not mobile

Academic & Student Affairs Handbook

SOURCES:
BoR POLICY 8.3.8, NON-TENURE TRACK PERSONNEL

USG Institutions can establish professional positions designated as non-tenure track. Institutional presidents have the authority to convert a non-tenure track position to a tenure track position and to convert a tenure track position to a non-tenure track one. However, the transfer of an individual in a tenure track position to a non-tenure track position must be done on a voluntary basis only.

See the
Sample Form for Section 4.1,
To Convert an Individual in a Tenure Track Position to a Non-tenure Track Position, to be completed and approved by the appropriate institutional officials.

Part-time faculty are non-tenured faculty employed less than full time at a single USG institution or at more than one USG institution and are subject to the following conditions:

  1. Are not accruing time toward tenure
  2. Are considered temporary appointees, requiring reappointment from year to year
  3. Are not the same as adjunct (courtesy) faculty appointments
  4. Are not issued contracts
  5. Are not eligible for USG benefits
  6. A part-time faculty member’s employment cannot exceed more than one-half time for the year at a single USG institution. A part-time faculty member teaching at more than one USG institution must limit his/her employment to less than half-time employment across all USG institutions. Upon appointment at a USG institution, part-time faculty will be asked to verify in writing that they are in compliance with this policy.

A sample compliance statement can be found at Section 4 samples. For additional information about part-time faculty, see the following sections of the BoR Policy Manual:

SOURCES:
BoR POLICY 2.5, PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITIES
BoR POLICY 8.3.2, REGENTS’ PROFESSORSHIPS
BoR POLICY 8.2.9.3, OTHER INSURANCE

With the exception of named (endowed) faculty appointments (Section 4.3.2, Establishment and Appointment of Named Faculty Positions), the president of each institution shall be responsible for the initial appointment and re-appointment of all faculty and administrative employees.

4.3.1 Employment Beyond Retirement

SOURCE:
BoR POLICY 8.2.8.3, EMPLOYMENT BEYOND RETIREMENT

Reemployment at a USG Institution of any USG retiree receiving benefits from the Teachers Retirement System (TRS), the Employees Retirement System (ERS), or the Regents’ Retirement Plan (RRP) must be approved by the president of the hiring institution and follow the conditions set forth in BoR Policy 8.2.8.3. Employment of USG retirees must be based on the direct needs of the institution for the services of the individual and on the individual’s ability to make a distinctive contribution to the institution. The rehire of retirees from other state agencies (e.g., public schools), even those receiving benefits from TRS, ERS, or RRP, do NOT require presidential approval.

Approval for all rehires of retiree appointments should be processed in advance to allow for presidential approval prior to their date of appointment. USG retirees who have not been approved by the hiring institution’s president cannot be employed by USG institutions.

return to top


4.3.2 Establishment and Appointment of Named Faculty Positions

SOURCE:
BoR POLICY 8.3.2.2 ESTABLISHMENT OF NAMED FACULTY POSITIONS

Requests to establish endowed chairs, professorships, or fellowships should be sent to the Assistant Vice Chancellor for Faculty Affairs to be placed on the next available BOR meeting agenda. Requests to establish a named faculty position should include evidence of funding for the position and that funding meets or exceeds the minimum funding levels specified in BOR Policy 8.3.2.2. All named faculty positions must be approved by the BOR before an individual can be appointed to the position.

Requests to appoint an individual to a BOR-approved named faculty position should be sent to the Assistant Vice Chancellor for Faculty Affairs and processed in advance to obtain BOR approval prior to the date of appointment. When the appointment date must occur before BOR approval can be obtained, administrative approval for the appointment must be obtained from the Assistant Vice Chancellor for Faculty Affairs. Administrative approval will cover only the period of time between the date of appointment and BOR approval, which must be requested at the next available BOR meeting (considering BOR agenda deadlines and the schedule of BOR meetings).

