3.6.4 Promotion and Tenure Reviews and Developmental Reviews: Graduate School of Education and Counseling

PREAMBLE

The Graduate School of Education and Counseling at Lewis & Clark College is dedicated to serving the needs of professionals in a constantly changing society. The school provides educational opportunities grounded in the liberal arts and the specialized content and methods of professional practice. The Graduate School is a community that values teaching, scholarship, and service as related expressions of a single vocation. The review of faculty for tenure and/or promotion requires careful consideration of review candidates’ contributions to their students’ knowledge and professional practice, to the profession in which they serve, and to the general good and mission of their program(s), school, and institution. While specific contributions and emphasis may vary from one faculty member to another and accomplishment might be presented in different ways, all faculty members are expected to demonstrate accomplishment in these areas. The assessment of these contributions shall include descriptions and evidence supplied by the candidates, faculty members in the professional program(s) in which the candidates serve, and others as specified in the document that follows.

I. GENERAL OVERVIEW: PURPOSE, TYPES, AND STAGES OF REVIEW FOR TENURE-TRACK FACULTY

In this document, faculty on tenure track who have not been awarded tenure will be referred to as tenure track. Faculty who are not on tenure track will be referred to as faculty with term. The following section describes review processes for tenure-track faculty.

A. Purpose

The purpose of faculty review is to evaluate faculty members’ contribution to the mission of the Graduate School of Education and Counseling, the College, the academic program, and the professions. Faculty will be reviewed in three areas of performance: teaching, scholarship, and professional and institutional service.

1. Teaching

Faculty are expected to demonstrate excellence in teaching. Excellent teachers are knowledgeable in their field, effectively communicate their knowledge to others, and use appropriate pedagogy that fosters students’ intellectual growth. Excellent teachers are academically rigorous and demonstrate care for their students through their teaching and advising.

2. Scholarship

Faculty are expected to contribute to scholarship by the development, application, and dissemination of knowledge that improves professional practice. Such contributions include publication in their area of expertise and active involvement in their field.

3. Professional and Institutional Service

Candidates must demonstrate evidence of consistent and valued contributions to the program, the Graduate School, and the broader community.

B. Types of Review

There are three types of review for tenured and tenure-track faculty: annual review, developmental review, and tenure and promotion review. An annual review is conducted in the spring of each year for all faculty. The annual review provides the faculty member and the institution an ongoing assessment of the faculty member’s performance and an opportunity for setting goals and establishing a work plan for the year ahead. Annual reviews shall include faculty members’ own assessment of their performance. Annual reviews are considered part of the preparation for major reviews and shall be included in a candidate’s files prepared for these reviews. The guidelines for the annual review are described in a separate document. Developmental reviews are conducted for tenure-track and tenured faculty according to a schedule described below. The review for promotion and/or tenure is conducted upon eligibility.

C. Composition of the Graduate Faculty Promotion and Tenure Committee

Voting members of the committee shall include four tenured members of the graduate faculty, representing at least two programs, and an outside member from the local professional community. The dean or his or her appointee shall serve as a nonvoting member. Committee assignments will be for two years and should be staggered to ensure continuity. Faculty members shall be elected by a vote of those tenured and probationary faculty and contract faculty who have a minimum of two continuous years of full-time employment in the Graduate School.

The outside member shall be appointed by the dean upon recommendation of the GFPTC. The outside member will be a practitioner, preferably with college or university experience. This member will participate in pretenure reviews and promotion and/or tenure reviews, but will not participate in senior developmental reviews.

D. Sequence of Review

The first level of review is conducted by the department chair and a tenured member of the faculty suggested by the candidate and approved by the dean. The GFPTC provides the second level and the dean the third. The president provides the fourth level of review for the decision of tenure and/or promotion.

E. Confidentiality

Confidentiality of information regarding individuals must be a primary consideration in all stages of review, promotion, and tenure. The contents of the review file, the deliberation of the committee, and the recommendations are to be held in strictest confidence.

