.png)
foundations
Vol. 26, Issue 1, Article 1
A Brief History of Faculty Affairs in the United States
September 25, 2026
Christopher L.W. Elliott, Ph.D.
Assistant Dean of Academic & Faculty Affairs, University of Virginia
ABSTRACT
This article traces the development of Faculty Affairs as a field from the small, teaching-centered colleges of the nineteenth century through the rise of the research university, the expansion of higher education after World War II, and the growing formalization of faculty support across the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. It examines the parallel evolution of faculty development, the broadening of faculty affairs beyond personnel administration toward a more holistic conception of faculty success, and the emergence of regional and specialized professional networks as indicators of a maturing field. Drawing on the histories of allied organizations including the AAUP, the POD Network, FANN, and APLU, the article argues that faculty affairs has developed not through any single institution or association, but through overlapping communities of practice in which colleagues compare approaches, build shared expertise, and adapt promising practices to local contexts. The article acknowledges the pressures - changing employment patterns, political scrutiny, financial constraints, and demands for more inclusive academic environments - that make more professionalized approaches to faculty support both more necessary and more complex today.
A Brief History of Faculty Affairs in U.S. Higher Education
Faculty Affairs is both an old responsibility and a comparatively new professional field. Colleges have always had to appoint classroom instructors, evaluate their work, settle disputes, and determine who would lead academic programs. As American higher education evolved during the late nineteenth century, however, faculty responsibilities expanded beyond teaching alone. Influenced by the rise of the research university and the growth of graduate education, faculty members were increasingly expected to produce original scholarship, advance disciplinary knowledge, and secure institutional prestige through research. While some Universities had already begun to adopt components of research activity, the founding of Johns Hopkins University in 1876 was a pivotal moment in establishing research as a central function of the American professoriate. Yet the modern idea of faculty affairs - a coordinated institutional function that supports faculty success in teaching, research, service, and academic leadership (Zeineldin, 2025, 2026) – emerged gradually. Its development parallels the transformation of U.S. higher education from a small system of elite colleges into a large, diverse, research-intensive, and increasingly complex set of institutions.
The field of Faculty Affairs encompasses the systems and structures to help academic communities create the conditions in which faculty can do their best work so that students, institutions, and the public can benefit from that work. The field brings together attention to appointment, promotion, tenure, workload, professional growth, well-being, leadership, policy, academic freedom, and institutional culture. Its history is therefore also a history of colleagues - faculty members, department chairs, deans, provosts, academic developers, and professional staff - learning from one another about how to sustain academic careers and strengthen the institutions in which those careers unfold.
From collegiate teaching to an academic profession
In the nineteenth century, most American colleges were small, teaching-centered institutions. Faculty responsibilities were generally governed through personal relationships, local customs, and the authority of presidents and governing boards. Drawing from German models of education and scientific inquiry, the rise of the U.S. research university in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries changed this arrangement. Graduate education expanded, scholarly disciplines became more specialized, and faculty work increasingly combined teaching with research and public service. As the professoriate became more professionalized, faculty members sought clearer expectations and greater protection for intellectual independence.
The founding of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) in 1915 was a foundational moment. The AAUP’s early work responded to a setting in which faculty members often lacked due-process protections and could be dismissed for views that conflicted with institutional, political, or donor interests. Its 1915 Declaration of Principles on Academic Freedom and Academic Tenure and the later 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure helped establish enduring norms for academic freedom, tenure, professional responsibility, and shared governance (AAUP, n.d.).
These developments did not create faculty affairs offices in the contemporary sense. They did, however, establish the central questions that would later animate the field: What does faculty success require? Who has responsibility for academic quality? How should institutions balance institutional direction with faculty judgment? And what fair processes should govern appointment, evaluation, advancement, and separation?
The expansion of higher education after World War II made those questions more pressing. Enrollment growth, new federal investments in research, and the growth of public university systems increased the scale and complexity of academic administration. Provosts, deans, department chairs, and central academic offices assumed larger roles in faculty recruitment, promotion and tenure, faculty records, compensation, research support, and academic planning. Faculty affairs responsibilities were often dispersed across these roles, but the work was becoming recognizable as a distinct institutional portfolio.
The rise of faculty development
Faculty affairs developed alongside, and eventually intertwined with, faculty development. Early faculty development efforts were often concerned with improving teaching, particularly as colleges enrolled more students from varied educational backgrounds and faced greater public expectations for instructional quality. Sabbaticals, mentoring, peer observation, workshops, and instructional consultation were among the ways institutions supported faculty learning.
