Department Role and Scope
Role, Scope, Criteria, Standards, and Procedures
for the Formal Review of Tenurable Faculty
Department of Mathematical Sciences
ROLE AND SCOPE STATEMENTS
100 APPROVALS REQUIRED
Role, scope, criteria, standards and procedures documents shall be approved by the department faculty, department head, the college review committee, the college dean, the UPT Committee, and the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs. [FH 622.]
112.2 Role and Scope of the Department of Mathematical Sciences
The Department of Mathematical Sciences is recognized as a leading department in mathematics, mathematics education, and statistics in the northern Rocky Mountain region. Bachelors, masters, and doctoral graduates in all areas are following successful careers in industry, governments, and academia.
The department has a multifaceted role on campus and in Montana. The Department of Mathematical Sciences has the largest instructional component on campus, providing about 11% of the total student credit hours. It provides core courses and numerous service courses. Students from a wide variety of disciplines take mathematics or statistics to satisfy requirements in their respective disciplines. The department also has a large developmental education program, which enables under-prepared students to advance to college-level mathematics and science courses.
The department offers B.S., M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in pure mathematics, applied mathematics, and statistics. The department also offers a math education option for the M.S. degree.
Mathematical research at MSU is focused primarily on applicable analysis. Considerable effort is expended to develop topics in mathematical analysis, which are reinforced by applicability and utilized for problem solving in science and engineering. Research in statistics encompasses a broad range of theoretical and applied topics. Because all the statisticians are actively engaged in interdisciplinary work, much of the statistical research is directed toward practical problems. Mathematics education faculty are active in both qualitative and quantitative experimental research areas. These include, paradigm shifts in mathematics education and the use of multiple embodiments utilizing modeling and technology. Each group is very active in publishing research results in appropriate refereed journals. Also, each group is active in pursuing and obtaining extramural funding to enhance research efforts. Notable outside granting agencies that have funded research in the department of Mathematical Sciences include NSF, NIH, EOA, ONR, AFOSR, and USDA.
Hand in hand with the research function is a service or consulting role. The department provides mathematical and statistical assistance to research scientists in other University departments and to schools, off-campus firms, and government agencies. The department is a leader in implementing statewide and national projects for mathematics teachers and has a large summer masters degree program for secondary teachers. Many research conferences drawing mathematicians from U.S. and foreign universities have been hosted by the department.
113 ACADEMIC PROGRAMS
113.2 Academic Programs of the Department of Mathematical Sciences
The department offers bachelors' degrees in mathematics, mathematics education, and statistics. The department also offers masters of science degrees and Ph.D.'s in mathematics and statistics.
114 RESEARCH AND CREATIVE ACTIVITY
114.2 Special Areas of Department Research and Creative Activity
Mathematics: The mathematics group encompasses fifteen tenure track faculty and is responsible for teaching and supervising roughly 60% of the student credit hours offered by the department. The relative low cost of teaching and the large number of courses offered by the department is a consequence of the graduate program: virtually all of our graduate students are GTA's. There are three broadly defined areas of research activity within the mathematics group: numerical-computational analysis, applied mathematics, and dynamical systems. Work in each of these areas is supported by outside funding. Nationally funded grants have been separately awarded to four of the faculty and several others are partially supported by funded research projects in other department and in other universities. Many research conferences, drawing mathematicians from U.S. and foreign universities, have been hosted by members of the mathematics group. The mathematics group has a component of service to the mathematics education and statistics programs in that it staffs certain undergraduate and graduate courses needed primarily by those programs, and participates in their graduate committees and in their comprehensive examination process.
Because of our breadth, we are able to offer well rounded undergraduate and graduate programs that lead to the B.S. in mathematics (statistics option), M.S. in statistics, and Ph.D. in statistics degrees. Our graduates can look forward to well paying positions and satisfying careers. The National Science Foundation expects a shortage of 11,000 statisticians in the 1990's. Our B.S. program prepares students for work in industry and government as senior level statisticians, for positions as teachers and researchers in colleges and universities, and for work as independent consultants. The statistics group is also responsible for teaching introductory and other service courses that are vital to the education of Montana's citizens, especially future scientists and engineers. Each member of the statistics faculty is active in research on statistical theory and methods, in collaborative research with scientists from outside the department, and in statistical consulting. Many of these research projects have received state and/or federal funding.
Mathematics Education: The mathematics education group consists of five tenure track faculty. Two of them are assigned part-time to the Department of Education. Two faculty are currently working full time on the Systemic Initiative for Montana Mathematics and Science (SIMMS), a major NSF project. One faculty is the co-PI and works full time on the Systemic Teacher Excellence Preparation (STEP), another major NSF grant. Other grant areas include a Department of Education nationally funded project for Native American teachers and reservation students called the American Indians in Mathematics (AIM project), and several Eisenhower funded in-service grants. Each member of the faculty is active in research. Current research areas include mathematical methods and technology interfacing, paradigm shifts in mathematics education, and iconic modeling interfaced with technology.
