Rules & Policies Section Four

Rule 4-1 Faculty Meeting Attendance

  1. Faculty meetings may be called in the discretion of the Dean, provided that the Dean shall give notice to all regular members of the Faculty of the rank of Assistant Professor or higher of the time, place, and agenda of any such meeting at least forty-eight hours before it is scheduled to take place. No item of business of which such members of the Faculty have not been so notified shall be acted upon by the Faculty over the objection of any member.

  2. Tenured and tenure-track members of the Faculty, Joint Appointees, and Research Professors shall be entitled to attend and participate in all Faculty meetings, with the exception that tenure-track Faculty will not be entitled to attend Faculty meetings (or the portions of Faculty meetings) dedicated to discussions of tenure for internal candidates or reappointment of tenure-track Faculty members.

    Clinical Professors and Professors of the Practice are entitled to attend and participate in all Faculty meetings with the proviso that: in Faculty meetings (or the portions of Faculty meetings) dedicated to discussions of tenure for external candidates, upon request made before or during a Faculty meeting by a member of the Faculty entitled to vote on the matter, some time shall be reserved during the discussion period for discussion of the candidates(s) with Clinical Professors and Professors of the Practice absent.

    In addition, the Faculty may, in its discretion, invite or permit others to attend and participate.

  3. No action shall be taken on any item of business at a Faculty meeting unless a quorum, which shall consist of not less than one-half of the regular members of the Faculty in-residence of the rank of Assistant Professor or higher, is present and unless by a majority vote of those present entitled to vote and actually voting.

  4. At the request of not less than three members of the Faculty present and entitled to vote, and after debate on the item, action on any item of business initially before the Faculty shall be deferred to the next meeting.

Back to topRevised January 2005

Rule 4-2. Committees

  1. The standing committees of the Law School shall be Admissions, Alumni Relations and Special Occasions, Curriculum, Faculty Appointments (both the Entry-Level Faculty Appointments Committee, and the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee), Library, Placement and Planning. Each of these committees shall be constituted of at least four Faculty and three student members, except the Placement Committee which shall have three Faculty and six student members. Members of these committees shall be appointed and vested with authority as follows:

    1. The Dean shall appoint the Faculty members of each of these committees and shall designate one Faculty member to serve as its chair.

    2. The Dean shall appoint the student members of each of these committees on which they are eligible to sit who shall have been selected by the student body under procedures approved by the Faculty.

    3. The student members of each of these committees on which they are eligible to sit shall have the same rights as its Faculty members unless the Faculty has expressly limited the rights of student members of specific committees.

    4. The Administrative Committee will have three Faculty members appointed by the Dean. Other committees of the Law School shall be created and their members appointed by the Dean in his or her discretion or as directed by the Faculty.

    5. Except as otherwise authorized by the Faculty, the function of each committee shall be to consider, either on direction from the Dean or the Faculty or on its own initiative, matters that fall within its proper purview and to formulate and transmit to the Faculty such proposals as it may deem appropriate.

Back to topRevised November 2009

Rule 4-3. Appointments, Promotions, and the Granting of Tenure

  1. Tenured and tenure-track members of the Faculty and Research Professors shall be eligible to vote on recommended appointments, provided, however, that only tenured members of the Faculty shall be eligible to vote on tenure, and only tenured members of the Faculty and Research Professors shall be eligible to vote on reappointments of tenure-track faculty. No affirmative action shall be taken by the Faculty on any recommended appointment unless by a two-thirds majority vote of those members present, eligible to vote, and actually voting, provided, however, that on a matter affecting indefinite tenure, affirmative action shall be taken by a majority vote of those members present, eligible to vote, and actually voting.

    Except as noted below, only those present at the time of the vote may vote. The presence requirement is satisfied by either (a) physical presence at the time the vote is taken or (b) presence by telephone at the time the vote is taken, in the case of a person who has been present either by phone or in person for all portions of the discussion of the candidate. An exception to the presence requirement may be granted, in the case of a person who is present by telephone at the time of the vote and who was present (physically or by telephone) for a substantial portion of the discussion of the candidate, upon a motion and approval by a majority vote of those physically present. To encourage active faculty participation in the discussion of candidates, and to discourage proxy voting and de facto proxy voting, exceptions should be granted only in extraordinary circumstances.

  2. Initial Professorial Appointments

    1. In recommending to the Faculty initial professorial appointments, the following guidelines shall ordinarily be followed by the Entry-Level Faculty Appointments and the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committees, provided, however, that the Committees may depart from these guidelines for compelling reasons:

      1. An initial appointment as Assistant Professor for a term of three years without tenure: to a candidate who when he or she commences teaching here will have had his or her basic law degree for less than five years.

      2. An initial appointment as Associate Professor for a term of three years without tenure: to a candidate who when he or she commences teaching here will have had his or her basic law degree for more than five years but less than ten years and who has not had substantial law school teaching experience.

      3. An initial appointment as Professor for a term of three years without tenure: to a candidate who when he or she commences teaching here will have had his or her basic law degree for more than ten years and who has not had substantial law school teaching experience.

      4. An initial appointment as Professor with indefinite tenure: to a candidate who when he or she commences teaching here will have had five or more years of law school teaching experience and who will have had a tenured appointment in another law school or the likelihood of gaining it shortly.

      5. The type of appointment to be recommended for a candidate who does not fall within any of the above categories shall be determined in light of his or her age and his or her professorial experience and achievements.

    2. No candidate ordinarily will be recommended to the Faculty by the Entry-Level Faculty Appointments Committee or the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee for an initial professorial appointment unless that candidate has visited the Law School or most members of the Faculty have otherwise had an opportunity to meet him or her.

  3. Promotions and the Granting of Tenure

    1. To provide direction and advice to a faculty member before tenure is granted, the Dean shall conduct annual reviews of the faculty member, including appraisals of his or her teaching, scholarly achievement, research agenda, and other contributions to the Law School. In addition to consulting directly with the faculty member for these annual reviews, the Dean shall consult with the faculty member's mentoring committee (described in paragraph 3(f), below).

      During the last semester of the penultimate year of the faculty member's initial appointment, a reappointment review shall be undertaken by the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee. The review should include appraisals of the faculty member's teaching, scholarly achievement, research agenda, and other contributions to the Law School. Although opinions of scholars outside of the Law School community may be relevant to the review, outside letters need not be solicited. After the completion of the review, the Committee shall advise the Dean of its recommendation with respect to reappointment, and the Dean shall take the recommendation to the Faculty for its consideration and vote. If the Faculty votes in favor of the reappointment, the Dean shall inform the Provost, whose approval is required for reappointment.

      If the Faculty has voted not to reappoint a faculty member, the Dean shall inform the Faculty member, and, if requested by the faculty member, shall provide him or her with a written statement of the reasons for the decision.

    2. Upon approval by the Faculty and the Provost, an Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor on an initial appointment without tenure shall be reappointed for an additional term without tenure. In the case of an Assistant and Associate Professor, he or she shall be reappointed for a term of three years without tenure and, in the case of an Assistant Professor, promoted to the rank of Associate Professor. In the case of a Professor, he or she will be reappointed for a term of two years.

    3. If the Dean concludes that it would be in the best interests of the Law School to pursue reappointment and promotion before the penultimate year of an initial appointment, the Dean may request consultation by the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee, which will ordinarily seek the advice of the candidate's mentoring committee.

