Governance Document
The Department of
Educational Studies
IV. FACULTY REVIEW
C.
Reappointment/Non-Reappointment Guidelines and Timelines
The reappointment process and agreement is essentially a 1-year contract that the university
completes to endorse faculty employment for the upcoming year. During the pre-tenure or
“probationary” years, they will be asked to submit an annual report of accomplishments in
the areas of teaching, research/scholarship/creative endeavor, and service and a current vita.
The reappointment materials are officially reviewed by the Department Chair and the Dean
and recommendations are made to the office of the VCAA to reappoint or renew the 1-year
contract or to dissolve the contract. When faculty first arrive on campus, they perceive the
reappointment process as occurring very quickly so they should be diligent to remain
organized and productive from Day 1. Plenty of guidance is available from existing faculty
and administrative sources to assist faculty in understanding what is required so that they
move toward tenure and promotion in a productive and systematic process.
Because the initial reappointments occur very quickly (the first in November of the first year
and the second in August or September beginning the second year), faculty are encouraged
from the first day to organize information in the three categories of teaching,
research/scholarship/creative endeavor, and service. Given that the first reappointment
occurs within the first 3-4 months of the first teaching year, course teaching evaluations for
the first semester will not yet be available. However, faculty can include copies of syllabi, a
current vitae, and a list of any creative/scholarship/creative endeavor projects, grants, or
presentations that they are currently pursuing or plan to pursue in the near future, and early
service activities. After the first two reappointments, remaining reappointments fall within
the same time frame as the annual reviews so the same documents can be used for both.
The key to annual reappointment is one’s individual ability to organize the materials and to
show productivity and progress toward tenure in the three central areas of teaching,
research/scholarship/creative endeavor, and service. See the specific guidelines for
1
Reappointment Review on the VCAA webpage under Memorandum No. 04-3 or Appendix
C.
Candidates for tenure track reappointments are expected to provide the following
documentation to the Department Chair and the Dean of the School of Education, according
to the schedule provided by the Department Chair:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
A current curriculum vita,
All current and previous annual reviews (peer reviews, Chair, Dean, and
VCAA’s), with supporting evidence for the most recent year in the areas of
teaching, research/scholarship/creative endeavor, and service,
All previous reappointment recommendations from all levels,
All raw and summary student evaluation forms for the most recent year, and
Any additional documents which provide evidence that the candidate is
meeting criteria for teaching, research/scholarship/creative endeavor, and
service by the candidate.
These materials should be categorized and organized based upon the Department of
Educational Studies and the IPFW campus Promotion and Tenure Documents.
For reappointment each year, the Chair of Educational Studies completes a written
evaluation of each non-tenured faculty member after reviewing their materials in regard to
teaching, research/scholarship/creative endeavors, and service. This evaluation should be
perceived by the faculty member as being a valuable resource in assisting them to address
problems or achieve goals that both they and the administration consider to be important.
The chair should meet with the faculty member to discuss the evaluation which will then
be forwarded to the dean. The dean writes an independent evaluation after reviewing the
chair’s evaluation along with the faculty member’s reappointment materials. The dean’s
evaluation serves both a formative and summative purpose. The dean’s evaluation
provides suggestions for improving or enhancing faculty performance to aid the faculty
member in developing strengths or overcoming weaknesses.
After meeting with the faculty member to discuss his/her evaluation, the dean forwards the
dean’s and chair’s reappointment evaluations, based on the faculty member’s materials, to
the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.
Copies of evaluations and other related personnel action forms are forwarded to all faculty
members each year and originals are placed in the confidential personnel file of the faculty
member. This confidential file is maintained in the School of Education office.
Timeline for Reappointment
Specific dates will be announced each year depending on the calendar and university
requirements. Note that for the first two reappointments, the reappointment and Annual
Review for merit occur at two separate times. From the third reappointment through
promotion and tenure, reappointment and merit review occur at the same point with the
same document. Unsatisfactory performance or progress is grounds for nonreappointment at any point, beginning in year one. Faculty should refer to OAA
Memorandum No. 04-3 in the Appendix for specific guidelines.
2
D.
Schedule of Review for Reappointment/Non-Reappointment for Tenure Track Faculty
1. Year 1 faculty reappointment materials are due to the chair November 1st of the first
semester (note: the Annual Review for merit is separate and is due in February). A
positive reappointment decision serves to insure employment for year 2 with faculty
notification in February. A non-reappointment decision serves as a 3- months notice.