The undergraduate program in mathematics education is the largest in the state and one of the largest in the Northwest. In terms of quantity of graduates, the summer masters program is the only such program in Montana for secondary mathematics teachers and is the largest in the Northwest. The cooperative doctoral program with the Department of Education is very active with three students completing doctoral degrees this year.
115 OUTREACH/PUBLIC SERVICE
115.2 Special Areas of Department Outreach/Public Service
CRITERIA AND STANDARDS
"Criteria" are the variables examined in an evaluation. "Standards" are the levels or degrees of performance which measure success in meeting criteria. [FH 602.00]
200 CRITERIA FOR THE FORMAL REVIEW OF FACULTY PERFORMANCE
211 TEACHING CRITERIA
211.3 Department Teaching Criteria
For the Department of Mathematical Sciences, criteria will include student teaching evaluations, including narrative comments. Student teaching evaluations shall be obtained for all classes taught during the review period. The cover summary forms of the "Knapp" and "Aleamoni" instruments will be included in the departmental report. Also, the evaluations will be summarized with close attention paid to narrative comments. In addition, the complete set of actual students evaluations for every course taught during the review period will be available for review by the College Promotion and Tenure Committee if requested.
The candidate may choose to submit a "portfolio" of materials related to teaching and enhancement of the curriculum. This is one way to provide evidence of an innovative component in his or her teaching. Any such materials submitted will be reviewed by the Review Committee and evaluation by outside reviewers shall be solicited by the department head or Review Committee.
212 RESEARCH CRITERIA
212.3 Department Research Criteria
In the Department of Mathematical Sciences, criteria for evaluating research/activity
1) refereed articles (published, accepted, or under review),
2) reviewing, refereeing, or editing activity,
3) talks given,
4) research funding obtained,
5) books or monographs,
6) any other evidence thought relevant.
213 OUTREACH/PUBLIC SERVICE CRITERIA
213.3 Department Criteria
Service activities are expected of every faculty member, but responsibilities may vary widely. Prior to the tenure review, service expectations are reduced in order to allow the faculty member to develop his or her teaching research.
Evidence of the service may include:
1) service to the Department of Mathematical Sciences,
2) service to the college and university,
3) service to the profession,
4) professional service to the public,
5) consulting activity,
6) any other relevant forms of service.
221 Effectiveness in Teaching Activity
221.3 Department Stanard(s) of Effectiveness on Teaching Activity
"Effectiveness" means meeting or exceeding the standards of the department and college, discipline or profession as appropriate for the individual's assignment. "Excellence" means achieving substantial recognition from students, clients, colleagues, and/or peers in the profession, appropriate to the activity. [FH 602.00]
A. Standard(s) of Effectiveness in Teaching for Faculty with Instructional Expectations
Faculty will use the Knapp form or its equivalent for purposes of evaluation of measuring student satisfaction. The department expectation is that scores from student evaluation instruments do not fall below the university average for the type of course taught. Grants to support the development of new courses or research aimed at improving overall teaching performance will be considered meritorious.
B. Standard(s) of Effectiveness in Teaching for Faculty with Professional Practice Expectations
222 EFFECTIVENESS IN RESEARCH/CREATIVE ACTIVITY
222.3 Department Standard(s) of Effectiveness in Research/Creative Activity
A. Standard(s) of Effectiveness in Research/Creative Activity for Faculty with Instructional Expectations
In the mathematical sciences, effectiveness is judged primarily by published work-usually refereed articles. The faculty
member is expected to have established an on-going record of independent research that has led to a regular and continuous record of publication in refereed journals. It is expected that the results of these publications will be presented at conferences and professional meetings. A record of seeking extramural funds to support research activities is also expected.
B. Standard(s) of Effectiveness in Research/Creative Activity for Faculty with Professional Practice Expectations
223 EFFECTIVENESS IN OUTREACH/PUBLIC SERVICE
223.3 Department Standard(s) of Effectiveness in Outreach/Public Service
A. Standard(s) of Effectiveness in Outreach/Public Service for Faculty with InstructionalExpectations
Effectiveness is judged primarily by contributions to the department, college, and the university. To meet the standards of effectiveness for promotion and tenure, the candidates service role must be comparable to that of a faculty member with similar assignments, retained, tenured, or promoted here or in comparable departments at other universities in the past several years.
B. Standard(s) of Effectiveness in Outreach/Public Service for Faculty with Professional Practice Expectations
230 STANDARDS OF EXCELLENCE
231 EXCELLENCE IN TEACHING
231.3 Department Standard(s) of Excellence in Teaching
A. Excellence in Teaching for Department Faculty with Instructional Expectations
Faculty performance in teaching will be judged excellent if it receives substantial recognition from Department faculty and other colleagues in the University or profession, and if the candidate's documentation includes evidence of significant teaching innovation, such as making novel connections among bodies of knowledge, linking theory and practice, creativity adapting new instructional technologies or pedagogical methods , or developing innovative approaches that foster critical thinking, problem-solving ability, or written and oral communication skills.