The field gained organizational infrastructure in the mid-twentieth century. The journal Improving College and University Teaching, now College Teaching, began publication in 1953. In 1962, the University of Michigan established the Center for Research on Learning and Teaching, an early and influential teaching-and-learning center. A decade later, the University of Massachusetts Amherst’s Clinic to Improve University Teaching employed practices that remain familiar: individual consultation, classroom observation, evidence gathering, and student feedback (Professional and Organizational Development Network in Higher Education [POD Network], 2016).
By the 1970s, faculty development had become a visible institutional movement. A national study documented development programs across U.S. colleges and universities, finding that institutions supplied most of their funding (Centra, 1976). In 1976, colleagues working in this growing area established the Professional and Organizational Development Network in Higher Education, now commonly known as the POD Network. Its formation created a durable national community for people who support teaching, learning, faculty development, and organizational change (POD Network, 2016). The Journal of Faculty Development was launched in 1983, initially to support and professionalize teaching in higher education, then broadening its scope to include professional development, curriculum and leadership, program design, and other innovative practices in faculty development.
This history matters because faculty development colleagues provided a blueprint for expanding the meaning of faculty support in U.S. higher education institutions. Rather than treating teaching improvement as remedial or individual, faculty developers increasingly understood it as collegial, developmental, evidence-informed, and connected to institutional conditions. The field also moved beyond a narrow focus on instruction. Faculty development came to include career stages, scholarly productivity, inclusive teaching, leadership development, interdisciplinary collaboration, and organizational change (Ouellett, 2010; Sorcinelli et al., 2006).
From personnel administration to faculty success
As institutions grew, faculty affairs also became more formalized. In many places, the work began as “academic personnel”: managing appointments, faculty records, policies, and processes for awarding promotion and tenure. Those functions remain essential in a modern context. Fair, transparent, and consistent processes are a core form of faculty support. Yet the work broadened as academic leaders recognized that policies alone do not create thriving faculty careers.
By the late twentieth century, colleges and universities faced a changing professoriate. Faculty appointments diversified across tenure-track, teaching, research, clinical, practice, and contingent roles. Expectations for externally funded research, student success, community engagement, interdisciplinary work, and public accountability grew. Faculty affairs professionals became increasingly responsible for helping institutions align appointment structures, career paths, workload policies, recognition systems, and developmental opportunities with their academic missions.
This shift made collaboration indispensable. A faculty affairs leader may coordinate with human resources, general counsel, institutional research, teaching centers, research offices, diversity and inclusion offices, faculty senates, department chairs, and academic deans. The work is both technical and relational: interpreting policy, building trust, facilitating difficult conversations, and designing practices that acknowledge different disciplines and career stages. And the variability of that work across disciplines adds further complexity, for example, when trying to align consistent institutional research standards across academic fields that value different types of technical, creative, artistic, clinical, or scientific scholarly production. Faculty success began to take on a wider range of meanings, heavily dependent on the college or university context, but with a clear intention to support the progress of faculty at one’s institution through important career milestones and development.
Regional and specialized networks and the case for professional connection
Regional and specialized networks have become another important part of the Faculty Affairs ecosystem. In a 2018 Chronicle of Higher Education essay, Jessica R. Pesce argued that faculty affairs professionals needed the kind of dedicated professional community long available to colleagues in student affairs and other academic disciplines. Her argument captured a persistent feature of Faculty Affairs work: professionals often enter the field from faculty, academic-administrative, human-resources, or legal roles, yet receive limited formal preparation for the distinctive combination of policy interpretation, relationship building, conflict navigation, and developmental work that the portfolio requires (Pesce, 2018).
The Faculty Affairs Network, Northeast (FANN) was created to offer a practical response to that need. Co-founded in 2018 by Pesce and Pamela Baldwin, FANN created a community of practice for faculty affairs professionals through recurring mini-conferences focused on networking and the exchange of effective practices. Participants can discuss common challenges in a setting close enough to their institutional contexts to foster candid exchange, while also benefiting from cross-institutional perspectives and professional relationships. FANN’s emergence is especially significant because it was built expressly for Faculty Affairs colleagues, rather than as a subgroup within a broader association (Pesce, 2025). It represents a maturation of the field: faculty affairs professionals are not only supporting the careers and success of faculty members, but also building the peer networks, vocabulary, and shared expertise needed to sustain their own practice.
