Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure

Download: 

The Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure set forth, in language suitable for use by an institution of higher education, rules that derive from the chief provisions and interpretations of the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure and of the 1958 Statement on Procedural Standards in Faculty Dismissal Proceedings. The Recommended Institutional Regulations were first formulated by Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure in 1957. A revised and expanded text, approved by Committee A in 1968, reflected the development of Association standards and procedures. Texts with further revisions were approved by Committee A in 1972, in 1976, in 1982, in 1990, in 1999, in 2005, in 2006, 2009, and in 2013.

The current text, adopted by the Council as AAUP policy, is based upon the Association’s continuing experience in evaluating regulations actually in force at particular institutions. It is also based upon further definition of the standards and procedures of the Association over the years. The Association will be glad to assist in interpretation of the regulations or to consult about their incorporation in, or adaptation to, the rules of a particular college or university.


Foreword

These regulations are designed to enable the [named institution] to protect academic freedom and tenure and to ensure academic due process. The principles implicit in these regulations are for the benefit of all who are involved with or are affected by the policies and programs of the institution. A college or university is a marketplace of ideas, and it cannot fulfill its purposes of transmitting, evaluating, and extending knowledge if it requires conformity with any ortho­doxy of content and method. In the words of the United States Supreme Court, “Teachers and students must always remain free to inquire, to study and to evaluate, to gain new maturity and understanding; otherwise our civilization will stagnate and die.”

1. Statement of Terms of Appointment

a. The terms and conditions of every appointment to the faculty will be stated or confirmed in writ­ing, and a copy of the appointment document will be supplied to the faculty member. Any subsequent extensions or modifications of an appointment, and any special understandings or any notices incumbent upon either party to provide, will be stated or confirmed in writing, and a copy will be given to the faculty member.

b. With the exception of special appointments clearly limited to a brief association with the institution, and reappointments of retired faculty members on special conditions, all full-time faculty appointments are of two kinds: (1) probationary appointments; (2) appointments with continuous tenure.

c. Except for faculty members who have tenure status, every person with a teaching or research appointment of any kind will be informed each year in writing of the renewal of the appoint­ment and of all matters relative to eligibility for the acquisition of tenure.

2. Probationary Appointments

a. Probationary appointments may be for one year, or for other stated periods, subject to renewal. The total period of full-time service prior to the acquisition of continuous tenure will not exceed ____ years,1 including all previous full-time service with the rank of instructor or higher in other institutions of higher learning, except that the probationary period may extend to as much as four years, even if the total full-time service in the profession thereby exceeds seven years; the terms of such extension will be stated in writing at the time of initial appointment.2 Scholarly leave of absence for one year or less will count as part of the probationary period as if it were prior service at another institution, unless the individual and the institution agree in writing to an exception to this provision at the time the leave is granted.

b. The faculty member will be advised, at the time of initial appointment, of the substantive standards and procedures generally employed in decisions affecting renewal and tenure. Any spe­cial standards adopted by the faculty member’s department or school will also be transmitted. The faculty member will be advised of the time when decisions affecting renewal or tenure are ordinarily made and will be given the opportu­nity to submit material believed to be helpful to an adequate consideration of the faculty member’s circumstances.

c. Regardless of the stated term or other provi­sions of any appointments, written notice that a probationary appointment is not to be renewed will be given to the faculty member in advance of the expiration of the appointment as follows: (1) not later than March 1 of the first academic year of service if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if a one-year appointment terminates during an academic year, at least three months in advance of its termination; (2) not later than December 15 of the second aca­demic year of service if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if an initial two-year appointment terminates during an academic year, at least six months in advance of its ter­mination; (3) at least twelve months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years of service at the institution.

d. The institution will normally notify faculty members whose appointments are being renewed of the terms and conditions of their renewals by March 15, but in no case will such information be given later than _____.3

e. When a decision not to renew an appointment has been reached, the faculty member involved will be informed of that decision in writing by the body or individual making the decision; the faculty member will be advised upon request of the reasons which contributed to that decision. The faculty member may request a reconsid­eration by the body or individual making the decision.

