Eshelman School of Pharmacy: Policy on Faculty Workload

Unit Policy

Title

Eshelman School of Pharmacy: Policy on Faculty Workload

Introduction

Purpose

This policy explains how faculty in the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's (“UNC-Chapel Hill” or “University”) Eshelman School of Pharmacy (“School”) comply with the UNC-Chapel Hill Faculty Workload Policy. By complying with the University’s policy, the School achieves the following three goals:

• Student-Centric Approach: Meet the needs of our students and other stakeholders.
• Transparency and Accountability: Facilitate transparency and accountability regarding faculty performance.
• Equitable Expectations: Establish clear and equitable expectations and guidelines for distributing work among faculty members.

As a School, we are expected to:

• Create a standardized teaching, research/scholarship, and service work distribution for each appointment type (Table 1: Distribution of Faculty Effort across Appointment Type reported as ranges).
• Implement an annual faculty performance review/evaluation that measures and rewards all aspects of faculty workload.
• Account for 1.0 FTE by assigning duties to teaching, research/scholarship, and service on a percentage basis totaling 100% (duties may be assigned to patient care and administration, where relevant).
• Ensure that the annual review and workplan include the specific effort distribution and outputs a faculty member is expected to complete in the next academic year, with a clear linkage to long-term evaluation (e.g., reappointment, promotion, tenure, post-tenure review).
• Identify what teaching, research/scholarship, and service distribution for each appointment type constitutes an adjustment in the workload.
• Provide a report to the University about academic workloads.
• Align the faculty member’s teaching, research/scholarship, and service work to:
  • The University’s mission and strategic plan, and
  • The School’s goals.

Scope

This policy applies to all faculty whose primary appointment is in the UNC-Chapel Hill Eshelman School of Pharmacy, including tenured, tenure-track, and fixed-term faculty (i.e., research focus, clinical focus, teaching focus, Professor of the Practice). It applies to fixed-term faculty holding one-year appointments or multi-year appointments. It encompasses faculty members who also serve in administrative roles.

The policy does not apply to adjunct faculty or fixed-term faculty with appointments of less than one year.

Policy

Components of Faculty Workload

Consistent with other major research institutions and UNC-Chapel Hill, the overall workload of School faculty members typically includes the following components outlined in our Faculty Annual Review (FAR) document. Each of these are described in greater detail below.

• Teaching,
• Research/Scholarship,
• Service,
• Patient Care (if applicable), and
• Administration (if applicable).

Teaching

Faculty Teaching Responsibilities

• All faculty members are responsible for teaching, with the exception of fixed-term research faculty.

Distribution of Teaching Effort

• The distribution of effort dedicated to teaching by faculty appointment type is outlined in Table 1.

School’s Annual Teaching Load

• The School’s standard annual Faculty Teaching Load is measured as the ratio of Actual Teaching Activity (i.e., hours reported by the faculty member in teaching each semester on the Teaching Activity Survey) to Planned Teaching Activity (i.e., the planned workload effort distribution assigned to teaching converted to hours).
• Reductions in the standard teaching load are permitted for administrative responsibilities, research/scholarship, service, and, where applicable, patient care responsibilities.
• Teaching effort is quantified by collecting teaching contact and non-contact hours rather than credit hours (Appendix A).
• Faculty members use the Teaching Activity Survey to report their teaching activities at the end of each academic semester.

Measurement of Teaching Workload

• The School measures teaching workload in terms of contact hours and non-contact hours rather than traditional three-credit-hour semester courses.
• The School considers the following variables when measuring teaching workloads:
  • Nature of the curriculum,
  • Structure and format of courses and assessments,
  • Pedagogy and instructional activities,
  • Teaching-related activities not tied to credit-bearing courses,
  • Competency of our students, and
  • Expertise of our faculty.

Teaching Engagement Opportunities

• All faculty (except fixed-term research faculty) are expected to teach in the professional or graduate programs, or both.
• Faculty can teach at the undergraduate level through the Minor in Pharmaceutical Sciences or by engaging undergraduate students in research laboratories.

Teaching Activities

• Teaching activities are categorized into 12 specific areas (please see Appendix A).
• The teaching categories align with the School's Teaching Activities guidelines.

