Faculty Handbook: Faculty Appointment, Tenure, and Promotion Guidelines | Faculty & Staff

#Faculty Appointment Policies

Faculty Hiring Procedures
1. Southern Arkansas University adheres to Higher Learning Commission guidelines on “Determining Quality Faculty.” These guidelines state that “qualified faculty members are identified primarily by credentials, but other factors, including but not limited to equivalent experience, may be considered by the institution in determining whether a faculty member is qualified.”
2. When a mutual agreement between the administration and the dean of a college indicates a faculty position opening, the following procedures are used: A personnel requisition form is to be completed by the supervisor and signed by the appropriate dean, the Provost, and the President. Upon receipt of the approved personnel requisition form in the Office of Human Resources, a representative from the Office of Human Resources will meet with the person(s) primarily responsible for the employment decision in order to explain the University’s employment procedures and to discuss other considerations regarding the position opening. The Office of Human Resources will advertise the position internally and externally and conduct standard correspondence with applicants.
3. The person or persons responsible for the hiring recommendation as designated by the administration have the responsibility of screening and interviewing applicants and recommending to the Provost the candidate to fill the position. If interviews are required, the administration will establish an appropriate number of interviews (generally at least three for faculty positions and five for dean and vice president positions). The University will pay the costs of one visit to campus for the selected applicants. The formal written contract will be offered by the President or designee. Upon signing a contract, the candidate becomes a member of the faculty. See the section on search policies.
4. Beginning at the time of employment and continuing throughout the term of employment, a set of basic records is maintained in the Office of Human Resources on the employee.
Academic Rank Structure
1. Academic personnel are classified in five categories: Distinguished Professor, Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor, and Instructor.
2. Academic personnel are defined here to include all members of the staff who teach either on a full-time or part-time basis. Academic personnel include both tenure-track and non-tenure-track appointments, except as noted in the following paragraph. Those who teach but whose duties are primarily administrative hold one of the above ranks, but in all official publications of the University, they are referred to by their administrative title only.
3. Temporary, less-than-full-time teachers are designated as adjunct professors or adjunct instructors. Adjunct professors and adjunct instructors hold non-tenure-track appointments and are not covered by the tenure and promotion guidelines.
  1. Criteria for Initial Academic Rank Appointment. The following criteria identify the minimum qualifications for academic ranks at the time of initial appointment. All references to academic credentials include only accepted degrees and hours of graduate study related to the primary teaching field. All references to professional experience include service at this or some other institution of higher education and other appropriate experience related to the primary teaching field. (For purposes of determining time in rank for subsequent promotions, credit for prior professional experience is negotiated at the time of initial appointment and is limited to a maximum of two years.)
  2. Minimum Qualifications for Academic Ranks
    1. Distinguished Professor
      1. Academic credentials in the discipline:
      2. an earned doctorate, comparable terminal degree, or equivalent scholarly achievement (Ph.D., Ed.D., D.B.A., D.A., J.D., L.L.D., M.F.A., etc.)
      3. national recognition as a scholar and teacher based upon research, teaching, and/or scholarly pursuits at this or some other institution
    2. Professor
      1. Academic credentials in the discipline and professional experience:
      2. an earned doctorate, or comparable terminal degree, with a minimum of nine years of professional service, and
      3. demonstrated effectiveness as a teacher on the college level, and
      4. demonstrated scholarly activity, and
      5. demonstrated professional service.
    3. Associate Professor
      1. Academic credentials in the discipline and professional experience:
      2. an earned doctorate, or comparable terminal degree, with a minimum of four years of professional service, or
      3. ABD with commitment to complete the doctorate with a minimum of six years of professional service, or
      4. a master’s degree plus 60 hours in field with a minimum of six years of professional service, or
      5. a master’s degree plus 45 hours in field with a minimum of eight years of professional service, or
      6. a master’s degree plus 30 hours in field with a minimum of ten years of professional service, and
      7. demonstrated effectiveness as a teacher on the college level, and
      8. demonstrated scholarly activity, and
      9. demonstrated professional service.
    4. Assistant Professor
      1. Academic credentials in the discipline and professional experience:
      2. an earned doctorate, comparable terminal degree, or ABD with commitment to complete the doctorate, or
      3. a master’s degree plus 12 hours in field with a minimum of three years of professional service, or
      4. a master of science in nursing with a minimum of three years of professional experience.
    5. Instructor
      1. Academic credentials in the discipline:
      2. Faculty should possess a master’s degree and have completed at least 18 graduate hours in the discipline or subfield of the undergraduate credit courses for which they are the instructor of record and a terminal degree in the discipline if teaching graduate courses, or
      3. Academic colleges may choose to assign faculty to teach courses or to employ faculty to positions based upon their equivalent experience rather than by their formal credentials. The deans of the colleges must follow HLC and University guidelines in documenting that these faculty have “tested experience” that may include defined skills relevant to the courses, a record of accomplishment throughout their career and profession, and credentials or certifications that confirm expertise in the field. A documentation letter of tested experience from the appropriate dean and approved by the Provost must be included in the personnel files of the faculty employed under these criteria, or
      4. A bachelor of science in nursing may be appropriate for some courses.
  3. The above criteria are minimum qualifications for each academic rank. They are not intended to suggest that faculty members be assigned to the highest category for which they are technically qualified. The total evaluation of faculty members is a process that requires the exercise of judgment. Decisions as to the initial rank assigned to individual faculty members are rightfully an administrative function. Such decisions should be based on careful consideration of the above criteria; of the individual’s academic credentials, experience, teaching competence, and scholarship; and of supply and demand in the field, usefulness to the institution, and other factors.

#Contracts

All members of the instructional and administrative staff are offered formal written contracts each year. These contracts outline the title of the position to which the individual is appointed, the salary, and term of the appointment. A sample contract is found here.
Members of the instructional staff who have achieved tenure are offered a contract each year, and it is understood that the contract will be offered automatically, unless the individual retires, resigns, or formal charges are made against the instructor as provided in the regulations covering tenure.
Contracts will be distributed after the Board of Trustees the new budget. It is expected that contracts will be accepted or rejected in writing within ten (10) days of receipt.
The position of faculty members on the new salary schedule will be determined by the President after consultation with the Provost and after the Provost has received recommendations from the deans. Special consideration will be given to faculty members who are continuing their graduate work, those who are doing especially effective teaching in the classroom and who are exerting constructive leadership in other campus roles, and those who are actively engaged in research.

