AMERICAN UNIVERSITY

IN BULGARIA

FACULTY HANDBOOK

Revised Version
Approved by the Board of Trustees
In May 2015
 CONTENTS

SECTION ONE: FACULTY RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

1.1 Acceptance of AAUP Policies and Principles page 5

1.2 Academic Freedom 5

1.3 Non-Discrimination Policy 5

1.4 Faculty Rights 5

1.5 Outside Activities 6

1.6 Conflicts of Interest 6

1.7 Faculty Code of Ethics 6

1.8 Disciplinary Actions under the Code of Ethics 8

SECTION TWO: TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT FOR FACULTY

2.1 Recruitment of Faculty 8

2.2 Types of Appointments 9

2.3 Faculty Contracts 9

2.4 Designation of Rank at the Time of Initial Appointment 10

2.5 Qualifications for Faculty in Graduate Programs 10

2.6 Probationary Period 10

2.7 Contract Renewal for Temporary Fixed-Term Appointments 10

2.8 Contract Renewal for Regular Positions 10

2.9 Voluntary Termination of Employment 11

2.10 Involuntary Termination of Employment During the First Six Years 11

2.11 Involuntary Termination of Employment of Faculty with Continuing Employment 12

2.12 Request for Resignation 12

2.13 Leaves of Absence 12

2
 SECTION THREE: EVALUATION OF FACULTY

3.1 Purpose of Evaluation 13

3.2 Evaluation of Faculty on Fixed Term Contracts 13

3.3 Evaluation of Faculty on Renewable Contracts 13

3.4 Evaluation of Adjunct Faculty 14

3.5 Evaluation of Visiting Faculty in the Executive MBA 14

3.6 Faculty Evaluation Criteria 14

3.7 Basic Responsibilities of Faculty 16

3.8 Evaluation Criteria 17

3.9 Selection of the Faculty Evaluation Team 19

3.10 Objective Evidence for Evaluation 19

3.11 Full-Time Faculty Evaluation Procedures 21

3.12 Adjunct Faculty Evaluation Procedures 21

3.13 Visiting Faculty Evaluation Procedures 22

3.14 Timetable for Faculty Evaluation and Recommendations 22

3.15 Promotion Criteria for Full Time and Adjunct Faculty 23

3.16 Promotion Procedures 24

SECTION FOUR: FINANCIAL EXIGENCY AND CURRICULAR REVISION

4.1 Financial Exigency 24

4.2 Curricular Revision 25

4.3 Definition of Seniority 25

SECTION FIVE: UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC ORGANIZATION

5.1 Academic Organization of the Faculty 25

5.2 Departmental Structure 25

5.3 Administration of the Department 25

5.4 Selection and Appointment of Department Chairs 26

3
 SECTION SIX: APPEALS, GRIEVANCES, AND INTERNAL HEARINGS

6.1 Faculty Appeals 26

6.2 Faculty Grievances 27

6.3 Faculty Grievance Against the President 28

6.4 Faculty Grievance Against Another Faculty Member 28

6.5 Internal Administrative Hearings 29

SECTION SEVEN: PROCEDURE FOR AMENDING POLICIES

7.1 Procedures for Amending the Faculty Handbook 30

7.2 Procedures for Amending the AUBG Policies Manual 30

INDEX 31

4
 All full-time, visiting, and adjunct faculty members are covered by the policies of the Faculty
Handbook. (For the purposes of this document, the term “faculty” shall mean an individual with
responsibility for teaching at least one formal course.) If the appointment letter carries specific terms
that are inconsistent with the policies, the appointment letter will be the binding document.

SECTION ONE: FACULTY RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

1.1 Acceptance of AAUP Policies and Principles

The faculty members of the American University in Bulgaria formally accept the statement of policies and principles of the
American Association of University Professors. Where questions of interpretation arise as a result of the following rights
and responsibilities one should normally consult AAUP Policy Documents and Reports (2001), the AUBG Policies
Manual (as amended), and all applicable U.S. and Bulgarian laws. In the event of a conflict between this Handbook and
the AAUP Policy Documents and Reports, the provisions of this Handbook shall prevail.

1.2 Academic Freedom

AUBG pledges to protect the academic freedom of its faculty. This includes the right to conduct research freely and to
publish the results, the right to discuss freely the subject matter of their areas of specialization in the classroom; the right to
speak, write, or act freely as private citizens in university, community, national and international affairs; and the right to
due process in any dispute with the University related to these matters. As members of the academic community, faculty
members must remember that the public may judge both their profession and institution by their words and deeds. Faculty
members must not represent themselves as University spokespersons when they act as private individuals.

1.3 Non-Discrimination Policy

AUBG recognizes its responsibility to adhere to U.S. Civil Rights Law, and Bulgarian and EU non-discrimination policies.
The American University does not discriminate on the basis of race, ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, religion, age,
or physical ability in the administration of its admissions policies, educational programs, employment opportunities, or
other University programs.

1.4 Faculty Rights

Faculty members have the following specific rights in relation to performance of their contractual obligations to the
University:

1.4.1 Faculty have the right to remove students from class when students interfere with the ability of the professor to
perform his/her duties or when students interfere with the right of other students to an education. Faculty also have the
right to seek permanent administrative removal of a disruptive student from the class; however, when faculty exercise this
right it is essential that they recognize the academic freedom of students as well. This power must never be used to
penalize a student because of his/her personal, political, or religious views.

1.4.2 Faculty have the right to be indemnified by the University as a result of all legal action brought against faculty when
such legal action is a result of the faculty member's proper performance of his/her contractual obligations to the university.
The University however, will not be held liable for any legal action brought against faculty when such action is a result of
negligence or unprofessional conduct on the part of the faculty member. Faculty should refer to the AAUP statement on
Professional Ethics and the Faculty Code of Ethics for further explanation.

1.4.3 Faculty members have the right to view and copy all material in their personnel files except for confidential letters of
recommendation requested by the faculty member or the University.

5
1.5 Outside Activities

Activities that contribute to improved scholarship and professional development, competence, and recognition, as well as to
education generally and to the society beyond the University, are assumed to be reasonable and expected parts of the
faculty member's commitment to academic life. These activities should supplement and not detract from the faculty
member's primary responsibilities to the University.

1.5.1 In order to provide departments with assurance that outside activities will not interfere with academic programs,
faculty members who propose substantial (more than one day a week) activities of the type described above must request
approval of the planned activity in writing from their Department Chair and the Provost. Faculty members should make
known their proposed activities a semester in advance to ensure that, should their requests be approved, the departments
may plan accordingly.

1.5.2 The outside activities of any one faculty member should not adversely affect the work loads and the prerogatives of
the other members of the department involved.

1.6 Conflicts of Interest

It is AUBG's policy to respect the rights of its faculty and administration to invest in private enterprise and to engage in
outside activities of a private nature. Individuals serving the University shall at all times act in a manner consistent with
their public responsibilities to the University and shall exercise particular care that no real or perceived detriment to the
University results from conflicts between personal interests and those of the University. Individuals are expected to avoid
ethical, legal, financial, or other conflicts and potential conflicts of interest that result from considerations of personal
preference and private gain. To ensure conformity with this policy, the University takes the following position with respect
to conflicts of interest:

1.6.1 Outside activities of full-time employees of the University must not interfere with their university duties, time
schedules, or normal participation in appropriate University events.

1.6.2 A potential conflict of interest exists whenever an employee or any member of the employee's family has a financial
interest in, or any connection with, an enterprise that does business with the University, and the employee is in a position
directly or indirectly to make or influence decisions concerning transactions with such outside enterprise.

1.6.3 An employee should not be in a position to gain from the present or potential dealings of the University with
suppliers, contractors, or service organizations. No University employee should accept directly or indirectly, through their
family or friends, gifts or other considerations from firms or individuals seeking to do business or doing business with the
University.

1.6.4 Buying, renting, or selling property, facilities, equipment, or services to the University by members of the faculty and
staff must have prior approval by the President.

1.6.5 In their relationships with students, faculty members are expected to avoid apparent or actual conflicts of interest,
favoritism, or bias. Faculty members are prohibited from exercising academic supervision over persons with whom they
have a romantic or sexual relationship.

1.6.6 Good judgment is the key to effective and fair implementation of any conflict of interest policy. In specific situations
where there is any question of interpretation of the above guidelines, faculty members should first consult with the Dean of
Faculty. If any doubt about the appropriateness of an action remains, the full situation will be reviewed by the Provost to
determine whether the conflict of interest policy applies.

1.7 Faculty Code of Ethics

The assumption underlying the Faculty Code of Ethics is that faculty members are bound by and honor the personal and
professional standards of conduct articulated in the documents of the American Association of University Professors and
AUBG's personnel policies included in the AUBG Policies Manual. The following principles are designed to further
explain what actions have the potential to lead to disciplinary action by the University.

6
1.7.1 Faculty shall use caution when entering into business relationships with students. Business relationships between
faculty and students that involve a potential for conflict of interest should normally be avoided.

1.7.2 Faculty shall exercise caution when employing students for personal services. When a supervisory or evaluative
relationship exists between a faculty member and a student, the extensive use of students for personal services which are
unrelated to the faculty member's professional obligations to the University, whether paid or unpaid, should normally be
avoided.

1.7.3 Faculty are strongly advised not to engage in consenting relationships with students as these relationships may result
in sexual harassment allegations, conflict of interest, and/or disruption of the academic environment. (Additional
information on the AUBG policy on sexual harassment definitions, investigations, and sanctions is included in the AUBG
Policies Manual and the Student Handbook.)

1.7.4 Faculty shall respect the right of their colleagues to freedom of speech and academic freedom. Faculty must
recognize that the right to hold divergent opinions and to speak freely on controversial matters is fundamental to academic
discourse.

1.7.5 Some speech goes beyond that which is protected by concepts of freedom of speech and academic freedom.
Behaviors or verbal comments that are severe and pervasive enough to create a hostile, intimidating, or abusive work
environment or classroom environment constitute harassment whether or not such comments are of a sexual nature.
Harassment may take the form of direct ethnic or racial slurs, or abusive language toward a specific individual on the
AUBG campus. Libel against a colleague or repeated attacks on the personal or academic reputation of a colleague or a
student is harassment as well, specifically when verbal statements are made with malicious intent and with the knowledge
that such statements are untrue.

