prof. Holmes asked who would make the decision about the bridge formula. Prof. Greene said that would be Committee A. Prof. Holmes suggested that a sentence be substituted that reads, "Committee A will decide on the relationship between years of funding and bridge formula."
Provost Mergler said the deans had some confusion about that issue. She said she had already seen some of the cases interpreted differently. She suggested that the wording could be sharpened and perhaps a forum could be held. Prof. Murphy said she was confused as to how the units would not assume any obligations for salaries, yet Committee A could dictate how the money was spent. Prof. Greene explained that it is the nature of the position that it would have an academic home but that some of the issues would be dictated in the contract. She offered to have the task force work on that paragraph.
Prof. Van Gundy proposed a straw poll to determine support for the recommendation in general. The Faculty Senate approved the general concept on a voice vote. Prof. Kudrna questioned whether this support would be subject to the same kind of qualifier as sabbaticals: the university's ability to absorb the financial obligation and the unit’s ability to spare the personnel. Prof. Greene said the contract usually would include some statement of support. Prof. Agrawal said the document implied there was a need for bridge funding in between grants. He asked whether the funding was need-based or a privilege. Prof. Greene said it would be need-based. This would be a mechanism for letting those people continue to do their work during a short period in between contracts. Prof. Engel commented that the University could be stuck with a bill of several hundred thousand dollars if several senior people needed bridging.
Prof. Benson said he thought the Faculty Senate was being asked for its opinion about creating such a position, not how the positions would be funded. We could put constraints on how they could be funded to make sure departments did not have to fund them, but no one would be able to hire anybody in one of these positions without administrative approval. His concern was that one source for the initial pool of bridge funding could be faculty lines. Prof. Engel added that the money could come out of Research Council funds. Prof. Benson said the Senate could only suggest how the funding could not be done.
Prof. Van Gundy suggested that some language be included to explain bridge funding and how one would qualify for it. Prof. Karriker asked that the word, "Professor," be inserted after "Full" in the first sentence. She noted that the first sentence under "Salary, Promotion, and Raises" should read, "…moneys awarded…," and the next sentence should read, "…at least twice as much in indirect costs…" Prof. Murphy asked whether these professors would teach. Prof. Greene said that would be negotiated. They would be hired to do research 100% of the time. Provost Mergler responded that most of these individuals are involved in the teaching mission at some level, and some do teach.
Prof. Leigh suggested that the language in the third paragraph under "Recruitment and Appointment Process" beginning with "Contracts" could be replaced with, "These appointments are not convertible to tenure-track." Prof. Beasley proposed that the third sentence of the first paragraph be changed to "…potential both to conduct high quality research..." Prof. Greene offered to have the task force hold a forum or revise the document and distribute it before the next meeting. Prof. Holmes proposed that a drafting committee composed of Professors Beasley, Murphy, and Karriker work with Professor Greene to suggest new language. Prof. Greene pointed out that if the content changed, she would want the task force to review it. Prof. Sutton returned to the question of whether this money would take away from something else that we are doing. Prof. Benson responded that if we put money aside for this, in the short term, it would take money away from something we are doing now. In the long term, it would increase the budget. Prof. Greene said it might be helpful to have Vice President Smith speak to the Senate about some of those issues. She said Vice President Smith had wanted to get a sense of whether faculty members were behind the general intent of this type of position. Once the task force members started working on the proposal, they concluded that the faculty would not vote on this position without knowing some of the details. Then as they worked on the details, they faced all of these complex issues. Prof. Holmes said some of the task force members involved with these kinds of research projects would be available to answer questions at the next meeting. Prof. Kunesh suggested that the sentence in bold end with "and moneys are available." Prof. Engel commented that the moneys are available; it is a question of the source. Prof. Beasley said he agreed with Prof. Benson that the Senate could only suggest who would not provide the money. He added that the Senate should not try to delineate the details. Prof. Greene noted that Prof. Bruce Roe (Chemistry and Biochemistry), a member of the task force, was present to answer any questions. She asked whether the Senate wanted to have Vice President Smith attend the next meeting. Provost Mergler said Vice President Smith could add valuable input. Prof. Patterson moved to table the proposal. Her motion was approved on a voice vote.