Requests to establish a position and to appoint someone to the position can be made at the same BOR meeting, but the appointment request will be considered only if the establishment of the position is approved.

return to top


4.3.3 Sample Faculty Contracts

SOURCES:
BoR POLICY 8.3.11, FACULTY CONTRACT FORMS

Contracts are specified for the following categories of employees at all institutions except Georgia Gwinnett College, and samples are provided:

  1. Fiscal Year Non-tenured/Track – 12 month contract for non-tenured faculty on tenure track and non-tenure track personnel including lecturers and senior lecturers
  2. Fiscal Year Tenured – 12 month contract for tenured faculty
  3. Academic Year Non-tenured/Track contract
  4. Academic Year Tenured contract
  5. Contract for Faculty Ranked Administrators for professorial personnel in the following categories: tenured, non-tenured on tenure track and non-tenure track

Contracts are specified for the following categories of employees at Georgia Gwinnett College, and samples are provided:

  1. Academic Year contract for three (3) or five (5) year term
  2. Fiscal Year contract for three (3) or five (5) year term

A contract is specified for the following category of employees at the Medical College of Georgia, and a sample is provided:

  1. Fiscal Year Contract for tenured personnel holding joint employment at the Veteran’s Affairs Medical Center in Augusta and the Medical College of Georgia

return to top


4.3.4 Inter-institutional Faculty Appointments

Guidelines for inter-institutional faculty appointment policies and procedures must be approved by the Executive Vice Chancellor and Chief Academic Officer of the USG or his/her designee and should adhere to the following parameters:

  • Institutions that have identified a need for an inter-institutional faculty appointment must establish procedures for searching and hiring for the appointment. These procedures must be approved by each institutional president involved in the appointment.
  • Before faculty who are already employed full-time at a USG institution can accept an inter-institutional appointment at another USG institution, they must obtain approval from the appropriate administrators (including the president) at their home institution.
  • Faculty with inter -institutional appointments will have a contract at their home institution and a written Memorandum of Appointment (MOA) between the home institution and the secondary institution(s)containing the following information:

    • Name of the home institution
    • Beginning and ending dates of the inter-institutional appointment
    • Tenure type of the position (tenure, if applicable, will reside at the home institution)
    • Rank at the home institution
    • Position title
    • Percentage of workload at each institution
    • Salary, including the amount paid by each institution
    • Percentage of benefits paid by each institution
    • Process for the exchange of funds for salary and benefits between institutions. This process must follow the 5.3.3 Payroll Policy for Joint Staffing in the USG Business Procedures Manual. If the joint appointment involves minimal work at the secondary institution(s), no exchange of funds may be necessary.
    • Responsibilities of each institution for supporting the work of the faculty position (e.g., professional travel, library privileges, professional development, equipment needs, etc.)
    • Procedures of the home institution will govern the evaluation of the faculty member’s performance, including annual reviews, pre-tenure and tenure review for faculty hired in tenure-track positions, promotion, and post-tenure review. The MOA must specify how each secondary institution will provide feedback to the home institution for performance evaluation purposes.
    • Procedure for input from the secondary institution(s) if the home institution is considering terminating the faculty member in the inter-institutional appointment or eliminating the faculty position
    • Other information deemed necessary by the home or secondary institutions

Requests for approval of new guidelines or revisions to previously approved guidelines should be sent to the Office of Faculty Affairs for processing.

return to top


SOURCES:
BoR POLICY 8.3.7 TENURE AND CRITERIA FOR TENURE

All criteria and expectations for faculty performance, including the criteria for tenure, should be stated in writing and available in a faculty handbook posted on an institution’s website. Note that the BOR has set minimum criteria for tenure that must be met by all institutions. These minimum criteria, including specific degree requirements, vary across institutional sectors (see BOR policy 8.3.7).

Institutions can set additional standards and requirements above these minimum criteria, but they must be approved by the Board. Any BOR-approved changes to tenure criteria at an institution must be updated annually in the faculty handbook on the institution’s website, and a summary of the changes made must be submitted to the Assistant Vice Chancellor for Faculty Affairs.

The institutional timeline for the review of faculty for tenure must be completed by early February of a given academic year in order to meet the data entry deadline of the end of February for the annual report to the Board of Regents. A copy of the president’s written notification of the award of tenure to an individual must be forwarded to the University System Executive Vice Chancellor and Chief Academic Officer.

In exceptional cases, an institution president may grant the award of tenure upon initial appointment of a faculty member (see BOR Policy 8.3.7 for conditions necessary to justify the award of tenure on appointment). The Chancellor’s approval is required to award an individual who has not previously held tenure and is being appointed to an administrative position.