f. If the faculty member so requests, the reasons given in explanation of the nonrenewal will be confirmed in writing.

g. Insofar as the faculty member alleges that the decision against renewal was based on inad­equate consideration, the committee4 that reviews the faculty member’s allegation will determine whether the decision was the result of adequate consideration in terms of the relevant standards of the institution. The review commit­tee will not substitute its judgment on the merits for that of the body or individual that made the decision. If the review committee believes that adequate consideration was not given to the faculty member’s qualifications, it will recom­mend reconsideration by the body or individual that made the decision, indicating the respects in which it believes the consideration may have been inadequate. It will provide copies of its findings to the faculty member, the body or indi­vidual that made the decision, and the president or other appropriate administrative officer.

3. Termination of Appointment by Faculty Members

Faculty members may terminate their appointments effective at the end of an academic year, provided that they give notice in writing at the earliest possible opportunity, but not later than May 15, or thirty days after receiving notification of the terms of appoint­ment for the coming year, whichever date occurs later. Faculty members may properly request a waiver of this requirement of notice in case of hardship or in a situa­tion where they would otherwise be denied substantial professional advancement or other opportunity.

4. Termination of Appointments by the Institution

a. Termination of an appointment with continuous tenure, or of a probationary or special appoint­ment before the end of the specified term, may be effected by the institution only for adequate cause.

b. If termination takes the form of a dismissal for cause, it will be pursuant to the provisions specified in Regulation 5.

Financial Exigency5

c. (1) Termination of an appointment with continuous tenure, or of a probationary or special appointment before the end of the specified term, may occur under extraordinary circumstances because of a demonstrably bona fide financial exigency, i.e., a severe financial crisis that fundamen­tally compromises the academic integrity of the institution as a whole and that cannot be alleviated by less drastic means.

[Note: Each institution in adopting reg­ulations on financial exigency will need to decide how to share and allocate the hard judgments and decisions that are necessary in such a crisis.

As a first step, there should be an elected faculty governance body, or a body designated by a collective bargaining agreement, that participates in the deci­sion that a condition of financial exigency exists or is imminent and that all feasible alternatives to termination of appointments have been pursued, including expenditure of one-time money or reserves as bridge funding, furloughs, pay cuts, deferred-compensation plans, early-retirement packages, deferral of nonessential capital expenditures, and cuts to noneducational programs and services, including expenses for administration.6

Judgments determining where within the overall academic program termination of appointments may occur involve con­siderations of educational policy, including affirmative action, as well as of faculty status, and should therefore be the pri­mary responsibility of the faculty or of an appropriate faculty body.7 The faculty or an appropriate faculty body should also exer­cise primary responsibility in determining the criteria for identifying the individuals whose appointments are to be terminated. These criteria may appropriately include considerations of length of service.

The responsibility for identifying individuals whose appointments are to be terminated should be committed to a person or group designated or approved by the faculty. The allocation of this responsibility may vary according to the size and character of the institution, the extent of the terminations to be made, or other considerations of fairness in judgment. The case of a faculty member given notice of proposed termination of appointment will be governed by the following provisions.]

(2) Before any proposals for program discon­tinuance on grounds of financial exigency are made, the faculty or an appropriate fac­ulty body will have opportunity to render an assessment in writing of the institution’s financial condition.

[Note: Academic programs cannot be defined ad hoc, at any size; programs should be recognized academic units that existed prior to the declaration of finan­cial exigency. The term “program” should designate a related cluster of credit-bearing courses that constitute a coherent body of study within a discipline or set of related disciplines. When feasible, the term should designate a department or similar adminis­trative unit that offers majors and minors.]

(i) The faculty or an appropriate faculty body will have access to at least five years of audited financial statements, current and following-year budgets, and detailed cash-flow estimates for future years.

(ii) In order to make informed recom­mendations about the financial impact of program closures, the faculty or an appropriate faculty body will have access to detailed program, department, and administrative-unit budgets.

