Problems in discipline and dismissal of faculty in American colleges and universities

Vita.The purpose of this study was to provide colleges and universities with a model of progressive discipline, the model serving as an alternative to termination. In this way, the disciplined professor can be helped to fulfill his/her obligations. However, if the faculty member continues with misconduct, termination could be the result. This research demonstrates first, how academic freedom, tenure, and academic due process came into being on American college and university campuses. A survey of periodicals, law journals, and court cases is included. Chapter II traces the development of academic freedom, tenure and due process, much of which grew out of the efforts of the American Association of University Professors. The most vital document, 1940 Statement of Principle on Academic Freedom and Tenure is analyzed. Chapter III devotes itself to those court cases which codified academic freedom. Included are extended discussions of landmark cases that determine the rights of professors. Property rights are defined in Sindermann v. Perry and Board of Regents v. Roth; liberty rights are defined in Epperson v. State of Arkansas, Shelton v. Tucker, Baggett v. Bullitt and Pickering v. Board of Education. Chapter IV includes a discussion of the essential aspects of collective bargaining: its history, the impetus for its appearance on the collegiate scene, its message for settling disputes, and etc. Some of the leading arbitration cases are discussed. The discussion of these essential aspects indicates that certain limited disciplinary procedures have been adopted on American college and university campuses that have collective bargaining agreements. Thus, collective bargaining agreements have provided an attempt to solve faculty disciplinary problems, although the often used private sector models seldom fit the needs of the public sector.