1.7.6 When a statement is made that has the potential to damage a colleague's personal or professional reputation or a
student’s reputation, and that statement is later proven to be false, the individual who made the statement has a professional
obligation to issue both a retraction and an apology.

1.7.7 Faculty are responsible for behavior that may not legally constitute harassment, but may, in ongoing, systematic, and
severe instances interfere with the ability of other faculty to fulfill their professional responsibilities. It is not possible to
specify in detail all behaviors that might violate this policy. It is possible, however, to state a general standard for judging
behavior in the workplace.

 When arguments and conflicts with colleagues create a work-place atmosphere that is permeated with overt
hostility, abusive behavior, or intimidation that prevents faculty or other employees from fulfilling their
professional obligations, then the matter ceases to be an issue of collegiality.

 When the general behavior of a faculty member, including comments of a purely verbal nature, creates a
demonstrably hostile, intimidating, or abusive work environment for other faculty members, that behavior
constitutes a violation of the Faculty Code of Ethics.

1.7.8 It is equally important to note what types of behaviors and statements are not actionable under this clause.

 A faculty member's opinions, beliefs, attitudes or public statements on controversial issues may not be used as
evidence against him/her in interpreting this policy.

 Divergent or unpopular opinions are not violations of the Faculty Code of Ethics. This resolution may not be
interpreted in a fashion that conflicts with U.S. Supreme Court rulings on Campus Speech Codes.

1.7.9 Faculty should respect the academic freedom of their students by evaluating students only on the quality of each
student's academic performance. Faculty should also demonstrate respect for the student's academic freedom and
recognize the right of students to hold views that differ from their own.

1.7.10 Faculty have the responsibility to excuse themselves from all duties which involve a conflict of interest when they
are in a position to evaluate colleagues or recommend their colleagues for promotion or reappointment.

7
1.7.11 Faculty have a responsibility to participate in grievance procedures, internal administrative hearings, and student
conduct councils. In these instances, faculty recommendations carry the potential to determine a student's course of study
or a colleague’s ability to work in his/her chosen profession. Such responsibilities cannot be undertaken lightly. When one
lacks legal experience or expertise, it is possible to be unaware of the gravity of serving in such a capacity. It is vitally
important that faculty serving on grievance committees, conduct councils, or internal administrative hearings do not
exert undue bias on the process, or allow personal biases to affect their judgment. Such behavior constitutes a conflict
of interest. Conflicts of interest in such proceedings also occur when a person acting in such a capacity fails to
disclose relevant information or relevant prior knowledge of the case, is engaged in an ongoing business relationship, a
supervisory or evaluatory relationship, or a close personal, sexual, or romantic relationship with any party to the
process.

1.8 Disciplinary Actions Under the Code of Ethics

Faculty should understand the accepted procedures through which an alleged violation of the Faculty Code of Ethics may
result in disciplinary action. Interpretation of Section 1.7 is subject to the statement on Faculty Ethics and Professional
Obligations contained in the AAUP Policy Documents and Reports (2001), the AUBG Policies Manual (1998), and
subsequently approved amendments to the AUBG Policies Manual. Enforcement of this section shall be in accordance
with the AAUP "Statement on Academic Freedom and Due Process": AAUP (2001) and Section Six of this document. In
the event of a conflict between this Handbook and the AAUP Policy Documents and Reports or the AUBG Policies
Manual, the provisions of this Handbook shall prevail.

1.8.1 Not all actions which potentially violate the general principles are necessarily severe enough to lead to administrative
action. Good judgment is the key to enforcement of any university policy. In some instances, faculty should attempt to
make use of the department chair and/or Dean of Faculty as a means of resolving disputes collegially and informally.
When this is neither possible nor appropriate, and evidence exists that a faculty member has violated the Faculty Code of
Ethics or other AUBG policies, the Provost, or any other duly appointed representative of the administration, should
communicate clearly in writing to the faculty member the nature of the violation and what changes in behavior are
expected.

1.8.2 When a violation of the Faculty Code of Ethics or any other AUBG policy is so severe that it threatens the ethical
integrity of the institution or of the teaching profession in general, the administration may initiate dismissal proceedings for
the first offense. It is expected, however, that formal proceedings will, under most circumstances, be instituted only as a
last resort.

SECTION TWO: TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT FOR FACULTY

2.1 Recruitment of Faculty

The decision to recruit faculty lies with the Provost acting with the knowledge and permission of the President. When the
decision to recruit is made, the University will advertise for either a regular position or a temporary fixed-term position as
defined in Section 2.2. The final decision to advertise for and offer a permanent or a temporary position will be at the sole
discretion of the President.

2.1.1 When the determination to conduct an international search and advertise for a regular or a temporary fixed-term
position is made, the Provost will approve the selection committee consisting of faculty members of the discipline on
regular appointments, a faculty member from outside the department, one student and any others that are deemed necessary
to make an adequate committee. Participation in hiring/selection committees is open to all regular members of the
department but not mandatory

2.1.2 The search committee, in consultation with the Dean of Faculty will prepare the job description, screen applicants,
check references, arrange for campus visits of final applicants, and recommend to the Provost, who in turn recommends to
the President, a candidate for appointment.

2.1.3 While occasions may arise when the institution has the need or opportunity to hire immediately, faculty in the
relevant program area should be consulted when temporary fixed-term positions are offered.

8
2.1.4 Adjunct faculty, Balkan Scholars, visiting faculty, and Fulbright faculty have a different affiliation with the institution
and, consequently, the search process may be conducted with less intensive use of University time and resources. Efforts
will ordinarily be made to identify multiple qualified candidates. The recommendation of a candidate will be made by the
Department Chair, in consultation with the members of the department, to the Dean of Faculty. As with all hiring, offers of
employment may be made only by the Provost after consultation with the President.

2.1.5 The final decision to offer a contract is made by the President. The President shall have the authority to review all
hiring recommendations and to ensure that appropriate standards and procedures have been followed. The President also
has the final responsibility to ensure that all recruitment procedures are in accordance with Bulgarian and U.S. law.

2.2 Types of Appointments

Faculty are appointed at the American University in Bulgaria on one of the several types of contracts defined below. The
policies regarding continuation of contracts and evaluation are specified for each type in Section 3.

2.2.1 Regular full-time faculty appointments are multi-year appointments, initially for three years. The rank, term of
service, salary, and benefits are outlined in the appointment letter. Full-time faculty are evaluated for reappointment and
eligible for promotion according to criteria and procedures outlined in Section 3.

2.2.2 Temporary full-time faculty appointments are for a fixed term, usually of one year. The rank, salary, specific
responsibilities, and benefits are outlined in the appointment letter. A faculty member hired on a temporary appointment
may be a candidate for a regular three-year appointment, if such a position becomes available.

2.2.3 Adjunct faculty are hired primarily to teach and supplement the full-time faculty in a department. The rank, salary,
term of service, and specific responsibilities are outlined in the appointment letter and are contingent upon enrollments.
Adjunct faculty are evaluated for reappointment and eligible for promotion according to criteria and procedures outlined in
Section 3. In the event an adjunct faculty member is subsequently hired on a full-time appointment, the time employed as
an adjunct does not count as years of service.

2.2.4 Visiting faculty, typically on leave from another academic organization, hold fixed-term appointments of one or two
semesters. Faculty who teach in the Executive MBA, Fulbright Scholars, and Balkan Scholars are all visiting faculty.
Their rank, term of service, salary, benefits, and specific responsibilities are outlined in their appointment letter,
incorporating all terms of the Faculty Handbook. Typically, visiting faculty hold a terminal degree. Faculty teaching in the
EMBA are evaluated for reappointment according to the criteria and procedures outlined in Section 3.

2.3 Faculty Contracts

The letter of appointment will specify the terms of the contract, incorporating the policies of the Faculty Handbook.
Normally, all full-time faculty on regular appointments are expected to teach six courses, engage in research or creative
work, and provide service to the department, University, and profession. Faculty should be demonstrably full time and
available to their students and colleagues over four days of the week.

2.3.1 In order to best meet the needs of AUBG, individual faculty may negotiate with the Provost to determine the relative
effort that each faculty member will devote to teaching, scholarship, and service. In negotiating this agreement, individual
faculty and the Provost will consider the particular skills of the faculty member, the resources available to the faculty
member, and the needs of AUBG. All such agreements will be in writing and will be valid for one year and be
renegotiated annually. When special circumstances arise, either party may offer to renegotiate the agreement sooner.

2.3.2 When contractual agreements exist which specify differing expectations for teaching load or in teaching, scholarship
and creative activity, and service, the faculty member will make any such contractual agreements available to the Faculty
Evaluation Team (FET). The FET will then evaluate the faculty member according to the conditions stated in the faculty
member's contract. Such contractual agreements will also be taken into account in the promotion process.

9
2.4 Designation of Rank at the Time of Initial Appointment

At the time of initial appointment, the Provost will determine the appropriate rank. The faculty member will be awarded a
rank based on the rank achieved at another recognized academic institution or according to the guidelines below. Faculty
rank granted through the Bulgarian High Attestation Commission may be recognized at the discretion of the
administration.

2.4.1 Instructor: Advanced degree or professional experience, but does not possess the Ph.D. or terminal degree
appropriate to the discipline.

2.4.2 Assistant Professor: Ph.D., terminal degree appropriate to the discipline, or equivalent experience, accomplishments,
or qualifications. Evidence of potential for professional competence in teaching and research.

2.4.3 Associate Professor. Ph.D., terminal degree appropriate to the discipline, or equivalent experience, accomplishments,
or qualifications. Proven ability and experience in teaching. Excellent record of research, publication, and/or substantial
creative accomplishments or experience appropriate to the discipline, and substantial service to the profession.

2.4.4 Professor: Ph.D., terminal degree appropriate to the discipline, or equivalent experience, accomplishments or
qualifications. Record of excellence in teaching, research, publication, and/or creative accomplishments. Record of service
to the community.

2.5 Qualifications for Faculty in Graduate Programs

As noted in the accreditation standards, faculty teaching at the graduate level are expected to have the academic
qualifications, record of scholarly contributions, and professional experience relevant to teaching graduate students.
Typically, this means a doctorate in the teaching field and a record of recent research and publication in the field. Faculty
will be recommended by the department and approved by the Provost. Regular faculty teaching at the graduate level will be
evaluated according to the procedures and frequency established for undergraduate faculty in the Faculty Handbook.

