Search form

University of Virginia UVA Arts & Sciences Default

Implementation Plan: New Policies for Academic General Faculty Members (AGFM)

FINAL (approved at FAS meeting on April 21, 2017)

PDF version of this document

Background 

For many years, the University only had a limited number of titles available for non-track faculty members. Faculty appointed at the “Lecturer” rank had no opportunity to advance to titles like “Senior Lecturer” that indicated career advancement. In recent years, the University has appointed the bulk of their non-track faculty appointments into positions with this title, prompting these faculty members to advocate for improvements in their status—not only new titles but also more opportunities to participate in the governance of departments and the schools. The provost’s office led a policy review lasting several years that resulted in new policies addressing many of these concerns, under the title “Employment of Academic General Faculty Members (Tenure-Ineligible)” This new policy went into effect on January 3, 2017. 

The policy requires each school, including Arts & Sciences, to develop an implementation plan for the new policy. The plan needs to conform with the provost’s policy (and will be reviewed by the provost’s office to ensure compliance) but it leaves room for the school to spell out details of its standards and procedures. The implementation plan summarized below has been approved by the A&S Personnel Committee, the A&S Steering Committee, and was approved by a vote of the A&S Faculty on April 21, 2017. 

Analysis of Positions 

The provost’s policy requires that part-time and full-time salaried Academic General Faculty Members (AGFM) be assigned to one of several tracks, each of which is constrained by provost guidelines. The assignment of titles will be guided by the principle that faculty who do work that requires a PhD or terminal degree and hold that degree should have professorial rank. Positions require a PhD for a variety of reasons, for example, because advanced scientific research can only be done by someone with the skills and independent research capability that come from PhD training, or because the teaching of advanced and scholarly courses requires the training that can only be provided by a PhD or equivalent terminal degree. 

If the provost approves our plan by May to assign Lecturers in the way summarized below, we expect to carry out the process of assigning faculty to tracks by July 1, 2017. Note that Lecturers who are in “wage” positions (paid bi-weekly instead of monthly), will not see any change in their titles. Wage Lecturers are governed by the provost’s policy on Faculty Wage Employment

Because the provost’s policy states that “With the exception of faculty members on the practice track, Academic General Faculty Members who hold professorial rank normally must hold the terminal degree in their discipline,” we will start our analysis by asking which of our Lecturers currently hold a terminal degree such as a PhD or MFA. Lecturers who do not hold one of these degrees will remain on the Lecturer track, except in the case of professors of practice or exceptional circumstances (requiring approval by the provost’s office).  

Before we reassign Lecturers holding a terminal degree to one of the tracks offering professorial ranks, we will next ask a second question: is the AGFM employed in a position whose “primary teaching responsibilities…do not require the qualifying terminal degree” (typically because they involve teaching of undergraduate competencies or technical skills)?

To determine which positions fall in this category, the Dean’s Office will review job listings to see which ones are requiring the terminal degree. If positions in a particular area of teaching or research consistently require a PhD or terminal degree because the nature of the work requires this advanced training, we will reclassify these positions to the teaching or research professorial ranks. If the positions consistently require only the MA or other non-terminal degree as a condition for employment, or state that “PhD is preferred but not required,” because the work does not require this advanced training, we will keep these positions on the Lecturer Track, even if the specific faculty member in that position happens to hold a PhD degree.

Finally, we will ask a third question: how does the allocation of duties in the position across teaching, research, and service fit into the newly-established AGFM tracks. Most salaried Lecturers have duties that fit neatly into the Teaching, Research, Practice, or Lecturer Tracks listed below. We note, however, that positions currently defined as “Post-Doctoral Fellows and Lecturers” generally do not fit any of the AGFM tracks. These are actually career-development positions where recent PhD’s have an opportunity to develop both their teaching and research skills, just as post-doctoral research associates in the sciences do. We will, therefore, reassign these positions to the research associate category in the Professional Research Staff (PRS).

