Faculty Policies

Faculty Policies Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Academic Advising

Academic Advising

The mission of academic advising at Rhodes is to promote student learning. As academic advisers, faculty members are both teachers and mentors to students, assisting students in understanding the nature of a liberal arts education, in assessing their strengths and weaknesses, in formulating their educational and career goals, and in planning a course of action to achieve these goals. Academic advisers are expected to be knowledgeable about the general academic program of the College so that they are able to advise all students. Advisers approve student course schedules, monitor progress towards completion of degree (and major, once declared) requirements, counsel students on academic probation, intervene with students in academic difficulty, and assist in preparing for the declaration of major. In addition, academic advisers may be called on for personal counseling or to make referrals for personal counseling. Increasingly, academic advisers are also expected to provide initial career and vocational counseling.

However, the person who bears ultimate responsibility for meeting all graduation requirements and choosing courses that will meet the student′s goals is the individual student. Therefore, a large part of the work of the faculty adviser is to develop and to cultivate in the student advisee responsibility for academic planning, careful judgment, timely decision making, and personal follow through on plans. The academic adviser′s role is to facilitate the student′s attainment of the goals set by the student; the academic adviser cannot and should not make the most important choices for the student.

The academic advising system has two components: 1) a first-year and sophomore component and 2) a departmental majors component.

Each year the Committee on Academic Advising invites eligible faculty members and administrators to be the advising group for the entering class. This group of advisers continues to serve those students until they formally declare their majors. This must be done prior to the registration period of the spring semester of the sophomore year.

The assignment of majors to faculty members is at the discretion of the departmental chair. Advising within this component of the system continues until the students graduate.

An advising group totaling 14-20 students is considered normal; however, because of large numbers of students interested in certain departments, this norm is occasionally exceeded.

Academic adviser workshops are conducted annually to help make the advising responsibility clear and the system more efficient. The College Catalogue and the adviser′s handbook contain helpful information on the academic program and institutional policy affecting the student′s instructional program.

Advising is the most important part of the service component of a faculty member′s duties, and all faculty are expected to serve as an academic adviser to a group of students. This includes regular advising of first-year students—whether annually or bi-annually—as well as advising of students in a department’s major, minor, and interdisciplinary programs. Any variance from this duty must be reviewed and approved by the academic advising committee. Section VIII in this document indicates the role of effective advising in the overall evaluation of the performance of a member of the Faculty.

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Class Attendance Policy

Class Attendance Policy

Rhodes, as a residential college of the liberal arts and sciences, considers interactive engagement with other students and the professor, in a structured setting, to be one of the essential and central components of the academic program. Students enrolled at the institution make a commitment to participate fully in their education, which includes attending class.

  • Monday-Wednesday-Friday classes meet for a total of 42 times in a semester;
  • Tuesday-Thursday classes meet for a total of 28 times in a semester.

Missing three (3) MWF classes, or two (2) TuTh classes, is equivalent to one week’s work out of the fourteen weeks of the semester; this is a significant amount of time. Absenteeism is not to be taken lightly.

Specific attendance policies are set by individual instructors, who state them in the course syllabus and during the first class session. Faculty should be mindful in setting attendance policies that college-sanctioned activities may require participating students to be off campus and consequently miss class. Faculty are discouraged from penalizing students solely for such absence and should normally, at their discretion, accommodate such a student in, e.g., an alternate date for a test. It is, however, the student’s responsibility in undertaking college-sanctioned activities (e.g., varsity athletics, internships, and off-campus competitions connected with courses) to understand that their participation may come at the cost of absences from other courses or even forfeiting credit on certain assignments when making them up is not feasible.

Students are responsible for knowing the attendance policy in each of their courses, for obtaining and mastering material covered during an absence, and for determining, in consultation with the instructor, whether and under what conditions make-up work will be permitted. It is the student’s responsibility to address the issues related to missing a class whatever the reason for the absence. If, in accordance with the course policies, the instructor determines that excessive absences are jeopardizing a student’s ability to obtain a passing grade in the course, the instructor may make written request to the Office of Academic Affairs that the student be removed from the course with a grade of F. If a student is removed from two or more courses in the same semester for this reason, the student may be asked to withdraw from the College.

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Class Rolls

Class Rolls

Class rolls listing all students who are registered for each course are made available to officers of instruction by the Registrar on the first day of classes of each semester. These rolls are available on Web for Faculty via BannerWeb. These rolls are updated daily during the Drop/Add and Extended Drop periods. These rolls can be of help both to students and the Registrar in cases where registration status is uncertain. No student will be officially added or dropped from a class without completing a drop or add form and filing it with the Registrar’s Office. Any student attending a course whose name is not on the most recent class roll should not be allowed to continue in the course until and unless the appropriate add process is completed and the student’s name has been added to the class roll by the Registrar.

All faculty members are asked to verify the accuracy of all class rolls during the fourth week of each semester. After this time, there should be no further additions or corrections to the class roll. Changes may occur, however, since students may withdraw from a course after this roll is verified. These students will continue to appear on the class roll, however, with a “WP” or “WF” grade designation denoting “withdrawn passing” or “withdrawn failing.”

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Class Schedules

Class Schedules

Each winter, department chairs in consultation with department members generate a schedule of classes to be taught in their department for the next academic year. These course schedules are then submitted to the Registrar and then to the Office of Academic Affairs. The schedule is updated prior to the registration for each semester.

After a semester starts, officers of instruction may vary from the official class schedule with respect to class meeting days and/or times, but such variation must be done with the approval of the department chair and the knowledge of the Registrar.

Classroom assignments are made by the Registrar in consultation with the department chair. Assignment of “smart classrooms,” those with special technical and electronic equipment, is made only upon written request of the Registrar because of the high demand for those rooms. Some departments have priority for certain classrooms (e.g.,natural science courses in Frazier-Jelke, psychology courses on the first floor of Clough Hall). Rooms which appear to be vacant at the beginning of a semester may have been left so purposely to accommodate discussion groups or other arrangements later in the semester. Classroom changes may not be made without the Registrar’s approval.

Faculty members should ensure that classroom activities do not extend beyond the assigned class period. To do so is unfair both to professors and the students who expect to use that classroom or who may have a class in the next class period. Any exceptions such as for learning disabilities or language difficulties should also avoid interference with other classes. Faculty members must confirm documented learning disabilities and approved accommodations with the Coordinator of Disability Services for Students before granting any accommodations.

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Course Syllabi

Course Syllabi

Faculty members must prepare and distribute to their students syllabi for all courses within the first week of the semester. Syllabi vary enormously across disciplines and from individual to individual. These should be documents that faculty prepare very carefully since they serve as the primary resource for adjudicating disputes regarding the course’s policies, expectations, and the responsibilities of both student and instructor. At a minimum a course syllabus must include information on course texts and other required reading materials; course objectives; required assignments; testing policies; grading policies; specific attendance expectations and the consequences for absences; expectations regarding the Honor System; and contact information and office hours of the instructor. Where possible, dates for tests and other assignments should be provided, along with consequences for missed work. It is also advisable to include in the syllabus policies regarding absences due to college-sanctioned activities; procedures for accommodating conflicts with required class meetings outside the regularly scheduled class time (e.g., film viewings, field trips, etc.); accommodating approved disabilities; and statements regarding plagiarism, group work, and other potential violations of student integrity. The syllabus for each course should be archived by the Department as the permanent record required for the College’s accreditation. 

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Department Chairs

Department Chairs

Department chairs are appointed for a three-year term by the Vice President for Academic Affairs, who confers with the President. At the end of the three-year appointment, another three-year term appointment may be made by the Vice President for Academic Affairs. A stipend accompanies the assignment as department chair, adjusted based on size of the department and extent of responsibility for the chair. Occasionally release time from teaching is granted.

Section VII and Section VIII of the "Statement of Policies and Procedures in Regard to Faculty" discuss special concerns that apply to the meeting of responsibilities at the College, including service obligations such as being a department chair.

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Directed Inquiries and Tutorials

Directed Inquiries and Tutorials

Directed Inquiries. The term directed inquiry indicates a type of independent study designed to give more individuality than is provided by regular coursework. A directed inquiry is a project agreed upon by a student and professor; it may be a laboratory experiment, special readings on a given topic, some type of art work, a group of essays, etc. The details of the project are agreed upon by the student and the professor. Directed inquiries may not be used to satisfy general degree requirements.

Credits for a directed inquiry range from one to four. Forty-six hours of work, including outside reading, experiments and conferences, are required for one credit. No more than twelve credits may be earned in any one department. The maximum number of credits for all directed inquiries allowed is twenty-four. Normally a first-year student may not undertake a directed inquiry until after the completion of one semester of regular studies. Special students are generally not eligible for directed inquiries.

Proposals for directed inquiries must be submitted for approval to the chair of the department. Appropriate forms are available online. These forms call for details such as the beginning and ending dates of the project and set forth specific rules governing such things as extensions or other possible considerations. The student should become familiar with this form well in advance of the date intended to submit a proposal so that everything will be in order and approved by the department when submitted. Applications for directed inquiries are to be submitted in time for the department to act and submitted to the Registrar before the date set for the project to begin. Normally a student will not be permitted to take more than one directed inquiry at a time.

In the event that more than two students are interested in a directed inquiry on the same topic, a special topics course may be taught. Such courses must conform to the standard forty-six hours of study per credit.

The Tutorial Plan. The tutorial plan of instruction, like the Honors Program and the Directed Inquiry, has as its chief purposes the individualizing of instruction and the provision of a means whereby students may go beyond the scope of a class course, both in the amount of work done and the kinds of interests pursued. The method is often that of extensive reading under guidance, and conferences with the tutor on the material read, either individually or in a small group.

The content of a tutorial is usually that of a regular catalogue course that is not scheduled to be taught during a particular term. A student may request that the course be taught in the tutorial fashion if a member of the faculty is available and agrees to direct the course. Approval by the faculty member, the chairperson of the department involved, and the Registrar is necessary for the tutorial to be scheduled. At a minimum, forty-six hours of study are required for each credit or a total of 184 hours of study for a four credit course.

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Examinations

Examinations

The Honor Code represents what the students, the faculty, and the administration believe to be the best environment for the pursuit of the College’s educational aims. All tests and examinations are conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Honor Code, and students are asked to indicate on their tests and final examinations that they have abided by the principles contained in the Honor Code. Students “pledge” that they have completed academic work in accordance with these principles, and faculty are expected to ask for this pledge before accepting academic work from students.

Normally every course for which credit is given has a final examination as a component. Final examinations are intended to assess students’ mastery of the subject matter of the course and are normally comprehensive in scope. The Foundations Curriculum Committee expects, in reviewing course proposals prior to approval, that the provisions of the final assessment of student performance are made explicit.

Final examinations are given during the examination week according to the published schedule. A professor may offer optional examination times for an entire class within the examination period, except for a Reading Day. Each member of the class must choose one of the optional times at least one week before the first day of examinations. The feasibility of implementing this option is left to the professor’s discretion.

No examination, including examinations at optional times, may be scheduled on a Reading Day. A student with three examinations in a row (not to include reading days) may petition the Office of Academic Affairs to reschedule no more than two examinations later in the examination period. Other changes because of extenuating circumstances (e.g., illness) also must be approved by the professor and the Office of Academic Affairs.

In some courses the purposes of a final examination are best served by special testing, for example take-home examinations, departmentally administered oral examinations, or special projects and assignments. Whatever the testing method, the important factor is that students are asked to synthesize major concepts, approaches, and facts for the course, and to demonstrate that they can do this on their own. If a professor wishes to give an in-class final examination outside the dates and times of the published examination schedule then this request, along with the approval of the chair of the department, must be made in writing to the Office of Academic Affairs.

A student who has a failing average on course work should be counseled before the final examination about the status of his or her work and about the role the final examination will play in determining the final grade, but the student may not be excluded from taking the final examination. A student who has a passing average on course work and who fails the final examination and as a result has a failing average for the course, may at the discretion of the professor be given an E grade and be permitted to take a reexamination. The highest grade in the course that can be given upon reexamination is D+.

A student who has a passing average on course work and who fails the final examination, but who earns a passing final grade, may be given the appropriate letter grade for the course. Unexcused absence from a final examination automatically results in failure in the course. A student who is prevented by illness or other reason from taking the final examination at the scheduled time must present a written excuse or doctor’s certificate and will be given a grade of X. In some courses, due to the lesser weight given to the final examination in determining the final grade for the course, a professor may not wish to give the grade of F for an unexcused absence or the grade of X in the event of an excused absence. The professor’s policy on this matter should be made clear at the beginning of the course so that there is no misunderstanding and so that it is clear that this situation is an exception to the general College policy.

Final examinations should be available for review by students and may be returned to students at the discretion of the professor. Professors should maintain copies of final examination questions for a period of one year, and if a professor keeps copies of the actual examinations they should be maintained for at least one academic year after the administration of the examination.

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Externally Funded Grants and Contracts

Externally Funded Grants and Contracts

Rhodes encourages faculty to seek out externally funded grants and contracts in support of research interests and in support of the academic program. The statement concerning Academic Freedom and Responsibility, in the "Statement of Policies and Procedures in Regard to Faculty" Section VI of the College Handbook, applies to all research undertaken with sponsorship from external sources.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Consultative Services

Consultative Services

Any formal arrangement for consulting work during the regular academic year must be submitted for review and approval by the Vice President for Academic Affairs in advance of an agreement to provide the services. If this work requires use of College resources and equipment, appropriate reimbursements must be made by the faculty member. This reimbursement includes a charge for the use of the College computing system.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Effort Reporting Policy

Effort Reporting Policy

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards, Final Rule, 2 CFR 200, December 26, 2014 (“Uniform Guidance”), sets forth standards for obtaining consistency and uniformity in organizations expending Federal awards. The Federal government requires an effort report when an individual is compensated by, or has agreed to contribute time to, a federally-sponsored project. All faculty who serve as investigators on sponsored projects are personally responsible to certify the amount of effort that they and their employees spend on sponsored activities.

The purpose of this policy is to define effort reporting, as well as identify those individuals who must comply.

Definitions

"Effort" is defined as the amount of time spent on a particular activity.  It includes the time spent working on a sponsored project in which salary is directly charged or contributed (cost-shared effort).  Individual effort is expressed as a percentage of the total amount of time spent on work-related activities—instruction, research (including externally-funded research), service, and administration--for which Rhodes College compensates an individual.

“Effort Reporting” is the mandated method of certifying to the granting agencies that the effort charged or cost-shared to each award has actually been completed.

Policy

In accordance with Uniform Guidance, Rhodes College requires effort reports for all faculty and staff who work on sponsored projects that are federally-funded, regardless of whether the effort is paid or unpaid. Rhodes uses after-the-fact certification. Faculty and staff submit time and effort reports annually in August to the Finance Office. Non-exempt employees who complete auditable timecards are not subject to effort reporting procedures. Effort reports must comply with Uniform Guidance Standards for Documentation of Personnel Expenses as follows:

  1. Charges to Federal awards for salaries and wages must be based on records that accurately reflect the work performed. These records must:
  • Be supported by a system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that the charges are accurate, allowable, and properly allocated.
  • Be incorporated into the official records of the non-Federal entity.
  • Reasonably reflect the total activity for which the employee is compensated by the non-Federal entityComply with the established accounting policies and practices of the non-Federal entity.
  • Support the distribution of the employee's salary or wages among specific activities or cost objectives.

Note: budget estimates alone do not qualify as support for charges to Federal awards.

  1. Because practices vary as to the activity constituting a full workload, records may reflect categories of activities expressed as a percentage distribution of total activities.
  2. Salaries and wages of employees used in meeting cost sharing or matching requirements on Federal awards must be supported in the same manner as salaries and wages claimed for reimbursement from Federal awards.
  3. It is recognized that teaching, research, service, and administration are often inextricably intermingled in an academic setting. When recording salaries and wages charged to Federal awards, a precise assessment of factors that contribute to costs is therefore not always feasible, nor is it expected.

 

Anonymous (not verified) November 21, 2017

Grant Approval Process

Grant Approval Process

All grant applications initiated by or for the benefit of faculty must, prior to submission, be approved by the Vice President for Academic Affairs and then by the Vice President for Finance and Business Affairs. Grant applications or proposals submitted for approval must be accompanied by a letter of support from the chair of the sponsoring academic or administrative department. Any grant requesting funds for purchase of computer equipment must be reviewed by the Director of Information Technology Services. An External Grant Approval Checklist Form may be obtained from the “Grants” folder located in the Rhodes College Information Volume in the Faculty Items folder. This form will delineate the approval process for the grant initiator and a copy should accompany the grant at each step to expedite the review.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Grant Budgeting and Indirect Cost Recovery

Grant Budgeting and Indirect Cost Recovery

Rhodes’s federally approved rate for indirect costs is 47% of all salaries and wages, including student wages. In drafting grant proposals, departments should budget 47% of salaries and wages, excluding benefits, for indirect costs. Grant proposals with salaries should also include a budget for fringe benefits at the approved rate of 28% for faculty/staff salaries and 8% for student wages.

1. Indirect Cost Policy for Grants not directly related to a specific faculty member’s research (College or Programmatic Grants)

It is the policy of Rhodes College to retain 100 percent of indirect costs to cover research-related overhead expenses incurred by the College

Indirect Cost Account: All of the indirect costs on each externally-funded grant will be deposited in a non-restricted account to be used for professional development by the Office of Academic Affairs. Some examples of how this account can be used would include: seed money for faculty conducting pilot research in anticipation of applying for external support; interim support to faculty and grants staff to cover travel costs associated with compliance workshops, or for matching or institutional cost-sharing obligations.

2. Indirect Cost Policy for Faculty Research Grants

In support of research activities, the College may allocate up to 50% of indirect cost recovery funds received from a successful grant application to the department of the principal investigator, subject to the approval of the Vice President of Academic Affairs. Questions concerning budgeting or indirect cost recovery should be directed to the Finance Office.

The grant or contract must provide sufficient financial provisions to purchase the equipment, supplies, and research assistance necessary for the project. The annual budget of the Office of Academic Affairs may not be used to meet such expenses unless agreed to by the Office of Academic Affairs. Equipment and supplies purchased by funds in the grant or contract are considered property of the College. Subject to negotiation and approval the faculty member and the College may agree to the purchase and/or transfer of research-related equipment should the faculty member not continue at Rhodes.

Faculty members who wish to seek course releases during the academic year of a grant may request funding for no more than one course release per academic year that the grant support covers. Any exception to this limit must be approved by the Office of Academic Affairs before the grant application is submitted. The reimbursement rate for a course release is 10% of salary or $7,500, whichever is higher, plus fringe benefits.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Grant Compensation

Grant Compensation

All compensation from grants, whether as a principal investigator at Rhodes or as a subgrantee with another institution, must be approved in advance by the Vice President of Academic Affairs. The Office of Academic Affairs will establish the level of compensation, release time for any participants (if any), and will have final approval over all research and staffing participation for all grants. The regular and scheduled academic needs of the College will be the primary consideration in determining a faculty member’s participation in a grant activity. During the summer months or while on sabbatical, monthly grant compensation in excess of 1/9 of the faculty member’s annual salary must be approved by the Vice President of Academic Affairs and Vice President for Finance and Business Affairs. All College Human Resources policies and practices for compensation and fringe benefits will be followed. Compensation from grants, regardless of the funding source, will be issued on payroll checks. Federal Income Taxes and F.I.C.A. taxes will be withheld on all grant checks, as required by the Internal Revenue Service.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Grant Reporting and Funds Management

Grant Reporting and Funds Management

Upon award of a grant or a contract, the management and investing of funds and disbursement of payments will be controlled by the Finance Office. It is the responsibility of the principal investigator to make sure that all progress reports, budget reports, fund requests, and budget reports are submitted on a timely basis as defined within the grant. Copies of each report submitted to the granting agency should be forwarded to the Comptroller in the Finance Office, the Dean of the Faculty, and the Director of Foundation and Corporate Relations in the Office of External Programs, if applicable. Annual reports accounting for the disbursement of funds will be reviewed by the Office of Academic Affairs.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Grants Requiring College Matching Funds

Grants Requiring College Matching Funds

All grant proposals which require College matching funds must have the approval of the Dean of the Faculty and the Vice President for Finance and Business Affairs before submission to the granting agency or organization.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Grants Requiring Matching Gifts

Grants Requiring Matching Gifts

When a grant proposal requires matching gifts to be raised by the College, the initiator must send the final draft of the proposal along with a list of prospects for the matching funds to the Vice President for External Programs, the President and the Vice President for Finance and Business Affairs for initial approval, and then to the President for final approval.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Policy on Misconduct in Science

Policy on Misconduct in Science

A Rhodes College faculty member in the course of pursuing research and scholarship supported by funds from beyond the college or in the process of seeking such funding may be the subject of allegations of misconduct. This alleged misconduct may either involve violation of generally accepted standards of conduct of scientific research or violation of specific policies of the granting agency.

In either case the allegations will be investigated by a panel consisting of the chairs of the departments of Biology, Chemistry, Mathematics/Computer Science, Physics, and Psychology. If one of the chairs has a close relationship to the work in question, that person will be expected to recuse himself or herself and the remaining members of the panel will select a faculty replacement from the affected department.

The panel will present its findings to the Vice President of Academic Affairs and will recommend appropriate courses of action. Options include one or more of the following:

  1. No further action;
  2. Administrative action to protect federal funds and to insure that the purposes of the federal financial support are being carried out;
  3. Appropriate disciplinary action toward the faculty member involved;
  4. Notification of the Office of Scientific Integrity of the NIH of any reasonable indication of possible criminal violation or of any circumstances that might affect current or future NIH funding of the subject.

All investigations, whether ending in a finding or wrongdoing or not, will be reported to the Office of Scientific Integrity. This report will thoroughly document the investigative process, the panel’s findings, and the actions taken. In every case these procedures will be carried out in such a way as to protect the reputation of those against whom allegations are brought which are found to be groundless, and of those who may in good faith bring allegations, regardless of their final disposition.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Publicity

Publicity

Copies of all funded grant proposals must also be sent to the Director of Communications.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Teaching Responsibilities and Research

Teaching Responsibilities and Research

During the regular academic year the primary responsibility of a faculty member is teaching and the professional development activities necessary to maintain a timely and informed knowledge of the teaching area. Any released time from teaching responsibilities necessary to pursue research must be agreed to in writing by the Vice President of Academic Affairs in advance of the submission of the grant or contract request. The faculty member, the chair of the department, and the Vice President of Academic Affairs will determine the amount of released time, the duration of the period of released time, and the implications for staffing in the department. A research grant or contract that runs concurrent with the regular academic year must include sufficient financial provisions to provide released time for the researcher. The standard course load for a teacher is five four-credit hour courses; the released time should be provided for by a pro-rata share of the researcher’s current salary plus the standard 34 percent for fringe benefits. These funds will be used to hire a replacement instructor for the duration of the grant or contract. The fringe benefit rate for student stipends is 8 percent. Research requiring the total time of a faculty member will necessitate a leave of absence without pay. This leave of absence must be requested at least six months in advance of the beginning of the research period. The College will hire a replacement instructor for the duration of the leave of absence.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Faculty Governance

Faculty Governance

Faculty governance rests on the assumption that faculty should hold a substantive role in decision-making in several identified areas in the life of the institution.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

I. Core Principles

I. Core Principles

At Rhodes, we wish to ensure that the work of the faculty is completed effectively and in an environment where shared decision-making is valued. To this end, we affirm that:

  1. A shared commitment to the mission of the College informs all decision-making and structures of governance. Governance is informed by maximum collaboration and consultation, respectful and reasoned discussion, trust between administration and faculty, and consistent communication.
  2. Governance occurs in multiple venues, must be flexible to accommodate emerging institutional challenges and opportunities, and is accomplished in an institutional culture that balances stability and innovation.
  • Areas of responsibility and the roles of everyone involved in governance must be unambiguous. 
  •  Structures of governance must be as simple and straightforward as possible and respect the time commitment of all involved.
  • Those who participate in the work of governance, either elected or appointed, agree to be held accountable for their work.
  • All participation by members of the Faculty in the work of governance is reckoned as service to the College. Normally, faculty members in the first three years of their appointment serve the College through academic advising and service to their department. Beginning in the fourth year of appointment, faculty may serve the College in an additional way through membership on standing committees or task forces. 
Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

II. Areas of Faculty Governance

II. Areas of Faculty Governance

Effective Faculty governance depends on a clear delineation of roles and responsibilities. At Rhodes, the work of governance occurs in three areas: 

1. An area where Faculty has clear expertise and decision-making responsibility. This area includes: 

  • The development and maintenance of degree programs including its content, the academic standards to be met for matriculation and graduation, and the ongoing assessment of the quality of the academic program.
  • The standards for tenure and promotion that lead to a recommendation to the administration and the Board of Trustees as to whether a faculty member should be granted tenure and/or promoted and the process by which tenure and promotion decisions can be appealed.
  • The oversight of structures of faculty governance.
  • The oversight of faculty professional interests that lead to recommendations to the administration and Board of Trustees on issues related to the welfare of the Faculty as a whole.
  • The oversight of policy and procedures for faculty development resources including the review of requests and recommendations to the Vice President for Academic Affairs for faculty development grants and sabbaticals.

2. An area where the Faculty share expertise and decision-making responsibility with the administration. This area includes:

  • The standards for evaluating teaching, research and service;
  • The process by which outstanding students compete for post-graduate scholarships;
  • The oversight of academic advising;
  • The process to prepare students for successful membership in a community of scholars through an integral and interconnected first-year experience;
  • The management of information and resources in technology;
  • The policies and procedures to meet admissions and retention goals;
  • The policies and procedures related to international education and study abroad;
  • The process by which new faculty and administration are recruited and hired;
  • Student appeals.