2.6 Probationary Period

All initial appointments to either a temporary fixed-term or regular position are subject to a two (2) year probationary
period during which the faculty member’s contract may be terminated for any reason whatsoever, without any showing of
cause, provided notice is given, by March 1st of their first year of appointment and by December 15th of their second year
of appointment. During their probationary periods, faculty members are employees-at-will of the University and neither
this Handbook nor any other document or publication will create any enforceable contractual rights in such employees. All
references in any other section of this Handbook to the requirements for dismissal of faculty members will be subject to the
provisions of this subsection and shall be applicable only after the completion of the faculty member's probationary period.

2.7 Contract Renewal for Temporary Fixed-Term Appointments

The length of temporary fixed term-appointments may vary, although they should not normally be for more than two years.
Temporary fixed-term appointments require no notification of or cause for non-renewal. The contractual relationship
between the faculty member and the University automatically expires at the end of the term stated in the contract.

2.8 Contract Renewal for Regular Positions

The determination of whether or not the contract of a faculty member in a regular position will be renewed will be based in
part on evaluations of whether the faculty member has performed his/her contractual obligations effectively and in good
faith; including teaching, engaging in scholarly and/or creative activity and taking an active part in University governance
and community/professional service. The criteria for evaluating faculty performance in these areas are given below in
Section 3. Faculty are also expected to abide by all applicable University policies.

10
2.8.1 Initial Three-Year Contract

Regular faculty are generally hired on the basis of an initial three-year renewable contract. Full time faculty members on
their first three-year contract will be evaluated according to the standards and procedures set forth in Section 3 in their
second year of employment with AUBG. This contract may be renewed for an additional three years at the discretion of
the President. Renewal of the initial three-year contract may be denied for any reason whatsoever without any showing of
cause. Neither this Handbook nor any other document or publication will create any enforceable contractual rights in
faculty to renewal of the initial three-year contract. Under no circumstances will a faculty member's expressions of
academic freedom, extramural utterances, political activity and/or artistic expression constitute the motivating factor for
non-renewal.

2.8.2 Second Three-Year Contract

Faculty on their second three-year contract are reviewed according to the standards and procedures set forth in Section 3 in
the next to the last year of their contract with AUBG. If the faculty member has met the standards for renewal set forth in
those sections, the faculty member will be offered a new, renewable five-year contract effective upon the completion of six
years of service. The President, however, may choose not to renew a contract for reasons related to financial exigency,
curricular revision, or cause.

2.8.3 Continuing Employment on a Five-Year Contract

Upon issuing a five-year contract, the University grants the faculty member continuing employment through the means of
renewable five-year contracts. Five-year contracts are subject to periodic performance reviews according to the standards
and procedures in Section 3. The renewal of such contracts requires the satisfaction of the standards set forth in those
sections. If the faculty member has met the standards for renewal, upon completion of each five-year contract, and in the
absence of cause, as defined in Section 3, the faculty member will be offered a new five-year contract subject to these same
terms and conditions. The University can choose not to renew a five-year contract for reasons related to financial exigency
or curricular revision.

2.9 Voluntary Termination of Employment

A faculty member may voluntarily terminate his/her contract with the University by giving adequate notice in writing to the
Provost. Notice should generally be given no later than March 1 for the following academic year or October 1 for the
following semester.

2.10 Involuntary Termination of Employment During the First Six Years

During the contract periods, after completion of the probationary period, faculty on renewable contracts may be dismissed
for cause. As used in this Section and elsewhere in this Handbook, the terms "cause" and "for cause" shall mean cause as
defined in the AAUP Policy Documents and Reports (2001), violations of the Faculty Code of Ethics as set forth above,
violations of the AUBG Policies Manual, and such other just cause as determined by the President to warrant disciplinary
action.

2.10.1 Faculty may be dismissed for cause during either of the initial two three year contracts after such cause has been
proven in the context of an administrative hearing which has occurred according to AAUP standards of due process. Such
administrative hearings (see Section 6.4) should respect the faculty member's rights to due process as defined by AAUP
Policy Documents and Reports; (2001). Pending the conclusion of such proceedings, the faculty member may be
suspended with or without pay.

2.10.2 Faculty contract may also be terminated for reasons of incompetent job performance or dereliction of duty (as
described under Basic Responsibilities in Section 3.7). After completion of the probationary period, inadequate job
performance during the three year contract periods will lead to termination of employment only after the faculty member
has been given notice of inadequate job performance and has been given reasonable time to correct any such inadequacies.

2.10.3 Notice of involuntary termination of employment for incompetent job performance should be given by March 15 for
termination effective at the end of the first year of employment and December 15 for termination effective at the end of the
second year of employment. When adequate notice is not given, the faculty member's contract will be extended for an
additional semester. Failure to provide notice by these dates will not, however, make the termination ineffective.

2.10.4 Faculty contract may also be terminated for reasons of financial exigency or curricular revision. (See Section 4.)

11
2.11 Involuntary Termination of Employment of Faculty with Continuing Employment.

The University may choose not to renew contracts for faculty with continuing employment either for cause or for failure to
meet the standards for renewal of such contracts. Faculty members on continuing five-year contracts may be terminated
during the term of such contracts for cause subject to the procedures set forth in Section 6 or for reasons of financial
exigency or curricular revision as set forth in Section 4.

2.12 Request for Resignation

The Provost, or a duly constituted representative of the President may request the resignation of a faculty member when
evidence exists which establishes a strong "prima facie" case of any of the conditions above in Section 2.10. The faculty
member shall retain the right to a formal hearing or to file a grievance against any adverse administrative action. Requests
for a faculty member's resignation will not be pursued without informal measures having been used to communicate to the
faculty member what changes in the faculty member's conduct or job performance are required.

2.13 Leaves of Absence

During the contract period, a faculty member may request a professional or personal leave. The Provost will determine
whether the time on unpaid leave will count in the years of the contract, according to the interests of the University, and
notify the faculty member in writing of the terms of the leave. The time on sabbatical will be a part of the period of service
and count toward reappointment and promotion.

2.13.1 Unpaid Leaves of Absence

Unpaid leaves of absence may be requested by any faculty member for personal or professional reasons. Unpaid leaves
may be for a period of one semester or one academic year and may be renewed once. Requests for unpaid leaves of
absence should be made, whenever possible, one semester in advance of the semester or academic year for which the leave
is requested. Requests should be made in writing to the Provost and copied to the Department Chair. The Provost, Dean of
Faculty, and the Department Chair will examine the curricular implications of the requested leave and determine if a
suitable temporary replacement can be found. If the granting of the leave does not jeopardize the faculty member's
program area, then the leave may be granted on the sole discretion of the President.

Unpaid leaves may also be requested for medical or family related emergencies. While in some cases the faculty member
may not give adequate notice, it is expected that both the faculty member and administration will make reasonable efforts
to accommodate each other.

The University will offer the faculty member on leave the opportunity to maintain his/her benefits. The faculty member
will be required to reimburse the University for the cost to the University of the benefits, subject to all applicable laws.

2.13.2 Sabbatical Leaves

After six years of full-time service at the University, faculty become eligible for sabbatical leave to be taken no earlier than
their seventh year of employment and every seventh year following such a leave. Sabbaticals are not automatic. Leaves
will be approved based on the merits of the application, prospects of completion, availability of funding, and the interests of
the University.

Faculty must apply for the leave at least a year before it is to be taken. Compensation during a sabbatical leave shall be
for half a year's salary for a one-year sabbatical leave and full salary for a one-semester leave. Bulgarian faculty members
taking a sabbatical in a country where the cost of living is comparable to the U.S. may receive an additional stipend unless
they are being supported through the host institution or an external agency.

Faculty are obligated to return to AUBG for a full year after their sabbatical or to repay the University for the salary
received during the sabbatical period. A written report describing the results of the sabbatical must be submitted when the
faculty member returns.

12
 SECTION THREE: EVALUATION OF FACULTY

3.1 Purpose of Evaluation

Because faculty are evaluated with respect to the mission of AUBG, faculty evaluation is both an individual and an
institutional matter. It has two basic aims: to assist faculty development and to meet institutional needs. As an
institution, AUBG places first emphasis on teaching, but also expects all regular faculty members to demonstrate an
appropriate level of engagement both in scholarly or creative work and in service to the institution or to its mission in
the broader community.

3.2 Evaluation of Faculty on Fixed-Term Contracts

Evaluation of faculty on temporary fixed-term contracts is strictly voluntary. However, faculty on fixed-term
appointments who wish to have their contracts extended should be evaluated by the Department Evaluation Team
(DET). The DET will recommend eligibility for contract renewal if a faculty member in his/her first fixed-term
contract is rated Meets Expectations in teaching (see 3.6). Renewal of fixed-term appointments is at the discretion of
the administration.

3.3 Evaluation of Faculty on Renewable Contracts

All faculty on regular full-time appointments are subject to periodic evaluation by the FET, regardless of whether the
faculty member is asking for contract renewal.

3.3.1 Full-time faculty members on their first three-year contract will be evaluated after their third semester. The FET
will evaluate the extent to which the individual’s performance meets criteria for contract renewal in the three areas of
evaluation: teaching, scholarship, and service. Determination of minimal performance in the three areas according to
the following table will be grounds to recommend contract renewal.

Scholarship &
Teaching Service
Creative Activities
Very Good Meets Expectations Needs improvement
Very Good Needs Improvement Very Good
Meets Expectations Outstanding Needs Improvement
Meets Expectations Very Good Meets Expectations
Meets Expectations Meets Expectations Outstanding

3.3.2 Faculty members on their second three-year contract or on a five-year contract will be evaluated during the year
before the last year of their existing contract. The evaluation will assess faculty performance for all semesters since the
previous evaluation, including the Spring semester, when the previous evaluation was conducted. Determination of
minimal performance in the three areas according to the following table will be grounds to recommend contract
renewal.

Scholarship &
Service
Teaching Creative Activities
Outstanding Very Good Needs Improvement
Outstanding Meets Expectations Meets Expectations
Very Good Outstanding Meets Expectations
Very Good Very Good Very Good
Meets Expectations Outstanding Outstanding

13
3.4 Evaluation of Adjunct Faculty
Adjunct faculty should be evaluated after three semesters of teaching and prior to being reappointed for a fourth
semester. Thereafter, evaluation will take place not less than once every six semesters. Evaluation of performance as
Meets Expectations in teaching will be grounds for contract renewal. Renewal of contract of adjunct faculty is at the
discretion of the administration. The evaluation procedures are outlined in Section 3.12.

