3.0 FACULTY RIGHTS, RESPONSIBILITIES AND EVALUATIONS (SD5613S)
3.1 Faculty Rights and Responsibilities (SD0294F, revised by SD2102S)
The professional responsibilities of full-time faculty at UNC Asheville are divided among the three general headings of teaching, scholarship and scholarly or creative activity, and service. All three are considered important, but historically UNC Asheville has placed the heaviest emphasis on teaching. The way in which faculty members meet these three responsibilities will vary from department to department and may differ throughout a faculty member's career. Faculty members must carry out these responsibilities in a professional, ethical and collegial manner that enhances the purposes of UNC Asheville.
Teaching
As a relatively small, primarily undergraduate, liberal arts university, UNC Asheville properly requires excellence in teaching as its first priority. Teaching loads are also heavier at UNC Asheville than at some of the larger institutions in the UNC system. In order to teach well at the university level, up to several hours of preparation may be required for every hour in the classroom. Besides direct preparation for class, members of the university faculty are also expected to keep abreast of the literature of their respective disciplines in order to incorporate current insights into their teaching. In addition, many more hours of follow-up are often necessary to meet with students, support ongoing projects, and evaluate their completed work. Finally, faculty members are often asked to present material in courses in other departments.
Scholarship and Scholarly or Creative Activity
While the category of scholarship and scholarly or creative activity is sometimes considered separate from teaching, at UNC Asheville the two are closely linked. University instruction presupposes scholarship and scholarly or creative activity. Scholarship is largely defined by a scholarly or creative product that is usually peer-reviewed, whether by other scholars or professionals in the field. This involves attending and presenting at professional conferences; writing books, articles, and book reviews; and preparing performances and exhibitions. Scholarly or creative activity is defined as the process of research leading to scholarly or creative products and the active participation in one’s discipline or in interdisciplinary work. It takes the form of original research or creative endeavors, integrative scholarship, and sharing knowledge with peers in the profession. A list of examples appears in 3.5.4.3. At a minimum, scholarly or creative activity requires demonstrated effort at professional self-development through keeping abreast of the state of the art in one’s field. At UNC Asheville, given the emphasis on teaching mentioned above, the participation in undergraduate research and research for new course preparation are considered forms of scholarly activity.
Service
The foundation of service rests on its contribution to the mission of the university. The service responsibilities of faculty members primarily use their expertise in their departments, colleges, institutions, professions, and communities. Institutional service activities include academic and other advising; sponsoring of student and other organizations; laboratory and studio management; involvement in departmental, college and university committees; recruiting efforts; participation in faculty governance bodies; administrative assignments; and seeking external funding. Outside the university, it often involves service in professional organizations; lectures, performances, and readings at local, regional, or state clubs and organizations; sponsorship of conferences; consulting; service to public schools; and other service to various agencies and organizations. Since UNC Asheville has a tradition of heavy faculty participation in university governance, more involvement in university service is expected here than at many other universities. Special consideration is given to service activities that substantively contribute to university governance.
The mission of this University encourages, but does not require faculty members to meet each of the professional responsibilities of teaching, service, or scholarship and scholarly or creative activity through informed, responsible and creative engagement with the community. This may involve projects of a local, regional, state, national or international nature and may include students and staff, in addition to faculty and community members. Community engagement is a collaborative and reciprocal integration of teaching, service, or scholarship and scholarly or creative activity with community partners that not only meets professional responsibilities, but also serves a public purpose. Community engagement is not a separate category of professional responsibility. (For specific procedures on tenure, reappointment, and promotion, refer to sections 3.3-3.7.)
3.1.1 Academic Freedom
Chapter VI, Sections 600 and 601 of The Code of the University reads as follows:
Section 600: Freedom and Responsibility in the University Community.
Section 601: Academic Freedom and Responsibility of Faculty
UNC Asheville
As a constituent institution of the UNC System UNC Asheville subscribes to the foregoing statement as well as the AAUP 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure.
3.1.2 Duties of Department Chairs/Program Directors (SD5720S)
Department Chairs (Revised by Provost and VCAA 2/27/06 in consultation with the assembled department Chairs and program Directors)
The department Chair is a member of the faculty who is appointed by the Provost and VCAA to perform the administrative functions described below in addition to the usual faculty responsibilities. For performing these duties, the Chair receives an annual stipend and a reduced teaching load. The Chair is directly responsible to the program area Dean and is normally appointed to a four year term. Consecutive reappointments for variable terms may be made.
The Chair is the leader of the department faculty and the manager of all departmental affairs and operations. Chairs may, at their discretion, delegate certain specific functions to members of the department. General leadership functions and evaluation responsibilities may not be delegated. At all times, the Chair remains accountable for the actions of the delegate. If responsibilities are delegated, Chairs must delegate an appropriate amount of their chair compensation and/or reassigned time to the faculty member taking on said responsibilities. This must be approved by the Provost.
Chairs serve a University function as well as a departmental one. The Chair, therefore, conveys to the department members a university-wide view of issues and initiatives and to ensure department participation in same, including a commitment to university core values of diversity and inclusion, innovation, and sustainability. The major responsibilities and authority of the position are stated as, but not limited to, the following:
A. Department Leadership
B. University Service
C. Academic Programs
D. Faculty
1. Recruitment/Hiring
· Write requests for new full-time faculty positions.
· Oversee search process for new full-time faculty, ensuring compliance with all University policies and procedures (e.g., Affirmative Action).
· Make recommendations to the Provost and VCAA on the hiring of full-time faculty.
· Request and appoint adjunct/part-time faculty through the program area Dean.
2. Regular operations
· Assign courses to faculty each semester during schedule construction, ensuring representation of all faculty ranks across all facets of the curriculum.
· Assign department discretionary reassigned time to department members as allocated by Academic Affairs..
· Assign advisees to faculty, ensuring an equitable distribution of advising loads.
3. Mentoring
· Assist faculty with their professional development in the areas of teaching, scholarship and service.
· Encourage faculty to utilize available professional development opportunities (e.g., Center for Teaching and Learning, Office of Sponsored Scholarship and Programs).
· Encourage faculty participation in University and community life (e.g., co-curricular activities that enrich student learning experiences, attendance at campus events).
· Ensure that all faculty are accessible to students during the week.
· Ensure that faculty are informed about and refer students to available support services (e.g., Writing Center, Health & Counseling Center, Office of Accessibility).
4. Evaluation
· Ensure that all faculty are evaluated by students and observed by peers in accordance with University policies.
· Evaluate full-time faculty annually (i.e., Faculty Record process) and as required for reappointment, tenure, promotion and post-tenure review.
· Provide feedback on performance to adjunct/part-time faculty at the end of each semester.
· Recognize faculty for participation in institutional initiatives (e.g., LAC) and activities in accord with institutional priorities (e.g., wrok related to diversity, equity, and inclusion, community outreach, co-curricular activities).
E. Students
F. Staff
G. Budget
Program Directors
Program Directors function similarly to department Chairs. However, because programs may not have their own faculty, staff or majors, some items in the preceding list may not apply. In all cases, Program Directors are required to provide teaching evaluations to the department Chairs of their instructors' home departments.
3.1.3 Campus Governance Participation (see Section 10.1)
3.1.4 Instructional Activities (SD1513F)
3.1.4.1 Teaching Responsibilities
A full-time teaching assignment is 24 contact hours per academic year, after accounting for any reassigned time approved by Academic Affairs, in 8 or more organized course sections as defined by the Delaware Study (an instructional activity which is provided principally by means of regularly scheduled meetings in a classroom or similar facility at stated times, including laboratory, recitation or other sections which accompany a lecture section), as mandated by UNC Policy 400.3.4.
Faculty teaching workload is monitored by the Academic Deans through review of class schedules, annual faculty evaluation, and review of the annual Teaching Load Report, prepared by Institutional Research for use by Department Chairs/Program Directors and Academic Affairs.
3.1.4.1.2 Compensation for Overload Teaching
Compensation for overload teaching may be approved by the Provost and VCAA only by way of exception in order to meet an unanticipated need or to ensure an appropriate level of expertise which is not otherwise available in the local community. To be awarded compensation for overload teaching a faculty member must already be scheduled to teach 24 contact hours for the academic year, after accounting for administrative reassigned time. Requests should be submitted by the Department Chair/Program Director to the Program Area Dean, who will consult with the Provost and VCAA before the request is approved.
3.1.4.1.3 Independent and Special Topics (ST) Courses (SD4323S)
When in the judgment of the Department Chair/Program Director there is a curricular or student need coupled with available faculty expertise, Special Topics (ST) Courses may be part of a program's set of scheduled courses. When scheduled, these courses are part of a faculty member's normal teaching load. Before a particular ST course can be offered a third time, the Dean’s office will remind the Chair of that department or program director that they must submit a proposal to APC to seek a permanent course number, to be approved by the Faculty Senate. If the ST course does not fall within a department or program, the Dean’s Office will remind the instructor of the ST course that they must submit a proposal to APC. If a ST course has been taught three or more times, a grace period may be requested from the Dean’s office.
Faculty members are free to assume the responsibility, with the approval of the Chair, of teaching an "Independent Course" to a student in order to meet an academic need of that student which cannot be met through the regular schedule of courses. The instructor must complete an “Independent Study Course Form” which includes course objectives, assignments and due dates, weekly meeting times, and other course information, consistent with UNC Board of Governors Policy 700.6.1[R]. The student must register for the course in the usual manner during registration. While independent study courses are not part of a faculty member's regular teaching load, a faculty member who consistently offers independent study courses without sacrifice of quality teaching and other professional duties may expect recognition for these efforts by his/her chair. No member of the faculty may teach more than two independent study courses per semester, independent of undergraduate research supervision, without prior approval of the Department Chair/Program Director and the appropriate Program Area Dean.
3.1.4.1.4 Faculty Reassigned Time Policy (SD7416S) (SD2114F) (SD2799S)
Full-time faculty members may request Reassigned Time which reduces their full-time teaching responsibility (as defined in 3.1.4.1.1) for activities which benefit UNC Asheville's distinctive mission. Responsibilities for which Reassigned Time may be granted include activities above and beyond usual expectations of faculty members such as, but not limited to:
The Chair of the Faculty Senate is granted 6-8 contact hours per academic year (one course per semester); other members of the Senate Executive Committee will receive 3-4 contact hours per academic year (one course per year).
Requesting and Allocating Reassigned Time
Individual faculty requests for reassigned time for the above purposes will ordinarily be made by February 15 of the prior academic year by the Department Chair/Program Director to the Program Area Dean, who will consult with the Provost and VCAA before approving such requests. It is preferable for reassigned time to be taken in the spring semester of the academic year. The Provost has discretion to determine when reassigned time is granted for any of the above purposes.
Chairs are also teacher-scholar members of the faculty, and may request reassigned time on an equal footing for purposes such as professional development for enhanced teaching effectiveness, scholarship and scholarly or creative activity, and others as described above. These requests will be made to the Provost and VCAA prior to planning the schedule. The Provost and VCAA is responsible for a judicious, equitable allocation of reassigned time to Chairs and Program Directors on behalf of UNC Asheville's mission.
