Clayton State University - Faculty Handbook

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION

The policies and procedures included herein are based on the policies of the Board of Regents (Board of Regents) and the Office of the Chancellor. Selected sections of the Board of Regents Bylaws, the Board of Regents Policy Manual, University System Academic and Student Affairs Handbook, and other official University System of Georgia directives have been quoted verbatim when convenient reference is appropriate. Complete copies of the Board of Regents Policy Manual and Academic and Student Affairs Handbook are available in the offices of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs (hereafter referred to as the Provost) and Dean of each College and School. The Policy Manual may also be accessed on the University System of Georgia’s website (http://www.usg.edu/policymanual/).

Institution-specific elaborations on University System policies and procedures are included when appropriate. These have been established by the administrative officers and approved by the President of Clayton State University (hereafter referred to as Clayton State).

This policy and procedure listing is intended to include or refer to the policies and procedures most likely to concern faculty members; it should not be regarded as an exhaustive listing of all the policies and procedures of Clayton State. The directives of administrative officers, so long as they are lawful and consistent with Board of Regents policy, are considered to constitute official policy and procedure of Clayton State. All policies and procedures are subject to change and are not contractual in nature.

Throughout this handbook, excerpts from the Board of Regents Policy Manual are included where appropriate. These excerpts are offset from the rest of the text with black bordering.

101 Faculty


101.01 Appointment of Faculty

101.01.1 Equal Opportunity


Clayton State is an equal employment, equal access, and equal educational opportunity and affirmative action institution. It is the policy of the University to recruit, hire, train, promote and educate persons without regard to race, color, national or ethnical origin, age, disability, gender, religion, sexual orientation or veteran status as required by applicable state and federal laws (including Title VI, Title VII, Title IX, Sections 503, and 504, AREA, ADA, E.O. 11246, and Rev. Proc. 75-50). Clayton State University is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution. See Board of Regents Policy 8.2.1, 8.2.4

101.01.2 Americans with Disabilities

Clayton State University complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act and will make reasonable accommodations for students and employees with disabilities. Information on ADA for students is available through the Disability Services Coordinator. Information on ADA for employees is available in the Office of Human Resources and Services.

101.01.3 Nepotism

Clayton State University follows the Policy Manual of the Board of Regents on Employment of Relatives. See Board of Regents Policy 8.2.3

101.01.4 Summer Appointments

Members of the teaching faculty are usually hired on an academic year contract, which does not include summer teaching. Summer teaching assignments are made in accordance with University needs and resources. Consequently, academic year faculty members are not assured of summer teaching assignments. Faculty members employed during the summer are expected to assume the same faculty  responsibilities required during the academic year. Summer salary is typically calculated at the rate of three percent of the previous academic year’s salary per credit hour taught. If other summer duties are assigned, the compensation will be specified in a letter of agreement. The Policy Manual of the Board of Regents specifies a total compensation limit for summer appointments. See Board of Regents Policy 8.3.12.3

101.02 Definition of Faculty

The faculty will consist of the Corps of Instruction and the Administrative Officers.

101.02.1 Corps of Instruction


Full-time (holding academic year or fiscal year contracts) professors, associate professors, assistant professors, instructors, senior lecturers, lecturers, clinical track1, and teaching personnel with such other titles as may be approved by the Board of Regents, shall be the Corps of Instruction. Full-time research and extension personnel will be included in the Corps of Instruction on the basis of comparable training. This includes duly certified librarians and archivists who hold the MLS or equivalent and serve in full-time professional positions as designated by the Provost or Vice President for Academic Affairs. Persons holding special titles shall not be considered members of the faculty. The faculty has primary responsibility for the curriculum and its delivery. The faculty participates in all facets of policy making and institutional management through a system of governance committees. See Board of Regents Policy 3.2.1

1

Part-time faculty are not members of the Corps of Instruction and are therefore excluded from service on standing committees such as the Faculty Senate, Promotion & Tenure Committees, the Faculty Affairs Committee, the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, the Academic Policy Committee, and the Student Affairs Committee, although they may serve on task forces or ad hoc committees as needed.

101.02.2 Administrative Officers
 

Faculty status of full-time administrative officers will necessarily vary with the size and complexity of the institution. A faculty member who has academic rank and rights of tenure in the Corps of Instruction and who accepts an appointment to an administrative office (other than president) shall retain his/her academic rank and rights of tenure as an ex officio member of the Corps of Instruction, but shall have no rights of tenure in the administrative office to which he or she has been appointed. The additional salary, if any, for the administrative position shall be stated in the employment contract and shall not be paid to the faculty member when he or she ceases to hold the administrative position. An administrative officer having faculty status shall have all the responsibilities and privileges of faculty membership. Administrative officers shall be appointed by the president with the approval of the Board of Regents and shall hold office at the pleasure of the president. See Board of Regents Policy 3.2.1.2

The following administrative positions require academic rank in the Corps of Instruction:

  1. Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs
  2. Associate Provost
  3. School/College deans
  4. Associate deans
  5. Heads of academic departments

The Provost, Associate Provost and Deans may be eligible for tenure at Clayton State. The decision regarding rank, years towards tenure, or the award of tenure will be made by the Provost and President before a letter of offer is sent and material submitted to the Board of Regents. If tenure is sought, the curriculum vita of the individual will be confidentially reviewed by the appropriate department committee and subsequently the appropriate school/college committee. If the candidate meets the designated criteria, tenure may be granted. The recommendation is written by the school/college’s committee chair and sent to the Provost (or the President in the case of the Provost). Tenure may be awarded to incoming administrators in the faculty rank to which they are appointed, but these individuals shall have no rights of tenure in the administrative office. See Board of Regents Policy 8.3.7.4

The Provost (Office of Academic Affairs official) will appoint the search and screening committees for academic deans and assistant vice presidents reporting to the Office of Academic Affairs. The academic deans will appoint the search and screening committees for department heads/associate deans/coordinators.

101.03 Qualifications for Appointment

In keeping with normative practices in higher education, the following titles are used to categorize faculty by rank:

  1. Part-Time Faculty2
  2. Clinical Faculty
  3. Librarian or Archivist
  4. Lecturer
  5. Senior Lecturer
  6. Instructor
  7. Assistant Professor
  8. Associate Professor
  9. Full Professor
  10. Joint Appointments
  11. Special Titles3 - Visiting Faculty, Adjunct Faculty, Continuing Education Faculty, Emeritus Faculty, Honorary Faculty, and Joint Appointments.

Clayton State University has established minimum credentials for the appointment of faculty. Meeting minimum credentials does not assure employment. Individual job positions may specify higher minimum requirements. In addition, these guidelines do not prohibit a program from establishing higher requirements. The minimum qualifications for appointment at Clayton State University follow the Policy Manual of the Board of Regents and the minimum requirements set by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools of a master’s degree with 18 graduate semester hours in the teaching discipline. See Board of Regents Policy 8.3.1.2, 8.3.1.4 

2

Part-time faculty are not members of the Corps of Instruction and are therefore excluded from service on standing committees such as the Faculty Senate, Promotion & Tenure Committees, the Faculty Affairs Committee, the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, the Academic Policy Committee, and the Student Affairs Committee, although they may serve on task forces or ad hoc committees as needed.

3

“Special Titles” faculty are excluded from service on standing committees such as the Faculty Senate, Promotion & Tenure Committees, the Faculty Affairs Committee, the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, the Academic Policy Committee, and the Student Affairs Committee, although they may serve on task forces or ad hoc committees as needed.

101.03.1 Faculty Rank

  1. Part-Time Faculty
    1. Non-tenured faculty who are employed at less than full time (less than 50% for the academic year) are considered temporary part-time faculty.  Such individuals require appointment from semester to semester as needed and do not accrue time toward tenure.  A temporary faculty member who is made fulltime on a one-semester-at-a-time basis is still considered a part-time faculty member even if the person serves in this capacity during consecutive semesters. [Part-time faculty members are reported to the Board of Regents via the Faculty Information System, FIS, as limited term.]  Part-time faculty members may serve on subcommittees, task forces, working groups, etc. as an appropriate administrator may determine; however, part-time faculty members may not serve on standing committees.  Written contracts issued to part-time faculty must be appropriate to specific assignments.  Additional justification is required when employment equals or exceeds one-half time for the year. Qualifications must be in accordance with SACS minimum requirements of a master’s degree with 18 graduate semester hours in the teaching discipline; USG Academic and Student Affairs Handbook, Section 4; and, the Clayton State University Credentials and Hiring Guide.
  2. Clinical Faculty
    1. Clinical track faculty are faculty members who are employed full time to perform special instructional functions associated with offering a clinically based academic program. These educator-practitioners may hold the rank of Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor or Professor, consistent with their educational preparation, teaching experience and scholarly activities. Clinical track faculty do not accrue time toward tenure and are not tenure eligible. Time served as clinical faculty shall count toward promotion but not tenure. Qualifications for promotion in a clinical track are determined by the School or College where the appointment originates and approved by the Provost.
  3. Librarian or Archivist
    1. Faculty who hold a master’s degree from a library school accredited by the American Library Association may hold the rank of Librarian or Archivist.  Individuals who have a terminal degree and who are certified by the Academy of Certified Archivists may hold the rank of Archivist.  The earned terminal degree appropriate for a specific designated discipline at Clayton State University or extraordinary recognition and achievement in the area of specialization is required. Librarians are given annual appointments on an academic or fiscal basis. 
  4. Lecturer4
    1. A Lecturer is a faculty member who is employed full time to carry out special instructional functions.  Lecturers are given annual appointments on an academic year or fiscal year basis.  Reappointment of a Lecturer who has completed six consecutive years of service to the university will be permitted only if the Lecturer has demonstrated exceptional teaching ability and extraordinary value to the university.  Not more than 10% of the university’s FTE corps of primarily undergraduate instruction may be Lecturers and/or Senior Lecturers.  Faculty holding the rank of Lecturer are not eligible for tenure. Time in this rank does not count toward tenure, nor is probationary credit granted.  Reappointment procedures for Lecturers are found in Section 200.02.2 of this handbook. Qualifications must be in accordance with SACS minimum requirements of a master’s degree with 18 graduate semester hours in the teaching discipline, Board of Regents Policy 8.3.8.1, and the Clayton State University Credentials and Hiring Guide.
  5. Senior Lecturer5
    1. Faculty who possess the qualifications of Lecturer and have served for a period of at least six years at Clayton State University may be considered for promotion to Senior Lecturer.  Senior Lecturers are given annual appointments on an academic year or fiscal year basis.  Promotion to Senior Lecturer requires approval by the President and is reported to the Board of Regents.  Faculty holding the rank of Senior Lecturer are not eligible for tenure.  Time in this rank does not count toward tenure, nor is probationary credit granted.  Reappointment procedures for Senior Lecturers are found in Section 200.02 of this handbook.​
  6. Instructor
    1. Faculty who possess a master's degree in the teaching discipline and generally have fewer than three years previous teaching experience as regular full-time college teachers are classified as Instructors.  Instructors are given annual appointments on an academic year or fiscal year basis.  Faculty holding the rank of Instructor are not eligible for tenure.  Time in this rank does not count toward tenure, nor is probationary credit granted (except in cases recommended by the Dean and approved by the Provost).  The rank of Instructor may be given to a faculty member who is ABD and will not complete the doctoral degree in time for the academic year.  … the maximum period of time that may be served at the rank of full-time instructor shall be seven years. See Board of Regents Policy 8.3.7.6, 8.3.7.8
  7. ​Assistant Professor
    1. Faculty who possess the qualifications of the previous rank, and meet the qualifications for Assistant Professor, as stated in section 205.03.1.2, may be employed as Assistant Professors.  The earned terminal degree appropriate for a specific designated discipline at Clayton State University or extraordinary recognition and achievement in the area of specialization is required. Faculty may not be tenured at the rank of Assistant Professor.  (In disciplines where faculty are normally appointed to tenure-track positions at Clayton State University and the appropriate terminal degree is the doctorate, the doctorate is the required credential. Exceptions to this requirement are made only in situations of unique merit.)  An exception to this minimum requirement may be made for candidates who have completed all doctoral requirements except the dissertation and are making satisfactory progress toward its completion. Completion of the doctoral degree is expected prior to pre-tenure review.
  8. Associate Professor
    1. Faculty who meet the qualifications for Associate Professor, as stated in section 205.03.1.3, may be employed as Associate Professors.  The earned terminal degree appropriate for a specific designated discipline at Clayton State University or extraordinary recognition and achievement in the area of specialization is required. (In disciplines where faculty are normally appointed to tenure-track positions at Clayton State University and the appropriate terminal degree is the doctorate, the doctorate is the required credential. Exceptions to this requirement are made only in situations of unique merit.) 
  9. Professor
    1. Faculty who hold the terminal degree appropriate to their specific designated discipline, and meet the qualifications for Professor, as stated in section 205.03.1.4, may be employed as Professors. See Board of Regents Policy 8.3.6
  10. Joint Appointments
    1. In order to promote interdisciplinary research, the exchange of ideas and enhance learning for CSU students, full time faculty may hold a joint appointment.  A faculty member holding a joint appointment is based in one college or school but is assigned to teach courses in more than one college or school, or performs other duties at a cooperating organization or agency.
    2. For the purposes of evaluation, the dean and/or department head where the faculty member holds his or her primary appointment (and will apply for tenure and promotion) will conduct the annual evaluation.  Input from other supervisors will be provided for annual evaluations, tenure, and promotion evaluations wherever applicable.
  11. Special Titles
    1. Visiting Faculty: Part-time faculty members who teach credit classes for Clayton State University without monetary compensation through special partnership arrangements may be designated by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs as “visiting” faculty. Appropriate rank is determined as for adjunct faculty.
    2. Adjunct Faculty: Adjunct faculty appointments to Clayton State University are courtesy appointments and do not have monetary compensation associated with the appointment. Adjunct faculty are not considered as part of the Clayton State Corps of Instruction. The appointment requires the appropriate credentials. See Board of Regents Academic and Student Affairs Handbook Section 4
    3. Continuing Education Faculty: Individuals teaching continuing education courses are part-time employees or independent contractors (depending on specific arrangements) and do not acquire any faculty privileges by virtue of that service.
    4. Emeritus Faculty: Emeritus status is awarded to a retired faculty member who has achieved distinction at Clayton State University.  The institution may confer, at its discretion, the title of “emeritus” on any retired and tenured professor, associate professor, or Board-approved non-tenure track faculty of equivalent rank, who at the time of retirement, had ten years or more of honorable and distinguished service in the University System.  Also, the institution may confer, at its discretion, the title of  “emeritus” on any Board approved, retired administrative officer who, at the time of retirement, had ten years or more of honorable and distinguished service in the University System.  This title may be conferred upon the recommendation of the president of the institution in which the employee has served. See Board of Regents Policy 8.3.13
    5. Honorary Faculty: This includes individuals who have been awarded honorary degrees or given other honorific faculty status by Clayton State University (e.g. distinguished visiting) in accordance with Board of Regents policies. See Board of Regents Policy 3.2.1.1 

​200 Recruitment and Hiring Procedures

200.01 Faculty Hiring

The procedures outlined here refer to regular, full time faculty positions. Upon approval of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, this process may be expedited for temporary full-time faculty. 

  1. The Dean will discuss the proposed position with the Provost to determine the following:
    • If the position will be a tenure or non-tenure track and the qualifications required
    • Salary range and starting date
    • Academic rank or range
  2. Recruitment and Search
    • The Dean will submit to the Provost a recruitment plan on the Recruitment Plan Summary Form.
    • The Dean will appoint a screening committee and designate a chairperson.  The screening committee for full-time academic teaching faculty positions will consist of at least three faculty members selected from the school/department where the search is being conducted.  When appropriate, the committee will include other members.
    • The committee will follow procedures for the University System of Georgia Applicant Clearinghouse and place ads in appropriate publications and on the University web page.
    • The committee will receive and log the applications and initiate and maintain a master file for each applicant, which consists of the following:
      • The letter of application and curriculum vita
      • Names, addresses, phone numbers, and email of three current references
      • Other supporting materials
    • Send a letter of receipt to each applicant including the EEO Voluntary Disclosure Form with a pre-addressed return envelope and a copy of the position description.
  3. Screening Process
    • The committee will develop a set of criteria that meets the position description.  Following approval of the criteria by the Dean, the committee will review the applications. All efforts need to be made to seek and retain a diverse pool of applicants; diversity subject of race, country, and gender is particularly important to uphold Clayton State’s mission.
    • The chair may request additional information from a narrowed pool, check references, and arrange with the screening committee to conduct telephone interviews if necessary.  
    • If telephone interviews are conducted, the committee will use a standard and agreed upon list of questions, and the interview may be taped if the applicant concurs.
    • Following the initial review, the screening committee will submit to the Department Head/Associate Dean/Dean the list of finalists still under consideration, indicating which applicants it recommends for on-campus interviews. The administrator will review the list for diversity, quality of applicants’ educational experience and credentials, and decide to proceed with the search or begin a new search process with a new committee.
  4. Interviewing Candidates
    • The chair of the screening committee will set up appointments for appropriate individuals/groups to meet with the candidate and develop an evaluation form.  All interviewers will provide input to the committee on their perceptions of the candidates’ appropriateness for the position using this form.  
    • After an interview timetable is confirmed, time may be set aside for the candidate to meet with an individual in the Human Resources Department to discuss possible benefit questions.  
    • The chair should set up an opportunity for each candidate to make a presentation (this may be oral, a demonstration, performance, or whatever is appropriate for the discipline).  Standard criteria developed by the screening committee should be used to rate the presentation; these could include using the overall evaluation form.
    • Following all interviews, the committee will meet to formulate its recommendation using all evaluative data, and submit to the Department Head/Associate Dean an unranked list of the top candidates (a minimum of three).  The Department Head/Associate Dean in turn submits the list to the Dean.
    • The Dean’s office will send the finalist’s name to the Office of Academic Affairs, and the applicant will fill out the Board of Regents Security Questionnaire, Clayton State PeopleSoft Employee Data Form, and an authorization for release of personal information.
    • The Dean and the Provost will discuss the starting salary, rank, tenure line, contract type, and beginning date of appointment. The Office of Academic Affairs will send out a Letter of Intent to Hire contingent upon the Board of Regents’ approval and successful background check.
  5. Follow Up and Documentation
    • The department head/associate dean will notify the remaining non-selected candidates that the position has been filled.  Finalists may be contacted by phone as well as a letter if the chair chooses. 
    • The Office of Human Resources will contact the appointee and arrange for completion of the necessary personnel payroll and benefit forms.  
    • The Dean’s office will ensure that the Applicant Clearinghouse procedures are completed.
    • The Dean will submit to the Office of Provost a documentation file for the specific position as a record of the search and screen efforts.  This file must include the following:
      • A copy of the recruitment plan
      • A list of the screening committee members
      • A copy of the log of applications
      • Copies of all advertisements, including names of publications and their dates
      • Copies of all correspondence with applicants
      • Application materials of all non-selected candidates

Files will be maintained in accordance with appropriate state law and USG regulations.

200.02 Letters of Intent/Annual Contracts 

200.02.1 Annual Contracts

Official Board of Regents faculty contracts (academic year or fiscal year) are issued only to individuals with regular academic rank.  Other individuals may be given letters of agreement at the President’s discretion.

200.02.2 Notification of Intent to Renew or Not to Renew

All tenured faculty members employed under written contract for the fiscal or academic year shall give at least sixty days written notice of their intention to resign to the president of the institution or to his/her authorized representative.

Non-tenured faculty members, instructors, and lecturers at Clayton State University will receive written notification of intent to renew or not to renew contracts according to this schedule mandated by the Board of Regents.  A faculty member is considered to be in his or her “initial one-year contract” if the person’s starting date of employment for the duration of the fiscal or academic year is between July 1 and Sept. 30 (inclusive).  Any faculty member whose initial contract begins on or after Oct. 1 does not have a full one-year contract and, therefore, is not officially due notice during that initial contract period.

Courtesy letters of intent may be issued to faculty members on temporary contract or in an initial contract of less than one year.  Such courtesy letters do not affect the official notification schedule. 

See Board of Regents Policy 8.3.4

200.03 Removal of Faculty Members

Clayton State University follows the Policy Manual of the Board of Regents. See Board of Regents Policy 8.3.9

200.03.1 Procedures for Removal of Faculty

The Policy Manual of the Board of Regents, Section 8.3.9, details the procedures for the dismissal of tenured and non-tenured faculty members before the end of their contracts. These procedures constitute the “minimum standards of due process” and allow institutions to “set additional standards or procedures” that are consistent with Board of Regents’ policy and bylaws. The Board of Regents requires that any “additional standards or procedures shall be incorporated into the statutes of the institution.”

200.03.2 Removal of Part-Time Faculty Members Serving Without a Written Contract

Clayton State University follows the Policy Manual of the Board of Regents. See Board of Regents Policy 8.3.9.3

200.03.3 Suspension for Violation of State or Federal Laws

Clayton State University follows the Policy Manual of the Board of Regents. See Board of Regents Policy 8.3.9.4

201 Faculty Ranks

The tenure status of an individual (tenured, tenure track, non-tenure track) does not affect faculty classification for purposes of this document.  Appropriate initial faculty rank is determined at the time of appointment by the President upon the recommendation of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.

201.1 Tenure

Refer to Section 205.02.1 of the Faculty Handbook for more detailed information.

201.2 Non-Tenure

Clayton State University follows the Policy Manual of the Board of Regents. See Board of Regents Policy 8.3.8

202 Annual Faculty Evaluation

202.01 Policy for Annual Faculty Evaluation  

The purpose of the annual faculty evaluation process at Clayton State is to assess the performance of full-time faculty (as defined in Section 101.02) during the previous calendar year through self, administrative, and student evaluations, as well as through peer review as appropriate. The annual faculty evaluation process allows faculty to demonstrate their contributions to the University, articulate their goals, gain insight into the expectations of their discipline, department/academic unit or school and/or college, and the University, and encourages faculty to continue making significant contributions to Clayton State. In addition, administrators base merit salary increases on annual faculty evaluations. 

Clayton State University follows definite and stated criteria, consistent with Board of Regents’ policies, the Academic and Student Affairs Handbook of the Board of Regents, and the policies of the University, against which the performance of each faculty member is evaluated. The criteria include evaluation of teaching, student success activities, service, scholarly and/or creative activities, and professional development, as is appropriate to the faculty member’s college/school, department/academic unit, and the responsibilities of their position. Faculty members can find a list of activities constituting evidence of achievement in these areas of teaching effectiveness, student success activities, service, scholarly and/or creative activities, and professional development in Section 205.03.3 of this handbook. 

The annual evaluations guide faculty in their progress toward successful promotion, tenure, or post-tenure review on an annual basis and provide administrators and promotion and tenure committees with a measure of each faculty member’s consistent progress. As such, annual evaluations will be utilized as a part of subsequent pre-tenure, promotion, tenure, and post-tenure reviews as well as retention, promotion, and tenure decisions. Section 205 further explains the relation between annual faculty evaluation and the process of promotion and tenure. Section 206 further explains the relation between annual faculty evaluation and the process of post-tenure.

Annual evaluation takes place primarily at the lowest academic unit that sets promotion and tenure requirements for each faculty member (hereafter referred to as academic unit in this section). Each faculty member shall be evaluated by their immediate supervisor (direct academic supervisor).   