    4. Ordinarily during the first semester of the penultimate year of an Associate Professor's or an untenured Professor's additional term, the tenured members of the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee shall consider the Associate Professor or the untenured Professor for reappointment with indefinite tenure at the rank of Professor. (See paragraph 3(e) for contents of the Committee review.) After the completion of its consideration, the Committee shall advise the Dean of its recommendation with respect to reappointment, and the Dean shall take the recommendation to the Faculty for its consideration and vote. If the Faculty votes in favor of the reappointment, the Dean shall inform the Provost, whose approval is required for reappointment.

    5. If the Faculty has voted not to reappoint a faculty member, the Dean shall inform the Faculty member, and, if requested by the faculty member, shall provide him or her with a written statement of the reasons for the decision.

    6. With the consent of the tenure candidate and after consultation with the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee, the Dean may extend the time at which a non-tenured member of the Faculty shall be considered for reappointment with indefinite tenure. When the Dean grants such an extension, the term of the member concerned shall be extended by one year. The total length of a non-tenured faculty member's term is not to exceed seven years.

    7. A candidate shall be granted indefinite tenure only if he or she has demonstrated the qualities necessary for sustained excellence as both a teacher and a creative and productive scholar, looking to the future as well as the past. In making this decision, the Faculty may assess the quality of a candidate's teaching on the basis of student evaluations, class visitations, and/or such other techniques it deems appropriate; it may assess the quality of a candidate's scholarship only on the basis of his or her written work that is in a state of completion sufficient to satisfy reasonable standards of craftsmanship, and this written work must be sufficiently substantial to permit confident judgment by the Faculty in the matter. Other factors that may weigh in the decision are the extent, relevance, and significance of a candidate's contributions to legal education, law reform, public service, and the administration of justice. These standards may, however, be appropriately modified if it is intended and expected that a candidate's paramount function will be not directly to contribute to the teaching and scholarship missions of the Law School, but rather to perform in an ancillary capacity, as in the case of a head librarian; but in such a case, the granting of indefinite tenure shall not carry an entitlement to teach except and to the extent as may be specifically authorized by the tenured members of the Faculty.

    8. The Dean shall appoint a mentoring committee for each tenure-track member of the Faculty for the purpose of following the progress of the member toward promotion and/or tenure and advising the tenure-track member and the Dean of that progress.

    9. Except as noted in Rules 4-1(2) and 4-3(1), all tenured and tenure-track members of the Faculty shall be entitled to participate in the governance of the school on all matters.

  4. Clinical Professor of Law

    1. Appointment to the position of Clinical Professor of Law will be made of experienced attorneys of demonstrated skill and judgment who exhibit the ability to inculcate these characteristics in others. The primary work of Clinical Professors within the Law School is to contribute importantly to the teaching and service missions of the Law School. A Clinical Professor will generally be expected to maintain a full teaching load and, if teaching in a real client clinic, to ensure the regular operation of that clinic as required to meet the needs of its clients. While it is not expected that a Clinical Professor will contribute to the research mission of the Law School, it is expected that a Clinical Professor will demonstrate intellectual engagement and leadership in their fields of expertise and make other contributions to the Law School comparable to those expected of other members of the Faculty. To provide guidance with respect to the implementation of this rule, the Faculty has adopted Policy 4-8, which addresses the meaning of the terms “excellence in clinical teaching” and “intellectual engagement and leadership” as they are used throughout this rule.

    2. An initial appointment without the presumption of renewal to the position of Clinical Professor of Law shall be considered by either the Entry-Level Faculty Appointments Committee or the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotions Committee, at the Dean’s discretion. In its consideration of the appointment, the Committee shall consult with the Dean and the Director of Clinics or the Director of Legal Writing, as appropriate. After the completion of its consideration, the Committee shall advise the Dean of its recommendation regarding the appointment, and shall take the recommendation to the Faculty for its consideration and vote. If the Faculty votes in favor of the appointment, the Dean shall inform the Provost, whose approval is required for appointment. For appointments without the presumption of renewal, the Committee’s recommendation shall be based principally on its determination that the candidate has demonstrated the potential to achieve excellence in clinical teaching, its appraisal of the candidate’s potential for intellectual engagement and leadership in the candidate’s field, and its assessment of the candidate’s potential to make other important contributions to the Law School. In making its determination, the Committee shall review a curriculum vitae, any available indicia of teaching skills, written comments provided by current members of the faculty (including, without limitation, from clinical faculty members), letters of reference, and a statement from the candidate that includes, without limitation, (i) a description of the course(s) the candidate will be teaching (including (a) the professional development objectives of the course, and (b) if applicable, client service objectives, plans for case selection, and case management strategies), and (ii) a discussion of the activities in which the candidate engages, or expects to engage, that evidence intellectual engagement and leadership in the candidate’s field. Appointments of Clinical Professors will be made at ranks corresponding to those used for regular professorial appointments, albeit normally without tenure eligibility while holding a clinical appointment. An appointment without the presumption of renewal will ordinarily be made for terms of three years.

    3. Ordinarily, during the first semester of the penultimate year of a Clinical Professor’s initial appointment without the presumption of renewal, a review shall be undertaken by the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotions Committee to determine whether the candidate should be reappointed to a second three-year term without the presumption of renewal. This review should take into account appraisals of the candidate’s progress with respect to the candidate’s teaching, intellectual engagement and leadership in their field, the candidate’s other contributions to the Law School, as well as a written Dean’s report concerning the candidate. After completion of its consideration, the Committee shall advise the Dean of its recommendation regarding the reappointment, and shall take the recommendation to the Faculty for its consideration and vote. If the Faculty votes in favor of the reappointment, the Dean shall inform the Provost, whose approval is required for reappointment. If the Faculty has voted not to reappoint a faculty member, the Dean shall inform the Faculty member, and, if requested by the faculty member, shall provide him or her with a written statement of the reasons for the decision. Under no circumstances shall a Clinical Professor serve more than two appointments without the presumption of renewal before then being considered for an appointment with the presumption of renewal.

    4. Ordinarily, during the first semester of the penultimate year of a Clinical Professor’s second appointment without the presumption of renewal, a review shall be undertaken by the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotions Committee to determine if a Clinical Professor should be granted an appointment with the presumption of renewal. For a Clinical Professor’s initial appointment with the presumption of renewal, the Committee’s recommendation shall be based on its determination that the candidate has demonstrated sufficient progress towards achieving excellence in clinical teaching, as well as its appraisal of the Clinical Professor’s non-clinical teaching (if applicable), professional service, evidence of intellectual engagement and leadership in their field, other contributions to the Law School, as well as a written Dean's report concerning the candidate. In making its determination, the Committee shall review the Dean’s report, student evaluations of the course(s) taught by the candidate, written comments provided by former students in the clinical course assessing the candidate’s teaching, written comments provided by faculty members, including clinical faculty, and at least three letters of reference solicited by the Committee from persons outside Duke Law School who are familiar with, and qualified to assess, the candidate. The Committee shall also review a statement from the candidate that includes, without limitation: (i) a self-assessment of the candidate’s clinical and non-clinical (if any) teaching; (ii) an overview of the changes, if any, proposed for the clinical and non-clinical (if any) course(s) taught by the candidate; (iii) a discussion of the activities in which the candidate engages that evidence intellectual engagement and leadership in their field and how this work is expected to evolve, if at all, during the period of the reappointment; and (iv) a discussion of the other contributions to the Law School made by the candidate. The Committee may also seek the advice of the candidate’s Mentoring Committee. After completion of its review, the Committee shall advise the Dean of its recommendation with respect to the candidate’s initial appointment as Clinical Professor with the presumption of renewal, and shall take the matter to the Faculty for its consideration and vote. If the Faculty votes in favor of the reappointment, the Dean shall inform the Provost, whose approval is required for reappointment. An appointment with the presumption of renewal shall ordinarily be for a term of five years.

