Chapter 4D - Personnel Rules

CHAPTER 4D PERSONNEL RULES

SECTION 15: SELECTED DOCUMENTS PERTINENT TO PERSONNEL MATTERS

OPEN MEETINGS LAW, SECTIONS 19.81-19.98, WIS. STATS. (1991-92)

NOTE:  The following is a verbatim copy of the statute.

19.81 Declaration of policy. 

1. In recognition of the fact that a representative government of the American type is dependent upon an informed electorate, it is declared to be the policy of this state that the public is entitled to the fullest and most complete information regarding the affairs of government as is compatible with the conduct of governmental business.
2. To implement and ensure the public policy herein expressed, all meetings of all state and local governmental bodies shall be publicly held in places reasonably accessible to members of the public and shall be open to all citizens at all times unless otherwise expressly provided by law.
3. In conformance with article IV, section 10, of the constitution, which states that the doors of each house shall remain open, except when the public welfare requires secrecy, it is declared to be the intent of the legislature to comply to the fullest extent with this subchapter.
4. This subchapter shall be liberally construed to achieve the purposes set forth in this section, and the rule that penal statutes must be strictly construed shall be limited to the enforcement of forfeitures and shall not otherwise apply to actions brought under this subchapter or to interpretations thereof.

19.82 Definitions.

…As used in this subchapter:

1. “Governmental body” means a state or local agency, board, commission, committee, council, department or public body corporate and politic created by constitution, statute, ordinance, rule or order; a governmental or quasi-governmental corporation except for the Bradley center sports and entertainment corporation created under ch. 232; any public purpose corporation, as defined in s. 181.79 (1); a nonprofit corporation operating an ice rink which is owned by the state; or a formally constituted subunit of any of the foregoing, but excludes any such body or committee or subunit of such body which is formed for or meeting for the purpose of collective bargaining under subch. IV or V of ch. 111.
2. “Meeting” means the convening of members of a governmental body for the purpose of exercising the responsibilities, authority, power or duties delegated to or vested in the body.  If one-half or more of the members of a governmental body are present, the meeting is rebuttably presumed to be for the purpose of exercising the responsibilities, authority, power or duties delegated to or vested in the body. The term does not include any social or chance gathering or conference which is not intended to avoid this subchapter.
3. “Open session” means a meeting which is held in a place reasonably accessible to members of the public and open to all citizens at all times.  In the case of a state governmental body, it means a meeting which is held in a building and room thereof which enables access by persons with functional limitations, as defined in s. 101.13 (1).

19.83 Meetings of governmental bodies. 

Every meeting of a governmental body shall be preceded by public notice as provided in s. 19.84, and shall be held in open session. At any meeting of a governmental body, all discussion shall be held and all action of any kind, formal or informal, shall be initiated, deliberated upon and acted upon only in open session except as provided in s. 19.85.

19.84 Public notice. 

Public notice.

1. Public notice of all meetings of a governmental body shall be given in the following manner:

1. As required by any other statutes; and
2. By communication from the chief presiding officer of a governmental body or such person’s designee to the public, to those news media who have filed a written request for such notice, and to the official newspaper designated under ss. 985.04, 985.05 and 985.06 or, if none exists, to a news medium likely to give notice in the area.

2. Every public notice of a meeting of a governmental body shall set forth the time, date, place and subject matter of the meeting, including that intended for consideration at any contemplated closed session, in such form as is reasonably likely to apprise members of the public and the news media thereof.
3. Public notice of every meeting of a governmental body shall be given at least 24 hours prior to the commencement of such meeting unless for good cause such notice is impossible or impractical, in which case shorter notice may be given, but in no case may the notice be provided less than 2 hours in advance of the meeting.
4. Separate public notice shall be given for each meeting of a governmental body at a time and date reasonably proximate to the time and date of the meeting.
5. Departments and their subunits in any university of Wisconsin system institution or campus and a nonprofit corporation operating an ice rink which is owned by the state are exempt from the requirements of subs. (1) to (4) but shall provide meeting notice which is reasonably likely to apprise interested persons, and news media who have filed written requests for such notice.
6. Notwithstanding the requirements of s. 19.83 and the requirements of this section, a governmental body which is a formally constituted subunit of a parent governmental body may conduct a meeting without public notice as required by this section during a lawful meeting of the parent governmental body, during a recess in such meeting or immediately after such meeting for the purpose of discussing or acting upon a matter which was the subject of that meeting of the parent governmental body. The presiding officer of the parent governmental body shall publicly announce the time, place and subject matter of the meeting of the subunit in advance at the meeting of the parent body.

19.85 Exemptions. 

1. Any meeting of a governmental body, upon motion duly made and carried, may be convened in closed session under one or more of the exemptions provided in this section.  The motion shall be carried by a majority vote in such manner that the vote of each member is ascertained and recorded in the minutes.  No motion to convene in closed session may be adopted unless the chief presiding officer announces to those present at the meeting at which such motion is made, the nature of the business to be considered at such closed session, and the specific exemption or exemptions under this subsection by which such closed session is claimed to be authorized.  Such announcement shall become part of the record of the meeting.  No business may be taken up at any closed session except that which relates to matters contained in the chief presiding officer’s announcement of the closed session.  A closed session may be held for any of the following purposes.

1. Deliberating concerning a case which was the subject of any judicial or quasi-judicial trial or hearing before that governmental body.
2. Considering dismissal, demotion, licensing or discipline of any public employee or person licensed by a board or commission or the investigation of charges against such person, or considering the grant or denial of tenure for a university faculty member, and the taking of formal action on any such matter; provided that the faculty member or other public employee or person licensed is given actual notice of any evidentiary hearing which may be held prior to final action being taken and of any meeting at which final action may be taken. The notice shall contain a statement that the person has the right to demand that the evidentiary hearing or meeting be held in open session. This paragraph and par. (f) do not apply to any such evidentiary hearing or meeting where the employee or person licensed requests that an open session be held.
3. Considering employment, promotion, compensation or performance evaluation data of any public employee over which the governmental body has jurisdiction or exercises responsibility.
4. Considering specific applications of probation or parole, or considering strategy for crime detection or prevention.
5. Deliberating or negotiating the purchasing of public properties, the investing of public funds, or conducting other specified public business, whenever competitive or bargaining reasons require a closed session.

(ee) Deliberating by the council on unemployment compensation in a meeting at which all employer members of the council or all employee members of the council are excluded.

(eg) Deliberating by the council on worker’s compensation in a meeting at which all employer members of the council or all employee members of the council are excluded.

(em) Deliberating under s. 157.70 if the location of a burial site, as defined in s. 157.70 (1)(b), is a subject of the deliberation and if discussing the location in public would be likely to result in disturbance of the burial site.

6. Considering financial, medical, social or personal histories or disciplinary data of specific persons, preliminary consideration of specific personnel problems or the investigation of charges against specific persons except where par. (b) applies which, if discussed in public, would be likely to have a substantial adverse effect upon the reputation of any person referred to in such histories or data, or involved in such problems or investigations.
7. Conferring with legal counsel for the governmental body who is rendering oral or written advice concerning strategy to be adopted by the body with respect to litigation in which it is or is likely to become involved.
8. Consideration of requests for confidential written advice from the ethics board under s. 19.46 (2), or from any county or municipal ethics board under s. 19.59 (5).
9. Considering any and all matters related to acts by businesses under s. 560.15 which, if discussed in public, could adversely affect the business, its employees or former employees.
10. Considering financial information relating to the support by a person, other than an authority, of a nonprofit corporation operating an ice rink which is owned by the state, if the information is exempt from disclosure under s. 23.37 or would be so exempt were the information to be contained in a record.  In this paragraph, “authority” and “record” have the meanings given under s. 19.32.

2. No governmental body may commence a meeting, subsequently convene in closed session and thereafter reconvene again in open session within 12 hours after completion of the closed session, unless public notice of such subsequent open session was given at the same time and in the same manner as the public notice of the meeting convened prior to the closed session.
3. Nothing in this subchapter shall be construed to authorize a governmental body to consider at a meeting in closed session the final ratification or approval of a collective bargaining agreement under subch. IV or V or ch. 111 which has been negotiated by such body or on its behalf.

19.86 Notice of collective bargaining negotiations. 

Notwithstanding s. 19.82 910, where notice has been given by either party to a collective bargaining agreement under subch. IV or V of ch. 111 to reopen such agreement at its expiration date, the employer shall give notice of such contract reopening as provided in s. 19.84 (1)(b).  If the employer is not a governmental body, notice shall be given by the employer’s chief officer or such person’s designee.  This section does not apply to a nonprofit corporation operating an ice rink which is owned by the state.

19.87 Legislative meetings.

This subchapter shall apply to all meetings of the senate and assembly and the committees, subcommittees and other subunits thereof, except that:

1. Section 19.84 shall not apply to any meeting of the legislature or a subunit thereof called solely for the purpose of scheduling business before the legislative body; or adopting resolutions of which the sole purpose is scheduling business before the senate      or the assembly.
2. No provision of this subchapter which conflicts with a rule of the senate or assembly or joint rule of the legislature shall apply to a meeting conducted in compliance with such rule.
3. No provision of this subchapter shall apply to any partisan caucus of the senate or any partisan caucus of the assembly, except as provided by legislative rule.
4. Meetings of the senate or assembly the information committee on organization under s. 71.78 (4)(c) or 77.61 (5)(b)3 shall be closed to the public.

19.88 Ballots, votes and records. 

1. Unless otherwise specifically provided by statute, no secret ballot may be utilized to determine any election or other decision of a govern-mental body except the election of the officers of such body in any meeting.
2. Except as provided in sub. (1) in the case of officers, any member of a governmental body may require that a vote be taken at any meeting in such manner that the vote of each member is ascertained and recorded.
3. The motions and roll call votes of each meeting of a governmental body shall be recorded, preserved and open to public inspection to the extent prescribed in subch. II of ch. 19.

19.89 Exclusion of members. 

No duly elected or appointed member of a governmental body may be excluded from any meeting of such body.  Unless the rules of a govern-mental body provide to the contrary, no member of the body may be excluded from any meeting of a subunit of that governmental body.

19.90 Use of equipment in open session. 

Whenever a governmental body holds a meeting in open session, the body shall make a reasonable effort to accommodate any person desiring to record, film or photograph the meeting.  This section does not permit recording, filming or photographing such a meeting in a manner that interferes with the conduct of the meeting or the rights of the participants.

19.96 Penalty. 

Any member of a governmental body who knowingly attends a meeting of such body held in violation of this subchapter, or who, in his or her official capacity, otherwise violates this subchapter by some act or omission shall forfeit without reimbursement not less than $25 nor more than $300 for each such violation. No member of a governmental body is liable under this subchapter on account of his or her attendance at a meeting held in violation of this subchapter if he or she makes or votes in favor of a motion to prevent the violation from occurring, or if, before the violation occurs, his or her votes on all relevant motions were inconsistent with all those circumstances which cause the violation.

19.97 Enforcement. 

1. This subchapter shall be enforced in the name and on behalf of the state by the attorney general or, upon the verified complaint of any person, by the district attorney of any county wherein a violation may occur.  In actions brought by the attorney general, the court shall award any forfeiture recovered together with reasonable costs to the state; and in actions brought by the district attorney, the court shall award any forfeiture recovered together with reasonable costs to the county.
2. In addition and supplementary to the remedy provided in s. 19.96, the attorney general or the district attorney may commence an action, separately or in conjunction with an action brought under s. 19.96, to obtain such other legal or equitable relief, including but not limited to mandamus, injunction or declaratory judgment, as may be appropriate under the circumstances.
3. Any action taken at a meeting of a governmental body held in violation of this subchapter is voidable, upon action brought by the attorney general or the district attorney of the county wherein the violation occurred.  However, any judgment declaring such action void shall not be entered unless the court finds, under the facts of the particular case, that the public interest in the enforcement of this subchapter outweighs any public interest which there may be in sustaining the validity of the action taken.
4. If the district attorney refuses or otherwise fails to commence an action to enforce this subchapter within 20 days after receiving a verified complaint, the person making such complaint may bring an action under subs. (1) to (3) on his or her relation in the name, and on behalf, of the state.  In such actions, the court may award actual and necessary costs of prosecution, including reasonable attorney fees to the relator if he or she prevails, but any forfeiture recovered shall be paid to the state.

19.98 Interpretation by attorney general. 

Any person may request advice from the attorney general as to the applicability of this subchapter under any circumstances.

OPEN MEETINGS LAW:  COMMENTS AND INTERPRETATIONS

These comments and interpretations are from the Attorney-General, System Legal Counsel, or local guidelines.  Those marked * are from Wisconsin Open Meetings Law:  A Compliance Guide, 1993, Department of Justice, Attorney-General James E. Doyle.

The comments are arranged alphabetically; some appear under multiple headings.

Absentee Ballots. 

Absentee ballots may not be used for decisions of a governmental body.

Agendas. 

No item which has not been announced as part of the meeting agenda may be introduced for action.  Every member of the body and the public must be advised of any changes (additions or deletions) at least 2 hours before the meeting.

Miscellaneous Business. 

The attorney general has concluded that under very limited circumstances, general subject matter designations such as “miscellaneous business” constitute adequate notice that items not specifically listed may come before the body.  Such listings may never be used 

• to circumvent the statute;
• when giving more notice and greater specificity is possible;
• where a member of the body is aware, prior to the meeting, of the subject matter; or
• where the matter is of great public concern.

In any of these enumerated circumstances or in any reasonably similar circumstances, the matter should be held over for a subsequent meeting and appropriate notice given.

Reconsideration of a Vote. 

Where notice of a pending reconsideration and the specific subject to be reconsidered are not specifically given, a reconsideration may be brought before a body under a general subject designation.  However, any discussion or action on a motion to reconsider should be held over for a subsequent meeting and appropriate notice given.

Closed Sessions. 

Closed sessions are to be used sparingly and only when necessary to protect the public interest, and only when appropriate under one or more of the exemptions of the statute.*

Convening Closed Meetings. 

Section 19.83 requires that every meeting shall be preceded by public notice and shall initially be convened in open session.  It provides that all discussion and action, formal or informal, be initiated, deliberated and acted upon in open session except where the meeting has been closed, with announcement made for purposes permitted by Sec. 19.85.   If proper notice is given, an open session can be held after a closed session.

Request for a Closed Meeting. 

While a closed meeting is permissible under the Open Meeting Law for purposes of a personnel decision (or reconsideration), a faculty or academic staff member has no absolute right to have the meeting closed.  [See also “Request for a Closed Session,” below]

Vote. 

Although there are two differing lower court rulings (one based on previous law on open meetings), there is no definitive court ruling on whether it is appropriate to vote in closed session.*

The advice of the attorney-general is, “a governmental body should vote in open session, unless doing so would compromise the need for the closed session.”*

(A vote may be taken in closed session if the vote is an integral part of the purpose for which the closed session was properly called.)

Results of Closed Sessions. 

In most cases it is proper for the chief presiding officer to announce the results of the closed session immediately thereafter. This would not result in reconvening in open session within twelve hours after completion of closed session.

Who May Attend Closed Sessions. 

Attendance at closed sessions usually should be limited to the members of the governmental body, confidential staff persons, and other nonmembers as may be directly participating in the session or portion of the session.

Those persons necessary for a proper discussion of the subject may attend a closed session at the request of the governmental body. The body has the discretion to excuse persons attending a closed session at any time it believes those persons are no longer necessary for its work.

Convening Closed Meetings. 

Section 19.83 requires that every meeting shall be preceded by public notice and shall initially be convened in open session.  It provides that all discussion and action, formal or informal, be initiated, deliberated and acted upon in open session except where the meeting has been closed, with announcement made for purposes permitted by Sec. 19.85.   If proper notice is given, an open session can be held after a closed session.

