Draft 2-9-12

Evaluation of Faculty Members

If you have been "fathered" to the old policy please follow this link.

I. REFERENCE

PPM 3-62 - Evaluation of University Personnel

PPM 9-9 – Due Process/General Statement

R481 – Regent’s Policy: Academic Freedom, Professional Responsibility, Tenure, Termination,

and Post-Tenure Review

II. POLICY   POST-TENURE REVIEW

A. Departmental Interviews Purpose

The post-tenure review shall be based on criteria separately defined from the award of tenure with the intent of:

1.    demonstrating the tenured faculty member’s growth and development in the discipline;

2.      communicating to the faculty member specific areas in need of improvement related to

performance in scholarship, teaching, and service, and

3.      enhancing each individual's future productivity.

B. Procedures

After tenure is granted, faculty will be evaluated every Every three   five  years, or more often at the discretion of the department chair or dean or at the request of the faculty member., faculty members shall meet with their department chair for an interview covering the recent performance of the faculty member. Goals of the interviews include finding ways to help faculty members improve their performance, finding ways the University might better support faculty members, and discussing individual, department, and University goals and expectations Each College Tenure document shall specify procedures to administer a review of the work of each tenured faculty member in a manner and frequency consistent with institutional and professional accreditation standards. The criteria for such review shall include multiple indices, and be discipline- and role-specific, as appropriate, to evaluate:

1.      teaching, through student, collegial, and administrative assessment.

2.      the quality of scholarly and creative performance and/or research productivity. 

3.      service to the profession, school and community.

Teaching performance should be a priority item for discussion. To provide a focus for discussion and better inform the chair, faculty members shall bring to the interview a summary of their most recent activities in teaching, in scholarship, and in service (vita update since the last review).

The chair shall send a written summary report of the interviews to the dean for inclusion in the personnel file. That report shall include a listing of the major items of accomplishment of each faculty member and identify deficiencies, if any, for inclusion in the personnel file. An individualized copy of the report shall be sent to the faculty member, who may make a response to the dean.

C. Student Evaluations

In an attempt to chart ongoing teaching performance, student evaluations shall be administered and compiled by an impartial third party.  Each year, all contract, non-tenured, and adjunct faculty members will have student evaluations administered in every course taught, and each tenured faculty member shall have student evaluations administered in at least two of the courses. The two courses to be evaluated each year will be determined through consultation between each faculty member and his/her department chair. If the faculty member and the chair cannot come to agreement on which two courses should be evaluated by the students, the choice of courses to be evaluated will be subject to binding arbitration by the dean, after consultation with the faculty member and the chair. The results of those evaluations shall be seen by the chair, the faculty member, and those specified in the review process. The summaries will be kept on file in the office of the chair.
 

D. Remedial Actions Based on Post-Tenure Review

If, as a result of the post-tenure review process, the faculty member is found to not be meeting the minimum standards required of a tenured member of his or her discipline, he or she is responsible for remediating the deficiencies, and both the University and College are expected to assist through developmental opportunities. A faculty member's failure to successfully remediate deficiencies may result in disciplinary action governed by due process pursuant to the standards described in PPMs 9-9 through 9-17.

Evaluation of University Personnel

POLICY

It shall be the practice to evaluate all University personnel periodically.

A. The evaluation of administrators shall include (1) performance reviews: regular, low-profile reviews of incumbent administrators for essentially "formative" purposes and (2) reappointment reviews occurring near or at the end of a stated term and bearing directly on the question of continuation in office.

B. Faculty shall undergo an evaluation at least every two five years (see PPM 8-11).

C. Staff personnel shall be evaluated at least annually. Criteria and procedures are to be developed by the institution.

D. The evaluation of personnel may be used in the determination of salary, promotion, tenure, merit, retention, etc.