Research / Scholarship

Scholarly Leadership and Research

• Faculty must strive to be nationally and internationally recognized leaders in their areas of expertise, as outlined in the School’s Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure (ARPT) document.
• All faculty, regardless of rank, appointment type, or area of expertise, are expected to engage in scholarly activities.
• Areas of scholarship include discovery, application, and education, as detailed in the ARPT document.

Distribution of Research Effort

• The distribution of effort dedicated to research/scholarship by faculty appointment type is outlined in Table 1.

Expectations for Tenure-Track and Tenured Faculty

• Dedicate considerable effort to research.
• Cover 40-80% of salary through grants and contracts (adjusted for faculty with administrative responsibilities).

Research Activities (examples)

• Engaging in research and other scholarly endeavors.
• Writing grant proposals and securing grants.
• Leading and/or collaborating on research studies in research laboratories, clinical or community settings, or with large secondary databases.
• Writing and publishing scholarly articles, book chapters, books, and other scholarly works.
• Presenting research findings at conferences.
• Creating intellectual property.

Integration of Research and Teaching

• Faculty engagement in research and scholarly activities allows them to design course materials and teach students state-of-the-art and cutting-edge knowledge in their respective fields.

Service

Faculty Service Commitment

• Faculty members engage in service activities that advance the work of the School and University and the University’s role in supporting North Carolina (“the State”). Faculty service may also have national and international reach.

Distribution of Service Effort

• The distribution of effort dedicated to service by faculty appointment type is outlined in Table 1.

Service Activities (examples)

• Enhancing the work of the School, University, community, profession, or one’s discipline
• Improving the quality of life in society
• Promoting the general welfare of the University, the School, professional and academic societies, the State, the nation, the local community, or the global community
• Supporting and enabling student success by participating in activities such as admission interviews and writing student recommendations.

Patient Care

• Faculty members may provide clinical patient care services.

Distribution of Patient Care Effort

• The distribution of effort dedicated to patient care depends on the faculty member’s responsibilities, associated salary offset, and the needs of the collaborating organization.

Administration

Distribution of Administrative Effort

• The distribution of effort dedicated to administration is determined by the Dean and the administrative supervisor and is based on the needs of the School.

Administrative Assignments

• The Dean appoints administrative roles and responsibilities to faculty within the School. The School specifies the means and extent by which administrative responsibilities count toward a faculty member’s total workload.

Faculty Administrative Roles in the School

• Executive Vice Dean
• Division Chair
• Executive Vice Chair
• Vice Chair
• Center Director
• Director
• Associate Director
• Associate Dean
• Assistant Dean

Distribution of Faculty Effort

Percent distribution is shown in ranges; however, the faculty member’s actual distribution of effort across their respective areas of responsibility must add up to 100%.

1. The Dean or their designee (e.g., the Executive Vice Dean-Chief Academic Officer) must approve assignments that significantly differ from expected School teaching or research efforts.
2. Faculty with administrative appointments will have their effort distribution and resultant teaching, scholarship, and service responsibilities adjusted for administrative effort/responsibilities.
3. Seventy percent is the minimum effort to be dedicated to teaching for fixed-term teaching/clinical-focus faculty with no patient care or administrative responsibilities. If the faculty member has administrative or patient care responsibilities, this may lead to a redistribution of teaching effort and an adjustment in teaching expectations as determined by the Division Chair and the Executive Vice Dean-Chief Academic Officer
4. Distribution of effort for research and scholarship is 5-20% for fixed-term faculty (teaching/clinical focus) without faculty salary offset. This may be higher with grant and contract salary offset (i.e., faculty may be able to buy out their time in teaching with approval from the Division Chair and Executive Vice Dean-Chief Academic Officer).
5. Fixed-term research faculty are typically 100% dedicated to research and scholarship. Depending on their role and with the approval of the supervising Principal Investigator (PI), a fixed-term research faculty member may have a minimal amount of teaching and/or service.

Assigning Duties to Faculty Effort

The Division Chair (or Vice Chair designee, if applicable), in collaboration with the faculty member, is responsible for assigning duties to teaching, research/scholarship, and service based on the needs of the School, on a percentage basis totaling 100% (duties may be assigned to patient care and administration, where relevant). The Division Chair, during the faculty annual review process, is responsible for ensuring that these duties account for the established distribution of effort.

Faculty Annual Review Process

Overview

• The annual evaluation process assesses a faculty member’s performance, contributions, and accomplishments based on their established work plan.
• Evaluations are conducted on a calendar year basis.

Review Components

• Faculty reflection and self-assessment on the past year.
• Planning for the upcoming year.