B. Excellence in Teaching for Department Faculty with Professional Practice Expectations
232 EXCELLENCE IN RESEARCH/CREATIVE ACTIVITY
232.3 Department Standard(s) of Excellence in Research/Creative Activity
A. Excellence in Research/Creative Activity for Department Faculty with Instructional Expectations
Faculty performance in research will be judged excellent if it receives substantial national or international recognition from peers and colleagues as having made a substantial contribution to the candidate's discipline. Evidence of the peer recognition may be found in reviews in professional journals and the receipt of competitive awards.
B. Excellence in Research/Creative Activity for Department Faculty with Professional Practice Expectations
233 EXCELLENCE IN OUTREACH/PUBLIC SERVICE
233.3 Department Standards of Excellence in Outreach/Public Service
A. Excellence in Outreach/Public Service for Department Faculty with Instructional Expectations
Excellence is judged primarily by contributions to the department, the college, and the university. To meet the standards of excellence the candidates service/outreach component must receive substantial recognition for exceeding the standard for effectiveness.
B. Excellence in Outreach/Public Service for Department Faculty with Professional Practice Expectations
240.1 DEMONSTRATION OF EFFECTIVENESS AND EXCELLENCE
Department and college criteria for retention, tenure and promotion may recognize differential staffing and allow for individual uniqueness in faculty assignments. Standards should not make all faculty perform alike, but commensurate quality must be expected for all equivalent reviews. [FH 622.00]
240.2 The procedures for establishing the departmental report on any candidate will
be developed by the candidate's department.
241 DEMONSTRATION OF EFFECTIVENESS AND EXCELLENCE IN TEACHING
241.3 Department Policies and Procedures
Methods for conducting an in-depth assessment of teaching performance are:
Faculty will use the Knapp evaluation for or its equivalent for purposes of measuring student satisfaction for all courses taught during the review period. Also, the evaluations will be summarized with close attention paid to narrative comments. In addition, the complete set of actual student evaluations for every course taught during the review period will be available for review by the College Promotion and Tenure Committee if requested.
242 DEMONSTRATION OF EFFECTIVENESS AND EXCELLENCE IN RESEARCH/CREATIVE ACTIVITY
242.3 Department Policies and Procedures
Methods for conducting an in-depth assessment of performance in research/creative activity are:
The candidate's vita should separately indicate a) refereed books or book chapters, b) refereed journal articles, c) invited conference presentations, d) contributed conference presentations, e) seminars and/or colloquia, f) grant proposals submitted and grants funded, and g) other. Indicate complete authorship on papers, grants funded, etc. The departmental report also should indicate the quality and reputation of the vehicles in which the candidate publishes. When appropriate, the candidate's contribution to papers and grant proposals should be described and interpreted. Note work in progress or in submission/circulation; evaluate its quality. Letters of reference should especially address an evaluation of the candidate's scholarship/creativity.
Confidential external letters of evaluation (from outside Montana State University Bozeman) are required for tenure and promotion reviews. A minimum of four such letters is required. All letters of evaluation received must be included in the candidate's file. Letters of evaluation should address the candidate's professional potential and accomplishments rather than personal qualities. Specific assessments of scholarship/creativity are essential.
Evaluators should be specialists in the candidate's field and familiar with the usual expectations for faculty performance. Letters from mentors, former colleagues, close collaborators, or personal friends have less credibility and should not be solicited. A majority of the outside evaluators must be selected by the department head and/or departmental committee; a minority may come from a list of names submitted by the candidate. Candidates should not be informed of the identity of outside evaluators in order to protect the confidentiality of the review process.
The external review letters must be requested by the department head and/or the department promotion and tenure committee chair, and must not be solicited by the candidate. The department report should state clearly how external referees were chosen and should include a brief statement of their status in the field. A copy of the letter soliciting outside reviewers must be included in the candidate's file; referees should state either knowledge of or relationship to the candidate, if any.
External evaluators should be sent a copy of the candidate's vita, as well as a selection of relevant publications and/or
unpublished manuscripts, along with other materials, as appropriate. They should be asked to comment specifically on the quality of the candidate's written scholarship and his or her productivity.
243 DEMONSTRATION OF EFFECTIVENESS AND EXCELLENCE IN OUTREACH/PUBLIC SERVICE
243.3 Department Policies and Procedures
Methods for conducting an in-depth assessment of performance in outreach/public service are:
The assessment of service/outreach is largely done internally. If a component of the candidates service/outreach warrants external review, the department will solicit the external review by letter following the same procedures as in the external reviews for research/creativity.