 

Assigning Salaried Lecturers to New Tracks

Teaching Track (Assistant Professor, General Faculty; Associate Professor, General Faculty; Professor, General Faculty) - Salaried Lecturers whose duties are at least 60% (2-2) in teaching, who are employed in positions that require a qualifying terminal degree and hold such a degree, will be assigned to the teaching track and will receive one of these titles. These teaching track titles will also be assigned to Monroe Hall deans who serve as Assistant Deans / Association Deans.

Research Track (Research Assistant Professor; Research Associate Professor; and Research Professor) - Salaried Lecturers 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, will be assigned to the research track and will receive one of these titles.

Practice Track (Assistant Professor of Practice; Associate Professor of Practice; and Professor of Practice) - Salaried Lecturers who are employed in positions that focus on “integrating professional experience with the academic mission of the school” will be assigned to the practice track, even if they do not hold a terminal degree. They will, however, be required to have relevant professional experience “equivalent to a PhD.”

Lecturer Track (Lecturer/Instructor – Senior Lecturer – Distinguished Lecturer) – Salaried Lecturers who do not fit in any of the above categories will be placed on the Lecturer track, where they will now have an opportunity to advance to the new titles of “Senior Lecturer” and “Distinguished Lecturer.”

Teaching Post-Doctoral Fellows – Current teaching post-docs in programs such as the Whyburn Fellow program where teaching makes up less than 60% of duties, and the career development of the recent PhD is the focus, will retain their current employment status, but these positions will be shifted to the PRS “research associate” category as we make new hires.

Grandfathering of Titles and Duties for AGFM Hired Before January 3, 2017

Academic General Faculty Members hired before January 3, 2017, will not be required to shift duties or adopt a new rank solely to fit into one of the above categories. For example, someone with the current title “Associate Professor, General Faculty” who is assigned to duties that are 50% teaching and 50% service can keep that title, even though this position does not fit the definition of teaching track position (requiring 60% teaching). Note also that faculty who temporarily take on additional administrative duties (such as Chairs) will not need to change titles if their teaching titles fall below 60%. Someone who currently holds a professorial title but does not hold a PhD or terminal degree will not be required to give up that title.

 

Assigning Ranks to Faculty with the Current Title of Lecturer

As soon as our implementation policy has been approved by the provost, probably by July 1, 2017, we will begin working with department leadership to assign Lecturers to specific ranks on the tracks to which they have been assigned.

Lecturer Track – Current salaried Lecturers on this track who have been in their role for six years or less will retain the title Lecturer. Current salaried Lecturers who earned ECE (Expectation of Continuing Employment) in the 2016-17 review cycle or in earlier years will be assigned to the rank of Senior Lecturer. In the future, faculty who have completed at least six years of service in a Lecturer role will be eligible to be reviewed for promotion to the rank of Senior Lecturer through the promotion process detailed below. According to the provost’s policy, “Promotion to senior lecturer or senior instructor requires demonstrated excellence as a teacher.” Excellence as a teacher should be demonstrated by course evaluations, observations of teaching by colleagues, and student letters. Where data on student performance (e.g., language competency exams, measures of student progress, examples of stellar work, etc.) are available, these should be included. In 2017-18 or in later years, departments will be welcome to initiate reviews of Senior Lecturers who have served with distinction for many years for promotion to the new rank of Distinguished Lecturer. According to the provost’s policy, “Promotion to distinguished lecturer or distinguished instructor requires further sustained excellence as a teacher and substantial service to the school or University.” Excellence as a teacher should be demonstrated by course evaluations, observations of teaching by colleagues, and student letters. Where data on student performance (e.g., language competency exams, measures of student progress, examples of stellar work, etc.) are available, these should be included. In addition, candidates for Distinguished Lecturer should demonstrate 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.