II. DEVELOPMENTAL REVIEWS

A. Purpose

The review process is intended to meet the common goals of the faculty member, program, Graduate School, and College by identifying and using faculty strengths and suggesting areas for future development. It is designed to assist faculty members by both providing an evaluation of work already completed (summative evaluation) and suggesting areas that need further development (formative evaluation). It is also intended to provide tenure-track faculty members and tenured associate professors with an assessment of their progress toward tenure or promotion. Developmental reviews will be used to guide decisions regarding contract renewals for tenure-track faculty members, and annual salary reviews, workload plans, sabbatical awards, and faculty research and travel grants for all faculty members.

B. Eligibility and Timing

Developmental reviews of tenure-track faculty members will typically be conducted during the third year. Senior developmental reviews will be conducted at least every six years for tenured associate professors and every eight years for tenured professors

C. Tenure-Track Appointments

Any appointment without tenure to a position in which tenure may be granted is a tenure-track appointment. The probationary period for tenure-track positions is normally six years unless otherwise stated in the letter of appointment. A faculty member may request an early review for promotion or tenure with the approval of the dean of the Graduate School.

Assistant professors shall normally be given three-year appointments, with annual renewals of their appointment contingent on satisfactory performance. They will typically have pretenure reviews in the third year after appointment to determine whether they are making satisfactory progress toward meeting the institution’s standards for promotion and tenure. Pretenure reviews will include a review by the department chair and second reviewer and by the GFPTC. The review in the third year will result in a recommendation as to whether the faculty member under review should be given a new three-year appointment that will replace the current appointment, thus extending the current appointment for three years beyond the year in which the review takes place. In cases where a candidate is not offered a new three-year appointment, the faculty member will normally be given a one-year terminal contract. The dean of the Graduate School, after consultation with the department chair, may approve a request by a faculty member to extend the probationary period by a maximum of one year, specifying a new schedule for review. Such approval will only be granted when it is clearly in the interest both of the Graduate School and of the faculty member, for example, when a faculty member has taken on a major short-term assignment or has taken a leave of absence for health or other personal reasons.

D. Process for Developmental Reviews

1. The candidate shall prepare a review file in a manner similar to that specified for the promotion and tenure review, with the exception that external reviews will not be solicited. The review file, which includes the faculty review candidate’s self-evaluation report, will be submitted to the department chair and second reviewer.
2. The department chair and the candidate select a second reviewer from among the tenured faculty. The chair and the second reviewer examine the review file and additional material. Each prepares an independent report. The department chair or second reviewer also has the option of soliciting additional information required to evaluate the candidate’s performance in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service. The department chair and second reviewer will inform the candidate of any formal requests for additional information.
3. Before the reports by the department chair and second reviewer are submitted to the GFPTC, the candidate shall have the opportunity to review the reports. The candidate may submit within one week a written response to one or both reports to the GFPTC. The response will become part of the candidate’s review materials.
4. The department chair and second reviewer submit the review file, additional materials, and the reports reviewing the candidate to the GFPTC through the dean.
5. Following its individual assessments and deliberations, the GFPTC submits to the dean the review file and its own report evaluating the candidate’s performance. For tenure-track faculty, this report shall include an evaluation of the progress being made toward tenure and/or promotion and a recommendation regarding extension of the contract. For tenured associate professors, judgment regarding the progress the individual is making toward promotion to professor will be provided. A copy of this report shall be forwarded to the candidate.
6. The dean shall review the faculty candidate’s file and all reports and recommendations. The dean shall send to the candidate a letter reviewing the candidate’s performance with appropriate recommendations.
7. The candidate may request an additional review and consultation with the GFPTC.

E. Schedule for Developmental Review

The dean will inform the candidate of the scheduled developmental review during the academic year preceding the scheduled review. The schedule for review will be provided to the candidate by the dean no later than the end of the preceding academic year.

III. REVIEW FOR PROMOTION AND/OR TENURE

A. Purpose

The promotion and/or tenure review serves to evaluate the faculty member’s performance for the purpose of granting tenure and/or promotion to a new rank.

B. Eligibility for Promotion or Tenure

1. For Tenure

Faculty members hired in a tenure-track position will normally be reviewed for tenure during the sixth year of service. Credits may be given for previous employment, and eligibility for tenure review may be negotiated in the letter of appointment. Faculty members awarded tenure shall meet the standards articulated in Section III.C, below.

2. For Promotion

Faculty members shall normally be eligible for review for promotion during the sixth year at the assistant professor rank and after six years at the associate professor rank. A request for an accelerated or delayed review must be approved by the dean prior to the submission of the review file.

