Feb 07, 2023  
2022-2023 Undergraduate & Graduate Catalog 
    
2022-2023 Undergraduate & Graduate Catalog

Chapter 2: Faculty Appointment, Rank, Tenure and Promotion


Last updated November, 2022.

 

Salisbury University faculty engage in teaching, scholarship and creative activity, service, and, as appropriate, administrative responsibilities. Teaching is the primary criterion for tenure and promotion, and no one will be recommended who has not in the opinion of the committee demonstrated proficiency in this area. At SU, scholarly work is defined by the Boyer Model of scholarship which categorizes scholarship in four areas: discovery, integration, application, and teaching. The first category, discovery scholarship, refers to increasing the knowledge base with new information. Integration scholarship relates (or integrates) the new knowledge into the academic realm. The third category of the Boyer model, applied scholarship, means demonstrating the application of the new knowledge to and engagement with the world at large. Finally, the scholarship of teaching is devoted to furthering student learning within the specific discipline. All four areas of scholarship serve Salisbury University’s mission in important ways.  Many faculty at SU work within accredited units which may have specific guidelines for scholarship and creative activity.

Appointment, Rank and Tenure of Faculty

BOR II-1.00

The criteria specified here for the appointment, promotion, and granting of tenure/permanent status to faculty at Salisbury University are derived from the university’s mission. Final authority for the appointment, promotion, and granting of tenure/permanent status to faculty resides with the president of the institution.

Faculty Search Process

1.  Determination of Tenure Track/Permanent Status Position to be Filled: Departments/Schools that have identified either the need to replace a faculty member who has left the University or the need for an additional tenure track/permanent status line should consult with their dean regarding permission to do so.  Upon receiving verbal confirmation, the department chair/school director should complete a Faculty Personnel Requisition in Gullnet. This request will be forwarded to the dean who will then forward it to the Provost. The disposition of faculty lines will be determined by the Provost. Upon determining that a vacancy is to be filled, the Provost will authorize an academic unit/library to recruit for a specified or open rank. Instructions for use of the SU Personnel Electronic Requisition (SUPER) system are available online.  See faculty search and selection handbook and other resources available from Human Resources Faculty Recruitment webpage.

2. Visiting Faculty Appointments: Visiting faculty appointments are usually made for one to two academic years. Only in unusual circumstances will a visiting appointment exceed a total of three years. A visiting faculty appointee can become a regular appointee only through a search process before or after the initial appointment in accordance with the institution’s procedures, including adherence to affirmative action guidelines. Years of service in a visiting appointment may, upon mutual agreement of the faculty member and the institution, be counted as probationary years for purpose of consideration for tenure/permanent status.

3. Formation and composition of the Search Committee: After the Provost has given authorization to recruit, the appropriate dean will ask the department chair/school director/designated librarian to form a Search Committee composed of full-time faculty, if possible from the department/school/library, for the purpose of identifying qualified candidates for the open position. The composition of the screening committee is an integral part of ensuring a fair and unbiased selection process. Please consider members that represent a variety of perspectives on the role and function of the vacant position and represent the diversity of the campus. To achieve this goal, committees may include members from other departments and areas of campus on the search committee. The search committee should have 3-5 members.  Ideally, committee members should have relevant knowledge of the responsibilities and requirements of the vacant position; however, this is not required. Always recognize that some committee members may bring additional and unique perspectives to the search. Committee members will be responsible for helping to actively recruit applicants for the position. Although it is not encouraged to have the Hiring Manager be a part of the screening committee, it will be the department chair/school director and dean’s joint decision as to whether or not the circumstances are appropriate for inclusion. See the Faculty Search & Selection Handbook for guidelines, best practices, and responsibilities of the search chair and committee.

The screening committee members are expected to adhere to and ensure the search process follows the practices, rules, and procedures prescribed by Salisbury University.  To this end, all members will be provided and must complete training prior to completing the Certification of Expectations form.

Once all parties approve the ad/job posting and an approval to fill the vacancy has been granted per the appropriate approval process, HR will request the Search chair and department chair/school director/designated librarian to complete and submit the Certification of Expectations form after which HR will coordinate the placement of the ad/job posting based on the Recruitment Plan.

4. Developing the Position Announcement and Recruitment Plan: The position description must be specific as to title, rank of appointment, primary duties, and qualifications required, and if appropriate, specialty within the discipline. Normally, included along with the position description and candidate qualifications are a deadline for receipt of or date of first review of applications, a letter of interest, a curriculum vitae, and a request for names and contact information for or recommendations from at least three references.

The qualifications required or preferred must reasonably relate to the position; it is unlawful to overstate the minimum qualifications. Consider broadening the pool of potential candidates by eliminating unnecessary minimum qualifications and including preferred or desired qualifications. Every SU web-posted advertisement should include the statement “Diversity and inclusion are core values of Salisbury University. We strive to create a truly diverse and inclusive environment where the richness of ideas, backgrounds, and perspectives of our community is harnessed to create value for our University community to include students, faculty, and staff, today and in the future. To this end, the University recruits exceptional and diverse faculty, staff, and students from across Maryland, the United States, and around the world, supporting all members of the University community as they work together to achieve institutional goals and vision. To learn more about the University’s commitment to fostering a diverse and inclusive campus, please visit http://www.salisbury.edu/equity/.” All print advertisements should include at a minimum the statement: “SU is an EEO employer and is strongly committed to recruiting and retaining a diverse faculty, staff and student body” where the advertisement includes reference to the SU Human Resources website which contains the complete AA/EEO statement. At least 30 days should be allowed between the day the ad will be published in a particular publication and the deadline for applications to give applicants enough time to contact their references, etc.

The department chair/school director/designated librarian is responsible for preparing the position advertisement and locating appropriate discipline-specific advertising venues. See the Faculty Recruitment Resources webpage for guidance on preparing and routing the Recruitment Plan and the appropriate form.  When the Provost’s approval of the announcement with all changes has been obtained, the Office of Human Resources will place the ad.

Once the position advertisement is finalized, the Office of Human Resources will send an “information packet” to the search committee chair containing a cover letter, a copy of hiring procedures, and the appropriate forms (described in the following steps).  All persons involved in this process will respond in a timely fashion so that important advertising deadlines will not be missed.

Please see Strategies for Attracting Applicants in the Faculty Search & Selection Handbook and consult with Human Resources about strategies to maximize the capturing the attention of as many potential applicants as possible.

5. Placement of Position Announcement/Recruitment Sources: Positions announcements should be circulated widely in a variety of professional, specialized, and mass circulation media likely to reach a large and diverse pool of candidates. Some examples of recruiting strategies are:

  1. Consult the Survey of Earned Doctorates detailed data by discipline on the demographic characteristics, educational history, sources of financial support, and postgraduation plans of doctorate recipients across the United States. This provides a baseline for the expected diversity of the applicant pool.
  2. Beginning the advertising effort as early in the academic year as possible. The best strategy in recruitment is to be between the first to advertise and the first to bring finalists to campus.  Early advertisement also attracts the largest pool of candidates and enhances the probability that the desired candidate will still be available.
  3. Early and timely advertisement in national publications or general circulation media.  Examples: The Chronicle of Higher Education; Science.
  4. Early and timely advertisement in professional journals.  Examples: Physics Today; American Political Science Association’s employment bulletin.
  5. Contact should be made with academic institutions having graduate programs where students may possibly be qualified for the position. It should be noted that if a committee sends its position announcement to colleges and universities that graduate predominantly white males then similar efforts must be made to reach institutions with a high proportion of underrepresented individuals within those disciplines.
  6. Early and timely advertisement in publications serving diverse readerships that advertise position vacancies. Human Resources can provide information on these outlets and advertising costs. See the Office of Diversity and Inclusion’s Faculty Recruitment Resources webpage for several of these organizations.  
  7. Personal communication by members of the committee with professional contacts. 
  8. Recruitment at professional conferences, including those oriented to minority students.  
  9. Contact with selected minority affinity organizations (e.g., the Association of Black Sociologists, National Society of Black Engineers), which may provide recruitment assistance. (A listing of these organizations can be provided by Human Resources).  
  10. Use of a listing of colleges and universities participating in the U.S. Department of Education’s Graduate and Professional Opportunities Program (which awards fellowships to graduate students demonstrating financial need). (Available in the Office of Institutional Equity.)

6. Acknowledging Receipt of Applications and Use of EEO Statistical Information Form: Once a position has been advertised and applications from candidates are received, an email of acknowledgment to each applicant will be sent by Human Resources. Applicants also have the opportunity to indicate demographic data in the online application system. This demographic information is used for statistical purposes only to identify race, sex, veteran, and disability status of applicants on an anonymous basis and to provide feedback to the Office of Institutional Equity, Dean, and Provost that the advertisements are reaching potential applicants in underrepresented groups. These data are required by federal legislation on affirmative action. This information will not be shared with the search committee prior to the end of the search.

7.  Screening and Permission to Interview: Upon posting the position, HR will grant the search committee access to the applicant database. Each application must be reviewed by the Search Committee on its merits in relation to the advertised position and qualifications and other criteria supplied to candidates. Criteria used in screening candidates must be applied uniformly to all candidates. Selection of candidates must be made on professional grounds. The Committee may not consider factors such as race, national origin, religion, sex, age, sexual orientation, or condition of handicap; unless the factor relates to the responsibilities of the position or other legal grounds exist. 

The screening procedure will result in the determination of an “interview pool.” The names and credentials of the top candidates to be interviewed must be approved by the department chair/school director/designated librarian and dean. No department/school/library may invite persons for on-site interviews until it has received approval from the appropriate dean and Human Resources’ representative (see Faculty Candidate Pool Finalist Report).

NOTE: Some departments/schools may wish to conduct interviews of preliminary applicants at a conference or annual meeting of a professional association, by phone, or by videoconference. In general, interviews at this stage do not need dean and Human Resources’ representative approval. Interviews of finalists typically take place on campus. Offers of employment cannot be made without the approval of the Provost.

It is suggested that search committees consider seeking permission to check listed references as well as unlisted references or contacts from candidates who are being considered for on-campus interviews.  During the reference check process, members of the search committee can solicit position-related information on the candidate’s ability to perform the duties of the position for which they are being considered.  It is important to keep records of the conversations and the information obtained as well as to ask a standard set of questions from all references.  Sample questions and reference check guidelines appear on the Human Resources Faculty Recruitment webpage.

8. Candidates Who Advance Major Campus Initiatives: On occasion, a search committee may identify a candidate or candidates who, although they do not meet all of the selected criteria for a particular search, show the potential to advance University initiatives. In such cases, the committee chair should bring these candidates to the attention of the department chair/school director/designated librarian who may bring them to the attention of the Dean, Provost, or President.  If it is clear that the candidate does have the potential to advance University initiatives and there is a need for additional faculty in the area, the Provost may authorize the department/school/library to interview the candidate with the possibility of an additional line being made available. 

9. Invitations to Interview: Once approval has been given to begin interviewing, each person in the interview pool must be contacted to arrange a date for the interview. The terms under which travel expenses for applicants are reimbursed should also be explained to the candidates. The Accounts Payable Office provides information on reimbursement to applicants and search committee for search-related expenses, some of which may be pre-paid on behalf of the applicant.

10. Interviews: A core of similar questions should be asked of all candidates in a given search. Search Committees should agree upon this set of questions in advance of interviewing and formulate them in writing. Search Committees must also be sure to use criteria that coincide with the qualifications listed in the position advertisement. Additional questions may also be asked. Notes should be maintained for each interview. Consult the Faculty Search & Selection Handbook for information on how to establish selection criteria, develop interview questions, and evaluate applicant materials and responses.

Everyone who is responsible for hiring should review guidelines on the interviewing process. According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidelines, also contained in Appendix A-6, pre-employment inquiries as to the following are to be avoided: age, date of birth, number and age of children, marital status, race, religion, and national origin. Other useful documents on interviewing developed by the Maryland Department of Personnel and CUPA (College and University Personnel Association) are available from the Office of Human Resources. Wherever possible, candidates should be asked to interact with students and to make a presentation that is appropriate for the discipline which is hiring. Examples of this are the opportunity to teach a class, an invitation to speak to an academic club, or an invitation to give a presentation to faculty. Candidates should be given the opportunity to speak informally with as many members of the department/CHHS school/library as possible and to ask questions of them as well. It is helpful to think of the interview process as a two-way street where the candidate and the department/school/library are attempting to discern whether the position/candidate are the best to suit their needs.

Avoid exclusionary thinking - when evaluating candidates for “best fit”, keep in mind that this does not necessarily mean screening for individuals who are “like us” in terms of having the same experiences, philosophies, values, and perspectives as the screening committee. Rather, look for those candidates who will serve in the best interests of the University. Use diversity-related experience and expertise as selection criteria where appropriate. This can be valid criteria if it is required to successfully perform the functions of the position.  Also, consider what effect diverse experiences and expertise may have on the ability to meet organizational objectives. Consider unconventional career paths such as someone whose background includes overcoming educational or other obstacles, employment in industry, service organizations, charitable organizations, or government agencies. Each search committee member should give their honest input on each candidate interviewed. Recommend the best-qualified candidates to the Hiring Manager based on advertised position requirements and substantive qualifications.

Committee chairs need to be aware of prevailing policies and procedures regarding reimbursement of expenses incurred by both the candidates and search committee members associated with the on-campus interview.  Full information on these policies is available on the Accounts Payable Search Committee and Moving Procedures website and on the Human Resources Faculty Recruitment webpage.

11. Recommending Offer of Position: Candidates are recommended by the department chair/school director/designated librarian in accordance with departmental/school/library policy. The names of the recommended final candidates are reviewed by the dean, who obtains permission from the Provost to make an offer. The conditions of the offer with respect to salary, rank, and credit from previous experience towards tenure/permanent status and promotion are decided by the Provost in consultation with the dean and the chair/school director/designated librarian. In general, the department chair/school director/designated librarian will be given permission to discuss the pending offer and terms with the candidate verbally prior to the actual written offer being sent.       

All formal appointment offers require approval from the Provost. Upon signing the contract, the appointee will provide official copies of any transcripts unless such transcript(s) has/have already been provided. For a variety of reasons, the Provost may decide that it is in the University’s best interests to authorize a department/CHHS school/library to make more than one offer in parallel for a potential extra position. Special arrangements for inter-institutional appointments, interdepartmental appointments, and appointments in new academic units will be handled by the Provost.

12. Unsuccessful Candidates or Searches: Unsuccessful candidates must be notified in writing that the position has been filled and thanked for their applications. This is typically done by Human Resources staff for applicants who were not semi-finalists or finalists.  For semi-finalists and finalists, it is recommended that the search committee chair notify unsuccessful applicants that the position has been filled and thank them for their applications.

If the search committee is unable to fill the position, the chair of the search committee must notify Human Resources of the failed search.

13. General Record Keeping: All written records having to do with the hiring of an individual must be kept for the life of the affirmative action plan (five years) according to the Office of Civil Rights of the U.S. Department of Education. The following form is to be kept on file in the Office of Human Resources: the equal employment opportunity recruitment report. Human Resources will also maintain copies of letters of acknowledgment and rejection; interview notes and criteria used in making a selection; applicant resume/credential files; and all other correspondence (including copies of published advertisements) relative to the search for a period of three years. The department/school/library will send these records to Human Resources once the hiring process is complete.

14. Emergency Recruitment Procedures: Emergency recruitment may be warranted where death, medical or other approved leave of absence, resignation, dismissal, or suspension has resulted in a vacancy of an existing position: (1) during a semester in which the incumbent was working where the event was not foreseeable prior to two months of its occurrence, or (2) where the vacancy occurs after spring semester commencement prior to a fall semester in which the incumbent was assigned to teach.

No emergency hires will be made for tenure/ permanent status or tenure-track positions.  Emergency hires will be considered temporary.

Where an emergency recruitment situation as defined above exists, the following procedures apply:

  1. The appropriate dean will notify the Provost of the emergency situation. Any disagreement as to the existence of an emergency situation will be resolved by the President.
  2. If time permits, the supervisor or department chair/school director/designated librarian will devise a limited advertisement and recruitment plan which must be approved by the appropriate administrator or dean along with an approved position description.
  3. A screening committee consisting of at least three appointed faculty members will screen the candidate and/or candidates recommended by the department chair/school director/designated librarian or supervisor.
  4. The department chair/school director/designated librarian will maintain documentation of evaluation criteria and all other correspondence related to the selection.

15.  Summary of Hiring Procedures: A one-page summary of hiring procedures provided by the Provost and entitled “Candidate Selection Protocol” can be found in the Faculty Search and Selection Handbook.

Offers of Appointment

1. Prior to an offer agreement being sent to a foreign national, the agreement should contain language that appears in Appendix A-10.

2. A final offer of appointment can be made only with the approval of Salisbury University’s President or Provost.

3. The official form for letters of appointment to the faculty at Salisbury University appears in Appendix B and provides for both the general terms of employment at the university and any specific terms of employment, which may be negotiated by the university and the new faculty member at or prior to appointment and as a part of employment. The contract or letter of appointment shall constitute a contractually binding agreement between the institution and the appointee.

4. In negotiation with the successful candidate who is coming in without tenure/permanent status, the President (more typically the Provost as their designee) may grant up to a maximum of three years prior service credit to count towards tenure/permanent status and/or promotion.

5. In addition to the official letter of appointment, each new faculty member will receive a link to the Salisbury University Faculty Handbook, which includes most University System of Maryland-wide policies and procedures relating to the appointment, rank, and tenure/permanent status of faculty as approved by the Board of Regents, and all then-current Salisbury University policies and procedures relating to the appointment, rank, and tenure/permanent status of faculty as approved by the president of Salisbury University and the Chancellor of the USM.

6. All faculty appointments shall be made to a designated rank and shall be effective on a specific date.

Provisions Related to Appointment, Promotion, Tenure and Permanent Status

The following provisions are furnished to all new faculty at time of initial appointment in tenure-track positions.

1.  Adjustments in salary or advancement in rank may be made under these policies, and, except where a definite termination date is a condition of appointment, the conditions pertaining to the rank as modified will become effective as of the date of the modification. For tenure-track/permanent status appointments, the year in which the appointee is entitled to tenure/permanent status review under this policy (“mandatory tenure/permanent status-review year”) shall be specified in the original and subsequent contracts/letters of appointment. Tenure/permanent status review shall occur in that year unless otherwise agreed in writing by Salisbury University and the appointee. Tenure/permanent status in any rank can be awarded only by an affirmative decision based on a formal review.

2.  Appointments and reappointments to the rank of full-time instructor without tenure may be for one to three years, provided no appointment without tenure may extend beyond the end of the mandatory tenure-review year. An appointment to the rank of full-time instructor will be renewed automatically for one additional year unless the appointee is notified in writing to the contrary in accordance with the following deadlines: not later than March 1 of the first academic year of service if the current appointment expires at the end of that year, not later than December 15 of the second academic year of service if the current appointment expires at the end of that year, and not later than August 1 prior to the third or any subsequent academic year of service if the current appointment expires at the end of that year. For appointments beginning at times other than the start of an academic year, the institution may adjust the notice of non-renewal dates accordingly by specifying such adjustments in the initial contract or letter of appointment. Appointments to the rank of instructor may be terminated at any time in accordance with paragraphs 6 through 11 below.

