Faculty Personnel Policies and Procedures
18.104.22.168 Research Faculty
22.214.171.124 Clinical Faculty
126.96.36.199 Adjunct and Part-Time Faculty
7.2.4 Emeritus Faculty
188.8.131.52 Academic Year
184.108.40.206 Calendar Year
220.127.116.11 Initial Appointment Contracts
18.104.22.168 Reappointment Contracts
22.214.171.124 The Probationary Period
126.96.36.199 Tenure Contracts
188.8.131.52 Clinical and Research Faculty
7.4.3 New Faculty Orientation
7.5 Faculty Workload
184.108.40.206 Effectiveness in Teaching
220.127.116.11 Effectiveness in Service
18.104.22.168 Assistant Professor
22.214.171.124 Associate Professor
126.96.36.199 Effectiveness in Teaching
188.8.131.52 Effectiveness in Service
7.7.4 Promotion Review File
184.108.40.206 Annual Evaluation Procedures
220.127.116.11 Reappointment Procedures
7.9.3 External Peer Review
7.9.11 University Review Board
7.9.12 Review by the Provost
7.9.14 Tenure Appeals
7.10.1 Nominations for Promotion
7.10.2 External Peer Review
7.10.3 Promotion Comprehensive File
7.10.6 Review by Department Chair
7.10.8 Review by the Dean
7.10.9 University Review Board
7.10.10 Review by the Provost
7.10.11 Notification to the Candidate
7.10.12 Promotion Appeals
7.14.1 General Policy
7.15.1 Academic Freedom
7.15.2 Professional Ethics
7.18 Political Activity
A. The University of Alabama in Huntsville is committed to making employment opportunities available to qualified applicants and employees without regard to race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin or disability. All personnel actions and programs, including recruitment, selection, assignment, classification, promotion, demotion, transfer, layoff and recall, termination, determination of wages, conditions, and benefits of employment, etc., shall be administered in accordance with this equal opportunity policy. It is the intent of the university that, in all aspects of employment, individuals shall be treated without discrimination on any of the foregoing bases, and that employment decisions shall instead be premised upon a person's ability, experience, and other job-related qualifications.
Additionally, the university is an affirmative action employer of women, minorities, qualified individuals with a disability, and covered veterans. It is committed to making sustained, diligent efforts to identify and consider such individuals for employment and for opportunities arising during employment.
UAH is also committed to equal educational opportunity for all qualified students and does not discriminate in its educational policies, practices, programs, or activities on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age, or national origin, or against qualified disabled persons. Its admissions, financial aid, athletics, student services, and other programs are administered in accordance with this policy.
Discrimination, under this policy, shall be understood to include harassment in the form of verbal or physical conduct relating to an individual's race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, or disability. Such harassment must have the purpose or effect of either creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working/learning environment for an individual or unreasonably interfering with an individual's performance as an employee or student. Harassment in the form described above which adversely and substantially affects an individual's employment or educational opportunities in other ways is also considered to be unlawful discrimination.
Sexual harassment, in addition and more specifically, includes unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature when any of the following are present: submission to such conduct is made a condition, explicitly or implicitly, of employment or academic advancement; submission to or rejection of such conduct by an employee or student is used as the basis for employment or academic decisions; or such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's performance as an employee or student or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working /learning environment.
In these respects, the university affirms its desire to create a work environment for all employees and a learning environment for all students that is fair, humane, and responsible--an environment which supports and rewards career and educational goals on the basis of such relevant factors as ability and employment or academic performance. A university student or employee who is found, under established university procedures, to have been guilty of discriminatory conduct in violation of these policies will be subject to discipline, up to and including possible dismissal or expulsion, by the university.
These commitments are designed to meet nondiscrimination/affirmative action requirements imposed by the following federal and state sources of legal obligation, as amended: Title VI and VII, Civil Rights Act of 1964; Executive Order 11246; Title IX, Education Amendments of 1972; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990; the Equal Pay Act of 1963; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967; The Age Discriminations Act of 1975; the Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974; Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986; contract and grant agreements with governmental agencies; and the Alabama Constitution of 1901. The university's equal opportunity policies pertaining to its employees and students include specific administrative procedures and implementing measures designed to carry out these pledges and to insure compliance with foregoing laws.
Inquiries or complaints concerning the application of this policy and these federal requirements should be directed to one of the following persons:
Ms. Delois Smith
Student Equal Educational Opportunity Officer
114 University Center
The University Of Alabama in Huntsville
Huntsville, AL 35899 (256) 824-6700)
Dr. Fran Johnson
Faculty Equal Employment Coordinator
111 Madison Hall
The University of Alabama in Huntsville
Huntsville, AL 35899 (256-824-6767)
Ms. Gerry Moore
Staff Equal Employment Coordinator
135 Madison Hall
The University of Alabama in Huntsville
Huntsville, AL 35899 (256-824-6545)
Grievances alleging unlawful discrimination will be resolved according to the discrimination grievance procedures in Appendix F.
B. The university's equal employment/affirmative action (EE/AA) program is comprehensively stated in its Affirmative Action Plan, which is issued annually by the president. A copy of the plan is available for review in the Office of Human Resources; in addition, copies of the plan are distributed each year to all deans and department chairs.
C. The overall responsibility for insuring that the university effectively implements an equal employment/affirmative action program rests with the president. The president is assisted in this responsibility by designated officials. For the faculty, the provost is the appointed EE officer. A faculty member appointed by the provost functions as EE coordinator and is assigned many of the coordinating and monitoring duties in connection with the implementation of the university's EE/AA program in the faculty area. The vice president for finance and administration is the staff EE officer, and the assistant vice president for human resources is the staff EE coordinator. These individuals represent the president in EE/AA matters in their respective areas and are jointly responsible for insuring that the university's obligations are being carried out.
D. The president has appointed a university committee, designated the Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Committee, to advise him concerning equal opportunity and affirmative action matters, to identify issues or problems which need to be addressed to make the university's affirmative action plan more effective, and to provide assistance upon request to university officials with responsibilities in this area. This committee includes representatives from each college/school as well as from non-academic units on campus.
E. Grievance relating to discriminatory treatment in violation of the university's EE/AA policy should be addressed to the faculty EE coordinator, the associate provost, who will assist in directing the individual to the appropriate process for resolution. Individuals who have questions or recommendations about EE/AA matters are encouraged to contact the faculty Equal Employment coordinator and/or the chair of the Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Committee.
Tenured and tenure-earning faculty appointments carry the following titles: professor, associate professor, assistant professor, and instructor.
The titles of research professor, associate research professor, and assistant research professor are given to members of the faculty whose primary responsibility is research. Those appointed to full-time research faculty positions are expected to participate in the academic programs of the department.
Funding of the salaries of research faculty is derived primarily from contracts and grants. Research faculty appointments are for one year and are subject to annual review prior to reappointment or nonreappointment (See 7.8.3). Research faculty are not eligible for tenure, nor may they serve as department chairs. They are also ineligible for service on the college Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee (PTAC) and on appointment or reappointment committees for tenure-earning faculty.
The total number of research faculty appointments within a department or program is normally limited to 50 percent of the number of tenured and tenure-earning faculty in the department. The upper limit may be exceeded only in exceptional circumstances. The rationale for any request to exceed the established upper limit must be developed by the departmental faculty and be approved by the dean and the provost.
The titles of clinical instructor, clinical assistant professor, clinical associate professor, and clinical professor are awarded to members of the faculty whose major responsibilities are in clinical teaching, clinical practice, and clinical scholarship. These appointments are most likely to occur in the College of Nursing.
Clinical appointments are nontenure-earning appointments of one to three-year renewable contracts. There is no limit to the number of years for which clinical appointments may be held. However, contract renewal is always based on curricular, enrollment, and financial factors as well as on individual faculty evaluation.
Term appointments are nontenure-earning full-time faculty appointments of limited or specific duration. Term appointments are for a delineated period of time and convey no right or expectation of employment beyond the period stated in the letter of appointment. Term appointments are normally for one academic year but may be for longer or shorter periods as detailed in a letter of appointment. (Notice of nonreappointment may be provided at any time prior to the end of the specified term). Term faculty are eligible for selected university benefits and are expected to participate in the academic programs of the unit.
Lecturer is a term appointment for full-time, nontenure-earning faculty who are appointed to serve special instructional needs in academic departments. Lecturers are eligible for selected university benefits and are included in considerations for merit salary increases.
Lecturers must have completed at least 18 graduate semester hours in the teaching discipline and hold at least a master's degree, or hold the minimum of a master's degree with a major in the discipline in which the lecturer teaches. Any exceptions to these criteria must be justified and documented.
Letters of appointment for lecturers define the length of the appointment that may be from one semester to three years, with the initial appointment usually for one year. Offer letters state that tenure cannot be earned in the position. Appointments may be renewed depending on the satisfactory performance of the lecturer and continuing instructional needs of the department. Lecturers are evaluated in the spring semester of the last year of their appointment term by the chair who consults with the tenured faculty in the department and makes a recommendation to the dean on continuing employment or nonreappointment. Lecturers who have served continuously for at least four years must be given one academic year's notice prior to nonreappointment.
The teaching load for lecturers is normally 24 semester hours in the academic year with additional service expectations in student advising, participation in departmental programs concerned with student activities and instructional matters, and other responsibilities as assigned by the chair of the department. Teaching requirements may be adjusted for involvement in important projects or special activities of value to the department and the college. Lecturers do not participate in departmental processes concerning appointments, reappointments, promotion, and tenure.
Visiting faculty appointments are temporary full-time appointments, usually for one academic year, and may carry the titles of visiting assistant professor, visiting associate professor, visiting professor, visiting research professor, etc. The visiting designation is normally used for faculty who are temporarily on leave from other universities or organizations.