Institutions must annually submit the number of tenure appointments awarded in a fiscal year. Reports should include gender and race of all such appointments and must be submitted to the Assistant Vice Chancellor for Faculty Affairs by June 30 of each year.

4.4.1 Probationary Credit Toward Tenure

SOURCES:
BoR POLICY 8.3.7 TENURE AND CRITERIA FOR TENURE

A maximum of three years probationary credit toward tenure for service at other institutions or service at the rank of Instructor or Lecturer within the institution can be established only at the time of the individual’s initial appointment to or promotion to the rank of Assistant Professor. Individuals serving in part-time, limited term or full-time temporary positions are not eligible for probationary credit toward tenure.

If, due to an error of omission, a request for awarding of probationary credit toward tenure was not made at the time of the initial appointment, the President should consider a request only if it is submitted within the first few months after employment.

Probationary credit toward tenure cannot be established during leaves of absence.

Probationary credit awarded on appointment may be used toward determining an individual’s eligibility for tenure, but the individual is not required to do so.

return to top


SOURCES:
BoR POLICY 8.3.6, CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION

All criteria and expectations for faculty performance, including the criteria for promotion to each rank, should be stated in writing and available in a faculty handbook posted on an institution’s website. The BOR has set minimum criteria for promotion that must be met by all institutions. These minimum criteria, including specific degree requirements, vary across institutional sectors (see BoR Policy 8.3.6). Institutions can set additional standards and requirements above these minimum criteria but they must be approved by the Board. Any BOR-approved changes to promotion criteria at an institution must be updated annually in the faculty handbook on the institution’s website and a summary of the changes made must be submitted to the Assistant Vice Chancellor for Faculty Affairs.

The institutional timeline for the review of faculty for promotion must be completed by early February of a given academic year in order to meet the data entry deadline of the end of February for the annual report to the Board of Regents.

Special considerations for Promotion:

  • Recommendations for promotion are not normally considered for individuals who are currently on leaves of absence or who hold “temporary” appointments.

  • Strong justification must be provided to support any decision to promote to the rank of Associate Professor or Professor if the individual has not earned the terminal degree in the discipline.

  • Strong justification must be provided to support any consideration of “early” promotion wherein the individual has served fewer than the number of years in rank at the current institution as listed below:

For Promotion to Minimum Service in Rank
Assistant Professor 3 years as Instructor
Associate Professor 4 years as Assistant Professor
Professor 5 years as Associate Professor
Senior Lecturer 2 years as Lecturer

SOURCES:
BoR POLICY 8.3.7, TENURE AND CRITERIA FOR TENURE

The primary purpose of the post-tenure review process is to assist faculty members with identifying opportunities that will enable them to reach their full potential for contribution to system institutions. Post-tenure review is one of several types of faculty performance reviews (e.g., annual, promotion, and tenure reviews) and is intended to provide a longer term perspective than is usually provided by an annual review. The review should be both retrospective and prospective, encouraging a careful look at possibilities for different emphases at different points of a faculty member’s career.

With the exception of tenured administrators whose majority of duties are administrative, all tenured faculty will be reviewed. Each faculty member must be assessed five years after the most recent promotion or personnel action, and reviews will continue at five-year intervals unless interrupted by a further review for promotion.

Specific written post-tenure criteria and procedures must be stated in writing and available in a faculty handbook on an institution’s website.

The review should focus on the faculty member’s accomplishments, research agenda (where applicable), teaching program, and service contributions, relating these to the stated expectations for performance developed by the institution. The results of post-tenure reviews must be linked to rewards and professional development. Faculty members who are performing at a high level should receive recognition for their achievements. Each institution will prescribe how the results of the review will be related to merit pay increases, and study and research leave opportunities.

When deficiencies are identified, the faculty member’s supervisor(s) and faculty member will work together to develop a formal plan for faculty development that includes clearly defined and specific goals or outcomes, an outline of activities to be undertaken, a timetable, and an agreed-upon monitoring strategy. If, after three years, the faculty member has not been successful with remedying the identified deficiencies, he or she may be subject to dismissal for cause (regular, independent dismissal processes will apply).

