SB 1 requires the university to have a post-tenure review process that aligns with the statute and to document it in a policy. A new track of the Faculty Rule 3335-5-04 disciplinary process is being developed in consultation with Senate leadership to meet the statutory requirements, and the new rule will be referenced in the updated Faculty Annual Review and Reappointment policy.
SB 1’s faculty workload policy requirements are largely covered in the university’s preexisting Faculty Workload Guidelines. Under SB 1 this will need to be updated to include some additional items, but they will be folded into the existing form with the additional information now required. There is a process for review and approval for each unit-level workload structure (integrated into the units’ Pattern of Administration). The review and approval of governance documents is run by OAA every time a new academic leader (dean and chair/director) is appointed or reappointed. Target reviews can also accelerate the incorporation of new elements.
ODHE has indicated that they will provide additional guidance by the end of September regarding these new requirements, with expected submission of materials by December 31.
The university has long required academic units to provide all compensated faculty (including tenure-track, clinical/teaching/practice, research and associated faculty) with “an annual written performance review that examines performance over the prior year and sets goals for future performance.” The full requirements for such reviews are set forth in the Faculty Annual Review and Reappointment policy.
SB 1 outlines a series of minimum standards for faculty annual reviews, some of which are already outlined in the above policy, and some of which are new. Specifically, SB 1 provides that such reviews must:
In addition, SB 1 requires a written system of peer evaluations to support professional development. It also provides that faculty have the right to a review and appeal process for their annual reviews, including the ability to appeal to their dean, with the provost having final decision-making authority if there is disagreement between a chair and dean.
The university is updating the Faculty Annual Review and Reappointment policy to address each new requirement, and must submit that policy to the Board of Trustees for review and approval before it goes into effect.
While SB 1 went into effect on June 27, 2025, the new annual review process will first apply to the academic year 2025-2026 annual reviews because the 2024-2025 faculty annual reviews will be substantially completed under the pre-SB 1 requirements by that date. As noted above, the university will be updating the Faculty Annual Review and Reappointment policy to account for these new requirements, and the Office of Academic Affairs will provide guidance on the updated process and work with units to review and update their relevant governance documents and practices to align with it over the coming year.
While units have numerous options to address faculty performance issues, including coaching and counseling, annual reviews, and similar actions, the university has long had a faculty disciplinary process in place under Faculty Rule 3335-5-04, known as the “04 process.” All faculty may be subject to discipline for violations established under this process, regardless of tenure status. While such complaints can include allegations of research misconduct, sexual misconduct, workplace violence, policy violations, and more, the existing 04 process also provides that faculty may be disciplined for the failure to meet their academic responsibilities under Faculty Rule 3335-5-04.1(A), up to and including termination of employment for serious violations.
SB 1 does not change these existing processes, but it does require the university to add an additional disciplinary pathway specifically for tenured faculty, known as post-tenure review. While this new pathway is similar to the existing 04 process for the failure to meet academic responsibilities, SB 1 provides that a post-tenure review must specifically occur if one of three conditions is met:
As with the existing 04 process, tenured faculty may face a range of sanctions for substantiated violations under a post-tenure review, up to and including termination of employment. However, SB 1 does not require any specific sanction to be imposed in a particular case, and permits the university to consider a range of potential corrective actions, including steps like training and reprimands. Further, while the current 04 process has certain timing requirements, the post-tenure review process must take no longer than six months, with the President having discretion to grant a single, two-month extension if needed.
To address these requirements, the university will update its faculty rules to add a post-tenure review pathway to the 04 process, and the Board of Trustees must approve that rule. As with the updated annual review requirements, the Office of Academic Affairs will be working with units to review and update their relevant governance documents and practices to align with the updated rule. Additionally, the current 04 process will remain in effect, and as noted above any faculty member may be subject to that existing process, regardless of faculty title or rank.
The university has long been required to adopt and maintain faculty workload requirements. In addition to these existing standards, SB 1 requires the university to provide certain additional information, specifically:
Because these concepts can have different meanings across different substantive areas, and because units have a variety of individualized considerations related to workload, the Office of Academic Affairs is developing updated workload guidelines and engaging with the Chancellor of Higher Education regarding the required standards. Additional guidance is expected to be released during the autumn semester on the implementation of these standards in practice, and the Board of Trustees must approve the updated requirements once they are developed.
SB 1 requires the university to have a policy on tenure and retrenchment (i.e., changes made to services or programs as a result of financial concerns) and requires the Board of Trustees to approve this policy, but does not impose any specific policy requirements regarding these terms.
These concepts are currently addressed extensively in several sections of the faculty rules, including:
In addition, Board Bylaw 3335-1-08(E) and the university’s pre-existing Furloughs policy contain relevant provisions regarding the circumstances in which furloughs may be appropriate. The Faculty Appointments policy is being revised to incorporate these pre-existing rules and processes for Board review and approval. At this time, this is the only action anticipated for these specific requirements.
The above provisions may have differing impacts on different types of faculty depending on the circumstances. Faculty may reach out to the Office of Faculty Affairs and the Faculty Ombudsperson, and both faculty and staff may contact the Office of Human Resources with specific questions.