Intranet

Faculty Handbook

Appendix XII—Post-Tenure Review

Philosophy

All faculty are currently evaluated annually for their performance in teaching effectiveness, scholarly activity/creative work and professional service. The purpose of post-tenure review is to provide additional encouragement in the continuous, unrelenting faculty commitment to the students, the discipline, the institution and the public. This philosophy is consistent with West Texas A&M University’s mission to provide “a high quality baccalaureate and graduate education.” The mission further states the University strives “to educate students to be informed, responsible, creative and articulate decision makers who will exercise good citizenship, appreciate diversity and be professionally competitive.”

The University’s mission statement stresses the importance of teaching, scholarly activity/creative work and professional service. . . . the emphasis at West Texas A&M University is on providing an intellectually challenging education reflecting high standards of academic performance. . . . The University takes pride in its highly personalized student/teacher relationships. A major commitment at West Texas A&M University is its emphasis on quality teaching at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Simultaneously, however, the faculty have an obligation to engage in research, creative activity and other professional pursuits of a level and type consistent with a quality regional institution. It is the belief that such activity contributes to and enhances the quality of teaching. . . . The University is committed to fulfilling its outreach and service obligations in addition to its primary emphasis on teaching. This service obligation is fulfilled primarily through the processes of teaching, research and creative endeavors, as the outcome of these activities significantly addresses the needs of the region. . . . Central to West Texas A&M University’s mission is the recognition that the cornerstone of the University is a strong, enthusiastic and student-oriented faculty who are knowledgeable in their particular disciplines and evidence their interest and enthusiasm for their fields of study by their ability to teach, write, create, conduct research and perform a variety of professional and community services. . . . Its mission’s three components are, therefore, teaching (which is primary), research and creative work (considered necessary both to the advancement of knowledge and to high quality teaching), and community service (aimed toward the development of the region).

Clearly, the University’s faculty play a key role in producing the institution’s academic environment. The faculty at West Texas A&M University have a commitment with the students to make available the finest education possible. The faculty have a commitment with the taxpayers to wisely use the resources entrusted to the institution. The faculty have a commitment with their disciplines to maintain relentless pursuit of understanding. And the University has a commitment with faculty to provide the means necessary to fulfill these obligations.

It is the philosophy of post-tenure review that all faculty share in this commitment to excellence in instruction, scholarly activity/creative work and professional service. However, it is also recognized that faculty may, at times, need additional encouragement and assistance from their colleagues to maintain their focus on excellence. The effort to encourage and assist faculty must not threaten the community’s commitment to academic freedom and tenure. Rather, the effort to encourage and assist faculty must enhance academic freedom and be consistent with the institution’s commitment to tenure.

Goals

With this philosophy in mind, the goals of post-tenure review are as follows:

Goal 1. Every faculty member will be fully engaged in an interactive exchange with students directed toward the creation of understanding and meaning.

Goal 2. Every faculty member will be fully engaged in scholarly activity/creative work.

Goal 3. Every faculty member will be fully engaged in professional service to the University, the community and the discipline.

While it is desirable for all faculty to be fully engaged in every aspect of the profession, it is also recognized that this is not always possible. Careers in the academy possess the same ebb and flow as do careers outside the academy. A junior faculty member, for example, may excel in research while a senior faculty member may excel in professional service. Similarly, within categories faculty may make diverse but equally important contributions. The junior faculty member may produce multiple publications while the senior faculty member may produce one philosophical piece. Indeed, one faculty member’s research may take ten years to produce fruit while another’s may be published quickly. Nevertheless, both faculty members are fully engaged in scholarly activity/creative work; and both faculty members are engaged in interactive exchange with students directed toward the creation of understanding and meaning.

Minimal Standards

Therefore while the above goals are desirable, the following minimal standards are established.

Standard 1. Every faculty member will be satisfactorily engaged in an interactive exchange with students directed toward the creation of understanding and meaning. Each department is responsible for determining standards for satisfactory performance in instruction for their faculty.

