archive-org.com » ORG » A » AAUP.ORG

Total: 1208

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • Statement on Copyright | AAUP
    abridgments and literary musical or artistic variations and indeed to censor and forbid dissemination of the work altogether Such powers so deeply inconsistent with fundamental principles of academic freedom cannot rest with the institution College or University Copyright Ownership Situations do arise however in which the college or university may fairly claim ownership of or an interest in copyright in works created by faculty or staff members Three general kinds of projects fall into this category special works created in circumstances that may properly be regarded as made for hire negotiated contractual transfers and joint works as described in the Copyright Act 1 Works Made for Hire Although traditional academic work that is copyrightable such as lecture notes courseware books and articles cannot normally be treated as works made for hire some works created by college or university faculty and staff members do properly fall within that category allowing the institution to claim copyright ownership Works created as a specific requirement of employment or as an assigned institutional duty that may for example be included in a written job description or an employment agreement may be fairly deemed works made for hire Even absent such prior written specification ownership will vest with the college or university in those cases in which it provides the specific authorization or supervision for the preparation of the work Exam ples are reports developed by a dean or by the chair or members of a faculty committee or college promotional brochures prepared by a director of admissions Some institutions appear to treat course examinations as falling within this category but the stronger case can be made for treating examinations as part of the faculty member s customary instruc tional materials with copyright thus owned by the individual The Copyright Act also defines as a work made for hire certain works that are com missioned from an individual who is not an employee but an independent contractor The institution will own the copyright in such a commissioned work when the author is not a college or university employee or when the author is such an employee but the work to be created falls outside the normal scope of that person s employment duties such as a professor of art history commissioned by the institution under special contract to write a catalog for a campus art gallery In such situations for the work made for hire doctrine to apply there must be a written agreement so stating and signed by both par ties the work must also fall within a limited number of statutory categories which include instructional texts examinations and contributions to a collective work 2 Contractual Transfers In situations in which the copyright ownership is held by the facul ty or staff member it is possible for the individual to transfer the entire copyright or a more limited license to the institution or to a third party As already noted under the Copyright Act a transfer of all of the copyright or of an exclusive

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/report/statement-copyright (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive


  • Intellectual Property at Risk | AAUP
    Conferences Start a Chapter Intellectual Property at Risk Intellectual Property An Education Action Toolkit Intellectual property IP at colleges and universities refers most importantly to the products of faculty staff and student research and scholarship IP falls into two groups work covered by patent law and work covered by copyright law Both categories have undergone significant change over the last generation In response university policies have either evolved or been radically revised The most troubling changes have occurred in university patent policies with major research universities leading the way in limiting or eliminating faculty members traditional rights to decide what happens to their discoveries or inventions Many campus copyright policies remain good but they are being undermined by the online course revolution including the wave of interest in MOOCs since many institutions have sought to deny faculty members their traditional rights to the instructional materials they author Campus patent policies however have taken a radical turn for the worse with a number of campuses revising them to mandate automatic institutional ownership of the fruits of scholarly work We provide recommended language both for patent and online instruction policies The AAUP believes it is appropriate to issue a warning Your intellectual property is in danger In trying to reassert the principles inherent in the US Constitution two centuries of patent law and a landmark 2011 US Supreme Court decision the first task is educational Everyone on campus needs to learn more about the law the issues at stake and the rights they can assert through collective action This AAUP IP web section has been assembled to help you with the information you need to participate in informed discussion and organize for better campus policies We have launched a national campaign to publicize the website and inform people about the issues at

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/get-involved/issue-campaigns/intellectual-property-risk (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Resources on Accreditation | AAUP
    Workload Family Work Grading Graduate Students The Academic Bill of Rights Minority Serving Institutions Post Tenure Review Retirement Sexual Diversity Gender Identity Teaching Evaluation Tenure Women in Higher Education Resources on Accreditation AAUP Policy Statements Reports Analysis The Role of the Faculty in the Accrediting of Colleges and Universities pdf Accreditation and Academic Freedom An American Association of University Professors Council for Higher Education Accreditation Advisory Statement pdf 2012 In early 2012 CHEA and AAUP agreed to work together to address the issue of academic freedom and the role of accreditation CHEA and AAUP brought together a small of accrediting organizations members of the AAUP Committee on Accreditation and others to develop an advisory statement The advisory statement has been approved both by the CHEA Board of Directors and the AAUP Committee on Accreditation The statement provides guidance to CHEA institutional members recognized accrediting organizations and AAUP members Institutional Accreditation A Call for Greater Faculty Involvement 2008 Issued by a joint subcommittee of the Association s Committee on Accreditation and Committee on College and University Governance The Faculty Role in Regional Accreditation Service on Evaluation Teams 2008 Issued by a joint subcommittee of the Association s Committee on Accreditation and Committee on College and University Governance Looking the Other Way Accreditation Standards and Part Time Faculty 2008 Approved for publication by the Committee on Contingent Faculty and the Profession Other AAUP Resources The Rise of the Professoriate doc Essay by Greg Gilbert a member of the AAUP Committee on Accreditation which urges faculty to participate actively in accreditation work to the ultimate benefit of their institutions the students and the academic profession Other Resources Accrediting Agencies Joint Statement on Accrediting Distance Education Programs 2000 Recommendation from the six regional bodies on principles for the accreditation of distance education programs Accreditation

