Physics and Astronomy Post-Tenure Review Policy



Physics and Astronomy Post-Tenure Review Policy

I. Statement of Purpose. The overarching purpose of post-tenure review in the Department of Physics and Astronomy is to serve as an additional means of fostering the Department's mission of educational excellence, including its goal of providing high-quality instruction to its students and contributing to the development of physics and astronomy through scholarship and service. In order to achieve this purpose, the review process should assist individual faculty members in their ongoing professional development, in particular in their efforts to enhance their skills as teachers, their accomplishments as scholars, and their contributions to the profession and the public. The review process is intended to foster constructive dialogue between colleagues that will be characterized by fairness, mutual respect, a desire to learn, open-mindedness, and appreciation for the importance of academic freedom. The process of review will also serve to enhance a sense of accountability within the Department and the University. The process will conform to the Framework for Implementation of Post-Tenure Review adopted by the UNC-CH Board of Trustees and the University Board of Governors.

II. Expectations of Faculty Members. All members of the faculty of the Department of Physics and Astronomy are expected throughout their careers to maintain the standards of excellence in teaching, scholarship, and service that are set forth in the Department's tenure and promotion policy. Evaluation of performance will take into account changing expectations AND EVOLVING CONTRIBUTIONS at different stages of faculty careers.

III. Schedule for Review.

A. Cycle of Review. The number of faculty members to be reviewed in any given year will be approximately 20% of the number of tenured faculty members. All tenured members of the faculty will be reviewed during a five-year period beginning with the 1998-99 academic year, and in five-year cycles thereafter. Members of the faculty who are appointed or promoted to tenured positions in subsequent years will be brought into the five-year cycle so that they participate in the process of post-tenure review no later than five years after the effective date of tenure. If necessary, adjustments in the schedule of review will be made to meet the needs of individual faculty members and the institution.

B. Phase-In of Review Process. In consultation with the department's Personnel Review Committee and individual faculty members, the Department Chair will develop a proposed schedule for post-tenure review that assures that all members of the faculty will be reviewed during a five-year period beginning with the 1998-99 academic year. The proposed schedule will provide for a distribution of senior, mid-level, and relatively junior faculty members being reviewed each year throughout the five-year period. The schedule of faculty members to be reviewed during the 1998-99 academic year will be determined after agreement by the faculty members in question.

C. Notice. Faculty members who will undergo post-tenure review in any given year will be advised by the Department Chair of the upcoming review as early as possible, and AFTER THIS INITIAL YEAR, in no event later than September 1 of the academic year in which the review is to take place.

D. Relation to Other Forms of Review. The system of post-tenure review will supplement, rather than substitute for, other systems of review, including those relating to tenure and promotion, annual feedback in years prior to tenure, appointment to distinguished chairs, salary determinations, yearly evaluation meetings with the chair, or personnel actions taken pursuant to University policies on tenure and promotion and other matters relating to faculty conduct and performance.

IV. Process.

A. General Principles. The faculty believes that the post-tenure review process should be as simple, straightforward, fair, functional and flexible as possible, so that the purposes of the review process are achieved in both an effective and time-efficient fashion.

B. Obligation of Confidentiality. All post-tenure review matters relating to individual faculty members will be regarded as confidential in character. All faculty members who participate as members of the personnel review "Post Tenure Review Committee" or otherwise advise on individual cases will abide by this requirement.

C. Participation by Faculty Member Being Reviewed. Each faculty member who is to undergo review in a given year will take an active role in the post-tenure review process by assisting with planning, preparing relevant background information, engaging in constructive dialogue with colleagues and the Department Chair, and undertaking a development plan if needed to address deficiencies in performance.

D. Composition of "Post-Tenure Review Committee" and Related Assistance from the Faculty and the Chair. Selected members of the Department's Personnel Review Committee and the Department Chair, as an ex officio member, will serve as the "Post-Tenure Review Committee" provided for under University policies. Usually, the chair of the "Post Tenure Review Committee" also will be the chair of the Department's Personnel Review Committee. Working with the faculty member being reviewed, the Department Chair and the Post-Tenure Review Committee will arrange for additional members of the faculty to provide assistance through visitation of classes and review and comment upon scholarly writing.

E. Information to be Considered During Review Process. The review process will be conducted in a way that provides the faculty member being reviewed, the Department Chair, and the members of the "Post-Tenure Review Committee" with relevant information concerning the faculty member's accomplishments and plans in the areas of teaching, scholarship and service. Information to be considered will include, but not be limited to, the following:

1. Self-Assessment by Faculty Member. The faculty member being reviewed will prepare a written self-assessment indicating his or her accomplishments during the past five years (and, in the case of the initial review, his or her accomplishments during the period since tenure or promotion to full professor); their goals for the next five years; and their thoughts on ways in which the school could assist them in their professional development.