Adjunct faculty have recognized professional qualifications and are assigned the rank of adjunct assistant professor, adjunct associate professor, or adjunct professor. The title is intended for individuals whose responsibilities include more than teaching or serving on graduate advisory committees and who have a continuing association with a department in some academic or professional capacity. Their duties and responsibilities may vary between departments and colleges, but they are specified in the letter of appointment. Letters of appointment for adjunct faculty also define the length of the appointment that may be for one to three years, with the initial appointment usually for one year. Adjunct faculty are not compensated except when they are engaged as part-time faculty teaching a course on a demand basis. These faculty do not earn tenure nor may they participate in matters relating to personnel decisions in the department.
Part-time faculty are appointed to teach or serve on committees on the basis of demand in academic departments. Their responsibilities are defined upon appointment. Part-time faculty teaching credit courses at the undergraduate level must have completed at least 18 graduate semester hours in the discipline in which they teach and hold at least a master's degree, or hold the minimum of a master's degree with a major in the discipline. Part-time faculty teaching at the graduate level must hold the terminal degree, usually the earned doctorate, in the teaching discipline or a related discipline. Any exceptions to these criteria must be justified and documented. The submission of official transcripts is a condition of part-time faculty employment. Part-time faculty do not earn tenure, nor may they participate in matters relating to personnel decisions in the department.
Board of Trustees Rule 370 permits the establishment of special academic chairs and the appointment of prestigious and named professorships. All named professorships and academic chairs are established by Board action. Appointments to fill these professorships are made by the Board of Trustees after recommendation by the provost, the president, and the chancellor. In order to maintain adequate uniformity and the highest degree of prestige and selectivity in the establishment of chairs and professorships, to assure academic excellence, and to provide the highest honor in the selection of recipients, the Board has adopted policies that recognize classifications of prestigious professorships. See Appendix C.
A tenured faculty member with ten years of full-time service to the university will be awarded emeritus status at his or her professorial rank upon retirement. Other faculty members who retire may also be considered for emeritus status (Section 7.10.1).
The academic year encompasses the fall and spring semesters. The official beginning of the academic year is noted on the university calendar; faculty are expected, on that date, to be available for student advising, departmental and university meetings, or other faculty responsibilities. The academic year concludes with spring commencement.
The calendar year appointment is for twelve months or for a term specified in the letter of offer. The beginning and ending dates are not necessarily tied to the academic calendar.
Appointment as a tenure-earning member of the faculty requires a recommendation by a majority of the tenured and tenure-earning faculty of the department or program concerned and an affirmative recommendation to the provost by the dean of the college concerned. No offer or appointment, either written or verbal, may be extended without the approval of the provost.
The dean informs each new appointee in a written letter of offer of the terms and conditions of the appointment, including but not limited to: (a) the length of the probationary period; (b) the length of the initial appointment; (c) the salary and fringe benefits applicable to the appointment; (d) the policies and procedures applying to reappointment, promotion, and tenure determinations; and (e) in cases of joint appointments, designation of the faculty member's primary department. Official transcripts are required as a condition of employment for all faculty.
The initial appointment contract is normally for one academic year, although contracts for up to three years may be offered when the department chair, dean, and provost agree that the candidate's qualifications or the university's needs make such appointments advisable.
Reappointment contracts are normally made for a period of one academic year until a tenure-earning faculty member is: (a) granted tenure or (b) receives a notice of nonreappointment, or (c) is discharged for cause. Reappointment is based on the current need of the university.
The probationary period is defined as the maximum length of time between the initial appointment as a member of the tenure-earning faculty and the year in which tenure is awarded or denied. For appointees whose initial appointment to the tenure-earning faculty begins in the fall semester, the probationary period will be no more than six years in length, unless extended subject to the provisions stated below. For appointees whose initial appointment to the tenure-earning faculty begins in the spring semester, the probationary period contract ends no more than six years from the beginning of the first fall semester following the date of initial appointment.
The probationary period may be extended a maximum of one additional year in cases where the tenure-earning faculty member's productivity is temporarily reduced because of extenuating circumstances, including when the faculty member has experienced a serious or chronic illness or short-term disability, the birth of a child, or the serious illness of a family member. The faculty member submits a request for extension, stating the reasons, to the department chair. Requests for extension must be acted upon by the chair, the appropriate dean, and the provost.
Time spent on leaves-of-absence normally will not count as part of the probationary period. However, specific agreements to include such time may be made based upon mutual agreement between the tenure-earning faculty member and the department chair, with approval by the dean and the provost.
Tenure is a means both to protect academic freedom in teaching, research, and of extramural activities and to insure a sufficient degree of economic security to make the profession attractive to men and women of ability. Once awarded, tenure will be strictly observed in accordance with the guidelines in the AAUP Policy Documents and Reports (1990) and consistent with official University of Alabama System guidelines.
Board Rule 310 of the Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama states that:
The definition of tenure to be used in each campus policy should recognize that tenure is an affirmative commitment by the Board of Trustees to a faculty member, generally offered after a probationary period of employment, of a right to continuing employment except upon dismissal for cause, retirement, resignation, bona fide financial exigency of the campus or division in which tenure is held, or major curtailment or formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction.
UAH adopts the statement of the nature of tenure reflected in Board Rule 310, as quoted above. A tenure contract is for an academic year and gives the faculty member the contractual right to be employed for succeeding academic years until the faculty member resigns, retires, is discharged for cause, is terminated pursuant to bona fide financial exigency, or major curtailment or formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction, or becomes permanently disabled or dies. This contract is subject to the terms and conditions of employment that exist from one academic or calendar year to the next, but such terms will not be inconsistent with this policy, nor will a faculty member be reduced in rank except for just cause.
Tenure is granted only to those faculty members who show evidence of substantial growth and future promise. Except in unusual circumstances, tenure will be granted only to persons with a terminal degree. The respective faculties of the UAH Library and of the UAH colleges of Administrative Science, Engineering, Liberal Arts, Nursing, and Science have the responsibility for recommending action on tenure. Board Rule 310 further states that tenure is held "only in the unit in whose name tenure has been awarded, not in the system as a whole."
The university administration may offer tenure to new members of the faculty at the time of first employment to the position of associate professor or professor. Any recommendation for tenure or academic rank must include consideration by the faculty of the appropriate department (or equivalent academic unit) and the appropriate college using established criteria. No award of tenure or promotion in rank and no offer of employment stipulating tenure and rank will be made without securing the explicit recommendation of the tenured faculty in the department (or equivalent academic unit) in which the faculty member is, or will be, based. The process leading to these recommendations must agree with the process normally followed when the department (or equivalent academic unit) recommends tenure or promotion in rank for internal candidates. For external candidates this process normally coincides with the reviewing process for hiring, and the applicant's employment file for hiring may replace the dossier required of internal candidates seeking tenure and/or promotion in rank.
Before initiating a search for full or part-time faculty, the department chair must consult and follow carefully the university's affirmative action plan and checklist of affirmative action procedures. Employment of non-U.S. citizens is subject to immigration laws; the chair should consult with the UAH Security Officer and Immigration Specialist early in the search process about compliance with these laws.
Faculty appointment follows the identification of the existence of a need, together with administrative approval of the availability of funds for the position. Responsibility for identifying prospective faculty members lies with the appropriate department or program chair (chairs, if a joint appointment is contemplated) and the faculty in the department. In a case in which no department has direct responsibility, the appropriate dean assumes the role of the department chair. The department chair is responsible for gathering information about the candidates. This information includes but is not limited to: (i) a statement of interest from the candidates, (ii) completed resumes, (iii) three professional references, and (iv) a copy of recent written work. As a condition of employment, official transcripts must be submitted to the dean of the college in which an appointment is held.
The department chair appoints a faculty committee to aid in the identification and screening of prospective candidates. This committee includes the department chair, at least two other faculty members from the tenured and tenure-earning faculty of the department, and, at the suggestion of the dean, one such faculty member from outside the department. Whenever possible, all members of the committee should hold professional rank at least equal to that for which a candidate is being considered. For a candidate who will have responsibilities in more than one department, the committee consists of faculty from each of the affected departments. After the committee has identified the primary candidates, the chair confers with the remaining departmental faculty and then recommends to the dean (or deans, if a joint appointment is contemplated) those candidates to be invited to the campus. Campus interviews must be authorized by the provost.
During the candidate's visit, the chair arranges the following:
(a) Some type of seminar or lecture to give indication of the
candidate's scholarly and teaching competence;
(b) An informal gathering to permit all interested faculty to meet the
(c) An opportunity for individual discussion between the candidate
and his or her prospective colleagues;
(d) An opportunity to meet students, either at the seminar or at
another appropriate occasion;
(e) Interviews with appropriate academic administrators.
After visits by the candidates, the department chair again consults with the departmental faculty and others who interacted with the candidate to obtain their reactions and comments. A departmental recommendation is determined by majority vote of the tenured and tenure-earning faculty. The chair then submits the departmental recommendation for appointment to the dean of the college. In the case of candidates who will have responsibilities in more than one department, a recommendation is made by each of the affected chairs to the appropriate deans. Letters of offer in joint appointments must clearly designate one department or program as the primary unit. After these recommendations are made, they are reviewed by the dean who writes a letter of offer for approval by the provost. In the event actions are taken at any level contrary to the departmental recommendation, the administrator responsible for such a decision must give the department chair a written explanation for the decision.
Appointment procedures for clinical and research faculty are similar to the procedures for the appointment of faculty to tenure-earning positions. All appointments must be approved by the provost.
Appointment procedures for temporary nontenure-earning or term faculty are normally the same as the procedures for the appointment of tenure-earning faculty, except that a modified interview schedule may be appropriate for short term appointments.
Responsibility for identifying and evaluating potential candidates for adjunct faculty status lies with the appropriate department or program chair and the faculty in the department. The chair is responsible for gathering information about the candidates. The standards of professional accomplishment required of each candidate in the evaluation process must be consistent with those for full-time faculty appointments. After an affirmative vote by a majority of the tenured and tenure-earning faculty in the department, the department or program chair forwards the candidate's completed file, together with a written recommendation for appointment, to the dean. This recommendation must include the specified duties and responsibilities of the individual and the length of the appointment, which may be for one to three years. (See Section 18.104.22.168). Following review of the recommendation, an appointment letter is issued by the appropriate dean with approval by the provost. Initial appointments can be made at any time, but normally they begin at the beginning of the academic year.
