Following the format of the "Guidance for Self-Evaluation Report," this section describes (or refers to documents that describe) RCB policies, procedures, processes and criteria pertaining to faculty resource management; faculty recruitment, selection and orientation; and faculty development, promotion, retention and renewal.

Acquisition and Deployment of Faculty Resources. The annual faculty planning and recruiting process is initiated by the dean's office during the spring term through a memorandum to heads of academic units that contains current and historical data on the number of faculty in each academic unit relative to various measures of credit hours. The memorandum also provides information on projected faculty for the coming academic year based on confirmed resignations and hiring as of the current date and various supply and demand data such as degrees conferred during the past ten years by major and the age distribution of the faculty in each academic unit. The head of each academic unit is invited to prepare a request for recruiting during the academic year for appointment in the following academic year.

Requests received by the dean's office, which must be specific with respect to rank, area of specialization and tenure-track versus non-tenure-track for each requested faculty position, serve as the basis for subsequent faculty recruiting conferences involving the head of the academic unit, the dean and associate deans. The results of these conferences, which are consistent with the RCB Strategic Plan (Appendix M-1) and budgetary constraints, are summarized in memoranda to the heads of academic units. When all of the conferences have been completed (about the end of June), the requests approved by the dean are summarized in spreadsheet form and presented to the provost for review and approval. The provost's approval permits advertisements, after affirmative action review, to be placed.

Recruitment, Selection and Orientation Practices for New Faculty. [Standard FD.2] Recruitment in the college's academic units is conducted in accordance with a University policy and procedures document titled "Faculty Searches." For most tenure-track positions, a relatively large number of candidates is interviewed by members of the search committee at academic meetings; from this group, two or three candidates per position are usually invited to the GSU campus for a more comprehensive interview. Each on-campus interview is approved by an associate dean for consistency with the position for which recruiting was approved at the conference with the dean at the beginning of the recruiting process. During a typical recruiting year, about 50 candidates will be invited to campus to interview for about 20 continuing (either tenure-track or non-tenure-track) faculty positions. When the search committee of an academic unit has reached a hiring recommendation, the head of the academic unit reaches agreement with the dean's office on the terms of the offer, to be subsequently approved by the provost's office and the Office of Affirmative Action.

Starting in 1998, the RCB conducted a new faculty orientation session before the beginning of the fall term in the afternoon of the same day in which the university conducted its orientation in the morning. The timing and the contents of the college's orientation were coordinated with the university's orientation. These orientation sessions are in addition to any conducted by the individual academic units.

Processes for Faculty Development and Personnel Reviews. [Standard FD.3] As mentioned in Section M (Mission and Objectives), the college has operated during the past decade under a policies and procedures document titled "Faculty Performance: Planning, Development and Evaluation," as contained in Section F (10) of the RCB Policies and Procedures Manual (Reference M-1). The primary impetus for developing this management-by-objectives approach to evaluation was concern by the college's Faculty Development Committee in the late 1980's about incentives for continuing productivity of older faculty who had not been hired with the increasing research expectations applicable to more recent faculty hires. This annual review process involves the establishment of a goal statement for an annual period that is discussed with the faculty member and approved by the head of the academic unit. At the end of the annual period, the faculty member submits an annual statement of activities and accomplishments which the head of the academic unit uses to compare to goals and to complete an evaluation that is discussed with the faculty member. Relating goals and accomplishments to needs for development is an integral part of this document.

In addition to the annual reviews, the college conducts multi-year reviews of non-tenured tenure-track faculty in accordance with University and Board of Regents policy as described in Section V.(C)--Pre-Tenure Cumulative Review for Tenure-track Faculty--of the college document titled "Promotion, Tenure and Reappointment of Faculty: Policies and Procedures," as contained in Section F(6) of the RCB Policies and Procedures Manual. Section V(E) contains similar procedures for the cumulative review of non-tenure-track faculty.

Cumulative reviews of tenured faculty are conducted every five years in accordance with Section VI. of the college's promotion and tenure document (Section F (6) of the RCB Policies and Procedures Manual). As stated in the purpose (Section VI.A), these "post-tenure reviews" are intended to emphasize faculty development.