Accountability for Reassigned Time
Faculty members who receive reassigned time will record the assignment and will report on the results of the assignment in their Annual Faculty Records. The productive use of this reassigned time will be a factor considered by Chairs and Deans in the annual evaluation of faculty members who have received it.
Similarly, Chairs who receive reassigned time for purposes other than the administrative duties of their position will report on the results of the assignment in their Annual Faculty Records. The productive use of this reassigned time will be a factor considered by Deans and the Provost and VCAA in their annual evaluation of Chairs.
3.1.4.1.5 Reassigned Time for Department Chairs/Program Directors (Academic Affairs policy, distributed to Chairs/Directors on 12/7/98, revised October 2014, April 30, 2020 [SD5720S])
Compensation of faculty and allocation of reassigned time is the purview of the Provost. Below are the recommendations of the Faculty Senate on factors to consider when establishing reassigned time for Department Chairs/Program Directors.
Academic Department Chairs are eligible for reassigned time based on the number of full-time faculty they supervise, the number of part-time faculty they supervise, the number of students in the major and minor, and other factors that may impact workload for the Department Chair.
Directors of university programs may be eligible for reassigned time based on the complexity of the position. Program directors will work with the Provost and VCAA, in consultation with FWDC, to agree on a fair and equitable amount of reassigned time for the role.
Additional reassigned time may be awarded by the Provost to Chairs or Directors according to the following criteria:
3.1.4.1.6 Teaching Opportunities
UNC Asheville faculty are encouraged to engage in team teaching, to teach outside their own disciplines and to cross-list courses appropriate to more than one academic area. Faculty interested in pursuing these activities should discuss their plan with their Department Chair/Program Director and other affected Department Chairs/Program Directors.
3.1.4.2 Office Hours
Faculty are expected to post and maintain regularly scheduled office hours for purposes of advising students and offering assistance to students enrolled in their classes. Office hours should be scheduled to allow access to instructors and advisors at times convenient to students. Course syllabi should also list regularly scheduled office hours.
3.1.4.3 Meeting Classes
3.1.4.3.1 Faculty meeting regularly scheduled classes
Faculty meeting regularly scheduled classes is to receive the highest priority in terms of faculty activity. Effective quality teaching is first priority for faculty at UNC Asheville. However, there are times when faculty must miss class, e.g., attendance at professional meetings, illness, and personal considerations such as weddings or funerals for members of immediate family. For the policy on extended absence, see Section 4.2.1.2 (Family and Medical Leave policy).
On their syllabi, faculty are expected to include information about course assignments in cases when they cannot meet their classes. In every instance Faculty are to notify their Department Chair and/or Program Director when they cannot meet their classes, and to indicate what assignments are to be followed during that absence.
3.1.4.3.2 Class Cancellations Due to Inclement Weather
While the presumption is that all classes will be taught during inclement weather, on occasion severe weather conditions may make it unusually dangerous or physically impossible for faculty and students to get to campus. The Provost and VCAA is charged with making the judgment about canceling classes under these conditions.
Each individual student, in the event that classes are not cancelled, must assume the personal responsibility of deciding to go to class or not when local road conditions appear too hazardous. In such cases students should inform their instructors as soon as practicable.
Each faculty member should include in any class attendance policy a provision for the fair treatment of students who cannot reasonably be expected to attend class, especially in cases involving scheduled exams or due dates for papers.
The decision to delay, cancel, or hold classes is made by the Provost and VCAA after consultation with Campus Operations and Public Safety following the evaluation of campus and local area road conditions and forecasts. When possible, the decision should be made by 5:30 a.m. to enable notification in time for all to plan for the day appropriately. Faculty may receive the latest information from local media, at the UNC Asheville website, or on the Adverse Weather and Emergency Line (828-259-3050).
An Instructor may schedule additional class meetings with attendance required if weather conditions have forced cancellation of the equivalent of one full week of class meetings.
3.1.4.3.3 Snow/Late Start Schedule
As an alternative to the cancellation of classes, UNC Asheville may implement its snow/late start schedule. The inclement weather policy is posted at: https://registrar.unca.edu/inclement-weather-policy
3.1.4.3.4 Students Attending Class
Students are responsible for regular class attendance. Faculty members are responsible for reporting to the student's advisor any student whose repeated absence from class is impairing the student's work. Any faculty member who has a particular attendance policy for his or her classes is to state that policy in the course syllabus.
Students failing to attend the first session of class may be administratively dropped by the instructor; however, this is at the discretion of the instructor. (SD2811S)
Religious Observances: It should be noted that a student who misses a test or deadline due to a religious observance must be allowed to make up the test or other work if the student informs the instructor at least seven days prior to the event. Legal counsel of the University system advises that to ask for proof of religious affiliation or to refuse this may be a violation of the prohibition against religious discrimination. (SD0510F)
Students who miss class to travel on university-sanctioned business are given excused absences for the class time missed. Occasional absences of this kind will have no punitive impact on their grades. It is the student's responsibility to inform the instructor of the travel plans at least one week prior to the sanctioned absence, and to make up all work missed within a specified time period, as agreed to by instructor and student. However, significant absences may affect academic performance and grades. (SD2002S)
3.1.4.4 Approval of Candidates for Degrees (SD0613F)
At the end of the fall semester, the spring semester, and the summer session, the names of the candidates for graduation and honors are presented to the faculty for approval. If approval is not sought at a faculty meeting, the provost will report to the faculty the results of the vote.
Academic advising is an important component of the institution’s commitment to student success. Each full-time faculty member is expected to be serve as an academic advisor to students, including both declared and intended majors, minors, and teacher licensure candidates. The Department Chair is responsible for assigning academic advisees to faculty in that department, ensuring an equitable distribution of advising loads as outlined in Faculty Handbook 3.1.2.
Academic Advising is part of the expected responsibilities of all full-time faculty members, and this role should be documented in the relevant section of the Annual Faculty Record. Per Faculty Handbook 3.3.3.3, lecturers are not expected to provide any service to the institution during their first year, including advising.
Expected Duties
Faculty should meet with advisees at least once per semester during the advising period to assist them in planning their schedules for the next semester, share their Registration Access Number (RAN), and to provide other academic assistance as needed, such as referral to other support services and/or follow up on academic alerts as appropriate.
Recommendations
Successful advisors develop relationships with their advisees, rather than approaching advising as a task to complete. Academic advisors can enhance their skills and knowledge through professional development opportunities such as advising workshops, one-on-one support, and departmental advising training, all accessible through the Office of Academic Advising. Additionally, the Center for Teaching and Learning offers resources like learning circles and other programming to support advisors in improving their practices.
3.1.5 Patent and Copyright Procedures (see Section 9.4)
3.1.6 Political Activities of University Employees (see Section 13.2.5)
3.2 Other Employment Opportunities
3.2.1 Employment Opportunities in Special Programs
Centers such as Special Academic Programs and the North Carolina Center for Creative Retirement provide additional opportunities for faculty employment. Formal involvement in such programs during periods when the faculty member has instructional responsibility for his/her department requires the department chair's approval. The conditions of employment, salary, responsibilities, and time requirements are specified by the Center or Program Director consistent with Center or Program policy.
3.2.2 Faculty Exchanges (see Section 4.1.2)
3.2.3 Summer Programs Abroad
Certain study abroad programs also provide opportunities for faculty employment, usually during the summer term. Contact the Provost and VCAA or the Director of Study Abroad for more information.
3.2.4 Summer School Employment
Opportunities to teach during the summer session are subject to program needs, student enrollment and Chair/program director approval. Academic Affairs works with each department and/or program to assess student needs for the summer curriculum and develops a schedule of summer courses accordingly. As a general rule a faculty member may request to teach up to two courses during the summer. There is no requirement that faculty teach during the summer, nor can teaching during the summer substitute for teaching responsibilities of the regular academic year. A salary schedule for summer teaching may be obtained from the Office of Academic Affairs. Salary checks are issued during the regular payroll cycle and are subject to withholding for social security, state and federal income taxes, and retirement.
3.3 Evaluation of Faculty Members
3.3.1 Types of Evaluations
Faculty evaluation is conducted for:
a) Formative purposes (to assist in the professional development of the individual non-tenured faculty member through assessment, feedback, and dialogue with faculty peers or professionals.)
1. Post-tenure review (see Section 3.7).
2. Narrative evaluation of performance by the Department Chair and the Dean during annual evaluation (see Section 3.4).
3. Other formative evaluations may be initiated by the faculty member (possibly encouraged by the department chair or dean.) Faculty members are encouraged to seek formative evaluation from faculty peers within and outside their departments and from the Center for Teaching and Learning. These evaluations are not used in personnel decisions.
b) Summative purposes (to contribute to professional, efficient, and appropriate personnel decisions)
1. Annual performance review and awarding of salary increases for merit (see Section 3.4),
2. Personnel decisions (i.e., reappointment, tenure and promotion.) (See Section 3.5.).
3.3.2 Philosophy behind Evaluation of Faculty Members
3.3.2.1 Objectives of Evaluation
There are two basic objectives in all faculty evaluations and reviews at UNC Asheville:
In all evaluations the highest priority is to measure, improve and reward teaching effectiveness.
General considerations that govern faculty personnel actions are delineated in the Tenure Policies and Regulations, Section III, A. (See Section 14.2). For policies related to specific issues see:
Tenure, Notice, and Reappointment (III-B)
Faculty Ranks (III-C)
Initiation, Review, and Approval of Promotion and Reappointment decisions (III-D)
Resignations (III-E)
Leave of Absence During Probationary Terms (III-F)
Terms and Conditions of Appointment (III-G)
Continued Availability of Special Funding (III-H)
Provisions for Less than Full-Time Employment (III-I)
Nonreappointment of Faculty Members on Probationary Term Appointments (III-J)
All faculty are strongly advised and encouraged to become familiar with the Tenure Policies and Regulations of the institution.
3.3.2.2 Important Considerations in Personnel Evaluations (SD0513F) (SD5820S)
Section 602(4) of The Code of the Board of Governors states (see Section 13.1.1) that in personnel decisions such as appointment, reappointment, tenure and promotion, consideration should be given "to at least the following: the faculty members demonstrated professional competence, his or her potential for future contributions and institutional needs and resources.” In addition, UNC Asheville Tenure Policy and Regulations (see Section 14.2) indicates that reappointment "may be based on any factor considered relevant to the total institutional interests." Possession of the appropriate degree and demonstrated excellence in teaching are assumed to be prerequisite to any positive recommendation. Additionally, the candidacy should be supported by evidence of vigorous and effective activity in the other categories below.
The terminal degree, the Ph.D. except in certain professionally acknowledged areas, is required for employment or promotion to the professional ranks and is necessary for tenured positions. Exceptions to this may be made only in extraordinary circumstances. Demonstrated progress toward the attainment of the appropriate degree is expected of non-tenured candidates who were initially hired with a Master's degree. The areas of specialization must be consonant with departmental needs.
Consideration shall be given to such matters as knowledge of subject matter, effectiveness of course design, clarity of thought and expression, maintenance of fair and appropriate standards, ability to arouse and maintain interest, rapport with students, availability to students, and ability to direct research and non-traditional learning activities,upholding the University's core values of
- diversity and inclusion with an equitable and inclusive learning environment, and application of various pedagogical tools used to optimize teaching and learning for all,
- innovation,
- sustainability.