STANDARDS FOR APPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, RETENTION AND TENURE
310 RETENTION AND SPECIAL REVIEW
Faculty members are formally reviewed for retention in their third year of appointment.
Faculty may also be reviewed at times other than those required for third year, tenure, and promotion. [Such a] special review may be recommended to the President by the department review committee, department head, college review committee, college dean, University Promotion and Tenure Committee or the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
If the recommendation is accepted by the President, he or she shall initiate a special review by sending a written notice to the faculty member. The notice of special review shall set forth the nature of the review and identify appropriate deadlines for its conduct. A special review shall be conducted by the departmental review committee or by a special review committee composed of academic faculty. [FH 615.00]
310.3 Department Standards for Retention
The Department standards for retention of faculty members are:
A. effectiveness in the performance of their responsibilities,
B. promise of continuing effectiveness, and
C. if appropriate to the level of review, the promise of attainment of the standards for tenure and promotion, as demonstrated by a clear progression of accomplishment. [FH 640.00]
Faculty members will be reviewed for tenure in their sixth year (or equivalent year if credited for prior service) of full-time service in a tenurable position. No more than three (3) years of full-time service at another institution may be credited toward determining the sixth year of service. The amount of creditable prior service is determined at the time of initial appointment and must be confirmed in writing by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
A faculty member's tenure review scheduled for the sixth year may be extended for good cause under exigent circumstances upon the approval of the faculty member's department head, college dean, and Provost. Extension may be granted for no more than two years and must be agreed to in writing by all parties. [FH 613.00]
321 STANDARDS FOR TENURE
321.1 Standards for Faculty with Instructional Expectations.
A. Department Standards
The Department standards for the award of tenure to faculty with instructional expectations are:
1. demonstrated and sustained effectiveness in the performance of their responsibilities in the three areas of teaching, research/creative activity, and service, appropriate to the assignment as set forth in the letter of hire and role
2. demonstrated potential for sustained effectiveness in each of these areas in the future, and
3. demonstrated potential for achieving excellence in teaching and/or research/creative activity. [FH 651.00]
321.2 Standards for Faculty with Professional Practice Expectations
A. Department Standards
The Department standards for tenure for faculty with professional practice expectations are:
1. demonstrated and sustained effectiveness in the performance of the responsibilities of the assignment as set forth in the letter of hire and the role statements,
2. demonstrated potential of sustained effectiveness in the future, and
3. demonstrated potential for achieving excellence in at least one of the areas of teaching, research/creative activity, or service, appropriate to the responsibilities of the assignment. [FH 652.00]
330 APPOINTMENT AND PROMOTION
Faculty members may be appointed to the rank of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor depending upon their qualification, thus University-wide standards for appointment and promotion vary by rank. [FH 660.00]
Normally, promotion is awarded after the completion of no fewer than five (5) years of service, which is generally considered the minimum time needed to meet the standards for promotion described in 660.00 and in the college and department documents.
Faculty who believe they have met the department, college, and University criteria and standards for promotion and wish to be considered for promotion should submit a formal request for consideration to the department head and department review committee. The department head may also request a faculty member to submit materials for promotion. Since promotion, except in cases of automatic review with tenure, is optional, a faculty member may withdraw his or her materials from further consideration at any time during the review process. [FH 614.00]
331 STANDARDS FOR APPOINTMENT AND PROMOTION TO THE RANK OF ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
331.1 Standards for Faculty with Instructional Expectations
A. Department Standards
To be appointed as an Assistant Professor, a faculty member with instructional expectations shall, at a minimum, have:
1. a terminal degree appropriate to the field or department,
2. demonstrated potential to teach at the undergraduate and/or graduate levels, and
3. qualifications to conduct research/creative activity in a specialized field. [FH 661.01]
331.2 Standards for Faculty with Professional Practice Expectations
A. Department Standards
To be appointed as an Assistant Professor, a faculty member with professional practice expectations shall, at a minimum, have:
1. a terminal degree appropriate to the field or department, and
2. demonstrated potential to carry out the primary duties of his or her assignments. [FH 661.02]
332 STANDARDS FOR APPOINTMENT AND PROMOTION TO THE RANK OF ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR
A candidate of Associate Professor rank shall be expected to be approved for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor simultaneously, unless Associate Professor rank has been previously awarded. [FH 662.00]
332.1 Standards for Faculty with Instructional Expectations
A. Department Standards
To be appointed as an Associate Professor, a faculty member with instructional expectations shall, at a minimum, have:
1. a terminal degree appropriate to the field or department,
2. a record of demonstrated and sustained effectiveness in each of the three areas of teaching, research/creative activity and service, appropriate to the assignment as set forth in the letter of hire and role statements, and
3. demonstrated potential for achieving excellence in teaching and/or research/creative activity. [FH 662.01]
