THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT ASHEVILLE FACULTY SENATE Senate Document Number 1092S Date of Senate Approval 1/16/92 Signature of Senate Chair __________________________ Date________ Action of Vice Chancellor: Approval _______________________________ Date________________ Denied _______________________________ Date________________ Reasons for denial and suggested modifications: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Statement of Faculty Senate Action: FWDC #1: Revision of UNCA REAPPOINTMENT, TENURE, PROMOTION GUIDELINES FOR FORMAL APPLICATION The candidate for reappointment, tenure, or promotion is expected to present his or her Chair with a well-documented report of accomplishments in the categories described below. The department Chair will review and evaluate each faculty member's level of accomplishment accordingly and, after appropriate consultation within the department, shall make recommendation relative to reappointment and tenure, and may advance recommendations relative to promotion. Such recommendations are carefully reviewed by the Committee of Tenured Faculty and by the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. The decision on the granting of tenure may precede the decision on promotion, although it is assumed that tenure will be awarded only to faculty who demonstrate the potential for promotion. In their early years at UNCA, faculty members should emphasize teaching and scholarly and creative activity. In cases where unusual amounts of service are expected from an untenured faculty member, the University will take this into account in making decisions about reappointment, tenure and promotion. It is expected that an individual will have achievements in all three categories (teaching, scholarly and creative activity, and service). In all cases there must be clear evidence of highly effective teaching. It is normally expected that candidates will also demonstrate significant contributions in one of the other two areas. Because promotion is based largely on accumulated accomplishment while in rank at UNCA, time spent in rank will vary according to the rate of achievement. Longevity per se is not considered sufficient grounds for promotion. In the interest of fairness it is desirable that approximately even standards prevail across the university. However, differences among departments and disciplines, as well as differing responsibilities among individual faculty members, require that these guidelines be implemented with some flexibility. It is normally expected that promotion to a senior rank (Associate or Full Professor) requires an outstanding level of achievement in either teaching or scholarly and creative activity, with at least a significant level of contribution in the other area, as well as in service. While the evaluation will focus on accomplishments since the last promotion, the candidate's whole career will be taken into consideration. Chairs or Program Directors who wish to recommend candidates for reappointment, tenure, or promotion should submit the following documents, in the order listed, to the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. I. The Candidate's Statement (a) Purpose: The Candidate's Statement should be viewed as a cover letter to the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. The Statement provides an opportunity for the candidate to integrate, expand, explain, and draw attention to information in the Annual Faculty Records. In addition, the statement can be used to discuss factors affecting the candidate's performance, factors not ordinarily covered in the listing of activities by categories. (b) Format: The Candidate's Statement should be written in narrative form. The specific orientation or focus of the statement is the candidate's choice. What follows are some possible issues to address in the various categories of evaluation and the guidelines used for the evaluation of performance in the categories. The lists in no way imply that lengthy statements are expected (2-4 pages normally are sufficient), and are suggestive but not prescriptive. Teaching Guidelines for Evaluation: As an undergraduate, liberal arts-oriented institution, UNCA 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. Advising is considered an essential part of the teaching-learning process. Good teaching is seldom measurable in quantitative terms; numerical summaries of student evaluations by themselves can never adequately measure the quality of teaching. Superior teaching may, in fact, be most recognized by students only after they have graduated. There is no one style nor any all-inclusive measure of excellent teaching. For all these reasons, guidelines can be only approximate. Some indicators of superior teaching are (not ranked in any order of priority): -- excellent student evaluations from semester to semester (summaries of student evaluations should always reflect student comments as well as numerical rankings) -- an outstanding commitment to advising -- successful involvement of students in undergraduate research or other special academic projects -- successful interdisciplinary teaching activities -- significant curricular or pedagogical contributions -- outstanding extramural achievement by a student, in which the instructor was directly instrumental -- unusual effort given to help students individually -- a teaching award given in open competition Suggested Issues to Address: * philosophy of teaching * methods employed (examples can be given) * noteworthy accomplishments (e.g., curricular innovations, student projects, testing methods) * 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.) Scholarly and Creative Activity Guidelines for Evaluation: Members of the faculty are expected to engage in scholarly or creative activity. These activities should be evaluated by their contribution to an academic area. Scholarly and creative activity which involves students and/or interdisciplinary work is noteworthy. In an undergraduate, liberal arts-oriented institution, research and scholarship can be especially valuable as they enhance teaching. Faculty members with reassigned time for scholarly and creative activity are expected to be more productive than those without. "Scholarly and creative activity" is defined broadly to include (not in any order of priority): -- participation in ongoing research -- creative activity, including production or performance of art, music, literature, or drama -- supervising student scholarly and creative activity -- attendance and participation in professional meetings, presentation of oral/poster papers, chairing of paper sessions, participation in symposia -- submission of grant proposals -- professional development activities -- publications in journals (indicate if refereed), review articles, and scholarly books -- other writings such as textbooks, book reviews, or software; or non-print instructional materials -- editorships and peer reviews -- scholarly or creative awards Suggested Issues to Address: * noteworthy accomplishments * work completed (but not yet published or presented) or in progress * grant activity, including proposals (pending or denied) * future plans * factors to consider regarding performance in these areas (e.g., competitiveness/stature of journals/conferences in one's discipline, changes in one's line of research, obligations in other areas, etc.) Service Guidelines for Evaluation: Members of the faculty are expected to participate actively in university and community life. Outstanding service activities which involve the faculty member's professional competence will be most relevant to the evaluation. Faculty members with reassigned time for service activities are expected to accomplish more in the area of service than those without. Among the recognizable activities for evaluating service are (not in any order of priority): -- administration of programs and tasks