3. An area where the Faculty serve in a consultative role but where primary expertise and decision-making responsibility remain with the administration and/or Board of Trustees. This area includes:

  • Faculty-related personnel policies;
  • Budget;
  • Long range and strategic planning;
  • Athletics;
  • Campus Safety;
  • Special Events and Programming;
  • Liaison with administrative units;
  • Policy Boards;
  • Policies on Environment and Sustainability;
  • Faculty and staff awards.
Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

IIA. Substantive Change Policy and Procedures

IIA. Substantive Change Policy and Procedures

Substantive Change Policy and Procedure 
Rhodes College

Approved by the President and the Executive Staff on 3/6/13.

Rhodes College is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools – Commission on Colleges (SACS COC) and all potential substantive changes – whether proposed by students, faculty, staff, or Board of Trustees – must be discussed with and reviewed by the SACS COC Accreditation Liaison, who is appointed by the Rhodes College President. It is the responsibility of the SACS COC Accreditation Liaison to ensure that potential substantive changes are reported to, and approved by the SACS COC, prior to implementation.

The purpose of this Policy and Procedures document is to comply with the Substantive Change for Accredited Institutions of the Commission on Colleges, Policy Statement, Institutional Obligations, Item #2, that “Member institutions are required to have a policy and procedure to ensure that all substantive changes are reported to the Commission in a timely fashion” (p. 1).

What is a substantive change? 
Substantive change is a significant modification or expansion in the nature and scope of an accredited institution. Under federal regulations, substantive change includes:

  • Any change in the established mission or objectives of the institution
  • Any change in legal status, form of control, or ownership of the institution
  • The addition of courses or programs that represent a significant departure, either in content or method of delivery, from those that were offered when the institution was last evaluated
  • The addition of courses or programs of study at a degree or credential level different from that which is included in the institution’s current accreditation or reaffirmation.
  • A change from clock hours to credit hours
  • A substantial increase in the number of clock or credit hours awarded for successful completion of a program
  • The establishment of an additional location geographically apart from the main campus at which the institution offers at least 50 percent of an educational program.
  • The establishment of a branch campus
  • Closing a program, off-campus site, branch campus or institution
  • Entering into a collaborative academic arrangement that includes only the initiation of a dual degree program or a joint degree program with another institution
  • Acquiring another institution or a program or location of another institution
  • Adding a permanent location at a site where the institution is conducting a teach-out program for a closed institution
  • Entering into a contract by which an entity not eligible for Title IV funding offers 25% or more of one or more of the accredited institution’s programs

What are the procedures for reporting substantive change? 

SACS COC has identified three procedures for addressing the different types of substantive changes. These include:

  • Procedure One – for the review of substantive changes requiring notification and approval prior to implementation,
  • Procedure Two – for the review of substantive changes requiring only notification prior to implementation, and
  • Procedure Three – for closing a program, site, branch campus or institution.

The different types of substantive change, the specific procedure to be used for each, their respective approval notification requirements, and their reporting time lines are included in the document “Substantive Change for Accredited Institutions of the Commission on Colleges - Policy Statement” located on pages 6-9 at http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/081705/Substantive%20change%20policy.pdf.

Procedures for the institutional changes such as mergers, acquiring or adding programs, or changes in governance or legal status can be found in a separate document, “Mergers, Consolidations, Change of Ownership, Acquisitions, and Change of Governance, Control, Form, or Legal Status.” at http://www.sacscoc.org/subchg/policy/Mergers.pdf.

The initiation or revision of programs not offered for academic credit and that are not eligible for federal financial aid does not require reporting: however, such programs are subject to review at the time of reaffirmation.

Identifying and reporting substantive change:
The President is responsible for:

  • Submitting substantive change notification letters and associated documentation to the President of the SACS COC and providing a copy of the letters and documentation to the Accreditation Liaison

or

  • Designating the Accreditation Liaison as his representative to submit substantive change notification letters and associated documentation to the President of the SACS COC

The President and Vice Presidents are responsible for:

  • Informing relevant personnel under their supervision about the existence of the SACS COC Policy on Substantive Change and the need to check with the Accreditation Liaison regarding any and all significant changes in policy to determine if they meet the criteria for a substantive change as defined in the policy
  • Consulting with the College’s SACS COC Accreditation Liaison regarding questions about substantive changes within their divisions
  • Providing sufficient time to notify the SACS COC prior to the implementation of any changes
  • Assisting with the writing of appropriate documentation and notification of substantive changes as needed by the SACS COC

The SACS COC Accreditation Liaison is appointed by the President and is responsible for:

  • Staying up to date with the SACS COC Substantive Change Policy Statement
  • Serving as the contact person and communication liaison between SACS COC staff and the College regarding substantive change matters
  • Meeting with the President and Vice Presidents yearly to review the policy and planned initiatives
  • Working with the appropriate Vice President to develop a plan of action and timeline for any substantive change actions requiring approval from the SACS COC
  • Preparing substantive change prospectus in collaboration with the appropriate administrators and faculty
  • Submitting substantive change notification letters and associated documentation to the President of the SACS COC as requested by the President
  • Maintaining a database of substantive changes, initiatives, action plans and their status

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

III. Structures of Faculty Governance

III. Structures of Faculty Governance

Faculty governance occurs in multiple venues and through multiple structures. Two factors are critical in the decision as to what kind of governance structure should be in place:

  1. In what area (as defined above) is the work of faculty governance occurring?
  2. Is the work being undertaken continuing (recurring annually or cyclically) or is it a time-limited task with a clear completion point? 
  1. Continuing work of the Faculty
    1. In the case of continuing work in the area where faculty has clear expertise and decision-making responsibility, present structures include:
      • The Faculty of the College
      • The Academic Department
      • Standing Committees of the Faculty
        • Committee on Committees
        • Educational Program
        • Foundations Curriculum Committee
        • Appeals
        • Development
        • Governance
        • Professional Interests
        • Standards and Standings
        • Tenure and Promotion
    2. In the case of continuing work in the area where the Faculty share expertise and decision-making responsibility with the administration, present structures include:
      • Administrative-Faculty Committee
      • Advising Committee
      • Information and Technology
      • Post-Graduate Scholarships
    3. In the case of continuing work in areas where the Faculty serve in a consultative role but where the primary expertise and decision-making responsibility remain with the administration and/or Board of Trustees, present structures include:
      • Council of Academic Chairs
      • Standing Administrative Committees
        • Budget
        • Faculty-related employment issues
        • Campus Safety
        • Athletics
        • Special Events and Programming
        • Policy Boards (i.e., Sexual Harassment and Assault)
        • Rhodes Planning Cooperative
      • Faculty Liaison appointments to advise specific administrative units (i.e., Board of Trustees, President’s Office, Student Support Services, Student Affairs, Meeman Center for Life Long Learning, Administrative Affairs, Career Services, Disability Services, etc.) 
  2. Time-limited tasks of the Faculty with a clear completion point
    • Task Forces of the Faculty to address time-limited tasks related to any area above
    • Faculty liaison appointments to advise on specific issues
    • Personnel Search Committees (administration and faculty)
Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

IV. Standing Committees of the Faculty

IV. Standing Committees of the Faculty

Faculty committees derive their powers and responsibilities from the Faculty. Committees in general take routine actions without specific faculty approval but with notice to the Faculty through committee minutes. In all more important matters, committees bring recommendations to the Faculty, and a majority of the voting members of every standing committee of the Faculty will be full-time-teaching faculty members. Ex officio members are without vote unless otherwise indicated. Student members are voting members. The standing committees of the Faculty transact most of the business of the Faculty in their specific areas of concern and responsibility. Each faculty committee has four general tasks within its sphere of responsibility:  

  1. Faculty committees serve to keep the academic program under continuing scrutiny, minimizing weaknesses and encouraging improvements, by functioning as a forum for ideas and by investigating academic policy.
  2. Faculty committees recommend policy to the Faculty by guiding the Faculty through carefully formulated proposals. The Faculty then enacts or rejects that policy.
  3. Once the Faculty has approved a policy, faculty committees see that the policy is properly administered, that exceptions are mediated, and that details are tended to. Committees are empowered and encouraged to delegate administrative authority within their bodies so long as the committee retains supervisory and review authority.
  4. With the exception of the Tenure and Promotion Committee and the Appeals Committee, each Faculty committee must inform the Faculty of its actions, normally through reports made at faculty meetings. The exceptions for the two stated committees are in regard to confidential matters only; those committees must report to the Faculty regarding other (non-confidential) committee actions.

All standing committees function under the general oversight of the Faculty Governance Committee. Except for at-large members, all committee members are nominated and elected by their division within the faculty. Probationary members of the Faculty are not normally expected to serve on standing committees until after their third year of full-time service. Elections for all at-large members of all faculty standing committees and Faculty Trustees are normally held at the April meeting of the Faculty. Faculty Governance Committee divisional representatives will call divisional elections, and they should be held prior to the April meeting of the Faculty.

Each committee has a Chair and a secretary. The full-time faculty members of each faculty committee for the next Academic Year will meet shortly after the May elections to elect a committee Chair and to consider the committee’s agenda for the next year. When necessary and without special permission of the Faculty, committees may meet or otherwise conduct their business during the summer recess, though all such business must be reported and approved as usual at the stated meeting of the Faculty in August or September. During any such summer work, the committee shall consist of continuing and newly-elected committee members; any member unavailable for the summer may be replaced for that time by an available outgoing former member by vote of the committee. In the rare instance where a member of the faculty needs to resign from a standing committee of the faculty (or an equivalent service activity), written notice is to be sent to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and to the Committee on Committees. 

The Chair calls the committee meetings and carries out all other duties appropriate to the position. Each committee selects its own secretary unless a member of the administrative staff has been assigned to the task. The secretary keeps minutes, distributes minutes to the committee members, and works with the Chair in maintaining communication between the committee and the rest of the College.

Student members of the Faculty committees are appointed by the Rhodes Student Government. Appointees are nominated by the Rhodes Student Government Internal Affairs Committee which will, prior to the nominations, solicit applications from the student body at large to identify interested candidates. The slate of nominations must be approved by the Committee on Faculty Governance, with an eye to diverse student representation. Nominations will be voted upon by the Student Senate for final approval. Student representatives will be accountable to the Rhodes Student Government, and shall, after each meeting of their committee, submit a written report of the meeting to the chair of the Internal Affairs Committee within five days of the meeting. The representative may then be requested to attend the next Student Senate meeting to elaborate upon that report if the Internal Affairs Committee deems that to be appropriate.

No faculty member shall serve simultaneously on more than one of the following committees: Appeals, Tenure and Promotion, and Faculty Professional Interest.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

The Academic Advising Committee

The Academic Advising Committee

Membership. Four faculty members (preferably one elected by each of the four curriculum divisions, serving 3-year terms. Two of the faculty members must be tenured, and junior faculty are not eligible to serve as chair); two students (elected by the Student Senate, one first-year or sophomore student and one junior at the time that service on the committee commences, serving two consecutive year-long terms); ex officio: the Associate Dean of Students for Student Academic Support (voting); the Director of New Student Programs (non-voting); the Registrar (non-voting); an additional faculty member who has just completed his/her first year of advising first-year students will be invited by the committee to serve one year on the committee (non-voting).

Duties.

  • Oversee the academic advising program and work to promote an effective advising system
  • Develop and oversee programs and workshops for the ongoing development of advisers and advisees, including:
  • Registration workshops
  • New advisor development
  • Continuing advisor development
  • Work to ensure that students are educated on appropriate advising expectations and their role and responsibility in the adviser-advisee relationship
  • Serve as the resource on academic advising for all members of the community
  • Revise and circulate annually the Advising Handbooks for Faculty and Students
  • Develop and recommend guidelines for academic advisers
  • Provide faculty interface with appropriate student services groups
  • Provide guidance concerning the academic components in Open Rhodes and Welcome Week
  • Review faculty petitions for variance from regular first-year advising

Expected Involvement. Meetings are held at the call of the Chair.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

The Departments and Programs Assessment Committee

The Departments and Programs Assessment Committee

Membership. Five faculty members (one tenured representative elected by each of the four curriculum divisions, plus one tenured at-large member, 3-year terms); the Accreditation Liaison (ex-officio, non-voting).

Duties.

  1. Review the annual reports of departments and programs as related to the educational program every five years and submit a report to the Office of Academic Affairs;
  2. Review with the Vice President for Academic Affairs external reviews of departments and programs on a ten-year cycle;
  3. Work closely with the Administrative Assessment Committee in conducting department and program assessment.

Expected involvement. Committee usually meets weekly.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

The Educational Program Committee

The Educational Program Committee

Membership. Five faculty members (one elected by each curriculum division, plus one elected at-large, 3-year terms); one student (member of the junior and/or senior classes, elected annually by the Student Senate); ex officio (non-voting): designated representative of the Office of Academic Affairs and Registrar.

Expected Involvement: Biweekly meetings are scheduled throughout the academic year. Ad hoc subcommittees may be established as needed.

Duties.

  • Recommend to the Faculty general academic policies.
  • Review and approve significant changes to requirements for existing educational programs and degrees, including majors, minors, Maymesters and other off-site programming, and master’s degrees.
  • Make recommendations to the Faculty about the creation of new educational programs and degrees, including majors, minors, Maymesters and other off-site programming, and master’s degrees.
  • Review and approve student proposals for self-designed interdisciplinary majors.
  • Review Buckman International Curriculum Grants and make recommendations about these grants to the Buckman Center for International Education.
  • Report to the Office of Academic Affairs each year about one or more aspects of the educational program beyond the foundations curriculum
    • The committee will consult with the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the council of chairs to determine which aspects of the curriculum it will undertake to review each year
    • Aspects of the educational program to be examined include, but are not limited to:
      • writing instruction
      • oral communication instruction
      • internship programs
      • senior seminars
      • preparing students for graduate and professional study
      • interdisciplinary study
      • study abroad
      • co-curricular and fellowship activities
      • These reviews will be based on information gathered from department and program chairs, from the Registrar’s Office, from the Office of Institutional Research, and from other offices of the College (e.g., career counseling, study abroad) as needed
      • Reviews will include:
        • a descriptive report of how the departments and programs vary in their implementation of these aspects of the curriculum;
        • an assessment of our overall effectiveness in meeting learning outcomes in these areas; and
        • a set of recommendations for continued progress in these areas
        • Oversee the Hill Presidential Initiative Grants.
          • Establish curricular priorities for proposals, based on the assessment work of this committee (described above) and on consultations with the Foundations Curriculum Committee
          • Review applications
          • Recommend to the Office of Academic Affairs grant awards
        • Review Buckman International Curriculum Grants and make recommendations about these grants to the Buckman Center for International Education.
Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

The Faculty Committee on Admission and Enrollment

The Faculty Committee on Admission and Enrollment

Membership.  Four faculty members (one elected by each of the four academic divisions, 3-year terms); ex-officio (non-voting, except in case of a tie): Associate Dean of Admission or other senior Admission officer, as appointed by the Dean of Admission. One member of the committee will serve as the Admission Faculty Representative to the departmental liaisons.

Duties.

  • Recommend to the faculty changes to academic policies for admission to the College.

  • Advise the Dean of Admission about academic policies and standards for admission set by the Faculty, as indicated by the College Handbook.*

  • Review and report to the faculty current admission and financial aid policy and trends as well as student retention rates.

  • Advise and assist the Dean of Admission in coordinating faculty engagement in student recruitment.

Expected Involvement. Meetings are held at the call of the Chair.

*The College Bylaws delegate to the Faculty, through the regular channels described in Article VIII, the responsibility to admit students.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

The Faculty Committee on Appeals

The Faculty Committee on Appeals

Membership. Five faculty members (one tenured representative elected by each of the four curriculum divisions, plus one tenured at-large member, 3-year terms). An alternate will be appointed by the Faculty Governance Committee in consultation with the chair of the appeals committee when a principal member is unavailable or must abstain for personal reasons or potential conflict of interest. The committee may hear Honor Council appeals with a quorum of 4 people at the discretion of the committee chair. Service on this committee precludes the holding of a seat on the Faculty Professional Interest Committee.

Duties.

  • Hear appeals of faculty fourth-year review, tenure and promotion decisions and report their actions and conclusions to the President;
  • Hear appeals of dismissal for cause cases and report their actions and conclusions to the President;
  • Hear appeals of student Honor Council decisions and report their actions and conclusions to the parties designated in Article IV. Section 5 of the Honor Council Constitution (and to the Faculty, while preserving confidentiality).

Expected Involvement. Meetings are held at the call of the Chair.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

The Faculty Committee on Committees

The Faculty Committee on Committees

Membership. Three tenured faculty members to be recommended by the Faculty Governance Committee, with open nominations accepted from the floor of the faculty, 3-year terms, non-repeatable consecutively. No two members shall be from the same division.  
 
Duties.

  1. Conduct both divisional and faculty-at-large elections of committee members to the various standing committees of the faculty and report results to the Office of Academic Affairs, the Faculty Governance Committee, and the faulty-at-large.
  2. Nominate personnel for standing faculty committees, with open nominations accepted from the floor.
  3. Nominate the presiding officer, the faculty secretary, and the faculty parliamentarian, with open nominations accepted from the floor.
  4. Approve a slate of student nominees for standing faculty committees, as submitted by the Rhodes Student Government.
  5. Maintain a rotational system for membership on standing faculty committees.

Expected Involvement. Meetings are held at the call of the Chair.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

The Faculty Committee on Diversity and Equity

The Faculty Committee on Diversity and Equity

Membership:

5 faculty members, all elected at large. At least 2 must hold tenure, and no more than 2 may represent any academic division. One student member, ex officio (non-voting); a representative of the Office of Academic Affairs, ex-officio (non-voting). When bringing nominees to the faculty for this committee, the Committee on Committees will seek to build a demographically, ideologically, and intellectually diverse committee, representing the broad range of experience and viewpoint found among the faculty.

Duties:

  • Formulate and recommend to the faculty policies and strategies for promoting a diverse and equitable campus environment for all students and faculty. 
  • Assist in the implementation of such policies and strategies, the assessment of their impact.
  • Advise the Office of Academic Affairs on issues of diversity and equity.
  • Liaise with the other faculty committees and with relevant offices of the College on issues of diversity and equity.
  • Consult with the Title IX Officer on the College’s compliance with Title IX.
  • Create ad hoc groups for specific projects related to the work of the committee.
admin June 01, 2017

The Faculty Committee on Information and Technology

The Faculty Committee on Information and Technology

Membership. Four faculty members (each one selected by the Information Services division based on their frequency of use of divisional services) and one student member (selected by RSG), chaired by the CIO.

Duties.

  • Advise the CIO on matters affecting the welfare of the Faculty and students as a whole and specifically on policies relating to technology and information services; and
  • Propose campus-wide meetings on issues and items requiring campus-wide input and communication.

Expected Involvement. Meetings are held at members′ request but not more than monthly. 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

The Faculty Committee on Post-Graduate Scholarship

The Faculty Committee on Post-Graduate Scholarship

Membership. Membership is flexible but normally includes four faculty members (divisional representation preferred), one administrator and the Dean of Academic Affairs for International Education. The Committee works in conjunction with other faculty coordinators who serve as liaisons to particular fellowship foundations and as campus coordinators.  

Duties:

  • Coordinate informational meetings, receptions and other pertinent events with the objective of cultivating and recruiting students for post-graduate scholarships;
  • Manage and assist the network of campus coordinators;
  • Manage and update the post-graduate scholarship calendar and website;
  • Along with campus coordinators, advise potential applicants throughout all stages of the application process; provide guidance on the preparation of students’ dossiers; when required, conduct the internal competition and selection process; prepare and submit institutional endorsements to foundations;
  • Assist students in preparing for the interview process;
  • Serve as occasional guest lecturers for Interdepartmental Studies 331

Expected Involvement. Regular meetings are held at the call of the Chair. Much of the month of October is dedicated to reviewing applications, serving in mock interviews, preparing endorsement letters and submitting candidates’ dossiers. Members are also expected to

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

The Faculty Committee on Standards and Standings

The Faculty Committee on Standards and Standings

Membership. Five faculty members (one elected by each of the four curriculum divisions, plus one elected at-large, 3-year terms; two should be tenured); ex officio Associate Dean of Students for Student Academic Support (voting); Director of Academic and Learning Resources; Registrar.

Duties.

  • Act on individual requests for substitutions for or waivers of degree requirements;
  • Act on individual requests for variation from academic policy;
  • Evaluate college-level equivalence requests;
  • Recommend policies and guidelines for academic probation, suspension, or leave of absence;
  • Consider cases of academic probation, suspension, or leave or absence;
  • Exercise oversight of and recommend changes in admissions standards and policy;
  • Act on applications for readmission;
  • Recommend requirements for eligibility for a degree;
  • Recommend guidelines for determining “reasonable progress towards a degree,” including policy on course sequencing, course load limits, and definition of “acceptable academic work”;
  • Recommend policies regarding grades, their meaning, and their use in determining grade point averages;
  • Recommend policies for degrees with academic achievement and with honors.
  • Serve as the Institutional Review Panel in cases involving appeals of awards of the Tennessee Hope Scholarships

Expected Involvement. Meetings are called by the Chair as needed. Ad Hoc subcommittees may be established as needed. 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

The Faculty Committee on Technology and Academic Space

The Faculty Committee on Technology and Academic Space

Membership:

Five faculty members (one from each division, one at-large, at least two tenured); Associate Provost, ex-officio (non-voting); Chief Information Officer, ex-officio (non-voting); Director of Physical Plant, ex-officio (non-voting); Director of Library, ex-officio (non-voting).

Charge:

  • Address immediate concerns and current problems with academic space and technology for instructional, scholarly, and creative activities.
  • Facilitate long-term planning of technology needs and services for classrooms, lecture halls, and performance spaces.
  • Support faculty technology needs.
  • Review policies and practices regarding the use of technology in instructional, scholarly, and creative spaces.
  • Advise and guide the library regarding instructional, scholarly, and creative resources.
  • Liaise with Information Services, Student Life, and other offices as relevant.
admin August 19, 2015

The Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion

The Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion

Membership. Five faculty members (one tenured faculty member elected by each of the four curriculum divisions and one tenured faculty member elected at-large, with a preference for faculty at the rank of professor, 3-year terms).

Duties.

  • Receive recommendations from departments for tenure and promotion;
  • Assess departmental recommendations and all other information used in the evaluation of candidates for tenure or promotion;
  • Recommend action on each candidate to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and to the President;
  • Publish specific procedures and have changes in these procedures affirmed by the Faculty.

Expected Involvement. Meetings are held at the call of the Chair. 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

The Faculty Development Committee

The Faculty Development Committee

Membership. Five faculty members (one elected by each of the four curriculum divisions plus one elected at-large, 3-year terms); ex officio: a representative of the Office of Academic Affairs.

Duties:

  • Oversee the Faculty development programs of the College and review specific proposals for sabbaticals and summer grants;
  • Receive and review reports from faculty members who have had sabbaticals or grants;
  • Advise the Office of Academic Affairs concerning applications for and administration of Faculty Development Endowment Grants, and other grants in support of faculty development.

Expected Involvement. Meetings are scheduled weekly for about six months of the academic year. Each member of the committee will have a supervisory role related to some segment of the committee’s work. 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

The Faculty Governance Committee

The Faculty Governance Committee

Membership. Five tenured faculty members (one elected by each of the four curriculum divisions, one elected at large, 3-year terms); ex officio: Presiding Officer of the Faculty (non-voting except in case of a tie), Vice President for Academic Affairs.

Duties – In relation to the Faculty as a whole:

  • Oversee the implementation of faculty actions;
  • Provide general oversight of all standing committees of the faculty;
  • Coordinate the process for faculty consideration and input when broad consultation is requested by the Vice President for Academic Affairs or the President;
  • Recommend procedures for administration and collection of student evaluations of instruction;
  • Make recommendations to the Faculty concerning the establishment or elimination of standing committees;
  • Supervise agenda for faculty meetings, procedures in faculty meetings, and the calling of special faculty meetings;

Duties – In relation to the Office of Academic Affairs​:

  • Advise the Vice President for Academic Affairs on any major change in academic direction or program;
  • Advise the Vice President for Academic Affairs on diversity and campus climate matters;
  • Advise the Vice President for Academic Affairs on the addition or deletion of any department of instruction;
  • Advise the Vice President for Academic Affairs on the overall academic budget;
  • Advise the Vice President for Academic Affairs on the assignment, reassignment, addition and deletion of faculty positions;
  • Recommend procedures for the administration and collection of student evaluations of instruction.

Expected Involvement. Meetings are scheduled at least biweekly during the academic year.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

The Faculty Professional Interests Committee

The Faculty Professional Interests Committee

Membership. Five faculty members (one elected by each of the four curriculum divisions plus one elected at-large, 3-year terms, non-successive).

Duties.

  • Advise the Faculty, on matters affecting the welfare of the Faculty as a whole and specifically on policies relating to conditions of employment, such as faculty remuneration, evaluation, tenure, promotion, and retirement;
  • Serve as a watchdog committee for the maintenance of academic freedom, high standards of professional faculty conduct, and high standards of the academic program.
  • Monitor the Bias Education Reporting System as it relates to faculty and faculty professional interests.
  • Each year choose one member of the committee, preferably with tenure, to serve as a representative on the Campus Climate Team.

Expected Involvement. Meetings are held at the call of the Chair.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

The Foundations Curriculum Committee

The Foundations Curriculum Committee

 

Membership. Eight faculty members (one elected by each curriculum division, plus four elected at-large with no more than two being from any division, 3-year terms); one student (member of the junior or senior class, elected annually by the Student Senate; a representative of the Office of Academic Affairs, ex officio (non-voting): ex officio (non-voting), Registrar.

Duties.

  • Review and approve all new Foundations proposals;
  • Review and re-approve, on a regular cycle, all existing Foundations experiences;
  • Recommend to the Faculty policies regarding the Foundations Curriculum;
  • Assess the Foundations curriculum.

