1. Home
  2. Faculty Affairs
  3. A&S Policies and Procedures for Academic General Faculty Members

A&S Policies and Procedures for Academic General Faculty Members

March 2024

Academic General Faculty Members (AGFM) provide important academic service in the College and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, focusing primarily on teaching, research, and integration of professional practice. Revised provost-level policies on the “Employment of Academic General Faculty Members (Tenure-Ineligible)” went into effect in February 2022. This statement of Arts and Sciences policies and procedures for Academic General Faculty Members summarizes how such faculty are to be involved in the governance of the College and its programs, as well as procedures for their appointment, renewal, and promotion. These policies do not apply to faculty hired as ‘wage’ (e.g. adjunct) on the wage track. Policies for wage employees are governed by PROV-026.

The College appoints AGFM at one of three job (profile) types: Professorial, Lecturer, or Instructor. Professorial profiles may be appointed in one of three tracks: Teaching, Research, and Practice and one of three ranks: assistant, associate, or full. Lecturers may also be in one of three ranks: lecturer, senior lecturer, or distinguished lecturer, and are considered to be on the lecturer/instructor track.  The instructor rank (on the lecturer/instructor track) is used primarily for faculty hired to teach music lessons. For AGFM on the professorial track, provost’s policy requires that the full title, including the terms, “research” or “practice” for those on the research and practice track or “general faculty” for those on the teaching track, must be used internally in all communications related to the faculty member’s employment (e.g., renewal letters, etc.). Faculty must also use the full title when applying for external grants or fellowships though this requirement may be waived by the dean. 

The provost’s policy requires that Academic General Faculty Members “are represented equitably in matters of shared governance in the school, including, but not limited to, the hiring, evaluation, and promotion of Academic General Faculty Members. School policies should make clear what rights and opportunities apply to Academic General Faculty Members, such as sabbatical leave, emeritus status, and roles in matters related to the hiring, evaluation, and promotion of tenured or tenure-track faculty members. ”In Arts & Sciences, AGFM will be actively included in the life of their departments and/or programs, not just in the areas specifically mentioned in the provost’s policy, but more broadly in areas like curricular design, advising, the evaluation of teaching performance, email communications, and department events, in a manner that is consistent with the nature and terms of their appointment.

AGFM will be represented appropriately in matters of shared governance, including, but not limited to, the hiring, evaluation, renewal, and promotion of AGFM. As a rule, AGFM or their chosen representative(s) will also be able to vote on issues that directly affect them as citizens of their department or program. Departments and programs will draft bylaws governing the representation of AGFM in matters of shared governance. These bylaws will specify the issues on which AGFM will be eligible to vote. In cases in which voting eligibility on a particular issue might be in question, the chair or director will clarify the matter in advance. A department’s or program’s bylaws on AGFM representation in matters of shared governance may stipulate:

  • That broader categories of AGFM shall participate in decisions related to the hiring, evaluation, renewal, and promotion of AGFM; 
  • and/or that AGFM of one or more ranks shall participate in decisions related to the hiring, evaluation, renewal, and promotion of tenured and tenure-track faculty.

AGFM will be engaged in service whenever appropriate and possible. Lecturer/Instructor, Teaching Track, and Practice Track AGFM are expected to contribute to the academic life of their department and/or program by providing internal service (i.e. to their department, the school, and/or the university). Service effort up to that associated with one full course (i.e. 16.67% for 3-3 teaching faculty) is considered normal, but service effort beyond that is typically compensated with a course reduction. This limit applies also to half-time Lecturers in the Music Faculty who teach a full complement of performance classes. AGFM teaching a 2-2 load, especially those promoted above the entry-level rank, will perform service duties up to 40% of their time.