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/issues/accreditation/resources-accreditation (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Resources on Sexual Harassment & Assault | AAUP
    Grading Graduate Students The Academic Bill of Rights Minority Serving Institutions Post Tenure Review Retirement Sexual Diversity Gender Identity Teaching Evaluation Tenure Women in Higher Education Reports Publications AAUP Policies Reports Academe Economic Status Report Compensation Survey Bulletin of the AAUP The Redbook Journal of Academic Freedom AAUP Bookstore News AAUP in the News AAUP Updates For the Media Get Involved Upcoming Events Local Toolkit Issue Campaigns Find Chapters Conferences Start a Chapter I Need Help With Workplace Issues Understanding Terms and Abbreviations Responding to Financial Crisis You are here Home Issues Sexual Harassment Assault Academic Freedom Shared Governance Contingent Faculty Positions Faculty Compensation Copyright Distance Ed Intellectual Property Accreditation Sexual Harassment Assault Resources on Sexual Harassment Assault Academic Research Civility Conflicts of Interest Collective Bargaining Hiring and Promotions Discrimination Diversity Affirmative Action Ethics Faculty Work Workload Family Work Grading Graduate Students The Academic Bill of Rights Minority Serving Institutions Post Tenure Review Retirement Sexual Diversity Gender Identity Teaching Evaluation Tenure Women in Higher Education Resources on Sexual Harassment Assault AAUP Policy Statements Reports Analysis Statement on Campus Sexual Assault 2012 The AAUP s Committee on Women in the Academic Profession issued this statement adopted by the Association s Council at its November 2012 meeting Sexual Harassment Suggested Policy and Procedures for Handling Complaints 1995 Due Process in Sexual Harassment Complaints 1994 Consensual Relationships Between Faculty and Students 1995 AAUP Amicus Briefs Summaries of and links to AAUP Amicus Briefs filed in cases involving Sexual Harassment Legal Primer For New Not So New Administrators 2005 By Donna R Euben Legal outline Domestic Partner Benefits 2005 By Donna R Euben AAUP Counsel Informational outline Sexual Harassment In Higher Education Current Issues And Trends November 19 2005 A joint paper presented for the Education Law Association in Memphis Tennessee Sexual Harassment in

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/issues/sexual-harassment/resources-sexual-assault-and-sexual-harassment (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Sexual Harassment: Suggested Policy and Procedures for Handling Complaints | AAUP
    reasonably regarded as offensive and substantially impairs the academic or work opportunity of students colleagues or co workers If it takes place in the teaching context it must also be persistent pervasive and not germane to the subject matter The academic setting is distinct from the workplace in that wide latitude is required for professional judgment in determining the appropriate content and presentation of academic material 8 Applicable Procedures 1 Bringing a Complaint a Any member of the college or university community who believes that he or she has been the victim of sexual harassment as defined above the complainant may bring the matter to the attention of the individual s designated to handle complaints of discrimination such as the grievance officer or another officer on campus sensitive to the issues involved 9 b The complainant should present the complaint as promptly as possible after the alleged harassment occurs One consequence of the failure to present a complaint promptly is that it may preclude recourse to legal procedures should the complainant decide to pursue them at a later date Another possible consequence is greater difficulty in conducting an investigation c If the complainant decides to proceed the complainant should submit a written statement to the grievance officer 10 Cases involving sexual harassment are particularly sensitive and demand special attention to issues of confidentiality Dissemination of information relating to the case should be limited in order that the privacy of all individuals involved is safeguarded as fully as possible d The grievance officer should inform the alleged offender of the allegation and of the identity of the complainant A written statement of the complaint should be given to both parties Every effort should be made to protect the complainant from retaliatory action by those named in the complaint 2 Resolution of a Complaint a Promptly after a complaint is submitted the grievance officer should initiate whatever steps he or she deems appropriate to effect an informal resolution of the complaint acceptable to both parties 11 b The complainant if unsatisfied with the resolution proposed by the grievance officer should have access to the grievance procedures at the institution upon prompt submission of a written request to the grievance officer c Review by a faculty committee of a complaint against a faculty member 12 Members of the faculty review committee should meet to discuss the complaint Unless the committee concludes that the complaint is without merit the parties to the dispute should be invited to appear before the committee and to confront any adverse witnesses The committee may conduct its own informal inquiry call witnesses and gather whatever information it deems necessary to assist it in reaching a determination as to the merits of the allegations Once such a determination has been reached it should be communicated in writing to both parties and to the grievance officer A summary of the basis for the determination should be provided to either party upon request d Corrective action and or disciplinary measures If the

