1. A Process for Academic Reorganization
Faculty Senate Process Task Force
December 6, 2016

2. Process Task Force Charge
“The Task Force on Process is charged with developing a standard operating procedure for unit reorganization at UMKC. Starting with the draft document on ‘General guidance Associated with University Reorganization,’ and the feedback from faculty, the task force will present to the Faculty Senate an appropriate SOP by December 6, 2016.”
Members:
Jen Salvo-Eaton, Chair
Dale Morehouse
Jack Nelson
Jerzy Wrobel

3. Background
The UMKC Bylaws and UM System Collected Rules and Regulations (CRRs) provide no guidance for academic reorganization
Existing schools and colleges are defined by UMKC Bylaws
Any change to existing schools or colleges requires a change to the UMKC Bylaws
Academic reorganization is at the Chancellor’s discretion

4. Approach How do ideas organically develop?
Step #1 of the Recommended Procedures for Academic Reorganization at UMKC document drafted by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee:
“The impetus to reorganize a school should come from the Chancellor, with input from the Provost.”
How do ideas organically develop?
How can one work within existing checks and balances?
Who needs to flesh out an idea for reorganization?
How does one seek appropriate support along the way?

5. Process A: Faculty Impetus for Reorganization

6. Exploratory Committee
Faculty Governance Group A
Faculty Governance Group B
Faculty Governance Group C

7. The Exploratory Committee
Comprised of faculty chair-appointed members from each affected unit
Including the initiating faculty and any other key/interested faculty
Each unit represented equally
Writes a final report
Stakeholder feedback
Relevant data
Evidence-based recommendation for/against reorganization

8. Faculty Governance Group A Faculty Governance Group B
Exploratory Committee
Faculty Governance Group A
Faculty Governance Group B
Faculty Governance Group C

9. Faculty Senate advisory vote
Deans’ feedback
Faculty Senate advisory vote
Provost’s feedback
Chancellor

10. Process B: Chancellor Impetus for Reorganization

11. Reorganization Study Committee
Chancellor and Provost
Deans
Faculty Representatives
Unit and University Budget Committees
Staff, Student, and Alumni Representatives

12. The Reorganization Study Committee
Gathers data
Provides sufficient and compelling evidence-based justifications for reorganization
Develops goals for reorganization that meet the justifications
Produces a report for the Provost

13. Reorganization Study Committee Provost
Reorganization Implementation Committee

14. The Reorganization Implementation Committee
Broadly empowered to gather data
Consider implications
Make recommendations for how to implement a reorganization
Plans for assessment

15. Provost Statement of endorsement (or not) Faculty Senate Vote
Chancellor
Provost
Statement of endorsement (or not)
Faculty Senate
Vote
Faculty Governance Groups

16. If all accept the recommendation
Chancellor puts forth Bylaw change
UM System and Board of Curators
If some do not accept the recommendation
Goes back to the Reorganization Implementation Committee for modification
Repeat confirmation steps of the process

17. With a modified recommendation
Can pass through with all votes and endorsements to be submitted as a Bylaw change
Can be shelved for three (3) academic years, then reviewed by the Chancellor
Chancellor can revive the recommendation; goes through confirmation steps again
Can not achieve necessary votes endorsements - dissolved
Chancellor can dissolve the recommendation

18. After a Bylaw change passes
The Provost and the Reorganization Committee oversee implementation of the recommendation
The Reorganization Implementation Committee submits three (3) assessment reports to the Provost, according to the assessment plans laid out in the recommendation
One-year
Three-year
Five-year

19. Questions?
We will send the full text of the proposal out following this meeting.
We will discuss at the December 20th meeting.