|
Office
of the Provost
Faculty and Unclassified Staff Handbook Chapter 3 -- Faculty:
Employment, Tenure, Promotion, and Merit
Policy, Criteria, and Procedures for Determining
Annual Merit, Promotion, and Tenure Recommendations
(Members of the collective bargaining unit represented by Fort Hays State University chapter of the American Association of University Professors should consult the current Memorandum of Agreement for terms and conditions applicable to them.)
PART
I: STATEMENT OF POLICY
PART II: DUTIES AND CRITERIA
PART III: ANNUAL MERIT
PART IV: PROMOTION
PART V: TENURE
PART VI: SCHEDULES
Part I: Statement Of Policy
The policy of the Fort Hays State University regarding
the evaluation of faculty members is to enhance professional development
and to arrive at decisions for annual merit, promotion, and tenure.
Recommendations shall consist of the following general principles:
A. All faculty members shall be evaluated according
to their contributions to the mission of the university and to their
respective colleges and departments. The Kansas Board of Regents
has directed Fort Hays State University to emphasize instructional
activity and also to carry out scholarly activity and service.
B. All faculty members shall be evaluated openly on
the basis of factors over which they have sufficient control. A
clear, precise, and careful enumeration of their duties in the areas
of instructional activity, scholarly activity, and service must
be made known to them. Also, the relative weighing of each duty
should be negotiated and developed in consultation with the individual
faculty member and the chair prior to the beginning of the academic
year.
C. All faculty members shall be evaluated fairly and
equitably and without discrimination, pursuant to the Equal Employment Opportunity Policy of Fort Hays State University.
D. Tenure/promotion documentation should include a
cumulative record of progress toward either tenure and/or promotion.
E. Departmental/unit criteria for tenure and promotion
must be developed by departmental/unit faculty and be approved by
departmental/unit faculty, departmental/unit chair, respective dean,
and provost. Each list of criteria must include the date the faculty
approved the departmental/unit criteria.
F. Each faculty member must include the appropriate
list of departmental criteria in the packet being submitted for
tenure and/or promotion.
Faculty Senate approved administrative revisions (05-02-95).
Part II: Duties And Criteria
A. The university planning procedure will annually
provide university goals and objectives plus action plans for the
budget units and departments. This process will provide direction
for assignment of faculty responsibilities relating to the mission
of Fort Hays State University and to its respective colleges and
departments.
B. Description of the three types of duties and criteria:
1. Instructional activity: Instructional duties
and activities shall include, but not be limited to, formal classroom
activities and tutorial sessions, class preparation, laboratory
supervision, supervision of students in internships or other practica,
development of new courses for inclusion in the curriculum, or
new instructional materials including software (development or
adaptation) and other applications of educational technology,
professional development advisable in preparation for possible
new courses, and academic advising.
2. Scholarly activity: Scholarly activities at Fort Hays State University are defined as original, innovative intellectual contributions in the form of research, practice, creative activity, or performance. FHSU recognizes and values the diversity of types of scholarship, including discovery, pedagogy, integration, engagement, and application (Boyer, 1997). Scholarly activities must be intended and reasonably expected to lead to the production of scholarly works. Scholarly works must be communicated with and validated by peers beyond the FHSU campus community. The means of communication as well as the comparative value of types of scholarly activity and work are to be determined by each department. These determinations will reflect what is commonly accepted in the discipline. (Boyer, E.L., Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1997, 147pp.) (03-03-08)
3. Service: There are three general categories of
service: service to your profession, service to Fort Hays State
University, and service to the community. Service to the profession
includes but is not limited to state, regional, or national offices
held in professional organizations, organizing a professional
workshop or meeting, and other related activities. Service to
Fort Hays State University includes but is not limited to committee
assignments (chair or member), offices held (elective or appointed),
involvement in campus activities (Parent's Day, high school workshops,
etc.), part?time administrative assignments, sponsoring or advising
a student organization, contributions to recruitment, or retention
of students. This service includes activities in support of the
department, the college, and the University. Community service
is expected of every good citizen of the community. Community
service as a part of the evaluation process should be related
to one's professional expertise.
C. Relative weighing of the three types of duties:
1. The chair of each department shall establish
in consultation with each faculty member the relative weighing
of instructional activity, scholarly activity, and service of
each faculty member within the department, and the chair, with
the approval of the dean, shall establish the criteria to be used
in evaluating each faculty member's contribution.
2. Instructional activity: The evaluation of the
faculty member's instructional activities shall constitute 60
percent of the total evaluation, based on teaching 12 credit hours
each semester, unless otherwise negotiated with the department
chair and approved by the dean. Evaluation of instructional activity
must include student ratings. Off-campus instructional activity
should be treated as part of the regular load or as part of an
instructional overload, but in either case it should carry some
merit for service.