SOURCES:
BoR POLICY 8.3.5, EVALUATION OF PERSONNEL

Each institution is responsible for establishing definite and stated criteria for faculty performance that are consistent with Regents’ policies and the statutes of the institution. These criteria must be stated in writing and available in a faculty handbook posted on an institution’s website. All changes to these performance criteria must be updated in the faculty handbook in a timely fashion. At a minimum, faculty evaluation systems must include the following:

  • Annual reviews (for faculty and senior administrators)

  • Pre-tenure progress reviews for faculty in their third year

  • Reviews of graduate teaching and laboratory assistants

  • Subordinate (one level down) reviews of senior administrators at least once every five years

  • Tenure reviews

  • Promotion reviews

  • Post-tenure reviews

The following steps should be made a part of all faculty evaluation systems:

  • The immediate supervisor will discuss with the faculty member in a scheduled conference the content of that faculty member’s annual written evaluation.

  • The faculty member will sign a statement to the effect that he/she has been apprised of the content of the annual written evaluation.

  • The faculty member will be given a specific period of time (e.g., 10 working days) to respond in writing to the annual written evaluation, with this response to be attached to the evaluation.

  • The immediate supervisor will acknowledge in writing his/her receipt of this response, noting changes, if any, in the annual written evaluation made as a result of either the conference or the faculty member’s written response. This acknowledgement will also become a part of the records.

4.7.1 Renewal and Nonrenewal of Contracts of Non-tenured Faculty

SOURCES:
BoR POLICY 8.3.4, NOTICE OF EMPLOYMENT AND RESIGNATION
Effective Date: October 15, 2008

As of October 15, 2008, institutions are no longer required to provide written notice of renewal of contract to non-tenured faculty with the rank of instructor, assistant professor, associate professor, or professor. Faculty with the rank of instructor, assistant professor, associate professor, or professor, who are employed under written contract, and who served full-time for the entire previous year, have the presumption of renewal for the next academic year unless notified in writing, by the president of an institution or his/her authorized representative, of the intent not to renew.

Procedures to be followed when a non-tenured faculty member’s contract is not renewed are specified in BOR Policy 8.3.4. Deadlines for notice of nonrenewal vary depending on the length of service of the non-tenured faculty member. The Attorney General advises USG institutions not to give reasons for nonrenewal of contracts to the faculty member.

Sample form letters are provided for use in the following circumstances:

  1. Sample Letter 1. The President issues a letter to his/her designated representative authorizing him/her to notify non-tenured faculty that no new contract will be offered. This form must be used whenever someone other than the President gives notice of nonrenewal.

  2. Sample Letter 2. The President’s designated representative issues a letter to the non-tenured faculty member notifying him/her that no new contract will be offered.

  3. Sample Letter 3. The President issues a letter directly to the non-tenured faculty member notifying him/her that no new contract will be offered. (This form may be used by the President regardless of whether authorization for nonrenewal has been given to anyone.)

WARNING: A letter similar to Sample Letter 1 must be used whenever the President’s representative issues the notice of nonrenewal. Some courts have held that in the absence of specific written authorization from the President, the notice of nonrenewal is deficient and subjects the sender to damages.

Also, the courts have held that a “conditional” notice of nonrenewal is not sufficient. For example, nonrenewals may not be conditioned on some future eventuality such as promotion, tenure, vacancies, etc.

return to top


4.7.2 Faculty Work in the Schools

SOURCES:
BoR POLICY 8.3.15, WORK IN THE SCHOOLS

The BOR values USG faculty engagement with K-12 schools. BOR Policy 8.3.15 states BOR expectation for faculty engagement with the public schools in institutions that prepare teachers. The Board expects presidents, provosts, academic vice presidents, and deans of colleges of education and arts and sciences in institutions that prepare teachers to advocate for, assess, recognize, and reward practices consistent with this policy.

Faculty effort under the provisions of this policy is anticipated in teaching, scholarship, and/or service. The USG values all types of faculty scholarship, including the Scholarship of Discovery, the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, and the Scholarship of Engagement. All faculty members are encouraged to enhance their classroom instruction by using scholarly teaching. It also is important for faculty to assist in improving teaching quality and student learning in K-12 classrooms by service to the schools. Definitions and examples of these various activities are provided below for illustrative purposes. See examples of faculty work in each of the three categories – Teaching, Scholarship, and Service – in
Cases of Faculty Work in Teaching, Scholarship, and Service.