Departmental/Unit Decisions. 

A departmental or unit vote/decision must be conducted at a duly convened meeting of that department or unit.

Ballots may not be circulated to the members of the department or unit complete, sign, and return them to the department office.  Since this would not be within the confines of a duly convened meeting of the department or unit, it cannot constitute an official act of the department or unit.

Exclusion of Members. 

No department or unit or committee or other body covered by the Open Meeting Law may exclude any member of that body from any meeting unless the group has specific rules to the contrary.  This section [of the statute] also provides that no member of a body may ever be excluded from meetings of subunits of the body unless the body has specific rules to the contrary.

Exemptions to Open Meetings. 

Section 19.85 was designed to limit and specify the topics which can be discussed in closed sessions.  By having the presiding officer announce the specific exemption which applies, describe the nature of the business to be considered, and then record each member’s vote on convening in closed session, it is easier to determine whether there is a violation of the law and who is responsible.

Exemptions Must Be Cited. 

Naming the general subject matter of a closed session is not sufficient to comply with Sec. 19.85(1); it is necessary to also name the specific statutory exemption which applies.  (The phrase “personnel matters” is insufficient notice.)

Governmental Bodies. 

“The definition of ‘governmental body’ includes a ‘state or local agency, board, commission, committee, council, department or public body corporate and politic created by constitution, statute, ordinance, rule or order.’”*

Subunits. 

A “‘formally constituted subunit’” of any governmental body is also a governmental body under the definitions of the law.  A subunit is a separate, smaller body of a parent body.  A smaller entity which is made up both of members of a parent body and persons not members of the parent body is not a subunit under the law but may nonetheless also be a governmental body.*

UW System Applicability.

Institutional Subunits. 

Colleges, schools, departments (or functional equivalents), and all committees or subcommittees of these units, and all committees or subcommittees created by or pursuant to rules and regulations of the Board of Regents are governmental bodies within the meaning of the law.

Common Council. 

All groups which have and exercise an authority not vested in the individual members are covered by the terms of the law. This includes the Common Council and all committees and subcommittees thereof.

Exemptions. 

Staff meetings, social events, and meetings of appointed advisory bodies, unless provided for in rule, charter or constitution, are not subject to the requirements of the Open Meeting Law.

Mail Ballots. 

Advisory. 

Mail ballots are permissible if confined to advisory referenda.

Departmental/Unit Decisions. 

A departmental or unit vote/decision must be conducted at a duly convened meeting of that department or unit.  Mail ballots may not be used for votes on actions of the department or unit.

Minutes. 

The law does not demand detailed minutes but requires only that a record be kept of motions and roll call votes, both in open and closed session.*

Every official meeting of a department/unit or a department or unit committee must be recorded in a formal set of minutes.  These minutes must include a record of each motion, the vote on that motion, and, in the event or a roll call vote (or a written ballot), a record of individual votes.

• There should be agreement in advance, preferably recorded in the minutes of the first meeting, or in the departmental or unit personnel rules or constitution, on the distribution of minutes and disposition of the written ballots.
• Department and unit rules should also make clear the effect of an abstention, or a response of “present.”  [According to Robert’s Rules of Order, an abstention is not a vote; answering “present” is considered an abstention.]

Motions and Votes Recorded. 

The motions and roll call votes of each meeting shall be recorded, preserved, and open to public inspection.  Further, any member of the body may require that a vote be taken in such a manner that the vote of each member may be ascertained and recorded.

Open Meeting Defined. 

A meeting is open within the meaning of the law if members of the public are free to come and go.  There is no legal requirement that such meetings be held in the largest hall on campus.  Open meetings should be scheduled where convenient.

Open Meetings:  Who May Speak. 

An open meeting does not give any member of the audience the right to speak.  Only members of the body and persons specifically recognized for that purpose by the presiding officer may speak.  In personnel matters, the affected faculty member may request an open meeting but does not thereby gain the right to speak. That option is the prerogative of the body which is meeting.

Personnel Decisions. 

Legal requirements and System or UWSP policies concerning open or closed meetings, and the options available to faculty and academic staff for personnel decisions, may be found in Chapters UWSP 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, and 13 of the local personnel policies and procedures, and the procedures adopted under each of those chapters.

Requests for Open Meeting. 

When an open session is requested by one or more, but less than all, of the persons under consideration, that portion of the meeting devoted to presentation of all materials for or against each of the candidates requesting the open session must be open. 

Discussion of other individuals under consideration should be closed and held after the open portion of the deliberations.  A person requesting an open session is not entitled to hear comparable discussion about peers not requesting open sessions.

All Sessions Must Be Open. 

If a faculty or academic staff member requests that the evidentiary session of a meeting on renewal or tenure or the evidentiary session of a hearing be open, then the deliberative session must also be open.

Notice of Renewal Consideration. 

A department or unit or university committee considering renewal of a contract is exempt from the notice provisions of Sec. 19.84 except that it must give notice to interested persons and members of the news media filing written requests.  [Refer also to the section on “Public Notice,” below.]

Policy Presumption. 

The open meetings law establishes a presumption that all meetings of governmental bodies will be held in open session.  There are exemptions but the exemptions are to be invoked sparingly and only when necessary to protect the public interest.  The law provides that its provisions are to be liberally construed so as to achieve the highest degree of openness in government.*

Public Notice. 

Under Section 19.84 (5), departments/units and their subunits are exempt from the public notice requirements, except that they “shall provide meeting notice which is reasonably likely to apprise interested persons, and news media who have filed written requests for such notice.”  In order to assure compliance with this requirement, departments/units and the subunits are advised to adhere to all requirements of the statute as if they were not exempt.

Meeting Announcements. 

The official vehicle for public announcement of all meetings at UWSP is the University Newsletter.

Responsibility for Notice. 

Those responsible for convening any meeting covered by the Open Meeting Law are to provide electronic mail or other written notice (including group, date, time, place, brief agenda, and whether a closed session is involved) to News Service, Main Building, before 9:00 a.m., Wednesday.

A standing notice may be filed for groups which hold regular meetings.

Deadline Missed. 

If the decision to hold a meeting is made after the deadline for the University Newsletter has passed, the requirements for public notice may be met by posting an announcement of the meeting, at least 24 hours in advance (in emergencies, at least 2 hours in advance), in a place where those of the public most interested might reasonably be expected to see it.

In addition, written notice is to be filed with News Service, which serves as the office of record for all meetings covered by the Open Meeting Law and will respond to inquiries from the news media and others.

Request for a Closed Session. 

While a closed meeting is permissible under the Open Meeting Law for purposes of a personnel decision (or reconsideration), a faculty or academic staff member has no absolute right to have the meeting closed.

A Personnel Committee is a “governmental body” as defined in 19.82 (1), Stats., and thus subject to the open meeting requirement of 19.83.  However, Sec. 19.85 (1)(b) permits a governmental body to hold a closed session for the purpose of considering and acting on the grant or denial of tenure for a university faculty member, upon a motion duly made and carried by the governmental body.

The decision to invoke the exemption from the open meetings requirement is a matter for the governmental body itself rather than the faculty member.

Section 19.85 (1)(b) does give the faculty member the right to demand that meetings which are evidentiary hearings be held in open session under some circumstances, but there is no specific statutory right to a closed session.  That right to open sessions has been extended through Common Council action to all faculty and academic staff.

The absence of a right in the faculty or academic staff member to demand a closed meeting does not preclude the Personnel Committee from meeting in closed session.  Section 19.85 (1)(b) appears to contemplate that tenure deliberations will generally occur in closed meetings.  There appears no reason why the Personnel Committee could not or should not vote to honor the faculty or academic staff member’s request by convening in closed session.

Requirements. 

There are 2 basic requirements of the Open Meetings Law:

• give advance public notice; and
• conduct all business in open session, unless an exemption applies.*

Secret Ballots Not Permitted. 

Except for the election of officers, secret ballots may not be taken at any open or closed meeting of a body covered by the terms of the Open Meeting Law.

Taping. 

The law gives anyone the right to tape record or videotape open sessions, so long as the recording does not disrupt the meeting.*

NOTE:  the provisions of the Open Records Law most likely preclude asking someone who wishes to record a meeting either their name or why they wish to record the meeting.

Violations. 

Any action taken in violation of the Open Meeting Law may be voidable, and any member of a governmental body who knowingly attends a meeting held in violation of the law, or who, in an official capacity, otherwise violates the law by some act or omission, may be fined not less than $25 nor more than $300 for each such violation.

No person may be found in violation if that person makes or votes in favor of a motion to prevent the violation from occurring.

Voting.

Absentee Ballots. 

Absentee ballots may not be used for decisions of a governmental body.

Departmental/Unit Decisions. 

A departmental or unit vote/decision must be conducted at a duly convened meeting of that department.

Mail Ballots. 

Mail ballots are permissible only if confined to advisory referenda.

Motions and Votes Recorded. 

The motions and roll call votes of each meeting shall be recorded, preserved, and open to public inspection.  Further, any member of the body may require that a vote be taken in such a manner that the vote of each member may be ascertained and recorded.

Reconsideration of a Vote. 

Where notice of a pending reconsideration and the specific subject to be reconsidered are not specifically given, a reconsideration may be brought before a body under a general subject designation.  However, any discussion or action on a motion to reconsider should be held over for a subsequent meeting and appropriate notice given.

Results of Closed Sessions. 

In most cases it is proper for the chief presiding officer to announce the results of the closed session immediately thereafter. This would not result in reconvening in open session within twelve hours after completion of closed session.

Secret Ballots Not Permitted. 

Except for the election of officers, secret ballots may not be taken at any open or closed meeting of a body covered by the terms of the Open Meeting Law.

Vote in Closed Session. 

Although there are two differing lower court rulings (one based on previous law on open meetings), there is no definitive court ruling on whether it is appropriate to vote in closed session.  “A governmental body should vote in open session, unless doing so would compromise the need for the closed session.”*

(A vote may be taken in closed session if the vote is an integral part of the purpose for which the closed session was properly called.)

Written Ballots. 

It is not advisable to use written ballots for any vote.  However, if written ballots are used, to meet the requirements of the Open Meetings Law, which prohibits any secret ballot except in the election of officers, the ballots must be

• signed by the individual voters at the time of the vote;
• preserved by the presiding officer of the body or treated as a roll call vote and recorded in the minutes of the meeting;
• open to public inspection upon request (whether the vote was taken at an open or closed session); and
• if any member requests that the vote be taken in such a manner that the vote of each member may be ascertained and recorded, written ballots must be treated as a roll call vote.

This does not preclude the use of a written evaluation or a written advisory recommendation where such evaluations or recommendations are signed and used only as information.

• Forms circulated to department members for these purposes should not specifically request a yes or no recommendation on personnel matters such as promotion, retention, or tenure, although the individual responding may choose to make such a recommendation.
• Evaluations of individuals for personnel actions must be available to the individual, and to all members of the committee making the decision.

When Applicable. 

The open meetings law applies to all meetings of all governmental bodies.*

What Constitutes Meetings. 

1. One-half the Members.  Normally, when half the members of a body are gathered other than for a social event or convention, there is a rebuttable presumption that a meeting is taking place, even if the members are gathered only to hear information on a matter within the authority of the body.*
2. Negative Quorum.  When a number of the body’s members sufficient to control the outcome are involved in a gathering, there is a rebuttable presumption of a meeting.  For example, if a body has a two-thirds majority rule and one-third of the members are gathered (a so-called negative quorum), there is a rebuttable presumption of a meeting.*
3. Conference Calls.  Telephone conference calls involving a sufficient numbers of members of a body to control the outcome also meet the definition of a meeting.*

Written Ballots.

It is not advisable to use written ballots for any vote.  However, if written ballots are used, in order to meet the requirements of the Open Meetings Law prohibiting any secret ballot except in the election of officers, the ballots must be

• signed by the individual voters at the time of the vote;
• preserved by the presiding officer of the body or treated as a roll call vote and recorded in the minutes of the meeting;
• open to public inspection upon request (whether the vote was taken at an open or closed session); and
• if any member requests that the vote be taken in such a manner that the vote of each member may be ascertained and recorded, written ballots must be treated as a roll call vote.

This does not preclude the use of a written evaluation or a written advisory recommendation where such evaluations or recommendations are signed and used only as information.

• Forms circulated to department members for these purposes should not specifically request a yes or no recommendation on personnel matters such as promotion, retention, or tenure, although the individual responding may choose to make such a recommendation.
• Evaluations of individuals for personnel actions must be available to the individual, and to all members of the committee making the decision.

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION POLICY

PURPOSE. 

The University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point is committed to a policy of equal employment opportunity and nondiscrimination.  The University’s Affirmative Action Plan represents both a commitment to hire and promote underrepresented groups, and a positive effort to assure that minorities, women, and persons with disabilities are not underrepresented among our employees.

Objectives. 

The objectives of the University include a commitment to prevent and eliminate discrimination or harassment by supervisors, coworkers, or students on the basis of age, race, color, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, pregnancy, marital status, parental status, sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, disability, political affiliation, arrest record, membership in the National Guard, state defense force and/or any other reserve component of the military forces of the United States or of this state, or other protected class status.  Such harassment is unlawful in the state of Wisconsin.

RESPONSIBILITY.

Program Development. 

The responsibility for the development of an effective affirmative action program on this campus is assigned to the Affirmative Action Director.

Program Implementation. 

Administrative personnel are responsible for implementation of the affirmative action/equal employment program and for enforcement in their area of responsibility.  Affirmative action programs will be monitored and management performance in this program will be evaluated as is performance of other administrative objectives.

Discriminatory Practices. 

Each administrative officer of the University is responsible for eliminating discriminatory practices where they exist and for assuring that applicants and employees are not denied access to employment, training, transfers, or promotions based upon age, race, color, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, marital status, pregnancy, parental status, sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, disability, political affiliation, arrest record, membership in the National Guard, state defense force or any other reserve component of the military forces of the United States or this state, or other protected class status.

Compliance. 

Federal, state, and gubernatorial laws and orders regulate affirmative action and equal employment opportunity practices in the State of Wisconsin.  The University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point is committed to complying with these rules and acknowledges equal employment opportunity as a legal responsibility.  In addition, this commitment is institutionalized and incorporated into the University Handbook, institutional policy, administrative evaluations, and University structure and procedures.

Related Policies. 

Additional policies which further describe and support the University’s commitment to a discrimination- and harassment-free environment are the “Sexual Harassment Policy,” the “Discrimination-free Environment Policy,” and the various policies and procedures for dealing with allegations and complaints of harassment or discrimination under Chapters UWS and UWSP 3, 4, 6, 10, 11, and 13.

APPLICATION. 

The University is committed to an affirmative action/equal opportunity program to assure that all employees are treated fairly.

Equal Employment Opportunity. 

The University is committed to equal employment opportunity for all persons, regardless of race, creed, ancestry, religion, color, sex, national origin, age, disability, arrest record, marital status, pregnancy, parental status, political affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, or membership in the National Guard, state defense force or any other reserve component of the military forces of the United States or this state, or other protected class status.

General Principle. 

All university staff, unclassified, and student positions are open to both sexes, persons with disabilities, and members of minority groups.

Employment Considerations. 

The individual’s ability and willingness to do the job are the only considerations, and jobs may not be restricted

• to members of one race, color, religion, creed, age, sex, or national origin for reasons such as the preferences of coworkers, employers, clients, or customs;
• because a job has been traditionally limited to members of one sex or race;
• by an assumption that members of one sex or race are less able to do a particular job–such as assemble parts, type, operate machinery, serve as lead worker–without regard to the applicant’s actual abilities.

Affirmative Action Needed. 