    5. During the first semester of the penultimate year of any of a Clinical Professor’s initial appointment with the presumption of renewal or any subsequent renewal appointment thereafter, a reappointment review of a Clinical Professor shall be undertaken by the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotions Committee. All such reappointment reviews should include appraisals of the Clinical Professor’s clinical teaching, non-clinical teaching (if applicable), professional service, evidence of intellectual engagement and leadership in the Clinical Professor’s field, the candidate’s other contributions to the Law School, as well as a written Dean’s report concerning the candidate. In making its determination, the Committee shall not ordinarily be expected to receive or consider written comments from former students or letters of reference (whether from other members of the faculty or from persons outside the Law School). Unless there is good cause for non-reappointment, it is presumed that the Committee shall recommend that a Clinical Professor holding an appointment with the presumption of renewal be reappointed when considered for any renewal term. Good cause for non-reappointment is defined as (i) substantial evidence that the candidate (a) has failed to demonstrate sustained excellence in the candidate’s clinical teaching and sustained intellectual engagement and leadership in their field, as well as in the candidate’s other service to the Law School, (b) in the case of a Clinical Professor teaching in a real client clinic, has not provided high quality supervision with respect to the legal work of the candidate’s clinic, or (c) otherwise failed to meet high standards of competence and professionalism; (ii) the termination or material modification of the entire clinical program; or (iii) the termination or material modification of the clinic in which the Clinical Professor teaches. After the completion of the review, the Committee shall advise the Dean of its recommendation with respect to reappointment, and shall take the matter to the Faculty for its consideration and vote. If the Faculty votes in favor of the reappointment, the Dean shall inform the Provost, whose approval is required for reappointment.

    6. Clinical instructors, legal writing instructors, and other instructors teaching experiential education courses (as distinguished from Clinical Professors of Law) may be appointed by the Dean pursuant to Rule 4-3.1. It is presumed, however, that any clinical instructor holding such an appointment while also serving as the director of a clinic, and any legal writing instructor holding such an appointment while also serving as the Director of Legal Writing, shall be considered for an initial appointment without the presumption of renewal as a Clinical Professor within three years of the Clinical Professor’s initial appointment under Rule 4-3.1. Any clinical or legal writing instructor who is not also serving as the director of a clinic or as the Director of Legal Writing, but who holds an appointment pursuant to Rule 4-3.1, may be considered for appointment as a Clinical Professor at any time at the discretion of the Dean.

    7. To provide direction and advice to a Clinical Professor, the Dean shall conduct an annual review of the faculty member, including appraisals of the Clinical Professor’s teaching, professional service, evidence of intellectual engagement and leadership in their field, and other contributions to the Law School. Additionally, to provide direction and advice to a Clinical Professor in advance of the Committee’s consideration of the Clinical Professor for an initial appointment with the presumption of renewal, the Dean shall generally appoint a mentoring committee to work with the Clinical Professor (as described in paragraph 4(h), below). In addition to consulting directly with the faculty member for these annual reviews, the Dean shall consult with the Clinical Professor's mentoring committee while it is constituted.

    8. Unless the Dean, the candidate, and the Director of Clinics or Director of Legal Writing, as appropriate determine that it is unnecessary, the Dean shall appoint a mentoring committee to work with a Clinical Professor during the term(s) of the Clinical Professor’s appointment without the presumption of renewal. The mentoring committee shall follow the progress of the Clinical Professor toward promotion and advise the faculty member and the Dean of that progress. The mentoring committee shall include at least the Director of Clinics or the Director of Legal Writing, as appropriate, one other Clinical Professor and one tenured or tenure-track member of the faculty, preferably one who is knowledgeable about the Clinical Professor’s field.

    9. Except as noted in Rule 4-1(2), Clinical Professors shall be entitled to participate in the governance of the school on all matters other than voting on tenure and the appointment and reappointment of tenure-track Faculty; provided, however, that only Clinical Professors who have an appointment with the presumption of renewal shall be eligible to vote on the reappointment of Clinical Professors and Professors of the Practice.

  5. Visiting Professorial Appointments

    Absent exceptional circumstances, visiting appointments made for the purpose of evaluation of the candidate for possible appointment to the faculty shall be made by the Dean in consultation with the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee, which shall identify such candidates through procedures adopted to ensure examination of the academic field or other definition of relevant alternative candidates.

  6. Professor of the Practice of Law

    1. Appointment to the position of professor of the practice of law at the rank appropriate for a regular professorial appointment may be made for individuals with distinguished legal practice experience who carry a full teaching load and whose professional activities outside teaching focus on relevant areas of practice without the usual expectations of scholarship. An exception to the requirement of a full-time teaching load may be made for those holding a joint appointment at a comparable rank in another school within the University. An initial appointment shall ordinarily be for a period of three years.

    2. An initial appointment to the position of professor of the practice of law shall be considered by either the Entry-Level Faculty Appointments Committee or the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee, at the Dean’s discretion. After the completion of its consideration, the Committee shall advise the Dean of its recommendation regarding the appointment, and the Dean shall take the recommendation to the Faculty for its consideration and vote. If the Faculty votes in favor of the appointment, the Dean shall inform the Provost, whose approval is required for appointment. For initial appointments, the Committee shall review a curriculum vitae, student evaluations and other indicia of teaching skills, a representative sample of the candidate's publications, if any, and letters of reference.

    3. Appointments are for the initial term only unless the Dean recommends renewal. If the Dean wishes to renew the appointment of a professor of the practice of law, the Dean shall notify the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee and the Governing Faculty that a review has been commenced, and shall solicit comments. All such comments shall be incorporated in a written Dean's report, which shall be submitted to the Committee for consideration in its review of the renewal. After the completion of the review, the Committee shall advise the Dean of its recommendation with respect to reappointment, and the Dean shall take the matter to the Faculty for its consideration and vote. If the Faculty votes in favor of the reappointment, the Dean shall inform the Provost, whose approval is required for reappointment.

    4. In conducting the review of any proposed renewal, the Dean and the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee shall generally follow the procedures for the review of tenure track faculty, and shall also meet the requirements of the University review applicable to such appointments.

    5. The procedures for promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor of the Practice of Law, and from Associate to full Professor of the Practice of Law, shall generally follow the procedures for the review of tenure track faculty, and shall also meet the requirements of the University review applicable to such appointments.

    6. Except as noted in Rule 4-1(2), Professors of the Practice shall be entitled to participate in the governance of the school on all matters other than voting on tenure and the appointment and reappointment of tenure-track Faculty; provided, however, that only Professors of the Practice who have been appointed to a renewal appointment shall be eligible to vote on the reappointment of Clinical Professors and Professors of the Practice.