2. Year 2 faculty reappointment materials are due to the chair by September 15th of the
second year (note: the Annual Review for merit is separate and is due in February). A
positive reappointment decision serves to insure employment for year 3 with faculty
notification in November. A non-reappointment decision serves as a 6-months notice.
Year 2 faculty reappointment materials are again due to the chair during the second
year of employment the second Friday in February in the form of the Annual Review
(note: this is three months after the second-year reappointment). A positive
reappointment serves to insure employment for year 4 with faculty notification in May.
A non-reappointment decision serves as a 1- year notice.
3. Year 3 faculty reappointment materials are due to the chair by the second Friday in
February and also serves to form the Annual Review. This annual review follows a
special format and serves as a comprehensive 3rd –year review. A comprehensive
department-based third year review prepared according to the Promotion and Tenure
dossier format outlined in OAA 99-1 is required in year 3 (See third-year review
guidelines). A positive reappointment serves to insure employment for year 5 with
faculty notification in May. A non-reappointment decision serves as a 1-year notice.
4. Year 4 faculty reappointment materials are due to the chair by the second Friday in
February and also serves to inform the Annual Review. A positive reappointment
serves to insure employment for year 6 with faculty notification in May. A nonreappointment serves as a 1-year notice.
5. Year 5 faculty reappointment materials are due to the chair by the second Friday in
February and also serves to inform the Annual Review. A positive reappointment
serves to insure employment for year 7 with faculty notification in May. A nonreappointment serves as a 1-year notice.
6. Year 6 faculty promotion and tenure dossier is due to the department in early fall.
Positive tenure decisions are announced in the spring. If tenure is denied, the end of
the probationary period is the day before the start of the fall contract date.
E. Annual Faculty Review (tenure-track faculty)
1. Each year, tenure-track faculty evaluate themselves in regard to teaching, research and
creative endeavor, and service activities. It is suggested that faculty members organize
their materials according to the format of the campus promotion and tenure document
(OAA Memorandum 93-1). Particularly during the tenure-track years, it is suggested
that faculty members use multiple means of documentation such as those listed in the
3
OAA Memorandum 93-1, Senate Document SD 94-3, and the School of Education and
Department of Educational Studies Guidelines to gather information to assess
performance relative to their own needs, goals, and objectives. The annual faculty report
should reflect accomplishments from the previous calendar year and should be
completed and submitted to the department chair by the second Friday in February.
2. Annually, each tenure-track faculty member has the option of selecting a peer review
committee (to include at least one tenured faculty member from the School of
Education), to provide feedback for the previous year’s activities in the areas of
teaching. research and creative endeavor, and service. The faculty member has the
option of retaining the peer feedback results or including this in the annual report which
is sent to the Department Chair and the Dean. Although the peer review committee is
optional with the exception of year 3, in practice, the peer review feedback is
recommended as one of the several sources of information in a comprehensive faculty
evaluation. The peer review committee should be selected by the faculty member to be
reviewed no later than the second week in January. The annual report materials should
be submitted to the peer review committee by the end of January. The annual report and
peer review are due to the chair by the second Friday in February.
F. Annual Peer Review Committees for Tenure-Track Faculty
1.
Membership
a. The faculty member to be reviewed will choose tenured or tenure track faculty
members to serve on their committee. At least one member of the committee must
be tenured within the Department of Educational Studies. A tenured member must
chair the committee.
b. The committee should be established by the second week of January.
2. The faculty member to be reviewed has the option to select the chair of their
committee.
3. Responsibilities of the peer-review committee.
a. The peer review committee should review the annual report documents provided
by the tenure track faculty member under review..
b. The written feedback of the committee should summarize teaching, research and
creative endeavor, and service for the calendar year and when possible, should
provide evaluative comments on progress toward promotion and tenure.
c. The written summative portion is to be submitted by the committee chair to the
other committee members for approval and signature, then presented to the faculty
member being reviewed. The reviewed faculty member may then choose to submit
the peer review with Annual Report to the chair of the department.
4
d. An informative verbal review will be presented informally by the chair of the
committee to the reviewed faculty member.
G. Each year the Chair of the Department of Educational Studies completes a written
evaluation of each tenure-track faculty member in regard to teaching, research and creative
endeavor, and service. This evaluation should be perceived by the faculty as being a
valuable resource in assisting them to address problems or to achieve goals that both they
and the administration consider to be important.