Required Documents

• FAR document.
• Updated curriculum vitae (CV).

Process Timeline

• Mid-December: Process launch via email for the subsequent calendar year.
• January 31st: Deadline for faculty to:
  • Update and highlight new additions to their CV.
  • Complete the FAR document with reflections, self-assessment, and goals.
  • Email the updated CV and FAR document to the division Executive Assistant / Division Chair.
• End of March: Faculty meet with the Division Chair (or Vice Chair designate, if applicable) to discuss:
  • Accomplishments, challenges, and effort from the past year.
  • Planned effort, goals, and needed resources or professional development support for the upcoming year.
  • Planning for the next milestone (reappointment, promotion, tenure, or post-tenure review).

Annual Evaluation Requirements

• Occur in person, with documentation required in writing,
• Are completed at least once per academic year (School conducts annual reviews on a calendar year),
• Apply to every faculty member
• Cover all areas of a faculty's duties (administrative reviews are conducted separately),
• Do not replace the post-tenure review process already set by the University for tenured faculty,
• Include a mutually agreed upon workplan/goals (with specificity in each area of responsibility) by the faculty member and Division Chair/Dean for the upcoming year. Note: if annual review workplans/goals lack specificity this makes it challenging for faculty to know how to improve. A well-structured workplan provides a framework for continuous improvement and professional growth.

Exceptions to the above-listed requirements may be granted in limited circumstances by the Division Chair or Dean.

Other Important Considerations

Written Documentation

• All faculty receive a written letter documenting the annual review meeting.
• The letter highlights the past year’s accomplishments and challenges and outlines goals/work plans for the upcoming year.
• The review letter should be written by the person conducting the review. Faculty should not draft their annual review letters.

Planned Effort Distribution and Dashboard

• Faculty annual effort in all areas of responsibility is documented on the faculty annual review document, refined by the Division Chair if needed, and maintained in a dashboard by the Office of Organizational Effectiveness, Planning, and Assessment (Office of OE).

Administrative Reviews

• Administrative reviews occur independently from the faculty annual review.
• Faculty with administrative appointments have a separate meeting with the administrative supervisor for the annual administrative review.
  • Exceptions: Division Chairs and the Executive Vice Dean-Chief Academic Officer receive one combined annual review and letter covering both faculty and administrative roles.
• The assessment and workplan/goals for the administrative appointment are documented in a separate letter emailed to the faculty member and Division Chair.

Initial Appointments

Faculty in their first year of the initial appointment should:

• Complete the FAR document,
• Share goals for the upcoming year, and
• Include their CV.

Reviews for Fixed-Term Faculty

• Reviews for fixed-term faculty in research may be conducted by the Division Chair (or Vice Chair designee) and/or the faculty member’s immediate supervisor.
• Feedback from the immediate supervisor should be included in the review and contribute to the workplan.
• The review letter should be written by the person conducting the review.
• Annual reviews for fixed-term research faculty with one-year appointments can be conducted off-cycle to align with the reappointment date but must occur annually.

Guidance on Assessing Faculty Productivity and Effort

Teaching

Productivity

Productivity should be assessed based on:

• The accomplishment of the specific duties outlined in the past year’s workplan for teaching, and
• An assessment of overall productivity in teaching.

An assessment of teaching productivity should ensure the faculty member is on the right path toward reappointment, promotion, tenure, or post-tenure review.

Effort

Effort should also be assessed. It is important to determine whether the time spent on the duties assigned to teaching (actual effort) aligns with the planned effort established during the annual review for the prior year. Data from the Teaching Activity Survey (Report Catalog: Instructional Assignments and Effort) and the summary teaching information provided to Division Chairs on the Faculty Data Report are valuable resources. This information can help assess the relative alignment of the faculty member’s reported effort compared to the planned effort established during the annual review. The actual effort (in hours) the faculty member reports is subjective. While not intended to be exact or prescriptive, it is intended to provide an approximation to evaluate workload and should be compared to the planned effort in making an assessment. If the actual versus planned effort in teaching is not relatively aligned, the Division Chair should make an adjustment in the distribution of effort for teaching and/or increase or decrease the annual workload responsibilities and duties in teaching.