#Criteria and Specific Rules for Tenure

Criteria for Evaluation of Applications for Tenure
1. Evaluation of applications for tenure will be based upon 1) assessments of the applicant’s teaching effectiveness; scholarly activity; and service to the University, profession, and community, consistent with departmental and/or college policies and the professional judgment of those reviewing the application; and 2) evaluation of progress in achieving developmental goals, consistent with the applicant’s Professional Development Plans. To be eligible for tenure, a faculty member must have at least a master’s degree and have a tenure-track appointment. In most departments however, a terminal degree will normally be required.
  1. Departments or colleges may have additional requirements for attaining tenure, which are agreed to at the time of employment. These requirements supplement, but do not replace, standards that are enumerated in this Handbook. College and school requirements can be found here:
    - CSE
    - DCLPA
    - RCB
    - CEHP
    - Graduate
2. Evaluation of applications for tenure will not be based upon an arbitrary number of years at the University; however, an adequate amount of time is necessary for a faculty member to demonstrate competence and for the University to evaluate it. Therefore, the following minimum probationary periods should be followed:
  1. 1. Professor — after 2 completed years
    2. Associate Professor — after 3 completed years
    3. Assistant Professor — after 4 completed years
  2. Fixed-term faculty members (Instructors and Adjunct Faculty) are not eligible for tenure.
3. Typically, the probationary period is longer than the above stated MINIMUM probationary period. NORMAL PROBATIONARY PERIODS are as follows:
  1. 1. Professor — after 3 completed years
    2. Associate Professor — after 4 completed years
    3. Assistant Professor — after 5 completed years
4. In the case of Assistant Professors, tenure should only be granted prior to the NORMAL PROBATIONARY PERIOD if the application documents extraordinary performance in at least one of the three areas of evaluations (i.e., teaching, scholarship, and service).
5. Barring tenure negotiations at the time of hire, in the case of Assistant Professors, the tenure application should normally be made at the same time as the application for promotion.
6. Exceptions to the above probationary periods may be made by the President of the University in extraordinary cases.
Notice of Attainment or Denial of Tenure
1. The faculty member must be given written notice of attainment or denial of tenure at the end of the sixth year. (A one-year approved leave of absence granted by the University counts as one year in the probationary period.) A faculty member who is denied tenure at the end of the sixth year will receive a terminal contract for the seventh year, after which their employment with the University will conclude.
2. Faculty members who are denied tenure in any year prior to their sixth year of employment will have the opportunity to apply for tenure on one additional occasion no later than their sixth year of employment.
3. During the probationary period, notice of non-reappointment or of intention not to recommend reappointment to the Board of Trustees will be given in accordance with the following:
  1. not later than March 1 of the first year of academic service,
  2. not later than December 15 of the second year of academic service, and
  3. at least twelve months before expiration of an appointment after two or more years at the University.
Procedures for Appeal of Tenure Decisions
1. All applications for tenure will be evaluated and forwarded for further review through all levels of the evaluation process, up to and including the Board of Trustees, unless withdrawn by the applicant.
2. The chair, College Council, dean, University Council, Provost, and President will each notify the applicant within five (5) days of the due date given on the calendar that they may find documents in favor of or opposed to their tenure and/or promotion process within the University approved system. For each applicant who receives a negative recommendation, the notification will state the general reasons for such recommendation, based upon relevant criteria.
3. Within five (5) working days of receipt of notification of a negative recommendation, an applicant may submit a written appeal to the next level of review (i.e., College Committee, Dean, University Committee, Provost, or President), which includes a brief statement (not exceeding two pages) explaining reasons for the appeal. The written appeal will be added to the application package, and a copy of the written appeal will be sent to the department chair for informational purposes. An applicant who receives a negative recommendation from the President may appeal by letter to the SAU Board of Trustees.

#Criteria and Specific Rules for Promotion

Criteria to Determine Eligibility for Promotion
1. Evaluation of applications for promotion will be based upon 1) assessments of the applicant’s teaching effectiveness; scholarly activity; and service to the University, profession, and community, consistent with departmental and/or college policies and the professional judgment of those reviewing the application; and 2) evaluation of progress in achieving developmental goals, consistent with the applicant’s Professional Development Plans. Eligibility for promotion consideration is determined based on academic credentials, years of professional experience, and time in rank. Academic credentials and years of professional experience are evaluated in terms of the Criteria for Initial Rank Appointment (Part 1.A in this section). The minimum times in rank to be eligible to apply for promotion are as follows:
  1. Associate Professor to Professor — after 5 years completed years
  2. Assistant Professor to Associate Professor — after 4 completed years
2. Fixed-term faculty members (Instructors and Adjunct Faculty) are not eligible for promotion.
3. The normal times in rank to be eligible to apply for promotion are as follows:
  1. Associate Professor to Professor — after 5 completed years
  2. Assistant Professor to Associate Professor — after 5 completed years
4. In the case of Assistant Professors, promotion to Associate Professor should only be granted prior to the NORMAL PROBATION PERIOD if the application documents extraordinary performance in at least one of the three areas of evaluations (i.e., teaching, scholarship, and service).
5. Exceptions to the above time in rank requirements may be made in cases of extraordinary merit.
Criteria Evaluated to Determine Merit of Promotion
1. Satisfaction of the eligibility requirements does not constitute grounds for recommendation of promotion. Rather, evaluations will include consideration of all of the following: teaching effectiveness, scholarly activity, and professional service.
  1. Demonstrated effectiveness as a teacher is a necessary criterion and is a primary consideration in all promotion decisions.
  2. Scholarly activity—broadly defined to include published and unpublished research, creative works, and professional academic growth—is a consideration in all promotion decisions.
  3. Service to the University, the profession, and the community is a consideration in all promotion decisions.
Standards for Evaluation of Applications for Promotion
1. Teaching effectiveness, scholarly activity, and professional service are evaluated as excellent, commendable, satisfactory, or unsatisfactory, based on documentation submitted in the application for promotion. Applicants for promotion should document activities meriting promotion as follows:
  1. For promotion to professor: document excellent performance in either teaching effectiveness or scholarly activity with, at minimum, a commendable evaluation in all categories.
  2. For promotion to associate professor: document commendable teaching effectiveness, scholarly activity, and professional service.
Operational Definitions for Evaluating Merit
1. Promotions from one academic rank to another are based on evaluations of merit. These are evaluations based on the experiences or professional judgment of the evaluator, guided by departmental and/or college policies.
  1. Teaching effectiveness – Evaluation of teaching effectiveness is based on a combination of accomplishments and contributions, including the following: student evaluations, peer evaluations, courses taught, alumni evaluations, student performance assessments, pedagogical methodologies, summaries of individualized student supervision, and awards and honors received for teaching effectiveness. See the Documentation of Criteria for Promotion and Tenure section.
  2. Scholarly activity – Evaluation of scholarly activity is based on a combination of contributions, including those which are listed in the Documentation of Criteria for Promotion and Tenure and Department/College provided guidelines. Demonstration of scholarly activity is required in all promotion decisions. Generally speaking, a record of continuous scholarly activity—a commitment to scholarship rather than one-time or intermittent scholarly activity—is important, and the level of scholarly activity is expected to increase as one progresses through the academic ranks.
    1. Excellent scholarly activity is demonstrated by adding a combination of more substantial contributions, including, for example, substantial scholarly contributions at the national and/or regional level evidenced by publication of books and/or articles in refereed/peer-reviewed professional journals or by juried presentations in the arts; and substantial scholarly presentations at recognized, refereed/peer-reviewed national and/or regional professional meetings.
    2. Commendable scholarly activity is demonstrated by a combination of additional activities, including, for example, scholarly contributions at the state or regional level evidenced by publications, or presentations or by juried presentations in the arts; participation in regional or state professional meetings; and a continual record of attendance at national, regional, and/or state professional meetings
    3. To demonstrate satisfactory scholarly activity, all faculty are expected to perform sufficient scholarly activity to maintain competency in their teaching areas and to ensure that the content in courses they teach is consistent with accepted standards in the field. Typically, satisfactory scholarly activity is demonstrated by a combination of activities, including, for example, expansion of the faculty member’s knowledge base, contribution to curricular development, and attendance at professional meetings.
  3. Service – Evaluation of service is based on a combination of contributions, including those that are listed in the Documentation of Criteria for Promotion and Tenure. Evaluators consider both the quantity and level of service.