The growth of faculty affairs in academic medicine also illustrates this trajectory clearly. Medical schools must support faculty members whose work integrates research, education, clinical practice, and service, often across multiple appointments and affiliated organizations. The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) began convening Faculty Affairs professionals in 1987 through a professional-interest group known as the Faculty Affairs Forum. The forum initially addressed resource constraints and tenure policy, then broadened its focus to professional development, promotion, definitions of scholarship, and the advancement of women and faculty from historically excluded groups (AAMC, 2006). In 2006, the AAMC established the Group on Faculty Affairs as a national professional home for Faculty Affairs leaders. This group later merged into a Faculty and Staff Vitality Group. Today, the group supports institutional policy, professional development, and vitality for both faculty and staff in medical schools (AAMC, n.d.).
Additional specialized networks began to emerge in Business Schools (Faculty Affairs in Business Schools (FABS) Network) and Law Schools through the American Association of Law Schools (AALS), for example. These examples are important not because faculty affairs belongs only to one’s academic discipline, but because it demonstrates a larger pattern that when faculty work becomes more differentiated and institutional contexts more complicated, colleagues create networks to compare practices, develop expertise, and avoid solving common problems in isolation.
Allied organizations and communities of practice
No single organization represents all of faculty affairs. Instead, the field has developed through overlapping communities with related purposes.
Since 1915, the AAUP has remained active in advocating for faculty rights, academic freedom, and shared governance. Its legacy reminds faculty affairs professionals that institutional effectiveness depends on legitimate processes and meaningful faculty participation.
Founded in the 1940s, the American Conference of Academic Deans (ACAD) has long served academic leaders at colleges and universities, particularly deans and other administrators responsible for faculty and curricular matters. Through professional development programs, annual meetings, publications, and peer networks, ACAD has helped shape leadership capacity among those whose responsibilities increasingly intersect with faculty affairs. Its evolution reflects the growing professionalization of academic administration and the recognition that faculty success is closely linked to effective academic leadership.
Emerging in 1976, the POD Network has provided a professional home for educational developers and others supporting learning, teaching, and organizational development. Its history reflects the growing recognition that faculty learning is ongoing and that improvement is strengthened by communities of practice.
For at least the last two decades, the AAMC’s Faculty Affairs community has advanced a specialized body of practice in academic medicine. Similarly, other disciplinary and institutional associations have created spaces in which faculty leaders examine the distinct career structures and scholarly expectations of their sectors.
More recently, organizations focused explicitly on faculty development and success have expanded the field's reach. Founded in 2010, the National Center for Faculty Development and Diversity (NCFDD) emerged as a national provider of mentoring, coaching, and professional development programs designed to support faculty productivity, well-being, and career advancement. Although not a faculty affairs association in the traditional sense, NCFDD has become an influential partner for many institutions, reflecting a shift in the field toward evidence-based approaches to faculty success, inclusive excellence, mentoring, and retention.
The Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU) has developed another important venue through its Committee on Faculty Affairs. Situated within APLU’s Council on Academic Affairs, the committee convenes faculty affairs leaders to consider issues such as faculty development, term-faculty roles, tenure, dual-career hiring, post-tenure review, workload, accountability, and performance management (APLU, n.d.). Its Annual Faculty Affairs Retreat and broader Faculty Success community illustrate a contemporary feature of the field: faculty affairs professionals work across institutions to share approaches while recognizing that effective policy must fit local mission, governance, and culture.
The Ivy+ Faculty Advancement Network is a consortium that brings leaders from top research universities together to reconsider the norms, structures, policies, and programs that shape academic work and institutional culture (Ivy+ Faculty Advancement Network, n.d.). Such networks are valuable because they permit deeper exchange among institutions confronting similar challenges while preserving the cross-sector learning offered by larger associations.
Software companies who build and maintain faculty information systems also recognized the needs for collegial connection, while engaging colleagues with their products. Companies began hosting events to gather and engage the community of faculty affairs practitioners, both virtually during the global pandemic and in-person through the Watermark Engage Conference, first launched in 2018, followed by the Interfolio Summit in 2019. Similarly, Academic Analytics and Scholarly Software have emerged in recent years to also advance the way colleges and universities collect and utilize data to best support faculty. With the complexity of faculty data and personnel management, this interface with software companies has offered valuable tools, early communities of practice, and engagement to support the professional work of Faculty Affairs colleagues in the U.S.
Foundational and emerging scholarship in faculty affairs and faculty success
Another indicator of the maturation of Faculty Affairs is the emergence of a growing scholarly and practitioner literature devoted specifically to faculty success, development, and academic career support.