  7. Appointment as Director of the Law Library and Research Professor of Law

    An appointment as Director of the Law Library and Research Professor of Law may be made by the Faculty to the person selected by the Dean to administer the Law Library if his or her educational and professional background qualify him or her, in the Faculty's judgment, to assume teaching responsibilities within the School. The incumbent shall teach courses in the curriculum on call of the Dean, subject to the authority of the Curriculum Committee.

    Appointment as Research Professor will be made at a rank corresponding to that appropriate for a regular professorial appointment and may be held only as long as the individual serves as director of the Law Library. The appointment shall not carry a right of indefinite tenure and shall be subject to formal review and renewal by the Faculty at five-year intervals. Such review shall be conducted by the Library Committee. At the request of the Dean, the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee may lengthen the interval for review to 10 years when the Faculty member has undergone at least one review for reappointment at the level of Research Professor.

    A Research Professor shall be entitled to participate in the governance of the school on all matters except voting on tenure.

  8. Appointment as Professor of Law for Untenured Dean Selected by the Provost

    An appointment as Professor of Law may be made by the Faculty to the individual selected by the President and Provost as Dean of the Law School. In the event this individual is not awarded tenure under Rule 4-3(3)(e), the appointment would be with all of the privileges and status of a tenured professor except that the appointment would be held only as long as the individual serves as Dean of the Law School plus three years.

Back to topRevised January 2007

Rule 4-3.1. Non-Tenure Track Faculty and Secondary Appointments in the Law School

  1. Categories of Non-tenure-track Appointments

    Non tenure-track instructors may be appointed by the Dean with the following titles (supplemented with descriptors -- e.g., of Legal History, of Criminal Law -- as appropriate):

    1. Adjunct Professor of Law (at the rank appropriate for a regular professorial appointment), for part-time instructors from outside the Law School with regular academic appointments elsewhere;

    2. Lecturer in Law (with the Senior rank awarded ten years after receipt of a law degree), for law-trained library personnel teaching courses approved by the Curriculum Committee other than or in addition to legal research;

    3. Lecturing Fellow in Law (with the Senior rank awarded ten years after receipt of degree), for (a) law-trained library personnel teaching Legal Research, and for (b) instructors from outside the Law School without regular academic appointments elsewhere

  2. Joint Appointments

    An instructor holding a primary appointment in another division of the University may simultaneously hold a secondary appointment of professorial or non-professorial rank in the Law School, provided that a candidate shall in no case be granted an indefinite term if he or she does not already have indefinite tenure in his or her primary appointment. Such an appointee shall have a standing invitation to attend faculty meetings and to participate in deliberations as a non-voting member, and shall be eligible for appointment by the Dean to standing or ad hoc committees of the School.

  3. Initial Appointment and Periodic Review of Non-tenure-track Faculty and Joint Appointments

    1. Initial appointments and renewals will be considered by the committees and the Dean as described in subsections (b) through (j) below. Except as otherwise provided, appointments and decisions on renewal will not be submitted to the full Faculty for approval.

    2. Secondary Appointments from other Departments at Duke University or Other Universities

      1. Proposals for initial secondary appointments shall be reviewed by the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee. After the completion of its review, the Committee shall forward any positive recommendation to the Dean, who shall then take it to the Governing Faculty for its consideration and vote. If the Faculty votes in favor of the appointment, the Dean shall inform the Provost, whose approval is required for appointment. For initial appointments, the file of the primary department or school should be used, where available. Where not available, the Committee should review the curriculum vitae, student evaluations or other indicia of teaching skills, at least one or two publications, one or two references and a brief report of the Dean. An initial appointment shall ordinarily be made for a period of three years. Subsequent reappointments may be for three years or for a longer term.

      2. Review after a three-year initial appointment shall be conducted by the Dean, and should normally include a curriculum vitae and student evaluations or other indicia of teaching skills as well as any other material considered relevant. Consideration shall also be given to the institutional contributions the faculty member in question has made to the Law School.

      3. As part of any review after the initial appointment, the Dean shall notify the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee and the Governing Faculty that a review has been commenced, and shall solicit comments. All such comments shall be incorporated in a written Dean's report to accompany the decision on renewal. Except as provided in (b)(iv), the Dean may act on behalf of the Law School in renewing a secondary appointment without action of the Governing Faculty.

      4. The Dean shall convey her decisions on renewal to the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee before making them final, together with her written report, and may at her initiative consult with the Committee before making those decisions final. At the request of the Committee, the Dean shall consult with the Committee on any specific renewal decision. The Committee may refer any decision on renewal to the Governing Faculty for its final action.

      5. After Law School action on an appointment or renewal, the recommendation to appoint or renew shall be submitted to the dean or department chair of the faculty member's primary department or school.

    3. Non-tenured Faculty with Multi-Year Contracts

      1. Initial appointments shall be considered by either the Entry-Level Faculty Appointments Committee or the Lateral Faculty Appointments or Promotion Committee, at the Dean’s discretion. When available, the Committee should review a curriculum vitae, student evaluations or other indicia of teaching skills, at least one or two publications, one or two references and a brief report of the Dean.

      2. Appointments are for the initial term only unless the Dean recommends renewal.

      3. Reviews after the initial appointment shall be conducted by the Dean, and should normally include a curriculum vitae and student evaluations or other indicia of teaching skills, as well as any other material considered relevant.

      4. As part of any review after the initial appointment, the Dean shall notify the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee as well as the Governing Faculty that a review has been commenced, and shall solicit comments. All such comments shall be incorporated in a written Dean's report to accompany the decision on renewal.

      5. The Dean shall convey his or her decisions on renewal to the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee before making them final, together with his or her written report, and may at his or her initiative consult with the Committee before making those decisions final. At the request of the Committee, the Dean shall consult with the Committee on any specific decision on renewal. The Committee may refer any decision on renewal to the Governing Faculty for its final action.

    4. Non-tenure Track Faculty with Contracts of One Year or Less

      1. Initial appointments to teach existing courses shall be made by the Dean. (Provisions governing the appointment of new instructors to teach new courses are detailed in subsection (e), infra.)

      2. The Dean shall continuously monitor the performance of non-tenure track faculty on one year contracts, and shall in addition conduct a review of each such instructor's performance every three years. The periodic reviews by the Dean should normally include a curriculum vitae and student evaluations or other indicia of teaching skills, as well as any other material considered relevant.

      3. As part of the periodic review after the initial appointment, the Dean shall notify the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee as well as the Governing Faculty that a review has been commenced, and shall solicit comments. All such comments shall be incorporated in a written Dean's report to accompany the decision on renewal.

      4. With regard to the three-year evaluation, the Dean shall convey her decisions on renewal to the Lateral Faculty Appointments and Promotion Committee before making them final, together with a written report, and may at her initiative consult with the Committee before making those decisions final. At the request of the Committee, the Dean shall consult with the Committee on any specific decision on renewal. The Committee may refer any decision on renewal to the Governing Faculty for its final action.