1. Procedures for Appeal of Promotion Decisions
  1. All applications for promotion will continue in the evaluating process at least through Level Four unless withdrawn by the applicant. If an application for promotion receives three successive negative recommendations from the College Council, dean, and University Council, that application will not receive further consideration and will not be forwarded to Level Five, the Provost. All other applications will be forwarded for further review.
  2. The chair, College Council, dean, University Council, Provost, and President will each notify the applicant within five (5) days of the due date given on the calendar that they may find documents in favor of or opposed to their tenure and/or promotion process within the University approved system. For each applicant who receives a negative recommendation, the notification will state the general reasons for such recommendation, based upon relevant criteria.
  3. How a faculty member may appeal: Any faculty member may appeal a negative recommendation for promotion. Within five (5) working days of receipt of any negative recommendation, an applicant may submit a written appeal to the next level, which should include a brief statement (not exceeding two pages) explaining reasons for the appeal. The written appeal will be added to the application package, and a copy of the written appeal will be sent to the department chair. An applicant who receives a negative recommendation from the President may appeal by letter to the SAU Board of Trustees.
  4. All documentation of criteria for tenure and promotion will be submitted electronically through the University’s approved system.
  5. Applications for tenure and promotion should include documentation of all criteria to be considered as specified by each College. Unless otherwise specified, evidence presented should be for the time period since the last promotion or since the initial appointment if no promotion has been received (referred to as the Application Timeframe).
  6. Applications should include the information presented below. The information required for the sections below must have originated in the University’s approved system or have been uploaded to the online system by the applicant or relevant supervisor. Concise, well-organized documentation is encouraged.
    1. Required General Information
      1. Cover Letter providing an overview of faculty member’s productivity
      2. Current curricula vita (CV)
      3. Copy of the most recent Annual Summary of Professional Activity
      4. Copy of all developmental plans (for non-tenured faculty only)
      5. Completed Faculty Member’s Statement
    2. Instructions for Completing and Submitting Tenure and Promotion Applications Using Mentor
      1. Log in to Mentor and choose Faculty Reporting from the menu across the top of the page.
      2. Select Evaluations and then choose the Promotion and Tenure Application form for the current academic year.
      3. Set a date range for the application. This should be the time period since the last promotion or since the initial appointment if no promotion has been received.
      4. You will see the following tabs across the application form: Summary, Scholarship, Teaching, Service, Administration, and General Info. You can click each tab to provide the appropriate information. At the bottom of each tab, there is a section for Requested Documents. Each tab is further described below.
        
        Scholarship – This section holds all relevant documentation of research, creative works, and scholarly activity.
        
        The bibliography of publications can include scholarship outside the date range you have set for your application.
        
        Teaching – This section includes all required information for documentation of teaching effectiveness.
        
        If syllabi or student evaluations are uploaded for specific courses listed, there is no need to include them separately as well. Faculty can include a Statement of Teaching Philosophy if desired. (This should be uploaded in the optional additional documents section.)
        
        Service – Documentation of service includes institutional service, professional service, and community service in this section.
        
        If your list of service activities is complete, then there is no need to upload a separate list here.
        
        Administration – This section can be used for faculty administration responsibilities such as department chair or director.
        
        General Information – This section requests general academic and professional information from the applicant. (include all requested documents)
        
        Past Forms – This option allows the applicant to select past evaluations from Mentor or upload documents in the Requested Documents section.
        
        Educational History – The applicant’s educational history is requested here. If blank, you can enter your degrees in Mentor in the Faculty Reporting section.
        
        The applicant’s curriculum vita (CV) should be provided in this section of the application.
        
        Summary – This section includes the applicant’s Cover Letter providing an overview of the faculty member’s productivity in teaching, scholarship, and service. In addition, application evaluations from the faculty member’s college council, department chair, and college dean will be available in this section for the applicant’s review.
        
        Submit your completed application. After all required documentation is included, click the Submit button. This action notifies the department chair that your application has been submitted.
    3. Documentation of Teaching Effectiveness
      1. Required Documentation
        
        Student Evaluations
        
        Student evaluation summary documents for the Application Timeframe, if available. This should include a minimum of three years of documents. Evaluations may also be included for specific courses if desired.
        
        All written student comments for each course, with appropriate identification. If desired, the faculty member’s written responses to the student evaluations and to the written comments.
        
        Peer Evaluations
        
        Summaries of required Peer Evaluation Forms from the selected Application Timeframe.
        
        Peer evaluations include classroom observations and evaluations from peers within the same department or college.
        
        Courses Taught
        
        The faculty reporting system will list all courses taught during the application timeframe.
        
        Examples of course syllabi for three courses taught during the application timeframe.
        
        Student Advising: Summary of student advising responsibilities, including field(s), and number of advisees if applicable.
        
        Optional Documentation – These documents may be uploaded to the Optional Document link.
        
        Supplemental Peer Evaluation(s)
        
        Written peer evaluations based upon observation of teaching performance (including online courses), and/or
        
        Written peer evaluations based upon viewing a videotape of teaching.
        
        Descriptions of conditions under which supplemental evaluations were conducted.
        
        Alumni Evaluations
        
        Solicited or unsolicited testimonial letters. (Specify whether solicited or unsolicited.)
        
        Summary of alumni accomplishments, as reported in the last three Annual Summaries of Professional Activity placed in the University’s approved system.
        
        Student Performance Assessments
        
        Summaries of student accomplishments, as reported in the last three Annual Summaries of Professional Activity. For example, admissions to graduate and professional schools, performance on standardized examinations, job placement, honors and awards, and course examination results.
        
        Pedagogical Methodologies
        
        Summary of innovative pedagogical methodologies used in teaching, as reported in the last three Annual Summaries of Professional Activity in the University’s approved system.
        
        Summary of help sessions and tutorial work used in supporting instruction.
        
        Individualized Student Supervision
        
        Summaries of student supervision, e.g., undergraduate research, practicums, independent study courses, and direction of theses and honor projects.
        
        Awards and honors received for teaching effectiveness.
        
        Additional documentation that supports teaching effectiveness, such as a teaching portfolio.
    4. Documentation of Research, Creative Works, and Scholarly Activity
      1. Bibliography of publications. Copies of publications may be uploaded to the entries under Scholarship or should be available upon request.
      2. Solicited and unsolicited reviews of faculty member’s published works by experts in the field.
      3. Summaries of faculty member’s creative shows, recitals, etc.
      4. Critiques of above creative shows, recitals, etc.
      5. Summaries of reviews and critiques made by faculty member of others’ research and creative works.
      6. Descriptions, including programs, of faculty member’s scholarly presentations.
      7. Documentation of significant expansion of faculty member’s knowledge laterally and/or vertically related to faculty member’s discipline (e.g., new undergraduate and graduate credits earned, self-study, seminars and workshops, and additional degrees and certificates).
      8. Documentation of significant curricular development and curricular research by faculty member.
      9. Description of grant proposals submitted by faculty member and funding received.
      10. Summary of attendance at professional meetings, with indication of level of participation.
      11. Summaries of unpublished and in-progress research by faculty member.
    5. Documentation of Service
      1. Institutional Service
        
        List of University committees, offices held, work written, and studies completed.
      2. Optional Documentation
        
        Summary of activities directed toward fundraising.
        
        Summary of activities related to sponsorship of student group(s).
        
        Summary of activities directed to student recruitment.
        
        Description of consultation provided to other departments or areas of the University.
        
        Summary of contributions to self-studies of department, school, or University.
        
        Summary of responsibilities for teaching non-credit courses, workshops, or seminars.
        
        Summary of non-teaching or administrative duties.
      3. Professional Service
        
        List of memberships in professional organizations.
        
        List of offices held in professional organizations.
        