The college's other personnel review process is for promotion and tenure of tenure-track faculty as contained in the college's promotion and tenure document.

Criteria employed in personnel decisions. With respect to annual reviews, the criterion is an evaluation of the level of performance relative to the teaching, research and service goals of the individual which will vary depending on the individual's assigned workload. Similarly, cumulative reviews for non-tenure-track faculty evaluate accomplishments relative to assigned workload since the last review.

The criterion in pre-tenure reviews for tenure-track faculty is satisfactory progress toward promotion and tenure and this is conveyed to the faculty member; if progress is unsatisfactory, it can lead to a recommendation to not offer the candidate a contract for the subsequent year.

The criteria for awarding of tenure are stated in Section II (B) of the college's promotion and tenure document; the criteria for promotion for both tenure-track and non-tenure-track faculty are contained in Section III (A) of the college's promotion and tenure document (RCB Policies and Procedures Manual, Reference M-1).

The criterion pertaining to post-tenure reviews is a satisfactory level of accomplishment with respect to the combination of teaching, research and service workload elements of the faculty member.

Processes and resources that support continuing instructional and intellectual development. The college has a standing Faculty Development Committee as described in Section V of the RCB Bylaws (Reference P-3). This committee annually puts together a series of seminars for the college's faculty on both teaching and research topics. A five-year schedule of these seminars is included in Table FD--1. These topics are selected on the basis of faculty surveys and have changed over time to reflect a changing environment. The need for these seminars has lessened in recent years as the university created a Teaching and Learning Center which conducts seminars on many similar topics. Several of the academic units have on-going research seminar series, including Finance, Computer Information Systems and Accountancy. Incentives to achieve excellence in teaching, research or service are provided by the college's annual Faculty Recognition Awards of which there are usually two in each of teaching and research and one in service and involve in-kind remuneration equal to about $3,000 per recipient. These recipients are chosen by the college's Executive Committee in accordance with policies and criteria developed by that committee.

Internal funding is provided for the award, on a competitive basis, of the purchase of faculty time for research during the summer term. During the summer term of 1998, 37 faculty received compensation equal to 10% of their 9-month salary for this purpose. This summer research support is in addition to that provided as part of the hiring of new faculty where providing 10% for each of the first two summers has been the norm in recent years and is driven by market conditions.

Faculty Involvement in Academic and Professional Organizations. The RCB allocates travel to academic units with priority given to faculty presenting papers, and to those faculty who are attending meetings in the capacity of officer of an association, member of the board of directors of an association or program or session chair. The college has managed to allocate sufficient funds to its travel budget to make sure that any significant involvement by faculty at a national or regional academic organization is supported. Because of its large programs that involve industry relations (accounting, risk management and insurance, actuarial science, real estate), historically the college has also placed significant emphasis on involvement in professional organizations that may not be primarily constituted of academic members. When funding from the "hard money" travel budget is not sufficient to cover faculty participation in these organizations, the individual academic units usually fund travel from soft money sources.

Policies for Outside Activities of Faculty, Paid and Unpaid. Section F(4) of the RCB Policies and Procedures Manual (Reference M-1) summarizes the Board of Regents, university and college policies pertaining to outside activities and provides references to other policies of relevance.

 Minimum Full-Time Equivalent (MFTE) Faculty. [Standard FD.4] For fall semester 1998, the college taught 30,282 undergraduate credit hours and 17,925 graduate credit hours. Under Standard FD.4, the MFTE faculty is 30,282/400 + 17,925/300 = 75.71 + 59.75 = 135.46.

Full-Time Faculty. For fall semester 1998, the college has 193 full-time faculty.

Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Faculty. The FTE faculty for fall semester 1998 is equal to the 193 full-time faculty plus 12.25 FTE graduate teaching assistants and part-time instructors (usually called adjunct faculty at most institutions) for a total FTE faculty of 205.25. The FTE of the part-time faculty is computed on the basis that the maximum teaching load under the College's workload policy for a full-time instructor whose workload is comprised almost wholly of teaching for-credit courses is normally eight three-semester-hour courses; thus, one FTE is eight three-semester hour sections taught by part-time faculty.