332.2 Standards for Faculty with Professional Practice Expectations
A. Department Standards
To be appointed as an Associate Professor, a faculty member with professional practice expectations shall, at a minimum, have:
1. a terminal degree appropriate to the field or department,
2. a record of demonstrated and sustained effectiveness in the primary responsibilities of the assignment as set forth in the letter of hire and role statements,
3. demonstrated potential for the achievement of excellence in at least one of the three areas of teaching,
research/creative activity, and service. [FH 662.02]
333 STANDARDS FOR APPOINTMENT AND PROMOTION TO THE RANK OF PROFESSOR
333.1 Standards for Faculty with Instructional Expectations
A. Department Standards
To be appointed as a Professor, a faculty member with instructional expectations shall, at a minimum, have:
1. a terminal degree appropriate to the field or department,
2. a record of demonstrated and sustained effectiveness in each of the three areas of teaching, research/creative
activity, and service, appropriate to the assignment, and
3. a record of excellence in teaching and/or research/creative activity. [FH 663.01]
333.2 Standards for Faculty with Professional Practice Expectations:
A. Department Standards
To be appointed as a Professor, a faculty member with professional practice expectations
shall, at a minimum, have:
1. a terminal degree appropriate to the field or department,
2. a record of demonstrated and sustained effectiveness in the primary duties of their assignment,
3. a record of excellence in at least one of the three areas of teaching, research/creative activity, or service as demonstrated by recognition of the outstanding nature of the candidate's contributions to the public, the discipline
and/or profession from peers outside the University. [FH 663.02]
PROCEDURES FOR FORMAL REVIEW OF FACULTY PERFORMANCE
"Substantive review" means an assessment of the merit of a candidate's dossier in terms of the department, college, and University-wide criteria and standards appropriate to the type of review. [FH 802.00]
400 GENERAL PROCEDURES
The review of individual faculty [for retention, tenure, and promotion] is initiated at the department level, where the relevant disciplinary expertise is located, and is then carried to the college and University levels, where successively broader perspectives are employed. [FH 603.05]
401 REVIEW BASED ON EVALUATION OF TOTAL PERFORMANCE
Third year, tenure and promotion reviews are based upon cumulative performance in each area (teaching, research/creative activity, and service) over the total period preceding review. In contrast, annual reviews assess the faculty member's performance averaged over all areas within a year. Thus, a record of having met performance expectations as indicated by Annual Reviews does not necessarily guarantee the candidate has assembled and demonstrated a cumulative record that meets the standards for retention, tenure or promotion. [FH 611.00]
402 MANDATED CONTENTS OF DOCUMENTS
The criteria, standards and procedures documents of the department and college shall, at a minimum, contain the following information:
A. The criteria and standards used to assess faculty members' contributions to the role of the department and evaluate their performance in their assigned responsibilities and in teaching, research/creative activity, and service, according to the type and level of review. (See Section 200 above.)
B. Any quantitative and qualitative expectations in terms of job performance, teaching, research/creative activity, and/or service. (See Section 300 above.)
C. The procedures used in selecting the membership of [college and/or department] review committees. (See Sections 413.1 and 415.1 below.)
D. The department's designation as to courses and presentations which are to be evaluated using student evaluation forms and the evaluation instruments to be used. (See 241 above.)
E. A description of the methods, in addition to student evaluations, to be used to obtain formal, in-depth assessment of a faculty member's teaching performance. (See 241 above.)
F. The type of materials accepted or required in the documentation of research and creative activities and of outreach and public service. (See 242 above.)
G. The dates and times of review. (See 412 below.)
H. The procedures for obtaining outside peer reviews and soliciting internal letters of support/evaluation. (See 243. above and 415.3 below.)
I. The methods for designating and handling confidential materials. [See 415.2 below.] [FH 623.00]
410 PROCEDURES FOR THE CONDUCT OF FORMAL REVIEWS OF FACULTY
The formal review of academic faculty supports the mission and goals of Montana State University-Bozeman and assists faculty in meeting the expectations of the institution. Formal review for retention, tenure and promotion shall be conducted according to the procedures outlined in this section.
Third year, tenure, promotion, and, unless otherwise specified, special reviews are conducted on the following levels: review by department committee, department head, college committee, college dean, University committee, and Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs. [FH 810.00]
College Procedures for Formal Review of Faculty Performance
A. Departments should follow the Uniform Data Format for departments presented in Section 421.2. For third year, tenure, promotion and special reviews, the faculty member must submit to the departmental committee all previous goal statements, annual review documents and previous promotion and tenure review summaries and other materials
relevant to his/her performance.
B. Departments must indicate explicitly the means by which their recommendations are determined. Since different
departments may use different methods, it is essential to CLSPTRC and to the University Promotion and Tenure
Committee to know what those methods are. For example, does the entire department vote, or only certain ranks, or only a departmental promotion and tenure committee? What documents are made available to the voters? What is the vote tally? In addition, the department head's vote and recommendation should be clearly differentiated from the
departmental committee's; and the head's degree of concurrence with the candidate's peers should be clearly stated and supported.