Resources for Teaching Productivity and Effort

• The teaching section of the CV and FAR.
• Assessment of whether the teaching duties outlined in the past year’s workplan have been achieved.
• Student course evaluation data (quantitative and qualitative data) available by request from the School’s Office of OE.
• Data provided by the Office of OE in the Report Catalog, including:
  • Faculty Planned Effort
  • Course and Instructor Evaluation Scores
  • Instructional Hours, Assignments, and Activities.
• Data provided on the Faculty Data Report provided to Division Chairs by the Office of OE.

Research/Scholarship

Productivity

Productivity should be assessed based on:

• The accomplishment of the specific duties outlined in the past year’s workplan for research/scholarship, and
• An assessment of overall productivity in research/scholarship.

An assessment of research/scholarship productivity should ensure the faculty member is on the right path toward reappointment, promotion, tenure, or post-tenure review.

Tenure-Track Faculty

• Tenure-track faculty research productivity includes ensuring that:
  • The specific duties outlined in the past year’s workplan for research/scholarship have been accomplished,
  • Annual faculty salary offset is meeting expectations of 40-80% salary offset from grants and contracts (Report Catalog: Annual Faculty Salary Offset),
  • The faculty member is successful in their grant writing and awards (Report Catalog: Externally Funded Proposals and Awards), publications (CV), and presentations (CV), and
  • The faculty member is on the right path toward their reappointment, promotion, tenure, or post-tenure review.

Fixed-Term Research Faculty

• Fixed-term research faculty productivity should be assessed based on the accomplishment of the specific duties outlined in the past year’s workplan for research/scholarship.
• Assessing research/scholarship productivity should also ensure the faculty member is on the right path toward reappointment or promotion.

Fixed-Term Clinical/Teaching Faculty

• Fixed-term clinical/teaching faculty productivity should be assessed based on the accomplishment of the specific duties outlined in the past year’s workplan for research/scholarship.
• Assessing research/scholarship productivity should also ensure the faculty member is on the right path toward reappointment or promotion.

Effort

Effort should also be assessed. It is important to determine whether the time spent on the duties assigned to research/scholarship (actual effort) aligns with the planned effort established during the annual review for the prior year. Data from the Report Catalog (Annual Faculty Salary Offset, Externally Funded Proposals and Awards) and CV are valuable resources. This information is useful in helping assess the relative alignment of the faculty member’s reported effort compared to the planned effort established during the annual review. If the actual versus planned effort in research/scholarship is not relatively aligned, the Division Chair will make an adjustment to the distribution of effort for research/scholarship and/or increase or decrease the annual workload responsibilities and duties in research/scholarship.

Tenure-Track Faculty

• For tenure-track faculty, it is possible to estimate one’s actual effort (i.e., time spent in research/scholarship) to determine if it is relatively aligned with the planned effort established during the annual review. This can be done by reviewing metrics such as:
  • Grant activity (e.g., number of grants submitted, number of grants awarded, number of active grants, role on grants),
  • Salary offset estimates,
  • Publications,
  • Presentations,
  • Patents/intellectual property, and
  • Laboratory research meetings.

Fixed-Term Research Faculty

• Fixed-term research faculty typically devote 100% effort to research and scholarship. Depending on their role and with the approval of the supervising Principal Investigator (PI), a fixed-term research faculty member may have a minimal amount of teaching and/or service.
• Assessing research/scholarship productivity should also ensure the faculty member is on the right path toward reappointment or promotion.

Fixed-Term Teaching/Clinical Faculty

• Distribution of effort for research/scholarship is 5-20% for fixed-term faculty (teaching/clinical focus) without faculty salary offset. This may be higher with grant and contract salary offset (i.e., faculty may be able to buy out their time with approval from the Division Chair and Executive Vice Dean-Chief Academic Officer).
• Assessing how much time is spent engaging in research/scholarly activities relative to the established distribution of effort is helpful in guiding the workplan/goals and ensuring an appropriate distribution of effort in research/scholarship.
• Types of activities may include:
  • Conducting research
  • Writing papers
  • Writing grants, where applicable
  • Leading team meetings
  • Presenting at research conferences or meetings.

Resources for Research/Scholarship Productivity and Effort

• The research/scholarship section of the CV and FAR.
• Assessment of whether the research/scholarship duties outlined in the past year’s workplan have been achieved.
• Data provided by the Grants Management office on faculty productivity (e.g., grant dollar awards as PI and Co-PI). Note: this data source is based on the previous Federal Fiscal Year but is more accurate than RAMSeS as an authoritative data source.
• Data provided by the Office of OE in the Report Catalog, including:
  • Faculty Planned Effort,
  • Faculty Salary Offset,
  • Peer-Reviewed Publications and Citations,
  • External Grant Proposals and Awards (Note: Award recorded in RAMSeS is the total award and not the amount awarded the review year), and
  • Grant Proposals and Awards.

