The existing version of the regulation on graduate student employees in the Association’s Recommended Institutional Regulation on Academic Freedom and Tenure dates back to the 1970’s. Over the ensuing decades, graduate student employment in the academic workforce has changed substantially. It has been a growing component of the workforce during a time when the proportion of faculty members whose positions are tenured or probationary for tenure has sharply decreased. Moreover, graduate students are remaining longer in the workforce in that capacity as the length of time in many academic disciplines to obtain the terminal degree has been increasing. The enhanced use of graduate student employment brings with it enhanced concerns for the student employees regarding academic freedom, governance, and due process. A revised recommended regulation with a wider scope and more specification is needed and timely.
The following text draws distinctions between graduate student responsibilities as academic or professional employees and graduate students employed in other capacities. The text was prepared by a joint subcommittee of Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure and the Committee on Graduate and Professional Students, and was approved in June by both parent committees for publication. It is proposed as an additional regulation in the Association’s Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure, which is available in the AAUP’s Policy Documents and Reports (also known as the Redbook) or on the AAUP Web site. The Recommended Institutional Regulations set forth, in language suitable for use by an institution of higher education, rules that derive from AAUP policy statements. Comments are welcome on this proposed new regulation from Association members, chapters, and conferences and other interested persons and organizations. They should be addressed to the Department of Academic Freedom at the Association’s Washington office (academicfreedom@aaup.org).
14. Graduate Student Employees
a. The length, terms, and conditions of every university appointment of a graduate student employee will be stated in writing at the time of the initial appointment. A copy of the appointment document will be supplied to the appointee.1
b. The graduate student employee on recurring appointments will be advised at the time of initial appointment of the substantive standards, expectations, and procedures generally employed at the institution in decisions affecting renewal, and of any special standards adopted by the graduate student employee’s department or school. The graduate student employee will be advised of the time when decisions affecting renewals are made and will be given the opportunity to submit material believed to be helpful to an adequate consideration of his or her circumstances.
c. In a case of dismissal before the end of the period of an academic or professional appointment the graduate student employee will be provided with a statement of reasons for the action, and will have the right to a pretermination hearing before a duly constituted committee. The hearing need not conform in all respects with a proceeding conducted pursuant to Regulation 5, but the essentials of an on-the-record adjudicative hearing will be observed. In such a hearing, the administration will have the burden of showing adequate cause for dismissal. 2 Adequate cause for a dismissal will be related, directly and substantially, to the fitness of graduate student employees in their professional capacities regarding teaching or research. Dismissal will not be used to restrain graduate student employees in their exercise of academic freedom or constitutional rights.
d. Written notice of reappointment or nonreappointment will be issued to graduate student academic or professional employees no later than one month before the end of the existing appointment.
e. Graduate student academic employees who are notified of nonreappointment will be advised upon request of the reasons that contributed to the decision. Upon the employee’s further request, the reasons will be confirmed in writing. The employee will be afforded the opportunity for review of the decision by a duly constituted committee.
f. In a case of nonreappointment, if a graduate student academic or professional employee establishes a prima facie case, to the satisfaction of a duly constituted committee, that considerations that violate academic freedom or governing policies against improper discrimination based on race, sex, national origin, age, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation significantly contributed to his or her nonretention, it is incumbent on those who made the decision to come forward with evidence in support of that decision.
g. If a graduate student employee who is denied reappointment to an available academic or professional position alleges that the decision was based on inadequate consideration, the allegation will be subject to review by a duly constituted body. If this body, while not providing judgment on the merits of the decision, finds that the consideration has been inadequate in any substantial respects, it will remand the matter, recommending to the department that it assess the merits once again, this time remedying the inadequacies of its prior consideration. 4
h. Graduate student academic or professional employees will have access to the faculty grievance committee, as specified in Regulation 16.
Endnotes:
1. Universities assume responsibilities when they accept graduate students with a promise of financial support. Graduate student employees have a legitimate expectation of fulfillment of the promise unless legitimate cause to terminate support is shown. If the cause relates to the graduate student employee’s work and/or academic performance or progress, the employee should be given sufficient time and opportunity to redress the concern. Back to text
2. According to the Association’s Statement on Collective Bargaining, “Participation in a strike or other work action does not by itself constitute grounds for nonrenewal or dismissal.” Back to text
3. The term “adequate consideration” refers essentially to procedural rather than to substantive issues: Was the decision conscientiously arrived at? Was all available evidence bearing on the relevant performance of the candidate sought out and considered? Was there adequate deliberation by the department over the import of the evidence in the light of the relevant standards? Were irrelevant and improper standards excluded from consideration? Was the decision a bona fide exercise of professional academic judgment? These are the kinds of questions suggested by the standard “adequate consideration.” Back to text
4. Nonreappointment conditioned on inadequate academic performance as a graduate student may be reviewed in the manner provided in Committee A’s statement on The Assignment of Course Grades and Student Appeals. Back to text