C. Departments must describe the standards used in their department for evaluating candidates in each of the three criteria areas. Included should be a general statement as to what the department expects from all faculty in terms of teaching, scholarship/creativity, and service. Departments should include the candidate's departmental role statement.
D. Dissenting or minority opinions about the candidates by members of the department committee must be explained within the report.
411 MANDATORY CONSIDERATIONS AT ALL LEVELS OF REVIEW
In conducting the review, [promotion and tenure committees of the college and department] shall at a minimum, consider the following:
A. the University criteria and standards described above,
B. the previously approved role and scope, criteria and standards document of the college,
C. the previously approved role and scope, criteria and standards document of the department,
D. the letter of hire and any subsequent faculty role statements, including any differential staffing/differential assignment, and
E. in cases of review for promotion and tenure, the written evaluations of external peer reviewers.[FH 811.00]
414 RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT HEAD
The department head shall determine, to the best of her or his ability, whether the candidate's preceding review was conducted in substantial compliance with the procedures set forth by the department, college and this Handbook. The department head shall also conduct an independent and substantive review of the candidate's dossier and make recommendations regarding retention, tenure, and/or promotion. In cases of non-concurrence with the preceding review, the recommendation shall include a written rationale for non-concurrence.
The department head is also responsible for:
A. Accurately describing, in the initial letter of hire, the primary duties, responsibilities and conditions of employment,
including the instructional or professional practice expectations of the appointment and years of credit toward tenure, of the faculty member.
B. Informing the faculty member of the University, college, and department role and scope, criteria and standards
documents, which form the basis of formal review.
C. Ensuring that each faculty member has a copy of the University, college, and department documents related to annual review, retention, tenure, and promotion.
The documents in C, as well as the faculty handbook, are given to the candidate under review. The candidate is responsible for having read these materials.
D. Preparing role statements, after negotiation with the faculty member that accurately describe the faculty member's current responsibilities, including any agreement regarding differential assignments which have been approved by the dean and Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
E. Informing faculty members of the applicable time lines for review.
The department will follow the guidelines and deadlines set by the college dean and the provost. These deadlines are communicated orally by the department head to the review committee, as well as the candidate.
F. Providing the department review committee with information and materials essential to their deliberations, according to department, college and University procedures.
The department will provide copies of all previous reviews, as well as all teaching evaluations and
annual reviews that have occurred since the candidate's last review.
G. Forwarding the candidate's dossier, including recommendation(s), to the college dean and sending a copy of the
recommendation(s) to the candidate.
H. Maintaining complete, accurate and up-to-date files on each faculty member. [FH 814.00]
415 RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
Each department shall establish a "departmental review committee" to consider the dossier submitted by each candidate for review and formulate its recommendation for retention, tenure, and/or promotion.[FH 813.00]
415.1 Membership and Procedures for Selection
departmental review committee shall be composed only of tenured or tenurable faculty at least a majority of whom shall be elected by departmental faculty. The committee shall have twenty five percent (25%) female and/or minority representation whenever possible. No faculty member shall serve on the committee during the review of her or his own dossier.
The department head may be present at committee meetings at the discretion of the committee. The department head may present data that is essential to the committee's deliberations, but shall not be present when the committee votes. [FH 813.01]
Each year the department will elect a Promotion and Tenure Review committee from the faculty. If the elected committee is not at least 25% female or minority, the department head will appoint an additional female or minority member. The data for each review will be gathered by the candidate and a two or three-person fact-finding subcommittee selected by committee. The department head will attend the deliberations of the Review Committee as a non-voting member. The recommendation of the departmental Review Committee will be clearly differentiated from the recommendation of the department head.
415.2 Responsibilities of the Committee
The department committee shall review all submitted materials and may solicit and obtain additional materials it deems necessary to make a thorough and substantive review of the candidate's qualifications. [The] committee shall conduct a fair, objective, independent, and substantive review of the candidates' dossiers based on department, college, and University criteria and standards. (See 600.00.) [FH 813.00]
Each candidate shall submit a list of persons from whom the department committee or department head may solicit evaluations and letters of support. Candidates shall not themselves solicit letters of support. [FH 471.01]
The department head will solicit, by letter, the peer evaluations (both external and internal (if required)) of the candidate. These letters will be given by the department head to the department Review Committee.
A. No materials may be added to the dossier without notice to the candidate and opportunity for the candidate to respond. [FH 813.02]
B. The department committee is also responsible for annually reviewing, making suggestions for modification, and
approving the role and scope, criteria and standards document of the department.