The meeting adjourned at 4:20 p.m. The next regular session of the Senate will be held at 3:30 p.m. on Monday, February 8, 1999, in Jacobson Faculty Hall 102.
Sonya Fallgatter, Administrative Coordinator Ruth Okediji, Secretary
COPYRIGHT TASK FORCE REVISIONS IN AND FACULTY SENATE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS TO LEGAL COUNSEL DRAFT (1/99)
(deletions crossed through; additions in bold)
As a publicly supported institution of higher education, the University of Oklahoma is dedicated to serving the state through teaching, research and service. The University values creativity in all academic endeavors and the creation of copyrighted works is one of the ways the University fulfills its mission of contributing to the body of knowledge for the public good.
Copyrights are created by the Constitution and the laws of the United States to promote the progress of science and the useful arts by securing for limited times to authors the exclusive rights to their works and writings. The basic objectives of the University’s policy concerning copyright include the following:
It is the policy of the Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma that all rights in copyright shall remain with the creator of the work unless the work is created with substantial use of University resources, is specifically assigned or commissioned by the University, is subject to non-University contractual or legal obligations, or is a "work made for hire" as that term is defined by U.S. Copyright Law.
3.1 Scholarly/Aesthetic Works.
In keeping with traditional academic practice and policy, ownership of copyrights to works of artistry or
traditional scholarship in the creator’s professional field such as textbooks, course materials, scholarly papers and articles, computer courseware, software, novels, poems, paintings, musical compositions or other such works of artistic imagination produced by University employees who have a general obligation to produce such works where the specific choice, content, course and direction of the effort is determined by the employee without direct assignment or supervision by the University shall reside in the creators and the works shall not be deemed "works made for hire" unless they are also sponsored/contracted works or specifically assigned by the University. The general obligation of faculty to produce scholarly works does not constitute specific assignment. Such exempt works of artistry or traditional scholarship shall be subject to an irrevocable, non-exclusive, free-of-cost and world-wide license in the University to exercise all copyright rights in and to the work except the right to commercially distribute copies. Upon request by the University, the creator(s) will grant University a nonexclusive, free of cost, world wide right and license to exercise all copyright rights in and to the work, except the right to commercially display, use, perform or distribute copies of the work, unless to do so would impair the ability of the creator to commercially or professional exploit the work. If a use of the work by University is reasonably determined by the creator to impair the exercise of such rights, the University shall discontinue the impeding use but otherwise shall remain free to use the work as provided in this Paragraph 3.1.
3.2 Personal Works.
Ownership of copyrights to works prepared outside the course and scope of University employment and without the substantial use of University resources (equipment, facilities, services or funds (regardless of source) administered by and/or under the control of the University) shall reside with the creators; provided, the provision of office facilities, limited secretarial assistance, library facilities for which special charges are not normally made or other resources which are made available to the public without charge, shall not be considered substantial use of University resources.
3.3 Sponsored Works.
Ownership of copyrights to works produced by or through the University in the performance of a written agreement between the University and a third-party/sponsor shall be governed in accordance with the agreement. If the agreement is silent in that regard, ownership shall be governed by the other provisions of this policy
it shall be owned by the University.
3.4 Commissioned Works.
Ownership of copyrights to works produced for University purposes by persons not employed by the University or by University employees outside their regular University employment (commissioned works) normally shall reside with the University. In all cases, copyright ownership shall be specified in a written agreement signed by the parties. Any commissioned work agreement which provides for ownership by other than the University shall also provide the University with an irrevocable, free-of-cost, non-exclusive, world-wide license to exercise all copyright rights in and to the work, except the right to commercially display, use, perform or distribute copies of the work, unless to do so would impair the ability of the creator to commercially or professionally exploit the work. If a use of the work by University is reasonably determined by the creator to impair the exercise of such rights, the University shall discontinue the impeding use but otherwise shall remain free to use the work as provided in this Paragraph 3.4.
