Policies of Academic Freedom and Tenure

The University of North Carolina Wilmington

Approved by the Board of Governors of The University of North Carolina - May 14, 1976, effective June 11, 1976; revisions approved July 20, 1979, effective July 20, 1979; revisions approved May 10, 1982, effective July 1, 1982; revisions approved November 11, 1994, effective December 9, 1995; revisions approved January 2001, effective July 1, 2001; revisions approved August 2007, effective August 2007; revisions approved October 2009.

This document sets forth the official policy of The University of North Carolina Wilmington regarding academic freedom, rights, and responsibilities, promotion, and tenure of its faculty. Fundamental in this policy are the concepts of academic freedom, rights, and responsibilities as stated in Chapter VI of the Code of The University of North Carolina. Equally fundamental is an explicit policy of promotion and tenure.

1. Freedom and responsibility in the university community
2. Academic freedom and responsibility of faculty
3. Academic tenure
4. Policies on appointment, promotion, and tenure
5. Mediation of faculty grievances
6. Non-reappointment hearings procedure
7. Faculty committee to hear grievances
8. Policies regarding cessation of university employment
9. Termination of faculty employment
10. Retirement
11. Policy on leave
12. Implementation

Section VI. non-reappointment Hearings Procedure

1. Permissible and impermissible grounds for non-reappointment
2. Conference with dean
3. Conference with the Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs
4. Request for review by Hearing Committee; scope of review
5. Conduct of hearing
6. Preservance of Evidence
7. Hearing procedure
8. Procedure after hearing
9. Appeal Rights

1. Permissible and Impermissible Grounds for Non-reappointment
        The decision whether to reappoint a tenure track faculty member when a probationary term appointment^[4] expires may be based on any factor considered relevant to the total institutional interests, but it must consider the faculty member's demonstrated professional competence, potential for future contributions, and the institution's needs and resources. These considerations may form, in whole or in part, the basis of the ultimate decision, except that a decision not to reappoint may not be based upon (1) the faculty member's exercise of rights guaranteed by either the First Amendment to the United States Constitution or Article I of the North Carolina Constitution; (2) discrimination based upon the faculty member's race, color, sex, religion, creed, national origin, age, disability, veteran status or sexual orientation; or (3) personal malice (meaning dislike, animosity, ill-will, or hatred based on personal characteristics, traits, or circumstances of an individual; or (4) material procedural irregularities.
      
2. Conference with Dean
        Within five days after receiving a written notice of non-reappointment, a faculty member may in writing request a private conference with the appropriate dean to discuss the reasons for non-reappointment.^[5] The faculty member's request shall be granted and the conference held forthwith, within five days after receipt of the request if possible.^[6]
         Within five days after the conference, the dean shall give the faculty member a simple, unelaborated, written statement of whether the original decision remains in effect.
      
3. Conference with the Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs
        Within five days after receiving notice that the original decision remains in effect, the faculty member may in writing request a conference with the Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. This request shall be granted and the conference held forthwith, within five days after receipt of the request if possible.
         Within ten days after the conference, the Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs shall send a written evaluation of the matter to the faculty member and to the appropriate dean. The evaluation may be in the form of an unelaborated concurrence with the decision; an expression of disagreement with the decision, with or without supporting reasons; or a recommendation for reconsidering the decision, with or without suggestions for specific procedures in doing so. Whatever form the evaluation may take, it is merely recommendatory and not binding upon the dean or final as to the faculty member.
         Within five days after receiving an evaluation that disagrees with the decision or recommends its reconsideration, the dean shall give the faculty member and his/her immediate supervisor a response in writing.
       
