Academic Policies

Submit Feedback

Faculty Workload Policy
4.21.26

Rationale

Faculty workload – defined here as the distribution of effort among the core responsibilities associated with a faculty appointment – is foundational to all academic functions at a university. On an individual level, faculty workload shapes the daily and the long-term responsibilities of a faculty member. On a collective level, faculty workload impacts a university’s overall scholarly impact, the size and composition of its faculty, students’ ability to complete their academic programs in timely fashion, and the healthy functioning of departments, schools/colleges, the university, and the wider communities with which faculty are connected. For all these reasons, an equitable, fair, and transparent approach to faculty workload, as it relates to the individual faculty member, the academic unit (i.e., department, school, or college), and the university, is of the utmost importance.

This policy lays out the principles and expectations that guide Syracuse University’s approach to faculty workload. It also maps out a process for creating school/college faculty workload policies and for handling disputes or appeals related to faculty workload assignments. Neither this policy nor any workload adjustments made under it alter the core responsibilities associated with each kind of faculty appointment, as laid out in Section 2.1 of the Faculty Manual. In similar fashion, nothing in this policy changes the terms of research or administrative leave, as laid out in Section 2.55 of the Faculty Manual.

Policy Scope:

This policy applies to all full-time faculty in renewable and continuing appointments (hereafter ‘faculty’) at Syracuse University.

Policy Guiding Principles

• Faculty workload, at the individual and collective level, should reflect the University’s strategic academic goals and values, with particular attention to the following core values (see Faculty Manual, Sections 2.24 and 2.34, for a definition of each core responsibility):
  • Research/scholarship/creative accomplishment (hereafter ‘research’) that contributes to knowledge in or across specific fields or disciplines is an expectation of all tenure-stream (i.e., tenure-track and tenured) professors, as well as research professors. Professors of practice are expected to remain involved and keep abreast of developments in their professional fields; this work will sometimes take the form of research.
  • Quality teaching is an expectation of every faculty member for whom teaching is a core responsibility.
  • With the exception of research professors, all faculty are expected to make service contributions to their home academic units, the University, and/or the communities with which their scholarly, professional, or pedagogical work is associated.
• Deans and/or department chairs/school directors, depending on a school/college’s structure, are expected to regularly review and share feedback on faculty members’ workload and future research, teaching, and/or service obligations and aspirations.
• Conversations, decisions, and policies about faculty workload should start from the perspectives of equity within a given academic unit, transparency in how faculty workloads are determined, and a shared commitment to the fiscal sustainability and strategic priorities of schools/colleges and the University.
• The use of teaching overload, defined later in this policy, should not be a long-term solution to staffing academic programs in most cases. The regular use of part-time instructors to staff academic programs should meet specific academic or professional needs that cannot be met with full-time faculty.
• Approaches to faculty workload should reflect collaboration and engagement across all university levels (Academic Affairs, deans, department chairs/school directors, individual faculty).
• Individual faculty workloads are best managed at the local level but should follow policy guidelines set at both the school/college and university levels.
• Faculty workload guidelines and expectations should be responsive to the changing needs of faculty members across the arc of their careers, to the changing needs of their academic units over time, and to the strategic priorities and core mission of the university.
• Faculty workload should be arranged at all levels (University, school/college, department) such that the overall academic unit’s workload is distributed among faculty in an equitable and transparent manner.

Policy

Faculty workload is defined by effort, not hours. As exempt employees, faculty are assigned core responsibilities, defined in the Faculty Manual, which they are expected to complete in a satisfactory manner.

The workload of each faculty member at Syracuse University can be divided into five units, each constituting 20% of that faculty member’s effort. Faculty effort includes three primary categories: research and/or professional activities; teaching; and service. The workloads of all faculty must be divided among these five units in a way that reflects the core responsibilities associated with their appointment and the allocation of effort across those responsibilities articulated in their school/college faculty workload policies. All faculty, except research professors, are expected to devote one unit (20%) to service, although under some circumstances, it may be appropriate to divide a unit of effort, including service, into 10% increments. All faculty must have an effort distribution, approved by their deans in coordination with department chairs/school directors (where relevant), that articulates the distribution of effort among their core responsibilities. While a faculty member’s total amount of effort should stay at 100%, the distribution of that effort among the core responsibilities associated with a given faculty appointment may change, based on mutual agreement between a dean and a faculty member or based on changes in the evaluation of faculty effort across those core responsibilities.