Service

Areas of Service Evaluation

During the review of effort and impact in the areas of service, information should be derived from the faculty member’s CV and discussion of activities and impact in the following areas (examples only):

• Service to School
  • Formal service assignments
  • Participating in admissions / recruitment / celebration activities
  • Writing student recommendations
  • Engaged participation in School administrative meetings
  • Engaged in search committees/interviews to hire new talent
• Service to University
  • Participating in UNC committees and forums to improve the university
  • Collaborating with other UNC Health Professional Schools to promote interdisciplinary efforts
• Service to State
  • Participating in activities that promote and enhance patient care, public health, the profession of pharmacy, healthcare, and the health and well-being of the citizens of North Carolina
• Service to Nation
  • Active participation in professional associations / boards that serve to advance the profession of pharmacy or pharmaceutical sciences education and research
• Service to the World
  • Active participation in the PharmAlliance or other global endeavors to enhance the global perspective, advance the school’s impact as a global leader, and advance the profession or pharmaceutical sciences education and research.

Resources for Service Evaluation

Data from the faculty members’ CV, FAR, and the Report Catalog (Report Catalog: Internal Service Assignments) provide insight into assessing faculty contributions and effort toward service.

Patient Care and Administration

Data Sources for Patient Care and Administration Evaluation

• Data from the faculty member’s CV and FAR provide insight into assessing contributions and effort toward patient care and administration.
• Additional insights into the faculty member’s productivity and effort in patient care can be gathered from collaborating health system partners.

Documenting the Annual Review: Overall Assessment and Workplan

Two critical components of the faculty annual review are:

• Conducting an overall assessment of the past year (based on the past year’s workplan), and
• Establishing the annual workplan for the upcoming year.

Assessment

Performance Assessment

• After the review, the Division Chair assesses performance in the three areas of responsibility (teaching, research/scholarship, and service; where applicable patient care) based on the approved work plan from the prior year.
• Each faculty member receives a rating of Exceeds Expectations, Meets Expectations, or Not Meeting Expectations for each area of responsibility as well as an overall assessment. Select faculty may receive a rating of exceptional as defined below. Only 1-2 faculty at most in any division will qualify for this ranking. 
• The overall assessment is affirmed or modified during the school’s annual merit review day.

Administrative Responsibilities Evaluation

• Faculty members receive a rating of Exceeds Expectations, Meets Expectations, or Not Meeting Expectations for administrative responsibilities.

Ratings and Definitions

• Exceptional: Performance far exceeded expectations due to exceptionally high quality of work performed in all essential areas of responsibility, resulting in an overall quality of work that was superior; and either 1) included the completion of a major goal or project, or 2) made an exceptional or unique contribution in support of Division, School, or University objectives. This rating is achievable though given infrequently.  Only 1-2 faculty at most in any division will qualify for this ranking. 
• Exceeds Expectations: Performance consistently exceeded expectations in all essential areas of responsibility, and the quality of work overall was excellent. Annual goals were met.
• Meets Expectations: Performance consistently met expectations in all essential areas of responsibility, at times possibly exceeding expectations. The quality of work overall was very good. The most critical annual goals were met.
• Not Meeting Expectations: (i.e., Needs Improvement): Performance did not consistently meet expectations. Performance failed to meet expectations in one or more essential areas of responsibility, and/or one or more of the most critical goals were not met.

Workplan

Collaborative Work Plan Development

• Each faculty member collaborates with their Division Chair (and administrative supervisor, if applicable) to develop a mutually agreed-upon work plan.
• For faculty with appointments or salary offset in more than one department, the Division Chair coordinates the workplan in consultation with the other appointing unit.

Work Plan Organization

• Each Faculty Workload Plan should be well-organized and provide a clear roadmap to support faculty planning, growth, and assessment.