(iii)  Faculty members in a program being considered for discontinuance because of  financial exigency will promptly be informed of this activity in writing and provided at least thirty days in which to respond to it. Tenured, tenure-track, and contingent faculty members will be informed and invited to respond.

(3) If the administration issues notice to a particular faculty member of an intention to terminate the appointment because of financial exigency, the faculty member will have the right to a full hearing before a faculty 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. The issues in this hearing may include the following:

(i) The existence and extent of the condi­tion of financial exigency. The burden will rest on the administration to prove the existence and extent of the condi­tion. The findings of a faculty committee in a previous proceeding involving the same issue may be introduced.

(ii) The validity of the educational judg­ments and the criteria for identification for termination; but the recommenda­tions of a faculty body on these matters will be considered presumptively valid.

(iii) Whether the criteria are being properly applied in the individual case.

(4) If the institution, because of financial exi­gency, terminates appointments, it will not at the same time make new appointments, except in extraordinary circumstances where a serious distortion in the academic program would otherwise result. The appointment of a faculty member with tenure will not be terminated in favor of retaining a faculty member without tenure, except in extraordinary circumstances where a serious distortion of the academic program would otherwise result.

(5) Before terminating an appointment because of financial exigency, the institution, with faculty participation, will make every effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position within the institution.

(6) In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial exigency, the faculty member concerned will be given notice or severance salary not less than as prescribed in Regulation 8.

(7) In all cases of termination of appointment because of financial exigency, the place of the faculty member concerned will not be filled by a replacement within a period of three years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement and at least thirty days in which to accept or decline it.

Discontinuance of Program or Department for Educational Reasons8

d. Termination of an appointment with continuous tenure, or of a probationary or special appointment before the end of the specified term, may occur as a result of bona fide formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction. The fol­lowing standards and procedures will apply.

(1) The decision to discontinue formally a program or department of instruction will be based essentially upon educational considerations, as determined primarily by the faculty as a whole or an appropriate committee thereof.

[Note: “Educational considerations” do not include cyclical or temporary variations in enrollment. They must reflect long-range judgments that the educational mission of the institution as a whole will be enhanced by the discontinuance.]

(2) Faculty members in a program being con­sidered for discontinuance for educational considerations will promptly be informed of this activity in writing and provided at least thirty days in which to respond to it. Tenured, tenure-track, and contingent fac­ulty members will be invited to participate in these deliberations.

[Note: Academic programs cannot be defined ad hoc, at any size; programs must be recognized academic units that existed prior to the decision to discontinue them. The term “program” should designate a related cluster of credit-bearing courses that constitute a coherent body of study within a discipline or set of related disciplines. When feasible, the term should designate a department or similar administrative unit that offers majors and minors.]

(3) Before the administration issues notice to a faculty member of its intention to termi­nate an appointment because of formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction, the institution will make every effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position. If placement in another position would be facilitated by a reasonable period of train­ing, financial and other support for such training will be proffered. If no position is available within the institution, with or without retraining, the faculty member’s appointment then may be terminated, but only with provision for severance salary equitably adjusted to the faculty mem­ber’s length of past and potential service, an amount which may well exceed but not be less than the amount prescribed in Regulation 8.

[Note: When an institution proposes to discontinue a program or department of instruction based essentially on educational considerations, it should plan to bear the costs of relocating, training, or otherwise compensating faculty members adversely affected.]

(4) A faculty member who contests a proposed relocation or termination resulting from a discontinuance has a right to a full hearing before a faculty 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. The issues in such a hearing may include the institution’s failure to satisfy any of the conditions specified in Regulation 4d. In the hearing, a faculty determination that a program or department is to be discontin­ued will be considered presumptively valid, but the burden of proof on other issues will rest on the administration.

Review

e. In cases of termination of appointment, the gov­erning board will be available for ultimate review.