Yet the intellectual foundations of the field predate the emergence of faculty affairs as a recognized administrative function. For decades, scholars in higher education, sociology, faculty developers, and psychology have examined topics that today fall squarely within the faculty affairs portfolio, including faculty workload, promotion and tenure systems, research productivity, career advancement, mentorship, faculty development, job satisfaction, work-life integration, and academic leadership. Seminal studies of the professoriate explored the nature of academic work, faculty reward structures, and the evolving relationship among teaching, research, and service, while later scholarship expanded to examine faculty careers across institutional types and career stages. Foundational contributions by Ernest L. Boyer (1990), R. Eugene Rice and both Mary Deane Sorcinelli (2002) and KerryAnn O'Meara (2005), and a tremendous 40 years of published work by Ann E. Austin and many others (1983, 1990, 1991, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2013, 2023) helped establish a substantial literature on faculty roles, tenure and promotion, professional development, and academic careers. Researchers continue to devote increasing attention to the experiences of women faculty, faculty of color, contingent faculty, and scholars at different career stages, producing a rich but sometimes fragmented body of literature that was not commonly organized under the banner of "faculty affairs."
Much of this scholarship emerged through faculty development centers, disciplinary associations, schools of education or medicine, and federally supported research initiatives. Programs funded by agencies such as the National Science Foundation, particularly those focused on broadening participation and advancing academic careers in STEM fields, generated important research on mentoring, retention, promotion, leadership development, institutional climate, and pathways to faculty success. Although these studies often addressed discrete aspects of academic work, collectively they helped establish the evidence base that contemporary faculty affairs professionals draw upon when designing policies, programs, and interventions to support faculty careers. In this sense, the practice of faculty affairs emerged not from a single scholarly tradition but from the convergence of multiple streams of research concerned with understanding and improving the academic profession.
Recent books by Reema Zeineldin, including A Practitioner's Guide to Faculty Affairs (2025) and Faculty Affairs Practices for Holistic Faculty Success (2026), represent some of the first comprehensive efforts to define faculty affairs as a distinct field of higher education practice and to articulate its role in supporting faculty careers across multiple dimensions. These works build on a broader body of literature examining faculty development, mentoring, organizational change, and faculty well-being.
Recent contributions such as Faculty Development on a Shoestring (Chapman & Bartlett, 2024), Faculty Development: Achieving Change Through Action Research (Ewell et al., 2024), and Faculty Success in the Academy (Tomlin & Smith, 2025) reflect increasing attention to evidence-based approaches that support faculty effectiveness, engagement, advancement, and retention. Together with contemporary research on thriving faculty careers and holistic faculty development, this literature suggests that the field is moving beyond personnel administration toward an integrated conception of faculty success that encompasses professional achievement, institutional effectiveness, well-being, community, and belonging.
The work ahead
The history of Faculty Affairs is a story of nonlinear, complicated, and decentralized progress. The academic profession has long reflected inequities in access, status, compensation, opportunity, and voice. Current pressures - including changing employment patterns, debates about academic freedom and institutional autonomy, political pressures on higher education, artificial intelligence, public skepticism, financial constraints, and demands for more inclusive academic environments - make faculty support both more necessary and more challenging.
Still, the central lesson of this history is hopeful. Faculty Affairs emerged because colleagues recognized that faculty success is not solely an individual responsibility or that of a single department leader. It is shaped by the policies, relationships, resources, expectations, and cultures that comprise every institution. The work calls for careful stewardship of academic standards and fair process, but also for imagination: designing career structures that recognize varied contributions; preparing chairs, deans, and faculty leaders; supporting excellent teaching and research; and building academic communities in which faculty can flourish.
For the Faculty Affairs Consortium (FAC-USA), as the first national professional association for the field, this history offers both inheritance and invitation. The field has been built through collegial exchange - leaders comparing notes, testing ideas, sharing setbacks, and adapting promising practices to local circumstances. We are thrilled to launch FA Insights as our professional publication to extend that tradition by creating a forum for reflection, evidence, practical wisdom, and the collective work of supporting faculty in all dimensions of academic life. As a professional publication, we intend to feature new research and extend the legacy of those researchers who lend their insights into this history above. We look forward to your contributions to this discussion, and to our collective future as we all contribute to the next chapter for our field of Faculty Affairs.