3.5 Evaluation of Visiting Faculty in the Executive MBA Program

Visiting faculty teaching in the Executive MBA program for the first time will be evaluated after the first semester and
before reappointment. If the evaluation is successful (with no qualifications), the faculty member’s next evaluation
will occur after two additional semesters. The evaluation procedures are outlined in Section 3.13.

3.6 Faculty Evaluation Criteria

Based on materials prepared by the faculty member, the Faculty Evaluation Team will evaluate the individual and
assign one of the following assessments for the three areas of teaching, research, and service.
3.6.1 Unacceptable: The faculty member being evaluated fails to demonstrate that basic academic duties are being
fulfilled. Guidelines for basic academic responsibilities in each area of evaluation are given below in Section 3.7.
Unacceptable performance in any of the three areas of evaluation is sufficient for refusing contract renewal.
3.6.2 Needs Improvement: The faculty member being evaluated demonstrates that basic academic duties (see
Section 3.7) are being fulfilled, but improvement in performance outcomes is needed to meet the minimum
institutional standards in the respective area.
Some of the following apply:
 Teaching:
o The course syllabi, the sample course materials, assignments, exams, and graded student work, and
the grading policies and results do not consistently align with the level of academic rigor appropriate
to the course.
o Students’ evaluations are not significantly below discipline norms. Student evaluation results show
some strengths, but also significant areas requiring improvement.
 Scholarship or Creative Activities:
o Demonstrated work in progress, non peer-reviewed publications or equivalent creative work
appropriate to the rank and discipline.
 Service
o Participates in committees without visible contribution
3.6.3 Meets Expectations: The faculty member being evaluated demonstrates that basic academic duties (see
Section 3.8) are fulfilled with performance outcomes that meet the minimum institutional standards in the respective
area.
Some of the following apply:
 Teaching:
o The course syllabi, the sample course materials, assignments, exams, and graded student work, and
the grading policies and results reflect a level of academic rigor appropriate to the course and
indicate commitment to promoting students’ active learning. Exams, projects and other assignments
are professionally developed and allow fair distinction between students;
o Students’ evaluation results and grade reports are generally near University and discipline norms.
The evaluations are analyzed in the context of other factors such as grading policies, rigor of
courses, required vs. elective courses, senior vs. first-year students, time of class meetings, and
deviations of discipline norm from the university norm. The faculty member demonstrates

14
 responsiveness to student evaluations by indicating how he or she has considered students’
recommendations or is actively addressing any significant or recurring concerns raised by students.
o The peer review letters identify areas of strength in the faculty member's teaching which encourage
student learning.
o Other evidence of effective teaching or innovation in the classroom indicates the faculty member’s
success in fostering student learning.
 Scholarship or Creative Activities:
o The faculty member demonstrates continual research or creative activity, leading to peer-reviewed
publications, or equivalent. (Note: corresponding to the period of evaluation)
 Service
o The faculty member provides active contributions to the work of a reasonable number of faculty
and/or university committees.
3.6.4 Very Good: The faculty member being evaluated demonstrates that the basic academic duties (see Section
3.8) are fulfilled with performance outcomes that consistently surpass the minimum institutional standards in the
respective area.
Most of the following apply:
 Teaching:
o The course syllabi, the sample course materials, assignments, exams, and graded student work, and
the grading policies and results reflect a level of academic rigor appropriate to the course and
indicate a high level of academic quality and / or success in promoting students’ active learning.
o The student evaluation results consistently meet or surpass the discipline norm, when other factors
(grading policies, rigor of courses, required vs. elective courses, senior vs. first-year students, time of
class meetings) that influence student evaluation results are considered.
o The faculty member demonstrates responsiveness to student evaluations by indicating how he or she
has considered students’ recommendations or has effectively addressed concerns raised by students.
o The peer review letters identify strengths in the faculty member's teaching which promote student
learning.
o The faculty member has demonstrated innovation in the area of student learning at AUBG.
o The faculty member has performed work with students extending their learning outside traditional
class-work at AUBG.
o Evidence of other accomplishments in the area of teaching indicates a high level of achievement in
fostering student learning.
 Scholarship or Creative Activities:
o The faculty member demonstrates fruitful research or creative activities, leading to peer reviewed
publications, or equivalent, recognized by corresponding professional communities. (Note:
appropriate to the length of the period of evaluation)
o The faculty member makes contributions to professional societies as active member, reviewer,
organizer of events, and others.
 Service
o The faculty member makes contributions with visible impact on faculty or university committees or
in leadership roles on campus.
3.6.5 Outstanding: Truly exceptional performance that goes above the level described as “very good”.

15
3.7 Basic Responsibilities of Faculty
All faculty are expected to fulfill the following responsibilities. The Department Chair, Discipline Coordinator, Dean
of Faculty, or Provost may intervene at any time when basic responsibilities are not being met and inform the faculty
member of the need to address the concerns and the time limit for correcting the inadequacies.
3.7.1 Teaching:
 Each faculty member must distribute a syllabus to all students outlining the goals of each course, the
assignments, and grading policies by the end of the first week of class. An electronic copy of the syllabus must be
sent to the department chair and the Office of the Provost by the end of the first week of classes. Time table,
including office hours, is posted in front of the faculty office.
 Each faculty member should have appropriate activities for scheduled class meeting times. The faculty member
should arrange to make-up missed classes or have classes covered in his/her absence. The Faculty Office,
department chair, discipline coordinator, and the Office of Dean of Faculty must be informed of any cancelled
class, if possible, before the class is cancelled.
 Grades must be reported in a timely manner. The assignment of grades reflects the degree to which students have
met the learning outcomes for the course, and the distribution of grades is consistent with University averages.
Repeated and significant variations from University averages are justified by sound pedagogy and supported by
the department chair, discipline coordinator and Dean of Faculty.
 Appropriate assessment must be undertaken in all classes. Assessment or the reporting of assessment to students
is scheduled for the final exam period unless the Dean of Faculty has been provided with an appropriate
academic justification for an alternative schedule.
 Faculty members make themselves available for reasonable consultation with students.
 Faculty members provide reasonable opportunities to meet with advisees and/or students.
 Faculty members ensure that course content is up-to-date.
 Faculty member respond as appropriate to numerical and written feedback from students through the student
evaluation system.
 Faculty members abide by all Academic Policies as described in the Undergraduate Catalog and/or EMBA policy
documents with regard to such matters as academic integrity, grading, incompletes, and exam schedules.
 Faculty members provide information and cooperation as needed to support the University’s efforts to maintain
accreditation.
3.7.2 Research and Creative Activity
 Faculty members should be engaged in appropriate professional organizations in his/her discipline.
 Faculty members should demonstrate on-going work on appropriate research projects or creative activity in
his/her discipline. The research projects and/or creative activity meet the professional standards of peer review of
the respective discipline.
 Faculty members provide information and cooperation as needed to support the University’s efforts to maintain
accreditation.
3.7.3 Service:
 Faculty members participate in an individually determined profile of service activities that promote the
fulfillment of AUBG’s mission. Such activities could include, but are not limited to, working on an AUBG
University or faculty committee, serving as an officer of the Faculty Assembly, serving as department chair,
serving as student advisor, advising the student government or other student organizations, or contributing to
outreach education in the greater community.
 Faculty members participate in the following types of activities: academic meetings, in-service professional
advancement activities, official University functions, faculty orientation, Honors Convocation, Commencement,
and student placement activities.
 Faculty members engage in appropriate workshops, conferences, and programs at AUBG.

16
Section 3.8 Evaluation criteria

The FET evaluates the performance of the faculty under evaluation on the basis of his/her contribution in all three
areas: teaching, scholarship and creative activities, and service, and in accordance with the mission of AUBG, paying
special attention to its quality and impact.

The evaluation is based on the following criteria:

3.8.1 Teaching:
 Contribution to the Institution
 Courses:
i. Newly designed, proposed and taught courses;
ii. Courses which were significantly revised during the period of evaluation;
iii. Newly developed and introduced teaching materials.
 Contribution to the mission of the department.
 Pedagogy:
i. Exploring new technologies;
ii. Adapting new techniques;
iii. Innovation in class.
 Performance effectiveness
 Teaching – learning effectiveness
o Quality of prepared materials to support teaching;
o Efficient use of pedagogical techniques in class;
o Taking into account students’ suggestions;
o Examination materials and grading criteria that allow fair evaluation/ distinction of
students;
o Effective response to guidance and suggestions from previous evaluations.
 Additional work with students:
o Supervising senior project/thesis;
o Offering Independent Study courses;
o Additional work supporting learning.

Applicable sources of information

 Faculty Self Study;
 Student Evaluations;
 Grade tapes;
 Peer reviews;
 Other, such as input from the Department.

3.8.2 Research and Creative Activities

 Contribution to the profession
 Research
o Published books (peer-reviewed, invited, self-promoted);
o Book chapters (peer-reviewed, invited);
o Editor (book, special issue of a journal or other academic publication);
o Research papers in peer reviewed journals and books;
o Publication in peer reviewed conference proceedings;
o Encyclopedia and dictionary entries;
o Conference papers;
o Participation in conferences as invited speaker, keynote speaker, chair of a panel and/or
discussant;

17
 o Media coverage of research;
o Other publications;
o On-going research;
o Citations.
 Creative activities
o Exhibitions;
o Performances;
o Publications.
 Publicity activities
o Media activities.
 Initiating, leading or participation in projects

 Contribution to professional societies

 Leading roles;
 Membership;
 Organization of events;
 Service as reviewer/ referee;
 Involving students;
 Awards, grants, scholarships, and other honors.

Applicable sources of information

 Faculty Self Study;
 Evidence of academic and/or creative work/events;
 Other, such as input from the Department.

3.8.3 Service
 Contribution to the institution
 Contribution to Faculty Assembly:
o Leadership of FA;
o Chair of FA committee;
o Member of FA committee.
 Contribution to the University:
o Chair of university committee;
o Member of university committee;
o Student Advisor (either department/discipline or first-year).
 Contribution to the department
o Leadership;
o Search committee;
o Evaluation committees (Note: for adjunct faculty).
 Contribution to the general community (external entities)

Applicable sources of information

 Faculty Self Study;
 Letters and/or other evidence;
 Other, such as input from the Department.