Annual faculty evaluation at Clayton State is based on the Policy Manual of the Board of Regents and uses the four general criteria specified in the Academic and Student Affairs Handbook of the Board of Regents Manual:  

  1. Teaching Effectiveness
  2. Activities that Support Student Success
  3. Service to the Institution 
  4. Scholarly and/or Creative Activities and Professional Development

202.02 Procedures for Annual Faculty Evaluation 

202.02.1 PROCEDURES FOR FACULTY MEMBER

The annual faculty evaluation procedures for faculty include the maintenance of evidence of performance throughout each year to be used in assembling an annual evaluation portfolio. Along with such evidence, student evaluations and any peer reviews of instruction will be provided for the portfolio by supervisors and colleagues, but it is the faculty member’s responsibility to ensure that they are included with the portfolio. In addition, faculty members will provide a self-evaluation as part of their annual faculty evaluation. 

Based upon the evidence submitted in the faculty members annual evaluation portfolio, each faculty member will be assigned a single overall evaluation score. The overall evaluation score will be based upon individual scores earned in the evaluation categories listed in section 202.01 above. The overall evaluation score will be calculated by the direct supervisor as follows:

  • Individual scores will be assigned in each of the three categories of Teaching Effectiveness, Service to the Institution and the Larger Community, and Scholarly Activities and Professional Development.
  • A weighted composite score will be calculated based upon the category weights selected and category scores assigned in the categories of Teaching Effectiveness, Service to the Institution and the Larger Community, and Scholarly Activities and Professional Development. 

In order to properly compute the weighted composite score as described above, every academic unit must specify the allowable weight factor ranges for the annual evaluation categories of Teaching Effectiveness, Service to the Institution and the Larger Community, and Scholarly Activities and Professional Development. Academic unit weight factor ranges must be circulated among the academic unit faculty and posted publicly, ideally on the academic unit’s website. Academic unit weight factor ranges may be changed upon the approval of a supermajority of the faculty in that academic unit and final approval by the College Promotion & Tenure Committee and Dean. The faculty member under review may determine individual weight factors within those ranges and, should the faculty member elect to do so, these weight factors must be submitted to their immediate supervisor prior to the submission of the annual evaluation portfolio.

Student success activities will be evaluated as an overlay requirement. To satisfy the overlay requirement for student success activities, each faculty member must provide evidence of outstanding involvement in student success activities appropriate to their rank and position within their academic unit. The expected depth and breadth of outstanding involvement will be defined within guidelines adopted by each academic unit and approved by its College Promotion & Tenure Committee and Dean. Academic unit expectations for outstanding involvement in student success must be circulated among the academic unit faculty and posted publicly, ideally on the academic unit’s website.  While an annual evaluation area score is not calculated for this student success overlay, the faculty member must annually demonstrate outstanding involvement in student success activities of the kind listed in Section 205.03.3 and further defined by their unit for faculty of their rank and position.

202.02.2.1 Annual Evaluation Portfolio

The annual faculty evaluation at Clayton State requires that full time faculty members submit a portfolio to the immediate supervisor at a date in January set by their college. Portfolios provide evidence of faculty performance for use in the administrative evaluation of faculty and should document the period from January 1 to December 31 of the previous calendar year. They should adhere to the Annual Evaluation Portfolio Guidelines set forth in the appendices of this handbook. Portfolios should be submitted in a cloud-based, electronic format allowed by the faculty member’s college. If a faculty member is a candidate for promotion and/or tenure or pre-tenure review as of January 1, the portfolio under consideration in such review will serve as the portfolio for the individual’s annual evaluation as well, and there will be no need to submit a separate annual evaluation portfolio. However, the individual must submit to their immediate supervisor an updated Summary of Professional Activity Form by the January due date to document activities during the previous Fall Semester for purposes of annual evaluation. If a faculty member is under post-tenure review, the post-tenure review portfolio shall serve as the portfolio for annual review as well.

202.02.2.2 Student Evaluation of Instruction 

The University, as part of its evaluative procedures, utilizes a system of faculty evaluations by students, with the improvement of teaching effectiveness and student learning as the main focuses of these student evaluations. Students shall be given the opportunity on a regular basis to confidentially rate faculty performance. The information derived from the student ratings will be used by the faculty member for self-evaluation and by the administration as part of the faculty evaluation process. The form and procedure of the student rating of faculty (Student Evaluation of Instruction; SEI) shall be established by the Faculty Senate and be approved by the Provost. 

An academic unit also may choose to utilize a system of peer evaluations of instruction. If such a system is adopted, a faculty member or the immediate supervisor may request one or more faculty peers to observe and provide a written review of the faculty member’s instruction. The purpose of this review will be to expand upon or clarify information given by the SEIs and thereby enhance the evaluation of instruction. 

 202.02.2.3 Faculty Self-Evaluation

The Annual Faculty Evaluation process shall include a self-evaluation by each faculty member. This will be accomplished through the cover letter of the Annual Evaluation Portfolio. The cover letter will introduce the portfolio and provide the faculty member’s reflection upon their performance during the previous calendar year.

Since the Annual Faculty Evaluation is linked with the pre-tenure, promotion, tenure, and post-tenure processes, each faculty member will assess their work using their school or department’s promotion and tenure criteria for each area of assessment—instruction, student success, research/creative activities/professional development, and service—as it applies to their position. The faculty member will identify each accomplishment in their portfolio which they believe contributes to a successful pre-tenure, promotion, tenure, or post-tenure review (whichever applies to them). The faculty member will provide a written justification of this self-assessment and a written reflection upon their strengths and weaknesses along the path toward their next pre-tenure, promotion, tenure, or post-tenure review. The self-evaluation will include a statement of goals to capitalize on strengths, rectify weaknesses, and improve the likelihood of a successful pre-tenure, promotion, tenure, or post-tenure review. 

202.02.2 PROCEDURES FOR IMMEDIATE SUPERVISORS

Any department head, assistant dean, associate dean, dean, assistant provost, associate provost, or provost who directly oversees the work of individual faculty member(s) is an appropriate supervisor for purposes of annual faculty evaluation. Immediate supervisors review the Annual Evaluation Portfolios—including the self-evaluative cover letters, SEIs, and any peer evaluations—for the faculty members whom they supervise. This review will take place during the Spring semester according to the timeframe set by each college. Such review should not result in conclusions but should prepare the supervisor for the Annual Evaluation Conference.

During their review, the immediate supervisor will prepare a tentative evaluation using an academic unit Annual Faculty Evaluation Form. This form shall be adapted from the University Annual Evaluation Form template and account for the academic unit’s criteria for pre-tenure, promotion, tenure, and post-tenure review, as appropriate. The immediate supervisor shall use the academic unit form for a preliminary measurement of progress toward each faculty member’s next review. It also shall include a section for a final rating based on the scale set by the Board of Regents. The Annual Faculty Evaluation Form for each academic unit shall be created by the unit and approved by the full-time faculty in the unit and by the Dean of the school or college, subject to the review of the Provost.

Following the review of a faculty member’s Annual Evaluation Portfolio, the immediate supervisor shall hold an Annual Evaluation Conference with the faculty member. Each immediate supervisor is responsible for rating the progress of the faculty member toward pre-tenure, promotion, tenure, or post-tenure review (whichever applies) through completion of a final Annual Faculty Evaluation Form. 

The immediate supervisor also will make a final rating of the faculty member’s performance based on the scale set in the Academic and Student Affairs Handbook of the Board of Regents. That scale provides the following ratings: 1) Does Not Meet Expectations 2) Needs Improvement 3) Meets Expectations 4) Exceeds Expectations 5) Exemplary. 

The immediate supervisor will prepare a cover page that summarizes the outcomes of the evaluation conference, the assessment of the faculty member’s progress toward pre-tenure, promotion, tenure, or post-tenure review, the reasoning behind the individual criteria ratings, and the final overall rating of the faculty member, and any Performance Remediation Plan (PRP) or Corrective Post-Tenure Review progress. The cover page will be signed and dated by both the immediate supervisor and the faculty member and shared electronically with the final evaluation form, the portfolio—including the self-evaluative cover letter, SEIs, and evidence of performance--a written copy of the faculty member’s goals and plans for progress and improvement as developed during the evaluation conference, and any PRP to the Dean or the Dean’s designee according to the timeframe set by each college (usually early March). The faculty member will also be provided with copies of the cover page, the final evaluation form, a written copy of the faculty member’s goals and plans for progress and improvement, and any PRP or Corrective Post-Tenure Review improvement plan.

202.02.3 ANNUAL EVALUATION CONFERENCE

An Annual Evaluation Conference shall be held after the immediate supervisor has reviewed a faculty member’s Annual Evaluation Portfolio and before March 1. The immediate supervisor shall transmit a preliminary copy of the annual review, including proposed ratings and justifications, at least 3 working days before the date of the Annual Evaluation Conference. During the conference, the faculty member and the immediate supervisor will discuss the portfolio— including the self-evaluative cover letter, the SEIs, any peer evaluations, and other evidence of performance included in the portfolio. They additionally will discuss the faculty member’s progress toward their next pre-tenure, promotion, tenure, or post-tenure review (if applicable). The conference will include a discussion of the faculty performance, and the faculty member will have the opportunity to ask questions. The faculty member and the supervisor will talk about goals and plans for progress and improvement in the coming year, and those will be recorded in writing. 

As a result of the Annual Evaluation Conference discussion, the immediate supervisor may adjust the aforementioned preliminary ratings. Wherever possible, the immediate supervisor will connect the annual evaluation to progress toward a successful pre-tenure, tenure, promotion, or post-tenure review. The faculty member will be provided with the opportunity to respond to and/or rebut the review in writing. The response/rebuttal shall be a permanent part of the final review. Following the response/rebuttal inclusion, the immediate supervisor and the faculty member must each sign the review.

202.02.3.1 Remediation

If a faculty member receives any ratings of 1 – Does Not Meet Expectations or 2 – Needs Improvement, according to the scale set in the Academic and Student Affairs Handbook of the Board of Regents, the faculty member must be provided with a Performance Remediation Plan to remediate their performance during the balance of the calendar year. Any such plan shall be set through collaboration between the faculty member and their immediate supervisor during the Annual Evaluation Conference and written in accordance with the Academic and Student Affairs Handbook of the Board of Regents. A third faculty member may be invited by the faculty member being evaluated. In such a case, the conference may be continued at a later date and time to allow for the participation of the third faculty member. 

This remediation plan should address how deficiencies cited in the annual evaluation will be corrected. It should be individualized, taking into account the faculty member’s specific circumstances and the essential duties of the particular faculty member. In all cases, face-to-face meetings and discussions are required to ensure thorough exploration of all options and clear communication of the understandings reached.

A formal plan for performance remediation should do the following:  

  1. define specific goals or outcomes that are to be achieved;  
  2. outline the activities that will be undertaken to achieve the goals or outcomes;  
  3. set appropriate times within which the goals or outcomes should be accomplished; 
  4. identify appropriate resources and support faculty development; and  
  5. indicate appropriate criteria and strategy by which progress will be monitored.  

The Performance Remediation Plan shall be finalized in writing no later than one week after the Annual Evaluation Conference concludes. Within two additional working days, the Performance Remediation Plan, must be signed and dated by both the faculty member and the supervisor, and must be approved by the Dean of the academic unit. The approved plan will be submitted to the Provost.

The faculty member will have until their next annual evaluation to accomplish the goals/outcomes of the remediation plan. During that time, the faculty member, their immediate supervisor, and the invited third faculty member (in cases where one has agreed to serve) will meet to review progress on the Performance Remediation Plan according to the following schedule: 1) at least once in the spring semester in which the evaluation occurs, 2) at least twice in the subsequent fall semester, and 3) at least once in the subsequent spring semester prior to that spring’s annual evaluation submission. These meetings shall be for the purposes of reviewing progress, documenting additional needs/resources, and planning future accomplishments.  After each meeting, the immediate supervisor shall summarize the meeting in writing and disseminate that summary to the meeting participants within 2 working days. The summary shall explicitly indicate whether, in the supervisor’s estimation, the faculty member is on track to complete the Performance Remediation Plan.

202.02.4 POST-EVALUATION RIGHTS OF FACULTY MEMBER

After the final meeting required by the Performance Remediation Plan, the faculty member shall have 10 working days to respond in writing to the immediate supervisor’s final written evaluation. As part of their written response, the faculty member may elect to include a signed, written statement made by the third invited faculty member (as invited and described in section 202.02.3.1 above). The faculty member’s response shall be attached to the supervisor’s evaluation and shall become part of the official personnel records. Within 10 working days of the faculty member’s response, the supervisor will acknowledge in writing its receipt. Such acknowledgement shall note any changes made in the final, written evaluation as a result of the supervisor’s consideration of the written response provided by the faculty member.

While the final, written evaluation is not subject to discretionary review or appeal, a faculty member may meet with the Dean of their school or college or the Dean’s designee (not the immediate supervisor) within 30 days of the completion of the evaluation to correct the facts of the record by discussing any misunderstandings of the evaluation or the evaluative process and/or raising concerns that the process was not properly followed as set forth in this section. Any such corrected facts must be reflected in the final, written evaluation within 10 working days of any such meeting.

202.02.5 CORRECTIVE POST-TENURE REVIEW AFTER TWO CONSECUTIVE UNSATISFACTORY ANNUAL EVALUATIONS 

Per Board of Regents policy, tenured faculty members evaluated as deficient in any one of the elements of teaching, student success activities, service, and/or scholarly activities and professional development for two consecutive annual evaluations will participate in a corrective post-tenure review. The deficiency does not have to be in the same area but could be a different area from one year to the next. This review will be initiated prior to the normally scheduled five-year post-tenure review. The faculty member will follow the institution's guidelines and procedures for post tenure review. If the outcome of the Corrective PostTenure Review is successful, the faculty member will reset the post-tenure review clock. If the outcome of a corrective post tenure review does not meet expectations or needs improvement, the steps for creating and evaluating a Performance Improvement Plan will be followed. The normal due process rights of a faculty member undergoing post-tenure review will apply in cases of corrective post-tenure review. 

202.02.6 ANNUAL FACULTY EVALUATION IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS

In extraordinary circumstances, the Faculty Senate may ask the President of the University to temporarily alter, suspend, or waive any provision of the Annual Faculty Evaluation process outlined above. If the President agrees, the particulars of the proposed temporary alterations shall be communicated in writing to the Faculty no later than December 31 of the evaluation year which the alterations affect.

202.02.7 ANNUAL EVALUATION PORTFOLIO GUIDELINES

The portfolio for annual evaluation may consist of two parts,  submitted in a format allowed by the faculty member’s college (at least one format option allowed by each college must be electronic).

Part 1 consists of the following (1-5 are required; 6 is optional):

  1. A self-evaluative cover letter (See Faculty Handbook Section 202.02.2.3)
  2. The Summary of Professional Activity Form providing factual information about the faculty member and their accomplishments in the past calendar year.
  3. An up-to-date professional resume (curriculum vita).
  4. Student Evaluations of Instruction as entered in the SEI Dashboard through the SWAN (it is the responsibility of the immediate supervisor to ensure that SEIs are available to each faculty member in their academic unit)
  5. A statistical summary of the grade distributions of the courses taught by the faculty member during the evaluation period. (it is the immediate supervisor’s responsibility to ensure that grade distributions are available to each faculty member in their academic unit)
  6. Mentor and/or peer comments (optional).

Part 2 consists of any additional evidence as may be required by the College/School, and/or Department review guidelines. If a College/School, and/or Department does not require evidence beyond that required in Part 1, then Part 2 is not required.

205 Promotion and Tenure 

205.01. General Policies for Promotion and Tenure  

Each faculty member is expected to contribute to the achievement of the University’s mission through effective teaching, student success, service, scholarly and/or creative activities, and professional development,  appropriate to the faculty member’s discipline.  It is the responsibility of the faculty member, with assistance from administrators, to document the quality of his/her/their contributions by maintaining and presenting clear and adequate records. 

The Annual Faculty Evaluation process is integral to the procedures for faculty to advance in rank or to gain tenure at Clayton State University. Annual evaluations and periodic reviews shall be designed to assist faculty, promotion and tenure committee members, and administrators in making decisions relative to personal development, promotion, and tenure.   

The promotion and tenure policies and procedures at Clayton State are based on the policies, guidelines, and timelines established by the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia. While the Board of Regents policy prescribes minimum standards for promotion and tenure, it allows considerable flexibility to University System institutions in developing appropriate criteria.  In the event of any conflict, the policies of the Board of Regents shall prevail.  Appeal or grievance may be made in accordance with general University and Board policy and procedures. 

Tenure resides at the institutional level. See Board of Regents Policy 8.3.7 and Academic and Student Affairs Handbook Section 4.4. 

When the published dates in this document fall on a weekend, the deadline date will be the first working day immediately following the specified date. 

205.02. Clayton State University Policy on Tenure 

205.02.1. DEFINITION OF TENURE  

Tenure is the practice that entitles a faculty member to continuation of his/her/their appointment until relinquishment or forfeiture of tenure or until termination of tenure for adequate cause (see Board of Regents Policy 8.3.9.1), financial exigency, or academic program discontinuance. The burden of proof that tenure should be awarded rests with the faculty member. 

Tenure is acquired only by positive action of the President of the University. See Board of Regents Policy 8.3.7 

205.02.2. OBLIGATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITY OF TENURED FACULTY 

The primary responsibility of tenured faculty is to ensure the open and free exchange of knowledge and the pursuit of inquiry and to initiate others into their respective fields of learning and research through creative and effective teaching.  The American Association of University Professors states that faculty, as members of the academy, have the responsibility to be effective teachers and scholars and to encourage the free pursuit of learning in their students. Professors should exhibit the best scholarly and ethical standards of their discipline, adhere to “their proper roles as intellectual guides and counselors,” and demonstrate respect for students as individuals. 

It is the duty of all members of the academy to seek the best-qualified persons for appointment. Tenured faculty are also entrusted with the responsibility for retention and promotion of exceptional faculty.  As standard bearers, these faculty are to ensure the quality of learning within the institution. It is for that reason that tenured faculty members must be intimately involved in the development of an environment that is conducive to the discovery of knowledge, academic freedom, and high ethical standards of conduct. Tenure of a faculty member shall always be determined based on competence and professional performance and not based on beliefs, or any basis that constitutes an infringement of academic freedom (Section 211.02 faculty handbook). In addition, tenure ensures the academic freedom that is essential to an atmosphere conducive to the free search for inquiry and attainment of excellence in the University. 

205.02.3. ELIGIBILITY FOR TENURE 

Tenure should be granted only to faculty whose  teaching, student success, service, scholarly and/or creative activities, and professional development are meeting expectations in two categories and exceeding expectations in the other three categories for continued performance so that the University, to the extent that its fiscal and human resources permit, can justifiably undertake to employ the faculty member for the rest of that faculty member’s academic career. The granting of tenure, therefore, should be exercised only after a comprehensive evaluation of the faculty member’s capacity for effective continued performance throughout the individual’s career. 

According to Board of Regents policy, only faculty who hold the rank of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor and are employed on a full-time basis in a tenure-track appointment are eligible for tenure. At Clayton State University, tenure is usually considered for only associate professors and professors; adjunct faculty, instructors, senior lecturers, lecturers, clinical track faculty and assistant professors are not eligible for tenure, although assistant professors who received credit toward tenure upon appointment can be considered for tenure while holding the rank of Assistant Professor.  

Administrative personnel, such as department chairs, associate deans, and deans who hold academic rank in addition to their administrative positions, may hold tenured status as faculty members. Administrative positions per se are not subject to tenure.

It is routine and customary to consider tenure in the fifth year of a tenure-track appointment, with a tenure decision to be determined prior to the beginning of the sixth year. If the faculty member does not achieve tenure by the end of the fifth year, the faculty may have the opportunity to strengthen the identified areas where improvement is needed and resubmit documentation prior to the beginning of the sixth year for tenure beginning with the seventh year.  If notification of tenure is not awarded by the end of the sixth year of service, termination notice will be given. A maximum of two attempts at tenure is possible.  If the candidate waits until the beginning of the sixth year of employment, they will only have one attempt at tenure.

Clayton State University neither recognizes nor grants “de facto” tenure or the practice of conferring tenure without a tenure review solely by reason of the faculty member’s time of service in rank exceeding six years. 

205.02.4. PROBATIONARY PERIOD FOR CONSIDERATION OF TENURE 

Clayton State University’s policies for the probationary period required for the consideration of tenure are in accordance with policies prescribed in Board of Regents Policy 8.3.7.7. 

  1. A probationary period of at least five years of full-time service at the rank of Assistant Professor or higher is required before a candidate is eligible to be awarded tenure. (The term full-time refers to service with a one hundred percent workload for at least two out of three consecutive academic semesters.)  The earliest time for submission of a portfolio, therefore, is at the beginning of the fifth year. These five years of service must be continuous at Clayton State University with the following exceptions: 
    1. A maximum of two years of interruption because of a leave of absence or part-time service may be permitted and credit for the probationary period of an interruption may be given at the discretion of the President. In all cases in which a leave of absence, approved by the President, is based on birth or adoption of a child, or disability or prolonged illness of the employee or immediate family member, the five-year probationary period may be suspended during the leave of absence.  
    2. When hiring faculty with especially strong credentials and with experience in tenure track at a professorial rank, Clayton State University is permitted by the Board of Regents policy to grant up to three years of credit toward the required five years of probationary service at this institution. At Clayton State University, three years of credit is granted toward tenure only in cases of extremely exceptional and unique merit.  Such credit for prior service toward tenure shall be defined in writing by the President at the time of the initial appointment at the rank of Assistant Professor or higher. 
    3. The Board of Regents Policy Manual allows tenure on appointment in unique cases for highly distinguished positions. 
  2. The Board of Regents specifies policies concerning the maximum time that tenure-track faculty can serve without tenure. 
    1. The maximum time that may be served at the rank of Assistant Professor or above without the award of tenure is seven years. However, a terminal contract for an eighth year may be proffered if the President does not approve an institutional recommendation for tenure. 
    2. The maximum time that may be served in any combination of full-time instructional appointments (instructor or professorial ranks) without the award of tenure is ten years. However, a terminal contract for an eleventh year may be proffered if the President does not approve an institutional recommendation for tenure. 
  3. Faculty employed as clinical faculty, lecturer or other temporary positions are not eligible for consideration for the award of tenure.  Probationary credit toward tenure shall not be awarded for service as clinical faculty, lecturer, or temporary positions. 
  4. Faculty members employed as clinical faculty, lecturer, administrators with a faculty appointment, and other temporary positions follow the averaged workload for each category that is assigned by their respective unit or appropriate supervisor as part of their annual evaluations for the purpose of promotion.

205.02.5. CRITERIA FOR TENURE AT CLAYTON STATE UNIVERSITY

Tenure is awarded to a faculty member after a thorough review of all presented evidence, the ultimate determination of professional excellence and the reasonable presumption that the faculty member’s performance will contribute substantially over a considerable period to the mission and anticipated needs of the academic unit in which tenure is granted. Professional excellence is reflected in the record of faculty member's  teaching, student success, service, scholarly and/or creative activities, and professional development. The relative weights of these factors will vary according to the fit between the faculty member and the mission and needs of the academic unit to which he/she/they is/are appointed.  

At a minimum, candidates for tenure must satisfy the promotion criteria (as detailed in relevant parts of Section 205.03) for the rank at which they will be tenured. A candidacy for simultaneous promotion to Associate Professor and tenure at the rank of Associate Professor will result in one of the following three outcomes: promotion and tenure, promotion only, or neither promotion nor tenure. A candidacy for simultaneous promotion to Professor and tenure at the rank of Professor will result in one of the following four outcomes: both promotion and tenure, promotion only, tenure at the current rank, or neither promotion nor tenure. 