5. Dismissal Procedures

a. Adequate cause for a dismissal will be related, directly and substantially, to the fitness of faculty members in their professional capaci­ties as teachers or researchers. Dismissal will not be used to restrain faculty members in their exercise of academic freedom or other rights of American citizens.9

b. Dismissal of a faculty member with continu­ous tenure, or with a special or probationary appointment before the end of the specified term, will be preceded by (1) discussions between the faculty member and appropri­ate administrative officers looking toward a mutual settlement; (2) informal inquiry by the duly elected faculty committee [insert name of committee], which may, if it fails to effect an adjustment, determine whether in its opinion dismissal proceedings should be undertaken, without its opinion being binding upon the president; (3) a statement of charges, framed with reasonable particularity by the president or the president’s delegate.

c. A dismissal, as defined in Regulation 5a, will be preceded by a statement of charges, and the individual concerned will have the right to be heard initially by the elected faculty hear­ing committee [insert name of committee].10 Members deeming themselves disqualified for bias or interest will remove themselves from the case, either at the request of a party or on their own initiative. Each party will have a maximum of two challenges without stated cause.11

(1) Pending a final decision by the hearing committee, the faculty member will be suspended, or assigned to other duties in lieu of suspension, only if immediate harm to the faculty member or others is threat­ened by continuance. Before suspending a faculty member, pending an ultimate determination of the faculty member’s status through the institution’s hearing procedures, the administration will consult with the Faculty Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure [or whatever other title it may have] concerning the propriety, the length, and the other conditions of the suspension. A suspension that is intended to be final is a dismissal and will be treated as such. Salary will continue during the period of the suspension.

(2) The hearing committee may, with the consent of the parties concerned, hold joint prehearing meetings with the par­ties in order to (i) simplify the issues, (ii) effect stipulations of facts, (iii) provide for the exchange of documentary or other information, and (iv) achieve such other appropriate prehearing objectives as will make the hearing fair, effective, and expeditious.

(3) Service of notice of hearing with specific charges in writing will be made at least twenty days prior to the hearing. The faculty member may waive a hearing or may respond to the charges in writing at any time before the hearing. If the faculty member waives a hearing, but denies the charges or asserts that the charges do not support a finding of adequate cause, the hearing tribunal will evaluate all available evidence and rest its recommendation upon the evidence in the record.

(4) The committee, in consultation with the president and the faculty member, will exercise its judgment as to whether the hearing should be public or private.

(5) During the proceedings the faculty mem­ber will be permitted to have an academic adviser and counsel of the faculty member’s choice.

(6) At the request of either party or the hearing committee, a representative of a responsible educational association will be permitted to attend the proceedings as an observer.

(7) A verbatim record of the hearing or hear­ings will be taken, and a copy will be made available to the faculty member without cost, at the faculty member’s request.

(8) The burden of proof that adequate cause exists rests with the institution and will be satisfied only by clear and convincing evi­dence in the record considered as a whole.

(9) The hearing committee will grant adjourn­ments to enable either party to investigate evidence as to which a valid claim of sur­prise is made.

(10) The faculty member will be afforded an opportunity to obtain necessary witnesses and documentary or other evidence. The administration will cooperate with the hearing committee in securing witnesses and in making available documentary and other evidence.

(11) The faculty member and the administration will have the right to confront and cross-examine all witnesses. Where the witnesses cannot or will not appear, but the commit­tee determines that the interests of justice require admission of their statements, the committee will identify the witnesses, disclose their statements, and, if possible, provide for interrogatories.

(12) In the hearing of charges of incompetence, the testimony will include that of qualified faculty members from this or other institu­tions of higher education.

(13) The hearing committee will not be bound by strict rules of legal evidence and may admit any evidence which is of probative value in determining the issues involved. Every possible effort will be made to obtain the most reliable evidence available.

(14) The findings of fact and the decision will be based solely on the hearing record.

(15) Except for such simple announcements as may be required, covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, public statements and publicity about the case by either the faculty member or admin­istrative officers will be avoided so far as possible until the proceedings have been completed, including consideration by the governing board of the institution. The president and the faculty member will be notified of the decision in writing and will be given a copy of the record of the hearing.