18
3.9 Selection of the Faculty Evaluation Team

The Faculty Evaluation Team (FET) selection procedure is designed to provide broad representation from among the
full-time faculty but cannot ensure representation of all departments or disciplines.
3.9.1 All members of the FET must be current members of the Faculty Assembly (FA) on regular-term contracts who
have undergone positive evaluation at AUBG in the three areas of evaluation, who have not been refused a contract
renewal as applied for in the most recent evaluation, and who are not currently being considered for evaluation or
promotion. No individual can serve more than two consecutive years.
3.9.2 The FET will have five members and two alternate members elected by the FA in a secret ballot during the Fall
semester. The first three members will be elected from among the most senior eligible members of each of the
departments. Seniority will be determined first by rank, then years in rank, then years in academia. Any questions
about seniority will be arbitrated by the Provost. The two additional members of the FET and the two alternate
members will be elected from among all eligible members of the FA.
3.9.3 Every faculty member under review has the right to exclude one FET member from the process of evaluation of
his or her performance. In such cases, the FET chair assigns one of the elected alternate members to serve in the
excluded member’s place. The alternate can be present at any other meetings of the FET at the discretion of the FET
chair.
3.9.4 Individuals on the FET may also request that an alternate FET member serve. It is a matter of professional ethics
to avoid conflicts of interest. A faculty member who has a personal relationship with the faculty member being
evaluated should not write a peer review or participate in the evaluation process.
3.9.5 All requests for an alternate to serve in place of an excluded FET member should be submitted in writing at the
time of submitting the dossier and officially approved in writing by the Provost before any dossiers are evaluated.
3.9.6 In the case that more than two FET members are not able to serve due to health problems or any other emergency
situation, the FA elects additional FET member(s) to replace them, following the procedure described in 3.9.1 and
3.9.2

3.10 Objective Evidence for Evaluation

All faculty members must submit an evaluation dossier to the Office of the Provost according to the terms of their
contract, or when seeking promotion. Faculty members are responsible for submitting a complete dossier with a signed
checklist as the first page. The dossier includes materials regarding the faculty performance for all semesters since the
previous evaluation, including the Spring semester, when the previous evaluation was done. In this way, they show
their agreement that this is the dossier upon which they wish to be evaluated. Faculty who fail to submit a full dossier
by the deadline will be evaluated on what is available. The last day to submit a file for evaluation is the last day of the
first week of the spring semester. Dossiers submitted after the deadline will not be accepted or considered.
Faculty may seek the help of the Office of the Provost, well in advance of the deadline for submission, for materials to
be included in the faculty evaluation dossier. However, the faculty member is ultimately responsible for providing
copies of teaching evaluations, syllabi, previous FET evaluations, and other appropriate materials:
3.10.1. It is upon the contents of this dossier that the Faculty Evaluation Team (FET) will base its evaluation and its
recommendation to the Provost for or against contract renewal. The FET may contact the faculty member up for
evaluation if there are any questions that need clarification, but has no obligation to do so. Communication between
the FET and the faculty member being evaluated shall be conducted only through the Office of the Provost.
3.10.2. During the first half of the Fall semester, the Faculty Evaluation Committee will hold a dossier preparation
workshop for all faculty members being reviewed and any other faculty members interested in attending.
3.10.3. The dossier includes:
1.Cover letter, explaining the purpose of evaluation, the period of evaluation, the request for the type of
reappointment contract and/or promotion.
2.A letter of self-evaluation addressing the three areas of evaluation.
3.Up-to-date detailed vita and a cumulative list of academic and personal accomplishments.

19
4.FET, Provost’s and President’s recommendation letters from the last evaluation for contract renewal at
AUBG.
5.A list of the courses taught each semester during the current evaluation period with student enrollment
numbers for each course and indications of which courses carry WIC designations.
6.Syllabi for all courses taught during the evaluation period.
7.Student evaluation results for all courses taught during the evaluation period along with the university and
discipline or departmental average results, and grade tapes.
8.Samples of significant class assignments, examinations, and graded work of students from a variety of classes
taught during the evaluation period (student names and ID#'s must be removed or blotted out).
9.At least two peer reviews for the evaluation period, conducted by faculty members in the discipline or related
field. The selection of peer reviewers is approved by the Provost prior to the review. Each review should be
based on a class visit, review of syllabus, exams, and other materials prepared to support student learning.
The letter has to assess the instructor’s in-class performance, the rigor of the course, and the students’
response during the in-class visit. The peer review should be submitted to the faculty member and the FET
through the Provost’s Office in a sealed envelope for confidentiality. The faculty member has the right to
respond to the peer evaluation and include this response in the dossier.
10. A complete list of papers, presentations or other research, scholarship or creative work for this evaluation
period. The faculty is encouraged to provide evidence for the status of these works and to indicate explicitly
whether or not they are reviewed for acceptance.
11. Examples of publications, evidence of attendance and presentations at conferences, and other examples of
activities aimed at contributing to the discipline or profession, including works in progress, works under
review, and works accepted, but still not published. The faculty member is responsible for including enough
examples of publications, etc. to allow FET to make a reasonable evaluation of the quality, variety, and
quantity of scholarly contribution. It is the responsibility of the faculty member to ensure that any
publication that is not subject to the peer review standards of his/her discipline is clearly identified as such.
12. List of professional societies the faculty is a member of and roles assumed in these societies, including
scholar awards received during the evaluation period.
13. List of service activities to the faculty, university, and general society, identifying personal contribution to
the work and achievements of the respective body.
14. Evidence of contribution and performance as letters or memoranda received recognizing the faculty
member's contributions to service activities.
15. Letter from the Department/ Discipline, presenting evidence related to the contribution of the evaluee to the
mission, activities, and objectives of the department/ discipline.
15.1. Performing faculty basic responsibilities;
15.2. Attendance and contribution to departmental meetings and activities;
15.3. Student advising within the department;
15.4. Participation and role in search committees;
15.5. Flexibility of course offerings, including contribution for accomplishment of curriculum objectives;
15.6. Contribution to curriculum development, including new course content, new course proposals, new
programs;
15.7. Contribution to program or institutional accreditation;
15.8. Support and organization of extra-curricular and co-curricular activities, related to the department;
15.9. Instances of supporting colleagues;
15.10. Contributions to the design, writing, proctoring and grading of State Exams, Senior Projects or
Senior Theses;
15.11. Contribution to outcome assessment activities;
15.12. Other activities that help raise the profile of the department;

20
 The letter has to present facts regarding evaluee’s performance only. A draft of the letter, prepared by the
department chair, the discipline coordinator or other senior member of the department/ discipline, has to be
presented and discussed at a department meeting - without the presence of the faculty under evaluation. The
final version of the letter, approved by the department, signed by the department chair, discipline coordinator or
by another authorized senior member of the department and accompanied by the minutes of this department
meeting is submitted to the Office of the Provost and to the faculty under evaluation not later than December
1st. The faculty member has the right to respond to the letter and this response becomes part of the dossier.

The faculty member may include any other material that he or she feels will assist the FET in making an objective
evaluation of the faculty member's effectiveness in teaching, research, and service.

3.11 Full-Time Faculty Evaluation Procedures

The full-time faculty evaluation procedures for both contract renewal and promotion include several stages of review.
3.11.1 Faculty Evaluation Team’s Evaluation and Recommendation:
For each faculty member under evaluation, the FET will review all dossier contents and write a letter to the evaluee
and the Provost summarizing the FET’s findings. The FET will evaluate the faculty member’s performance according
to the rankings defined in Section 3.6 above, with a narrative describing the strengths and weaknesses of the faculty
member’s performance in each area. The FET will include in this letter a recommendation to the Provost whether or
not to renew the faculty member’s contract. The FET may recommend a short-term renewal to allow the faculty
member to address a particular weakness in performance identified by the FET. The faculty member has the right to
respond to the FET evaluation.
The FET letter and faculty member response (if any) become part of the evaluation dossier. When the FET has
finished all the evaluations, it will forward copies of the evaluation letters, all dossiers, and faculty responses to the
Provost.
3.11.2 Provost’s Recommendation:
For each faculty member under evaluation, the Provost will review all dossier contents including any response by the
faculty member and will make a written recommendation to the President for or against reappointment or promotion.
The Provost’s recommendation will be based on: the dossier, the FET’s evaluation, the faculty member’s response, if
any, to the FET, and his/her own evaluation of the faculty member’s contribution in relation to AUBG’s mission. The
faculty member has the right to respond to the Provost’s evaluation. This response, if any, will accompany the
Provost’s recommendation to the President.
3.11.3 President’s Action:
The President retains the sole and final authority to renew contracts or to offer promotion. If the President does not
concur with the recommendation of the FET and/or the Provost, she/he should state the reasons as provided in the
AAUP guidelines. The faculty member has the right to request reconsideration of the President’s decision as described
in Section 6.1.2.

3.12 Adjunct Faculty Evaluation Procedures

Each adjunct faculty member will be initially evaluated after three semesters of teaching and thereafter, every six
semesters based on a dossier that includes a self evaluation letter, the Department Evaluation Team’s (DET)
recommendation and the Provost’s recommendation from the most recent evaluation (if available), a current
curriculum vitae, syllabi for all courses taught during the evaluation period, student evaluation results for all courses
taught during the evaluation period, grade tapes for all courses taught during the evaluation period, samples of
significant class assignments, examinations, and graded work of students from a variety of classes taught during the
evaluation period, and two teaching evaluations by peers. One of the evaluations must be from a member of the
department and the other from outside the department. Both evaluators will be nominated by the faculty member under
evaluation, subject to the approval of the department. The letters will be forwarded to the Department Chair with
copies to the faculty member under evaluation.

21
3.12.1 Evaluation by the Department Evaluation Team:
The department chair will form a Department Evaluation Team (DET) consisting of the chair and two other full-time
faculty members, at least one of whom should be from the same department. The same team will perform all
evaluations of the department’s adjunct faculty members in a given year. The DET will rate the teaching performance
of the candidate according to the scale in Section 3.6 based on the peer review(s), the dossier (including the letter and
supporting documentation), and the student evaluations. The DET will recommend for or against renewal to the
Provost on the basis of the teaching performance and department needs. At each evaluation, the adjunct faculty
member has the right to respond to the department evaluation in a letter to the Provost.

3.12.2 Evaluation by the Provost and President:

The recommendation and all evaluation materials will be forwarded to the Provost. The Provost makes a
recommendation to the President who will make the final decision for or against renewal.