The case of research AGFM is more complex regarding internal service; most of their paid time is dedicated to conducting research (broadly defined), which is, in turn, supported by external sponsors. Consequently, unless a service commitment is incidental (that is, less than roughly 5% of the faculty member’s time), the department has two choices: the portion of the faculty member’s salary covered by grants can be reduced, with the portion devoted to internal service covered by non-grant sources; or, if the faculty member is supported 100% on grant funds, the faculty member could be paid for internal service on an overload basis, as long as such payment agreements accord with the provost’s policy on Faculty External Consulting and Internal Overload. In either case, funding for the service work will come from departmental, non-grant sources such as facilities and administrative (F&A) recovery fees generated by and distributed to the departments. If this guideline is followed, effort reports certified by research AGFM will be accurate, and external sponsors will not be paying for internal service.

AGFM should be represented on the elected and appointed committees of Arts & Sciences, including the Promotion and Renewal Committee for AGFM as specified above. (For a partial list of such committees, see Elected & Appointed Committees). AGFM should be represented on other school-wide committees of shared governance, whether standing or ad hoc, that for one reason or another may not be listed in the URL above. AGFM are not eligible for sabbatical (sesqui) leave under the College policy. By special request, departments may nominate AGFM who are associate or full professors for emeritus status to honor extraordinary contributions to the University over the course of their career (see PROV-018: Emeritus Faculty).

According to the provost’s policy, “Academic General Faculty Members may be given an initial appointment of a three-year term; a one-year term, followed by a two-year term when renewed; or three successive one-year terms. One-year terms should be used sparingly and primarily when further performance evaluation is necessary or the hire is filling a short-term need, such as a leave replacement. With the first renewal after the third year of continuous service, the Academic General Faculty Member will, when renewed, be offered a three-year appointment. Exceptions to these practices must be approved both in writing and in advance by the provost.” Furthermore, the policy holds that “Academic General Faculty Members will be considered for promotion in rank within seven years in an assistant, lecturer, or instructor rank unless they choose to postpone or forego promotion review by opting out in writing. Choosing to postpone or forego promotion review does not preclude renewal. The faculty member’s supervisor or manager (usually a department chair, associate dean, or dean) and the faculty member may agree that they are ready to be considered for early promotion based on exceptional performance or prior experience.”

Please visit the A&S Faculty Affairs site for full dossier details

Consistent with the above policy, the initial renewal reviews will not normally involve the question of promotion but will focus on the question of whether the faculty member should be renewed for a three-year term. In the final year of the initial three-year contract, departments will organize a renewal review that considers all materials relevant to the faculty member’s performance of his or her duties. The renewal review will be carried out by a committee of at least two members from inside the department. At least one member will be a member of the Academic General Faculty. No external membership is needed, but external members could be substituted for department members where there is no AGFM to serve on the committee from inside the department.

The department renewal committee will consider annual reports over the preceding two years; publications and grants submitted and received for research faculty; course evaluations, syllabi, and course observations for teaching faculty. No student or colleague letters will be part of these initial renewal reviews. The department committee will write a report on the question of whether the faculty member should be renewed, which will be reviewed, discussed, and voted on by faculty. The chair will write a letter reporting his or her recommendation.

The department’s recommendation will be reviewed by the Promotion and Renewal (P&R) Committee for Academic General Faculty Members, which will make a recommendation to the Dean. The Dean will communicate his or her decisions to the chair so that the chair can provide feedback on performance and expectations. The contents of this conversation will be documented by the chair in a memo of conversation that is acknowledged by both the divisional associate dean and the faculty member, and then filed in the faculty member’s personnel file in the Dean’s Office. The Dean will communicate his or her decision on renewal in a letter to the faculty member. Notification will be sent by May 24. A faculty member who is renewed will be granted a second three-year contract. A faculty member on a three-year contract who is not renewed will nevertheless be given notice and granted an additional one-year contract, consistent with Provost policy.

Please visit the A&S Faculty Affairs site for full dossier details

In the last year of the second three-year contract, an Academic General Faculty Member that the Department and College intend to renew will automatically be considered for promotion (i.e., Senior Lecturer or Associate Professor, General Faculty), unless the faculty member informs the department chair in writing that they wish to waive the promotion review. Under A&S policy, up to three years of prior experience in a comparable faculty appointment at the University of Virginia or another institution may be counted towards the six-year timeline for the first promotion. Departments wishing to consider prior experience as comparable must seek Dean's office approval in the spring semester prior to the academic year in which they intend to bring the promotion case.