Expected Involvement. Weekly or biweekly meetings are scheduled as necessary throughout the academic year. Ad hoc subcommittees may be established and may meet as needed.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Faculty Illness - College Handbook

Faculty Illness - College Handbook

For the Faculty Illness Policy, please refer to Benefits-Leave, Faculty Illness.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015
1206

Faculty Marshals

Faculty Marshals

In 1950, the office of Faculty Marshal was first included among the Officers of the Faculty. Prior to this time, a faculty committee, Public Functions, must have held the responsibilities subsequently given to the Faculty Marshals. Professor John Henry Davis became chair of that committee in 1944 (having been a committee member prior to this time) and apparently served until the change in 1950. In 1950, both Professor Davis and Professor Joe Embry (a member of the committee) became the first Faculty Marshals, and the committee was apparently disbanded. The following members of the Faculty have served as Faculty Marshals in the intervening fifty-one years.

  • John Henry Davis (1950-1969)
  • Joe Embry (1950-1962)
  • Jack Russell (1957-1978)
  • Charles Biggers (1962-1964)
  • Emmett Anderson (1964-1982)
  • Robert Amy (1968-1985)
  • David Jeter (1978-present)
  • Allan Barnhardt (1982-1998)
  • Donald Tucker (1985-1998)
  • Diane Clark (1994-2006)
  • Robert Entzminger (1998-2001)
  • Bette Ackerman (1999-2001)
  • Anita Davis (2001-present)
  • Mark Muesse (2001-present)
  • Susan Kus (2006-present)

Appointment of New Faculty Marshals. At the present time, there are four Faculty Marshals. When a position comes open among the Faculty Marshals, the remaining Marshals make a recommendation to the Vice President for Academic Affairs for a replacement. The Vice President for Academic Affairs appoints any new Marshals.

Eligibility. Eligibility for appointment obtains to any tenured or tenure-track member of the faculty. Matters of gender parity and divisional representation are appropriate considerations in selecting Marshals. Length of distinguished service to the College and leadership in the work of the Faculty should also be considered.

Term of Service. The term of service is undefined since the Marshals serve at the pleasure of the Vice President for Academic Affairs or until retirement.

Duties.

  • Serve on the Commencement Committee.
  • Organize and lead the processions at the Opening Convocation, the Awards Convocation, Baccalaureate, Commencement, and any other formal academic occasions.
  • Supervise the arrangement of both the platform seating and the student seating sections at Baccalaureate and Commencement.
  • Usher candidates onto the platform for the conferring of degrees at Commencement.
  • Hood graduates prior to their leaving the platform at Commencement.
  • Be of assistance to the President and others in the presentation of awards at Commencement.

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Grade Queries

Grade Queries

There is no more fundamental relationship in an academic program than that of the instructor and student. The Faculty and its academic officers work to support and to sustain a meaningful and productive instructor-student relationship to secure the educational aims of the College and of the members of its Faculty. Clearly the relationship is not one between equals, and this is most clearly evident when the instructor must assign a grade for the work required of, or expected of, a student.

General Provisions: On occasion a student may believe that a grade assigned is incorrect. Indeed it is possible that a mistake can be made in reporting a grade. The student has the right to initiate a discussion with the instructor to determine that the grade given is in fact correct. If a mistake has been made, the instructor changes the grade and, if it is necessary, requests the Office of Academic Affairs, to change a grade that has been officially entered on a student’s final grade report. In the event that, after consulting with the instructor, the student is not satisfied that a grade has been assigned fairly, the student may write an explanation of why he or she believes the grade assigned is not justified. The student gives this statement to the instructor who may decide that the explanation warrants a reconsideration of the grade assigned. If the instructor decides not to change the assigned grade and discussion with the student does not result in the student’s agreement with this decision, the instructor will ask the department chair to review the procedures for determining grades in the course, the student’s request, and the instructor’s response to it. The faculty member provides a written statement to the department chair about why the original grade is valid.

Should the chair of the department determine that no lapse in procedure has occurred and that full attention has been given to the explanation by the instructor, the matter is closed. The chair of the department communicates this to the student and the instructor.

Should the chair of the department determine that the procedure was not properly followed or that additional attention to the explanation is warranted, the chair discusses the situation with the instructor. The chair may also obtain additional evaluations of the student’s work that promises a constructive response to instructor and the student. These evaluations will be requested from colleagues within the Faculty whose knowledge and expertise are appropriate to a review of the student’s work. Having completed this additional evaluation, the chair’s determination about the grade closes the matter. The chair of the department communicates this to the student and the instructor.
 
Special provisions:

  • Time-limits: If the grade on a particular piece of work during a semester is questioned, the appeal for reconsideration must be made within four weeks of the receipt of the grade. The period of time during which appeals of final grades can be made expires at the end of the fourth week of the semester following the posting of the grade.
  • Substitutes for the department chair: In the event that appeals for reconsideration of grades involves grades assigned by a chair of a department, then the procedure outlined here will be conducted by the senior member of the department, or the next senior member of the department in the event that the chair is the senior member.
  • Claims of discrimination: The provisions outlined above are meant to apply to situations in which appeals for reconsideration of grades are made by students. There can be circumstances in which a student’s complaint involves a belief that he or she has been discriminated against because of the practices in managing a course. The Vice President for Academic Affairs is the administrative officer to receive any such complaint. It may be that the Vice President for Academic Affairs will ask that the general provisions above be followed in an investigation of possible discrimination.

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Grades

Grades

Reports of students’ grades are made to the Registrar at the mid-semester and at the end of each semester. All grades are submitted electronically via Web for Faculty on BannerWeb. In official recording of academic work, the following symbols are employed:

  • A, excellent;
  • B, good;
  • C, satisfactory;
  • D, passing;
  • F, failing;
  • P, pass;
  • E, reexamination;
  • X, incomplete;
  • IP, honors work in progress;
  • NG, grade not submitted by professor;
  • WP, withdrew passing;
  • WF, withdrew failing.

E and X grades are conditional and are removed during the following semester. The faculty member indicates on the course withdrawal form if the student who withdraws from a course is to receive a WP or WF. WP and WF are not computed in the student’s grade point average. A, B, C, and D can be employed with minus notations; B, C, and D may have the plus notation, but not the grade of A.

At the mid-semester reporting period, the S grade may be used to denote satisfactory work. The S grade is not recommended for first-year students, however. It is important for first-year students to have a clear declaration of their standing in classes at the mid-semester point. This is achieved by recording the grade that reflects this standing. In addition to A, B, C, D, and S, the grade of D and F may be subscripted at the mid-semester point with the following numbers as indicated:

  • 1, poor or failing work due to excessive absences;
  • 2, poor or failing work due to class work;
  • 3, poor or failing work due to a combination of both absences and class work.

Any student who has received a grade of D-, D, or D+ in a course may repeat the course for a higher grade. No additional hours credit may be earned when repeating a course for a higher grade. Any student who has failed a course may repeat the course for credit. When calculating a student’s overall grade point average, the hours attempted and the grade points earned for each attempt of the course are included. However, only one failure of a course will be calculated in the grade point average.

Students may enroll in a class on a pass/fail basis for one course per semester, or two courses per year. Permission of the professor is required and must be obtained during the first two weeks of the class in each semester. If there are special conditions to be met for the pass grade to be earned, e.g., an average higher than a D- as defined on the syllabus, the professor and student should have a written agreement as to those conditions. No more than six courses taken pass/fail are permitted to count towards graduation. The pass/fail option may not be used in courses taken to satisfy general degree requirements or courses taken to satisfy major requirements including cognate courses.

Credit hours with a grade of pass are not included in the determination of the grade point average although those hours with a grade of fail are included. A student who has a passing average on course work and who fails the final examination and, as a result has a failing average for the course, may, at the discretion of the professor, be permitted to take a reexamination. An E grade is given in this case and a special notation must be made with the Registrar by the professor. Students with E grades must notify the Registrar of their intention to take reexaminations at least one week in advance of the scheduled time and must pay the required fee. If the student passes the reexamination, a term grade of D-, D, or D+ will be earned, unless the course was taken pass/fail, in which case the grade of P will be recorded. Seniors in the final term of attendance are eligible for reexamination without delay at the discretion of the faculty member if they fail a final examination.

The grade of X (incomplete) will be given to the student who is unable to complete course work, including the final examination, because of illness or other emergency. Upon completion of the unfinished work, the student will receive whatever final grade is earned.

All unfinished work must be completed and all conditional grades must be removed by the professor submitting a final grade to the Registrar’s Office no later than the end of the fourth week of classes of the following term. After the removal of an X or E grade by the professor, the student must clear the record with the Registrar’s Office and Bursar’s Office by the end of the sixth week of classes of the following term. If illness or other extraordinary circumstances prevent this, then a petition requesting an extension must be submitted for the approval by the Standards and Standing Committee. Conditional grades not removed by the deadline will become grades of F.

Reports of students’ grades are available online on the Rhodes website at the end of each semester. Students are responsible for keeping other family members correctly and currently informed of their academic standing and progress. Mid-semester deficiency reports are mailed to those students who have a grade of D+ or below. Complete mid-semester reports are also available online to the students and their faculty advisors.

Revised January 26, 2014
In effect April 26, 2004.
Dean of the Faculty and Vice President for Academic Affairs.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

New Courses

New Courses

Faculty members are encouraged to develop new courses. Faculty members desiring to submit such courses should first discuss the matter within their departments and secure departmental approval. Course approval forms are available online.

Proposals of new Foundations courses are evaluated by the Foundations Curriculum Committee which ultimately makes a recommendation to the Faculty for its action. Forms for submission are available from the Registrar. All other courses require approval by the department.

The course category, “099 – Selected Topics,” offers departments and individual professors an appropriate avenue for experimentation in both substance and method before offering a new course among the regular course listings. “099” courses are normally open to all students. Prerequisites and other limitations may be set by the professor, who may also determine the degree of informality, contact hours, and other components of the course. Courses numbered “099” do not routinely carry credit value in satisfying general or major degree requirements.

It is expected that existing courses will be modified continuously to reflect current materials, established pedagogical practices, and modified expectations for student performance. Such changes do not need approval by the Faculty. However, substantial modifications in the objectives, content, and method of instruction in a Foundations course should be reviewed by the department and submitted for review by the Foundations Curriculum Committee. Such modifications are tantamount to designing a new course.

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Office Assignments

Office Assignments

Faculty offices are assigned by the Office of Academic Affairs. Requests for changes in office assignments may be made in the spring to the Office of Academic Affairs. Arrangements are made in late spring and early summer so that any changes in faculty offices can be effected over the summer.

Faculty members may secure keys for offices and for the outside door of their office building from the Administrative Services Office. Faculty who are not returning for the next academic year are expected to vacate their offices by June 30. If any faculty member wishes to remain beyond that time, he or she must submit a request for an extension to the Vice President for Academic Affairs who will determine whether space is available or not.

Faculty offices are furnished with a desk, desk chair, shelving for books, a filing cabinet, and side chair. Office equipment may be augmented by purchases supported by departmental funds, or by appeal to the Vice President for Academic Affairs for special consideration.

The College provides a desk-top computer in each faculty office connected to the College information services network. Servicing and replacement of this computer is provided by the College. The College provides a standard computer for each faculty office to run campus standard software applications. The standard configuration for hardware and software is posted on the ITS website. ITS normally replaces these computers on a three-year cycle. ITS provides all support services for standard hardware and software installations only. A member of the Faculty who is not reappointed for the next academic year or whose appointment status involves a terminal year for the next academic year may no longer have access to ITS services or ITS-maintained services, including but not limited to email, account privileges on the network or an office computer.

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Photocopying for Academic Use

Photocopying for Academic Use

Links to Online Copyright Guides [E-Books licensed for Rhodes College access from NetLibrary]

  • Guidelines For Educational Use Of Copyrighted Materials
  • Pullman, Wash. : Washington State University Press, 1997.
  • The Copyright Book
  • by Strong, William S.
  • Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press, 1999.
  • Getting Permission by Stim, Richard.
  • Berkeley, Calif.: Nolo, 2000.
  • The Copyright Primer For Librarians And Educators by Bruwelheide, Janis H.
  • Chicago : Washington, DC : ALA Editions of the American Library Association, 1995.
  • Copyright and Fair Use – Stanford University Website

Single Copying for Teachers. A single copy may be made of any of the following by or for a teacher at his or her individual request for his or her scholarly research or use in teaching or preparation to teach a class:

  • A chapter from a book
  • An article from a periodical or newspaper
  • A short story, short essay or short poem (whether or not from a collective work)
  • A chart, graph, diagram, drawing, cartoon or picture from a book, periodical, or newspaper

Multiple Copies for Classroom Use. Multiple copies (not to exceed in any event more than one copy per pupil in a course) may be made by the teacher giving the course for classroom use or discussion provided that:

  • The copying meets the tests of brevity and spontaneity as defined below
  • Meets the cumulative effect test as defined below
  • Each copy includes a notice of copy

Definitions:
Brevity:

  1. Poetry: (a) A complete poem if less than 250 words and if printed on not more than two pages, (b) From a longer poem, an excerpt of not more than 250 words.
  2. Prose: (a) Either a complete article, story, or essay of less than 2,500 words, (b) an excerpt from any prose work of not more than 1,000 words or 10% of the work whichever is less, but in any event a minimum of 500 words. (Each of the numerical limits stated above may be expanded to permit the completion of an unfinished line of a poem or of an unfinished prose paragraph.)
  3. Illustration: (a) One chart, graph, diagram, drawing, cartoon or picture per book, or per periodical issue.
  4. Special works: (a) Certain works in poetry, prose, or in “poetic prose” which often combine language with illustrations and which are intended sometimes for children and at other times for a more general audience fall short of 2,500 words in their entirety. Paragraph 2 above notwithstanding, such “special works” may not be reproduced in their entirety. An excerpt comprising not more than two of the published pages of such special work and containing not more than 10% of the words found in the text thereof may be reproduced.

Spontaneity:

  1. The copying is at the instance and inspiration of the individual teacher.
  2. The inspiration and decision to use the work and the moment of its use for maximum teaching effectiveness are so close in time that it would be unreasonable to expect a timely reply to a request for permission.

Cumulative Effect:

  1. The copying of the material is for only one course in the school in which the copies are made.
  2. Not more than one short poem, article, story, essay, or two excerpts may be copied from the same author, nor more than three from the same collective work or periodical volume during one class term.
  3. There shall not be more than nine instances of such multiple copying for one course during one class term. (The limitations stated in 2 and 3 above shall not apply to current news periodicals and newspapers and current news sections of other periodicals.)

Prohibitions. Notwithstanding any of the above, the following shall be prohibited:

  1. Copying shall not be used to create or to replace or substitute for anthologies, compilations, or collective works. Such replacement or substitution may occur whether copies of various works or excerpts there from are accumulated or are reproduced and used separately.
  2. There shall be no copying of or from works intended to be “consumable” in the course of study or of teaching. These include workbooks, exercises, standardized tests, test booklets and answer sheets, and like consumable material.
  3. Copying shall not: (a) substitute for the purchase of books, publisher’s reprints or periodicals, (b) be directed by higher authority, (c) be repeated with respect to the same item by the same teacher from term to term.
  4. No charge shall be made to the student beyond the actual cost of the photocopying.

Permission for Use. When a proposed use of photocopied material requires a faculty member to request permission, communication of complete and accurate information to the copyright owner will facilitate the request. The Association of American Publishers suggests that the following information be included to expedite the process.

  • Title, author and/or editor, and edition of materials to be duplicated.
  • Exact material to be used, giving amount, page numbers, chapters and, if possible, a photocopy of the material.
  • Numbers of copies to be made.
  • Use to be made of duplicated materials.
  • Form of distribution (classroom, newsletter, etc.).
  • Whether or not the material is to be sold.
  • Type of reprint (photocopy, offset, typeset).

The request should be sent, together with a self-addressed return envelope, to the permissions department of the publisher in question. For purposes of proof, and to define the scope of the permission, it is important that the permission be in writing.

The process of considering permission requests requires time for the publisher to check the status and ownership of rights and related matters, and to evaluate the request. It is advisable, therefore, to allow sufficient lead time. In some instances the publisher may assess a fee for permission, which may be passed on to students who receive copies of the photocopied material. 

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Professional Support Funds

Professional Support Funds

Professional support funds provided by the Chief Academic Officer to funded Chairs and to full-time, continuing, members of the Faculty are meant to be discretionary funds, supporting the scholarship of the faculty member.

The following guidelines describe the approved uses of and accounting for these funds.

  1. The funds are expected to be expended within the time frame established when awarded. Any remaining funds must be used within two additional calendar years.  Reports (detailing how funds were expended and describing the work achieved) must be submitted to the Office of Academic Affairs by 1 October following the year during which the funds were made available.
  2. Funds may not be taken as stipend or compensation, nor may they be used for personal expenses.
  3. Funds may be used for materials – e.g. books, journal subscriptions, professional memberships, equipment in support of scholarship – and for services – e.g. student assistants, consultants. Materials and services should be in direct support of research or creative activity projects of the faculty member. The employment of student assistants should be administered through the Human Resources Department of the College; provisions must be made to cover the necessary social security and withholding deductions.
  4. Funds awarded will be used for professional travel in support of relevant research and creative activity. Examples of such needs include travel to professional conferences; travel to libraries, archives, laboratories, or performances (for purposes of information collection and study); and travel for purposes of professional collaboration or conducting interviews. Expenses to be covered may include reimbursement for transportation costs, registration and admission fees, and lodging costs.
  5. Professional support funds may be used to purchase computers and peripheral devices subject to the following criteria: 
    • Proposed purchases must be reviewed with the Director for Information Technology Services to determine that the equipment will perform adequately in its desired function.
    • Proposed purchases for computers and peripheral devices must conform to institutional standards for such equipment, posted on the Information Technology Services web site. Appeals for nonstandard equipment must be made in writing and addressed to the Chief Information Officer and, such equipment may be purchased only after approval from the Chief Information Officer.
    • Computers and peripherals purchased with professional support funds are not considered as part of the College’s operational inventory; as such, support and maintenance, including upgrades and replacement when necessary, are the responsibility of the faculty member unless other accommodations are made in advance of the purchase.
    • Computers and peripherals remain the property of Rhodes College.
  6. Professional support funds may be used to purchase scientific equipment subject to the following criteria:
    • The purchases must be approved by the Chair of the department of the faculty member. Orders for equipment are processed following standard College procedures for the purchase of scientific equipment and laboratory supplies.
    • A plan for the maintenance and upgrade of the equipment is agreed to in advance by the faculty member and the Chair of the department.
    • The equipment remains the property of Rhodes College should the faculty member leave Rhodes.

 

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Registrar Records

Registrar Records

Contents of Student Academic Files

Retention Schedule

Academic action authorizations (dismissal, etc.) 10 years after graduation or date of last attendance
Academic records Permanent
Acceptance letters Five years
ACT/SAT scores Five years
Applications for admission or readmission 10 years after graduation or date of last attendance
Examination scores (AP, Dept. proficiency exams, etc.) Ten years
Curriculum change authorizations 10 years after graduation or date of last attendance
DD-214 and other armed services records Five years
Degree Audit Five years
Faculty Standing Committee petitions and results Five years
Financial aid assistance records 5 years after graduation or date of last attendance
Foreign student information (I-20, TOEFL scores, etc.) Five years
Grade changes/incomplete removals Permanent
High school transcripts Ten years
Hold or encumbrance authorizations Until released
Letters (general correspondence) Five years
Name change authorization Ten years
Permanent transcripts (record of courses, grades, etc.) Permanent
Requests for formal hearings Life of affected record
Requests and disclosures of personally identifiable information Life of affected record
Special student admission letters Five years
Student requests for nondisclosure of directory information 1 year after date submitted
Student statements on content of records regarding hearing panel decisions Life of affected record
Student’s written consent for record disclosure Until terminated by student or life of affected
Transfer transcripts and evaluations Until terminated by student or life of affected record
Transcripts sent (record of) Ten years
Waivers/Substitutions authorization Permanent
Waivers for rights of access Ten years
Withdrawal from College authorizations Until terminated by student or life of affected record
Written decisions of hearing panels 5 years after graduation or date of last attendance
Other Hard Copy Records Life of affected record
Admission files for students who never enrolled (maintained by the Admissions Office) Retention Schedule
Applications for graduation Five years
Catalogue Grade Runners (Original) Permanent
Commencement Program Permanent
Dean’s Lists Permanent
Degree statistics Permanent
Diplomas (not picked up by student) Permanent
Drop/Add and Overload/Underload petitions Two years
Enrollment statistics Permanent
Enrollment verifications One year after verification
Grade Reports (office copy) Two years
Grade statistics Permanent
Graduation lists and statistics Permanent
Medical records 1 year after graduation or date of last attendance
Pass/Fail Petitions Two years
Racial/ethnic statistics Permanent
Registration cards One year
Schedule of Classes Permanent
Social security certifications 1 year after certification
Registrar’s Statistical Reports Permanent
Transcripts requests One year
Veterans Administration certifications 3 years after graduation or date of last attendance

 

Notes

  • All records are housed in the vault of the Bursar’s Office or the Registrar’s Office unless otherwise noted.
  • Number of years refers to period of time following last term of enrollment (if student enrolled) or term of application (if student never enrolled).
  • Student academic files are stored alphabetically by student name.
  • Other records are filed alphabetically by record type and/or year.
  • Extra copies of the College Catalogue are housed in the Bursar’s Office and in the Library.

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Registration

Registration

Students must register for each semester. Registration takes place in November for the Spring Semester and in late March for the following Fall Semester. Since registration advising is done over a period of days designated for each class, faculty members serving as academic advisors and department chairs are expected to maintain extra office hours during the registration period. At the beginning of each semester, students make any desired changes in the registered schedule and validate their enrollment and the schedule. Students are required to clear any financial obligations they have to the College prior to enrolling. Enrollment clearance is usually the day before classes begin in each semester.

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Rotational Professorships

Rotational Professorships

Three-Year Renewable Faculty Professorships. Rotational Professorships are awarded for a three-year term to faculty members of Rhodes College who are engaged in significant scholarly projects in the form of research or creative activity. Normally, such Professorships will be awarded to tenured full time faculty members. Recipients of Professorships will receive $7,500 per year to fund the expenses associated with their projects.

Purpose and Appointment Criteria. The purpose of the Rotational Professorships is to support faculty scholarship (research, and creative activity). Therefore, faculty members who show promise of producing work that will be evaluated positively by their peers will be appointed. Promise will be determined by a faculty member’s past performance as well as by an articulated plan for scholarly activity to be completed during the three year period of appointment to the Professorship.

Rotational Professorships may be renewed once only, for up to three additional years, should the faculty member be able to demonstrate both an on-going need for support and tangible results – for example, substantial completed, published, or exhibited work – stemming from activity undertaken during the first term in the Professorship. (In exceptional circumstances, continuation for a third term may be considered.)

Rotational Professors will be ineligible to apply for summer Faculty Development Endowment Grants. Normally, such Professors also will be ineligible to receive travel support from the standard faculty travel budget. Rotational Professors will, after the termination of their term, have two additional years to call upon any funds that may remain in their accounts to cover research expenses associated with their projects.

Annual Reports. Holders of Rotational Professorships are required to submit a report of their project activities annually, by 1 October following each year in the Professorship, to the Office of Academic Affairs. The report will consist of a one or two page statement of scholarly activity completed during the year as well as any outcomes resulting from that activity, and a one-page overview of funds expended. 

Initial Appointment (first three-year term)

1. When a rotational professorship is vacated the Office of Academic Affairs compiles a list of all faculty members who are eligible to fill the open professorship. Normally, only tenured members of the faculty in relevant departments who have not held a rotational professorship for at least six years are considered to be eligible.

2. The Office of Academic Affairs notifies the eligible faculty members, who are invited to prepare an application (made up of a three- to five-page proposal and an updated vita), and provides them with a precise timeline for the process. Notification normally will take place no later than early March. Faculty considering application will be encouraged to consult with their department chairs before doing so. (In cases where the department chair is a candidate for the professorship in question, faculty considering application should consult with the faculty colleague who is vacating the professorship in question.)

3. The proposals are reviewed by a four-person group made up of two representatives of the Office of Academic Affairs and the Chairs of two standing committees of the Faculty: the Faculty Development Committee and the Faculty Governance Committee. These proposals normally will be due no later than early April. Relevant departmental chairpersons also will be consulted unless they are themselves candidates for the professorship in question.

4. If either of these two faculty committee members is required to evaluate a proposal that comes from themselves or from any member of their academic department, the faculty member in question will recuse himself or herself and the faculty committee in question will appoint a replacement.

5. The four-member group evaluates and ranks the proposals. Criteria for evaluation include (but are not limited to): the quality of the proposal; its significance to the professor’s ongoing scholarly program; the professor’s scholarly track record; a record of effectiveness in the two other areas of professional assessment (teaching and service); and matters of rank and years of service to the College.

6. The group then makes a recommendation to the Dean of the Faculty, who will make the final decision.

7. The Office of Academic Affairs notifies the candidates. This notification normally will be given by the end of April.

Renewal (second and final three-year term)

1. In the final year of the first term of a three-year rotational professorship appointment, the professor has the option of applying for a second and final three-year term in the professorship. This application is made to the Office of Academic Affairs. The application will include a summary of scholarship achieved during the first term, a discussion of work to be completed in the second term, and an updated vita.

2. This material is evaluated by the above four-member group, which then makes a recommendation to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, who makes the final decision.

3. If the renewal application is approved, the faculty member is appointed for a second (and final) three-year term. (If not approved, a representative of the Office of Academic Affairs compiles a list of all faculty members who are eligible to fill the open professorship and follows the process described in the section above.)

4. The designated the Office of Academic Affairs notifies the candidates. This notification normally will be given by the end of April.

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Secretarial Support

Secretarial Support

Departmental assistants are employed to provide secretarial and administrative assistance to faculty members in their specific academic departments. This includes, but is not limited to, providing a liaison between department members and administrative support staff, assistance in preparation of professional correspondence, classroom and laboratory materials, professional manuscripts, memos and minutes relating to faculty committee business, and grant proposals, ordering office supplies, paying invoices, and coordinating departmental faculty recruiting efforts and departmental events such as guest lectures. The standard secretarial duty of being the receptionist for the department, including receiving calls to the department, receiving visitors, arranging appointments, is expected of those persons whose offices and faculty permit this level of assistance to be available. Departmental assistants are not expected to handle personal business for members of their departments.