Identification and evaluation of potential part-time faculty are the responsibility of the respective department or program chair. Candidates for graduate course or committee assignments must be approved by the graduate dean. At least two weeks prior to the first formal teaching or graduate committee assignment, a file containing the candidate's personnel material, including a vita, recommendations, and official transcripts, must be completed and forwarded to the dean. After receiving the approval of the dean, the department or program chair may make teaching and graduate committee assignments, according to guidelines within the college. The dean issues an appointment letter to the part-time faculty member detailing the specific assignment, its length and terms, and the remuneration.
After the initial approval and the first teaching (or graduate committee) assignment, each new assignment must be based on careful and thorough examination of all available information pertaining to the individual's performance in previous assignments, including student evaluations.
Prior to the beginning of the fall semester, the Office of the Provost conducts an orientation for new faculty that provides an opportunity to meet with university administrators and to become familiar with the work of university departments with which they will interact. New faculty should work closely with their department chairs to become aware of the expectations and requirements of their departments.
It is recognized that the workload of a tenured or tenure-earning faculty member normally includes obligations in three areas of activity: teaching, research or creative achievements, and service. The workload of clinical faculty is normally concentrated in the areas of clinical teaching and clinical practice. Deans, in consultation with department chairs, are responsible for administering faculty workloads in an equitable fashion and for weighing the impact of teaching loads on resources and productivity. The teaching responsibility for research-active, full-time faculty is normally 18 semester hours per academic year. Teaching responsibilities may be higher, with a maximum of 24 semester hours, or lower depending on the needs and mission of the department and the obligations of the faculty member. Exceptions to the standard are recommended by the appropriate department chair and approved by the dean after discussion with the provost. Possible exceptions might include special assignments for the department, college, or university; supervision of professional projects, theses, or dissertations; and major time commitments to funded or unfunded research.
Full-time academic faculty members may obtain a redistribution in the amount of non research assignments (teaching and service obligations) if they are able to charge a fraction of their academic-year salary to either a contract, grant, or research unit. Such arrangements require long-term consultation with and approval by the respective chair, director and dean. In the interest of the quality and continuity of teaching, research assignments should normally be limited to 50% of the usual workload of a faculty member.
Faculty members are evaluated on the basis of their effective performance or potential for effective performance in three areas of activity: (1) teaching, (2) research or creative achievements, and (3) service. These criteria form the basis for evaluating faculty members for appointment, annual performance reviews, tenure, promotion, and salary increases.
Faculty members are expected to perform effectively in all appropriate teaching settings and situations. Students, colleagues, and administrators should have recognized the faculty member's diligence and dedication in a classroom, lecture hall, seminar, laboratory, clinic, or library, and when appropriate, effectiveness in directing the research and creative activities of undergraduate and/or graduate students. Criteria for judging effectiveness in teaching include but are not limited to the following: thorough knowledge of subject matter; imaginative, efficient, and rigorous methods of presenting course materials and evaluating learning; effectiveness in oral and written communication; active concern for students' advancement in the discipline, in the university, in the workplace, and in the community; ability to engender and nurture values of learning (e.g., curiosity, objectivity, enthusiasm, fairness, and critical thinking) in students; a record of producing students who, by virtue of effective teaching, achieve success throughout their university careers; and pedagogical diligence, dedication, versatility, generosity, and creativity.
The university encourages a broad spectrum of research and creative activity of the highest possible quality, from basic to applied, across the full range of academic disciplines. The university's commitment stems from its obligation to advance knowledge, to educate both undergraduate and graduate students, and to serve the economic and cultural needs of society. Criteria for judging effectiveness in research and creative accomplishments include but are not limited to the following: (1) the ability to publish research in peer-reviewed outlets or peer and/or professional recognition of the faculty member's scholarly and creative work, and (2) the contribution of the faculty member's research to knowledge or the contribution of the faculty member's creative work to the needs of society.
Evaluation of a faculty member's effectiveness in service is based upon both internal and external service activities. Internal service encompasses service to the faculty member's department and college as well as university-level activities. Internal service activities include but are not limited to the following: diligent service on departmental, college, or university committees; membership in the Faculty Senate and its committees; advising student clubs and organizations; and administrative assignments. Applicable external service encompasses service to the profession and to the public for the benefit of the university. External service activities include but are not limited to the following: activities in learned and professional societies; unremunerated services or consultation provided to business, government, cultural, educational, or health-care organizations; and service as an editor or referee for scholarly publications. Faculty members are also judged as to whether or not their collegial relationships contribute to the advancement of the college and university.
Appointment at this rank is reserved for individuals who are candidates for the terminal degree within a pertinent discipline. The appointment is normally tenure-earning with the expectation that subsequent appointment to assistant professor will be made upon the university's receipt of certification that the faculty member has completed all requirements for the terminal degree. An instructor also must show potential to perform effectively in the three areas of activity on which faculty are evaluated: (1) teaching, (2) research or creative achievements; and (3) service. Prior teaching experience is not essential.
An assistant professor must have the terminal degree in a pertinent discipline, except where the individual has achieved equivalent status through outstanding performance. An assistant professor also must show potential to perform effectively in the three areas of activity on which faculty are evaluated: (1) teaching, (2) research or creative achievements, and (3) service. Prior teaching experience is not essential.
An associate professor must have the terminal degree in a pertinent discipline, except where the individual has achieved equivalent status through outstanding performance. An associate professor also must show superior achievement in either teaching or research/creative achievements and high levels of effectiveness in other areas of activity on which faculty are evaluated: (1) teaching, (2) research or creative achievements, and (3) service, with a balance consistent with the expectations of the discipline.
A professor must have the terminal degree in a pertinent discipline, except where the individual has achieved equivalent status through outstanding performance. A professor also must have attained authoritative knowledge and reputation in a recognized field of research or creative achievements and must have maintained high levels of effectiveness in teaching and in service.
Clinical faculty are evaluated on the basis of their effective performance in four areas of responsibility: 1) clinical teaching; 2) clinical scholarship; 3) clinical practice; and 4) service. Not all faculty are expected to contribute equally in all areas and the major emphasis is expected to be on clinical teaching and clinical practice. The emphasis in the four areas is determined at the time of appointment and in planning for each contract term. These criteria form the basis for evaluating faculty members for appointment, annual performance reviews, reappointment, promotion, and salary reviews.
Clinical faculty members are expected to perform effectively in all teaching situations. The majority of teaching activities are expected to be in clinical or laboratory settings. Criteria for judging effectiveness in teaching include but are not limited to the following: thorough knowledge of subject matter; imaginative, efficient, and rigorous methods of presenting course materials and evaluating learning; effectiveness in oral and written communication; active concern for students' advancement in the discipline, in the university, in the workplace, and in the community; ability to engender and nurture values of learning (e.g., curiosity, objectivity, enthusiasm, fairness, and critical thinking) in students; a record of producing students who, by virtue of effective teaching, achieve success throughout their university careers; pedagogical diligence, dedication, versatility, generosity, and creativity.
Clinical faculty members are expected to be excellent clinicians. Criteria for judging effectiveness in clinical practice include but are not limited to the following: demonstrated knowledge and advanced skills in selected clinical specialty area; evidence of continuing professional development; and evidence of clinical advancement and achievement.
The university encourages a broad spectrum of research and creative activity of the highest possible quality. The university's commitment stems from its obligation to advance knowledge, to educate both undergraduate and graduate students, and to serve the economic, cultural and health needs of society. Criteria for judging effectiveness in clinical scholarship include but are not limited to the following: the ability to publish research in peer-reviewed outlets; peer and/or professional recognition of the faculty member's scholarly and creative clinical work; and the contribution of the faculty member's scholarly work to the health needs of society.
Evaluation of a clinical faculty member's effectiveness in service is based upon both internal and external service activities. Internal service encompasses service to the faculty member's department and college as well as university-level activities. Internal service activities include but are not limited to the following: diligent service on departmental, college, or university committees; membership in the Faculty Senate and its committees; advising student clubs and organizations; and administrative assignments. Applicable external service encompasses service to the profession and to the public. External service activities include but are not limited to the following: activities in learned and professional societies; unremunerated services or consultation provided to business, government, cultural, educational, or health-care organizations; and service as an editor or referee for scholarly publications. Faculty members are also judged as to whether or not their collegial relationships contribute to the advancement of the college and university.
Appointment at the clinical instructor rank requires a minimum of a master's degree in nursing. An instructor must show potential to perform effectively in clinical teaching, clinical practice and in service.
Clinical Assistant Professor
A clinical assistant professor meets all the criteria for clinical instructor. The clinical assistant professor must hold a minimum of a master's degree in nursing and either have certification in an appropriate clinical specialty or demonstrate evidence of comparable clinical advancement/achievement. The clinical assistant professor must also demonstrate excellence in clinical teaching, leadership in incorporating clinical developments in educational programs, and beginning achievement in scholarly clinical work. Prior clinical practice or teaching experience is essential.
Clinical Associate Professor
A clinical associate professor must meet all criteria for clinical assistant professor. In addition, the individual must possess a doctorate in nursing or a related discipline or have significant relevant clinical teaching/clinical practice experience and certification in a clinical specialty. The associate professor must show superior achievement in clinical teaching, clinical scholarship, and clinical practice. Such achievement may be demonstrated through significant clinical contributions, an established record of publication, clinical research, and consultation in an area of clinical specialization.
In addition to meeting all criteria for the rank of associate professor, the clinical professor must also hold the doctorate in nursing or a related field. The professor must also present an established record of clinical consultation or research and a national reputation based on clinical expertise.
