Two primary documentsIndiana University Academic Handbook and IUPUI Supplement to the Indiana University Academic Handbook set forth University and campus policies on the assignment of faculty work. Authority to set policies in this and in many other matters derives from the Board of Trustees. Although Faculty Council actions and campus administrative practices may come to be regarded as having the effect of policy, both are subject to review by the Trustees and may be affected by their actions. Nothing in this statement, therefore, should be construed as speaking on behalf of the Trustees.

An example of the Trustees' interest in faculty work relates to their request that the campuses develop teaching capacity models. Although capacities of individual schools to teach average numbers of course sections per faculty member may vary, the IUPUI average has been seen by Trustees to be six course sections per year, with allowances for individual assignments to research, service, and administrative responsibilities. (Some schools, such as Medicine, organize their teaching activities in other ways and would thus have different norms.)

As a general principle, the Trustees, University officers, and campus administrators have assumed the acceptance of common responsibilities from a strong, participatory system of faculty governance at campus and University levels. Administrative actions in the academic schools and departments, however, have largely determined the mix of teaching, research, and public service; specific assignments with regard to those functions; and support matters, including rewards for results.

In terms of governance, the Trustees have delegated to the President the responsibility and authority "for the effective and economical planning, utilization, and management of its resources" (Academic Handbook), of which faculty talent, time, and expertise are the most important. The President has, in turn, delegated authority to Vice Presidents and Chancellors for the management of each campus. Deans, therefore, operate under the authority of their Chancellors in assigning our most important resource.

In establishing the authority of the faculty in its constitution, the Faculty Council has not claimed responsibility for assigning faculty work. In practice, with provision for consultation, assigning faculty to achieve each academic unit's mission and meet its obligations is principally a function of administrators in departments and schools. Practices in regard to faculty work among colleagues derive from collective responsibilities, based on dynamic and productive tension between individual intellectual interests and the necessity to maintain a viable and effective organization.

Although the individual faculty member lacks authority to define or assign unilaterally the conditions of his or her work, neither can a chair or dean arbitrarily assign faculty to specific work. Academic freedom ensures that faculty can pursue their scholarly interests, but only insofar as they may meet their responsibilities to their unit. "The teacher and librarian shall have full freedom of investigation, subject to adequate fulfillment of their academic duties." (Academic Handbook) This limitation is crucial to effective operation of the University.

In practice, this means that school deans are expected to develop and administer policies and practices for faculty work that ensure that responsibilities are met and that individuals are treated fairly and equitably. The campus Chancellor and the Dean of the Faculties, in turn, are responsible for the effectiveness of deans in following this principle across the campus as a whole. Faculty should expect to receiveupon requestan explanation for work assignments. (If there have been consultation and development of understanding of shared responsibilities, explanations will rarely be required.) The explanation must bear scrutiny by peers in the contexts of University, campus, school, and departmental missions. Instead of setting forth detailed work rules, therefore, administrators in each unit are expected to interpret and apply general policies in accord with the special missions of their units.

The Academic Handbook contains two sections that pertain generally to the conditions of faculty work ("Academic Appointments" and "Conditions of Work"), but there is no specific policy or procedure regarding the assignment of faculty to particular activities. This responsibility rests with departmental chairs and school deans through authority delegated from the President to the campus Chancellor.

In response to questions raised by faculty members, the remainder of this statement deals with six broad topics. These include research, outside work, conflicts of interest, teaching assignments, initial appointment, and faculty complaints.

Each unit should address its research responsibilities and expectations in its mission statement and should periodically review and then reaffirm or revise its statement. Although some faculty, in this complex institution, specialize in research or clinical assignments (as described in the Academic Handbook,), tenure-related faculty are expected to combine teaching, research, and public service at performance levels that their departmental and school peers regard as satisfactory or better. As these standards have developed within academic units through time, colleagues have come to recognize needs for flexibility, dis-

cussion, equity, fairness, and variations in views on minimal attainments in all three areas of activity.

It is assumed that faculty will spend some time in research, appropriately balanced by teaching and service. If time spent in research will impinge on the other two areas, the faculty member must obtain the consent of the administrative officer. It is further assumed that faculty members' research will be directly related to the unit's mission, documented by such measures of accountability as individual annual reports.