Teaching Track – All Lecturers moved into this track will be assigned the title Assistant Professor, General Faculty starting August 25, 2017. In 2017-18 or in later years departments will be welcome to initiate promotion reviews for teaching track faculty who have served in a salaried Lecturer/Assistant Professor, General Faculty role for at least six years. Reviews of faculty for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor, General Faculty, will be carried out through the process detailed below. According to the provost’s policy, faculty with this rank must “demonstrate sustained excellence in teaching and meet or exceed the expectations of their position as defined in their appointment letter or position statement. They also must demonstrate that they have attained a local or regional reputation as a superior educator. Scholarship is not required for promotion unless it is specified as a requirement in the appointment letter or position statement. If required, scholarship for promotion on the teaching track must be evaluated for its contributions to the enhancement of the Academic General Faculty Member’s teaching.” Sustained excellence in teaching should be demonstrated by course evaluations, observations of teaching by colleagues, and student letters. Where data on student performance (e.g., language competency exams, measures of student progress, examples of stellar work, etc.) are available, these should be included. A local reputation as a superior educator will be demonstrated by letters from UVa faculty. A regional reputation as a superior educator may be demonstrated by letters from faculty beyond UVa, commenting on the impact of the candidates’ scholarship on their effectiveness as a teacher. Similarly, departments may initiate promotion reviews for the rank Full Professor, General Faculty, in which case the faculty must demonstrate “further sustained excellence in teaching, contributions to the educational capabilities and excellence of the University, and regional, national, or international reputation as a superior educator. Promotion to the rank of Professor also may require further achievements, as set forth in the school’s policies on Academic General Faculty Members, such as substantial scholarship that enhances their teaching, national contributions to the development of curriculum or pedagogy in their discipline, or many years of extraordinary service to the school or University.” Sustained excellence in teaching should be demonstrated by course evaluations, observations of teaching by colleagues, and student letters. Where data on student performance (e.g., language competency exams, measures of student progress, examples of stellar work, etc.) are available, these should be included. A regional, national, or international reputation as a superior educator will be demonstrated by letters from faculty beyond UVa. Contributions to the educational capabilities and excellence of the University will be demonstrated by development and dissemination within the University of pedagogical techniques, involvement in the Center for Teaching Excellence, pedagogical mentoring of teaching faculty, participating in regional and national conferences, and so forth.

Research Track – All Lecturers on this track will be assigned the title Research Assistant Professor, starting August 25, 2017. In 2017-18 or in later years, departments will be welcome to initiate promotion reviews for research track faculty who have served in a salaried Lecturer/Research Assistant Professor role for at least six years. Reviews of faculty for promotion to the rank of Research Associate Professor will be carried out through the process detailed below. According to the provost’s policy, faculty with this rank must have a record of “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” while for promotion to Research Professor, a faculty member must have “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.

Practice Track - All Lecturers on this track will be assigned the title Assistant Professor of Practice, starting August 25, 2017. In 2017-18 or in later years, departments will be welcome to initiate promotion reviews for practice track faculty who have served in a salaried Lecturer/Assistant Professor of Practice role for at least six years. Reviews of faculty for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor of Practice will be carried out through the process detailed below. 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 or position statement, 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 or position statement. If required, scholarship for promotion on the practice track should relate primarily to integrating professional experience into academic instruction or scholarly research.” Sustained excellence in integrating professional experience with the academic mission of the school may be demonstrated by course evaluations, observations of teaching by colleagues, student letters, and letters from professionals in the field commenting on the employability of the individual’s students. Where data on student performance (e.g., competency exams, measures of student progress, examples of stellar work, etc.) are available, these should be included. Regional, national, or international recognition for contributions to their professions may be demonstrated by letters from professionals in the field. For promotion to the rank of Professor of Practice, a faculty member must demonstrate “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 related to integrating professional experience into academic instruction or scholarly research, 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.” Sustained excellence in integrating professional experience with the academic mission of the school may be demonstrated by course evaluations, observations of teaching by colleagues, student letters, and letters from professionals in the field commenting on the employability of the individual’s students. Where data on student performance (e.g., competency exams, measures of student progress, examples of stellar work, etc.) are available, these should be included. Further recognition for regional, national, or international achievements in the field will be demonstrated by letters from professionals in the field. 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.

Lecturers on the Teaching, Research, and Practice Tracks Recently Reviewed for ECE – Arts & Sciences plans to authorize faculty who have recently been reviewed for ECE and therefore have a dossier of external and internal letters to be reviewed for promotion to the Associate rank on their tracks on an expedited basis, drawing on letters gathered earlier for these reviews.