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/policydocs/contents/sexharass.htm (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Resources on Academic Research | AAUP
    Sexual Diversity Gender Identity Teaching Evaluation Tenure Women in Higher Education Reports Publications AAUP Policies Reports Academe Economic Status Report Compensation Survey Bulletin of the AAUP The Redbook Journal of Academic Freedom AAUP Bookstore News AAUP in the News AAUP Updates For the Media Get Involved Upcoming Events Local Toolkit Issue Campaigns Find Chapters Conferences Start a Chapter I Need Help With Workplace Issues Understanding Terms and Abbreviations Responding to Financial Crisis You are here Home Issues Academic Research Academic Freedom Shared Governance Contingent Faculty Positions Faculty Compensation Copyright Distance Ed Intellectual Property Accreditation Sexual Harassment Assault Academic Research Resources on Academic Research Civility Conflicts of Interest Collective Bargaining Hiring and Promotions Discrimination Diversity Affirmative Action Ethics Faculty Work Workload Family Work Grading Graduate Students The Academic Bill of Rights Minority Serving Institutions Post Tenure Review Retirement Sexual Diversity Gender Identity Teaching Evaluation Tenure Women in Higher Education Resources on Academic Research Policy Statements Reports Analysis Defending the Freedom to Innovate Faculty Intellectual Property Rights after Stanford v Roche 2013 Corporate Funding of Academic Research 2004 Academic Freedom and Electronic Communications 2004 Protecting Human Beings Institutional Review Boards and Social Science Research 2000 Faculty Employment Outside Of The University 2004

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/issues/academic-research/resources-academic-research (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • On Collegiality as a Criterion for Faculty Evaluation | AAUP
    view this development as highly unfortunate and we believe that it should be discouraged Few if any responsible faculty members would deny that collegiality in the sense of collaboration and constructive cooperation identifies important aspects of a faculty member s overall performance A faculty member may legitimately be called upon to participate in the development of curricula and standards for the evaluation of teaching as well as in peer review of the teaching of colleagues Much research depending on the nature of the particular discipline is by its nature collaborative and requires teamwork as well as the ability to engage in independent investigation And committee service of a more general description relating to the life of the institution as a whole is a logical outgrowth of the Association s view that a faculty member is an officer of the college or university in which he or she fulfills professional duties 2 Understood in this way collegiality is not a distinct capacity to be assessed independently of the traditional triumvirate of teaching scholarship and service It is rather a quality whose value is expressed in the successful execution of these three functions Evaluation in these three areas will encompass the contributions that the virtue of collegiality may pertinently add to a faculty member s career The current tendency to isolate collegiality as a distinct dimension of evaluation however poses several dangers Historically collegiality has not infrequently been associated with ensuring homogeneity and hence with practices that exclude persons on the basis of their difference from a perceived norm The invocation of collegiality may also threaten academic freedom In the heat of important decisions regarding promotion or tenure as well as other matters involving such traditional areas of faculty responsibility as curriculum or academic hiring collegiality may be confused with the expectation that a faculty member display enthusiasm or dedication evince a constructive attitude that will foster harmony or display an excessive deference to administrative or faculty decisions where these may require reasoned discussion Such expectations are flatly contrary to elementary principles of academic freedom which protect a faculty member s right to dissent from the judgments of colleagues and administrators A distinct criterion of collegiality also holds the potential of chilling faculty debate and discussion Criticism and opposition do not necessarily conflict with collegiality Gadflies critics of institutional practices or collegial norms even the occasional malcontent have all been known to play an invaluable and constructive role in the life of academic departments and institutions They have sometimes proved collegial in the deepest and truest sense Certainly a college or university replete with genial Babbitts is not the place to which society is likely to look for leadership It is sometimes exceedingly difficult to distinguish the constructive engagement that characterizes true collegiality from an obstructiveness or truculence that inhibits collegiality Yet the failure to do so may invite the suppression of dissent The very real potential for a distinct criterion of collegiality to cast a pall of stale uniformity places it

