UPDATE 3/7/2025:
The Nevada Board of Regents, swayed by input from faculty leaders, rejected the proposal to modify the Title 2 policies. The existing policy, which requires the final appeal of Chapter 6 proceedings that may result in faculty termination to be submitted to the full Board for final resolution.
ORIGINAL POST 2/6/2025:
A proposal to modify Title 2 policies in the Board of Regents Handbook, which alarmed many NSHE faculty members when it was introduced last December, will have its second reading and possible approval at the March 6-7 Board of Regents meeting at Nevada State University in Henderson. Chapter 6, and Chapter 8 for DRI professionals, outline faculty discipline policies, including termination for cause. The changes would grant the Chancellor final authority over faculty termination appeals, requiring consultation only with the Board's chair, excluding other Regents from the process.
Most faculty who responded to NFA's request for input last November were concerned that the change will make the process for faculty appeals even more opaque and tilt the balance in favor of the administration. Although appeals under the existing policy are heard in a closed hearing of Regents during one of their meetings, Nevada's open meeting laws require the agenda to list the appeal and the hearing. The new policy will likely bypass this, placing the decision in the hands of the Chancellor instead of 13 Regents.
The NFA issued a letter to the Board of Regents opposing the proposal and asserting that the changes would violate the long-standing doctrines from AAUP's 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure. The principles, and recent interpretations of them, establish that the governing board is responsible to review appeals and take the final action. By removing the Board from the process, the proposal diminishes due process and removes what little transparency exists because proceedings will no longer appear on Board agendas. Giving the authority exclusively to the Chancellor curtails the diversity of perspectives from the full Board and tips the balance in favor of the administration. At the December Board meeting, members asked about an alternative that would give faculty members the option to direct their appeals either directly to the Chancellor or to an Appeals Board consisting of the Chancellor and selected members of the Board.
The NFA urges all faculty members to contact their Regent and tell them to reject the current proposal to modify Title 2, Chapters 6 and 8 in the Handbook and consider other options. All avenues of due process must be exhausted in proceedings where an individual's career or an institution's reputation are at stake.
