SPC Faculty Manual
Summary of SPC Scholarship Expectations
Instructor

Assistant Professor

Associate Professor
Full Professor
Tenure
Annual Performance
Expectation
1 production/year in rank
1 production/year (average
over time in rank)

2 productions/year (average
in rank)

Rolling Average of 1
professional publication per
year every three years
Promotion Eligibility for Next
Rank
Strong Potential for scholarship

Average of 1 production
per year as an assistant
professor with evidence of
the potential to sustain
productivity rate expected
for an associate professor.

3 professional publications
prior to promotion review
for associate professor

Average of 3 productions
per year as an associate
professor & at least 5
professional publications
prior to promotion review
for full professor.

Scholarly reputation
reflects national distinction

3 production/year (average
in rank)

Rolling average of 1
publication per year every
three years

Periodic contributions
consistent in quality with
full professor status

Demonstrated competence in all three faculty domains
(teaching, scholarship, service) with excellence evident in at
least the domain of teaching or scholarship.
Demonstrated integrative competency and congruence with
faith mission of program and university.

1
N/A
SPC Faculty Manual
SPC WORKLOAD POLICY
Revised March, 2013
The SPC workload policy clarifies the application and use of the Regent University workload
policy found in the Regent Faculty and Academic Policy Handbook. The university policy
defines faculty workload as “…all faculty activities that are related to professional duties and
responsibilities…distributed across three domains: teaching, scholarship and service.” While
faculty members are expected to perform activities in each of these domains, the relative
proportion of time spent in each activity may differ based upon missional needs and planned
faculty loads. As a general principle faculty loads will be planned in a manner conducive to
successful career development when performed well by the faculty member. Examples of
specific activities typical of the three traditional faculty work domains are presented in the
University handbook.
A single workload unit is understood as the amount of work required to prepare and teach a three
credit course of average enrollment for the respective discipline. The total expected workload for
faculty on a 9 month contract is 10 units and for faculty on a 12 month contract it is 12 units.
The Regent and SPC workload policies are intended as a planning tool to allow rational and
intentional management of faculty resources, to determine when overload compensation may be
appropriate, to facilitate faculty career development, and to ensure that program and university
faculty needs are satisfied. The load plan will cover specific tasks and activities assigned to each
faculty member. A number of customary duties and roles equally shared by faculty are not
specifically addressed in the faculty plan, but remain an expected part of faculty duties.
Examples of these customary generic duties include: attendance at chapel, participation in all
program/school or university faculty meetings, attending retreats and other in-service activities,
and routine academic advising.
SPC Workload Guidance by Specific Workload Area
Teaching/Mentorship: Teaching workload in the SPC is assigned for three types of
activities: course instruction, clinical supervision and dissertation committee service.