    5. The Appointment of New Non-Tenure Track Faculty to Teach New Courses

      If the Dean wishes to submit for consideration a proposal for a new course to be taught by a new instructor, the course proposal as well as the proposed instructor's qualifications to teach the course should be reviewed by the Curriculum Committee. If the Dean recommends the renewal of the appointment of a new instructor teaching a new course after the first year in which it is taught, the Curriculum Committee should conduct a review of the course before the Dean renews the instructor's contract. The review should include a curriculum vitae, student evaluations or other indicia of teaching skills and a brief report of the Dean.

    6. Non-tenure Track Faculty with Supervisory Responsibility Over Other Instructors

      1. Initial appointments are made by the Dean after consultation with the Curriculum Committee. Annual reviews of the supervisors will be conducted by the Dean.

      2. After a time specified by the Dean, not to exceed three years, the program being supervised will be evaluated by the Curriculum Committee.

    7. The Director of the Law Library will appoint and review the performance of the Director of Research Instruction. The Director of Research Instruction will review the teaching performance of librarians who instruct in legal research under the supervision of the Director of the Law Library.

    8. Instructors in the First-Year Writing Program will be reviewed by the Director of Legal Writing, under the supervision of the Dean.

    9. Instructors in the clinical programs supervised by the directors or team leaders shall be reviewed by the director or team leader of each program under the supervision of the Dean.

    10. Judges and practitioners in special team-taught courses such as Legal Ethics and Appellate Practice shall be selected by, and may be reappointed by, the faculty member in charge of each program after consultation with the Dean.

    11. Language instructors shall be selected by, and may be reappointed by the Dean upon the advice of the Dean for International Studies.

Back to topRevised April 2003

Rule 4-4.1. Deanship Search Procedures

The President and the Provost will initiate the search for the Dean of the Law School according to the following procedures.

  1. Dean Search Committee

    1. The Provost will appoint a seven member Deanship Search Committee composed of at least four members of the Law School Faculty, plus at least one Duke Faculty member from another discipline. One member of the Law School Board of Visitors may be among the members of the Search Committee. All Committee members will be drawn from the Law School Faculty, non-Law School Duke Faculty, the Law School Board of Visitors, or the Board of Trustees.

      1. The Law School members of the Committee will be selected by the Provost from a list of at least six nominated by the Law School Faculty. Tenured and tenure-track Faculty members, Professors of the Practice, Clinical Professors, and the Director of the Library, shall be eligible to serve as Law School members of the Committee.

      2. The faculty member from another discipline will be selected by the Provost from a list of four nominees provided by the Academic Council.

      3. The Law School Board of Visitors will, if asked, nominate two of its members as potential members of the Committee, from whom the Provost will select one to serve.

      4. The Chair of the Search Committee shall be selected by the Provost from among the Search Committee members from the Law School Faculty.

  2. The Search Process

    1. The function of the Search Committee is, with due consultation of the Law School Faculty, to advise the President and Provost with regard to the selection of the Dean, including the definition of a final list of appropriate candidates.

      1. Prior to beginning its work, the Search Committee should meet with the Provost to determine the criteria governing the search process.

      2. The Search Committee will solicit nominations, engage in discussions with individual members of the faculty, receive correspondence, and advertise when and where appropriate.

      3. The Search Committee will report to the Faculty periodically regarding progress with the search. The Search Committee will discuss with the Faculty the candidacies of all individuals being seriously considered by the Search Committee for inclusion on the list of candidates to be presented to the President and the Provost.

      4. It is desirable that the process have the full confidence of the faculty. The process will, therefore, include visits of all promising candidates to the Law School and meetings with the Faculty, and will lead up to a short list of potential candidates to be presented to the President and Provost. As this list is formulated, the Committee will seek the advice of the Law School faculty members and they will be invited to send individual letters to the Committee and/or the President and Provost regarding individual candidates. In addition, the Law School faculty may choose to provide a collective judgment on the candidates to be presented to the Provost and President.

    2. The Search Committee will transmit a short list that is expected to have three nominees unless the committee petitions the Provost for a different number for specified reasons. Under no circumstances can only one candidate be submitted.

      1. The President and Provost shall then meet with the Search Committee to discuss the candidates.

      2. Following discussion with the Search Committee, the President and Provost may wish to invite one or more candidates to visit the campus.

    3. Before making their final recommendation to the Trustees, the President and Provost shall inform the Search Committee of their decision and seek their further advice if appropriate.

Back to topRevised May 2005

Rule 4-4.2. Selection Procedures--Dean Search Committee

Step 1. The Dean's office will forward a memorandum to all tenured and tenure-track members of the Faculty, Professors of the Practice, Clinical Professors, and the Director of the Library, listing all such Faculty members. All such Faculty members who do not, within 72 hours, indicate their unwillingness or inability to serve on the Committee shall be deemed candidates.

Step 2. The Dean's Office will circulate the list of candidates to each tenured and tenure-track member of the Faculty, Professor of the Practice, and Clinical Professor, and to the Director of the Library. Each person shall vote for six candidates. Ballots containing votes for fewer than six candidates shall be void. Three (3) working days will be allowed for voting. The Dean's office will tally the votes. The candidates receiving the six highest vote totals shall constitute the list submitted to the Provost.

Any voting members who are away from the Law School during the period a ballot is being taken may make arrangements with the Dean to cast their ballots by telephone.

In case any issue on interpretation arises under the rules, the Dean's decision shall be determinative.

The Dean's office will retain the ballots until the Provost has acted on the Law School 's nominations to the Dean Selection Committee, after which they may be destroyed. During the period the ballots are retained, they will be open for inspection by any member of the Governing Faculty.

Back to topRevised May 2005

Policies

Policy 4-1. Research Leave and Support

Policy 4-1.1. Sabbatical Leave

Sabbatical leaves are provided for in Article XXIV of the University Bylaws. This policy has been adopted to clarify the provisions of the bylaws.

The primary purpose of sabbatical leave is to increase the value of the professor's further service both to his profession and to the University. Although there may be exceptions, such a purpose is ordinarily served by the pursuit of scholarship (e.g., for teaching abroad, study, research, or publication) undertaken to further the solution of pedagogical and administrative problems. Sabbatical leaves are not to be used for purposes of recreation or general travel.

Granting of Sabbatical Leaves. Normally, a sabbatical leave is not granted if the applicant's request is for the purpose of accepting remunerative employment. This rule does not apply to the acceptance of fellowships and similar grants which serve the purposes outlined above. Furthermore, there may be other situations in which acceptance of a remunerative position may lead to a fulfillment of the primary purpose of increasing the value of the professor's further service to his profession and to the University.

Any person granted sabbatical leave is expected to return for at least one year's service following the leave.

Sabbatical leave may be granted for a full year at half salary or for a half year at full salary.

Eligibility. All members of the faculty at the rank of professor, associate professor, or assistant professor, including those with part-time administrative duties, are eligible to apply for a sabbatical leave during their 7th, 14th, 21st, etc., year of service to the University.

Service to the University includes full-time service as an assistant professor or above.

Neither full-time leave without pay, nor the year in which the sabbatical leave is taken, may count toward eligibility time for sabbatical leave.

Sabbatical leave not taken when due may accumulate up to three leaves, but under no circumstances may two leaves be taken in succession.

When eligibility for sabbatical leave is not clearly established, the case should be discussed with the appropriate dean or the Vice President for Health Affairs.

Application Procedure for Sabbatical Leaves or Academic Leaves of Absence. The following procedure should be followed in applying for either a sabbatical leave or a leave without pay.

