At MSU Denver, full-time faculty members, except temporary personnel, are eligible for a paid sabbatical leave when they have completed seven academic years of continuous service to the University.

For those considering applying for a sabbatical, please review the Faculty Employment Handbook and Guidelines for Preparation of Applications for Sabbatical Leave for additional information regarding eligibility and expectations as well as for templates related to the Sabbatical Leave Application.

For those ready to submit their application, several resources are included below including the Office of Faculty Affairs Canvas course which includes a module that covers all aspects of the sabbatical leave application process as well as the post-sabbatical requirements for faculty. The Office of Faculty Affairs also hosts a Sabbatical Application Preparation Workshop during which OFA provides an overview of the process and answers questions to assist with submitting your application.

Faculty Employment Handbook Sabbatical Leave Application Guidebook
Office of Faculty Affairs Canvas Course Office of Faculty Affairs Workshop Signup

Sabbatical Application Details

Criteria Not Demonstrated (0) Poor, Unsatisfactory, Below Expectations (1) Satisfactory, Adequate, Meets Expectations (2) Commendable, Good, Strong, Exceeds Expectations (3) Outstanding, Exceptional, Excellent, Superior, Far Exceeds Expectations (4)
Feasibility of Timeline Can activities and outcomes be completed in the time allotted? How realistic is the time frame for proposed activities? Fails to explicitly address this criterion. Timeline is unrealistic – very unlikely that activities can be completed in time allotted. Timeline is appropriate, but potential disruptions or delays could result in incompletion. Timeline is realistic for completion of described activities. Completion of activities fall well within allotted timeframe – details are very specific and fallback plans are outlined.
Likelihood of Success Does the applicant’s experience and understanding of the related literature indicate that the applicant will achieve their goals? Fails to explicitly address this criterion. Success is unlikely given the applicant’s experiences related to the proposal. No relevant literature related to the proposal included. Success is possible as evidenced by the applicant’s experience and the inclusion of relevant literature. Success is very likely given the applicant’s experiences and the inclusion of relevant literature. Success is highly likely due to the applicant’s experiences and depth of the proposal’s grounding in relevant literature.
Benefit to Faculty Member Do the activities and outcomes contribute to professional growth (including benchmarks PTR/RTP)? (Professional growth – the enhancement of the applicant’s expertise in the subject matter and overall level of knowledge.) Fails to explicitly address this criterion. Activities and outcomes are unlikely to result in professional growth or contribute to meeting RTP/PTR benchmarks. Activities and outcomes are likely to result in professional growth or contribute to meeting RTP/PTR benchmarks. Activities and outcomes are very likely to result in significant professional growth and contribute to meeting RTP/PTR benchmarks. Activities and outcomes are highly likely to result in exemplary professional growth and contribute to meeting RTP/PTR benchmarks.
Benefit to the Institution Do the activities and outcomes contribute to the University, School/College, or Department missions and/or strategic plans? Fails to explicitly address this criterion. Activities and outcomes minimally contribute to the University, School/College, or Department missions and/or strategic plans. Activities and outcomes moderately contribute to the University, School/College, or Department missions and/or strategic plans. Activities and outcomes greatly contribute as evidenced by specific demonstrable outcomes that will positively contribute to the University, School/College, or Department missions and/or strategic plans. All activities and outcomes significantly contribute to, and positively promote, the standing of the University, School/College, or Department missions and/or strategic plans with specific metrics and demonstrable outcomes.
Benefit to Students Do the activities/outcomes enhance student educational experiences and/or academic, intellectual curiosity and success? Intellectual curiosity – is it likely to promote additional motivation to learn more about the subject? Fails to explicitly address this criterion. Activities and outcomes are unlikely to enhance student educational experiences and/or increase intellectual curiosity and success. Activities and outcomes are likely to enhance student educational experiences and/or increase intellectual curiosity and success. Activities and outcomes are very likely to enhance student educational experiences and/or increase intellectual curiosity and success, as evidenced by detailed inclusion in the proposal. Activities and outcomes are highly likely to improve and enhance student educational experiences and/or increase intellectual curiosity and success, as evidenced by specific details in the proposal.
Benefit to Discipline or Community Do the activities/outcomes benefit the faculty member’s discipline or community? Fails to explicitly address this criterion. Activities and outcomes are unlikely to benefit their discipline or community. Activities and outcomes are likely to benefit their discipline or community. Activities and outcomes will more than likely benefit their discipline and/or the community as evidenced by detailed inclusion noted in multiple ways in the proposal. Activities and outcomes will substantially benefit their discipline and/or the community in multiple ways, as evidenced by the detailed specifics outlined in their proposal.
Funding Sources and Needs* Faculty did not apply for external funding. Faculty applied for external funding. Faculty successfully received external funding. N/A N/A

*In the Faculty Employment Handbook (Section VII.A.4), criteria for evaluation includes (ii) “availability of resources necessary to complete the proposed activities.” Resources include, but are not limited to, affiliates or other department members available to teach courses, department and college/school service needs, and monetary funding. The number of sabbaticals granted will vary from year to year, depending on exogenous forces such as budget, enrollment, and/or departmental workforce. These numbers will be determined by Department Chairs, Deans, and ultimately, the Provost. Additional limitations may be applicable, such as rules regarding percentages of department and/or college/school faculty that may simultaneously be on sabbatical leave. These will be determined at the department and/or college/school level.

Using Watermark for the Sabbatical Application Process

Like with RTP/PTR reviews, Watermark is used by MSU Denver to usher faculty through the sabbatical leave process. If you already have your CV information uploaded to Watermark, you will only need to update the information (as needed) and add information about your requested sabbatical to the “Sabbatical Leave” screen. The tool will pull data from the various data entry screens in order to generate the Sabbatical Leave Application, which includes CV information as well as information specific to the application for sabbatical leave.

Discover more about MSU Denver

Request Information

Ready to find out what MSU Denver can do for you? We’ve got you covered.

Academic Programs

200+ undergraduate, graduate, and non-degree customizable paths to choose from.

Apply now

Wherever you’re heading, your road begins here. Let’s go.