Because of the changing technology that supports secretarial services - word processors, electronic mail, spreadsheets, and administrative software - departmental assistants must keep themselves up-to-date with the technology in place at the College that enables the institution and its staff to work efficiently. Both the immediate supervisor of the departmental assistant and the assistant must work to ensure that the skills and competencies necessary to provide the services needed are developed.

Work-study students are trained and supervised by the departmental assistants to assist them in carrying out their work. Work-study students may be assigned other departmental responsibilities under the supervision of the department assistants, e.g., maintenance of departmental libraries and files, preparations for departmental events (food and beverages, etc.), updating departmental bulletin boards.

Each assistant will accept work and indicate an expected finish-time. To the extent possible, work requiring immediate attention will be done as soon as possible, but it cannot be expected that assistants can respond to all last minute requests. Work on syllabi, course outlines, quizzes, examinations, etc., should be given to the assistants sufficiently in advance of the date needed so that they can conveniently manage their total work load and fulfill faculty members’ requests. Generally, a lead-time of two days is customary, with the exception of manuscripts that may require several weeks for completion.

When major projects require the work of more than one assistant, the department assistant assigned will call the administrative assistant in the Office of Academic Affairs. Every effort will be made to coordinate all the assistants to complete the project.

The immediate supervisor for a departmental assistant is the chair of the department. This is the person who completes the annual assessment.

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Statement of Policies and Procedures in Regard to Faculty

Statement of Policies and Procedures in Regard to Faculty

Note: Amendments to this document requires approval of the Rhodes Board of Trustees.

(Updated August 8, 2005)

Amended by Faculty action, February 16, 2011

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

I. Academic Governance

I. Academic Governance

Appropriate sections of the Bylaws of the Board of Trustees of Rhodes College also govern the academic program of the College.

The Statement of Policies and Procedures in Regard to Faculty may be amended at a stated meeting of the Board of Trustees by a majority of its voting members. However, as provided in the by-laws, at least sixty (60) days notice must be given to the Faculty of proposed changes, during which period the Faculty shall have opportunity to express its views to the Board. No action that would rescind the College’s obligations to Faculty under contract can become effective until the end of the Faculty contracts currently in force.

Other Procedures. The Faculty has adopted other more detailed procedures for carrying out its business and formulating its recommendations. These must be consistent with the letter and spirit of this Statement of Policies and Procedures in Regard to Faculty.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

II. Faculty Organization

II. Faculty Organization

A. Membership. The President of the College, the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the Associate Provosts, and all full-time officers of instruction are members of the Faculty of Rhodes College. A part-time officer of instruction who has been appointed at one-half time or more for at least three years may, at his or her request, be extended the privileges and responsibilities of a member of the Faculty. The service responsibilities of such members of the Faculty will be in rough proportion to the fraction of full-time that they serve.

The designation, officer of instruction, includes all persons within the institution appointed with academic rank except instructors in physical education and certain instructors in applied music. The ranks are: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor and any of these named ranks when modified by the terms—Adjunct, Visiting, Distinguished, or Distinguished Service.

B. Responsibilities. Articles VII and VIII of the College Bylaws describe the responsibilities of the Faculty in academic matters.

The Faculty’s concern extends to areas beyond the strictly academic, as they are concerned with the whole of student and community life. Thus it is proper for Faculty, individually and collectively, to express their views and give advice privately to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the other representatives of Academic Affairs, the President, and other administrative officers on nonacademic matters.

In general the Faculty and the Vice President for Academic Affairs will take care to inform each other of policy discussions in a timely way so that appropriate advice can be given before action is taken.

C. Meetings. The Faculty shall meet monthly during the academic year to carry out its business. Normally these meetings will be held on the second Wednesday of the month at 4:15 p.m. but can be shifted by vote of the Faculty. Scheduled meetings of the Faculty occur in August (the opening meeting), October, December, February, April, and May. The Faculty elects the Presiding Officer in May for the next academic year. Absences from meetings of the Faculty may be excused if requests and explanations are presented to the Secretary of the Faculty in advance of the meeting.

There are in addition three meetings of the Faculty each year which are designated formal academic occasions. These are:

  1. The Opening (Founders) Convocation in the fall semester
  2. The Awards Convocation in the spring semester
  3. The Commencement Exercises at graduation

Additional Special Convocations may be called by the President. Attendance and academic regalia are required at each of these formal academic occasions. Absences may be excused if requests and explanations are presented to the Vice President for Academic Affairs in advance of the formal academic occasion.

The Faculty may be called into special session by the President or upon the request of one-fourth of the members of the Faculty. Special sessions of the Faculty shall be designated “for discussion” or “for action.” In special sessions for action all of the rules and procedures of this “Statement of Policies and Procedures in Regard to Faculty” apply.

Members of the Faculty are required to attend regular and special meetings of the Faculty and Faculty retreats unless excused by the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Classes should not be scheduled to conflict continuously with scheduled meetings of the Faculty.

The Faculty shall elect such officers as it deems necessary to carry out its responsibilities. The Faculty Secretary is elected for a one-year term, and is responsible for keeping the minutes of Faculty meetings and such other records as the Faculty determines. A Faculty Parliamentarian is elected for a one-year term. In addition, four Faculty Marshals are appointed by the President.

More detailed rules and procedures concerning the Faculty meeting are given in Appendix A.

D. Committees. The Faculty shall have the authority to establish any standing committees it deems necessary to meet its responsibilities. Such committees derive their powers and responsibilities from the Faculty and their actions are subject to Faculty review and possible veto.

Though established by the Faculty and subject to it, such standing committees include student and administrative members when appropriate to the committee’s area of concern. The President and the Vice President for Academic Affairs shall be members, ex-officio, of all standing committees, unless the Faculty action in constituting the committee explicitly excludes these members. The The Vice President of Academic Affairs may name a representative from the Office of Academic Affairs as a liaison to the committees of the Faculty.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

III. Recruiting and Appointment of New Faculty

III. Recruiting and Appointment of New Faculty

Appointments to the Rhodes Faculty are made by the Board of Trustees on the recommendation of the President of the College. Responsibility for the formulation of recommendations in these matters is delegated to the Faculty as described in the College By-laws, Article VII, Section 1 and Article VIII, Section 2. Appointments to the Faculty are made to those persons who are expected to combine intellectual excellence with a strong commitment to the liberal arts and to Rhodes’ mission.

The allocation of all full-time Faculty positions among the various departments shall be made by the President after receipt of a recommendation from the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The Vice President for Academic Affairs′s recommendations are formulated in consultation with the Faculty Governance Committee, and, with departmental chairs. The recommendations will define the educational qualifications and experience required of candidates for the position, the rank(s) at which the appointment can be made, the anticipated teaching responsibilities, and the approximate level of remuneration.

A. The Search Committee. The search is normally carried out by a search committee. The Vice President for Academic Affairs appoints search committees after consultation with the chair of the department where the appointment is expected to be made.

B. The Search Process. The appointment of excellent candidates to on-going Faculty positions requires that the search be carried out in a timely way with special efforts made to attract a large, well-qualified pool of applicants representing as great a diversity in its composition as possible in support of the recruitment and hiring goals for the College. Announcements describing the position should be written to attract the broadest possible group of applicants whose preparation is consistent with the requirements of the position. When doubts exist about the adequacy of the applicant pool or the excellence of the best candidates, the search will be reopened or continued in the next academic year.

In conducting the search, the following steps will normally be followed:

  1. The position will be announced in appropriate disciplinary publications with broad national circulation.
  2. Clear expectations about the adequacy of the applicant pool should be defined before the search begins. If the pool is inadequate, the search will be re-opened or continued before narrowing down the pool.
  3. Those responsible for the search process must be certain that the search meets the College’s definitions of equal opportunity employment.
  4. Promising candidates will be interviewed at national meetings when possible.
  5. Normally three candidates are invited to visit the campus.
  6. Campus visits will include interviews with department members, students (preferably majors) and appropriate administrators. 
    The candidate will make a public presentation open to any Faculty member or student. When possible the candidate should also make a classroom presentation.
  7. Following consultation with those who interviewed the candidates, the Chair of the Search Committee will make the Committee’s recommendations to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.
  8. The Office of Academic Affairs monitors the recruitment process to ensure that diversity goals for the College are maintained.

C. Faculty Appointments. New officers of instruction holding an earned doctorate will be appointed to the rank of assistant professor unless prior teaching experience and scholarly production justify appointment at a higher level. Confirmation of all new Faculty members’ credentials will be obtained in writing by the Office of Academic Affairs before the beginning of the new Faculty member’s appointment. New officers of instruction who do not hold the doctorate will normally be appointed to the rank, instructor. Promotion to assistant professor is made immediately upon completion of the appropriate terminal degree.

In certain disciplines a terminal degree other than the doctorate is considered appropriate for appointment to a professorial rank. In rare cases, other kinds of professional certification or outstanding accomplishments may provide the rationale for professorial rank.

New full-time appointments to the Faculty are designated tenure track or nontenure track and are given term or probationary contracts as described in Section “IV. Faculty Contracts.” On rare occasions a new appointment of an experienced Faculty member can be made with tenure if approved by the Board of Trustees.

Part-time appointments to the Faculty are always made on term contract and cannot lead to tenure.

Named Chairs: In departments in which special funds provide for named chairs, additional recognition of distinguished professional accomplishment may be given by naming officers of instruction to such chairs. The President, with advice from the Vice President for Academic Affairs, will designate Faculty members to occupy named chairs.

Emeritus/Emerita Professor: The rank emeritus or emerita professor may be granted to Faculty at or after retirement by the President in order to recognize years of distinguished service. A member of the Faculty may, upon retirement from the College, be designated as an emeritus/emerita member of the Rhodes College community if the following criteria are met:

  1. The person must have served the College as a full-time member of the Faculty for at least ten consecutive academic years.
  2. The person must be honorably retired at the College.
  3. The person must be eligible to draw retirement benefits as defined by applicable federal and local (e.g. college) regulations.
  4. The person must be recommended to the Faculty Governance Committee, by the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President of the College as a member, emeritus or emerita, of the Rhodes College community. If the Faculty Governance Committee approves the recommendation, the recommendation is then forwarded to the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees. If the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees approves the recommendation, then the President is authorized to announce the designation.

The person will be listed in the official record of the College – The Rhodes College Catalogue – by name, title of appointment with the emeritus/emerita designation, the date of the designation, and the appropriate academic credentials. This listing will continue as an official part of the College’s record as long as the person lives.

Certain Faculty appointments may be designated visiting, adjunct, distinguished, or distinguished service as appropriate. In each case the appointment is made on a term contract:

  • Visiting — a full-time but temporary appointment of an academic officer who plans to return to a position elsewhere.
  • Adjunct — usually a part-time appointment of a professional who is maintaining another professional career while teaching at Rhodes. There is no expectation of tenure.
  • Distinguished — usually applied to a particularly accomplished senior visiting professor.
  • Distinguished Service — a non-tenure track appointment usually made in recognition of long service and outstanding accomplishments.

Distinguished Service: In exceptional cases, full-time, non-tenure-track members of the Rhodes Faculty are eligible to be nominated to assume the title of Distinguished Service Professor provided they have served with unusual distinction at Rhodes and/or elsewhere for at least fifteen years and have achieved widespread recognition in their designated area(s) of service. The title of Distinguished Service Professor is unique within the system of faculty positions at Rhodes, lying outside the sequence of promotions available to both tenure-track and non-tenure-track faculty. It is intended to recognize extraordinary work to advance the mission of Rhodes College, or work done during extended service at another institution of learning, or in a career outside of education which has prepared the holder in a unique way to join a Department or Program at Rhodes. The conferring of this title would recognize achievement outside of or well beyond the standard of Excellence in the area of Service to the College which the Handbook describes. Regular Service to the College at that level over the course of fifteen years would typically not qualify faculty for nomination. Rather, the title would honor a nominee who has undertaken a truly extraordinary pattern of activity, at Rhodes or in some other setting. Rhodes faculty who have committed many years to service in an area that extends beyond typical patterns might be recognized with this title for their long-term achievement. Persons joining the Rhodes faculty might be recognized with this title for career achievement in, for example, research, government, the arts, or community service.

Nominations for the title of Distinguished Service Professor should be directed to the Faculty Governance Committee, with a copy to the Vice President for Academic Affairs. In order to be considered, nominees will need a minimum of three letters of support from senior members of the Rhodes faculty, one from a member outside the home department or program, and to submit a portfolio documenting relevant achievements over the course of their career. The Faculty Governance Committee will make a recommendation to the Dean of the Faculty, who will undertake an independent evaluation and confer with the President on the matter before arriving at a decision as to the awarding of title.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

IV. Faculty Contracts

IV. Faculty Contracts

A. Types of Contracts. At the time of initial appointment, and, for continuing Faculty on or about March 15 of each year, each officer of instruction will be provided with a written contract of employment for the following academic session. The service year for Faculty is normally defined as the period from the first Faculty meeting before the opening of the fall semester through the Monday following commencement in the subsequent spring semester. However, in programs with required summer enrollment, faculty may be hired on 12-month contracts. This contract will specify rank and salary, the nature of the contract and any special terms and conditions of employment. Rhodes has three types of contracts with officers of instruction. They are:

1. Term Contract. This type of contract is made on an annual basis, or on an academic term basis, or on a contingent basis (for example, contingent upon a sufficient number of students enrolling for a proposed course). Beyond the limits set in the document, there is no assumption of further employment. All part-time and nontenure track officers of instruction receive term contracts. Officers of instruction on term contracts and Distinguished Service professors may serve for more than seven years without the granting of tenure.

2. Probationary Contract. This type of contract is made on an annual basis and is a tenure-track appointment in a particular department. An officer of instruction may not work more than seven years under such contracts unless by mutual agreement between the College and the Faculty member the normal progress towards a review for tenure is interrupted. Those full-time officers of instruction who do not have the Ph.D. or appropriate terminal degree may not work for more than two years under such contracts. (Exceptions can be made in rare cases, which the President must be prepared to defend before the Board of Trustees.) The College is under no obligation to renew probationary appointments nor does it guarantee that a tenurable position will be available at the time a probationary Faculty member is considered for tenure. (See Section X, Non-Reappointment.)

3. Contract With Tenure. Appointments with tenure are made in a particular department. Faculty holding tenure receive a contract each year which reflects changes in rank, salary, special terms, or in the provisions of “The Statement of Policies and Procedures in Regard to Faculty.” Tenure contracts can be abrogated in circumstances described in Section XII.

B. Faculty Salary. Rhodes does not follow a binding formula either in negotiating initial salaries or in granting increments.

Salary recommendations are formulated by the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with department chairs and made to the President. Salary increments awarded by the President are reflected in each year’s contract letters. Salary adjustments may be made to recognize merit, as part of a general salary increase, to remove inequities, or to recognize promotion in rank. The Vice President for Academic Affairs shall offer any Faculty member who requests it an explanation of the basis on which his or her salary increment, or lack of it, was determined.

Remuneration of part-time Faculty will generally be determined based on the number of four-credit courses or equivalents being taught and the academic qualifications of the faculty member. As full-time Faculty remuneration rises, the normal rate for teaching a four-credit course on a part-time basis may be adjusted.

Ordinarily, salary levels of tenured Faculty members will not be individually reduced, except for cases described elsewhere herein. However, in the event of financial exigency, general reduction of salaries or the reduction of some but not all salaries may be necessary.

C. Merit Salary Increments. Annual evaluation of each continuing Faculty member may lead to a salary increment that recognizes teaching, research and/or creative activities, and/or service. The evaluation system described in Section VIII recognizes five levels of performance. In general, consideration for a merit increase will require a minimum ranking of “excellent” in all these areas. (A discussion of these ratings is given in Section VIII.)

The relative weight assigned each area for purposes of merit salary adjustment is 40% for teaching, 35% for research and/or creative activities, and 25% for service.

D. Fringe Benefits. The College provides a retirement plan to which the College contributes. A Faculty member’s equity in this plan is fully vested in the Faculty member. Other benefits such as medical, life and disability insurance, and tuition benefits are established by the Board of Trustees on the recommendation of the President. (See the College Handbook for a description of current benefits.)

E. Salary Retrenchment. If there is a significant unfavorable deviation from the annual budget of the College in any given year, as determined by the President, the President may announce a state of retrenchment and initiate a new budgeting process to produce a balanced budget. The new budget will go through all the steps of the regular annual budget building process to allow adequate opportunity for input from all segments of the College community. Under such circumstances, a general reduction of salaries or the reduction of some but not all salaries may be necessary.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

V. Professional Duties and Responsibilities

V. Professional Duties and Responsibilities Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

A. Professional Ethics

A. Professional Ethics

Every officer of instruction shall support the integrity, good reputation, general welfare, and stated purpose and mission of the College. Every officer of instruction is expected to maintain the highest personal standards of character and conduct.

Faculty members must abide by the highest standards of integrity in their own duties and responsibilities. Though members of the Faculty are not subject to the procedures identified and administered within the Honor Code for students at the College, it is expected that members of the Faculty will abide by the provisions of that code of ethics in their dealings with persons at the College.

In addition, Faculty members must support the Honor Code by reporting to the Honor Council cases of student plagiarism, cheating, and lying in official matters, and report to the Honor Council cases of failure by other students to report such matters. If a Faculty member is unsure whether a situation needs to be reported, they are to consult with either the Honor Council President or the College’s Judicial Officer for the Honor Council.

Faculty members have the responsibility to communicate the Honor Code to students and to make clear the Code’s application to class assignments. Where appropriate, a clear definition of plagiarism should be presented and the extent of allowable collaboration among students in fulfilling academic requirements should be carefully explained. Faculty members are to make clear what materials may and may not be used in preparing graded work. Faculty members require each student to “pledge” all work expected to be governed by the provisions of the Honor Code.

In reporting a suspected violation of the Honor Code it is appropriate to consult with the chair of the department. It is also appropriate to inform the student of your concern about irregularities in the work submitted, on the assumption that the student may be able to explain them and therefore remove suspicions about the nature of the work.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

B. Faculty Responsibilities

B. Faculty Responsibilities

The service year for Faculty is defined as the period from the first Faculty meeting before the opening of the fall semester through the Monday following commencement in the following spring semester. During the period of their contract, members of the Faculty must be on campus for a substantial part of each class day. When professional or personal affairs require that a Faculty member be away from campus for 1-5 class days, the department chair must be notified and must approve the absence. For longer absences the approval of the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the President must also be obtained. Normally, full time Faculty members in tenured or tenure-track positions teach five four-credit courses or their equivalent, and supervise a number of independent projects, or their equivalent, and participate in departmentally-sponsored academic programs such as senior seminars in each year. Full time Faculty members on term appointments normally teach six four-credit courses or their equivalent.

Officers of instruction contribute in many other ways to the education of their students, to the welfare of their department and programs, and to the general welfare of the College. Some of these are:

  1. Leading directed inquiries, conducting tutorials and independent study projects, and supervising honors projects.
  2. Keeping adequate office hours at times reasonably accessible to students.
  3. Advising students—both general academic advising and the advising of majors.
  4. Helping to maintain a vital curriculum by revision of existing courses and inauguration of new courses.
  5. Aiding students who seek admission to professional and graduate schools through advice and preparation of letters of reference.
  6. Carrying a fair share of the administrative work of departments, the Faculty, and the College.
  7. Attending all Faculty meetings and convocations.
  8. Maintaining and building library and other academic resources.
  9. Maintaining an active, involved professional life including scholarly work or artistic production.

A more detailed narrative description of the work of the Faculty comprises Section VII of this document.

Part-time officers of instruction are appointed for the teaching of a designated number of courses. Except for such contact with students outside of class time as needed for effective teaching, a part-time position does not carry the other obligations that are normal to full time positions. However, part-time Faculty who are extended Faculty membership assume these duties in proportion to the fraction of full time that they teach. (See Section II A.)

An officer of instruction shall not substitute nor appoint anyone to perform his or her College duties without the approval, in each case, of the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

An officer of instruction, in accepting an appointment from the College, thereby agrees to conform to all regulations adopted by the Faculty, by the President, and by the Board of Trustees.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

C. Professional Growth

C. Professional Growth

As an important corollary to the evaluation system, Faculty members each year make plans for professional growth as teachers and scholars. These plans, formulated with the department chair and, where appropriate, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, should make use of both College supported and outside professional development activities.

When, as the result of annual evaluation, a Faculty member is found to have serious deficiencies, a more formal plan for improvement will be developed with the help of the department chair and the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The plan shall list the improvements to be made, and over what time period. It will indicate how improvements are to be assessed and the consequences of failure to improve. If a plan cannot be agreed upon, the views of the Faculty member, the department chair and the Vice President for Academic Affairs will be forwarded to the President for final decision.

At the end of each calendar year Faculty members make a formal report to the Office of Academic Affairs concerning scholarly publications and other professional activities. This report includes an updated curriculum vitae.

Sections VII and VIII of this document contain important information about the work of the Faculty in scholarship and the standards that are applied.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

D. Outside Employment

D. Outside Employment

Faculty who wish to accept outside employment during the academic year must make a written request to the Vice President for Academic Affairs for approval. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will grant permission for outside employment only when it will not interfere with College duties, will not create a conflict of interest for the Faculty member’s primary obligations to the College, and when it is consistent with Rhodes values and goals. If outside employment involves the use of College materials or facilities this must be made clear in the request for approval, and reasonable compensation must be made for this use. Faculty granted permission for such employment must make an annual report to the Vice President for Academic Affairs concerning its nature and extent.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

E. Fraternization Policy

E. Fraternization Policy

As an educational institution Rhodes College is committed to maintaining an environment in which its Faculty members, students, administrators, and staff members are safe, can be trusted and count on others to be trustworthy, and receive and extend to others respect as human persons. Indeed, mutual respect among Faculty members, students and administrators is an essential ingredient in the educational process and the greatest care must be taken that it not in any way be eroded.

Virtually all Faculty members, administrators, and staff members are, or can appear to be, in a position to exercise power or authority, directly or indirectly, over students, whether or not an individual student is enrolled in their classes, are subject to their direct supervision, or have some form of business to transact with offices at the College. Many students are at a stage in their development when they may be particularly vulnerable to the influence of Faculty members, administrators, and staff members who are in positions where they can affect the terms and conditions of a student’s standing at the College.

If a student consents to a romantic relationship with a Faculty member, administrator, or staff member, the existence of such a relationship could have unintended adverse effects on the educational environment of the College. In some cases such a relationship can end unhappily or become problematic, resulting in charges of sexual harassment, and even physical or psychological abuse.

Some circumstances in which Faculty members, administrators, staff members work with students can have the potential for the exploitation of students. For example, a work-study student might be asked to perform services that go beyond the terms and conditions of the work-study assignment, e.g. child care, personal business transactions. In such cases, it must be clear that the student may decline such personal invitations without any adverse consequences. It may be that a work-study student will respond to an invitation to provide personal assistance, but this relationship must be one in which the student volunteers, is offered and accepts a fair wage for services, and one which bears no relationship to the continuation of or the evaluation of the work-study assignment.

Because of the commitment to maintaining an environment that supports our educational goals Rhodes College prohibits romantic, sexual, and exploitative relationships between college employees and students. In the event that any such relationship is reported and confirmed the college employee is subject to employee disciplinary procedures up to and including termination in the case of administrators and staff members, or dismissal for cause in the case of Faculty members. The policies and procedures for employee disciplinary procedures and dismissal for cause, as outlined in the College Handbook, apply in all such cases.

There are exceptional circumstances in which the spouse or partner of a college employee is a student at the College. This fraternization policy does not apply in such circumstances. The Vice President for Academic Affairs, in consultation with the Director of Human Resources, is the administrative officer who determines whether an exceptional circumstance applies.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

F. Sexual Harassment Policy

F. Sexual Harassment Policy

Rhodes College prohibits and will not tolerate sexual harassment. Sexual harassment is reprehensible. It violates the personal rights, growth, and integrity of the victim. It is especially damaging when it involves exploitation of the relationship between Faculty members or administrators on the one hand and students on the other or between superiors and subordinates of any kind. When the authority and power inherent in such relationships is abused, there is damage not only to individual victims but also to the educational climate of the College.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

VI. Academic Freedom and Responsibility

VI. Academic Freedom and Responsibility

The free search for truth and its free exposition are at the heart of a Rhodes education. Academic freedom protects this process by granting Faculty members freedom of inquiry and expression while defining the special responsibilities that accompany them.

Officers of instruction shall have the freedom to determine, consistent with each course’s description, the specific content of the courses they teach. They have the responsibility to avoid departing from their areas of competence or devoting time to material extraneous to the subject matter of the course.

Officers of instruction shall have full freedom in carrying out their research and in publication of the results, consistent with the performance of their other academic duties. Research or consulting for pecuniary return may be undertaken only with the approval of the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

When officers of instruction speak or write as citizens or as members of a learned profession they shall be free of institutional restraints. While they may identify themselves as Rhodes Faculty, they have the concurrent obligation to state that they are not speaking for the College. The public statements of officers of instruction should be accurate, and should show restraint and respect for the opinions of others.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

VII. The Work of the Faculty

VII. The Work of the Faculty

The College seeks to provide a liberal arts and sciences curriculum that is imaginative and evolving: imaginative, in that it makes an appeal to faculty members and students alike to engage in study that will take both beyond their current understanding; and, evolving, in that it is structured and regularly assessed to achieve the best environment in which the intellectual advancement of both faculty and students can be pursued and realized.

Such a curriculum is possible only if there is effective teaching of students, active scholarly engagement within academic disciplines, and conscientious service to the College community on the part of all faculty members of the College. These three activities are the basis of performance evaluations of faculty members at the College.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

A. Teaching

A. Teaching

Effective teachers are enthusiastic about their disciplines and imaginative in presenting them. They work confidently in their discipline, and they are able to make sound professional judgments about it. They demonstrate their command of the discipline by presenting it systematically and coherently, by making important connections between their discipline and other related fields of study, and by actively probing the boundaries and limitations of their disciplines.