Candidates will be informed of their eligibility for promotion review, and their option to waive the review, in the spring semester preceding the year in which a promotion review is to be conducted. The specific date by which candidates must waive or confirm promotion review will be set by the department in accordance with the Dean’s office annual guidelines, but the decision must be confirmed in all cases by the end of the spring semester to ensure the Department has sufficient time to organize the promotion review. 

The promotion review will be carried out by a committee of at least three faculty members, one of whom must be an external member. In extraordinary circumstances (e.g., when multiple reviews in a small department make it difficult to staff committees), the dean may approve a committee of two members. All members of the promotion review committee must be of a rank at least equivalent to that being sought, and at least one of the members will be an Academic General Faculty Member of a rank that is more senior than the candidate. The committee’s membership is subject to approval by the relevant Associate Dean. This committee will review the performance of the faculty member over the preceding five years.

The Department proceeds through its consideration process (including discussion of the case by all eligible members of the department personnel committee, and a recorded vote), arriving at one of the following recommendations:

a) a recommendation for promotion, accompanied by all materials that are part of the promotion portfolio (see below), submitted to the Dean at a date subject to annual notice.

b) a recommendation against promotion, accompanied by all materials by the same date.

The department recommendation will then be considered by the Dean’s Promotion and Renewal (P&R) Committee for Academic General Faculty Members. Each year the Dean appoints a P&R Committee consisting of seven to nine members, comprised of both tenure track faculty (TTF) and AGFM. After the committee members have individually studied the materials on the various candidates, the committee will meet to discuss and evaluate them in detail. The chair of the department and/or the chair of the department committee may be invited to appear before the P&R committee to answer questions. The Dean or a representative from among the associate deans will preside and will be present at all meetings of the committee. When the interviews and discussions are completed, the P&R committee will vote on promotion and renewal recommendations for each candidate. Following the final deliberations, the Dean will decide whether or not to concur with the recommendations of the committee and submit those recommendations to the Provost for final approval. Faculty will be informed of the Dean’s recommendation to the Provost. According to the Provost’s Policy, in the event of a negative recommendation from the Dean, the “faculty member will have thirty (30) days to submit a written appeal to the provost. The appeal will be accompanied by adequate documentation and a statement of reasons as to why the recommendation is believed to be inappropriate.”

The Provost will review promotion recommendations from the Dean’s Office (positive and negative). The Provost will make final decisions regarding promotion. In the case of a positive recommendation, the Academic General Faculty Member will be appointed to a five-year contract as Associate Professor on the Academic General Faculty track or Senior Lecturer.  In the case of a negative recommendation, the Provost will notify the Academic General Faculty Member in writing with a copy to the Dean.

As specified in the Provost’s Policy, “A school may renew the contract of a faculty member with assistant, lecturer, or instructor rank who has been denied a promotion. Reappointment following an unsuccessful promotion review will be for three-year terms.” When an AGFM is considered for promotion and denied, the P&R committee may recommend renewal at the same rank, following the same guidelines as an initial third year review. A faculty member on a three-year contract who is not renewed will nevertheless be given notice and granted an additional one-year contract, consistent with Provost policy.

In the case of AGFM who receive a negative promotion decision but are renewed for another three-year term at the same rank, it is A&S policy not to reconsider that faculty member for promotion review in either of the next two academic year cycles. In this case, the faculty member will be eligible to be considered in the third and final year of the contract, following the same procedures summarized above. A decision to waive promotion at the time of eligibility must be documented by the candidate in writing. 

If a faculty member waives promotion in year 6 (which, as noted above, must be done in writing), they will be considered for reappointment for a three-year term and automatically eligible for promotion consideration in the last year of that term. A faculty member may request to be reviewed for promotion prior to the final year of the reappointment, as long as the request is made in writing to the chair and associate dean by the end of the spring semester to ensure the Department has sufficient time to organize the promotion review.

Please visit the A&S Faculty Affairs site for full dossier details.