As stated below, an academic unit must also establish more specific criteria for tenure in that unit. After approval by the faculty of the academic unit, these criteria for tenure shall be published in the bylaws of the College or School and posted on the official University Promotion and Tenure website. 

If a tenure-track assistant professor, who does not have previous credit for tenure, applies for tenure, the faculty member must simultaneously apply for promotion to associate professor. Applying for promotion to associate professor without applying for tenure is permitted. 

205.03. Clayton State University Policy on Promotion

Promotion is a way in which the University rewards professional achievement and contributions of individual faculty during their employment. Promotion is not a routine event for satisfactory time in rank, but rather an endorsement of high professional competence and service.  

205.03.1. LENGTH OF SERVICE REQUIRED FOR PROMOTION 

The Board of Regents has established minimum requirements for length of service in rank at an institution before a candidate is recommended for promotion (see Board of Regents Academic and Student Affairs Policy 4.6). At the time of an individual’s initial appointment, a maximum of three years of probationary credit towards promotion may be awarded for service at other institutions or service in a faculty rank within the institution.  Such awards require approval by the President and written notification to the USG Chief Academic Officer. Individuals serving in part-time, temporary, or limited term positions are not eligible for probationary credit towards promotion. Without the approval of the President, faculty given probationary credit towards promotion may not use their years of credit towards consideration for early promotion.

Clayton State University’s policies for the length of service in rank before consideration for promotion are in accordance with policies prescribed by the Board of Regents; however, an academic unit must establish the specific criteria for promotion in that unit. After approval by the faculty, these criteria for promotion shall be published in the bylaws of the College or School and posted to the University Promotion and Tenure website. The minimum years for consideration of promotion refer to full-time service.  

205.03.1.1. Minimum Time in Rank for Promotion To: 

Assistant Professor: For those not appointed as Assistant Professor, faculty members must serve three years but may serve no more than seven years at the rank of instructor at Clayton State University. The portfolio may be submitted electronically during August of the beginning of the third year.

Associate Professor: Faculty members must serve a minimum of five years at the rank of Assistant Professor at Clayton State University. The portfolio may be submitted electronically during August of the beginning of the fifth year.

Professor: Faculty members must serve a minimum of five years at the rank of Associate Professor. The portfolio may be submitted electronically during August of the beginning of the fifth year.

Faculty hired during the academic year (e.g., in January) may opt to have that year counted as a full year for the purposes of both promotion and tenure. This decision must be made by the academic unit head and clearly documented in the contract at the time of hiring.

205.03.1.2. General requirements for Promotion and/or Tenure 

The Board of Regents Policy Manual and the Board of Regents Academic and Student Affairs Handbook prescribe the evaluation of six general criteria for promotion, upon which the criteria for promotion and tenure at Clayton State University are based:   

  1. Academic Achievement: An earned degree appropriate to a specified discipline and rank at Clayton State University, or extraordinary recognition and achievement in the area of specialization, is required. For Senior Lecturers, an appropriate master’s degree is required. For faculty in tenure track positions, the appropriate terminal degree is required. In disciplines where the appropriate terminal degree is the doctorate, the doctorate is the required credential.
  2. Excellence and effectiveness in teaching and instruction: The candidate must show an overall positive assessment in his/her/their courses as evidenced by a system of evaluations that must include faculty evaluations by students. Criteria should include measures such as an assessment of student perception, evidence of effective student learning, the use of continuous improvement methodologies, peer assessment of pedagogy, an evaluation of curricular design, quality of assessment and course construction, and the use of established learning science methodologies. The candidate must show that syllabi for all courses are readily available to students in the course management system or other university/academic unit syllabus repository. Each academic unit should establish a minimum number of office hours per week. Other evidence germane to this category may be included as the candidate deems appropriate for evaluation. 
  3. Student Success Activities: Demonstration of effectiveness and participation in student success activities and other evidence germane to this category may be included as the candidate and unit deem appropriate for evaluation.  (See overlay statement below).
  4. Professional Service to the institution or the community: Demonstration of effectiveness and participation in service activities and other evidence germane to this category may be included as the candidate and unit deem appropriate for evaluation centered around public contemporary issues, solutions to complex societal problems and human needs, or improvement of public higher education through service to the academic unit, college or school, and/or university.
  5. Scholarly and/or Creative Activities.  Demonstration of effectiveness and participation in the candidate’s discipline and other evidence germane to this category may be included as the candidate and unit deem appropriate for evaluation.  Evidence from scholarly teaching, scholarship of teaching and learning, and scholarship of engagement should be included.
  6. Professional Development. Demonstration of effectiveness and participation in the candidate’s discipline and other evidence germane to this category may be included as the candidate and unit deem appropriate for evaluation. (See overlay statement below).

Student success and professional development activities shall be presented and evaluated as overlay criteria encompassing the entire faculty member’s professional activities in all general criteria during the period under review. Student success activities, for example, may encompass a wide range of professional activities in areas of teaching, service, and scholarship.

Each criterion, including the overlay criteria, will be assessed as to whether the candidate has met expectations or has exceeded expectations and to what degree they may have exceeded those expectations by the candidate’s academic unit. The portfolio will then be reviewed by the candidate’s Promotion and Tenure Committee(s) and by the Dean of the academic units. At each step in the review, up to and including the assessment by the Dean of the academic units, a rating value will be assigned to each criterion as follows: 

1 - Does not meet expectations
2 - Needs improvement
3 - Meets expectations
4 - Exceeds expectations
5 - Exhibits exemplary performance 

Noteworthy achievement as referenced in Board of Regents Policy 8.3.7.3 is reflective of a 4 or 5 on the above Likert Scale. Deficient and unsatisfactory is reflective of a 1 or a 2 on the above Likert Scale.

The academic units will establish description of a “meets expectations”, “exceeds expectations” and “exhibits exemplary performance” rating that would have to be attained by the candidate for each rank, tenure and/or promotion. Academic units can tailor their requirements to meet the needs of their accreditation agencies, faculty, etc. without competition or conflict from dissimilar areas. Once these rating policies are established, they will be attached to the College or School bylaws and posted on an Official University Promotion and Tenure website with any necessary forms needed for the review process. 

All candidates will be evaluated on the first criterion listed above, Academic Achievement, on a “pass/fail” basis determined by the candidate’s academic unit. 

A successful candidate for promotion to Senior Lecturer must have a rating of meets expectations in the criterion of Academic Achievement and have a rating of exceeds expectations or greater in the criterion of Teaching. 

Meeting expectations across all evaluation categories is a necessary but not sufficient condition for promotion and/or tenure. A successful candidate for promotion in all professorial ranks must have earned a rating of either “exceeds expectations” or “exhibits exemplary performance” in at least three categories for the rank description the candidate is seeking (see Board of Regents policy manual 8.3.6.1).  A successful candidate for tenure in all professorial ranks must have earned a rating of either “exceeds expectations” or “exhibits exemplary performance” in at least two categories (see Board of Regents policy manual 8.3.7.3). If a rating of “Does not meet expectations” or “Needs improvement” is given in any category, the candidacy for promotion and/or tenure will be denied following an appeal process.

Each academic unit’s tenure and promotion guidelines must be approved by three fifths of the full-time tenure-track and tenured faculty in that academic unit and three fifths of the full-time tenure-track and tenured faculty in that academic unit before being published to the College or School bylaws and to the Official University Promotion and Tenure website.

205.03.1.3. Adoption of New and Amended Promotion and Tenure Guidelines by Academic Units 

The faculty of each academic unit immediately below the college level (academic unit, area, program, or school) are responsible for developing guidelines for promotion and tenure for the members of its faculty. Promotion and tenure guidelines developed and that may be amended by the unit must conform to all Board of Regents and University criteria and requirements and must meet the standards of applicable accrediting agencies and of professions within the unit. New and amended guidelines must be approved by three-fifths of the full-time, tenure-track and tenured faculty in the unit. 

Upon approval by the faculty of the academic unit, the college promotion and tenure committee will review the proposed new or amended guidelines to make sure that they align with the requirements of the faculty handbook and that they meet the minimum college requirements. Approval will require three-fifths of the members of the committee. The college promotion and tenure committee will only consider general requirements and not discipline specific requirements as identified by the academic unit committees. Once the guidelines are approved, they will be referred to the full-time, tenure-track and tenured faculty of the college, which will vote upon the proposed guidelines. A three-fifths vote by said college faculty in favor of the guidelines is required for approval. Following the faculty vote, the Dean of the college or school will review the guidelines in compliance with the Board of Regents Promotion and Tenure policies. In case of non-compliance, the guidelines will be sent back to the College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee for revisions and for a final vote by the college or school faculty.  

During their consideration of the proposed new or amended guidelines, the academic unit and the College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee, may consult with the University Promotion and Tenure Committee to make sure that the proposed guidelines align with the Faculty Handbook and meet the minimum university requirements. 

Once the guidelines are approved by the Dean, they will be referred to the Provost for approval or disapproval only based on compliance with Board of Regents policies.  In case of non-compliance with Board of Regents Promotion and Tenure policies, the guidelines will be sent back to the College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee for revisions and for final vote by the college or school faculty. 

Following approval by the Provost, the President of the University will approve or disapprove the new or amended proposed guidelines only based on compliance with Board of Regents policies. Proposed guidelines will not become effective until the necessary academic unit vote and approvals are obtained, and the guidelines are published by the head of the academic unit on the University promotion and tenure website. The approved guidelines may be reviewed by the Board of Regents.

Academic units within a college or school may choose to adopt promotion and tenure guidelines as a college or school. In this case, the same approvals must be obtained as set forth for guidelines for academic units.  

If the faculty of any academic unit chooses not to adopt the college or school promotion and tenure guidelines, then the promotion and tenure guidelines will be determined by the academic unit.  

Based upon Board of Regents and University criteria and requirements and the guidelines of each academic unit within the college or school, each academic units will establish forms for use in the promotion and tenure process in their respective college or school. Once adopted, such forms will be circulated among the academic unit faculty and posted publicly, ideally published by the Dean of the college or school on the University promotion and tenure website.  

205.03.1.4. Implementation of amended and new guidelines 

New and amended academic unit guidelines that have been reviewed by August 1 will be in effect for new faculty appointed in the year that they were approved. Faculty members that have appointments prior to the August 1 of the year they go into effect may choose to be evaluated using the old or approved new/amended academic unit guidelines for four years following their last review. Faculty must inform their academic unit committee when they turn in their portfolio under which guidelines they want to be evaluated. The fifth year after guidelines are approved all faculty will be evaluated using the new or amended guidelines. 

205.03.2. EVIDENCE TO DOCUMENT ACHIEVEMENT OF CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION AND/OR TENURE AT CLAYTON STATE UNIVERSITY

The Promotion Procedure and Criteria listed in Section 205.03 specify the degree requirements of Clayton State University for promotion to a certain rank or to receive tenure at rank.  Candidates will document their evidence for promotion and/or tenure in the categories of effective teaching, student success, service, scholarly and/or creative activities, and professional development in an electronic portfolio submitted for review.  The evidentiary sources will be reviewed by the appropriate head of the academic unit, the appropriate Dean, the Provost, and the promotion and tenure committees of the academic unit (if applicable), of the college or school, and (when warranted) of the University.

205.03.3. EVIDENTIARY SOURCES RELEVANT TO PROMOTION AND/OR TENURE 

Each academic unit is responsible for determining what will constitute evidence for promotion and/or tenure. What follows below is a list of some examples of areas of endeavor which faculty members may use as evidence of effective teaching, student success, service, scholarly and/or creative activities, and professional development.  

1. Academic Achievement 

  • Validation of the appropriate degrees is described in the Board of Regents policy 8.2.1.4, and verified by the Office of the Provost.

2. Teaching Effectiveness: 

  • Evidence from faculty evaluation by students 
  • Assessment of student perception
  • Evidence of effective student learning
  • Use of continuous improvement methodologies
  • Peer or mentor assessment of pedagogy
  • Evaluation of curricular design
  • Quality of assessment and course construction
  • Use of established learning methodologies
  • New course development 
  • Significant updating or revision to existing course(s) 
  • Noteworthy application of technology to course(s) 
  • Program and/or curriculum development 
  • Direction of individual student research or internship 
  • Participation in collaborative instruction 
  • Participation in cross-disciplinary program 
  • Program implementation in K-12 schools 
  • Teaching of core or introductory courses 
  • Coordinator of large core class sections 
  • Design and/or implementation of community engagement course or academic community engagement activity 
  • Special recognition for teaching accomplishments
  • Other activities identified by the lowest academic unit that establishes Promotion and Tenure criteria

3. Student Success Activities

  • The candidate may include in their narrative (self-evaluative cover letter), within the scope of review, significant professional activities accomplished in support of diversity, equity, and/or inclusion. Any accomplishments associated with these activities may be included within the items found below.
    • Include syllabus graded activities demonstrating active learning from students (rather than quizzes/exams)
    • Demonstrate clear articulation of course activities with learning outcomes
    • Demonstrate regular and appropriate assessments that align with the learning outcomes
    • Redesign course(s) to improve learning outcomes and eliminate opportunity gaps
    • Support persistence of students from diverse and historically underrepresented backgrounds
    • Adapt course contents to establish sense of belonging that recognizes the students’ identities and aspirations
    • Mentoring activities engaging students outside of the classroom
    • Demonstrate a consistent pattern of willingness to meet outside of regular working hours to accommodate students
    • Professional career advisement
    • Collaboration with Professional advisors
    • Placement for career purposes
    • Placement for internships and/or practicum
    • Writing letters of recommendation that impact students’ advancement
    • High Impact Practices in the course such as experiential learning
    • Increase the number of quality online courses to improve access to graduate education or job placement
    • Tutoring
    • Additional course content reviews
    • Participation in the experience and/or activities of Honors Program students
    • Study abroad programs
    • Partner with international institutions or organizations
    • Project-based/active learning activities
    • Teaching evaluation by student items 
    • Participate in developing new programs
    • Improve existing programs that impact student success outcomes
    • Professional field trip
    • Research and creative activities with students
    • Presentation to professional organizations or to the community with students
    • Publications with students
    • Grant or contract development with and/or for students
    • Grant or contract execution with and/or for students
    • Event management (fundraising, community, enrollment efforts) with/for students
    • Direction of students in thesis, practicum/internship courses, labs (1 contact hour extra), research and service learning
    • Support to student organization
    • Any (independent) study/courses which fall outside of the faculty workload
    • Reduce barriers to opportunities with historically lower participation rates
    • Activities that develop leadership, entrepreneurial attitudes and skills, and digital and technical/analytical abilities to prepare students for technology and automation readiness
    • Collaboration with student affairs and services’ activities demonstrating the value of the students’ college experience
    • Participation of alumni engagement in student mentorship and career development
    • K-12 activities
    • Other activities identified by the lowest academic unit that establishes Promotion and Tenure criteria

4. Professional Service to the Institution or to the Community:

  • Committee service 
  • Evidence that the faculty member links his/her/their 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
  • Service as a mentor to full-time and/or part-time faculty 
  • Mentoring of students 
  • Development of advisement and mentoring materials 
  • Support to student organizations and/or campus activities 
  • Management of academic unit-, school-, college-, or university-wide budgets 
  • Coordination of academic unit-,, school-, college-, or university-wide programs 
  • Contributions to system or regional accreditation programs 
  • Other administrative duties
  • Contributions to the improvement of campus life 
  • Contributions to the improvement of community life related to one’s discipline 
  • Participation in community activities and organizations which enhance CSU’s image 
  • Direct participation in K-12 school activities 
  • Other activities identified by the lowest academic unit that establishes Promotion and Tenure criteria

5. Scholarly and/or Creative Activities: 

  • At Clayton State University, scholarly and/or creative activities should be selected from any of the four following categories:

a. 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/their 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/their own classes
  • Evidence that the faculty member assesses whether or not he/she/they has been successful in increasing student learning by doing some formative evaluation with students, adjusting his/her/their approach, asking a peer to come into the class to review the changes he/she/they has implemented

b. 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 his/her/their department or college,
    • Presentations at professional conferences,
    • Publications

c. Scholarship of Engagement with Public Schools

  • 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

d. Evidence of the Scholarship of Discovery:

  • Evidence that the faculty member’s research is innovative (as opposed to routine) as demonstrated by the faculty statement in the cover letter
  • Evidence of the faculty member’s publications in appropriate venues for the discipline  
  • If appropriate for the discipline, evidence of the ability to attract extramural funding
  • Evidence of invited seminars and presentations (abstracts)

For these evidentiary scholarly and creative categories, sources may also include:

  • Publications 
  • Artistic performances or creations as appropriate to the discipline 
  • Development of new grant proposals, contracts, or fellowship applications 
  • Receipt of new grants, fellowships, or contracts 
  • Research with undergraduate or graduate students 
  • Research activities
  • Professional peer-reviewing activities for journals and/or conferences
  • Development of professional applications of technology 
  • Honors and awards for research, scholarship, or other creative activities
  • Other activities identified by the lowest academic unit that establishes Promotion and Tenure criteria

6. Professional Growth and Development

  • Professional Membership
  • Service in professional societies
  • Consulting or other applications of professional expertise 
  • Professional licenses, certifications, or other (continuing education) credentials/credits
  • Participation in professional development training related to teaching effectiveness
  • Participation in professional development training related to one’s discipline, scholarship and/or creative activities.
  • Letter of recommendation from a mentor
  • Other activities identified by the lowest academic unit that establishes Promotion and Tenure criteria

The general criteria of teaching, student success, service, scholarly and/or creative activities, and professional development allow flexibility by permitting other evidentiary sources to be included by the candidate.  Student success and professional development activities shall be presented and evaluated as overlay criteria encompassing professional activities across all the general criteria. 

In addition to the evidentiary sources listed above, specific requirements for promotion and/or tenure are determined by the academic units. 

205.04. Process and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure 

At Clayton State University, the processes for application for promotion and/or tenure follow the same procedures, and an applicant may apply for tenure and promotion at the same time. The documentation period for promotion covers the period that is minimally required prior to submission of the application. The applicant should have the evidence uploaded by August 21st. Between August 21st and September 21st, the faculty member’s immediate supervisor will consult with the faculty member and review the evidence with the candidate for any changes required to the portfolio, but nothing can be included by the applicant after the September 21st submission deadline. An applicant with strong credentials could apply early (after 4 years for Assistant and Associate faculty), and if the faculty member fails, the faculty member can reapply the following year (after 5 years with an additional year of documentation). There is no additional opportunity for applications after the beginning of the 6th year. 

Tenure decisions will be made using evidence/documentation which spans the period that is required in the promotion guidelines for the rank that is currently held by the candidate requesting tenure in addition to the information provided by the curriculum vitae relative to accomplishments throughout the faculty member’s career. 

If the faculty member is requesting both tenure and promotion, the documentation shall be the evidence provided by the faculty member’s portfolio for promotion and the faculty member’s curriculum vitae listing accomplishments throughout his/her/their career. 

When Heads of Academic Units, Associate Deans, or Deans are candidates for promotion and/or tenure, their petitions will follow the same process and procedures as nonadministrative tenure-track/tenured faculty, except that a review by an ad hoc committee of three tenured faculty at appropriate rank as stated for other reviews will replace the review the Heads of Academic Units, Associate Dean, or Dean would normally conduct.  Such an ad hoc committee will be convened by the appropriate Dean in the case of Heads of Academic Units or Associate Deans and by the Provost in the case of Deans.  The members of such an ad hoc committee will not have previously reviewed the candidate’s portfolio at any level. 

205.04.1. MEMBERSHIP AND TERMS ON PROMOTION AND TENURE COMMITTEES 

Faculty holding an administrative appointment1 are not eligible to serve on promotion and tenure committees. Only tenured faculty members are eligible to serve on Promotion and Tenure Committees. 

Departmental/Academic Unit Committee:    

If a department/academic unit committee is formed, it will consist of a minimum of three eligible tenured departmental/academic unit faculty. Only members who hold the academic rank at or above the rank being sought may evaluate a candidate’s portfolio.   If there are fewer than three faculty members eligible and available to serve, the department/academic unit head, in consultation with the school/college Dean, will appoint member(s) from the school/college to augment the departmental/academic unit committee. These members must not be serving on the College Promotion and Tenure Review Committee.  The term limit on service at the Departmental/Academic Unit committee is determined by the College/School bylaws.

1

Administrative appointment will apply to any person who plays a direct role in the evaluation of the candidates under consideration, such as a Head of Academic Unit or Dean. This may or may not include directors and/or coordinators depending upon the circumstances. 

College/School Committee:

Each college/school will elect a Promotion and Tenure Committee consisting of a minimum of three tenured faculty members and meeting other requirements specified by the College/School bylaws. Only tenured faculty members who hold the academic rank at or above the rank being sought may evaluate a candidate’s portfolio. If there are fewer than three faculty members eligible and available to serve, the Dean, in consultation with the relevant other Deans, will appoint members from the larger University community to augment the school committee. The term limit on service at the college/school committee will be determined by the College/School bylaws. 

University Committee:   

Each college/school will elect an appropriate number of tenured Professors as representative(s) to the University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee. If a college/school does not have enough tenured Professors to elect the requisite number of representatives, the Dean, in consultation with the Provost, will appoint representative(s) from the larger University community as needed to equal the specified number. Representatives of the University committee serve for three years.  Members may serve multiple terms with a break of at least one year in committee service. University committee members may serve on departmental/academic unit or college/school committees during the same academic year unless the college or school chooses to prohibit this in its own bylaws.

205.04.2 PROMOTION AND/OR TENURE ELECTRONIC PORTFOLIO GUIDELINES

The electronic portfolio that the candidate submits for promotion and/or tenure should be compiled by the candidate to assure their promotion/tenure. The composition of the electronic promotion/tenure portfolio mirrors the one of the electronic annual evaluation portfolios. The candidate should be aware of the time span and documentation required for promotion and tenure.  The portfolio should include the following folders:  

A. A General/Mandatory Folder with the following files/subfolders:

a. A self-evaluative cover letter presenting the portfolio, describing significant accomplishments and information about performance or other information that would promote the candidate. Candidates should endeavor to coordinate their narrative with the order of categories on the Promotion and Tenure Evaluation form. This self-evaluative cover letter is optional for the purpose of the electronic annual evaluation portfolio when a candidate chooses a self-evaluation form instead of an essay.

b. The Summary of Professional Activity Form provides factual information about the candidate covering the entire promotion/tenure evaluation period. To complete this section of the portfolio, faculty members should follow the Instructions for Completing the Summary of Professional Activity Form for their respective academic unit.  Each academic unit may customize their Summary of Professional Activity Form format.  

c. A copy of the faculty member's Annual Faculty Evaluation Form for each full year during the promotion/tenure evaluation period.  Whenever possible, a candidate with previous academic employment during the promotion/tenure evaluation period will provide similar documentation from the previous employer. 

d. An up-to-date curriculum vitae at the candidate’s discretion

e. Statistical summaries of the grade distributions of the courses taught by the faculty member during the evaluation period (Summer optional).  These summaries will be provided to each faculty member by the immediate supervisor responsible for evaluation; any missing data will be explained.

B. Folders with Evidentiary Sources Relevant to Promotion and/or Tenure

The documentation for each activity for which the faculty member is claiming credits are organized by criteria subfolders. This section will be clearly organized in the order in which the evidentiary categories appear on the Promotion and Tenure Evaluation Form. 

a. Teaching Effectiveness. For the teaching effectiveness section, the following subfolders must include the following items:

i. Statistical summaries of the responses to questions from the faculty evaluations by students during the evaluation period. Summer semester statistical summaries may be included at the candidate’s discretion. Any missing data should be explained by the candidate. 

ii. A summary of student comments from faculty evaluations by students (Summer optional).

b. Student Success Activities.

c. Professional Service to the Institution or to the Community

d. Scholarly and/or Creative Activities

e. Professional Growth and Development

The portfolio must follow any additional guidelines published by the faculty member’s academic unit. Student Success and professional development  activities can be presented as overlay categories for excellence and effectiveness in teaching and instruction, service to the institution or the community, and scholarly and/or creative activities.