References
American Association of University Professors. (n.d.). Timeline of the first 100 years. https://www.aaup.org/about/history/timeline-first-100-years
Association of American Medical Colleges. (2006, July 1). Faculty affairs: An increasingly complex support function in medical schools. https://www.aamc.org/professional-development/affinity-groups/gfa/faculty-vitae/faculty-affairs
Association of American Medical Colleges. (n.d.-a). AAMC history. https://www.aamc.org/about-us/aamc-history
Association of American Medical Colleges. (n.d.-b). Group on Faculty Affairs (GFA). https://www.aamc.org/learn-network/affinity-groups/gfa
Association of Public and Land-grant Universities. (n.d.). Committee on Faculty Affairs. https://www.aplu.org/councils/academic-affairs/committee-on-faculty-affairs/
Austin, A. E., & Gamson, Z. F. (1983). Academic Workplace: New Demands, Heightened Tensions (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Research Report No. 10).
Austin, A. E. (1990). "Faculty Cultures, Faculty Values." New Directions for Institutional Research, 17(4), 61-74.
Austin, A. E., & Baldwin, R. G. (1991). Faculty Collaboration: Enhancing the Quality of Scholarship and Teaching. (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 7). School of Education and Human Development, The George Washington University.
Austin, A. E. (2002). "Preparing the Next Generation of Faculty: Graduate School as Socialization to the Academic Career." The Journal of Higher Education, 73(1), 94-122.
Austin, A. E. (2003). "Creating a Bridge to the Future: Preparing New Faculty to Face Changing Expectations in a Shifting Context." The Review of Higher Education, 26(2), 119-144.
Austin, A. E., & McDaniels, M. (2006). "Preparing the Professoriate of the Future: Graduate Student Socialization for Faculty Roles." In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (Vol. 21, pp. 397–456). Springer.
Austin, A. E., & Sorcinelli, M. D. (2013). "The Future of Faculty Development: Where Are We Going?" New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2013(133), 85–97.
Beach, A. L., Sorcinelli, M. D., Austin, A. E., & Rivard, J. K. (2016, 2023). Faculty Development in the Age of Evidence: Current Practices, Future Imperatives. Routledge.
Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. Carnegie Foundation.
Centra, J. A. (1976). Faculty development practices in U.S. colleges and universities. Educational Testing Service. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED141382
Chapman, D. D., & Bartlett, M. E. (Eds.). (2024). Faculty Development on a Shoestring: Programs to Support Higher Education Faculty Using Little or No Resources. Information Age Publishing.
Ewell, S. B., Giblin, J., & McNabb, J. (2024). Faculty Development: Achieving Change Through Action Research. Information Age Publishing.
Fettes, D. L., Hazen, V. M., Reznik, V., Wingard, D., & Trejo, J. (2025). "Thriving in Academia: A Model of Faculty Development for Successful, Diverse, Engaged Faculty Across Career Stages." Journal of Faculty Development, 39(1), 96–99.
O'Meara, K. A., & Rice, R. E. (2005). Faculty Priorities Reconsidered: Rewarding Multiple Forms of Scholarship. Jossey-Bass.
Ouellett, M. L. (2010). Overview of faculty development: History and choices. In K. J. Gillespie & D. L. Robertson (Eds.), A guide to faculty development (2nd ed., pp. 3–20). Jossey-Bass.
Pesce, J. R. (2018, August 21). Student affairs has an association; faculty affairs needs one, too. The Chronicle of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/Student-Affairs-Has-an/244313
Pesce, J.J. (2025). The Creation and Development of Faculty Affairs Network, Northeast (FANN). In R. Zeineldin (Ed.), A Practitioner's Guide to Faculty Affairs, (pp. 14-18). Routledge.
Professional and Organizational Development Network in Higher Education. (2016). Milestones before and after establishment of the POD Network.
https://www.schreyerinstitute.psu.edu/pdf/PODHistoryMilestones.pdf
Sorcinelli, M. D. (2002). New Conceptions of Scholarship for a New Generation of Faculty Members. New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 2002(90), 41-48.
Sorcinelli, M. D., Austin, A. E., Eddy, P. L., & Beach, A. L. (2006). Creating the future of faculty development: Learning from the past, understanding the present. Anker.
Tomlin, A. D., & Smith, H. (Eds.). (2025). Faculty Success in the Academy: Tips, Tools, and Resources for Success. Emerald Publishing.
Zeineldin, R. (2025). A Practitioner's Guide to Faculty Affairs. Routledge.
Zeineldin, R. (2026). Faculty Affairs Practices for Holistic Faculty Success. Higher Education Affairs.
How to Cite
Elliott, C. L. W. (2026). A brief history of faculty affairs in the United States. FA Insights: A Professional Publication of the Faculty Affairs Consortium (FAC-USA), 26(1), 1. https://www.fac-usa.org/FAInsights-2026-1