The general guidelines for faculty workload allocation are the following:

• Research professors are expected to devote all or almost all of their effort to research. They have no teaching responsibilities, and service expectations are minimal.
• Teaching professors are expected to devote most of their effort (typically 80%) to teaching, with little to no effort on research except in unusual circumstances, and one unit (20%) to service, except under the circumstances described below.
• Tenure-stream faculty should devote one unit (20%) to service and divide their remaining effort between teaching and research. In some circumstances, service expectations for tenure-track faculty can be reduced to 10%. The distribution of effort for tenure-track faculty, however, must remain the same throughout their probationary period.
• Professors of practice should devote one unit (20%) to service and divide their remaining effort between teaching and staying connected with their profession.

Teaching, as defined in this policy, follows the broad definition of teaching articulated in Section 2.34 of the Faculty Manual and encompasses more than credit-bearing courses. This policy, however, establishes an absolute ceiling, or maximum, for teaching defined as credit-bearing courses. Annual teaching responsibilities for faculty on academic-year appointments may not exceed the equivalent of 24 credits or eight 3-credit courses; this teaching load would constitute 80% of their effort. Annual teaching responsibilities for faculty on calendar-year appointments may not exceed the equivalent of 30 credits or ten 3-credit courses; this teaching load would constitute 80% of their effort. Any faculty member assigned the maximum teaching load may not be assigned any additional teaching responsibilities, including advising, unless their service effort is reduced to 10%. Teaching during Summer sessions, Maymester, Winterlude, or in short courses offered during Spring Break does not count toward this absolute ceiling or maximum teaching load for faculty on academic-year appointments. Schools and colleges are not required or encouraged to set teaching loads for teaching professors at this ceiling and are free to establish a lower course or credit ceiling for their teaching professors.

Teaching professors should have teaching loads that are greater than those of tenure-stream faculty meeting research expectations in their school/college. Because professors of practice have core responsibilities other than teaching and service, their teaching load should be lower than that of teaching professors within a given school/college.

Distributed responsibilities for faculty workload

Key responsibilities associated with determining faculty workload are distributed across three levels of University governance.

Responsibilities of the Provost

Through this policy, the Provost will establish the overall structure and framework for determining faculty workload. The Provost will also be the final adjudicator in appeals and disputes related to faculty workload assignments (see the final section in this policy for a discussion of the appeals process). Additionally, the Provost is responsible for ensuring that there are enough faculty relative to the University’s research, teaching, and public impact mission and goals. Per the Syracuse University Policy Creation, Revision and Retirement Policy and Process, the Provost’s Office will oversee the creation and implementation of school/college faculty workload policies, in collaboration with the relevant deans.

Responsibilities of Schools/Colleges

The school/college will establish the quantity and type of effort associated with each of the five units in a faculty’s workload, as well as the allocation of effort for faculty members. School/college deans, in consultation with department chairs/school directors in schools/colleges with departments, faculty councils (where present), and faculty, will create specific policies and procedures that align with and implement the faculty workload framework, guiding principles, and requirements articulated in this policy. These school/college policies will identify the specific teaching, research, and service activities that reflect the range of disciplines, fields, and approaches in their unit and the specific amounts of teaching, research, and service activities that constitute a unit of effort for their faculty. In larger schools/colleges or in schools/colleges with a wide range of disciplines or fields, it may be appropriate to identify multiple distributions of effort among teaching, research, and service and multiple sets of effort expectations for each core responsibility. Deans will also manage their school’s/college’s overall teaching capacity, as well as resource allocation for staffing departments and/or academic programs. Deans have the final authority to establish the quantity and distribution of effort associated with each kind of faculty position in their school/college and to establish the criteria for meeting effort expectations in each core responsibility. They must do so, however, through consultation with department chairs/school directors (where relevant), faculty councils (where relevant), and the faculty themselves.