Teaching

Definition: Scholarly teaching is teaching that focuses on student learning and is well grounded in the sources and resources appropriate to the field. The aim of scholarly teaching is to make transparent how faculty members have made learning possible (Shulman).

Evidence of Scholarly Teaching (under normal conditions, the expectation is that faculty will do all three):

  • Evidence that the faculty member reads the pedagogical literature, or attends instructional development sessions, in his/her own discipline and then branches out to the broader pedagogical literature
  • Evidence that the faculty member tries some of the teaching methods from the literature/instructional development sessions in his/her own classes
  • Evidence that the faculty member assesses whether or not he/she has been successful in increasing student learning by doing some formative evaluation with students, adjusting his/her approach, asking a peer to come into the class to review the changes he/she has implemented

Scholarship

The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

Definition: The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning is the “systematic examination of issues about student learning and instructional conditions which promote the learning (i.e., building on previous scholarship and shared concerns), which is subjected to blind review by peers who represent the judgment of the profession, and, after review, is disseminated to the professional community” (Research Universities Consortium for the Advancement of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning).

Evidence of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning:

  • Evidence that the faculty member’s scholarship in the schools or in the university classroom is public, peer reviewed, and critiqued
  • Evidence that the faculty member’s scholarship is exchanged with other members of professional communities through postings on websites, presentations to h/her department or college, presentations at professional conferences, and/or written up and published.
  • Evidence that the scholarship builds upon previous scholarship and shared concerns
  • Evidence that the scholarship contributes new questions and knowledge about teaching and learning

The Scholarship of Engagement

Definition: The Scholarship of Engagement in schools is characterized by the following:

  • It is to be conducted as an academic engagement with the public schools.
  • It is to involve the responsible application of knowledge, theory and/or conceptual framework to consequential problems.
  • It should test a research question or hypothesis.
  • One must be able to use the results to improve practice and inform further questions.
  • Resulting work should be available for dissemination for peer review of results.

(Glassick, Huber and Maeroff).

Evidence of the Scholarship of Engagement:

  • Evidence that the faculty member designs and implements a research agenda in at least one area of need recognized by the public schools
  • Evidence that the faculty member applies relevant knowledge toward resolution of the identified need
  • Evidence that the faculty member assesses the impact of the engagement
  • Evidence that the faculty member disseminates for peer review the results of the outreach

The Scholarship of Discovery

Definition: The Scholarship of Discovery is basic research in the disciplines including the creative work of faculty in the literary, visual, and performing arts. It is the “pursuit of knowledge for its own sake, a fierce determination to give free rein to fair and honest inquiry, wherever it may lead” (Glassick, Huber and Maeroff). It contributes to the stock of human knowledge in the academic disciplines.

Evidence of the Scholarship of Discovery:

  • Evidence that the faculty member’s research is innovative (as opposed to routine) as judged by peers at the institution and elsewhere
  • Evidence that the faculty member’s research represents quality, rather than mere quantity
  • Evidence of the faculty member’s publications in high quality refereed journals and the quality and quantity of citations and reprints of h/her research publications
  • If appropriate for the discipline, evidence of the ability to attract extramural funding
  • Evidence of invited seminars and presentations (abstracts), if travel funds are provided, are also an indication of the Scholarship of Discovery

Service

Definition: service is outreach or engagement by higher education faculty for the purpose of contributing to the public good. Contributions to the public good may include faculty work that contributes to solutions to complex societal problems, to the quality of life of Georgia’s citizens, and to the advancement of public higher education. In the case of service to the public schools, the intent should be for the improvement of teaching quality and student learning. The following activities might be included in work with the schools: involvement in Learning Communities, workshops given based on need, collaborative development of courses, unit writing for the new Georgia Performance Standards, design of field experiences to support existing courses, engagement in co-observation / vertical alignment, etc.

Evidence of Service:

  • Evidence that the faculty member links his/her work in some way to public contemporary issues and/or to improving the quality of life.
  • Evidence that the faculty member, either through scholarly work and/or service, applies knowledge toward solutions to complex societal problems and human needs.
  • Evidence that the faculty member contributes to the continuous improvement of public higher education.
  • Evidence that the faculty member contributes in some way to the public good.

Works Cited

Glassick, C.E., M.T.Huber, and G.I. Maeroff. Scholarship Assessed: Evaluation of the Professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1996.