Consideration shall be given to such matters as currency of knowledge in the field, intellectual breadth, scholarly research and publication, creative accomplishments if relevant to the field, activity within professional organizations, and any evidence of recognition of accomplishment by the profession. Evidence suggesting future growth or continued accomplishment in these areas is considered significant. Expectations surrounding quantity of scholarship and scholarly or creative productivity will be based on teaching workloads, which are impacted by overall credit loads, class sizes, number of advisees, undergraduate research students, independent studies, as well as participation in diversity intensive courses, service-learning courses, and Arts & Ideas, among other things.
Consideration shall be given to such matters as flexibility and range of competence in relation to the present and foreseen needs of the department, involvement in program design and evaluation, contribution to administrative functions within the department, development of student activities, academic advising, and contributions to academic programs outside the department. Effective working relationships with colleagues and university staff is considered an important contribution to the department and the institution.
Demonstrated commitment to the core university values of
- Diversity and inclusion,
- innovation,
- sustainability.
Consideration will be given to the amount and quality of work done in committees, in administrative tasks, in developing the University's off-campus relationships, in procuring grants, and such matters. Expectations surrounding quantity of extra-curricular service to the institution will be based on teaching workloads,which are impacted by overall credit loads, class sizes, number of advisees, undergraduate research students, independent studies, as well as participation in diversity intensive courses, service-learning courses, and Arts & Ideas, among other things.
Consideration will be given to such activities as presentations to public or organizational audiences, involvement with the local schools, and media appearances in a professional capacity. Community activities unrelated to professional standing are of course encouraged but receive less weight in the evaluation process. Expectations surrounding quantity of activity in community affairs will be based on teaching workloads, which are impacted by overall credit loads, class sizes, number of advisees, undergraduate research students, independent studies, as well as participation in diversity intensive courses, service-learning courses, and Arts & Ideas, among other things.
Basic to all personnel decisions, indicated by such factors as financial resources, program requirements, changing patterns of student demand for courses and faculty resources.
Departments and programs with faculty appointments will develop specific criteria and/or values peculiar to a discipline which, upon written approval of the Provost and VCAA, will be considered in evaluating faculty members. This Values Document will be created by each Department or Program from within their discipline. This list can explain what the department or program places importance on, but must align with the Universities’ values for reappointment, tenure, and promotion, including the core university values of diversity and inclusion, innovation, and sustainability. The document will contain the standards by which a candidate will be evaluated for reappointment, tenure, and promotion within their discipline. This list will be shared with any candidate at the time of their hiring. It will also be sent to Academic Affairs which will share the document with the Committee of Tenured Faculty and the Post Tenure Review Committee when a candidate from that Department or Program comes up for review. Academic deans and the Provost may also consult this document as they fulfill their responsibilities for all types of faculty evaluation.
3.3.3 Criteria in Evaluations
The criteria below are stated in a broadly-defined sequence of priority, with recognition that the "mix" for any individual may vary. These criteria apply to all summative faculty evaluations (i.e., annual, reappointment, tenure and promotion) and post-tenure review. Community engagement, defined in 3.1 as “a collaborative and reciprocal integration of teaching, service, or scholarship and scholarly or creative activity with community partners that not only meets professional responsibilities, but also serves a public purpose,” is not a separate area of faculty activity but is valued by UNC Asheville.
3.3.3.1 Teaching
The faculty member is expected to show clear, positive evidence of effective teaching. This is the primary and constant consideration in all personnel decisions. Effective teaching has multiple dimensions such as:
Because no one source can provide adequate insight into all these dimensions, effective teaching is best measured by gathering information from all sources involved in the teaching process. Therefore, evaluation of teaching effectiveness must include inputs from students, other faculty peers, and the faculty member’s Department Chair. In addition, self reflection on the part of the faculty member is an essential part of teaching evaluation.
The role of the Chair and self evaluations are discussed in sections 3.4 (Annual Evaluation of Faculty), 3.5.4 (Procedure for Evaluating Faculty Members for Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion) and 3.7.2 (Procedures for Evaluation – Post Tenure Review). Student and peer evaluations of teaching are discussed below.
3.3.3.1.1 Student Feedback on Instruction (SD0308F) (SD1482F) (SD0308F) (SD8209S) (SD3010S) (SD2419S)
The following guidelines apply to the collection of student feedback on instruction:
Individual faculty will have the option to add additional questions to the SFI instrument that they deem appropriate. The following guidelines apply to the use of student feedback:
In addition to the University wide administered SFI instrument, departments/programs or individual faculty may wish to develop and administer their own instruments (for example in mid-semester) for formative purposes.
3.3.3.1.2 Peer Review of Teaching (SD6315S) (SD1413F) (SD1623S)
Peer review of teaching is an essential component of faculty evaluation. It contributes to evidence of teaching effectiveness through the observations of peers with an understanding of effective pedagogy and complements student ratings of instruction. Tenured faculty members and senior lecturers should be peer reviewed at least once every other academic year; all other full-time faculty members should be peer reviewed at least once per academic year. This required peer review should be conducted by a tenured faculty member or senior lecturer in the same academic department or program area or related program area. Additional peer reviews may be conducted by any member of the faculty. Peer reviews should be submitted to both the faculty member and the Department Chair or Program Director who will incorporate the peer review into their annual evaluation and into any documents required for personnel review; peer reviews of Department Chairs should be submitted to both the Department Chair and to the appropriate Program Area Dean (see section 3.4). Peer reviews should be conducted according to the following guidelines.
1. Peer reviews of teaching should incorporate both evaluation of course materials and classroom observation. Reviewers should set up a pre-review conference to request relevant course materials and schedule a classroom observation. The reviewer and faculty member should discuss the plan and objectives of the class to be observed and the guidelines that will be used for the review. Reviewers should also meet with faculty members after the review of materials and classroom observation have been completed to provide prompt feedback and a copy of the resulting evaluation. Peer reviews should be retained in department files.
2. Evaluation of course materials may include examination of course syllabi, reading assignments, course management system pages, handouts, project guidelines, tests, rubrics, or instructor feedback on student work. If the faculty member maintains a teaching portfolio, portions relevant to the course being evaluated may be submitted. Such materials can provide valuable information about a faculty member’s teaching philosophy, expertise, dedication, and creativity.
3. In the effort to enhance the reliability of classroom observations, reviewers should make use of standardized rating forms or checklists in their evaluations. Such forms should be adopted by departments in accordance with their disciplinary goals and accepted teaching practices. In selecting or adapting rating criteria, departments and program areas are encouraged to consult the Center for Teaching and Learning for relevant resources.
4. Faculty who teach regularly or substantially outside of their home departments (e.g., in humanities or arts) may opt for peer review in these areas instead of one within their departments. Peer review in this case should follow the procedures of the relevant department or program area.
5. Where possible over the course of a faculty member’s career, peer reviews should be rotated among multiple observers, including observers outside their department. In addition, a range of classes taught by the faculty member should be observed.
6. Departments are encouraged to expand peer review activities beyond the aforementioned summative review procedures, incorporating formative peer review opportunities as a regular practice. Such experiences may be helpful for junior faculty, faculty teaching new courses, or faculty experimenting with new pedagogies.
3.3.3.2 Scholarship and Scholarly or Creative Activity (SD5820S)
The faculty member should demonstrate continued efforts toward professional development. This can take the form of contributions to one's academic field or interdisciplinary work through scholarship and scholarly or creative activity as those are defined above in 3.1. At minimum it requires demonstrated effort at professional self-development through teaching improvement and keeping abreast of the state of the art in one's field, although the sustained absence of any scholarly or creative product will jeopardize the success of a candidate’s application for tenure. However, expectations surrounding scholarship and scholarly or creative productivity will be based on teaching workloads, which are impacted by overall credit loads, class sizes, number of advisees, undergraduate research students, independent studies, as well as participation in diversity intensive courses, service-learning courses, and Arts & Ideas, among other things.
The distinction between scholarship and scholarly or creative activity applies to both traditional work and that which engages the community (defined in 3.3.3 above).
3.3.3.3 Service (SD8718S) (SD5820S) (SD1723S)
Shared Governance is founded on the cornerstone principles of partnership, respect, accountability and ownership. These principles meet at the point of service to the University. Because of the university’s commitment to shared governance, and due to our size, more involvement in university service is expected from all tenure-track and tenured faculty at UNC Asheville than at other universities. In their first year, lecturers are not expected to provide any service, including but not limited to advising. After their first year, lecturers are expected to provide service to the department or program and invited to provide service to the university and/or community. All service completed by lecturers will be acknowledged in their annual faculty record and will count towards promotion to Senior Lecturer. Service needs and opportunities will vary with program requirements, allocations of financial and personnel resources, changing patterns of student demand, etc. Therefore, the priority of this consideration varies from program to program. Three types of faculty service are considered:
1. To the department: Contributions to program and curricular development and evaluation, contributions to administrative functions within the department and in the rest of the university, effective service on committees, etc., are considered here. Availability and effectiveness of student advising is an essential part of service. Effective working relationships with colleagues and staff, characterized by collegiality and respect, are important elements in this same category.
2. To the university: Initiative and demonstrated readiness to serve the academic community is especially important in a small institution. Service in both elected and appointed functions are considered here. Availability and effectiveness in student advising outside of the department, e.g., to FYS students, is a part of service to the university. Expectations surrounding quantity of service to the university will be based on teaching workloads, which are impacted by overall credit loads, class sizes, number of advisees, undergraduate research students, independent studies, as well as participation in diversity intensive courses, service-learning courses, and Arts & Ideas, among other things.
3. To the community: Service to the community, especially that which is relevant to one's professional competence, flows from the nature of a publicly-supported university. Consideration is given to memberships on boards, presentations to various community groups, involvement with local schools, media presentations and any of a wide range of activities through which faculty members contribute to the community. Publicly engaged service is that which responds to societal needs, enhances public good, or improves the wellbeing of people outside of the UNCA campus community via collaboration with communities and/or the people living in them. Expectations surrounding quantity of service to the community will be based on teaching workloads,which are impacted by overall credit loads, class sizes, number of advisees, undergraduate research students, independent studies, as well as participation in diversity intensive courses, service-learning courses, and Arts & Ideas, among other things.
3.3.4 Reappointment of Department Chairs
During the final semester of the Chair's appointment, or whenever the Provost and VCAA deems it necessary, he or she will initiate the evaluation process by asking the appropriate Dean to solicit evaluations from the departmental faculty and staff. The completed evaluations are confidential and will not be shown to the Chair. The process of evaluation will include the opportunity for faculty to suggest alternative nominees or to self-nominate.
After reviewing all the above responses the Dean may feel the need for further clarification and information. In such a case Dean may ask to meet with individual department members, or with all members collectively if he or she feels it would be more helpful.
The Dean will review and analyze the information conveyed, taking note of salient strengths, weaknesses, or problems of the department or the Chair, and also taking note of differences of opinion among the respondents. The Dean will summarize this information in written form and provide his or her recommendation to the Provost and VCAA. At his or her discretion the Provost and VCAA may then consult other administrators, staff, or faculty with whom the Chair interacts.