  1. A letter requesting the leave should be addressed to the chair and dean before December 1 of the year preceding the academic year for which leave is requested. In exceptional cases, a slightly later request will be considered. The letter should contain a statement by the faculty member explaining how he or she expects to use the leave and where he or she expects to be during the leave, and a clear statement indicating whether he or she is requesting a sabbatical leave of one semester at full pay, one year at half pay, or a leave of absence without pay for an indicated period.

  2. A copy of the letter should be sent to the Provost and, if appropriate, to the Vice President for Health Affairs.

  3. The dean (department chair in the School of Medicine) will send a letter to the Provost or Vice President for Health Affairs endorsing the requested leave and indicating whether the leave will necessitate provision for replacement of instructional time. Only when both the department chair and dean have endorsed the leave will the Provost consider the request. Final responsibility for granting sabbatical leaves rests with the Board of Trustees which acts upon the recommendation of the Provost and the approval of the President.

  4. Upon return from leave, the faculty member is expected to give a full report in writing to his or her department chair, dean and to the Provost or Vice President for Health Affairs.

Other Matters Relating to Leaves.

  1. Requests for sabbatical leaves and leaves of absence are due by December 1 of the year preceding the leave. However, some requests cannot be firm at that time, since leaves are often contingent on obtaining funds from outside the University, and notification dates may be in the spring. For planning purposes in the department or school as well as in central administration, in cases where the leaves are contingent on funding or on other factors, it is desirable that the request made before December 1 be, in effect, a letter of intent rather than a firm request. The chair or dean should endorse the leave at that time, implying approval of the leave if the contingency is satisfied. The faculty member should write again to the Provost when plans are firm, with copies to the chair and dean or the Vice President for Health Affairs if appropriate. The Provost will then write the faculty member.

  2. A faculty member who learns well after December 1 about an opportunity to take a leave during the following year may request the leave. Approval will depend heavily on whether the program can be adjusted to accommodate the absence of the faculty member. Such late requests are usually for leaves of absence rather than sabbaticals.

  3. The Office of the Provost maintains a chart, updated each year, to indicate the eligibility of each faculty member outside the Schools of Medicine and Nursing for a sabbatical leave. Records for faculty members in the Schools of Medicine and Nursing are maintained in the Office of the Vice President for Health Affairs. Information concerning eligibility status may be obtained by calling either the Office of the Provost, or the Vice President for Health Affairs.

  4. Since sabbatical leaves are for the purpose of enhancing the stature of the individual, there should be an opportunity for at least one year of service after taking a sabbatical. A nontenured faculty member who is being reviewed during the sixth year for continuation beyond the seventh should therefore not request a sabbatical for the seventh year. In the event tenure is granted, every year of service in the unmodified rank of assistant, associate, or full professor is counted toward eligibility.

  5. Questions arise frequently about the pay period (or no-pay period) in connection with leaves. The following dates apply:

    1. Sabbatical for fall or spring semester--no change in pay.

    2. Sabbatical for fall and spring semesters--half pay from September through August

    3. Leave of absence during the fall semester--no pay or benefits from September through February.

    4. Leave of absence during the spring semester--no pay or benefits from March through August.

    5. Leave of absence for fall and spring semesters--no pay or benefits from September through August.

    These dates indicate that the period for the fall semester is the six-month period beginning September 1, and the pay period for the spring semester is the six-month period beginning March 1. Sabbaticals, even at half pay for the full year, carry full University contributions to benefits as if the faculty member were on full pay. Persons taking leaves of absence can make arrangements, if they wish, through the benefits office to pay both their own contributions and the amount the University would be paying if they were receiving salaries.

  6. When a grant to the University is used to pay the other half of full-year sabbatical leave pay, or full or partial pay during a leave of absence, written authorization from the principal investigator is needed to charge such pay to the grant. Since fringe benefits are charged to the grant at the audited percentage of salary, it may be advantageous to a faculty member in some cases to receive a fixed sum grant or fellowship directly from the agency rather than through the University; in this way the full sum would be available for salary.

Back to top

Policy 4-1.2. Research Leave

To the extent resources and curricular needs permit, it shall be the policy for the Law School to attempt to make available to tenured and tenure-track faculty whose primary appointment is in the Law School a Eugene T. Bost research leave, to be available, with the exceptions set out below, on the same terms and conditions as sabbatical leaves. The Annual Release Time (ART), Policy 4-1.3, will be discontinued upon the adoption of the new leave policy with the exception of faculty currently utilizing the ART program. It is contemplated that faculty will generally not be eligible for more than one Bost research leave between sabbaticals.

The following exceptions vary from the sabbatical leave policy: (1) tenure-track faculty may receive a Bost research leave during the period before tenure is granted; and (2) Bost research leaves are (i) generally not available until the mid-point between sabbatical leaves has been reached, but the leave may be advanced by the Dean when academic justification is provided; and (ii) are not permitted to be accumulated.

No more than two leaves, sabbatical and Bost, may be claimed in any two consecutive academic years, but they may be combined to form a calendar-year or academic-year leave. The Bost research leave will have no impact on a faculty member's eligibility for a University sabbatical leave.

Eligibility and other conditions for leaves of both types in future years will be determined in accordance with the policies for sabbatical leaves and will begin with the system of eligibility accounting for sabbatical leaves presently used by the Law School and the Provost's Office.

Upon application of a faculty member, a Bost research leave may be granted by the Dean, on the advice of the Research Committee and with the consent of the Board of Visitors. Primary consideration will be given to the nature and quality of the projects to be undertaken. Normally, Bost research leaves will not be granted to prepare second and third editions of remunerative casebooks and treatises. Within a reasonable time after completion of a research leave, a faculty member will provide the Dean a report on activities conducted during the research leave.

Back to topRevised October 1995

Policy 4-1.3. Annual Release Time (ART)(Discontinued, except for faculty currently utilizing program; See Policy 4-1.2)

The purpose of ART is to maximize the effect of the Bost grants by enlarging that part of the calendar in which our productive scholars are liberated from the strictures of a formal schedule of student contact.

The formal contact obligation of the grantee professor is reduced to a level that makes it manageable in one of the two semesters, assuming a somewhat higher than normal load in that one semester of formal contact. The other semester would be unscheduled time for research and writing, interrupted only by contact with students through tutorials, or by commitments of faculty governance.

Professor on Annual Release Time contracts may have 10% of their salary and fringes paid by the Bost grant. It would also be understood that professors on ART contracts would not accumulate credits toward a sabbatical; the sabbatical entitlement would be woven into the program. Together, these justify a 17% reduction in annual contact; the normal teaching load of a professor on an ART contract is therefore about 8 hours, scheduled in a single semester. For those performing part of their teaching obligation through tutorial work, the load for the one semester may be reduced pro tanto.

ART time may not be used for professional consulting or teaching elsewhere for pay. Professors on ART should remain in-residence during the research semester except by leave of the Dean, where relocation consists with the interests of the School.

Professors on ART are subject to biennial review, based on their reports of their efforts and scholarly productivity.

