House subcommittee advances bill requiring annual faculty evaluations and six‑year post‑tenure reviews

Chair Tim McGinnis opened debate and read the bill summary identified in the hearing as “47 61,” saying the measure does not abolish tenure but would add accountability across state institutions. The bill requires annual faculty performance evaluations that "measure core performance areas," include student and peer evaluation summaries, and assign ratings of "exceeds, meets, [or] does not meet expectations." Tenured faculty would face a post‑tenure review at least once every six years; each review must be completed within nine months, with a possible six‑month extension for good cause. A "does not meet" rating can trigger supplemental review, a remediation plan of up to 12 months and, if unsuccessful, a revocation process described in the bill.

The bill also requires each institution’s president, in consultation with the provost, to review evaluation and review processes no less than every five years and to secure board of trustees approval for updates. Annual compliance letters attesting to adherence must be submitted by November 15 to the chairs of the House and Senate education committees and to the Commission on Higher Education board chair.

Proponents framed the bill as a uniform accountability measure rather than a removal of academic protections. McGinnis said, "We're not doing away with tenure," and emphasized that constitutionally protected expression would not be a basis for removal. Macy Webb, the committee attorney, pointed committee members to statutory language limiting review to conduct not protected by the constitution and reiterated that the bill was not intended to punish protected speech.

Opponents and witnesses cautioned against duplication. Carol Harrison, a history professor at the University of South Carolina and president of the South Carolina State Conference of the American Association of University Professors, testified that many public institutions already conduct annual and post‑tenure reviews. "We do it every year," Harrison said, describing annual dossiers, peer and chair reviews and dean reports. She called the bill largely duplicative of existing faculty manuals but said one provision—allowing a post‑tenure review for administrators returning to the classroom—could be "a pretty, harsh thing to do" for faculty who paused research while serving in leadership.

After questions and brief public testimony, the subcommittee recorded a roll call vote and reported the bill favorably by a vote of 8 to 0. Chair McGinnis said the measure was intended to create uniform standards and to give the General Assembly oversight information about institutional compliance. The subcommittee will forward the bill to the full committee for further consideration.