Faculty Evaluation Process and Standards

Faculty Evaluation Criteria and Documentation

Members of the full-time teaching faculty are regularly evaluated on performance of their faculty assignments and the progress they have made in their professional development.  Semester summaries of each faculty’s teaching evaluations are sent to and reviewed by department chairs.  Department chairs’ evaluations are reviewed by the dean of the school or college.

Annually, department chairs or deans are expected to have at least one evaluation interview with each non-tenured member of their department.  The interview includes a discussion of teaching evaluations, course syllabi, scholarly development, and service to the department, the University and the community.  The results of these interviews are transmitted to the dean of the school or college and then to the Vice President for Academic Affairs for placement in the faculty member’s file.  The Vice President for Academic Affairs is responsible for reviewing these evaluations and ensuring that they are included in the appropriate files.

Formal evaluations by the ART Committee are carried out in the second, fourth, and sixth years for all faculty, before promotion in rank and before granting continuous (tenured) contracts.  Following the sixth-year review, each faculty member will be evaluated every five years by the ART Committee.

Faculty evaluations cover four major categories of performance:

1. Teaching Effectiveness
2. Effectiveness as an Adviser
3. Scholarly Productivity and Professional Service
4. University and Community Service.
Of the four, teaching effectiveness is the most important and is weighted most heavily.

  1. Teaching Effectiveness

    At California Lutheran University, teaching effectiveness is the most important attribute of a faculty member.  An effective teacher is one who:

    - fulfills basic teaching obligations;
    - has command of the subject and knowledge of current developments in the discipline;
    - relates the subject to other areas of knowledge;
    - effectively communicates with students;
    - plans and executes a substantive, well-organized course;
    - stimulates critical and creative thinking;
    - actively engages  students in the learning process;
    - designs assignments and assesses student performance consistent with high academic standards;
    - uses a variety of teaching methods where appropriate;
    - makes efforts to improve overall teaching.

    Teaching effectiveness is assessed by:

    - the candidates’ presentation in their dossiers of teaching philosophy, materials, methods and self-evaluation;
    - student course evaluations;
    - peer and chair evaluations based on classroom observations;
    - evidence of efforts to improve teaching.
  2. Effectiveness as an Adviser 

    An effective adviser is one who:

    - is knowledgeable about all curricular requirements;
    - is available to students by maintaining adequate open office hours;
    - helps students select a course of study;
    - accepts a proportionate share of advisees;
    - guides students to integrate co-curricular and extracurricular activities into their academic and career planning;
    - provides students in the faculty member’s classes with additional consultation and guidance outside of class.

    Evidence of effectiveness as an adviser is provided through:

    - self-evaluation;
    - evaluation by chair or program director based on input from students, faculty, and staff;
    - student evaluations.
  3. Scholarly Productivity and Professional Service

    A productive scholar engages in a sustained program of research, scholarship, or creative activities in his or her field of expertise and presents the results in publications or other appropriate public or professional forums.

    Criteria for scholarly productivity:

    - require a high level of scholarly  expertise;
    - are in a documented form;
    - are peer reviewed.

    Professional service includes:

    - serving as a reviewer for a professional journal;
    - holding office in a professional association.

    Evidence of scholarly productivity and professional service is provided through:

    - documentation of such activities as advanced study, research, publication, leadership in scholarly and professional organizations, and artistic performance;
    - reviews or statements of evaluation by professional peers;
    - presentations or publications in juried venues or organs such as journals, books, or conferences;
    - awards, grants, or commendations.
  4. Service
    1. University Service
      1. Faculty members who are effective contributors to the life of the University:
        1. regularly participate in academic gatherings, faculty governance, and other forms of service    
        2. demonstrate initiative, leadership, or sustained responsibility in some area that contributes to    the vitality of the University community.
      2. Evidence of institutional service is provided through:
        1.  self-report of activities;
        2. evaluation by the chair/program director;
        3. evaluation by peers.
    2. Community Service
      1. Faculty members who are active contributors to the community work with people and/or organizations in their professional field or in communities.  They might:
        1. present lectures to community groups;
        2. hold leadership positions or provide service in community, religious or political organization activities;
        3. participate in non-profit organizations designed to serve the general public;
        4. serve community groups in a professional capacity.
      2. Evidence of community service is provided through:
        1. self-report of activities, adequately documented;
        2. awards;
        3. testimony by leaders of community/professional groups.