Effective teachers are committed to the intellectual development of their students. They accomplish this by encouraging the maturing of critical faculties, the cultivation of analytic and synthetic abilities, and the focusing of creative imagination. Effective teachers are attentive to the progress of each of their students and encourage each student to become seriously engaged with the subject of the course.

Effective teachers design and teach courses that challenge students to grow intellectually. They are demanding, set high standards, and make their learning objectives clear. Effective teachers seek to develop and improve their pedagogical skills.

Faculty work that is pedagogical is considered to be teaching. Mentoring student scholarship is also considered to be teaching. If such collaborative work results in a peer-reviewed publication, the outcome is considered to be scholarship.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

B. Scholarship and Other Professional Work

B. Scholarship and Other Professional Work

Faculty members at Rhodes are actively engaged with their academic fields as scholars and artists. They are confident exponents and interpreters in the practice of their disciplines. They have an abiding interest in and passion for their discipline.

Faculty scholarship is the development and use of skills and competencies, appropriate to one’s discipline, to address issues within and challenges of the discipline and to enrich the discipline by informed, critical study or performance. The expectation is that these skills and competencies will advance the discipline.

Faculty scholarship includes both research and creative activities. Faculty research refers to original scholarly activity that is intended principally for academic and professional peers and is subject to a peer review process. This research should culminate, where appropriate, in peer-reviewed conference presentations, articles, essays, monographs, or books. Such research may also generate external grants. Creative activity refers to work that reflects an active engagement with the discipline typically intended for an audience not limited to academic peers. Typical forms of creative activity are works of art, productions, compositions, and performances.

Some faculty investigate interdisciplinary research questions or explore issues in fields outside their discipline. Such work is expected to undergo the same rigorous peer review processes as work within a traditional discipline.

Invited expert testimony, consultant assignments, book reviews, participation in professional meetings in roles such as panel chair or discussant, non-peer-reviewed publications, review work for journals or book publishers, and outside reviews of the work of Faculty colleagues comprise professional citizenship activities. These activities are contributions to one’s discipline and valued as part of a faculty member’s professional life at, and on behalf of, the College, but do not substitute for faculty research/creative activity.

Academic Departments work with the Office of Academic Affairs to develop expectations for the assessment of scholarship, making clear how the forms of research/creative activity, appropriate to that discipline, are weighted in the evaluation process. The Office of Academic Affairs, in consultation with department chairs, regularly reviews  these departmental expectations in order to maintain a level of parity across departments.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

C. Service

C. Service

Members of the Faculty serve Rhodes in many ways that go beyond formal teaching duties and scholarship. Faculty service is essential in creating the community within which our shared work is best accomplished.

Student advising is a critically important service activity. Faculty members will serve as advisors to students majoring in their disciplines, but will also regularly serve as advisors to entering first year students. Faculty members affilitated with master's programs will also serve as advisors for students in the relevant graduate programs. Academic advising includes the routine activities of meeting with advisees, monitoring academic progress, reviewing course grades, responding to notices of academic warning, making registration materials available, and reviewing petitions concerning academic regulations. However, academic advising is also an opportunity to help a student realize his/her academic potential and to utilize the resources at the College to assist a student in envisioning and shaping his/her longer term goals, and to counsel and nurture a student as he/she confronts the inevitable challenges of a collegiate environment.

The Faculty of Rhodes is given and carries out a major role in the planning and implementation of the academic program of the College. Faculty members must assume obligations within the governance structure of the College by attending Faculty meetings, serving on and providing leadership on committees, carrying out departmental functions, and other special assignments that work to ensure that the College provides an excellent educational program for its students. Faculty members demonstrate support for the intellectual life of the College by organizing and participating in events, such as guest lectures, symposia, workshops and seminars. In addition, faculty members serve in ways that develop and nurture a viable Faculty cohort, such as recruitment of Faculty and reviews of colleagues.

The College is an institution whose mission includes service within the greater Memphis community. The College, therefore, values the services rendered by faculty members who apply their professional skills to work that benefits the larger community.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

VIII. Standards for Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion

VIII. Standards for Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion

Section VIII establishes the standards of evaluation assigned to each of the three areas of faculty work. Assessments using these standards provide the basis for decisions on reappointment, tenure, and promotion. The College expects a record of excellence in all three areas of assessment, except in instances of non-tenure track faculty seeking promotions (indicated below). Candidates for tenure and/or promotion must meet the standard in each area, commensurate with appointment.

Candidates who reside and teach primarily in departments are evaluated by senior departmental faculty in accordance with procedures in Section IX. For candidates who reside in departments but have interdisciplinary research and/or creative activity programs and/or significant interdisciplinary teaching and service commitments, the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the department and program Chairs, will appoint senior colleagues from the department and the program to evaluate candidates. For candidates with primary appointments in interdisciplinary programs, the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the program Chair will appoint senior colleagues from the interdisciplinary program to evaluate candidates. These procedures are also described in Section IX.

If evaluation criteria are changed within the two-year period prior to tenure evaluation, a tenure candidate may, at his or her request, be evaluated by the criteria in effect during the year of the candidate’s fourth-year review. Such a request must be submitted to the Vice President for Academic Affairs in writing as a part of the tenure application.

Teaching: Effective teaching is central to Rhodes’ educational mission. Teaching includes traditional classroom and laboratory instruction (disciplinary or interdisciplinary), leading internships or fellowships, and supervising directed inquiries, honors projects and/or other forms of student research or creative activity. In evaluating performance in this area, the following standards apply:

  • Faculty members sustain in their classes a consistent engagement with matters of substance and importance in the subject area.
  • Faculty members demonstrate command of the subject material and the critical issues surrounding it.
  • Faculty members construct syllabi that make grading policies and course goals clear.
  • Faculty members design student assignments and projects that demonstrably advance course goals.
  • Faculty members organize courses in ways that reflect an effective pedagogy, and result in successful educational outcomes.
  • Faculty members develop in students the ability to think critically on the subjects studied and to communicate effectively about these subjects.

Rhodes College evaluates teaching by gathering input from students, colleagues, a committee whose charge is specifically to review a faculty member’s in-class performance and teaching materials, as well as by members of the Tenure and Promotion Committee that have access to all of the materials relevant to a particular faculty member’s promotion.

Scholarship: Appointment to the Rhodes Faculty is made with the expectation that faculty members bring with them a commitment to advancing scholarly knowledge and/or producing creative works in their field. In evaluating a faculty member’s performance in this area, the following general standards apply:

  • Faculty members demonstrate their ongoing engagement in original research and/or creative activity by the regular appearance of original scholarly work which includes peer-reviewed products, juried exhibits/performances, and products that have undergone rigorous scholarly evaluation appropriate to the discipline.
  • Each academic department of the College provides a Statement of Expectations that articulates in more detail the specifics of each discipline with regard to appropriate forms of peer review and scholarly products. These expectations should consider related interdisciplinary research and/or creative activity programs. The departmental expectations are subject to review and approval by the Office of Academic Affairs.
  • Each interdisciplinary program with tenure-track faculty appointments provides a Statement of Expectations that articulates in more detail the specifics of what constitutes appropriate forms of peer review and scholarly products. The program expectations are subject to review and approval by the Office of Academic Affairs.
  • The quality and the quantity of juried or peer-reviewed work are both important indicators of achievement in scholarship. The quality and quantity of a candidate’s scholarly work is evaluated internally by departmental and/or program colleagues and externally by peer evaluators within the candidate’s discipline(s). The Tenure and Promotion Committee, drawn from representatives of all College divisions, gathers all of these materials together, reviews and evaluates them, and forwards a recommendation to the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The Vice President for Academic Affairs considers all of these evaluations in determining a final recommendation to the President of the College.
  • Faculty members, particularly those at the rank of associate professor and professor, are expected to participate in the activities associated with effective professional citizenship, such as reviewing articles and manuscripts for scholarly publications, organizing conferences and panels, serving as a commentator on a scholarly panel, delivering invited talks, taking on leadership roles within professional organizations, and the like. While not a substitute for the appearance of scholarly work as defined above, these activities provide a means by which scholars remain actively involved in their scholarly communities as well as engaged and up to date in their own scholarship.

Service: Effective professional service involves contributing to the operation and welfare of the College, the departmental and/or program, and the larger community. The operation and welfare of the College involve a number of important responsibilities invested in the Faculty. The governance structure of the College serves to distribute these collegial duties in a fair and effective manner. Normally, major leadership responsibilities (such as chairing standing committees, academic departments, or academic programs) should be assigned to senior faculty members. In evaluating a faculty member’s service, the following standards apply:

  • A faculty member is an effective advisor to students and regularly advises both incoming students – through the students’ declaration of major – and continuing students within the major. Aiding students who seek post-graduate scholarships and/or admission to professional and graduate schools by providing counsel and, where appropriate, preparing letters of reference is also expected. A faculty member’s work as an advisor is assessed by the Tenure and Promotion Committee using a student survey of all of a faculty member’s advisees, past and current.
  • Faculty members participate in the administrative work of their departmental and/or program. This work includes participating in departmental and/or program meetings, faculty development and evaluation activities, curriculum reviews, and implementation of curriculum changes; overseeing library and other academic resources; aiding in the recruitment of students and new faculty; and supporting departmental and/or program co-curricular activities. Departmental and/or programcolleagues are expected to include in their letters to the Tenure and Promotion Committee their assessment of a candidate’s contributions to the work of the departmental and/or program.
  • Faculty members participate in the governance of the Faculty and the College. Faculty members are expected to serve the College through such channels as membership on standing committees of the Faculty, administrative committees of the College or Board of Trustees, ad hoc committees or task forces, engaging in and/or providing leadership for appropriate co-curricular activities, and/or activities that develop and sustain the College’s connections to external communities. Faculty members are also expected to work with other departments to help with faculty recruitment, development, and evaluation. The Tenure and Promotion Committee relies in this case on the evaluation of a candidate’s contributions in service by colleagues and College staff members who have served with the candidate during the probationary period.

Effective service means not only becoming a member of one or more of the many committees on campus, but also participating in a significant and effective way. As such, faculty members are expected to work productively and respectfully with students, staff, and colleagues in both the department and the College. Tolerance for differing points of view and the capacity to give civil expression to one′s own position are highly prized. Evidence of such collegiality in the past and the prospect of continuing collegiality are thus important factors in decisions about reappointment, promotion, and tenure.

Levels of assessment: As noted above, the College expects a record of excellence in all three areas of assessment. Faculty work is assessed as either meeting or not meeting the high standards expected by the College. In the second- and fourth-year reviews particular attention will be paid to the trajectory of work exhibited by the probationary faculty member with an eye towards the level of achievement necessary for a successful sixth-year review.

Contributions to the tenure decision are made by students, faculty colleagues, outside evaluators, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President of the College. A decision to recommend tenure remains a matter of judgment by the relevant individuals at the College, based on their reading of the evidence and projection of the candidate′s future performance. The recommendation is reached after careful attention to the procedures authorized in Processes and Procedures to be followed in the Evaluation of a Member of the Faculty (Section IX).

The importance of the three areas of the work of the Faculty: All faculty members are required to be engaged in teaching, research/creative activity, and service throughout their career at the College. Care should be taken by the faculty member and those in academic administrative positions to ensure that no one component threatens to compromise a faculty member’s overall performance over extended periods of time.

The College therefore affirms the following:

During the probationary years (normally, the first year through the sixth year of service to the College): The focus at this stage should be on a faculty member’s work as a teacher and scholar/artist – on becoming skilled in the classroom and established as an authoritative contributor to one’s discipline. Service to the College is not a substitute for meeting the standard in teaching and in research and/or creative activity, so care should be taken to ensure that a probationary faculty member’s service involvements do not interfere with his or her development as a teacher and scholar/artist. Service activities early in a faculty member’s career should focus on developing skills and competency as an advisor to students and as a departmental and/or program colleague. After a successful fourth year review, service should normally expand to include work on college-wide committees and/or on campus-wide initiatives.

Following the probationary years (normally, the seventh year of service until retirement): Becoming a senior member of the Faculty entails assuming a more prominent role in faculty governance (e.g., by serving as department or program chair, providing effective service and leadership on college-wide faculty committees or task forces, initiating curricular reform or program development).

Concentrated efforts in pedagogical and/or curricular development may take away time from research/creative activity and service. The awarding of a major grant may involve a reduction in teaching load and in service commitments for the grant period. While such shifts are appropriate, they should be carefully monitored. The post-tenure evaluation cycle provides room for such shifts while also monitoring them to prevent more extensive involvement in one area from compromising a faculty member’s performance in other areas.

Normally, heavy service commitments should not last longer than six consecutive years in order to ensure that every faculty member remains an active and energized teacher and scholar. Care should be taken by each faculty member and those in academic administrative positions to ensure a profile for each faculty member that is in keeping with the College’s standards. Ideally, the equitable distribution of workload across the Faculty is done with the intention of making possible this profile.

Promotion of non-tenure track faculty: In rare circumstances, long-term, full-time, non-tenure track faculty holding the rank of Assistant Professor may seek promotion to the associate level. Such promotion may be sought in the tenth year, normally after three successful tri-annual reviews, commensurate with contractual obligations. Candidates will be assessed on the same teaching and service standards as tenure-track faculty.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

IX. Processes and Procedures to be followed in the Evaluation of a Member of the Faculty

IX. Processes and Procedures to be followed in the Evaluation of a Member of the Faculty

The work of the Faculty is outlined in Section VII. This work is expected to be done at a level of accomplishment that meets or exceeds the standard of excellence set by the College as detailed in Section VIII above. This section of the “Statement of Policies and Procedures in regard to Faculty” is a compilation of the procedures that govern the collection of information about the performance of a faculty member. It identifies those persons, committees, and administrative officers involved in the task of making assessments.

Assessments of Faculty occur periodically, based on the standing of a member of the Faculty. Probationary members of the Faculty undergo reviews at the Department/program level (A below), in their second year (B below), in their fourth year (C below) and in their sixth year (D below) of appointment. These reviews focus on progress towards and eligibility for a contract with tenure in the seventh year of appointment. Promotion to the rank of Associate Professor normally coincides with the awarding of tenure. Subsequent to the granting of a contract with tenure, members of the Faculty are reviewed every six years (E below). A special review applies to those members of the Faculty who are eligible and apply for promotion to the rank of Professor (F below).

Input into the assessment processes includes evaluations by students, by colleagues both within and from outside the department/program of the faculty member, and in some cases by faculty members at other institutions within the discipline of the faculty member.

Evaluation by students is achieved in two ways:

  1. Near the end of a course, a college-wide evaluation instrument, approved by the Faculty and the Vice President for Academic Affairs, is administered.
  2. Questionnaires are distributed in support of the fourth- and sixth-year reviews and in support of the review for promotion to Full Professor.

The college-wide student evaluations are administered in all courses taught by probationary faculty members and part-time officers of instruction, and in at least one course taught each semester by each tenured faculty member. In the latter case, evaluations should be administered to ensure that the variety of courses taught by each tenured faculty member is represented.

For each of the reviews outlined below, the special obligations of colleagues for assessments are noted. Colleague evaluations from within or beyond the Rhodes Faculty may be requested at any time should the department and/or program Chair(s) and the Vice President for Academic Affairs deem it necessary.

A shift in curricular requirements or a substantial change in enrollment patterns may make it necessary to change the definition of a position in the Faculty from tenure-track to temporary or to eliminate the position entirely. The tenure-track member of the Faculty in such a position will be informed about the possibility of a change in status as early as is reasonably possible. Reappointment or tenure may be denied if such shifts have reduced the need for a permanent position in the department/program of the faculty member.

Terms and definitions that apply to section IX:

Candidate – Any faculty member undergoing an evaluation.

CV – A faculty member’s CV may be disciplinarily specific but for evaluative purposes should include at a minimum all professional work accomplished by the faculty member and all records of service to the College and community.

Portfolio – For purposes of evaluation a portfolio consists of a current CV, annual Position Responsibility Statement(s) (PRS), a list of courses taught during the evaluation period, syllabi for each of these courses, and samples of assigned work and exams. Copies of all scholarly achievements (e.g., published work, sound recordings, images of artwork, etc.) should be included in the portfolio. The portfolio also includes a narrative statement (normally three-five double-spaced, pages) that discusses the faculty member’s performance and trajectory in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service. Examples of types of information to discuss include: a description of teaching philosophy as it relates to courses taught during this period, a description of the feedback given to students on graded assignments, additional teaching experiences, new course development, major changes to existing courses, any initiatives taken to improve teaching, a description of scholarship that has been completed or published during the review period as well as a trajectory for ongoing scholarly activities, and a description of forms of service to the department/program, College, and/or to the wider community, and any other forms of professional activity within the faculty member’s academic discipline. Candidates should update their portfolios annually; these portfolios will be assessed at all stages of review during the probationary period and post-tenure reviews.

Position Responsibility Statement (PRS) - This is a narrative description of faculty responsibilities in teaching, scholarship, and institutional service created in collaboration by the faculty member, Department Chair, Program Chair, and Vice President for Academic Affairs. The PRS specifies teaching commitments to departments and programs, scholarship expectations for the candidate, advising and general service expectations, and evaluation personnel.

Scholarship –research and/or creative activity outcomes as specified in department or program scholarship expectations. All department and program scholarship expectations are approved by the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Each candidate’s scholarship or creative activity expectations are specified in the PRS.

Senior member of the department/program – A full-time, tenured faculty member in the department/program.

Teaching Evaluation Committee – A group of three or four colleagues appointed during the candidate’s first term with special responsibility for assessing classroom teaching during the second-, fourth-, and sixth-year reviews. The members of this committee will normally continue to serve during the candidate’s entire probationary period. Normally, these committees are comprised of the Chair of the faculty member’s home department or home program and two senior faculty members. For faculty with significant interdisciplinary teaching commitments, the Chair of the program normally will serve on the Teaching Evaluation Committee. In the sixth-year review, this group also includes a senior faculty member who does not reside in the candidate’s department or program. Where fewer than three senior members of the department/program exist, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, in consultation with the Chair of the Department/Program, will appoint ad hoc members to fill out these committees as necessary. Committee membership for all Teaching Evaluation Committees leading up to tenure will be specified in the PRS in the first year of the candidate’s appointment.

Tenure-track faculty member – A faculty member in her or his first six years of service at the College, who is on a tenure-track appointment but has not yet achieved tenure.

Special Provisions for Changes in Section IX of the “Statement of Policies and Procedures in regard to Faculty”

Modifications in the processes and procedures outlined in this section of the “Statement of Policies and Procedures in regard to Faculty” are operational matters. Modifications may be initiated by committees of the Faculty or by members of the College administration. All modifications must be approved by the Faculty and the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Modifications are then reported to the Committee of Student Learning of the Board of Trustees. The Committee may bring such matters to the attention of the Board of Trustees for further action as deemed necessary. As such, changes in this section (Section IX) fall outside the procedure for modifying the “Statement of Policies and Procedures in regard to Faculty” prescribed in Section I.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

A. Department-Level Reviews

A. Department-Level Reviews

Overview: In the spring semester of years one, three, and five, tenure-track faculty will undergo reviews at the departmental/program level. These reviews are designed to ensure that, when a faculty member is not undergoing a second- or fourth-year review, or a tenure review, ongoing attention is given to the trajectory toward tenure. In the third and fifth years, it will be important to focus on any areas where suggestions for improvement were made to the faculty member in the preceding year’s review.

First-Year Review

The Process: The first-year review is conducted by the department/program Chair early in the spring semester (January) of the tenure-track faculty member’s first year of service to the College. The first-year review is formative in nature as it occurs after only one semester. The candidate will submit a portfolio according to instructions provided by the Office of Academic Affairs that includes materials on teaching, scholarship, and service. The department/program Chair (or, with the approval of the Vice President for Academic Affairs, a designated senior colleague in the department/program) will observe the candidate’s teaching during the fall semester and meet with the candidate to provide appropriate feedback. The purpose of these visits is to support and guide the candidate toward effective teaching at Rhodes. The Chair and the candidate should work together to determine the timing of class visits to help promote the candidate’s development. Additionally, the department/program Chair will review the candidate’s college-wide student evaluations and grade distributions for all classes taught during the first semester. The department/program Chair and a representative for Academic Affairs will meet with the candidate to discuss his or her progress, plans for future work, and the College’s expectations in all three areas of assessment.

Third-Year and Fifth-Year Reviews

The Process: The third-year and fifth-year reviews are conducted by the department/program Chair early in the spring semester (January) of the tenure track faculty member’s third or fifth year of service to the College, respectively. The department/program Chair reviews materials on teaching, scholarship, and service included in the candidate’s updated portfolio. The department/program Chair (or, with the approval of the Vice President for Academic Affairs, a designated senior colleague in the department/program) will observe the candidate’s teaching during the fall semester and meet with the candidate to provide appropriate feedback. The purpose of these visits is to support and guide the candidate toward effective teaching at Rhodes. The chair and the candidate should work together to determine the timing of class visits to help promote the candidate’s development. The department/program Chair will also review college-wide student evaluations and grade distributions for all classes taught during the review period. The department/program Chair determines whether progress in each category of evaluation is satisfactory or if there are areas of concern. In the third-year, the department/program Chair will also consider feedback provided to the faculty member during the second-year review and assess whether progress is being made by the candidate in any areas identified as needing improvement. In the fifth-year, feedback provided during the fourth-year review will be considered in a similar fashion. The department/program Chair then meets with the candidate to discuss the Chair’s assessment as well as the candidate’s plans for future work. If no concerns are noted, this concludes the review process.

If there are any areas of concern, the department/program Chair also schedules a meeting with the Vice President for Academic Affairs to discuss the outcome of the review. In the event of such a meeting, the department/program Chair conveys in writing the results of the evaluation (including feedback from the Vice President for Academic Affairs) to the candidate. The department/program Chair will also send a copy of this letter to the Vice President for Academic Affairs that will be maintained in the Office of Academic Affairs throughout the candidate’s tenure-track period of service to the College, and it is available to the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion upon request during a sixth-year review.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

B. The Second-Year Review

B. The Second-Year Review

Overview: A tenure-track member of the faculty undergoes a second-year review in the spring semester of the second year of the first six years of his or her appointment. As both formative and summative, this review provides feedback on progress towards a successful tenure review and identifies areas that require attention prior to a tenure review.

The Process: The second-year review is conducted very early in the spring semester (January) by the tenure-track faculty member’s department/program Chair. The candidate prepares an updated portfolio for this review. The department/program Chair reviews materials on teaching, scholarship and service included in the candidate’s portfolio. The department/program Chair (or, with the approval of the Vice President for Academic Affairs, a designated senior colleague in the department/program) will also observe three of the candidate’s classes in the fall semester prior to the review. Additionally, the department/program Chair will review the candidate’s college-wide student evaluations and grade distributions for all classes taught during the review period.

The department Chair will receive input from at least two senior members of the department. The program Chair will receive input from at least two senior faculty members in the program or faculty designated by the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Faculty housed in departments but engaged in significant interdisciplinary scholarship or significant and regular teaching in interdisciplinary programs will be evaluated by the department Chair and two other senior faculty, normally the program Chair and a senior faculty member designated by the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the Chairs. These senior members of the department and/or program will be identified in the fall of the candidate’s first year of service at the College and designated in the PRS. When possible, the senior faculty who participate in the second-year review will remain in place through the tenure review in order to ensure continuity of observation and feedback.

Input from these senior department/program members will be informed by observations from class visits during the previous two semesters (at least one class session during the first year and one class session in the fall semester of the second year) and a review of the candidate’s portfolio. These senior members of the department/program will meet as a group with the department/program Chair to discuss their observations and findings.

The department/program Chair then makes a determination regarding the candidate’s progress in each category of evaluation using the description of performance described in the previous section (Section VIII). The department/program Chair then meets with the candidate to discuss the Chair’s assessment as well as the candidate’s plans for future work.

The department/program Chair’s written assessment of the candidate’s progress in each category of evaluation (including the reasons for the assessments) and the candidate’s portfolio are sent to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, usually late in January. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will have an initial meeting with the department/program Chair to discuss the Chair’s assessment and the Dean’s assessment of the candidate’s progress. This is followed by a meeting with the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the department/program Chair, and the candidate to discuss his or her progress. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will provide a written summary of the outcome of the review focusing on the candidate’s progress in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service with recommendations for improvement when necessary. If progress is deemed to be insufficient, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will communicate this in the letter as well. This letter will become part of the official record examined during the fourth-year review. After the meeting with the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the department/program Chair will have a follow-up meeting with the candidate to discuss the feedback from the review process and to assist the candidate in identifying strategies to foster an ongoing positive trajectory in each category of evaluation.

In the case of departments/programs with fewer than three senior faculty members, an ad hoc department/program committee for a tenure-track faculty member will be constituted in the first year and specified in the PRS. One or two ad hoc department/program committee members will be designated by the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the senior members of the candidate’s department/program and the candidate. Ad hoc department/program committee members will be expected to engage in regular classroom visitations, as well as have a conversation with the candidate concerning teaching and scholarship expectations. Normally, the ad hoc department/program committee will continue to evaluate the candidate through the tenure review, even if the department/program grows to more than three senior members between the candidate’s first and sixth year. This will help to ensure continuity of observation and feedback throughout the probationary period.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

C. The Fourth-Year Review

C. The Fourth-Year Review

Overview: The fourth-year review is both formative and summative. It considers the same three areas of faculty performance as the second-year review, but is broader in scope in that all tenured faculty participating in the review provide a written assessment of a candidate. The fourth-year review is particularly crucial for determining the likelihood of success during the tenure review for a faculty member at the College. The fourth-year review is also done with attention given to the College’s needs for the position in the faculty member’s discipline.

Faculty housed in academic departments are evaluated at the fourth year by all tenured departmental faculty members. 

Faculty housed in interdisciplinary programs are evaluated by a committee of senior faculty constituted in the first year by the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the program Chair and specified in the PRS. Normally, this committee will include the program Chair and two senior faculty involved in the candidate’s second-year review, and possibly other senior faculty with appropriate expertise. When possible, this review committee will stay in place through the candidate’s sixth-year in order to ensure continuity of observation and feedback.