3.13 Visiting Faculty in the Executive MBA Program Evaluation Procedures

Visiting faculty teaching in the Executive MBA program for the first time will be evaluated after the first semester and
before reappointment. If the evaluation is successful (with no qualifications), the faculty member’s next evaluation
will occur after two additional semesters. If there is a qualified evaluation, the faculty member will be evaluated again
after the next semester. (A qualified evaluation is one in which the evaluation team identifies one or more specific
performance area(s) which must be addressed in the next semester.) Visiting EMBA faculty are evaluated in two
categories: 1) teaching and 2) professional, scholarly, and creative activities. The faculty member will submit a letter
requesting consideration for reappointment, including a statement of professional, scholarly, and creative activities
with supporting documentation, and an evaluation dossier containing the following: current curriculum vitae, the
syllabus for the course taught during the evaluation period, the student evaluations, and the grade distribution for the
course taught during the evaluation period. There will be at least one peer evaluation by a full-time AUBG faculty
member. The evaluator may be nominated by the candidate subject to the approval of the Department Chairperson, or,
if requested, be named by the Department Chair. The evaluation letter will be forwarded to the Department Chair, with
copies to the candidate.

3.13.1 Evaluation by the Department Evaluation Team

The department chair will form a Department Evaluation Team (DET) consisting of the chair and two other full-time
faculty members, at least one of whom should be from the same department. The same team will perform all
evaluations of the department’s visiting faculty members in a given year. The DET will rate the teaching performance
of the candidate according to the adopted scale and criteria in Section 3 based on the peer review(s), the dossier
(including the letter and supporting documentation), and the student evaluations. The DET will provide both
evaluative and developmental feedback, and will recommend for or against renewal on the basis of teaching
performance and professional and scholarly activities. The recommendation and all evaluation materials will be
forwarded to the Provost.

3.13.2 Evaluation by the Provost and President

The recommendation and all evaluation materials will be forwarded to the Provost. The Provost makes a
recommendation to the President who will make the final decision for or against renewal. The faculty member will
have the opportunity to respond in writing at each stage

3.14 Timetable for Faculty Evaluation and Recommendations

The timetable for faculty evaluation and recommendations is designed to ensure that faculty receive a timely review
and that all participants in the process have sufficient time for deliberations. Any changes in the timetable must be
agreed to in writing prior to beginning the review process. In years when there are a large number of cases to be
reviewed, the FET and the Provost may agree to a change in the calendar and inform faculty in writing of the change.

22
3.14.1 The faculty evaluation process for regular full-time appointments should proceed according to the following
timetable:
 Second FA meeting of fall semester FA: election of FET;
 November 15: Letter indicating interest in promotion and names of external reviewers submitted to Provost;
 December 1: Internal Peer Review letters due;
 Last day of first week of the Spring semester: Evaluation dossiers due (including any faculty response to the
peer reviews);
 March 1: FET recommendation letters due;
 March 15: Faculty response (if any) to FET letter due;
 March 30: Provost’s recommendation due;
 April 5: Faculty response to Provost’s letter due;
 April 15: President’s decision due.

3.14.2 When the adjunct and/or visiting EMBA faculty member is up for evaluation, the Provost, the Department
Chair, and the faculty member should sign an agreement for the timetable of the evaluation.

3.15 Promotion Eligibility and Criteria for Full Time and Adjunct Faculty
While it is assumed that all faculty members conduct themselves conscientiously and professionally in the three areas
of teaching, scholarship, and service, promotion is dependent on a combination of ratings of Faculty in all three areas
of evaluation as indicated below. However, because each individual faculty member’s relative contributions will be
unique, depending on his/her talents and disciplinary interests, the FET, the Provost, and the President are expected to
evaluate the candidate’s overall performance and to recommend for or against promotion according to the candidate’s
suitability for the academic rank as described and defined below with regard to both years of service and level of
performance.
3.15.1 For promotion to Assistant Professor, the faculty member must have a Ph.D., terminal degree appropriate to the
discipline, or equivalent experience; one year of employment at AUBG; and ratings corresponding to the requirements
for a second three-year contract in all areas of evaluation. Adjunct faculty must have taught at least four sections.
3.15.2 For promotion to Associate Professor, the faculty member must have a Ph.D., terminal degree appropriate to the
discipline, or equivalent professional experience; five years as Assistant Professor, four of which have been at AUBG;
and ratings corresponding to the requirements for a five-year contract in all areas of evaluation. Adjunct faculty must
have taught at least 16 sections and served at least five years as Assistant Professor. Evaluation for promotion of an
adjunct faculty member to this rank is based on evaluation of teaching and scholarship.
3.15.3 For promotion to Professor, the faculty member must have a Ph.D., terminal degree appropriate to the
discipline, or equivalent professional experience; six years as Associate Professor, five of which have been at AUBG;
a continuing and substantial record of research, publications, and professional activity; substantial and sustained
service to the professional community, especially in leadership positions; an Outstanding rating in at least one of the
two evaluation categories – Teaching and Scholarship or creative activity and at least Very Good in the other one as
well as in Service to the institution. Adjunct faculty must have taught at least 16 sections and served at least six years
as Associate Professor. Evaluation for promotion of an adjunct faculty is based on evaluation of teaching and
scholarship. For promotion to Full Professor, a rating of at least Very Good performance in scholarship is required.
3.15.4 Alternative to the criteria above, an adjunct faculty member becomes eligible for consideration for promotion to
a higher rank if he/she has reached the equivalent of that rank in his/her home institution.

23
3.16 Promotion Procedures
Application for promotion may be submitted at any time. Consideration for promotion follows the same timetable and
procedures as for other evaluations except with regard to seeking external evaluations.
3.16.1 Early Promotion
In cases of exceptional merit a faculty member may apply for early promotion. Faculty will state their case in writing
to the Provost at least one month before the deadline for dossiers and prior to going to the FET. If the Provost agrees to
waive the years of service requirement, years of service will not be considered negatively in evaluation
recommendations. Waiving of requirements of years in service will be at the Provost's discretion. In cases where prior
contractual understandings regarding early promotion were negotiated at the time of hiring, the contractual
understanding will determine the relevancy of years in service. If the application for early promotion is rejected by the
Provost, the FET will not consider either the application or its rejection in a subsequent evaluation.
3.16.2 External Letters of Evaluation
Faculty seeking promotion to Associate Professor should prepare a full dossier by the appropriate deadline. In addition
to the regular contents of the evaluation dossier, the candidate for promotion to Associate Professor should submit the
names of three outside reviewers regarding research, publication, or professional activity. The names should be
submitted in writing to the Provost no later than November 15 in order to allow sufficient time for the Provost to
request the external letters of evaluation. The Provost will send a current CV and samples of work to the three persons
on the list. The letters should be sent directly to the Provost’s Office.
Faculty seeking promotion to Professor should prepare a full dossier by the appropriate deadline. In addition to the
regular contents of the evaluation dossier, the candidate for promotion to Professor should submit the names of five
outside reviewers regarding research, publications, and professional activity. The names should be submitted in
writing to the Provost no later than November 15 in order to allow sufficient time for the Provost to request the
external letters of evaluation. The Provost will send a current CV and samples of work to three of the persons on the
list. The letters should be sent directly to the Provost’s Office.

SECTION FOUR: FINANCIAL EXIGENCY AND CURRICULAR REVISION

4.1 Financial Exigency

The University has the right to reorganize its academic programs when financial constraints necessitate such a process.
When such a circumstance occurs, the faculty should be consulted to determine its collective thoughts regarding such
restructuring. However, the legal and fiduciary interests of the President and the Board require that final decisions rest with
the President and the Board. The following procedures are intended to set up a process whereby faculty input may be
constructively used to advise the President and Board as they arrive at a workable restructuring of the University's
academic programs when financial constraints require such restructuring. However, the President and the Board are not
required to utilize these procedures.

4.1.1 Upon receipt of notice from the Board and the President that financial constraints will necessitate restructuring of
academic programs, the Provost will consult with the Dean's Advisory Council to determine which positions and/or
programs, if any, will be eliminated or reduced in size and scope.

4.1.2 The final decision as to which programs and/or positions will be eliminated lies with the Board, acting on
recommendations of the President, Provost, and Faculty Assembly. It is expected that the Provost will meet with the
Curriculum Committee to consider recommendations for program changes. The Curriculum Committee will propose a
restructuring plan to the Faculty Assembly which will recommend a course of action to the Provost.

4.1.3 The Provost will then consult with the President, and upon the approval of the Board and President, take such steps as
are necessary to carry out the restructuring.

4.1.4 When positions or programs are eliminated, faculty will be retained according to seniority and teaching competence
in remaining positions. Seniority shall be defined as in Section 4.3.

24
4.2 Curricular Revision

All universities must periodically review their curriculum and student enrollments to determine the need for a given
program area or for positions in that area. Immediate responsibility for the curriculum lies primarily with the faculty and
the Provost subject to Board approval.

4.2.1 In the event that the Provost proposes a revision of the curriculum, his/her proposal shall go to the Curriculum
Committee for review. After reviewing the Provost's proposal, the Curriculum Committee shall make a recommendation
to the Faculty Assembly, which, in turn, shall make a recommendation to the Provost and the President.

4.2.2 When curricular revisions are made and positions eliminated, faculty shall be retained according to seniority and
relative to ability to teach in a given area. Seniority shall be defined as in section 4.3.

4.3 Definition of Seniority

Seniority for purposes of financial exigency and curricular revision is defined as follows in descending order: Full
Professors on five-year contracts, Associate Professors on five-year contracts, Assistant Professors on five-year contracts;
Full Professors in their second three-year contract, Associate Professors in their second three-year contract, Assistant
Professors in their second three-year contract, Full Professors in their first three-year contract, Associate Professors in their
first three-year contract, Assistant Professors in their first three-year contract, and Instructors in their first three-year
contract. Should there be a need for further definition within any particular group, seniority will be based on length of
service to AUBG.

SECTION FIVE: UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC ORGANIZATION

5.1 Academic Organization of the Faculty

The faculty is organized by departments with assignment based on programs and curricula. Although a faculty member
may teach in more than one program or meet with more than one department, for purposes of conducting department
business he/she may vote only in the home department.