Back to topRevised May 1984

Policy 4-2. Teaching Loads

Memorandum of 1980

Discussion at the last faculty meeting called attention to the inadequacy of credit hours as a basis for measuring the contributions of teachers to students. Recognizing that only quantity and not quality is all that is intended to be measured, there are nevertheless vast quantitative differences which are concealed in any description of teaching loads which is limited to credit hours. Thus, in economic parlance, the teacher of a large section of a first year course who teaches 154 students is seven times as productive as a teacher of a small section of 22 students, even though both are teaching five credit hours of work. There may be some important advantage to be gained in regarding those two activities as being in some way equivalent, but surely we ought not beguile ourselves into treating them as equivalents for all purposes.

Doubtless any effort to quantify the sizes of teaching loads must fail of precision because of the ineffable and self-generated characteristics of what is sought to be measured. It may be necessary to have some kind of measure to assure ourselves that everyone is pulling some kind of minimum weight in the shared enterprise. But given the fact that our various contributions are made in very different currencies, it is senseless to take any quantified comparisons of their values very seriously.

If we must have some measure of minimum contribution to the shared enterprise, our method should be one which encourages us to do what is more important. A system which gives equal recognition to both important and minor contributions is not only unfair, but also dysfunctional. The faculty discussion may have indicated that the practice of thinking of teaching loads in terms of credit hours is in fact dysfunctional in just this way. In one view at least, the first year tutorial work is very important to the students while the small class feature of the program is much less so. Yet the teacher is perceived to get five credits for the latter, and two for the former.

I have tried to think seriously about trying to weight credit hours according to the number of students and according to the nature of the teaching commitment involved. Weighting such measures is not novel, and has often been done in crude ways for limited purposes. My thoughts ran to excessive complexity. If account were taken only of the most obvious differences in teaching activities, the measure quickly becomes intricate and overloaded. Subject to encouragements from others to renew my efforts, I have abandoned the task of trying to develop a weighting system for use in this office in calculating teaching loads.

Having forsaken the effort at precision, it does seem necessary to express the view that tutorial teaching is very valuable to students. It is, indeed, of sufficient value that no one should think it a misuse of their time to engage in the activity, and all should feel some encouragement to do so. It is unmistakably heavier duty.

This is particularly true for tutorial work with first year students, because it is impossible for most of us to link that kind of work with our research interests. Thus, teachers who do assume responsibility for a section of the first year tutorial and entitled to regard themselves as carrying the heaviest of teaching burdens. This should certainly be taken into account in appraising the equity of their teaching assignment. If one chooses to think of it as entitled to double weight, I would not quarrel with the calculus.

A like activity is teaching a simulated clinical seminar. Perhaps these offerings ought to be described as Practice Tutorials to avoid any suggestion that live clients are served. They are less onerous to the teacher than the first year tutorial for the reason that the subject matter of the exercises can be aimed at matters of special interest to the teacher, and because the number of students may generally be limited to a group smaller than the currently usual size of a first year small group. But the obligation of the teacher to provide critical feedback to the students is a central characteristic of such offerings, and that is a heavier burden than is usually borne by law teachers. Teachers who are willing to assume such obligations are surely entitled to be thought of as doing extra duty. If one were to choose to claim credit and a half for such work, I would not resist the claim. Certainly every member of the faculty should feel strongly encouraged to try to link their special research interests to simulated practical experiences for students. By making the commitment to students to provide the critical feedback, teachers can fully justify the concentration of their attention on a relatively narrow range of material.

In contrast, the new Research Tutorials should probably be given no extraordinary consideration. I assume that the teacher in perfecting student writing to publishability will invest pretty heavily in the student writers and editors, and thus justify full credit as a teacher. But given the nature of the work, there should also be a substantial contribution to the teacher's scholarship which partly compensates for the investment made. In a sense, the Research Tutorial is a form of research leave. Similar compensation may be received by the teacher in a Practice Tutorial or Clinical Seminar as well, but cannot ordinarily be presumed.

However one may choose to quantify their worth, I reiterate that all of these forms of teaching should be regarded as favored activities. Inclinations in any of these directions are encouraged as much as possible consistent with maintaining a basic program of core courses.

Perhaps it is necessary to add that the obviously greater productivity of large classroom instruction is also much appreciated. Our collective ability to pursue special and narrower interests is dependent on the abilities of some of us to perform this very valuable work.

I suppose that it necessarily follows from all of the above that it is a less favored activity to teach small groups of students in formal classes or seminars. This is not to say that there is no place for the small section in the first year, or for the even smaller special seminar which serves only a few students (whose work is not subject to tutorial criticism). but one is obliged to recognize that formal teaching to small groups is light work, at least relatively. In a sense, such activities are compensation for teachers. Such rewarding assignments should be most readily available to those who have borne other burdens, such as large classes or substantial doses of tutorial teaching.

Back to top

Policy 4-4. Grant Application Procedures

Faculty must notify the Dean of their intention to file grant applications to foundations, government agencies, or corporations. The Dean will evaluate the nature of the proposal for purposes of monitoring the following items: (1) the need to seek clearance from the University to file the application; (2) whether the application should be made for the award of the grant to the faculty member or to the Law School; (3) the need to limit compensation to faculty members to (i) payment to the operating budget of the Law School to cover part of the regular salary of the faculty member, which would normally be reflected in a reduced teaching load, or (ii) a summer supplement of up to 3/9 of salary, because all Law School faculty are on a nine-month contract with the University; (4) the claim of overhead for the current operating budget of the Law School; and (5) whether the final grant application must be approved by additional internal University procedures prior to being submitted.

Except for fellowship applications or other types of grants that may only be made in the name of a faculty member by specification of the granting institution, grant applications will presumably be made in the name of Duke University or the Law School. The Law School Dean's office will be responsible for assisting the faculty member in obtaining all internal University approvals.

Back to topRevised June 1991

Policy 4-5. Office Assignments

  1. Order of Priority. Faculty offices are assigned in the following priority order:
    1. Tenured faculty;
    2. Tenure-track faculty;
    3. Visiting, full-time faculty;
    4. Other full-time, teaching members of the extended faculty;
    5. Emeritus faculty who continue to be available for teaching assignments;
    6. Joint appointment faculty whose primary appointment is in another department or school in the University;
    7. Faculty with joint appointments in another university;
    8. Three-quarter time members of the extended faculty;
    9. Half-time members of the extended faculty;
    10. Other members of the extended faculty and non-teaching emeriti;
    11. International visitors (see also (3) and (6), below).
  2. Seniority. Within the same category, offices are assigned by order of seniority.
  3. Office Assignments Limited to Teaching Semesters. Offices are assigned on a year-to-year basis and, except for international visitors, are effective only for semesters when the person is teaching at the Law School or, in the case of tenured and tenure-track faculty, when on research leave or sabbatical in-residence. Ordinarily, faculty members who regularly teach in the Law School will not be required to move their belongings out of the office when they are not in-residence, but will be required to clear space for another occupant. Office space made available by a faculty member who is visiting away ordinarily will be filled by a visiting faculty member.
  4. Office Sharing by Faculty. Faculty who are not teaching on a full-time basis at the Law School may be required to share an office with one or more others. Office assignments will be made so that only one person in an office-sharing arrangement ordinarily will be at the Law School at any given time.
  5. Handling of Vacancies. When office vacancies occur, the above priorities will be applied to those known by the Dean's Office to need offices, and to those who have notified the Senior Associate Dean for Academic Affairs of their wish to change offices. Notice will not be given of pending vacancies.
  6. Reservation of Offices for International Visitors. If space allows, the Office of International Studies will have one office in its suite of offices for visiting scholars. Other offices will be made available in accordance with the priority listing set out in Paragraph 1 above. The assignment of individual scholars to the available spaces shall be made by the Office of International Studies, in cooperation with the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and the Building Manager.