The Dean and the Provost and VCAA will meet with the Chair to convey the summary of these evaluations, sharing the strengths and weaknesses of the Chair's performance and of any problems which need to be addressed, as well as any issues which need to be considered by the department as a whole. This summary will be discussed with the Chair who may, if he or she wishes, reply in writing. If the Chair has expressed an interest in being reappointed as Chair, the Provost and VCAA will then notify the Chair of his or her decision to reappoint or not to reappoint.
In instances in which the Chair is reappointed, but where sufficient serious problems appear, evaluations should be conducted each year until the problem has been resolved.
(Revised by Academic Affairs April 2015)
3.3.5 Reappointment of Program Directors
Program Directors typically are appointed for three year terms and are evaluated in much the same way as Department Chairs. Faculty teaching in the program and other persons knowledgeable about the program (e.g., members of advisory committees) are asked to complete evaluations and submit them to the Provost and VCAA. Subsequently steps c-i for Evaluation of Departmental Chairs are followed (see Section 3.3.4).
3.4 Annual Evaluation of Faculty
3.4.1 Purpose (SD1914F) (SD3404S)
All full-time faculty members participate in an annual evaluation that has both formative and summative functions. Department chairs provide feedback on each faculty member's accomplishments, rate each individual on teaching, scholarship and scholarly or creative activity, and service and make recommendations regarding salary increases (i.e., merit raises, salary equity adjustments). Annual evaluations are reviewed by the Program Area Dean who makes the final evaluation and salary recommendation. For Department Chairs, Program Area Deans make recommendations to the Provost, who makes the final evaluation and salary recommendation. These annual evaluations become part of each faculty member's personnel file and are considered in all personnel reviews. If applicable, the annual goals should correspond to annual milstones and other elements of the five-year plans developed by tenured faculty members.
3.4.2 Procedure (revised by Provost and VCAA, Spring 2011) (SD4512S)
For the purpose of this section, the words "Department Chair" and "Chair" refer to any faculty member who directly evaluates faculty for merit, reappointment, tenure or promotion.
1 a. By the Friday following Commencement, each continuing faculty member submits a completed Faculty Record and supporting materials to his/her Department Chair covering activities from the previous fall and spring semesters.
b. By the Friday following Commencement, Department Chairs will submit their Faculty Record and supporting materials to their Program Area Dean.
2 a. The Department Chair reviews the Record along with student evaluation rating data, summaries of student comments, peer reviews of the faculty member's teaching and whatever other materials the faculty member chooses to submit. Informal anonymous sources should not be consulted. Note: Faculty teaching outside the department (e.g. in Humanities) should request that student/peer evaluation information be forwarded to the Department Chair.
b. For the review of the Department Chair, the Dean reviews the Record along with student evaluation rating data, summaries of student comments, peer reviews of the chair's member's teaching and whatever other materials the chair chooses to submit. Informal anonymous sources should not be consulted. Note: Chairs teaching outside the department (e.g. in Humanities) should request that student/peer evaluation information be forwarded to the Dean.
3 a. By June 15, after reviewing the materials for the faculty member, the Chair completes an evaluation form including a narrative discussion of the faculty member's activities and rating scales on teaching, scholarship and scholarly or creative activity, and service. The Chair also makes a recommendation regarding a salary increase including a rationale when required (e.g. high level of merit).
b. By June 15, after reviewing the materials for the Department Chair, the Dean completes an evaluation form including a narrative discussion of the Chair's activities and rating scales on teaching, scholarship and scholarly or creative activity, and service. The Dean also makes a recommendation regarding a salary increase including a rationale when required (e.g. high level of merit).
4 a. The faculty member reviews the Chair's evaluation/recommendation and signs a statement to this effect (which does not imply endorsement of the Chair's evaluation). The faculty member has the right to discuss the evaluation with the Chair prior to signing it for submission to the appropriate Dean.
b. The Department Chair reviews the Dean's evaluation/recommendation and signs a statement to this effect (which does not imply endorsement of the Dean's evaluation). The Chair has the right to discuss the evaluation with the Dean prior to signing it for submission to the Provost and VCAA.
5 a. The Faculty Record, with Chair's Evaluation, is submitted to the appropriate Dean. For Program Directors, this should be the Dean who oversees the program rather than the Dean who oversees the home department. The faculty member has the right to submit a written appeal of the Chair’s Evaluation to the Dean or to request a meeting to discuss it. By September 15, after reviewing the documents, results of student evaluations, and any other pertinent information, the Dean determines both the final evaluation and salary recommendation and reports it, with written explanation, to the faculty member and the Chair. Within ten days, the faculty member may submit a written appeal to the Provost and VCAA for reconsideration of the final evaluation. The entire process is to be completed no later than October 1.
b. By June 15, the Faculty Record, with Dean's Evaluation, is submitted to the Provost and VCAA. The chair has the right to submit a written appeal of the Dean’s Evaluation to the Provost or to request a meeting to discuss it. By September 15, after reviewing the documents, results of student evaluations, and any other pertinent information, the Provost and VCAA determines both the final evaluation and salary recommendation and reports it, with written explanation, to the Chair. Within ten days, the Chair may submit a written appeal to the Provost and VCAA for reconsideration of the final evaluation. The entire process is to be completed no later than October 1.
3.4.3 Merit Evaluation Categories (SD5920S SD9018S SD5713S SD2412S)
Each category of faculty activity is evaluated relative to minimum expectations, as defined in Section 3.3.3. The rating of exceeds expectations is awarded to those whose accomplishments clearly surpass those minimum expectations.
The following categories will be used in evaluating the work of faculty members in annual evaluation:
Improvement Plan Needed: This category is for faculty members who fall well below the minimum expectations in either teaching, service, or scholarship/scholarly or creative activity as defined in Section 3.3.3. Faculty members in this category are not eligible for merit-based salary increases.
Some Attention Needed: This category is for faculty members who are slightly below meeting minimum expectations in teaching, service, or scholarship/scholarly or creative activity as defined in Section 3.3.3.
Meets Expectations: This category is for faculty members who are meeting minimum expectations in teaching, service, and scholarship/scholarly or creative activity as defined in Section 3.3.3.
Exceeds Expectations: This category is for faculty members who exceed expectations in teaching, service, or scholarship/scholarly or creative activity while meeting expectations in the other category.
A faculty member with Professional Development Leave, an endowed Professorship, or any other assignment which removes them from any teaching responsibilities will be expected to have correspondingly greater accomplishments in scholarship and scholarly or creative activity and/or service to compensate for a lighter teaching load.
3.4.4 Annual Evaluation of Chairs and Program Directors (SD2512S) (SD5223S)
1) By May 1, each department chair/program director (CPD) completes an Annual Administrative Review, developed by Academic Affairs. This form allows CPDs to report their work. The form is submitted to the Dean who is responsible for that department or program. By March 15, the Dean will solicit feedback from the departmental faculty and staff by means of a Google form based on the CPD duties outlined in 3.1.2. Faculty and staff should submit the Google form to the Dean by April 15. Anonymized results will be shared with the chair after the chair submits their Faculty Performance Appraisal forms but before July 1 for formative and summative purposes. Chairs will have the opportunity to respond to colleagues’ feedback. At the discretion of the dean, the dean and chair will meet to develop a plan to address concerns raised and share these steps with the department. The dean will use the annual feedback from departmental faculty and staff in the following year to assess progress on the improvement plan. The chair’s appointment remains at the discretion of the Provost.
2) By May 15, the Dean completes an evaluation of the performance of the CPD with both qualitative descriptors and a narrative evaluation. The Annual Administrative Review, with Dean’s evaluation, is attached to the Faculty Record of the CPD before it is submitted according to the procedures outlined in Section 3.4.2 and is incorporated into the annual evaluation of that faculty member by being evaluated as a separate category in addition to teaching, scholarship and scholarly or creative activity, and service.
3) This administrative evaluation is incorporated in the determination of the merit evaluation of the CPD’s work as a faculty member as defined in Section 3.4.3.
3.5 Policies and Procedures Governing Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion
The following sections apply specifically to institutional reviews of faculty for the purposes of awarding reappointment, tenure or promotion.
3.5.1 Institutional Policies on Personnel Decisions
It is important for faculty to become familiar with the information in the following documents regarding personnel decisions:
Key information from these documents is summarized in a section of this Handbook titled "Important considerations in personnel decisions" (see Section 3.3.2.2).
3.5.2 Policy on Granting of Rank and Tenure to Administrators (Board of Trustees adopted 1/18/79)
An administrator is defined as anyone whose administrative functions amount to more than fifty percent of his or her assignment load, as long as he or she is on a yearly contract of at least nine-months. Because of the special nature of their positions, librarians are exempt from the provisions of this policy.
3.5.3 Guidelines for Awarding of Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion for Faculty
(amended by SD1092S) (SD3701S) (SD0102F) (SD0202F) (SD1003F) (SD10316S) (SD2821S))
The candidate for reappointment, tenure or promotion is to present to his or her chair a well-documented report of accomplishments in the categories described in Section 3.5.4.3. The Department Chair will review and evaluate each faculty member's level of accomplishment accordingly, after appropriate consultation with the department, and shall make recommendation relative to reappointment, tenure, or promotion, or in the case of Lecturers and Senior Lecturers, recommendations for the issuance of a new contract. Such recommendations are carefully reviewed by the Committee of the Tenured Faculty (except for the granting of new contracts to Lecturers and Senior Lecturers) and by the Provost and VCAA. The following sections present guidelines for that review process in each evaluation category.
Lecturer: Lecturer contracts shall specify departmental expectations regarding teaching load, scholarship and scholarly or creative activity, and service responsibilities. The process for appointing Lecturers originates with the Department Chair, who submits a request to the appropriate Dean, except in the case of requests to promote a Lecturer to the rank of Senior Lecturer, described below. The Deans consult with the Provost on all other requests for lecturer contracts, both new positions and continuing positions, including new five-year contracts for Senior Lecturers. In considering all such requests, they shall take into account department instructional needs, the faculty member’s performance (documented through observation and evaluation), and available university resources.
Senior Lecturer: The process for promoting a Lecturer to the rank of Senior Lecturer is the same as that for promotion to Associate Professor or Professor, described in 3.5.4 below. Only those continuing lecturers who have completed at least seven years as a fulltime faculty member (of any rank) are eligible. For promotion to Senior Lecturer, the faculty member must have a strong record of effective teaching and demonstrated noteworthy accomplishment, either in scholarship and scholarly or creative activity, or in service, which includes contributions both within and outside the department.
The promotion to senior lecturer process is considered separate from the lecturer contract renewal process. Department Chairs will still be required to submit contract renewal requests to the Non-Tenure-Track Position Committee for lecturers with expiring appointments, regardless of whether or not that lecturer is pursuing promotion to senior lecturer that year. If promotion to senior lecturer is later awarded, the senior lecturer appointment letter and terms will supersede any other existing contract.
Instructor. The rank of Instructor is viewed as both temporary and transitional. It is temporary in that it cannot be extended beyond two years. (However, the candidate can be offered a terminal one-year appointment.) It is transitional in that the faculty member is expected to acquire the terminal degree necessary for appointment at the Assistant Professor rank in a tenure-track position. As in all UNC Asheville positions, effective teaching is expected of instructors.