In order to meet the criterion of sustained excellence, faculty serving in the rank of Associate Professor, General Faculty or Senior Lecturer typically become eligible to be considered for promotion to Professor, General Faculty or Distinguished Lecturer in their sixth year. In exceptional cases, faculty may be considered in their fourth or fifth year of service as Associate Professor, General Faculty or Senior Lecturer, if the criteria elaborated below are met. 

Feedback provided to faculty in conjunction with the annual review should help a faculty member to determine readiness for consideration for promotion (see below). Departments will regularly review the progress of Associate Professors toward attaining the standards consistent with promotion to Professor. If in the judgment of the department the candidate is not ready for promotion consideration in their sixth year, the department will make recommendations to the candidate for further professional and scholarly development and will reconsider the case at regular intervals.  

Candidates must convey their request to be considered for promotion in in the spring semester preceding the year in which a promotion review is to be conducted. The specific date by which candidates must request promotion review will be set by the department in accordance with the Dean’s office annual guidelines, but the decision must be confirmed in all cases by the end of the spring semester to ensure the Department has sufficient time to organize the promotion review.

The process for the review of promotion to Professor, General Faculty or Distinguished Lecturer is identical to that outlined above for the first promotion review.

When an AGFM is considered for promotion and denied, they will be considered for renewal at the same rank, following the same guidelines as a regular renewal review. A faculty member who is not renewed will nevertheless be given notice and granted an additional one-year contract, consistent with Provost policy.

An AGFM who receives a negative promotion decision and is renewed for another five-year term at the same rank may be considered for promotion again in the third academic year cycle following the previous promotion review.
 

Standards for Promotion

Expectations for promotion and the materials required for promotion reviews differ according to track and rank. 

Lecturers

Faculty with the titles Lecturer are members of the Academic General Faculty whose duties are at least 60% (2-2) in teaching, and who are employed in positions that require a minimum of a masters’ degree and hold such a degree. Lecturers teach undergraduate classes, typically lower-division courses (e.g., 1000 and 2000-level). Faculty in their sixth year on the Lecturer track are eligible to be considered for promotion to Senior Lecturer. According to the provost’s policy, promotion to this rank requires “demonstrated excellence as a teacher.”

According to the provost’s policy, “Promotion to Distinguished Lecturer requires further sustained excellence as a teacher and substantial service to the school or University.” A&S requires, further, that promotion to these ranks requires a demonstrated impact on pedagogy in the field. This may take the form of presentations or demonstrations at conferences, published articles or books on pedagogy, and other means of disseminating pedagogical techniques. Substantial service to the school or University may include service as a department/program officer, service on committees, or substantial and sustained advising responsibilities.

Faculty with the titles Assistant Professor, General Faculty; Associate Professor, General Faculty; and Professor, General Faculty are members of the Academic General Faculty who duties are at least 60% (2-2) in teaching, and who are employed in positions that require a qualifying terminal degree and hold such a degree. AGFM in the teaching track may teach undergraduate courses at any level as well as Master’s level courses (5000-level classes) at the discretion of the department chair or program director. Faculty in their sixth year as Assistant Professor, General Faculty are eligible to be considered for promotion to Associate Professor, General Faculty. According to the provost’s policy, to be promoted to associate professor on the teaching track, “Academic General Faculty Members must demonstrate excellence in teaching and meet or exceed the expectations of their position as defined in their appointment letter, position statement, or school policy. They also must demonstrate, either through internal review or local or regional reputation, that they have attained status as a superior educator. Scholarship is not required for promotion unless it is specified as a requirement in the appointment letter, position statement, or school policy. If required, scholarship must be evaluated for promotion on the teaching track according to the standards set out in the school’s policies on Academic General Faculty Members.” The College neither requires nor considers scholarship for promotion to Associate Professor on the teaching track unless it is scholarship related to pedagogy or teaching.  