Course Work Load: A standard three credit, graduate course in psychology or counseling
has an average enrollment of 15 students. Yet because of the diverse types of courses in
the clinical and counseling programs, class sizes have a relatively broad range. Didactic
doctoral courses required for all students in a single cohort will frequently have all
students from single cohort enrolled in the course. In this type of course an enrollment of
up to 25 students is common and will still be considered a standard course in the
discipline with no additional load credit being given for student enrolment. Clinical
intensive courses, such as internship or practica, or specialty electives will frequently
have smaller enrollments with less than a full cohort registered for each section. Three
credit courses of standard enrollments will earn 1 load unit. Because of the need to offer
smaller specialty and clinical intensive courses and the added intensive mentorship that
occurs in such courses, faculty will receive full work load credit for courses approved by
the dean with enrollments as small as 7 students. Courses of other than 3 credit hours will
2
SPC Faculty Manual
be assigned work load in proportion to their three credit numerical equivalent. So for
example, a 1 credit tutorial with a standard course enrolment for a normal class would
result in a .33 work load. Once faculty members have received load credit for teaching a
course, they are obligated to perform all duties associated with the course instruction
without further load credit or compensation. For example, the grading of work submitted
after the term has ended to satisfy an incomplete would be expected without additional
load credit or compensation.
Load unit adjustments based on deviations from standard enrollment will be made as follows:
Graduate Course Work Load Adjustments Based on Enrollment
15 Students
1 Unit
<7 Students*
-.1 per student
>25 students
+.1 per every 5 students over 25 (.5 maximum)
*Courses with registration < 7 require approval from the dean to be offered.
New Course Preparations (.1 units): Faculty assigned to teach a new course they have not
previously instructed, but that has already been designed will receive a load increase of .1
work units.
New Course Creation/Major Course Redesign (.5 units): Faculty asked to create a new
course or to engage in major revision of a previously designed course will receive a load
increase of .5 work units.
Adjustment for Co-Instructed Courses: Courses with multiple instructors will divide the
workload for the course according to each individual instructor’s percentage of the
instructional duties. The total proportion of work units across all co-instructors must total
to the eligible workload for the course if instructed by a single instructor.
Independent Studies: (.033 work units per SCH) Independent studies must be
preapproved by the dean to count as part of a planned workload or for overload
consideration. Work load for independent studies will be awarded .033 of a unit per each
student credit hour generated. Independent studies run as a nested or subunit within a
larger course will not receive separate work load consideration. In such cases the SCH
enrollment generated from the students enrolled in the independent study will be pooled
with the enrollment for the associated course and the combined enrollments will be used
to determine the appropriate work load.
 Work Load Exempt Registrations: Some courses may not be eligible for work load units.
For instance, no work units may be taken for student registration on faculty research
teams. Also faculty may not take teaching work units for students enrolled under their
names for dissertation sections since this service is separately accommodated under
dissertation load
 Clinical Supervision in Faculty Role: Faculty that function as the primary clinical
supervisor for a student as part of his or her assigned faculty duties will accrue up to a
total of .80 work load units per student supervised as follows:
o Fall or spring semester supervision:
.30 per student per semester.
o Summer semester supervision:
.20 per student.