For all reappointment, tenure and promotion decisions, in cases where unusual amounts of service or teaching (e.g., more than 24 contact hours during spring and fall, more than three separate course preparations per semester, larger-than usual courses) are expected from a faculty member, the Committee of Tenured Faculty will take this into account.
Assistant Professor. Assistant Professors are appointed initially to a probationary term of four years, with a review of the faculty member in the third year. An unsuccessful review allows for the fourth year to serve as a grace year. After a successful review, a second probationary contract may be offered for a final four-year term, beginning in the academic year directly following the review. During the sixth year of the full probationary period, a promotion-with-tenure decision is made.
To become reappointed to a second probationary period as an Assistant Professor an individual must have a record of effective teaching, some scholarly or creative activity with clear potential for the successful production of scholarship as defined in 3.1, and effective service. A high level of effective service would be considered an asset but is not an expectation of all candidates as this level.
It is expected that an individual seeking promotion to Associate Professor with tenure will have a strong record of effective teaching, recognized accomplishment in scholarly/creative activity, and some level of service both within and outside the department (i.e., to the University or community).
Associate Professor. Tenure decisions are also made for individuals hired at the rank of Associate Professor. To be eligible for tenure at the rank of Associate Professor a candidate must have a record of excellent teaching, demonstrate a pattern of scholarship and scholarly or creative activity commensurate with departmental and university standards, and give evidence of commitment to the University through service both within and outside the department.
Promotion from Associate to Professor requires evidence of continued excellence in teaching and further growth and maturity in scholarship and scholarly or creative activity. A more significant level of service to the department and to the University or community is expected. While the evaluation will focus on accomplishments since promotion to Associate Professor, the candidate’s whole career will be taken into consideration. Because promotion is based largely on accumulated accomplishment while in rank at UNC Asheville, time spent at the rank of Associate Professor will vary according to rate of achievement.
Professor. Tenure decisions are also made for individuals hired at the rank of Professor. An individual seeking tenure as a Professor must have a strong record of excellent teaching, continued accomplishment in scholarship and scholarly or creative activity, and evidence of commitment to the University through service both within and outside the department.
Extensions to probationary periods. Because reappointment and tenure decisions are governed by timetables, modifications to these timetables must be documented in writing. Section III-F of the UNC Asheville Tenure Policies and Regulations notes that a probationary faculty member who receives a one-year leave of absence also receives an automatic timetable extension of one year. A probationary faculty member who receives a one-semester leave of absence normally does not stop the tenure clock;however, the faculty membermay request a one-year timetable extension from the Provost and VCAA. Written acknowledgement or authorization of the extension must be provided to the faculty member and to his or her department chair, and is retained in the faculty member’s personnel file. See Section 4.2 for descriptions of faculty leaves. A leave of absence due to maternity or primary-care duties (as prescribed by the Family Leave and Medical Act) automatically extends the probationary period by one year unless requested by the faculty member and authorized by the Provost and VCAA.
3.5.4 Procedure for Evaluating Faculty Members for Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion (SD3701S)
3.5.4.1 Summary of the Evaluation Procedure (SD5821S) (SD5921S) (SD6021S) (SD8918S) (SD2818S) (SD10316S) (SD10216S) (SD1914F) (SD5813S)
1. This evaluation procedure is applied to all faculty members who are on at least a yearly nine-month contract and who are eligible for reappointment, tenure or promotion. The term "candidate" in subsequent items refers to the faculty member undergoing evaluation. The term "Chair" refers to the Department Chair or Program Director responsible for evaluating the candidate.
2. For faculty whose contracts begin in the fall, the evaluation process begins in Fall of the year of review. For faculty whose contracts begin in the spring the tenure clock begins the following academic year.
A. In the case of a contractually required review (i.e., a reappointment or tenure review), the Provost and VCAA begins the process by sending a notice of review to each candidate with a copy to the faculty's member's chair. The notice of review specifies the documents to be prepared and the timetable for the review process.
B. In the case of a requested review (i.e., an early tenure review or promotion to either Professor or Senior Lecturer), the candidate initiates the process, notifying Academic Affairs and his/her Department Chair in writing of the request for review by December
1. Faculty members are encouraged to meet with their Chairs to discuss the request and to consider the likelihood of Chair and Department support before pursuing the request. If the faculty member decides to pursue the request, he/she notifies the Provost and VCAA who then sends the candidate a notice of review as described above. Faculty members considering early tenure reviews or promotion reviews prior to the awarding of tenure should note that while a faculty member may request a review for tenure before the contractually specified time, a negative tenure decision in this case is equivalent to a decision to not reappoint the faculty member after completion of the current probationary term. Because a promotion implies tenure, a negative decision on a request for promotion from a non-tenured faculty member on the tenure-track has the same consequences; this provision does not apply to negative promotion decisions for candidates for the rank of Senior Lecturer.
3. Each faculty member under review prepares an evaluation file including a Candidate's Statement, a Fall semester Faculty Record and an up-to-date curriculum vitae of his/her professional career. (Information about the format and contents of the Candidate's Statement is available in Section 3.5.4.3.) If the candidate desires, letters of recommendation from students and/or colleagues and samples of professional work may be collected for submission at this time. All materials must be submitted to the Chair by the deadline specified in the notice of review.
4. The Chair adds copies of the candidate's annual Faculty Records and Merit Evaluations (including Dean's or Provost's written explanation of final evaluation and Provost's response to any appeal), student evaluation rating summaries and comments (available from Academic Affairs upon request), and peer reviews of the faculty member's teaching to this file. For candidates for reappointment and for tenure and promotion to the rank of Associate Professor, these additional materials should cover the full period of time that the faculty member has been a full-time member of the UNC Asheville faculty. For candidates for promotion to the rank of Professor or Senior Lecturer, these additional materials should cover the preceding five full years. The Chair makes these materials available to the tenured members of the Department for their review.
In addition, personnel review letters (available from Academic Affairs upon request) are added to the file. For candidates for tenure, the Provost’s letter granting reappointment (if applicable) is added to the file; for candidates for promotion to Full Professor, all personnel review letters since the granting of tenure are added: Provost’s letters granting tenure, denying promotion, or responding to post-tenure review; Dean’s post-tenure review letters; PTRC recommendation letters to the Dean/Provost; and if applicable, any PTR development plans.
5. In certain circumstances, this process is modified as described below to ensure a fair and comprehensive evaluation.
A. When the faculty member under review is a Chair or Program Director
When the faculty member under review serves as a department chair or program director, the Provost and VCAA, or designated program area Dean, in consultation with the faculty member being evaluated, will assign a tenured faculty member to serve in the role of Chair. The designated Chair will have a tenured faculty appointment outside the department (or program) and within the division (or divisions).
B. When the Department has fewer than three tenured faculty members
If the department has fewer than three tenured faculty members, the Chair will consult with faculty members outside the department chosen in consultation with the candidate and approved by the Provost and VCAA. No fewer than three tenured faculty members shall participate fully in the departmental review process. Faculty mentors from the New Faculty Mentoring Program (see section 4.1.7) may not be selected to act in this capacity. The following are faculty appropriate to consider for inclusion:
1) Tenured faculty members in Departments where the faculty member has taught courses.
2) Chairs or Program Directors in Departments where the faculty member has taught courses.
3) Tenured faculty members in other Departments who are familiar with the faculty member's work.
C. When the faculty member has taught courses outside the Department
When the faculty member has taught courses outside the Department, the Chair should request written evaluations of the faculty member's performance from the Chairs/Directors of those Departments/Programs. The Chair in his/her statement regarding the candidate's performance should address these evaluations.
D. When the faculty member has reassigned time for administrative duties
When the faculty member has reassigned time for administrative duties, the Chair will request a written evaluation of the faculty member's performance from the person who supervises these administrative activities. The Chair in his/her statement regarding the candidate's performance will address this evaluation.
E. When the Chair is untenured (SD6205S)
If the Chair of the faculty member is untenured, the Provost and VCAA (or designated Dean) in consultation with the faculty member and his or her Chair will assign a tenured faculty member to serve in the role of Chair. The designated Chair should be a tenured faculty member appointed in the same division of the University or from a related department/program. The untenured Chair will be provided the opportunity to submit a letter of evaluation for the candidate's review dossier, and the candidate will have opportunity to respond to this letter.
F. When the faculty member has a joint appointment (Faculty Handbook 2.6.2)
The Chair of the faculty member's primary department will be responsible for coordinating the departmental review and for composing the Chair/Director's Evaluation and Recommendation. The Chair of the second department will prepare an evaluation statement and recommendation which is made available to the candidate and added to the materials listed in (4) above. The Chair of the primary department must refer to this statement and recommendation in the Chair/Director’s Evaluation and Recommendation.
G. When the faculty member is a member of the Committee of Tenured Faculty
Because Associate Professors are eligible to serve on the Committee of Tenured Faculty (CTF), it is possible members of the CTF to themselves apply for promotion to Professor during their term of service. A member of CTF who applies for promotion will resign from the committee before deliberation of any files begins and be replaced in accordance with 10.2.1.3 by the faculty member who was runner-up in the appropriate program area in the last faculty election.
6. After all tenured Department members have reviewed these materials, the Chair assembles these faculty for a vote on the candidate's reappointment, tenure or promotion request.
7. After consulting with the tenured Department members, and reviewing all materials in the evaluation file, the Chair writes an evaluation of the faculty member under review, including the vote of the assembled tenured Department members, and the date of that meeting, as well as the Chair's own recommendation regarding the faculty member. (Information about the format and contents of the Chair's Statement is available in Section 3.5.4.4.)
8. The Chair must submit his/her statement to the faculty member at least 5 days prior to its submission to the Office of Academic Affairs and, if the faculty member so desires, meet with him/her to discuss the recommendation.
A. In all cases, the faculty member may write a supplementary statement including explanatory or clarifying information after reviewing the Chair's Statement. This supplementary statement should be sent to the Chair and included in the candidate's evaluation file.
B. In cases where the Chair makes a negative recommendation, the UNC Asheville Tenure Policies and Regulations (Section 14.2, III-D-1-b) delineate a specific procedure to be followed:
1) In addition to submitting the Chair's Statement to the candidate, the Chair simultaneously communicates the intention to issue a negative recommendation to the Provost and VCAA and the faculty member in a separate simple, unelaborated written statement.
2) Within 5 days of receipt of that notice, the faculty member may request a conference with the Chair and the opportunity to provide additional written evidence or views bearing on the faculty member's demonstrated professional competence and potential for future contributions. This statement of rebuttal is included in the faculty member's evaluation file.
3) If the faculty member does not request a conference or provide additional written materials bearing on the case during this 5 day interval, the Chair's evaluation and recommendation are added to the candidate's evaluation file.
9. The candidate and Chair submit copies of only the following materials to the Office of Academic Affairs by the deadline specified in the notice of review: the Candidate's Statement, the Curriculum Vitae, the Fall semester Faculty Record, the Chair's Evaluation and, if written, the candidate's statement of clarification or rebuttal.