3. For Hiring With Tenure

In some instances, a potential new hire with tenure in his or her present position may request an expedited timeline for a tenure review.

In such cases, the search committee, dean, and department chair shall meet with the Graduate Faculty Promotion and Tenure Committee (GFPTC) to create a timeline for such review prior to the contract being issued. Typically, the timeline for review will fall into one of three general categories: (1) review prior to the employment start date, (2) review and completion during the first year of employment, or (3) review after the first year of employment and completed before the beginning of the second year of employment. The department chair, second reviewer, and GFPTC shall also determine the type of materials required to be equivalent to full review. In such cases, it shall be stated in the contract that awarding tenure will be contingent upon satisfactory tenure review.

This policy for tenure review shall be shared with potential hires by the search committee.

C. Standards for Tenure

The granting of tenure requires successful contributions in each of the following three areas:

1. Teaching

The candidate must demonstrate excellence in teaching

2. Scholarship

The candidate must make significant contributions to scholarship through the development, application, or dissemination of knowledge that improves professional practice.

3. Professional and Institutional Service

The candidate must demonstrate evidence of consistent and valued contributions to the program, the Graduate School, professional associations, and the broader community.

D. Standards for Promotion

1. Promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor

An assistant professor granted tenure will also be promoted to the rank of associate professor

2. Promotion From Associate to Professor

To be promoted to professor, candidates must demonstrate continued excellence in teaching and significant scholarship, and a record of professional and institutional service consistent with expectations associated with the rank of professor.

3. Promotion Without Tenure

In rare instances faculty may be appointed at the rank of associate professor or professor without tenure. In such instances, the schedule for review, including the promotion and tenure review, will be specified in the letter of appointment.

E. Standards, Criteria, and Evidence for Excellent Teaching

1. Standards for Excellent Teaching

Excellent teachers inspire and challenge their students, communicate their knowledge of the field, use appropriate teaching methods, and foster students’ intellectual growth.

2. Criteria for Excellent Teaching

1. Carefully plans and teaches well-organized courses; clearly states goals, objectives, and standards of student performance; and uses appropriate course materials.
2. Maintains current knowledge of the field.
3. Seeks to improve teaching techniques and performance.
4. Provides accurate and timely academic advising.
5. Actively involves students in the classroom learning experience.
6. Regularly assesses student performance and apprises students of the results.
7. Creates and maintains an atmosphere conducive to learning.
8. Contributes to the development of curriculum.
9. Provides assistance and supervision to students in field-based courses such as practica and internships.
10. Encourages students to participate in joint scholarship projects.
11. Maintains accessibility to students.

3. Evidence of Excellent Teaching

The following materials will be included in the review file:

1. A syllabus for each course taught that includes goals, readings, explication of written assignments, and methods of student evaluation.
2. All student course evaluations obtained since the last promotion or since date of employment including those developed by the faculty member and a summary and interpretation of the evaluations.
3. A narrative explaining teaching accomplishments and goals.
4. A narrative describing advising responsibilities, and, where applicable, supervisory activities and accomplishments.
5. Evidence from peers, colleagues in the field, past students, and others as appropriate.
6. Other materials, such as letters, may also be included.

F. Standards, Criteria, and Evidence for Scholarship

1. Standards for Scholarship

Scholarship contributes to professional and disciplinary knowledge.

2. Criteria for Scholarship

Significant contributions to scholarship may include:

1. Refereed and invited publications, including books, monographs, articles in journals, and book chapters.
2. Solicited and evaluated consultation
3. Refereed and invitational conference papers or presentations.
4. Competitively reviewed grants and contracts.
5. Presentations to professional colleagues and practitioners.
6. Documents that apply knowledge to improve professional practice.

3. Evidence of Scholarship

1. A narrative explaining past, current, and future work highlighting major areas of interest, research, and particular challenges.
2. Copies of books, chapters, articles published or currently under review.
3. Reviews of books or articles published.
4. Papers presented.
5. Grant proposals written, with reviewers’ comments. Information concerning grants awarded.
6. Manuals, programs, and curricula.
7. Letters of testimony and external reviews indicating the quality of research and publications.
8. Letters of testimony and evaluation indicating the quality of invited consultation.