Although some schools have developed a practice that faculty have, as a right, one day a week for research, there is no University or campus policy that states this assignment of time. Exceptions could be made by the chair or dean within the context of a faculty member's overall responsibilities.

The Trustees' requirement that each campus develop models of teaching capacity can affect allocations to research and service, given the finite nature of total faculty time to assign. Although IUPUI's clear, growing, and substantial commitment to research will eventually be recognized by its attaining a Carnegie Foundation Research I classification, its degree of involvement in graduate education will be less than that of IU Bloomington. As a result, IUPUI's capacity, on average, for more undergraduate teaching will grow while sharing similar research responsibilities. Since IUPUI is still developing its research infrastructure, individual faculty are likely to have different involvements within a unit. On average, faculty of a unit might expect the number of sections to be taught, but chairs must have the ability to assign more or less research participation as commitments of faculty time.

This section deals with several policies associated with faculty members' obtaining compensation from outside sources. Topics include annual lengths of appointments, leaves of absence, remunerated activities, and use of equipment and supplies.

Many faculty hold 10-month appointments and are required to be fully available and professionally accountable to the University

from at least seven days before the beginning of classes through commencement (see page 21 of the Academic Handbook). At other times, faculty may engage in compensated activities without accountability to the University. Faculty who teach during the summer are required to be present on the first day of classes through the day grades are due. Because of the intensive nature of summer teaching and service, faculty teaching full-time in the summer should not expect to engage in remunerated outside activities. Before undertaking outside activities, even continuing activities begun during the academic year, faculty should establish advance expectations for summer work with the chair or dean.

Faculty who hold 12-month appointments are entitled to a one-month vacation. They may not, however, engage in remunerated outside work during the entire 12-month period except as permitted during the academic year (see the Academic Handbook). Moreover, the scheduling of vacations and assigning of faculty time during semester breaks are mutual responsibilities with chairs and deans, not a unilateral right of faculty. If advising or other student services ordinarily provided by faculty are required during a semester or vacation break, faculty may be asked to provide these on a fair and equitable basis. Also, faculty who hold 12-month appointments may be asked to engage in teaching, research, and service as determined by the unit's mission. Chairs and deans are obligated to know how 12-month faculty spend their time, and these faculty are responsible for reporting that information to their chairs and deans.

Leaves of absence without pay are described in the Academic Handbook. Faculty may request a leave without pay for up to one year with approval from their chair and dean, who may deny the request because it would adversely affect the ability of the department or school to meet its responsibilities as a unit. While a faculty member should expect to receive and be entitled to fair and equitable treatment, an individual does not have a right to a leave of absence. Subject to approval of school and campus administrative officers, leaves of absence without pay can be approved that permit a faculty member to engage in remunerated activities. On occasion and for reasons beneficial to the unit, a leave

may, with the dean's approval, be extended beyond a year.

Although outside remunerated activities are listed and described on pages 47-48 of the Academic Handbook, there will always be some ambiguity about what is "outside" and what is "inside." When in doubt, faculty should confer with their chair or dean, especially in regard to clinical practices. Taking part in paid outside activities requires prior approval of the faculty member's chair and dean as provided in school-specific policies. Additional specific approvals may be required to continue such work. Faculty also must report periodically to their chair and dean on their continuing activities, which must remain compatible with the unit's mission and continue to enhance the faculty member's effectiveness as a member of the unit.

Current University policies on a faculty member's use of equipment and supplies in performing outside work and on properly compensating the University appear in the Academic Handbook. As IUPUI and its units develop collaborative relationships with private sector organizations, this area is likely to become more complex and difficult to address. Faculty whose work may call into question the use of University resources for work outside an internal unit's mission should expect to document both their own time and use of facilities and materials.

An IUPUI Policy on Conflicts of Interest was adopted in 1995 and appears in the IUPUI Academic Handbook Supplement. An original concern involved how conflicts of interest might affect research results. Since then, other potential issues have evolved. IUPUI's policy is consistent with those of the University but is more specific and outlines procedures for enforcement. Each school is required to develop and implement consistent policies and procedures. In general, faculty can avoid allegations of conflicts of interest by reporting potential conflicts and seeking approvals. If a faculty member's proposed activity is denied, there is an appeals procedure to help resolve and adjudicate disagreements.