An instructor without tenure, whose appointment has been extended to a sixth year of continuous, full-time service shall receive no later than during that sixth year a formal review of tenure as instructor.  If the institution fails to conduct a tenure review in accordance with the schedule provided in this policy, the appointee is entitled to a further one-year appointment during which the tenure review shall take place. The appointee reviewed for tenure shall be notified in writing, by the end of the appointment year in which the review was conducted, of the decision either to grant or deny tenure.  An instructor who has been reviewed during a mandatory review year and who has been notified that tenure has been denied shall be granted an additional and terminal one-year appointment in that rank, but barring exceptional circumstances, shall receive no further consideration for tenure.  An instructor with or without tenure may be promoted to assistant professor. If an instructor without tenure is appointed as an assistant professor, the provisions of paragraphs in 3 below apply to the appointment, except that the appointee’s review for tenure must occur no later than the sixth year of continuous full-time employment in the ranks of instructor and assistant professor. Tenure in any rank can be awarded only by an affirmative decision based upon a formal review. 

3. Subject to any special conditions specified in the letter of appointment, full-time appointments and reappointments without tenure may be for one to three years, provided no appointment without tenure may extend beyond the end of the mandatory tenure-review year. An appointment to the rank of full-time assistant professor will be renewed automatically for one additional year unless the appointee is notified in writing to the contrary in accordance with the following deadlines: not later than March 1 of the first academic year of service if the current appointment expires at the end of that year, not later than December 15 of the second academic year of service if the current appointment expires at the end of that year, and not later than August 1 prior to the third or any subsequent academic year of service if the current appointment expires at the end of that year. For appointments beginning at times other than the start of an academic year, the institution may adjust the notice of non-renewal dates accordingly by specifying such adjustments in the initial contract or letter of appointment. Appointments to the rank of assistant professor may be terminated at any time in accordance with paragraphs 6 through 11 below.

An assistant professor without tenure, whose appointment has been extended to a sixth year of continuous, full-time service, shall receive, no later than during that sixth year, a formal review for tenure. If the institution fails to conduct a tenure review in accordance with the schedule provided in this policy, the appointee is entitled to a further one-year appointment during which the tenure review shall take place. The appointee reviewed for tenure shall be notified in writing, by the end of the appointment year in which the review was conducted, of the decision to grant or deny tenure.  An assistant professor who has been reviewed during a mandatory review year and who has been notified that tenure has been denied will be granted an additional and terminal one-year appointment in that rank, but, barring exceptional circumstances, will receive no further consideration for tenure.

4.  Appointments or promotions to the rank of full-time associate professor require the written approval of the President of the institution.  New full-time appointments to the rank of associate professor may carry immediate tenure provided that each such appointee has been formally reviewed for tenure. Otherwise, such appointments will be for an initial period of one to four years, except that initial appointments for individuals with no prior teaching experience may be for a maximum of six years, and will terminate at the end of that period unless the appointee is notified in writing that they have been granted tenure.  Promotions to the rank of associate professor carry immediate tenure. Consequently, such promotions may only be awarded subsequent to a formal tenure review and an award of tenure.

An associate professor who is appointed without tenure will receive a formal review for tenure during the period of appointment in accordance with the following deadlines: If the appointment is for an initial period of one year, then the formal review must be completed, and written notice must be given that tenure has been granted or denied, by March 1 of that year. If the appointment is for two years, then the formal review must be completed, and written notice must be given that tenure has been granted or denied, by no later than December 15 of the second year. If the appointment is for more than two years, then the formal review must be completed, and written notice must be given that tenure has been granted or denied, by no later than August 1 prior to the beginning of the final year of the appointment. For appointments beginning at times other than the start of an academic year, the institution may adjust the notice of non-renewal dates accordingly by specifying such adjustments in the initial contract or letter of appointment.  Appointments to the rank of associate professor may be terminated at any time in accordance with paragraphs 6 through 11 below.

If the institution fails to conduct a tenure review in accordance with the schedule provided in this policy, the appointment shall be extended for an additional year, so that the notice required by this section may be provided in full. An associate professor who has been notified in writing that tenure has been denied, barring exceptional circumstances, will receive no further consideration for tenure.

5. Full-time appointments or promotions to the rank of full-time professor require the written approval of the President of the institution. New full-time appointments to the rank of professor may carry immediate tenure provided that each such appointee has been formally reviewed for tenure. Otherwise, such appointments will be for an initial period of one to four years, except that initial appointments for individuals with no prior teaching experience may be for a maximum of six years, and will terminate at the end of that period unless the appointee is notified in writing that they have been granted tenure. Promotions to the rank of professor carry immediate tenure. Consequently such promotions may only be awarded subsequent to a formal tenure review and an award of tenure.

A professor who is appointed without tenure will receive a formal review for tenure during the period of appointment in accordance with the following deadlines:  If the appointment is for an initial period of one year, then the formal review must be completed, and written notice must be given that tenure has been granted or denied, by March 1 of that year.  If the appointment is for two years, then the formal review must be completed, and written notice must be given that tenure has been granted or denied, by no later than December 15 of the second year.  If the appointment is for more than two years, then the formal review must be completed, and written notice must be given that tenure has been granted or denied, by no later than August 1 prior to the beginning of the final year of the appointment.  For appointments beginning at times other than the start of an academic year, the institution may adjust the notice of tenure review dates accordingly by specifying the adjustments in the initial contract or letter of appointment.  Appointments to the rank of professor may be terminated at any time in accordance with paragraphs 6 through 11 below.

If the institution fails to conduct a tenure review in accordance with the schedule provided in this policy, the appointment shall be extended for an additional year, so that the notice required by this section may be provided in full. A professor who has been notified in writing that tenure has been denied, barring exceptional circumstances, will receive no further consideration for tenure.

6.  A term of service may be terminated by the appointee by resignation, but no resignation will become effective until the termination of the appointment period in which the resignation is offered except by mutual written agreement between the appointee and the president of Salisbury University or designee.

7. The President of Salisbury University may terminate the appointment of a tenured or tenure-track appointee for moral turpitude, professional or scholarly misconduct, incompetence, or willful neglect of duty, provided that prior to the termination the following steps are taken:

  1. the charges are stated in writing and the appointee is furnished a copy thereof;
  2. at the request of the appointee, the President asks the Faculty Mediation Committee of the Faculty Senate to informally inquire as to the possibility of effecting an adjustment to the situation, which would prevent termination;
  3. where such mediation fails, the appointee is given an opportunity to request a hearing by the University’s Academic Freedom & Tenure (AFT) Committee.

Once mediation has failed (see 7b above) or if mediation does not occur, the appointee will have 30 calendar days to request a hearing. The request must be made no later than 30 days following notice that the mediation has failed or following receipt of the charges. The hearing will be held no sooner than 30 calendar days after receipt of such a request. The date of the hearing will be set by mutual agreement of the appointee and the chair of the AFT Committee. The AFT Committee will make a recommendation to the President for action to be taken. The recommendation will be based only on the evidence of record in the proceeding.  Either party to the hearing, that is, either the appointee or the person(s) bringing the charges, may request an opportunity for oral argument before the President prior to action on the Committee’s recommendation. If the President does not accept the recommendation of the AFT Committee, the reasons will be communicated promptly in writing to the appointee and the chair of the AFT Committee. In the event that the President elects to terminate the appointment, the appointee may appeal to the Board of Regents, which will render a final decision.

Under exceptional circumstances and following consultation with the chair of the AFT Committee, the President may direct that the appointee be relieved of some or all of their institutional duties, without loss of compensation and without prejudice, pending a final decision in the termination proceedings. (In case of emergency involving threat to life, the President may act to suspend temporarily prior to consultation.) The appointee may elect to be represented by counsel of their choice throughout termination proceedings.

8. If an appointment is terminated in the manner prescribed in paragraph 7, the President of the university may, at their discretion, relieve the appointee of assigned duties immediately or allow the appointee to continue in the position for a specified period of time.  The appointee’s compensation will continue for a period of one year commencing on the date on which the appointee receives notice of termination.  A faculty member whose appointment is terminated for cause involving moral turpitude or professional or scholarly misconduct will receive no notice or further compensation beyond the date of final action by the President or the Board of Regents.

9. The institution may terminate any appointment because of the discontinuance of the department, program, school, or unit in which the appointment was made; or because of the lack of appropriations or other funds with which to support the appointment.  Such decisions will be made at Salisbury University in accordance with the procedures detailed in USM BOR Policy II - 8.00 (Faculty Retrenchment). The President will give a full-time appointee holding tenure/permanent status notice of such termination at least one year before the date on which the appointment is terminated.

  1. If the need arises for reduction or reallocation of faculty, the University will develop a retrenchment plan, which protects the rights of faculty. The University will also establish a Retrenchment Appeals Committee with a majority membership of tenured/permanent status faculty elected by the faculty.
  2. The retrenchment plan will be used to make recommendations to the President about which faculty positions should be terminated at the University and/or which positions should be reallocated in some way.  The Retrenchment Appeals Committee has the responsibility of hearing appeals from faculty who have been notified of termination or reallocation and determining the validity of termination or reallocation on the basis of the grounds for appeal identified in the University’s faculty retrenchment procedures, implemented in response to USM BOR Policy II-8.00.
  3. Final decisions on retrenchment and reallocation of faculty will be made on the basis of Salisbury University’s educational mission, its needs to maintain program integrity, its needs to maintain financial viability, and to be responsive to the needs of its clientele. Final decisions will be made by the President.

10.  Notwithstanding any other provisions to the contrary, the appointment of any non-tenured/non-permanent status faculty member, 50% or more of whose compensation is derived from research contracts, service contracts, gifts or grants, will be subject to termination upon expiration of the research funds, service contract income, gifts, or grants from which the compensation is payable.

11.  Appointments will terminate upon the death of the appointee. Upon termination for this cause, the institution will pay to the estate of the appointee all of the accumulated and unpaid earnings of the appointee plus compensation for accumulated unused annual leave.

12.  Appointments to all other ranks not specifically mentioned below in Faculty Ranks and Criteria and all part-time appointments are for terms not to extend beyond the end of the fiscal year unless otherwise stipulated in the letter of appointment. Faculty appointed to ranks not specifically mentioned in Faculty Ranks and Criteria on a full-time basis for a term not less than one academic year shall receive notice of non-renewal of contract based upon their length of continuous full-time service in such ranks.  If such service is less than seven years, at least 90-days notice is required.  If such service equals or exceeds seven years, at least six-months notice is required. If the required notice is not provided prior to the termination of the then-current contract, this condition may be remedied by extending the contract by the number of days necessary to meet the notice requirement.

13.  If in the judgment of the appointee’s department chair/school director, a deficiency in the appointee’s professional conduct or performance exists that does not warrant dismissal or suspension, a moderate sanction such as a formal warning or censure may be imposed, provided that the appointee is first afforded an opportunity to contest the action through application to the Faculty Welfare Committee.

14.  Unless the appointee agrees otherwise, any changes that are hereafter made in paragraphs 1-13 will be applied only to subsequent appointments.

15.  Compensation for appointments under these policies is subject to modification in the event of reduction in State appropriations or in other income from which compensation may be paid.

16.  Appointees will be subject to all applicable policies and procedures duly adopted or amended from time to time by Salisbury University or the USM, including but not limited to, policies and procedures regarding annual leave; sick leave; sabbatical leave; leave of absence; outside employment; patents and copyrights; scholarly and professional misconduct; retirement; reduction, consolidation, or discontinuation of programs; and criteria on teaching, scholarship and service.

Faculty Academic Credentials

BOR II-1.02

1. Persons seeking appointment to the Salisbury University faculty must accompany their initial applications with curriculum vitae which they certify as accurate and correct.

2. Persons seeking appointment to tenured status must submit for review names and contact information of recognized professionals and/or experts who can attest to proficiency and excellence in teaching, scholarship or research, creative activity and community and professional service as appropriate.

3. Each person preparing to accept a faculty appointment at Salisbury University is required to send an official, sealed transcript from the institution that awarded the highest degree claimed by the prospective faculty member and a completed Employment Data Sheet to the Provost.

4. The Office of Academic Affairs makes a record of all faculty transcripts and Employment Data Sheets received and places transcripts and data sheets on file in the Human Resources Office.

Faculty Ranks and Criteria

BOR II-1.00

A. General Principles

1.  The only faculty ranks which may involve a tenure commitment are: professor, associate professor, assistant professor, instructor, distinguished university professor and such other ranks as the Board of Regents may approve. Appointments to all other ranks, including any qualified rank in which an additional adjective is introduced (such as “clinical professor”) are for a definite term and do not involve a tenure commitment.

Promotion to the ranks of associate professor or professor carries immediate tenure. Non-tenured faculty members applying for promotion to these ranks must first stand for tenure review. Faculty hired at the rank of associate professor or professor must go up for tenure review and approval, typically within three years of their hire.

Professorial titles should be granted only to teaching and/or research personnel who are associated with teaching or research departments or units.

Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this policy, faculty in certain ranks may be granted permanent status. The only faculty ranks which may involve a permanent‑status commitment are Librarian II, Librarian III, and Librarian IV and such other ranks as the Board of Regents may approve. Permanent status may not be granted to an individual holding the rank of Librarian I.

Permanent status is defined as continuing employment such that a decision to remove an employee must be made by the president of the campus and must be justified by cause as defined by USM and campus policy. Permanent status is an employment status different from tenure.

An appointee who has been notified that permanent status has been denied shall be granted an additional and terminal one‑year appointment in that rank, but, barring exceptional circumstances, shall receive no further consideration for permanent status.  Permanent status can be awarded only by an affirmative decision based upon a formal review.  Individuals who have been granted permanent status under USM BOR Policy VII‑2.15 B (Policy On Librarians), which is superseded by this policy, shall retain this status. Appointments of faculty librarians with permanent status may be terminated at any time for cause. Procedures for termination of faculty librarians with permanent status are covered below in Section 9. Removal for Cause.

Appointments of faculty librarians who do not have permanent status may be terminated under policies and procedures that apply to full-time non‑tenure track faculty.

A person appointed to the position of Dean of the Libraries and Instructional Resources shall serve in that capacity at the pleasure of the President or their designee, regardless of whether the appointee has at the time of the appointment, or obtains during the appointment, permanent status as a librarian.

2.  In addition to the ranks listed in Faculty Ranks below, there may also be such other faculty ranks as institutions shall define and include in their respective appointment, rank, and tenure policies, subject to the approval of the Board of Regents.

Institutions should specify in writing to faculty at the time of appointment the length of the appointment and the applicable terms and conditions of the appointment with regard to tenure.

See Chapter 1: General Administration  of the Faculty Handbook regarding Academic Freedom at Salisbury University.

B. Criteria and Procedures for Tenure and Promotion

1. The criteria for tenure and promotion at Salisbury University are: (a) teaching effectiveness including student advising; (b) research, scholarship, professional development and, in appropriate areas, creative activities; and (c) relevant service to the community, profession, and institution.  The relative weight of these criteria will be determined by the mission of the University.

2. The activities considered being within the criteria for tenure and promotion shall be flexible and expansive.  The assessment of teaching, research/scholarship/ creative activities, and service during the tenure and promotion process shall give appropriate recognition, consistent with the institution’s mission, to faculty accomplishments that are collaborative, interdisciplinary, and inter-institutional and to faculty innovations in areas such as undergraduate education, minority‑achievement programs, K‑16 curriculum development, and technology‑enhanced learning.

C. Faculty Ranks

The following criteria are used at Salisbury University to make decisions about the appointment, promotion, and tenure of tenure-track faculty.

Faculty with Duties Primarily in Instruction, Research and Service: Criteria for Eligibility for Appointment and Promotion to Academic Ranks:

Instructor 

  1. At a minimum, a master’s degree in the subject field in which the faculty member teaches.
  2. Pursuit of continued graduate study toward a doctorate or other terminal degree. Upon completion of requirements for the terminal degree, an instructor who meets the requirements for assistant professor may be recommended for promotion to the rank of assistant professor.
  3. Tenure normally will not be granted at the rank of instructor.  The institution will determine the standard for granting tenure in exceptional circumstances.
  4. Evidence of potential for effective university teaching.
  5. Willingness to participate in the activities of the academic community.

Assistant Professor

  1. The earned doctorate, or recognized terminal degree in the field of specialization from a regionally accredited or internationally reputable foreign institution.  In extraordinary circumstances, the president, after consultation with the appropriate faculty committee at the institution, may waive the criterion of the earned doctorate. 
  2. Evidence of effective teaching.
  3. Evidence of scholarly contribution in the area of specialization including, but not limited to, activities such as research, publication, participation in the programs of professional societies, or professionally recognized performance in the arts.
  4. Participation in the activities of the academic community at the department, school, and university levels including, but not limited to, such activities as performing assigned administrative duties, assuming committee responsibilities, effective academic advising of students, working actively with student organizations, and evidencing interest in external community activities related to the faculty member’s area of specialization. In cases where service is not specifically discipline-related, the candidate should describe the service and address how it could be of professional benefit to the candidate and/or to Salisbury University’s role in the community since the faculty member is representing the University positively. Volunteerism related to one’s family, hobbies, or special interests may be laudable but may not be weighted heavily if it appears to be more personal than professional.

Associate Professor

  1. The earned doctorate, or recognized terminal degree in the field of specialization from a regionally accredited or internationally reputable foreign institution. In extraordinary circumstances, the President, after consultation with the appropriate faculty committee at the institution, may waive the criterion of the earned doctorate.
  2. A minimum of six years of full-time university/college teaching experience with at least five years in assistant professor rank. Exceptions may be made by the Provost for comparable professional activity or research.
  3. Excellence in teaching.
  4. Evidence of scholarly contribution in the area of specialization including, but not limited to, such activities as research, publication, participation in the programs of professional societies, or professionally recognized performance in the arts.
  5. Participation in the activities of the academic community at the department, school/college, and university levels including, but not limited to, such activities as performing assigned administrative duties, assuming committee responsibilities, effective academic advising of students, working actively with student organizations, and evidencing interest in external community activities related to the faculty member’s area of specialization. In cases where service is not specifically discipline-related, the candidate should describe the service and address how it could be of professional benefit to the candidate and/or to Salisbury University’s role in the community since the faculty member is representing the University positively. Volunteerism related to one’s family, hobbies, or special interests may be laudable but may not be weighted heavily if it appears to be more personal than professional.