205.04.3 RESPONSIBILITIES AND TIMELINES IN THE PROMOTION AND TENURE PROCESS 

The promotion and tenure process involves five stages: 

  1. Preparation by the faculty member of the electronic Portfolio for Promotion and/or Tenure  
  2. The faculty member’s immediate supervisor must consult with the faculty prior to submitting their electronic portfolio.  From September 22, the faculty member may not make further modifications to the portfolio, and the portfolio access is restricted to “read only” for the candidate.  Administrators and Promotion and Tenure Committee members and chairs are not authorized to modify the electronic portfolio provided by candidates. 
  3. Review at the Department/Academic unit level (immediate supervisor and Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee, if one exists) 
  4. Review at the College or School Level (College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee and Dean of the College or School) 
  5. Review at the University Level (University Promotion and Tenure Committee, if needed, Provost, and President) 

These stages as well as the timelines in the process of promotion and tenure are described in the following section.  For convenient reference, refer to the Calendar for Promotion & Tenure.

205.04.3.1 Fair Practices in Evaluative Due Process

Each Promotion and/or tenure evaluator will not merely review/summarize the evidence but must speak to the value, impact, and importance of the contributions made by the faculty member in each category. The letters of recommendation and all committee votes, as determined by simple majority vote, will be added to the electronic portfolio by each administrator and committee chair. Said recommendations must provide a succinct rationale for their professional judgment. The recommendation may include ratings of “Does not meet expectations” and/or “Needs improvement”.

When a negative recommendation seems inevitable, the review committee chairs and/or administrators must notify the candidate within 3 business days. The candidate has a right to meet with review committee chairs and/or administrators within five (5) business days of the notification to discuss the negative recommendation consideration. A faculty advocate may accompany the candidate to this meeting. Any person present at this meeting may request that it be recorded with the approval of all participants present. Responsibility for arranging the recording of the meeting lies with the party making the request. Any recordings made during the meeting are official university records and must be maintained in accordance with the record retention policy.

The meeting between the candidate and the review committee chairs or administrators at each level of evaluation/review provides the candidate the opportunity to clarify his/her/their portfolio’s content. If the information provided at the meeting does not address the review committee or administrator’s concerns, a negative recommendation will be transmitted. The candidate may write a response to the review committee and/or administrator disputing the negative recommendation and this response will be added to the candidate’s electronic portfolio by the review committee chair(s) and/or administrator(s). The candidate has 10 working days to submit this response to the review committee chair or administrator.

205.04.3.2 Preparation of the Portfolio for Promotion and/or Tenure 

a. During the Spring Semester (approximately February 1), the candidate receives notification from the immediate supervisor that he/she/they is/are facing a retention deadline. Copies of this notification will be forwarded to the dean of the college/school and to the faculty member’s file in the Office of the Provost. A faculty member who believes that he/she/they has/have met the criteria for consideration of promotion and/or tenure may initiate the process by submitting an electronic portfolio to the immediate supervisor.

b. By August 21, each candidate for promotion and/or tenure will submit an electronic portfolio to the candidate’s immediate supervisor. For the next month, the immediate supervisor will consult with the faculty member to ensure that all required materials have been included in the electronic portfolio.  No material may be added by the candidate after September 21. The electronic portfolio materials, the format of the electronic portfolio, and the criteria to be met are described above in Section 205.03 and 205.04.2.  The candidate must also submit an electronic annual evaluation folder to the candidate’s immediate supervisor in January. 

205.04.3.3. Review at the Department/Academic Unit Level (immediate supervisor and Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee, if applicable)

a. From September 22 to October 4, the Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee may evaluate the faculty member’s portfolio. For the purpose of promotion and/or tenure, if a Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee exists, a faculty member may choose to be reviewed by this committee: this level of review is optional. The Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee, if applicable, and the immediate supervisor will evaluate the candidate’s portfolio materials using the academic unit’s Promotion and Tenure Evaluation Form. The immediate supervisor and/or committee members may request clarifying information and/or evidentiary sources from the candidate. Such clarifications will be noted on the evaluation form and the candidate’s response will be added to the portfolio.  If a recommendation is unfavorable, please refer to the Faculty Handbook section 205.04.3.1.

Faculty holding an administrative appointment2are not eligible to serve on promotion and tenure committees.  The immediate supervisor will confer with the academic unit’s Dean to ensure that a departmental/academic unit committee is appropriate and not redundant to the School or College Promotion and Tenure Committee.  If a department committee is formed, it will consist of an odd number of faculty and a minimum of three eligible tenured departmental/academic unit faculty.  For candidates seeking promotion (whether applying for tenure or not), only members who hold the academic rank at or above the rank being sought may evaluate the candidate’s portfolio.  For candidates not seeking promotion, only members at or above the rank of the candidate may evaluate the candidate’s portfolio.

When there are fewer than three departmental/academic unit members who meet the criteria for service on a departmental/academic unit committee, faculty seeking promotion and/or tenure will be reviewed according to the College or School by-laws. In the absence of such mention in the bylaws, if there are fewer than three faculty members eligible and available to serve, the department/academic unit head, in consultation with the school/college Dean, will appoint member(s) from the school/college to augment the department/academic unit committee.  These members must not be serving on the College Promotion and Tenure Committee.      

b. By October 5, the immediate supervisor uploads the completed Promotion and Tenure Evaluation Form, the most recent annual evaluation form, any faculty’s response, and notifies the Dean of the college or school.   

If a departmental/academic unit committee is formed, the committee chair uploads a written recommendation for each candidate and any faculty response(s) to the portfolio and notifies the Dean. 

c. By October 6, the Dean verifies that the immediate supervisor’s evaluation, any candidate’s response(s), and any departmental/academic unit committee recommendations are presented in the candidate’s portfolio and notifies the College or School Promotion and Tenure Review Committee, regardless of whether the recommendations are favorable or unfavorable (see 205.04.3).  

205.04.3.4. Review at the College/School Level (College/School Promotion and Tenure Committee and Dean of the College/School)   

a. College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee 

1. From October 7 to November 6, for each eligible candidate applying for promotion and/or tenure, the College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee reviews the portfolio, the evaluation form(s), any candidate’s response(s), and any departmental/academic unit committee and immediate supervisor’s recommendations. The College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee may request clarifying information from a candidate. For unfavorable recommendation, please refer to the Faculty Handbook 205.04.3.1.

Faculty holding administrative appointments2are not eligible to serve on promotion and tenure committees.  Only tenured faculty members are eligible to serve on College or School Promotion and Tenure Committees. The College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee will consist of an odd committee number and a minimum of three eligible tenured faculty, and meeting other requirements by college or school bylaws. Redundancy in promotion and tenure committee membership on a Departmental/Academic Unit, and College or School, and University Promotion and Tenure committee must be consistent with the College or School’s own bylaws.  When the College or School bylaws do not address redundancy in promotion and tenure committee membership, redundancy is not allowed.  For candidates seeking promotion (whether applying for tenure or not), only members who hold the academic rank at or above the rank being sought may evaluate the candidate’s portfolio.  For candidates not seeking promotion, only members at or above the rank of the candidate may evaluate the candidate’s portfolio.  If fewer than three members of the committee are eligible to review a particular portfolio (e.g., if the portfolio is for promotion to the rank of full Professor and there are not three full Professors on the committee), additional members will be appointed by the Dean either from the college or school, or from the larger university faculty if there are not sufficient eligible faculty within the college or school. In the case of an appeal of an unfavorable Post-Tenure Review by a committee member, that committee member will be replaced for that academic year by election or appointment as appropriate

2. By November 7, the College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee will upload a written report of its findings which includes a recommendation to the Dean of the college or school regarding each candidate, and the candidate’s response, and notify the Dean.  For unfavorable recommendation, please refer to Faculty Handbook 205.04.3.1.

b. Dean of the College or School 

1. From November 8 to November 22, the Dean of each college or school will review all portfolios submitted by candidates of that college or school and will evaluate each portfolio. For an unfavorable recommendation, see Faculty Handbook 205.04.3.1. 

a. If all previous levels of review produce a favorable evaluation and the Dean concurs, the Dean uploads a note of written concurrence to the evaluation report completed by the college or school committee. The Dean notifies the Provost and makes the portfolio available to the Provost by December 1.

b. If a candidate receives an unfavorable recommendation at any levels, the Dean notifies the Provost that the portfolio materials, and the candidate’s response(s), and evaluations are made available for review by the University Promotion and Tenure Committee (described below).   Also, 

  • The Dean must complete a separate evaluation and upload it in the candidate’s portfolio for the University Promotion and Tenure Committee’s consideration after meeting with the candidate (see Faculty Handbook 205.04.3.1).
  • The Dean will provide a written notification to the candidate. The candidate has the option of submitting a statement of appeal to the University Promotion and Tenure Committee between December 1 and December 15. The appeal materials are due to the Provost on December 16 who uploads the appeal statement to the candidate’s portfolio for the University Promotion and Tenure Committee’ review.
  • If the candidate submits no appeal when all recommendations were unfavorable, the candidacy is terminated. 
  • If the candidate receives at least one favorable recommendation and at least one unfavorable recommendation, the University Promotion and Tenure Committee will review the portfolio regardless of an appeal from the candidate.  

2.  By December 16, the Provost notifies the University Promotion and Tenure Committee that the candidate’s evaluations, the candidate’s response(s), and recommendations are available for review.

205.04.3.5. Review at the University Level (University Promotion and Tenure Committee, when warranted; Provost; and President) 

a. Composition of the University Promotion and Tenure Committee

The University Promotion and Tenure Committee will consist of tenured professors elected from each college or school: Arts and Sciences, three (3); Business, one (1); Health, one (1); Information and Mathematical Sciences, one (1).  Every year, the Provost will review the distribution of faculty within the Colleges or Schools at Clayton State University. After review, the Provost may recommend that the Faculty Senate reconsider the proportional representation.

Faculty holding administrative appointments2are not eligible to serve on promotion and tenure committees. 

Each college or school will elect its representative(s) to the University Promotion and Tenure Committee.  If a school does not have enough tenured Professors to elect the requisite number of representatives, the Dean, in consultation with the Provost, will appoint representative(s) from the larger university community as needed to equal the specified number.

Elected members of this committee will have a term of three (3) years. Terms will be staggered to provide continuity of representation.  Appointed representatives will have a term of one year and may be reappointed.  In the case of an appeal of an unfavorable Post-Tenure Review by a committee member, that committee member will be replaced for that academic year by election or appointment as appropriate.   

b. Actions by the University Promotion and Tenure Committee

1. From December 17 to January 20, the University Promotion and Tenure Committee reviews the materials of candidates who have not received a positive recommendation at all previous levels of review or who have requested an appeal.  The University Promotion and Tenure Committee will review to assure compliance with procedures. The committee will consider any recommendations from the immediate supervisor (and Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee, if applicable), College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee, and the Dean, and any responses and appeal from the candidate.  The University Promotion and Tenure Committee may request clarifying information from the candidate and meet with the candidate in case of an unfavorable recommendation to clarify the portfolio’s content (see Faculty Handbook 205.04.3.1).

2. A candidate must receive favorable votes from at least two-thirds of the membership of the University Promotion and Tenure Committee to be recommended for promotion and/or tenure to the Provost.

3. By January 21, the University Promotion and Tenure Committee will upload their recommendation to the candidate’s portfolio and present it to the Provost. The Provost will provide written notification of the University Promotion and Tenure Committee’s recommendation to the candidate and to the Dean of the candidate’s college or school.  Any candidate who receives an unfavorable recommendation from the University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee has the option to appeal to the Provost.

c. Provost

From January 21 through January 28, any candidate who has received an unfavorable recommendation from the University Promotion and Tenure Committee may appeal to the Provost.  Written justification for the basis of the appeal must be included within ten working days after and, only after, the candidate has received the necessary information from administrators to formulate an appeal response.     

1. From January 29, for candidates who received favorable recommendations from all levels of review, candidates who received favorable reviews from the University Promotion and Tenure Committee, and candidates who appealed an unfavorable recommendation from a lower level, and candidates who appealed an unfavorable recommendation from the University Promotion and Tenure Committee, the Provost will review portfolios, specific criteria developed by individual academic units, and the Promotion and Tenure Evaluation Forms, the candidate’s response(s), and recommendations from the immediate supervisor  (and Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee, if one exists), College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee, and Dean, and any appeal materials from the candidates.   

2. In February, at a date consistent with the Board of Regents timetable, the Provost will make recommendations to the President.  Each candidate, as well as the Dean of the candidate’s school or college, will be informed in writing of this recommendation by the Provost.  In the case of an unfavorable recommendation, the candidate has the option of submitting a statement of appeal with clarifying information to the President within ten business days from the receipt of the Provost’s notice.

d. President

1. By the date specified by the Board of Regents timetable, the President decides of the approval or rejection for all candidates that were submitted to the President by the Provost.   

2. The President will provide written notification to the candidate, the Provost, and the Dean of the candidate’s school of his/her/their recommendation. 

2

Administrative appointment will apply to any person who plays a direct role in the evaluation of the candidates under consideration as immediate supervisor. This may or may not include directors and/or coordinators depending upon the circumstances. 

205.99 Forms and Instructions 

Form for Promotion and/or Tenure, and Pre-/Post-Tenure Review

Calendars

206 Pre- and Post-Tenure Review  

206.01 Pre-Tenure Review: Policy and Procedures

206.01.1 PRE-TENURE REVIEW: POLICY

The Board of Regents Policy Manual specifies requirements for pre-tenure review at University System of Georgia institutions. Clayton State University’s policy on pre-tenure review is in accordance with Board of Regents requirements. 

During the Spring Semester of their third year at Clayton State University, tenure-track faculty are required to participate in a review of progress toward tenure.

The purpose of this review is to assist faculty members in determining whether they are making appropriate progress toward tenure or promotion into tenure-track rank. Because this review occurs before a faculty member becomes eligible for tenure or promotion, it does not result in or guarantee a positive tenure or promotion decision. Instead, pre-tenure review provides feedback to the faculty member about performance strengths and weaknesses and addresses progress toward tenure or promotion, taking into account his/her/their stage of academic career development. The general performance expectations vary with academic rank. See Section 205.3 for specific criteria.

The third-year progress review assesses how well the faculty member is meeting the expectations of the University during the probationary period. The review also addresses the individual’s prospects for continued development and contributions to his/her/their department/academic unit and school or college and to the University. The review concludes with a formal written report stating the faculty member either is “Making Good Progress” (indicating the individual’s performance to date appears to be progressing well for promotion or tenure in due course) or “Deficiencies Noted” (indicating that there are areas of performance that are deficient and need to be addressed for a successful promotion or tenure decision in the future).  If the candidate’s performance in any of the categories is judged to be not satisfactory, the faculty member must be provided with a Performance Remediation Plan (see Section 206.01.3).

Each committee involved in the pre-tenure review process provides a single written recommendation with rationale for each candidate. Any minority opinion recommendations and rationale must be included. 

206.01.2 PRE-TENURE REVIEW: PROCESS AND PROCEDURES

Pre-tenure review is an integral part of the promotion and tenure process at Clayton State University. So that the faculty member will receive constructive feedback, the dean will provide a written notification to the faculty member.  The evaluation forms for pre-tenure review shall reflect the criteria used for promotion and tenure:

  1. The Annual Faculty Evaluation Summary Form provides a record of qualitative ratings from the annual evaluations of the two preceding years and the current year.  
  2. The Pre-Tenure Evaluation Form provides a suggested list for the criteria for promotion and tenure and the evaluator’s recommendations.  

The pre-tenure review process involves three stages:

  1. Preparation of the Pre-Tenure Review Portfolio by the Faculty Member 
  2. Review at the Department/Academic Unit Level (immediate supervisor and Departmental Review Committee, if one exists) 
  3. Review at the School or College Level (School or College Promotion and Tenure Review Committee and Dean). 

These stages, as well as the timelines in the process of pre-tenure review, are described in the following section. For convenient reference, refer to the Calendar for Pre-Tenure Review.

1. Preparation of the Pre-Tenure Review Portfolio

a. By the end of Spring Semester of the second year of employment (approximately May 1), the faculty member receives notification from the immediate supervisor that he/she/they will be undergoing pre-tenure review. Copies of this notification will be forwarded to the Dean of the college or school and to the faculty member’s personnel file.

b. By January 21 of the third year of employment, each individual undergoing pre-tenure review will submit an electronic portfolio to the candidate’s immediate supervisor.  For the next month, the immediate supervisor will consult with the faculty members to ensure that all required materials have been included in the electronic portfolio. No material may be added by the candidate after February 21. The electronic portfolio materials, the format of the electronic portfolio, and the criteria to be evaluated are described above in Section 205.03 and 205.04.2.

c. The portfolio for pre-tenure review will constitute the individual’s annual evaluation.

2. Pre-Tenure Review at the Department/Academic Unit Level (immediate supervisor and Departmental Promotion and Tenure Review Committee, if one exists)

a. From January 22 to February 20, the Departmental/Academic Unit Review Committee, if applicable, and the immediate supervisor will evaluate the individual’s portfolio materials using the Pre-Tenure Evaluation Form.  At their discretion, the immediate supervisor and/or Departmental/Academic Unit Review Committee may request clarifying information from the candidate. 

b. By February 21, the immediate supervisor uploads the completed PreTenure Evaluation Form, the current annual evaluation form, and the recommendation to the candidate’s portfolio. 

If a Departmental/Academic Unit Review Committee exists, the committee chair uploads a written recommendation for each candidate to the portfolio.  Any minority opinion recommendations and rationale must be included.

The completed Pre-Tenure Evaluation Form and written recommendation from the immediate supervisor and Departmental/Academic Unit Review Committee (if applicable) are provided to the candidate at this time.  The immediate supervisor discusses with the faculty member in a scheduled conference the content of the faculty member’s pre-tenure evaluation. The faculty member signs a statement to the effect that he/she/they have been apprised of the content of the pre-tenure evaluation.

The faculty member has 10 working days to respond in writing to the pretenure evaluation, with this response to be uploaded to the candidate’s portfolio.  The immediate supervisor will acknowledge in writing receipt of the response, noting changes, if any, in the pre-tenure evaluation made because of either the conference or the faculty member’s written response.  The specific time period for this response is 10 working days from the faculty member’s rebuttal/response.  This acknowledgement will become a part of the official records and is not subject to discretionary review.

c. By March 13, the immediate supervisor notifies the appropriate Dean that the candidate’s portfolio is ready for review.

d. By March 14, the Dean notifies the College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee, regardless of whether the recommendations are favorable or unfavorable.

e. Section 205.04.2 provides guidelines for forming a Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee.

3. Pre-Tenure Review at the College or School Level (College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee and Dean)

a. College or School Promotion and Tenure Review Committee

  1. From March 14 to April 6, the School or College Promotion and Tenure Committee will review the portfolios of each individual undergoing pretenure review and all evaluations and recommendations from the immediate supervisor and the Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee, if one was formed. At its discretion, the School or College Promotion and Tenure Committee may request clarifying information from the individual undergoing pre-tenure review. 
  2. By April 7, the College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee will upload a written report of its findings and recommendation to the candidate’s portfolio and submit its recommendation to the Dean of the School or College regarding each individual’s pre-tenure review Any minority opinion recommendations and rationale must be included. The College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee's written recommendation will be provided to the candidate at this time.

b. Dean of the College or School

  1. From April 7 to April 24, the Dean of each school or college will review and evaluate all portfolios, including the recommendations of the School or College Promotion and Tenure Committee and, if applicable, any response by the faculty member.  
  2. By April 25, the Dean will provide a formal written report indicating a final decision of “Making Good Progress” or “Deficiencies Noted.” A copy of this report is forwarded to the faculty member undergoing pretenure review, to the immediate supervisor, and to the Provost.  The final decision letter is uploaded to the candidate’s portfolio.

206.01.3 PERFORMANCE REMEDIATION PLAN FOR FACULTY WITH NOTED DEFICIENCIES IN PRE-TENURE REVIEW

If the candidate’s performance in any of the categories is judged to have “Deficiencies Noted", the faculty member must be provided with a Performance Remediation Plan.  The immediate supervisor will develop the Performance Remediation Plan in consultation with the faculty member and feedback from any committee that participated in the pre-tenure review and written in accordance with the Academic and Student Affairs Handbook of the Board of Regents. 

This remediation plan should address how deficiencies cited in the pre-tenure review will be corrected. It should be individualized, taking into account the faculty member’s specific circumstances and the essential duties of the particular faculty member. In all cases, face-to-face meetings and discussions are required to ensure thorough exploration of all options and clear communication of the understandings reached.

A formal plan for performance remediation should do the following:  

  1. define specific goals or outcomes that are to be achieved;  
  2. outline the activities that will be undertaken to achieve the goals or outcomes;  
  3. set appropriate times within which the goals or outcomes should be accomplished; 
  4. identify appropriate resources and support faculty development; and  
  5. indicate appropriate criteria and strategy by which progress will be monitored.  

The Performance Remediation Plan shall be in place no later than May 31, must be in writing and signed and dated by both the faculty member and their immediate supervisor, and must be approved by the Dean of the academic unit. The approved plan will be submitted to the Provost. 

The faculty member will have one year to accomplish the goals/outcomes of the remediation plan. During that time, the faculty member and their immediate supervisor will meet no less than twice during the fall and during the spring semesters to review progress, document additional needs/resources, and plan accomplishments for the upcoming quarter.  After each meeting, the immediate supervisor should summarize the meeting and indicate if the faculty member is on track to complete the Performance Remediation Plan.

206.06 Post-Tenure Review: Policy and Procedures

206.06.1 POST-TENURE REVIEW POLICY 

The Academic and Student Affairs Handbook of the Board of Regents states that all institutions in the University System of Georgia shall conduct post-tenure reviews of all tenured faculty members, within five years of the faculty member’s tenure or previous post-tenure review. The policy and procedures for post-tenure review at Clayton State University are in accordance with Board of Regents requirements described in section 8.3.5.4 of the Board of Regents Policy Manual and section 4.6 of the University System of Georgia Academic and Student Affairs Handbook. Faculty are encouraged to familiarize themselves with these system policies.

The primary purpose of post-tenure review is to examine, recognize, and enhance evaluation of teaching, student success activities, scholarship and/or creative activities, professional development, and service of all tenured faculty members, consistent with the mission of the University (see Section 205.03.3 of this handbook for examples of evidence documenting achievement in these areas of faculty work). Post-tenure review serves to highlight constructive and positive opportunities for all tenured faculty to realize their full potential in contributing to Clayton State University and the University System of Georgia. It also serves to identify deficiencies in performance and provides a structure for addressing such concerns through a performance improvement plan (PIP). 

At Clayton State University, the actual review typically begins in the Spring Semester of the individual’s fifth year after award of tenure or since the candidate’s last post-tenure review or other personnel action. Some individuals may elect to undergo post-tenure review sooner than five years after their previous review, in which case it will begin the Spring of the chosen year. For individuals who submit materials for promotion in the same academic year in which they would be required to submit for post-tenure review, the promotion portfolio will be used for the post-tenure review as well. If a candidate withdraws from consideration of promotion before the portfolio reaches the School or College level, that Faculty Member must submit a separate post-tenure review portfolio in January of the same academic year.  Recommendation for promotion will constitute a successful post-tenure review. If, at any level of review, promotion is not recommended, the review will indicate whether or not the candidate is achieving expectations in post-tenure performance.   