10. The materials listed in # 9, along with the faculty member's annual Faculty Records and Merit Evaluations (including Dean's or Provost's written explanation of final evaluation and Provost's response to any appeal), the results of student evaluation of instruction (both rtings and comments, and personal review letters as stipulated in (4) above (all provided by the Office of Academic Affairs) are made available to the Committee of Tenured Faculty. During the entire process from Tenure Committee to the review of the Chancellor, confidentiality is of paramount importance. Only individuals authorized to be involved in the review may have knowledge of the content of the review or share the vote tally. Members of the Committee are asked not to discuss any review material apart from the whole committee and to focus their comments and arrive at their conclusions based on the contents of the candidate’s dossier. The Committee of Tenured Faculty, upon completion of the reviews, meets with the Provost and VCAA to transmit, with comment, its vote on their recommendation regarding the faculty member's reappointment, tenure or promotion. The Provost and VCAA may involve the Deans in a consultative role so as to help assure equity of standards. The vote, including its tally, along with the comment material will be held in confidence thereafter by all members of the Committee and the Provost and VCAA (and any involved Deans). After the Provost and VCAA shares the vote tally and comment material from the Committee with the Chancellor, the Chancellor will also hold this information in confidence, and will refer to the Provost and VCAA without comment or context all queries regarding a review. The Chancellor’s communication roles are restricted to forwarding a favorable decision to the Board of Trustees and notifying the faculty member of an unfavorable decision. Under no conditions will the vote tally of the Committee be shared beyond the circle of reviewers. The Provost and VCAA will meet with the Committee after he or she knows whether the Chancellor will recommend the conferral of tenure and/or promotion so as to apprise the Committee members on the outcome of the process. The Committee members will hold this information in strict confidence.
11. After reviewing all materials, including the Chair's statement and the recorded vote of the assembled tenured Department members, and the vote of the Committee of Tenured Faculty, the Provost and VCAA makes a decision regarding the faculty member's reappointment, tenure or promotion.
12. The UNC Asheville Tenure Policies and Regulations specify the subsequent actions required by the Provost and VCAA, the Chancellor, and the Board of Trustees. In the case of a favorable Provost and VCAA recommendation, the decision is communicated to the faculty member and the Chancellor, and the process continues. In the case of an unfavorable Provost and VCAA recommendation, the faculty member has the right to conferences with the Provost and VCAA and the Committee of Tenured Faculty, and the right to seek review of the Provost and VCAA decision before the Faculty Hearings Committee. Candidates should consult the UNC Asheville Tenure Policies and Regulations (Section 14.2) for a more detailed description of all aspects of the process.
13. A candidate for tenure and/or promotion who is awarded promotion should then, in consultation with the immediate supervisor (Department Chair, unless the candidate is a Department Chair, in which case the program area Dean), develop a five-year plan for future accomplishments. This plan should indicate milestones connected to annual goals, and may be modified annually in consultation with the immediate supervisor.
14. Candidate's Chairs shall be informed of decisions at the same time as the candidate is informed; regardless of a negative or positive decision.
15. Any person that has served as a candidate’s faculty mentor through the formal faculty mentorship program on campus must recuse themselves in decision making about their mentee’s reappointment, tenure, or promotion decision, including a position as Chair, member of the CTF, or acting in the Provost position as signatory of the decision letter.
16. Candidates given a negative tenure decision shall be informed in their decision letter of their procedural rights to an appeal, including that they have full access to all letters in their personnel file.
3.5.4.2 Documents for Evaluation by the Office of Academic Affairs (SD10216S) (SD5813S) (SD1413F)
An evaluation folder must be established in the Office of Academic Affairs for each candidate under review for reappointment, tenure or promotion. Documents in this folder are reviewed by the Committee of Tenured Faculty and the Provost and VCAA. The Academic Affairs folder contains only the following documents:
1. The Candidate's Statement (submitted by the candidate)
2. The Professional Curriculum Vitae (submitted by the candidate)
3. The Fall semester Faculty Record (submitted by the candidate)
4. The Candidate's Statement of Clarification, Explanation or Rebuttal, if written (submitted by the candidate)
5. The Chair/Director's Evaluation and Recommendation (submitted by the Chair/Director)
6. The results of student evaluation of instruction (both ratings and comments) as stipulated in 3.5.4.1.4
7. All annual Faculty Records and Merit Evaluations (including Dean's or Provost's written explanation of final evaluation and Provost's response to any appeal) as stipulated in 3.5.4.1.4 (collected by Provost and VCAA)
3.5.4.3 Guidelines for Preparation of Documents by Candidates (SD5820S)
Candidates are required to prepare three documents: the Candidate's Statement, the Professional Curriculum Vitae and the Fall Semester Faculty Record. These documents first are submitted for review by the Chair and Department and then are forwarded to the Office of Academic Affairs where they are reviewed by the Committee of Tenured Faculty and the Provost and VCAA. Unless requested, candidates should not forward other supporting materials such as syllabi, course outlines, sample exams, and samples of scholarly or artistic work, testimonials, or letters from other Chairs/Directors or colleagues.1) Teaching: As an undergraduate, liberal arts-oriented institution, UNC Asheville values outstanding teaching above all other faculty accomplishments. Teaching is the art of helping students to learn. Consequently, it extends beyond the classroom to include individual teacher-student interaction, availability to students, and readiness to assist them. The following are suggested issues to address concerning teaching:
* titles, course numbers and actual enrollment of courses taught in each semester during the period under consideration
* philosophy of teaching
* reflection of university core values of diversity and equity, innovation, and sustainability in teaching
* methods employed (examples can be given)
* significant curricular or pedagogical contributions
* interdisciplinary teaching activities
* involvement of students in special academic projects
* mentorship of undergraduate research projects
* grants for pedagogical innovation
* peer and/or student teaching evaluations
* awards for teaching given in open competitions
* future plans
* factors to consider regarding performance in these areas (e.g., required v. elective courses, lower v. upper division courses, teaching within discipline v. teaching outside discipline, major v. service course, advising freshmen v. majors, etc.)
2) Scholarship and Scholarly or Creative Activity: Members of the faculty are expected to engage in scholarly or creative activity, some of which results in published scholarship. See 3.1 for the definitions of scholarship and scholarly or creative activity. Scholarship and scholarly or creative activity that involves students, community engagement, and/or interdisciplinary work is noteworthy. In an undergraduate, liberal arts-oriented institution, research and scholarship are especially valuable when they enhance teaching. The following are examples of scholarship and scholarly or creative activity:
Scholarship
* publications in journals (indicate if refereed), review articles, edited volumes and scholarly books or chapters
* other writings such as textbooks, book reviews, or software; or non-print instructional materials
* production or performance of art, music, literature, or drama
* presentation of papers or posters
Scholarly or creative activity
* participation in ongoing research or creative activity
* submission of grant proposals and grant-funded activities
* editorships and peer reviews
* attendance and participation in professional meetings, chairing of paper sessions, participation in symposia
* professional development activities
* work completed (but not yet published or presented) or in progress
* participation in undergraduate research
* research for new course preparation
Candidates should identify factors that contextualize performance in these areas, especially teaching workload (e.g., credit loads, class sizes, number of advisees, undergraduate research students, and independent studies as well as participation in diversity intensive courses, service-learning courses, and Arts & Ideas) but also including awards for scholarly or creative work, competitiveness or stature of journals or conferences in one's discipline, changes in one's line of research, obligations in other areas, or other relevant considerations. For community-engaged scholarship and scholarly or creative activity, the candidate should clarify the role of her or his expertise in the work, the faculty role in the process, the process and products of the inquiry and their relevance to academia and the public purpose.
3) Service: Members of the faculty are expected to participate actively in university and community life. Service activities that involve the faculty member's professional competence will be most relevant to the evaluation. The following are suggested issues to address concerning service:
* administration of programs and tasks that contribute to the cultural, educational, and social welfare of the university and community
* election or appointment to committees, task forces, commissions, boards, or public offices
* advising activities
* development of resources
* professional activity as judged by election or appointment to boards, offices in societies, and committees
* awards and prizes given in recognition of service
* positions of leadership
* public lectures, workshops, and consultations
* benefits to student-faculty relations, to one's department, to the University, and to the local, regional, national, or international community
* factors to consider regarding performance in these areas (e.g., opportunities for service, obligations in other areas)
Candidates should identify factors that contextualize performance in these areas especially teaching workload (e.g., credit loads, class sizes, number of advisees, undergraduate research students, and independent studies as well as participation in diversity intensive courses, service-learning courses, and Arts & Ideas) but also including reassigned time for service roles, time commitments for various service roles, obligations in other areas, or other relevant considerations.
3.5.4.4 Guidelines for Preparation of Documents by Chairs/Directors
Chairs are responsible for writing an evaluation of the candidate's performance, including a specific recommendation regarding reappointment, tenure or promotion, and for assembling all comments from annual student evaluation forms administered since the candidate's last review. These documents are forwarded to the Office of Academic Affairs where they are reviewed by the Committee of Tenured Faculty and the Provost and VCAA. Chairs should not forward other supporting materials such as syllabi, course outlines, sample exams, and samples of scholarly or artistic work, testimonials, or letters from other Chairs/Directors or colleagues.
1. Chair's Evaluation1) Required issues: The Chair is required to address the following points in the Chair's Evaluation. Evaluations failing to cover these points will be returned for revision.
* The statement must report the results of the vote taken at the meeting of the tenured faculty in the department and the date of that meeting.
* If the candidate has reassigned time from teaching, the Chair should make clear the amount of reassigned time awarded and the specific departmental expectations in view of this reassigned time.
* The statement should provide a brief description of the department's Peer Review of Teaching (3.3.3.1.2) and summarize the results of peer reviews.
2) Evaluation of teaching: Chairs should address the appropriate points regarding teaching from the following list in the Chair's Evaluation.
* appropriateness of candidate's training and expertise to departmental and institutional needs
* trends, patterns or tendencies in student feedback on instruction interpreted in light of the nature of the courses surveyed (e.g., major/service/general education, required/elective, upper division/lower division
* teaching effectiveness as indicated by peer review, senior exit interviews, information from Chairs/Directors of other departments/programs in which the candidate has taught, or other methods by which the candidate's teaching has been evaluated. Informal anonymous sources should not be consulted. (Comparison may be made to others in the department or others teaching similar courses with similar loads.)
* class materials such as textbooks, exams; syllabi/course policies
* curricular/pedagogical innovations by the candidate
* supervision of student projects by candidate
* utilization of reassigned time for teaching
* when problems exist in teaching, factors likely to be influencing performance (e.g., types of courses, types of students) as well as how the candidate has addressed concerns about their teaching effectiveness as addressed in peer reviews, student feedback on instructions, and/or AFRs and what kind of support was provided through the department and the university to address these concerns.
3) Evaluation of scholarship and scholarly or creative activity: Chairs should address the following points regarding scholarship and scholarly or creative activity in the Chair's Evaluation while taking into account the faculty’s teaching workload (e.g., credit loads, class sizes, number of advisees, undergraduate research students, and independent studies as well as participation in diversity intensive courses, service-learning courses, and Arts & Ideas). It is imperative that the Chair communicate these points in a clear and comprehensive manner because members of the Committee of Tenured Faculty, and the Provost and VCAA, often are individuals outside of the discipline.