The policy divides faculty activities into two categories (those such as publication or con-

sulting considered to be ordinary and thus subject only to annual reporting, and other, more extensive or involved, activities that require more detailed reporting). The policy is not intended to limit outside work but to protect faculty who may appear to have undertaken projects that could interfere with their university duties by documenting that such activities have been formally reported to and approved by chairs and deans in accord with school policies.

It is possible that many remunerated outside faculty activities, such as consulting, executive education, or even product development, may increasingly become attractive to departments and schools as services that they can provide collectively, with income being returned to the department and individual. Such options may become more important as traditional forms of support diminish. For this reason, faculty need to discuss such activity.

Also, a related concept called "conflict of commitment" addresses allocation of time and effort between university and outside activities. Neither IU nor IUPUI has developed policies on this matter, in part because of difficulty in precisely defining the term in an academic culture. This is another issue that might be usefully discussed at departmental and school levels.

Assigning faculty to specific courses is complex and reflects the best aspects of mutual responsibility between faculties and unit administrators. The process must be based on a whole faculty's collective responsibility, however. An individual has no particular rights with regard to assignment, except a right to fair and equitable treatment which would withstand peer review. Peers within a department should ideally reach consensus on assignments, but when consensus is not possible the chair must decide, using a prespecified procedure for conflict resolution when appropriate.

It is always in the best interest of the unit to take advantage of individual faculty members' competencies, strengths, and interests when matching them to specific departmental needs. Chairs and deans must develop a schedule of classes each term based on

curricular requirements, direct and indirect promises of course availability, and actual needs of students. The process should involve the unit's faculty and derive from the faculty's authority to determine curriculum. In acting on behalf of the faculty to implement the curriculum, academic administrators should assume that their peers will scrutinize and review their judgments. They also are expected to give priority to unit needs and responsibilities instead of those of individual faculty, who do not have an unrestricted right to teach a specific course where and when they want to teach it. In most situations, a balance of interests is reached successfully in the shared process of planning teaching activity.

In the matter of assessing future faculty workloads, the Trustees' interest in maintaining teaching capacity models at IUPUI and the other campuses must be considered. Two principles can be observed. First, teaching assignments can vary among faculty in a department or school in accordance with other assigned duties in research, service, and administration. Second, individual assignments must be equitable and fair in comparison with the workloads of all of the faculty in a unit.

Faculty themselves can best determine how to address the public's perceptions of needs for increased productivity in teaching. They should be encouraged and assisted in making even more efficient uses of their time, especially through better uses of technology. Faculty also can help chairs and deans decide how much time must be assigned to teaching to meet the unit's learning goals. In the final analysis, however, after suitable negotiation and discussion, chairs and deans must decide how much teaching will be assigned to each faculty member.

In response to student and public needs, many academic units of IUPUI have accepted responsibilities to conduct classes at off-campus locations in recent years. Faculty whose initial appointments occurred prior to a unit's becoming involved in off-campus teaching are not excused from a responsibility to contribute personally to the new unit responsibility. This applies at such places at high schools, corporate or institutional sites, hospitals, shopping malls, other communities within

commuting distances, and even other countries based on contracts. Units that have program responsibilities at Bloomington and Columbus and that are based in Indianapolis also may involve off-campus assignments, subject to the test of equity and fairness as affirmed by peer review and with possible exceptions for individual hardship. As noted, the technology of distance learning promises a more flexible model of teaching assignments with regard to time and space.

A frequent issue involves levels of course work and subject areas. In some units, there is a presumption that faculty do not have to teach lower division courses and concerns about eligibility to teach graduate courses. Occasionally, a department chair must ask an individual to teach a course or part of a course beyond the faculty member's expectations or specialization. Chairs and deans must make these decisions, but they also are accountable for the consequences to students and to faculty in providing fairness and equity. At an evolving university, faculty also are expected to grow as scholars and teachers with encouragement and tangible support from their chairs and deans.

