The University of Wisconsin Oshkosh
Policy # [####]
Faculty Retention, Development and Sabbatical (FAC 4.A)

Original Issuance Date: MMMM DD, YYYY
Last Revision Date: MMMM DD, YYYY
Next Review Date: MMMM DD, YYYY







FAC 4.A.1. Faculty Retention.

Probationary faculty are offered positions with the expectation that they will become tenured faculty at the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh. To achieve that end, tenured faculty at the department level should begin advising probationary faculty during their first year of employment about the process for earning a tenured appointment. Support for probationary faculty includes such things as a mentoring system, a collegial atmosphere and a clear explanation of what is expected of the probationary faculty member. It is expected that tenured faculty will, after each regular performance review, provide appropriate advice and counsel to all probationary faculty. Just as tenured faculty have an obligation to review the work of probationary faculty in a fair and honest manner, probationary faculty also have an obligation to present materials for renewal and tenure in an orderly file that documents their teaching, scholarship and service.

FAC 4.A.2. Faculty Development.

The Faculty Development Program provides financial support for well-defined professional development projects through the following program components: Teaching, Research,Faculty College, University Needs, Off-Campus, Academic Staff Professional Development, University Institutes, Professional Development Semester, Individually Planned Program, and Small Grant.

All continuing faculty and academic staff holding full or part time academic year or annual appointments are eligible to participate in the Program.

A detailed description of the Program and each component is contained in the Faculty Development Program Handbook, which can be located at http:/ on the Faculty Development Program Web page

FAC 4.A.3. Sabbaticals.

Note: The following institutional guidelines are drawn from the UW System sabbatical program guidelines (ACPS-3.3) as revised Summer 1994 and describe program administration practices as implemented at the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh.

(1) Purpose.

The purpose of the faculty sabbatical program is to enable recipients to be engaged in intensive study in order to become more effective teachers and scholars and to enhance their services to the University. This privilege should be granted to faculty members on the merit of their past academic contributions.

(2) Eligibility.

A faculty member is eligible for a sabbatical award under the following terms:

(a) A faculty member must have completed six or more years of full-time instructional service, or its equivalent, in the UW System and not have taken a sabbatical within the UW System during the previous six years of full-time service, or its equivalent.

(b) Leaves of absence, regardless of source of funding (including personal resources), will be excluded in determining a faculty member’s years of full-time service.

(c) Preference shall be given to those making significant contributions to teaching and who have not had a leave of absence, regardless of funding source, in the previous four years.

(d) A sabbatical will not be awarded to a faculty member denied reappointment to a permanent position for the year following the proposed sabbatical leave.

(3) Types.

Two types of sabbatical leaves are available to faculty members at the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh:

(a) A faculty member may take a sabbatical leave for an academic year and receive from the institution 65% of his/her full compensation for that period.

(b) A faculty member may take a sabbatical leave for one semester of the academic year and receive from the institution his/her full compensation for that period.

While the outcomes of a sabbatical will vary from faculty to faculty, and from college to college, there is a general expectation that the activities and outcomes contained in a one-year sabbatical will be greater than those contained in a one-semester sabbatical. The Faculty Development Board will assess the proposal to determine that the nature and extent of the proposed activities and outcomes are appropriate for the length (one semester or two semesters) of the requested sabbatical.

(4) Conditions.

The following conditions govern the faculty sabbatical program:

(a) A sabbatical leave will be granted for the purposes of enhancing teaching, course and curriculum development, or research related to the faculty member’s field of expertise.

(b) A faculty member may receive supplementary grants or other awards while on sabbatical leave, but such compensation, when combined with the amount of institutional compensation, shall not exceed the full compensation normally received from the UW System for the sabbatical period.

(c) Such additional grants or awards may be received by a faculty member only if the conditions for accepting the additional resources do not interfere with the stated purposes of a faculty member’s sabbatical program.

(d) A faculty member may not use the sabbatical leave to accept other paid employment during the period of the leave, unless as stipulated as a condition of the leave.

(e) A faculty member must specify in his/her application for the sabbatical program all grants or other awards applied for or to be received during the leave.

(f) A faculty member must return to the institution from which leave was granted for at least one academic year of service after the termination of the sabbatical, or repay any compensation (salary, plus the University’s share of fringe benefits) received from the UW System during the sabbatical.

(g) A faculty member must submit a written report detailing his/her accomplishments during the leave within three months after the project completion date.

(h) Prior academic achievements, however, do not take precedence over the need to address in detail the criteria listed in Section (6) below.

(5) Procedures.

(a) A Sabbatical application is due in the Dean’s office on the last Monday of September.

(b) The Sabbatical narrative should not exceed 10-12 double-spaced pages in length.