Annual Reviews

According to the provost’s policy, all salaried members of the Academic General Faculty must undergo annual performance reviews in accordance with the provost’s policy “Annual Performance Reviews.” Arts & Sciences is requiring all departments to review their AGFM annually. This requirement applies not only to faculty in three-year appointments but also to those on one-year salaried contracts. Departments should 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 should communicate their rating and qualitative feedback on performance to each faculty member.

 

Renewal Reviews

According to the provost’s policy, AGFM who have not been promoted beyond the entry-level rank (Lecturer; Assistant Professor, General Faculty; Research Assistant Professor, Assistant Professor of Practice) must undergo renewal reviews far enough in advance of their renewal date to meet clearly defined standards of notice.

The policy gives schools the option of appointing AGFM to a series of up to three one-year appointments. Such appointments may be renewed, but policy explicitly states: “One-year appointments of AGFM (whether paid over nine or twelve months) carry no expectation of renewal and do not require advanced notice.” Under Arts & Sciences procedures, one-year renewals do not require consulting with a renewal committee. The Chair or Director will write an email to the relevant Associate Dean summarizing the faculty member’s performance based on the annual review and recommending renewal (or declining to do so). According to provost’s policy, any renewal beyond these first three one-year terms must be into a three-year contract, which requires prior approval by the Associate Dean.

Faculty who are in an initial three-year appointment are to undergo a renewal review, through the process defined below, in their second year, providing a full year of notice should they not be renewed. The same standards apply for faculty who have been renewed into a three-year appointment but have not yet been promoted beyond the entry-level rank. They will be subject to a renewal review through the process described below in the penultimate year of their contract, providing a full year of notice should they not be renewed. Renewals for faculty who have not yet been promoted above the entry-level rank or earned ECE under the old policy are subject not only to faculty meeting performance expectations associated with their positions but also to the availability of funds and continued need for the position in view of shifting curricula or enrollment demand. Arts & Sciences reserves the right to end a position on the grounds that shifts in curricular need and available resources do not allow us to continue the position. Because the ability of the school to make decisions on these bases are constrained after promotion beyond the entry-level rank, there will be a particular focus on this question of priorities and resources in the second year of salaried AGFM employment (a year before renewal into a three-year contract) and the fifth year of salaried AGFM employment. Arts & Sciences will solicit feedback from departments about hiring priorities, curricular need, and resources affecting the renewal of faculty in these years during the annual hiring plan consultations.

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 consistent annual performance reviews at or above the “high standards” level – If a check of annual reviews confirms strong performance across the preceding three-year period, we will renew these contracts in the penultimate year of the contract, except: 1) when there has been a loss of grant 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” required by the school are governed by the above two conditions and by the provost policy quoted here:

- At any time, or if the annual performance review or interim evaluations reveal that the faculty member’s performance is not at a high level, 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.

To operationalize this provision of provost policy, Arts and Sciences will augment the annual department reviews with a Dean’s level review of every case that results in a review below the “high standards” level. If this review, based on consultations with the Promotion and Renewal Committee, confirms that a faculty member’s annual review was thorough and fair, and that the department is applying “high standards” in a way that is consistent with practices in other departments, the Dean’s Office will work with department chairs to provide the faculty member with the improvement plan stipulated in the provost’s policy. If performance has not returned to the “high standards” expected by the school by the penultimate year of the AGFM’s contract, despite remediation efforts, the department will be asked to carry out a full renewal review, with a department report submitted to the P&R committee for review and a recommendation to the Dean. If the Dean recommends against renewal, the recommendation will go to the Provost’s Office for review. If the provost office approves that negative recommendation, the faculty member will be given one year’s notice of non-renewal.

Note that 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.