Annual Review Documentation Template

The faculty annual review documentation follows a standard template within the School. The template includes, but is not limited to:  

• Faculty Information
  Faculty appointment and rank
• Effort Distribution
  Distribution of effort for the past year and the upcoming year
• Accomplishments and Challenges
  Specific accomplishments and challenges over the past year in teaching, research/scholarship, service, and, where relevant, patient care, and/or administration.
• Good Citizenship and WE CARE Values
  Division Chair assessment of good citizenship (i.e., engagement and collegiality) and WE CARE values (along with faculty self-assessment and input) should be assessed and discussed at the time of the annual review, with plans and goals in place, where needed, to address any areas needing improvement.
• Workload Effort and Expectations
  Goals and deliverables for the upcoming year in:
  • Teaching
  • Research/Scholarship
  • Service
  • Patient Care (if relevant)
  • Administration (if relevant)
• Assessment
  Each faculty member will receive an overall rating of Exceeds Expectations, Meets Expectations, or Not Meeting Expectations in each area (e.g., teaching, research, service) and overall, for the past year. Select faculty may receive a rating of exceptional.
• Resources Needed
  Resources required to achieve goals.
• Future Milestones
  Address future milestones needed to achieve goals toward reappointment, promotion, tenure, or post-tenure review.

Faculty Success Plans

Purpose of Faculty Success Plans

• Faculty Success Plans are required for faculty who do not meet expectations / performance goals in any given area (e.g., teaching, research, service).
• These plans are intended to be a supportive and personalized approach to helping individual faculty improve their performance and excel in their role.
• The Division Chair provides any faculty member rated as "Not Meeting Expectations" in one or more areas with a "Faculty Success Plan" to help them get back on track toward continuous improvement and professional growth.
• For faculty with administrative responsibilities, the administrative supervisor provides any faculty member rated as "Not Meeting Expectations" in one or more administrative performance goals with a "Faculty Success Plan" to help them get back on track toward continuous improvement and professional growth.

Components of a Faculty Success Plan

Each Faculty Success Plan must be in writing and include the following components:

• Rationale Supporting the Success Plan
• Specific Steps for Improvement
  • Detailed actions designed to lead to performance improvement.
• Available Resources
  • Resources the faculty member can use to help them improve (e.g., School resources, Center for Faculty Excellence).
• Timeline for Improvement
  • A specific timeline during which the Division Chair expects the faculty member’s performance to improve.
• Consequences of Non-Improvement
  • A clear statement of consequences should improvement not occur within the designated timeline. Coordination with the School’s Senior Director of HR is required to ensure compliance and consistency with University policy.

Establishment and Approval

• The Division Chair establishes Faculty Success Plans.
• The faculty member’s second-level supervisor (e.g., Executive Vice Dean-Chief Academic Officer) must approve all Faculty Success Plans in writing.
• The second-level supervisor may, as needed, work with the Division Chair to change or clarify requirements included in a Faculty Success Plan before approval.

Roles and Responsibilities

Dean / Executive Vice Dean Chief Academic Officer

• Establish the criteria to evaluate faculty performance within the School.
• Establish any guidelines concerning weights assigned to teaching, research/scholarship, and service.
• Establish the process and schedule for annual evaluations within the School.
• Ensure the School has a faculty workload policy in alignment with the University’s faculty workload policy.
• Create criteria for teaching percentage efforts and associated responsibilities consistent with University policy.
• Approve assignments that vary significantly from expected School teaching percent efforts.
• Approve all Faculty Workload Plans.
• Approve all Faculty Success Plans.
• Ensure that adequate data is available to support an effective assessment and that data evolves as needed to inform and create desired levels of clarity adequately.

Division Chairs

• Meet individually with each faculty member in the division for annual performance reviews (or Vice Chair designee, if applicable).
• Ensure that productivity is assessed and faculty members meet their performance goals.
• Ensure that the distribution of faculty effort across each area of responsibility (e.g., teaching, research/scholarship, service) is:
  • Appropriate,
  • In alignment with the faculty members’ actual effort,
  • In alignment with the faculty workload policy, and
  • If not in alignment, that effort or responsibilities/duties are adjusted accordingly.
• When assessing and assigning individual faculty workplans, consider the needs of the students, the division, and, importantly, the School and the faculty member’s qualifications and appointment responsibilities.
• May, with the Dean/Chief Academic Officer’s approval, change the established performance criteria and goals to meet the needs of the School and fit each faculty member's unique expertise and job better.
• For faculty with appointments in more than one school or effort allocated to the health system or another unit on campus, conduct the review and develop the workplan in consultation with the faculty member’s supervisor in the other school or unit.
• Approve all Faculty Workload Plans (the head of the supervising unit must also approve if the faculty member has a secondary appointment).
• Draft and finalize the annual faculty review letter and workplan (faculty should not draft their own annual review letters).
• Develop Faculty Success Plans for faculty who fail to meet workplan expectations for the year, in partnership with the Executive Vice Dean-Chief Academic Officer and Senior Director of HR.
• Conduct periodic check-ins with each faculty member to monitor progress throughout the Faculty Success Plan and maintain written summaries of the check-in meetings.

