Policies

1. Faculty without Credit toward Tenure from Previous Institutions: YEAR 4

1. Faculty without Credit toward Tenure from Previous Institutions: YEAR 4

Year 4: Formal, Summative Evaluation

  1. By Sept 1: The candidate submits a slate of four names to the VPAA/Dean of the Faculty of tenured faculty members outside the candidate’s department willing to serve as a second evaluator of the candidate.

    Eligible faculty who agree to be added to the slate of second evaluators acknowledge that they are able to conduct an evaluation of the candidate free of bias and based on evidence presented in the file.

    Tenured faculty outside of the candidate’s department who will be serving on the Faculty Personnel Committee, on leave (sabbatical, medical, family, or other) or teaching off campus during the semester of the 4th year (or equivalent) classroom visits and/or evaluation file review and letter due date are not eligible to serve and therefore should not be included in the slate. If the slate contains ineligible names, the candidate will submit a list of four eligible candidates within seven calendar days of being contacted by the VPAA.

  2. By Oct 1: The VPAA/Dean of the Faculty appoints one of the eligible nominated faculty members to serve as a second evaluator of the candidate.
  3. By Oct 1: The candidate submits a complete portfolio that includes a new Professional Statement of Goals and Accomplishments and updated curriculum vitae.
  4. The Department Chair and second evaluator each make at least two classroom observations during the fall semester.
  5. The evaluation file includes the Department Chair’s letter from Year 2.
  6. The Department Chair meets with students currently enrolled at Central College who have taken or are taking courses from the candidate to discuss the candidate’s teaching effectiveness.
  7. The Department Chair invites all tenured members of the department who are not on leave to discuss the candidate’s performance and progress toward tenure based on the evaluation file. Tenured members of the department have access to the same information in the candidate’s evaluation file that is available to the Department Chair and second evaluator.
  8. By Dec 1: The Department Chair submits a letter to the VPAA/Dean of the Faculty evaluating the candidate’s performance in teaching, professional growth and development, and institutional service and leadership. The letter includes:

a.  Specific reports of classroom observations.

b. A summary of the discussion with students.

c.  A summary of the discussion with tenured members of the department. This section of the letter is to be approved by the tenured members of the department who participated in the discussion.d.  One of the following ratings:

Recommend renewal of probationary status

Recommend renewal of probationary status with concerns about progress toward tenure

Recommend non-renewal of probationary status

The full letter is shared with tenured members of the department who participated in the discussion. The end of the letter includes a statement to be signed by those individuals acknowledging agreement with the summary of their discussion. Prior to submitting the letter, the Department Chair meets with the candidate after sharing an unsigned copy of the letter in order to allow the candidate to identify any factual errors for the Department Chair to correct.

  1. By Dec 1: The second evaluator submits a letter to the VPAA/Dean of the Faculty evaluating the candidate’s performance in teaching, professional growth and development, and institutional service and leadership. The letter is based on the candidate’s evaluation file and includes specific reports of classroom observations, along with one of the following ratings:

Recommend renewal of probationary status

Recommend renewal of probationary status with concerns about progress toward tenure

Recommend non-renewal of probationary status

Prior to submitting the letter, the second evaluator meets with the candidate after sharing an unsigned copy of the letter in order to allow the candidate to identify any factual errors for the second evaluator to correct.

  1. The Faculty Personnel Committee conducts an evaluation during the spring semester. The committee discusses the evaluation file as a group. The VPAA/Dean of the Faculty is present to ask and answer questions and to provide an institutional perspective, but does not make a recommendation based on performance criteria at this time.
  2. The members of the Faculty Personnel Committee vote using secret ballot on a recommendation to the VPAA/Dean of the Faculty, each choosing one of the following ratings:

Recommend renewal of probationary status

Recommend renewal of probationary status with concerns about progress toward tenure

Recommend non-renewal of probationary status

The VPAA/Dean of the Faculty does not participate in this vote.

  1. The Faculty Personnel Committee submits a written recommendation to the VPAA/Dean of the Faculty supported by the vote and evidence from the candidate’s evaluation file in the areas of teaching, professional growth and development, and institutional service and leadership. A record of the vote is included in this letter.
  2. The VPAA/Dean of the Faculty meets with the Faculty Personnel Committee to convey his or her decision whether or not to renew probationary status.
  3. The VPAA/Dean of the Faculty meets with the candidate to convey the recommendation from the Personnel Committee and his or her decision whether or not to renew probationary status and to share the VPAA/Dean of the Faculty’s decision letter with the candidate. The candidate has the right to appeal the outcome based on process violation.