Second- and Fourth-Year Reviews

Purpose
The second- and fourth-year reviews are designed to assist faculty in their development as teachers, advisers, scholars, and contributing members of the University community as well as to provide faculty with a formal assessment of their performance in each of these areas.

Process

For both second- and fourth-year reviews, the faculty members and their deans and department chairs/program directors are notified that they are candidates for review by the Vice President for Academic Affairs (because of different structures, some academic areas have “department chairs” and other areas have “program directors”). The faculty are sent a packet of guidelines, instructions, and deadlines for preparing their dossiers. At the same time, the deans and department chairs/program directors are sent guidelines and forms for evaluating the candidates.

Candidates submit their dossier directly to Academic Affairs. Academic Affairs will add the course evaluations, peer evaluations, and all other evaluation materials into a confidential file in a secure network folder. Only the ART committee, Dean, and Vice President for Academic Affairs will have access to this confidential file. The Personal Statement section of the dossier is also maintained in the confidential file. Department chairs and program directors will have access to all sections of the dossier except the Personal Statement. The department chair/program director will provide an evaluation of the candidate’s performance in all categories, addressing both strengths and weaknesses and identifying specific goals for improvement. This is submitted directly to Academic Affairs.  

The ART Committee conducts a thorough review of the evaluation materials including the candidate’s dossier, student evaluations, and evaluations by peers, department chair/program director and dean. The ART Committee submits a written report of its evaluation, which covers the candidate’s professional preparation (e.g., degree completion) as well as performance in each of the four areas for evaluation, and its overall assessment of the fourth-year candidate’s progress toward and prospects for tenure for those on probationary contracts.

The report by the ART Committee is sent to the Vice President for Academic Affairs  who then sends the report with a cover letter to the candidate. A copy is provided to the dean and is also placed in the faculty member’s permanent file. The report forms the basis for a conference between the candidate and the Vice President for Academic Affairs if the candidate wishes to review the dossier further.

Sixth-Year Reviews for Non-Tenure Track

Faculty who are on non-tenure track contracts submit a dossier in their sixth year following the same procedures as the promotion and tenure review.   See "Definition of Faculty" section for information on eligibility for promotion to Senior Lecturer.

Promotion Policies, Eligibility, and Criteria

Promotion in academic rank is one way the University encourages, recognizes and rewards faculty members for demonstrated excellence in the performance of their responsibilities. The initial responsibility of applying for advancement in rank and the burden of proof for the advancement rests with the individual faculty member.  Although a ranked faculty member may anticipate advancement in rank during an extended period of productive service at the University, length of service alone does not constitute sufficient reason for promotion.  Promotion is earned and not automatic.

  1. Eligibility for Promotion 
    1. Individual faculty members ordinarily may not apply for advancement until the minimum length of time in the current rank has been completed.
  2. For Advancement to Associate Professor:
    1. A minimum of six years of full-time teaching in a regular, ranked faculty position in a regionally accredited college or university or a minimum of five years of full-time teaching at the rank of assistant professor.
  3. For Advancement to Professor:
    1. A minimum of 10 years of full-time teaching in a regular, ranked faculty position in a regionally accredited college or university or minimum of five years of full-time teaching at the rank of associate professor.
    2. Sabbatical leaves and leaves with pay will count as years in rank toward promotion. Leaves without pay are not counted toward eligibility.
  4. Criteria for Promotion to Rank

Those promoted to each academic rank must consistently fulfill the responsibilities expected of all faculty members. In addition, they must meet the guidelines for each rank below. (See Faculty Evaluation Criteria and Documentation) Faculty members who do not meet all the criteria for promotion to a particular rank should not expect to be promoted to that rank. However, the ART Committee may recommend the waiver of particular guidelines if an individual faculty member’s performance in other areas is so outstanding as to warrant such action.