G. Standards, Criteria, and Evidence for Professional and Institutional Service

1. Standards for Service

Faculty members are expected to contribute actively to their department, the Graduate School, the College, their professional associations, and the broader community.

2. Criteria for Service

Service may include regular participation on a standing or ad hoc committee serving the Graduate School or the College. It also may include assuming substantial responsibilities or leadership in a program, the Graduate School, or the College. Service also includes participation in professional organizations and contributions to the profession and the community.

3. Evidence of Professional and Institutional Service

1. A narrative explaining the significance of one’s service contributions to the department, the Graduate School, the College, professional associations, and the broader community. Wherever appropriate, the narrative shall include a description of the candidate’s accomplishments related to assigned departmental responsibilities, developing and maintaining ties with professional associations, and curriculum or program development and leadership.
2. Letters of testimony indicating the significance of the faculty review candidate’s service contributions.
3. Editorial and review responsibilities.

H. Process of Review for Promotion and/or Tenure

1. The candidate prepares a review file including a self-evaluation letter and supplemental materials addressing the three areas of review. (See Section III.J, below, on responsibilities.)
2. External reviews will be solicited by the department chair and second reviewer from a list consisting of at least nine potential reviewers (the extensive list). This list will be generated by the candidate, the department chair and second reviewer, and the dean of the Graduate School. The department chair and second reviewer, in consultation with the dean of the Graduate School, shall decide on the short list of external reviewers who will receive review requests.

   The chair and second reviewer shall consult with the candidate regarding which materials to send to external reviewers. These materials may include samples of scholarly work, the candidate’s curriculum vitae, and a statement from the faculty candidate. A cover letter from the department chair and second reviewer should describe the purpose of the review and the fact that the letter and its author will remain confidential. A sufficient number of reviewers should be contacted so that a minimum of four reviews are received.

3. The department chair and second reviewer may obtain additional information from colleagues within and outside the College and from scholar-reviewers and others as necessary to evaluate teaching, scholarship, and service. The candidate will be informed regarding areas in which information is being formally requested.
4. The department chair and second reviewer review the candidate’s review file, including program and external letters, each writes an independent report, and forwards these materials to the GFPTC through the office of the dean of the Graduate School. Before the reports by the department chair and second reviewer are submitted to the GFPTC, the candidate shall have the opportunity to review the reports. The candidate may offer corrections of any errors and may submit, within one week, a written response to the GFPTC, which will become part of the candidate’s review materials.
5. Following the individual assessments and deliberations, the GFPTC makes a recommendation in writing and submits it to the dean. A copy of the GFPTC recommendation shall be sent simultaneously to the candidate.
6. The Graduate School dean makes a recommendation in writing to the president. A copy of this recommendation shall be sent simultaneously to the candidate and to the GFPTC.
7. Final decisions regarding matters of promotion or tenure rest with the president.

I. Schedule for Review for Promotion and/or Tenure

The faculty member will be notified by the dean of eligibility for a promotion and/or tenure review by the end of spring semester of the academic year preceding the scheduled review.

J. Responsibilities in the Review Process

1. The dean shall

1. Prepare the schedule for review.
2. Notify faculty members in writing of their eligibility for promotion and for tenure by the end of the spring semester of the academic year prior to the review.
3. Assure that the GFPTC is in place.
4. Consult with the candidate and the department chair and second reviewer in the process of generating an extensive list of potential external reviewers who have expertise in the candidate’s field. This list shall be of sufficient length to assure an adequate number of agreed-upon reviews and to protect the anonymity of the selected reviewers.
5. Reach consensus with the department chair and second reviewer regarding the final selection of external reviewers from the list of potential reviewers.
6. Serve as a nonvoting member of the GFPTC.
7. Review the file and the report of the GFPTC and write an evaluation and recommendation, including rationale.
8. For promotion and tenure reviews, submit the dean’s and the GFPTC’s written evaluations and recommendations and the candidate’s review file to the president. If the dean’s recommendation dissents from the GFPTC recommendation, he or she must present a written report and discuss the nature of the dissent and its rationale with the members of the GFPTC prior to forwarding these materials to the president.
9. In the case of pretenure reviews and reviews of tenured faculty, the dean shall forward his or her recommendation and that of the GFPTC to the candidate.
10. Notify the candidate of the GFPTC’s and the dean’s recommendations. The candidate shall have the opportunity to read and respond in writing to the department chair and second reviewer’s report, the GFPTC report, and the dean’s report. A candidate wishing to respond to a report must submit a response within one week from receiving a copy of the report. The response will become part of the review materials.