(16) If the hearing committee concludes that adequate cause for dismissal has not been established by the evidence in the record, it will so report to the president. If the presi­dent rejects the report, the president will state the reasons for doing so, in writing, to the hearing committee and to the faculty member and provide an opportunity for response before transmitting the case to the governing board. If the hearing commit­tee concludes that adequate cause for a dismissal has been established, but that an academic penalty less than dismissal would be more appropriate, it will so recommend, with supporting reasons.

6. Action by the Governing Board

If dismissal or other severe sanction is recommended, the president will, on request of the faculty member, transmit to the governing board the record of the case. The governing board’s review will be based on the record of the committee hearing, and it will provide opportunity for argument, oral or written or both, by the principals at the hearing or by their represen­tatives. The decision of the hearing committee will either be sustained or the proceedings returned to the committee with specific objections. The committee will then reconsider, taking into account the stated objec­tions and receiving new evidence, if necessary. The governing board will make a final decision only after study of the committee’s reconsideration.

7. Procedures for Imposition of Sanctions Other Than Dismissal

a. If the administration believes that the conduct of a faculty member, although not constitut­ing adequate cause for dismissal, is sufficiently grave to justify imposition of a severe sanction, such as suspension from service for a stated period, the administration may institute a proceeding to impose such a severe sanction; the procedures outlined in Regulation 5 will govern such a proceeding.

b. If the administration believes that the conduct of a faculty member justifies imposition of a minor sanction, such as a reprimand, it will notify the faculty member of the basis of the proposed sanction and provide the faculty member with an opportunity to persuade the administration that the proposed sanction should not be imposed. A faculty member who believes that a major sanction has been incorrectly imposed under this paragraph, or that a minor sanction has been unjustly imposed, may, pursuant to Regulation 16, petition the faculty grievance committee for such action as may be appropriate.

8. Terminal Salary or Notice

If the appointment is terminated, the faculty member will receive salary or notice in accordance with the following schedule: at least three months, if the final decision is reached by March 1 (or three months prior to the expiration) of the first year of probationary ser­vice; at least six months, if the decision is reached by December 15 of the second year (or after nine months but prior to eighteen months) of probationary service; at least one year, if the decision is reached after eigh­teen months of probationary service or if the faculty member has tenure.12

This provision for terminal notice or salary need not apply in the event that there has been a finding that the conduct which justified dismissal involved moral turpitude. On the recommendation of the fac­ulty hearing committee or the president, the governing board, in determining what, if any, payments will be made beyond the effective date of dismissal, may take into account the length and quality of service of the faculty member.

9. Academic Freedom and Protection against Discrimination

a. All members of the faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to academic freedom as set forth in the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, formulated by the Association of American Colleges and Universities and the American Association of University Professors.

b. All members of the faculty, whether tenured or not, are entitled to protection against illegal or unconstitutional discrimination by the institution, or discrimination on a basis not demonstrably related to the faculty member’s professional performance, including but not lim­ited to race, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation.

10. Complaints of Violation of Academic Freedom or of Discrimination in Nonreappointment

If a faculty member on probationary or other non­tenured appointment alleges that a decision against reappointment was based significantly on consider­ations that violate (a) academic freedom or (b) govern­ing policies on making appointments without prejudice with respect to race, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation, the allegation will be given preliminary consideration by the [insert name of committee], which will seek to settle the matter by informal methods. The allegation will be accompanied by a statement that the faculty member agrees to the presentation, for the consideration of the faculty committee, of such reasons and evidence as the institution may allege in support of its decision. If the difficulty is unresolved at this stage and if the committee so recommends, the matter will be heard in the manner set forth in Regulations 5 and 6, except that the faculty member making the complaint is responsible for stating the grounds upon which the allegations are based and the burden of proof will rest upon the faculty member. If the faculty member succeeds in establishing a prima facie case, it is incumbent upon those who made the decision against reappointment to come forward with evidence in support of their decision. Statistical evidence of improper discrimination may be used in establishing a prima facie case.