Finally, the concept of peer review underlies policies and interpretation of policies associated with observing and assessing faculty performance. The academic world has long recognized the necessity and value of peer review in research, but has only recently embraced the process as an inherently valuable aspect of teaching and professional service. As schools and departments at IUPUI develop the role of peer review to the status of widely accepted practice, a shared commitment to unit missions and responsibilities will deepen. The process will include chairs, deans, and colleagues; and outcomes will include greater understanding of each other's work. Although each unit should develop its own practices in regard to peer review, faculty also will need to acknowledge the obligation of chairs and deans to observe their colleagues in their most important form of work.

Many faculty at IUPUI were appointed when conditions were different from now in many ways, and differences will increase in the

years ahead. Other faculty received letters of appointment that may have specified certain conditions of work, such as number of courses to be taught or type of staff support. In either case, faculty may feel they have a "contract" with the University regarding conditions of work. Although not "contracts," the Academic Handbook and the IUPUI Academic Handbook Supplement contain policy statements on which faculty can rely and for which the University and campus must be responsible. While each letter of offer must be reviewed carefully and while the University, campus, and school are each committed to honoring promises, faculty need to recognize that conditions of work can change. Individual faculty should expect to contribute proportionately to current and emerging departmental or school norms for the faculty collectively. In some units, for example, research expectations were low when some faculty were initially appointed. Accordingly, it would be unreasonable to expect or to require these colleagues to contribute to the school's research mission to the same degree as more recently appointed colleagues. However, it would be reasonable to expect them to accept added teaching or service responsibilities that would bring their overall level of contribution to the departmental or school norm or to help them develop the capacity for research that meets or exceeds departmental needs. As noted earlier, the balance of teaching, research, and service, as reflected in assignments, must be contingent on many factors, but all faculty are expected to contribute. When the University awards tenure to faculty, they in turn accept a responsibility to grow and change to meet the University's evolving needs. Faculty have a right to expect their colleagues to develop new competencies that will keep departments and schools current. Department chairs must be able to rely on the support of all faculty when encouraging individuals to develop competencies needed for the unit's vitality.

Individual faculty have the right to request a hearing before peers with regard to the decisions of deans and chairs through the Faculty Boards of Review process (see the Academic Handbook, which says Boards shall consider complaints of faculty concerning, among other

things, "the nature or conditions of work"). Similarly, an appeals process is provided for contesting administrative decisions with regard to conflicts of interest. Peer review by a Faculty Board of Review helps assure faculty that their administrative officers will act in accord with the best interests of the unit, campus, and University and will exercise their authority fairly and equitably.

An example of a specific concern would be an unscrupulous administrator who assigns a faculty member to inappropriate work as a way of creating a condition of misconduct because the faculty member reasonably refuses the assignment. While this theoretical situation, however unlikely, could happen, the Faculty Board of Review offers a remedy. Faculty who disagree with work assignments should first protest to the person making the assignment and , if unsatisfied, to that person's superior. Several schools have created procedures or committees to address grievances, and this immediate recourseif availableis likely to be most satisfactory. If there is no administrative remedy, then the faculty member should request a hearing by a Faculty Board of Review. The IUPUI Supplement to the Indiana University Academic Handbook Supplement outlines the process, and the authority for administrative action is described in the Academic Handbook. To avoid any possibility of misconduct charges, even while protesting, the faculty member should meet assigned duties and responsibilities. If there is concern about adverse consequences of delay, the faculty member should seek a Board of Review as quickly as possible, but still accept assignments.

Through collaborative decision-making involving the faculty whom they are charged with leading, deans and chairs have the authority to assign individual faculty to specific duties that have been identified and acceptedexplicitly or implicitlyby agreement on mission and collective responsibility. Nonetheless, policies on the obligation and authority of chairs, deans, and other administrative officers to assign faculty individually to specific duties and to regulate use of faculty of faculty time as a resource are largely inferred and contextual. However, responsibility and

authority for management and use of University resources are inherent functions of administrative officers, in collaboration with faculty and according to the principles of fairness and equity.

IUPUI faculty have participated in development of a reasonable and successful system of academic authority and review. Indiana University generally and IUPUI in particular, are well-positioned to emerge as leaders in a reformed national system of postsecondary education based on collegial interaction of faculty and administrators through shared understanding of purpose and combined commitment to the students and citizens we serve.

Table of Contents

HANDBOOK

Index