2. The department chair and second reviewer shall

1. Work collaboratively with the candidate and the dean to generate the extensive list of potential external reviewers.
2. Consult with the candidate to decide which scholarly materials are to be sent out for review.
3. In consultation with the dean, select the reviewers to be contacted. Personally contact reviewers from the approved list and send the materials selected for review to those reviewers who are willing to review the candidate’s work. These letters and their authors shall be designated as confidential and are not to be seen by the candidate.
4. Review the external letters.
5. Solicit additional information as deemed necessary to evaluate teaching, scholarship, and/or service.
6. Write a letter of recommendation for the granting of tenure or

   promotion based on specific evidence and provide a copy of this to the candidate.

7. Review and forward the file to the GFPTC through the office of the dean.

3. The candidate shall

1. Prepare the review file. (See Standards, Criteria and Evidence for Teaching, Scholarship, and Service, Sections III.E, III.F, and III.G.)
2. Participate in generating the extensive list of potential reviewers with the department chair, second reviewer, and the dean.
3. In consultation with the department chair, second reviewer, and the dean, select which scholarly materials are to be sent out for external review. Materials may include a curriculum vitae and a personal statement, if desired.
4. Have the opportunity to review and provide a written response to the extensive list of potential external reviewers and the chair and second reviewer’s letter of recommendation.
5. Have the opportunity to read and respond in writing to the chair and second reviewer’s report, the GFPTC report, and the dean’s report. In each case, the candidate must submit a response within one week from receiving a copy of the report. The response will become part of the review materials.

4. The Graduate Faculty Promotion and Tenure Committee shall

1. Review the contents of the file, additional materials, and the chair and second reviewer’s evaluation and make an individual assessment in keeping with the standards outlined in this document.
2. Solicit additional information regarding the candidate’s performance, if desired. The candidate will be informed regarding areas in which information is being formally requested.
3. Meet as a committee to review each case, with the aim of reaching consensus whenever possible.
4. Formally record each member’s vote.
5. Provide a written summary of evaluation for each area of review: teaching, scholarship, and service. The committee shall make a specific recommendation regarding promotion and/or tenure or contract renewal, as appropriate.

5. The president shall

Inform the candidate of his or her decision regarding tenure and/or promotion in writing.

IV. APPEALS

A. Eligibility

The candidates may appeal to the dean of the Graduate School within two weeks of written notification of the president’s decision. An appeal to the dean of the Graduate School of Education and Counseling is granted only on grounds of:

1. errors in procedures,
2. discrimination,
3. violation of academic freedom, and
4. failure to consider existing evidence adequately. A decision cannot be overturned on appeal unless the candidate has sustained the burden of proof on one or more of these four grounds.

If the dean finds that there are sufficient grounds for appeal, he or she appoints an appeals board and gives the board 30 days in which to make a recommendation.

B. Composition

The Graduate School Appeals Board shall consist of the three previous chairs of the GFPTC who are not currently serving on the GFPTC. In the event that the faculty under review held this position, or that three previous GFPTC chairs are not available, the other members of the appeals committee shall, in consultation with the Graduate School dean, select other members for the Appeals Board.

C. Recommendation of Appeals Board

The Appeals Board makes its recommendation directly to the president, who informs the applicant of his/her decision within 30 days. In all cases, the president’s judgment shall be final.

V. GENERAL OVERVIEW: PURPOSE, TYPES, AND STAGES OF REVIEW FOR FACULTY WITH TERM

A. Purpose

The purpose of faculty review is to evaluate faculty members’ contributions to the mission of the Graduate School of Education and Counseling, the institution, the academic program, and the professions. Faculty with term will be reviewed in two areas of performance: teaching, and professional and institutional service. See Section 3.6.4.III for applicable criteria.

1. Teaching

Faculty are expected to demonstrate excellence in teaching. Excellent teachers are knowledgeable in their field, effectively communicate their knowledge to others, and use appropriate pedagogy that fosters students’ intellectual growth. Excellent teachers are academically rigorous and demonstrate care for their students, through their teaching and advising.