Post-tenure review shall continue at a maximum of five-year intervals unless interrupted by a further review for promotion or other personnel action. Post-tenure review provides both retrospective and prospective examination of performance, considering that a faculty member will have different emphases and assignments at different points in his/her/their career. As proven experts in their field, faculty should feel free to undertake longer projects or pursue particular career focuses within a review period—depth and not just breadth should be a feature of post-tenure review evaluation. In general, post-tenure review is directed toward career development and a multi-year perspective of accomplishments and plans for professional development at different points in a faculty member’s career. Each department/academic unit or, school or college will adopt specific post-tenure review criteria as part of their promotion and tenure review requirements.

206.06.2 POST-TENURE REVIEW CRITERIA

The criteria for evaluating the performance of a faculty member undergoing post-tenure review will be defined in the promotion and tenure guidelines of the faculty member’s department/academic unit or school/college. Two outcomes of the evaluation will be possible:  

  1. “Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance” means that the faculty member’s performance is evaluated as satisfactory in evaluation of teaching, student success activities, research/scholarship, professional development, and service, and that satisfactory performance has been sustained in annual evaluation reviews since the last tenure or post-tenure review. The individual has continued to grow in his/her/their development as a faculty member and has maintained a level of professional activity and accomplishment that meets expectations for the review criteria defined by the candidate’s department/academic unit, or school or college. Broad definitions of “Meeting Expectations” are further defined at the level of the department/academic unit, or school or college (See Section 205.03.1.2).  
  2. “Not Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance” means that the faculty member has failed to meet expectations in evaluation of teaching, student success activities, research/scholarship, professional development, and/or service, and/or that satisfactory performance has not been sustained in annual performance reviews over the past five years. The individual has failed to address the recommendations in the Corrective Post-Tenure Review Plan for annual evaluations (See Section 206.06.4).

206.06.3 POST-TENURE REVIEW: PROCESS AND PROCEDURES

Each committee involved in the post-tenure review process will provide a single written recommendation with rationale for each candidate. Any minority opinion recommendations and rationale must be included. In cases in which the person undergoing post-tenure review is also applying for promotion, the materials required for promotion will constitute post-tenure review.

The post-tenure review process involves four stages:

  1. Preparation of the Post-Tenure Review Portfolio by the Faculty Member 
  2. Review at the Department/Academic Unit Level (immediate supervisor and Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee, at the discretion of the faculty member if one exists) 
  3. A mandatory review at the College or School Level (College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee and Dean of the college or school) 
  4. Review at the University Level of those portfolios not meeting expectations  (University Promotion and Tenure Committee and Provost) 

These stages, as well as the timelines in the process of post-tenure review, are described in the following section. Please refer to the Calendar for Post-Tenure Review. 

1. Preparation of the Post-Tenure Review Portfolio by the Faculty Member 

a. By the end of Spring Semester of the fourth year since the faculty member’s tenure or post-tenure review (approximately May 1), the faculty member receives notification from the immediate supervisor that he/she/they is undergoing post-tenure review. (Copies of this notification will be forwarded to the Dean of the school or college and to the faculty member’s personnel file.) 

b. By January 21, each individual undergoing post-tenure review will submit a portfolio to his/her/their immediate supervisor for review by that individual and to the Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee if one exists. Teaching effectiveness, Service to the Profession and to the Institution, Scholarly Activities, Professional Development, and Student Success Activities are the primary focuses of post-tenure review.  Any tenured faculty member who is scheduled for post-tenure review must submit the following for consideration to the committee:

Option 1: 

  1. A cover letter or narrative or self-evaluation of accomplishment and projected goals, 
  2. The last five Annual Evaluation Forms from the immediate supervisor including the response(s) from the faculty member if any,
  3. A letter of evaluation from the faculty member’s immediate supervisor that addresses the faculty member’s work over the fiveyear period, 
  4. A current curriculum vitae in the format at the discretion of the faculty member,
  5. An analysis or summary of the past five year’s Student Evaluation of Instruction results including the comments and/or peer evaluation of the faculty member’s classroom instruction addressing teaching effectiveness

All academic units that identify tenure expectations may establish more specific requirements for the post-tenure review portfolio as appropriate to their respective fields. These criteria must be publicly available to members of the faculty undergoing review and serving on promotion and tenure committees. If an academic unit adopts more specific requirements, a faculty member that is currently within his/her/they post-tenure five-year review cycle shall be able to opt to use the requirements that existed at the time the review cycle began or use the more specific requirements established by the academic unit.  For all subsequent post-tenure review cycles, the faculty member is required to use the more specific requirements established by the academic unit.

If the candidate is uncomfortable using only the last five Annual Evaluation Forms as the basis of his/her/their post-tenure review, he/she/they may compile a more comprehensive portfolio consisting of additional materials listed below from the previous five years:

Option 2:

  1. A cover letter or narrative or self-evaluation of accomplishments over the past five years and projected goals,
  2. A current curriculum vitae in the format at the discretion of the faculty member,
  3. An analysis or summary of the past five year’s Student Evaluation of Instruction results including the comments and/or peer evaluation of the faculty member’s classroom instruction addressing teaching effectiveness, 
  4. The last five annual evaluation forms from the immediate supervisor including the faculty member’s response(s) if any, 
  5. A letter of evaluation from the faculty member’s immediate supervisor,  
  6. Written peer evaluations if an academic unit requires such evaluations,
  7. Any evidentiary sources from the faculty member’s portfolio at the discretion of the faculty member.

As stated in Section 202 of this faculty handbook, the Post-Tenure Review Portfolio shall also be used for annual evaluation.

2. Post-Tenure Review at the Department/Academic Unit Level (immediate supervisor and Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee, at the discretion of the faculty if one exists)

a. From January 21 to February 20, the Departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee, if applicable, may evaluate the faculty member’s portfolio. Section 205.04.1 provides guidelines for forming a departmental/academic unit review committee. For the purpose of post-tenure, if a departmental/academic unit review committee exists, a faculty member may choose to be reviewed by this committee (this level of review is optional).  The committee members may request clarifying information and/or evidentiary sources from the candidate.

b. The immediate supervisor will evaluate the faculty member’s portfolio materials using the Post-Tenure Evaluation Form of that academic unit. The immediate supervisor may request clarifying information and/or evidentiary sources from the candidate.

c. By February 21, the immediate supervisor will upload the completed Post-Tenure Evaluation Form, and the evaluation and recommendation to the candidate’s portfolio.

If a Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee was formed, the committee chair will upload a written recommendation including details from the committee members’ evaluations to the candidate’s portfolio.  Any minority opinion recommendations and rationale must be included.

The completed Post-Tenure Evaluation Form and written recommendation from the immediate supervisor and Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee (if applicable) will be provided to the candidate at this time.  In the event of an unsuccessful post-tenure review, the letter from the immediate supervisor must also include next steps, due process rights, and the potential ramifications if the faculty member does not remediate or demonstrate substantial progress toward remediation in the areas identified as unsatisfactory (see below).  The immediate supervisor will discuss the content of the faculty member’s post-tenure evaluation with the faculty member in a scheduled conference. The faculty member will sign a statement to the effect that he/she/they have been apprised of the content of the post-tenure evaluation.

The faculty member has 10 working days to respond in writing to the post-tenure evaluation, with this response to be uploaded to the candidate’s portfolio.  The immediate supervisor will acknowledge in writing receipt of the response, though no action is required of the immediate supervisor.

d. By March 3, the immediate supervisor notifies the appropriate Dean that the candidate’s portfolio is ready for review.

e. By March 4, the Dean will notify the College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee that a portfolio is available to be reviewed regardless of whether the recommendations are favorable or unfavorable.  The Dean will also notify the faculty member.

3. Post-Tenure Review at the College or School Level (College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee and Dean) 

a. College or School Promotion and Tenure Review Committee

  1. From March 4 to March 20, the College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee will review the portfolios of each candidate undergoing post-tenure review and all evaluations and recommendations from the immediate supervisor and the Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee, if applicable. The College or School Promotion and Tenure Review Committee may request clarifying information from the individual undergoing post-tenure review. 
  2. By March 21, the College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee will provide a written report of its findings including a recommendation to the Dean of the school or college regarding each candidate. The recommendation will be uploaded in the faculty member’s portfolio and shared with the faculty member. Any individual receiving a “Not Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance” by the College or School Promotion and Tenure Review Committee will have 10 working days to submit a statement of response to the Dean, who will upload it to the portfolio.

b. Dean of the College or School 

  1. From March 22 to April 7, the Dean of each college or school will review and evaluate all portfolios submitted by each faculty member of  the academic units in the College or School undergoing post-tenure review. The Dean’s review will include the recommendations and evaluations of the immediate supervisor, the Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee, if applicable, and the College or School Promotion and Tenure Review Committee.  
  2. If all levels of review concur in a recommendation of “Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance,” the review process is complete. In such cases, the Dean can simply endorse the recommendation and no separate statement is necessary. A copy of the favorable recommendation will be forwarded to the Provost and to the faculty member. 
  3. If the candidate receives a recommendation of “Not Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance” from any committee or administrator, the portfolio is automatically reviewed by the University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee. In such cases, the Dean must prepare a separate report explaining her/his/their recommendation. From April 8 through April 15 the candidate has the option of submitting a written statement of appeal with clarifying information to the University Promotion and Tenure Committee. By April 8, the Dean will notify the Provost that his/her/their report, the report from College or School Promotion and Tenure Committee, and the faculty member’s response (if any) have been uploaded in the portfolio for review. The Provost will notify the University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee and the individual undergoing post-tenure review that the review is moving to the University Promotion and Tenure Review level.

4. Post-Tenure Review at the University Level (University Promotion and Tenure Committee and Provost)

a. University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee 

  1. The University Promotion and Tenure Committee will review the file of any individual undergoing post-tenure review who has received a recommendation of “Not Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance,” and it will make a recommendation even if the individual has not submitted a formal statement of appeal. 
  2. The University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee may not begin a review of post-tenure files until the deadline for submission of a response has passed or until it has received all possible responses, whichever occurs first. 
  3. The University Promotion and Tenure Committee will review to assure compliance with procedures. The University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee will review the following: 
    1. The recommendation of the Departmental/Academic Unit Promotion and Tenure Committee, if applicable
    2. The recommendation of the College or School Promotion and Tenure Review Committee 
    3. The recommendation of the immediate supervisor
    4. The recommendation of the Dean 
    5. The faculty member’s portfolio 
    6. The faculty member’s response, if any 
  4. Representatives of colleges or schools will advise other University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee members of the criteria used by the academic unit before consideration of the individuals undergoing post-tenure review begins.  
  5. In order to be recommended as “Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance,” the individual undergoing post-tenure review must receive favorable votes from at least two-thirds of the membership of the University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee. Fewer than two-thirds of the votes constitute a recommendation of “Not Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance.” 
  6. By the deadline established by the Provost, the University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee will present to the Provost a written report containing its recommendation and justification concerning each individual reviewed. The Provost will forward a written evaluation of an unfavorable recommendation to the individual undergoing post-tenure review and to the Dean of the College or School.  

b. Provost  

  1. Any individual undergoing post-tenure review who receives a recommendation of “Not Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance” from the University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee has the right to submit a statement of appeal to the Provost, who will establish a deadline for receipt of the appeal statement. (This deadline must allow the individual at least one week to prepare the appeal statement.) The Provost will review the recommendation regardless of whether the individual undergoing post-tenure review submits a response. 
  2. The Provost will review all post-tenure recommendations (whether favorable or unfavorable) from the University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee. 
  3. After reviewing the recommendation from the University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee, the individual’s response (if one is submitted), and any other relevant information deemed appropriate, the Provost will assign a final determination of either “Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance” or “Not Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance” and will inform the faculty member and the Dean of her/his/their decision in writing. The decision by the Provost must be made and communicated no later than five business days following the deadline for the individual to submit her/his/their response.
  4. If the decision of the Provost is “Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance,” then the process is complete. If the decision of the Provost is “Not Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance,” then a formal Performance Improvement Plan is prepared (See Section 206.06.4). 
  5. Further Due Process in Instances of “Not Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance”

Following the decision of the Provost of “Not Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance,” the faculty member may appeal to the President of the University within five working days of receiving the decision from the Provost.  The President’s final decision shall be made within 10 working days, and the faculty member should be notified of the decision and the process for discretionary review application as provided in Board of Regent’s Policy. 

206.06.4. CORRECTIVE POST-TENURE REVIEW

A faculty member evaluated as deficient in any one of the elements of teaching, student success activities, research/scholarship, and/or service for two consecutive annual evaluations will participate in a corrective post-tenure review. Note that the deficiency does not have to be in the same area; but could be in a different area from one year to the next. This review will be initiated prior to the normally scheduled five-year review. The faculty member will follow the institution’s guidelines and procedures for post tenure review. If the outcome of the Corrective Post-Tenure Review is successful, the faculty member will reset the post-tenure review clock. If the outcome of a corrective post tenure review does not meet expectations or needs improvement, the same process for an unsuccessful PTR will be followed. The institution should follow appropriate due-process mechanisms for a faculty member to appeal a corrective post-tenure review as outlined below.

206.06.5. RECOGNITION OF SUCCESSFUL POST-TENURE REVIEW AND PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR FACULTY NOT MEETING EXPECTATIONS IN POST-TENURE PERFORMANCE

When the faculty member undergoing post-tenure review is found to be “Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance” they will be recognized and/or rewarded for their contributions to the university.

When a faculty member at Clayton State University is identified in the post-tenure review as “Not Meeting Expectations in Post-Tenure Performance” a formal Performance Improvement Plan must be developed in consultation with the University Promotion and Tenure Committee and written in accordance with the Academic and Student Affairs Handbook of the Board of Regents. This improvement plan should address how deficiencies cited in the post-tenure review will be corrected. It should be individualized, taking into account the faculty member’s specific circumstances and place in their career, as well as the essential duties of the particular faculty member. In all cases, face-to-face meetings and discussions are required to ensure thorough exploration of all options and clear communication of the understandings reached. As part of the Performance Improvement Plan, the faculty member will be notified in writing of possible corrective actions that would result from failing to reasonably engage with the performance improvement process or failing to make the progress defined in the plan.

A formal plan for performance improvement should do the following:  

  1. define specific goals or outcomes that are to be achieved by the annual review following the plan’s creation;   
  2. set appropriate times within which the goals or outcomes should be accomplished; 
  3. outline the activities that will be undertaken to achieve the goals or outcomes;  
  4. identify appropriate sources of faculty development, whether they be located on campus (such as the Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching), on other campuses of the University System, at the system level, or in other locations;  
  5. and indicate appropriate criteria and strategies by which progress will be monitored.  

The immediate supervisor and the Dean of the faculty member’s school are jointly responsible for arranging appropriate funding for the improvement plan, if required. However, plans will typically expect the faculty member to remedy deficiencies within existing resources and the normal level of support available for faculty development and for achieving faculty expectations. Furthermore, faculty members with unsatisfactory performance reviews should not expect to receive paid leaves to pursue further study or research for the purpose of remediation of the deficiencies.

The following individuals and committee will be involved in the creation of a formal Performance Improvement Plan:  

  1. the faculty member 
  2. his/her/their immediate supervisor
  3. the administrative officer one level above the faculty member’s administrative unit  

The Performance Improvement Plan shall be in place no later than May 31, must be in writing and signed and dated by both the faculty member and their immediate supervisor, and must be approved by the Dean of the academic unit. The approved plan will be submitted to the Provost. 

The faculty member will have until the following year’s annual evaluation  accomplish the goals/outcomes of the plan. During that time, the faculty member and their immediate supervisor will meet no less than twice during the fall and during the spring semesters to review progress, document additional needs/resources, and plan accomplishments for the upcoming quarter.  After each meeting, the immediate supervisor should summarize the meeting and indicate if the faculty member is on track to complete the Performance Improvement Plan.  As a supplement to the advice, support, and encouragement that these principal colleagues will provide, the faculty member will be free to seek other mentors as needed for the successful completion of the plan.

The assessment of the Performance Improvement Plan will take place at the first annual review after its creation. Faculty members will be evaluated based on their successful achievement of the goals stated in their Performance Improvement Plan.

Satisfactory completion of the plan must be documented in writing, approved by the signatories of the plan, and copied to the Provost. Each candidate, as well as the Dean of the candidate’s college or school, will be informed in writing of this recommendation by the Provost. The faculty member’s next post-tenure review will take place on the regular five-year schedule.

In the case of a faculty member failing to achieve the goals of the Performance Improvement Plan, the candidate has the option of submitting a statement of appeal with clarifying information to the President (see below).    

206.06.6. CONSEQUENCES OF AN UNSUCCESSFUL PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT PLAN OR AN UNSUCCESSFUL CORRECTIVE POST-TENURE REVIEW

If, after conducting a final review of appropriate materials and allowing the faculty member an opportunity to be heard at the conclusion of the Performance Improvement Plan, the immediate supervisor and Dean determine that the faculty member has failed to make sufficient progress in performance as outlined in the performance improvement plan (or has refused to engage reasonably in the process), the immediate supervisor and Dean will propose appropriate remedial action corresponding to the seriousness and nature of the faculty member’s deficiencies. If faculty members do not achieve the goals of the Performance Improvement Plan, they face disciplinary actions up to and including, but not limited to, reallocation of effort, salary reduction, and tenure revocation and dismissal.

206.99 Forms and Instructions

Form for Promotion and/or Tenure, and Pre-/Post-Tenure Review

Calendars

207 General Personnel Regulations

207.01 Faculty Absence (Corps of Instruction)

When a faculty member must be absent from class for any reason, he or she is responsible for notifying the department head or coordinator as soon as practical and for making proper arrangements for classes. Responsibility for missed class time should be left up to the faculty in consultation with department heads and/or deans. It is normally preferable to have another faculty member teach the classes, but if this arrangement cannot be made, students should be given specific and meaningful assignments, such as library research, group work, or work in the Center for Academic Success. (The Library or Center for Academic Success should be notified if students are to attend as a group.) Class dismissal with no assignment to replace class time is inappropriate.

Specific reasons for absences and types of leave are discussed below.

207.01.1 Professional Absence (including Professional Travel)

Absence from class or other scheduled activities for professional reasons, whether on- or off-campus, requires the approval of the department head or equivalent supervisor.  In addition, off-campus travel must be approved by the dean and the Provost (and the Vice President for Business and Operations if University funds are used).  The following procedure must be followed:

  1. For any off-campus professional absence, the faculty member must complete a Travel Authorization Form and submit it to the appropriate department head or other supervisor.  For routine travel directly connected to duties (e.g., clinical travel or attendance at required University System meetings) and day trips at no expense to the University, this is the only form necessary. Forms are found at http://www.clayton.edu/accounting-services/expenses/travel/forms.
  2. For any professional development travel involving University funds (or overnight travel even if no University funds are used), the faculty member must complete the same Travel Authorization form.
  3. Additional policies regarding travel can be found at http://www.clayton.edu/accounting-services/expenses/travel.

207.01.2 Sick Leave

  • Sick Leave with Pay:

The normal maximum leave time for death in the immediate family (spouse, parents, guardian, child, sibling) is three (3) days.  Exceptions to this provision may be granted in unusual circumstances when recommended by the faculty member’s supervisor and approved by the Provost (or other appropriate administrative officer). See Board of Regents Policy 8.2.7.2

  • Sick Leave Without Pay:

A physician’s statement or other evidence may be required by the supervisor or Director of Human Resources. See Board of Regents Policy 8.2.7.3

207.01.2.2 Procedure for Reporting Sick Leave (Corps of Instruction)

All absence from class or other officially scheduled activity must be reported within a week.  Please note that sick leave must be reported even if a colleague “covers” the class or if the time is “made up” through an alternate assignment or meeting time.

As full time employees of the University, faculty are expected to take sick leave hour-for-hour of time unable to work in accordance with the University’s Employee Handbook.

207.01.3 Military Leave

Board of Regents policies concerning military leave are detailed in Section 8.2.7.5 and Section 8.2.7.7 of the Policy Manual and in Section 4.9 of the Academic and Student Affairs Handbook.

207.01.4 Court Duty (Jury or Witness)

A Clayton State faculty member called to court duty should notify his or her supervisor of the duty and make arrangements to cover classes or other duties.  When possible, the faculty member should work with the court to arrange the absence for the least inconvenient time.  At the conclusion of the court duty, the faculty member must file an Absence Report form with the Office of Human Resources.  The form should be clearly marked “Court Duty” and a copy of the official court order should be attached.

The faculty member will be paid his or her normal salary while on jury duty. Since payment for jury duty is usually a nominal amount, it shall be considered as expense money and may be retained by the faculty member.

Except as noted herein, a faculty member compelled to serve as a witness will be paid his or her normal salary and may accept expense money.  Absence by faculty involved as principals in litigation requires careful attention by the faculty member and supervisor.  A fiscal-year employee will normally take annual leave.  An academic-year employee will make special arrangements with his or her supervisor.

Employment of a faculty member as an expert witness shall be considered as consulting rather than court duty. (See the Outside Activities section below). See Board of Regents Policy 8.2.7.7.

207.01.4 Voting

Clayton State University follows Board of Regents Policy 8.2.7.7.c.

207.01.5 Personal Leave

Clayton State University follows Board of Regents Policy 8.2.7.7.e.

207.01.6 Weather/Emergency Leave

Clayton State University follows Board of Regents Policy 8.2.7.7.f.

207.01.7 Leaves of Absence

This category includes but is not limited to leaves for further academic study. Clayton State University follows Board of Regents Policy 8.2.7.4.

207.01.8 Vacation (Annual Leave)

Faculty on academic-year contracts do not accrue vacation leave.  Faculty on fiscal-year contracts do accrue vacation leave and must report days between semesters and other appropriate absences as vacation leave time.

207.01.9 Pregnancy and Family Leave

Clayton State University follows Board of Regents Policy 8.2.7.6

207.02 Gratuities

Clayton State University follows Board of Regents Policy 8.2.18.4

207.03 Check-out Procedure for Faculty Members Ending Employment

The final paycheck cannot be issued to a faculty member who has resigned, retired, or been terminated until a Clearance of Campus has been completed and signed by the appropriate administrator.  The exit checklist accounts for keys, grade books and student records, curriculum materials, manuals, equipment and supplies, library materials, forwarding address, University credit cards, and other listed items.  A copy of the Faculty Exit Checklist will be given to the employee by the department head or other supervisor.

207.03.1 Resignation of Tenured Faculty

Clayton State University follows Board of Regents Policy 8.3.4.

207.03.2 Non-Renewal of Non-Tenured Faculty

Clayton State University follows Board of Regents Policy 8.3.4

207.04 Sexual Harassment

Clayton State University follows Board of Regents Policy 6.7

207.04.1 University Policy on Sexual Harassment

Clayton State is committed to providing a learning and work environment conducive to effective learning and to the effective discharge of work-related duties and responsibilities.  Employees are expected to act professionally in their respective work settings.  Students are expected to respect the rights of other students and all members of the University community.  The University environment must be free of discrimination and harassment of any kind, especially that of a sexual nature.  Any allegations of sexual harassment will be thoroughly and expeditiously investigated.  Sexual harassment is totally unacceptable, and determination that such harassment has occurred will result in prompt and firm disciplinary action which may include immediate dismissal.