Professor

  1. The earned doctorate or recognized terminal degree in the field of specialization from a regionally accredited or internationally reputable foreign institution.  In extraordinary circumstances, the President, after consultation with the appropriate faculty committee at the institution, may waive the criterion of the earned doctorate.
  2. A minimum of ten years of full-time university/college teaching experience and at least seven years in the associate professor rank. Exceptions may be made for faculty who have attained national distinction for comparable professional activity or research by the Provost.
  3. Excellence in teaching.
  4. Evidence of scholarly contribution in the area of specialization including, but not limited to, such activities as research, publication, participation in the programs of professional societies, or professionally recognized performance in the arts.
  5. Participation in the activities of the academic community at the department, school, and university levels, including, but not limited to, performing assigned administrative duties, assuming committee responsibilities, effective academic advising of students, working actively with student organizations, and evidencing interest in external community activities related to the faculty member’s area of specialization. In cases where service is not specifically discipline-related, the candidate should describe the service and address how it could be of professional benefit to the candidate and/or to Salisbury University’s role in the community since the faculty member is representing the University positively. Volunteerism related to one’s family, hobbies, or special interests may be laudable but may not be weighted heavily if it appears to be more personal than professional.

Additional Full-Time Faculty Ranks

Assistant Instructor: The appointee should be competent to fill a specific position in an acceptable manner, but is not required to meet all the requirements for an Instructor. Appointment to this rank requires at least the appropriate baccalaureate degree.

Lecturer: This title may be used for appointment at any salary and experience level of persons who are competent to fill a specific position but who are not intended to be considered for professorial appointment. Appointments to this rank shall be for terms not to exceed three years and are renewable.

Senior Lecturer: In addition to having the qualifications of a lecturer, the appointee shall have completed at least six years as a lecturer (or in a rank at another institution of higher education that is accepted as comparable to Lecturer), and shall have established a record of teaching excellence and a record of service. Fewer than six-years experience may qualify one for this rank if approved by the President or designee. Appointments to this rank shall be for terms not to exceed five years and are renewable.

Artist‑in‑Residence; Writer‑in‑Residence; Executive‑in‑Residence: This title may be used to designate temporary appointments, at any salary and experience level, of persons who are serving for a limited time or part‑time, and who are not intended to be considered for professorial appointment.

Adjunct Assistant Professor; Adjunct Associate Professor; Adjunct Professor: These titles are used to appoint outstanding persons who may be simultaneously employed outside the institution. The appointee should have expertise in the discipline and recognition for accomplishment sufficient to gain the endorsement of the preponderance of the members of the faculty of the department/CHHS school to which they are appointed. Appointment is made on a semester or an annual basis and is renewable. These titles do not carry tenure. Note: These are full-time positions. 

Affiliate Assistant Professor; Affiliate Associate Professor; Affiliate Professor: These titles are used to recognize the affiliation of a faculty member or a member of the professional staff with an academic department, program or center when that individual’s appointment and salary lie in another department, CHHS school, or center of the institution. The appointment will be made upon the recommendation of the faculty of the department/CHHS school, and at a level commensurate with the appointee’s qualifications, consistent with standards established for regular tenure track faculty, although tenure cannot be earned on an affiliated appointment. Each institution shall establish guidelines and procedures for awarding these titles.

Visiting Appointments: The prefix “Visiting” before an academic title is used to designate a short‑term, full‑time appointment without tenure.

Emerit Faculty Appointments: Emerit status may be bestowed by an institution on the basis of both quality and length of service to the institution. Guidelines and procedures for awarding this title appear below. Emerit titles at the System level may be bestowed by the Chancellor.

Professor of the Practice: This title may be used to appoint individuals who have demonstrated excellence in the practice as well as leadership in specific fields. The appointee shall have attained regional and national prominence and, when appropriate, international recognition of outstanding achievement. Additionally, the appointee shall have demonstrated superior teaching ability appropriate to assigned responsibilities. As a minimum, the appointee shall hold the terminal professional degree in the field or equivalent stature by virtue of experience. Appointees will hold the rank of Professor but, while having that stature, will not have rights that are limited to tenured faculty. Initial appointment is for periods up to five years, and reappointment is possible. This title does not carry tenure, nor does time served as a Professor of the Practice count toward achieving tenure in another title. Different schools and colleges at SU may have specific requirements for this rank.

[Institution] Professor:  This title may be used for nationally distinguished scholars, creative or performing artists, or researchers who would qualify for appointment at a USM institution at the level of Professor, but who normally hold full-time positions outside the University. Holders of this title may provide graduate students supervision, serve as principal investigators, and participate in departmental/CHHS school and university shared governance.  Initial appointment is for three years and is renewable annually upon recommendation to the Provost by the unit head and the dean. This is a non-paid non-tenure track title.

Procedures and Policies for Granting of Tenure to Faculty 

For deans, see Procedure for Granting Tenure to Deans

1. Definition of Tenure: According to the American Association of State Colleges and Universities in its 1971 pamphlet entitled Academic Freedom and Responsibilities, and Academic Tenure, “… tenure … is a means of making the teaching profession attractive to persons of ability, and constitutes an important protection for academic freedom. It, thus, contributes to the success of an institution in fulfilling its obligations to its students and to society.”

To ensure the integrity of the university’s tenure process, it is essential that:

  1. the criteria actually applied in the tenure decision be approved by the department/CHHS school in which the candidate is employed, be known to evaluators at all stages of the tenure decision process, and be communicated to candidates at the beginning of their employment.
  2. all information regarding the candidate’s success in meeting those criteria be considered by those involved in making tenure recommendations and all information considered be disclosed to the candidate in a timely manner.
  3. the criteria, and corresponding performance expectations, be applied consistently to all candidates and that the criteria be applied consistently to the same candidate over time.
  4. the University’s procedures for conducting tenure review are adhered to by all participants, at all stages of the review.
  5. periodic evaluations of each candidate’s progress toward meeting the criteria for tenure are reported to the candidate clearly and candidly as well as constructive guidance on the candidate’s future efforts.

2. Tenure Recommendations: Tenure recommendations are primarily the responsibility of the tenured faculty in the candidate’s department/CHHS school, subject to administrative approval. Since there is considerable diversity among academic units, each unit shall establish its own tenure review committee. Departmental/CHHS school committees will establish written standards/guidelines for faculty member performance necessary for the granting of tenure. Performance areas will include teaching, scholarship and service. The written standards/guidelines for each department/CHHS school’s tenure requirements shall be subject to the approval of the tenured faculty of the department/CHHS school, the department chair/school director, the dean, the Provost, and the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure. Hereafter, department or CHHS school Tenure Review Committees will be referred to as “Tenure Review Committee.”

3. Responsibilities and Structure of Tenure Review Committees: Each academic department/CHHS school shall establish a Tenure Review Committee.  This Committee will have the following responsibilities:

  • Establish written standards/guidelines for faculty member performance necessary for the granting of tenure as described in Paragraph 2 above.
  • Conduct annual progress reviews of all faculty in tenure line positions and meet with these faculty to discuss their progress toward tenure. These reviews will produce written reports advising each candidate of their progress in achieving the performance expected of a tenured faculty member, offering constructive suggestions where appropriate. Copies of these reports will be forwarded to the candidate at the same time that they are forwarded to the department chair/school director. A copy will also be forwarded to the dean and a copy preserved by the Tenure Review Committee.
  • Upon application for tenure by a candidate, the Tenure Review Committee will conduct a review of the candidate’s record and make a written recommendation to the department chair/school director as to whether the candidate should be awarded tenure (see Table 1 and Table 2) In reviewing the record, the Committee shall give significant weight to the guidance provided to the candidate and the candidate’s response to that guidance contained in the annual evaluations described in Paragraph 4 of this section. A copy of this recommendation is to be forwarded to the candidate at the same time that it is forwarded to the department chair/school director.

The following guidelines apply to the structure of Tenure Review Committees.

Committees shall consist of (at least) three faculty members, and each of these must themselves be tenured in the University. In the event that a department/CHHS school does not have three tenured members, the Committee will include tenured faculty members from other units in academic disciplines similar in nature to the discipline of the candidates. For departments/CHHS schools with more than three tenured members, the manner of the selection of faculty for the Tenure Review Committee will be determined by the tenured faculty members of that department/CHHS school subject to the following principles:

  • No tenured faculty member of a department/CHHS school may be denied membership on the Tenure Review Committee or a vote on the final tenure recommendation for a candidate unless a conflict of interest or other sound reason for denial exists. Faculty members on sabbatical leave may vote in the tenure process; faculty members on leave of absence may not vote in the tenure process. A person aggrieved by a denial of participation may appeal to the Academic Freedom & Tenure Committee whose decision shall be final.
  • No individual may participate in the tenure recommendation process at more than one level. For example, if the chair of a department/CHHS school with less than three tenured faculty members available to sit on the departmental/CHHS school committee elects to sit on the Tenure Review Committee, the chair shall not also forward their own separate recommendation.
  • Faculty members may not serve on Tenure Review Committees when the candidate is a member of their immediate family.
  • When faculty from outside the candidate’s department/CHHS school are included on the Tenure Review Committee (less than three tenured faculty members in the department available to serve), the candidate shall be presented with a list of potential extra-departmental committee members by the tenured faculty of the department/CHHS school. Barring extraordinary circumstances, the candidate will have the right to reject no more than two names from that list.
  • In the event that there are no tenured faculty members in an academic department/CHHS school, the Academic Freedom & Tenure Committee will, in consultation with the department chair/school director, prepare a list of tenured faculty from related disciplines from which the candidate may strike two names.

4. Annual Review Procedures

To prepare for future tenure decisions, the department chair/school director is to prepare a realistic and candid written evaluation annually for each tenure-track faculty member concerning their progress toward tenure. A copy of this evaluation will be forwarded to the faculty member at the same time that it is forwarded to the dean. A copy will also be forwarded to the Tenure Review Committee for its consideration the following year. The department chair/school director will also meet annually with each tenure-track faculty member to discuss this evaluation along with that of the  Tenure Review Committee. This is not a merit evaluation; its purpose is to provide the faculty member with a realistic appraisal of work to date and prospects for the future.

The annual review process begins with submission by tenure-track faculty to the Tenure Review Committee of information regarding their performance during the previous two semesters with respect to the tenure criteria.

All members of the Tenure Review Committee will thoroughly examine the information provided by tenure-track faculty along with previous year’s annual progress reviews.

When the Committee has concluded its examination of the faculty member’s performance, it will prepare a report to the faculty member. That report will express the Committee’s candid assessment of the faculty member’s success in satisfying tenure requirements and offer recommendations, where appropriate, of how the faculty member might better satisfy those requirements.

A copy of this report will be forwarded to the candidate at the same time that it is forwarded to the department chair/school director. A copy will also be forwarded to the dean and a copy retained by the Tenure Review Committee.

The dean will review the annual recommendations made by the Tenure Review Committee and the department chair/school director. The dean will also meet with the faculty member and the department chair/school director approximately midway between initial appointment and the tenure review year and develop a written report of the faculty member’s progress toward tenure for a Mid-Term Review.

A copy of the dean’s evaluation will be forwarded to the faculty member at the same time that it is forwarded to the department chair/school director, and the chair of the Tenure Review Committee.

The department chair/school director will maintain a tenure review file for each tenure-track faculty member in their department/school. This file should include a copy of the annual written evaluations made by the Tenure Review Committee, the chair/school director, and the dean.

A candidate may, upon receipt of an evaluation by the Tenure Review Committee, the department chair/school director, or the dean (or other communications per Paragraph 5.e.3) prepare a letter of rebuttal and forward this letter to all evaluators.

5.  General policies and procedures for the final tenure review

  1. It is important that the five essential points to ensure the integrity of the tenure process noted in Procedures and Policies for Granting Tenure to Faculty be observed.
  2. In the early summer of each academic year, the Provost’s Office establishes a list of all faculty who are eligible for review of their service for the granting of tenure in the subsequent academic year.  The Provost notifies faculty in each academic department/CHHS school who should be reviewed for tenure so that reviews may be carried out in accordance with System and University policy for such reviews.
  3. Upon receipt of names of faculty eligible for tenure, deans will notify the candidates and their respective chair/CHHS school director. Deans will also forward to the candidate a copy of their contract and statement of certification of years of service for inclusion in their tenure application file.
  4. The applicant is responsible for assembling the tenure application file (see instructions in the Faculty Success platform or Appendix D in Faculty Handbook Appendices and Forms ) and forwarding it to the chair of the Departmental/CHHS School Tenure Review Committee. Faculty are highly encouraged to use Watermark Faculty Success (formerly Digital Measures (DM)) platform for their application for tenure.  See the DM Knowledge Base for helpful information. At a minimum, the candidate’s tenure review file should include the following: 
  • The tenure application described in the Faculty Success platform and Appendix D in Faculty Handbook Appendices and Forms .
  • A copy of the applicant’s contract.
  • Statement of certification of years of service (received from the Provost’s Office).
  • Evidence of teaching, professional development, and service. This information should be organized in accordance with the tenure committee’s requirements as described in the Faculty Success platform and Appendix D in Faculty Handbook Appendices and Forms . 
  • Evaluations made by the Tenure Review Committee, department chair/school director, and the dean for all previous years.
  1. Review procedures for the Tenure Review Committee, the department chair/school director, and the dean are the same as described in the annual review procedures with the following additions:
    1. Significant positive conduct by the candidate that occurs or becomes known after the tenure application has been submitted is to be considered. It is the responsibility of the applicant to forward evidence of the positive conduct to their department chair/CHHSschool director. The department chair/school director will see that the tenure application is updated. Previous evaluators will also be expected to consider these events.
    2. Significant negative conduct by the candidate that occurs or becomes known after the tenure process has begun is to be considered. The applicant will be notified of the allegation and given an opportunity to respond. Some allegations may be considered exclusively by the Tenure Review Committee. Other allegations may require channeling into other university dispute mechanisms and the suspension, upon agreement of the candidate and the University, of the tenure process until their conclusion.
    3. Letters, e-mails, or other written documents created by faculty members or others that are not part of the formal process that come to the attention of evaluators (committee minority opinions, private letters, etc.) may be considered as part of the evaluation materials as long as they are forwarded to the chair of the Tenure Review Committee before that committee has completed its deliberations. Once the Tenure Review Committee has completed its deliberations, communications of this type are no longer allowed at any level unless approved by the Provost. In all cases, whether the communications are allowed or not, the evaluator receiving such communications and any other participant aware of such communication will make sure that the candidate and the chair of the Tenure Review Committee receives a copy. In addition, private meetings or extensive verbal communications that are not part of the formal process but intended to influence the process should not be entertained by evaluators.  Knowledge of such material, however, must be immediately disclosed to the candidate.
    4. While tenure recommendations are primarily the responsibility of the tenured faculty, the recommendation of the Tenure Review Committee shall carry greater weight than the recommendation of tenured department faculty not on the Committee. 
    5. The Tenure Review Committee, the department chair/school director, and the dean will each independently and expressly make a recommendation in favor or opposed to the award of tenure for the candidate. A copy of these recommendations will be forwarded to the candidate on the dates prepared.
    6. A candidate may, upon receipt of an evaluation by the Tenure Review Committee, the department chair/school director, or the dean (or other communications per paragraph 5.e.3) prepare a letter of rebuttal and forward this letter to all evaluators.
  2. The Provost will review the applicant’s file, make a recommendation, include the recommendation in the applicant’s file, and forward the recommendation to the President of the university.
  3. The President, in consultation with the Provost, makes final decisions as to whether or not to award tenure to applicant faculty and notifies faculty in writing of that decision.
  4. Participants in the tenure review process must regard their work to be of the utmost confidentiality.  Any discussion of matters that come before the Tenure Review Committee to anyone not on the Committee or discussion of these matters in public areas or in unofficial meetings is inappropriate.  Any and all such behavior shall be regarded as a serious breach of confidentiality and shall be subject to disciplinary action. 
  5. When procedural conflicts exist, the procedures documented in the Faculty Handbook for tenure take precedent over procedures documented elsewhere.  

6. Timeline for Faculty Tenure

Deadlines for completing each step in the procedures for granting of tenure to faculty are presented in Table 1 and in the DM KnowledgeBase. This timeline is carried out in the fall semester of each academic year so that faculty seeking promotion in the spring of the academic year will have been reviewed for tenure when they seek promotion.  Deviations from the schedule that do not prejudice the parties will not be grounds for appeal. Note: If you are applying for tenure and seeking promotion to Associate Professor see Table 2 for additional details.  

Table 1.  Timeline for Faculty Seeking Tenure (see date or next working day)

STEP DEADLINE (or next working day)
Notification by Provost’s Office to tenure-track faculty of eligibility for tenure review Mid-summer
Faculty gain access to Watermark Faculty Success (formerly Digital Measures) Mid-summer
Applicant notifies department chair/school director, in writing, of intent to apply for tenure. Department chair/school director notifies chair of Tenure Review Committee of intentions of candidates September 15
Candidate’s application file for tenure to the chair of the Tenure Review Committee October 1
Recommendation by Tenure Review Committee along with application file forwarded to department chair November 1
Faculty responds to Tenure Review Committee Evaluation. Faculty Response Note: The Faculty Handbook stipulates that the faculty member has five days to respond.  However, most faculty do not choose to enter a response, so we have provided only two days on the Faculty Success schedule for this step.  If the faculty member would like to avail themselves of the full five days, they should email their Chair to inform them that their submission will be coming at the end of the allowed five days.  *Note, deadlines in Faculty Success are not hard deadlines, and late notifications should be ignored if you are using the additional time to respond. November 3
Recommendation by department chair/school director along with application file forwarded to dean November 15
Faculty responds to department chair/school director evaluation  November 17
Recommendation by dean along with application file forwarded to the Provost December 1
Faculty responds to dean evaluation  December 3
Recommendation for tenure by Provost to President December 15
Written notification of tenure decision by the President to the candidate January 15

 

Table 2. Timeline for Faculty for Seeking Tenure and Promotion (see date or next working day)

STEP DEADLINE (or next working day)
Notification by Provost’s Office to tenure-track faculty of eligibility for tenure and promotion review Mid-summer
Faculty gain access to Watermark Faculty Success (formerly Digital Measures) Mid-summer
If the candidate is applying for promotion, then the applicant should notify the department chair/school director, in writing, of intent to apply for tenure and promotion. If the candidate is applying for promotion, department chair/school director notifies chair of Tenure and Promotions Review Committee(s) of intentions of candidate. (Departments/CHHS schools may wish to alter their policies so that this is one committee.)  September 15
Candidate’s application file for tenure and promotion to the chair of the Tenure & Promotion Review Committee(s). October 1
Recommendation by Tenure and Promotions Review Committee(s) along with application file forwarded to department chair/school director November 1
Faculty responds to Tenure and Promotions Committee(s) Evaluation. Faculty Response Note: The faculty handbook stipulates that the faculty member has five days to respond.  However, most faculty do not choose to enter a response, so we have provided only two days on the Faculty Success schedule for this step.  If the faculty member would like to avail themselves of the full five days, they should email their Chair to inform them that their submission will be coming at the end of the allowed five days.  *Note, deadlines in Faculty Success are not hard deadlines, and late notifications should be ignored if you are using the additional time to respond. November 3
Recommendation on tenure and if applicable, promotion, by department chair/school director along with application file forwarded to dean November 15
Faculty responds to department chair/school director evaluation  November 17
Recommendation on tenure and, if applicable, promotion, by dean along with application file forwarded to the Provost December 1
Faculty response to dean evaluation  December 3
Recommendation for tenure by Provost to President December 15
Written notification of tenure decision by the President to the candidate January 15
If the candidate is awarded tenure and is applying for promotion, then the candidate’s application file will be submitted to the University Promotions Committee (Round 1 promotions) February 1
Recommendations for promotion to Provost by the University Promotions Committee and notification, in writing, to the applicant faculty March 1
Recommendations for promotion to President by Provost March 22
Notification of promotion to faculty, in writing, by President April 15

Procedures for Promotion of Faculty

The following are the procedures for promotion of faculty at Salisbury University that takes place in the spring semester of each academic year (see below for Promotion Procedures for Faculty Librarians).