        Summary of participation in professional organizations, including attendance at meetings.
        
        Summary of work on professional organization committees.
        
        Summary of activities related to organization of professional conferences, workshops, or seminars.
        
        List of presentations at professional conferences, workshops, or seminars.
      4. Community Service
        
        List of memberships in community organizations.
        
        List of offices held in community organizations.
        
        Summary of other participation in community service activities.

#Application Procedures for Tenure and Promotion

During the fall semester of each year, the administration will notify the faculty regarding tenure and promotion procedures. This information includes the date by which to apply for promotion and/or tenure and the dates on which action will be taken on applications during the decision process.
Faculty members seeking promotion and/or tenure will initiate the process by submitting the Faculty Member’s Statement See Documentation of Criteria for Tenure and Promotion for outline of supporting documentation. See flow chart for Faculty Promotion and Tenure Process.
Applications for tenure and promotion will be evaluated using the following procedures: All evaluations are based on documentation submitted in the application for promotion and/or tenure. An applicant cannot add documentation to the application after it is submitted to the department chair. Upon receipt of a negative recommendation, the applicant may add a two-page letter of appeal. See Procedures for Appeal of Tenure Decisions and Procedures for Appeal of Promotion Decisions. Evaluators may add documentation to the application to clarify and/or verify statements of fact and must notify applicant of such additions. Supervisors’ comments and additional evaluations are included in the Summary tab under Supervisor’s Comments section. Appeals can also be included in this section of Mentor.
An applicant may choose to withdraw the application for promotion and/or tenure at any point in the process.
1. Levels
  1. Level One: Department Chairperson
    1. The department chairperson will review the departmental applications for promotion and/or tenure and supporting documentation. The chairperson must consult with other members of the department during the review process.
    2. The Department Chair will complete the following:
      1. Department Chairperson’s Recommendation
      2. Detailed and specific account of the ways in which the candidate’s teaching effectiveness, scholarly activity and service do (positive recommendation) or do not (negative recommendation) meet the criteria for tenure and/or promotion as detailed in Criteria and Specific Rules for Promotion of this section.
      3. Within one (1) working day following the decision the chairperson shall notify each applicant by email that their application has been reviewed and made available to the next level of review. Notification of an applicant by email opens the five (5) working day appeal window.
  2. Level Two: College Tenure and Promotion Council
    1. Each college will determine a method for selecting a College Tenure and Promotion Council and for selecting a chairperson for the College Council. The College Council will include only tenured faculty members representing the departments of the college and will include no more than one department chair. The College Council must consist of at least three faculty members; the exact size and composition will vary according to the needs of each college. (An applicant for promotion and/or tenure may not serve on the College Council.) If an elected University Council representative is not on the respective College Council, one elected representative will attend all meetings of the College Council.
    2. The College Council will complete their review of the applications in its college after the five (5) working day appeal window from the previous level has closed. Following careful review, the College Council will vote by secret ballot with decisions based on a majority opinion.
    3. The College Council Chairperson will complete the following:
      1. College Council Chairperson’s Recommendation
      2. Detailed and specific account of the ways in which the candidate’s teaching effectiveness, scholarly activity and service do (positive recommendation) or do not (negative recommendation) meet the criteria for tenure and/or promotion as detailed in Criteria and Specific Rules for Promotion of this section.
      3. Within one (1) working day following the decision the chairperson shall notify each applicant by email that their application has been reviewed and made available to the next level of review. Notification of an applicant by email opens the five (5) working day appeal window.
  3. Level Three: College Dean
    1. The dean of each college will complete their review of all applications in the college after the five (5) working day appeal window from the previous level has closed.
    2. The dean will complete the following:
      1. College Dean’s Recommendation
      2. Detailed and specific account of the ways in which the candidate’s teaching effectiveness, scholarly activity and service do (positive recommendation) or do not (negative recommendation) meet the criteria for tenure and/or promotion as detailed in Criteria and Specific Rules for Promotion of this section.
      3. Within one (1) working day following the decision the College Dean shall notify each applicant by email that their application has been reviewed and made available to the next level of review. Notification of an applicant by email opens the five (5) working day appeal window.
  4. Level Four: University and Tenure Promotion Council
    1. The University Tenure and Promotion Council will be composed of two tenured faculty members from each college. Specific instructions about elections for the Council are included with the Council’s committee membership and mission document. The Provost will serve as non-voting chair of the University Council.
    2. The University Council will complete their review of all applications for promotion and/or tenure after the five (5) working day appeal window from the previous level has closed
    3. The University Council Chairperson will compile a single list of applicants who are recommended for promotion and/or tenure. All decisions of the University Council will be based on voting by secret ballot. Decisions will be determined based on the majority opinion (5 out of 8).
    4. The University Council Chairperson will complete the following:
      1. University Tenure and Promotion Council’s Recommendation
      2. Detailed and specific account of the ways in which the candidate’s teaching effectiveness, scholarly activity and service do (positive recommendation) or do not (negative recommendation) meet the criteria for tenure and/or promotion as detailed in Criteria and Specific Rules for Promotion of this section.
      3. Within one (1) working day following the decision the chairperson shall notify each applicant by email that their application has been reviewed and made available to the next level of review. Notification of an applicant by email opens the five (5) working day appeal window.
    5. After the deliberations of the University Council, any application for promotion that has received three successive negative recommendations at Levels Two, Three, and Four is removed from consideration. All applications for tenure are forwarded for further review through all levels, regardless of recommendations at any level, unless the faculty member withdraws the application.
  5. Level Five: Provost
    1. The VPAA-Provost will complete their review and evaluation of all applications for promotion and/or tenure after the five (5) working day appeal window from the previous level has closed.
    2. The Provost will complete the Provost’s Recommendation
    3. Within one (1) working day following the decision the Provost will notify each applicant by email that their application has been reviewed and made available to the next level of review. Notification of an applicant by email opens the five (5) working day appeal window.
  6. Level Six: President
    1. The President will complete their evaluation of the Provost’s recommendations for promotion and/or tenure and all other forms and related documentation deemed appropriate after the five (5) working day appeal window from the previous level has closed.
    2. The President will convey his or her recommendations on promotion and tenure to the Provost and the deans of the colleges prior to presentation of the recommendations to the Board of Trustees.
      1. Within one (1) working day following the decision the President will notify each applicant by email that their application has been reviewed and made available to the next level of review. Notification of an applicant by email opens the five (5) working day appeal window.
      2. For each applicant who receives a negative recommendation from the President, the notification will include a written general statement of the reasons for the decision.
      3. The President then will make his or her recommendations on promotion and tenure to the Board of Trustees.
  7. Level Seven: The Board of Trustees
    1. The Board of Trustees will make the final decision on promotion and tenure after the five (5) working day appeal window from the previous level has closed.
    2. Upon approval by the Board of Trustees, and following Level Eight, there will be a public announcement.
  8. Level Eight: Notification of Candidate
    1. Within ten (10) working days of the Board of Trustee’s decision about tenure and/or promotion, the President will notify each candidate by email, or paper-document, informing them of the University’s final decision.
2. Procedures for Decision on Tenure and Promotion for Department Chairs, Deans and Administrators
  1. Department chairs seeking promotion and/or tenure submit an application and supporting documents to the chair of the College’s Tenure and Promotion Council for initial review. Evaluation of an application for promotion and/or tenure from a department chair begins at level two, the College Tenure and Promotion Council, and proceeds through the regular remaining evaluation process. Deans seeking promotion and/or tenure submit an application and supporting documentation to the relevant department chair for initial evaluation. Evaluation of an application for promotion/tenure from a dean begins with the relevant department chair, proceeds through the College Tenure and Promotion Council, and is forwarded from the College Council directly to the chair of the University Council.
  2. An application for tenure from an administrator holding academic rank and a tenure-track appointment is submitted to the relevant department chair for initial evaluation and then proceeds through the regular evaluation process. However, if the applicant is the Provost, the application is forwarded from the University Council directly to the President.
  3. Deans and the Provost who apply for promotion and/or tenure are expected to excuse themselves during the evaluation of their applications.