* basis on which the candidate's work is being evaluated (e.g., Chair's appraisal, consultation with colleagues familiar with the work within or outside the institution who are familiar with the work, or members of the community in the case of engaged scholarship and scholarly or creative activity)
* quality of the candidate's work, along with corroborative data and/or specific examples
* significance of candidate's activities to his/her teaching, to the Department, to the University, to knowledge in his or her field
* if the work involves community engagement (defined in 3.1), the community impact
* utilization of reassigned time for scholarly and creative activity
* when activities in this area are minimal, factors likely to be influencing scholarly productivity should be discussed
4) Evaluation of service: Chairs should address the following points regarding service in the Chair's Evaluation while taking into account the faculty’s teaching workload (e.g., credit loads, class sizes, number of advisees, undergraduate research students, and independent studies as well as participation in diversity intensive courses, service-learning courses, and Arts & Ideas). Generally, as a faculty member’s rank increases, his or her amount of service should increase as well. The service should also increase in its relative substantive contribution to the primary goals of the university.
* basis on which candidate's work is being evaluated (e.g., Chair's appraisal, interviews of colleagues and/or community members with whom the candidate has worked)
* significance of the candidate's work to the Department, the institution, the community
* candidate's performance in advising, including corroborative data and/or specific examples
* quality of the candidate's other service activities, including corroborative data and/or specific examples
* when activities in this area are minimal, factors likely to be responsible (e.g. opportunities for service, obligations in other areas)
3.6 Grievance Procedure (amended by SD0813F, SD0710F, SD4189S)
3.6.0 Process for Filing a Grievance
Any faculty member having a grievance as defined in Section 14.2 may petition the Faculty Grievance Committee for redress. The petition shall be written and shall set forth in detail the nature of the grievance and the party against whom the grievance is directed. The petition shall contain any information that the petitioner considers pertinent to his case. If the grievance arises out of a single action, the petition should be filed within thirty days from the time that the grievant should have reasonably known that the action occurred. The committee shall decide whether the facts merit a detailed investigation so that submission of a petition shall not result automatically in an investigation or detailed consideration of the petition. . In cases where a faculty member wishes to address a workplace concern but does not yet wish to file a formal grievance, they have the option of contacting one of the Faculty Ombuds, whose roles are outlined in Section 10.5.13.
3.6.1 Grievance Committee Procedure
Upon the receipt of a grievance petition, the Chair shall, within one week, summon the committee to meet.
Any committee member who is a party to the grievance or who is in the same academic department as the petitioner(s) shall disqualify himself. In addition, a faculty member who feels he or she has a conflict of interest may, after consultation with the Chair of the Grievance Committee and the Chair of the Faculty Senate, be disqualified.
The Grievance Committee shall assume its duties at the beginning of the academic year and shall continue in those duties until the new committee is formed the following year.
3.6.2 Initial Screening
Mere receipt of a petition does not establish the need for a full grievance hearing. The first effort of the committee is to "decide whether the facts merit a further investigation". This determination shall be made only by a designated committee member who will secure from the grievant details necessary to explain the petition. Such inquiry shall be made only of the grievant, and findings shall be reported back to the committee simply as allegations. The purpose of this inquiry is to allow members to understand the petition as delivered, to amplify written charges, to remove possible misunderstandings of or ambiguities in the petition, and to ascertain whether at least prima facie the grievant has raised a significant issue.
If it is determined that this is the case, and if mediation has not already been pursued, the Chair of the Grievance Committee will ask both parties to the grievance whether they wish to voluntarily submit their grievance to mediation, in accordance with 3.6.3. A decision not to participate in mediation will not be held against either party in any further proceedings.
3.6.3 Mediation
If both parties choose to attempt mediation, the Chair of the Grievance Committee will assemble a list of mediators to be agreed upon by both parties. If both parties do not agree on a mediator, the mediation attempt will be terminated. Members of the UNCA faculty or staff, members of the faculty or staff of other campuses within the University, or individuals from outside the University community, may serve as mediators, as long as they have successfully completed either (1) formal mediation training that is substantially equivalent to the training required for certification by the North Carolina Administrative Office of the Courts, or (2) formal mediation training that has been specifically designed for use in a university setting. However, mediators may not be members of the committee that hears grievances.
If there are costs associated with the mediation, they will be shared by the parties to the grievance. Attorneys will not be allowed to participate in the mediation process, except as mediators or non-participatory observers.
No record of the mediation process will be produced by the mediator other than an unelaborated written statement to the appropriate authority necessary to invoke the next step in the grievance, i.e., that mediation was attempted, but settlement was not reached. Mediators may not be called as witnesses in any subsequent proceeding. Nothing that is said or done by any party during a mediation process may be referred to by, or used against, a party in any subsequent proceeding and no blame will attach to either party if the mediation does not produce a resolution.
Any mediation agreement that binds the University must be signed by a University official with the authority to bind the University concerning the particular agreement.
Any time limit concerning the grievance will be suspended for the duration of the mediation process.
If mediation does not result in a satisfactory resolution of the grievance, the Grievance Committee initiates a formal inquiry.
3.6.4 Formal Inquiry
The formal inquiry should begin within forty days of the conclusion of unsuccessful mediation unless all parties agree in writing to an extension or the grievance is filed within forty days of spring commencement.
In conducting a formal inquiry, the Grievance Committee shall offer the petitioner(s) and the accused:
The committee shall offer to keep a recording of its hearings, and shall allow supervised access to the tape by the petitioners and the accused. A transcript of the tape will not be prepared except on request of one of the parties who shall bear the cost of the transcript.
The committee shall prepare minutes of each of its meetings, summarizing activity and listing in detail its findings and the reasons supporting them.
If the committee determines that an adjustment in favor of the grievant is appropriate, the committee conveys that information to the faculty member, the dean, the department head, or other appropriate administrators. If the relevant administrator does not make the recommended change, or a different satisfactory change, within a reasonable period of time, the grievant will inform the chair of the committee, who will advise the chancellor of the committee’s recommendation. The decision of the chancellor is the final administrative decision, and he or she will notify the faculty member and the appropriate administrator of that decision in writing. The chancellor may consult with the committee prior to making a decision.
If the committee determines that no adjustment in favor of the grievant is appropriate, it will advise the faculty member and the chancellor.
If neither the relevant administrative official nor the chancellor makes an adjustment as recommended by the committee, the faculty member may appeal to the board of trustees by filing a written notice to the chancellor, with evidence of delivery, within 10 days of the receipt of the decision. The notice must include a brief statement of the basis for appeal. If the board agrees to consider the appeal, it does so as expeditiously as possible on a schedule established by the chancellor. The chancellor must inform the grievant of the time limit for filing the petition, the requirement of a written notice of appeal, and the schedule for submission of information to be reviewed by the board. The decision of the board of trustees is final.
3.7 Post-tenure review (SD2711S) (SD1000F) (SD6405S) (SD0208F) (SD0709F)
Post-Tenure review at UNC Asheville is a periodic, comprehensive, cumulative review of tenured members of the faculty that emphasizes peer participation. The primary purpose of Post-Tenure Review (PTR) is to ensure continued faculty development and promote faculty vitality.
3.7.1 Objectives of Post-Tenure Review
Entirely separate from reviews for reappointment, tenure, and promotion, PTR is a formative process that focuses on identifying specific areas of strength among senior faculty and, when appropriate, areas requiring more concentrated development efforts. PTR recognizes and respects disciplinary differences in pedagogy and in the focus of faculty professional activities. This process recognizes that each faculty member is reviewed annually by the department chair and that this review is a comprehensive evaluation in the three major areas of teaching, scholarship and scholarly or creative activity, and service. The PTR reviews all aspects of performance and creates a summary of several years of professional activity that may address trends not immediately obvious in annual evaluations. As professionals, faculty will welcome opportunities for and are committed to professional growth. The faculty assume primary responsibility for the implementation of activities which foster professional growth in ways that support the missions of their programs and the University as well as their own professional career(s). Professional development plans (see Section 3.7.3 below) will identify resource support necessary to accomplish specified goals. The Provost and VCAA (hereafter referred to as Provost) is responsible for approval of these plans and allocation of any special resource support required to accomplish the objectives of the plan(s).
3.7.2 Procedure for Evaluation (SD9118S) (SD2818S) (SD1317F) (SD7516S) (SD6615S) (SD1914F) (SD5813S) (SD8212S)
For the purpose of these sections, the words "Department Chair" and "Chair" (except where Post Tenure Review Committee Chair is noted) refers to any faculty member who directly evaluates the PTR evaluee for merit, reappointment, tenure or promotion.
1. The term "faculty member" includes all persons on a nine or twelve-month contract who teach one half or more of a full load and librarians with faculty rank. A faculty member who accepts an administrative appointment which results in teaching less than one half of a full load will have their PTR review period extended by the time served in this appointment.
2. Tenured faculty members shall be evaluated every five years. . The first post-tenure review covers the five academic years following the academic year in which a successful tenure application was considered. Likewise, when a faculty member is promoted to the rank of Professor, the subsequent PTR period covers the five academic years following the year in which the application for promotion was considered. The Provost may approve the postponement of Post-Tenure Review in a case of illness, leave of absence, family emergency or other similar circumstances.
3. A review for promotion will take precedence over the PTR process and may replace it as follows. When faculty members apply for promotion in the same year they are to be evaluated for PTR, the PTR will be postponed. If successful, the review for promotion will satisfy the requirement for PTR and will start a new five-year PTR clock for the faculty member who is promoted. If the review for promotion is not successful, however, the faculty member will complete the PTR process in the following year, even if the application for promotion is renewed. Thus, post-tenure reviews will be deferred by an application for promotion only once.
The case of a faculty member who is on a PTR development plan is an exception, in that an application for promotion cannot delay the timing of PTR review indicated in the development plan. However, a successful application for promotion still implies that the faculty member now meets or exceeds expectations, satisfying the PTR development plan and starting a new five-year PTR clock for the faculty member who is promoted.
4. In the spring before the academic year in which a tenured faculty member is to be evaluated, the Office of the Provost begins the evaluation process by notifying the selected tenured faculty members and requesting them to begin assembling materials for the review committee. In this process, the Office of the Provost serves as facilitator and convener.
5. The evaluation will be performed by a University-wide committee called the Post-Tenure Review Committee (PTRC). All members of the PTRC, all Chairs (and those assuming the role of Chair as described in item 9 below), and all Deans are required to complete training using (1) digital training modules developed by UNC General Administration and (2) annual information and review sessions covering campus-specific policies and procedures.
6. Evaluation of tenured faculty members is peer evaluation. The committee will consider a variety of materials. Peer observation of teaching will always be one of the procedures employed in the evaluation.
7. The PTRC will review a dossier containing documents from several sources. The evaluee will submit the items noted (see A 1-2, below) to the Chair of his or her department. The Chair will provide items 3-4. The Office of the Provost provides item 5-6. For evaluation of Chairs, the most senior tenured member of the department/program will normally assume the duties of the Chair, as described below.
A. Completed Dossier (SD9118S) (SD1413F)
The evaluee's dossier is assembled by the Chair (or, for evaluation of Chairs, by the most senior tenured member of the department) and submitted to the PTRC by the third Monday of October. The complete dossier will include, in order:
1) The Evaluee's Statement focusing on the five years of the PTR review period (submitted by Evaluee to Chair by the third Monday of September).
2) The Professional Curriculum Vitae (submitted by Evaluee to Chair by the third Monday of Septmber).