Faculty personnel files are maintained in a number of locations, including the department, the dean's office, the Office of the Provost, and the Office of Human Resources. The official faculty personnel file, including original, official transcripts, is maintained in the dean's office. The comprehensive file, described below, is assembled in the department and used for personnel decisions on reappointment, tenure, and promotion.
The faculty member and the department chair are responsible for preparing and maintaining a comprehensive file that adequately reflects the faculty member's achievements in the three areas of activity: (1) teaching, (2) research or creative achievements, and (3) service. The file must include, but is not limited to the following:
(a) A vita;
(b) The permanent record of the preceding years' performance evaluations, as identified in Section 7.8.1, and of preceding years' reappointment decisions, as identified in Section 7.8.2;
(c) Evidence of teaching competence and innovation, including but not limited to: courses taught, new courses developed, teaching materials developed, copies of syllabi and other course materials, summary of results of student evaluations of teaching, efforts in student advising, etc.;
(d) Evidence of research or creative achievements in the faculty member's discipline, including but not limited to: papers and/or books published (authors, title, journal, volume, page, year published); papers/books submitted for publication; papers/books in preparation; recitals, concerts, exhibits, and productions; research and other contracts/grants received (agency or foundation, title, dollar amount, time period); research proposals submitted but not funded; on-going unfunded research or pending unpublished reports; unpublished technical reports, case studies, analyses, book reviews, etc.; research honors and awards; evidence of acceptance of articles and/or other publications, etc.;
(e) Evidence of service to the university, the profession, and the public, including letters of appointment, correspondence, and recognitions.
(f) Copies of the faculty member's Annual Activity Reports since his or her last promotion.
The faculty member may supply any additional material that appears appropriate to the evaluation. Nothing may be added to or removed from the comprehensive file without the faculty member's knowledge.
In addition to the items in 7.7.1, the faculty member includes in the file a statement with a paragraph evaluating work completed for that year and a second paragraph describing professional development goals for the future.
In addition to the items in 7.7.1, the faculty member incorporates the following information into the file for the comprehensive reappointment review and for the tenure review:
(a) A statement summarizing the faculty member's research accomplishments thus far and a research plan for the future.
(b) Copies of the faculty member's teaching evaluations and other performance evaluations.
(c) If appropriate, the faculty member provides the chair with names and professional accomplishments of peer referees from outside the university who the faculty member believes are qualified to assess the quality of the faculty member's research and creative achievements in accordance with the procedure in Section 7.9.3.
In addition to the items in 7.7.1, the faculty member incorporates the following information into the file for promotion review:
(a) A statement summarizing the faculty member's research accomplishments thus far and a research plan for the future.
(b) Copies of the faculty member's teaching evaluations and other performance evaluations conducted since the last promotion review;
(c) For promotion to full professor, the faculty member provides the chair with names and professional accomplishments of peer referees from outside the university who the faculty member believes are qualified to assess the quality of the faculty member's research and creative achievements in accordance with the procedure in Section 7.9.3.
Each year tenured and tenure-earning faculty are evaluated to provide feedback regarding the faculty member's progress toward meeting expectations for promotion and tenure, for salary adjustment, and, in cases where the faculty member's contract is due to expire at the end of the academic year, for reappointment. If the faculty member's contract is not due to expire at the end of the academic year, the review is conducted in accordance with the annual performance evaluation procedure in Section 7.8.1. If the faculty member's contract is due to expire at the end of the academic year, the review is conducted in accordance with the comprehensive review procedure in Section 7.8.2. Reappointment is based on the current need of the university.
In addition to the evaluation process outlined below, faculty who hold appointments in research centers are evaluated by the relevant center director in addition to the normal evaluation process conducted within the academic unit. The chair of the faculty member's department notifies the center director that the evaluation is occurring and requests a written evaluation from him or her to be included in the faculty member's comprehensive file.
Annual performance evaluations for tenured, tenure-earning, clinical, and research faculty, based on the faculty member's record during the period April 1 of the past year to March 31 of the current year, are conducted by the department chair during the spring semester. The faculty member will submit her/his file as directed by the Chair.
(a) The faculty member provides in a timely manner representative evidence to the chair regarding teaching, research or creative achievements, and service. The chair should invite written comments and suggestions on the faculty member's teaching, research or creative achievements, and service from tenured members of the department prior to the performance evaluation meeting with the faculty member.
(b) The chair prepares a written evaluation of the faculty member's performance in the three areas of teaching, research or creative accomplishments, and service. The chair's written evaluation may also incorporate any comments and suggestions of other tenured faculty members in the department. The chair gives the written evaluation to the faculty member prior to the annual performance review discussion.
(c) The chair meets with the faculty member by April 30 to discuss his or her performance and the evaluation by the chair. To assure that the review is a two-way experience, the chair gives the person being reviewed a full opportunity to discuss strengths and weaknesses, problems, and ways in which the department chair, or other colleagues, might be helpful in improving performance.
(d) The faculty member may prepare a written response to the chair's written evaluation. The faculty member gives any such written response to the chair within one week after the performance review discussion.
(e) After the annual performance evaluation meetings, the chair meets with the dean to discuss the evaluation and provides the dean with copies of the chair's statement and any written response by the faculty member to the chair.
The chair's written evaluation and any written responses that may be made by the individual become part of the faculty member's comprehensive file.
If a chair's evaluation reveals significant concerns about the performance of a tenured faculty member, the chair's statement may include a recommendation that the dean convene a review committee of tenured faculty in the department to consider possible action. Following three consecutive years of performance concerns, the chair's recommendation must include a recommendation for a special review by tenured faculty in the department.
If the tenure-earning faculty member's contract is due to expire at the end of the academic year, a comprehensive performance evaluation will be conducted. Faculty in the first year of employment are evaluated according to section 22.214.171.124. Faculty who are not in the first year of employment are evaluated according to section 126.96.36.199.
The department chair notifies the faculty member of the upcoming comprehensive review by December 15 of the faculty member's initial year of appointment. At this time the department chair meets with the faculty member and discusses the comprehensive reappointment review process.
By January 15 of the academic year in which the review is conducted, the faculty member and the department chair prepare the faculty member's comprehensive file as described in Section 7.7.1.
After consultation with the dean, faculty member, and prospective committee members, the department chair appoints a review committee. The committee consists of at least two tenured faculty members from the candidate's department, or equivalent, and at least one tenured faculty member from another department in the candidate's college, or from outside the college in units without departments. In cases where there are not enough tenured faculty members in the department, the chair appeals to the dean for a variance in the composition of the review committee.
The review committee assesses the qualifications of the candidate for reappointment. In its deliberations, it considers the contents of the faculty member's comprehensive file and renders a professional judgment on the candidate's strengths and weaknesses. The review committee prepares a detailed written report stating its recommendation for or against reappointment and the reasons for the recommendation. A minority report may be included. The committee report indicates how many favor reappointment and is signed by all committee members. Affirmative recommendations for reappointment are normally for two academic years. Copies of the committee report are transmitted to the chair by February 1.
The chair prepares an independent recommendation report. The chair provides both the chair's recommendation report and the committee's recommendation report to the candidate and the dean by February 10. The dean reviews the reports with the provost and discusses possible actions by February 20. The dean notifies the faculty member in writing of the reappointment decision by March 1. The department chair meets with reappointed faculty to discuss concerns and to plan objectives for the next two years.
The department chair notifies the faculty member of the upcoming comprehensive review by December 15. At this time the department chair meets with the faculty member and discusses the comprehensive reappointment review process. By February 1 the faculty member and the department chair update the faculty member's comprehensive file as described in Section 7.7.1.
After consultation with the dean, faculty member, and with prospective committee members, the department chair appoints a review committee. The committee consists of at least two tenured faculty members in the candidate's department, or equivalent, and at least one tenured faculty member from another department in the candidate's college, or from outside the college in units without departments. In cases where there are not enough tenured faculty members in the department, the chair appeals to the dean for a variance in the composition of the review committee.
The review committee assesses the qualifications of the candidate for reappointment. In its deliberations, it considers the contents of the faculty member's comprehensive file and renders a professional judgment on the candidate's strengths and weaknesses. The review committee prepares a detailed written report stating its recommendation for or against reappointment and the reasons for the recommendation. A minority report may be included. The committee report indicates how many favor reappointment and is signed by all committee members. Affirmative recommendations for reappointment in the first year evaluation are normally for two academic years then annually or until the end of the reappointment candidate's probationary period (i.e., the year in which the candidate will be evaluated for tenure), whichever is shorter. Copies of the committee's recommendation and report(s) must be transmitted to the chair by March 1.
The department chair prepares an independent recommendation and transmits this report and the review committee's recommendation and report(s) to the dean no later than April 1. The dean reviews the reports with the provost and discusses possible actions by April 20. The dean notifies the faculty member in writing of the reappointment decision by May 1.
The probationary period for research faculty is from four to seven years, as specified in the letter of appointment and depending upon the qualifications and experience of the individual. All research faculty appointments are for one year, and probationary research faculty are subject to annual review prior to reappointment or nonreappointment. This review follows the same procedure as the annual performance evaluation of tenure-earning faculty members (7.8.1). Research faculty members who are reappointed beyond their stipulated probationary period are given an appointment that continues indefinitely without the need for annual review and appointment, until such time as support is not generated or notice of termination is issued by the appropriate university official.
Annual performance evaluation procedures for clinical faculty are the same as those for tenured and tenure-earning faculty outlined in 7.8.1.
The term of appointment for clinical faculty is specified in the letter of appointment. Clinical faculty appointments are for one to three years and are subject to annual review prior to reappointment or nonreappointment. Reappointment decisions are based on curricular, enrollment, and financial factors as well as annual faculty evaluation. Reappointment procedures parallel those for tenure-earning faculty.
The department chair notifies the faculty member of the upcoming review by the following dates:
December 15: Faculty after the first year of employment
December 15: Faculty in first year of employment.
At this time the department chair meets with the faculty member and discusses the reappointment review process.