Affirmative action efforts for women, racial/ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities and Vietnam Era and disabled veterans are required when necessary to ensure equal opportunity and to overcome the effects of past discrimination.  When deemed necessary, affirmative action will affect all employment practices, including but not limited to recruiting, hiring, transfer, layoff, termination, retention, promotion, certification, and testing.

Disability Accommodation. 

Reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities are provided to ensure equal access to employment in accordance with federal and state regulations.

Retaliation Prohibited. 

Retaliation against an employee who files a discrimination complaint is also a form of discrimination and will not be tolerated.

Equal Educational Opportunity. 

Under the provisions of 36.12 (1) Wis. Stats., “No student may be denied admission to, participation in, or the benefits of, or be discriminated in any service, program, course or facility of the system or its institutions or centers because of the student’s race, color, creed, religion, sex, national origin, disability, ancestry, age, sexual orientation, pregnancy, marital status or parental status.”

Students’ Rights. 

The University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point affirms the right to equal opportunity in education.  All campus programs and activities are equally available to all students.  In its educational programs, activities, and employment practices, the University does not discriminate on the basis of age, race, color, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, pregnancy, marital status, parental status, sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, disability, political affiliation, arrest record, membership in the National Guard, state defense force and/or any other reserve component of the military forces of the United States or this state.

Religious Accommodations. 

In response to an employee’s or student’s request, reasonable accommodations are provided for religious practices.

Student Complaints. 

Students wishing to file a discrimination complaint with the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point should do so with the Affirmative Action Director within 300 days of the alleged violation.

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION PLAN. 

UWSP’s Affirmative Action Plan requires that the campus, including each department/unit, affirm its commitment to implement all federal, state and University of Wisconsin System equal employment opportunity and affirmative action laws, executive orders, rules, regulations and policies.

Such laws and regulations include but are not limited to:

• Equal Pay Act of 1963;
• Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964;
• Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967;
• Sections 503 and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973;
• Executive Order 11246;
• Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972;
• Section 402 of the Vietnam Veterans Readjustment Act of 1974;
• Wisconsin Statutes Chapter 230;
• Wisconsin Fair Employment Act;
• Executive Order 28; and
• University of Wisconsin System Equal Employment Opportunity and Affirmative Action Policy.

COMPLAINTS OF DISCRIMINATION OR HARASSMENT.

Filing a Complaint. 

Persons wishing to file a complaint alleging discrimination or harassment are advised to lodge their complaint with the Affirmative Action Director, or with the Director of Personnel Services if the complaint concerns a member of the university staff.

Complaints alleging discrimination may also be lodged with the chancellor or provost, or any vice chancellor, dean, executive director, director of a unit, or department chairperson.

Procedures.

Faculty. 

Complaints alleging discrimination or harassment by a member of the faculty will be handled under the provisions of either Chapters UWS/UWSP 6, 3, or 4, as appropriate.  These procedures are delineated in the University Handbook.

Academic Staff. 

Complaints alleging discrimination or harassment by a member of the academic staff will be handled under the provisions of either Chapters UWS and UWSP 13, 10, or 11, as appropriate.  These procedures are delineated in the University Handbook.

University Staff. 

Complaints alleging discrimination or harassment by a member of the university staff will be handled under the provisions of the union contract or institutional work rules, as appropriate.  These procedures are available from the Personnel Office.

Students. 

Complaints alleging discrimination or harassment by a student will be handled according to the provisions of Chapters UWS/UWSP 14, student conduct procedures.  These procedures are delineated in the brochure entitled Community Rights and Responsibilities.

CONSENSUAL AND FAMILIAL RELATIONSHIP POLICY

DEFINITIONS. 

As used in this policy statement:

Instructor.

“Instructor” means all those who teach at UWSP, including faculty, coaches, teaching academic staff, and graduate students with teaching responsibilities.

Sexual Relations.

A person engages in “sexual relations” when the person causes contact with any body part of any person with the intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.  The term “person” includes not only the one doing the contacting but also the one being contacted.  “Contact” means intentional touching, either directly or through clothing.

Familial Relationship.

The term “familial relationship” means an evaluative relationship with one’s spouse, child, parent, sibling, or anyone qualifying as a “dependent” under the Internal Revenue Code.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

The University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point has only limited authority to regulate the private lives of its employees and students.  The University has even less interest in formalizing regulations concerning the private lives of its employees and students, except insofar as the University has a duty to protect the rights of employees and students and to define professional/ethical standards for its employees.

The University also recognizes that all individuals entering into consensual relationships must accept responsibility for their actions.

Nonetheless, certain consensual relationships are of concern to the University.

Consensual relationships of concern to the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point are those sexual relationships in which the parties appear to have consented, but where there is a definite power differential between the parties and where there is the appearance of bias on the part of an instructor or supervisor.

Codes of ethics for most professional associations forbid improper professional-client relationships.  University policy and general ethical principles preclude professional individuals from evaluating the work or academic performance, or from making hiring, salary or similar financial decisions concerning family members.  The same principles apply to romantic/sexual relationships, and require, at a minimum, that appropriate arrangements be made for objective decision-making with regard to the student, subordinate, or prospective employee.

RELATIONSHIPS AND CORRESPONDING REGULATIONS.

Consensual Sexual Relationships with a Student in One’s Class.

These relationships with a non-spousal student in an instructor’s class are not permitted.  Violation of this regulation will subject an instructor to appropriate disciplinary action by the Vice Chancellor, including, but not limited to, reprimand, suspension, or dismissal.  The University feels that the instructor/student relationship is one where a great fiduciary duty is imposed upon the instructor (one which is equivalent to doctor/patient or attorney/client) and where this prohibition is as appropriate as the prohibition imposed in other professions.

Consensual Sexual Relationships with a Student Not in One’s Class.

These relationships are often problematic and should be avoided.  The potential conflict of interest, bias, power differential, and appearance of impropriety problems are obvious.  Further, there is the possibility that the student may subsequently enroll in the instructor’s class, resulting in the difficult choice of putting the relationship on hold or facing disciplinary action.

Consensual Sexual Relationships with an Employee under One’s Supervision.

These relationships are of concern to the University (and all other employers) because of conflict of interest and abuse of power differential problems.  If such a situation develops, the supervisor should work with his or her supervisor to remedy the problem (e.g. by having one or both of the couple transferred.).

Familial Relationships.

The situation where one is in an evaluative position (such as a supervisor or instructor) with a family member is to be avoided if at all possible.  The supervisor or instructor must consult with his or her dean/chair/supervisor before accepting such a responsibility.  Together they should act to avoid the situation (e.g. by transferring an employee, having a student take another section of a course or take the course by independent study, correspondence, etc.).

SEXUAL HARASSMENT POLICY STATEMENT

PURPOSE. 

Sexual harassment is recognized as a violation of civil rights laws, U.S. Equal Opportunity Commission Rules and by the civil law courts.  The University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point is committed to providing its faculty, staff, and students with a sexual harassment-free environment.

The Chancellor, the Common Council, and the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System approved the following policy statement:

Sexual harassment is impermissible and unprofessional conduct, subject to disciplinary action in accordance with applicable due process requirements, including, but not limited to reprimand, temporary suspension, expulsion, or discharge of the harassing individual.

DEFINITION. 

Sexual harassment is defined as unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature when

• submission to such conduct is made either as an implicit or explicit condition of an individual’s employment, career advancement, grades, or academic achievement; or
• submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment or academic decisions affecting that individual; or
• such conduct has the purpose or effect of substantially interfering with an individual’s academic or work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.

COMPLAINTS. 

Persons wishing to file a complaint alleging sexual harassment are advised to lodge their complaint with the Special Assistant to the Chancellor for Affirmative Action.

Complaints alleging sexual harassment may also be lodged with the chancellor or provost, or any vice chancellor, dean, executive director, director of a unit, or department chairperson.

DISCRIMINATION-FREE ENVIRONMENT POLICY

PURPOSE. 

UWSP will:

• foster an environment of respect for the dignity and worth of all students, employees, and guests of the University:
• provide an environment which is conducive to the free and open exchange of ideas; and
• strive to eliminate bias, prejudice, discrimination, and harassment in all forms and manifestations.

DISCRIMINATION. 

Discrimination based on an individual’s race, gender religion, color, creed, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, national origin, ancestry, age, marital status, pregnancy, or parental status is demeaning to all students, employees, and guests; impairs the process of education; and violates individual rights.

COMPLAINTS. 

Students, faculty, academic staff, university staff, prospective employees, prospective students, or visitors who believe they have been the target of discrimination on the basis of race, gender, religion, color, creed, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, national origin, ancestry, age, marital status, pregnancy, or parental status in employment or as a UWSP student should report it to the Special Assistant to the Chancellor for Affirmative Action/Equity–Room 210, Main Building, ext. 2002– (within 300 days of the alleged violation) for action under Section 36.12 (1), Wis. Stats., and Title IX of the Education Act, 1972.

Complaints alleging discrimination or harassment may also be lodged with the chancellor or provost, or any vice chancellor, dean, executive director, director of a unit, or department chairperson.  These individuals and campus service providers (i.e., Counseling Center personnel, Health Service care providers, Residence Hall Directors) should normally refer complainants to the Affirmative Action Office for resolution.

EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMMING. 

To promote UWSP’s goal of creating a discrimination-free educational environment, the chairperson of the Affirmative Action Committee shall annually appoint a nine-member subcommittee for educational programming on discriminatory harassment.

Membership.

• Three members, at least two of whom shall be university staff, shall be members of the Affirmative Action Committee;
• three members shall be members of the University Affairs Committee; and
• three student members shall be appointed by the Student Government Association.

The Affirmative Action Director or a designee shall serve as a consultant to the subcommittee.

Duties. 

The subcommittee shall recommend educational programs for employees and students on:

• the nature of sexual and discriminatory harassment;
• means of working to eliminate sexual and discriminatory harassment;
• ways to increase sensitivity to harassment; and
• methods of publicizing the procedures to combat and eliminate sexual and discriminatory harassment on the campus.

PUBLICATION. 

This policy shall be included in the Community Rights and Responsibilities booklet and the University Handbook.

INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN SUBJECTS

PURPOSE

The Institutional Review Board is established as an independent peer group to advise the Chancellor in the planning, evaluation, implementation and coordination of UWSP’s programs concerning research on human subjects as well as review all human subjects research conducted at UWSP. The IRB has the authority to review, approve, disapprove, or require changes for approval in research activities involving human subjects.

RESPONSIBILITIES

The Board shall review all research involving human subjects, whether funded or not, to insure compliance with Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Guidelines on Research Involving Human Beings (45 CFR 46), and UW System principles concerning research on human beings as subjects.

MEMBERSHIP

The Board shall consist of at least seven persons appointed by the Vice Chancellor.  At least three of the members shall have experience conducting human subjects research.   At least one member of the board will be a community representative with no formal connection to the university.

MEETINGS

1. The Board will be scheduled to meet on a regular basis at least monthly during the academic year to transact business.  Unless otherwise provided, meetings will be conducted according to the current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order.  Regularly scheduled meetings may be canceled if there is no business.
2. An agenda and accompanying review materials will be distributed to Board members within the week preceding the meeting.
3. Principal investigators, or their designated representatives, may be present during the meeting to provide additional information or to answer questions at the time the protocol is reviewed.  Visitors may speak at Board meetings after recognition by the chairperson or upon request of a Board member.

QUORUM

A quorum of the Board will consist of a majority of the membership.

OFFICERS AND MINUTES

1. The chairperson of the board is appointed by the Vice Chancellor.   The chairperson will be responsible for communicating official actions of the Board to appropriate individuals and will preside over Board meetings.  In the absence of the chairperson, a designated member of the board will perform these functions.
2. An official record of each meeting will be maintained.  The official minutes will reflect the attendance, motions of the Board, and votes, noting negative votes and abstentions.  The official minutes will include any statement members of the Board may wish to be officially recorded.  A copy of the minutes shall be forwarded to the Vice Chancellor and to University Archives.  Additional copies will be forwarded to interested parties upon request.  The official minutes will be subject to correction and/or approval and the original of all records will be retired to the University Archives at the conclusion of each academic year.

VOTING

1. Except for cases covered in (2) below, all motions must receive a number of affirmative votes equal to the legal quorum for adoption.  The chairperson is eligible to vote on all matters, except as provided in (4) below.
2. Voting will take place in Board meetings by those members present.  Because of the importance of discussion in the Board’s review and approval processes, absentee votes may not be taken.  Any Board member who anticipates being absent from a meeting and who wishes to participate in voting on a given protocol may request in writing to the chairperson in advance of the meeting that consideration of the protocol be deferred in accordance with (3) below.  Any member who anticipates being absent from a meeting may submit written information to be presented at the meeting on protocol(s) for the Board to consider in its review of the protocol(s).
3. Any member of the Board, on any given motion, may request that the protocol being voted on be deferred for consideration at a special meeting or at the next regularly scheduled Board meeting.  Members will be sent a special notice informing them of the deferral action, and the date, place, and time of the meeting for reconsideration.  Deferral for reconsideration can be made only once for each protocol.
4. No member of the Board shall be involved in either the initial or continuing review or approval of an activity in which the member has a conflicting interest except to provide information requested by the Board.  A conflict of interest exists if a person (i) is written into the proposal or project as a participant or (ii) signs the proposal transmittal form in a capacity other than a representative of the Chancellor or Board of Regents.  Any member may voluntarily abstain from voting due to a conflict of interest even if the member does not fall within these definitional categories of “conflict of interest.”
5. All meetings shall comply with the provisions of the Open Meeting Law, Sections 19.81-19.98, Wisconsin Statutes.

WORKPLACE VIOLENCE 

REPORTING GUIDELINES

Acts of violence are prohibited by law. The University of Wisconsin - Stevens Point is committed to providing faculty, staff and students with an environment that is safe, secure and free from violence, and other forms of aggressive behavior; one which is based upon civility, respect and the free expression of ideas.

To promote an atmosphere that encourages learning and productive employment, quick responsive action will be taken if violence or the threat of violence arises. This includes any direct, conditional or implied threat, intentional act, or other conduct that reasonably arouses fear, hostility, intimidation or the apprehension of harm.

Violence and threats of violence are always prohibited on campus, especially whenever:

• the act, behavior, or communication is abusive and could cause another person physical, emotional, or psychological harm;
• the act, behavior, or communication damages or threatens to damage property of the university or of an individual.

All members of the university community should report any act of violence, potential violence, threatening, aggressive or disruptive behavior to a supervisor, department chair, Student Rights and Responsibilities Office (if students are involved), the Personnel Office or Protective Services.  These resource people can help ensure that your concerns are properly reported and investigated. The employee who receives such a report is obligated to channel the complaint through the appropriate university procedures.

Examples of campus violence include, but are not limited to:

• threats of harm to a person or their property;
• intentional damage to university or private property;
• brandishing a weapon or an object that appears to be a weapon;
• threatening or directing abusive language toward another person;
• stalking as defined by Wisconsin statute;
• physical attacks on another person such as slapping, punching, pushing or intimidating gestures;
• domestic conflicts that extend into the workplace.

Any person who exhibits violent, aggressive or threatening behavior will be held accountable for their actions under university policy and rules, as well as local, state and federal laws.  Violators are subject to disciplinary action, including suspension or dismissal, and may be subject to criminal prosecution.

This policy does not replace any current disciplinary or formal grievance process established in agreements with collective bargaining units and governance groups.  Nor does the use of this process cause an employee to forfeit the right to file a grievance.  If an employee is represented by a bargaining unit, he/she may request the assistance of a union representative at any step in this process.

REPORTING PROCEDURES

Employee Responsibilities:

• Remove yourself from the threat as soon as possible.
• Contact Protective Services at ext. 3456 if there is a threat of danger of physical violence.
• Call 911 if there is a medical emergency.
• Immediately notify your supervisor, department chair, dean, or residence hall director if you are a victim of, or a witness to, an act of violence or other violation(s) of this policy.
• Document the incident as soon as possible.