    Commitments to visiting scholars may be made for one or two semesters, or for a shorter period. If a visiting scholar wishes to extend the period of his or her residence beyond the period originally committed, he or she will ordinarily move out of the assigned space if it has been committed to another scholar or designated for some other use.
  7. Academic Support Staff. When possible and otherwise permitted by available space, Academic Assistants (from the Academic Services Department) will be located in offices most convenient to the faculty.
  8. Use of Offices for Job Interviews. Emeritus faculty, faculty with joint appointments, and visiting scholars may be required to make their offices available to the Office of Career Services during the fall interviewing season. All others may be required to do so when their office is not in use.

Back to top Approved August 1997


Policy 4-6. Centers and Programs

Scope

The guidelines described in this policy shall apply to proposed centers and programs, and to existing centers and programs, as appropriate, including those that are separately incorporated. Centers and programs are subentities involving the substantial participation of one or more faculty members, established for the pursuit of particular scholarly and educational purposes. The primary distinction between centers and programs is one of scope, with centers typically being more comprehensive.

Establishment

Centers and programs are to be established at Duke Law School with the approval of the Dean, after consultation with a faculty committee. The Dean will notify the faculty of the pending status of a proposed new center or program no less than thirty days before its operations are intended to commence.

Governance

A center must adopt by-laws for the governance and operation of the center. Programs may in individual cases also be required to adopt by-laws. The by-laws must cover the mission of the center or program, and its organization and governance. The director of a center or program should ordinarily be a member of the faculty, and will report from time to time on center or program matters to the Dean or Dean's designate. Centers will ordinarily have Boards of Advisors, appointed for terms fixed in their by-laws. Such appointments will ordinarily be made by the Dean on the advice of the faculty director. In appropriate cases--especially those involving faculty members of more than one school or department--the Board of Advisors may be appointed by the President, or collectively by the respective deans and department heads of the units involved.

Mission and activities

The mission and activities of a center or program must be broadly consistent with the teaching, research, and service goals of the Law School. Whether or not physically located in the Law School, a center or program will ordinarily be regarded as part of the School, which has interests in its quality, standards, and reputation. Conduct of a center or program's activities should be coordinated when appropriate with relevant offices in the School. In particular, major conferences and meetings may require extensive planning and efforts at allocating work responsibilities in advance among various entities and personnel.

Financing and administrative relations with the Law School

  1. Independent financing. Centers and programs are expected to be self-financing through sources outside the Law School. The Dean may, however, assist in the establishment of a center or program, or in times of extenuating circumstances, by providing grants or loans.

  2. Budgeting. Centers and programs must prepare budgets in cooperation with the School's chief budget administrator. Budgets are subject to the approval of the Dean. Centers and programs will ordinarily be able to use Law School and University accounting and purchasing systems and will be subject to Duke University accounting practices.

  3. Staff. Paid employees of centers and programs will ordinarily be carried as employees of Duke University; will be subject to University personnel policies and procedures, including but not limited to University policies regarding conflict of interest; and will take part in University benefits programs, with the center or program being financially responsible for the benefit charges as well as direct salary expense.

  4. Space and facilities. To the extent possible and consistent with other needs, the Law School will provide office and other program space, as availability is determined by the Senior Associate Dean. The School may in appropriate cases charge reasonable rentals for space provided.

  5. Support, communications, and computing services. Centers and programs may use Law School support facilities for such matters as copying, mailing, etc. When providing office space the School will provide telephone service. The School will permit use of the library and provide access to Law School information technology as needed by the center or program, subject to consultation with the Associate Dean for Library and Computing Services. The School may in appropriate cases impose reasonable charges for such use and services.

  6. Fundraising and External Relations. Any fundraising undertaken in connection with a center or program affiliated with the Law School must be coordinated with the Associate Dean for External Relations and is subject to policies of the Law School and of Duke University. In particular, contacts with possible external funding sources must not be undertaken without following all procedures necessary for clearances. Reasonable charges may be imposed in appropriate cases for the time of external relations staff employed in the advancement of the interests of a center or program.

  7. Reporting and review. The Dean shall assign to some appropriate committee, which could be an ad hoc committee, the task of developing such reporting and review provisions as the committee determines are necessary to enable appropriate law school oversight, except that any such provisions will prohibit the review under this policy of activities by center-related faculty that are of the same nature as activities that, when undertaken by a faculty member who is not affiliated with a center or program, are not currently subject to periodic review by the faculty.

Back to top


Policy 4-7. Part-Time Faculty

The Law School's procedures for the employment, evaluation, and supervision of part-time faculty are stated in Rule 4-3.1.

The Law School will provide each new part-time member of the Law Faculty orientation materials that will provide information about policies on matters such as grading, faculty availability to students, student misconduct, harassment, faculty/student dating, and severe weather procedures, and will direct faculty to the pertinent Law School rules and policies on the Web. In addition, the orientation materials will also direct faculty to the University policies stated in the Faculty Handbook, which will be available on-line beginning in the summer of 1998. Thereafter, part-time faculty will receive supplementary information about Law School and University policies as needed.
 

Back to top


Policy 4-8. Appointment of Clinic Faculty

Guidance for Consideration in the Appointment and Reappointment of Clinic Faculty

Duke Law School is committed to the excellence of its experiential education program, including, without limitation, its clinical and legal writing programs. This requires that the Law School recruit, promote and retain clinical faculty members of the highest quality. In making appointments and promotions decisions with respect to Clinical Professors, the Law School will seek candidates who demonstrate the potential for sustained excellence in clinical teaching, intellectual engagement and leadership in their field, the ability to make other important contributions to the life of the Law School, and who maintain and model high standards of professional responsibility.

 

Because it is important that the terms “excellence in clinical teaching” and “intellectual engagement and leadership” are applied consistently in all appointment and promotion decisions for clinical faculty, the Law School’s faculty has adopted the following guidelines to confirm the common understanding of the Law School community with respect to these terms.

Excellence in clinical teaching means that a faculty member (i) consistently demonstrates the ability to help students make substantial progress in the development of the range of identified professional skills taught through his or her course(s) (taking into account the time and credit hours allocated to that course), (ii) in the case of a faculty member teaching in a real client clinic, ensures that the legal needs of the clinic’s clients are met at the highest levels, (iii) is able to help students self-consciously begin to develop the attitudes, habits and judgment required for ethical practice, and (iv) consistently models the highest levels of integrity and professionalism through the faculty member’s clinical teaching, client service and other activities. In making the determination of whether a Clinical Professor has demonstrated excellence in clinical teaching, the following should be considered: organization of the course, including identification of teaching goals and objectives; preparation and selection of teaching materials; instruction of students in classroom, individual and other settings; quality and effectiveness of student evaluation methods; and, in the case of real client clinics, selection of cases, supervision of student client service and case management, outcomes of client representation, as well as client satisfaction with the representation provided by the clinic, efficiency and effectiveness of clinic administration, and the efficiency and effectiveness of representation in cases handled directly by the faculty member, if any.



Back to top