3.5 University Works.
Except as otherwise provided in this Policy, the University shall own all copyrights to works made by University employees in the course and scope of their employment and shall own all copyrights to works made with the substantial use of University resources. Provided, University shall give due regard to the creator’s interests in the quality and integrity of the work and where appropriate grant recognition for creation of the work. To the extent consistent with University rights under the U.S. copyright law, nothing herein shall be construed to prevent the creator from using his/her knowledge, expertise, research and creative achievement in other employment.
3.6 Student Works.
Ownership of copyrights to works produced by
registered enrolled students without the use of University funds (other than Student Financial Aid), that are produced outside any University employment and are not sponsored or commissioned works, shall reside with the student creator(s). Provided however, in all cases a student’s graduate thesis or dissertation shall be deemed a student work under this policy but as a condition of enrollment and awarding a degree, the University reserves an irrevocable, non-exclusive, free-of-cost and world-wide right to reproduce in any media and distribute to the public, on a non-commercial basis, copies of said theses and dissertations., unless to do so would impair the ability of the creator to commercially or professionally exploit the work. If a use of the work by University is reasonably determined by the creator to impair the exercise of such rights, the University shall discontinue the impeding use but otherwise shall remain free to use the work as provided in this Paragraph 3.6
Provided, nothing herein shall be construed to prohibit the University from copying, displaying or performing academic assignments/projects and to destroy same if left by student.
3.7 Jointly Originated Works.
Ownership of copyrights to jointly originated works shall be determined by separately assessing the category of work of each creator under this Section 3. Rights between joint owners of a copyright shall be determined pursuant to copyright law or by agreement between the owners of the work.
4. REVENUE SHARING
4.1 The University may assign or license its copyrights to others. The University shall share revenue which it receives through copyrights with the creators, as provided hereafter. Specific provisions of sponsored agreements (grants or contracts) or other third-party contracts may govern rights and revenue distribution. Accordingly, any royalty share or expenses contractually committed to such third parties shall normally be deducted before revenues accrue or before the creator’s share is distributed. In all events, revenue sharing with the creator(s) may not violate the terms of any funding agreement or applicable laws and regulations.
4.2 The revenues received from a University owned copyright (excepting commissioned works) after deducting costs and expenses of registration, maintenance and defense of University copyrighted works and pursuant to paragraph 4.1 (net revenue) shall be shared with faculty creators as follows:
(A) the first $5,000.00 of net revenue will be paid to the creator(s);
(B) thereafter, faculty creators will receive sixty percent (60%) of such net revenue;
(C) the remaining forty percent (40%) of net revenue to the University will be dedicated to research purposes and to the promotion of original works.
4.3 Notwithstanding the above or anything else to the contrary herein, staff employees are not eligible to share revenues received from University owned copyrights where such employees create copyrightable works as a part of their normal responsibilities of University employment. Provided, a staff employee may apply to the appropriate
Vice President for Research Provost to be treated as a faculty member for purposes of revenue sharing for a work resulting from a specific project upon a showing that his/her duties and responsibilities in that project are, in practical effect, substantially the same as those of a faculty member.
5.1 Release to the Creator. An individual creator of a University owned work may seek transfer of the University owned copyright to him/herself by making written request to the appropriate
Vice President for Research Provost. If the University decides not to exploit such work, then it may transfer the copyright, by written agreement, to the individual creator to the extent consistent with any applicable third-party agreement or law. Provided, such transfer shall be subject to an irrevocable, non-exclusive, free-of-cost and world-wide license in the University to exercise all rights under the copyright in the work except the right to publicly distribute copies for commercial purposes and subject to or such other conditions as may be agreed upon in writing between the individual creator(s) and the Provost Vice President for Research, unless to do so would impair the ability of the creator to commercially or professionally exploit the work. If a use of the work by the University is reasonably determined by the creator to impair the exercise of such rights as transferred in the agreement, the University shall discontinue the impeding use but otherwise shall remain free to use the work as provided in Paragraph 5.1.
