Evaluation of Tenured Faculty

Reference Number: F84-122
Senate Approval Date: Saturday, September 01, 1984

EVALUATION OF TENURED FACULTY

Academic Senate Policy #F84-122

At its meeting of September 18, 1984, the Academic Senate approved the following

policy on the evaluation of tenured faculty:

The Agreement between the Board of Trustees of the California State University

and the California Faculty Association: August 16, 1983 - June 30, 1986 (Article

15.1-15.20, 15.29-15.31) mandates the periodic performance evaluation of tenured

faculty unit employees.

Purpose:

Evaluation of ourselves as tenured faculty is consistent with the University's

mission of educational excellence. The primary purpose of the evaluation of

tenured faculty is to benefit the faculty member through peer review. The evaluation

is the department’s responsibility. The most positive effects of the evaluation

will be obtained at the department level and accrue to the individual. The evaluation

should encourage and recognize the accomplishments of tenured faculty, and make

recommendations for correcting any deficiencies. In addition, the purpose of

the evaluation of tenured faculty is to consider the relationship of the faculty

member to new and on-going programs of the department.

Eligibility:

All tenured faculty unit employees, including faculty on the early retirement

program, are covered by the mandate except for those tenured faculty who are

undergoing or have undergone, in the preceding five year period, a performance

review for tenure or promotion.

Frequency of Evaluation

Tenured faculty members shall be evaluated according to these procedures at

least once every five years. Because tenured faculty on leave status are continuing

faculty, the period in which a tenured faculty member is on leave is included

as part of the five year interval.

At the beginning of each five-year cycle, departments shall establish a schedule

for the evaluations which ensures that all eligible tenured faculty are evaluated

once every five years. The names of faculty to be evaluated each year will be

sent to the Faculty Affairs Office each fall semester.

Criteria:

All tenured faculty must be evaluated by a Peer Review Committee and the dean/director

or designee for teaching effectiveness or for effectiveness in primary assignment.

Evaluation of teaching effectiveness must include written student evaluations

in a minimum of two classes annually during the five-year period of review.

Beyond the requirement of student evaluation of teaching performance, departments

may establish their own criteria for the evaluation of tenured faculty. Optional

criteria may include, but are not limited to: curriculum development or revision;

advising; contributions to the department, school, and/or university; currency

in the field; professional achievement and growth; community service; and participation

in professional associations. (See Evaluation of Tenured Faculty Cover Sheet)

Procedures:

Evaluation of tenured faculty shall be conducted by a properly constituted

Peer Review Committee of the department or equivalent unit. Departments shall

specify on the Evaluation of Tenured Faculty Cover Sheet whether an HRTP

Committee was used or whether a specially constituted committee was established

for this purpose.

At the beginning of each five-year evaluation cycle, it is the responsibility

of the Peer Review Committee to inform tenured faculty eligible for evaluation

about the procedures, the departmental criteria, and any supporting materials

they are to submit to the committee. Department Peer Review Committees shall

notify all tenured faculty to be reviewed about the time frames for the evaluation

and deadlines for submission of materials. Some departments may choose to evaluate

tenured faculty during the fall semester when the workload of an HRTP committee

is lighter. In any case, tenured faculty should be notified the preceding semester

of the pending evaluation.

At the conclusion of its deliberations, the Peer Review Committee shall prepare

a written Peer Review Committee report, herein after referred to as the summary

report. The Peer Review Committee summary report shall be forwarded to the dean/director

or designee and to the tenured faculty member. Indexed materials submitted by

the faculty member shall be returned to the faculty member. The Peer Review

Committee Chair and the dean/director or designee shall meet with the tenured

faculty member being evaluated to discuss his/her strengths and weaknesses along

with suggestions, if any, for improvement.

The Evaluation of Tenured Faculty Cover Sheet, the Peer Review Committee's

summary report, the results of student evaluations of teaching effectiveness

in two classes annually, and a written statement by the dean/director or designee

(if not part of the Cover Sheet) shall be placed in the official Personnel

Action File at the conclusion of the evaluation.

Any rebuttal or statement the tenured faculty member wishes to make at any

stage in the evaluation shall also be placed in the official Personnel Action

File at the conclusion of the evaluation.

EVALUATION OF TENURED FACULTY

COVER SHEET

Department: Date of Evaluation:

Date Tenure Awarded: _______

Faculty Member: Date of Last Promotion:

Rank: Date of Most Recent Evaluation:

SECTION I: (To be completed by the Chair of the Peer Review

Committee)

A. Membership of Department Review Committee: Check

appropriate box (members of the Committee must be tenured, full-time faculty).

  • HRT Committee
  • Promotion Committee
  • Specially Constituted Committee

B. Required Criteria used by Peer Review Committee: Check

appropriate box.

  • Written Student evaluations of teaching performance in a minimum of two

    classes annually during the five-year review period.

  • Effectiveness in primary assignment for librarians

Optional Criteria:

Departments vary greatly in their criteria for performance. Any of the following

criteria may be selected by the department and included in the evaluation: peer

review of teaching effectiveness; curriculum development or revision; advising;

contributions to the department, school, and/or university; currency in the

field; professional achievement and growth; community service; participation

in professional associations; or other selected criteria.

C. Procedures Followed:

  • The faculty member chose to submit an updated vita or self-assessment as

    part of the evaluation.

  • The peer Review Committee examined materials supplied by the faculty member

    and materials gathered y the committee, and prepared its written report.

  • An index of materials submitted by the faculty member is attached. (The

    actual manuscripts, creative works an other materials provided by the faculty

    member have been returned to her/him.)

  • The Chair of the Peer Review Committee has discussed the results of the

    evaluation with the faculty member.

  • The Peer Review Committee summary report has been given to the dean/director

    or designee. A copy has been given to the faculty member.

Signature of Committee Chair:

Date

Signatures of Committee Members:

Date

Date

SECTION II: To be completed by Dean/Director or Designee.

  • I have discussed the results of the evaluation with the faculty members.
  • Commendations for strengths and suggestions for improvement, if any, have

    been made; and avenues of assistance have been identified.

  • The procedures followed have been in conformity with San Francisco State

    University’s Policy for the Evaluation of Tenured Faculty.

  • The summary report has been sent to the official Personnel Action File along

    with evaluations of teaching effectiveness.

  • I concur with the summary report of the Peer Review Committee and have no

    further comment.

  • I do not concur with the summary report of the Peer Review Committee and/or

    wish to comment further. My separate statement is attachment.

Signature of Dean/Director or Designee Date

Signature of Faculty Member Reviewed* Date

*This signature indicates receipt of a copy only; it

does not indicate agreement or disagreement with the evaluation.

Summary Report and Student Teaching Evaluations have been filed

in the faculty member’s Personnel Action File.

Signature of Dean of Faculty Affairs Date

*** APPROVED BY PRESIDENT WOO ON OCTOBER 23, 1984 ***