Department Responsibilities:

• Contact Protective Services at ext. 3456 if there is a threat of danger or physical violence.
• Call 911 if there is a medical emergency.
• Obtain written statements from witnesses.
• Investigate or arrange to investigate the complaint.
• Interview witnesses, gather facts, and assess the situation.
• Determine if the complaint can be resolved within the unit without disciplinary action or if other action should be taken.
• If resolved within the unit, take whatever action is deemed appropriate.
• If disciplinary or other action is considered, confer with the Personnel Office, the appropriate division head, or the Student Rights and Responsibilities Office (if students are involved) to determine the appropriate course of action.

RESEARCH MISCONDUCT POLICY

STANDARDS OF CONDUCT

Researchers are expected to retain appropriate documentation for their research and adhere to accepted ethical standards appropriate to their academic discipline.

DEFINITION OF RESEARCH MISCONDUCT

Misconduct is intentional falsification of data, plagiarism, or other practices that deviate from common research practice within the academic community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research.  Honest errors and differences in interpretation of data are not considered misconduct.  Misconduct is prohibited at UWSP, and may be cause for discipline or dismissal.

REPORT OF RESEARCH MISCONDUCT

Research collaborators, colleagues, and anyone who has reason to believe that research misconduct has occurred has the responsibility of reporting the misconduct.  Retaliation because of good faith reporting of misconduct is prohibited.  However, individuals found to have brought allegations of a frivolous or malicious nature shall be subject to the same range of disciplinary action as individuals found guilty of violating this policy.

PROCEDURE FOR PROCESSING RESEARCH MISCONDUCT ALLEGATIONS

1. Allegations shall be reported in writing to the dean of the appropriate college.  The accused individual shall be informed in writing by the dean within 10 days (a) what allegations have been made, (b) the identity of the accuser, and (c) that an initial inquiry into the allegations may result in a subsequent investigation.
2. The dean of the college shall undertake a prompt and discreet inquiry.  All matters pertaining to the inquiry shall be kept in strict confidence.  The inquiry consists of information gathering and preliminary fact-finding to determine whether a more extensive investigation is warranted.  The inquiry shall be completed within 60 days from the time the written allegations were received by the dean.
3. If the inquiry concludes that the allegation of misconduct is unsubstantiated, and an investigation is not warranted, then the reasons and supporting documentation for this conclusion shall be reported to the Chancellor.  If the Chancellor concurs with the conclusion that an investigation is not warranted, then no further action shall be taken in the matter.  The conclusion of the dean and Chancellor, as well as all supporting documentation from the inquiry, shall be recorded and the record maintained confidentially for a period of three years following termination of the inquiry.
4. If the inquiry finds reasonable cause to believe the allegations are neither frivolous nor misguided, the individual against whom the allegation was made shall be provided a copy of the report of the dean’s inquiry.  The matter shall then be referred to an ad hoc committee appointed by the dean for formal investigation.  Committee members shall be individuals who are knowledgeable in the researcher’s area of study, but who are not involved with the research in question nor in competition with the accused.  It may be advisable in certain situations to invite researchers from other institutions to participate in the investigation.  The investigation shall be initiated within 30 days of the completion of the inquiry.  If the research in question has been supported by extramural funds, the institution may be required to notify the funding agency that a formal investigation is underway.

1. The ad hoc committee shall determine whether misconduct has occurred and assess its extent and consequences.
2. If the ad hoc committee finds the charges to be true, then the dean shall follow normal governance procedures (UWSP Chapters 4, 6, 11, or 13) to invoke an appropriate penalty, ranging from reprimand to dismissal.
3. A copy of the committee’s report shall be provided to the individual under investigation.  The dean shall afford the individual under investigation an opportunity to discuss the matter with the committee and himself/herself prior to any action taken under Section 4(B) above.  The individual under investigation may reply in writing to the Committee.  Any reply will be appended to the committee report.
4. Appropriate agencies and journals shall be notified by the Office of Academic Affairs in the event that misconduct is verified by the ad hoc committee.
5. If misconduct is not verified by the ad hoc committee, extensive efforts shall be made to restore the reputation of the accused individual.

FACULTY LEAVES WITHOUT PAY

DEFINITION

A leave without pay (LWOP), for the purposes of this policy, is defined to include any reduction in appointment which is requested by the individual and for which no salary is received from University of Wisconsin sources.  The leave is considered to be of a temporary nature for the purposes indicated below.  This definition does not include leaves for faculty development, illness, sabbatical purposes, or political activity.

POLICIES GOVERNING ALL LWOP

Office Space

Faculty members on leave are entitled to office space in their departments as long as such space is available.  If a temporary replacement is hired for a faculty member on leave and there is no extra office space available in the department, then the member on leave may be required to relinquish his/her office.

Use of Facilities

Faculty members on leave may use University facilities and equipment related to their academic field and their usual University responsibilities.  If shortages of facilities or equipment arise, faculty members actively teaching in the given semester have priority over those on leave of absence.

Duration

Normally, the maximum length of time for which a leave will be granted is one year.  The leave may be renewed annually, but only with the approval of the department.

Procedures and Dates for Request and Renewal of Leaves

Normally requests for, and renewal of, leaves that involve a faculty member’s return to formal schooling to obtain an advanced degree should be submitted by March 1 for the following academic year.   Requests for, and renewal of, all other leaves should be submitted by May 1 for the following academic year, and October 1 for the second semester.  Consideration of all leaves and renewals shall begin at the department level.

TYPES OF LEAVES AND ASSOCIATED POLICIES

Full Leaves

Full leaves entail a total severance of all duties for a period of not less than one semester.

Individuals on full leaves for one semester or longer may not be members of the Common Council nor may they serve on Common Council committees.

Individuals on full leaves may participate in departmental governance as specified by the department’s by-laws, so long as they comply with appropriate provisions of the statutes of the State of Wisconsin.

Education Leaves

These leaves may be requested by individuals not holding the terminal degree for time to pursue a terminal degree at a recognized institution of higher education within a specified program.

Salary:  The individual will not be advanced a year on the salary schedule, but may opt to be considered for merit.

Seniority:  Such leaves shall not count toward seniority under UWSP 5.08.

Professional Leaves

These leaves may only be granted with the concurrence of the department.  They are defined as leaves for any purpose related to an individual’s duties at the University.  They may include, but are not limited to: teaching at another institution; research at another institution; work outside an educational institution related to duties at UWSP; work not clearly related to duties at UWSP but deemed appropriate by the department.

Salary:  The individual will be advanced one year on the salary schedule, and may opt to be considered for merit.

Seniority:  Such leaves shall count toward seniority under UWSP 5.08.

Non-Professional Leaves

Persons may be granted LWOP upon recommendation of their department for purposes not related to their employment at UWSP or to their professional duties.  Persons on non-professional LWOP do not advance in either seniority or on the salary schedule during the period on leave but may opt to be considered for merit.

Partial Leaves

A person on partial leave remains on campus during part of the leave period and participates in the normal activities associated with full-time employment, though to a lesser extent.  Consequently, no special policies need apply.

Salary:  The individual on partial leave shall advance one full year on the salary schedule while on partial leave.

Seniority:  Covered by UWSP 5.08(2).

Governance:  The individual on partial leave shall continue to have the same rights and responsibilities to both his/her department and to the University in governance matters.

HAYES-HILL TITLING ADVISORY COMMITTEE OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES & POLICIES

NOTE.  This document has been put into a format similar to the rest of the Handbook.  With the exception of the section on appeals, modified to conform to existing grievance procedures and policies, no other changes were made from the original, copies of which are available from the Personnel Office.

GENERAL INFORMATION.

Charge and Role. 

The Hayes-Hill Titling Advisory Committee (HHTAC) is appointed by the Chancellor.  HHTAC advises the Chancellor and the Cabinet on the ongoing administration of the Hayes-Hill personnel system, including review of

• requests for new positions to ensure assignment of the appropriate title and salary grade;
• requests to upgrade positions or promote academic staff to ensure that Hayes-Hill requirements are met; and
• requests to move filled or vacant positions from university staff to academic staff appointment and from academic staff to university staff appointment to ensure that provisions of Unclassified Personnel Guideline #7, “Designation of Positions as ‘Academic Staff’ Under s. 36.09, Wis. Stats., UWS 9-14, Wis. Admin.  Code and Regent Policy Document 75-3,” are met.

A primary goal of HHTAC is to ensure that the system is applied fairly and equitably across the campus. 

Membership.

• The Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and the Vice Chancellors for Business Affairs, and Student Affairs shall each recommend at least one individual to the Chancellor to serve on HHTAC; in addition, the Academic Staff Council shall recommend at least one individual to the Chancellor.
• The Chancellor will appoint at least one person for each cabinet-level division from among those recommended by the respective cabinet officers, and one from among those recommended by the Academic Staff Council.  The Affirmative Action Officer or his/her designee will also be a member of the committee.  HHTAC will elect its chair from among its members.
• No member of HHTAC may also be a member of the Academic Staff Mediation Subcommittee or the Faculty Mediation Subcommittee.
• All members of HHTAC serve as resource personnel; persons with any questions related to Hayes-Hill matters are invited and encouraged to contact one of the members for consultation.

Meetings.

• All meetings of the HHTAC shall conform to the provisions of 19.81-19.98 of the Wisconsin Statutes (1985-86), the Open Meetings Law, as appropriate.
• Regularly scheduled meetings are normally held twice each month.  Dates, time and location of meetings are available from any committee member.
• Minutes shall be distributed to all members of HHTAC, the Chancellor, the members of the Academic Staff Council, the Special Assistant to the Chancellor for Affirmative Action, and anyone requesting a copy.
• Individuals have the right of access to all materials submitted to HHTAC except as otherwise provided by law to protect privacy rights of employees.

Scope of Responsibility. 

For individuals or positions covered by Hayes-Hill categories, which includes all academic staff and some faculty, personnel actions involving

• titling for a new position prior to announcing the position;
• titling for a replacement position prior to announcing the position;
• changes in position description which might cause change in Hayes-Hill titling;
• assignment of title or changes in title;
• assignment of grade or changes in grade; and
• promotion or demotion

must be presented to the HHTAC for review and response before proceeding.

PROCEDURES AND POLICIES.

New and Replacement Positions.

Submittal Procedure.

• Copies of position description questionnaires [a sample, Appendix A of the original HHTAC document, may be obtained from the Personnel Office] for new positions, and for replacement positions should be submitted to HHTAC for assignment of title, grade, and salary range minimum and maximum at least thirty days prior to advertising the position.

To help expedite procedures, units may submit materials required by HHTAC and materials required by the Affirmative Action Office to both simultaneously, simply omitting the Hayes-Hill title in the materials submitted to AAO and providing it after HHTAC action.

• Unit supervisors submitting position description questionnaires are asked to include an organizational chart of the unit with the request, and shall include a recommended title or titles.

The page asking for recommended title added to the position description questionnaire and used at UWSP during the initial campus Hayes-Hill titling implementation will continue to be used with questionnaires for all future actions [a sample, Appendix B of the original HHTAC document, may be obtained from the Personnel Office].

• Where there may be questions concerning whether a change in the position description is significant and might warrant a change in Hayes-Hill title, supervisors are urged to contact any member of HHTAC for consultation.

• For all actions, completed position description questionnaires shall be sent to the Chair of HHTAC.  The Chair will place items on the HHTAC meeting agenda.

Position Description Questionnaire Review Procedure.

• Normally, HHTAC will review Position Description Questionnaires at a regularly scheduled meeting and within thirty days of their receipt.
• HHTAC will review the questionnaire and compare the duties and responsibilities to the titling manual.  HHTAC will conduct a point count for positions that require it.

• Where HHTAC agrees with a recommended title or action, its response will be recorded in the HHTAC minutes and, a notice of HHTAC action shall be sent to all those signing-off on items submitted to HHTAC as well as to the regular distribution.
• Where HHTAC disagrees with a recommended title or action, the Chairperson of HHTAC or a designee will contact both the individual involved and the immediate supervisor of the position to attempt to reconcile differences.

• Where resolution occurs, HHTAC’s response will be recorded in the HHTAC minutes and, a notice of HHTAC action shall be sent to all those signing-off on items submitted to HHTAC as well as to the regular distribution.
• Where such informal contact does not lead to resolution, both the individual and the supervisor of the position shall be invited to attend an HHTAC meeting for reconsideration.

• Where resolution occurs, HHTAC’s response will be recorded in the HHTAC minutes and, a notice of HHTAC action shall be sent to all those signing-off on items submitted to HHTAC as well as to the regular distribution.
• If differences remain, HHTAC shall forward its recommendation to the appropriate administrative officer, and to the Chancellor.

If the supervisor of the position disagrees with HHTAC’s recommended title he/she can appeal to the Chancellor who shall make a final decision.

• For positions requiring a point count for titling, members of HHTAC will perform a point count of the position at a regularly scheduled meeting.

• Once consensus is reached, the Chair will notify the Supervisor in writing of the point count and the impact on the employees title and grade.  The supervisor will be asked to share that information with the employee.
• If the supervisor and employee agree with the point count results and the final titling decision may be made locally (i.e. does not need UW-System approval), HHTAC’s decision is communicated to all affected parties.
• If the supervisor and/or employee disagree with the point count, they will be invited to meet with HHTAC to review the point count to insure that it accurately reflects the position.
• If agreement cannot be reached on a titling decision that may be made locally, the supervisor or employee may appeal to the Chancellor, who shall make a final decision.
• When the final decision must be made by UW System personnel, the returned decision is communicated by the chair of HHTAC to all parties.
• If the supervisor or employee disagree with the point count result of a titling decision, made by UW System Personnel, either or both may appeal to the Associate Vice President - Office of Human Resources.

Promotion. 

Role and Responsibility. 

With regard to promotion, the function of HHTAC is to review materials prior to final approval for promotion in the professional and program manager titles to ensure that Hayes-Hill criteria have been met.

Promotion Criteria

Professional Titles - (A recruitment is not necessary in such actions.)

Submittal Procedure

It is the responsibility of the employee to understand how and when a promotion may be appropriate and to initiate the process.  As part of the annual and supplemental reviews, the employee is encouraged to clarify with their immediate supervisor whether the UW-System and institutional criteria for promotion have been met.  If the employee has additional questions on promotions, they are encouraged to speak with the Associate Vice Chancellor for Personnel and Budget, Director of Personnel Services and/or members of HHTAC.

It is the employee’s responsibility to request, in writing, recommendation(s) supporting their promotion from their immediate supervisor and any other officer in the line preceding the appropriate Cabinet Officer.

Policy in the University Handbook on academic staff promotions (Chapter 1, “Primary Unclassified Personnel Policies and Procedures”, Section 4, “Implementation Procedures and Guidelines for Personnel Rules and Policies for Academic Staff”) provides that a supervisor who receives a request for promotion shall:

• “review the request and accompanying materials within 15 days of receipt of the request;
• within 20 days of receipt of the request, afford the academic staff member making the request an opportunity to present additional materials or oral testimony on the academic staff member’s behalf;
• act on the request in a reasonable time and shall provide written notification of decision, which shall normally be within 15 days of the meeting with the academic staff member (or from the date of informing the academic staff member of the opportunity if the academic staff member decides not to meet with the supervisor) but may be up to 90 days after receipt of the request if the supervisor decides that an additional performance review involving a questionnaire is appropriate.”

The employee must file a request for promotion with their Cabinet Officer (i.e. Provost/Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, Vice Chancellor for Business Affairs, Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs, and with HHTAC through its Secretary, the Director of Personnel Services.  If possible, recommendations from the immediate supervisor and any other officer in the line preceding the appropriate Cabinet Officer should accompany the request for promotion.