During the academic year in which the review is conducted, the faculty member and the department chair prepare the faculty member's comprehensive file as described in 7.7.1 by the following dates:
February 1: Faculty beyond the first year of employment
January 15: Faculty in first year of employment.
After consultation with the dean, faculty member, and prospective committee members, the department chair appoints a review committee. The committee consists of at least two tenured faculty members and one clinical faculty member from the candidate's department. Committee members should be at a rank equal to or higher than the candidate being reviewed.
The review committee assesses the qualifications of the candidate for reappointment. In its deliberations, it considers the contents of the faculty member's comprehensive file and renders a professional judgment on the candidate's strengths and weaknesses. The review committee prepares a detailed written report stating its recommendations for or against reappointment and the reasons for the recommendation. A minority report may be included. The committee report indicates how many favor reappointment and is signed by all committee members. Copies of the committee report are transmitted to the chair by:
March 1: Faculty beyond the first year of employment
February 1: Faculty in first year of employment.
The chair prepares an independent recommendation report. The chair's recommendation takes into account not only the candidate's performance but also the curricular needs and financial resources of the college. The chair provides both the chair's and committee's report to the dean by:
April 1: Faculty beyond the first year of employment
February 10: Faculty in the first year of employment.
The dean reviews the reports with the provost and discusses possible actions. The dean notifies the faculty member in writing of the reappointment decision by:
May 1: Faculty beyond the first year of employment
March 1: Faculty in the first year of employment.
The department chair meets with reappointed faculty to discuss concerns and to plan objectives for the next year(s).
Reappointment procedures for full-time temporary and term faculty are the same as those for tenure-earning faculty in the first year of employment (188.8.131.52)
Recommendations for reappointment of adjunct faculty are the responsibility of a department or program reappointment committee consisting of at least three faculty members appointed by the department chair. The committee writes an evaluation of the individual's performance and a statement of the need for his or her continued services. Recommendations for reappointment or nonreappointment are submitted by the department or program chair to the dean as soon as possible prior to the end of the candidate's current appointment. The dean, with the approval of the provost, issues a letter of reappointment or nonreappointment.
As part of the reappointment committee's evaluation, the committee may, at its own discretion, review the rank of the individual; a complete written review of the criteria for this action is included as part of the overall reappointment recommendation.
For the purpose of this section, "Chairs of Departments," "Chairs of Programs," the "Associate Dean" in the College of Nursing, and the head of public services or other designated administrator in the Library are equivalent. Tenured faculty members in the department who are also academic or research administrators may serve on departmental tenure committees provided they are not in the review process at a higher level and/or do not serve in an advisory capacity to an administrator who must make decisions on tenure. In no case may an administrator serve in a review capacity that would result in dual consideration of a candidate.
The immediate supervisor informs the candidate by May 15 of the academic year before the tenure review that the tenure evaluation process is to begin. This tenure review process occurs no later than the last year in the candidate's probationary period and/or during the year as stated in the letter of offer, or in an earlier year that is agreed upon by the candidate and the candidate's immediate supervisor because of exceptionally meritorious or distinguished achievements. Candidates proposed for tenure during a year earlier than that in which a decision on granting of tenure must be made may withdraw from consideration at any point in the review process without prejudice to future tenure review.
Tenure is granted only to those faculty members who show evidence of substantial growth and future promise in the three areas of teaching, research or creative achievements, and service. Except in unusual circumstances, tenure will be granted only to persons with a terminal degree in an appropriate discipline.
Tenure may be awarded to professors, associate professors, or assistant professors with tenure-earning contracts. Board Rule 310 states that administrative appointments do not carry tenure. However, administrative officers may also hold an appropriate academic appointment and may earn tenure in that appointment under the criteria and procedures described below. Tenure recommendations for faculty members in executive and senior administrative positions must be considered by the tenured faculty of the department and must be reported to the Chancellor for approval by the Board.
Because external peer review has played a long-standing role in evaluating scholarly performance, letters from peer evaluators outside the university may be sought and are required for promotion to professor. Well in advance of their review for tenure or promotion, faculty members should consult with their chairs and deans about college requirements and the advisability of having external reviews for tenure and promotion to associate professor if they are not specifically required by the department or the college. Assessments of the candidate's scholarly research or creative achievements should be obtained during the summer prior to the academic year in which the candidate is being reviewed for tenure and/or promotion. A minimum of three letters is recommended.
The department chair, the candidate, and members of the tenure committee may propose names of appropriate external reviewers and provide supporting documentation about their qualifications. The chair will select four external reviewers from the proposed list to be contacted. Reviewers should have outstanding professional qualifications; otherwise a candidate could be disadvantaged in the review process. Dissertation advisors, mentors, and co-authors should not be asked to serve.
The candidate provides the department chair with a packet of information to send to outside peer reviewers. The packet will include a curriculum vitae and five representative examples of the candidate's research or creative achievements. The candidate also adds a signed form indicating whether or not the letters of assessment provided by the external reviewers may be kept confidential.
The department chair sends the packet of information to the reviewers who have been selected along with a letter requesting that they assess the quality of the candidate's research or creative achievements. In the event that fewer than three outside peer referees have returned their reviews by August 15, the department chair solicits additional reviews from among those who have been recommended according to the procedure given above.
The candidate, with the assistance and guidance of the department chair or equivalent, is responsible for updating the candidate's comprehensive file by October 1. (Section 7.7.1). If external reviews are used, the chair will add to the candidate's comprehensive file, a copy of the cover letter soliciting the peer reviews, a summary of the reviewers' qualifications, a list of the materials sent to the peer referees, the form on confidentiality, and the letters by the referees reviewing the quality of the candidate's research or creative achievements. With the knowledge of the candidate, additional material that has a direct bearing on the qualifications of the faculty member for tenure may be added to the comprehensive file at any stage in the review process by the department chair, the dean, or the provost.
By October 1 and after consultation with the candidate, the dean, and with the prospective committee members, the chair of the candidate's department forms the committee. If the chair is to be evaluated, the dean forms the committee. All full-time tenured faculty members in the department are eligible to serve on the tenure committee except administrators who are in the review process at a higher level and/or serve in an advisory capacity to an administrator who must make decisions on tenure.
The tenure committee will consist of all eligible faculty members in the candidate's department (or equivalent unit), and at least one eligible faculty member, selected by the department chair, from another department. Normally, the department chair serves as an ex officio nonvoting member only, and writes a separate report as described below. If there are fewer than three eligible faculty members within the candidate's department, other than the chair, then the department chair serves as a voting member of the committee and a single report is written. For faculty holding joint appointments the tenure committee consists of all tenured faculty members in the primary department and at least one tenured faculty member from the other department or program. In the case of joint appointments, tenure is granted only with respect to the primary department.
For faculty members being considered for both tenure and promotion to associate professor, the tenure committee will serve as the promotion committee as well.
The committee selects a committee chair from among its members. The committee considers information provided in the candidate's comprehensive file. If data in the file is questioned, or if new information is submitted to the file, the department chair will be informed. The department chair notifies the candidate that material has been added and requests a clarification of the data that is then added to the file. After the committee has deliberated, it chooses a member or members of the committee to write the committee report, which is made available to the department chair prior to submission to the dean. The department chair, providing he or she is not a voting committee member, submits a separate report to the dean. Each report must make one of the following recommendations:
(a) Recommend that tenure be granted effective with the beginning of the following academic year;
(b) Recommend that tenure not be granted in cases in which a decision on
granting tenure must be made; or
(c) Recommend that the decision on granting of tenure be deferred.
Option (c) is open only for those candidates who are being considered for granting of tenure during a year earlier than that in which a decision on granting of tenure must be made. See Section 7.9.1.
A written rationale including the positive and negative factors that influenced the decision(s) of the committee and chair must be part of the report(s). A minority report may be included. The committee report must be signed by all committee members and must include a vote.
By November 1, the comprehensive file and recommendation(s) of the committee and chair must be forwarded to the dean of the candidate's college. At the same time, the chair of the committee and, where applicable, the department chair sends to the candidate a short statement expressing which of three options listed above was recommended.
Prior to October 1, a nominating committee comprised of the dean and all department chairs prepares a slate of at least ten qualified nominees and conducts an election by October 15 to select the membership of the College Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee (PTAC) for those colleges organized into departments. Since the College of Nursing and the Library do not contain departments, there is no PTAC in these units. Whenever possible, the nominating committee shall encourage diversity in representation. All PTAC nominees must be tenured faculty members and hold the rank of professor or associate professor. No administrator (department chair or above), no candidate for promotion or tenure, and no member of the University Review Board may serve on the PTAC. No member of any college's PTAC may serve on the University Review Board.
All tenured and tenure-earning faculty members of the college who are not on termination notice have the right to vote in the election. At least five regular and two alternate members are elected to serve on PTAC for a term of one year. Alternate members replace regular PTAC committee members who are unavailable or who must disqualify themselves. In cases where there are not enough qualified faculty, the dean consults with the provost, who determines a suitable arrangement for a college-level review.
After the dean has received the recommendation(s) and comprehensive file from the department, the comprehensive file is referred to the PTAC for its review and recommendation. PTAC members exclude themselves from discussion and voting at the PTAC level in cases from their own units. Alternates, when available, serve instead. The PTAC considers only information contained in the comprehensive file. If any item is questioned or if additional information is requested, the chair of the PTAC makes the request or seeks clarification through the dean's office. The Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee prepares a report that may include minority reports. The report is signed by all voting members and a vote is recorded. The PTAC forwards its written recommendation and supporting rationale to the dean by December 1.
After the dean has received the recommendation and comprehensive file from the college PTAC, the dean reviews the documents and prepares a recommendation. This recommendation is in writing, includes a specific statement as to whether or not tenure should be granted, and includes the reasons and rationale for the decision. The comprehensive file and the dean's recommendation, together with the recommendations of the chair and the departmental and college committees, are forwarded to the provost by January 15. At the same time, the dean transmits the recommendations only, without the rationales, of the PTAC and the dean to the candidate and the candidate's department chair.