which 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 -- writing of grant proposals or the 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 Suggested Issues to Address: * noteworthy accomplishments * 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) II. The Professional Vitae (a) Purpose: The complete vita puts the candidate's professional work at UNCA into perspective relative to the individual's career in general. This permits the committee to assess the individual's activities at UNCA in light of his/her previous level of activity. This is particularly useful for candidates new to UNCA. (b) Format: The vita should be written in the format appropriate to applying for an academic position. It should include information about the candidate's education, degrees, awards and honors, professional employment, and most important papers/publications/artistic activities, grant activities, professional consultancies, or service activities. III. Chair/Director's Evaluation and Recommendation (a) Purpose: The Chair/Director's Evaluation has always been central to decisions concerning reappointment, tenure, and promotion. It is a summary evaluation which, when viewed together with the evaluations appended to the Annual Faculty Record, provides an historical account of the candidate's progress in the eyes of his or her Chair/Director. (b) Format: The Chair/Director's Evaluation should be written in simple narrative form, addressing all issues listed in the guidelines for evaluation that are relevant for the candidate in question. (For example, comments on supervision of student projects may not be relevant for all candidates.) In addition, the Chair/Director should address the following issues: Teaching * appropriateness of candidate's training and expertise to departmental and institutional needs * evaluation of teaching with corroborative data -- an interpretation of student evaluations in an historical context should be included (data on a single course or single semester is usually insufficient); Chair/Directors should provide data which show trends, patterns, or tendencies; the data should be interpreted in light of the nature of the courses surveyed (major/service/general education, required/elective, upper division/lower division);comparison should be made to others in the department or others teaching similar courses with similar loads -- all student comments on course evaluations may be requested in cases of reappointment and promotion and are expected in cases of tenure decisions -- other methods by which the candidate's teaching has been evaluated should be provided (e.g., senior exit interviews, class visitations by Chair/Director, interviews of colleagues who have observed the candidate's teaching) * comments on textbooks, exams, syllabi/course policies, curricular/pedagogical innovations, supervision of student projects by candidate * when problems exist in teaching/advising, factors likely to be influencing performance (e.g., types of courses, types of students), and recommendations Chair/Director has made to candidate, if any Scholarly and Creative Activity * significance of candidate's activities to his or her teaching, to the department, to the University, to knowledge in his or her field; basis on which the candidate's work is being evaluated (e.g., Chair/Director's appraisal, consultation with colleagues familiar with the work within or outside the institution); indicate number of tenured faculty consulted in the department, and summarize their judgement * the quality of the candidate's work, along with corroborative data and/or specific examples * when activities in this area are minimal, factors likely to be influencing productivity ( e.g., competitiveness of journals, conferences, etc. in the candidate's scholarly/professional area, teaching obligations) and recommendations Chair/Director has made to candidate, if any Service * basis on which candidate's work is being evaluated (e.g., Chair/Director'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 * quality of the candidate's work, 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) and recommendations Chair/Director has made to candidate, if any (c) Recommendation: The Chair/Director's Evaluation should conclude with a clear recommendation. If the Chair/Director desires reappointment, tenure, or promotion for his or her candidate, there should be no equivocation. Half-hearted statements will be interpreted as an indication of lack of support for the candidate. In turn, a Chair/Director's recommendation for denial of reappointment, tenure, or promotion should be firm and well reasoned. If nothing else, the Chair/Director's position must be clear as a matter of courtesy to the candidate. Note: All other supporting documents, such as syllabi, course outlines, sample exams, samples of scholarly or artistic work, and testimonials should be retained by the candidate. Raw data on student evaluations, including student comments, should be retained in departmental files for cases of reappointment and promotion, but forwarded to the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs in cases of tenure. Should the Committee of the Tenured Faculty desire more information, it will contact the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs who will request the materials from the appropriate Chair/Director. IV. Annual Faculty Records Upon receipt of the above three items (Candidate's Statement, Curriculum Vitae, Chair/Director's Evaluation/Recommendation), the Vice Chancellor will assemble, in order, the following Annual Faculty Records for the candidate: * for the promotion to Full Professor: all records since promotion to Associate Professor; if hired as Associate, all since hiring * for promotion to Associate Professor, tenure, reappointment as Assistant Professor or as an Instructor: all since hiring * reappointment as Lecturer: those since last appointment (a) Purpose: Annual Faculty Records are the primary means of providing information about the candidate's activities at UNCA. They will provide an historical account of the progress of the candidate. (b) Format: Activities are to be listed in three broad categories: teaching/advising, scholarly and creative activity/professional development, and service. Records should be comprehensive but should not be diluted with expected and ordinary activities. V. Merit Evaluations (a) Purpose: As an attachment to the Annual Faculty Record, the Chair/Director's annual evaluation and recommendation for or against a merit increase provides an historical record of the candidate's progress in the eyes of his or her Chair/Director. They also provide a collective corroboration for the Chair/Director's summary evaluation, submitted at the time of the faculty member's candidacy for reappointment, promotion or tenure. (b) Format: As specified by the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. VI. Complete Folder Once complete, the Candidate's folder will contain, in order, the following documents for the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Committee of the Tenured Faculty to review: (a) The Candidate's Statement (submitted by the candidate) (b) The Professional Vitae (submitted by candidate) (c) The Chair/Director's Evaluation and Recommendations (submitted by Chair/Director) (d) All appropriate Course Evaluations (collected by Chair/Director) (e) All appropriate Annual Records (collected by VCAA) (f) All appropriate Merit Evaluations (collected by VCAA) VII. The guidelines for Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion are subject to and subordinate to "Tenure Policies and Regulations" found in the Faculty Handbook, Appendix A-15 Section III, parts A through J, and Appendix A-16, "Procedures for Evaluation of Faculty Members;" and these must be read with care by both the applicant for reappointment, tenure, and promotion, and by the chair of the sponsoring department.