  1. Assistant Professor
    1. possession of an appropriate earned doctorate or an appropriate terminal professional degree/certification (an MFA for studio art and drama;  a CPA or CMA and an appropriate master’s degree for accounting) from a graduate institution of recognized standing or accomplishments that are considered equivalent, such as outstanding performance in the creative arts or in the business or medical community;
    2. record of good teaching and advising at the rank of instructor;
    3. proven or presumptive potential for scholarly productivity;
    4. record of service to the University and the community.
  2. Associate Professor
    1. possession of an appropriate earned doctorate or an appropriate terminal professional degree/certification (an MFA for studio art and drama;  a CPA or CMA and an appropriate master’s degree for accounting) from a graduate institution of recognized standing or accomplishments that are considered equivalent, such as outstanding performance in the creative arts or in the business or medical community;
      1. evidence of sustained teaching and advising effectiveness;
      2. evidence of scholarship or creative work which has been published or presented at appropriate professional forums;
      3. record of continued service to the University and the community.
  3. Professor
    1. possession of an appropriate earned doctorate or appropriate terminal professional degree/certification (an MFA for studio art and drama; a CPA or CMA and an appropriate master’s degree for accounting) from a graduate institution of recognized standing or widely acclaimed accomplishments in the field, such as outstanding performance in the creative arts or the business or medical community;
    2. evidence of outstanding teaching and advising effectiveness;
    3. evidence of a sustained program of scholarship or creative work which has been published or presented at appropriate professional forums since having attained the rank of Associate Professor;
    4. record of sustained and significant service to the University, especially in a leadership role, and service to the community.

Tenure Policy, Eligibility, and Criteria

Promotion in academic rank is one way the University encourages, recognizes and rewards faculty members for demonstrated excellence in the performance of their responsibilities. The initial responsibility of applying for advancement in rank and the burden of proof for the advancement rests with the individual faculty member. Although a ranked faculty member may anticipate advancement in rank during an extended period of productive service at the University, length of service alone does not constitute sufficient reason for promotion. Promotion is earned and not automatic.

  1. Eligibility for Tenure

    The University’s decision to offer a tenure-track appointment to a candidate should be based on a good-faith assessment at the time of the appointment that the needs and resources of the University, as well as the overall tenure quota, provide reasonable assurance that the candidate can make regular progress toward achieving tenure. 

    Anyone holding a tenurable (probationary) faculty appointment is eligible for tenure.  Ordinarily, tenure is granted after a probationary period of teaching at California Lutheran University.  In rare cases, tenure may be granted on appointment of a faculty member who has been tenured or has held equivalent faculty status elsewhere.

    Beginning with an appointment to probationary status, the probationary period shall ordinarily not exceed six full-time academic years of service.  Prior service in full-time, regular (not adjunct or special appointment) positions at the rank of assistant professor or higher at other regionally accredited colleges and universities may be included.  The amount of credit given toward tenure for previous teaching is granted by the President upon recommendation by the Vice President for Academic Affairs.  Normally, this credit will not exceed three years.  The precise terms of any credit given for previous teaching experience and the length of the probationary period to be fulfilled at California Lutheran University must be stated in writing at the time of the initial appointment.  Normally, it is incorporated into the initial letter of appointment and in the contract.

    Sabbatical leaves and leaves with pay count toward promotion and tenure.  All other leaves normally do not.

    Although the University may recognize superior service by offering an early grant of tenure, the individual faculty member may not apply for tenure until he or she is in the sixth year of probation or the equivalent as defined above.
  2. Criteria for Tenure 

    The University’s decision to grant tenure to a candidate is based on two considerations:  the University’s needs and financial resources and the qualifications of the candidate for tenure.
    1. University Need Requirement and Tenure Quota

      Tenure is granted only in cases when it is judged likely that for the foreseeable future there will continue to be a demand for the particular expertise of the faculty member and that University resources are sufficient to support continued reappointment of the individual.  This judgment is based upon an assessment of such factors as departmental and University enrollment projections, likely directions of the curriculum, tenure patterns of faculty in the candidate’s department and University financial projections. 

      In addition, consideration must be given to the current University policy that no more than 75% of the full-time faculty may be tenured at any one time (excluding professional librarians).  A decision not to grant tenure, therefore, does not necessarily reflect an unfavorable judgment of the candidate. 

      These criteria for election to tenure should be included in the letter of appointment for new probationary faculty.
    2. Individual Requirements 

      Candidates for tenure will be expected to have: 

      - consistently fulfilled the faculty responsibilities outlined in Section Two.IV. of this handbook;
      - earned an appropriate doctorate in the field or an appropriate terminal professional degree/certification (an MFA for studio art and drama;  a CPA or CMA and an appropriate master’s degree for accounting) from a graduate institution of recognized standing; or completed accomplishments that are considered equivalent, such as outstanding performance in the creative arts or in the business or medical community.  Although the University reserves the right to waive this requirement in unusual cases, faculty members who fail to meet this requirement should not expect to be granted tenure;
      - demonstrated their effectiveness in teaching, advising, scholarship, and  service through a satisfactory review and proven their potential for sustaining long-term excellence in these areas.