Provided further, in all events the University shall retain such rights as it deems necessary to perform its obligations under law or any contract/grant arrangement with third parties.
5.2 Disclosure and Protection. An individual creator of a University owned copyrightable work shall protect the work by placing the following statutory copyright notice on all copies thereof
("Copyright [insert year produced, e.g., 2000], the Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma."). If the creator believes the work may have commercial value, he/she shall promptly provide written disclosure of the work to the appropriate Provost
Vice President for Research.
5.3 Legal Compliance
Warranty. A creator of any copyrighted work owned by the University under this policy shall, prior to the filing of the application for registration with the Copyright Office, Library of Congress, execute a statement that he/she warrants that Any work created by a University employee or student, to the best of his/her knowledge and informed belief, shall the work does not infringe on any existing copyright. or other legal rights; that work not identified as quotations is the expression or creation of the creator; that necessary permission for quotation and the like have been obtained; and that the work contains no libelous material nor material that invades the privacy of others.
5.4 Creators of copyrightable works subject to this policy and the University shall cooperate as reasonably necessary to effect the terms of this policy. For example, if copyright to a work of
traditional scholarship vests in the University by law, the University will, upon request and to the extent consistent with its legal obligations to third parties, promptly execute such documents as will transfer copyright to the faculty creator(s).
5.5 The Provosts
Vice Presidents for Research, Norman Campus and the Health Sciences Center, shall be responsible for administering the research and copyright affairs of the University in a manner consistent with this policy. The Provosts Vice Presidents for Research shall cooperate in consultation with the Copyright committee on each campus to establish written directives to be approved by the President of the University and distributed to the employees and students of the University, which shall govern the procedures to be followed in processing copyrighted works created within the University.
5.6 The University does not act as a fiduciary for any person concerning consideration received under the terms of this policy.
6. CONTRACTUAL TERM
The terms of this copyright policy are a part of any contractual relationship of the University with any member of the faculty, staff or student body. This policy, as amended from time to time, shall be deemed to be a part of the conditions of employment of every University employee and a part of the conditions of enrollment and attendance of every student at the University.
7. RESOLUTION OF CONFLICT
Should disputes arise relative to the distribution of royalties and/or ownership of copyright between the creator and the University, the matter will be referred to the Copyright Committee, which will make recommendations to the President for proper resolution of the disputes. Either the University or creator may contact the
Chairman of the Faculty Senate or Provost to arrange to have the Copyright Committee meet to consider such disputes.
8. UNIVERSITY COPYRIGHT COMMITTEE
a) The University shall have a Copyright Committee for each Campus that shall consider and investigate disputes among administrators, faculty, or staff and shall recommend appropriate solutions to the President. The Committee's responsibilities shall include, but not be limited to, disputes concerning:
1) Ownership of copyright
2) Terms of commissions
3) Distribution of royalties for the University-owned works
4) Distribution of royalties for works that may have required specific and unusual University expenses
b) The Copyright Committee of each campus shall have as its members:
Each member of the Committee shall have one vote. The Committee shall keep its own records, determine its own procedures, and elect its own chair who shall report to the President. The Committee also may review this policy from time to time and may recommend changes to the President.
RESEARCH PROFESSOR POSITION
PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO SECTION 3.5.3
OF THE FACULTY HANDBOOK (1/99)
(language added 12/7/98 in bold)
The Research Professor position is non-tenure track, with continuous term appointments at the rank of Assistant, Associate, or Full. This track will be used to recruit top research scholars to support and enhance the major research programs and initiatives at the University of Oklahoma. Candidates for these positions must demonstrate significant capability or potential to both conduct high quality research and obtain external funds. The primary responsibilities of these faculty will be research and research-related such as proposal writing, project management, and teaching and service specifically linked to their research programs (supervision of graduate students, service for professional organizations). The continued appointment of these professors will depend on their success, or the success of the research program with which they are connected, in obtaining external funding. These procedures should be considered the only route to appointing people to non-tenure track Research Professorships.