415.3 Establishing Procedures for Obtaining External Peer Reviews
Each department shall establish the specific procedures by which external peer reviews shall be conducted. If they are required, peer reviews shall be obtained from no fewer than three (3) external reviewers, the majority of whom shall be recommended by the department committee, the minority of whom shall be recommended by the candidate. [FH 813.03]
The department requires at least three external review letters.
College policies and procedures are described in 410.
415.4 Establishing Procedures for Obtaining Internal Reviews
Each department shall establish the specific procedures by which letters of support and/or internal reviews by students, staff, and other faculty shall be obtained. Candidates shall not solicit letters of support or internal reviews for themselves. [FH 813.04]
This review process will be handled by the same mechanisms as an external review process.
415.5 Actions of the Committee
The department review committee:
A. prepares a written recommendation, with vote tally, concerning the retention, tenure, and/or promotion of each
B. forwards the recommendation to the department head, sending a copy to the candidate.
The recommendation becomes a permanent part of the faculty member's personnel files maintained in the department office. [FH 813.00]
420 RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CANDIDATE
421 RESPONSIBILITY TO PREPARE AND SUBMIT DOSSIER
It is the responsibility of the faculty member under review to demonstrate to the satisfaction of colleagues and professional peers that high standards of performance have been met.
The candidate is responsible for preparing the dossier and making her or his case for retention, tenure or promotion.
421.1 Personal Statement or Self-Evaluation
The case for retention, tenure and/or promotion shall be made, in part, through a personal statement or self-evaluation in which the candidate shall discuss his or her accomplishments in teaching, research, creative activity, outreach and service and provide the framework for the review of the dossier. This personal narrative shall be included in the dossier and may be forwarded to external and internal reviewers according to the procedures of the college and/or department.
The department requires a personal statement in each review
421.2 Other Materials to be Submitted with the Dossier
Candidates shall submit to the department committee or department head a dossier that lists all research, creative activities and service and includes the set of articles, publications, creative endeavors, or other evidence that, in their judgment, represents their best efforts to advance the discipline or profession.
The "Cover Sheet Candidate's Dossier," available from the office of the Provost shall be used as the cover page of the dossier.
Procedures for the Conduct of Formal Review
A. Mechanical Procedures
1. Notebooks containing the materials presented by the Departments are prepared by the Dean's Office. The material
should include the dossier assembled in the order listed on the "Candidate's Cover Sheet," namely:
I. Title Page (listing name, department and college)
II. Review documents (for review committees and administrators)
III. Letter of Hire; Role Statements
IV. Curriculum Vitae
V. Self-Evaluation or Personal Statement
VI. Teaching Performance
VII. Research/Creative Activity
Plus the additional documents, such as solicited confidential letters.
2. Once the notebooks have been submitted to the Dean's Office, no materials may be added or deleted except as
requested by the CLSPTRC.
3. All files are confidential.
The candidate should assemble his dossier in the form of a loose-leaf notebook, which contains a detailed table of contents describing the contents of each section. Section dividers should be used to allow easy navigation of the dossier. Appendices may be assembled for specific documentation that may excessive in volume or not be essential for deliberations by the College Committee. A summary page for such material should be included in the dossier and identified in the Table of Contents. Such material should be made available on request.
421.3 Requests for Additional Documentation
Each review committee or reviewing administrator may request further documentation from the candidate.
421.4 Prohibition Against Altering Dossier Once It Has Been Submitted
The candidate may not add to, alter, modify, delete or remove documents from his or
her dossier once it has been submitted except by:
1. updating the status of materials in support of tenure unknown at the time the dossier was submitted,
2. responding to a review committee's or reviewing administrator's notice that materials in addition to those identified in the role, scope, criteria, standards and procedures documents have been added to the dossier (see 471.00 and 813.00), or
3. responding to a request for further documentation from an reviewing administrator or review committee.[FH 812.00]
421.5 Soliciting Letters of Support Prohibited
Each candidate shall submit a list of persons from whom the department committee or department head may solicit evaluations and letters of support. Candidates shall not themselves solicit letters of support. [FH 471.01] [See Section 415.2 above for description of department and/or college policy regarding soliciting and handling letters of support and other confidential materials.]
421.6 Deadline for the Submission of Dossiers
Each candidate shall submit the dossiers by the dates established by the Provost, dean, and department head. Materials submitted after this date shall not be considered.