Dissertation Load Planning: Dissertation committee service counts as a teaching load
activity within the SPC. Regent faculty engaged in dissertation committee service should
3
SPC Faculty Manual
ordinarily have no more than 10 active dissertation committee roles per academic year.
An active dissertation committee role is one where a proposal or defense is planned for
the academic year. Workloads for dissertation committee service are afforded as follows:
o Total Load for Chairing Dissertation:
.50
o Total Load for Serving as Committee Member:
.30
o ½ of each of this load amounts is to be taken when proposal is anticipated to be
completed and ½ when the dissertation is anticipated to be defended.
o If student does not propose or defend, no load credit will be given. All
dissertations for which a faculty member has formally assumed a committee role
should be listed, even if one is not anticipating a proposal or defense during the
planned period. If load credit has been taken for a planned dissertation proposal or
defense, the faculty member will be obligated to complete the service role with no
additional load credit or financial compensation in subsequent academic years or
after the end of the contract year in which the load credit was received.
o Faculty on 9 month contracts who are not willing to complete summer dissertation
service without additional compensation must do one of the following:
1. Ensure that students are informed at the formation of the committee
that the faculty member will not be available for committee work
during the summer and then work with the student to complete all
necessary dissertation work during the fall and spring semesters.
2. Obtain approval for reduced dissertation load credit during the annual
performance planning process and receive a one semester only
overload pay per dissertation equivalent to the adjunct compensation
for an independent study with a single student for each student signed
up for the required dissertation core during the summer (i.e., CES 701704 or PSY 701-703). Dissertation overload pay is paid at the per
student independent study adjunct rate ($100 for each registered credit
hour per student for dissertation chairs and $40 for each registered
credit hour per student for other committee members)The maximum
reduced dissertation loads to be taken during the 9 month contract
cycle under this option are as follows:
 Total load for Chairing a dissertation:
.30
 Total Load for Other Committee Service: .10
3. Or, complete dissertation duties as required based on student project
needs over any of the academic semesters (including summer), but
receive full release time for the dissertation during the fall and spring
semesters.
NOTE: Once the maximum workload has been taken by a faculty member for the
dissertation proposal, the faculty member is obligated to continue to provide the
dissertation committee service for the respective student until the dissertation is
complete with no further compensation. A faculty member under a 9 month
contract will receive no additional compensation for summer dissertation
committee work if they have already been given the respective maximum load
units for the dissertation proposal or received the reduced proposal load combined
with additional summer compensation during a prior summer term for the student.
4
SPC Faculty Manual
Scholarship: The typical range that will be given for Scholarship Load will be 1-2 Units
per academic year for faculty on an annual contract. Faculty should assume a 1 unit release time
for scholarship unless a larger amount is negotiated during the review. The SPC does not
allocate load units for specific scholarly productions. The faculty performance plan includes a
specified amount of load to “create space” for scholarship. Planned (and subsequently actually
completed productions) are delineated during the planning process. In rare cases, a 10%
reduction in teaching apportionment, and equivalent increase in the load for scholarship, may be
given by the Dean with the EVP’s approval for faculty with a track record of unusual significant
and productive scholarship. It is often the case that SPC faculty members exceed expectations in
scholarly productivity. While additional load is not awarded in such cases, highly productive
faculty will be given special consideration during the faculty load planning such as being given
maximum scholarship releases on subsequent faculty load plans or, if justified and mission
appropriate, be referred to the EVP’s office for reduced teaching load to allow for greater focus
on scholarship.
Service: University, program, profession and community service are all valued and
essential parts of the faculty role within the SPC. Faculty members may elect to serve in
additional and commendable ways for their profession or in community organizations beyond
that specified in the load plan. However, SPC workload will only be awarded for previously
agreed upon activities or for service activities specifically requested by program, school or
university administrators. Faculty who do not hold a formal administrative role, such as a
director of clinical training, program director, program coordinator or department chair, will
generally allowed a total 1 unit release time for service for the academic year except in those rare
cases where a larger amount is negotiated during the review for unusual, temporary service roles
such as chairing an accreditation self-study process for a program. Over the course of a career,
faculty members should anticipate shouldering a proportional amount of the faculty service
required for the successful operation of the programs in which they work and the university.
However, during any given year some faculty may have somewhat greater or lesser service
obligations in their faculty role depending on the program, school and university operational
needs and assigned duties. Faculty service assignments will be assigned by University, school
and program administration. Faculty on 9 month contracts who are assigned to chair or serve on
routine committees or other vital service tasks that require service during the summer semester
are expected to fulfill their service obligations without additional compensation unless an
alternative arrangement is approved by the dean and EVP. In order to be considered for
additional compensation, at a minimum, a faculty member would need to present clear evidence
that he or she otherwise shouldered a full share of the needed service activities among the faculty
during the fall and spring semesters and that needed summer service activity requires a
substantial investment of time and work to complete. The need to perform service activities
during the summer which could have been completed during the fall and spring semester in the
course of a normal faculty work load would not result in additional compensation. As with all
overload determinations, the final decision to grant overload compensation rests with the Dean
and the EVP.
5
SPC Faculty Manual
Overload & Underload
Overload is present when the planned or requested workload activities of a faculty member
exceed their expected workloads by .5 or more units during the period under which a faculty
member is under contract (not to exceed 25% of the base contractual workload). The SPC does
not ordinarily operate with planned overloads that require additional faculty compensation
beyond the standard salary. Planned overloads are to be addressed during the annual performance
planning process at the request of program directors and subject to approval by the Dean. If
approved, overload pay will be given only for overloads produced by planned teaching that
exceeds the apportionment guidelines for teaching in conjunction with service and scholarship
loads that are within the guidelines. No overload pay will be considered retroactively or for
overloads due to scholarship (or ordinarily due to service activities). Authorized overload pay
will be equivalent to the adjunct compensation for the equivalent activity and must be preapproved by the Dean.
In some cases, faculty engaging in overload activities may be offered a release time during
subsequent academic year’s equivalent to the assumed overload, as an alternative to receiving
additional financial compensation.
Faculty who complete over .5 of a work unit less than their respective target load (10 for 9 month
contracts & 12 for annual contracts) will be in an underload situation. Underloads are to be
redressed by a corresponding increase in the subsequent academic year’s duties without any
additional compensation.
Summer Work for 9 Month Faculty
Faculty members on 9 month contracts, who are requested by the SPC and agree to perform offcontract summer work, will sign a letter of intent to accept an overload contract during the
annual faculty performance planning. The final offer of the summer contract will be subject to
the SPC needs at the time of its generation. This will be treated as adjunct compensation and
does not factor into overload limits specified by the university policy.
6
SPC Faculty Manual
FACULTY PERFORMANCE PLANNING, REVIEW & DEVELOPMENT
The SPC faculty performance planning and review process occurs annually between the months
of April and July. During this process faculty establish performance plans for the upcoming
academic year, review accomplished work on the current year’s plan, receive performance
feedback from his or her program director and the dean, and construct a development plan to
facilitate continued professional development. Faculty members are also given the dean’s and
program director’s feedback about the faculty member’s progress on promotion and tenure goals
during the review process.
Process Components & Timeline: The following sequence of events characterize the annual
performance planning and review process.