Research Universities Consortium for the Advancement of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Policies and Procedures Supporting the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in the Research University (Draft). Carnegie Consortium for the Advancement of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2005.

Shulman, Lee. “Course Anatomy: The Dissection and Analysis of Knowledge Through Teaching.” The Course Portfolio: How Faculty Can Examine their Teaching to Advance Practice and Improve Student Learning. Ed. P. Hutchings. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education. 1998. 5-12.

return to top


SOURCES:
BoR POLICY 8.2.15.2, CONSULTING

The USG considers professional consulting by faculty to be both reasonable and desirable. Each institution is responsible for developing guidelines to govern consulting activities of faculty members. These guidelines must comply with BoR Policy 8.2.15.2, be stated in writing, and be available in a faculty handbook posted on an institution’s website.

The following disclaimer should be included in any written reports prepared by faculty members of the USG for clients for whom they perform consultative services:

“This report represents the opinion of the author(s). It carries no official endorsement by ________________. ”

The blank should be filled in with the name of the University System institution employing the author(s).

SOURCES:
BoR POLICY 8.2.7 and the following subordinate sections

The Board of Regents has established policies on the following types of leave:

  1. Vacation/Annual Leave (Policy 8.2.7.1)
  2. Sick Leave with Pay (Policy 8.2.7.2)
  3. Sick Leave without Pay (Policy 8.2.7.3)
  4. Educational and Professional Leave (8.2.7.4)
  5. Military Leave with Pay (Policy 8.2.7.5)
  6. Family and Medical Leave (Policy 8.2.7.6)
  7. Miscellaneous Leave (Policy 8.2.7.7)

Miscellaneous leave includes leave related to court duty, voting, military physical exams, personal leave, leave for organ and marrow donation, and other leave due to inclement weather or emergencies.

4.9.1 Interpretation of Sick Leave

SOURCES:
BoR POLICY 8.2.7.2 & 8.2.7.3

The following provisions for the reporting of sick leave shall apply to all full-time faculty on 9 or 10 month contracts, employed by institutions of the USG, who serve primarily in assignments defined by faculty roles in instruction, research and scholarly activity, and service:

  1. Faculty are responsible for informing their immediate supervisors of any illness that prohibits them from meeting their assigned responsibilities.
  2. In reporting sick leave, faculty will report leave based on the number of whole hours sick as defined by the BoR Policy 8.2.7, with a full day being eight (8) hours, a half day being four (4) hours, and less than a half day based on whole hours missed, with a full week being the equivalent of a forty-hour workweek.
  3. Nothing in this policy shall be interpreted to indicate that faculty work on a standardized schedule.

return to top


4.9.2 Educational and Professional Leave

SOURCES:
BoR POLICY 8.2.7.4, EDUCATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL LEAVE

Leaves of absence of one year or less with or without pay may be granted by the institution’s president and reported to the Chancellor. All leaves of absence must be entered into the appropriate HR data systems. Recommendations for extensions of one-year leaves of absence or the initial granting of leaves of more than one year, require the Chancellor’s or his/her designee’s approval. The president’s request to the Chancellor for such leaves must include the following:

  1. A statement that the faculty member’s absence will not adversely affect institutional programming
  2. Strong justification for the request for leave with pay to a faculty member who has not been employed at the institution for at least three years
  3. A statement of the direct and significant benefits that will accrue to the institution as the result of the faculty member’s activities during the period of leave
  4. If the granting of leave with pay will require additional institutional expenditures, a note of that fact (If the granting of leave with pay will not require additional institutional expenditures, no statement to that effect is required)
  5. The amount of leave pay, determined with reference to the following:
    • The normal rate of leave pay shall be considered as an amount up to one-half of the regular salary of the faculty member during the period of leave.
    • Extraordinary justification must accompany a recommendation for leave pay in an amount exceeding one-half of the faculty member’s regular salary during the period of leave or for leave pay at full regular salary for the period of leave.
    • The amount of any external stipend or any other external remuneration to be received by the faculty member for his/her activities during the period of leave shall be taken into account in the determination of institutional leave pay recommended. The recommendation for leave must indicate the source and the amount of applicable external remuneration.

return to top


SOURCES:
BoR POLICY 8.3.12.4, RESEARCH, SATURDAY CLASSES AND OFF-CAMPUS CONTINUING EDUCATION
Business Procedure Manual, Section 5.3.2, Extra Compensation