Senior Director of Human Resources

• Review all Faculty Success Plans for faculty who fail to meet workplan expectations for the year.

Administrative Supervisors

• Meet individually with each faculty member holding an administrative appointment for whom you serve as the supervisor.
• Assess each faculty member’s productivity and ensure the faculty members meet their performance goals.
• Ensure the distribution of faculty effort for administration is appropriate and, if not, that efforts or responsibilities/duties are adjusted accordingly.
  • If effort is adjusted, this should be done in collaboration with the faculty member’s Division Chair.
• When assessing and assigning individual faculty workplans, consider the School’s needs and the faculty member’s qualifications and appointment responsibilities.
• Approve all Faculty Workload Plans for the administrative role and responsibilities.
• Draft and finalize the annual faculty administrative review letter and workplan (faculty should not draft their own annual administrative review letters).
• Administrative reviews should also include an Exceeds Expectations, Meets Expectations, or Below Expectations rating.
• Develop Faculty Success Plans for each faculty who fails to meet workload expectations for the year in their administrative role.
• Approve all Faculty Success Plans related to administrative roles.
• Conduct periodic check-ins (at least quarterly) with each faculty member to monitor progress throughout the Faculty Success Plan and maintain written, brief summaries of the check-in meetings.

Faculty Members

• Complete the FAR document and update your CV annually, highlighting new additions over the past year.
• Actively prepare for and engage in the annual review meeting with their Division Chair (or Vice Chair designee, where applicable).
• Work with your Division Chair to develop a mutually agreed-upon distribution of effort and work plan.
• Implement the annual workplan.
• Implement the Faculty Success Plan, if applicable.

Monitoring and Reporting on Faculty Workloads

Consistent with UNC System Policy 400.3.4, UNC-Chapel Hill will use the University of Delaware’s National Study of Instructional Costs and Productivity methodology to collect data annually to monitor faculty workloads and workload policies. The School will submit aggregated data annually per the University’s Faculty Workload Policy.

Required Components of the Report

All School faculty will be included in the annual report.

The annual report must include, at minimum, the following quantitative data elements for monitoring faculty workloads:

• Organized course sections taught (Note: School faculty do not routinely teach entire courses or sections as we have a fair number of team-taught courses; we define teaching load in this document on page 15),
• Student credit hours produced (Note: the School may need to report in hours (i.e., student contact hours and non-contact hours) or convert hours to credit hours as we do not define teaching load based on credit hours),
• Faculty contact hours (Note: the School defines this term in this policy and Appendix A),
• Metrics related to research/creative activity (Note: for the School, this may include metrics such as grant activity (e.g., number of grants submitted, number of grants awarded, number of active grants, role on grants), salary offset from grants and contracts, publications, presentations, and patents/intellectual property),
• Service rendered in the previous academic year (Note: this currently comes from the CV, the FAR, and the School-based service assignment dashboard; the School will need to create a process for collecting and reporting on service consistent with the service section in this policy).
• Analysis of faculty FTE allocations by teaching, research/creative activity, and service at the department, school/college, and University level (Note: the School has this data trended over multiple years by School, Division, Name, Gender, Appointment Type, Tenure Status, and other factors).

Note: According to the University's Faculty Workload Policy, mentoring or clinical patient care activities may be categorized as either service or teaching. The School categorizes advising and mentoring as teaching, and these activities are now included in the School’s Teaching Activity survey. The School will categorize clinical patient care activities as service.

Other Considerations

Teaching Overload

Justification for Teaching Overload

• Teaching overloads may be justified based on University and departmental needs, consistent with UNC System Policy 300.2.13 and UNC-Chapel Hill’s Policy on Supplemental Pay for EHRA Employees.
• The School has established guidance on teaching overload pay.

Approval Process

• The Dean and the Office of the Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost must approve all overload requests.
• Requests should be made only in unusual circumstances or in the case of a critical University business need that cannot be reasonably met through any other means.