Application Deadline

To be considered for promotion on July 1, the employee must submit their request to the appropriate Cabinet Officer and HHTAC by February 1.

If the supervisor(s) recommendations do not accompany the employee’s request for consideration of promotion and are not received by February 15, the HHTAC’s Secretary will request a recommendation from the supervisor(s) by March 1. 

Requests for consideration of promotion will not be reviewed in that cycle if they are received by the officials identified above after February 1 OR if the file, though received by February 1, does not have recommendations from the immediate supervisor as well as any other officer in the line preceding the appropriate Cabinet Officer by March 1.

Notification Date

By April 1, the Chancellor and appropriate Cabinet Officer will notify the employee as well as the appropriate supervisor(s) of the decision on promotion.

Effective Date

Promotions become effective on July 1 of the calendar year in which promotion was approved by the appropriate Cabinet Officer and Chancellor.

Minimum Years of Service

No promotion is acquired solely because of years of service.  An employee is first eligible for consideration for promotion from Associate to No Prefix when 1.5 years of experience have been accumulated by January 1 in the year application for promotion is submitted. An employee is first eligible for consideration for promotion from No Prefix to Senior when 6.5 years of experience have been accumulated by January 1 in the year application for promotion is submitted.

Minimum Performance Criteria

For Promotion from Associate to No Prefix:

• Positive annual and supplemental evaluations.  Material submitted for promotion must include results of at least one annual evaluation and a supplemental evaluation completed within the past 12 months.
• The UW SYSTEM UNCLASSIFIED TITLE DEFINITIONS BOOK (1/1/94) provides that an employee at the No Prefix level “… performs those duties and responsibilities expected of a fully competent professional.  Typically such duties and responsibilities require knowledge and skills gained only through considerable experience.  A fully competent professional works independently in applying the approaches, methods and techniques of his or her profession, and is active in developing or assisting in the development of new approaches to resolving problems.” (page 56)

For Promotion from No Prefix to Senior:

• Positive annual and supplemental evaluations. Material submitted for promotion must include results of annual evaluations and a supplemental evaluation completed within the past 12 months.
• The UW SYSTEM UNCLASSIFIED TITLE DEFINITIONS BOOK (1/1/94) provides that an employee at the Senior level “… performs program functions at a level of proficiency typically requiring extensive experience (e.g. a minimum of at least seven years of professional experience) and advanced knowledge and skills.  At this level, the professional has a consistent record of exemplary performance.  A Senior professional is expected to develop new approaches, methods or techniques to resolve problems with little or no expert guidance and to cope independently with new, unexpected or complex situations.  At this level, a professional can be expected to guide or train other professionals or to oversee their work.” (page 56)

For Promotion from Senior to Distinguished:

• Positive annual and supplemental evaluations. Material submitted for promotion must include results of annual evaluations and a supplemental evaluation completed within the past 12 months.
• The REVIEW PROCESS FOR CANDIDATES FOR THE DISTINGUISHED PREFIX - University of Wisconsin - Stevens Point (11-18-92) provides the criteria an employee must meet for movement to this prefix/title.
• Promotion to this level is not part of a natural career progression track.

A copy of the UW SYSTEM UNCLASSIFIED TITLE DEFINITIONS BOOK (1/1/94) and REVIEW PROCESS FOR CANDIDATES FOR THE DISTINGUISHED PREFIX - University of Wisconsin - Stevens Point (11-18-92) are available from HHTAC committee members or the Reserve Desk of the University Library.

Salary Increases

For promotion from Associate to No Prefix

• The salary increase shall move the employee’s base salary up to the minimum of the pay grade to which the employee is promoted or 7% of the employee’s current base salary, whichever is greater, on the effective date of the promotion. 
• A salary increase beyond 7%, other than to the minimum of a pay grade, shall require approval of the Chancellor.

For promotion from No Prefix to Senior

• The salary increase shall move the employee’s base salary up to the minimum of the pay grade to which the employee is promoted or 9% of the employee’s current base salary, whichever is greater, on the effective date of the promotion.
• A salary increase beyond 9%, other than to the minimum of a pay grade, shall require approval of the Chancellor.

Bi-annual salary increase review

• The percentage increase in base salary associated with promotion to No Prefix and to Senior will be reviewed in January of each odd-numbered year.  Any recommendations for change will be made jointly by HHTAC and the Academic Staff Council and forwarded to the Chancellor for approval with an effective date of July 1 of that calendar year.

Program Manager Titles - (A recruitment is not necessary in such actions.)

Assignment to a Level

Program Manager positions are assigned to one of three levels (I, II or III).  The level assigned to a particular position is based upon application of the title evaluation rating system (i.e. point count of the position description).  It is not determined on the basis of minimum experience or performance level of the employee in the position.

Effective Date

The effective date for a promotion in the Program Manager titles is the first of the month prior to the date HHTAC receives the request and PDQ for review (e.g., a request received on March 29 would be effective on March 1, if approved).

Salary Increases

Promotion in the Program Manager titles will result in a base pay increase of no less than 5% and no more than 10% on the effective date as defined in b. above, unless a 10% increase does not reach the minimum of the newly assigned pay grade.  Then the increase will be sufficient to achieve this requirement.

A salary increase beyond 10%, other than to the minimum of a pay grade, shall require approval of the Chancellor.

Director Titles

A move to or within the Director titles is a promotion and normally requires a recruitment.

Change of Job

A move from one job to another within the same pay grade (e.g. Academic Curator to Cartographer, Information Manager to Instructional Program Manager) is not a promotion, but requires a recruitment.

Review Procedure.

• Normally, HHTAC review will occur at a regularly scheduled meeting and within thirty days of receipt of supporting materials.
• HHTAC will compare the materials submitted by the candidate to the duties and responsibilities as defined in the current titling manual.

• Where criteria have been met, HHTAC will forward a positive recommendation to the Chancellor for final action on the promotion.
• Where criteria have not been met, a copy of the materials shall be returned to the appropriate recommender with an explanation.  A copy of the explanation shall also be sent to the individual recommended for promotion.

• Where HHTAC concludes that Hayes-Hill criteria have not been met and the individual/recommender disagree with HHTAC’s conclusion and wishes to pursue the matter, the recommender shall request reconsideration.  Normally, a request for reconsideration will include a reason and any appropriate supplementary material/s.

• Where, after receipt of a request for reconsideration and review of supplementary materials, HHTAC decides that criteria have been met, HHTAC will so note and inform the appropriate individual/recommender.  A copy of HHTAC’s recommendation will be submitted to the Chancellor for final action on the promotion.
• Where, after receipt of a request for reconsideration and review of supplementary materials, HHTAC continues to believe that criteria have not been met, HHTAC will so note and advise the recommender and the involved individual.  The chair of HHTAC will offer both parties the opportunity to meet with HHTAC to attempt to reconcile the differences that continue to exist regarding the promotion.

Appeal to the Academic Staff Mediation Subcommittee or Faculty Mediation Subcommittee.

• The individual/supervisor who is dissatisfied with HHTAC’s decision, after reconsideration, has 20 days in which to file a grievance with the Academic Staff Mediation Subcommittee.  

• Any grievance shall be filed under UWSP 13.02 and related procedures.  These materials may be found in the University Handbook.  
• The individual filing a grievance shall simultaneously send a copy of the grievance to the chairperson of HHTAC.

• Classroom teaching academic staff may elect to take grievances under 13.02 either to the Academic Staff Mediation Subcommittee or the Faculty Mediation Subcommittee, but shall have access to only one subcommittee for each case.  Regardless of which subcommittee is selected, the hearing procedures to be followed will be those for hearings under 13.02

EMERGENCY HIRING SITUATIONS. 

Titling in emergency hiring situations may be authorized by the chair of HHTAC or designee.  Report of any such actions shall be submitted to HHTAC for its information and review at its next meeting.

PROCESS FOR DESIGNATING GPR-FUNDED ACADEMIC STAFF POSITION FIXED-TERM

The following process must be followed to seek approval from Academic Staff Council to designate a GPR-funded position as fixed-term:

• Contact Academic Staff Council chair at least 2 weeks prior to the next scheduled meeting. If emergency cases arise during the summer, the employing department must contact the ASC Chair to request a meeting.  The meeting will take place as quickly as a quorum can be achieved (within a three week timeframe).
• Provide written documentation outlining the rationale for converting the position from probationary to fixed-term.  This documentation must be given to the ASC chair no later than one week prior to the meeting to discuss the request.
• Representation from the unit must attend the meeting in which the request will be discussed.  If there is currently an Academic Staff person in the position in question and their status has the potential of being changed, they will be invited to attend the meeting and will also receive all supporting documentation prior to the meeting.

If a position is approved as a fixed term position, a two-year review may be assigned to the position to re-assess the necessity for it to be fixed term.  The Academic Affairs Office, in particular the Associate Vice Chancellor for Personnel and Budget, will be responsible for notification to the department that the position must be reviewed.

STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTION - EVALUATIVE FORM

The results of this survey will be used in personnel evaluations, and to provide summary data for Student Government Association records, and will be made available to your instructor only after grades have been recorded for the course. Mark the most appropriate response to each statement in the corresponding circles to the right.

Unless you are otherwise instructed, please answer all items on a scale of 1=strongly agree to 5=strongly disagree.

ITEMS ABOUT THE STUDENT:

1. I completed all assigned tasks before coming to class.
2. I came to this course with a strong interest in learning this material.
3. I sought out the instructor when I needed help with course content.
4. I made a serious effort to attend class regularly.
5. I expect to receive the following grade in this course

1-A or Pass             2-B                3-C                4-D                5-F

6. Why did you enroll in this class?  (mark all that apply)

1-GDR/GEP  2-Required for major/minor  3-elective for major/minor  4-general elective  5-recommended by advisor  6-sounded interesting

ITEMS ABOUT THE COURSE:

7. The course objectives and requirements were clear.
8. The course materials and activities were relevant to the course objectives.
9. Based on the course objectives and requirements, the course workload was

Much too low             low                  appropriate                high                much too high

1                     2                          3                           4                           5      

10. I learned a lot in this course.
11. Overall, this was a good course.

ITEMS ABOUT THE INSTRUCTOR:

12. The instructor organized the course material well.
13. The instructor demonstrated enthusiasm for the subject matter.
14. The Instructor treated students with courtesy and respect.
15. The instructor encouraged participation in class.
16. The instructor welcomed interaction outside of class for academic support.
17. The instructor provided useful feedback on my performance.
18. Overall, the instructor taught this course effectively.

STUDENT EVALUATION OF ONLINE INSTRUCTION - EVALUATIVE FORM

The results of this survey will be used in personnel evaluations, and to provide summary data for Student Government Association records, and will be made available to your instructor only after grades have been recorded for the course. Mark the most appropriate response to each statement in the corresponding circles to the right.

Unless you are otherwise instructed, please answer all items on a scale of 1=strongly agree to 5=strongly disagree.

ITEMS ABOUT THE STUDENT:

1. I completed all assigned tasks on or before due dates.
2. I enrolled in this course with a strong interest in learning this material.
3. I contacted the instructor when I needed help with course content.
4. I kept up with all assigned readings and activities.
5. I expect to receive the following grade in this course

1-A or Pass             2-B                3-C                4-D                5-F

6. Why did you enroll in this class?  (mark all that apply)

1-General Degree Requirement  2-Required for major/minor  3-elective for major/minor  4-general elective  5-recommended by advisor  6-sounded interesting

ITEMS ABOUT THE COURSE:

7. The course objectives and requirements were clear.
8. The course materials and activities were relevant to the course objectives.
9. Based on the course objectives and requirements, the course workload was

Much too low             low                  appropriate                high                much too high

1                      2                         3                            4                          5

10. I learned a lot in this course.
11. Overall, this was a good course.

ITEMS ABOUT THE INSTRUCTOR:

12. The instructor prepared a well-organized online course.
13. The instructor demonstrated enthusiasm for the subject matter.
14. The instructor helped to foster mutual respect.
15. The instructor encouraged active participation in the course.
16. The instructor responded to my questions in a timely manner.
17. The instructor provided useful feedback on my performance.
18. Overall, the instructor taught this course effectively.

STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTION REPORTING FORM

Instructor’s Name________________________________________________________

Course Number    _______________  Credit Hours   ______          GDR:    Y      N                

Class Size            ______________   Responses   _________                                

Instructor’s prior experience teaching this course: _________ semesters

  *Comparable courses, using the same evaluation form, include the following:

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

STUDENT EVALUATION OF INSTRUCTION - OPTIONAL DEVELOPMENTAL FORM

· BANK OF SAMPLE STATEMENTS ·

 A-Strongly Agree       B-Agree       C-Neutral          D-Disagree        E-Strongly Disagree

INSTRUCTIONAL METHODS

1. Lectures were presented in a way that facilitated note-taking.
2. The instructor provides individual attention when needed.
3. This instructor made effective use of examples and illustrations.
4. The instructor commands the respect of students.
5. Student participation is encouraged during discussion sessions.
6. The questions asked by this instructor stimulated me to think more deeply.
7. The instructor answered questions clearly and concisely.
8. This instructor stresses conceptual understanding.
9. Abstract ideas and theories were presented in a clear manner.
10. The instructor identified the relative importance of topics covered in class.
11. This instructor can sense whether class members are following the lecture or discussion.
12. Class time is used to the maximum benefit of students.
13. The material in this course was presented objectively.
14. This instructor invites critical assessment of the ideas presented in class.
15. The instructor conveys interest and excitement in the subject matter.
16. The instructor speaks clearly and can easily be heard throughout the class.
17. Laboratory exercises helped to clarify the material presented in lecture.

COURSE OBJECTIVES, MATERIALS, AND ORGANIZATION

18. The principal objectives of the course were clearly presented by the instructor.
19. This course met the objectives outlined by the instructor.
20. The course requirements were challenging without being excessively difficult.
21. The instructor used visual aids effectively in this course.
22. The textbook was helpful in meeting course objectives.
23. Laboratory or studio facilities were adequate for the tasks required.
24. The instructor suggests appropriate references for further study.
25. Sufficient time was allotted by the instructor to meet course objectives.
26. Course content matched the course objectives well.
27. The material presented seemed well planned and organized.

ASSIGNMENTS, EXAMINATIONS, AND GRADING

28. The assignments appeared to promote course objectives.
29. The instructor provides assignments which increase understanding of the subject matter.
30. I regularly completed the assignments in this course.
31. Directions and materials provided by the instructor adequately prepared me for assignments.
32. Course exams demanded understanding rather than rote memorization.
33. Examination questions were clearly worded.
34. The number of examinations ensured a fair evaluation.
35. Tests could be completed in the allotted time.
36. Students were given sufficient notice of tests and quizzes.
37. Tests and assignments were graded and returned within a reasonable period of time.
38. Evaluation in this class was directly related to the course objectives.
39. The grading standards seemed fair and reasonable from my perspective.

CLASSROOM CLIMATE AND FACULTY CHARACTERISTICS

40. Students were encouraged to think for themselves.
41. This instructor treats students with courtesy and respect.
42. The instructor was able to develop good rapport with the students.
43. Students felt free to ask questions and express their ideas.
44. My interest in the subject has increased as a result of this instructor.
45. Regular attendance at class was necessary in order to learn the required material.
46. This instructor appears to understand the academic difficulties experienced by students.
47. The instructor made an effort to know students as individuals.
48. This instructor is clearly enthusiastic about teaching.
49. The instructor keeps appointments with students, including scheduled office hours.