1) Faculty at Salisbury University are recommended for promotion on the basis of their a) eligibility by rank and degree as established by the Office of Academic Affairs and b) recommendation by the University Promotions Committee (Promotions Committee).  The Promotions Committee is composed of eight voting members: a designated tenured Faculty Senator, four tenured faculty, one elected from and by each school, and three tenured faculty elected at large, two retiring in each of two years, and three retiring every third year. These faculty may not themselves be eligible for promotion during their term of service on the committee.  All materials submitted by faculty for consideration for promotion will be maintained in confidence and safekeeping by the Promotions Committee.  Faculty are highly encouraged to use Watermark Faculty Success (formerly Digital Measures (DM)) platform for their application for promotion. See the DM Knowledge Base for helpful information.  In the following, ‘candiate file’ or ‘promotion application’ refer to documents in the digital platform (Watermark Faculty Success).  For faculty who choose to not use this platform, emails must be used to notify recipients and subsequent reviewers of committee/chair/director/dean recommendations.

  1. Faculty members who seek promotion obtain certification of eligibility by rank and degree from the Office of Academic Affairs and submit this with documentation that they have met the criteria for promotion as described in section B.1 (Criteria and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure) to their departmental/CHHS school promotions committees for endorsement. (Requirements for the number of faculty who serve on departmental promotions committees, procedures for the selection of those faculty, and the criteria used in their selection are described in Appendix M)
  2. All applications for promotion must be initiated through the submission of credentials to a departmental/CHHS school promotions committee, the department chair/school director, and dean for review and recommendation. The departmental/CHHS school committee, chair/school director, and dean respectively, must add to the candidate’s application file a written recommendation stating whether or not they endorse the candidate’s promotion.
  3. Departmental/CHHS school promotions committees add a written positive or negative recommendation to the candidate’s file, and forwards the complete file to the department chair/school director who in turn adds a written positive or negative recommendation to the candidate’s file, and forwards the complete file to the dean. The dean adds a written positive or negative recommendation to the candidate’s application file, and forwards the complete file to the University Promotions Committee. At any step of this process the candidate may, within five (5) business days of the date of email service referenced in D 1c. above, provide written rebuttal in any professionally reasonable manner (i.e. a short memorandum or more formal rebuttal letter.) After reviewing the letters from the departmental/CHHS school promotions committees, the department chair or school director, and the dean, the candidate may write a formal rebuttal letter. This letter must be delivered to the chair of the Promotions Committee no later than the first business day after April 5. The chair of the Promotions Committee will add this letter and any other prior rebuttal documents to the candidate’s file before making the file available to the full committee for review.
  4. The University Promotions Committee reviews the completed file using the criteria described in section B.1 of this policy and the procedures described in section D.1 of this document.
  5. The University Promotions Committee sends its recommendations for faculty promotions to the Provost and privately notifies, in writing, each faculty member who has applied for promotion of its recommendation. The University Promotions Committee, which consists of seven (7) faculty elected by the faculty, makes recommendations regarding candidates for promotion to the Provost and President. The authority to promote or not promote a faculty member resides with the President of the University. The committee serves to provide the President with a faculty perspective on the applications for promotion. The committee reviews the applications of candidates for promotion in light of the criteria stated in the Faculty Handbook. After each candidate’s application has been scrutinized by individual committee members, the committee meets to discuss and vote on the candidates. Candidates must receive at least five (5) votes in favor of promotion in order to win the recommendation of the committee. Candidates who receive five (5) or more unfavorable votes will receive an unfavorable recommendation from the committee. When candidates do not receive the required five (5)- favorable or unfavorable-votes in the first round, their strengths and weaknesses are further discussed and further votes are taken until the candidate receives the necessary five (5) votes.  The only considerations in the committee’s discussions of a candidate are those related to the criteria for the rank sought. Teaching is the primary criterion for promotion, and no one will be recommended who has not in the opinion of the committee demonstrated proficiency in the classroom. Achievement in professional development and service are also expected of all candidates but the balance will vary among candidates. The committee’s standards may change slightly from year to year as its membership changes, but there has been no conscious decision by the committee to raise or lower standards. After the committee has completed its evaluation of the applications, it meets with the Provost to recommend those candidates that it believes have met the criteria for promotion. The committee chair reports the committee’s recommendation on each candidate with a brief rationale based on the committee’s discussions.
  6. After the Promotions Committee has met with the Provost, but before the Provost makes their recommendations to the President, the Provost and the Promotions Committee Chair will meet with applicants whom the committee has chosen not to recommend for promotion at the request of the applicant. Those applicants whom the University Promotions Committee has chosen to recommend, but whom the Provost intends not to recommend will be invited to a similar meeting.
  7. The Provost reviews recommendations for faculty promotion submitted by the University Promotions Committee and makes recommendations for faculty promotion to the President.
  8. The President in consultation with the Provost makes final decisions regarding faculty who will be promoted and faculty who will not be promoted, and the president notifies faculty of these decisions in writing.
  9. The Provost and the President may promote faculty who have not been recommended for promotion by their departmental/CHHS school promotions committees, department chair/school director, deans, or the University Promotions Committee.

2. Deadlines for Faculty Promotion (see date or next working day) 

STEP DEADLINE
Notification by Provost’s Office to tenure-track faculty of eligibility for promotion review September 15
Access to DM platform for promotion.  Note: Even before access to Faculty Success is granted, faculty may access guidance on all materials needed for the workflow and the location for all entries pulled by Faculty Success for the CV for Tenure and Promotion.  See this Faculty Success (formerly Digital Measures) Knowledge Base site for many useful Faculty Success articles.  For Tenure and/or Promotion see the following links on that page: Tenure and Promotion Faculty Submission Guide & CV for Tenure and Promotion Checklist) September 30
Submission of promotion file by faculty to department/CHHS school promotions committees February 15
Recommendations to department chair/school director by departmental/CHHS school promotions committees March 1
Recommendations to deans by department chairs/school director  March 15
Recommendations to the University Promotions Committee by deans March 30
Recommendations for promotions to Provost by the University Promotions Committee and notification in writing to applicant faculty April 22
Recommendations for promotion to president by Provost May 1
Notification of promotion to faculty in writing by President May 15

3. Promotions Committee guidelines for using criteria to evaluate faculty promotion applications

The balance between the areas of teaching/advising, scholarship and creative activities, and service is subject to professional peer evaluation within the following guidelines:

  1. Teaching is the primary criterion for consideration.  Assistant professors are expected to be effective teachers; associate and full professors are expected to be excellent teachers.
  2. Achievement in scholarship and creative activities and in service is also expected of all candidates for promotion.  The balance between these criteria may differ for individuals, but evidence of both is expected of all candidates for promotion. 

4. Superior performance is defined as performance which is at least equal to the performance of those individuals who have been, within the past few years, recommended by the Promotions Committee for promotion to the rank being sought.

5. Individuals seeking promotion to the assistant or associate professor rank should not be required to provide evidence of superior performance in all three areas mentioned above. However, those seeking promotion to the rank of professor should be superior in all categories.  Additionally, it should be understood that for promotion to any rank an individual need not provide evidence of superior performance in all categories for each year.

6. As faculty members rise in professional rank, they will achieve wider recognition, and the quality of professional activities expected will increase.  For example, it is expected that an assistant professor will have better professional credentials than an instructor, an associate professor better credentials than an assistant professor, and a professor better credentials than an associate professor.

a) Excellence in Teaching:  Of primary importance to any faculty member recommended for promotion is the demonstration of and the reputation for exceptional teaching.  It is the responsibility of the candidate for promotion to demonstrate and produce support of this teaching expertise.  That support may take the form of self-evaluation, peer evaluation, student evaluation, and any other recognized evaluative measures which the candidate or the department selects, such as syllabi of new courses, samples of student work, and descriptions of innovative and creative classroom activities.  Other factors will be considered, but promotion will not be granted without evidence of successful teaching.

Good teaching is the primary goal for faculty at Salisbury University.  Good teaching implies the need for constant striving to improve and continual efforts to teach more effectively than previously. 

Good teaching includes fresh approaches to a course, innovations, creativity, designing productive experiments and field experiences, eliciting creative work from students, and engaged pedagogy.  Growth in teaching is demonstrated by specific activities such as creating new courses, revising curriculum and earning teaching awards because of improved teaching.

b) Professional Activity:  The University expects faculty to be dedicated to scholarly pursuits and to be professionally active as evidenced by scholarly contributions in their professional area(s) of specialization and by participation in the activities of academic and external communities.  “Area of specialization” is defined as an area of knowledge or skill related to one’s teaching or research in which an individual develops a recognized level of expertise.

Clear distinction between scholarship and service is not always possible.  Faculty members applying for promotion should indicate the category in which they wish their activities to be classified as either “scholarship or creative activities,” or as “service.”  These activities may include different components of administrative duties.

Scholarship and Creative Activities:  Devotion in learning to continually developing knowledge, accuracy, critical ability, and to giving or being responsible for furnishing knowledge or ideas; creating and presenting one’s art form or developing and presenting one’s research.

The six categories listed below include examples of activities used for judging a candidate’s scholarship and creative efforts.  This is not designed to be an exhaustive list of all relevant activities, nor does participation alone in these activities guarantee promotion. The activities in each category are ordered on the basis of movement from a local audience to a national audience or from the inception to the completion of a project.  Faculty seeking promotion to the rank of assistant professor should be engaged in some lower-level activities. Faculty seeking promotion to the rank of associate professor should be engaged in some of the higher-level activities. Faculty seeking promotion to the rank of full professor should be engaged in most of the higher-level activities.

Examples of Scholarship and Creative Activities

■  Participation in academic work related to one’s area of specialization or the development of a new area of specialization.

  1. Taking courses, attending workshops, clinics, seminars, etc.
  2. Completing the academic (terminal) degree
  3. Obtaining and maintaining professional licensure, certification, etc.

Participation in research and/or creative activities.

  1. Carrying out research and/or creative projects
  2. Publishing research in a book and/or article

■ Participation in grant activities.

  1. Developing grant proposals
  2. Receiving grant awards

■ Participation at professional societies and/or professional performance in the arts.

  1. Presenting at local workshops, conferences, lectures, exhibitions, recitals, concerts, performances, etc.
  2. Presenting at state/regional workshops, conferences, lectures, exhibitions, recitals, concerts, performances, etc.
  3. Presenting at national and/or international workshops, conferences, lectures, exhibitions, recitals, concerts, performances, etc.

■ Participation in publishing, consulting, and/or editing activities; judging creative activities.

  1. Consulting with professionals in one’s area of specialization
  2. Editing or serving on an editorial board, refereeing journal articles
  3. Securing a book contract or article acceptance from a publisher
  4. Publishing a book and/or article

■ Recognition for scholarly and/or creative activities.

  1. Receiving recognition, scholarship(s), or award(s) from the department, school or university
  2. Receiving recognition, scholarship(s), or award(s) from another organization or professional society

c) Service:  Participation, performance, and/or leadership undertaken which advances the mission of the institution, either on the campus or in external community activities.

The five categories listed below are the criteria for judging a candidate’s service. This is not designed to be an exhaustive list of all relevant activities, nor does participation alone in these activities guarantee promotion. There is no order to the categories and no order within the categories.

Examples of Service Activities

■  Performing voluntary administrative duties.

  1. Participating in university wide activities such as orientation, recruitment, etc.
  2. Participating in special university programs
  3. Providing school/department leadership

■  Assuming committee responsibilities.

  1. Being actively involved or providing leadership on school or department committees
  2. Being actively involved on committees of the Faculty Senate and other university-wide committees
  3. Performing leadership on committees of the Faculty Senate
  4. Being actively involved or providing leadership on system-wide committees

■  Supporting student programs/activities.

  1. Directing department programs/activities
  2. Acting as advisor for interdisciplinary programs
  3. Working with student organizations
  4. Serving as leader/advisor in student organizations

■ Service participation in professional societies.

  1. Participating in leading local workshops, conferences, lectures, exhibitions, recitals, concerts, performances, etc.
  2. Participating in leading state/regional workshops, conferences, lectures, exhibitions, recitals, concerts, performances, etc.
  3. Participating in leading national and/or international workshops, conferences, lectures, exhibitions, recitals, concerts, performances, etc.

■  Participation in external community activities.

  1. Voluntarily contributing time and resources outside one’s area of specialization in cases where service is not specifically discipline-related, the candidate should describe the service and address how it could be of professional benefit to the candidate and/or to Salisbury University’s role in the community since the faculty member is representing the University positively. Volunteerism related to one’s family, hobbies, or special interests may be laudable but may not be weighted heavily if it appears to be more personal than professional.
  2. Voluntarily contributing time and resources within one’s area of specialization.

7. Although no equations are offered to measure relative importance of the criteria for evaluation, it is clear that excellence in teaching, the primary consideration for promotion, derives from a dedication to scholarship and a concern for the integrity of the profession and the institution. Therefore, attention will be given to all three areas:  effective teaching, scholarship, and service. The various departments and schools should provide guidance concerning the activities that are appropriate for faculty. The more ways candidates excel in all three areas during the period in rank, the better their chances for promotion.

8. Guidelines for faculty’s documentation of teaching, scholarship, and service and for preparing materials which faculty wish to use in support of their applications for promotion are detailed in the Faculty Success platform and Appendix C in the Faculty Handbook Appendices and Forms .

Procedures for Faculty Appeals in Matters of Promotion and Tenure

1. The President of the University has the final authority to decide on appeals from faculty for promotion and tenure decisions.

2. Appeals by faculty of tenure decisions may be made on the basis of an allegation of error in procedures or application of policy and not on the substance of recommendations per se. Mere disagreement with the substance of recommendations of departmental/CHHS school promotions committees, department chairs/school director, deans, and the Provost or with the decisions of the president is not cause for appeal.

3. Appeals by faculty of tenure decisions which are related to allegations of unlawful discrimination based arbitrarily upon race, color, national origin, sex, age, marital status, handicap, or sexual orientation will be heard by the Academic Freedom & Tenure Committee.

4. When a faculty member wishes to appeal a tenure decision, the faculty member will notify the Provost who will in turn notify the president.  The president will then refer the case for review and recommendation to the Academic Freedom & Tenure Committee, which will serve as an appeal hearing board. Appeals must be made within 45 days of receiving the president’s tenure decision letter.

The Academic Freedom & Tenure Committee may gather information; hold hearings; meet with faculty, department chairs/school directors, deans, other committees, administrators, and other parties; offer counsel; mediate; and perform the investigations it believes necessary to make a recommendation to the president concerning the appeal for tenure. The Academic Freedom & Tenure Committee may, after a preliminary investigation, decide not to pursue a grievance or to forward the grievance to another committee. The procedure to be followed is set forth in the University Grievance Policy in the University Grievance Policy for faculty (See Appendix E).

5. The Academic Freedom & Tenure Committee will maintain its deliberations in strict confidence and will gather necessary information and forward recommendations with the utmost discretion.

6. When a faculty member wishes to appeal a promotion decision, the faculty member will notify the Provost who will in turn notify the President.  The President will then refer the case for review and recommendation to the Faculty Welfare Committee, which will serve as an appeal hearing board for promotion appeals. The same policies and procedures will apply to promotion appeals as to tenure appeals.

Part-Time Tenure-Track and Tenured Faculty

BOR II-1.10 

  1. The term “permanent part-time employment” applies to faculty at the university who work in a tenure-track position for at least two (2) days per workweek for at least 50 percent (50%) but not more than 80 percent (80%) of the normal workweek for that position.  A “shared” position is defined as a tenure-track position which “consists of two (2) permanent part-time positions.”
  2. Each faculty member in a shared position shall teach full-time for one semester of the year or shall teach a 50 percent (50%) course load during the same semester. The particular teaching arrangement will be determined by the Provost in consultation with the dean(s).
  3. Salary, salary increments, sick leave, and any other fringe benefits authorized for a permanent full-time faculty member shall be determined on a pro-rata basis.  The faculty member’s pro-rata salary shall be appropriate to their rank.
  4. Permanent part-time faculty are required to become members of the State Retirement or Pension System according to date of entry into State service.  Benefits will be accrued at the same rate as the contributions of the faculty member.
  5. The specific faculty rank of an individual in a shared position is determined by the University.  Faculty members in a shared position need not necessarily occupy the same rank within that shared position.
  6. Permanent part-time faculty are considered for promotion and tenure in accordance with Salisbury University’s Policy on Appointment, Rank and Tenure of Faculty on the basis of the number of full-time equivalent years of employment at the university.
  7. Permanent part-time faculty are subject to the annual evaluation required for all full-time faculty members.
  8. The responsibilities of permanent part-time faculty members on campus and their participation in campus governance activities are determined by the department chair/school director in consultation with their deans and the Provost.
  9. A shared position may be abolished or vacated, in whole or in part, by giving notice in accordance with the provisions of the Salisbury University Policy on Appointment, Rank and Tenure of Faculty. If one part of the shared position is abolished or vacated, the incumbent occupying the other part of the shared position shall continue to discharge duties according to the terms of employment and shall not automatically be eligible for a permanent full-time position.

Comprehensive Review of Tenured Faculty

BOR II-1.19

Introduction: Salisbury University will use the following policies and procedures to implement the University System of Maryland’s Policy on Comprehensive Review of Tenured Faculty.  Consistent with this policy, SU’s policies are intended to complement the “faculty development program” and “to enhance the professional abilities of the faculty as teachers and scholars and members of the academic community.”  The policies are written to fulfill the requirements of the USM policy by providing guidelines that give departments flexibility over specific arrangements and procedures for the reviews.

Policies and Procedures for the Five-Year Comprehensive Reviews of Tenured Faculty Members: Every tenured faculty member at SU shall undergo a comprehensive review of their performance every five years with approximately one‑fifth of the tenured faculty undergoing a comprehensive evaluation each academic year. This review will examine the faculty member’s performance for the previous five year period. Given their thorough rigor, reviews for tenure and promotion can be substituted for this comprehensive review. A comprehensive review can also be triggered prior to the five year period only if the department chair/school director, the dean, and the Provost find a faculty member “materially deficient” in complying with “quantitative workload expectations” in two consecutive workload‑related annual reviews that are done regularly by the department chair/school director.  “Quantitative workload expectations” refers exclusively to the workload expectations as identified in Section IV. Standard Workload Expectations of the USM BOR Policy on Faculty Workload and Responsibilities (II.1.25) which addresses the ratio of time spent among the three areas of faculty responsibilities: teaching, scholarship, and community service. This annual review of workload referred to in the USM policy should not be confused with the SU annual review that presently exists and is more comprehensive in scope.