4. Request for Review by Hearing Committee; Scope of Review
        Within fourteen calendar days after the faculty member receives notice of an unfavorable action resulting from the conference with the Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, he/she may request that the Faculty Hearings Panel review the decision^[7]. This review is limited solely to determining whether the decision not to reappoint was based upon any of the grounds stated to be impermissible in Section VI.A.
         The request for review shall be written and addressed to the chairperson of the Hearings Panel. It shall specify the grounds upon which the faculty member contends that the decision was impermissibly based, with a short, plain statement of facts that the faculty member believes supports the contention.
         Such a request constitutes on a faculty member's part: (1) a representation that he/she can prove the contention, and (2) an agreement that the institution may offer in rebuttal of the contention any relevant data within its possession.
         The Hearings Committee (selected from the Hearings Panel) shall consider the request and grant a hearing if it determines that (a) the request contains a contention that the decision was impermissibly based under this section, and (b) the facts suggested, if established, will support the contention. A denial of the request finally confirms the decision. If the request is granted, a hearing shall be held within ten days after the request is received; the faculty member shall be given at least five days' notice of the hearing.
       
5. Conduct of Hearing
        The hearing shall be conducted informally and in private with only the members of the Hearings Committee, the faculty member, the appropriate dean, and such witnesses as may be called in attendance, except that the faculty member and the dean may each be accompanied by a person of his/her choice, but is not allowed to participate actively in the hearing. If a faculty member brings an attorney as an observer, the dean may be provided an attorney from or designated by the university's office of general counsel. A quorum for the hearing is a simple majority of the total committee membership. Committee members who hold an appointment in the faculty member's department or school, who will testify as witnesses, or who have any other conflict of interest are disqualified from participating in the hearing. The hearing shall be transcribed or recorded. If the faculty member requests it, a transcript of the proceedings shall be provided to the faculty member. The committee may consider only such evidence as is presented at the hearing and need consider only the evidence offered that it considers fair and reliable. All witnesses may be questioned by the committee members, the faculty member, the dean. Except as herein provided, the conduct of the hearing is under the committee chairperson's control.
       
6. Preservation of Evidence
   The role of the committee is to create a clear, permanent record of the evidence presented at the hearing. The Committee must preserve all testimony and evidence received at the hearing in a form that will allow later review by the parties to the hearing, the Chancellor and the Board of Governor.
   
   
7. Hearing Procedure
        The hearing shall begin with the faculty member's presentation of contentions, which shall be limited to those grounds specified in the request for a hearing and supported by such proof as he/she desires to offer. When the faculty member has concluded this presentation, the Hearings Committee shall recess to consider whether he/she has established a prima facie case. If it determines that the contention has not been so established, it shall notify the parties to the hearing of its conclusion and thereupon terminate the proceedings. Such termination confirms the decision not to reappoint. If it determines that rebuttal or explanation is desirable, it shall so notify the parties and the hearing shall proceed. The dean may then present in rebuttal of the faculty member's contentions, or in general support of the decision not to renew, such testimonial or documentary proofs as he/she desires to offer, including his/her own testimony.
         At the end of this presentation, the Hearings Committee shall consider the matter in executive session and make findings of fact. The burden shall be upon the aggrieved faculty member to satisfy the committee that his/her contention is true by a preponderance of the evidence.
      
8. Procedure after Hearing
        If the Hearings Committee determines that the faculty member's contention has not been established, it shall, by a simple unelaborated statement, so notify the faculty member, the appropriate dean, and the Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. Such a determination confirms the decision not to reappoint. If the Hearings Committee determines that the faculty member's contention has been satisfactorily established, it shall so notify the faculty member, the appropriate dean, and the Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs by a written notice that shall also include a recommendation for corrective action by the dean.
         Within five days after receiving such a recommendation, the dean shall notify the faculty member, the Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, and the chairperson of the Hearings Committee what modification, if any, he/she will make with respect to the original decision not to reappoint.
         If the dean fails to make a recommended modification in the original decision, the Hearings Committee shall submit a report to the Chancellor containing the committee's findings and recommendation and what it considers to be appropriate action by the Chancellor to resolve the matter.
   
   
9. Appeals Rights
   A faculty member may file a written of appeal an unfavorable decision within fourteen calendar days after receipt of the chancellor’s written decision to the Board of Governors. The review shall be in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Code Section 604D (2) and UNC Policy 101.3.1, section III.