      Because the actual conferral of tenure is an affirmative act by the Board of Regents, the individual must formally request tenure during the sixth year of probationary status or its equivalent as defined in this faculty handbook.  This request for review is ordinarily made upon notification by the Vice President for Academic Affairs of the faculty member’s eligibility for review, which should be made no later than September 1 of the sixth probationary year.  If timely notice is not given, it is the faculty member’s duty to bring such failure to the attention of the ART Committee and the Vice President for Academic Affairs.

Procedures for Promotion and Tenure Review

  1. Initiation of Candidacy
    1. Academic Affairs will email all faculty reminding them of the deadline for initiating candidacy for promotion and/or tenure. It is the faculty’s responsibility to initiate this process by submitting the Declaration for Promotion form (found online athttp://www.callutheran.edu/academic_affairs/faculty_resources/art_information/6year.php) to their Department Chair/Program Director and Dean for signature and then to the Vice President for Academic Affairs by May 31st prior to  the sixth probationary year.
  2. Confirmation of Candidacy
    1. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will notify all candidates who have submitted a Declaration for Promotion form and have met eligibility requirements of their responsibility for compiling a dossier and confidential file, based on the guidelines provided. Each year the Vice President for Academic Affairs will publish the deadlines for submission of the dossier and confidential file.
  3. Promotion and Tenure Review Files
    1. Evaluations by the ART Committee will be based on evidence contained in the promotion/tenure review file. This file will consist of two parts: the dossier prepared by the faculty member, and the confidential file containing material solicited by the ART Committee including the file of student course and advising evaluations. All of these documents are available to the Dean, the ART Committee, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President. The department chair/program director has access to all sections of the dossier, except the personal statement. The department chair/program director does not have access to any other documents in the review process.
  4. Promotion and Tenure Dossier

    Candidates primarily make their case for promotion or tenure via the promotion/tenure dossier.  Guidelines for preparing the dossier are provided to candidates at the time of confirmation of candidacy.  Each dossier should contain:

    - a personal statement;
    - a current curriculum vitae;
    - sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the candidate meets or exceeds the criteria for teaching and advising effectiveness, scholarly productivity, and institutional and community service.
  5. Confidential File
    1. The confidential file contains evaluations solicited by the Vice President for Academic Affairs on behalf of the ART Committee. Details regarding contents of this file are specified in the promotion/tenure packet, “Guidelines for Promotion/Tenure Review,” . These evaluations include:
      1. teaching and general evaluations from tenured faculty inside and outside the department;
      2. optional letters from people inside or outside the University;
      3. evaluations by the department chair/program director and dean;
      4. evaluations from student advisees;
      5. copies of all of the faculty member’s California Lutheran University course evaluations;
      6. course loads and grade distributions.
    2. No unsolicited material will be accepted for this file, and this part of the file is closed to the candidate.
  6. Evaluation and Action
    1. The ART Committee reviews all the information in the dossier and the confidential file, and then interviews each candidate. The committee evaluates each candidate for promotion and/or tenure based on the general faculty evaluation criteria.
    2. The elected faculty members of the ART Committee submit to the Vice President for Academic Affairs their recommendation in each case. The vice president transmits the recommendations of the committee along with his or her own recommendation to the President. The President then makes known his or her recommendation to the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Regents. Following the action of the Academic Affairs Committee and the entire Board of Regents, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will notify the candidate in a timely manner, but no later than April 1.
    3. When an application for promotion and/or tenure is approved by the Board of Regents, the promotion in rank will take effect at the beginning of the next contract period.
  7. Appeals

    If an application for tenure is denied, the faculty member, department chair/program director or dean may initiate an appeal in one of two ways:
    1. By requesting a second consideration by the President, who may in turn require the ART Committee to reconsider the case, or;
    2. By filing a grievance with the Vice President for Academic Affairs, asking the Grievance Committee to review the process and advise the President regarding whether or not the process has been fair. Formal appeals may be made only on procedural, not substantive grounds.  The Grievance Committee will not substitute its judgment on the merits of the case for promotion/tenure but rather determine whether the decision was the result of adequate consideration.  (See Step III of  Grievance Procedures)

Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review Policy and Procedures

Following the 2/4/6 year review process, faculty are reviewed by ART every 6 years. The purposes of this review are to nurture faculty growth and development, to maintain quality teaching and advising, and to sustain meaningful contributions on the part of each faculty member to the life of the university community. The post-tenure/post-6th year review provides an opportunity for faculty to engage in regular self-reflection on their academic career and to receive feedback from peers in order that these purposes may be achieved.