#Termination of Appointment, Dismissal Review, Dismissal Appeals

Termination of Appointment
1. By the Faculty Member. A faculty member may terminate an appointment effective at the end of an academic year, provided that notice is given in writing at the earliest possible opportunity, but no later than May 15, or 30 days after receiving notification of the terms of the appointment for the coming year, whichever date occurs later. A faculty member may properly request a waiver of this requirement of notice in case of hardship or in a situation involving the potential loss of substantial professional advancement or other opportunity.
2. By the Institution. Terminations of tenured appointments or of non-tenured special appointments which occur before the end of the appointment period may be made for three reasons: 1) for bona fide financial exigency or discontinuation of a program or department of instruction, 2) for medical reasons, or 3) for just cause.
  1. For 1 and/or 2: Terminations based on bona fide financial exigency or discontinuation of a program or department of instruction or on medical reasons must be documented by clear and convincing evidence. (3) Termination may be made for just cause—including gross negligence, incompetence, and gross unfitness to associate with students or faculty, or moral turpitude. Just cause includes such grounds which are put forth by the Board of Trustees in good faith and which are not arbitrary, irrational, or unreasonable. In the case of termination of a tenured appointment for just cause, the burden of proof rests upon the institution. Adequate cause for dismissal will be related directly and substantially to the fitness of the faculty member in the professional capacity as a teacher.
  2. All dismissal and sanction procedures will be preceded by discussions between the faculty member and appropriate administrative officer, attempting mutual agreement. The decision to terminate will be reached only after 1) the faculty member or designated representative has been informed of the basis of the proposed action and 2) the faculty member has been afforded an opportunity to respond to the appropriate administrative officer, presenting his or her position and responding to the evidence.
3. Termination Schedule. If the appointment is terminated, the faculty member will receive salary 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 of the second year (or after nine months but prior to eighteen months) of probationary service or if the faculty member has tenure. This provision for terminal notice or salary need not apply if there has been a finding that the conduct which justified dismissal involved just cause, as defined above. 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.
  1. Before terminating an appointment because of the abandonment of a program or department of instruction, the institution will make every effort to place affected faculty members in other suitable positions. If an appointment is terminated before the end of the period of appointment because of financial exigency or because of the discontinuance of a program of instruction, the released faculty member’s place will not be filled by a replacement within a period of two years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reappointment and a reasonable time within which to accept or decline it.
Dismissal Review Procedures
1. Termination of tenured appointments or of non-tenured appointments which occur before the end of the appointment period may be appealed based on the following procedures:
2. Review by Mediation Committee – If the parties cannot reach a mutual agreement, the faculty member may initiate a review by a Mediation Committee by informing the Vice President for Administration and General Counsel of their desire to do so within five (5) working days of receiving the notice of termination. The Mediation Committee will be appointed by the Faculty Senate Committee on Committees and will consist of three members of the Faculty Senate. The Mediation Committee will attempt to resolve the dispute through consultation with the faculty member and the appropriate administrative officer(s). The faculty member may appeal in person or in writing to the Mediation Committee.
  1. Financial Exigency – When termination is based on a bona fide financial exigency or discontinuation of a program or department of instruction, the Mediation Committee will request that the administration provide the faculty member with a written statement explaining 1) the basis for the initial decision and 2) the information and data upon which the decision makers relied.
  2. Medical Reasons – When termination is based on medical reasons, the Mediation Committee will request that the administration provide the faculty member with a written statement explaining 1) the basis for the initial decision and 2) the medical evidence upon which the decision makers relied.
  3. Just Cause – when termination is for just cause, the Mediation Committee will request that the administration provide the faculty member with a written statement explaining the basis for the initial decision, or verify that the administration has already done so.
3. Faculty member appeal to Faculty Appeals Subcommittee – If the Mediation Committee cannot resolve the issue to the satisfaction of all parties, the faculty member can initiate an appeal by written request to the chair of the Faculty Appeals subcommittee of the Faculty/Staff Appeals Committee. The faculty member must initiate the appeal within ten (10) working days following conclusion of the review by the Mediation Committee. If the faculty member chooses not to initiate a review by the Mediation Committee, then the ten (10) working day window for filing an appeal with the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee begins with the date that the faculty member receives notice of termination. During summer months, all Fridays will be counted as working days for the purposes of the ten-day time window unless the Friday in question is an official University holiday.
4. Upon receipt of the appeal request, the chair of the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee will notify the President. Within five (5) working days, the President or a delegate of the President will provide a written statement of the administration’s position to the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee. The statement will offer clear and convincing evidence substantiating the administration’s position. When the termination is based on just cause, the President or a delegate of the President will formulate a statement of charges, framed with reasonable particularity. The statement of charges will be transmitted to the faculty member and to the chairperson of the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee.
Dismissal Appeals Procedures
1. Within ten (10) working days following receipt of the formal statement by the President, the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee will conduct a formal hearing. Notice of the hearing with specific charges in writing will be dispatched to the faculty member and all other concerned parties at least five working days before the hearing. During summer months, all Fridays will be counted as working days for the purposes of the ten-10 and five- day windows specified in this section, unless the Friday in question is an official University holiday.
2. The Faculty Appeals Subcommittee will proceed by considering the statement of grounds for dismissal already formulated and the faculty member’s response written before the time of the hearing. Members of the hearing committee deeming themselves disqualified for bias or interest shall remove themselves from the case (to be replaced by alternates agreed upon by the President of the Faculty Senate and President of the University). Each party shall have a maximum of two challenges without stated cause. The faculty member and the administration shall have the right to confront and cross-examine all witnesses. A letter from the President or the President’s representative shall be addressed to the chairperson of the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee, putting into writing the pertinent facts of the case.
3. The Faculty Appeals Subcommittee, in consultation with the President and the faculty member, should exercise its judgment as to whether the hearing should be public or private. The parties of both sides will submit in writing the name of an academic advisor and counsel, if desired, and the names of any witnesses to the chairperson of the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee at least one week before any hearing. At the request of either party or the hearing committee, a representative of a responsible educational association shall be permitted to attend the proceedings as an observer. The committee will invite the President of the University or the President’s representative. Each of the following may invite one observer: the faculty member, the President, and the committee. Questioning of witnesses will be limited to members of the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee, the faculty member involved, and the President or the President’s representative. Questioning shall be relayed through the chair to the person to whom the question is directed. The President or the President’s authorized representative will have the option of attendance during the hearing. The President or the President’s representative, as well as the faculty member, may be assisted by counsel.
4. A verbatim record of the hearing will be made, and a hard copy will be made available to the faculty member without cost if the faculty member so requests. The “burden of proof” that adequate cause exists rests with the institution and shall be satisfied only by clear and convincing evidence in the record considered as a whole. The hearing committee will not be bound by strict rules of legal evidence and may admit any evidence that is of a probative value in determining the issues involved. Every possible effort will be made to obtain the most reliable evidence.
5. Following the hearing, and as soon as possible, the committee in closed session will draw up a written report, which will include a recommendation with respect to each of the charges which have been presented as being pertinent to the resolution of the problem. A copy of these recommendations will be submitted to the President of the University and to the individual faculty member involved.
6. Except for simple announcements as may be required covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, public statements and publicity about the case will be avoided so far as possible by the faculty member, the committee, and administrative offices until the proceedings have been completed, including consideration by the Board of Trustees. The President and the faculty member will be notified of the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee’s decision in writing and will be given a copy of the record of the hearing.
7. 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 present the reasons for the rejection in writing to the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee and to the faculty member and provide an opportunity for response before transmitting the case to the Board of Trustees. If the hearing committee concludes that adequate cause for dismissal has been established but that an academic penalty less than dismissal would be appropriate, it will so recommend by providing supporting reasons.
8. Consideration by the Board of Trustees
  1. If dismissal or other severe sanction is recommended, the President will, on request of the faculty member, transmit to the Board of Trustees the record of the case. The Board of Trustees’ review will be based on the record of the committee hearing, and the Board will provide opportunity for argument, oral or written or both, by the principals at the hearings or by their representatives.
  2. Either the decision of the hearing committee will be sustained, or the proceedings will be returned to the committee with specific objections. The committee will then consider, taking into account the stated objections and receiving new evidence, if necessary. The Board of Trustees will make a final decision only after study of the committee’s reconsideration.
9. Imposing Sanctions for Alleged Violations of Policy and Discharge for Cause
  1. Imposing sanctions for violations of University policy and/or termination of a tenured or non-tenured appointment before the end of the period specified in the faculty member’s current contract may be effected only for adequate cause.
  2. Grounds – Adequate cause for dismissal must directly and substantially relate to the fitness of faculty members in their professional capacity as academics. Dismissal shall not be used to restrain faculty members in the lawful exercise of any individual legal rights. Adequate causes for termination of a contract before the end of its specified term are defined as follows:
    