3. Scholarly activity: The evaluation of the faculty
member's scholarly activities shall constitute 20 percent of the
total evaluation unless otherwise negotiated with the department
chairperson and approved by the dean.
4. Service: The evaluation of the faculty member's
service activities shall constitute 20 percent of the total evaluation
unless otherwise negotiated with the department chair and approved
by the dean.
Part III: Annual Merit
Annual merit salary recommendations will be based
on the principles and criteria discussed in Part I and Part II above.
The period of evaluation is the academic year and the sequence of
events will follow this order:
A. Prior to the employment term (or portion thereof) for which
the faculty member will be evaluated, the faculty member will be
informed of the criteria and procedures to be used in the merit evaluation.
B. The chair will use the procedure outlined in this articale to produce an overall evaluation of the faculty member.
C. The faculty member shall be allowed to review the chair's final written merit evaluation and be allowed to discuss it with the department chair before it is submitted to the dean. If there is disagreement between the chair and faculty unit member, the parties shall attempt to reach consensus. If no consensus is reached, the chair will submit his/her written merit evaluation and faculty member may submit a written position summary to the dean, who shall make a decision on the disagreement. The dean's decision will be sent to the chair and the faculty member. The merit evaluation, containing the dean's decisionon the area of disagreement shall be forwarded to the provost for review in "E", below.
D. If there is no dispute, the chair's merit evaluation of the faculty member will be sent to the dean and a copy sent to the faculty member. The dean will review and evaluate all evaluation materials and merit evaluations to insure that the merit evaluations are consistent with the criteria and procedures approved for the department and/or college.
In addition, a dean who does not agree with any merit evaluation made by a department chair will attempt to reach consensus through consultation with the department chair and faculty member. If this fails, the dean's writtent decision will be attached to the chair's merit evaluation. If any attachment has been added to the faculty member's merit evaluation, the dean must notify, in writing, the faculty member and chair of the change and the rationale for making the change. The materials will be forwarded to the provost.
E. The provost will review and evaluate all evaluation materials and merit evaluations to insure that merit evaluations are consistent with the criteria and procedures approved by the department and/or college. In addition, if the provost does not agree with previous merit evaluations or the merit evaluation is contested, an attempt will be made to reach consensus through consultation with the dean and the department chair and faculty member. If the provost alters the dean's recommendation, the provost's final merit recommendation will be sent to the appropriate dean, chair and the faculty member.
F. The provost will issue a recommendation to the president to issue a contract for the faculty member that includes the individual's salary for the next fiscal year, if such monetary or fiscal issues have been previously resolved through the meet and confer process. The president's decision is the final step in the merit review process.
G. Merit decisions are not subject to the grievance process outlined elsewhere in this Agreement.
Part IV: Promotion
A. Promotion is not an entitlement awarded just for
longevity. The applicant must earn the promotion by fulfilling the
requirements and demonstrating in the promotion file that they have
been fulfilled. New faculty members should become familiar with
the qualifications, the procedures, the schedule for application,
and the structure of the promotion file that each applicant must
prepare. Department chairs should do what is reasonable to insure
that new faculty are familiar with the guidelines of this policy
and assist their faculty in the preparation of the promotion files
well in advance of the deadline for submission.
B. The following descriptions of professional rank
specify the minimum level of achievement and performance necessary
for promotion in rank.
1. Instructor: An instructor is an individual who
ordinarily does not possess a terminal degree or the equivalent
in the field.
2. Assistant Professor: An assistant professor is an individual
who normally possesses a terminal degree or the equivalent in the
field (e.g., M.F.A.). The rank of assistant professor can be a beginning-level
appointment for one who holds the terminal degree or its equivalent
in the field, or it can be a rank achieved after service in the
rank of instructor.
Qualification:
a. Education and experience: Promotion from instructor
to assistant professor should normally follow achievement of
the terminal degree or its equivalent in the field.
b. Additional college and department qualifications
may be required.
3. Associate Professor: An associate professor
is an individual who in all but exceptional circumstances possesses
a terminal degree or its equivalent in the field and appropriate
professional experience.
Qualification:
a. Education and experience: Promotion from the
rank of assistant professor to associate professor requires
demonstrated noteworthy contribution and definite potential
for further major contribution to the field and the university.
Normally, individuals promoted to associate professor would
be in prior rank for a minimum of four years.
b. Normally, promotion from assistant professor to associate
professor is not granted prior to the granting of tenure. Promotion
does not guarantee that tenure will be granted.
c. Additional college and department qualifications may be required.