Full-Time Faculty as Percent of MFTE Faculty. The full-time faculty of 193 is 142% of the MFTE faculty of 135.46.

Percent of Student Hours Taught by Full-Time Faculty by Discipline and Level. Table FD--2 shows the percentage of credit hours taught by full-time faculty in each discipline (academic unit) and by level (undergraduate and graduate).

and Instructional Level: Fall Semester 1998

The data by academic unit in Table FD--2 are presented as a proxy for discipline. Data by undergraduate versus graduate credit hours are a proxy for path. NA in a cell means that there are no graduate or undergraduate credit hours, as applicable, taught by this academic unit. There is one "academic unit" in Table FD--2 which is not an actual academic unit in that it does not offer majors or degree programs--Business Communications Program. While the Business Communications Program is a separate cost center in the college's budget, it only teaches undergraduate core courses in business communications required for the BBA degree and elective courses which can be chosen for the MBA program.

Teaching Loads. The college's teaching load policy is contained in the document titled "Faculty Workload Policy" as contained in Section F(17) of the RCB Policies and Procedures Manual (Reference M-1). This policy provides for large variations in teaching load depending on the faculty member's research and service workload and level of productivity. For full-time faculty for fall semester 1998, teaching loads varied from zero to four courses (zero to 12 semester hours).

Table FD--3 summarizes the college's faculty, by full-time and FTE part-time as of fall semester 1998 with respect to academic or professional qualifications where the seven qualification categories used in Table FD--3 are defined as follows [Standard FD.5]:

RCB faculty vitae are contained in Appendix FD-1, Volumes 1 and 2, separate from this report.

One accreditation criterion of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools by which the university is accredited specifies that "eligibility requirements for faculty members teaching graduate courses must be clearly defined and publicized" (Reference FD-1.). The University Faculty Senate approved graduate faculty membership guidelines for GSU in April 1997, contained in Section 306.07 of the GSU Faculty Handbook (Reference FD-2). In 1998 the RCB adopted guidelines for Graduate Faculty membership (Section F(6)VII of the RCB Policies and Procedures Manual, Reference M-1) consistent with the Senate guidelines, which require that a faculty member must hold graduate faculty membership to be eligible to:

• teach a doctoral (9000-level) course or research-oriented master's course (as identified by the academic unit), or
• serve as chair, member, or reader of a doctoral dissertation committee; however, a dissertation committee may include one member without graduate faculty membership in order to bring special expertise to the committee.

Graduate faculty membership requires (1) an earned doctorate in the relevant discipline; (2) several scholarly refereed publications of significant quality during the last five years or active engagement in scholarly research; and (3) evidence of effective teaching in graduate courses.

Table FD--4 shows number of RCB graduate faculty appointments by academic unit.

CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT 

With respect to mission, the emphasis on teaching and research is implicitly equal. The processes in place for selecting faculty, determining faculty workloads and rewarding faculty productivity are implicitly designed to maintain this balance. [Standard FD.5]

With respect to achieving quality and continuous improvement, the processes in place implicitly provide standards that increase over time. For example, the college's promotion criteria for tenure-track faculty (Section III.A of Section F(6) of the RCB Policies and Procedures Manual, Reference M-1) state that candidates "will be evaluated as to whether they have met the expectations for promotion at peer institutions rated at the same Carnegie classification by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching or comparable criteria." Another example pertains to annual evaluation of faculty in each area relative to "college standard." As indicated in the college document titled "Faculty Performance: Planning, Development and Evaluation" (Section F(10), page 7 of the RCB Policies and Procedures Manual), college "standards reflect the promotion recommendation decisions of departmental promotion and tenure committees, department heads, the college-wide promotion and tenure committee and the dean. We recognize that as the criteria for promotion change, we must revise our college standard for the five profiles."

The annual Faculty Recognition Awards are intended to motivate the faculty by rewarding high levels of accomplishment. With respect to salary administration, the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia has provided no funding for across-the-board raises for about five years so that all changes in compensation are based on merit.