    1. Substantial neglect of duties;
    2. Documented gross unfitness to associate with students, faculty, or staff;
    3. Demonstrable incompetence;
    4. Moral turpitude;
    5. Misuse of funds,
    6. Violation of criminal law that places the institution or members of the university community in jeopardy;
    7. Persistent and willful violation of standards of faculty conduct; these standards are located in the subsection on Standards of faculty conduct included in the section entitled Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Tenure;
    8. Medical issues of such a nature as to render the faculty member unable to fulfill their professional responsibilities; or
    9. Bona fide financial exigency on the part of the University or discontinuance of a program, department, or College.
  3. Faculty Sanctions for Cause
    Effective performance and development of each faculty member is a mutual concern and responsibility of the faculty and of the University. At times, the imposition of a sanction may be necessary as a corrective measure. A sanction is a documented action in response to improper performance of duties, responsibilities, or conduct by a faculty member.
    
    The University has, and retains, the right to apply sanctions to faculty members, ranging from lesser sanctions such as reprimand up to and including major actions, such as termination of employment. Sanctions will be applied for just cause, based on stated grounds, and will be determined on the basis of the appropriateness of the penalty imposed for each individual situation.
    
    Timeliness, fundamental fairness, and appropriate procedural processes and safeguards are held in high regard. Each case will result in a thorough review by the appropriate supervisors of the issues relating to a) the conduct of the accused and b) an appropriate sanction(s).
  4. Types of Sanctions
    The severity and type of sanction selected for a particular offense must be appropriately related to the nature and circumstance of the case. For some sanction types, the sanction is a definitive terminal penalty, whereas other types may incur a penalty to be carried out for a limited or specified duration of time. The types of disciplinary sanctions that may be imposed on a faculty member, with or without tenure, are described below in order of increasing severity.
    1. Minor Sanctions: Imposed penalties for lesser offenses against duty, responsibility, or conduct unbecoming a University professional at this institution. Examples of such actions include, but are not limited to, inadvertent academic misconduct, breach of commitment to the community, or minor neglect of duties, etc.
      1. Verbal Reprimand: A person holding a faculty appointment with or without tenure may receive an informal reprimand or oral warning for cause. The oral reprimand is the initial step in a progressive disciplinary process that warns the member of disapproval of actions. The reprimand brings the inappropriate action to the attention of the member, emphasizes the seriousness of continued actions, and presents instructions on how to resolve or correct the problem. The supervisor giving the verbal reprimand may write a brief summary of the conversation, allowing for comments from the faculty member to be attached. Confidential documentation is held between the two parties, but no formal documentation will be placed in personnel records.
      2. Written Censure: A person holding a faculty appointment with or without tenure may receive a formal written notification of strong disapproval of actions. The written censure documents the occurrence and warns that further violations may result in additional sanctions. The written censure will be delivered confidentially to the member and a copy maintained in personnel records for a period of time specified in the notice.
      3. Apology: A person holding a faculty appointment with or without tenure may be required to issue a private apology to a colleague or student, or a public apology to the University community, depending on the nature of the incident, with written documentation of the violation provided to the faculty member. The apology documents the member’s good faith approach to acknowledge inappropriate actions while agreeing not to repeat such actions in the future. Apologies may be combined with other sanctions. A copy of the apology will be maintained in personnel records for a period of time specified in the notice.
      4. Probation: A person holding a faculty appointment with or without tenure may be placed on probation for a specified period of time. The letter authorizing probation will inform the faculty member of any corrective measures that need to be taken during the probationary period and specify that further violations of policy or additional offenses may result in major sanctions.
    2. Major Sanctions: Imposed penalties for more serious offenses against duty, responsibility, or conduct unbecoming a professional at this institution. Examples of such actions include, but are not limited to, repetitive or substantial neglect of duties, documented incompetence, intentional misuse of funds, academic misconduct, conflict of interest, gross unfitness to associate with students or faculty, etc.
      