4. Professor: A professor is an individual who in all but very
exceptional circumstances possesses a terminal degree or the
equivalent in the field and who has demonstrated meritorious
teaching, scholarship, and service in the field as defined by
the individual's department and college. The rank of professor
shall be awarded only to those who are proven masters of their
field, are outstanding in that field, and whose general attributes
of culture are recognized by their fellows with such determination
to be made by administrations and faculties in traditional manner.*
Qualification:
a. Education and experience: Promotion from the
rank of associate professor to professor requires demonstrated
major contributions to the field and to the university. Normally,
individuals promoted to professor would be in prior rank for
a minimum of five years.
b. Additional college and department qualifications
may be required.
*Kansas Board of Regents: Policies and Procedures Manual (11-20-69).
C. Promotion Procedures: The applicant for promotion
should read and be familiar with all the steps of the promotion
procedure and special attention should be given to section D below,
Format of the Promotion File, and the schedules given in PART VI
of this policy.
1. The faculty member submits his or her application
for promotion in the form of a promotion file (Section D) to the
department chair. The chair then forwards the applicant's file
to the departmental promotion committee as described in step two
below and according to the schedule of PART VI.
2. A promotion committee shall be established at
the department level by the chair in consultation with the faculty
and the college dean. The chair shall determine the size of the
committee, and it will be composed of tenured faculty members
of the department. In a department with few tenured members, the
committee may include tenured faculty of other departments, but
shall not include the chair. All committee members shall be familiar
with the guidelines of this policy. After examining the applicant's
file the committee will vote affirmatively or negatively regarding
the promotion of the applicant. The committee should strive for
unanimity in its vote, but a simple majority is all that is necessary.
The committee report must include reasons for the recommendation,
including the numerical vote of the committee. Though addressed
to the chair, a copy of the recommendation of the committee will
be sent only to the applicant at this time.
a. Applicants for promotion should note that
at each level of review a pattern is followed as described above
and is essentially a pattern of: review of the file, inform
the applicant of the findings, appeal if desired by applicant,
place the recommendation into the file, and forward of the file
to next level of review. The applicant shall have 3
days after receipt of the final recommendation to respond in
writing to any unresolved differences regarding the evaluation.
The applicant's response must be sent to the next level of review
and will become a part of the promotion file.
b. In the event that the chair is up for promotion,
the dean of the college will establish the departmental promotion
committee, and that committee will make recommendations directly
to the dean.
3. The applicant may insert additional materials
in the file at this point. Within 5 days after receipt
of the recommendation and upon request, the applicant will receive
a hearing by the department promotion committee. The committee
will then place its initial and final recommendations into the
file, return the file to the chair, and send a copy of the final
recommendation to the applicant. The applicant shall have 3
days after receipt of the recommendation to respond in writing
to any unresolved differences regarding the evaluation. The applicant's
response must be sent to the department chair and will become
a part of the promotion file in the back of the department promotion
committee's recommendation section.
4. The chair shall make an independent evaluation
of the faculty member's file. Though addressed to the dean, the
chair's recommendation will be sent only to the applicant and
department promotion committee chair at this time.
5. The applicant may insert additional materials
in the file at this point, but may insert no additional material
beyond this point except as noted below. Within 5 days
after receipt of the recommendation and upon request, the applicant
will receive a hearing with the chair. The chair's initial and
final recommendations shall be placed in the file and the file
forwarded to the dean. Copies of the final recommendation shall
be sent to the applicant and the department promotion committee
chair. The applicant shall have 3 days after receipt of
the recommendation to respond in writing to any unresolved differences
regarding the evaluation. The applicant's response must be sent
to the college dean and will become a part of the promotion file
in the back of the department chair's recommendation section.
6. A promotion committee shall be established at
the college level by the dean in consultation with the department
chairs. It shall be composed of tenured faculty members that are
not serving on a departmental or other promotion committee. The
dean shall determine the size and distributional representation
of the committee and shall chair the committee. All committee
members shall be familiar with the guidelines of this policy.
The committee shall make an independent evaluation of the faculty
member's file and shall include in its recommendation to the dean
the procedures and criteria followed and the numerical vote. Though
addressed to the dean, the committee's recommendation will
be sent only to the applicant, department chair, and department
promotion committee chair at this time. If a vote is not unanimous,
a dissenting opinion may be written.
7. Within 5 days after receipt of the recommendation
and upon request, the applicant will receive a hearing by the
college promotion committee. The committee will then place its
initial and final recommendations in the file, forward the file
to the dean, and send copies of the final recommendation to
the applicant, department chair, and department promotion committee
chair. The applicant shall have 3 days after receipt of
the recommendation to respond in writing to any unresolved differences
regarding the evaluation. The applicant's response must be sent
to the dean and will become a part of the promotion file in
the back of the college promotion committee's recommendation section.