March: Faculty members submit a draft of a completed annual review document, and
dossier if pre-tenure, to their program directors obtaining input as necessary from the
director to plan prospective teaching assignments or other individualized duties for the
upcoming year. Faculty performance plans are to produce workload totals at target level
for the faculty member’s type of contract unless an overload is pre-approved by the dean.
o Annual review document: This document is to be prepared as a single Word
document consists of Performance Review & Performance Plan template
 Spiritual Vitality Narrative
 Completed Faculty Development Plan (if needed)
o Annual Review Dossier: The annual review dossier is to be prepared by all faculty
members who have not been granted tenure. (Tenured faculty members do not submit
the annual review dossier on an annual basis, but only prior to a tenure review year).
The dossier may be submitted in paper or electronic form but if printed in electronic
form it must be in the form of a single, combined document separate from the annual
review document. The dossier should be organized as a promotion & tenure dossier as
follows:
 Student Evaluations of Teaching for Courses Instructed During the Year
 Syllabi for Courses
 Sample Articles or Readings
 Peer Evaluations (to be completed in the first year for new faculty and once every
three years after that by pre-tenured faculty)
 Other Supporting Evidence of Faculty Performance as Desired by Faculty
Member
Note: Any faculty member who has not submitted the annual review materials by the end of
March to the program director will be required to cancel all planned activities other than
7
SPC Faculty Manual
teaching on the first working day of April and to devote that entire day to completion of the
required materials.