11. Administrative Personnel

The foregoing regulations apply to administrative personnel who hold academic rank, but only in their capacity as faculty members. Administrators who allege that a consideration that violates academic freedom or governing policies against improper dis­crimination, as stated in Regulation 10, significantly contributed to a decision to terminate their appoint­ment to an administrative post or not to reappoint them are entitled to the procedures set forth in Regula­tion 10.

12. Political Activities of Faculty Members

Faculty members, as citizens, are free to engage in political activities. Where necessary, leaves of absence may be given for the duration of an election cam­paign or a term of office, on timely application, and for a reasonable period of time. The terms of such leave of absence will be set forth in writing, and the leave will not affect unfavorably the tenure status of a faculty member, except that time spent on such leave will not count as probationary service unless otherwise agreed to.13

13. Part-Time Faculty Appointments14 

a. The terms and conditions of every appointment to a part-time nontenured faculty position will be stated in writing, including the length of ser­vice. A copy of the appointment document will be provided to the part-time faculty member.

b. In a case of dismissal before the end of the period of appointment, the administration will set forth cause for the action, and the faculty member will have the right to a hearing before a faculty committee.15

c. In a case of nonreappointment, if a part-time faculty member establishes a prima facie case, to the satisfaction of a duly constituted faculty committee, that considerations that violate academic freedom or governing policies against improper discrimination, as stated in Regulation 10, 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.

d. After having been reappointed beyond an initial term, a part-time faculty member who is subsequently notified of nonreappointment will be advised upon request of the reasons that contributed to the decision. Upon the faculty member’s further request, the reasons will be confirmed in writing. The faculty member will be afforded opportunity for review of the deci­sion by a faculty committee.

e. For part-time faculty members who have served for three or more terms within a span of three years, the following additional protections of academic due process apply:

(1) Written notice of reappointment or non­reappointment will be issued no later than one month before the end of the existing appointment. If the notice of reappointment is to be conditioned, for example, on suffi­ciency of student enrollment or on financial considerations, the specific conditions will be stated with the issuance of the notice.

(2) If the faculty member notified of nonreap­pointment alleges that the decision was based significantly on considerations that violate academic freedom or governing policies against improper discrimination, the allegation will be subject to review in the manner set forth in Regulation 10.

(3) When the part-time faculty member is denied reappointment to an available assignment (one with substantially identical responsibilities assigned to another part-time faculty member with less service), if the nonreappointed faculty member alleges that the decision was based on inadequate consideration, the allegation will be subject to review by a faculty 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 for fur­ther consideration accordingly.16

f. Prior to consideration of reappointment beyond a seventh year, part-time faculty members who have taught at least twelve courses or six terms within those seven years shall be provided a comprehensive review with the potential result of (1) appointment with part-time tenure where such exists, (2) appointment with part-time con­tinuing service, or (3) nonreappointment. Those appointed with tenure shall be afforded the same procedural safeguards as full-time tenured faculty. Those offered additional appointment without tenure shall have continuing appoint­ments and shall not be replaced by part-time appointees with less service who are assigned substantially identical responsibilities without having been afforded the procedural safeguards associated with dismissal as set forth above in section b.

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.17

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.18 Adequate cause for a dismissal will be related, directly and sub­stantially, to the fitness of the graduate student employee in his or her professional capacity regarding teaching, research, or other academic duties. 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 or professional 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.19 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.20

h. Graduate student academic or professional employees will have access to the faculty griev­ance committee, as specified in Regulation 16.

15. Other Academic Staff

a. In no case will a member of the academic staff who is not otherwise protected by the preceding regulations that relate to dismissal proceedings be dismissed without having been provided with a statement of reasons and an opportunity to be heard before a duly constituted committee.21 (A dismissal is a termination before the end of the period of appointment.)

b. With respect to the nonreappointment of a member of such academic staff who establishes a prima facie case to the satisfaction of a duly constituted committee that considerations that violate academic freedom, or of governing poli­cies against improper discrimination as stated in Regulation 10, significantly contributed to the nonreappointment, the academic staff member will be given a statement of reasons by those responsible for the nonreappointment and an opportunity to be heard by the committee.