Overload Pay Limits

• The total of a full-time employee’s overload pay in any fiscal year may not exceed:
  • 20% of their July 1 base salary if in a 12-month appointment, or
  • 25% of base salary in a 9-month appointment.
• The Office of the Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost may grant exceptions to these limits.

Independent Study

Monitoring Independent Teaching Loads

• Consistent with UNC System Regulation 700.6.1[R], the Office of the Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost will monitor the individual teaching loads of all faculty who offer independent study for academic credit.

Compliance with University Policy

• The University’s Policy Memorandum #30 limits the number of students a faculty member may supervise during a term to two.
• The Office of the Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost ensures compliance with this policy.

Annual Timeline for Review, Approval, and Distribution of Report

• UNC-Chapel Hill must prepare a written annual report of the previous fiscal year’s activity and submit it to the UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees for review and approval.
• The UNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees must approve the report by September 30 each year.
• UNC-Chapel Hill must provide the UNC System president with a copy of the approved report by October 15 each year.

Definitions

Credit Hours: A credit hour is a unit of measure that represents the amount of work, represented in intended learning outcomes and verified by evidence of student achievement, which approximates: 

• Not less than one hour of classroom or direct faculty instruction AND a minimum of two hours out of class student work each week for approximately fifteen weeks for one semester, or the equivalent amount of work over a different amount of time, or; 
• At least an equivalent amount of work as outlined in item 1 above for other academic activities as established by the University, including laboratory work and other academic work leading to the award of credit hours. 
• Thus, one credit is 2250 minutes for 15 weeks (750 minutes in class and 1500 minutes outside of class).

Faculty Success Plans: Supportive and personalized documents designed to help individual faculty improve their performance.

Faculty Teaching Load (University definition): The number of semester credit hours or courses an individual faculty member is assigned to teach in a semester or an academic year.

Faculty Teaching Load (School definition): Teaching load is defined as the amount (in hours) of Actual Teaching Activity in a year as a ratio to Planned Teaching Activity.  The denominator is standard hours of work in a year.

Example: 50% of the teaching load planned for a 1.0 Faculty FTE is 1,040 hours of teaching. This is based on  2,080 expected work hours per year (i.e., 40 hours per week x 52 weeks; Central HR and the School’s HR offices as well as the School’s Compliance office support this standard).

Faculty Workload: The entirety of a faculty member’s responsibilities. This may include teaching, research/creative expression, clinical duties, public service, and other duties as assigned.

Overload: Temporarily added duties that exceed the academic unit’s approved teaching workload criteria.

Standard Annual Faculty Teaching Load (University definition): The minimum number of organized courses faculty are expected to teach in a given academic year as defined in UNC System Policy 400.3.4.

Standard Annual Faculty Teaching Load: The School does not define this; we plan hours of Teaching in a Calendar Year.

Scholarship: Scholarship involves creating, disseminating, and applying new knowledge or synthesizing existing knowledge in novel ways or practical applications to identifiable problems.

Teaching hours: Contact and non-contact hours (please see Appendix A).

Related Requirements

External Regulations

• North Carolina General Statute § 116-1 - Higher Education: General Provisions: Purpose
• UNC System Policy 300.2.13 - Supplemental Pay Policy for Employees Exempt from the State Personnel Act (EPA)
• UNC System Policy 400.3.4 - Faculty Workload Policy
• UNC System Regulation 400.3.4[R] - Faculty Workload Regulation
• UNC System Regulation 700.6.1[R] - Academic Integrity Regulations
• Policy on Supplemental Pay for EHRA Employees
• Policy on Faculty Reviews for Untenured Faculty
• University Post-Tenure Review Policy
• University Registrar: University Policy Memorandum #30 - Independent Study Policy

Unit Policies, Standards, and Procedures

• Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Governance Document and Manual

Compliance

This policy complies with UNC System Policy 400.3.4 and its implementing regulation.

Contact Information

Name: Mary McClurg, PharmD, MHS

Title: Professor and Executive Vice Dean-Chief Academic Officer

School: UNC-Chapel Hill Eshelman School of Pharmacy

Email: mroth@unc.edu

 

Name: Nicole Kenney, MBA, PHR

Title: Senior Director of Human Resources and Engagement

School: UNC-Chapel Hill Eshelman School of Pharmacy

Email: nkenney@unc.edu