April: Annual review documents and dossiers are submitted to the dean after approval by
the program directors. The program director/department head submit to the dean a
completed narrative evaluation of the faculty member’s performance as part of the single
word annual performance review documents. Program coordinators may be tasked by the
department head with the preparing or helping to prepare the narratives and individual
faculty load plans. All completed and supervisor reviewed annual review documents are
to be uploaded to the restricted faculty review folders on the m-drive by the last working
day of April.
May & June: Faculty members meet for annual review meetings with dean and his or her
program director or department head. The dean will insert the dean’s rating form for the
faculty member in the annual review document. During the annual review meeting, the
dean and program director’s annual evaluation of the faculty member is provided, the
performance plan for the upcoming academic year is finalized, and the faculty member’s
professional development plan is approved/refined. The goal will be to generate a
consensual, feasible, and aspirational development plan that all parties in the review fully
embrace. However, on occasion the dean and/or program director may specify additional
goals and/or development strategies that must be included in the plan. The goal of the
development plan is to facilitate the faculty member’s professional growth and to ensure
the missional needs of the program, SPC and university are met.
 August: The dean submits verification of the completion of the faculty performance plans
to the EVP’s Office.
Annual SPC Performance Review Document: The following descriptions provide further
guidance regarding the use of the various materials that faculty members must submit as part of
the annual faculty review process. All of these items must be included in a single word
document with a title as follows faculty last name FPP (2013) where the faculty last name is
followed by FPP (standing for faculty performance plan) and the year of the review in
parentheses. So an annual review document for Bill Hathaway submitted during the April of
2014 would be titled as follows Hathaway FPP (2014) and would be a word document. The
annual performance review is to include only the following components:
 Faculty Performance Review: Each faculty member must update their Faculty
Performance Plan for the current academic year by resubmitting the previously approved
Faculty Performance Template edited to reflect changes in completed performance and
other information on the form. The document must be titled Faculty Performance Review
with the current academic year listed. All changes from the original plan need to be
reflected in two ways
8
SPC Faculty Manual
1. Make any changes in red font. If a planned task is completed without changes
in workload or other details, it is to be left in blank ink with no other changes
in the font or formatting.
2. Use strike out to reflect deletions or changes. This will allow the prior planned
activities/load to still be present in the same document for comparison with the
completed activity.
 Faculty Performance Plan: The next document in the annual review must be the Faculty
Performance Plan. The document must be titled Faculty Performance Plan with the
upcoming academic year listed. Care must be taken on planned load for dissertations to
avoid taking credit for proposals or defenses that do not occur as this would result in a
burdensome accumulation of owed work in subsequent years without any further release
time for the faculty member.
 Dean’s Evaluation: This form is provided by the dean and/or the faculty member’s
discipline based evaluator (e.g., program director or department chair). The faculty
member will receive a copy of the completed review form at the annual performance
review meeting.
 Faculty Development Plan: This document is not a standard part of the annual review
materials. It is included on an ad hoc basis at the discretion of the dean. A Faculty
Development Plan consists of a narrative description of an identified area for targeted
professional development and includes the outline of a specific plan to realize the
development collaboratively strategized by the dean, supervisor and the faculty member.
The plan may be initiated by either the dean or faculty supervisor with the dean’s
concurrence. Development plans may be prepared for a variety of reasons as to remediate
an area of weakness or to target an area for growth with no presumption of prior
weakness. Faculty members who wish to initiate a Faculty Performance Plan may do so
by informing his or her supervisor and the dean prior to the annual review meeting.
Faculty Dossier: Faculty members who have not been granted tenure must submit an updated
version of their faculty dossier each year even if they are not being considered for promotion
or tenure during the next academic year. Once a faculty member has been granted tenure, the
dossier does not need to be submitted to the dean as part of the annual review materials.
Faculty dossiers may be submitted in either paper or electronic form by the same deadlines.
Electronic submission of the dossier should be in word or PDF format.
The required materials for inclusion in the dossier are described in the Regent University Faculty