Faculty housed in departments but engaged in significant interdisciplinary scholarship or have significant and regular teaching commitments to interdisciplinary programs will be evaluated by all tenured departmental faculty members, but in these cases the review will normally include the Chair of the relevant interdisciplinary program and/or other tenured program faculty with relevant scholarship and/or teaching expertise. The decision to expand the review beyond the department will be made by the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the department Chair, the program Chair, and the candidate and will be specified in the PRS. Normally this decision will be made in the first year, and when possible, the department and program faculty for the fourth-year review will remain in place through the tenure review in order to ensure continuity of observation and feedback.

The fourth-year review takes place in the fall semester of the candidate’s fourth year of service to the College. The review process is initiated in August, with data collection early in the fall semester. It concludes in December with a meeting attended by the candidate, department/program Chair, and Vice President for Academic Affairs.

The Process: By the first day of the fall semester, the candidate will submit an updated portfolio according to instructions provided by the Office of Academic Affairs. During the fall semester, the Office of Academic Affairs will distribute questionnaires to be completed by all students who have completed a class (or classes) with the candidate and earned grades of A through D- during his or her first six semesters of teaching at the College. If the Vice President for Academic Affairs believes more information on teaching performance is needed, a representative for Academic Affairs and the department/program Chair will co-conduct interviews with selected students. The Office of Academic Affairs will also send questionnaires to all of the candidate’s advisees, and will collect copies of all of the candidate’s college-generated course evaluations.

Senior departmental/program faculty members will review the candidate’s portfolio and visit at least one class. Faculty who are members of the Teaching Evaluation Committee will visit a minimum of three classes during the first semester of the candidate’s fourth year. Senior faculty members will meet as a group with the department/program Chair to discuss the candidate’s performance in teaching, scholarship, and service over the four years, his or her suitability for renewal, and suggestions for possible improvement, where necessary. Each senior member writes a letter of his or her assessment of the candidate; this letter is submitted according to instructions provided by the Office of Academic Affairs. In addition to his or her independent assessment, the department/program Chair’s letter to the Vice President for Academic Affairs addresses any problems raised by the senior faculty members taking part in the review.

The candidate has the option of soliciting additional letters from faculty and staff members that focus on the candidate’s service performance and campus citizenship. These letters should be submitted according to instructions provided by the Office of Academic Affairs. The remainder of the review, which culminates in December, is carried out by the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the department/program Chair. A final assessment of performance in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service is given in writing by the Vice President for Academic Affairs to the candidate at the review’s conclusion.

A faculty member not meeting the College’s standards and/or not making adequate progress toward tenure in any area of evaluation (teaching, scholarship, or service) following the fourth-year review will not have his or her contract renewed after the fifth year of appointment. This candidate does not undergo a sixth-year review. The fifth year constitutes the twelve months’ notice of non-reappointment.

The materials compiled during the fourth-year review will be maintained by the Office of Academic Affairs and will be available to the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion upon request during a tenure review.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

D. The Tenure (and Promotion to rank of Associate Professor) Review

D. The Tenure (and Promotion to rank of Associate Professor) Review

Overview: The tenure review process is a comprehensive assessment of the work of a faculty member. It is a review of the work of the candidate since the beginning of his or her appointment as well as an attempt to gauge a trajectory of the candidate’s career at the College. A candidate for tenure must hold the Ph.D. degree or other appropriate terminal degree.

The group of senior faculty who evaluate the candidate during the tenure review is constituted in parallel with the procedure for the fourth-year review. Faculty housed in academic departments are evaluated for tenure by all tenured departmental faculty members. 

Faculty housed in interdisciplinary programs are evaluated by a committee of senior faculty constituted in the first year by the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the program Chair and specified in the PRS. Normally, this committee will include the program Chair and the senior faculty involved in the candidate’s fourth-year review, and other possibly other senior faculty with appropriate expertise.

Faculty housed in departments but engaged in significant interdisciplinary scholarship or significant and regular teaching in interdisciplinary programs will be evaluated by all tenured departmental faculty members, but in these cases the review will normally include the Chair of the relevant interdisciplinary program and/or other tenured program faculty with relevant scholarship and/or teaching expertise. The decision to expand the review beyond the department will be made by the Vice President for Academic Affairs in consultation with the department Chair, the program Chair, and the candidate and will be specified in the PRS. When possible, extra-departmental faculty participating in the tenure review will include those who evaluated the candidate in the fourth-year review.

At the start of the year of the review, the candidate for tenure prepares an updated portfolio, together with supplemental materials described below. The Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion, the candidate’s department/program Chair, and the Office of Academic Affairs then work together to gather all of the documentation required for the review. A number steps are involved in this process:

  • A designated representative for Academic Affairs and the Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion contact the Teaching Evaluation Committee assembled prior to the fourth-year review. Four external reviewers are secured to assist in evaluating the candidate’s scholarship. A designated Associate Dean of Academic Affairs and the Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion select two outside reviewers from a list created by the candidate. The designated representative for Academic Affairs, in consultation with the Chair of the candidate’s department/program and with the Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion, selects two additional reviewers. The representative for Academic Affairs contacts outside reviewers to secure their agreement to participate in the process of assessment and forwards the materials to be reviewed.
  • The Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion obtains a list of students taught by the candidate. These students receive a survey about the candidate’s teaching effectiveness. A similar list is prepared to include all of the advisees served by the candidate. These students will receive a survey about the candidate’s work as an advisor.
  • The Chair of the Teaching Evaluation Committee convenes the committee, reviews the process of visitation, and oversees the timely preparation of letters for the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion.
  • The Chair of the Committee on Tenure and Promotion invites those faculty colleagues named by the candidate to submit letters of evaluation concerning service to the College.
  • The Chair of the department/program reviews the process of evaluation at the departmental/program level with the senior members of the department/program early in the semester of review, and oversees the scheduling of class visits for senior faculty not appointed to the Teaching Evaluation Committee. He or she then convenes the department/program meeting to discuss the candidate’s performance at the end of the review process, and oversees the timely submission of letters for the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion.

When all of the review materials have been assembled, the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion evaluates the candidate’s record of teaching, scholarship, and service. Deliberation by the Tenure and Promotion Committee usually occurs late in the fall semester of the review year. This committee makes a recommendation for or against the granting of tenure to the Vice President for Academic Affairs normally by February 15. The Vice President for Academic Affairs’s review of the case is completed by early March. The Vice President for Academic Affairs forwards his or her recommendation, along with the Tenure and Promotion Committee’s recommendation, to the President for review. The President’s decision, if positive, results in a recommendation for the granting of tenure and promotion that is sent to the Board of Trustees at their April meeting. Tenure is granted to members of the Rhodes Faculty by the Board of Trustees on the recommendation of the President (typically at that same meeting).

In completing the assessment and determining that a recommendation in favor of granting tenure is appropriate, the consensus of the department/program Chair, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President must be that there is a clear need for continuing a permanent position in the area of the faculty member’s expertise and teaching competence.

Normally no member of the Faculty may teach more than seven years at Rhodes without having been granted tenure; exceptions are made only in those special circumstances where a term contract is appropriate.

Promotion to Associate Professor normally accompanies a positive tenure decision as a natural consequence of meeting the standards for tenure. On rare occasions, promotion to Associate Professor may occur before completion of twelve semesters of full-time teaching as a way to recognize an unusually effective member of the Faculty. While such early promotion to Associate Professor requires evidence of outstanding contributions to the College, it does not guarantee a positive tenure review.

Tenure may be offered with the initial appointment of a senior academic to the Rhodes Faculty; in this case expedited reviews by the appropriate academic department/program, the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion, and the Vice President for Academic Affairs are required.

A number of people or groups have roles in this process, and the responsibilities of each of these are outlined below.

The responsibilities of candidates for tenure are as follows:

1. Preparation of an updated portfolio in which the candidate presents relevant materials in support of the application for tenure. This portfolio would include the following

  • A current curriculum vitae
  • A written statement about the candidate’s work that focuses on contributions to the scholarship of the respective discipline(s) and the candidate’s teaching and service at Rhodes College.
  • Copies of all scholarly work (publications, evidence of creative activities, etc.).
  • Teaching materials including, but not limited to, syllabi, exams, study questions, laboratory exercises.

2. Lists of the following possible evaluators:

  • The names of the four members of the Faculty who served on the fourth-year Teaching Evaluation Committee.
  • The names of at least six outside evaluators of professional work. All of these persons should be recognized scholars in the discipline. None should have a personal stake in the career of the candidate. The candidate provides a description of the extent of personal acquaintance, if any, the candidate has with each of the scholars named. At least two of the outside evaluators will be selected from this list.
  • The names of three members of the Rhodes community (tenured faculty members and/or staff members) who can provide evaluations of service to the College.

The responsibilities of the senior members of the candidate’s department/program as specified in the PRS are as follows:

  • Senior members review the materials prepared for the department/program by the candidate. Senior members should be especially mindful of the particular expectations for scholarship formulated by the academic department/program of the candidate. These have been established to present, in more detail, expectations for scholarship that must be met for a positive review at the department/program level.
  • Senior members will observe at least one class during the fall semester of the review year. (Those senior members appointed to the Teaching Evaluation Committee will observe more classes, and their specific responsibilities are described below.)
  • Senior members may seek further information, not gathered as a result of the processes described above, when that information is essential in making a reasoned judgment about the candidate’s performance. While candidates for tenure cannot be privy to student, faculty, or outside colleague comments on their performance, they must be informed if the department/program has questions about matters which the candidate can reasonably be expected to answer or clarify. In such instances, the candidate makes a written response which becomes a document available throughout the review process.
  • As a group, senior members meet with the Chair of the department/program to discuss the performance of the candidate, as measured against the College’s standards for reappointment with tenure. At the close of this meeting, each senior member will indicate whether or not, in her/his judgment, the candidate has met the College’s standard for excellent work in all three areas of evaluation: teaching (as defined in Handbook section 7A), scholarship (section 7B, and further clarified in the department/program expectations), and service (section 7C). The purpose of this meeting of senior department/program colleagues is to provide the candidate a clear and direct indication of the judgment of their department/program colleagues, while still preserving confidentiality, and so senior members are asked here only to judge whether the candidate has met the College’s standards for promotion and tenure, or not. This meeting will take place no later than November 1.
  • Following this meeting the department/program Chair will prepare a very brief letter to the candidate summarizing its outcome. This letter will not contain names or number of votes. This department/program letter shall be conveyed to the candidate by November 15, with copies sent to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion.
  • Each senior member of the department/program writes an individual letter of assessment, covering all three areas (teaching, scholarship, and service) and submits the letter according to instructions provided by the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion. These letters are due by November 15.

The responsibilities of the Teaching Evaluation Committee are as follows:

  • Committee members review the teaching materials prepared for the Committee by the candidate.
  • Committee members will coordinate with the candidate to schedule visits to classes during the fall semester of the review.
  • Each member of the Committee will visit a minimum of three different class sessions. The Committee will meet with the candidate at the conclusion of the class visits to discuss its observations and findings.
  • Each member of the Committee then prepares a letter detailing his or her observations of the classes. When a member of the Teaching Evaluation Committee is also a senior department/program member, the letter writer should identify himself or herself as such and write a single letter. This letter will include a more substantial discussion of the candidate’s teaching than will the standard evaluation letter. All letters are submitted according to instructions provided by the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion. This letter is due by November 15.

The responsibilities of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion are as follows:

  • In the event that a member of the Committee is from the same departmental/program as (or has served on an ad hoc evaluation committee for) the candidate, that member is excluded from the discussion and formulation of the Committee’s recommendation.
  • A designated representative for Academic Affairs and the Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion select two outside reviewers from a list created by the candidate. The designated representative for Academic Affairs, in consultation with the Chair of the candidate’s department/program and with the Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion, selects two additional reviewers.
  • The Committee will apply the College’s standard of excellence in all three areas of assessment as described in Section VIII in assessing the performance of the candidate being reviewed over the entirety of his or her appointment at the College. The committee will be especially mindful of the particular expectations for scholarship as formulated by the academic department/program of the candidate.
  • The Committee will request letters of evaluation of service/campus citizenship from three outside-of-the department/program colleagues/staff members selected by the candidate.
  • The Committee will distribute special surveys to the candidate’s advisees and students. In the assessment of teaching, only students with grades A through D- will be included. In addition to the special survey, the Committee will also review the record of teaching, as measured by the college-wide evaluation instrument, during the entirety of the candidate’s probationary years at the College.
  • The Committee may seek any further information, not gathered as a result of the processes described above, where that information is essential in making a reasoned judgment about the candidate’s performance. While candidates for tenure cannot be privy to student, faculty, or outside colleague comments on their performance, they must be informed if the committee has questions about matters which the candidate can reasonably be expected to answer or clarify. In such cases, the candidate makes a written response which becomes a document available throughout the review process.
  • The Committee may consult materials compiled for the second-year and/or the fourth-year reviews.
  • The Committee will make a recommendation in regard to appointment with tenure and promotion to Associate Professor to the Vice President for Academic Affairs normally by February 15 (the recommendation is provided at the same time to the President). A positive recommendation means that the committee has established to its satisfaction that the candidate has met the College’s standard of excellence in teaching, scholarship, and service and that based on this comprehensive review the pattern of excellence evidenced in the candidate’s teaching, scholarship, and service can be expected to be a distinguishing mark of the candidate’s continued work at the College.
  • By mid-February the committee will inform the candidate in writing of its recommendation, positive or negative, with an explanation of the Committee’s reasoning in reaching its recommendation.

The responsibilities of the Vice President for Academic Affairs are as follows:

  • The Vice President for Academic Affairs will review all information collected in the process of assessment.
  • The Vice President for Academic Affairs will weigh the recommendation of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion, requesting from the Committee or its Chair additional information, if needed, to clarify the Committee’s recommendation.
  • The Vice President for Academic Affairs will apply the College’s standard of excellence in all three areas of assessment as described in Section VIII in assessing the performance of the candidate being reviewed over the entirety of his or her appointment at the College, and will be especially mindful of the particular expectations for scholarship as formulated by the academic department/program of the candidate.
  • The Vice President for Academic Affairs will make an independent recommendation for or against the granting of tenure which is then submitted, along with all materials collected in the process of assessment, to the President by early March. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will meet with the President to discuss the recommendation.
  • Normally by mid-March the Vice President for Academic Affairs will meet with the candidate and communicate his or her recommendation for or against the granting of tenure, along with that of the President.
  • After the meeting, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will provide the candidate with a letter summarizing his or her recommendation.
  • The Vice President for Academic Affairs will inform the Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion and the candidate’s department/program Chair of both the Dean’s own recommendation and that of the President.

Personal circumstances may arise that warrant a delay in the tenure review of a faculty member. Examples may include, but are not limited to, the birth or adoption of a child or the need to care for a partner or family member who is seriously ill. In such cases, a faculty member is eligible to request a one-year postponement of the tenure review. This postponement will not change what is expected in the cumulative record of the faculty member in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service at the time of tenure consideration, even though the candidate will have been in the probationary period longer than six years. This extension of the probationary period is independent of and different from any full or partial leave of absence, although faculty who meet qualifications for the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) would also be eligible to request an extension of the probationary period. An extension of a faculty member’s service to seven or more years does not de facto grant tenure.

The faculty member wishing to request a postponement of the tenure review must submit this request in writing to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, copying the department/program Chair. Requests normally will not be granted if made after the first Friday of March in the calendar year during which review materials are due to be submitted to the Tenure and Promotion Committee. In consultation with the department/program Chair and the Director of Human Resources, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will determine whether the extension will be granted. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will issue a written reply to the faculty member, copying the department/program Chair and the Director of Human Resources, within one month of the day the request was made. Requests for more than two postponements normally will not be granted.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

E. The Promotion to rank of Associate Professor (without tenure)

E. The Promotion to rank of Associate Professor (without tenure)

Overview: The review process is a comprehensive assessment of the work of a faculty member. It is a review of the work of the candidate since the beginning of his or her appointment as well as an attempt to gauge a trajectory of the candidate’s career at the college. A candidate for promotion must hold the Ph.D. degree or other appropriate terminal degree.

In the year prior to review, the candidate consults with the department/program Chair to discuss the viability of a promotion. At the start of the year of the review, the candidate for promotion prepares an updated portfolio, described below. The Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion, the candidate’s department/program Chair, and the  Office of Academic Affairs then work together to gather all of the documentation required for the review. A number of steps are involved in this process:

  • A designated representative for Academic Affairs and the Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion assemble a Teaching Evaluation Committee, working in consultation with the candidate’s department/program Chair, and as specified in the PRS.
  • The Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion obtains a list of students taught by the candidate. These students receive a survey about the candidate’s teaching effectiveness. A similar list is prepared to include all of the advisees served by the candidate. These students will receive a survey about the candidate’s work as an advisor.
  • The Chair of the Teaching Evaluation Committee convenes the committee, reviews the process of visitation, and oversees the timely preparation of letters for the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion.
  • The Chair of the Committee on Tenure and Promotion invites those non-departmental/non-program colleagues named by the candidate to submit letters of evaluation concerning service to the College.
  • The Chair of the department/program reviews the process of evaluation at the department/program level with the senior members of the department/program early in the semester of review, and oversees the scheduling of class visits for senior faculty not appointed to the Teaching Evaluation Committee. The Chair then convenes the department/program meeting to discuss the candidate’s performance at the end of the review process, and oversees the timely submission of letters for the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion.

When all of the review materials have been assembled, the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion evaluates the candidate’s record of teaching and service. Deliberation by the Tenure and Promotion Committee usually occurs late in the fall semester of the review year. This committee makes a recommendation for or against the granting of promotion to the Vice President for Academic Affairs by the end of the fall semester. The Vice President for Academic Affairs and the President undertake their own, respective, evaluations of the candidate’s record. The Vice President for Academic Affairs’s review of the case is completed by early March. The Vice President for Academic Affairs forwards his or her recommendation, along with the Tenure and Promotion Committee’s recommendation, to the President for review. The President’s decision, if positive, results in a recommendation for the granting of promotion that is sent to the Board of Trustees at their April Meeting. Promotion is granted to members of the Rhodes Faculty by the Board of Trustees on the recommendation of the President (typically at that same meeting).

In completing the assessment and determining that a recommendation in favor of granting promotion is appropriate, the consensus of the department/program Chair, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President must be that there is a need in the area of the faculty member’s expertise and teaching competence. Nothing in this paragraph alters the nature of the term contract appointments of nontenurable faculty or confers tenure on nontenurable faculty.

A number of people or groups have roles in this process, and the responsibilities of each of these are outlined below.

The responsibilities of candidates for promotion without tenure are as follows:

1. Preparation of an updated portfolio in which the candidate presents relevant materials in support of the application for tenure. This portfolio would include the following

  • A current curriculum vitae.
  • A written statement about the candidate’s work that focuses on the candidate’s teaching and service at Rhodes College.
  • Teaching materials including, but not limited to syllabi, exams, study questions, laboratory exercises.

2. Lists of the following possible evaluators:

  • The names of four members of the Faculty nominated by the candidate to serve on the Teaching Evaluation Committee; these members are to be tenured Faculty from the department/program and/or related departments/programs as specified in the PRS.
  • The names of three members of the Rhodes community (tenured faculty members and/or staff members) who can provide evaluations of service to the College. 

The responsibilities of the senior members of the candidate’s department/program are as follows: 

  • Senior members review the materials prepared for the department/program by the candidate.
  • Senior members will observe at least one class during the semester of the review year. (Those senior members appointed to the Teaching Evaluation Committee will observe more classes, and their specific responsibilities are described below.)
  • Senior members may seek further information, not gathered as a result of the processes described above, when that information is essential in making a reasoned judgment about the candidate’s performance. While candidates for promotion cannot be privy to student, faculty, or outside colleague comments on their performance, they must be informed if the department/program has questions about matters which the candidate can reasonably be expected to answer or clarify. In such instances, the candidate makes a written response which becomes a document available throughout the review process.
  • As a group, senior members meet with the Chair of the department/program to discuss the performance of the candidate, as measured against the College’s standards for promotion. At the close of this meeting, each senior member will indicate whether or not, in her/his judgment, the candidate has met the College’s standard for excellent work in both areas of evaluation: teaching (as defined in Handbook section 7A) and service (section 7C). The purpose of this meeting of senior department /program colleagues is to provide the candidate a clear and direct indication of the judgment of their department/program colleagues, while still preserving confidentiality, and so senior members are asked here only to judge whether the candidate has met the College’s standards for promotion, or not. This meeting will take place no later than October 1.
  • Following this meeting the department/program Chair will prepare a very brief letter to the candidate summarizing its outcome. This letter will not contain names or number of votes. This department/program letter shall be conveyed to the candidate by October 15, with copies sent to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion.
  • Each senior member of the department/program writes an individual letter of assessment, covering both areas (teaching and service) and submits the letter according to instructions provided by the Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion. These letters are due by October 15. 

The responsibilities of the Teaching Evaluation Committee are as follows: 

  • Committee members review the materials prepared for the Committee by the candidate.
  • Committee members will coordinate with the candidate to schedule visits to classes during the fall semester of the review.
  • Each member of the Committee will visit a minimum of three different class sessions. The Committee will meet with the candidate at the conclusion of the class visits to discuss its observations and findings.
  • Each member of the Committee then prepares a letter detailing his or her observations of the classes. When a member of the Teaching Evaluation Committee is also a senior department/program member, the letter writer should identify himself or herself as such and write a single letter. This letter will include a more substantial discussion of the candidate’s teaching than will the standard evaluation letter. All letters are submitted according to instructions provided by the Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion. This letter is due by October 15. 

The responsibilities of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion are as follows: 

  • In the event that a member of the Committee is from the same department/program as (or has served on an ad hoc evaluation committee for) the candidate, that member is excluded from the discussion and formulation of the Committee’s recommendation.
  • The Committee will apply the College’s standard of excellence in both areas of assessment as described in Section VIII in assessing the performance of the candidate being reviewed over the entirety of his or her appointment at the College.
  • The Committee will request letters of evaluation of service/campus citizenship from three outside-of-the department/program colleagues/staff members selected by the candidate.
  • The Committee will distribute special surveys to the candidate’s advisees and students. In the assessment of teaching, only students with grades A through D- will be included. In addition to the special survey, the Committee will also review the record of teaching, as measured by the college-wide evaluation instrument, during the entirety of the candidate’s years at the College.
  • The Committee may seek any further information, not gathered as a result of the processes described above, where that information is essential in making a reasoned judgment about the candidate’s performance. While candidates for promotion cannot be privy to student, faculty, or outside colleague comments on their performance, they must be informed if the committee has questions about matters which the candidate can reasonably be expected to answer or clarify. In such cases, the candidate makes a written response which becomes a document available throughout the review process.
  • The Committee may consult materials compiled for the three preceding tri-annual reviews.
  • The Committee will make a recommendation in regard to promotion to Associate Professor to the Vice President for Academic Affairs normally by the end of the fall semester (the recommendation is provided at the same time to the President). A positive recommendation means that the committee has established to its satisfaction that the candidate has met the College’s standard of excellence in teaching and service and that based on this comprehensive review the pattern of excellence evidenced in the candidate’s teaching and service can be expected to be a distinguishing mark of the candidate’s continued work at the College.
  • By mid-February the Committee will inform the candidate in writing of its recommendation, positive or negative, with an explanation of the Committee’s reasoning in reaching its recommendation. 

The responsibilities of the Vice President for Academic Affairs are as follows: 

  • The Vice President for Academic Affairswill review all information collected in the process of assessment.
  • The Vice President for Academic Affairswill weigh the recommendation of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion, requesting from the Committee or its Chair additional information, if needed, to clarify the Committee’s recommendation.
  • The Vice President for Academic Affairswill apply the College’s standard of excellence in both areas of assessment as described in Section VIII in assessing the performance of the candidate being reviewed over the entirety of his or her appointment at the College.
  • The Vice President for Academic Affairswill make an independent recommendation for or against the granting of promotion which is then submitted, along with all materials collected in the process of assessment, to the President by early January. The Vice President for Academic Affairswill meet with the President to discuss the recommendation.
  • In mid-January the Vice President for Academic Affairswill meet with the candidate and communicate his or her recommendation for or against the granting of promotion, along with that of the President.
  • At the end of the meeting, the Vice President for Academic Affairswill provide the candidate with a letter summarizing his or her recommendation.
  • The Vice President for Academic Affairs will inform the Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion and the candidate’s department/program Chair of both the Dean’s own recommendation and that of the President.
Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

F. The Post-Tenure Review

F. The Post-Tenure Review

Overview: Faculty members who achieve tenure at Rhodes College continue to develop as effective teachers and active scholars and as members who support in their service work the educational mission of the College. Tenured associate professors have a post-tenure review every six years, with a mid-period update at the third year. Tenured full professors have a post-promotion review every six years. The objective of these reviews is to provide opportunities for reflection and feedback on the tenured faculty member’s continued growth in teaching, scholarship, and service, and to provide a framework for discussions of long-term career planning, including, in the case of associate professors, promotion to professor.

Excellence as defined in Section VIII of the College Handbook remains the benchmark for tenured faculty. Excellence in the post-tenure period entails:

  • A level of teaching effectiveness that maintains or exceeds the excellence required for tenure;
  • Continued scholarly achievement, demonstrated by activities and outcomes appropriate for a recognized scholar in the field;
  • Sustained and effective academic citizenship commensurate with level of experience.

The process for post-tenure review: During the first full academic year of service following the receipt of tenure, the faculty member prepares a non-binding prospectus of professional development for the next six years. This prospectus is written in consultation with the department/program Chair and filed with the Office of Academic Affairs. The prospectus addresses all three areas of evaluation. At six-year intervals thereafter until promotion to the rank of professor, the faculty member prepares a two-part professional development document, consisting of a reflection on the faculty member’s growth in teaching, scholarship, and service over the previous six-year period, and a prospectus for the next six years. The professional development document provides a framework for a review of the faculty member’s professional growth.

