Introduction
The State Board of Higher Education has determined that criteria for faculty evaluation shall be established for each institution as a "guide in evaluating faculty in connection with decisions as to reappointment, promotion, and tenure," and "as a basis for assessing those aspects of the faculty member's performance in which improvement is desirable, whether the faculty member is tenured or non-tenured, with a view to stimulating and assisting the faculty member toward improvement available under the institution's staff career support plan."
In addition, the State Board of Higher Education has indicated that the "criteria shall reflect the primary functions for which the State System was established." Further, four general primary functions were identified as instruction, research accomplishments and other scholarly achievements, professionally related public service, and institutional service.
The State Board of Higher Education further requires the following: "sources of such input shall include, but not need be limited to, solicitation of student comments, student evaluations of instructors, and opportunities for participation by students in personnel committee deliberations."
The usual procedure in faculty evaluation has been to pose the negative questions and ask why an individual should not receive a promotion, a salary increase, or indefinite tenure. Eastern should assume basic competency by a person having the necessary credentials to be appointed in the first place and then pose the question of what special qualities over and above basic competency does this person possess which so distinguishes him or her that consideration should be given for salary increase, promotion, or indefinite tenure or reappointment? This represents a fundamental belief that in faculty development more is required in faculty performance than just basic competency.
The Administrative Rules of the Board of Higher Education describe major criteria for faculty evaluation. In addition, specific Eastern criteria for the evaluation of faculty is developed by the Assembly Personnel Committee in cooperation with the Provost.
Review in all categories shall be based upon the faculty development plan. This plan will be on file in the Personnel Office. Faculty members at Eastern are evaluated for continuation, tenure, promotion, merit, and continuing review in four major categories:
Specific descriptions of these four major categories follows:
Instruction
Effective teaching is an essential criterion to advancement. Under no circumstances will tenure or promotion commitment be made to one whose principal duties include instruction unless there is a clear documentation of ability and diligence in the teaching role. In judging the effectiveness of teaching, the reviewers should consider such points as the following: The candidate's command of his/her subject; continuous growth in the field; ability to organize materials and present them with force and logic; capacity to awaken in students an awareness of the relationships of his/her subject to other fields of knowledge; grasp of general objectives; the spirit and enthusiasm which vitalize his/her learning and teaching; ability to arouse curiosity in beginning students and to stimulate advanced students to creative work; personal and professional attributes as they affect his/her teaching and students; the extent and skill of participation in the general guidance and advising of students.
Advising is an obligation to the student body and to the University. The skills and motivation required for advising are not equally distributed and should not be taken for granted. Special efforts and competencies in this area count as an important part of a faculty member's performance and should be rewarded. Factors involved in assessing this criterion include: accessibility to students; amount of time spent in advising students; familiarity with the requirements of various University programs; ability to relate successfully to a wide variety of students for purposes of advising; knowledge of resources available for the meeting of students' needs and the keeping of adequate records.
The reviewers should pay due attention to the variety of demands placed on instructors by the types of teaching called for in various disciplines and at various levels, and should judge the total performance of the candidate with proper reference to assigned teaching responsibilities. They should clearly indicate the sources of evidence on which the appraisal of teaching competence has been placed.
Standards and criteria to be used in the evaluation of teaching are further developed in Eastern's Policy on the Evaluation of Instruction.
Basic to the instructional role that a faculty member performs is an interest in and recurring commitment to his/her subject discipline. There is an implied obligation, to remain in the academic community, for a faculty member to reach beyond the classroom to maintain his/her competency and to contribute to the ongoing scholarly and research posture of the institution and his/her profession.
In judging this commitment, the reviewer should consider points such as the following: reading of scholarly and professional journals; publication of significance and quality; research in progress and substantially planned work; participation in conferences, conventions, seminars, and professional meetings--reading papers, holding office, serve on editorial boards; awareness of current developments in the faculty member's profession; association with organizations and groups that will result in professional improvement of the participant and bring recognition to the University; professional consultation; constructive use of sabbaticals and leaves of absence; recognized evidence of scholarliness such as special awards, scholarly citations, and the republication of work; scope and depth of scholarship as revealed in public lectures, book review and/or in special circumstances, discussions; works of art--sculpture, painting, design, planning, musical compositions, poetry, fiction, drama, dance, film; public performances--recitals, concerts, conducting, theater productions, radio and television productions; public recognition,--exhibitions, commissions, acceptance or work for permanent collections, awards.
