Faculty Workload

Workload Scope and Expectations

Workload assignments for faculty at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, a Carnegie-designated R1 institution, are predicated on the fundamental purpose of the research university: the pursuit of knowledge. This effort proceeds along three, intersecting dimensions: (a) the generation of knowledge through cutting-edge research, scholarship, and creative activity, (b) the dissemination of knowledge and advancement of student learning through teaching and other scholarly activities, and (c) the application of knowledge through service to the university, to regional and local urban communities, as well as to national and international constituencies. Faculty are expected to make substantial contributions in all of these areas, though the particular distribution of effort among areas may vary from one faculty member to another. 

Specific workloads are determined on an individual basis, in alignment with applicable institutional policies, including the Board of Regents (BOR) and accreditation requirements. Workloads must also comply with Wis. Stat. sec. 36.115(10), which provides that faculty at R1 institutions must teach at least 12 credits per academic year and at least one course each semester, subject to exceptions that may be developed in BOR policy.¹ These determinations are made in conjunction with each faculty member’s annual evaluation and departmental needs. Teaching loads may vary according to disciplinary norms for R1 peers in conjunction with research and creative activity. Faculty with a strong focus on teaching or lower research productivity may be assigned higher teaching responsibilities. Likewise, faculty with high research activity or administrative responsibilities may be assigned a reduced teaching load. Workloads should be flexible and responsive to individual faculty career stage, strengths, and contributions. 

Workload policies should promote equity within the unit through the application of differentiated workloads and should be developed and evaluated within the context of the department’s mission and this campus policy. Workloads should support the university’s continued commitment to the generation of innovative research, while balancing its fundamental responsibility to offer high-quality accessible instruction. 

As a research university committed to both access and community engagement, faculty workload teaching responsibilities must be assigned to ensure the availability of courses necessary for students to meet graduation requirements in a timely manner, while also accounting for continued excellence in research and creative activities. 

Unit-Level Workload Policy Development, Content, and Regular Review

A department or unit faculty workload policy is developed and approved by the unit’s Executive Committee. When drafting or reviewing a workload policy, the Executive Committee will seek input from all tenure-track faculty in the department. The policy is subject to review and approval by the Dean of the unit’s college.   

If a Dean does not accept the department or unit’s proposed workload policy, the Dean shall provide feedback to the Executive Committee within one month during the contractual period. The Executive Committee will then modify the proposed workload policy and again seek approval from the Dean within one month of receiving feedback from the Dean during the contractual period. After a good faith effort to reach an agreement, if the Executive Committee and Dean do not agree on a workload policy, the Dean and Executive Committee Chair shall consult with the Provost (or designee) and the University Committee for guidance before the Dean makes a final decision consistent with this Policy. 

Unit workload policies must contain the following elements: 

1. Definition of a full workload per academic year, including units of work assigned to research/creative activity, teaching, service and administrative positions. The workload policy must also define what activities qualify as “research-active” and establish appropriate objective criteria and an evaluation process.  
2. Description of minimum expectations for a unit of work in each area. 
3. Description of how differentiated workload allocations are accounted for in annual evaluations, comprehensive post-tenure reviews, promotion considerations, and merit distributions.  
4. Provision for faculty to propose changes to their individual workloads to pursue projects important to the department. 
5. Provision for an appeal process if a faculty member disagrees with their assigned workload. 

Units may develop processes that result in the assignment of partial units of research/creative activity, teaching, and service. However, all faculty should be assigned a full workload each academic year. 

Unit workload policies must be reviewed at least once every five years to ensure their continued relevance and alignment with institutional goals, departmental/unit needs, and disciplinary norms. To ensure that reviews and any necessary revisions are completed in a timely manner before the end of the academic year, the review process should be initiated no later than February 1 of the designated review year.  

The Dean shall establish a review cycle for their college, which may follow a staggered schedule to avoid reviewing all department/unit policies at once.   

Both the Executive Committee and the Dean must reapprove the workload policy during each review cycle.  

Workload Assignment and Implementation

Application and enforcement of the unit workload policy are the responsibility of the Executive Committee. However, all workload distributions must be approved by the Dean to ensure consistency with college and university expectations and regulations.  

In this policy, references to the Dean or Provost include their assigned designees. 

Resources

Example workload models, sample departmental policies, and templates are available from the Division of Academic Affairs.

Faculty Workload: The formal, documented assignment of responsibilities for a faculty member over a term or academic year. It includes all professional activities, including research or creative activity, teaching, service, and administration, as determined by the department chair in consultation with the faculty member, in accordance with departmental policy, annual evaluations, and institutional expectations. All assignments must be approved by the Dean.    

Differentiated Workload: Adjustments to the standard distribution of research or creative activity, teaching, and service based on faculty interests, departmental needs, career stage, research productivity, class size, or other relevant factors. Differentiated workloads must be assigned in accordance with the department’s approved workload policy.   

Teaching-intensive: A workload composed primarily of teaching responsibilities, with limited expectations for research or creative activity.   

Research-active: A designation for faculty who are engaged in sustained scholarly research or creative activity at a level that meets disciplinary standards in a R1 research university. Workload assignment for research-active faculty distributes teaching responsibilities and research or creative activity expectations equally, reflecting higher expectations for scholarly productivity compared to teaching-intensive designations.   

Workload Unit: A standardized measure of faculty effort, typically defined as the work required to teach a 3-credit course. Workload units may vary by discipline and should be clearly defined in the department’s/unit’s workload policy.    

Workload Model: A system used to assign and evaluate faculty responsibilities across research or creative activity, teaching, service, and administration. Common models include:   

• 8-point model: 4 points per semester, 1 point = 1 course; 8 points = full load (referenced in UWM workload policy)   
• 24-point model: 12 points per semester, 3-credit course = 3 points  
• 5-point or percentage-based model: Assign effort across areas (e.g., 40% research, 40% teaching, 20% service)    

May 12, 1994

No. 1902 (original)

February 22, 1996

No. 2027

February 15, 2007

No. 2027 (amended)

November 20, 2025

No. 3584