2. Professional and Institutional Service

Candidates must demonstrate evidence of consistent and valued contributions to the program, the Graduate School, and the broader community. Evidence of these contributions may include scholarship as determined by the dean in consultation with the department chair and as indicated in the individual’s most recent faculty contract.

B. Types of Review

There are two types of review for faculty with term: annual review and a peer review to be conducted every three years for positions that could be renewed for an additional period of time. An annual review is conducted in the spring of each year for all faculty. The annual review provides the faculty member and the institution an ongoing assessment of the faculty member’s performance and an opportunity to set goals and establish a work plan for the year ahead. Annual reviews shall include faculty members’ own assessment of their performance. Annual reviews are considered part of the preparation for the three-year peer review and shall be included in a candidate’s files prepared for these reviews. The guidelines for the annual review are described in a separate document. The three-year peer review is described below.

C. Composition of Peer Review Committee

The Peer Review Committee shall include a minimum of three faculty members approved by the GFPTC and the dean.

D. Sequence of Peer Review of Faculty With Term

1. The dean will inform the candidate of the three-year peer review during the spring of the preceding academic year and provide the schedule for review.
2. Candidate, department chair, and dean jointly nominate members of the Peer Review Committee.
3. Names of committee members are submitted to the GFPTC for approval.
4. The Peer Review Committee obtains a “Letter of Review” from the department chair.
5. The candidate is reviewed by the Peer Review Committee during the first semester of the third year of service according to the responsibilities, standards, and criteria described in his or her letter of appointment and subsequent annual work plans.
6. The Peer Review Committee makes a recommendation to the dean regarding the candidate’s continued employment in the Graduate School.
7. The final decision rests with the dean of the Graduate School.

E. Process for Peer Review of Faculty With Term

1. The candidate shall prepare a review file in a manner similar to that specified for the promotion and tenure review. The review file, which includes the faculty review candidate’s self-evaluation report, will be submitted to the department chair.
2. The department chair examines the review file and additional information and prepares a letter of review. The department chair also has the option of soliciting additional information required to evaluate the candidate’s performance in the areas of teaching and service. The department chair will inform the candidate of any formal requests for additional information.
3. Before the letter of review is submitted to the Peer Review Committee, the candidate shall have the opportunity to review the letter. The candidate may submit within one week a written response to the letter to the Peer Review Committee. The response will become part of the candidate’s review materials.
4. The department chair submits the review file, additional materials, and the letter of review regarding the candidate to the Peer Review Committee.
5. Following its individual assessments and deliberations, the Peer Review Committee submits to the dean the review file and its own report evaluating the candidate’s performance. A copy of this report shall be forwarded to the candidate.
6. The dean shall review the faculty candidate’s file and all reports and recommendations. Early in the following semester, the dean shall send to the candidate a letter reviewing the candidate’s performance with the dean’s decision.

VI. Appeals

A. Eligibility

The candidate may appeal to the department chair within two weeks of written notification of the dean. An appeal to the department chair is granted only on grounds of:

1. errors in procedures,
2. discrimination,
3. violation of academic freedom, and
4. failure to consider existing evidence adequately. A decision cannot be overturned on appeal unless the candidate has sustained the burden of proof on one or more of these four grounds.

If the department chair finds that there are sufficient grounds for appeal, he or she appoints an appeal board and gives the board 30 days in which to make a recommendation.

B. Composition

The Graduate School Appeals Board shall consist of the three previous chairs of the GFPTC who are not currently serving on the GFPTC. In the event that the faculty under review held this position, or that three previous GFPTC chairs are not available, the other members of the appeals committee shall, in consultation with the department chair, select other members for the Appeals Board.

C. Recommendation of Appeals Boards

The Appeals Board makes its recommendation directly to the dean, who informs the applicant of his/her decision within 30 days. In all cases, the dean’s judgment shall be final.

VII. REVISION OF DOCUMENT

The policies for faculty review, promotion, and tenure should be reviewed at least every five years. The dean, in consultation with the GFPTC, shall review the policies and decide if revisions are necessary. The revisions will be subject to approval of the Graduate School faculty.

Approved by the Faculty October 28, 2003
Amended by the faculty February 22, 2005