In the third year of each post-tenure review cycle, the faculty member prepares an update of the professional development document, indicating progress to date as well as any changes or updates to the prospectus. The faculty member presents this update and a current curriculum vitae to the department/program Chair. The department/program Chair also reviews whatever evidence of effective teaching seems appropriate to insure that the faculty member is continuing to meet the College’s standards of excellence in teaching. The faculty member and the department/program Chair meet to discuss the update along with any issues that may have arisen concerning teaching. The department/program Chair then sends a brief statement to the Vice President for Academic Affairs summarizing the outcome of that conversation. In the event that there are issues that appear to demand attention, the Vice President for Academic Affairs may request a meeting with the department/program Chair and/or the faculty member.

In early January of the post-tenure review year, the faculty member creates a portfolio containing:

  • The professional development document
  • A current curriculum vitae that includes
    • All scholarly or creative activity
    • Courses taught
    • Service to the College and the profession.
  • Representative samples of course syllabi, exams, and assignments for courses taught during the previous six-year period, a list of any additional teaching (Directed Inquiries, undergraduate research/creative activity, honors research/creative activity, etc.), and a list of any new courses taught.
  • Student evaluations from classes taught during the previous six-year period. Tenured faculty are required to have student evaluations conducted in one course each semester, selected in consultation with the department/program Chair to make sure that all types of teaching performed by the faculty member are represented in the review.

In addition to the portfolio, the department/program Chair reviews final grades given for all courses taught by the faculty member during the previous six-year period. This information is provided by the Data Services Office.

The department/program Chair meets with the faculty member to discuss the professional development document and the faculty member’s progress toward achieving career goals. The department/program Chair then writes an assessment of the faculty member’s professional growth which is sent to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, usually late in January. The Dean or a designated representative and the department/program Chair meet in mid-February to discuss points of agreement and disagreement in the assessment. The Vice President for Academic Affairs or designated representative conveys in writing the results of these discussions to the faculty member being evaluated, with a copy to the department/program Chair. The faculty member is welcome to meet with the Vice President for Academic Affairs or designated representative, if desired, to discuss the outcome of the review; the department/program Chair may be invited to this meeting at the discretion of the Vice President for Academic Affairs or designated representative.

The process for post-promotion review: At six-year intervals after promotion to the rank of professor, the faculty member prepares a professional development document, consisting of a reflection on the faculty member’s growth in teaching, scholarship, and service over the previous six-year period, and a non-binding prospectus for the next six years. The prospectus may propose shifts in emphasis between scholarship or creative activity and service, as appropriate for the faculty member’s career trajectory. In early January the faculty member provides to the department/program Chair the professional development document and a current curriculum vitae. The department/program Chair meets with the faculty member to discuss the professional development document and the faculty member’s progress toward achieving career goals. The department/program Chair then writes an assessment of the faculty member’s career growth which is sent to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, usually late in January. The Vice President for Academic Affairs or a designated representative and the department/program Chair meet in mid-February to discuss points of agreement and disagreement in the assessment. The Vice President for Academic Affairs or designated representative conveys in writing the results of these discussions to the faculty member being evaluated, with a copy to the department/program Chair. The faculty member is welcome to meet with the Vice President for Academic Affairs or designated representative, if desired, to discuss the outcome of the review; the department/program Chair may be invited to this meeting at the discretion of the Vice President for Academic Affairs or designated representative.

Reviews of department chairs: If the faculty member under review is a department/program Chair, the review normally will be conducted by some other senior member of the department/program designated by the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

Remediation: In rare and extreme cases, in either the post-tenure review or the post-promotion review, a faculty member may receive an assessment indicating that the faculty member has failed to meet the College’s standards of excellence in one or more areas of evaluation. In such cases, the faculty member will develop, in consultation with the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the department/program Chair, a plan for improvement that addresses the area(s) of deficiency and a timeline for improvement. In accordance with a schedule specified by the timeline, the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the department/program Chair will evaluate the faculty member’s work in removing the deficiency. After two years, if the Vice President for Academic Affairs determines that the faculty member has not shown evidence of improvement in the designated area(s), the salary of the faculty member will continue without increases until the level of achievement is deemed by the Vice President for Academic Affairs to be appropriate; that is, the salary will be frozen at the level of salary in the second year after the review. At the conclusion of the period specified in the timeline, should performance not meet the level of achievement specified in the plan for improvement, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will determine an appropriate response.

At the time of a negative review, the faculty member may request a review of the matter. The Tenure and Promotion Committee will hear the petition from the member of the Faculty, and the Committee will make a recommendation to the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The Committee’s recommendation will become part of the official record maintained at the College.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

G. The Promotion to rank of Professor Review

G. The Promotion to rank of Professor Review

Overview: Promotion to the rank of Professor recognizes a sustained trajectory of significant achievement in teaching, scholarship, and service to the College since the appointment to Associate Professor. Given the need for an extensive period of time in which to establish such a trajectory, application for promotion to Professor normally occurs six years or more after promotion to Associate Professor. In teaching, the successful candidate should have maintained or exceeded the level of teaching effectiveness achieved for tenure. In scholarship, there should be concrete evidence of scholarly productivity that has contributed significantly to the candidate’s professional profile. In service, the candidate should demonstrate a level of meaningful and effective service to the College beyond that required for tenure. Potential candidates are encouraged to discuss their plans for promotion with their department/program Chairs and a designate of the Office of Academic Affairs.

The Process: The process for consideration begins with notification of intent to apply to the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion at the end of the academic year preceding the academic year in which the review takes place (early May). The due date for submission of materials will be early August. The Faculty Committee will consider the application in the fall semester.

The candidate for promotion prepares an updated portfolio according to instructions provided by the Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion.

Participation in the review process:  Normally every senior member of a candidate’s department/program participates in the review process; the minimum number of reviewers is three. In cases where fewer than three senior members of the department/program exist, the Dean of the Faculty, in consultation with the Chair of the Department/Program, will appoint ad hoc members of the faculty to bring the number of participants in the review up to three. These external faculty will act in the capacity of senior departmental/program members for the purposes of the candidate’s evaluation, and their assessments of the candidate will be given equal weight with assessments from faculty within the candidate’s department/program. In selecting faculty, the Dean of the Faculty will consult with an Associate Dean of Academic Affairs, the candidate, and the candidate’s department/program chair.

For all faculty with significant interdisciplinary teaching commitments, regardless of the size of the home department, the Dean of the Faculty will normally invite the Chair or another senior member of the relevant interdisciplinary programs to evaluate the faculty as an ad hoc member of the candidate’s department.

The responsibilities of candidates for promotion are as follows:

1. Preparation of an updated portfolio in which the candidate presents relevant materials in support of the application for promotion. This portfolio would include the following:

  • A letter, or personal statement, addressing qualifications for promotion in the areas of teaching, scholarship activities, and service (These letters typically average from 4-5 typed, double-spaced pages.)
  • A current curriculum vitae, including a complete bibliography of published work or evidence of creative activity;
  • A representative sample of syllabi, examinations, and class or laboratory exercises covering the period since the appointment to Associate Professor;
  • Copies of publications, evidence of creative activity, and other materials related to professional work since the appointment to Associate Professor;

2.  Lists of the following possible evaluators:

  • Names of at least six (6) outside evaluators of scholarly production or creative works (These persons should be recognized scholars in the discipline; none of them should have a personal, vested stake in the professional standing of the candidate; the candidate should describe the extent of the acquaintance with the outside evaluators and indicate what work each outside evaluator is in a position to review.);
  • Names of three (3) members of the Faculty from outside the candidate’s department/program and/or College staff who can comment on the candidate’s citizenship at the College.

The responsibilities of the senior members of the candidate’s department/program, and of faculty acting in this capacity, are:

  • To review the portfolio prepared for the department/program by the candidate being reviewed;
  • To be especially mindful of the particular expectations for scholarly performance as prescribed for the academic department/program of the candidate as specified in the PRS;
  • To seek further information, not gathered as a result of the processes described above, where that information is essential in making a reasoned judgment about the candidate’s performance;
  • To write an individual letter of assessment that is submitted according to instructions provided by the Chair of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion. (In the case that the letter is written by a Professor in the Faculty, a recommendation in regard to the promotion is made; in the case that the letter is written by an Associate Professor in the Faculty, an evaluation without a recommendation is offered.)

The responsibilities of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion are:

  • In the event that a member of the Committee is from the same department/program as the candidate being reviewed, that member is excluded from the discussion and formulation of the Committee’s recommendation;
  • In the event that a member of the Committee is a candidate to be considered for promotion, that member resigns from the Committee;
  • The Chair of the Committee and a designated representative for Academic Affairs select two (2) outside evaluators for the candidate’s scholarly work, taken from the list provided by the candidate, and select two (2) additional outside evaluators after consultation with the Chair of the department/program;
  • To apply the standards as prescribed in Section VIII above in assessing the performance of the candidate being reviewed since the appointment of the candidate as an Associate Professor at the College;
  • To be especially mindful of the particular expectations for scholarly performance as prescribed for the academic department/program of the candidate and as specified in the PRS;
  • To collect information about teaching effectiveness and student advising duties from special student surveys, including interviews with students, if deemed necessary;
  • The Committee will distribute special surveys to the candidate’s advisees and students. In the assessment of teaching, only students with grades A through D- will be included; In addition to the special survey, the Committee will also review the record of teaching, as measured by the college-wide evaluation instrument since the appointment of the candidate as an Associate Professor at the College;
  • To seek further information, not gathered as a result of the processes described above, where that information is essential in making a reasoned judgment about the candidate’s achievements;
  • To make a recommendation in regard to appointment with promotion to Professor to the Vice President for Academic Affairs on or about December 5 (the recommendation is provided at the same time to the President); and,
  • To inform the candidate, normally by mid-December, of the result of the recommendation, positive or negative, made by the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion, with an explanation of the Committee’s reasoning in reaching its recommendation.

The responsibilities of the Vice President for Academic Affairs are:

  • In cases where a candidate’s department/program contains fewer than three senior faculty members, to select senior faculty from outside of the candidate’s home department/program who have first-hand experience of the candidate’s work in the areas of teaching, research, and/or service to act as senior departmental/program members for the purposes of the candidate’s evaluation.
  • To obtain, with the assistance of a designated representative for Academic Affairs, the agreement of outside evaluators to review the candidate’s scholarly work and to submit in a timely fashion a report of these evaluations to the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion;
  • To be especially mindful of the particular expectations for scholarly performance as prescribed for the academic department/program of the candidate and as specified in the PRS;
  • To review all information collected in the process of assessment;
  • To weigh the recommendation of the Faculty Committee on Tenure and Promotion, requesting from the Committee or its Chair additional information, if needed, to clarify the Committee’s recommendation;
  • To make an independent recommendation which is then submitted with all materials collected in the process of assessment to the President; this is to be done on or about January 10 (If the President agrees with a recommendation to promote, the President forwards this recommendation to the Board of Trustees for action.); and,
  • To inform the candidate of the result of the recommendation, positive or negative, made by the Vice President for Academic Affairs, with an explanation of the Vice President for Academic Affairs′s reasoning in reaching his or her recommendation.

In the event that a review for promotion reaches a negative outcome, the faculty member must wait at least three years from the date of the previous application before reapplying for consideration.

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

H. Reviews of a Fourth-Year Review, Tenure Decision, or Promotion Decision

H. Reviews of a Fourth-Year Review, Tenure Decision, or Promotion Decision

 

If contract extension beyond the fifth year is denied as a result of the fourth-year review, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will inform the candidate at a meeting of the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the department/program Chair, and the candidate, usually in December; notice will also be provided to the candidate in writing.

If tenure is denied, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will so inform the candidate, on or about March 15. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will meet with the candidate denied tenure to discuss with the candidate the reasons for denial.

If promotion to Professor is denied, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will so inform the candidate, normally on or about January 15. The Vice President for Academic Affairs meets with the candidate denied promotion to discuss with the candidate the reasons for denial.

The faculty member denied contract extension at the fourth-year review, tenure, or promotion to Professor may appeal the decision on the grounds that it was made capriciously or not in conformity with the established procedures. The faculty member must notify the Dean of the Faculty in writing of his or her intent to appeal the decision within ten calendar days of being notified that contract extension, tenure, or promotion was denied.

A written appeal must then be submitted to the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the President, and the Faculty Appeals Committee no later than twenty calendar days after the submission of the notice of intent to appeal. The appeal must specify what procedure is alleged to have been violated and/or in what way the decision is alleged to have been made capriciously. In making the appeal, as throughout the tenure process and promotion process, the burden of proof rests with the faculty member.

In considering the appeal, the Faculty Appeals Committee will review pertinent information regarding procedures supplied by the Vice President for Academic Affairs and will conduct interviews limited to the alleged capriciousness or violation of procedure described in the appeal.

The Appeals Committee will provide a written report to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the President. The report will contain findings of fact and conclusions as to whether or not the original decision was reached capriciously or procedures were violated. In the event the committee finds there were violations sufficient to warrant reconsideration, the Appeals Committee will recommend in its report that the President review the original decision. If the committee is divided, a minority report also will be filed.

A statement summarizing the Appeals Committee findings, which preserves the confidentiality of the process, will be made available to the candidate. The summary will indicate if the decision was unanimous. 

If the Appeals Committee asks the President to review a previous recommendation and the President upholds the previous recommendation, the President will provide the Appeals Committee’s full report (and the minority report if the Appeal’s Committee is divided), along with the President’s recommendation, to the Board of Trustees, who will determine the final College position on the matter.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

I. Non-Tenure Track Faculty Review

I. Non-Tenure Track Faculty Review

Persons holding non tenure-track appointments to the Faculty have responsibilities that vary by department/program. These areas of responsibility are specified in the contract of employment. Such individuals will normally have their work evaluated each year, with re-appointment contingent upon both the needs of the College as well as continued excellence in their areas of responsibility. The evaluation process for teaching will include student evaluations administered in all courses taught by the Faculty member, class visitations by the department/program Chair, or other senior member(s) of the department/program, review of syllabi, exams and final grades for the course. As with all appointments at Rhodes, the standard for re-appointment is the expectation of excellent teaching. For non-tenure track appointments that include service and/or scholarship, the evaluation process will be specified by the Vice President for Academic Affairsin the PRS in cooperation with the department/program in which the appointment is held. 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

X. Retirement, Resignation, Dismissal for Cause, Dismissal of Tenured Faculty

X. Retirement, Resignation, Dismissal for Cause, Dismissal of Tenured Faculty

A. Retirement. There is no mandatory retirement age for officers of instruction.

B. Resignation. Officers of instruction who intend to resign their faculty position will inform the Vice President for Academic Affairs in writing within two weeks of receiving contracts for the next academic year.

C. Dismissal for Cause. On rare occasions there are reasons to question the fitness of a tenured faculty member or a faculty member whose term has not expired for continued employment. Such reasons may include, without limitation, moral turpitude (including falsification of academic credentials), neglect of assigned duty, or incompetency.

The procedures to be followed in evaluating these reasons and taking appropriate actions must be pursued with due consideration of the position of the faculty member and of the welfare of the academic mission of the College. For this reason Rhodes College has adopted procedural guidelines set forth in the 1958 Statement on Procedural Standards in Faculty Dismissal Proceedings, established by the American Association of University Professors. A copy is attached as an Appendix. The procedures outlined in the paragraphs below are direct adaptations to the Rhodes College governance structure of these AAUP guidelines.

  1. Preliminary Proceedings Concerning the Fitness of a Faculty Member. When reason arises to question the fitness of a college faculty member who has tenure or whose term appointment has not expired, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, after consultation with the President, will discuss the matter with the faculty member in personal conference. The matter may be terminated by mutual consent at this point; but if a resolution does not result, the Faculty Governance Committee will informally inquire into the situation to effect a resolution if possible and, if none is effected, to determine whether in its view formal proceedings to consider dismissal for cause should be instituted.

    If the Faculty Governance Committee recommends that such proceedings be begun, or if the Vice President for Academic Affairs, after consultation with the President, even after considering a recommendation of the committee favorable to the faculty member, takes the position that a proceeding should be undertaken, action will be commenced under the procedures which follow.

    Except where there is disagreement between the Faculty Governance Committee and the Vice President for Academic Affairs, a statement with reasonable particularity of the grounds proposed for the dismissal will be jointly formulated by the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the Faculty Governance Committee. If there is disagreement, the DVice President for Academic Affairs will formulate the statement.
     
  2. Commencement of Formal Proceedings. The formal proceedings are initiated by a letter to the faculty member from the Vice President for Academic Affairs, informing the faculty member of the statement formulated, and informing the faculty member that, if requested, a hearing to determine whether the faculty member should be removed from the faculty position on the grounds stated will be conducted by the Faculty Committee on Appeals at a specified time and place. The Faculty Committee on Appeals sits as the Hearing Committee for matters involving dismissal for cause. The hearing is normally scheduled within thirty days of notification to the faculty member.

    In setting the date of the hearing, sufficient time will be allowed the faculty member to prepare a defense. The faculty member will be informed, in detail or by reference to published regulations, of the procedural rights that will be accorded to the faculty member. The faculty member will state in reply whether a hearing is requested and, if so, will answer in writing, not less than ten days before the date set for the hearing, the statements in the Vice President for Academic Affairs’s letter.
     
  3. Suspension of the Faculty Member. Suspension of the faculty member during the proceedings is justified only if immediate harm to self or others is threatened by a continuance of the appointment. Unless legal consideration forbids, any such suspension will be with pay.
     
  4. Faculty Committee on Appeals. The committee of faculty members to conduct the hearing and reach a decision is an elected standing committee of the Faculty – the Faculty Committee on Appeals. In the event that there is a conflict of interest presented to any member of the committee the standard procedure for appointing a replacement is to be followed.
     
  5. Faculty Committee on Appeals Proceedings. The Faculty Committee on Appeals proceeds by considering the statement of grounds for dismissal already formulated and the faculty member’s response written before the time of the hearing.

    If the faculty member has not requested a hearing, the Committee should consider the case on the basis of the obtainable information and decide whether the appointment of the faculty member should not be renewed; otherwise the hearing should go forward.

    The Committee, in consultation with the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the faculty member, will exercise its judgment as to whether the hearing should be public or private. If any facts are in dispute, the testimony of witnesses and other evidence concerning the matter set forth in the letter to the faculty member will be made available to the Committee by the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

    The Vice President for Academic Affairs has the option of attendance during the hearing. The Vice President for Academic Affairs may designate an appropriate representative to assist in developing the case; but the committee will secure the presentation of evidence important to the case, will determine the order of proof, and will normally conduct the questioning of witnesses if called.

    The faculty member will have the option of assistance by counsel, whose functions should be similar to those of the representative chosen by the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The faculty member has the additional procedural rights set forth in the 1940 AAUP Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure and will have the aid of the Faculty Committee on Appeals, when needed, in securing the attendance of witnesses.

    The faculty member or his or her counsel, and the Vice President for Academic Affairs or representative designated by the Vice President for Academic Affairs, have the right, within reasonable limits, to question all witnesses who testify orally. The faculty member has the opportunity to be confronted by all witnesses adverse to the faculty member. Where unusual and urgent reasons cause the Faculty Committee on Appeals to withhold this right, or where the witness cannot appear, the identity of the witness, as well as the witness’ statements, will nevertheless be disclosed to the faculty member. Subject to these safeguards, statements may when necessary be taken outside the hearing and made available to the Committee. All of the evidence will be duly recorded. Unless special circumstances warrant, it is not necessary to follow formal rules of court procedure.
     
  6. Consideration by the Faculty Committee on Appeals. The Faculty Committee on Appeals will reach its decision in conference, on the basis of the hearing. Before doing so, it will give opportunity to the faculty member or counsel and the representative designated by the Vice President for Academic Affairs to argue orally before it. If written briefs would be helpful, the committee may request them.

    The committee may proceed to decision promptly, without having the record of the hearing transcribed, where it feels that a just decision can be reached by this means; or it may await the availability of a transcript of the hearing if its decision would be aided thereby. It will make explicit findings with respect to each of the grounds of removal presented, and a reasoned opinion is required.

    Publicity concerning the committee’s decision may properly be withheld until consideration has been given to the case by the governing body of the institution.

    The Vice President for Academic Affairs, the President, and the faculty member will be notified of the decision in writing and will be given a copy of the record of the hearing. Any release to the public is made through the President’s office.
     
  7. Consideration by Governing Body. The President transmits to the Board of Trustees the full report of the Faculty Committee on Appeals, stating its action. On the assumption that the Board of Trustees has accepted the principle of the Faculty Committee on Appeals, acceptance of the committee’s decision is normally expected.

    If the Board of Trustees chooses to review the case, its review will be based on the record of the previous hearing, accompanied by opportunity for argument, oral or written or both, by the principals at the hearing or their representatives.

    The decision of the Faculty Committee on Appeals is either sustained or the proceeding is returned to the committee with objections specified. In such a case the committee will reconsider the case, taking account of the stated objections and receiving new evidence if necessary. It frames its decision and communicates it in the same manner as before.

    Only after study of the committee’s reconsideration will the Board of Trustees make a final decision overruling the committee.
     
  8. Publicity. Except for such simple announcements as may be required, covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, public statements about the case by either the faculty member or administrative officers are avoided so far as possible until the proceedings have been completed. Any announcement of the final decision will include a statement of the Faculty Committee on Appeal’s original action, if this has not previously been made known.

D. Dismissal of Tenured Faculty. Special institutional circumstances may lead to the dismissal of a tenured faculty member.

If a program or department or major track within a department is discontinued, faculty members within that program or department may be dismissed. However, the College will give hiring priority to any tenured faculty member who had been dismissed for these reasons should the program or department or track be reestablished within two years.

The President may declare a state of financial exigency in the event that the College’s total operating income declines by 10% or more from the annual projected income budget. In the event that a state of financial exigency is declared, each department and division of the College will develop a reduction plan immediately, not waiting for the next budget cycle.

If the College declares a state of financial exigency, tenured members of the faculty may be dismissed. The College should be most reluctant to take the extreme measure of dismissing tenured members of the Faculty.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

XI. Sabbatical Leave of Absence

XI. Sabbatical Leave of Absence

Sabbatical leave is granted to members of the Faculty to allow them to pursue professional activities that will promote scholarly research or creative activities. The College expects sabbatical leave to produce tangible results. Completing work for the Ph.D. or other terminal degree is not an appropriate use of sabbatical leave. A record of scholarship or creative productivity is expected for successful applications (including, when applicable, demonstrated outcomes from the previous sabbatical). However, the sabbatical is not granted in recognition of previous work; rather, it is awarded in anticipation of future work.

A. Eligibility. A Faculty member with tenure is eligible for sabbatical leave after twelve semesters of full-time teaching and thereafter is eligible after each successive twelve semesters of full-time teaching. The sabbatical leave or leave of absence will not count toward a subsequent sabbatical leave.

Full-time Faculty members may count semesters taught at a reduced load if the reduced load is the result of a College initiative. If a sabbatical leave is delayed beyond the semester in which a Faculty member is first eligible, the additional semester of teaching will not count toward a subsequent sabbatical unless the delay is the result of a College request. Only four semesters can be carried forward in this way.

B. Length and Compensation. Sabbatical leave may be granted for one semester or for one full academic year.

While on one semester leave a Faculty member will continue to receive full salary. While on a full year, two semester leave a Faculty member will be paid a total of 60% of the annual salary that would have been paid in that year if not on leave. Contributions by the College to a faculty member’s retirement plan will be based on the salary actually paid under the annual contract for the sabbatical leave year in accordance with the retirement plan adopted and approved for the College. During a sabbatical leave year, all other fringe benefits remain in force as outlined in the College Handbook.

C. Application.

  1. Faculty eligible for sabbatical leave will submit a letter of intent to the Office of Academic Affairs by 1 October of the year prior to the academic year of the projected leave. This letter of intent will include a statement from the candidate indicating the projected duration of the sabbatical leave (either a full academic year or the specific semester being requested for leave) and will be accompanied by a letter from the applicant’s Department Chair that describes the department’s (and any affected program’s) plan for covering the applicant’s teaching responsibilities during the leave. When a leave is contingent on acceptance into a program or research group, or on receipt of grant support, the letter of intent application should give a detailed description of such contingencies and the dates by which the contingencies will be removed.
  2. Applicants for sabbatical leave will present copies of the full project description and a current curriculum vitae to both the Office of Academic Affairs and the Faculty Development Committee by 1 November of the year prior to the academic year of the leave. This detailed description of the proposed project should not exceed 2500 words and must include the expected outcomes that will result from the leave activities. Proposals from applicants who have had a previous sabbatical leave must include a separate section reporting the final outcome(s) of project(s) undertaken in the most recent sabbatical leave. Any clarifications requested by the Committee must be provided by the faculty member no later than 1 December.
  3. The Faculty Development Committee will make a recommendation on the proposal to the Office of Academic Affairs by 15 December.
  4. The Office of Academic Affairs will notify the faculty member regarding the outcome of his or her application for sabbatical leave on or about 15 January.
  5. In special cases in which being awarded a grant is contingent upon an approved sabbatical, applications are permitted within a year in advance of the normal deadline, to accommodate idiosyncratic funding opportunities. In such cases, an appropriate similar timetable will be followed.
  6. In the event that a sabbatical leave application is denied, the faculty member can reapply in the following year or any later year.

D. Returning from Sabbatical Leave. Sabbatical leave is granted on the condition that the Faculty member will return to Rhodes for at least one full-time service year immediately after the leave. Faculty members who do not return following sabbatical leave for one full-time service year will be under a contractual obligation to refund to Rhodes the full amount of their sabbatical salary and benefits on demand. No pro-ration of this obligation will be given for partial year or part-time return service.

In exceptional circumstances a member of the Faculty may be eligible for a sabbatical leave of absence and plan to retire from the College upon the end of the sabbatical leave. In such cases the eligibility and provisions for a sabbatical leave of absence apply; however, it will be designated as an academic leave of absence, not a sabbatical, the provision to resume the teaching appointment is waived, and the reporting requirements associated with a sabbatical leave of absence are not in effect.