RECRUITMENT AND APPOINTMENT PROCESS
Units would be eligible for a Research Professor position if they can document that they have a major research program that has brought in sufficient funds to pay all costs of the program plus this new position for at least 3 years without additional University funding. Since these positions are different from the current designations for either regular faculty or temporary employees, units will need to modify their personnel policies (or organizational plans) to reflect the unit’s willingness to hire people with the new designation. Additionally, units should stipulate, in the modification to personnel policy, the different requirements for Research Professors appointed at the Assistant, Associate, or Full rank.
Candidates for Research Professorship positions will be recruited and appointed through a process similar to that used for hiring regular faculty. The positions will be posted in appropriate national publications and applications reviewed by a search committee chaired by the director of the research program in question. Since the director of the research program is the faculty member with the greatest interest and stake in this appointment, having him/her chair the committee allows for appropriate control over the process. The search committee will also consist of tenure track or tenured faculty within the department and at least one tenure track or tenured faculty member from outside the department. Applicants for these positions will be considered eligible if they meet the required qualifications determined by the head of the research program and the search committee. The search committee will recommend a candidate to the department’s Committee A and Department Chair. The Committee A and Department Chair can present the candidate, along with a recommendation for rank, to the department faculty for a vote.
Once a candidate has been recommended by the Department, their credentials will be reviewed by the Research Council whose recommendation will be forwarded to the Provost for review prior to presentation to the President and the Regents. All subsequent practices currently in place for regular faculty appointments would apply in these cases as well (see section 3.5.1 of the Faculty Handbook). Contracts will state clearly that these appointments will not become tenure track even though they may be renewed beyond the seven-year period described as a maximum for temporary appointments in section 3.5.3 of the Faculty Handbook. Should a tenure-track position come available in the department, an individual in a Research Professor position would be eligible to apply. The standard national search procedures for tenure track vacancies are to be rigorously followed before a Research Professor’s status can be changed to tenure track. The Research Professor should not expect to be favored for a tenured or tenure-track vacancy in the department.
SALARY, PROMOTION, AND RAISES
The salaries awarded those appointed to these positions will be paid out of the moneys award by the grants funding the research program. Initial salary and rank will be commensurate with experience and national standards. To qualify for bridge funding between external awards, the individual must have been appointed on grants or contracts that have generated at least twice as much indirect costs as the total amount of bridge funding to be received, with a maximum of 12 months of bridge funding to be provided by the University. For example, a successful Research Professor could expect the University to provide no more than one year's salary for every five years of service, if it was needed. The University will establish budgetary procedures for bridge funding; units will not assume any obligations for Research Professor salaries.
Evaluation and promotion procedures for Research Professors will be those described for regular faculty in section 3.11 of the Faculty Handbook, except that the nature of their non-tenure track, continuous term appointments means they will be evaluated and promoted primarily based on their research and funding productivity. Specific criteria for annual evaluation and for promotion will be determined by the department in conjunction with the director of the research program and Committee A and will be made clear to the holder of the position at his/her initial appointment.
Raises will be awarded in the same manner as they are for regular faculty.
Given that these temporary faculty will not have the same responsibilities and concerns as regular faculty, they will be excluded from participating in the governance roles within the University. Non-tenure track Research Professors are not governing faculty. Such faculty shall not be eligible to vote regarding departmental affairs, policies and procedures, tenure, promotions, administrative searches, Committee A, the Faculty Senate or other similar governance issues.
CAPS ON RESEARCH PROFESSORSHIPS
An initial cap on these non-tenure track, continuous term appointments will be set at 5% of the number of all faculty appointments on the Norman Campus, with an understanding that after a full evaluation of the program the percentage may increase up to 10% but not beyond that point.
The impact of these non-tenure track, continuous term appointments will be reviewed at regular intervals. The first such review will occur after three years, then review will occur every five years. These periodic evaluations will be undertaken by the Senior Vice President and Provost, the Vice President for Research, the Vice President for Technology Transfer, and the Faculty Senate or their appointees.