· BANK OF SAMPLE OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS ·

1. What were some of the strengths of the instructor?
2. What were some of the weaknesses of the instructor?
3. Is there something that you believe the instructor has done especially well in this course?
4. Is there something that you believe the instructor might have done better?
5. What surprised you most about the course?
6. What were some of the strengths of the course?
7. What were some of the weaknesses of the course?
8. How much intellectual discipline was required in this course?
9. Compare the level of difficulty of this course to others you have had.
10. How much effort have you put into this course compared to other students in the class?
11. In your opinion, how well did the course accomplish its objectives?
12. What was the most significant thing that you did to help fulfill the course objectives?
13. Describe the most significant thing the instructor did to help fulfill the course objectives.
14. Was there a significant factor that interfered with your ability to fulfill the course objectives?
15. Indicate what grade you feel you earned in this course and the reasons for the grade you select.
16. Describe your personal attitude toward this course.

PROCEDURES FOR THE EVALUATION OF NON-INSTRUCTIONAL FACULTY AND CATEGORY A AND C ACADEMIC STAFF

At the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point we evaluate our employees’ performance for five reasons:

1. To enable you to fully understand what’s expected of you,
2. To help you assess the quality of your past work,
3. To give you constructive feedback from those with whom you work,
4. To gain information we may use to make accurate personnel decisions on such        matters as promotion and retention, and,
5. To encourage you to do your best work.

ANNUAL REVIEW PROCEDURE for academic staff employees who are more than 10% of the calendar year

Each year, employee performance is evaluated by the person to whom the employee reports according to the following procedure:

SUPPLEMENTAL REVIEW PROCEDURE FOR ACADEMIC STAFF EMPLOYEES WHO ARE MORE THAN 10% OF THE CALENDAR YEAR

In the second and fifth years of employment and every fifth year after that, in addition to the annual review, employees take part in a special evaluation program that has two elements, a questionnaire survey and a self-evaluation instrument according to this procedure:

REVIEW POLICY FOR POSITIONS THAT ARE LESS THAN 10% OF THE CALENDAR YEAR

Any Academic Staff A or C position that is less than 10% of the calendar year, i.e. less than 5.2 weeks or 208 hours per calendar year, is not required to complete an annual review and/or supplemental review unless requested by the employee.

SURVEY DEVELOPMENT PROCEDURE FOR SUPPLEMENTAL REVIEW

The process for collection of data is designed to:  (1) allow for a review which is directly tied to the job description of the individual being evaluated and (2) to provide data, which, in the opinion of the employee being reviewed and the person to whom the employee reports, will contribute to the development of the employee.  In all cases, confidentiality will be maintained.  There are 3 mandatory, 1 optional components involved in this process:

SAMPLE SURVEY

Employee should construct individual survey according to guidelines on previous pages.  Paper surveys or electronic surveys may be used.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

Attached is a job description for the position held by the person being evaluated.  Please consider this carefully and evaluate the individual’s performance in relationship to this description.

DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONS

Please provide the following information in order to provide a context within which the evaluation data can be interpreted.  Please circle the number that best indicates your knowledge of the person you are evaluating.

1 =    I have regular and frequent contact with this person, know and understand the position very well, and am very familiar with the person’s performance.

2 =    I have regular contact with the person being evaluated and am aware of the person’s job performance.

3 =    I have occasional contact with the person being evaluated and have some

         knowledge of the person’s job performance.

4 =    I know the person, but I am not knowledgeable about the position.  My evaluation is based upon the impression I have of the individual as a person.

5 =    I know who this person is, but not personally.  My evaluation is based upon my

         contacts with the office in which the person works and how well it functions.

6 =    I have contact with this person only through UWSP committees outside his/her unit.

7 =    I have little or no contact with this person and/or office, and, therefore, believe I am unqualified to offer an evaluation.

GENERAL QUESTIONS

Based upon the job description of the individual being evaluated, answer each of the following questions to the best of your knowledge.  In the space that follows each item, please provide narrative comments that support your assessment.  The comments that you add will contribute substantially to the development of the individual.

Use the following scale in completing your assessment:

1. Strongly Agree
2. Agree
3. Neutral
4. Disagree
5. Strongly Disagree

Note:  please leave blank any questions for which you feel you do not have sufficient information to form an opinion.

This individual:

1. Is competent in dealing with personnel matters.  _____

               Comments:

2. Provides strong leadership for the unit.  _____

              Comments:

3. Communicates information accurately and clearly.  _____

               Comments:

4. Performs administrative tasks efficiently.  _____

              Comments:

5. In general, is an effective administrator.  _____

               Comments:

OPTIONAL QUESTIONS

Please provide your assessment of the performance of this individual as it relates to the criteria listed below.  In the space at the conclusion of this list, write any comments that you believe to be appropriate.

Use the following scale in completing your assessment:

1. Strongly Agree
2. Agree
3. Neutral
4. Disagree
5. Strongly Disagree

Note:  please leave blank any questions for which you feel you do not have sufficient information to form an opinion.

LEADERSHIP

This individual:

1. Has the trust and respect of those in the unit
2. Functions effectively under pressure
3. Motivates others to perform to their potential
4. Demonstrates a concern for quality
5. Maintains high standards of ethics, honesty, and integrity
6. Provides effective leadership to the unit in establishment of priorities
7. Supports faculty and academic staff in research activities
8. Supports faculty and academic staff in teaching excellence
9. Promotes high morale
10. Deals with nonproductive behaviors effectively
11. Finds creative solutions to problems
12. Examines alternative solutions to problems
13. Works appropriately toward finding solutions to problems and issues facing UWSP as an institution
14. Creates a positive work environment
15. Conducts meetings effectively
16. Conducts meetings efficiently
17. Utilizes effectively staff member’s talents and abilities
18. Makes unpopular decisions when necessary
19. Effectively uses available resources
20. Supports faculty and academic staff in professional development

COMMUNICATION

This individual:

1. Is effective in oral communication
2. Is effective in written communication
3. Communicates expectations clearly
4. Represents the unit to the University positively
5. Represents the unit to the community positively
6. Involves appropriate personnel in decisions which affect them
7. Listens respectfully to individuals
8. Shares appropriate information

ADMINISTRATION

This individual:

1. Demonstrates an awareness of the problems and issues facing UWSP as an institution
2. Effectively carries out Affirmative Action guidelines
3. Accepts responsibility for decisions made and actions taken
4. Bases decisions on relevant evidence and information
5. Follows through on commitments
6. Delegates responsibility appropriately
7. Works well with administrators
8. Processes paperwork effectively and efficiently
9. Understands the requirements of the position
10. Maintains an appropriate balance between attention to details and broader responsibilities

PERSONNEL

This individual:

1. Maintains confidentiality in personal matters
2. Maintains confidentiality in professional matters
3. Skillfully handles difficult situations involving people
4. Effectively helps members of the unit resolve conflicts
5. Skillfully recruits new personnel
6. Helps new faculty/staff make positive transitions to UWSP
7. Acts fairly and objectively in matters having to do with personnel decisions–titling, salary, retention, promotion, appointment type, and tenure

MISCELLANEOUS

This individual:

1. Works for the development and improvement of UWSP as a whole
2. Respects diverse opinions
3. Is sensitive to the needs of others
4. Is sensitive to the interest of others
5. Accepts constructive criticism
6. Responds with respect to differences in race, culture, gender and socio-economic status, and to individuals with disabilities
7. Demonstrates an understanding and respect for students
8. Encourages students to work to their potential
9. Helps students develop responsibility for their conduct

OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS

1. What are this individual’s strengths in performing the duties in the job description?
2. What suggestions can you make for improvement in the individual’s job performance?

FACULTY TEACHING LOAD

This policy on faculty teaching load is the recommendation of faculty governance.  It is recognized that its full implementation is necessarily dependent upon the availability of adequate financial and physical resources.

This policy does not address time commitments associated with scholarship and service.  Performance expectations in all areas of faculty responsibility are provided in the document “Teaching, Scholarship, and Service:  Descriptions, Expectations, and Peer Evaluation for Retention, Tenure, and Merit” available from the Office of Academic Affairs as well as department personnel guidelines available from individual department offices.

ACADEMIC YEAR TEACHING LOAD

1. The department chairperson is responsible for establishing individual teaching loads within the department.
2. A full-time teaching load is 24 credit hours or the equivalent.
3. Each faculty member should have a maximum of 3 separate class preparations per semester.
4. Laboratory hours are typically equated to lecture hours on a 3 to 2 ratio.  Supervision of student teachers and practica are typically equated to lecture hours on a 2.5 to 1 ratio.
5. There should be a maximum of 18 contact hours per week for each faculty member, except for faculty on temporary appointments.

In addition to the normal teaching assignment, the following are to be considered related activities not to be used as a basis for load reduction:

• Academic advising when the majority of departmental colleagues advise students;
• Maintenance of adequate office hours for student consultation;
• Routine maintenance of equipment used for teaching;
• Preparation of materials used in teaching;
• Participation in professional organizations;
• Study to remain current in one’s discipline;
• Scholarship as normally expected of faculty in the department;
• Service as normally expected of faculty in the department.

TEACHING LOAD FOR DEPARTMENT CHAIRPERSONS

1. All department chairs are given an academic year contract plus a half-time summer appointment.
2. The teaching load for department chairs is determined by the dean of the appropriate college.  Chairpersons normally teach 12 credits or the equivalent during an academic year.

LOAD RELIEF FOR THE CHAIRPERSON OF COMMON COUNCIL

0.50 FTE is assigned to the Chancellor’s Office to be used to provide load relief and replacement for the Chairperson of Common Council.  The affected department is authorized to hire a 0.50 FTE replacement for the Chairperson when deemed necessary by the department.

POLICY ON COURSE FORMATS AND CREDITS

UWSP follows the guidelines from University of Wisconsin System Academic Planning Statement No. 4 (revised May 11, 1984), Item 3 on the Awarding of Credit.  The following statements clarify the policy as used at UWSP:

1. That institutions shall award credit to students successfully completing approved instructional programs, or demonstrating competence or learning equivalent to that provided by such programs as either semester credits or quarter credits.
2. That study leading to one semester credit represents an investment of time by the average student of not fewer than 48 hours for a combination of class contact in lectures and for preparation and study.  Alternatively, a student may demonstrate learning that is an equivalent to that established as the expected product of such a period of study.
3. That study leading to one quarter credit is equal to two-thirds of a semester credit.
4. That, in addition to class contact for lectures, at UWSP contact hours and/or learning equivalencies may also include: laboratories, discussion sessions, tutorials, recitations, mediated lectures/discussions, and other instructor-approved experiential learning activities such as field trips, job shadowing, information interviewing and internships.

ALLOCATION OF GPR FUNDED GRADUATE ASSISTANTSHIPS

In determining the allocation of graduate assistant positions, the following criteria will be used:

1. By December 15, Graduate Coordinators or Associate Deans, in consultation with the College Dean, will establish priorities and prepare a justification describing their needs for, and proposed use of, assistantship support during the next academic year.  These needs statements will provide the basis for determining the number of assistantships allocated by the Provost.  Once allocations are made, the recipient graduate program area will select students to receive assistantship support, decide the length and level of that support within the academic year, and identify faculty to serve as supervisors for the student(s).  Except in unusual circumstances, each student will receive at least one half of a full assistantship per semester.
2. The primary consideration in making allocations is ensuring that the assistantship provides a valuable learning experience to the student.  Of secondary importance are requests based on the need for faculty assistance, the need to provide financial aid to students, or the need to generate more research and publications.  Tasks assigned to graduate assistants should be related to their professional development and degree program:  e.g., working with faculty on projects, research, curriculum, library holdings, and other professional endeavors.  These assignments should be geared towards improving the quality of the graduate program.
3. Each graduate program area that applies for assistantships should receive at least one, provided it has more than one full time graduate student in the semester of application.
4. In reviewing all applications for assistantships, a number of factors will be considered by the Provost or his designee:

• the impact of the assistantship on other graduate programs;
• the contribution of assistantship to the total university, e.g., public relations and service, potential for attracting extramural funding, assistance to other campus programs;
• the requirements for research/thesis;
• the past history/success of assistantships in the program;
• the graduate SCH production of the area;
• the number and type of graduate students enrolled in the program, i.e., active versus inactive, full-time versus part-time, out-of-state, out-of-nation (generally, programs with greater numbers of full-time, 9 credits or more, graduate students will be allocated a greater number of assistantships);
• and the opinion/recommendation of a graduate program review.

INSTRUCTIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF GRADUATE ASSISTANTS

(Approved by Graduate Council: 27 March 1991)

INTRODUCTION

Along with specific undergraduate programs, several master’s degree programs have been designated as components of the select mission of the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point.  Traditionally for the master’s degree, programs involve significant mentorship of the students by the graduate faculty.  Graduate students are directed by a major professor, and where appropriate, a graduate committee.  These professors provide close supervision of the student’s program plan and also provide a teacher/scholar model for the aspiring graduate student to emulate.

Graduate assistantship experiences have been established which enhance this tutoring process.  Assistantships provide additional benefits by providing financial support to the student, by providing work/study or “hands on” experiences for the student, and by providing graduate programs with additional human resources to carry out their academic missions.

At the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point we currently identify three types of graduate assistantships - program or project assistant (PA), research assistant (RA), and graduate assistant (GA).  The project assistant category is little used and is primarily reserved for non-research related extramurally supported activities where the assistantship duties are prescribed by the funding source.  The research assistant’s duties are designed to work with a faculty member on a specific research project directly related to the student’s degree.  In this position the student should be able to interact with a faculty member who can serve as a good role model.  The RA duties are also usually specified by an external funding source.  The graduate assistant’s duties have been described in previous policies, approved by the Graduate Faculty.

CURRENT DUTIES ASSIGNED TO GRADUATE ASSISTANTS

University of Wisconsin System interpreted policy does not allow the use of graduate teaching assistants (TA’s) on the comprehensive university campuses as the “instructors of record.”  At UWSP a graduate student may assist with instruction, but may not be the instructor of record.  The instructor of record is responsible for class activities, the syllabus, assignments, and, in general, the learning environment and is the person whose name appears in the timetable.  The instructor of record is the individual who teaches the academic content of the course, evaluates and grades the students, and structures the course.

The (GA) duties approved by the Graduate Council in 1982 state that graduate assistants “may assist with instruction, paper grading, assisting faculty members in laboratory sections and research projects; development of materials used in the classroom, and assist in departmental libraries, tutorial, and listening centers, etc.  Duties should be professionally related to the degree sought.”  These duties are consistent with those allowable by the UW System and with the policies of other UW comprehensive campuses.  Graduate assistants are normally utilized only in disciplines that already have a significant graduate component so that the students’ comprehensive experiences are professionally related to their degrees.  Most importantly, when graduate students are utilized directly in the classroom they are to assist the instructor of record.  They are never to be utilized to provide the primary instruction in a class.  There are currently graduate assistants in such programs as Soils, Water, Forestry, Biology, and Communication Sciences and Disorders.

Typically, these graduate students at UWSP assist with the laboratory and/or discussion sections of large freshman and sophomore classes that are taught by a faculty member with a terminal degree in the discipline.  In fact, during the last review of the College of Natural Resources, the outside consultants recommended that graduate assistants be used both in the classroom and for research purposes.  In the former instance, the professor in charge of the class provides the primary instruction and has the responsibility of determining the final student grade in the class.

The assistance provided by a graduate student may, for example, utilize a seminar model.  It is common in this model to have the students actually do the majority of the lecturing to a class while the professor in charge may focus on conceptual principles and then analyze the students’ presentations.  The use of graduate students to supervise an undergraduate class under appropriate controls is a variation of this commonly accepted model.

When graduate students currently assist with instruction, they share the general faculty’s responsibility for quality undergraduate teaching.  Since these graduate students would be serving an apprenticeship, they should be monitored and receive careful guidance from the department.  This guidance may take the form of seminars, conferences, observations by experienced teachers, or other methods designed to develop their instructional skills.