(c) System guidelines require a detailed listing or description of how the University will accommodate the faculty member’s absence. A letter from the Department Chair must describe how the faculty member’s absence will affect course offerings and must be included as an attachment to each copy of the proposal. However, a letter from the Department Chair that speaks to the quality of the proposed activities is unnecessary and should not be submitted.

(d) A complete vita must be included as an attachment to each copy of the proposal.

(e) Each copy of the proposal must have a Faculty Development Program cover sheet.

(f) In addition, a brief vita (not to exceed one, double-spaced printed page) must be submitted on a 3-1/2″ disk as a Word Perfect/MS Word or ASCII file.

(g) Sabbatical proposals (8 copies) must be submitted to the Faculty Development Board through the department chair (or equivalent) and the respective Dean/Unit Head.

(6) Auxiliary Support.

Limited auxiliary support for travel-related expenses only, e.g., transportation, lodging is available through the sabbatical program. A request for travel-related auxiliary support should be made as part of the sabbatical proposal. Preference for auxiliary support will be given to those faculty who leave campus for more than four consecutive weeks. Faculty meeting this criteria may apply for up to $200 per month for lodging and one round trip airfare (not to exceed $1000). Faculty who will not be away from campus for four consecutive weeks may apply for up to $1000 in travel support per semester if the travel is essential to achieving the sabbatical goals. Auxiliary support is not available for supplies or expenses or any expenses other than transportation and/or lodging.

(7) Selection.

The following guidelines govern the process for sabbatical leave:

(a) Proposals will be reviewed by the Faculty Development Board and recommended for support (in rank order of priority) to the Provost and Vice Chancellor. The Faculty Development Board uses the same criteria in evaluating one-semester and full-year proposals. The Faculty Development Board uses the following questions to serve as the basis for evaluating sabbatical proposals:

Have the sabbatical activities been described in detail? How will the sabbatical time be spent? What will the faculty member be doing? If the activities will be performed in collaboration with someone else, is it clear what this person’s qualifications are? (The Board is aware proposals for sabbaticals are written far in advance of the sabbatical itself. Nonetheless, as much detail as possible should be provided.)
What is the overall quality of the sabbatical activities? If off-campus activities are proposed, are they planned for high-quality institutions/organizations? How rigorous is any self-directed study which is planned by the proposer?
To what degree does the faculty member’s teaching/academic contributions while at the University merit a sabbatical leave? Have any awards for teaching or research excellence been received? Has the faculty member done any professional writing, made presentations, or conducted research?
Is the environment of the sabbatical clearly defined? Why was a specific location or learning environment chosen? What other locations were considered but not chosen?
Are the sabbatical activities clearly related to the faculty member’s responsibilities in teaching or research? What courses has the faculty member taught or will he/she be teaching? How does the sabbatical relate to these courses? How will the quality of instruction and/or research be enhanced?
Have the outcomes of the sabbatical been clearly defined? What will be learned? How will the faculty member’s professional development be enhanced? Will new course proposals be developed? How should the sabbatical be evaluated? On what basis should the Faculty Development Board assess the relative success of the sabbatical?
(b) The Provost and Vice Chancellor selects sabbatical recipients on 1) the basis of the Faculty Development Board’s recommendations; 2) recommendations from the respective Deans/Unit Heads, if requested; 3) the dollars available to support sabbaticals in a given year.

(c) Institutional selections for the faculty sabbatical program will be communicated in writing by the Chancellor to the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs by November 15 of each year. This communication will contain:

a copy of the application materials for each faculty member awarded a sabbatical leave, including a description of the proposed sabbatical program and an updated professional vita;
a certification by the Chancellor or a designee that the eligibility requirements, compensation arrangements and related conditions of the appointment, and the guidelines for sabbatical award selection have been observed in the determination and granting of the awards.
(d) Formal announcement of those faculty members receiving sabbatical awards will be made annually at the December meeting of the Board of Regents.

(8) Final Report.

(a) A faculty member receiving a sabbatical leave must submit a written report detailing his/her accomplishments during the leave within three months after the project completion date.

(b) The report will be evaluated by the Faculty Development Board against the project objectives included in the approved sabbatical proposal. Since the leave was originally granted on the basis of those objectives, it is expected that project activities will be totally directed toward their accomplishment. In rare cases where a change in project objectives or activities is required, notice of such proposed changes must be reviewed by the Faculty Development Board and approved by the Provost and Vice Chancellor prior to the effective date of such changes. Failure to adhere to this guideline will result in an unsatisfactory evaluation of the completed sabbatical project.

(c) The report must include a section stating how the sabbatical experience contributed to the faculty member’s professional development.

(d) The Faculty Development Board will use its standard evaluation procedure and criteria in evaluating the final report.