      Due to the nature of specific behaviors deemed applicable to major sanctions, a “relief of duties” may be assigned for a period of time along with a major sanction. This relief of duties not only refers to teaching assignments or roles consistent with one’s job description but also could include limited or prohibited access to university resources for the duration of the sanction period.
      1. Written Censure A person holding a faculty appointment with or without tenure may receive a formal written notification of strong disapproval of actions. The written censure documents the occurrence and warns that further violations may result in additional sanctions. The written censure will be delivered confidentially to the member and a copy maintained in personnel records.
      2. Suspension: A faculty member with or without tenure may be suspended from any or all appointments with pay, with or without relief of duties, for cause. The duration of the suspension, in alignment with the nature of the action, is to be no less than two weeks and no more than twelve months.
      3. Demotion: A person holding a faculty appointment with or without tenure may be demoted in title while maintaining current salary, demoted in title with a corresponding salary reduction, or incur an appropriate salary reduction aligned to new or revised assigned duties or reappointment of duties for cause, as determined by the administration.
      4. Prohibited Research: A person holding a faculty appointment with or without tenure may be prohibited from submitting grant or research proposals through the university or from acting as a representative of the university for a specified period of time. A relief of duties may apply for a period of time as determined by the administration.
      5. Involuntary Leave: A person holding a faculty appointment with or without tenure may be relieved of duties with or without pay for a cause of an accused major action while still retaining temporary employment status. This sanction is justified for major actions that warrant the temporary disassociation between the member and institution. The involuntary leave sanction is limited in duration for a period of time as determined by the administration pending the outcome of the related investigation connected to the major action. After such time of the investigated outcome, the member may be assigned Immediate Dismissal from Employ, one of the Major Sanctions, or be released from Involuntary Leave without further penalty.
      6. Immediate Dismissal from Employ of the University: A person holding a faculty appointment with or without tenure may be dismissed from employment and relieved of duties, without pay, on the grounds of major sanctions. This sanction is justified for actions with such gravity of gross conduct or unlawful conditions that render the member unfit for continuing association with students, faculty, or this institution. Member may constitute an immediate and substantial danger to members of the university or the property of the university. A member accused of major sanctions with potential for “Immediate Dismissal from Employ” may serve the “Involuntary Leave” sanction prior to dismissal if/until an investigation is conducted. If the investigation confirms the severe misconduct or finds the Member liable, then immediate dismissal is appropriate and the dismissed member shall not be entitled to receive any salary after the dismissal effective date. If the behavior is substantiated and an investigation is not required or relevant to alter the outcome of one’s standing at the university, then immediate dismissal is appropriate.
  5. Principles and Definitions
    This section describes the general principles and definitions of terms applying in instances in which the University investigates alleged violations of University policy by a faculty member, after which (should clear and convincing evidence support the allegation) the administration imposes sanctions. In certain cases, violation of University policy may also entail violation of the policies of external organizations; consequently, cases alleging discrimination/discriminatory harassment or misconduct in scholarly activity or research require special procedures to ensure compliance with external agencies and regulations. Nevertheless, the following general procedures and principles apply for all allegations against a faculty member for violation of a University policy.
    1. Purview: The procedures spelled out in this section of this Faculty Handbook shall be the sole method for investigating and/or resolving any complaint against a faculty member, unless otherwise mandated by law or policy of the United States or the State of Arkansas. Standards regarding faculty conduct and responsibilities are provided in the section titled Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Tenure.
    2. Initiation of Allegations: Allegation means any written or oral complaint of violation of University policy made to an appropriate administrative officer. A good faith allegation is one made with the honest belief that a violation may have occurred. According to the U.S. Office of Research Integrity, an allegation is not made in good faith “if it is made with reckless disregard for or willful ignorance of facts that would disprove the allegation (1995)”. The Administrative Officers empowered to receive allegations and to initiate inquiries are a) the program director, chair, and/or dean to whom the faculty member reports and b) the Provost. Allegations of discrimination or discriminatory harassment may also be made to the Equal Employment Opportunity and Affirmative Action (EEO/AA) Officer, or in the case of sex/gender discrimination, to the Title IX Coordinator.
    3. Deciding Officials: The Deciding Official is the administrative officer who makes the final determination that a policy has been violated and decides the appropriate institutional action. In cases in which the complaint is resolved during the stage of informal investigation and mediation, the deciding official may be the academic dean, the EEO/AA officer (in cases alleging discrimination or discriminatory harassment), or the Provost. In cases in which the complaint is resolved during an inquiry, the deciding official maybe the program director, chair, or academic dean, the EEO/AA officer (in cases alleging discrimination or discriminatory harassment), or the Provost. In cases that proceed to the stage of formal investigation and resolution, the deciding official(s) shall be the President, and/or the Board of Trustees.
    4. Inquiry, Investigation, and Mediation: Inquiry describes the stage in which the administrative officer suspects or receives an allegation of violation of policy, determines the validity of the allegation, and seeks to resolve the problem. An informal investigation and/or mediation occurs when preliminary attempts to resolve the matter fail or when the allegation makes private resolution impossible (for example, because of the gravity of the situation or because a granting agency requires at least informal investigation). Informal investigations gather and dispense information, attempt to mediate the complaint, and/or determine whether a formal investigation is warranted. Formal investigation and resolution describes the adjudicating committee’s examination and evaluation of the evidence supporting the charge and the determining officer’s decision based on the committee’s findings.
    5. Standards of Proof: Before any sanction is imposed, the determining officer must conclude that there is clear and convincing evidence in support of the allegation. “Clear and convincing evidence” does not require evidence that is beyond a reasonable doubt; it is defined as that degree of proof that will produce a firm belief in the allegations sought to be established. Clear and convincing evidence thus is an intermediate standard requiring more than a preponderance of evidence, but less than the certainty required by evidence that is beyond a reasonable doubt.
    6. Sanctions: There are two types of sanctions: Minor and Major.
    7. Safeguards: Against Retaliation Retaliation refers to any action taken by the University, a faculty or staff member, or group of faculty or staff members, against an individual or individuals because the latter have, in good faith, made or provided evidence in support of an allegation. Acts of retaliation violate the 1999 Arkansas Whistle-Blower Act and are subject to investigation and disciplinary action if the allegation of retaliation is substantiated.
    8. Confidentiality: In all proceedings, confidentiality will be maintained to the greatest extent possible. The administration will guard any involved member’s anonymity as much as is in their control throughout the pending investigation. Notes, reports, files, or other written documents may be kept about the inquiry or investigation but shall not be placed in an employee’s personnel file. Because the mere suspicion of wrongdoing, even if totally unjustified, is potentially damaging to an individual’s career, information concerning any investigation should be available only to those with a right or a need to know. An unwarranted reference to an exonerated case may in itself constitute misconduct.
      In accordance with 1999 Arkansas Whistle-Blower Act, the university will take steps to protect the complainant as necessary as an investigation ensues. Faculty can be investigated via the process described in this section as well as through the Title IX process depending on the alleged improper behavior(s). Should external regulation or safety concerns require the administrative officer to pursue an inquiry and/or investigation, the complainant’s identity will be kept confidential to the extent possible, but the faculty member shall be apprised of the allegation and have access to any written documents produced by University officials or committees.
    9. Faculty Notification and Access to Files: As mentioned in #8 above, nothing concerning allegations against a faculty member shall be kept in a faculty member’s personnel file by any committee, officer, or office of the University except as required by state or federal policy. This process should be followed unless the faculty member is notified of the existence of, and provided access to, the written material (notes, reports, images, files, etc.). The faculty member shall also be afforded the opportunity to respond to the allegation and to have that response added to the written record. (This standard does not apply to conversations or discussions that do not result in further inquiry or investigation and/or enduring notes, reports, files, or other written documents).
    10. Remedies and Sanctions: Remedies and sanctions are described in the Minor Sanctions and Major Sanctions sections of this document.
    11. Appeals of Sanctions: Should a faculty member, at the end of a formal investigation, receive a sanction, he or she may appeal the sanction by requesting a review from the Mediation Committee on the grounds of procedural irregularities or new evidence for consideration which was not available at the time sanction was recommended. This is the first step in the appeals process. Procedures for appeals are in section (##.##).
    12. Publicity: Dismissal for cause of a faculty member is an extreme measure, undertaken only for the protection of the University and of the members of the University community. The proceedings leading to this measure are not intended either to subject the dismissed faculty member to public censure or to compromise unduly the possibility of their employment elsewhere. For this reason, hearings are private unless the faculty member decides that they should be open to the University community. No public announcement of the initiation of the procedure aiming at dismissal for cause, of any later stages of the procedure, or of the final disposition of the case will be made, unless the faculty member requests—in writing addressed to the President—that a public announcement be made. Upon such a request, the President or the President’s representative shall make an appropriate announcement. The announcement of a dismissal for cause shall include summary statements of the charges and of the decisions of the Faculty Appeals Committee, the President, and the Board of Trustees. Confidentiality will be maintained consistent with Arkansas law.
      The same provisions shall apply, with the necessary adjustments, to procedures aimed at the imposition of sanctions other than dismissal for cause. Except when the nature of the sanction itself requires disclosure (e.g., censure, public apology), the fact that the sanction was imposed and a summary of the established charges shall be disclosed only to the extent strictly necessary.
      To the extent possible, public statements and publicity about the case will be avoided by the faculty member, the committee, and administrative offices until the proceedings have been completed, including consideration by the Board of Trustees. If a public statement about a case is made by the faculty member concerned or by any other person while the proceedings are still in progress or after they are concluded, the President shall have the right to a public reply.
  6. Process for Faculty Hearings Regarding Imposition of Sanctions
    1. Procedures for Imposition of Sanction other than Dismissal
      1. Addressing Allegations – When the appropriate deciding officer receives an allegation that a faculty member has violated University policy, or when that officer finds evidence that a faculty member under their supervision has violated University policy, that administrator shall first discuss the allegation and/or offending conduct with the faculty member. If the officer determines that there is reason to proceed, the officer shall define the violation and explain relevant policy and procedures in writing, when required by the sanction. This action includes any sanctions (minor or major) that may be imposed on the faculty member. The deciding officer shall provide the faculty member an opportunity to respond and shall seek a solution that is mutually satisfactory to all parties involved (e.g., an agreement to stop the offending conduct, amelioration, and/or remediation).
      2. Faculty Sanctions – If the administration believes that the conduct of a faculty member, although not constituting adequate cause for dismissal, is sufficiently serious to justify imposition of a sanction, the process presented in this section should be followed. This process applies to sanctions defined as minor or major.
        