The University Review Board (URB) is composed of six faculty members, one from each of the colleges and one from the Library. URB members should be sensitive to conflicts of interest and should neither participate in discussions nor vote unless such participation is without bias. URB members must abstain from voting on a candidate if they have participated in a review at the department level.
Elections for the Review Board in each unit must be conducted before October 15 and are supervised by the appropriate dean. Elections for University Review Board precede elections for PTAC. Review Board members must hold the rank of professor or associate professor, be tenured, and have at least five years of full-time academic experience on university faculties. Members of the Review Board may not be a candidate for promotion nor hold an administrative position at the level of department chair or higher. A nominating committee composed of the dean and all department chairs prepares a slate of at least two qualified nominees prior to October 1. Tenured, tenure-earning, research, and clinical faculty not on termination notice are eligible to vote in URB elections. The term of office is two years and is staggered among the members. The deans notify the provost of the results of the election, and the provost convenes the URB which chooses a chair from its members.
The provost makes available to the URB comprehensive files of the candidates, and the recommendations and reports of the department, PTAC, and dean. All Board members must have the opportunity to scrutinize the appropriate files fully, and in private, before the Board meets to consider its recommendations.
The URB must ascertain that there is adequate documentation to allow determination that the candidate has satisfied the requirements in each of the categories of teaching, research or creative achievements, and service. The Board determines that the review process has been carried out properly and that appropriate procedures have been followed. The Board insures that the application of criteria for promotion and tenure is consistent throughout the university and consistent with the criteria delineated earlier in this chapter. Its report to the provost is based solely upon the recommendations and evidence submitted in the comprehensive files. If data in the files are questioned, the URB chair should request clarification through the Office of the Provost. The URB report is due to the provost by February 15.
The provost receives the University Review Board's recommendation and conducts an independent review prior to making a final decision. In conducting the review, the provost evaluates all information submitted and may utilize professional assessments from appropriate faculty and academic administrators, as well as the comprehensive file and all previous recommendations.
By March 15, the provost sends a letter to all candidates informing them of the final decision in their individual cases. Following written notification of denial of tenure, the faculty member may, upon request, be verbally informed by the provost of the reason(s) for not being granted tenure. Only upon request of the faculty member for written confirmation shall these reasons be given in writing. The request for written reasons must be made within four weeks of the date of written notification of denial of tenure.
Any candidate has the right to discuss the outcome of his or her candidacy with the department chair, dean, and provost, in that order. If, after discussing the case with the provost, a faculty member believes there is just cause for grievance, a petition for redress may be made to the Faculty Appeals Committee in accordance with the faculty grievance procedure in Appendix E. An official appeal must be initiated within 45 days of the date of the provost's letter providing the reasons for denial.
For the purpose of this document, "Chairs of Departments," "Chairs of Programs," the "Associate Dean" in the College of Nursing, and the head of public services or other designated administrator in the Library are equivalent.
A person holding a full-time faculty appointment, including research and clinical faculty, may be nominated for consideration for promotion by any full-time faculty member in any department or program who holds rank at least equal to the current or proposed rank of the candidate. Self-nomination is also permitted. The nomination must be in writing, be signed by its originator, include evidence supporting the nomination, and be addressed to the appropriate department chair or equivalent, or in a case in which a department chair is a candidate, to the dean. A candidate may withdraw from consideration for promotion without prejudice at any time by written request to the immediate supervisor. All nominations must be presented to the appropriate person by May 15 of the year before the promotion review. By April 15 of each academic year, the provost sends a notice to deans and department chairs reminding them of the May 15 deadline for nominations.
The process for nominating a faculty member for Emeritus Professor with less than 10 years of full-time service to the university must include the nomination procedure stipulated in the foregoing paragraph. The evaluation process for the candidate is the same as for a regular faculty member undergoing promotion review.
Evaluation of scholarly contributions by external reviewers is required for promotion to professor. For procedures, see section 7.9.3.
By October 1 of the year of the review, the candidate, in consultation with the department chair or equivalent, is responsible for updating the comprehensive file in accordance with Section 7.7.1. All relevant experience, whether at UAH or somewhere else, is to be included in the promotion consideration. After preparation of the comprehensive file by a candidate and the chair, all members of the involved department, program or college are given the opportunity to write a letter to the promotion committee chair to provide evidence in support of their position on the candidate's promotion.
Nothing other than the letters of nomination for promotion, the letters from peer evaluators from outside the university, letters from members of the department, program or college, and the committee's recommendations can be added without the candidate's knowledge. With the knowledge of the candidate, additional material that has a direct bearing on the qualifications of the faculty member for promotion may be added to the comprehensive file at any stage in the review process by the department chair, the dean, or the provost.
For candidates for promotion to professor, and other candidates as appropriate, the chair adds a copy of the cover letter soliciting the peer reviews, a summary of the reviewers' qualifications, a list of the materials sent to the peer referees, and the referees' letters reviewing the quality of the candidate's research or creative achievements to the candidate's comprehensive file.
After consultation with the candidate, dean, and prospective committee members, the chair of the candidate's department forms the promotion committee. If the candidate is the department chair, then the candidate's dean forms the committee. Only full-time tenured faculty members of equal or higher rank to the candidate are eligible to serve on the promotion committee. Administrators who are in the review process at a higher level and/or serve in an advisory capacity to an administrator who must make decisions on promotion may not serve.
For faculty members being considered for both tenure and promotion to associate professor, the tenure committee serves as the promotion committee. (See section 7.9.6). For other cases, the departmental promotion committee consists of all eligible faculty members in the candidate's department (or equivalent unit), and at least one eligible faculty member from another department, selected by the candidate's department chair. The department chair serves as an ex officio nonvoting member only. In addition, the candidate may select one other eligible faculty member from outside the candidate's department to serve as a member of the committee. If there are fewer than three eligible faculty members within the candidate's department, other than the chair, then the department chair seeks a variance from the dean.
The committee elects a chair from among its tenured members. The department chair makes the candidate's comprehensive file available to all promotion committee members beginning October 1. After the necessary deliberations by the committee have taken place and a decision has been reached, the committee recommends whether or not the candidate should be promoted and prepares a written report of the rationale including the positive and negative factors that influenced the committee's decision. The committee report is signed by all committee members and reveals the committee vote. A minority report is an option that may be included as part of the committee report.
By November 1, the chair of the committee forwards the committee's recommendation and report to the candidate's department chair or equivalent.
The candidate's department chair reviews the reports of the promotion committee and the materials in the comprehensive file. The chair prepares an independent report including a recommendation of whether or not to promote the candidate and a review of the evidence underlying that recommendation.
By November 1, the chair forwards the candidate's comprehensive file, a copy of the chair's recommendation and report, and a copy of the departmental promotion committee's recommendation, vote, and report(s) to the dean. At the same time, the chair informs the candidate in writing whether or not the chair and the promotion committee have recommended the candidate's promotion.
The procedures for selecting the college's Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee are detailed in Section 7.9.8. The dean makes the candidate's comprehensive file; the departmental committee's recommendation, vote, and report(s); and the department chair's recommendation and report available to all PTAC members beginning November 1. PTAC members must excuse themselves from discussion or voting on candidates from their departments or programs; alternates serve instead. By December 1, PTAC forwards to the dean its signed written recommendation, with minority reports if appropriate, and supporting rationale identifying the positive and negative factors that influenced the decision of the committee.
After the dean has received the recommendation and comprehensive file from the college PTAC, the dean reviews the documents and prepares a recommendation. This recommendation is in writing, includes a specific statement as to whether or not promotion should be granted, and includes the reasons and rationale for the decision. The dean forwards the candidate's comprehensive file, the dean's recommendation, the chair's recommendation and report, the departmental promotion committee's recommendation and report, and PTAC's recommendation and report to the provost by January 15. At the same time, the dean forwards to the candidate and to the candidate's department chair both the dean's recommendation and the PTAC's recommendation for or against promotion.
The procedures for selecting the University Review Board and for the conduct of the University Review Board's review of promotion and tenure candidates are detailed in Section 7.9.11. URB members should be sensitive to conflicts of interest and should neither participate in discussions nor vote on candidates unless such participation is without bias. URB members must abstain from voting on a candidate if they have participated in a review at the department level.
The University Review Board reviews the comprehensive files, recommendations, and reports for promotion and tenure candidates submitted to the Office of the Provost by the deans. The University Review Board files its report with the provost by February 15.
The provost receives the University Review Board's recommendation and conducts an independent review prior to making a final decision. In conducting the review, the provost evaluates all information submitted and may utilize professional assessments from appropriate faculty and academic administrators, as well as the comprehensive file and all previous recommendations.
By March 15, the provost sends a letter to all candidates informing them of the final decision in their individual cases. The provost also provides a written general announcement of promotions to the faculty.
Any candidate has the right to discuss the outcome of his or her candidacy with the department chair, the dean, and the provost, in that order. If, after discussing the case with the provost, a faculty member believes there is just cause for grievance, a petition for redress may be made to the Faculty Appeals Committee in accordance with the faculty grievance procedure in Appendix E. Upon the faculty member's request, the provost provides unsuccessful candidates with copies of the reports of the departmental committee, the department chair, the PTAC, the dean, and the University Review Board, and with the provost's written summary of assessments solicited in accordance with Section 7.9.12. Official appeals must be initiated within 45 days of the provost's letter informing the candidate of a negative decision.
The complete comprehensive file of each candidate, including the recommendations and rationale at each level, is returned to the appropriate dean for retention for one year or until appeals have been concluded. The file is then returned to the faculty member's department, if appropriate, according to college policies.
By April 15 of each academic year: The provost provides deans and department chairs with a list of faculty under mandatory tenure consideration during the coming academic year and reminds them of the May 15 deadline for promotion nominations.
By May 15 prior to year of review: The immediate supervisor informs tenure candidates that the tenure evaluation process is to begin. All nominations for promotion are submitted to chairs and deans.