2. Background Information. The faculty member will also prepare a file that includes a current curriculum vitae; teaching evaluations (that have been maintained on file with the Department Chair since the date completed) and a "teaching portfolio" if desired; scholarly materials completed since the last review (with an indication of the most important materials); information concerning significant professional and public service; and other relevant materials. As appropriate, the Department chair and the chair of the "Post-Tenure Review Committee" will arrange for colleagues to read and comment on scholarly materials or other relevant background information. Peer visitation of classes will be conducted in order to enhance the insights of the faculty as a whole about teaching and provide relevant information on the faculty member being reviewed. The Department Chair will work with the faculty member being reviewed and the chair of the "Post-Tenure Review Committee" to arrange for class visitation as deemed appropriate. The Department Chair may also provide additional information that may be pertinent, including information developed during periodic merit reviews and information relating to the faculty member's ongoing work within the institution.

F. Consultation Between Faculty Member Being Reviewed, "Post-Tenure Review Committee," and Department Chair. As appropriate, the faculty member being reviewed will meet with the "Post-Tenure Review Committee" and the Department Chair in order to discuss teaching, scholarship, service, and other accomplishments. In preparation for such discussions, the committee and the Department Chair will carefully read and consider all relevant information concerning the work of the faculty member being reviewed.

G. Determination Regarding Overall Performance. The "Post-Tenure Review Committee" will advise the faculty member being reviewed and the Department Chair whether it believes that the faculty member being reviewed is performing OUTSTANDINGLY, at a satisfactory level, or has substantial deficiencies in performance that need to be addressed through creation of a development plan.

H. Establishment and Monitoring of Development Plan. In the event that the "Post-Tenure Review Committee" concludes that the faculty member being reviewed has a record of overall performance that reflects substantial deficiencies that need to be addressed, and has recommended the establishment of a development plan, the Department Chair and the faculty member being reviewed will meet to develop a development plan designed to assist the faculty member in curing deficiencies in performance. The development plan will include clear goals, indicators of goal attainment, a clear and reasonable time frame for the completion of goals, and a statement of consequences if the goals are not reached. The performance of a faculty member who has been found to have substantial deficiencies in overall performance and who is working on completion of a development plan will be reviewed by the Department Chair on an annual basis for a period of up to three years until such time as substantial deficiencies have been remedied. In the event that substantial deficiencies in performance continue to exist at the end of the three-year period, the Department Chair will consider whether action should be initiated pursuant to the Trustee Policies and Regulations Governing Academic Tenure or other steps taken to address the substantial deficiencies in performance.

I. Maintenance of Confidential Written Record. The "Post-Tenure Review Committee" and the Department Chair will develop a written summary of the committee's conclusions and will share that summary with the faculty member being reviewed for comment. The faculty member being reviewed may submit written comments to the committee and the Department Chair in response to the written summary. The Department Chair will maintain the committee's written summary and the response, if any, by the faculty member being reviewed as part of that faculty member's confidential personnel file, along with all background information and other materials used in connection with the review.

J. Recognition of Outstanding Performance. In instances in which the faculty member being reviewed is found to have evidenced outstanding overall performance, the Department Chair will endeavor to recognize that performance through appropriate forms of positive recognition, including but not limited to nominations for awards.

V. Appeals and Reports to the Provost.

A. Appeals of Findings of Substantial Deficiencies and Development Plans. Faculty members found by the "Post-Tenure Review Committee" and the Department Chair to have substantial deficiencies in performance and for whom a development plan is established may appeal the finding of substantial deficiency or the terms of the development plan within 30 days of receiving a final letter from the Department Chair including such findings and development plan. Appeal rights are as provided for in the University's policy on post-tenure review.

B. Annual Reports Filed with Provost. As provided in the University policy on post-tenure review, the Department Chair will file annual reports to the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences specifying the names of faculty members reviewed during the previous year, the names of faculty members for whom a development plan was recommended and established, and the names of faculty members who were subject to review in that year but for whom a delay was requested (along with the reasons for delay).

VI. Periodic Assessment of Post-Tenure Review Process. The Department Chair, members of the "Post-Tenure Review Committee", and the faculty members who are reviewed, will assess the DEPARTMENT'S experience with the post-tenure review process in its first year. The Department Chair will report to the faculty no later than September 1999, and in subsequent years as the need arises, regarding any ways in which the process might be improved.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download