        Faculty Notification – The administration shall provide written notification to the faculty member regarding the basis for the sanction, including all charges. Upon receiving this notification, the faculty member has ten (10) working days to address the alleged charge(s) and convince the administration that the proposed sanction should not be imposed.
        
        Review by Mediation Committee – If the two parties are unable to reach a mutual agreement regarding the proposed sanction, the faculty member may request a review by the Mediation Committee. Mediation Committees will be appointed by the Faculty Senate Committee on Committees and will be comprised of three members of the Faculty Senate. The Mediation Committee will determine whether the two sides are able to resolve the dispute through consultation with both parties.
        
        Faculty Appeals Subcommittee – If the Mediation Committee determines the matter cannot be resolved to the satisfaction of both parties, the faculty member can initiate an appeal by written request to the chair of the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee. This appeal by the faculty member must be initiated within ten (10) working days following the conclusion of the review by the Mediation Committee. Upon receipt of this appeal, the chair of the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee will notify the President.
        
        Within five (5) working days of this notification, the president or a delegate of the president will provide a written statement declaring the administration’s position to the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee. This statement will offer clear and convincing evidence substantiating the administration’s position, including all pertinent facts of the case. When sanctions are imposed for just cause, the president or a delegate will provide a list of charges. The statement of charges will be transmitted to the faculty member and to the chair of the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee for a hearing.
        
        Faculty Appeals Subcommittee Hearing – The Faculty Appeals Subcommittee will conduct a formal hearing within ten (10) working days from the receipt of the President’s statement. Notice of the hearing with specific charges in writing will be dispatched to the faculty member and all other concerned parties at least five (5) working days prior to the scheduled hearing.
        
        The Faculty Appeals Subcommittee, in consultation with the President and the faculty member, should exercise its judgement as to whether the hearing should be public or private. The parties of both sides will submit in writing the name of an academic advisor and/or counsel, if desired, and the name of any witnesses, to the chairperson of the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee as least one (1) week prior to the hearing. At the request of either party or the hearing committee, a representative of a responsible educational association shall be permitted to attend the proceedings as an observer. The committee will invite the University President or a representative. Each of the following may invite one observer: the faculty member, the President, and the committee. Questioning of witnesses will be limited to members of the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee, the faculty member involved, and the President or the President’s representative. The faculty member and the administration shall have the right to confront and cross-examine all witnesses. Questioning shall be relayed through the chair to the person to whom the question is directed.
        The Faculty Appeals Subcommittee will proceed by considering the justification for the faculty member’s sanction(s), as well as the faculty member’s response written prior to the hearing. A verbatim record of the hearing will be taken, and a printed copy will be made available to the faculty member without cost at the faculty member’s request. The “burden of proof” that adequate cause exists for the imposition of a major sanction rests with the institution and shall be satisfied only by clear and convincing evidence in the record considered as a whole. Every possible effort will be made to obtain the most reliable evidence.
        Following the hearing, the Committee will meet in closed session and draft a report stating a recommendation regarding each of the charges presented during the hearing. A copy of these recommendations will be submitted to the President and the faculty member.
        
        If the Faculty Appeals Committee concludes that adequate cause for sanction has not been established by the evidence in the record, it will so report to the President. If the committee concludes that adequate cause for a major sanction has been established but that a lesser sanction would be appropriate, the Committee will so recommend in their report without supporting reasons. If the President rejects the report, the President will present the reasons for the rejection in writing to the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee and to the faculty member, providing an opportunity for responses, before transmitting the case to the Board of Trustees.
        
        Board of Trustees – If a sanction is recommended, the faculty member may request that the President transmit to the Board of Trustees the record of the case. The Board of Trustees’ review will be based on the Faculty Appeals Committee hearing record, and the Board will provide opportunity for argument, oral or written or both, by the principals at the hearings or by their representatives.
        If they do not uphold the decision of the Faculty Appeals Committee, the Board of Trustees will return the proceedings to the Committee, the President, or the President’s appointed representative with specific objections. The Committee will then reconsider the matter by taking into account any stated objections or new evidence. The Board of Trustees will make a final decision only after study of the hearing committee’s reconsideration. The Board of Trustees will so report to the president who will then inform the faculty member and the Faculty Appeals Subcommittee of those findings.
10. Non-reappointment of Non-tenured Faculty
  1. If a faculty member on probationary or other non-tenured appointment alleges that a non-reappointment decision was based significantly on considerations which violate 1) academic freedom, 2) governing policies on making appointments without prejudice with respect to sex, age, race, religion, or national origin, or 3) in retaliation for exercise of first amendment rights, the allegation will be given preliminary consideration by the Mediation Committee of the Faculty Senate, which shall seek to settle the matter by informal methods. The allegations shall be accompanied by a statement that the faculty member agrees to the presentation, for the consideration of the Mediation 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 Mediation Committee so recommends, the matter will be heard in the manner set forth in the section on Dismissal Procedures, except that the administration in making the complaint is responsible for stating the grounds upon which the allegations are based, but the burden of proof shall rest upon the faculty member to disprove. If the faculty member succeeds in establishing a prima facie case in the opinion of the issue will be referred to the Faculty Subcommittee of the Faculty Staff Appeals and Human Rights Committee, it is incumbent upon those who made the decision not to reappoint the faculty member to come forward with evidence in support of their decision. If the Faculty Subcommittee Committee agrees with the non-reappointment decision, there is no further appeal.
11. Non-reappointment or Termination of Administrative Personnel
  1. The foregoing regulations apply to administrative personnel who hold academic rank, but only in their capacity as faculty members. If the administrator claims that the reason for termination or non-reappointment as an administrator constitutes a violation of academic freedom, then the administrator is entitled to procedures set forth for non-tenured faculty.

Resources forFaculty & Staff

Faculty Appointment, Tenure, and Promotion Guidelines

#Faculty Appointment Policies

#Contracts

#Criteria and Specific Rules for Tenure

#Criteria and Specific Rules for Promotion

#Application Procedures for Tenure and Promotion

#Termination of Appointment, Dismissal Review, Dismissal Appeals

Schools & Colleges

Quick Links

Social