Departmental Role, Peer Review and Criteria for Evaluation: Each academic department at SU may employ the same review procedures and criteria for evaluation presently used for the annual evaluations of tenured faculty at SU. These procedures make use of an examination and evaluation of a faculty member’s performance in the areas of instruction, research and scholarship, and service to the university and community.  The kinds of activities and sources of information for a faculty member’s performance can include, but are not limited to, the activities listed in Table 3.

Table 3:  Potential Sources of Faculty Evaluation Information

Performance Category Potential Information Sources
Teaching and Advising
  • Courses Syllabi
  • Student Evaluations
  • Instructional Planning
  • Conferences Program Planning
  • Department Meetings
  • Classroom Observation
  • Review of Advising Folders
  • Incidents of Advisee Confusion
  • Observation of Advising Conferences
  • Involvement in student clubs and organizations
Professional Development
  • Participation in Campus Professional Development Activities
  • Writing/Research Efforts and Creative Pedagogical Innovations
  • Research/Scholarship/Creative Efforts
  • Attendance at Conferences and Institutes
  • Yearly Self-Evaluations
  • Scholarly output
  • Applications for external funding
Service to the University and Community
  • Participation on Department Service and Campus Committees; Support to Registration and Orientation, and Retention Activities
  • Service to Schools, Businesses, and Service Agencies
  • Artistic Contributions to Campus and Community
  • Engagement and Leadership in Professional Societies

An additional performance indicator that may be used in the five-year evaluation is the workload review that is overseen by the department chair/school director on an annual basis.

For the five-year review, provision must be made at the department level for some degree of peer review.  The structure and size of such a peer-review mechanism should be established by the department and agreed upon by the faculty member under review.

The faculty member under review will be the principal provider of the information for the comprehensive review.  This need not exceed the submission of the annual self‑evaluations of the previous five years. They will provide the reviewer(s) with the necessary information by February 1 of the year in which the review is to take place, and the reviewer(s) shall provide a report to the faculty member by the same deadline as the annual review.  As in the annual reviews, the five-year comprehensive review must be based on multiple sources of information.

Departmental policies must be filed with and approved by the dean and the Provost of the University.

Uses and Consequences of the Comprehensive Review

As with the annual reviews, the reviewer(s) shall submit the results of the comprehensive review to the faculty member, the department chair/school director, and the dean.  Upon receipt of the review, the faculty member should have ready access to the documents and reports that contributed to their review.  The faculty member should also have a minimum of ten working days to respond formally to the review if they so desires.  This could involve a written response or a formal hearing with the reviewers and the department chair/school director.

A faculty member may choose to use a favorable five-year review for consideration in decisions on promotion, merit pay or other awards such as SU’s annual Distinguished Faculty Award.  The Administration shall review the rank and salary of each faculty member who undergoes the five-year review and shall make upward adjustments and recommendations as necessary and as funds allow.

However, if the peer evaluation concludes that the faculty member’s performance fails to meet expectations, then a specific faculty development plan must be worked out between the faculty member under review, the peer reviewer(s), the department chair/school director, and the dean.  At their discretion, the faculty member under review may choose a faculty colleague to participate in the development of this plan. The plan should address those elements of the review that were considered to be deficient in meeting expectations and make use of SU’s available resources, both scholarly and financial, for faculty development.

Given that the intention of this plan is to aid in the improvement of the faculty member’s performance, priority should be placed on fashioning a plan that facilitates the faculty member’s growth and is amenable to the faculty member’s preferences. Such a plan should be written and revised, if necessary, until mutual agreement between the reviewer(s) and the faculty member has been achieved. In the event an agreement cannot be reached, the Faculty Development Committee will mediate a consensus.

The plan must also include “a procedure for evaluation of progress at fixed intervals.”  This procedure will include progress reports to the reviewer(s) at intervals of no less than one year, unless a shorter interval is requested by the faculty member.  Departments may wish to use SU’s annual evaluations as the benchmarks for the “fixed intervals” as required by the Regents’ policy.

A faculty member under review who is dissatisfied with a plan that has emerged from this process retains the option of pursuing a grievance with the Faculty Welfare Committee. The Comprehensive Review of Tenured Faculty does not replace other SU reviews of faculty performance.

Neither the Comprehensive Review process nor its results can be substituted for the existing USM policies regarding tenure and its termination.  In this regard, this review carries with it no greater weight than any other evaluation presently employed at Salisbury University.

Finally, given that faculty members are primarily responsible for providing the bulk of the information for the evaluation, they should be granted flexibility in the provision of information on their activities from the most recent five academic years.  They must provide adequate information but cannot be required to supply information above and beyond that which was required to satisfy evaluation criteria applied in previous years.

Employment of Full-Time, Non-Tenure Track Instructional Faculty

BOR II-1.05        

In the matter of employment of Full-Time, Non-Tenure Track Instructional Faculty, Salisbury University operates under USM BOR Policy II-1.05.

Faculty Engaged Exclusively or Primarily in Clinical Teaching

Clinical Faculty Ranks

Clinical Assistant Professor: The appointee shall hold, as a minimum, the terminal professional degree in the field, with training and experience in an area of specialization. There must be clear evidence of a high level of ability in clinical practice and teaching in the field, and the potential for clinical and teaching excellence in a subdivision of this field. The appointee should also have demonstrated scholarly and/or administrative ability.

Clinical Associate Professor: In addition to the qualifications required of a Clinical Assistant Professor, the appointee should ordinarily have had extensive successful experience in clinical or professional practice in a field of specialization, or in a subdivision of the field, and in working with and/or directing others (such as professionals, faculty members, graduate students, fellows, and residents or interns) in clinical activities in the field. The appointee must also have demonstrated superior teaching ability and scholarly or administrative accomplishments.

Clinical Professor: In addition to the qualifications required of a Clinical Associate Professor, the appointee shall have demonstrated a degree of excellence in clinical practice and teaching sufficient to establish an outstanding regional and national reputation among colleagues. The appointee shall also have demonstrated extraordinary scholarly competence and leadership in the profession. 

Criteria and Procedures for Promotion of Clinical Faculty within the College of Health & Human Services (CHHS)

Eligibility: Faculty at Salisbury University are eligible for promotion on the basis of their rank and degree as determined by the Provost’s Office and recommendation by the CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee.

Clinical Faculty Promotion Committee - Selection, Membership, and Purpose

1. The CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee may consist of a maximum of two representatives at or above the rank of clinical associate professor within the College from each of the three schools. These faculty may not themselves be eligible for promotion during their term of service on the committee. The committee is charged with the task of reviewing each candidate eligible for promotion. All members of the CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee will be expected to vote on the final review of each candidate eligible for clinical faculty promotion. The committee will elect a chair who serves a two-year term. The duties of the chair include convening meetings and presiding over committee deliberations and activities. All materials submitted by faculty for consideration for promotion will be maintained in confidence and safekeeping by the CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee.

  1. Each school will designate two clinical faculty at or above the rank of clinical associate professor to serve on the committee.
  2. If there are fewer than two eligible clinical faculty, the school may designate tenured faculty at or above the rank of Associate Professor to fill their seats.

2. The CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee may appoint an ad hoc subcommittee charged with the task of revising clinical faculty procedures as circumstances change and addressing other business not related to the faculty review process that emerge. The ad hoc subcommittee will consist of at least three members, each of which must themselves be clinical faculty in the university or tenured faculty members from the CHHS. The CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee will decide on the membership and leadership of the ad hoc subcommittee.

Process 

  1. Faculty members who seek promotion obtain a letter of eligibility for promotion from the Provost’s Office and submit this with documentation that they have met the criteria for promotion to a school’s clinical promotions committee as described in the Faculty Handbook.
  2. Applications may be submitted by faculty either by Watermark Faculty Success (formerly Digital Measures) or for those who were employed at SU prior to 2014, by another form of submission determined by the school. All applications for promotion must be initiated through the submission of a portfolio to a school clinical promotions committee, the school director, the CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee, and dean of the CHHS. The school clinical promotions committee, school director, CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee, and dean respectively, must add to the candidate’s application file a written recommendation stating whether or not they endorse the candidate’s promotion.
  3. The school clinical promotions committee will review and discuss the candidate’s portfolio and will write a letter of recommendation to be forwarded to the school director. Next, the school director will write a letter based on the candidate’s application to be sent to the CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee. This letter is also forwarded to the candidate. A candidate may withdraw their application for promotion prior to submission to the school director.
  4. The CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee reviews the completed file using the criteria established by the candidate’s school policies and procedures and the faculty handbook. After CHHS review, a formal rebuttal letter can be included in the portfolio from the candidate prior to submission to the Dean.
  5. The CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee sends its recommendations for faculty promotions to the CHHS Dean and notifies, in writing, the faculty member who has applied for promotion of its recommendation.
  6. The CHHS Dean reviews recommendations for faculty promotion submitted by the CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee and makes recommendations for faculty promotion to the Provost.
  7. The Provost makes recommendations for faculty promotion to the president.
  8. The President in consultation with the Provost makes final decisions regarding faculty promotion, and the president notifies faculty of these decisions in writing.
  9. The Provost and the President of the University may promote faculty who have not been recommended for promotion by their school promotions committees, school directors, CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee, or CHHS Dean.

Timeline

  1. Establishment of promotion eligibility list by the Provost’s Office - September 15.
  2. Submission of promotion file from the candidate to school clinical faculty promotions committees - February 15.
  3. Report of promotions recommendations to School Director by school clinical faculty promotions committees - March 1.
  4. Report of promotions recommendations to CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee by School Directors-March 15.
  5. Report of promotions recommendations to CHHS Dean by CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee - March 30.
  6. Recommendations for promotions to Provost by CHHS Dean and notification in writing to applicant candidate - April 22.
  7. Recommendations for promotion to president by Provost - May 1.
  8. Notification of promotion to candidate in writing by president - May 15.

Criteria for Clinical Faculty Promotion

Although no equations are offered to measure relative importance of the criteria for evaluation, it is clear that excellence in teaching, the primary consideration for promotion, derives from a dedication to clinical expertise, professional development and a concern for the integrity of the profession and the institution. Therefore, attention will be given to effective teaching and clinical expertise. The various departments, programs, schools, and colleges should provide guidance concerning the activities that are appropriate for faculty.

  1. Following are the CHHS Clinical Faculty Promotions Committee guidelines for using criteria to evaluate faculty promotion applications. The balance between the areas of teaching/advising and professional development is subject to professional peer evaluation within the following guidelines:

a. Teaching is the primary criterion for consideration. Clinical Assistant Professors are expected to be effective teachers; clinical associate and full professors are expected to be excellent teachers.

b. Evidence of clinical expertise with a focus on professional development activities that have enhanced the candidate’s qualifications as a teacher and scholar. This includes maintenance of required licenses and/or certifications or acquisition of new professional credentials.

  1. Individuals seeking promotion to the clinical assistant or clinical associate professor rank should not be required to provide evidence of excellence in any category. However, those seeking promotion to the rank of clinical full professor should be excellent in clinical expertise and teaching. For schools in which service and/or additional contributions are a requirement, those seeking promotion to clinical full professor should be excellent in those categories as well. Additionally, it should be understood that for promotion to any rank an individual need not provide evidence of excellent performance in all categories for each year.
  2. As faculty members rise in clinical faculty rank, they will achieve wider recognition, enhanced portfolio, and the quality of professional activities expected will increase.

a. Teaching: Of primary importance to any faculty member recommended for promotion is the demonstration of and the reputation for exceptional teaching. It is the responsibility of the candidate for promotion to demonstrate and produce support of this teaching expertise. That support may take the form of self-evaluation, peer evaluation, student evaluation, and any other recognized evaluative measures which the candidate or the department selects, such as syllabi of new courses, samples of student work, and descriptions of innovative and creative classroom activities. Other factors will be considered, but promotion will not be granted without evidence of successful teaching. Good teaching is the primary goal for faculty at Salisbury University. Good teaching implies the need for constant striving to improve and continual efforts to teach more effectively than previously. Good teaching includes fresh approaches to a course, innovations, creativity, designing productive experiments and field experiences, and eliciting creative work from students, and engaged pedagogy. Growth in teaching is demonstrated by specific activities such as creating new courses, revising curriculum and earning teaching awards because of improved teaching.

b. Clinical expertise is defined as an area of specialization in knowledge and/or skills in which an individual develops a recognized level of know-how. The University expects clinical faculty to be professionally active as evidenced by contributions in their professional area(s) of specialization and by participation in the activities of academic and external communities. Candidates will not be considered for promotion if they have not engaged in sufficient activity to maintain required licenses and/or certifications.

c. Statement of Additional Contributions. This is an opportunity for faculty who have responsibilities and duties related or in addition to teaching, including advising or mentoring or additional administrative duties which are part of their job expectations but outside the realm of full-time teaching, to describe those responsibilities and provide evidence as to their effectiveness in these additional roles. This is optional for clinical faculty with no contractual obligations accompanying credit release. 

d. Statement of Evidence of Service: If service is a requirement of your school, those seeking promotion will detail the service contributions to the unit, college, university, and/or community. Service can include voluntary administrative duties, committee responsibilities, supporting student programs/activities, service participation to the professional organizations, and participation in external community activities. 

Faculty Engaged Exclusively or Primarily in Library Services

BOR II-1.00 

Library Faculty Ranks

The only librarian ranks with non‑tenure faculty status are Librarian I, Librarian II, Librarian III, and Librarian IV and such other ranks as the Board of Regents may approve.  These titles are to be granted to a limited number of appointees who fulfill roles defined by professional graduate training, such as librarian, curator, archivist, and information scientist. In the overwhelming number of instances, the professional graduate training required is an M.L.S. degree, which is considered the terminal degree in the practice of academic librarianship, from an American Library Association (ALA) accredited program.  However, each constituent institution may define instances when other graduate degrees may substitute for or augment the ALA‑accredited M.L.S.  Such exceptions will be based on and required by the functional needs of individual positions.  In recognition of the operational needs of USM libraries, appointments to these ranks are normally for twelve months with leave and other benefits provided to twelve‑month tenured/tenure‑track faculty members, with the exception of terminal leave, sabbatical leave, and non‑creditable sick leave (collegially supported).

Librarian I:  This rank is assigned to librarians just entering librarianship with little or no professional library experience but who have been judged to have demonstrated an understanding of the basic tenets of librarianship and a potential for professional growth.  A Librarian I is not eligible for permanent status.

Librarian II:  Appointment or promotion to this rank signifies that the librarian has demonstrated effective professional knowledge and skills significantly above those expected of a Librarian I.  Normally, a minimum of three years of professional experience is required.

Librarian III:  Appointment or promotion to this rank signifies that the librarian has mastered the skills, knowledge, and techniques of librarianship and has made meaningful contributions to the library, the institution, the library profession, and/or an academic discipline.  Normally, a minimum of six years of professional experience is required, three of which must be at a level comparable to the rank of Librarian II at the appointing USM institution.

Librarian IV:  Appointment or promotion to this rank is exceptional.  This rank is awarded to those librarians who have made distinctive contributions to the library, the institution, the library profession, and/or an academic discipline.  This rank normally requires a minimum of nine years of professional experience, at least three of which must be at a level comparable to the rank of Librarian III at the appointing USM institution.

Criteria and Procedures for Promotion and Permanent Status of Faculty Librarians

Document Scope: This document applies to all permanent (non-temporary, non-contractual) library faculty with full or part-time appointments applying for promotion and/or permanent status after 30 May 2004 and, for post-permanent-status review, to all library faculty who have been awarded permanent status. 

Library faculty hired before 30 May 2004 retain the status and rank earned under previously existing policies and documents.

Throughout this document, eligibility requirements and criteria for part-time library faculty rely on full-time equivalency of service. Two consecutive years of part-time employment equal one year of full-time employment.

Introduction

Library faculty, both full and part-time, within the University System of Maryland (USM) are employed within the context of two systems:

  • a system of functional position categories; and
  • a system of faculty ranks.

They hold positions based on job responsibilities (both technical and administrative) and ranks, independent of position, that reflect level of professional achievement.

The maintenance of standards and the recognition of achievement are the responsibility and privilege of the profession as a whole and are shared by each of its members.

In concert with the academic teaching faculty, library faculty are responsible for accomplishing the University’s instructional and research objectives. Accordingly, library faculty are expected to continue study in their field and advance themselves professionally. This perception of librarianship is intended to benefit the University, promote continuing professional accomplishment, and encourage and reward higher standards of performance.

Library Faculty Promotion Review Committee (LFPRC)

The LFPRC meets as needed (i.e., when the Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources receives promotion or permanent status applications). The LFPRC assesses and reports on the accomplishments of each candidate using the criteria defined in this policy and provides to the Dean an objective, thorough evaluation of the candidates’ qualifications for promotion or permanent status.

A.  Membership

  • The Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources is ineligible for service on the Committee.
  • The Committee consists of five library faculty with the rank of Librarian II or higher.
  • Library faculty, holding regular line item (non-temporary, non-contractual) appointments, elect two voting members and one alternate. The Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources appoints one voting member and one alternate.
  • If not enough library faculty are able or available to serve, the Dean can appoint non-library faculty to fill vacancies, as needed.

B. Chair

  • At its first meeting, the LFPRC will elect a chair or co-chairs.
  • Depending on the library faculty who apply for promotional or permanent status review during a particular annual review cycle, it is possible that no single committee member would be eligible to serve as chair for review of all candidates. In such circumstances, the committee should elect an additional chair to supervise and conduct those reviews for which the first chair is ineligible to serve as a voting member.

C. Terms of Service

  • The term of service will be one year. If nominated and elected, faculty will serve the term.

D. Quorum

  • A quorum consists of three members of the Committee.
  • Alternates attend all meetings, but vote only when needed to constitute a quorum.

E. Conflicts of Interest

No committee member shall be present at or participate in discussion or vote on their own application for promotion or permanent status or on the application of any individual with whom there is a clearly defined conflict of interest. The Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources will be responsible for identifying such situations and informing the LFPRC of them in writing prior to the first meeting of the Committee; applicants or others may point out conflicts of interest to the Dean. Should the LFPRC have questions concerning other potential conflicts of interest, the Dean will be responsible for deciding whether a member of the Committee should be excluded from participating in discussion or voting on a candidate’s application.

F.  Confidentiality

LFPRC members must regard their work as confidential. All members are responsible for maintaining the security and confidentiality of all submitted dossiers. Discussion of matters that come before the Committee to anyone not on the Committee, in public areas, or in unofficial meetings is inappropriate. Any and all such behavior shall be regarded as a serious breach of confidentiality and is subject to disciplinary action. Exception: The Chair of the LFPRC can consult the Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources on questions about or clarification of procedure.