By June 15 prior to year of review: If appropriate, the tenure and/or promotion candidate provides a list of peer evaluators to the department chair or equivalent and provides a waiver form about the confidentiality of peer review letters.
By October 1: The tenure and/or promotion comprehensive file is submitted to the appropriate office.
By October 1: Slate of nominees for University Review Board and PTAC selected.
By October 15: Elections of PTAC and University Review Board concluded. URB elected prior to PTAC.
By November 1: The departmental committee(s) recommendation(s) and report(s), and the chair's recommendation, are due to the dean.
By December 1: The College Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee submits its written recommendations and supporting rationale to the dean.
By January 15: The dean forwards all comprehensive files and recommendations to the provost.
By February 15: The University Review Board forwards all comprehensive files and recommendations to the provost.
By March 15: The provost informs all candidates of the outcome of their individual cases.
Faculty members are expected to give reasonable notice before terminating their appointment. Notifications of resignation should, in general, be early enough to obviate hardship to the institution and to provide for continuity of instruction.
University personnel who qualify for retirement benefits under the State Teachers' Retirement System of Alabama (TRSA) should contact the Office of Human Resources at least ninety (90) days before their anticipated retirement date. Timely notification allows for information required by TRSA to be compiled and for benefit options to be evaluated and selected by the employee.
The University, acting pursuant to constitutional and statutory authority, has the right to impose disciplinary sanctions upon a faculty member. Such sanctions may only be imposed, however, for adequate cause and in accordance with established procedures, all as set forth more fully in these sections. Sanctions will not be used to restrain faculty members in their exercise of academic freedom or other rights of American citizens
The dismissal of a faculty member or imposition of a major sanction on a faculty member is not purely an administrative decision. Rather, as set forth in the procedures below, it is an action that results from due deliberation of colleagues in the academic community.
In the formal proceedings provided below in which dismissal or other major sanction is sought, the burden of establishing adequate cause for applying such sanction will be on the academic administrator.
University personnel involved in a disciplinary proceeding are to maintain the confidentiality of information regarding the conduct of the faculty member who is the subject of the proceeding and related matters, disclosing such information to others only on a need-to-know basis.
Adequate cause for dismissal of a tenured faculty member or for dismissal of a faculty member during the term of an appointment must relate, directly and substantially, to the fitness of the faculty member to function in the role of teacher, researcher, and colleague in an academic community. Adequate cause for dismissal might include serious professional or personal misconduct; serious failure, without adequate justification and whether due to incompetence or refusal, to perform academic duties in accordance with generally accepted norms; conviction of a crime; serious violations of other law or of University policy; etc.
If the basis for seeking dismissal or suspension involves conduct by the faculty member that is known to the department chair or dean and that has occurred over a period of time, there should normally be a record of progressive discipline evidencing an attempt to allow correction of such conduct prior to the initiation of proceedings under this section.
The decision to initiate dismissal proceedings may be made by the faculty member's department chair or dean, with the concurrence of the Provost, or by the Provost. Prior to initiating formal proceedings, however, the department chair or dean shall confer with the faculty member in an effort to achieve, by means of thorough discussions, a mutually agreeable resolution. If such a resolution is achieved, no further proceedings under this policy will occur and no documents relating to dismissal will be retained in the faculty member's personnel records. If these efforts are not successful, a brief, nonprejudicial statement reciting that these informal measures were utilized but were not successful will be placed by the Provost in the disciplinary file.
Formal dismissal proceedings are initiated by furnishing to the faculty member a statement of the charges. The charges must relate to one or more of the recognized grounds for dismissal (as set forth in the discussion of "adequate cause" above) and must be framed with reasonable particularity, indicating in at least general terms the factual basis for the charges. The statement must further inform the faculty member that dismissal is being sought and that the faculty member is entitled to a hearing on the charges, if he/she desires and if the matter proceeds to that stage. If any interim suspension is being imposed, the faculty member should be so informed in the statement. The statement is to be prepared by the department chair or the dean and approved by the Provost, and it should be served upon the faculty member by personal delivery or by registered mail.
The Provost next appoints one or more faculty members to serve as preliminary action officers (PAOs), providing a copy of the statement of charges with the written notice of appointment. The PAO is to carry out the following duties:
a. Conduct a preliminary investigation of the charges, meeting with the academic administrator bringing the charges and with the faculty member to obtain further information. The PAO may interview other individuals and review documents as deemed helpful in gathering the facts relating to the charges. A written report is then made by the PAO to the Provost setting forth a summary of findings concerning the factual basis for the charges and a recommendation for action to be taken. Two actions may be recommended:
1. Referral of the case for a formal hearing. Such a recommendation is appropriate where, based on credible information acquired during the preliminary investigation and though there may be some doubt, the PAO believes that there is a reasonable basis for concluding that the charges are true and that they constitute adequate cause to warrant consideration of dismissal or other major sanction.
2. Dismissal of the case. Such a recommendation is appropriate in the absence of a "reasonable basis" conclusion, as stated above.
b. The PAO may attempt to facilitate resolution of the charges through informal consultation with the principal parties, mediation, or other voluntary means. If the principal parties agree to a settlement in this manner, the PAO summarizes the settlement in writing and informs the Provost. The case is then deemed closed.
Upon receipt of the PAO report, the Provost may accept and act on the recommendation (dismissing the charges or referring them for a formal hearing, as recommended), or the Provost may decide not to concur with the recommendation and dismiss the charges or refer them for a hearing as the Provost deems appropriate.
Referral of a case for dismissal proceedings may also be made pursuant to special University procedures established to address claims of discrimination, violation of ethical standards in research and other scholarly activity, and violation of conflict of interest policies.
If a case is to be referred for formal proceedings, the faculty member is so informed and asked to respond to the charges. The faculty member should, in a written response to the Provost, answer the charges and indicate whether a hearing is desired. A statement that a hearing is not desired will be regarded as a waiver of any right to a hearing, and the matter will proceed without a hearing. The faculty member's response should be timely and in any event should be provided within two weeks after receipt of the statement of the charges. The alternative responses of the faculty member and a summary of subsequent proceedings in each case are as follows:
a. The faculty member may admit or acknowledge the truthfulness of the charges and waive a hearing. The decision regarding dismissal will then be made by the Provost. The faculty member and the department chair or dean may, prior to such decision, confer with the Provost and/or submit to the Provost materials that they respectively contend should bear upon the Provost's decision. A decision by the Provost to dismiss the faculty member may be appealed by the faculty member, within forty-five days, to the President, whose decision will be final.
b. The faculty member may deny the charges and/or deny that the charges support a finding of adequate cause but waive a hearing. The decision regarding dismissal will be made by the Provost, with right of appeal to the President, in accordance with the general procedure outlined in a. above.
c. The faculty member may deny the charges and/or deny that the charges support a finding of adequate cause and request a hearing. A hearing will then be held before a faculty panel constituted as set forth below.
d. A failure to respond will be regarded as a general denial and a request for a hearing.
If the faculty member has requested a hearing in a dismissal proceeding, the following procedures will be followed:
a. The Provost will appoint an individual to act as proponent of the charges. The proponent is to be responsible for developing and presenting the case against the faculty member and handling other appropriate duties. The proponent may be any University employee, including the department chair or dean, who is not an attorney.
b. The faculty member may select an advisor to assist and represent the faculty member during the dismissal proceedings. The advisor may be any University employee who is not an attorney. The faculty member may also consult with an attorney. Such attorney may be present during the dismissal proceedings but may not participate as a representative of the faculty member before the faculty panel. An attorney who disrupts the flow of the proceedings may be excluded by the Hearing Panel.
c. The dismissal hearing will be conducted by a specially appointed Hearing Panel. The Hearing Panel will include five faculty members selected from among the members, regular or alternate, of the Faculty Appeals Committee (FAC). FAC members with bona fide reason for disqualification, such as bias, conflict of interest, or other cause, may remove themselves from the list of potential Hearing Panel members. A roster of remaining regular FAC members will be presented by the FAC chair to the faculty member and the proponent, each of whom may request the chair to remove any FAC member for cause and each of whom may strike up to two FAC members from the list without stated cause. The FAC chair will then select, by lot, five faculty from the remaining FAC members, and these five faculty will constitute the Hearing Panel. Alternate FAC members may be included on the roster if necessary to allow the operation of the foregoing selection process. The Hearing Panel will elect a chair from its members.
d. Notice of the date set for the hearing must be given to the parties at least twenty-one (21) days in advance of the hearing date.
e. The hearing will ordinarily be private, except that the faculty member will have the right, upon request to the Hearing Panel chair and absent compelling considerations involving privacy interests of other parties, to a hearing that is open to the public (barring only witnesses during periods when they are not testifying).
f. The burden of proof is on the party bringing the charges against the faculty member. This burden will be satisfied only by clear and convincing proof of the charges in the record of evidence, considered as a whole, presented to and received by the Hearing Panel. "Clear and convincing proof" refers to evidence of sufficient quantity and quality as would show that the truth of the charges is highly probable.
g. In the event the faculty member, after requesting a hearing, does not participate in the hearing process or withdraws in writing the request for a hearing, the Hearing Panel will nevertheless be convened without the faculty member to make findings of fact and provide recommendations regarding dismissal, if necessary or appropriate under the circumstances. The Panel may solicit and receive evidence from any source to assist it in developing its findings and recommendations.
h. The Hearing Panel will submit its findings and recommendations in a written report through the Provost to the President. It may conclude that adequate cause for dismissal does not exist, in which case it may recommend no sanctions or a sanction less than dismissal. The Provost will indicate concurrence or nonconcurrence with the report.
i. The final decision will be made by the President. If the President does not accept the recommendations of the Hearing Panel, the President will, within twenty-five (25) working days after receipt of the report, convey in writing to the Hearing Panel his/her position and allow the Hearing Panel an opportunity to respond in writing within five (5) working days. After receipt of any further report from the Hearing Panel, the President will render a final decision. No further right of appeal within the University, such as by use of the faculty General Grievance Procedure (see Appendix E) will be available to the faculty member.
j. The President will notify the faculty member of the decision in writing, to be hand delivered or sent by registered mail. Copies are to be sent to the Hearing Panel, the academic administrators involved in the case, the proponent, and the adviser. These parties will also be provided a copy of the Hearing Panel's report and any written communications between the President and the Panel. If the President decides on dismissal of the faculty member, an effective date (which may be the date of the notice) must be stated.
k. Except as modified above, the additional procedures set forth in Appendix E, section D.1-5, relating to grievance hearings by the Faculty Appeals Committee, are also to be used for dismissal proceedings, as appropriate and as adapted (e.g., the charged party generally relates to the "petitioner" in Appendix E).