While maintaining the primary commitment to quality undergraduate programs, it is important that each department have the flexibility and freedom to delineate more specifically the duties of the graduate assistants in the context of those policies approved by the Graduate Council.  It is the appropriate responsibility of the chair of the department or the associate dean and the Dean of the College to ensure their programs’ quality of instruction for both the graduate and undergraduate students.

The utilization of individuals without a master’s degree to assist with instruction understandably causes concern among those who believe a terminal degree is essential to assure quality undergraduate instruction at UWSP.  Since the use of graduate assistants in undergraduate classes potentially affects students from many disciplines, it is appropriate that the University develop minimum guidelines for the selection, training, and supervision of graduate students used to assist very directly and substantially with undergraduate instruction, in courses taken by a broad spectrum of students.

In order to differentiate graduate students who assist with instruction and are utilized directly in the classroom from those who provide more general service to the university or indirect instructional assistance (library research, grading of papers, etc.), a new category of assistantships has been proposed.  This category is a subset of graduate assistants, would be labeled Instructional Assistants (IA), and is currently being tested as a viable teaching approach in the Division of Communication.

In the spring of 1988, the Graduate Council approved a pilot project submitted by the Division of Communication to the Council.  This project was designed as one of the Division’s responses to the Graduate Program Review that had just been completed.  The project involved the use of graduate students in Comm 101 and had the approval of the Division, the Dean of COFAC, the Dean of Graduate Studies, and the Vice Chancellor.  The Graduate Council approved the project as a pilot study for two years and requested that the Undergraduate and Graduate Program Review Committees evaluate the project’s impact, success, and deficiencies with respect to graduate and undergraduate education before a policy was constructed.  The Council was impressed with the organization and goals of the project.  The IA’s would receive a training experience of 40 hours prior to the Fall Semester; the IA Coordinator would select the texts, organize the course, construct the syllabus, and formulate assignments.  In essence, there would be consistency across sections in Comm 101, and the contact hours would be increased from 2 to 3 with a greater emphasis on formal speaking.  The Common Council accepted this as an information item.  Subsequently, the chair of the Academic Affairs Committee received a letter and oral requests to submit material to the Common Council which would allow the faculty to approve or disapprove the use of graduate students as IA’s.  A policy was forwarded from the Academic Affairs Committee in December of 1988 before the initial results from the pilot project were known.  The issue was debated, an array of amendments was offered, and the matter was resubmitted to the Academic Affairs Committee.  The Chairs of the Academic Affairs Committee and Graduate Council discussed the situation and agreed to develop together a viable policy with the initial results of the pilot project as an appendix and submit this to the Common Council for a vote on whether graduate students may be used under careful supervision as instructional assistants in select undergraduate courses.  The following section is the proposed policy for the limited and controlled use of IA’s in the classroom.

SELECTION, TRAINING AND SUPERVISION OF INSTRUCTIONAL ASSISTANTS (IA’S)

(Approved by Common Council: 3 May 1989)

Prologue

Efforts must continuously be made by academic units to ensure that the quality of undergraduate instruction at UWSP is maintained and enhanced wherever possible.  A program for the utilization of Instructional Assistants should have as its primary goal the increase in the quality of its educational product - the graduates of its baccalaureate and masters’ programs.  The rationale to develop a program to utilize Instructional Assistants must be the enhancement of quality instruction for the affected undergraduates and of the academic benefit to the graduate students involved.  It has long been an irony of higher education that most individuals who teach in a university, government agencies, or businesses have had little or no formal instructional training.  Many of our graduate students will be involved in both formal and informal teaching after graduation.  It is appropriate, therefore, for them to learn teaching techniques on a campus that prides itself on the quality of its teaching.  Teaching techniques could be learned in a class in which the graduate students teach each other or through IA’s teaching undergraduates.  The latter possibility allows the University to tap into one of its major strengths.

The following policies and procedures are intended to provide broad guidelines for schools and departments or divisions that wish to utilize IA’s in their program.  Additional specific guidelines at the unit level will have to be developed.  It is expected that the criteria for the selection, training, and evaluation of the IA’s shall be similar to those utilized by a department when hiring individuals with only the bachelor’s degree under other employment categories.

Use of Instructional Assistants

Instructional Assistants shall be used only in freshman and sophomore level classes, not in junior or senior level classes, and not in graduate-only or in graduate/undergraduate classes.

Approval

A plan, specific in nature, to utilize Instructional Assistants in a course(s) for a school or department or division must be approved by the Graduate Council, based on the benefits accruing to the students involved.  Graduate students may not be used in the classroom unless an academically rigorous program of selection, training and evaluation has been approved through faculty governance procedures and by the Chancellor.

The IA program plan shall be submitted initially to the Graduate Council and then ultimately through the Common Council at least during the first semester prior to the academic year that the IA program is proposed for implementation.  Normally the plan will be approved for a two-year trial period.  An assessment of the IA program, based on student and faculty evaluations which focus on methodology and content, will be made by the end of the second year by a subcommittee of the Graduate Council and reported to the Common Council.  If the IA program is recommended to continue, the utilization of IA’s will be incorporated into the normal 5 year cycle of undergraduate/graduate program review thereafter.

Coordination

A program for Instructional Assistants shall be supervised by the department chair or associate dean and coordinated by a member of the graduate faculty of the unit involved, who will be responsible for the selection, orientation, training, and evaluation of the graduate student participants.  A positive assessment of the IA program will be contingent on the success of these early steps.  The IA coordinator, selected by the professionals in the discipline, will have the background, knowledge, expertise, and willingness to provide a viable instructional training experience for the graduate students selected for the IA program.

Selection

The departmental or school IA coordinator and the chair/associate dean shall utilize the graduate student’s academic record, experience, letters of reference, and interviews to select individuals to serve as Instructional Assistants.  The selection process will include goal statements by the applicants, indicating how the Instructional Assistant experiences will fit into their long range career plans, which should be advanced by the teaching experience received at UWSP.  Preference will be given to those graduate students who have had previous teaching experience and/or who can demonstrate a direct benefit derived from the IA experience in their master’s program of study and career goals.

Training

Instructional Assistants will attend an academically meaningful program focused on pedagogical methods and techniques as well as course content prior to the beginning of each semester.  This training will include a discussion of the course(s), with which each will assist, and focus on the course goals and content, teaching techniques, and evaluation strategies.  Having the instructional responsibilities for the course(s), the IA coordinator will ensure that the IA’s adhere to such normal teaching practices as having adequate and fixed office hours as well as returning tests and evaluations to their students in a timely fashion.

During the semester, the IA’s will meet regularly with the IA coordinator to discuss the instructional strategies utilized in the course(s) being taught.  The IA’s will be eligible to receive 1-2 graduate credits for the orientation and weekly instructional seminar (i.e. Seminar in Instructional Practices).  The conduct of this program as a useful educational experience will be part of the evaluative assessment.

Supervision

The IA coordinator will visit each IA’s class at least 3-5 times a semester to provide an evaluation and feedback on each IA’s performance.  Additionally, for example, someone beside the IA coordinator (a mentor) could also be assigned to each IA as a resource to advise and evaluate the graduate student as an IA.  The outcome of these classroom visits, student evaluations, performance in the graduate seminar, and general progress toward the master’s degree, will be utilized to determine whether the IA may be reappointed in subsequent semesters and whether the IA program is a successful academic experience for both the undergraduate and graduate students involved.

SECTION 16 - WISCONSIN ADMINISTRATIVE CODE, CHAPTERS UWS 14, 16 - 22

(Chapters UWS 1 - 13, and 15 are in Chapter 4A - Personnel Rules  of this Handbook.)

CHAPTER UWS 14 STUDENT ACADEMIC DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES

CHAPTER UWS 16 OTHER APPOINTMENTS

CHAPTER UWS 17 STUDENT NONACADEMIC DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES

CHAPTER UWS 18 CONDUCT ON UNIVERSITY LANDS

CHAPTER UWS 19 SICK LEAVE

CHAPTER UWS 20 NONRESIDENT TUITION DETERMINATION PROCEDURES AND APPEALS

CHAPTER UWS 21 USE OF UNIVERSITY FACILITIES

CHAPTER UWS 22 ACCOMMODATION OF RELIGIOUS BELIEFS

SECTION 17 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN AND UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-STEVENS POINT CHAPTER 17 NONACADEMIC STANDARDS AND DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES

The University of Wisconsin “Student Nonacademic Disciplinary Procedures,” Chapter UWS 17 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code, Rules of the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System, were adopted in January,1976, and revised September, 1996, September, 2009, September 2013* (Pending UWSP Common Council approval). Additional statements for the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point are indicated in BOLDFACE type. These added statements, in conjunction with Chapter UWS 17, constitute Chapter UWSP 17.

17.01 Policy statement. The missions of the University of Wisconsin System and its individual institutions can be realized only if the university’s teaching, learning, research and service activities occur in living and learning environments that are safe and free from violence, harassment, fraud, theft, disruption and intimidation. In promoting such environments, the university has a responsibility to address student nonacademic misconduct; this responsibility is separate from and independent of any civil or criminal action resulting from a student’s conduct. This chapter defines nonacademic misconduct, provides university procedures for effectively addressing misconduct, and offers educational responses to misconduct. The University of Wisconsin System is committed to respecting students’ constitutional rights. Nothing in this chapter is intended to restrict students’ constitutional rights, including rights of freedom of speech or to peaceably assemble with others.

17.02 Definitions. In this chapter:

17.02(1) “Chief administrative officer” means the chancellor of an institution or dean of a campus or their designees.

17.02(2) “Clear and convincing evidence” means information that would persuade a reasonable person to have a firm belief that a proposition is more likely true than not true. It is a higher standard of proof than “preponderance of the evidence.”

17.02(3) “Days” means calendar days.

17.02(4) “Delivered” means sent by electronic means to the student’s official university email address and, in addition, provided by any of the following methods:

1. Given personally.
2. Placed in the student’s official university mailbox.
3. Mailed by regular first class United States mail to the student’s current address as maintained by the institution.

17.02(5) “Disciplinary file” means the record maintained by the student affairs officer responsible for student discipline.

17.02(6) “Disciplinary probation” means a status in which a student may remain enrolled in the university only upon the condition that the student complies with specified standards of conduct or other requirements or restrictions on privileges, for a specified period of time, not to exceed two years.

17.02(7) “Disciplinary sanction” means any action listed in s. UWS 17.10(1) taken in response to student nonacademic misconduct.

17.02(8) “Expulsion” means termination of student status with resultant loss of all student rights and privileges.

17.02(9) “Hearing examiner” means an individual, other than the investigating officer, appointed by the chief administrative officer in accordance with s. UWS 17.06(2) for the purpose of conducting a hearing under s. UWS 17.12

17.02(10) “Institution” means any university, or an organizational equivalent designated by the board, and the university of Wisconsin colleges.

17.02(11) “Investigating officer” means an individual, or his or her designee, appointed by the chief administrative officer of each institution, to conduct investigations of nonacademic misconduct under this chapter.

17.02(12) “Nonacademic misconduct hearing committee” or “committee” means the committee appointed pursuant to s. UWS 17.07 to conduct hearings under s. UWS 17.12.

17.02(13) “Preponderance of the evidence” means information that would persuade a reasonable person that a proposition is more probably true than not true. It is a lower standard of proof than “clear and convincing evidence” and is the minimum standard for a finding of responsibility under this chapter.

17.02(14) “Student” means any person who is registered for study in an institution for the academic period in which the misconduct occurred, or between academic periods, for continuing students.

17.02(15) “Student affairs officer” means the dean of students or student affairs officer designated by the chief administrative officer to coordinate disciplinary hearings and carry out duties described in this chapter.

17.02(16) “Suspension” means a loss of student status for a specified length of time, not to exceed two years, with resultant loss of all student rights and privileges.

17.02(17) “University lands” means all real property owned by, leased by, or otherwise subject to the control of the board of regents of the University of Wisconsin System.

17.03 Consistent institutional policies. Each institution is authorized to adopt policies consistent with this chapter. A copy of such policies shall be filed with the board of regents and the University of Wisconsin System office of academic affairs.

17.04 Notice to students. Each institution shall publish ch. UWS 17 on its website and shall make ch. UWS 17 and any institutional policies implementing ch. UWS 17 freely available to students through the website or other means.

17.05 Designation of investigating officer. The chief administrative officer of each institution shall designate an investigating officer or officers for allegations of student nonacademic misconduct. The investigating officer shall investigate student nonacademic misconduct and initiate procedures for nonacademic misconduct under s. UWS 17.11.

17.06 Non-academic misconduct hearing examiner.

17.06(1) The chief administrative officer of each institution, in consultation with faculty, academic staff, and student representatives, shall adopt policies providing for the designation of a student nonacademic misconduct hearing examiner to fulfill the responsibilities of the nonacademic misconduct hearing examiner in this chapter.

17.06(2) A hearing examiner shall be selected by the chief administrative officer from the faculty and staff of the institution, pursuant to the policies adopted under sub. (1).

17.07 Non-academic misconduct hearing committee.

17.07(1) The chief administrative officer of each institution, in consultation with faculty, academic staff, and student representatives, shall adopt policies providing for the establishment of a student nonacademic misconduct hearing committee to fulfill the responsibilities of the nonacademic misconduct hearing committee in this chapter.

17.07(2) A student nonacademic misconduct hearing committee shall consist of at least three persons, including at least one student or students, except that no such committee shall be constituted with a majority of members who are students. The presiding officer shall be appointed by the chief administrative officer. The presiding officer and at least one other member shall constitute a quorum at any hearing held pursuant to due notice.

17.08 Nonacademic misconduct occurring on or outside of university lands.

17.08(1) MISCONDUCT ON UNIVERSITY LANDS. Except as provided in s. UWS 17.08(2), the provisions contained in this chapter shall apply to the student conduct described in s. UWS 17.09 that occurs on university lands or at university-sponsored events.

17.08(2) MISCONDUCT OUTSIDE OF UNIVERSITY LANDS. The provisions contained in this chapter may apply to the student conduct described in s. UWS 17.09 that occurs outside of university lands only when, in the judgment of the investigating officer, the conduct adversely affects a substantial university interest. In determining whether the conduct adversely affects a substantial university interest, the investigating officer shall consider whether the conduct meets one or more of the following conditions:

1. The conduct constitutes or would constitute a serious criminal offense, regardless of the existence of any criminal proceedings.
2. The conduct indicates that the student presented or may present a danger or threat to the health or safety of himself, herself or others.
3. The conduct demonstrates a pattern of behavior that seriously impairs the university’s ability to fulfill its teaching, research, or public service missions.

17.09 Conduct subject to disciplinary action. In accordance with s. UWS 17.08, the university may discipline a student for engaging in, attempting to engage in, or assisting others to engage in any of the following types of nonacademic misconduct:

17.09(1) DANGEROUS CONDUCT. Conduct that endangers or threatens the health or safety of oneself or another person.

17.09(2) SEXUAL ASSAULT. Conduct defined in s. 940.225, Stats.

17.09(3) STALKING. Conduct defined in s. 940.32, Stats.

17.09(4) HARASSMENT. Conduct defined in s. 947.013, Stats.

17.09(5) HAZING. Conduct defined in s. 948.51, Stats.

17.09(6) ILLEGAL USE, POSSESSION, MANUFACTURE, OR DISTRIBUTION OF ALCOHOL OR CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES. Use, possession, manufacture, or distribution of alcoholic beverages or of marijuana, narcotics, or other controlled substances, except as expressly permitted by law or university policy.

17.09(7) UNAUTHORIZED USE OF OR DAMAGE TO PROPERTY. Unauthorized possession of, use of, moving of, tampering with, damage to, or destruction of university property or the property of others.

17.09(8) DISRUPTION OF UNIVERSITY-AUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES. Conduct that obstructs or impairs university-run or university-authorized activities, or that interferes with or impedes the ability of a person to participate in university-run or university-authorized activities.