Section 1. Assignment of Rank

During initial appointments, the Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources shall assign a library faculty rank commensurate with prior professional accomplishments and attainments. The Dean’s decision will also take into consideration faculty/professional rank attained in previous employment as well as the recommendation of the search committee. Formal offers of appointment will include written verification of assigned rank.

Section 2. Criteria for Rank, Promotion, Permanent Status, and Post-Permanent-Status Review (See Appendix LIB-B in Faculty Handbook Appendices and Forms )

Advancement in rank is not automatic upon accumulation of years of experience, but is based on an assessment of performance and attainments. The purpose of the library faculty rank system is to foster professional development through external activity and study in conjunction with, but not at the expense of, fulfillment of responsibilities to the SU Libraries.  

Review for promotion and permanent status coincide with SU’s fiscal calendar, not the anniversary date of appointments. For appointments made between January 1 and June 30, years in rank are calculated as of July 1 following appointments. For appointments made between July 2 and December 31, years in rank are calculated as of July 1 preceding appointments.

A. Decisions for initial assignment, promotion in rank, and permanent status are measured by contributions to the University and to librarianship in three areas: 

  1. Job Performance - performance in the area of responsibility;
  2. Service - participation, performance and/or leadership advancing institutional mission in library, university, professional and community committees/organizations; and
  3. Professional Development/Achievement - seminars, workshops, and courses attended, advanced degrees obtained, presentations, research, publications and awards.

While job performance is the most important area, service and professional achievement
are also expected. The balance between areas may differ for individuals, but evidence of all three is expected for both promotion and permanent status.

Appendix LIB-B lists specific criteria in each area. These criteria:

  • are weighted in importance;
  • are neither inclusive nor exclusive; and
  • will vary in their applicability and relative importance, depending upon rank and responsibilities.

While evidence of activity in all areas is expected, promotion to Librarian II or III does not require excellence in all three. Rather, at a minimum:

  • promotion to Librarian II requires excellence in job performance;
  • promotion to Librarian III requires excellence in job performance and one other area; and
  • promotion to Librarian IV requires excellence in all three areas.

Evidence of excellence is not needed in each year. The University reserves the right to consider as “excellent” any performance that is consistently of a high caliber, whether it is labeled satisfactory, very good, or excellent (or comparable ratings) in annual evaluations during the relevant time period. Evidence of excellence includes proof that any “unsatisfactory” ratings have been addressed fully and corrected before submission of dossiers and concrete documentation of the higher weighted elements of the criteria in Appendix LIB-B in Faculty Handbook Appendices and Forms .

B. The criteria for permanent status include those used for promotion to the candidate’s current level, plus the following considerations: 

  • the needs of Salisbury University at the time;
  • whether the expertise offered by the candidate rounds out the Libraries or duplicates expertise offered by other permanent staff; and
  • the impact of a permanent status offer on the budget of the Libraries and the University.

Section 3. Eligibility Requirements/Timetable for Promotion (See Appendix LIB-D)

A. Librarian I

1. Eligibility Requirements

Bachelor’s degree in a subject field and either a Master’s degree in librarianship from an American Library Association (ALA) accredited library school or another graduate degree to substitute for or augment the ALA degree that the institution deems acceptable for the position being filled.

Librarians at this level are expected to demonstrate an understanding of the basic tenets of librarianship and potential for professional growth, and they should begin taking part in professional development activities.

2. Timetable

Librarians must initiate a mandatory promotion review upon completion of the third consecutive year of full-time employment as a Librarian I, if they desire to continue employment after the fourth year. Librarians employed as a Librarian I are not eligible for promotion until this mandatory review.

If promotion to Librarian II is denied after this initial review, the individual can continue to seek promotion up to and including the sixth year of employment. By fall of the sixth year of employment, the individual must apply for both promotion and permanent status at the same time if the individual desires to continue employment after the end of the sixth year. If the Library Faculty Promotion Review Committee (LFPRC) recommendation for promotion is positive, then permanent status will also be recommended, unless conditions in Section 2.B. preclude such a recommendation. If either promotion from Librarian I to Librarian II or permanent status is denied during the sixth consecutive year of full-time employment as a Librarian I, the individual will be granted an additional and terminal one-year appointment in that rank, but barring exceptional circumstances shall receive no further consideration for permanent status.

The Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources shall notify all library faculty who are in their required promotion year no later than July 15 that they must apply for promotion.

B. Librarian II - IV

1. Eligibility Requirements

Promotional review is neither mandatory nor automatic for library faculty at ranks II through IV.

Promotion to Librarian III and Librarian IV requires a minimum of six or nine years of professional experience, respectively. Three of these years must be served at SU’s libraries. For Librarian III, three of the six years must be at a level comparable to the rank of Librarian II at a USM institution. For Librarian IV, three of the nine years must be at a level comparable to the rank of Librarian III at a USM institution.

2. Timetable

Library faculty members must initiate promotion through submission of dossiers to the Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources by the required date (see Appendix LIB-D).

Library faculty hired at the rank of Librarian II or III who apply for promotion may, at the same time and using the same dossier, apply for permanent status. If applying for both, follow the permanent status timetable found in Appendix LIB-D.

If a staff member is denied promotion to Librarian III or IV, they shall not be reviewed in the next review cycle.

Section 4. Eligibility Requirements/Timetable for Permanent Status (See Appendix LIB-D)

BOR II - 1.11 - 1

Permanent status is an institutional commitment to permanent and continuous employment to be terminated only for adequate cause (see Section 9). The criteria for permanent status include those used for promotion, plus the additional considerations found in Section 2.B.

A. Eligibility Requirements

All ranks, other than Librarian I, are eligible for permanent status review. Application for permanent status is mandatory in the fall of the sixth consecutive year of employment, if it has not already been awarded.

For library faculty hired at the Librarian II rank or higher, a minimum of three years in that rank at SU’s libraries is required before applying for permanent status.

To be considered eligible for permanent status, a part-time librarian’s commitment shall be at least fifty percent time for the fiscal year.

Permanent status can be awarded only by an affirmative decision based upon a formal review. The LFPRC is the reviewing body for all permanent status applications.

If permanent status is denied, the individual will be granted an additional and terminal one-year appointment in that rank, but barring exceptional circumstances shall receive no further consideration for permanent status. If the individual has not applied for permanent status when required to do so or has withdrawn their application in the fall of the year in which they were required to apply for permanent status, the individual will be granted an additional and terminal one-year appointment in that rank, but barring exceptional circumstances shall receive no further consideration for permanent status.

Individuals appointed to the positions of Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources and Associate Dean serve in those capacities at the pleasure of the President or their designee, regardless of whether the appointees had at the time of the appointments, or obtained during the appointments, permanent status as faculty librarians.

B. Timetable

Library faculty in a full-time position hired at Librarian I must undergo mandatory permanent status review in the fall semester of their sixth consecutive year of employment. If someone hired at Librarian I has not already received promotion to Librarian II, application for promotion must be made in the fall semester of their sixth consecutive year of employment at the same time as application for permanent status.

Library faculty in a full-time position hired at Librarian II or higher may apply for permanent status review starting in their fourth consecutive year of employment and must undergo permanent status review no later than the fall semester of their sixth year.

Library faculty hired at the rank of Librarian II or higher who apply for permanent status may, at the same time and using the same dossier, apply for promotion. If applying for both, follow the permanent status timetable found in Appendix LIB-D.

The Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources shall notify all library faculty without permanent status who are in their required review year no later than July 15 that they must apply for permanent status.

Section 5. Promotion and Permanent Status Review Procedures (See Appendix LIB-D)

The following procedures leading to promotion and permanent status review are to be followed by all candidates and committees. They have been established to promote consistency and to guarantee full and fair hearings for all candidates. When applying for promotion and permanent status at the same time, each application is treated separately by the LFPRC.

Library faculty are responsible for tracking their eligibility for review, in consultation with the Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources, and for initiating the review process at the appropriate time.

A. Initial Submission

Candidates shall submit dossiers using Salisbury University’s online system (see Appendix LIB-C). The current supervisors will then upload their own letters of reference assessing the candidates’ job performance and any other areas that they are able to evaluate. In those cases in which the current supervisors have been in their positions for less than one year, the Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources will contact past supervisors as well to request letters of reference. Any letters of reference the candidates request from others should be sent directly to the Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources.

The Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources shall upload the position description or job announcement, letters of reference received other than those from current supervisors, and copies of the six most recent SU annual evaluations. If a candidate has not been employed long enough to have had six evaluations, then all evaluations since their start date shall be uploaded.

B. Review by the LFPRC

To provide the LFPRC and responsible administrators with broad-based documentation of achievements, candidates should supply the Committee with materials sufficient to document their range of achievements for all areas for the period since initial appointment or promotion to current rank. To ensure that it has a full picture of candidates’ activities, the LFPRC may ask candidates for additional information.

The Committee will complete considerations and reach decisions by secret ballot. For each candidate, the Chair of the LFPRC will upload a separate written summary of the Committee’s vote and recommendations, along with clear, detailed rationales for all recommendations.  

All candidates with negative recommendations from the LFPRC may provide written rebuttals within five business days of the uploading of the LFPRC’s summary. Rebuttals may be submitted in any professionally reasonable, written form (i.e., a short memorandum or more formal rebuttal letter) and will be submitted through the online system. Candidates with negative recommendations may either request that their applications move forward or withdraw from further consideration; this decision will be recorded in the online system.

Candidates with positive recommendations and all candidates with negative recommendations who choose to move forward will continue as follows.

C. Review by the Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources

The Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources will review and evaluate applications and make recommendations for or against promotion and/or permanent status in writing and upload copies in the online system.

All candidates with negative recommendations from the Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources may provide written rebuttals within five business days of the uploading of the Dean’s recommendation. Rebuttals may be submitted in any professionally reasonable, written form (i.e. a short memorandum or more formal rebuttal letter) and will be uploaded in the online system. Candidates with negative recommendations may either request that applications move forward or withdraw from further consideration; this decision will be recorded in the online system.

Candidates with positive recommendations and candidates with negative recommendations who choose to move forward will continue as follows.

D. Review by the Provost

The Provost will review candidates’ applications, make recommendations, and upload those recommendations to the candidates’ files in the online system.

E. Decision from the President

The President, in consultation with the Provost, will make final decisions as to whether or not to award promotion and/or permanent status and will notify both the candidate and the Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources in writing of that decision. The Associate Provost will then upload the President’s letter in the online system.

F. Disposition of the Dossier

At the completion of the review process, the Associate Provost will archive the applications. Appropriate records retention procedures and schedules will be followed.

Should candidates apply for promotion at another time, there will be no discussion of or reference to any previous application. Each application for promotion is to be considered on its own merits at the time it is submitted.

Section 6. Appeals of Promotion and Permanent Status Decisions

All promotion and permanent status decision appeals are to be handled in accord with the Salisbury University Procedures for Faculty Appeals in Matters of Promotion and Tenure.

Promotion appeals are reviewed by the Faculty Welfare Committee of the Faculty Senate.

Permanent status appeals are reviewed by the Academic Freedom and Tenure Committee of the Faculty Senate

As per these procedures, appeals may be made:

  • on the basis of an allegation of error in procedures or application of policy;
  • on allegations of unlawful discrimination; or
  • on allegations of arbitrary and capricious decision-making.

Mere disagreement with the substance of recommendations is not cause for appeal.

Section 7. Post-Permanent-Status Review of Library Faculty

All permanent status librarians will undertake a periodic comprehensive review every five years to assess and plan for their contributions to librarianship at Salisbury University. Reviews shall be based on the criteria for the librarians’ current rank, as outlined in Section 2 and Appendix LIB-B of this document. The review should be seen primarily as a formative process for on-going job performance, service and professional development/achievements.

Each librarian with permanent status will be the principal author of a self-analysis report and the primary provider of materials demonstrating the basis for the report. Reports will only cover the elapsed time since the last post-permanent-status review or initial award of permanent status. A positive promotion review may serve as a substitute for a post-permanent-status review and will re-set the due date for the next post-permanent-status review to five years.

Materials included with the report should be representative and succinct in nature. The report should include the librarian’s current Curriculum Vitae and items representing major accomplishments during the review period that illustrate the criteria listed in Appendix LIB-B of this document.

The submission process shall follow the comprehensive review timetable found in Appendix LIB-D, Table 3. Reviews shall commence in the fifth year from when the librarian received permanent status or the fifth anniversary of their last review. Extenuating circumstances may be considered regarding requests for postponement.

The Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources will maintain a schedule of reviews and alert librarians by July 15 of the fiscal year in which the reviews will commence. After the librarian has uploaded the completed report in the online system, the Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources will upload the position description and annual evaluations since the last post-permanent-status review or since the awarding of permanent status. The librarian’s immediate supervisor will review the report and upload their own letter of recommendation discussing the librarian’s accomplishments over the past review period. The Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources will review the report and upload a brief evaluation letter. The librarian may elect to upload a response to the supervisor’s or Dean’s letter.

If a librarian’s post-permanent-status review is found to be insufficient, a corrective plan shall be developed by the librarian and the librarian’s immediate supervisor. This plan will include a mechanism to monitor progress at fixed intervals and shall be signed by all parties.

At the completion of the review process, the Dean of Libraries & Instructional Resources will archive the review. Appropriate records retention procedures and schedules will be followed.

Section 8. Professional Leave

BOR II - 2.01

The President of Salisbury University may grant professional leave to library faculty. The primary purpose of such leave is to provide an opportunity for employees to conduct scholarly or creative work that helps implement the mission of the University and enhances their standing in their profession. 

Section 9. Removal for Cause

BOR II - 1.00

The President of Salisbury University may terminate the appointment of library faculty with permanent status for cause. Cause shall include moral turpitude, professional or scholarly misconduct, incompetence and/or willful neglect of duty. Prior to termination, the following steps must be taken:

  • the charges are stated in writing and the appointee is furnished a copy thereof;
  • the Provost is asked by the President to informally inquire as to the possibility of effecting an adjustment to the situation that would prevent termination; and
  • where such mediation fails, the appointee is given an opportunity to request a hearing by an impartial hearing officer appointed by the President or the Provost.

In addition to being terminated for cause, faculty engaged exclusively or primarily in library services may be terminated because of the discontinuation of the department, program, school, or unit in which the appointment was made or because of the lack of appropriations or other funds with which to support the appointment.

Procedures for termination of library faculty with permanent status are those that apply to tenured and tenure-track faculty.

Upon notice of termination, the appointee will have thirty calendar days to request a hearing. The hearing will be held no sooner than thirty days after receipt of such a request. The date of the hearing will be set by mutual agreement of the appointee and the hearing officer. The hearing officer will make a recommendation to the President for action to be taken. The recommendation will be based only on the evidence of record in the proceeding. If the President does not accept the recommendation of the hearing officer, the reasons will be communicated promptly in writing to the appointee and the hearing officer. The appointee may elect to be represented by counsel of their choice throughout termination proceedings.

Section 10. Emeritus/Emerita

Emeritus/emerita is a title of distinction conferred upon retiring faculty who normally have completed at least ten years of meritorious service to Salisbury University.

Beginning in the semester before retirement, library faculty may be nominated for emeritus/emerita status by any member of the SU faculty via a brief letter of nomination to the Provost.

The Provost will forward letters to the Library Faculty Promotion Review Committee for their consideration during a meeting in the final semester of the library faculty member’s service. The Committee may recommend that a retiring library faculty member should be granted emeritus/emerita status effective immediately upon retirement.

The names of library faculty emeriti are listed on Salisbury University’s website as appropriate to their contributions. Emeriti library faculty have the use of campus facilities and are welcome to attend campus events as regular library faculty.

Part-Time Faculty Members Engaged Exclusively or Primarily in Library Services

BOR II-1.11

In the matter of part-time library faculty, the University operates under USM BOR 11-1.11.

Evaluation of Performance of Faculty

BOR II-1.20

1.  Academic department chairs/school directors evaluate all of their faculty at the university each year. In making these evaluations, department chairs/school directors use information from as many sources as possible to assess each faculty member’s performance in the three areas of:  a) teaching and advising, b) professional development, and c) service to the University, their profession, and the community. Sources of information for faculty evaluation include but are not limited to those described in Table 3.  Department chairs/school directors are expected to annually meet with each faculty member in a one-on-one meeting to go over the faculty member’s evaluation.  Many departments use SU’s Faculty Success platform for annual evaluations.

2. Department chairs/school directors evaluate tenured and tenure-track faculty by March 15 of each academic year and summarize outcomes by using 1) evaluation forms found in Appendix O ; 2) evaluation forms approved by a department; or 3) evaluation forms approved by the department and dean.

3. Department chairs/school directors also evaluate full-time non-tenure track faculty each year by March 15.  Criteria and procedures for reviewing full-time non-tenure track faculty who are not on tenure-track lines are developed by the academic departments.  These criteria are provided to full-time non-tenure track faculty in a “memo of professional expectation” at the time of hiring.  A sample of such a memo appears in Appendix F in the Faculty Handbook Appendices and Forms .  Criteria are approved by the relevant dean and by the Provost and are on file in the dean’s office and in the Office of Academic Affairs. The steps and deadlines in Figure 4 describe the procedure for yearly reviewing these full-time non-tenure track faculty.

Table 4. Procedures for Reviewing Tenured, Tenure-Track and Full-time Non-tenure Track Faculty

STEP

DEADLINE

Department chairs/school directors evaluate faculty member yearly.

March 15

Department chairs/school directors recommend to deans as follows:

Termination (faculty not needed or unsatisfactory)

One-year Reappointment (faculty needed and satisfactory)

March 30

Deans recommend to the Provost as follows:

  1. Termination (faculty not needed or unsatisfactory)
  2. One-year Reappointment (faculty needed and satisfactory)

April 15

Provost approves terminations, one-year reappointments and continuing university appointments in consultation with the President

May 1

Provost notifies faculty in writing of termination, one-year reappointment or continuing university appointment

May 15

4. Department chairs/school directors summarize their evaluations of full-time non-tenure faculty on the evaluation form (see Appendix Q ).

5.  Department chairs/school directors also evaluate part-time non-tenure track faculty at the conclusion of each semester using criteria developed by the department and approved and on file with the dean and the Provost.  Department chairs/school directors summarize evaluations of part-time non-tenure faculty on the evaluation form (see Appendix R ).  Because part-time appointments are made on the basis of individual courses and automatically terminate at the end of the semester in which those courses are offered, the form contains no recommendations about termination or further appointment. 

Concurrent Faculty and Administrative Appointments

BOR II-1.03

1.     Each faculty member appointed to a concurrent administrative position shall receive a formal letter of appointment.

  1. Any faculty member who is appointed to a concurrent administrative position shall receive a formal letter of appointment separate from their faculty contract or appointment letter.
  2. A person who is simultaneously appointed to a faculty position and a concurrent position shall receive a separate contract or appointment letter for each position.
  3. A serving administrator who is appointed to a concurrent faculty position shall receive a faculty contract or appointment letter separate from his or her administrative appointment letter.