All documents related to a disciplinary proceeding, from the preliminary action phase through a hearing, if any, become part of a disciplinary file that is maintained, after the conclusion of the proceeding, in the Provost's office.
A faculty member may be suspended or assigned to other duties in lieu of suspension pending the final outcome of the dismissal proceedings if, and only if, such action is deemed necessary to protect the faculty member, other members of the University community, or institutional property or processes from immediate harm. A decision regarding such interim suspension is to be made by the Provost. The faculty member may appeal an interim suspension to the President, whose decision will be final. Ordinarily, salary will continue during such an interim suspension.
If a department chair or dean believes that the conduct of a faculty member may not justify dismissal under the standards set forth above but is sufficiently grave to warrant suspension from employment without pay for a period of one month or more or reduction in salary, formal proceedings may be instituted seeking such action. The procedures set forth in Section 7.14.2 will govern such a proceeding. In the statement of charges, the faculty member should be informed that the proceedings may result in major sanctions, including dismissal.
Disciplinary action involving sanctions less severe than dismissal, suspension without pay for one month or more, or reduction in salary may also be imposed. Such minor sanctions may include, without limitation, an oral warning, a letter of reprimand, a revised work assignment, a suspension with pay or a suspension without pay for less than one month, the denial of a merit salary increase, etc. Such actions are within the authority of a department chair and/or dean, except that any suspension may only be imposed by the Provost.
Imposition of a minor disciplinary sanction will occur only for adequate cause, which may include any conduct or performance problem adversely affecting the fitness of the faculty member to function in the role of teacher, researcher, or colleague in an academic community, such as professional or personal misconduct; failure, without adequate justification and whether due to incompetence or refusal, to perform academic duties in accordance with generally accepted norms; conviction of a crime; violations of other law or of University policy; etc.
Procedurally, the faculty member will be given notice of the charge and the intent of the administrator to impose a minor sanction and thereafter will be allowed an opportunity to present a defense to the administrator. The administrator will conduct an investigation and review of the relevant circumstances as may be necessary to determine the validity and assess the seriousness of the charge.
In any instance in which a minor sanction is imposed under these procedures, the faculty member shall have full access to those avenues of appeal and redress afforded by the faculty General Grievance Procedure set forth in Appendix E.
Academic freedom of the faculty is indispensable to fulfilling the university's mission. The university endorses the following excerpt from the statement on academic freedom from the AAUP Policy Documents and Reports, (1990) (pp. 3-4):
(a) Teachers are entitled to full freedom in research and in the publication of the results, subject to the adequate performance of their other academic duties; but research for pecuniary return should be based upon an understanding with the authorities of the institution.
(b) Teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their subject. Limitations of academic freedom because of religious or other aims of the institution should be clearly stated in writing at the time of the appointment.
(c) College and university teachers are citizens, members of a learned profession and officers of an educational institution. When they speak or write as citizens, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline, but their special position in the community imposes special obligations. As scholars and educational officers, they should remember that the public may judge their profession and their institution by their utterances. Hence they should at all times be accurate, should exercise appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that they are not speaking for the institution.
The University adopts the following excerpt from the "Statement on Professional Ethics" from the AAUP Policy Documents and Reports, (1990) (pp. 75-76):
I. Professors, guided by a deep conviction of the worth and dignity of the advancement of knowledge, recognize the special responsibilities placed upon them. Their primary responsibility to their subject is to seek and to state the truth as they see it. To this end professors devote their energies to developing and improving their scholarly competence. They accept the obligation to exercise critical self-discipline and judgment in using, extending, and transmitting knowledge. They practice intellectual honesty. Although professors may follow subsidiary interests, these interests must never seriously hamper or compromise their freedom of inquiry.
II. As teachers, professors encourage the free pursuit of learning in their students. They hold before them the best scholarly and ethical standards of their discipline. Professors demonstrate respect for students as individuals and adhere to their proper roles as intellectual guides and counselors. Professors make every reasonable effort to foster honest academic conduct and to ensure that their evaluations of students reflect each student's true merit. They respect the confidential nature of the relationship between professor and student. They avoid any exploitation, harassment, or discriminatory treatment of students. They acknowledge significant academic or scholarly assistance from them. They protect their academic freedom.
III. As colleagues, professors have obligations that derive from common membership in the community of scholars. Professors do not discriminate against or harass colleagues. They respect and defend the free inquiry of associates. In the exchange of criticism and ideas professors show due respect for the opinions of others. Professors acknowledge academic debt and strive to be objective in their professional judgment of colleagues. Professors accept their share of faculty responsibilities for the governance of their institution.
IV. As members of an academic institution, professors seek above all to be effective teachers and scholars. Although professors observe the stated regulations of the institution, provided the regulations do not contravene academic freedom, they maintain their right to criticize and seek revision. Professors give due regard to their paramount responsibilities within their institution in determining the amount and character of work done outside it. When considering the interruption or termination of their service, professors recognize the effect of their decision upon the program of the institution and give due notice of their intentions.
V. As members of their community, professors have the rights and obligations of other citizens. Professors measure the urgency of these obligations in the light of their responsibilities to their subject, to their students, to their profession, and to their institution. When they speak or act as private persons they avoid creating the impression of speaking or acting for their college or university. As citizens engaged in a profession that depends upon freedom for its health and integrity, professors have a particular obligation to promote conditions of free inquiry and to further public understanding of academic freedom.
UAH recognizes contributions and achievements by its faculty not only through appropriate compensation and promotion, but also by permitting faculty members substantial freedom in arranging their academic lives. Although teaching, research and service to the university are the primary functions of UAH faculty, the university recognizes the desirability of making faculty skills available to outside entities such as business, government, professional societies, and other appropriate groups consistent with their commitment to the university. Providing outside services of a professional nature contributes significantly to the public welfare, offers opportunities for professional challenge and growth, brings recognition to the institution, and contributes to the improvement of teaching and research programs. For these reasons, UAH encourages faculty activities outside the university so long as the activity is consistent with the mission and goals of the university and does not compromise the university, or unduly limit the faculty member's ability to fulfill his or her primary obligations to the university.
The university has no interest in setting forth policies and procedures that may interfere with legitimate outside interests of faculty members. Issues of academic freedom are addressed elsewhere in this Handbook (See Section 7.14.1). However, by accepting employment with UAH, full-time faculty members confirm that their primary professional commitment is to the university. Outside obligations, financial interests or other activities shall not interfere with this primary obligation. For the Conflict of Interest Policy, see Appendix I.
Reasonable restrictions are set on the capacity of all individuals with faculty status employed by the university to function as judge or advocate in specific situations involving members of their immediate family. Faculty members may neither initiate nor participate in institutional decisions involving a direct benefit such as initial appointment, retention, promotion, salary, leaves-of-absence, and other such benefits to members of their immediate families. Immediate family is defined to include one's spouse, parents, grandparents, children, grandchildren, brothers, sisters, or similar relationships-in-law. No appointing authority may employ or appoint a person related to him or her within the fourth degree of affinity or consanguinity to any job or position within the university.
No one on the payroll of the university is permitted to tutor any student in the university for compensation except with the permission of the chair of the department or program in which the student is being tutored and only in those cases where the tutor has no direct connection with the course in which the student is being tutored.
Faculty members are authorized to engage in political activity provided that it does not result in a conflict of interest or interfere with their performance of assigned duties at the university. Public support of a political candidate or cause may be given by university employees if they clearly indicate that they speak for themselves and not for the university. Employees may not lend the name of their university positions or departments to the political campaigns of public candidates or to any causes that become matters of civic concern. Violations of this policy are grounds for dismissal.
University employees desiring to seek election to public office must first obtain written consent from the chancellor through appropriate reporting channels.
No university employee may use or permit to be used university resources, time, or property for or on behalf of any political candidate, campaign, or organization or for any contribution or solicitation of any contribution to any campaign or organization.
Political activity on the part of a university employee must comply with Rule 320 of the Board of Trustees of The University of Alabama and existing state and federal laws. Employees who have a question about their involvement in such activities should seek guidance and approval from the university.
For the purpose of maintaining Board practice and policy and of preventing the appearance of conflicts of interest, no chancellor, president, vice president, financial officer, or any other administrator whose position permits a substantial influence on the nature or extent of banking relations and transactions shall accept appointment or election as a director of a bank or savings and loan association.
No campus administrator may accept such an appointment until the president has made, and the chancellor has affirmed, a determination that the position is not one that permits a substantial influence on the nature or extent of banking relations and transactions.
1. Do not initiate or reciprocate a sexual or romantic relationship with a student enrolled in your class or under your supervision. Faculty entering into such relationships with an existing student are subject to judicial review, reprimand, and possible termination.
2. In cases of established sexual or romantic relationships between a faculty member and a student entering your class or coming under your supervision, disclosure of the relationship with your chair and/or dean is required to avoid or mitigate any potential conflicts of interest and/or sexual harassment claims related to the student in question. Faculty are to act in a professional manner with respect to the student during class hours to avoid conflicts of interest claims that may arise from other students in the class.
3. Faculty not disclosing existing sexual or romantic relationships with students in such cases and incurring repetitive incident claims are subject to judicial review, reprimand, and possible termination.
- Hits: 1713