5.2 Departmental Structure

The curriculum of the University is organized according to the following departments. Each department is responsible
for the management and development of minor and major programs, as well as contributions to the General Education
program, as appropriate.
 Department of Arts, Languages, and Literature
 Department of Business
 Department of Computer Science
 Department of Economics
 Department of History and Civilizations
 Department of Journalism and Mass Communication
 Department of Mathematics and Science
 Department of Politics and European Studies

5.3 Administration of the Department

Each department is headed by a department chair who provides academic leadership for the department. The chair
should hold formal meetings and keep a written record of decisions, as appropriate. The chair is responsible for the
following academic and managerial responsibilities and participates in the Dean’s Council. The appointment of
program coordinators is at the discretion of the chair in consultation with the Dean of Faculty.

25
5.3.1 Curriculum Related Responsibilities:

 oversee development of the self-study for program review and Bulgarian Program Accreditation;
 oversee evaluation of the curriculum and curriculum development proposals;
 in consultation with other department chairs, recommend cross listing of courses;
 oversee recommendations for General Education courses consistent with the approved guidelines for General
Education courses;
 oversee the design, conduct, proctoring, and evaluation of Bulgarian State Exams.

5.3.2 Faculty Related Responsibilities:

 establish the schedule of courses and distribution of teaching assignments to faculty members, both are done
in consultation with department faculty and the Dean of Faculty;
 represent the hiring needs of the department to the Provost and take primary responsibility in the search and
recruitment process. They consult with the faculty in the department in the review of applicants and report the
results of these deliberations to the Dean of Faculty and Provost in making a recommendation to hire;
 identify and periodically evaluate adjunct faculty according to established criteria and procedures.

5.3.3 Student Related Responsibilities:

 supervise the advising of majors;

 encourage co-curricular activities;
 approve transfer credit and make recommendations to the Dean of Faculty;
 oversee preparation of reports on student outcomes assessment.

5.4 Selection and Appointment of Department Chairs

Each department chair is elected by a majority within the department and approved by the President for a two-year
term. Only full-time faculty members are eligible to serve as department chairs. The selection should be based on
rotation among disciplines within multi-disciplinary departments and among individual faculty. If the President does
not approve the proposed department chair, a new election is held. Elections will be held in April.

5.4.1 If the department chair must vacate his/her office for any reason for a semester or less, he/she and the Dean of
Faculty shall jointly appoint a temporary replacement until an election can be held to complete the term.

5.4.2 Should a department wish to change its chair before the expiration of the term, it may call for a vote of no
confidence and request in writing to the Dean of Faculty that the department chair be removed and another appointed
by the procedure outlined above. A vote of no confidence requires a two-thirds majority of votes cast by members of
the department eligible to vote in the Faculty Assembly, and the voting will be held under the supervision of the Dean
of Faculty.

SECTION SIX: APPEALS, GRIEVANCE, AND HEARING PROCEDURES

6.1 Faculty Appeals

An appeal is a request to review an adverse decision related to evaluation, contract renewal, promotion, or termination.
Typically, the bases for an appeal are violation of academic freedom, violation of due process, or misapplication of policy.
The appeal is not meant to challenge the merits of current policies and procedures.

6.1.1 Appeals During the Evaluation Process

If a faculty member disagrees with the written evaluation of the FET, the faculty member shall have the right to make
a written reply, which will become a part of the evaluation dossier.

If a faculty member disagrees with the written recommendation of the Provost, the faculty member shall have the right
to make a written reply, which will become a part of the evaluation dossier.

26
6.1.2 Appeal of the Final Decision

Following the final decision, if a faculty member disagrees with the final decision, the faculty member may make a
written request for reconsideration based upon new relevant and material evidence, such as that related to teaching,
scholarship or service, which was unavailable to the faculty member at the time the dossier was submitted to the FET.
Any such request for reconsideration must be made to the President in writing ten working (10) days after the final
decision has been received.

6.2 Faculty Grievances

A grievance is a complaint based upon a violation of a right while an appeal is a request to review an adverse decision.
Use of the grievance procedures does not preclude the right of a faculty member to seek legal counsel, or to seek to obtain
redress of an alleged grievance through formal legal action.

6.2.1 Faculty Grievance Against Administrative Action

Any administrative action that allegedly violates academic freedom or the faculty member's rights as set forth in this
handbook is grievable. All grievance procedures must adhere to AAUP standards of due process for hearing of grievances.
Confidentiality of all parties involved in grievance procedures must be respected.

6.2.2 Grieving the Decision of the Faculty Evaluation Team

Faculty may not grieve the decision of the Faculty Evaluation Team. If the faculty member has evidence that the FET
acted negligently or inappropriately, and that such actions on the part of the FET led to an unfair administrative action, the
actions of the FET may be used as evidence in filing an appeal of the administrative action resulting from the FET
recommendation.

6.2.3 Informal Grievance Procedures

When an administrative action negatively impacts a faculty member, the faculty member may elect to attempt to resolve
the matter through informal procedures such as consultation with the Provost or any other appropriate administrator. The
purpose of the informal procedures is to give both faculty and administrators a chance to resolve differences in a forum
where both parties can agree to a mutually acceptable resolution. When this resolution is agreed to, a written statement
from the Provost, and the faculty member's acknowledgement of the resolution shall be entered into the faculty member's
file with the consent of the faculty member.

6.2.4 Formal Grievance Procedures

When a faculty member is unable to resolve an alleged grievance informally, or has reason to believe that use of the
informal process would compromise his/her case, he/she may start a formal procedure by filing a written grievance to the
Faculty Grievance Committee within twenty (20) business days of the event giving rise to the grievance. The faculty
member will state in writing the nature of the grievance and the redress being sought. In doing so, the faculty member will
refer in writing to the evidence which supports his/her claim and provide the Grievance Committee with all evidence
referred to in the original complaint. It is important to note that in all grievances the person bringing the grievance must
establish that there is a preponderance of evidence in support of his/her claim. The burden of proof rests on the grievant.

6.2.5 Grievance Committee Procedures

The Faculty Grievance Committee will review the evidence presented and request a written response from the
administrator against whom the grievance was filed. The Grievance Committee may solicit any evidence that is of
relevance to the case, provided all parties to the grievance are given the opportunity to review and respond to the evidence.
The Grievance Committee will review all evidence and either convene a formal hearing or dismiss the grievance.

27
6.2.6 Grievance Committee Recommendations

After reviewing all the evidence and hearing testimony, the Grievance Committee will make a written recommendation to
the President. The grievant will be given a copy of this letter and, if the grievant chooses, may submit a written response to
the President within twenty (20) business days of receipt of the response. The President will review the recommendation,
and the response of the grievant, if any, and respond in writing to both the grievant and the committee. If the President
agrees with the judgement of the Grievance Committee, the President's response need only indicate that he/she is in
agreement with the committee. If the President disagrees with the Grievance Committee then the President will specify in
detail the reasons for his/her disagreement with the Grievance Committee.

6.2.7 Request for Arbitration of the President’s Decision

If the grievant is dissatisfied with the President's final decision, the grievant may request that the President submit to
outside arbitration within twenty (20) business days of receipt of the President's decision. The President may do so if
he/she believes such arbitration is appropriate but is under no obligation to engage in outside arbitration. When arbitration
is agreed to by both parties, the terms of arbitration will be negotiated between the President and the grievant or their duly
appointed representatives.

6.2.8 Final Authority of President

The Grievance Committee's responsibility is to recommend a course of action to the President. The President has the
final authority in all grievance and internal administrative hearings (as outlined in section 6.3) to render a judgement.

6.2.9 Time Limits

The time limits set forth herein are mandatory and may be waived only by mutual agreement of the parties.

6.2.10 Records of Grievances and Resolutions

When a formal grievance is resolved, the President shall prepare a written record and, along with the faculty member's
acknowledgement of the resolution, place it in the faculty member's file with the consent of the faculty member.

6.3 Faculty Grievance Against the President

The grievance procedure outlined in section 6.2 may not be used if the grievance is against an action of the President.
Any grievance filed against the President, individually, shall be filed with the Chairman of the Board. The Chairman
will determine whether the grievance should appropriately be filed against the President or the administration. If it is
not appropriate that the grievance be filed against the President, the grievance shall be dismissed. If the grievance is
appropriately filed against the President, the Chairman will assemble a Body to have final authority. This Body will
consist of the Chairman and a faculty member and a member of the administration appointed by the Chairman. The
Chairman shall give the grievant and the President notice in writing that the Body has been convened. The President
shall have an opportunity to respond in writing to the grievance. Such response shall be submitted to the Chairman
within 20 business days of receiving notice from the Chairman that the Body has been convened. A decision will be
made by agreement of at least two out of three members of the Body and shall be issued in written form to both the
grievant and the President. The Body will have final authority in all grievances filed against the President,
individually, to render a judgement.

6.4 Faculty Grievance against Another Faculty Member

When a faculty member engages in behaviour that is alleged to be in violation of the Faculty Code of Ethics in Section 1,
and that behaviour directly impacts a fellow faculty member, faculty may make use of informal and formal proceedings.
Normally, faculty should first attempt to resolve the matter with the individual in question in an informal setting that makes
use of the faculty ombudsperson or the Provost. In cases where the behaviour is alleged to be particularly egregious
however, faculty may elect to file a formal grievance or request an internal administrative hearing. Resort to AUBG's
grievance procedure does not preclude the right to legal counsel or the right to initiate legal action. All formal and informal
grievance procedures must respect the right of all parties to confidentiality and due process. In filing a grievance, it is
important to note that a preponderance of evidence must be shown, and that the burden of proof rests on the grievant.

28
6.4.2 Informal Procedures

In most cases involving faculty-faculty interaction every effort should first be made to resolve the matter in an informal,
collegial setting. The role of the faculty ombudsperson is to facilitate communication between faculty and to suggest
fruitful, and mutually agreeable resolutions to faculty-faculty conflicts.

6.4.3 Verbal Warning

When a successful resolution cannot be agreed to with the mediation of the ombudsperson, or the allegation is considered
egregious, faculty may take the matter to the Provost's office within twenty (20) business days of the event giving rise to
the grievance. The Provost will review the matter and suggest a resolution. If a successful resolution cannot be agreed
upon, and the Provost believes that the actions of one, or both parties was in violation of the Faculty Code of Ethics, the
Provost will issue a verbal warning to the faculty member and suggest how the offending party should alter his/her
behaviour to avoid disciplinary action.