According to the provost’s policy, Promotion to Professor, General Faculty on the teaching track “requires sustained excellence in teaching, contributions to the educational capabilities and excellence of the University, and a regional, national, or international reputation based on professional or academic achievements. The extent of the required reputation may depend on the discipline. Promotion to professor also may require further achievements, as set forth in the school’s policies on Academic General Faculty Members, such as substantial scholarship, national contributions to the development of curricula or pedagogy in their discipline, or many years of extraordinary service to the school or University.” A&S policy requires that AGFM seeking promotion to the rank of Professor on the teaching track contribute to the educational capabilities and excellence of the College and/or University as demonstrated by the development and dissemination of pedagogical techniques, involvement in the Center for Teaching Excellence, pedagogical mentoring of teaching faculty, participating in regional and national conferences, and so forth. Substantial service to the school or University will also be valued and may include service as a department/program officer, service on committees, or substantial and sustained advising responsibilities.

Faculty with the titles Research Assistant Professor; Research Associate Professor; and Research Professor are members of the Academic General Faculty who duties are at least 60% in research, and who are employed in positions that require a qualifying terminal degree and hold such a degree. Faculty in their sixth year as Research Assistant Professor are eligible to be considered for promotion to Research Associate Professor. According to the provost’s policy, to be promoted to associate professor, research track AGFM “must establish a substantial record of scholarship appropriate to their responsibilities and demonstrate leadership in local, regional, or national discipline-related affairs.”

According to the provost’s policy, promotion to Research Professor requires “independent research or research support as defined in the appointment letter or position statement, a sustained record of scholarship appropriate to the position, and national or international recognition for contributions to the field. Promotion to professor also may require further achievements, as set forth in the school’s policies on Academic General Faculty Members, such as significant innovations or accomplishments in research or many years of extraordinary service to the school or University.” The record of scholarship will typically include a substantial body of peer-reviewed work (e.g., a book, articles, digital projects) published since promotion to Associate Research Professor. National and international recognition will be demonstrated by letters from faculty beyond UVA. Extraordinary service to the school or University may be demonstrated by development or leadership of centers or programs, service as a department/program officer, service on committees, or substantial and sustained advising.

Faculty with the titles Assistant Professor of Practice; Associate Professor of Practice; and Professor of Practice are members of the Academic General Faculty who are employed in positions that focus on “integrating professional experience with the academic mission of the school, as well as providing service to the University.” Faculty in their sixth year as Assistant Professor of Practice are eligible to be considered for promotion to Associate Professor of Practice. According to the provost’s policy, faculty with this rank must “demonstrate sustained excellence in integrating professional experience with the academic mission of the school, meet or exceed the expectations of their position as defined in their appointment letter, position statement, or school policy, and receive regional, national, or international recognition for contributions to their professions. Scholarship is not required for promotion unless it is specified as a requirement in the appointment letter, position statement, or school policy. If required, scholarship must be evaluated for promotion on the practice track according to the standards laid out in the school’s policies on Academic General Faculty Members.” Scholarship or creative work related to the field of practice or teaching will be considered.

According to the provost’s policy, promotion to Professor of Practice requires “further sustained excellence in integrating professional experience with the academic mission of the school, substantial contributions to the capabilities and excellence of the University, and further recognition for regional, national, or international achievements in the relevant professional field(s). Promotion to professor also may require further achievements, as set forth in the school’s policies on Academic General Faculty Members, such as substantial scholarship, national or international contributions to the integration of professional experience with academic instruction or scholarly research, or many years of extraordinary service to the school or University.” Substantial contributions to the capabilities and excellence of the University may be demonstrated by development or leadership of centers or programs, service as a department/program officer, service on committees, substantial and sustained advising.

The contract renewal process for AGFM who have been promoted depends on the annual performance ratings that have been received since the last promotion or contract review. All salaried members of the AGFM must undergo annual performance reviews in accordance with the provost’s policy, Annual Performance Reviews. Arts & Sciences requires departments to review their AGFM annually, including not only faculty in multi-year appointments but also those on one-year salaried contracts. Departments rate each faculty member’s performance in their areas of responsibility (e.g., teaching and service), using the Excellent-Very Good-Good-Fair-Poor scale, and are required to communicate their rating and qualitative feedback on performance to each faculty member. This feedback must indicate how a faculty member is performing relative to the standards for promotion.