17.09(9) FORGERY OR FALSIFICATION. Unauthorized possession of or fraudulent creation, alteration, or misuse of any university or other governmental document, record, key, electronic device, or identification.

17.09(10) MISUSE OF COMPUTING RESOURCES. Conduct that involves any of the following:

1. Failure to comply with laws, license agreements, and contracts governing university computer network, software, and hardware use.
2. Use of university computing resources for unauthorized commercial purposes or personal gain.
3. Failure to protect a personal password or university-authorized account.
4. Breach of computer security, invasion of privacy, or unauthorized access to computing resources.

For more information regarding Information Technology policies, please refer to the following Web site: http://www. uwsp.edu/it/about/policies/.

17.09(11) FALSE STATEMENT OR REFUSAL TO COMPLY REGARDING A UNIVERSITY MATTER. Making a knowingly false oral or written statement to any university employee or agent of the university regarding a university matter, or refusal to comply with a reasonable request on a university matter.

17.09(12) VIOLATION OF CRIMINAL LAW. Conduct that constitutes a criminal offense as defined by state or federal law.

17.09(13) SERIOUS AND REPEATED VIOLATIONS OF MUNICIPAL LAW. Serious and repeated off-campus violations of municipal law.

17.09(14) VIOLATION OF CH. UWS 18. Conduct that violates ch. UWS 18, including, but not limited to, provisions regulating fire safety, theft, and dangerous weapons.

17.09(15) VIOLATION OF UNIVERSITY RULES. Conduct that violates any published university rules, regulations, or policies, including provisions contained in university contracts with students.

17.09(16) NONCOMPLIANCE WITH DISCIPLINARY SANCTIONS. Conduct that violates a sanction, requirement, or restriction imposed in connection with previous disciplinary action.

17.10 Disciplinary sanctions.

17.10(1) The following are the disciplinary sanctions that may be imposed for nonacademic misconduct, in accordance with the procedures of ss. UWS 17.11 to 17.13, are any of the following:

1. A written warning or reprimand.
2. Denial of specified university privileges.
3. Restitution.
4. Educational or service sanctions, including community service.
5. Disciplinary probation.
6. Imposition of reasonable terms and conditions on continued student status.
7. Removal from a course in progress.
8. Enrollment restrictions on a course or program.
9. Suspension.
10. Expulsion.

17.10(2) One or more of the disciplinary sanctions listed in sub. (1) may be imposed for an incident of nonacademic misconduct.

17.10(3) Disciplinary sanctions shall not include the termination or revocation of student financial aid; however, this shall not be interpreted as precluding the individual operation of rules or standards governing eligibility for student financial aid under which the imposition of a disciplinary sanction could result in disqualification of a student for financial aid.

17.11 Disciplinary procedure. (1) The investigating officer may proceed in accordance with this section to impose, subject to hearing and appeal rights, one or more of the disciplinary sanctions listed in s. UWS 17.10(1).

17.11(2) CONFERENCE WITH STUDENT. When the investigating officer concludes that proceedings under this section are warranted, the investigating officer shall promptly contact the student in person, by telephone, or by electronic mail to offer to discuss the matter with the student. The purpose of this discussion is to permit the investigating officer to review with the student the basis for his or her belief that the student engaged in nonacademic misconduct, and to afford the student an opportunity to respond. If the student does not respond to the investigating officer’s offer to discuss the matter, the investigating officer may proceed to make a determination on the basis of the available information.

17.11(3) DETERMINATION BY THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER THAT NO DISCIPLINARY SANCTION IS WARRANTED. If, as a result of a discussion under sub. (2), or review of available information, the investigating officer determines that nonacademic misconduct did not in fact occur, or that no disciplinary sanction is warranted under the circumstances, the matter will be considered resolved without the necessity for further action.

17.11(4) PROCESS FOLLOWING DETERMINATION BY THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER THAT NONACADEMIC MISCONDUCT OCCURRED.

17.11(4)(a) If, as a result of a discussion or review of available information under sub. (2), or review of available information, the investigating officer determines that nonacademic misconduct did occur and that one or more of the disciplinary sanctions listed under s. UWS 17.10(1) should be recommended, the investigating officer shall prepare a written report which shall contain the following:

1. A description of the alleged misconduct.
2. A description of all information available to the university regarding the alleged misconduct. Such information shall be available to the student upon request, except as may be precluded by applicable state or federal law.
3. Specification of the sanction sought.
4. Notice of the student’s right to a hearing.
5. A copy of this chapter and of the institutional procedures adopted to implement this section.

17.11(4)(b) The written report shall be delivered to the student.

17.11(4)(c) A student who receives a written report under this section has the right to a hearing under s. UWS 17.12 to contest the determination that nonacademic misconduct occurred, the choice of disciplinary sanction, or both.

1. Where the disciplinary sanction sought is one of those listed in s. UWS 17.10(1)(a) to (g), and if the student desires a hearing, the student shall file a written request with the student affairs officer within 10 days of the date the written report is delivered to the student. If the student does not request a hearing within this period, the determination of non-academic misconduct shall be regarded as final, and the disciplinary sanction sought shall be imposed.
2. Where the disciplinary sanction sought is one of those listed in s. UWS 17.10(1)(h) to (j), the investigating officer shall forward a copy of the written report under par. (b) to the student affairs officer. The student affairs officer shall, upon receipt of the written report, proceed under s. UWS 17.12 to schedule a hearing on the matter. A hearing shall be conducted unless the student waives, in writing, the right to such a hearing.

Students who choose to appeal disciplinary sanctions must do so in writing within ten (10) days from the date of the written decision, and shall state in the appeal exactly what is being appealed, whether the findings, decision, sanctions, or all three. In cases heard by an investigating officer, the appeal shall be to the hearing examiner. In cases heard by a hearing examiner, the appeal shall be made to the Dean of Students. An appellate decision by the Dean of Students may be appealed by the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs or Chancellor, who may review the decision at his/her discretion.

If, during a hearing involving a disciplinary sanction listed s. UWSP 17.10 (1) (a) to (h), the hearing officer concludes that suspension or expulsion should be sought rather than a lesser sanction, the hearing officer may cause a statement of charges to be served upon the student in accordance with UWSP 17.11 (4).

17.12 Hearing.

17.12(1) A student who requests a hearing, or for whom a hearing is scheduled under s. UWS 17.11(4)(c)2., shall have the right to decide whether the matter will be heard by a hearing examiner or a hearing committee.

17.12(2) If a student requests a hearing under s. UWS 17.11(4)(c)1., or a hearing is required to be scheduled under s. UWS 17.11(4)(c)2., the student affairs officer shall take the necessary steps to convene the hearing and shall schedule it within 15 days of receipt of the request or written report. The hearing shall be conducted within 45 days of receipt of the request or written report, unless a different time period is mutually agreed upon by the student and investigating officer, or is ordered or permitted by the hearing examiner or committee.

17.12(3) No less than 5 days in advance of the hearing, the hearing examiner or committee shall obtain from the investigating officer, in writing, a full explanation of the facts upon which the determination of misconduct was based, and shall provide the student with access to or copies of the investigating officer’s explanation, together with any other materials provided to the hearing examiner or committee by the investigating officer, including any additional available information of the type described in s. UWS 17.11(4)(a)2.

17.12(4) The hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the following guidance and requirements:

17.12(4)(a) The hearing process shall further the educational purposes and reflect the university context of non-academic misconduct proceedings. The process need not conform to state or federal rules of criminal or civil procedure, except as expressly provided in ch. UWS 17.

17.12(4)(b) The student shall have the right to question adverse witnesses, the right to present information and witnesses, the right to be heard on his or her own behalf, and the right to be accompanied by an advisor of the student’s choice. The advisor may be a lawyer. In cases where the recommended disciplinary sanction is identified in s. UWS 17.10 (1) (a) to (h), the advisor may counsel the student, but may not directly question adverse witnesses, present information or witnesses, or speak on behalf of the student except at the discretion of the hearing examiner or committee. In cases where the recommended disciplinary sanction is identified in s. UWS 17.10(1)(i) or (j), or where the student has been charged with a crime in connection with the same conduct for which the disciplinary sanction is sought, the advisor may question adverse witnesses, present information and witnesses, and speak on behalf of the student. In accordance with the educational purposes of the hearing, the student is expected to respond on his or her own behalf to questions asked of him or her during the hearing.

17.12(4)(c) The hearing examiner or committee shall admit information that has reasonable value in proving the facts, but may exclude immaterial, irrelevant, or unduly repetitious testimony. The hearing examiner or committee shall observe recognized legal privileges.

17.12(4)(c) The hearing examiner or committee:

1. Shall admit information that has reasonable value in proving the facts, but may exclude immaterial, irrelevant, or unduly repetitious testimony.
2. Shall observe recognized legal privileges.
3. May take reasonable steps to maintain order, and to adopt procedures for the questioning of a witness appropriate to the circumstances of that witness’s testimony, provided, however, whatever procedure is adopted, the student is allowed to effectively question the witness.

17.12(4)(e) The hearing examiner or committee shall prepare written findings of fact and a written statement of its decision based upon the record of the hearing.

17.12(4)(f) A hearing examiner’s or committee’s finding of nonacademic misconduct shall be based on one of the following:

1. Clear and convincing evidence, when the sanction to be imposed is one of those listed in s. UWS 17.10(1)(h) to (j).
2. A preponderance of the evidence, when the sanction to be imposed is one of those listed in s. UWS 17.10(1)(a) to (g).
3. A preponderance of the evidence, regardless of the sanction to be imposed, in all cases of sexual harassment and sexual assault.

17.12(4)(g) The hearing examiner or committee may impose one or more of the disciplinary sanctions listed in s. UWS 17.10(1)(a) to (g) that differs from the recommendation of the investigating officer. Sanctions under s. UWS 17.10(1)(h) to (j) may not be imposed unless previously recommended by the investigating officer.

17.12(4)(h) The hearing shall be conducted by the hearing examiner or committee, and the university’s case against the student shall be presented by the investigating officer or his or her designee.

17.12(4)(i) The decision of the hearing examiner or committee shall be prepared within 14 days of the hearing, and delivered to the student by e-mail and first class United States mail to his or her current address as maintained by the institution. If further investigation is needed prior to a decision being made that may go beyond the 14 days, an e-mail will be sent to the student alerting them and providing a date a decision will be made. The decision shall become final within 14 days of the date of the written decision, unless an appeal is taken under s. UWS 17.13.

17.12(4)(j) If a party fails to appear at a scheduled hearing and to proceed, the hearing examiner or committee may either dismiss the case or, based upon the information provided, find that the student committed the misconduct alleged.

17.12(4)(k) Disciplinary hearings are subject to the Wisconsin open meetings law and may be closed if the student whose case is being heard requests a closed hearing or if the hearing examiner or committee determines that it is necessary to hold a closed hearing, as permitted under the Wisconsin open meetings law. Deliberations of the committee shall be held in closed session, in accordance with s. 19.85, Stats. As such, proper notice and other applicable rules shall be followed.

17.13 Appeal to the chief administrative officer.

17.13(1) Where the sanction prescribed by the hearing examiner or committee is one of those listed in s.UWS

17.10(1)(h) through (j), the student may appeal to the chief administrative officer within 14 days of the date of the written decision to review the decision of the hearing examiner or committee, based upon the record. In such a case, the chief administrative officer has 30 days from receipt of the student’s appeal to respond and shall sustain the decision of the nonacademic misconduct hearing examiner or committee unless the chief administrative officer finds any of the following:

1. The information in the record does not support the findings or decision of the hearing examiner or committee.
2. Appropriate procedures were not followed by the nonacademic misconduct hearing examiner or committee and material prejudice to the student resulted.
3. The decision was based on factors proscribed by state or federal law.

17.13(2) If the chief administrative officer makes a finding under sub. (1), he or she may return the matter for consideration by a different hearing examiner or committee, or may invoke an appropriate remedy of his or her own.

17.14 Discretionary appeal to the board of regents. Institutional decisions under ss. UWS 17.11 to 17.13 shall be final, except that the board of regents may, at its discretion, grant a review upon the record.

17.15 Settlement. The procedures set forth in this chapter allow the university and a student to enter into a settlement agreement regarding the alleged misconduct, after proper notice has been given. Any such agreement and its terms shall be in writing and signed by the student and the investigating officer or student affairs officer. The case is concluded when a copy of the signed agreement is delivered to the student.

17.16 Effect of discipline within the institution. A student who, at the time of commencement, is subject to a continuing disciplinary sanction under s. UWS 17.10(1) or unresolved disciplinary charges as a result of a report under s. UWS 17.11, shall not be awarded a degree during the pendency of the sanction or disciplinary proceeding.

17.17 Effect of suspension or expulsion within the university system. (1) Suspension or expulsion shall be system-wide in effect and shall be noted on an individual’s transcript, with suspension noted only for the duration of the suspension period.

17.17(2) A student who is suspended from one institution in the University of Wisconsin System may not enroll in another institution in the system until the suspension has expired by its own terms, except as provided in s. UWS 17.18.

17.17(3) A student who is expelled from one institution in the University of Wisconsin System may not enroll in another institution in the system, except as provided in s. 17.18.

17.17(4) A person who is in a state of suspension or expulsion from the university under this chapter, or who leaves or withdraws from the university while under nonacademic misconduct charges under this chapter, may not be present on any campus without the written consent of the chief administrative officer of that campus.

17.17(5) Upon completion of a suspension period, a student who is academically eligible may re-enroll in the institution which suspended him or her, provided all conditions from previous disciplinary sanctions have been met.

17.18 Petition for restoration of rights after suspension or expulsion.
A student who has been suspended may petition to have his or her student status, rights, and privileges restored before the suspension has expired by its own terms under s. 17.17(2). A student who has been expelled may petition for the right to apply for readmission. The petition shall be in writing and directed to the chief administrative officer of the institution from which the student was suspended or expelled or of a different university of Wisconsin institution to which the student seeks admission. The chief administrative officer shall make the readmission decision.

17.19 Emergency Suspension. (1) The chief administrative officer may impose an emergency suspension on a student, pending final institutional action on a report of nonacademic misconduct, in accordance with the procedures of this section.

17.19(2) The chief administrative officer of each institution may impose an emergency suspension on a student when all of the following conditions are met:

1. The investigating officer has made a reasonable attempt to offer the student the opportunity for discussion, either in person or by telephone;
2. The investigating officer recommends a sanction of suspension or expulsion; and
3. The chief administrative officer concludes, based on the available information, that the misconduct occurred and that the student’s continued presence on campus meets one or more of the following conditions:

1. Would constitute a potential for serious harm to the student;
2. Would constitute a potential for serious harm to others;
3. Would pose a threat of serious disruption of university-run or university-authorized activities; or
4. Would constitute a potential for serious damage to university facilities or property.

17.19(3) If the chief administrative officer determines that an emergency suspension is warranted under sub. (2), he or she shall promptly have written notification of the emergency suspension delivered to the student. The chief administrative officer’s decision to impose an emergency suspension shall be effective immediately when delivered to the student and is final.

17.19(4) Where an emergency suspension is imposed, the hearing on the underlying allegations of misconduct shall be held, either on or outside of university lands, within 21 days of the imposition of the emergency suspension, unless the student agrees to a later date.

17.19(5) An emergency suspension imposed in accordance with this section shall be in effect until the decision in the hearing on the underlying charges pursuant to s. UWS 17.12 is rendered or the chief administrative officer rescinds the emergency suspension. In no case shall an emergency suspension remain in effect for longer than 30 days, unless the student agrees to a longer period.

17.19(6) If the chief administrative officer determines that none of the conditions specified in sub. (2)(c) are present, but that misconduct may have occurred, the case shall proceed in accordance with s. UWS 17.12.