1. The Chair’s evaluation is send to the Dean. The Dean writes an independent evaluation
after reviewing the Chair’s evaluation along with the faculty member’s annual report
materials. The Dean’s evaluation serves both a formative and summative purpose. The
Dean’s evaluation provides suggestions for improving or enhancing faculty performance
to aid the faculty member in developing strengths or overcoming weaknesses.
2. The Dean sends the Dean’s and the Chair’s evaluation, based on the faculty member’s
annual report, to the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.
3. Copies of evaluations and other related personnel action forms are forwarded to all
faculty members each year and originals are placed in the confidential personnel file of
the faculty member. This confidential file is maintained in the Dean’s office of the
School of Education.
H. Third Year Review Policy and Procedures
1. It is the policy of the faculty of the department to conduct a formal third-year review of
assistant professors. This review will take place prior to the faculty member’s third
Annual Review (after 2.5 years of employment), which allows the candidate
approximately 2.5 years to respond to recommendations in the review prior to submitting
a case for promotion and tenure. If the faculty member is officially bringing in years
from another institution, when possible, this review should take place at least two years
before P&T. The review committee’s conclusions and recommendations are not a direct
decision on the faculty member’s employment (or reappointment), but will be used by
the department chair as one point of data for evaluating the progress of the faculty
member.
2. Procedures
a. The faculty member under review selects a committee of three tenured faculty. Two
members must be from the department, and the chair must be a tenured member of
the department.
b. The faculty member will prepare a full case with appendices using the department’s
promotion and tenure criteria. This case will cover all information since being hired
at IPFW, previous material should be submitted if the faculty member is officially
bringing in years from another institution.
5
c. Due to the extra work involved in reviewing a third-year review, the case will be
given to the peer review committee by the end of the second week of January (as
compared to the end of January for the regular Annual Review).
d. The committee will review the case according to the department’s promotion and
tenure guidelines.
e. In a detailed summary letter, the committee will:
Report the candidate’s progress toward P&T (a summary of accomplishments),
Provide an evaluation of the faculty member’s likelihood of achieving tenure at the
current rate of production, using the promotion and tenure language of satisfactory
and excellence for each category of teaching, research and service,
Provide specific and detailed recommendations for the faculty member to achieve
promotion and tenure,
Provide a one-year peer review of the most recent calendar year, as described in the
peer review section, and
Provide a recommendation to the chair for or against reappointment of the faculty
member.
f. The whole committee will meet with the faculty member to review the letter by the
end of the first week of February.
g. The final letter, signed by all committee members, is forwarded to the faculty
member and department chair prior to the due date for the Annual Review (second
Friday in February). The faculty member may attach a written response to the
committee’s report.
I. Annual Faculty Reviews (tenured faculty)
Each year, tenured faculty evaluate themselves in regard to teaching, research and creative
endeavor, and service activities. It is suggested that faculty members organize their
materials according to the format of the campus promotion and tenure document (OAA
Memorandum 93-1). It is suggested that faculty members use multiple means of
documentation such as those listed in the OAA Memorandum 93-1, Senate Document SD
94-3, and the School of Education and Department of Educational Studies Guidelines to
gather information to assess performance relative to their own needs, goals, and objectives.
Tenured faculty at the rank of professor may, at their discretion, submit a current curriculum
vita with appropriate entries highlighted in lieu of a formal annual report. To be considered
for a merit increase however, tenured faculty at any rank must submit an annual report that
reviews the achievements in teaching, research and creative endeavor, and service. The
annual faculty report should reflect accomplishments from the previous calendar year and
should be completed and submitted to the department chair by the second Friday in
February.
6
1. The Chair will complete a written evaluation of the tenured faculty member’s annual
report documents.
2. The Chair will forward this evaluation and the faculty member’s annual report to the
Dean for review and evaluation.
J. Merit Evaluation Criteria
Each year, in the fall semester, the department Faculty Affairs Committee will review and
revise the department merit criteria document in determining merit raises. Ideally, the
faculty annual report serves as the central document that guides the Dean and/or Chair’s
decisions concerning merit raises. The Chair and/or Dean will communicate with each
faculty member to share the results of their evaluation of the annual report and to discuss
merit recommendations. Merit will be based upon achievement in teaching, research and
creative endeavor, and service for all faculty members. For additional information
concerning annual merit and salary allocation, faculty should consult the SOE governance
document.
7
8