Faculty Overloads

Under certain circumstances, qualified teaching faculty and administrative faculty may be called upon to take on additional teaching, research, or service responsibilities at their home institution. Whenever possible in this situation, institutions should consider adjusting the individual’s primary duties to incorporate the extra duties associated with the overload(s). If it is determined that a workload adjustment cannot be made, the faculty member’s contract should be amended to reflect a temporary change in compensation warranted by the additional responsibilities. A contract modification should also be done when faculty are involved in joint staffing agreements that warrant additional compensation at another USG institution (see Section 5.3.3 in the Business Procedures Manual).

Contract modifications should be done using the USG Contract Addendum for Temporary Overload Compensation. Because overloads involve a modification to a faculty member’s original contract, Section 5.3.2 of the Business Procedures Manual on Extra Compensation does not apply to faculty overloads.

When full-time exempt professional (i.e., non-contract) employees with the appropriate qualifications take on additional responsibilities, institutions should consider adjusting the staff member’s duties to incorporate the extra responsibilities associated with teaching. When workload adjustments cannot be made, the institution’s president should determine if extra compensation is warranted for the overload(s). When extra compensation is to be paid to non-contract employees, it should be consistent with Section 5.3.2 of the Business Procedures Manual on Extra Compensation.

SectionDescriptionDocument
4.1 Convert an Individual in a Tenure Track Position to a Non-tenure Track Position Download
4.2 Description, Sample Faculty Compliance Statement Download
4.3.3

Faculty Contract Forms for all Institutions Except Georgia Gwinnett College

  • Fiscal Year Non-tenured/Track contract
  • Fiscal Year Tenured/Track Contract
  • Academic Year Non-tenured/Track
  • Academic Year Tenured/Track Contract
  • Contract for faculty ranked administrators

Contracts for Employees at Georgia Gwinnett College

  • Academic Year Contract
  • Fiscal Year Contract

Contract for Tenured Personnel Holding Joint Employment at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center-Augusta and the Medical College of Georgia

Download
4.7.1

Sample Letters for Non-Renewal of Contracts of Non-tenured Faculty

  • President’s authorization for designated representative to notify non-tenured faculty of nonrenewal
  • President’s designated representative’s letter to non-tenured faculty to notify of nonrenewal
  • President’s letter to the non-tenured faculty notifying of nonrenewal
Download
4.10 USG Contract Addendum for Temporary Overload Compensation Download

4.3.5 Salary Conversion Guidelines for Fiscal and Academic Year Faculty Appointments

Last reviewed: July 2011

SOURCE:
BoR POLICY 8.3.12.2, CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING SALARY - SALARY FOR A FISCAL YEAR ADMINISTRATIVE EMPLOYEE RETURNING TO AN ACADEMIC APPOINTMENT AS A FACULTY MEMBER

When a faculty member on an academic year contract is given a fiscal year administrative appointment, institutions should pay the faculty member an administrative stipend based on the job description and responsibilities related to their administrative role. The administrative stipend should be identified separately from the base salary amount in the faculty member’s contract and the contact should specify that the stipend will no longer be available when the administrative appointment ends.

Sample contract language:

“Please be advised that your employment as [Faculty Rank and Administrative Title] is at a salary of [Total Salary Amount] from July 1, [Year] and ending on June 30, [Year]. This salary includes an academic year base salary of [Base Salary Amount] plus an administrative stipend of [Stipend Amount] for your administrative duties. Should you no longer hold your administrative position; your administrative stipend will be removed from your total salary.”

The amount of the stipend may vary across units based on the specific responsibilities of the administrative position. For example, a department chair in a department with 40 faculty might receive a larger stipend than a department chair heading a department with 5 faculty. Similarly, a department chair leading a department with multiple degree programs and/or centers might receive a larger stipend than a chair leading a less complex department. The amount of the stipend can be renegotiated annually if the administrative responsibilities change over time. Merit pay increases for administrative faculty may be based on the total fiscal salary (base salary plus the stipend amount).

When a fiscal year administrative employee returns to their academic appointment as a faculty member, the administrative stipend is removed and the faculty member returns to their academic year base salary amount, which should be similar to other faculty in the department with similar rank and experience or other faculty in similar positions at the institution.

return to top