The provost’s policy invites the schools to provide feedback to AGFM when their performance has fallen below the “high standards required by the school.” The annual review policy requires departments to notify faculty each year how they have been rated in their areas of responsibility. Arts & Sciences considers the ratings of “Excellent,” “Very Good,” or “Good” to constitute our “high standards.” Faculty whose annual review ratings fall below these levels should review carefully the improvement plan and consider this to be the advice on how they need to improve their performance in the designated time frame

Process for Renewal and Promotion Reviews

We will constitute a new body to carry out renewal and promotion reviews for AGFM in the spring semester of each year. The “AGFM Promotion and Renewal Committee” (P&R) will make recommendations to the Dean of Arts & Sciences based on recommendations coming to it from the departments for the following types of cases:

Renewals of the three-year contracts for faculty who have not yet been promoted beyond entry- level titles or earned ECE under the old policy. These reviews will take place in the penultimate year of the faculty member’s contract.
Promotions of AGFM to the ranks of Senior Lecturer; Distinguished Lecture; Associate Professor, General Faculty; Professor, General Faculty; Research Associate Professor; Research Professor.

In September of each academic year, departments will consider the contract status of each AGFM and determine which faculty are up for the penultimate-year contract renewal review, and consult with faculty who are eligible for a promotion review and wish to come up that year. These faculty members should receive clear instructions on the timetable for the renewal or promotion review that year, including when materials are due, and what materials are due.

At all levels, the major considerations for renewal of contract and promotion for the AGFM are excellence in the performance of all duties of the position. For promotion, please reference the promotion standards specific to each rank.

 

The Department Level – The department will constitute a renewal or promotion committee composed of at least two faculty members from the department, although members from outside the department may be included. 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 two years (for first renewal) or five years (for second renewal, or for promotion in rank). For this purpose, the department will compile recent annual reports, annual reviews, and any feedback provided to the faculty member. For teaching positions, the department will compile teaching evaluations, teaching observation reports, student letters, and syllabi. For research positions, the department will compile books, articles, digital projects, and other publications. In all cases, the candidate will provide a CV and a written statement summarizing the candidate’s approach to his or her major areas of responsibilities.

No letters are required for renewal reviews. For promotion cases to the ranks of Senior Lecturer; Associate Professor, General Faculty; and Associate Professor of Practice, no external letters are needed but 4-6 internal letters are required. For the ranks of Research Associate Professor; Research Professor; Distinguished Lecturer; Professor, General Faculty; and Professor of Practice, external letters as well as internal letters are required, totaling 6-8 and split evenly across internal and external letters. In all cases, solicitations of letters will be based on templates provided by the Dean’s Office and including details on the position’s areas of responsibility and standards for promotion for the relevant rank.

The renewal or promotion committee will write a review summarizing the record of performance, based on the materials compiled—being sure to cover all areas of responsibility, including service where appropriate. The renewal or promotion review report will be shared with all faculty with voting authority on the case (which will include AGFM of more senior rank), discussed at a department meeting, and a vote taken. The chair will summarize the discussion and report the vote in a “chair’s letter” which will be part of the file going up to the Dean’s Office.

The Dean’s Office Level – The P&R Committee will be composed of seven to nine members, with a majority drawn from the senior ranks of the 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 recommendations for each candidate. Following the final deliberations, the Dean will decide whether or not to concur in the recommendations of the committee.

The Provost’s Level – The Provost will review promotion recommendations from the Dean’s Office (positive and negative). In the case of a negative recommendation, the dean will notify the Academic General Faculty Member in writing with a copy to the provost. The faculty member will have thirty days to submit a written appeal to the provost. See provost policy for details.

 

Governance

The provost’s policy requires that Academic General Faculty Members be “represented appropriately 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 may, but are not required to, include Academic General Faculty Members 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 or their chosen representatives 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 restrict participation in (e.g., voting on) the hiring, evaluation, renewal, and promotion of AGFM to AGFM of a higher rank.

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, Teaching Track, and Practice Track AGFM are expected to contribute to the academic life of their department and/or program by providing service to their department, the school, and/or the university. For AGFM on these tracks with a full 3-3 load, service should normally occupy no more than 10% of their time, although more substantial service duties such as Director of Undergraduate Program work may be assigned if the faculty member is given a course reduction from his or her base teaching load. This 10% 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, in some sense, even more complex in regard to 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 service covered by non-grant sources; or the faculty member could be paid for 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 overhead 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 committee activity.

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 http://as.virginia.edu/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 (e.g., the Page-Barbour Committee).