E. Reports. A faculty member returning from leave will make a full written report of his or her leave activities to the Faculty Development Committee and Office of Academic Affairs no later than November 1st following their return. This report, together with a statement on additional long-term outcomes of these activities (if any), will be included as a section of the next sabbatical leave application. Both reports will guide the Committee and the Vice President for Academic Affairs when considering future leave applications.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

XII. Leave of Absence Without Salary

XII. Leave of Absence Without Salary

Personal leaves of absence without salary may be granted officers of instruction at the discretion of the President on the recommendation of the officer’s departmental chair and the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Requests for a Leave of Absence without pay must be made at least one semester prior to the beginning of the leave.

Leaves of absence may be granted for personal reasons or to allow a Faculty member to accept a fellowship or other short-term professional opportunity. A leave of more than one service year’s length will be granted only in exceptional circumstances. Failure to return to Rhodes at the end of a leave of absence will be considered a resignation.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

XIII. Special Provisions in regard to Faculty Status

XIII. Special Provisions in regard to Faculty Status

A. The Proportion of the Faculty Holding Tenure. The College takes seriously the commitment to a member of the Faculty when a tenured appointment is made; it also takes seriously the concerns that are frequently expressed when the proportion of the Faculty holding tenure appears to limit the College’s ability to alter, to modify, or to change academic programs when good reasons are presented for such changes. By action of the Board of Trustees the President and the Vice President for Academic Affairs are to present annually an accounting of the current profile of the Faculty, including the proportion of the Faculty holding tenure, and to present a projection of the Faculty cohort over the next five years, showing anticipated changes due to non-reappointment, tenure contracts awarded, and expected retirements.

B. Policy on the Replacement of Faculty Recruited to Administrative Positions. The expertise and experience of senior members of the Rhodes faculty can make them attractive candidates for administrative positions at the College, and their work in administration provides valuable service to the College. When the administrative appointment of a faculty member results in the loss of some teaching capacity to an academic department, that department should routinely be allowed to hire replacement faculty, on a term basis, to cover the courses lost. If the administrative duties of the faculty member are likely to extend over several years, a term appointment of three years or more may be justified. However, because administrative positions are not lifetime appointments, and because the length of an administrative appointment may be difficult to define or predict at the outset, replacement hires for faculty serving in administration will not be tenurable. 

The College may consider an exception to this general policy under certain circumstances. If a faculty member has served in an administrative position for a period of not less than four years, and if all parties expect her or his administrative appointment to continue indefinitely, her or his home academic department may apply for the creation of a tenure-track position to replace that colleague. Such applications should be made only if the department can demonstrate that there is a special need for a tenure-track or tenured faculty member in this position. These applications should be submitted according to the regular process for requesting new faculty positions. 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

XIV. Affirmative Action — Equal Opportunity

XIV. Affirmative Action — Equal Opportunity

A. The Affirmative Action Policy aims to achieve a broader race and gender employee applicant pool of minorities and women.

B. Rhodes’ Equal Employment Opportunity Policy prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, age, sex, national origin, color, veteran status, or disability.

C. Rhodes College’s Commitment to Diversity:

A diverse learning community is a necessary element of a liberal arts education, for self-understanding is dependent upon the understanding of others. We, the members of Rhodes College, are committed to fostering a community in which diversity is valued and welcomed. To that end, Rhodes College does not discriminate – and will not tolerate harassment – on the basis of race, gender, color, age, religion, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, genetic information, and national or ethnic origin.

We are committed to providing an open learning environment. Freedom of thought, a civil exchange of ideas, and an appreciation of diverse perspectives are fundamental characteristics of a community that is committed to critical inquiry. To promote such an academic and social environment we expect integrity and honesty in our relationships with each other and openness to learning about and experiencing cultural diversity. We believe that these qualities are crucial to fostering social and intellectual maturity and personal growth.

Intellectual maturity also requires individual struggle with unfamiliar ideas. We recognize that our views and convictions will be challenged, and we expect this challenge to take place in a climate of open-mindedness and mutual respect.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Appendix A

Appendix A

Quorum. A quorum is constituted by a majority of the voting members of the Faculty.

Attendance, Participation, and Voting. Regular meetings of the Faculty or special sessions of the Faculty are not open to all members of the community unless so designated by action of the entire Faculty.

Only members of the Faculty are eligible to vote in Faculty meetings. However others may attend Faculty meetings and participate in discussion. Persons normally expected to attend Faculty meetings are the President of the Student Assembly, members of the Office of the President Staff, the Librarian and the Registrar. Members of the Board of Trustees, Officers of Instruction who are not members of the Faculty, and one of the student members of any standing committee of the Faculty may attend Faculty meetings as they wish.

In addition, individuals whose views on a particular issue are important to the conduct of Faculty business may be invited to attend a Faculty meeting and participate in discussion of that issue. These invitations are made by the Faculty Governance Committee or by the Faculty as a whole.

The Faculty will vote by voice unless a show of hands is necessary to decide a majority. However a secret, written ballot can be called for by the presiding officer or by majority vote.

Agenda. The agenda for a given meeting shall be made available to the Faculty at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting time. Typically the agenda and supporting documents are distributed electronically. Committee reports and other items to be included in the agenda must be submitted to the Office of Academic Affairs well in advance of the 48-hour deadline. Proposals to change administrative or College-wide policies or procedures shall be sent to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the President at least 30 days in advance of the meeting where it will be considered. The Faculty will not take final action on any matter not included in the agenda.

New Business may be introduced from the floor of the meeting by any member of the Faculty, but any decision by vote on such business must be delayed until a subsequent meeting in order to satisfy the 48-hour notice rule.

Upon the passage of a motion from the floor, the order of consideration of agenda items may be changed at any time during the meeting.

Minutes. Detailed minutes of the Faculty meetings shall be kept by the Faculty Secretary and shall be filed in the Academic Affairs Office along with the relevant agenda and supporting documents.

Specific actions of the Faculty shall be communicated in writing by the Faculty Secretary to the individuals or committees affected by the action. The Faculty minutes shall be available to any Faculty member who wishes to see them.

Confidentiality. Deliberations or actions of the Faculty judged to be confidential by the President, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the Presiding Officer, or the Faculty shall not be discussed outside its membership. A designation of “Confidential” shall be made by the President, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, by the presiding officer, or by vote of the Faculty at the time of such deliberation or action. Announcement of the confidential Faculty action should be made only by the presiding officer or, if requested by the presiding officer, by the Secretary of the Faculty.

Important Matters. An action being considered by the Faculty may be designated an “important matter” when the importance of the action is deemed sufficiently great to demand extended deliberation. A matter may be declared an “important matter” by any one of the following methods:

  1. The President or the presiding officer at the Faculty meeting may so designate it;
  2. If the matter comes to the Faculty from a standing committee, the committee may so designate it by a majority vote; or,
  3. Upon a motion from the floor, in which case the motion requires the affirmation of one-third of the Faculty present.

In every case, the designation must take place prior to the final vote on the action.

When a matter has been declared an “important matter,” final vote on it shall be taken at a meeting subsequent to the meeting in which the matter was introduced for consideration. The matter may be debated on its first introduction, and will be discussed. It will be debated again at the subsequent meeting, at which time the final vote will be taken.

Nonconcurrence of the President. If an action is taken by the Faculty in which the President does not concur, the President may announce the nonconcurrence immediately after the Faculty action, or, in writing, at some later time. Notification of nonconcurrence by the President has the effect of tabling the action of the Faculty. The matter may then be reopened for debate at a subsequent meeting and if two-thirds of the Faculty members present vote affirmatively on the matter, the President must present the action to the Board of Trustees along with the President’s recommendation.

Parliamentary Rules. Faculty meetings shall be conducted in accordance with these rules and procedures and with Roberts’ Rules of Order, latest edition. The Faculty’s own rules and procedures shall have precedence. The Faculty Parliamentarian shall give interpretations of correct procedure when requested by the presiding officer or upon the Parliamentarian’s own volition. Procedural questions not specifically covered by these specified sources shall be decided by majority vote of the Faculty. These rules of procedure that do not limit the presiding officer may be suspended by a two-thirds vote of the Faculty present.

Revision of Rules and Procedures for Faculty Meetings. All amendments to the Rules and Procedures for Faculty Meetings must be approved by the Faculty. Proposals for revision shall be presented at a Faculty meeting at least one month before a final vote on the matter is taken. Ordinarily such proposals will be referred for study and recommendation to a committee appointed for this purpose by the Faculty Governance Committee.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Appendix B

Appendix B

[Reprinted from L. Joughin (Ed.), Academic Freedom and Tenure: A Handbook of the American Association of University Professors (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1969), pp. 33-39.]

In 1915, at the time of the founding of the association, a committee on academic freedom and tenure formulated a statement entitled A Declaration of Principles. This statement set forth the concern of the association for academic freedom and tenure, for proper procedures, and for professional responsibility. The declaration was endorsed by the American Association of University Professors at its second annual meeting, held December 31, 1915, and January 1, 1916.

In 1925, the American Council on Education called a conference of representatives of a number of its constituent members, among them the American Association of University Professors, for the purpose of preparing a statement in this area. There emerged the 1925 Conference Statement on Academic Freedom and Tenure, which was endorsed in 1925 by the Association of American Colleges and in 1926 by the American Association of University Professors.

In 1940, following upon a series of conferences which began in 1934, representatives of the Association of American Colleges and the American Association of University Professors agreed upon a Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure and upon three attached “interpretations.” The 1940 statement and its interpretations were endorsed by the two associations in 1941. In subsequent years endorsement has been officially voted by numerous other organizations.

The purpose of this statement is to promote public understanding and support of academic freedom and tenure and agreement upon procedures to assure them in colleges and universities. Institutions of higher education are conducted for the common good and not to further the interest of either the individual teacher or the institution as a whole. The common good depends upon the free search for truth its free exposition.

Academic freedom is essential to these purposes and applies to both teaching and research. Freedom in research is fundamental to the advancement of truth. Academic freedom in its teaching aspect is fundamental for the protection of the rights of the teacher in teaching and of the student to freedom in learning. It carries with it duties correlative with rights.

Tenure is a means to certain ends—specifically, (1) freedom of teaching and research and of extramural activities and (2) a sufficient degree of economic security to make the profession attractive to men and women of ability. Freedom and economic security—hence, tenure—are indispensable to the success of an institution in fulfilling its obligations to its students and to society.

Academic Freedom

(a) The teacher is entitled to full freedom in research and in the publication of the results, subject to the adequate performance of his other academic duties; but research for pecuniary return should be based upon an understanding with the authorities of the institution.

(b) The teacher is entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing his subject, but he should be careful not to introduce into his teaching controversial matter which has no relation to his subject. Limitations of academic freedom because of religious or other aims of the institution should be clearly stated in writing at the time of the appointment.

(c) The college or university teacher is a citizen, a member of a learned profession, and an officer of an educational institution. When he speaks or writes as a citizen, he should be free from institutional censorship or discipline, but his special position in the community imposes special obligations. As a man of learning and an educational officer, he should remember that the public may judge his profession and his institution by his utterances. Hence, he should at all times be accurate, should exercise appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that he is not an institutional spokesman.

Academic Tenure

(a) After the expiration of a probationary period, teachers or investigators should have permanent or continuous tenure, and their service should be terminated only for adequate cause, except in the case of retirement for age or under extraordinary circumstances because of financial exigencies. In the interpretation of this principle it is understood that the following represents acceptable academic practice:

  1. The precise terms and conditions of every appointment should be stated in writing and be in the possession of both institution and teacher before the appointment is consummated.
  2. Beginning with appointment to the rank of full-time instructor or a higher rank, the probationary period should not exceed seven years, including within this period full-time service in all institutions of higher education, but subject to the proviso that when—after a term of probationary service of more than three years in one or more institutions—a teacher is called to another institution, it may be agreed in writing that his new appointment is for a probationary period of not more than four years, even though thereby the person’s total probationary period in the academic profession is extended beyond the normal maximum of seven years. Notice should be given at least one year prior to the expiration of the probationary period if the teacher is not to be continued in service after the expiration of that period.
  3. During the probationary period a teacher should have the academic freedom that all other members of the Faculty have.
  4. Termination for cause of a continuous appointment, or the dismissal for cause of a teacher, previous to the expiration of a term appointment, should, if possible, be considered by both a Faculty committee and the governing board of the institution. In all cases where the facts are in dispute, the accused teacher should be informed before the hearing in writing of the charges against him and should have the opportunity to be heard in his own defense by all bodies that pass judgment upon his case. He should be permitted to have with him an adviser of his own choosing who may act as counsel. There should be a full stenographic record of the hearing available to the parties concerned. In the hearing of charges of incompetence the testimony should include that of teachers and other scholars, either from his own or from other institutions. Teachers on continuous appointment who are dismissed for reasons not involving moral turpitude should receive their salaries for at least a year from the date of notification of dismissal whether or not they are continued in their duties at the institution. 
    Termination of a continuous appointment because of financial exigency should be demonstrably bona fide.

Interpretations

At a conference of representatives of the American Association of University Professors and of the Association of American Colleges on November 7-8, 1940, the following interpretations of the 1940Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure were agreed upon:

  1. That its operation should not be retroactive.
  2. That all tenure claims of teachers appointed prior to the endorsement should be determined in accordance with the principles set forth in the 1925 Conference Statement on Academic Freedom and Tenure.
  3. If the administration of a college or university feels that a teacher has not observed the admonitions of paragraph (c) of the section on Academic Freedom and believes that the extramural utterances of the teacher have been such as to raise grave doubts concerning his fitness for his position, it may proceed to file charges under paragraph (a) (4) of the section on Academic Tenure.
  4. In pressing such charges the administration should remember that teachers are citizens and should be accorded the freedom of citizens. In such cases the administration must assume full responsibility, and the American Association of University Professors and the Association of American Colleges are free to make an investigation.
Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Appendix C

Appendix C

Proceedings

The following Statement on Procedural Standards in Faculty Dismissal Proceedings was prepared by a joint committee representing the Association of American Colleges and the American Association of University Professors and was approved by these two associations at their annual meetings in 1958. It supplements the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure by providing a formulation of the “academic due process” that should be observed in dismissal proceedings. The exact procedural standards here set forth, however, “are not intended to establish a norm in the same manner as the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, but are presented rather as a guide. . . .”

Introductory Comments

Any approach toward settling the difficulties which have beset dismissal proceedings on many American campuses must look beyond procedure into setting and cause. A dismissal proceeding is a symptom of failure; no amount of use of removal process will help strengthen higher education as much as will the cultivation of conditions in which dismissals rarely if ever need occur.

Just as the board of control or other governing body is the legal and fiscal corporation of the college, the Faculty are the academic entity. Historically, the academic corporation is the older. Faculties were formed in the Middle Ages, with managerial affairs either self-arranged or handled in course by the parent church. Modern college faculties, on the other hand, are part of a complex and extensive structure requiring legal incorporation, with stewards and managers specifically appointed to discharge certain functions.

Nonetheless, the Faculty of a modern college constitute an entity as real as that of the faculties of medieval times, in terms of collective purpose and function. A necessary pre-condition of a strong Faculty is that it have first-hand concern with its own membership. This is properly reflected both in appointments to and in separations from the Faculty body.

A well-organized institution will reflect sympathetic understanding by trustees and teachers alike of their respective and complementary roles. These should be spelled out carefully in writing and made available to all. Trustees and Faculty should understand and agree on their several functions in determining who shall join and who shall remain on the Faculty. One of the prime duties of the administrator is to help preserve understanding of those functions. It seems clear on the American college scene that a close positive relationship exists between the excellence of colleges, the strength of their faculties, and the extent of Faculty responsibility in determining Faculty membership. Such a condition is in no wise inconsistent with full Faculty awareness of institutional factors with which governing boards must be primarily concerned.

In the effective college, a dismissal proceeding involving a Faculty member on tenure, or one occurring during the term of an appointment, will be a rare exception, caused by individual human weakness and not by an unhealthful setting. When it does come, however, the college should be prepared for it, so that both institutional integrity and individual human rights may be preserved during the process of resolving the trouble. The Faculty must be willing to recommend the dismissal of a colleague when necessary. By the same token, presidents and governing boards must be willing to give full weight to a Faculty judgment favorable to a colleague.

One persistent source of difficulty is the definition of adequate cause for the dismissal of a Faculty member. Despite the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure and subsequent attempts to build upon it, considerable ambiguity and misunderstanding persist throughout higher education, especially in the respective conceptions of governing boards, administrative officers, and faculties concerning this matter. The present statement assumes that individual institutions will have formulated their own definitions of adequate cause for dismissal, bearing in mind the 1940 Statement and standards which have developed in the experience of academic institutions.

This statement deals with procedural standards. Those recommended are not intended to establish a norm in the same manner as the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, but are presented rather as a guide to be used according to the nature and traditions of particular institutions in giving effect to both Faculty tenure rights and the obligations of Faculty members in the academic community.

Procedural Recommendations

1. Preliminary Proceedings Concerning the Fitness of a Faculty Member. When reason arises to question the fitness of a college or university Faculty member who has tenure or whose term appointment has not expired, the appropriate administrative officers should ordinarily discuss the matter with him in personal conference. The matter may be terminated by mutual consent at this point; but if an adjustment does not result, a standing or ad hoc committee elected by the Faculty and charged with the function of rendering confidential advice in such situations should informally inquire into the situation to effect an adjustment if possible and, if none is effected, to determine whether in its view formal proceedings to consider his dismissal should be instituted. If the committee recommends that such proceedings should be begun, or if the president of the institution, even after considering a recommendation of the committee favorable to the Faculty member, expresses his conviction that a proceeding should be undertaken, action should be commenced under the procedures which follow. Except where there is disagreement, a statement with reasonable particularity of the grounds proposed for the dismissal should then be jointly formulated by the president and the Faculty committee; if there is disagreement, the president or his representative should formulate the statement.

2. Commencement of Formal Proceedings. The formal proceedings should be commenced by a communication addressed to the Faculty member by the president of the institution, informing the Faculty member of the statement formulated, and informing him that, if he so requests, a hearing to determine whether he should be removed from his Faculty position on the grounds stated will be conducted by a Faculty committee at a specified time and place. In setting the date of the hearing, sufficient time should be allowed the Faculty member to prepare his defense. The Faculty member should be informed, in detail or by reference to published regulations, of the procedural rights that will be accorded to him. The Faculty member should state in reply whether he wishes a hearing and, if so, should answer in writing, not less than one week before the date set for the hearing, the statements in the president’s letter.

3. Suspension of the Faculty Member. Suspension of the Faculty member during the proceedings involving him is justified only if immediate harm to himself or others is threatened by his continuance. Unless legal consideration forbid, any such suspension should be with pay.

4. Hearing Committee. The committee of Faculty members to conduct the hearing and reach a decision should either be an elected standing committee not previously concerned with the case or a committee established as soon as possible after the president’s letter to the Faculty member has been sent. The choice of members of the hearing committee should be on the basis of their objectivity and competence and of the regard in which they are held in the academic community. The committee should elect its own chairman.

5. Committee Proceeding. The committee should proceed by considering the statement of grounds for dismissal already formulated and the Faculty member’s response written before the time of the hearing. If the Faculty member has not requested a hearing, the committee should consider the case on the basis of the obtainable information and decide whether he should be removed; otherwise the hearing should go forward. The committee, in consultation with the president and the Faculty member, should exercise its judgment as to whether the hearing should be public or private. If any facts are in dispute, the testimony of witnesses and other evidence concerning the matter set forth in the president’s letter to the Faculty member should be received.

The president should have the option of attendance during the hearing. He may designate an appropriate representative to assist in developing the case; but the committee should determine the order of proof, should normally conduct the questioning of witnesses, and, if necessary, should secure the presentation of evidence important to the case.

The Faculty member should have the option of assistance by counsel, whose functions should be similar to those of the representative chosen by the president. The Faculty member should have the additional procedural rights set forth in the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure and should have the aid of the committee, when needed, in securing the attendance of witnesses. The Faculty member or his counsel and the representative designated by the president should have the right, within reasonable limits, to question all witnesses who testify orally. The Faculty member should have the opportunity to be confronted by all witnesses adverse to him. Where unusual and urgent reasons move the hearing committee to withhold this right, or where the witness cannot appear, the identity of the witness, as well as his statements, should nevertheless be disclosed to the Faculty member. Subject to these safeguards, statements may when necessary be taken outside the hearing and reported to it. All of the evidence should be duly recorded. Unless special circumstances warrant, it should not be necessary to follow formal rules of court procedure.

6. Consideration by Hearing Committee. The committee should reach its decision in conference, on the basis of the hearing. Before doing so, it should give opportunity to the Faculty member or his counsel and the representative designated by the president to argue orally before it. If written briefs would be helpful, the committee may request them. The committee may proceed to decision promptly, without having the record of the hearing transcribed, where it feels that a just decision can be reached by this means; or it may await the availability of a transcript of the hearing if its decision would be aided thereby. It should make explicit findings with respect to each of the grounds of removal presented, and a reasoned opinion may be desirable. Publicity concerning the committee’s decision may properly be withheld until consideration has been given to the case by the governing body of the institution. The president and the Faculty member should be notified of the decision in writing and should be given a copy of the record of the hearing. Any release to the public should be made through the President’s Office.

7. Consideration by Governing Body. The president should transmit to the governing body the full report of the hearing committee, stating its action. On the assumption that the governing board has accepted the principle of the Faculty hearing committee, acceptance of the committee’s decision would normally be expected. If the governing body chooses to review the case, its review should be based on the record of the previous hearing, accompanied by opportunity for argument, oral or written or both, by the principals at the hearing or their representatives. The decision of the hearing committee should either be sustained or the proceeding be returned to the committee with objections specified. In such a case the committee should reconsider, taking account of the stated objections and receiving new evidence if necessary. It should frame its decision and communicate it in the same manner as before. Only after study of the committee’s reconsideration should the governing body make a final decision overruling the committee.

8. Publicity. Except for such simple announcements as may be required, covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, public statements about the case by either the Faculty member or administrative officers should be avoided so far as possible until the proceedings have been completed. Announcement of the final decision should include a statement of the hearing committee’s original action, if this has not previously been made known.

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015

Textbooks

Textbooks

The Rhodes Bookstore is the supplier of textbooks and supplies, required or recommended by professors for use in the classroom. Faculty are responsible for supplying course book and supply information to the textbook manager as requested.

How to Supply Course Information

Text Information Forms are supplied by the Bookstore for use in submitting course book information, including author, title and edition. Texts may also be adopted online via the Bookstore’s Web site. Instructions for the service will accompany the pre-printed adoption forms distributed each March and September.

The forms request the faculty member to designate a “required title” or a “recommended title.” Required titles are purchased in quantities necessary to meet full class enrollment, recommended titles are purchased in smaller quantities. Costs involved in receiving and handling materials ordered and not assigned will be billed back to the department. These costs will include freight in and out, handling; and in the event the books are nonreturnable, the ordering department will be charged for the books.

When to Order. The schedule for the submission of textbook information is as follows: for the first semester, roughly April 15; for the second semester, October 15. The Bookstore guarantees that textbooks ordered by these deadlines will be available in sufficient quantities for the start of class.

Special rush service is available for textbook orders that are ordered within 6 weeks of the first day of class. The cost of this service will be charged to the authorizing department.

Out-of-Stock Books. If the adopted textbook is temporarily out-of-stock, it may be possible to obtain permission from the copyright owner or publisher to photocopy a portion of the text until the book arrives. It is the responsibility of the faculty member to request this permission.

Out-of-Print Books. Resources are available in both the Bookstore and Barret Library to determine the publication status of the adopted title. The Bookstore will assist as much as possible in obtaining limited copies of out-of-print books, but the request for permission to copy for multiple use in the classroom is the responsibility of the faculty member.

Photocopying. Although copying all or part of a work without obtaining permission may appear to be an easy and convenient solution to an immediate problem, such unauthorized copying violates the rights of the author or publisher of the copyrighted work and is contrary to the academic mission to teach respect for ideas and for the intellectual property which expresses those ideas. It is the responsibility of the individual faculty member to obtain permission prior to photocopying. Failure to understand the copyright law, including elements such as the doctrine of “Fair Use” and its application and limitations in the educational setting places faculty members, copy centers, college stores, and colleges at risk for engaging in illegal photocopying.

The College Handbook contains guidelines for photocopying for academic use. Specific prohibitions within the doctrine of “Fair Use” are:

  • Unauthorized copying may not be used to create, replace, or substitute for anthologies, compilations, or collective works, whether or not such unauthorized copies are collected and bound together or are provided separately.
  • The same teacher cannot copy the same item without permission from term to term.

In other words, when in doubt, seek permission. For your convenience, the Bookstore and the Barret Library provide a form letter that can expedite a request for permission to copy.

Customized Course Materials. When permission to create multiple copies for use in the classroom is granted, the quantities to order, along with the selection of the copy center or printer may be coordinated by the Bookstore. Under these circumstances, the Bookstore assumes responsibility for the cost of any overstock.
 
Desk Copies. A Directory of Publishers is available from the Bookstore. The faculty member is responsible for placing the request direct to the publisher. Textbooks loaned to faculty while awaiting receipt of desk-copies will be charged to the department. Only that same book or a clean, unmarked copy will be accepted by the Bookstore for credit to the department.
 
Complimentary Copies. Rhodes College believes that the practice of buying and selling complimentary copies of textbooks contributes to higher book prices, denies authors royalties, and discourages the writing and publishing of new works. Therefore, the Rhodes Bookstore will not buy or sell textbooks marked, “complimentary copy, not for resale.” This policy also applies to books originally so marked and taped or bound over to conceal these complimentary copy markings. These markings include but are not limited to: “Complimentary copy, not for resale,” “Instructor’s copy, not for resale”, “Review copy, not for resale”, “Free book, not for resale.”  

 

Anonymous (not verified) August 18, 2015