207.04.2 Procedure for Reporting Sexual Harassment

Any complainant (faculty member, staff member, or student) who believes that he or she is a victim of sexual harassment should follow the procedural steps described below: 

Step 1: Complainant should clearly convey his or her discomfort with the conduct to the alleged offender (see procedural notes);

Step 2: If the conduct continues, complainant should convey to the alleged offender, in writing, a request that the conduct be discontinued (see procedural notes);

Step 3: Reporting Procedure: 

  • Employee Complainant: If the offensive behavior continues, complainant should report the conduct to his or her immediate supervisor or the Director of Human Resources.
  • Student Complainant: If the offensive behavior continues, complainant should report the conduct to the Vice President and Dean of Student and Enrollment Services and to other administrators as follows:
    1. If the alleged offender is another student, and if the alleged offender is in a class with the complainant, the complainant should also notify the instructor.
    2. If the alleged offender is a faculty member, the complainant should also report the offensive behavior to the department head or other administrator to whom the faculty member reports.
    3. If the alleged offender is a University employee other than a faculty member, the complainant should also report the offensive behavior to the employee’s immediate supervisor, if known, or to the Director of Human Resources.
    4. If the alleged offender is a visitor to the University (i.e., anyone not a student, faculty member, or other employee) the complainant should also report the offensive behavior to the department or office where the behavior occurred.

Procedural Notes for Students and Employees:

  1. If the complainant has reason to fear reprisal from the alleged offender if steps one and/or two are carried out, the complainant may move directly to the next step.
  2. If the complainant has reason to be uncomfortable reporting as directed by this policy, the complainant should report the offensive behavior to any administrator (not a subordinate of the alleged offender) with whom the complainant feels comfortable.  That administrator then has the responsibility of helping the complainant with the procedure.
  3. If at any time a person experiencing sexual harassment has cause to fear immediate physical harm, the person should promptly contact campus public safety.

All such complaints shall be handled as further detailed by the Department of Human Resources’ policies and procedures which are available online and in the Department of Human Resources.

208 Outside Activities and On-Campus Extra Compensation

208.01 Conflict of Interest and Conflicts of Commitment: Policy

A conflict of interest is defined as a conflict between the private interests and the official responsibilities of a person in a position of public trust.  The first obligation of a University employee is always to Clayton State.  No University employee shall engage in any outside activity that competes or appears to compete with the interests of the University, and/or to inhibit the successful pursuit of University objectives, and/or to bring discredit upon the University.  Such outside activities are, by definition, a conflict of interest and will not be approved. See Board of Regents Policy 8.2.18.2 and subsections

208.02 Occupational Activity and Consulting

208.02.1 Definitions

1. An outside activity is considered “occupational” if the nine-month employee must commit more than one full business day per week to the pursuit of the activity. Twelve-month faculty assigned to administrative positions must take annual leave when engaged in consulting during their normal work hours Absences to engage in occupational activity must be requested using an “Conflict of Interest-Conflict of Commitment Approval Form found on the HR website.”  

2. “Ongoing occupational activities” are occupational activities that require the attention/time of an employee more than once in an academic year.

3. Single Occasion Occupational Activities are those activities involving only a few hours (generally fewer than 8) of faculty time and not recurring on a regular basis as part of an established pattern of consulting speaking or performing.

4. Extra compensation is defined as activities performed outside the frame work of the employee’s normal workload in which the employee is compensated through the University System of Georgia payroll system.

5. Consulting

Clayton State University follows Board of Regents Policy 8.2.18.2.4 and Board of Regents Academic and Student Affairs Handbook 4.8

208.02.2 Policy

  1. The use of University funds, facilities, materials, equipment, or supplies, in connection with outside occupational activities or consulting is strictly prohibited unless prior arrangements have been approved for reimbursing the University at the normal rates charged to outside users of University facilities. 
  2. Missing class or other assigned duties to engage in approved outside occupational activities or consulting is strongly discouraged, and general approval of an activity does not convey specific permission to be absent.  If special circumstances appear to warrant absence (e.g., out-of-town consulting), the faculty member must secure prior written authorization.  The faculty member must specify what arrangements have been made to make sure that the absence will not interfere with the discharge of official duties.  In no case may class absence for occupational activity or consulting exceed 10 percent of the lecture/lab time for a semester.

See Board of Regents Policy 8.2.18.2

208.02.3 Procedure for Obtaining Approval of Occupational Activity or Consulting

Before accepting outside occupational activity or consulting during the term of his or her contract or during summer if receiving compensation from the University, the faculty member must do the following:

1. A faculty member wishing to engage in outside occupational activity or consulting must first discuss the employment with his or her department head/associate dean or supervisor to determine if the employment is consistent with the University and Board of Regents policy.  

2. If this informal consultation indicates that the activity appears likely to be approved, then the faculty member should submit a completed Conflict of Interest-Conflict of Commitment-Approval Form to the department head/associate dean or supervisor, who will forward it through the administrative chain of command for approval. 

Employees who wish to engage in on-going occupational activities or on-going consulting must submit a form at the start of each academic year.  Approval during one academic year does not necessarily ensure approval in subsequent years.  It is the employee’s obligation to report and request approval of any change in the nature or extent of duties or obligations involved in outside occupational activities or consulting approved for the year.

Employees who engage in outside occupational activities or consulting on an occasional basis that is not amenable to long-term planning must submit an approval form for each occasion, and must not engage in the activity or activities until written approval is received. 

208.02.4 Occupational Activities Resulting in Extra Compensation

The following guidelines must be met for outside activities that result in extra compensation:

1. Compensation made through the college payroll system will be subject to the following limitations:

a. The compensation will not exceed the fair market value for the work performed.

b. During that part of the year when a faculty member is under contract as a full-time employee of the college, the compensation will not exceed 20% of the faculty member’s base pay as indicated in the contract.

(1) Faculty members on a fiscal year contract may be compensated up to an additional 20% of their base pay during the fiscal year.

(2) Faculty members on an academic year contract may be compensated up to an additional 20% of their base pay during the academic year contract period.  They may be compensated for an additional 33.3% of their academic year base pay during the period following the academic year contract period.  If a project resulting in extra compensation generates funds in excess of this limit, the funds will be used to “buy” a portion of the faculty member’s time; the faculty member will be released from an appropriate portion of his or her responsibilities as a full-time faculty member.

2. Any faculty member receiving compensation from a corporation that has a contract with the University must disclose and receive prior approval from the President or his designee for that compensation. This can be done using the Conflict of Interest-Conflict of Commitment-Approval Form.

3. A faculty member who participates in an outside activity during the summer semester is not subject to a compensation limit provided that the faculty member is not under contract during the summer semester. 

4. If a faculty member, while under contract for the summer semester, wishes to participate in an outside activity, the approval process as outlined in section 208.02.3 must be followed.

5. Employees are prohibited from consulting or otherwise receiving compensation from a current USG vendor or entity seeking a vendor relationship with the USG. Exceptions to this provision may be granted by the institution President.

208.02.5 Approval Procedures for Outside Activity Involving Georgia State Agencies (including other institutions of the University System of Georgia)

The following steps must be completed for outside activities involving Georgia state agencies:

  1. Employees of Clayton State who desire to perform paid services for another state agency should arrange an informal consultation with their department head/ associate dean, director, or dean, and vice president, as applicable, and discuss the proposed arrangements in detail.  No commitment of any kind to another state agency should be made by a Clayton State employee until and unless informal approval is obtained in Step 1.
  2. The chief executive officer of the department or agency desiring the services of a person at this University who falls in one of the eligibility categories mentioned above should address a letter to the President of the University, certifying the need for the Clayton State employee’s services and explaining why the best interests of the state will be served by obtaining the part-time services of a Clayton State employee, rather than obtaining the same services from a person(s) not presently employed by the State of Georgia.
  3. The President of the University may approve or disapprove the request.  In order to approve the other agency’s request for a Clayton State employee’s services, the President must certify in writing, to the requesting state agency or department, each of the following:
    1. The person whose services are desired is available to perform such services.
    2. The performance of the requested services will not detract from, or have a detrimental effect on the Clayton State employee’s performance of obligations to the University.
    3. The part-time employment of the employee will be in the best interests of the State.
  4. The two departments or agencies involved must then reach an agreement about the procedures under which the Clayton State employee shall perform the additional services.  The agreement shall specify the means of employment (whether as a part-time employee or as a consultant), the compensation involved, and other pertinent details and conditions.  The agreement may be terminated at any time by either party.

208.02.6 Professional Liability Insurance

Employees should be aware that they are not covered by The Board of Regents Professional Liability Insurance Plan when engaged in outside occupational activity or consulting.  Liability coverage for such activities was specifically excluded by the Board of Regents in 1987.  This exclusion specifically extends to “Participation in consultation practice in the employee’s discipline or related subject areas, when such consultation is for the employee’s personal gain and where the contract for the service is between the employee and the third party benefiting from the consultation.” (Board of Regents action Jan. 14, 1987)  

208.03 On-Campus Activities For Extra Compensation (Personal Services)

Faculty members are, of course, expected to devote a full workweek to their regular duties and responsibilities to the University.  Occasionally, special activities, above and beyond the normal workweek, will be performed for which extra compensation may be provided. 

208.03.1 Procedure for Approval

Any faculty member intending to perform on-campus activities for extra compensation must complete the Employee Extra Compensation Form.  The form requires the signatures of the immediate supervisor and other administrators. 

208.03.2 Continuing Education 

The most common type of extra compensation is that provided when the faculty member teaches or performs other services for the office of Continuing Education above and beyond the faculty member’s normal workweek.  The approval procedure explained in 208.03 must be followed for Continuing Education compensation. 

208.04 Political Activity

Any employee of Clayton State who files for political office must immediately notify his or her supervisor in writing. See Board of Regents Policy 8.2.18.3

208.05 State Business Disclosure Report

Georgia Code Sections 45-10-20 through 45-10-28 require that public officials and employees of the state or any agency thereof must disclose on or before January 31st of each year, all business transactions during the preceding calendar year between the State of Georgia and the public official or employee or any business in which such official or public employee or any member of the family has a substantial interest.

The Attorney General’s office has advised that employees of the Board of Regents are considered to be public employees and are required by law to comply with the disclosure provision of this law unless the amount of each individual transaction is less than $250.00 and the aggregate of all transactions does not exceed $9,000.00 per calendar year.

The Attorney General’s office has also confirmed that employees who have not engaged in any business with the State during the past calendar year are not required to file the report.

For any employee required to file, a copy of the State Business Transaction Disclosure Report to the Office of Secretary of State is available in the Department Office of Human Resources.

208.99 Forms

See the Human Resources website for the Conflict of Interest-Conflict of Commitment Form.

209 Use of State Property

209.01 Political Campaigns

Clayton State University follows Board of Regents Policy 9.10.6.1

209.02 Personal Use

Clayton State University follows Board of Regents Policy 9.10.6.4

210 Drug-Free Work Place: Policy

As a recipient of Federal funds, Clayton State supports and complies with the provisions of the Drug-Free Work Place Act of 1988.  In the discharge of its responsibilities as an employer, Clayton State promotes and requires a drug-free work place among its employees.  Therefore, Clayton State incorporates the following provisions as part of its drug-free policy:

A. No employee of Clayton State may illegally engage in the manufacture, distribution, dispensation or possession or use of controlled substances in the work place.  Such unlawful activity will be considered as sufficient grounds for a serious adverse personnel action, including dismissal from employment.

B. An employee must notify Clayton State of any criminal drug statute conviction (including a plea of nolo contendere) for a violation occurring in the work place no later than five days after such conviction.  The notification must be in writing to the Director of Human Resources at the University.

C. Violation of this policy, including felony and/or misdemeanor drug convictions, during the course of employment with Clayton State will result in appropriate disciplinary penalties being imposed by the University.

Clayton State actively encourages employees who feel they have a potential substance abuse problem to utilize a confidential referral service available through Counseling and Psychological Services.

211 Academic Freedom and Responsibility

211.01 Preamble

Institutions of higher education exist for the common good and not to further the interests of either the individual or the institution.  The common good depends upon the free search for and exposition of the truth.  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 faculty in teaching and of the student to freedom in learning1.  Membership in the academic community imposes on students, faculty members, administrators, and board members an obligation to respect the dignity of others, to acknowledge their right to express differing opinions, and to foster and defend intellectual honesty, freedom of inquiry, and free expression on and off the campus2.

211.02 Academic Freedom of Faculty3

Faculty are free to present relevant materials in the classroom without fear of censorship but should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their subject.  Faculty enjoy full freedom in research and publication of results, subject to the adequate performance of their other academic duties and to the requirements of individual research contracts and copyright limitations.

Faculty have the right to speak freely as private citizens but should clarify that they are voicing personal opinions and are not speaking for the University.  In expressing opinions publicly, faculty should realize that both the profession and the University may be judged by their statements and, accordingly, should exercise appropriate restraint.

211.03 Code of Ethics

Clayton State expects high ethical standards of all personnel.  In particular, it endorses the following principles4:

  1. Faculty have a primary responsibility to seek and to state the truth as they see it.  To this end, they devote their energies to developing and improving their scholarly competence. They accept the obligation to exercise critical self-discipline in using, extending, and transmitting knowledge.  Faculty practice intellectual honesty. Although they may follow subsidiary interests, these interests must never seriously hamper or compromise their freedom of inquiry.
  2. As teachers, faculty encourage students’ free pursuit of learning. They uphold the best scholarly standards of their disciplines. They demonstrate respect for students as individuals and adhere to their proper roles as intellectual guides and counselors. They exert reasonable effort to foster honest academic conduct and to assure that their evaluations of students reflect true merit. Faculty respect the confidential nature of the relationship between professor and student. They avoid any exploitation of students for private advantage. They acknowledge significant academic or scholarly assistance from them. They protect students’ academic freedom.

  3. As colleagues, faculty have obligations that derive from common membership in a community of scholars.  They respect and defend the free inquiry of their associates. In the exchange of criticism and ideas, they show due respect for the opinions of others. Faculty strive to be objective in their professional judgments of colleagues.  

  4. Faculty seek to be effective teachers and scholars. Although they observe the stated regulations of the University, provided they do not contravene academic freedom, they maintain their right to seek revision of these regulations through the appropriate channels. Professors give due regard to their paramount responsibilities within their institution in determining the amount and character of work done outside it. When considering the interruption or termination of their service, professors recognize the effect of their decision upon the program of the institution and give due notice of their intentions.

  5. As members of the community, faculty have the rights and obligations of any citizens. They measure the urgency of these obligations in the light of their responsibilities to their students, to their professions, and to the institution. When they speak or act as private citizens, they avoid creating the impression that they speak for the institution. As citizens engaged in a profession that depends upon freedom for its health and integrity, faculty have particular obligations to promote conditions of free inquiry and to further public understanding of academic freedom.

1

Adapted from the Joint Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities, as it appears in the AAUP Policy Documents and Reports.

2

Adapted from A Statement of the Association’s Council: Freedom and Responsibility, as it appears in the AAUP Policy Documents and Reports.

3

Adapted from the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, as it appears in the AAUP Policy Documents and Reports.

4

Adapted from the 1966 Statement of Professional Ethics, as it appears in the AAUP Policy Documents and Reports.

 

211.04 Professional Responsibilities

211.04.01 PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

This statement shall serve as a guide for the professional conduct of the members of the faculty of this University. The responsibilities of a faculty member may be considered from five major perspectives: 1) as a member of the teaching profession; 2) as a teacher; 3) as a colleague; 4) as a part of an institution; 5) as a member of a community.  Essential functions are listed as well.

  1. As a member of the teaching profession, the professor:
    1. Seeks and states the truth as perceived.
    2. Devotes energies to developing and improving scholarly competence.
    3. Accepts the obligation to exercise critical self-discipline and judgment in using, extending, and transmitting knowledge.
    4. Practices, fosters, and defends intellectual honesty, freedom of inquiry and instruction, and free expression on and off the campus.
    5. Avoids allowing subsidiary interests to hamper or compromise freedom of inquiry.
       
  2. As a teacher, the professor:
    1. Encourages the free pursuit of learning in students.
    2. Collaborates with colleagues to ensure the integrity of the curriculum offered by the School or Department.
    3. Holds before students the discipline's best scholarly standards.  
    4. Demonstrates respect for the student as an individual.
    5. Adheres to a proper role as an intellectual guide and counselor.
    6. Does not participate in the formal evaluation of any student or in any institutional decisions involving a direct benefit to a student who is a member of his or her immediate family, a blood relative, or with whom he or she has an economic, sexual, and/or romantic involvement which could reasonably be perceived as impairing objectivity.
    7. Makes every reasonable effort to foster honest academic conduct.
    8. Makes every reasonable effort to assure that evaluations of students reflect their true merit and are based on their academic performance professionally judged and not on matters irrelevant to that performance, such as personality, degree of political activism, personal beliefs, race, religion, color, disability, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, or age.
    9. Treats students with civility, understanding, and respect and does not denigrate, humiliate, or stigmatize students on the basis of race, religion, color, disability, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, or age.
    10. Makes every reasonable effort to assure that all students are treated with civility, understanding, and respect whenever the professor has responsibility for students and is acting in a professorial, professional, and/or mentoring role and that students do not denigrate, humiliate, or stigmatize other students on the basis of race, religion, color, disability, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, or age.
    11. Respects the confidential nature of the relationship between professor and student.
    12. Does not refuse to enroll or teach students on the grounds of their beliefs or the possible uses to which they may put the knowledge to be gained in a course.
    13. Refrains from forcing students by the authority inherent in the instructional role to make particular personal choices as to political action or their own part in society.
    14. Does not persistently intrude into the presentation of the subject, material which has no relation to that subject.
    15. Presents the subject matter of a course as announced to students and as approved by the faculty in their collective responsibility for the curriculum.
    16. Allows students the freedom to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in a course of study and to reserve judgment about matters of opinion.
    17. Avoids an exploitation of students for private advantage.
       
  3. As a colleague, the professor:
    1. Treats each member of the academy with dignity, courtesy and due consideration.
    2. Respects and defends the free inquiry of associates.
    3. Shows due respect for the opinions of others in exchanges of criticism and ideas.
    4. Acknowledges academic debts.
    5. Strives to be objective in the professional judgment of colleagues.
    6. Does not participate in personnel evaluations, such as appointment, retention, tenure, or promotion, of a member of his or her immediate family, a blood relative, or a person with whom he or she has an economic, sexual and/or romantic involvement that could reasonably be perceived as impairing objectivity.
    7. Does not participate in decisions, such as awarding of grants, sabbaticals, or other awards that involve a direct economic benefit to himself or herself, a member of his or her immediate family, a blood relative, or a person with whom he or she has an economic, sexual and/or romantic involvement that could reasonably be perceived as impairing objectivity.
       
  4. As a member of an institution, the professor:
    1. Seeks above all to be an effective teacher and scholar.
    2. Observes the stated regulations of the institution provided they do not contravene academic freedom.
    3. Maintains the right to criticize regulations and seek their revision.
    4. Determines the amount and character of the work that can be done outside the institution while fulfilling primary responsibilities within it.
    5. Recognizes, when considering the interruption or termination of services, the effect of such a decision upon the program of the institution, and gives due notice of intentions.
    6. Requests a leave of absence or resigns an academic position when acute conflicts between the claims of politics, social action, and conscience, on the one hand, and the claims and expectations of students, colleagues, and institution, on the other, preclude the fulfillment of substantial academic obligations.
    7. Refrains from calling attention to grievances in ways that significantly impede the functions of the institution.
    8. Accepts a share of faculty responsibilities for the governance of the institution.
       
  5. As a member of a community, the professor:
    1. Measures the urgency of any obligations as a citizen in light of responsibilities to subject, students, profession, and institution.
    2. Makes every effort, when speaking and acting as a citizen, to be accurate, to exercise appropriate restraint, to show respect for the opinions of others, and to indicate that these words and actions do not represent the University.
    3. Promotes conditions of free inquiry.
    4. Furthers public understanding of academic freedom.  

211.04.02 Essential Duties/Expectations of Faculty

All faculty at Clayton State University are expected to provide service to the university community that exemplifies teamwork, committee involvement, participation in shared governance, investment in academic advisement and mentoring of students and sponsorship of student activities.  Additionally, faculty are expected to foster professional growth and development and continuous learning of themselves as well as their colleagues.  Faculty work as a member of a self-directed team and report to a designated department chair or associate dean.  Faculty are expected to have an uncompromising commitment to learning that is reflective of the university’s mission, vision and values.  Faculty are expected to have a positive and proactive approach to their work, a willingness to change and the ability to foster consensus and collaboration in and out of the classroom.

Essential Duties:

  1. Facilitate learning through classroom activities, technology enhanced experiences, out-of-classroom activities, and mentoring of students and peers.
  2. Assess and evaluate student performance in alignment with established grading methodology.
  3. Meet assigned classes as scheduled for the scheduled length of time.
  4. Post and maintain office hours.
  5. Participate in ongoing curriculum development.
  6. Maintain up to date syllabi and course outcome summaries in an approved departmental/school format.
  7. Participate in institutional, advisory and program/instructional committee meetings.
  8. Submit grades in a timely manner.
  9. Maintain accurate records of student attendance and achievement for one year in accordance with CSU policy.
  10. Actively select and use appropriate learning materials and resources including textbooks, library resources, equipment and supplies to enhance learning.
  11. Assist in planning, development and implementation of new or modified program/courses. Identify areas in need of improvement. 
  12. Maintain currency in area of expertise and in teaching methodology.
  13. Maintain all required certificates if applicable.
  14. Assist in student academic advising as assigned.
  15. Actively serve on department, school and university committees as assigned. 
  16. Attend college’s in-service sessions and commencement.
  17. Assist Department Chair in carrying out their defined duties.
  18. Assists with student recruitment and admission activities as needed.

211.05 Rights and Freedoms of Students 

211.05.01 Student Intellectual Diversity Policy 

Clayton State expects faculty to respect the rights and freedom of students at CSU.  In particular, CSU endorses the following statements published on the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) website.

Academic institutions exist for the transmission of knowledge, the pursuit of truth, the development of students, and the general well-being of society. Free inquiry and free expression are indispensable to the attainment of these goals. As members of the academic community, students should be encouraged to develop the capacity for critical judgment and to engage in a sustained and independent search for truth. Institutional procedures for achieving these purposes may vary from campus to campus, but the minimal standards of academic freedom of students outlined below are essential to any community of scholars.

Freedom to teach and freedom to learn are inseparable facets of academic freedom. The freedom to learn depends upon appropriate opportunities and conditions in the classroom, on the campus, and in the larger community. In order to protect the freedom of students to learn, as well as enhance their participation in the life of the academic community, students should be free from exploitation or harassment. Students should exercise their freedom with responsibility.

The responsibility to secure and to respect general conditions conducive to the freedom to learn is shared by all members of the academic community. Each college and university has a duty to develop policies and procedures that provide and safeguard this freedom. Such policies and procedures should be developed at each institution within the framework of general standards and with the broadest possible participation of the members of the academic community. The purpose of this statement is to enumerate the essential provisions for students’ freedom to learn. 

211.05.02 Faculty Responsibilities and Protection of Student Freedoms

1. Protection of Students’ Freedom of Expression

Students have the right to learn and to inquire. They have a right to examine and discuss questions of interest, to take stands on issues, and to support causes, by orderly means, which do not impede the collegial process of learning.

Faculty in the classroom should encourage free discussion, inquiry, and expression. They should make students aware of viewpoints differing from their own, should carefully distinguish between fact and opinion, and should never require agreement on debatable matters as the price of academic success. Faculty should encourage students to develop the capacity for critical judgment and to engage in a sustained and independent search for truth in and out of the classroom.