Standard 2. Every faculty member will be satisfactorily engaged in scholarly activity/creative work; and/or, every faculty member will be satisfactorily engaged in professional service to the University, the community and the discipline. Each department is responsible for determining standards for satisfactory performance in scholarly activity/creative work and in professional service to the University, the community and the discipline.

Standard 3. Every faculty member will be engaged in teaching, scholarly activity/creative work and professional service. An absence of activity in any one of these three responsibilities is unacceptable.

The following procedures are designed to encourage and assist faculty in achieving the goals and to ensure the minimal standards are met.

Post-Tenure Review Procedures

I. All faculty members and academic administrators at WTAMU are evaluated annually for merit, promotion, tenure and/or post-tenure review. Faculty members are evaluated on teaching effectiveness, scholarly activity/creative work and professional service. These evaluations are the basis for performance review.

A. Each department’s faculty shall develop standards for satisfactory performance in teaching, scholarly activity/creative work and professional service, to be reviewed by appropriate department head, dean and VPAA. Said standards must clearly differentiate between unsatisfactory performance (poor, unsatisfactory) and satisfactory performance (satisfactory, good, excellent) in teaching, scholarly activity/creative work and professional service.

B. Each department’s standards for satisfactory performance are on file in the Office of the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs.

II. All tenured faculty with teaching and/or designated research responsibilities specified in their contracts (including but not limited to tenured instructors, assistant professors, associate professors, professors, department/division heads, deans) are eligible for post-tenure review.

III.

Post-tenure review is initiated under any one of the
following conditions:

A.

Tenured faculty member receives two consecutive “poor” and/or “unsatisfactory” evaluations in the annual evaluation of teaching effectiveness on the “Annual Evaluation of Faculty Performance by Department Head” form; or

B.

Tenured faculty member receives two consecutive “poor” and/or “unsatisfactory” evaluations in the annual evaluations of both scholarly activity/creative work and professional service on the “Annual Evaluation of Faculty Performance by Department Head” form; or

C.

Tenured faculty member receives two consecutive “poor” evaluations in the annual evaluations of scholarly activity/creative work on the “Annual Evaluation of Faculty Performance by Department Head” form; or

D.

Tenured faculty member receives two consecutive “poor” evaluations in the annual evaluations of professional service on the “Annual Faculty Evaluation By Department Head” form; or

E.

Tenured faculty member requests post-tenure review. For example, an associate professor may request a review to help develop strategy to be promoted to full professor. Implementation of such strategies would be advisory rather than mandatory.

F.

Nothing in the tenure review policy or any procedure relating to the policy removes or impacts the right of the University to proceed immediately to dismiss a faculty

member for cause, including incompetence or failure to meet job responsibilities. The University has no requirement to first offer a faculty member the opportunity to participate in a remediation program before dismissal for cause.

IV.

Following the first “poor” and/or “unsatisfactory” evaluation in teaching effectiveness, scholarly activity/creative work or professional service, the department head and faculty member are encouraged to meet face to face to identify specific deficiencies in performance and pursue activities designed to remediate said deficiencies.

V.

Following the second “poor” and/or “unsatisfactory” evaluation in teaching effectiveness, scholarly activity/creative work or professional service, the department head will submit the evaluations to the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee for confirmation.

A.

The Department Promotion and Tenure Committee will review the faculty member’s evaluations, vote to recommend/not recommend the faculty member’s participation in the post-tenure review development program and forward the recommendation to the next level according to promotion and tenure policies. Voting procedures (here and throughout the review) shall be the same as for the yes/no tenure vote in the University promotion and tenure policy.

B.

The department head will make an independent evaluation of the faculty member recommending/not recommending the faculty member’s participation in the post-tenure review development program and forward the recommendation to the next level.

C.

The College Promotion and Tenure Committee will review the faculty member’s documents and vote to recommend/not recommend the faculty member’s participation in the post-tenure review development program and forward the recommendation to the next level.

D.

The dean will make an independent evaluation of the faculty member recommending/not recommending the faculty member’s participation in the post-tenure review development program and forward the recommendation to the next level.