and Academic Policy Handbook. The only qualification from the dossier outline in the
University handbook is that the faculty member must ensure that the dossier includes complete
coverage of the annual work completed, not only the historical work over one’s academic career,
when submitting the dossier for the annual review. The following annual review materials
reflecting new information subsequent to the prior academic review should be included in the
annual review dossier for the SPC:
9
SPC Faculty Manual
o All Student Evaluation of Teaching evaluations for each course taught.
o Copies of peer and/or supervisor evaluations of teaching.
o Samples of all course syllabi that have undergone substantial revision or that are
new preparations for the faculty member.
o Certificates of completed training for the courses relevant to teaching (e.g., the
Teacher Scholar Program, Blackboard certifications, etc).
o Front page or other representative samples of each professional writing produced.
o Written summary of other types of scholarly contributions completed.
o Summary/description of any grants received.
o Description any awards or honors received.
o Description of relevant service roles assumed or performed and accomplishments
in these roles.
o A narrative summary of one’s continued Christian journey.
o Inclusion of all other materials required in the dossier by the university policy.
This will typically include a more selective but representative sample of the items
from academic years completed prior to the one under current review.
Electronic submission of the faculty dossier for the annual review must be in the form of
a PDF or Word document. NOTE: The annual performance review document is to be separate
from the dossier and may only be submitted in word format to allow for editing. Dossiers will
frequently include copies of student evaluations of teaching and other materials that require
scanning for inclusion into a PDF document. Thus it is vital that sufficient time be allotted to
accomplish this. It is recommended that the dossier be developed and revised over the course of
the academic year as relevant materials become available or are ready for updating to prevent the
task from becoming onerous at the end of the academic year. Maintaining a complete and current
faculty dossier will also facilitate the faculty member’s preparation for promotion and /or tenure
review when it is time for these career milestones.
10
SPC Faculty Manual
[Name of Faculty Member]
[Rank]
School of Psychology and Counseling
[Academic year] Faculty Performance [Specify if Template is for Plan or Review]
[Primary Program & Other Appointments]
[Administrative Title if applicable]
[Specify Annual Contract or Nine Month Contract]
[Specify if Tenured, Tenure Line, or Non-Tenure]
Teaching & Mentoring Load
Courses
Semester Course Name/Activity
Course #
# Cr
# Stu
Delivery
Mode
New
Prep/
Rev
FA
PSY 600
3
23
OC
No
Clinical Psychology
OC: On campus OL: On Line
Instr. Work Units
Team #
1
1.0
BL: Blended
Dissertations
Semester
SP
FA
Dissertations - Student Name
Some Student
Other Student
Other Student
Position
Dissertation
Title
Brilliant Topic
Brilliant Topic Redux
Something Else Entirely
Chair
Member
Member
Proposed Defended
X
Units
.25
.15
0
X
Other Teaching & Mentoring Activities
FA/SP/Su One Psy.D student in PSC
.80
Total Work Units for Teaching
?.?
Scholarship Load
Total Work Units for Scholarship
Scholarship Activities
Publications
Semester Title
FA/SP/Su Ethical Issues with Spirituality
Type
Chapter
Submitted to
APA Books
Status
Accepted
Type of Venue
National
Juried
Yes
Presentations
Semester Title
FA
Assessing Religious/Spiritual Functioning CE Workshop
Location
APA, San
Francisco
Other Scholarly Activities
11
SPC Faculty Manual
Service Load
Total Work Units for Service
Administrative Roles
Semester
Activity
Library Committee
FA/SP/Su
Position/Roll
Chair
Service Context
Workload Summary
Teaching & Mentoring
Work Units
Percentage*
Scholarship
Work Units
Service
Percentage*
Work Units
Percentage*
*Percentages are to be entered for Total Academic Year & add total to 100% unless an overload is authorized.
12
Total Work Units for
Academic Year
SPC Faculty Manual
Dean’s Evaluation with Program Director Concurrence
[Faculty member’s name]
Is the performance, proficiency and collegiality of the faculty member in
the following areas commensurate with the level of performance and
proficiency required for the rank that the faculty member holds?
Yes
No
Scholarship
Yes
No
Service
Yes
No
Teaching
Yes
No
N/A
If the individual is not already a full professor, is he or she developing an
exemplary or potentially exemplary record that would likely place him or
her under consideration for promotion?
Yes
No
N/A
If the individual is not already tenured, is he or she developing an
exemplary or potentially exemplary record that would likely place him or
her under consideration for tenure?
Yes
No
N/A
If the faculty member continues at his or her present level of performance,
is it likely that he or she would receive another contract this coming year?
___________________
Faculty Member
_______________________
Department Chair or
Program Director
__________________
Dean, SPC
___________________
Date
_______________________
Date
__________________
Date
13