16. Grievance Procedure

If any faculty member alleges cause for grievance in any matter not covered by the procedures described in the foregoing regulations, the faculty member may petition the elected faculty grievance committee [here name the committee] for redress. The petition will set forth in detail the nature of the grievance and will state against whom the grievance is directed. It will contain any factual or other data that the petitioner deems pertinent to the case. Statistical evidence of improper discrimination, including discrimination in salary, may be used in establishing a prima facie case. The committee will decide whether or not the facts merit a detailed investigation; if the faculty member succeeds in establishing a prima facie case, it is incumbent upon those who made the decision to come forward with evidence in support of their decision. Submission of a petition will not automati­cally entail investigation or detailed consideration thereof. The committee may seek to bring about a settlement of the issue(s) satisfactory to the parties. If in the opinion of the committee such a settlement is not possible or is not appropriate, the commit­tee will report its findings and recommendations to the petitioner and to the appropriate administrative officer and faculty body, and the petitioner will, upon request, be provided an opportunity to present the grievance to them. The grievance committee will con­sist of three [or some other number] elected members of the faculty. No officer of the administration will serve on the committee.

Note on Implementation

The Recommended Institutional Regulations here pre­sented will require for their implementation a number of structural arrangements and agencies. For example, the Regulations will need support by

1. channels of communication among all the involved components of the institution and between    them and a concerned faculty member;

2. definitions of corporate and individual faculty status within the college or university govern­ment and of the role of the faculty in decisions relating to academic freedom and tenure; and

3. appropriate procedures for the creation and operation of faculty committees, with particular regard to the principles of faculty authority and responsibility.

The forms which these supporting elements assume will of course vary from one institution to another. Consequently, no detailed description of the elements is attempted in these Recommended Institutional Regulations. With respect to the principles involved, guidance will be found in the Association’s 1966 State­ment on Government of Colleges and Universities.

 

Notes

1. Under the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, this period may not exceed seven years. However, the Association’s 2001 Statement of Principles on Family Responsibilities and Academic Work (AAUP, Policy Documents and Reports, 10th ed. [Washington, DC, 2006], 219–26) provides that “a faculty member be entitled to stop the clock or extend the probationary period, with or without taking a full or partial leave of absence, if the faculty member (whether male or female) is a primary coequal caregiver of newborn or newly adopted children,” that “institutions allow the tenure clock to be stopped for up to one year for each child, and . . . that faculty be allowed to stop the clock only twice, resulting in no more than two one-year extensions of the probationary period.” Back to text.

2. The exception here noted applies only to an institution where the maximum probationary period exceeds four years. Back to text.

3. April 15 is the recommended date. Back to text.

4. This committee, which can be the grievance committee noted in Regulation 16, is to be an elected faculty body. Similarly, the members of the committees noted in Regulations 4c(3), 4d(4), 10, and 13 are to be elected. A committee of faculty members appointed by an elected faculty body can substitute for a committee that is elected directly. Back to text.

5. See The Role of the Faculty in Conditions of Financial Exigency, in Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors (special issue of Academe), July–August 2013: 120–47. The definition of “financial exigency” offered in that report and adopted here is intended to be more responsive to actual institutional conditions and extends the standard of exigency to situations not covered by Committee A‘s previous definition. Back to text.

6. See The Role of the Faculty in Budgetary and Salary Matters, in Policy Documents and Reports, 149–52, especially the following passages:

The faculty should participate both in the preparation of the total institutional budget and (within the framework of the total budget) in decisions relevant to the further apportioning of its specific fiscal divisions (salaries, academic programs, tuition, physical plant and grounds, and so on). The soundness of resulting decisions should be enhanced if an elected representative committee of the faculty par­ticipates in deciding on the overall allocation of institutional resources and the proportion to be devoted directly to the academic program. This committee should be given access to all information that it requires to perform its task effectively, and it should have the oppor­tunity to confer periodically with representatives of the administration and governing board. . . .