E.

The University Promotion and Tenure Committee will review the faculty member’s documents and vote to recommend/not recommend the faculty member’s participation in the post-tenure review development program and forward the recommendation to the next level.

F.

The provost will review the faculty member’s documents and make a recommendation to the president.

G.

The president will make the final decision on a faculty member’s participation in the post-tenure review development program.

H.

All reviews provided for in Sub-sections A–G, above, will be completed by the end of the spring semester. The development program will begin upon president’s signature.

VI.

At the discretion of the department head and/or dean, a
faculty member subject to review may defer the post-tenure
development program review due to extenuating
circumstances.

A.

Extenuating circumstances include but are not limited to health difficulties, pregnancy and family crisis.

B.

Extenuating circumstances require documentation.

VII.

A faculty member subject to post-tenure review will be assisted by a development program.

A.

The development program, initiated by the department head (in consultation with the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee) and approved by the dean, will be tailored to the individual faculty member and will target the identified deficiencies, define goals to remedy the deficiencies, and outline a series of activities to achieve these outcomes. Reasonable resources necessary for successful completion of the development program must also be identified in the development plan but will not exceed those available to all faculty members. The faculty member will meet at least once each semester with the department head and/or dean for the duration of the development program.

1. A copy of the development plan must be kept on file in the Office of the Provost/VPAA.
2. The required outcomes of the development plan will be included in the faculty member’s annual letter of appointment while the faculty member is participating in the development program.

B. A faculty member in a development program may elect to receive assistance from the department head and/or a development team comprised of colleagues interested in offering assistance with respect to removal of specific deficiencies.

C. A faculty member in a development program for unsatisfactory teaching effectiveness evaluations should administer student evaluations in all classes for both fall and spring semesters. Summer evaluations are optional.

D. At the conclusion of the first semester of a faculty member’s participation in the development program, the faculty member and department head must meet to discuss the faculty member’s progress and identify goals for the completion of the program. For a faculty member who completes the program in the first year in the area(s) previously deemed deficient, the development program will be terminated and the faculty member will return to normal tenure status.

E. In the second year of a faculty member’s participation in the development program, the faculty member will be issued a contract specifying a date of possible tenure revocation and termination contingent on the faculty member’s unsuccessful completion of the development program.

VIII.

At the conclusion of a faculty member’s development period, the faculty member will be reviewed by the department head, Department Promotion and Tenure Committee, College Promotion and Tenure Committee, dean, University Promotion and Tenure Committee, provost and president.

A.

The Department Promotion and Tenure Committee will review the faculty member’s documents and vote indicating the faculty member’s successful or unsuccessful completion of the development program and forward the recommendation to the next level.

Successful completion: The faculty member has removed the deficiency by completing the development program within two years. Successful completion of the post-tenure review procedure is the desired outcome.

B. The department head will make an independent evaluation of the faculty member indicating the faculty member’s successful or unsuccessful completion of the development program and forward the recommendation to the next level.

C. The College Promotion and Tenure Committee will review the faculty member’s documents and vote indicating the faculty member’s successful or unsuccessful completion of the development program and forward the recommendation to the next level.

D. The dean will make an independent evaluation of the faculty member indicating the faculty member’s successful or unsuccessful completion of the development program and forward the recommendation to the next level.

E. The University Promotion and Tenure Committee will review the faculty member’s documents and vote indicating the faculty member’s successful or unsuccessful completion of the development program and forward the recommendation to the next level.

F. The provost will review the faculty member’s documents and make a recommendation to the president.

G. The president will make the final decision on successful or unsuccessful completion of the development program.

H. All reviews provided for in Sub-sections A–G, above, will be completed by the end of the spring semester.

IX.

Closure

A.

Faculty who successfully complete the development program will return to normal tenure status.

B.

Faculty who fail to complete the developmental program successfully will, at the discretion of the department head, dean, provost and president as tempered by due process, be subject to revocation of tenure and/or termination.

©2007 West Texas A&M University