2.  A faculty member who holds a concurrent administrative position serves in that position at the pleasure of the appointing authority unless otherwise specified in the appointment letter. For such faculty members, termination of the administrative appointment does not affect faculty status.

3.  Appointment letters for concurrent administrative positions shall:

  1. State that the appointee serves at the pleasure of the appointing authority or, if that is not the case, state the term of the appointment;
  2. State any additional salary and other forms of compensation to be paid the appointee for serving in the concurrent administrative position and the salary calculation method to be used upon termination of the concurrent administrative appointment;
  3. State whether the time spent in the concurrent administrative position shall count toward eligibility for sabbatical leave (The letter shall indicate that approval of sabbatical leave is a separate issue from accrual of years of eligibility toward sabbatical leave.);
  4. Identify the applicable Board of Regents’ and institutional policies on the accrual of annual, sick and personal leave.

1.  Disposition of annual leave and return of faculty status:

Appointments lasting three or more years and which are 12-month appointments:

  • Pay-Out Option:  The following language will be included in the letter of appointment: “To cover the transition period from July 1 until your entrance back to faculty status (the start of the academic calendar, on or about August 15), you have agreed to save a minimum of 15 annual, personal, and/or holiday leave days. Your available leave balance may be supplemented by an additional maximum of 15 days of administrative leave to cover the transition period, if needed.  If you have enough leave (annual, personal and/or holiday) to cover the entire transition period, then the balance of unused annual leave shall be paid-out at the time you return to faculty status, at the present Administrator salary/rate.  Should you have elected to use the Administrative Leave offered, any unused leave at the time of transition shall not be paid out to you.”
  • Non-Pay-Out Option: The following language will be included in the letter of appointment: ‘“To cover the transition period from July 1 until your entrance back to faculty status (the start of the academic calendar, on or about August 15), you have agreed to save a minimum of 15 annual, personal, and/or holiday leave days. Your available leave balance may be supplemented by an additional maximum of 15 days of administrative leave to cover the transition period, if needed.  If the combination of available leave and administrative leave is not enough to cover the transition period, you shall be given special assignments and/or work, or be placed on leave without pay, during those work days not covered.”

Appointments for at least one year and less than three years:

  • For each academic year appointment (July 1 through June 30) less than 3 years, administrative leave granted as a means to transition back to faculty status shall be pro-rated at a rate equal to 5 days per annual appointment (roughly three and one-third hours per month).  Upon transition back to faculty status, the prorated administrative leave shall be applied to the transition period and supplemented with any unused annual leave, personal leave and holiday leave.
  1. State, for tenure-track faculty members, whether or not the time in the concurrent administrative position counts as time toward promotion and/or tenure;
  2. State whether or not the time in the concurrent administrative position is included or excluded when schedules of comprehensive review of tenured faculty are determined; and
  3. Indicate which faculty rights (e.g., voting rights) the person shall have, if any. 

Title of Professor Emeritus

  1. Professor Emeritus is a title of distinction conferred upon retiring faculty who normally have completed at least ten years of meritorious service to Salisbury University. The title of Professor Emeritus/Emerita does not imply any particular rank or status, beyond that of having been a fulltime member of the SU faculty for a period of at least 10 years and having made valuable contributions to the University.
  2. Beginning in the semester before retirement, faculty may be nominated for the title of Professor Emeritus by any member of the SU faculty via a brief letter of nomination to the Provost. 
  3. The Provost will forward letters of nomination to the University Promotions Committee for their consideration during a meeting in the final semester of the faculty member’s service.  The University Promotions Committee may recommend that a retiring faculty member should be granted the title effective immediately on retirement. 
  4. The names of professors’ emeriti are listed on Salisbury University’s website as appropriate to their contributions.  Emeriti faculty have the use of campus facilities and are welcome to attend campus events as regular faculty.

Procedures for Granting Tenure to Deans

1.  All vacancy announcements will indicate that successful candidates must meet tenure approval in an academic department/CHHS school.

2.  When the search committee has selected those finalists they desire to interview, the search committee shall request each appropriate departmental/CHHS school tenure committee to review and tentatively approve such candidates before an invitation to interview will be made. Tenure committees will provide such notification within five (5) working days.

3.  In the event a candidate’s educational and teaching background does not clearly fit within one of the university’s academic departments/CHHS schools, the Provost will notify the school/college’s department chairs/school directors who will review the applicant’s background and forward the credentials to the most appropriate tenure committee.

4.  During campus visits, candidates will be interviewed by the same departmental tenure committee that provided the tentative clearance.

5. Only the names of those candidates interviewed and endorsed by both the search committee and the appropriate departmental tenure committee may be submitted as finalists to the Provost.

Roles and Responsibilities of Department Chairs 

The department chair is a member of the full-time faculty in terms of employment regulations. This part-time administrative appointment at Salisbury University is to be filled by a member of the tenure-track faculty who shall be appointed by the Provost, on recommendation of the relevant dean, in a manner consistent with the University’s general “Policy on Concurrent Faculty and Administrative Appointments.”  The term of a chair is three years, which may be renewed. A chair may be removed at any time during their term by the Provost, on recommendation of the appropriate dean, provided that a chair removed before the completion of a full term shall be entitled to whatever chair’s compensation would otherwise be due for the entire term. Faculty who are appointed to such positions are entitled to receive reduced teaching loads utilizing reassigned time during the academic year to provide them time for administrative duties. 

In addition to serving in positions of academic supervision during the academic year, the chair is expected to oversee department activities and to serve during the summer and at times as specified by the dean. The University provides an annual stipend and teaching download to compensate these administrators for their work. Stipend amounts will be determined by a formula that provides for a standard base dollar amount, determined by the Provost, and variable factors based on the number of Full-Time Equivalent Faculty (FTEF) and Total Student Credit Hours generated throughout the academic year, including the summer and winter terms. The stipend amounts are reviewed every three years without reduction during a term. In addition, each dean will have a percentage of the total amount available as discretionary money to award for special recognition during that academic year. 

Beginning in FY 2008, a portion of this annual stipend will be added to the faculty member’s salary and this increase in salary will be retained when the faculty member leaves the chair’s position. Upon completion of a three year term as chair on or after June 30, 2007 a chair will have 30% of the average annual stipend over the previous three years added to the chair’s salary. If such a chair serves a second three term, a) then, since essentially 30% of the annual stipend is now part of the chair’s salary, the stipend payment will be 70% of the annual stipend; and b) upon completion of the second term, 40% of the average annual stipend over the previous three years will be added to the chair’s salary. If the chair serves any additional years as chair, then, since essentially 70% of the annual stipend is now part of chair’s salary, the stipend payment will be 30% of the annual stipend.

Chairs are primarily responsible for seeing that the activities listed Section 3. Areas of Responsibility below are carried out and it is expected that, insofar as possible, they will involve the members of their departments in a collaborative effort to that end.  Chairs carry out these activities in accordance with regulations of the University System of Maryland and with Salisbury University institutional policy.

  1. Selection of Department Chairs: Whenever a vacancy occurs in the position of departmental chair, the Provost shall appoint a replacement, after receiving a recommendation from the appropriate dean, who shall canvas the department’s tenure-track and full-time non-tenure track faculty for their nominee or nominees for the position.
  2. Appointment of Department Chairs: Normally the contract for appointment starts at the beginning of the fiscal year–July 1–and ends on June 30 of the following year. A mid-term appointment may occur, with the final contract year as described above.  The dean and the Provost together will determine the amount of reassigned time each Department Chair will receive. 
  3. Areas of Responsibility: The following are areas of responsibility for department chairs. As appropriate for a given department, some of these activities may be carried out by an Associate Chair or other designee.

Program Development and Administration: The Department Chair is primarily responsible for developing and administering the academic programs within the department, such as majors, concentrations, tracks and minors.  According to the school’s written policy on the roles of chairs, this responsibility may include:

  1. evaluating, assessing and improving existing programs and courses;
  2. developing new programs and courses in consideration of available resources and student needs;
  3. seeking accreditation of programs;
  4. coordinating programs with other departments;
  5. staffing and scheduling courses to make best use of human, fiscal and physical resources;
  6. describing programs and courses so that they may be clearly understood by others inside and outside the university;
  7. working to improve the library holdings in the department’s discipline(s);
  8. interpreting the department’s requirements for students by evaluating transfer credits and recommending waivers of requirements to the Dean as appropriate.

Faculty Development: The Department Chair is primarily responsible for recruiting, retaining, and fostering the professional development of department faculty. According to the school’s written policy on the roles of chairs, this responsibility may include:

  1. promoting high standards of professional conduct, teaching and scholarly work within the department;
  2. seeking approval for new or replacement positions from the Dean, coordinating searches, and making hiring recommendations;
  3. evaluating faculty and making recommendations for reappointment, tenure, promotion and salary increments;
  4. making recommendations regarding requests for sabbatical leave, evaluating the impact on the department’s programs and teaching load;
  5. assisting part-time faculty in meeting department and university expectations.

Student-Faculty Relations: The Department Chair is the primary representative of the department in its dealings with students. According to the school’s written policy on the roles of chairs, this responsibility may include:

  1. coordinating the department’s participation in new student recruitment, student orientation, and general advising;
  2. coordinating departmental advising or designating a member of the faculty to act as advising coordinator;
  3. acting as a mediator in disputes between faculty and students;
  4. encouraging activities to augment the department’s academic programs, such as student clubs, speakers and field trips.

Department Administration: The Chair is responsible for the efficient operation of the department as an administrative structure within the University. According to the school’s written policy on the roles of chairs, this responsibility may include:

  1. working with the department faculty, Dean and Personnel Office to arrange secretarial and technical services;
  2. supervising and evaluating clerical staff;
  3. maintaining records, especially assessment reports, on such matters as majors, graduates, faculty, budget, facilities and equipment;
  4. disseminating relevant information within the department and responding to requests for information from other offices of the University;
  5. preparing budget requests and monitoring the use of fiscal resources;
  6. overseeing the maintenance and use of equipment and facilities assigned to the department; and
  7. developing, implementing, evaluating and enforcing departmental safety policies.

University Governance: As the primary representatives of their departments within the University, Department Chairs play a strategic role in university governance. According to the school’s written policy on the roles of chairs, this responsibility may include:

  1. convening regular department meetings to involve faculty in department decisions;
  2. providing a communication link between the faculty and the administration;
  3. advising the dean on all matters affecting the academic department;
  4. assisting the dean in carrying out programs and activities for the unit.

4. Evaluation of Department Chairs

The dean shall evaluate department chairs on an annual basis. Chairs submit a yearly self-evaluation of teaching, service to the institution and community, and evidence of professional development as well as activities performed as Chair.  (It should be noted that there might be overlap in areas of service and professional development, and responsibilities as Chair.) The self-evaluation of Chairs’ responsibilities should be based on the description of responsibilities in Part 3 of this document.

In evaluating the overall performance of faculty serving as Chairs, the deans use the school’s faculty evaluation format combined with their own observations of administrative competence of department chairs.

5.  Reappointment of Department Chairs

The dean shall work with the departments to develop procedures for the reappointment of sitting chairs, provided that such procedures (a) are approved by the Provost, (b) give each department faculty the opportunity to express their views on the performance of the chair, (c) mandate the Dean to meet with the chair in order to assess the chair’s overall performance, and (d) require the Dean to notify the chair in writing at least four months prior to the expiration of the term whether the Dean will recommend in favor or against reappointment.

Faculty Grievance Policy

BOR II-4.00

Salisbury University has established the Faculty Grievance Policy to give faculty members of the University community a forum in which to address concerns related to matters involving the interpretation or application of University policies including disciplinary action.  This policy provides a method for aggrieved faculty to express substantive complaints about denials of tenure, academic policy concerns, or other faculty issues and have them resolved by the appropriate University officials in a timely fashion.  The following matters are not covered by these grievance procedures:

  • Claims involving alleged discrimination or harassment.
  • Claims relating only to alleged violations of policies which were promulgated exclusively by the USM, actions of the Board of Regents or actions of the Chancellor of the System, over which SU has no jurisdiction.
  • Retrenchment appeals.
  • Grievances against University police officers that could result in the imposition of any discipline against the officer(s).

Jurisdiction and General Procedures

In all matters involving denials of tenure and any complaints that a faculty member’s academic freedom has been directly restricted, including disputes with other faculty or administrators over grades or grading policies, the grievance shall be referred to the Academic Freedom and Tenure Committee.  In matters related to other academic policy concerns, the grievance shall be referred to the Academic Policies Committee.  In all other matters, the grievance shall be referred to the Faculty Welfare Committee. 

If not all necessary members of the appropriate Committee are available, the President of the Faculty Senate in consultation with the Associate Provost will form an ad hoc committee. This ad hoc committee shall consist of all available members of the committee that would normally have heard the grievance, and enough replacement members to allow for a quorum. 

Jurisdictional Disputes

If a dispute arises over the jurisdiction of the committee assigned to decide the matter, the President of the Faculty Senate, in consultation with the chairs of the committees noted above and the Office of the Provost, shall decide the appropriate committee that should hear the matter.  (Jurisdictional disputes shall be directed to a member of the Office of the Provost other than the Provost in order to avoid any conflict of interest, as the Provost would ultimately decide an appeal of the committee’s findings in such a case.)  

Confidentiality

Matters pertaining to any grievance must be kept in confidence by the parties directly involved. Committee findings will only be provided to the parties and other appropriate University personnel on a need-to-know basis (e.g., Committee members, Department Chair, School Director, Dean, the Provost, the President).

Timeline

All time limitations contained within this policy may be extended for good cause as determined by the President of the Faculty Senate, the Chair of the relevant committee, or Provost. A grievance to be heard during the summer (June 16-August 14) would be postponed at the request of either of the parties to the grievance.  Failure to adhere strictly to the timelines shall not be grounds for appeal unless significant prejudice has occurred.

Procedures

Informal Grievance: Faculty members are encouraged to attempt to resolve differences between themselves and others in an informal manner prior to initiating a formal grievance under this policy. This may entail only a conversation in which the views of both parties are aired in a mutually satisfactory manner or a conversation using a neutral third party for mediation. If an informal resolution cannot be achieved, the grievant may elect to begin the formal grievance procedure that follows.

Formal Grievance

Timeline: A formal grievance must be filed within 20 working days of the date on which the grievant knew or should have known of the action that led to the grievance.  Nothing in this policy is to be construed to inhibit or prevent the grievant from withdrawing a formal grievance once the formal grievance procedures have begun.

Requirements: A formal grievance must set forth in writing a statement which clearly defines the basis for the grievance, including a chronology of events leading up to the grievance, the names of people with knowledge of the event, pertinent dates, a description of the actions taken against the grievant which led to the dissatisfaction and a proposed resolution to the situation. Any documentation relevant to the grievance should be attached in written form.  If known, information about relevant University policies should be provided. The grievant has the burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the action or inaction complained about did occur and that it was inconsistent with University policies or procedures. 

Responses: Faculty and committees who receive written formal grievances must respond to the grievant in writing. The written response should address the specific issues raised in the grievance and include all pertinent information.

Procedural Steps: 

Step One: The grievant must submit a formal grievance in writing to the person alleged to be responsible for the actions leading to the grievance within 20 working days of the date on which the grievant knew or should have known of the action that led to the grievance. The person alleged to be responsible for actions leading to the grievance will provide a written response to the grievant within five working days of receiving the formal grievance.

Step Two: If the response is not satisfactory to the grievant; they have five working days to file the grievance with the direct supervisor of the person alleged to be responsible for the actions leading to the grievance. The grievant must include all prior written responses. The direct supervisor of the person alleged to be responsible for the actions leading to the grievance will provide a written response to the grievant and to the person alleged to be responsible within five working days of receiving the formal grievance.

Step Three: If the direct supervisor’s response is not satisfactory, the grievant has five working days to file the grievance with the dean in which the dispute has occurred. The grievant must include all prior written responses. The dean will provide a written response to the grievant within five working days of receiving the grievance.

Step Four: If the response from the dean is not satisfactory, the grievant has five working days to forward the grievance to the Office of the Provost. The grievant must include all prior written responses. The Office of the Provost will refer the grievance to the appropriate committee for consideration and will notify the President of the Faculty Senate of the referral to Committee. 

Committee Review of Evidence

The Committee normally has 10 working days of receiving the formal grievance to decide among the following options: 

  1. review submitted evidence: render a written decision based on the documents and materials submitted with the appeal; 
  2. investigation: render a written decision based on a series of interviews, a review of documents, and any/or any other action deemed appropriate for the purpose of collecting additional information and evidence necessary for an informed and reasoned judgment to be rendered.  The investigation, including interviews, will usually be completed within 20 working days of the decision to conduct an investigation; or
  3. hearing: render a written decision based on a hearing.  If the Committee determines that a hearing is to be held, the committee shall send written notice of the time, date, and location to all parties.  The hearing shall be conducted as follows: 
  • The hearing shall be held at a reasonable time when all parties (to the extent possible) are available or have an opportunity to be present.
  • The parties shall be entitled to make opening and closing statements.
  • The parties shall be entitled to present evidence through witnesses and documents, and shall be entitled to question witnesses. At the discretion of the Chair of the Committee, direct questioning by a party of a witness, including an opposing party, may not be permitted; rather, the parties may be required to convey their questions to the Committee Chair, who will convey them to the witness.
  • All parties, the grievant and subject of the grievance are permitted to seek the support of a non-legal advocate for assistance in the preparation of a case before the Committee. The advocate may provide counsel during the hearing but shall not officially speak or participate formally in the proceedings.  In all cases, the advocate must be a member of the University faculty, staff, or student body. 
  • Neither party may be represented by an attorney at the hearing, unless they are facing or are likely to face criminal charges relating to the subject of the grievance. Under such circumstances University legal counsel must also be present. At no time may legal counsel give statements or participate in questioning witnesses and Committee members.
  • The hearing shall be closed with attendance limited to individuals directly connected with the case as determined by the Chair of the Committee.
  • Formal rules of evidence need not be followed at the hearing. The Committee may receive such evidence as a reasonable person would consider reliable in making important decisions. If a question arises about the authenticity of a document or the reasonableness, relevance or redundancy of evidence, the Chair of the Committee shall be the final decision maker on the evidence’s admissibility.
  • The parties may request, in writing, that the Committee contact specified persons to appear at the hearing to testify on behalf of the parties. The request must be made at least five working days before the scheduled hearing in order to allow ample time for the Committee to make the requests.
  • The Chair of the Committee shall be responsible for conducting the hearing in an efficient and decorous manner and shall rule on all disputes related to the procedures used throughout the proceedings. Reasonable limits may be set by the Chair on the length and nature of the opening statements, the evidence presented and on the duration of the hearing. At any time, the Chair may seek the advice of university legal counsel.
  • Since the University lacks full judicial authority, such as the power to subpoena or place witnesses under oath, a party’s procedural rights cannot be coextensive with or identical to the rights afforded the accused in a civil or criminal legal proceeding. The procedures outlined are designed, however, to assure fundamental fairness and to protect parties from arbitrary or capricious disciplinary action. Deviations from these procedures shall not necessarily invalidate a hearing or the results of a hearing unless significant prejudice results.
  • When possible the hearing should be completed within 20 working days of the decision to conduct a hearing.