Circumstances of financial exigency obviously pose special problems. At institutions experiencing major threats to their continued financial support, the faculty should be informed as early and specifically as possible of significant impending financial difficulties. The faculty—with substantial representation from its nontenured as well as its tenured members, since it is the former who are likely to bear the brunt of the reduction—should participate at the department, college or professional school, and institution-wide levels in key decisions as to the future of the institution and of specific academic programs within the institution. The faculty, employing accepted standards of due process, should assume primary responsibility for determining the status of individual faculty members. Back to text.

7. See Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities, in Policy Documents and Reports, 135–40, especially the following passage: “Faculty status and related matters are primarily a faculty re­sponsibility; this area includes appointments, reappointments, decisions not to reappoint, promotions, the granting of tenure, and dismissal. The primary responsibility of the faculty for such matters is based upon the fact that its judgment is central to general educational policy.” Back to text.

8. When discontinuance of a program or department is mandated by financial exigency of the institution, the standards of Regulation 4c above will apply. Back to text.

9. For cause relating to physical or mental disability, see Accommo­dating Faculty Members Who Have Disabilities, in Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors (special issue of Academe), July–August 2012: 30–43. Back to text.

10. This committee should not be the same as the committee referred to in Regulation 5b(2). Back to text.

11. Regulations of the institution should provide for alternates or for some other method of filling vacancies on the hearing committee resulting from disqualification, challenge without stated cause, illness, resignation, or other reason. Back to text.

12. For renewable term appointments not specifically designated as probationary for tenure, see “The Applicability of the ‘Standards for Notice of Nonreappointment’ to All Full-Time Faculty on Renewable Term Appointments,” in “Report of Committee A, 1994–95,” Academe, September–October 1995: 51–54. Back to text.

13. See Statement on Professors and Political Activity, in Policy Documents and Reports, 33–34. Back to text.

14. This regulation does not apply to faculty members with reduced loads who are tenured or probationary for tenure and who have the protections of academic due process that are provided in Regulations 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. It does apply to all other faculty members whose appointments are less than full time, whatever their rank or title and whether they are paid on a pro-rata, a per-course, or any other basis. Back to text.

15. As stated in Regulation 5a, “Adequate cause for a dismissal will be related, directly and substantially, to the fitness of faculty members in their professional capacities as teachers or researchers. Dismissal will not be used to restrain faculty members in their exercise of academic freedom or other rights of American citizens.” Back to text.

16. See Statement on Procedural Standards in the Renewal or Nonre­newal of Faculty Appointments (Policy Documents and Reports, 16–21), especially the following passages:

It is easier to state what the standard “adequate consideration” does not mean than to specify in detail what it does. It does not mean that the review committee should substitute its own judgment for that of members of the department on the merits of whether the candidate should be reappointed or given tenure. The conscientious judgment of the candidate’s departmental colleagues must prevail if the invalu­able tradition of departmental autonomy in professional judgments is to prevail. 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.”

If, in applying this standard, the review committee concludes that adequate consideration was not given, its appropriate response should be to recommend to the department that it assess the merits once again, this time remedying the inadequacies of its prior consid­eration. Back to text.

17. 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.

18. According to the Association’s Statement on Collective Bargain­ing (Policy Documents and Reports, 259–60), “Participation in a strike or other work action does not by itself constitute grounds for dismissal or nonreappointment or for imposing other sanctions against faculty members.” Back to text.

19. For comment on the term “adequate consideration” see footnote 16, supra. Back to text.

20. Nonreappointment conditioned on inadequate academic perfor­mance as a graduate student may be reviewed in the manner provided in Committee A’s statement The Assignment of Course Grades and Student Appeals, in Policy Documents and Reports, 127–28. Back to text.

21. Each institution should define with particularity who are members of the academic staff. Back to text.