2. Protection of Students against Improper Evaluation

Students shall have the right of protection through orderly procedures against prejudiced or capricious academic evaluation. At the same time, students are responsible for learning the content and maintaining the standards of academic performance established by the faculty for each course in which they are enrolled. Any student who believes that individual academic rights have been violated may seek redress by contacting the associate provost for academic affairs for direction in filing a formal grievance. 

Faculty should evaluate student performance solely on an academic basis and not on opinions or conduct in matters unrelated to academic standards. Faculty have a duty to provide promptly evaluation of the work of each student as required by relevant faculty policies. This evaluation must be based upon academic performance professionally judged and not upon such irrelevant matters as personality, sex, race, religion, degree of political activism, or personal beliefs. The arbitrary assignment of a fixed percentage of students to each grade level is an unacceptable practice.

3. Protection of Students against Improper Disclosure

Faculty have an obligation to respect the rights of students, including, in the absence of exceptional circumstances, an obligation to respect student confidences shared with them.

212 Grant Proposal Submission Process

212.01 Process

  1. A minimum of 15 business days prior to the funding agency deadline for the proposal, the Preliminary Proposal Review Sheet should be submitted to the relevant Department Head, who will review the information to determine if the proposal is consistent with the mission and priorities of the department.  If approved, the Preliminary Proposal Review Sheet will then be submitted for approval by the relevant Dean and then the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.  Proposals requiring the waiver of indirect costs or other institutional commitments will also require the approval of the Vice President for Operations, Planning & Budget. If the proposed work is deemed consistent with the mission of the University, the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs will work with the Department Head/Associate Dean and Dean to assist in the preparation of the proposal, as requested by the principal investigator/project director.  The Department Head/Associate Dean and Dean will assist the principal investigator/project director with budgeting and interpretation of financial guidelines for the proposal.
  2. A minimum of 5 business days prior to the funding agency deadline, the Final Proposal Review Sheet and a budget for the proposed work must be submitted to the Department Head/Associate Dean and Dean.  The Department Head/Associate Dean and Dean will assist the principal investigator/project with fine-tuning of the budget.
  3. A minimum of three business days prior to the funding agency deadline, an appropriate number of copies of the proposal (including Preliminary and Final Proposal Review Sheets) must be submitted for approval by the Department Head, the Dean, and the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.  The Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs will transmit the proposal to the President.  When the President approves the proposal, it becomes an official University proposal to the funding agency.
  4. File copies of the completed proposal and signed Final Proposal Review Sheet must be submitted to the Dean, the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the Office of Grant and Contract Programs.

212.99 Forms

Preliminary Proposal Review Sheet
Final Proposal Review Sheet

301 Grievance Procedures for Faculty and Classified Employees

The policy and procedures for grievance at Clayton State have been approved by the University System of Georgia’s Board of Regents.

301.01 Grievance Committee

The Grievance Committee at Clayton State shall be known as the Board of Review.

301.02 Purpose

The Board of Review is established to provide a means to hear the complaints of college employees (faculty members and classified personnel) who have exhausted normal channels, as defined herein, but who have not received satisfaction in the resolution of a grievance.  Prior to filing a complaint with the Board of Review, as provided in Section 301.04 below, an aggrieved employee shall have attempted through normal channels, that is, by appeal to administrative officers through and including (at least) one level of authority higher than the grievant’s immediate supervisor, to resolve the grievance satisfactorily.

301.03 Jurisdiction

The Board of Review shall have jurisdiction to consider grievances of any faculty member or classified employee of Clayton State.  Grievances heard by the Board of Review shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

A. Complaints reasonably related to terms and conditions of employment, supported by affidavit of the grievant or other credible evidence, when properly and timely filed in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 301.04 below.

B. Grievances concerning salary or promotion of any employee or involving the award of tenure or nonrenewal of a faculty member, but only when it is reasonably alleged that the action complained of was the result of discrimination based on race, color, sex, religion, creed, national origin, handicap, or age.

C. Any grievance referred to the Board of Review for hearing by the President of Clayton State or the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia.

Except as stated in paragraph C above, the Board of Review shall not be authorized to hear grievances related to salary or promotion of any employee, or the award of tenure or nonrenewal of faculty members, unless it is reasonably alleged by the grievant that such decisions have been based on discrimination as set forth in Section B above.

All decisions made by the Board of Review are advisory in nature and are reviewed by the President of the University for final determination within 30 days of the Board of Review’s recommendation.

The next level of review following the President’s final decision shall be the Board of Regents, in accordance with the provision of (the Policies) of the Board of Regents. See Section VIII Appeals in the Bylaws of the Board of Regents:

A Board of Review shall not re-hear any grievance for which the President has already made a final decision unless directed to do so by the Board of Regents. See Board of Regents Policy 4.7

Involuntary Termination (Dismissal)

In cases of involuntary termination of tenured faculty or nontenured faculty during their contract term, an application for review may be directed to the Board of Regents. See Board of Regents Policy 8.3.9

In cases of involuntary termination of classified employees, an application for review may be directed to the Board of Regents, according to the procedures set forth in the Grievance Policy of the Board of Regents Human Resources Practice Manual.

301.04 Board of Review

301.04.1 Definitions

Notification “in writing” shall mean by hand-delivered letter given to the recipient personally or by certified mail.
Faculty members shall be construed to mean those persons defined as “faculty” by the Bylaws and Policies of the Board of Regents and the Statues of Clayton State and those persons with faculty status appointed by the President to administrative positions at the institution.
Classified personnel shall be construed to mean those persons identified as “classified personnel” by the Clayton State Office of Human Resources.

301.04.2 Selection of a Chairperson

There shall be a Chairperson for each Board of Review.  At the first faculty meeting of each Fall Semester, the faculty shall be provided with a list of tenured faculty members who have completed a minimum of one full academic year of full-time service at the institution.  These persons are eligible to serve as Board of Review Chairpersons.  This list will be considered a ballot, and each faculty member will vote for two eligible persons to serve as Chairpersons.  The person receiving the greatest number of votes and the person receiving the next greatest number of votes and representing an academic division or organizational unit other than that represented by the person receiving the greatest number of votes shall be designated Chairpersons.

By the toss of a coin these two Chairpersons shall determine who shall chair the first Board of Review to be called.  Thereafter they shall alternate as Chairperson for any subsequent Boards of Review during their service.  Should a Chairperson be a party in any action brought to a Board of Review, the other Chairperson shall chair the Board of Review.  If for any reason both Chairpersons are unable to serve on a Board of Review, the President shall call a special faculty meeting to elect a chairperson.  A quorum shall be present at any such meeting.

301.04.3 Drawing of Panel

A grievant shall file a grievance in writing with the President of the institution within thirty (30) days after the alleged act prompting the grievance.  The President shall within three (3) working days notify in writing the Chairperson whose turn it is to chair a Board of Review.

If the Chairperson determines the grievance to be within the jurisdiction of a Board of Review, he or she shall obtain from the Office of Human Resources a random list of nine (9) eligible faculty or classified employees appropriate to the case.  The panel must be drawn within five (5) working days after the chairperson has been notified of the need for a Board of Review.  When grievances involve only faculty member(s), the Chairperson shall draw the nine (9) member panel from faculty members having at least one (1) academic year (nine months) of continuous service at the college.  For grievances involving classified employees only, the Chairperson shall draw the nine (9) member panel from the names of classified employees having at least nine months of continuous service at the University.  A new panel for each grievance shall be drawn by the chairperson in the presence of the Director of Human Resources or the Affirmative Action Officer of Clayton State who shall certify to the President that the panel drawing process has been impartially executed.

301.04.4 Eligibility for Service on Board

With the exception of the President, all full-time employees (faculty and classified) having at least one (1) academic year (nine months) of continuous service excluding full-time temporary service at the University are potential panel members of the Board of Review.  Employees’ names shall be removed from the pool if: (a) employment terminates; (b) the employee is a grievant; (c) the employee is named or otherwise directly involved in the grievance; or (d) the employee is on full- or part-leave.

301.04.5 Notification and Excuse of Panel Members

After the panel is drawn, panel members must be notified in writing of their possible service on a Board or Review.  A panel member will be required to serve on a Board of Review if chosen unless (1) there is a bona fide conflict of interest between the panel member(s) and either of the parties’ grievance; (2) the panel member is ill; or (3) service on the Board of Review should be excused for good cause shown.  A panel member wishing to be excused shall inform the Chairperson in person or in writing within two working days after he or she has been notified.  The Chairperson shall then cause another panelist to be selected. 

400 Syllabus and Course Structure

400.01 Syllabus Content

Faculty members must prepare and make available a course syllabus at the beginning of the course.  A copy of the syllabus must be filed with the department each semester unless the dean of the school or college establishes another procedure. 

Whenever departments and/or courses establish standard or semi-standard syllabi, copies will be available online and faculty members are expected to abide by them.  A faculty member should consult his or her department head/associate dean about modifications of established standards in a syllabus.  Changes in course requirements or grading policy made after the first class meeting of the semester must be given to students in writing.   

The syllabus must contain all essential class policies, grading methods and a tentative timetable for covering course content.   Required components of a CSU syllabus can be found in the syllabus template in the form section below.

400.02  Course Codes 

Each course offered by CSU is issued a code that indicates the percentage of seated class time that is replaced by the use of technology. These codes are standardized and issued by the Board of Regents.  An explanation of the codes and symbols used can be found in the Form section below. 

400.03 Final Examinations

Faculty members are expected to give final examinations (or equivalent evaluation measure) and to follow the examination schedule printed in the Schedule of Classes.  In the event a student has a conflict that cannot be resolved, the student may submit a written request for a change of date of the final examination.  The student must receive approval signatures from the instructor, the appropriate department head/associate dean, and the dean of the school offering the course.  Since the final exam schedule is published well in advance, change of time or date will be approved only for serious reasons and not for mere convenience.  (In the unlikely event that a student has three finals scheduled on the same day, approval to reschedule one exam will be routinely granted.)

400.99 Forms

Syllabus Template
Course Codes 

402 Textbooks and Materials 

402.01 Procedures for Adopting Locally Developed or Campus-Authored Materials (Textbooks, Software, Etc.)

When materials developed or authored by Clayton State faculty are adopted as required purchases for our students, procedures outlined below must be followed and also documented.  Conflict of interest or the appearance thereof must be avoided.  The department head/associate dean (or dean or area coordinator, if applicable) must:

  1. Ensure that the entire faculty who teach the course are involved in the selection process.  (If the course is always, or almost always, taught by the faculty member who wrote the text, other appropriate faculty must be involved in the selection process.)
  2. Ensure that several alternative texts are considered and that the faculty involved in the selection process are aware of the cost to students of each alternative.
  3. Ensure that the selection process is documented, including the rationale for selecting the faculty written textbook. 
  4. The selection process must be repeated at least annually.
  5. Documentation must be kept on file in the office of the dean of the school or college.  

402.02 Examination/Desk Copies

Examination/desk copies of texts and other curriculum material are provided by vendors for legitimate adoption consideration.  Abuse of this marketing technique by resale of examination copies or requests beyond legitimate needs may influence vendors to restrict their services in ways that inconvenience professional colleagues.

403 Faculty Office Hours

Full- and part-time faculty members are expected to be in their offices and accessible to students and colleagues for specified periods during the week.  Each school/department shall establish office-hour guidelines appropriate to its programs.  A portion of the regular office hours may be conducted online.  Hours must be stated in the syllabus and posted on the faculty member’s office door or other convenient location and conveyed in writing to the department office.  

404 Grade Reporting

The grading system for institutions in the University System of Georgia is detailed in the Academic and Student Affairs Handbook, Section 2.5 and Board of Regents Policy 3.5.

The current Clayton State Academic Catalog contains a description of the University’s grading system.  There is no official campus-wide percentage standard because grade calculation methods vary widely among courses, programs, and faculty.  The faculty member is responsible for insuring that his or her grading method is reasonable, fair, and easily understood.  The course grading method must be clearly explained to students in the course syllabus.

404.01 Incomplete Grade (Procedure for Assigning) 

If a student’s work is satisfactory but for non-academic reasons beyond the student’s control the student is unable to complete the class or take the final examination, a faculty member may assign a grade of Incomplete (I).  Faculty who wish to assign a grade of I must submit a written Request for Incomplete Grade signed by the appropriate dean with the final hard copy of the grade roll.  The grade of I should be used only when the incomplete portion of the course can be clearly identified, and the student can be expected to make up the work within the time allotted to remove the Incomplete, as described in the catalog.  If a substantial portion of the work of the course remains to be done at the time that the extenuating circumstances arise, withdrawal is normally more appropriate than a grade of Incomplete.

404.02 Hardship Withdrawal

Students who experience an unexpected event or circumstance beyond their control that directly interferes with their ability to continue to make satisfactory progress in class(es), such as serious illnesses or unexpected major life events, may petition the Dean of their major for a hardship withdrawal.  In order to be considered for a hardship withdrawal, the student must have been passing the course at the time that the emergency or other hardship arose and notify his or her instructors or other University officials about the hardship situation as soon as possible after it arose (per University and Board of Regents policy, “passing” is defined as a grade of “D” or above).  Hardship requests that are not filed in a timely manner are subject to denial even if the student was passing and the hardship was legitimate.  Faculty will be required to attest to the passing status of all students requesting a hardship withdrawal.  The faculty and dean may request documentation of the hardship.

404.03 Reporting Grades

Faculty must follow the Registrar’s instructions for reporting grades online. It is important for grades to be submitted by the deadline established by the Registrar.  When grades are not turned in on time, the student receives a grade of NR (Not Reported), and the department head/associate dean is notified.   Not reporting grades can have serious negative consequences for students such as placing a student on probation or lost of financial aid.  

404.04 Maintaining Grade Records

Faculty must keep for a minimum of one calendar year all copies of final examinations and final grade sheets.  Students have one semester of enrollment, or one year if not enrolled, to appeal a grade.  

When a faculty member leaves Clayton State, either permanently or on a leave of absence, grade records for previous years should be left with the department head/associate dean to assist in resolving questions regarding students’ grades.  

404.05 Change of Grade

A faculty member may request a change in a student’s grade in order to correct an error in the grade assigned or to remove an Incomplete.  A faculty member must complete a Change of Grade Form, which the appropriate department head/associate dean and the dean of the school must approve.  The signed form must be sent to the Office of the Registrar. 

404.06 Release of Grades

Releasing grades to any unauthorized person is a violation of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).  Grades cannot be given out via telephone or email and should only be communicated to the individual student.

404.99 Forms

Change of Grade Form
Request for Incomplete Grade

405 Disruptive Behavior

Faculty Responsibilities

Faculty are to establish expectations for student course behavior.  Faculty should set the tone for expected course behavior at the beginning of each term. This is best achieved by directly addressing policies regarding attendance, tardiness, decorum, student misconduct, withdrawal policies, and by referring the student to the CSU Student Handbook Code of Conduct. Faculty should remind students that any disruption of a positive learning environment in the classroom or actions which impede the ability of other students to learn or the ability of the professor to teach is a violation of the student conduct code.

Faculty should state in writing CSU’s Disruptive Student Policy and any other course policies in their syllabi.  Faculty should clarify the definition of student misconduct, citing specific examples of misconduct that would result in disciplinary action.  Disruptive behavior includes but is not limited to intoxication, belligerent, abusive (physically or verbally), profane, distracting, and/or threatening behavior.  More subtle forms of behavior may also negatively impact the teaching-learning process.  Some examples include: inappropriate attire, eating during class time, and unwillingness to participate in educational activities, in some cases, may significantly impact the instructor’s ability to conduct the class.  A more comprehensive list of specific suggested example behaviors can be found in the Student Code of Conduct. Any statement beyond the above regarding disruptive behavior should be clarified in course documents including the syllabus.

Faculty should also provide students with an opportunity to clarify course policies and issues. 

Faculty have the authority and responsibility to maintain a positive learning environment in the classroom. Faculty should remember that discussion and expression of all views relevant to the subject matter are permitted in the classroom, subject only to the responsibility of the instructor to maintain order. However, student behavior that disrupts the ability of other students to learn or impedes the ability of the professor to teach is a violation of the student code conduct and should be addressed.  To maintain classroom order, the faculty member has the right and responsibility to take the steps he or she deems necessary and reasonable, including private or public requests that the student(s) refrain from disruptive behavior.

Faculty members also have the responsibility to respond to students in a calm and objective manner. Even in the face of inappropriate behavior, it is imperative for faculty to maintain a professional and controlled demeanor with students in order to facilitate constructive interactions. 

A student who fails to respond to reasonable faculty direction regarding classroom behavior and/or behavior while participating in classroom activities may be dismissed from class, and in some circumstances may be dismissed from a course for the remainder of the semester. A student is entitled to due process (see “Disciplinary Procedures” in the “Student Handbook”) and will be afforded such rights as soon as possible by the processes described below. If found in violation of the Student Code of Conduct, a student may, in addition to other outcomes, be administratively withdrawn from the course and may receive a grade of WF. 

406 Release of Student Information

Students have the right to assurance that their educational records as defined by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974 will be recorded accurately and retained in confidence.  Students have the right to review the contents of their educational records.  The type of information maintained by the University is divided into two groups: directory information and personally identifiable information.

Clayton State has identified the following as directory information that the University may release without written consent of the student: name; address; telephone number; dates of attendance; previous institutions attended; major; awards and/or honors; degree conferred; participation in clubs, organizations, and sports; date and place of birth.

All other information is considered personal and cannot be released without the student’s written consent.  Grades matched with a Social Security number are considered personally identifiable and, therefore, must not be posted for public view.  (See Section 404.05.)

Student record information accessible via computer is subject to all of the rules and regulations of confidentiality under FERPA.  Faculty should take care to make sure that computer-accessible confidential information is handled with due professional care.

501 Duplicating and Printing (Print, Computer, Audio, Visual)

501.01 Duplicating Services

Duplicating facilities are available for faculty in various departmental offices and in the Library. Faculty members must use a LakerCard to access most copiers on campus. 

High volume or specialized duplication and printing services are centralized under Media and Printing Services.

Faculty members should be aware that their departments must pay duplication and printing costs out of their budgets.  Therefore, department heads/associate deans or other supervisors may establish guidelines for reasonable use of these services. 

501.02 Copyright

The Board of Regents has detailed its policies, procedures, and guidelines for copyright and fair use in Policy 6.3 (For information on faculty creation of copyrightable material, see Section 602.)

501.02.1 Fair Use

Each faculty member is responsible for maintaining familiarity with the Fair Use doctrine of the copyright law (17 U.S. Code), and to follow it carefully.  A copy of Section 107 of 17 U.S. Code (Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair Use) is in each department and in the Library and is also available at this website.  All duplicating, copying, or reproduction of material must be in compliance with the copyright law.  A “Fair Use Checklist” is available from the USG at this website. 

For more information, faculty may also refer to “Reproduction of Copyrighted Works by Educators and Librarians (Circular 21), United States Copyright Office”.

Any faculty member who is uncertain about the proper interpretation of the Fair Use doctrine should discuss the matter with the department head/associate dean or with the Dean of Library Services.

501.02.2 Software Policy: Copying and Using

Clayton State supports the work of EDUCOM, a non-profit consortium of over 450 colleges and universities committed to the use and management of information technology in higher education, and ADAPSO, the computer software and services industry association.  This work is outlined in the brochure “Using Software: A Guide to the Ethical and Legal Use of Software for Members of the Academic Community”:

“Software enables us to accomplish many different tasks with computers.  Unfortunately, in order to get their work done quickly and conveniently, some people justify making and using unauthorized copies of software.  They may not understand the implications of their actions or the restrictions of the U.S. copyright law.  Here are some relevant facts:

  1. Unauthorized copying of software is illegal.  Copyright law protects software authors and publishers, just as patent law protects inventors.
  2. Unauthorized copying of software by individuals can harm the entire academic community.  If unauthorized copying proliferates on a campus, the institution may incur a legal liability.  Also, the institution may find it more difficult to negotiate agreements that would make software more widely and less expensively available to members of the academic community.
  3. Unauthorized copying of software can deprive developers of a fair return for their work, increase prices, reduce the level of future support and enhancement, and inhibit the development of new software products.

Respect for the intellectual work and property of others has traditionally been essential to the mission of colleges and universities.  As members of the academic community, we value the free exchange of ideas.  Just as we do not tolerate plagiarism, we do not condone the unauthorized copying of software, including programs, applications, data bases and code.

Therefore, we offer the following statement of principle about intellectual property and the legal and ethical use of software. This ‘code’—intended for adoption and use by individual colleges and universities—was developed by the EDUCOM Software Initiative.

Respect for intellectual labor and creativity is vital to academic discourse and enterprise.  This principle applies to all works of all authors and publishers in all media.  It encompasses respect for the right to acknowledgement, right to privacy, and right to determine the form, manner, and terms of publication and distribution.

Because electronic information is volatile and easily reproduced, respect for the work and personal expression of others is especially critical in computer environments.  Violations of authorial integrity, including plagiarism, invasion of privacy, unauthorized access, and trade secret and copyright violations, may be grounds for sanctions against members of the academic community.

It is expected that each employee of Clayton State will follow and support the above principle.

502 Use of Campus Facilities and Other State Property

Use of campus facilities and state property at Clayton State follows the policies, procedures, and guidelines specified in Section 9.0 of the Board of Regents Policy Manual.

502.01 Classroom Assignment

Classrooms for regularly scheduled credit classes are assigned by the department heads/associate deans in consultation with the Registrar and the Office of the Provost.  Changes of rooms must be cleared by the Office of the Provost with consultation with the departments. 

Classrooms for other academic use (in all buildings except Continuing Education and Spivey Hall) are centrally scheduled (by the Office of the Provost).

Rooms in the Continuing Education (CE) building for any use are scheduled through the Office of Continuing Education. Use of classrooms for Continuing Education or Community Services in buildings other than CE (including the Student Center Building and the Athletics & Fitness Center) shall be coordinated between the Office of Continuing Education and the Office of the Provost.

Use of classrooms by student groups or for other Student Affairs purposes shall be coordinated between the Office of Student Affairs and the Office of the Provost.

Use of Spivey Hall is scheduled by the director of this facility.  (See Section 502.03.2.)

Use of conference rooms not in the BANNER system shall be scheduled by the department or office having principal responsibility for the room, but conference rooms are open to use by any campus group as available.

502.02 Equipment and Climate Control

Faculty should not move or transfer Clayton State equipment or property from rooms and buildings. Requests for removal or transfer of media equipment should go through Media and Printing Services. Problems with other equipment should be referred to Plant Operations.

If climate control equipment in classrooms or buildings is not working properly, faculty should contact Plant Operations. Faculty should not tamper with climate control equipment. (Plant Operations may be reached through Public Safety when offices are closed.)

502.03 Use of Campus Buildings

502.03.1 Use of the Student Activities Center

Information about the hours for the Student Activities Center is available at this website.

Information about the Student Activities Center weight room,  gymnasium, locker rooms, and other facilities is available through the Athletics Staff office.   

Information about classroom use in the Athletics & Fitness Center is available through the Office of the Provost. 

502.03.2 Use and Operation of Spivey Hall

Information about Spivey Hall is available at http://www.spiveyhall.org/. Spivey Hall is a highly specialized, special-purpose facility of superior quality with valuable contents and operating elements that require skill, knowledge and special training for proper use. Consequently, it is not an open campus facility. Except for approved activities that have been properly scheduled, all areas of Spivey Hall, except the second floor foyer and administrative offices, are closed and accessible only by prior arrangement with the Executive Director.