3) Chair's Evaluation (prepared by the Chair, or for the review of Chairs, by the most senior tenured member of the department), as well as any supplementary statement submitted by the evaluee in response.
4) Quantitative scores and student comments from course evaluations over the PTR review period (provided by the Chair; available from Academic Affairs upon request).
5) Annual Faculty Records (past five years, collected by the Office of the Provost).
6) Merit Evaluations (including Dean's or Provost's written explanation of final evaluation and Provost's response to any appeal) (past five years, collected by the Office of the Provost).
7) All personnel review letters since the granting of tenure are added: Provost’s letters granting tenure, denying promotion, or evaluating a Post-Tenure Review development plan; Dean’s Post-Tenure Review letters; PTRC recommendation letters to the Dean/Provost; and if applicable, any PTR development plans (collected by the Office of the Provost).
Failure of the evaluee to provide materials for his or her dossier in a timely fashion may result in sanctions imposed by the Provost.
B. The Evaluee's Statement
1) Purpose: The Evaluee's Statement should be a reflective self-assessment that comments on the evaluee's past, present and future contributions to the department and the university. This statement may also be used to discuss factors and extenuating circumstances affecting the evaluee's performance, which are not usually covered in the listing of activities by category. The evaluee should refer to categories outlined in Section 3.5.4.3 of the Faculty Handbook.
2) Format: The Evaluee's Statement should be written as a cover letter to the Chair of the PTRC. The statement is written in narrative form; possible issues to address, along with categories and guidelines for evaluating performance, are discussed in Section 3.5.4.3. The Evaluee should also briefly outline his or her professional plans for the next five years in the context of the missions of department and university, which may also include a discussion of resources required.
C. The Professional Curriculum Vitae
1) Purpose: The complete curriculum vitae puts the evaluee's professional work at UNC Asheville into perspective relative to the individual's career in general. This allows the PTRC to evaluate the individual's recent activities or changing emphases at UNC Asheville in light of his or her previous levels of activity and responsibilities.
2) Format: The curriculum vitae should be written in a format appropriate to apply for an academic position in the discipline. It should include information about the evaluee's education, degrees, awards, honors, professional employment, papers/publications/artistic activities, grant activities, professional consultancies and major service activities.
D. Materials supporting professional activity (submitted by evaluee to Department Chair by the third Monday of September, if requested)
1) Purpose: Materials selected by the evaluee are meant to emphasize or augment the curriculum vitae regarding teaching, scholarship and scholarly or creative activities, and service. Materials provided should be chosen to illuminate the quality of the evaluee's activities rather than duplicate those reported in the curriculum vitae.
2) Format: Materials provided by the evaluee should be representative and only a sampling, supporting:
a) Teaching: Representative syllabi, assignments, student work or other materials illustrating teaching practices and student learning.
b) Scholarship and Scholarly or Creative Activity: Representative scholarly papers, letters of commendation, awards, reviews of scholarly, creative or performance activities.
c) Service: Representative professional service activities to local or greater community, letters of commendation, awards, etc.
E. Chair's Evaluation (provided by the Chair of the department and assembled in the dossier submitted to the PTRC by the third Monday of October)
1) Purpose: The Chair's Evaluation has always been central to decisions concerning reappointment, tenure and promotion. It is a summary evaluation that, when viewed together with the evaluations appended to the Faculty record, provides an historical account of the evaluee's overall performance as viewed by the Chair.
2) Format: The Chair's Evaluation should be written in simple narrative form, to the Chair of the PTRC, addressing the evaluee's past, present and future contributions to the department and the university and providing a clear recommendation as to whether the evaluee exceeded, met, or did not meet expectations, where faculty expectations are defined in section 3.3.3. This statement may also be used to address factors and extenuating circumstances affecting the evaluee's performance, which are not usually covered in the listing of activities by category. Discussion of teaching performance should refer to the results of peer review of teaching as well as student rating of instruction. The Chair must consult with all tenured faculty colleagues in the department and report on that consultation. It is not expected that a department vote is taken or reported. The Chair may consult with untenured faculty (who have completed GA-provided PTR training modules) or with tenured faculty members outside of the department at their discretion; for the PTR of a joint appointment, the Chair must consult with the department chair/program director of the second department in making the evaluation. For purposes of faculty development, the Chair should discuss the evaluation with the faculty member prior to submission of the evaluation to the PTRC. The evaluee may write a supplementary statement including explanatory or clarifying information after reviewing the Chair's Evaluation. This supplementary statement should be sent to the Chair and included in the candidate's evaluation file.
8. The faculty member and his or her chair will provide all materials to the Office of Academic Affairs by the date specified by the Post-Tenure Review Committee.
9. For Post-Tenure Review of Chairs, the most senior tenured member of the department will normally assume the duties of the Chair. However, a Chair who perceives a conflict of interest with that person may petition the Provost to appoint another tenured faculty member to those responsibilities. If no tenured member is available within the department, the Provost may appoint one from a department within the same division of the university, giving weight to seniority of UNC Asheville service and consulting with the Committee on Faculty Welfare and Development.
3.7.3 Results of Post-Tenure Review (SD7516S) (SD1914F)
1. The PTRC will write a report following the objectives of PTR given in section 3.7.1 that will go to the Program Area Dean by March 1, with a copy to the faculty member, the department chair, and the Provost and VCAA. This report should provide a narrative evaluation of the faculty member’s performance over the past five years and will include the specific recommendation of the PTRC to the Dean that the faculty member has met or exceeded expectations as defined below or has one or more areas that require concentrated development efforts.
2. Drawing on this recommendation, the Dean will evaluate the faculty member’s performance as either:
A. The faculty member exceeds expectations. For purposes of PTR, to be evaluated as exceeding expectations, a faculty member should either: (1) have significant accomplishments in at least one area of faculty activity while meeting expectations in all other areas over the five-year PTR period, or (2) consistently perform above expectations in all areas of faculty activity over the five-year PTR period. A letter communicating this evaluation will be sent to the faculty member, with copies to the Chair and the Provost. The letter will express collegial appreciation for contributions to the mission of UNC Asheville, and will cite accomplishments that are particularly noteworthy. In consultation with the immediate supervisor (Department Chair, unless the candidate is a Department Chair, in which case the program area Dean), the successful candidate should then develop a five-year plan for future accomplishments. This plan should indicate milestones connected to annual goals, and may be modified annually in consultation with the immediate supervisor. The Post-Tenure Review process will then be complete.
B. The faculty member meets expectations. For purposes of PTR, to be evaluated as meeting expectations, a faculty member should show satisfactory performance in all three areas of faculty activity over the five-year PTR period as defined in section 3.3.3. A letter communicating this evaluation will be sent to the faculty member, with copies to the Chair and the Provost. The letter will express collegial appreciation for contributions to the mission of UNC Asheville, and will cite accomplishments that are particularly noteworthy as well as any suggested areas of improvement. In consultation with the immediate supervisor (Department Chair, unless the candidate is a Department Chair, in which case the program area Dean), the successful candidate should then develop a five-year plan for future accomplishments. This plan should indicate milestones connected to annual goals, and may be modified annually in consultation with the immediate supervisor. The Post-Tenure Review process will then be complete.
C. The evaluee does not meet expectations in one or more areas that require concentrated development efforts. The letter communicating this evaluation will be sent to the evaluee and the Chair with a copy to the Provost. The letter will identify which of the three major areas of teaching, scholarship and scholarly or creative activity, and/or service are of concern while noting any accomplishments that appear commendable or excellent. The faculty member may challenge the evaluation that a Development Plan is needed by petitioning in writing to the Provost within 14 calendar days of receiving the recommendation.
If the Provost affirms the recommendation after considering a challenge, or the recommendation is unchallenged, the faculty member will construct a Development Plan in consultation with the Chair and the Program Area Dean. The Plan will include specific steps to lead to improvement in the area(s) of concern noted in the evaluation. The Plan will include a time when the evaluee will again be reviewed by the PTRC - no less than one year later, up to three years later. The Chair and the Provost will review the plan to determine resource implications. The Plan must be approved by the Provost. The evaluee will meet at least semi-annually with the Department chair or academic unit head during the development period to assess progress.
Development Plans should include provision for mentoring peers who are requested by the evaluee and approved by the Provost. Mentoring peers should be senior members of the faculty who are skillful in collegial relationships and recognized for excellence in the area(s) requiring improvement. On request a mentoring peer may be appointed before the Development Plan is finalized.
3. At the conclusion of the term specified in the development plan the evaluee will be reviewed a second time by the PTRC. The committee will review the original file, the development plan, and a new file documenting developmental progress. The PTRC Report will be sent to the Provost for review and final decision, with copies to the Program Area dean, the evaluee and the chair. The PTRC now can make one of three recommendations to the Provost, who makes the final evaluation:
A. The evaluee now meets or exceeds expectations. The PTRC Report will recognize developmental progress and take note of any added accomplishments, which are commendable or excellent. In consultation with the immediate supervisor (Department Chair, unless the candidate is a Department Chair, in which case the program area Dean), the successful candidate should then develop a five-year plan for future accomplishments. This plan should indicate milestones connected to annual goals, and may be modified annually in consultation with the immediate supervisor. The Post-Tenure Review process will then be complete.
B. The evaluee has made some progress toward remediating problem areas but should continue his/her efforts. If the Provost affirms this judgment, the evaluee will revise the plan in consultation with his/her Chair and the Program Area Dean and come before the PTRC one final time in no more than 1 year.
C. The evaluee has failed to make any progress toward improvement and warrants sanctions. In a case that warrants sanctions the Provost will decide the nature of these sanctions. Before implementing sanctions the Provost should consult with the PTRC, much as the Provost now consults with the Committee of Tenured Faculty before issuing a denial of tenure, but the final decision, as with tenure, is up to the Provost.
4. If a final review is warranted in accordance with 3B above, the PTRC will review the original file, the original and revised development plans, and a new file documenting developmental progress. The PTRC Report will be sent to the Provost for review and final decision, with copies to the Program Area dean, the evaluee and the chair.The PTRC now can make only one of two recommendations to the Provost, who makes the final evaluation:
A. The evaluee now meets or exceeds expectations. The PTRC Report will acknowledge developmental progress and take note of any new accomplishments or contributions to the mission of UNC Asheville that appear excellent or commendable. In consultation with the immediate supervisor (Department Chair, unless the candidate is a Department Chair, in which case the program area Dean), the successful candidate should then develop a five-year plan for future accomplishments. This plan should indicate milestones connected to annual goals, and may be modified annually in consultation with the immediate supervisor. The Post-Tenure Review process will then be complete.
B. The evaluee has failed to make sufficient progress toward improvement and warrants sanctions.
5. Any sanctions including discharge or other disciplinary action imposed on faculty members for continuing deficiency in performance shall be in compliance with the criteria and procedures for due process as established in Chapter VI, Sections 602, 603, and 605 of The Code of the University of North Carolina.
6. The provost must annually certify that all aspects of the post-tenure review process are in compliaance with Policy 400.3.3 of the UNC Policy Manual and any associated guidelines adopted by the president of the University.
3.8 FORMS for Section 3.0
Chair's Narrative Form ("Faculty Performance Appraisal")
Annual Administrative Review (for chairs and program directors) (see bottom of link)