Evidence of a productive and creative mind should be sought in the person's published research, original writings, recognized artistic productions, or the like. There should be evidence that the person is continuously and effectively engaged in creative activity of high quality and significance. Work in progress should be assessed whenever possible. Account should be taken of the type and quality of creative activity normally expected in the person's field.
In certain fields such as art, music, literature and drama, distinguished performance (including conducting, directing, and writing) is evidence of a person's creativity.
There is an implied obligation for a faculty member to actively participate in and to contribute to the ongoing activities of the institution as reflected by his/her accepting a role in the institutional governance, committee assignments, evaluation of programs, in the establishment of academic standards, and commitment to students through activities and counseling. In judging this commitment, the reviewers should consider points such as the following: contributions to committees; assistance to student activities; work with student interest groups; ability to carry out special assignments of the School or University; contribution to programs, revisions, curriculum, etc.
There is an implied expectation that concerns an individual's outreach to the general public as time and specialty will permit. On judging this commitment, the reviewers should consider points such as the following: appropriate weight should be given to the evaluation of such service when it constitutes one of the faculty member's principal duties or responsibilities in the University community or public service programs; community activities related to one's field; using one's professional knowledge or skill in a layman's activity which contributes to the well-being of the community as a whole, of which the University is an integral part; special appointments or awards as a result of professional expertise used on behalf of the community; consultant work; public lectures and seminars; public speeches.
The preceding principles and expectations apply to each of the reviews of teaching faculty undertaken at Eastern. The remainder of this section presents criteria specific to particular types of reviews.
Promotion
The individual considered for promotion must have shown a competence and willingness to participate in the work of the institution, to make significant contributions to teaching and to engage in research of scholarly activity. The candidate should ordinarily:
[Note: the APC has recently -- and the Provost and the President do -- interpret this requirement to mean, "that only in a very rare and uniformly exceptional, and extraordinarily well-documented case should a faculty member be consider for promotion to Professor prior to the 12th year of service." The operative words are "very rare," "uniformly exceptional," and "extraordinarily well-documented." "Uniformly exceptional" is interpreted to mean exceptional achievement in each of the four areas of review. "College-level teaching" refers to full-time teaching with complete responsibility for the courses being taught; experience as a graduate teaching assistant is not relevant. The initial Notice of Appointment for tenure-related appointments will clearly state whether any years of teaching prior to the initial appointment at Eastern are to be included in calculating the applicability of this criterion.]
Tenure
Faculty members on annual tenure ("tenure track") are normally reviewed for tenure during the Fall term of the fifth year at Eastern. The Notice of Appointment will state the "starting date" to be used for purposes of determining eligibility for consideration for indefinite tenure under the "five years at Eastern" criterion. If, at the time of initial hiring, there was agreement to count years of service elsewhere than at Eastern toward the "five years" criterion, then this will be stated as a part of the Notice of Appointment; unless such a statement exists on the Notice of Appointment, time-in-rank calculations begin with the year of initial service at Eastern.
Continuance
Regular faculty members not on tenure track (i.e., faculty with appointments not in programs covered by the tenure policy or faculty with transitional status under the tenure policy) are normally reviewed for continuation during the Fall term of the fifth year at Eastern.
Resource faculty members on fixed-term are reviewed on an annual basis following policies developed by Schools and approved by the Provost's Office.
Third Year (Retention) Review
See "Major Categories for Review" and "Criteria for Academic Rank."
Post-Tenure Review
Eastern uses a biennial review process for tenured faculty. When that policy requires more intense review, the processes and criteria associated with review for tenure and the rank of the individual being reviewed, as outlined in the preceding section on criteria and the following section on process, are used.
[Responsible for Accuracy: John S. Miller, Provost - Last Verified: 7/28/00]