The renewal process for these faculty who have been promoted is governed by the provost’s policy which states:

“Once promoted to associate professor or senior lecturer rank, the Academic General Faculty Member will continue to be reappointed for three or five-year terms, per school policy, and may be given notice of non-renewal in accordance with the standards of renewal defined below in section IV.E. Standards of Notice for Non-Renewal, only with the provost’s advance written permission and only if one of the two conditions applies:

  1. The faculty member’s performance falls below the standards required by the school: At any time, or if the annual performance review or interim evaluations reveal that, the faculty member’s performance does not meet the expectations of their position as defined in their appointment letter, position statement, or school policy, the school will provide the faculty member with written guidance that documents the deficiencies in performance, stipulates that future reappointments are contingent upon significant improvement in performance, and establishes a timeline by which the faculty member needs to demonstrate significant improvements in performance.
  2. The school no longer needs the disciplinary expertise for which the faculty member was hired: Situations that may warrant non-renewal include, but are not limited to, the closure of a specialized center, sustained declines in student enrollment in a particular field, significant curricular redesign, or a change in curricular standards defined by an accrediting agency.

These conditions apply as well to Academic General Faculty Members hired at or above associate professor or senior lecturer rank who are renewed after their initial appointment term (see section IV.A. Initial Appointment Term). For positions supported by contingent funds, the provisions of this section do not preclude schools from placing the faculty member on leave without pay and/or giving immediate notice of non-renewal in the event such funds are no longer available (see section VII. Positions Supported by Contingent Funds).”

Arts & Sciences considers the ratings of “Excellent” or “Very Good” to constitute our “high standards.” When a department rates the annual performance of a faculty member below these levels (i.e., “good” “fair” or “poor”)—regardless of when over the contract period this happens—A&S will convene the Promotion and Renewal Committee for AGFM and review the evidence of performance below the required high standards. If the below-standards rating is confirmed, the Dean’s Office will work with the department to ensure the faculty member receives “written guidance that documents the deficiencies in performance, stipulates that future reappointments are contingent upon significant improvement in performance, and establishes a timeline by which the faculty member needs to demonstrate significant improvements in performance.”

Contract renewals for AGFM covered by the new policy who have been promoted beyond the entry-level rank (and faculty who have earned ECE under the old policy) who have received annual performance reviews at or above the “high standards” level over the current contract period – If an AGFM’s annual reviews confirm strong performance across the current contract period, they will be renewed for five years. Contract renewals will occur in the penultimate year of the contract, except 1) when there has been a loss of external or contingent funding needed to support the position; or 2) when “the school no longer needs the disciplinary expertise for which the faculty member was hired. Situations that may warrant non-renewal include, but are not limited to, the closure of a specialized center, sustained declines in student enrollment in a particular field, curricular redesign, or a change in curricular standards defined by an accrediting agency.”

Contract renewals for AGFM promoted beyond the entry-level rank (or with ECE) who have received annual performance reviews below the “high standards” level. Faculty whose average annual review ratings for their areas of responsibility fall below the “high standards” level at any time during the current contract prior to the penultimate year of the contract will undergo a full renewal review (following the process outlined for third year reviews above), with a department report subject to a vote of faculty in the department; a chairs letter; etc.; submitted to the P&R committee for review and a recommendation to the Dean. The review will assess whether the faculty member’s overall performance over the period meets the “high standards” expectation, especially in the period after the faculty member was given “written guidance that documents the deficiencies in performance, stipulates that future reappointments are contingent upon significant improvement in performance, and establishes a timeline by which the faculty member needs to demonstrate significant improvements in performance.” If the Dean recommends against renewal, the recommendation will go to the Provost for review. If the provost approves that negative recommendation, the faculty member will be given one year’s notice of non-renewal.

The policy requiring a year’s notice before non-renewal does not apply when positions are supported by contingent funds that are no longer available, or when termination is for just cause.

Christa Acampora, Dean
College and Graduate School of Arts & Sciences