Each school/college faculty workload policy should contain, at minimum, the following elements:

1. A clear articulation of workload effort expectations for teaching, research, and service for faculty, including the percent effort allocated to each core responsibility for different types of faculty appointments, as well as the criteria that will determine whether faculty are meeting, exceeding, or falling below effort expectations in each area. These standards must reflect the school/college’s goals, mission, and the breadth of fields or disciplines represented within it.
2. Credit-hour-to-effort conversions that reflect attention to factors including but not limited to course enrollment, the presence or absence of teaching assistants, lab/studio responsibilities, and the nature of teaching in the disciplines/fields represented in the school/college.
3. A description of how departments or, in schools/colleges without departments, the school/college will establish criteria for identifying advising workloads, particularly for doctoral students, that are significantly higher than that of most faculty in the unit and, where necessary, for reducing the number of assigned courses or credits in response.
4. A process for establishing and seeking approval for faculty workloads that differ from those established by the school/college, on a yearly basis. Upon approval by the Dean, these faculty workloads should be submitted to the Provost’s Office. Department chairs, school/program directors, and associate deans whose workloads are automatically adjusted as part of their augmented appointments are exempt from this process.

At the school/college level, differential faculty workloads may be appropriate in recognition of circumstances such as commitments to student success, exceptional research productivity, external funding, course level, pedagogies, enrollment, accreditation requirements, team-teaching arrangements, significant service or advising assignments, or other activities that are central to the University’s academic mission and goals. In these circumstances, a faculty member’s course-related teaching load may be reduced, and their research or service effort may be increased. Such adjustments are made at the dean’s discretion and with their sole authority. School/college policies will also articulate under what, if any, circumstances designing a new course, substantially revising an existing course, or changing its modality might count toward a faculty member’s teaching effort.

Deans must document any workload changes for a given faculty member in a letter sent to the faculty member and cc’ed to Faculty Affairs and the department chair/school director (where relevant). While input from department chairs, school directors, and faculty councils is essential for shaping equitable and transparent school/college faculty workload policies, the dean holds final decision-making authority over school/college workload policies and faculty workload adjustments. The dean is also responsible for interpreting and applying this policy within their school/college and for making final determinations in alignment with university guidelines, subject to appeal to the Provost where noted.

Schools/colleges that have or anticipate having faculty with 50/50 dual appointments must either explicitly address how these faculty’s workloads will be assigned and assessed in their workload policies or articulate those expectations in a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for each faculty member. This MOU should be negotiated and finalized by the relevant academic deans and approved by the Provost. It should also reflect either the adoption of one school/college’s workload arrangements, with approval from the other school/college, or a blend of the two school/college’s workload arrangements that is most appropriate for the research, teaching, and service responsibilities of the faculty member at hand. Faculty in 75/25 dual appointments will follow the faculty workload policy of the school/college that accounts for 75% of their appointment.

Responsibilities of Departments/Schools

The department chair/school director, with feedback from individual faculty members, will determine the content and responsibilities associated with the units of effort devoted to teaching (i.e., courses assigned, advising responsibilities) and some service for each faculty member, on a semester or term basis. In schools/colleges without departments, the dean will establish this content of effort. Tenure-stream faculty will determine the content of their research effort, which will be evaluated according to the standards and criteria established by the home school/college. The same is true for professors of practice vis-à-vis maintaining connections to their profession or field. The content of a faculty member’s service effort will be determined collaboratively, with input from the department chair, school director, or dean and the individual faculty member. In schools/colleges with departments, department chairs/school directors can assign faculty department and school/college service responsibilities. In schools/colleges without departments, deans can assign faculty school/college service responsibilities. Disputes concerning the content of an individual faculty member’s teaching and/or service efforts will be decided by the relevant dean, with an appeal option to the Provost, who has the final decision.

Faculty overload

Faculty overload occurs when a faculty member is assigned additional duties beyond their standard workload for which they are compensated, resulting in a workload that exceeds 100% of their effort in an academic or calendar year. Faculty overload typically involves additional teaching responsibilities but can also involve additional service responsibilities. Independent studies, thesis/dissertation hours, non-credit courses, and study abroad do not count as teaching overload. Any exception to these expectations concerning faculty overload requires Provost approval.