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/report/collegiality-criterion-faculty-evaluation (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Ensuring Academic Freedom In Politically Controversial Academic Personnel Decisions | AAUP
    freedom From its inception even as the AAUP sought to protect academic freedom by strengthening tenure and instituting procedural protections it struggled with the particular difficulties of defending faculty members embroiled in political controversy Beginning with professional economists who ran afoul of the conservative business community in the Association s early days the individuals who lost their positions for political reasons have been involved with some of the most controversial issues of their time Whether by deviating from the hyperpatriotism of World War I or refusing to answer questions about communism during the McCarthy era or taking an unpopular stance toward the current conflict in the Middle East the protagonists in these academic freedom struggles have tested the limits of permissible dissent within the academic as well as the broader community What makes the recent spate of politically controversial cases particularly alarming is how many of them involve faculty members holding contingent appointments who can be dismissed without the procedural protections their tenured and tenure track colleagues enjoy The AAUP has been responding to these new threats to academic freedom by releasing new policy statements emphasizing the rights of non tenure track faculty members and academic professionals and defending the integrity of the classroom But even in cases where politically controversial individuals receive the full complement of AAUP recommended procedural guarantees there is increasing concern that mere adherence to due process or weak or substantively biased faculty committees may provide politicized decision making with a veneer of legitimacy As the past century of political threats to academic freedom has revealed although procedural protections such as providing adequate notice a statement of specific charges and a hearing before one s peers are crucial to the defense of academic freedom they may not be sufficient in themselves especially in cases where the dissenting faculty member confronts a strong mainstream consensus in support of repression The fundamental principle is that academic evaluation should be grounded on considerations that substantially affect the performance of academic responsibilities This means especially that the selection and interpretation of course material should be assessed solely on the basis of educationally appropriate criteria and that the exclusion of controversial material on other than professional grounds stifles academic freedom and the opportunity for student learning Since academic professionals are best prepared to distinguish professional from political or other extraneous concerns the procedures recommended to implement these principles seek to ensure and give great weight to the findings of collegial committees We therefore recommend the following principles and procedures to enhance the protection of academic freedom in politically controversial academic personnel decisions Principles to Guide Decision Making regarding Politically Controversial Academic Personnel Decisions The fundamental principle is that all academic personnel decisions including new appointments and renewal of existing appointments should rest on considerations that demonstrably pertain to the effective performance of the academic s professional responsibilities A Assessing Charges of Indoctrination in the Classroom 1 Only the proven demonstration of the use of dishonest tactics to deceive students not the political views advocacy or affiliations of the faculty member may provide grounds for adverse action 2 In a politically controversial proceeding the admonition to tailor questions narrowly to permissible issues of academic fitness and to avoid any inquiry into political affiliations and beliefs is plainly imperative 3 Neither the expression nor the attempted avoidance of value judgments can or should in itself provide a reasonable ground for assessing the professional conduct and fitness of a faculty member 4 So long as opinion and interpretation are not advanced and insisted upon as dogmatic truth the style of presentation in the classroom should be at the discretion of the instructor Freedom in the Classroom 3 5 Whether a specific matter or argument is essential to a par tic u lar class or what weight it should be given is a matter of professional judgment based on the standards of the pertinent disciplines and consistent with the academic freedom required if the disciplines themselves are to remain capable of critical self reflection and growth 6 Exclusion of controversial matter whether under the persistent intrusion clause of the 1970 Interpretive Comment 2 on the 1940 Statement or in the name of protecting students from challenges to their cherished beliefs stifles the free discussion necessary for academic freedom B Collegiality and Civility Are Not Appropriate Independent Criteria for Evaluation The academic imperative is to protect free expression not collegiality In keeping with the general admonition that evaluation should focus on professional fitness the statement On Collegiality as a Criterion for Faculty Evaluation maintains that what ever is pertinent with regard to collegiality should emerge through an evaluation based on the standard considerations of teaching scholarship and service C Consideration of Extramural Speech in Politically Controversial Personnel Decisions 1 Consideration of the manner of expression is rarely appropriate to an assessment of academic fitness 2 An administration should not discipline a faculty member for an off campus statement that the faculty member could freely make on campus 3 We find no basis upon which an institution might properly discipline a faculty member for extramural speech unless that speech implicates professional fitness 4 We recommend therefore that institutions be especially careful in bringing charges shortly after controversial extramural expression and that should disciplinary hearings be found necessary the administration board and faculty all take special care to ensure full fair and equitable proceedings and judgments 5 Academic institutions should take special care to ensure that the sanctions resulting from judicial determinations of criminal activity involving expressive conduct are not unnecessarily compounded by institutional sanction for faculty as for students institutional authority should never be used merely to duplicate the functions of general laws If however institutions are legally compelled to take such action or if the faculty committee considers it pertinent to an evaluation of professional fitness then academic hearings should be confined to the issue of whether the alleged conduct has substantially impaired the professional fitness of the academic appointee D Compelled Political Declarations Loyalty Oaths

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/report/ensuring-academic-freedom-politically-controversial-academic-personnel-decisions (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive



  •