Committee Findings

After the Committee has completed its review, the Committee shall issue a written decision based on findings of fact and conclusions, including procedures followed and any applicable University policies and procedures, usually within ten working days, and shall provide a copy of the findings to all directly involved parties, including the grievant, the person alleged to be responsible for the actions leading to the grievance, and other appropriate University officials on a need to know basis (e.g. Committee members, Department Chair, School Director, Dean, the Provost, the President). The Committee shall provide written notice to the President of the Faculty Senate that it has reached a decision in the case.    

Appeal of Committee’s Findings

If either party elects to appeal the decision of the committee, they must provide written notice of the appeal to the Provost, within five working days from the date of the Committee’s written decision. The written appeal should set forth all of the reasons that support reversal of the Committee’s decision and include any supporting documentation. 

The Provost’s review is limited and the appellant shall have the burden to prove anyone exceeded their given authority and/or discretion and/or materially failed to follow proper procedures. The Provost has the discretion to take any action necessary to thoroughly complete a review, and then will issue a decision, which will be binding and final.  The outcome of the appeal will be conveyed in writing to all directly involved parties, including the grievant, the person alleged to be responsible for the actions leading to the grievance, and other appropriate University officials on a need-to-know basis (e.g. Committee members, Department Chair, School Director, Dean, the President).  As a matter of courtesy, the President of the Faculty Senate may be notified that an appeal has been filed and settled.  Findings will only be provided to University personnel on a need-to-know basis as set forth in the Confidentiality section above.  

Procedures for Appeals to the USM Board of Regents of Decisions to Terminate Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty Members

BOR II-1.04

1. A tenured or tenure-track faculty member whose faculty employment has been terminated for cause by the President of the employing institution pursuant to USM/ART Policy II-1.00, I.C.7(a) may appeal to the Board of Regents.  All such appeals shall conform to these procedures.

2. An appeal may be requested only by filing a written notice of appeal.  The notice of appeal must identify the faculty member and state that the faculty member wishes to appeal the termination of their employment to the Board of Regents. The notice must be filed within ten working days of the faculty member’s receipt of the letter communicating the President’s decision to terminate. The notice of appeal is filed when it is received at the Office of the President.

3. The President shall deliver the notice of appeal and the record (as defined herein) to the USM Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs no later than ten working days after the receipt of the notice of appeal by the Office of the President.  The record shall include:

  1. The statement of charges provided to the faculty member;
  2. A tape recording, or written transcript, of the hearing provided pursuant to USM/ART Policy II-1.00, I.C.7(a). If no transcript of the hearing has been made, either party may request that a transcript be prepared.  Such a request must be directed to the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. If such a request is made, a transcript will be prepared and a copy provided to each party at the expense of the appointing institution;
  3. Copies of all exhibits received by the hearing officer or faculty board of review;
  4. The written recommendation of the hearing officer or faculty board of review;
  5. Any additional material or information used by the President, if any;
  6. The written decision of the President; and
  7. A letter of transmittal from the President.

4. Within 30 days of the filing of the notice of appeal, the faculty member shall file a memorandum in support of the appeal. The memorandum is filed when it is received in the office of the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.  The memorandum must be signed by the faculty member and by any attorney retained by the faculty member. It must identify the points in the President’s written decision to which the appellant takes exception and a statement in each case of the reasons why. Factual allegations must include references to the record at the institutional level.  New factual material not a part of that record will not be considered on appeal.

5. The Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs shall send a copy of the faculty member’s memorandum to the president, who may file a written response with the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs no later than 30 days from the President’s receipt of the faculty member’s memorandum.  A copy of the response must be sent to the faculty member or the faculty member’s attorney or representative.

6. Upon receipt of a notice of appeal, the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs shall send a copy to the Chair of the Board of Regents, who shall appoint three regents to hear the appeal (the “appeal panel”) on the Board’s behalf and name one of them to serve as chair.  The appeal panel shall set a hearing date consistent with the above procedures and with the goal of achieving an expeditious conclusion.

7.  The hearing shall consist of an oral argument on behalf of the faculty member and of the President. The panel chair shall specify in advance the time permitted for oral argument.  No witness testimony will be allowed, and the argument shall be limited to matters in the record.

8. The appellant shall have the burden of showing that the President’s decision was not supported by substantial evidence in the record and/or that the decision is premised upon an error of law, including procedural error.

9. Either party may be represented by legal counsel at the hearing.

10. The appeal hearing will be closed and will be recorded.11. Following the hearing, the appeal panel shall issue a recommendation to the full Board of Regents. The Panel may recommend affirmation of the President’s decision, reversal of that decision, or remand to the institution for further action as specified. The Board shall consider and act on that recommendation in executive session no later than its next regularly scheduled Board meeting. The Board may concur with the Panel’s decision or modify it. It shall communicate its decision in writing to the faculty member and the president within five (5) working days of its decision. The Board’s decision is final.

Faculty Retrenchment

BOR II-8.00

1. General Principles

a) The term “retrenchment” means the termination of a faculty appointment as autho­rized in the November 29, 1990, University of Maryland (USM) Board of Regents Policy on Faculty Retrenchment (II-8.00).[4]

b) The retrenchment procedures which follow do not apply to such normal staffing actions as:

1) Not filling vacant positions;

2) Deciding against contract renewal in the ordinary course of contract renewals;

3)  Reallocating vacant positions to programmatic areas with high need.

c) These retrenchment procedures are applicable only to a rank identified or permitted under the USM Policy on the Appointment, Rank and Tenure of Faculty(II-1.00) of the USM Bylaws, Policies and Procedures of the Board of Regents.

The USM Retrenchment Policy and these retrenchment procedures are in addition to and not in limitation of other USM and Salisbury University’s policies and procedures concerning faculty appointment, nor are they in limitation of any USM or Salisbury University’s policy on academic program review.

2. Initiation of Retrenchment

The President has the sole authority within Salisbury University, subject to the authority of the Board of Regents, to initiate retrenchment. The President shall initiate retrench­ment when the president determines that retrenchment is necessary, consistent with the USM and Salisbury University’s policy on Appointment, Rank and Tenure. Before determining that a fiscal crisis necessitates retrenchment, the President shall consult with the chancellor and the Board of Regents. The Board may request relevant information from the President and may consider comments from representatives of campus and faculty governance bodies and other interested persons.

The policy of Salisbury University is to make every reasonable effort to avoid retrenchment, even under the extraordinary circumstances of budgetary or program­matic contraction. However, program review is a part of routine institution planning. While such reviews may be motivated in part by broad financial considerations, they normally occur as part of the ongoing management of the institution. Resulting program eliminations provide a basis for faculty terminations without the necessity of showing a lack of appropriations. Where the lack of appropriation is the basis for faculty retrenchment, the retrenchment plan may take into consideration such non-financial factors as institutional mission, long-range educational planning, and may call for program reductions and/or program eliminations. A lack of appropriations exists when, in the President’s judgment, there is a fiscal crisis that threatens or endangers the institution’s ability to carry out its mission as defined in the most recent mission statement approved by the Board of Regents, and the termination of tenured or tenure-track faculty appointments will be substantially less detrimental to the institution’s ability to fulfill its mission than other forms of budgetary curtailments available to the institution.

The university prefers, nevertheless, the following measures to retrenchment of faculty:

  1. retraining of faculty;
  2. reducing the use of part-time and contractual faculty positions;
  3. transferring faculty to other duties (in other academic departments or administrative units);
  4. encouraging early retirements;
  5. leaving vacant positions unfilled;
  6. not renewing tenure-track appointments.

Only when the President believes that such measures are inadequate or inappropriate will the university retrench faculty.

3. Procedures

a) Prior to faculty retrenchment, a Retrenchment Committee shall be formed. 

The committee shall consist of the following:

The committee shall consist of ten voting members: Six ex officio members: the President of the University, the Provost or their designee, the chair of the Faculty Welfare Committee, the chair of the Academic Policies Committee, and the two Faculty representatives to the USM’s Council of University Faculty; three department/school chairs serving three-year terms with one retiring annually, elected by their chair peers from departments/CHHS schools not already represented by Faculty designated above; and a Designated Senator (voting) from a department/CHHS school not already represented above. The President of the University shall be the chair. Should a committee member’s program or department/CHHS school be recommended for retrenchment, the President of the University shall so notify the Membership and Elections Committee who in turn shall remove the Faculty member from the committee and designate a replacement. Members of the Faculty Mediation Committee, Faculty Hearing Committee, and the Retrenchment Appeals Committee may not serve on this committee.

b)  The Retrenchment Committee shall develop a plan for retrenchment considering the following factors in accordance with the mission of the university:

  1. The educational mission of the University
  2. The programmatic mission of the University
  3. Budgetary constraints of the University
  4. The impact of any proposed action of retrenchment on students
  5. The impact of any proposed action on the faculty
  6. Termination of appointment for the purpose of retrenchment should be a last resort.  Every reasonable effort should be made to locate the faculty scheduled for retrenchment elsewhere on the campus.

c) The Retrenchment Committee may investigate and suggest all reasonable alternatives to retrenchment.  If retrenchment must be implemented, the unit of retrenchment shall be the school, department, or curricular concentration.  When making the list of appointments within the retrenchment unit, the only faculty members to be included on the list are those whose appointments are made within the school, department, or curricular concentration in which the retrenchment unit is located.  The list shall not include faculty members assigned to the retrenchment unit, but whose appointments are in another school, department, or curricular concentration. After the approval of these procedures, any new, renamed or reorganized school, department or curricular concentration created within the university shall constitute a separate retrenchment unit.

When the President has requested a plan for retrenchment, the Retrenchment Committee shall produce such a plan.  Should the committee fail to do so, the president shall have the right to appoint a new committee.  The Retrenchment Committee normally shall have at least two (2) months to develop a plan.  Nevertheless, the president retains the authority to establish a shorter time period when the president believes that swifter action is required.

d) The committee shall submit the retrenchment plan to the president for approval at least three (3) months prior to the implementation date, as established by the president.  The president shall report the retrenchment plan to appropriate committees and the institution. All options considered by the Committee, and the expected consequences of each shall be presented with the recommendation of the Committee. The recommendation of the Committee shall include an explanation of its identification of the retrenchment unit recommended for retrenchment.  Consistent with applicable law, deliberations of any committee shall be confidential.

4.  Authority of the President

The President has final authority over any decision or determination under these retrenchment procedures. In addition to the advice of the committees established under retrenchment procedures, the President may seek the advice of any individual, group or office within Salisbury University or outside the institution.  The President may adopt recommendations from any committee identified in the retrenchment procedures, adopt them with modifications, or reject them and make substitutions for them.

If the President does not accept the recommendations of the committee in whole or in part, they should consult with the committee concerning the reasons for this action.

The President shall have the right to adjust any schedule referenced in the retrenchment procedures except for those pertaining to the notice for termination and to the appeal process. An effort will be made to give advance notice of any such adjustment.  Failure to comply with such schedules, however, shall not be grounds for appeal under these retrenchment procedures.

5. Notification of Termination

The President shall give a written notice of termination to each faculty member whose appointment is to be terminated pursuant to these retrenchment procedures.  The termination notice shall include:

  1. notification that the appointment is being terminated pursuant to these retrenchment procedures;
  2. the applicable notice period;
  3. the effective date of termination;
  4. a statement that System Administration shall send, for a period of one year, written notice of faculty openings within the System to the last address that the faculty member has on record with the institution;
  5. notification of the right of the faculty member to appeal the termination of appointment and a copy of these retrenchment procedures;
  6. if applicable, a statement that deviation was made from the order of termination and the circumstances of the deviation.

In all cases of retrenchment, the position of the faculty member concerned shall not be filled by a replacement within a period of three years unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement. A faculty member would have no more than 90 days to accept or reject reinstatement.  If the university, because of retrenchment terminates a faculty member within a retrenchment unit, the university shall not make a new appointment(s) or create new position(s) with equivalent duties and responsibilities in that retrenchment unit, or a successor unit, within a period of three years unless the released faculty member(s) has been offered reinstatement, at the same or higher rank and tenure status and up to 90 days in which to accept or reject reinstatement.

6. Notice Period For Termination

For the purpose of these retrenchment procedures, the applicable termination notice period is determined by the status of the faculty at the time the notice of termination is given.

Non-tenure track faculty, as defined in the USM Policy on Appointment, Rank and Tenure of faculty, shall be given written notice at least 60 days prior to the date of termination of appointment.

Non-tenured, tenure-track faculty shall be given notice of termination not less than one year prior to the date of termination of appointment. 

Full-time instructors or lecturers, with seven or more years of continuous service to the institution beginning July 1, 1984, shall be given written notice of termination of at least one year prior to the date of termination of appointment.

Tenured faculty members shall be given notice as set forth in USM Policy on Appointment, Rank and Tenure of Faculty, Section I.C.9. or corresponding sections of earlier faculty appointment agreements still in effect, as applicable.

Notice of termination shall be effective on the date the notice is mailed by U.S. certified or registered mail, return receipt requested to the last address that the terminated faculty member has on record with Salisbury University.

An institution shall offer within three years to a tenured or tenure-track faculty member whose appointment was terminated pursuant to these retrenchment procedures any new positions with equivalent duties and responsibilities within the retrenchment unit prior to hiring any other person.

7. Order of Termination

a) Retrenchment within a retrenchment unit shall be as follows:

  1. Part-time faculty on non-tenure track temporary contract;
  2. Full-time faculty on non-tenure track temporary contract;
  3. Tenure-track faculty;
  4. Tenured faculty.

Deviations from the order of termination may be made only when the termination of the appointment of the faculty member would significantly impede the ability of the institution or retrenchment unit affected by retrenchment to fulfill its mission and goal or to fulfill commitments under grants and contracts.

The reason and basis for making a decision to deviate from the order of termination shall be adequately documented.

b)   Seniority

The termination of employment of tenured faculty shall be by ascending length of service.  Seniority is based on length of service at the university dating from the respective date of initial appointment in the tenure-track position, not the date tenure was awarded.  Faculty members with equal seniority shall be released in reverse order of obtaining tenure status.  Faculty members of equal seniority and with equal years of tenure status shall be released in ascending order of academic rank.

8. Appeals Process

a.   Retrenchment Appeals Committee

The committee shall have five voting members: five members of the Faculty elected at-large serving three-year terms, no two from the same department/CHHS school, no fewer than three of whom are tenured, with two retiring in each of two years and one the next. Members of the Faculty Mediation Committee, Faculty Hearing Committee, and the Faculty Retrenchment Committee may not serve on this committee. The Membership and Elections Committee shall appoint a temporary replacement for a committee member should a member of their department/CHHS school be appealing retrenchment.   Should an elected faculty member not be the Designated Senator, a non-voting Designated Senator shall also serve on the committee.   The committee shall elect its chair annually.

No Retrenchment Appeals Committee member will participate in a hearing in which the committee member is subject to a conflict of interest.  Conflicts of interest include, but are not limited to, being a member of the same department/CHHS school as the appealing faculty member.  An appealing faculty member shall be entitled to disqualify one committee member, whether elected or appointed, for any reason.  Anytime an elected committee member is removed or fails to serve, the Nominations and Elections Committee shall appoint a replacement member.

The committee shall elect its chair annually. If the faculty decline to elect faculty member(s) in a timely manner, or if the faculty decline to serve, the president shall appoint the required number of committee members to serve on the committee.

The committee shall consider the appeal of any faculty member terminated under a retrenchment plan and shall use for these cases procedures set forth herein.

b)  Filing an Appeal

A faculty member whose appointment is terminated under these retrenchment procedures shall have a right to appeal in accordance only with these procedures.  No other appeal procedures within Salisbury University are applicable.

The faculty member must include all grounds for appeal in the written request for appeal.  The filing of a request for appeal will not alter the effective date of termination of the appointment.

c)  Appeal Schedule

  1. A request for appeal must be filed with both the University President and the President of the Faculty Senate within ten (10) working days[5] after the effective mailing date of the notice of termination. The President will notify the chair of the Retrenchment Appeals Committee of the appeal.
  2. The committee shall inform the faculty member of the date, time and place of the hearing no later than ten (10) working days after the President’s receipt of the request for appeal.  The committee must schedule the hearing to occur within 30-45 calendar days after the President’s receipt of the appeal.
  3. The faculty member may, at the Committee’s discretion, amend the original request for appeal to include or delete grounds for appeal.  Such amendment must be in writing and must be made no later than ten (10) working days before the hearing is scheduled to occur. The faculty member must file the amended appeal with the president no later than ten (10) working days before the hearing is scheduled to occur.
  4. The faculty member must provide to the committee a statement of facts on which the appeal is based and a list of witnesses and documents to be introduced at the hearing no later than five (5) working days prior to the date of the hearing.
  5. The institution must provide the committee a list of witnesses and documents to be introduced at the hearing no later than four (4) working days prior to the date of the hearing.
  6. The committee shall send its recommendation to the president no later than ten (10) working days after the conclusion of the hearing. Written minority opinions may also be sent to the president at the request of the dissenting members.
  7. Within ten (10) working days after receipt of the committee’s recommendation, the President shall issue a final decision and mail a copy to the faculty member by U.S. certified or registered mail, return receipt requested.

d) Grounds for Appeal

The grounds for appeal shall be limited to:

  1. error in the application of the order of termination of appointment;
  2. procedural error;
  3. insufficiency of notice of termination;
  4. whether any deviation from the order of termination was made without reasonable grounds; and
  5. the termination was otherwise unlawful.

e) Conduct of the Hearing

The Institution will be represented by the Office of the Attorney General or its designee.  The Retrenchment Appeals Committee may request separate representation by the Office of the Attorney General. The faculty member may be represented by legal counsel throughout the appeal proceedings at the faculty member’s expense.

The faculty member and the institution may each call and cross examine witnesses and present documentary evidence at the hearing.  Each member of the committee may call and question witnesses and request the presentation of documentary evidence.

The formal rules of evidence and of judicial procedure shall not apply to the appeal hearing; however, the committee may exclude irrelevant or repetitious testimony.

The hearing shall be audio recorded and a copy of the recording shall be made available if requested by the faculty member or the university.

The faculty member’s failure to appear at the hearing shall be deemed a voluntary dismissal of the appeal in the absence of extraordinary circumstances.

Postponement of the hearing may be granted at the discretion of the committee upon the written request of the faculty member or the University.

The appeal committee must make the decision based on the record. Consistent with applicable law, the committee’s deliberations shall be confidential. The committee’s decision will be based on a simple majority vote with a quorum of at least seventy-five percent of the membership present and voting.

The committee shall send its recommendation to the President no later than ten (10) working days after the date of the conclusion of the hearing.  Written minority opinions may also be sent to the president at the request of the dissenting members.

 

 

 

 

Salisbury University Faculty Handbook ©