Overload work performed by a faculty member may not exceed 20%, or one unit, of their full-time effort. No faculty member on an academic-year appointment may teach more than two courses, or the equivalent of 6 credits, on overload during the academic year. No faculty member on a calendar-year appointment may teach more than three courses, or the equivalent of 9 credits, on overload during the calendar year. Courses taught in Winterlude, Maymester, or otherwise outside the academic semester, such as short courses, do not count toward the maximum 6 credits of overload a faculty member on an academic-year appointment may carry. Any deviation from this arrangement requires Provost approval.

Tenure-track faculty should be actively discouraged from teaching on overload and may never be required to do so by deans, department chairs, or school directors.

To be eligible for overload teaching, a faculty member must be evaluated by the department chair/school director (where relevant) and dean as meeting or exceeding effort expectations in all core responsibilities associated with their position (research, teaching, and service for tenure-stream faculty; teaching and service for teaching professors; and teaching, service, and professional involvement for professors of practice) in the preceding year. There are no exceptions to this rule.

Overload teaching should be a temporary arrangement, not a long-term staffing plan, for most academic programs. For new academic programs, within three years of their establishment, the program should be staffed primarily with faculty in full-time, renewable or continuing positions.

Overload teaching is not available to faculty who have a reduced teaching load through having bought out portions of their teaching with external funding or being on research leave. Any exception to this expectation requires Provost approval.

Effort banking

Effort stacking or banking occurs when faculty redistribute their effort within an academic or calendar year to complete all or most of their teaching responsibilities in one semester or term, allowing them to focus more intensively on research or other core responsibilities during the other semester. While effort stacking or banking can create flexibility for individual faculty members, it can also create challenges for academic units trying to balance faculty workloads. Additionally, effort stacking or banking can create challenges for students, as it impacts course scheduling, advising workloads, and student mentoring. For these reasons, effort stacking or banking must be carefully managed at the school/college and department level.

To be eligible to bank or stack teaching, faculty must be evaluated in the preceding year as meeting or exceeding effort expectations in all core responsibilities associated with their appointment. Approval to bank or stack teaching is at the dean’s discretion on a case-by-case basis, with input from department chairs, school directors, or program directors. No faculty member can be forced to bank or stack teaching assignments, and tenure-track faculty should generally avoid effort banking/stacking. Effort stacking or banking may only take place within an academic or calendar year, depending on the faculty member’s appointment. Faculty who bank teaching effort must continue to contribute 20% service effort each semester.

School/college workload policies must explicitly indicate whether they allow course banking or stacking, and this decision should reflect the distinctive aspects of teaching in the fields and disciplines associated with that school/college. If a school/college allows effort banking or stacking, its faculty workload policy must explicitly address the conditions under which faculty may stack or bank teaching assignments. Such policies must include a specific process by which faculty interested in banking or stacking teaching effort can apply and the specific criteria by which their requests will be evaluated. Schools and colleges must also create a clear and transparent way of tracking faculty course stacking or banking.

In some circumstances, onload courses or teaching assignments can be shifted to summer sessions, Maymester, or Winterlude as a form of course banking or stacking, if the dean, with feedback from department chairs, school directors, or program directors, determines that such an arrangement will facilitate students’ timely completion of their degrees, student success, or specific research or service obligations of a particular faculty member. Such arrangements must be approved in advance by the relevant dean and the Provost and should not exceed two courses in an academic year.

Appeals

Workload-related appeals submitted to the Provost will be reviewed by a Provost’s Faculty Advisory Committee on Workload (PFACW). This committee will include 16 faculty from diverse disciplinary and social backgrounds, as well as representation from tenure-stream faculty, teaching professors, and professors of practice. Since research professors have little or no service responsibilities, they will not be asked to join this committee. No one currently serving in an academic leadership role may serve on the PFACW, but previous academic leadership experience will be prioritized when this committee is populated. The PFACW will be jointly selected by the University Senate Chair and the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs from a pool of nominees brought forward by the deans and by the Agenda Committee of the University Senate.

This draft academic policy reflects feedback from the following groups:

• School/college faculty council chairs or their equivalents (two rounds of feedback)
• Department chairs and school directors
• Senate Committee on Appointment and Promotions
• Senate Committee on Intersectional Equity for Race, Ethnicity, Sexuality, Gender Identity, & Disability
• Senate Committee on Academic Affairs
• Senior associate deans, associate deans for academic affairs, associate deans for faculty affairs, and associate deans for research
• Academic Affairs leadership team
• Deans

Submit Feedback