  1. Eligibility for Post-tenure/Post-6th Year Review

    Members of the faculty will be reviewed every six years from the granting of tenure, or six years from the most recent promotion or most recent sixth year review, whichever is later. If a faculty member is a member of the ART Committee at the time he or she is eligible for Post Tenure/Post-6th Year review, the review ill be postponed until the year after the faculty member leaves the ART Committee.
  2. Criteria for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year Review

    Candidates for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review are expected to demonstrate that in the past six years they have:
    1. fulfilled the faculty responsibilities outlined in Faculty Responsibilities portion of this handbook;
    2. maintained their teaching effectiveness, effectiveness as an adviser/mentor, scholarly productivity and University/community service and proven their potential for sustaining excellence in these areas.

      In areas other than teaching, the committee will recognize that long-term faculty may reapportion their productivity, based on their talents and interests, to include greater contribution in either scholarship or university service and leadership within faculty governance.
  3. Procedures
    1. Initiation of Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year Review

      The Vice President for Academic Affairs will notify faculty by September 15 of the review year of their responsibility for compiling a dossier based on guidelines provided to them.
    2. Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year Review Files

      An evaluation by the ART Committee will be based on a Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review dossier.  The file will consist of two parts:
      1. a dossier, prepared by the faculty member in accordance with forms and guidelines  provided by the ART Committee and kept on file with the office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs.  The dossier should  include:

        - a personal statement;
        - a current curriculum vitae;
        - sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the faculty member meets or exceeds the criteria for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review.
         
      2. a confidential file that contains evaluations solicited by the Vice President for Academic Affairs on behalf of the ART Committee.  These evaluations include:

        - evaluations by faculty inside of the department;
        - evaluations by the department chair/program director and dean;
        - Copies of all of the faculty member's California Lutheran University course evaluations;
        - Course loads, enrollment and grade distributions

        No unsolicited material will be accepted for this file and this part of the file is closed to the faculty member under review.
  4. Evaluation and Action

    The ART Committee reviews all the information in the dossier and the confidential file. The committee evaluates each faculty member based on the criteria for Post-Tenure/Post-6th Year review (F.2. above).

    The elected faculty members of the ART Committee submit their evaluation in each case to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.  The ART Committee will communicate to the faculty member in writing its evaluation and suggestions for improvement where improvement is deemed necessary.  Faculty are expected to take the recommendations of the ART Committee seriously and implement suggestions as necessary. 
  5. Appeals

    The faculty member may initiate an appeal or grievance if he or she feels the process has been unfair.
  6. Personnel Records

    Because appointment as a ranked faculty member may lead to a continuing relationship with the University, it is essential that there be adequate and detailed documentation to support every action involving each individual, especially those actions pertaining to appointment, promotion, tenure, layoff and dismissal.

    Two sets of files are maintained for each ranked faculty member in the office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs.
    1. The Official Personnel File

      The official personnel file contains the following basic documents:
      1. letters of application (originals);
      2. appointment and acceptance letters (originals);
      3. personal data information;
      4. citizenship or legal residency documents (I-9 and specific identification required);
      5. hiring transaction documents;
      6. performance review, student and other nonconfidential evaluations and letters of recommendation;
      7. annual contracts and payroll change documents (salary increases or changes, changes in status);
      8. current official transcript or verification of degree;
      9. resume (updated every three years);
      10. documented information that the faculty member or academic dean wishes to place in this file on professional background or accomplishments.

        This file is available on a need-to-know basis only to the Board of Regents, university legal counsel, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, chair of the ART Committee, the Director of Human Resources, the individual faculty member, or others specifically designated by the signature of the President.

        The faculty member, may, for the cost of duplication, obtain copies of any non-confidential materials in the official personnel file.  Any such copies will be made by a staff member of the Academic Affairs Office.

        The official personnel file will be kept in strictest confidence and will be available for confidential use only to the individuals indicated above.  However, for a valid reason, the faculty member may authorize in writing access to his or her file by a person not indicated above.

        Further, the University may permit access to and copying from such files pursuant to lawful requests and identification of federal or state agencies relevant to investigations, hearings, or other proceedings pending before such agencies or the courts.
    2. The Confidential File

      The confidential file, which contains confidential statements of assessment or evaluations, is also maintained for each ranked faculty member.  It is available for inspection only by the ART Committee, the deans and department chairs, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President.  By university policy, letters and statements of recommendation and evaluation of qualifications for employment, retention, or promotion are confidential within the limits of the law and are not available to the faculty member.
©