Requests for the use of Spivey Hall by University faculty must be made through the appropriate Department Head and the Provost.  The Provost will forward authorized requests to the Executive Director of Spivey Hall with a copy to the Office of the President.  Requests by authorized student groups must be made through the Office of Student Affairs, which will forward authorized requests to the Director of Spivey Hall with a copy to the Office of the President.  Other University personnel will make requests through their supervisor to the Executive Director of Spivey Hall with a copy to the Office of the President.  All requests must be made on forms available from the Office of the Director of Spivey Hall.

Requests for the use of Spivey Hall during an academic year will be reviewed and decided upon by the Executive Director beginning in August. Requests for the use of the hall during the Summer Semester will be considered during May and June.  Exceptions to these time frames can be made for special events that require advanced reservations.  Request for the use of Spivey Hall by non-University personnel can be made at any time, but will not normally be considered until after requests by University personnel have been scheduled.

502.04 Use of Campus Outdoor Facilities

Official policies are posted at appropriate sites (e.g., tennis courts, amphitheater). Policy is established by the Vice President of Business Operations in consultation with other appropriate administrative officers.

502.05 Campus and Building Security

Campus and building security is the responsibility of the Department of Public Safety under the supervision of the Vice President of Business Operations.  For more information on Public Safety, go to https://www.clayton.edu/public-safety/

502.05.1 After Hours Identification and Procedure

In order to enhance campus safety and security, the Department of Public Safety may check identification of persons in buildings, especially after normal operating hours.  It is important to understand that this procedure is for the protection of personnel and property and not a type of harassment.  If a person does not have proper identification, he or she will be asked to leave the building until regular operating hours.

If students are authorized to be in a building after normal operating hours, the appropriate administrator must notify the Department of Public Safety in advance.

It is important that all desks, file cabinets, and other equipment be locked when an employee leaves an office or work area.  When leaving a building after normal operating hours, it is especially important to check to make sure that the outer door is locked. 

502.06 Traffic and Parking

Faculty and staff are expected to abide by all traffic and parking regulations issued by the Department of Public Safety. Faculty and staff who violate parking regulations will receive tickets.  Information on traffic and parking regulations is available at https://www.clayton.edu/public-safety/parking-services/rules-and-regulations 

502.07 Use of University Vehicles

University vehicles may be used for approved official travel when available. (It is usually less expensive to use a University vehicle than a privately owned vehicle, especially when several faculty members are traveling together and can use the van.)

Faculty members wanting to use a University vehicle should reserve one online at https://www.clayton.edu/facilities/services/vehicle-request. Campus Vehicle Use Policy and Driver Safety Tips are available for reference at the same location. 

502.08 Personal Use

Clayton State University follows Board of Regents Policy 9.10.6.4

502.09 Political Campaigns

Clayton State University follows Board of Regents Policy 9.10.6.1

602 Production of Copyrightable Materials

The Board of Regents has detailed its policies, procedures, and guidelines for copyright and fair use at http://www.usg.edu/copyright/.  (For information on faculty responsibilities in regard to copyright and fair use of educational materials, see Section 501.)

602.01 Definition of Copyrightable Materials

The term “copyrightable materials” refers to those materials that qualify for protection under United States or international copyright (or other protective statutes, whether or not copyrightable there under).  Examples of copyrightable materials include the following but are not limited to:

  1. books, journal articles, texts, glossaries, bibliographies, study guides, manuals, syllabi, tests, and proposals; 
  2. lectures, musical or dramatic compositions, unpublished scripts; 
  3. films, filmstrips, charts, transparencies, and other visual aids; 
  4. video and audio tapes, cassettes; 
  5. live video and audio broadcasts; 
  6. programmed instructional materials; 
  7. computer program documentation; and 
  8. online course materials and computer-related instructional resources (including software, CDs, digital images/video/audio). 

602.02 Determination of Rights and Equities in Copyrightable Materials

Copyright considerations are classified according to the following four categories of development:  (1.) individual effort, (2.) University-assisted individual effort, (3.) University-assigned effort, and (4.) sponsor-supported effort.  

602.02.1 Individual Effort

Copyright in materials produced by a faculty member of Clayton State vests exclusively in the faculty member under these conditions:

  1. If there is no significant use of University personnel or facilities (library collections excluded) and 
  2. If the materials are not prepared in accordance with the terms of a contract or grant as a specific assignment.  

The production of scholarly and creative works stemming from a faculty member’s general obligation to develop professionally does not constitute a specific assignment.  

Examples of copyrightable materials in this category include:

  • Materials developed by faculty without involvement by the Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching or the Office of Information Technology & Services personnel, facilities, and/or equipment, and without course released time or special funding by the University or other agency.  
  • Use of the faculty member’s office space, notebook computer, campus-wide licensed software, and workshops provided by the Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching are acceptable for this category (i.e. use of these items is not considered to constitute “significant use” of University facilities.).  

602.02.2 University-Assisted Individual Effort

Copyright in materials produced by a Clayton State faculty member vests jointly in the University and the faculty member under these conditions:

  1. If there is significant support of an individual’s effort by use of University personnel or facilities (library collections excluded) and 
  2. If the materials are not prepared in accordance with the terms of contract or grant or as a specific assignment.  

Division of income from royalties and other use should be agreed upon in writing by the Clayton State faculty member and appropriate administrative personnel in advance of the use of University personnel or facilities.

An example of copyrightable material in this category is:

  • The development of materials initiated by faculty with or without special funding, released time, project teams, or Summer Institute, but frequently requiring personalized, repeated use of the Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching and/or the Office of Information Technology and Services personnel or resources.

602.02.3 University-Assigned Effort

Copyright in materials produced by a Clayton State faculty member vests in the University if the institution has assigned the employees the writing or production of the materials.  The originator retains revision and editing privileges.  Sharing of royalty income with the faculty member is authorized as an incentive to encourage further development of copyrightable materials.

An example of copyrightable material in this category is:

  • Materials developed in response to administrative requests with the aid of course released time, internal grants, project teams, or other structured and systematic forms of University assistance.

602.02.4 Sponsor-Supported Effort

Rights to copyrightable materials developed as a result of work supported partially or fully by an outside agency through a contract or grant are disposed of in accordance with the terms of the contract or grant or, in the absence of such terms, in accordance with the policy governing University-assisted or University-assigned efforts.  If all rights are vested in the University or if royalty income is shared between the sponsor and the University, the faculty member may appropriately share in the income.  The nature and extent of the faculty member’s participation in royalty income, however, are subject to sponsor and University regulations.

An example of a Sponsor-Supported Effort is:

  • Materials and/or software developed as a result of special funding from a forprofit or non-profit corporate or governmental agency.  

602.03 Institutional Procedures

602.03.1 Procedures to Determine Rights and Equities

  1. A faculty member who desires to produce potentially copyrightable material should notify his or her department head or supervisor and explain the nature of the project.  The department head or supervisor recommends in writing to the Provost how the project should be classified according to Section 602.02 above.  Any substantial change in the nature of the project shall be reported to the department head or supervisor, who in turn notifies the Provost of the change. 
  2. If the faculty member and the Provost agree to the project’s classification and royalty division (if any), then the agreement will be written (subject to the approval of the Vice President for Operations, Planning, and Budget) and signed by both parties, and no further administrative action will be required.  When substantial changes in the nature of a project are made, a revised agreement will be written and signed.  Copies of each agreement shall be filed with the Vice President for Operations, Planning, and Budget and with the President.
  3. If the faculty member disagrees with the Provost, the Copyright Committee will hear such testimony as it deems appropriate and recommend a classification and royalty agreement to the Provost.  The recommendations of the Committee shall be advisory and not binding.  The Provost will then offer the faculty member a final agreement. 
  4. The faculty member may appeal the final decision of the Provost to the President and Board of Regents in accordance with the established University and Board of Regents’ policy.

602.04 Guidelines for Determining Rights and Equities

1. An award of royalty to a faculty member is based on the principle that such payments are an appropriate reward for and encouragement of research, writing, and production (i.e. scholarship).  The division of royalties should generally reflect the relative contributions of the faculty member, the University, and the sponsor, if any. 

The standard allocation of royalty revenue table, indicates the standard allocation of royalty revenues, given the different conditions of development outlined in Section 602.02 above.

2. Special royalty conditions may be authorized in certain circumstances.  For example, in lieu of continuing payments, a flat single payment by either party, discharging all responsibility for further income from use of a particular piece of work, may be authorized.  Also, royalties totaling less than $1,000 may be allocated 100% to the originator, regardless of development category.

3. The University’s share of royalty funds are held in a special account by Clayton State for support of research and other uses as recommended by the Faculty Council and approved by the President.  The costs incurred in obtaining copyrights may be paid from this fund.

603 Patent Policy

Clayton State encourages the development and marketing of patentable inventions and materials by faculty and staff.  When the development of these patentable inventions and materials is aided wholly or in part through the use of University facilities, the following procedure will be followed:

  1. The faculty or staff member (or his or her immediate supervisor) should notify the Provost about the patentable invention or material. 
  2. The Provost will convene a committee that conforms to the guidelines established in Section 6.3 of the Board of Regents Policy Manual.  This committee will be activated to consider the determination of rights and equities in patentable materials on an individual basis. 

In general, the rights to patentable materials will follow the general principles for copyright policy (see Section 501) and will be adjusted as the committee recommends and in accordance with Board of Regents policy.

604 Research Involving Human Subjects

604.01 General Policy

Clayton State abides by appropriate federal and state laws and regulations concerning research involving human subjects.  In addition, faculty and staff members engaging in such research are expected to abide by the appropriate ethics statements and research guidelines established by the professional associations in the discipline of the research.  The Institutional Review Board (see Section 604.02) shall consider such laws, regulations, statements, and guidelines in its review of specific proposals.

604.02 Procedures and Committee

The Institutional Review Board shall serve as the screening, reviewing, and recommending body for all research body for all research proposals and projects which involve human subjects. 

The Human Subjects Committee Review Committee shall be appointed by the Provost. It shall include representatives from each school or college, and at least one member of the Institutional Review Board shall be a department head, associate dean, or dean. The Provost will designate the chair of the committee. If any member of the committee has a potential conflict of interest on any case, he or she shall be disqualified and the Provost will appoint a substitute member from that school for that case. The Director of Institutional Research shall be an ex officio, non-voting member of the Human Subjects Review Committee.

Safeguarding the personal integrity, rights, and welfare of all human subjects involved in research undertakings at Clayton State shall be of primary importance. In order to provide for this responsibility, it shall be the policy of Clayton State that all research endeavors involving human subjects shall be described in writing to the Institutional Review Board in advance of beginning such research.  The description shall include explanation of how the research conforms to the standards mentioned in Section 604.01 above.

The Human Subject Review Committee shall review the proposal and shall recommend approval, modification, or rejection of the project to the Provost. The Institutional Review Board may impose the requirement of the subject’s informed consent or other modifications before recommending approval of the project.

604.03 Applicability

The policy applies to any and all research endeavors that may place the human subject at  risk. This policy applies (but is not limited) to those experiments known as “double blind,” and to those endeavors using experimental stimuli such as electrical stimulus, sensory deprivation, and hypnosis, when such conditions are deliberately generated and deliberately applied for experimental purposes. Moreover, data obtained from such experimentation shall not be divulged or otherwise made visible unless proper informed consent has been obtained.

604.04 Subject

The term describes any student, faculty, staff, employee, or volunteer who is used in any research of a psychological, biological, sociological, medical, or educational nature.  This term applies equally to persons who have either unrestricted civil freedom or restricted civil freedom (prisoners, patients, etc).

604.05 “At Risk”

An individual is considered to be “at risk” if he or she may be exposed to the possibility of harm --physical, psychological, sociological, or other--as a consequence of any activity which a reasonable person would judge as going beyond the application of those established and accepted methods necessary to meet the reasonable needs of the research project. The determination of when an individual is at risk is a matter of the application of common sense and sound professional judgment to the circumstances of the activity in question.

604.06 “Informed Consent”

Informed consent assumes that the subject individual has been fully informed and indicates understanding of the nature of experimental techniques to be applied, studied, or manipulated.  It additionally assumes that the subject is capable of understanding any normally expected risks and hazards (short-term or long-term) and gives consent freely, especially where Clayton State students are involved, without pressure of threat to academic grades.

604.07 Stored and Retrieved Data

This policy requires that data and information about individuals obtained during scientific and scholarly research and experimentation will be protected against compromise and or unauthorized visibility and that such data will be removed to the “objective” category at the earliest possible time -- that is, the names and other identities of human subjects will be removed from the data and destroyed and all “keys” for such re-identification will be likewise rendered useless.

604.08 Publication of Research Findings

All authors and researchers will be obliged to adhere to the rules as outlined in this document of confidentiality, ethics, and consideration of the individual’s personal welfare in any subsequent publication of research findings.

604.09 Interpretation

Questions and disputes arising from the implementation of this policy that the Institutional Review Board cannot resolve shall be settled by the Provost or such other authority as the President of Clayton State may designate.

All human-subject based research applications must be reviewed by the college representative prior to submission to the IRB committee.  All applications, forms and background information are posted at the IRB Committee's website. 

605 Research Involving Animals

605.01 General Policy

Clayton State abides by appropriate federal and state laws and regulations concerning research involving animals.  In addition, faculty and staff members engaging in such research are expected to abide by the appropriate ethics statements and research guidelines established by the professional associations in the discipline of the research.  The Institutional Review Board acting as the Animal Care and Use Committee, shall consider such laws, regulations, statements, and guidelines in its review of specific proposals.

In accordance with guidelines set forth by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Research Council (NRC), animals that come under the jurisdiction of this section are living, vertebrate animals that are used for teaching or research. Studies/experiments/demonstrations using preserved (i.e., dead when received) vertebrates or invertebrates (animals without a backbone) are considered exempt from these guidelines.

605.02 Procedures and Committee

The Institutional Review Board will also serve as the Animal Care and Use Review Committee.  It is required to screen, review, and recommend to the Provost the approval, approval with modification, or rejection of all research proposals and projects dealing with animals, as defined above. This includes the use of animals for teaching, laboratory studies, and field studies. 

The University policy regarding animal care and use is intended to ensure the humane treatment of all animals utilized in research, teaching, and testing in order to comply with applicable federal laws, as well as the policies of granting agencies and accrediting bodies. In addition, the use of vertebrate animals at Clayton College and State University must not result in warranted complaints from the public sector or place the University in jeopardy of litigation from specific public groups. Violations of federal standards could result in the suspension of federal funding.

Any individual who has the principal responsibility for the use of the animal in a research, teaching, or testing application must complete the appropriate forms available from the Office of the Vice President of Academic Affairs.  Once approved, any significant changes in the testing protocols or procedures (including, but not limited to, a change in species, anesthetic, surgical procedure, location in housing, etc.) will require the submission of a revised form.

Useful Forms and Information

Annual Evaluation/Promotion and Tenure Portfolio Guidelines

The Summary of Professional Activity Form

Annual Faculty Evaluation Summary Form

Form for Promotion and/or Tenure and Pre/Post-Tenure Review

Calendar for Promotion and Tenure

Calendar for Pre-Tenure Review

Calendar for Post-Tenure Review

Standards for Online Courses

These online course standards are designed to help ensure a high-quality digital learning experience for any online, blended, and hybrid class taught at Clayton State.  Not only will they provide students with a similar learning experience across their courses, but they will also help to ensure the University’s compliance with the Regular and Substantive Interaction Rule released by the Department of Education.  This rule provides further clarity to separate online, or distance education, from correspondence education.  A summary of what constitutes effective distance education is included below: 

  • The institution’s online instruction is delivered through an appropriate form of media;  o The instructors with whom students regularly and substantively interact meet the requirements of the institution’s accrediting agency for instruction in the subject matter; 
  • Instructors engage in at least two forms of substantive interaction, meeting the regulatory requirements for the course or competency;  o providing direct instruction;
  • assessing or providing feedback on a student’s course work;
  • providing information or responding to questions about the content of a course or competency;
  • facilitating a group discussion regarding the content of a course or competency; or other instructional activities approved by the institution’s or program’s accrediting agency.
  • The institution has established scheduled and predictable opportunities for substantive interaction between students and instructors and create expectations for instructors to monitor each student’s engagement and substantively engage with students on the basis of that monitoring; 
  • and instructors are responsive to students’ requests for instructional support.

In sum, online, blended, and hybrid courses must meet the criteria outlined above and include regular and substantive interaction; when they do not, they may be regarded as correspondence courses.  If a class is considered a correspondence course, then it is not eligible for financial aid. Therefore, an institution could be made to pay back funds received from federal financial aid programs for all students that enrolled in that particular course.  Hence, many institutions have adopted online course policies and procedures which allow them to refute any issues that may come up in the future if the Department of Education or SACSCOC delves into their online course offerings.  This document is an attempt to set forth minimum standards for classes offered online, in whole or in part, at Clayton State.  In addition to these standards, departments and colleges within the University may adopt more specific guidelines that are tailored to address the unique needs of their distance education students.

Online Course Design and Setup

1. Accessibility

A. Lecture materials, instructional resources, and multimedia, if provided in the course, must be available in multiple formats.  For example,

  • recorded lecture videos and the associated PowerPoint files used as part of those lectures should both be posted and available to students
  • videos should include captions or transcripts*
  • audio recordings should include transcripts*

B. Text, images, and tables provided in the course should be accessible. For example,

  • Text should be formatted using styles
  • Documents should be text-based and searchable (i.e., not scanned as images of text)
  • Images and tables should be described with alt-text tags*

*CELT WILL GUIDE FACULTY THROUGH THE PROCESS, IF NECESSARY, AND MINIMIZE THE SETUP TIME

2. Start Here Module 

Use a “Start Here” (or similarly named) content module which contains information with which students need be familiar as the course begins. The following items should be included, at a minimum, in that module:

  • Video or Audio Recorded Introduction posted at least one (1) day prior to the start of class along with a welcome announcement
    • Studies show that a brief welcome video or audio message for students creates an atmosphere of interaction in the online classroom.  You can use Kaltura or similar software for such purposes.
  • Course Schedule
    • At a minimum, the course schedule should list the graded assignments, activities, and assessments the students have to complete throughout the term and their respective due dates. 
    • This could be complemented by listing aligning reading materials, and other activities to form a more holistic “course map”. 
  • Syllabus (including correct dates and posted at least one (1) day prior to the start of class) should include at least the following:
    • Faculty information: email, phone number, preferred method of contact
    • Office hour information: virtual, if online and virtual and/or in-person if hybrid 
    • Attendance/participation policy
    • Attendance verification/no-show deadline information: clearly indicate the assignment to be completed and due date in Start Here folder
    • Course description
    • Course materials information: textbook, external systems access (e.g., third-party publisher systems) 
    • Grading standards: note the anticipated turnaround time on assignments and assessments, grading scale, late policy 
    • Course netiquette policy 
    • Academic Honesty Statement
    • Disability Statement (DRC)
    • “Individuals with disabilities who need to request accommodations should contact the Disability Resource Center, Edgewater Hall, Suite 255; 678-466-5445; DisabilityResourceCenter@clayton.edu”
    • Library Syllabus Statement
    • Accessibility Statements for External Vendors (consult CELT)
    • Student support services
    • FERPA/TurnItIn Statement, if software is used in the course:
    • “Students agree that by taking this course all required papers may be subject to submission for textual similarity review by TurnItIn for the detection of plagiarism. All submitted papers will be included as course documents in the TurnItIn reference database solely for the purpose of detecting plagiarism of such papers. You should submit your papers in such a way that no identifying information about you is included.” 

3. D2L Gradebook 

a) The D2L gradebook should be the “source of truth” for all graded activities and assessments within a course.

  • All assignments used to assess students' performance must have a corresponding gradebook item.  The distribution of gradebook percentages or points should match exactly with those outlined in the syllabus.
  • Grades for all graded work and assessments should be posted, imported, or synced in the D2L gradebook as soon as possible, even if they occur within a third-party platform (e.g., MyMathLab, Mindtap, or Achieve).

b) Up-to-Date Overall Grade Students should have some indication of where they stand overall throughout the course as assignments are graded on a timely basis.

  • One method of doing so, even though not accurate until the end of the term, is to open final grades to students at the start of the term; D2L will then keep the overall grade updated as grades are posted throughout the term. Alternatively, instructors should consider opening overall grades at specific intervals such as monthly or quarterly.  

4. Professional Development/Course Review/Course Certification Requirements

  • For instructors who are teaching a distance education course for the first time at Clayton State, training will be necessary.  It does not need to be completed before teaching the class; however, it should be completed within a year of first doing so.  Those instructors should either take CELT’s Academy for Online Course Development or Quality Matters’ Improving Your Online Course (IYOC) workshop. 
  • For instructors who are experienced in teaching online classes at Clayton State, one of the following indicia of professional development related to online teaching is required at least once every five years:

a) Significant Professional Development re: online teaching, including any of the following:

(i) CELT

(i.a) Academy for Online Course Development

(i.b) Short-Course Offerings: Backward Design, others currently in development

(ii) Quality Matters (QM) Workshop(s)

(iii) Professional development completed at previous institution(s) 

b) Course Review

(iv) Internal/Informal/Peer Course Review, using any of the following:

(iv.a) QM Rubric

(iv.b) Department/College specific standards • Other online course evaluation instruments

c) Course Certification

(v) Official QM Course Review: Valid for a period of 5 years

In addition, at the discretion of his or her chair, an instructor may have a course reviewed by CELT or the department or college online course review committee if

  1. that course has a failure (D or F) rate that is significantly higher than the face-to-face offering of the same class;
  2. that course has a failure rate of 33.3% or more; or
  3. if the chair has received multiple student complaints regarding the quality of the instructor’s online teaching.

Based on that review, corrective action must be taken before the instructor can teach the course again in an online format.

Course Delivery/Student Engagement

Engagement is vital to success in distance education classes.  Instructor-student, student-student, and student-content engagement can be promoted significantly by implementing a majority or all of the following practices.

  • Respond to e-mails from students within 24-48 hours of receipt on weekdays and 72 hours of receipt on weekends (including Friday).
  • Regularly access the course to check for student e-mails and to confirm that there are no issues with course content.
  • Use apps and other technology to readily communicate with students (e.g., Sideline offers students “text-in” office hours whereby instructors can be reached instantaneously via text).
  • Make sure that all hyperlinks in lessons are working.  
  • Record lectures instead of just posting PowerPoints or assigning reading.
  • Make every effort to relate course content to the real-life experience of our students to make it more relevant.
  • Post weekly announcements including vital information such as to-do lists, upcoming deadlines, and study tips.
  • For synchronous classes, encourage students to turn on their cameras.  If they are required to do so, then provide information at the start of the semester about how to blur backgrounds or use virtual backgrounds, if necessary.
  • Contribute to discussion board postings and look for other opportunities to engage with students in real-time interactions throughout the semester, such as scheduling online office hours or study and review sessions.
  • Use high engagement practices such as service learning, interactive/video quizzes, projects, blogs, wikis, and group assignments in addition to or in lieu of traditional assessments.
  • Provide grading rubrics to students.
  • Grade student work within one week of the due date.
  • Provide timely feedback on all graded assignments; try audio or video feedback for more engagement.
  • Monitor student progress and submit alerts or reach out to at-risk students.

Student Preparedness

Students registering for distance education classes must be adequately prepared for and fully informed of what it takes to succeed in those classes.  To this end, prior to course registration, each new or transferring student must complete a one-time survey to confirm their readiness for online, blended, and hybrid classes.  Upon completion of the survey, students will receive links to articles with tips for how to succeed in online classes and to trainings administered by CELT which are designed specifically for Clayton State students.