The candidate who fails to submit the dossier by the established deadline forfeits his or her opportunity for review. In cases of third year review, the faculty member who fails to submit a dossier shall receive notice of termination effective at the end of the academic year, In cases of tenure review or special review for retention, the faculty member shall be issued a terminal contract for the next contract term. [FH 472.02]
422 CANDIDATE'S RIGHT TO GRIEVE/TIME LIMITS
After the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs has made and communicated the recommendation(s) regarding retention, tenure, and/or promotion, the faculty member has the right to pursue the formal grievance procedures outlined in FH 1330.00. If the Provost's recommendation is positive, a negative action in a prior review cannot be grieved. If the Provost's recommendation is negative, the candidate may cite a negative action in a prior review in the grievance. Grievances must be filed with the chair of the Grievance or Conciliation Committee no later than thirty (30) days from the date the faculty member is notified of the recommendation. [FH 472.00]
500 PURPOSE OF ANNUAL REVIEW
Annual review assesses the faculty member's performance over the preceding calendar year and is based upon the faculty member's letter of hire, role statements, annual assignments, self-assessment, and the department head's evaluation of the individual's performance. Reviews must be completed by April 10 or the date specified by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
501 LETTER OF HIRE/FACULTY ROLE STATEMENT
The letter of hire identifies the instructional or professional practice expectations of the faculty member's appointment. The faculty member and the department head are responsible for developing, and updating as necessary, the Role Statement which identifies the broad responsibilities each faculty member is expected to perform. Any substantive changes in the expectations and/or the role of the faculty within the department must be approved by the dean, department head, and the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, after negotiation with the faculty member.
Annual reviews evaluate the faculty member's success in meeting expectations identified in the letter of hire and the role statement. [FH 712.00]
Each annual review includes a section where the faculty member projects their job responsibilities for the following year. Any change or update of the faculty's role within the department is discussed during the annual review before the faculty member and the department head sign the annual review cards.
510 PROCEDURES FOR CONDUCTING ANNUAL REVIEWS
The following procedures should be used in conducting annual reviews:
A. The faculty member and department head annually review the faculty member's performance relative to the faculty
member's role and responsibilities. Evaluations are expected to recognize the requirements and expectations of the
position and the proportionate time and resources officially allocated to particular activities.
B. The department head rates the performance of each faculty member and submits the
rating card to the college dean
using the rating system prescribed by the Salary Review Committee (SRC).
C. The faculty member must sign the card on which the rating is communicated to the
SRC. The signature of a faculty
member does not indicate concurrence with the rating; rather it signifies that he or she has seen the rating. If the faculty
member refuses to sign the card, the card shall be forwarded with the notation that the faculty member refused to sign it.
D. Copies of all annual reviews and the performance ratings of each faculty member
shall be maintained in the faculty
member's file in the department. These files shall be kept confidential and maintained in conformity with 453.00.[FH
510.02 Department Procedures
511 RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT HEAD
The department head shall assign each faculty member the specific duties and responsibilities, which meet department needs and enable the faculty member to fulfill the responsibilities of the position. The department head shall ensure that, taken collectively, the assignments of the faculty shall meet the department's and college's obligations to the University. The department head and the faculty member shall annually review the faculty member's role within the department and make any modifications as may be necessary, after consultation with the faculty member. Any substantial modification of the faculty member's role within the department must be approved by the department head, dean and Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, after consultation with the faculty member. [FH 721.00]
511.1 Procedures for Making Salary Recommendations
Salary recommendations are based on the faculty member's performance as assessed in the annual review process. Salary recommendations are not guarantees; the faculty member's actual salary may be changed by the SRC, by the President, or the Board of Regents.
A. The department head shall submit a proposed salary recommendation for each faculty member to the college dean.
B. The dean will approve or modify the salary recommendation, and submit it to the
Salary Review Committee by the
C. A written copy of the salary recommendation will be given to the faculty member. [FH 722.00]
512 RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE SALARY REVIEW COMMITTEE
The Committee shall review all salary recommendations for conformity in the application of the standards of the University's salary administration plan and forward them to the President. [FH 722.01]
513 CANDIDATE'S RIGHTS RELATIVE TO ANNUAL REVIEW
513.1 Right to Timely Review
A faculty member who is not reviewed or does not receive a copy of the written annual review with performance rating by April 11may bring the matter to the attention of the dean. The faculty member should inform the dean in writing, no later than April 15.[FH 731.00]
The SRC does not hear appeals or grievances from individual faculty regarding their salaries. [FH 462.00]
513.2 Right to Appeal Annual Performance Evaluation
A faculty member who disagrees with a performance evaluation or rating may append to the annual review document a rationale for his or her disagreement and forward it to the college dean. Rationales must be filed with the dean within ten (10) days of signing the rating card. The dean shall consider the appeal and prepare the salary recommendation to be sent to the Salary Review Committee. The dean shall notify the faculty member, in writing, of the decision regarding the appeal.
A faculty member who disagrees with a salary recommendation may send a letter with a rationale for his or her disagreement to the college dean. Disagreements must be filed with the dean within ten (10) days of learning of the department head's salary recommendation. The dean shall consider the disagreement and prepare the salary recommendation to be sent to the Salary Review Committee. The dean shall notify the faculty member, in writing, of the decision regarding the disagreement.
Faculty members who are not satisfied with the decision of the dean may seek conciliation. (See 1314.00.)[FH 462.00]