6.4.4 Written Warning

If, following a verbal warning, the behaviour persists, the matter may be brought to the Provost's attention again within
twenty (20) business days after the event demonstrating that the behaviour has persisted. The Provost will then consult
with the relevant parties and if he/she finds that the faculty member has failed to heed the verbal warning, will issue a
written warning to the faculty member. The party receiving the warning may, within twenty (20) business days after
receipt of the warning, appeal to the grievance committee to have the warning removed from his/her record. In that case,
the grievance procedures are as outlined above in Section 6.2. If no written warning is issued, and the grievant has reason
to believe that the Provost improperly judged the severity of the behaviour, the grievant may file a written grievance with
the grievance committee, within twenty (20) business days after the Provost’s decision in the matter.

The grievance committee will then follow the procedures as outlined in Section 6.2 above, and, if it finds in favour of the
grievant, recommend to the President that an internal administrative hearing be convened to review the case. The time
limits set forth herein are mandatory and may be waived only by mutual agreement of the parties.

6.5 Internal Administrative Hearings

An Internal Administrative Hearing shall be convened when there is evidence that a faculty member has violated the
Faculty Code of Ethics or AUBG Policies and has failed to heed prior verbal and written warnings regarding his/her
conduct; or when the offense is egregious enough to warrant the convening of an Internal Administrative Hearing upon the
first offense. The purpose of the Internal Administrative Hearing is to review the evidence; protect the right to due process
of the person being charged with an offense; determine whether or not an offense has actually occurred; and, when
appropriate, recommend to the President a course of disciplinary action that is in keeping with the gravity of the offense.
While it is not possible to delineate under what conditions which disciplinary sanction will be imposed, it is expected that
disciplinary action will be in accordance with the severity and the circumstances surrounding the case. In some cases the
nature of the offense may simply require a relatively minor sanction. In other cases, the sanction may lead to suspension
without pay for a period of time, a determination to not renew an employee's contract, or termination.

6.5.1 When the President receives a formal written request from the Provost, an appropriate administrator, any employee,
or a student to convene a formal administrative hearing the President will review the evidence and judge the severity of the
allegation. The President will also review the entire case to ensure that where appropriate, informal procedures, such as
verbal and written warnings, were issued to the faculty member which clearly explained the nature of the policy and the
faculty member's violation of said policy.

6.5.2 If the President finds that the faculty member has failed to heed appropriate warnings, or finds that the offense was so
egregious that informal procedures are inappropriate, the President shall convene an Internal Administrative Hearing and
appoint, in consultation with the Provost, the Faculty Assembly Chair, the grieved party, and the party alleged to have
committed the action in question, a faculty conduct council composed primarily, though not necessarily exclusively, of
faculty.

29
6.5.3 The committee appointed by the President shall conduct formal hearings, and at the conclusion of these proceedings,
issue a recommendation to the President as to the appropriate course of action. All parties will receive a copy of the
committee's recommendation and be given the opportunity to respond to the President in writing. After reviewing the
matter, and ensuring that due process was followed, the President will issue his/her decision.

6.5.4 In such cases, the President's decision will be final, though all parties retain the right to seek legal redress outside the
institution. If the President finds evidence of substantial violations of due process, the President will order the case to be
re-heard. If the President finds that there is not sufficient evidence to hold the accused party responsible, the President shall
dismiss the case and no records will be kept in the faculty member's personnel file and the matter may not be used against
the faculty member in any matters related to personnel decisions. If the President finds that the accused party should be
held responsible, the President will advise the faculty member of pending disciplinary actions.

6.5.5 When an offense is not serious enough to warrant immediate dismissal for cause, but the President judges it to be
serious enough to preclude contract renewal, the President shall state clearly upon conclusion of the Internal Administrative
Hearing that the offense is serious enough to lead to non-renewal of a contract. The President may also indicate that the
absence of any further offenses, or the taking of specific actions by the faculty member, will lead the President to rescind
an earlier decision to not renew a contract.

6.5.6 In all cases the President will inform the faculty member and any and all allegedly aggrieved parties of his/her
decision in writing.

6.5.7 All Internal Administrative Hearings must respect due process as defined by AAUP and maintain the confidentiality
of all parties to the hearing. Use of internal administrative hearings does not preclude any party from obtaining legal
counsel or from having recourse to legal proceedings.

SECTION SEVEN: PROCESS FOR AMENDING POLICIES

7.1 Procedures for Amending the Faculty Handbook

7.1.1 The Dean's Council may recommend to the Faculty Assembly changes in the Faculty Handbook at any time provided
that the Faculty Assembly receives prior notice of such recommendations. Any individual member or a specially appointed
committee of the Faculty Assembly may propose an amendment or revision to the Faculty Assembly at any regularly
scheduled meeting. All changes to the Faculty Handbook must receive a two-thirds majority vote of the Faculty Assembly
to pass on as a formal recommendation to the President.

7.1.2 Upon a two-thirds vote of the Faculty Assembly, the President will consider the recommended changes, and reply as
to their appropriateness at the earliest possible time. At the discretion of the President, recommended changes to the
Faculty Handbook will be on the agenda of the May Board meeting. All changes in the Faculty Handbook require
approval of the Board of Trustees.

7.2 Procedures for Amending the AUBG Policies Manual

7.2.1 From time to time the University policies may need to be revised to ensure that the University is in compliance with
changes in the law of the US, Bulgaria, and the European Union. Such changes should not be made without informing the
faculty of the recommended change and the reason for it.

7.2.2 At any point in time, the President may appoint a University Committee to review the University's policies and
procedures. The President retains the legal right to recommend any changes in University policies to the Board at any
point in time. Normally, however, he/she will do so only after consulting with the Faculty Assembly and duly considering
the recommendations of the Faculty. All changes to University policies require approval of the Board of Trustees.

30
INDEX
Absence, from campus (2.13) Hearings, Administrative (6.5)
Absence, from class (3.7.1) Hiring Procedures (2.1; 5.3.2)
Academic Freedom (1.7.9) Indemnification (1.4.2)
Academic Freedom, defined (1.2) Involuntary Termination (2.10; 2.11)
Adjunct Faculty, defined (2.2.3) Leave, Without Pay (2.13.1)
Adjunct Faculty, evaluation (3.12) Leave, Sabbatical (2.13.2)
Adjunct Faculty, promotion (3.16) Letter of appointment (2.3)
Amending the Faculty Handbook (7.1) Non-Discrimination Policy (1.3)
Amending University Policies (7.1) Office Hours (3.7.1)
Appeals, bases for (6.1) Outside Activities (1.5; 1.6.1)
Appeals, procedures (6.1) Personnel file (1.4.3)
Attendance at Commencement (3.7.3) Principles of Academic Freedom (1.2)
Benefits during leave of absence (2.13.1) Probationary period (2.6)
Changes to the Faculty Handbook (7.1) Procedures for Evaluation, Full –Time (3.11)
Collegiality (1.7.7) Procedures for Evaluation, Adjunct (3.12)
Conflicts of Interest (1.6; 1.7.10; 1.7.11) Procedures for Evaluation, Visiting (3.13)
Conflicts of Interest, financial dealings (1.6.2; 1.6.3; 1.6.4; Promotion, Criteria (3.15)
1.7.1) Promotion, Early (3.16.1)
Conflicts of Interest. personal relationships (1.6.5) Promotion, Procedures (3.16)
Consenting Relationships (1.7.3) Rank, Initial Appointment (2.4)
Contract (2.3) Rank, Promotion (3.16; 3.15)
Contract Renewal (2.7; 2.8) Recruitment of Faculty (2.1)
Curricular revision, faculty positions (4.2) Reduction in Force, Financial Exigency (4.1)
Class Administration, syllabi (3.7.1) Renewal of Contracts (2.7; 2.8)
Class Administration, exclusion of students (1.4.1) Resignation of Faculty (2.12)
Department, Chair Responsibilities (5.3) Responsibilities, Department Chairs (5.3)
Department, Chair selection (5.4) Responsibilities, Faculty (3.7)
Department, membership (5.1) Sabbatical Leave (2.13.2)
Department, structure (5.2) Scholarly Activities (3.7.2; 3.8.2)
Disciplinary Actions (1.8) Sexual Harassment (1.7.3)
Dossier for Evaluation (3.11) Standards of Conduct (1.7; 2.11; 6.5)
Early Promotion (3.16.1) Students, Removal from Class (1.4.1)
Evaluation, Adjunct Faculty (3.4) Search Committees (2.1.1; 2.1.2)
Evaluation, Criteria (3.6; 3.7; 3.8) Seniority, Definition (4.3)
Evaluation, Fixed Term Contracts (3.2) Service (3.7.3)
Evaluation, Purpose (3.1) Standards of Conduct 1.7
Evaluation, Renewable Contracts (3.3) Students, Consenting Relationships (1.7.3)
Evaluation, Visiting EMBA Faculty (3.5) Students, Conflict of Interest (1.6.5; 1.7.2; 1.7.9)
Faculty, Code of Ethics (1.7) Students, Financial Dealings With (1.7.1; 1.7.3)
Faculty, Recruitment (2.1) Teaching, Load (2.3)
Faculty, recruitment of adjunct and visiting (2.1.4) Teaching Responsibilities (3.7.1)
Faculty Evaluation criteria (3.6; 3.7; 3.8) Teaching, peer evaluation of (3.7.1; 3.10.3;)
Faculty Evaluation Team, election (3.9) Teaching, student evaluation of (3.8.1)
Faculty Evaluation Team, alternate (3.9.4) Temporary Appointments (2.2.2)
Faculty Responsibilities (3.7) Termination of Employment, Financial Exigency (4.1)
Faculty Rights (1.4) Termination of Employment, Probationary Period (2.6)
Final Examinations (3.7.1) Termination of Employment, Voluntary (2.9)
Financial Exigency (4.1) Termination, for Cause (2.10)
Five Year Contract (2.8.3) Three Year Contract (2.8.1; 2.8.2)
Freedom of speech (1.7.4) Timetable for Evaluation (3.14)
Full-time Faculty, Fixed Term Contracts (2.7) University Functions, attendance (3.7.3)
Full-time Faculty, Regular Contracts (2.8) University Service (3.7.3)
Graduate Faculty, Qualifications (2.5) Verbal Warning (6.4.3)
Grievance, Against an Administrative Action (6.2.1) Visiting Faculty, defined (2.2.4)
Grievance, Against Another Faculty Member (6.4) Written warning (6.4.4)
Harassment (1.7.3; 1.7.5)

31