8. The dean shall make an independent evaluation of the faculty member's file that includes the previous recommendations. Though addressed to the provost, the dean's recommendation will be sent to the applicant, department chair, and chairs of the department and college promotion committees.
9. Within 5 days after receipt of the recommendation and upon request, the applicant will receive a hearing by the dean. The dean will then place the initial and final recommendations in the file, forward the file to the provost and send copies of the final recommendation to the applicant, department chair, and chairs of the department promotion and college promotion committees. The applicant shall have 3 days after receipt of the recommendation to respond in writing to any unresolved differences regarding the evaluation. The applicant's response must be sent to the provost and will become a part of the promotion file in the back of the dean's recommendation section.
10. A University Promotion Committee shall be established. There will be five members on the Committee who will serve two-year terms. Terms will be staggered so that approximately half of the members will change each year. Two members will be chosen from the College of Arts and Sciences and one member from each of the other three colleges. To fill vacancies and to maintain a balanced representation on the University Promotion Committee, the president of the Faculty Senate will submit the name of a tenured faculty member to the provost (normally in late Spring) for each of the vacancies on the Committee. The provost will initially convene the Committee. Committee members shall select a chair who will prepare the recommendations that will be sent to the provost. If the Committee members feel that a written ballot should be used, the chair will tabulate the results. All committee members shall be familiar with the guidelines of this policy. Upon request, the provost, dean and/or department chair will attend a hearing of the University Promotion Committee to answer questions pertaining to the candidate and the promotion file. The Committee shall make an independent evaluation of the faculty member's file and shall include in its recommendation the procedures and criteria followed and the numerical vote. Though addressed to the provost copies of the Committee's recommendation will be sent to the candidate, department chair, chairs of the department and college promotion committees, and the dean at this time.
11. Within 5 days after receipt of the recommendation and upon request, the candidate will receive a hearing by the University Promotion Committee. The Committee will then place its initial and final recommendations in the file and forward it to the provost. Copies of the final recommendation will be sent to the candidate, department chair, dean and chairs of the department and college promotion committees. The candidate shall have 3 days after receipt of the recommendation to respond in writing to any unresolved differences regarding the evaluation. The candidate's response must be sent to the provost and will become a part of the promotion file in the back of the University Promotion Committee's recommendation section.
12. The provost shall make an independent evaluation
of the faculty member's file that includes all previous recommendations.
Though addressed to the president, the provost's recommendation
will be sent only to the applicant, department chair, dean, and chairs
of the university, college, and department promotion committees at this time.
13. Within 5 days after receipt of the recommendation
and upon request, the applicant will receive a hearing by the
provost. The provost will then place the initial and final recommendations
in the file and forward the file to the president. Copies of the
final recommendation will be sent to the applicant, department
chair, dean, and chairs of the university, college, and department promotion committees.
The applicant shall have 3 days after receipt of the recommendation
to respond in writing to any unresolved differences regarding
the evaluation. The applicant's response must be sent to the president
and will become a part of the promotion file in the back of the
provost's recommendation section.
14. Given the information and recommendations described
above, the president of the university writes an initial recommendation
to the applicant. Within 5 days after receipt of the recommendation
and upon request, the applicant will receive a hearing by the
president. The president then sends the final recommendation to
the applicant forwarding copies to the provost, department chair,
dean, and chairs of the university, college, and department promotion committees.
D. Format of Promotion File: Promotion files will
normally consist of a single, three-ring binder notebook (no more than 2
inches thick). All publications of the applicant need not be submitted
as a part of the file, but a representative sample is required.
For the service category, meetings attended shall be listed, but actual meeting announcements shall not be included. Exceptions to the one notebook limit should be explained in the
department chair's letter of recommendation. The emphasis should
be on quality and not quantity, and although the aesthetic appearance
of the promotion file is not paramount, the file represents the
applicant and consequently cannot be ignored by those evaluating
the applicant's file. The format indicated below shall be utilized
in preparation of the applicant's promotion file. Items 8 and 9
are not appropriate for non-teaching faculty such as employees of
Forsyth Library. In such exceptional cases the candidate in consultation
with the immediate supervisor may substitute other documentation
related to the specific nature of one's employment.
1. A statement by the applicant: This would normally
be the last item the applicant prepares before submitting the
promotion file to the department chair. This letter should clearly
state the applicant's qualifications for the promotion and focus
attention on the unique strengths and credentials of the applicant,
and should stress the activities and accomplishments of the applicant
since the last promotion. The applicant should recognize that
members of the various committees may not be entirely familiar
with the applicant's field. It is to the advantage of the applicant
to explain the significance of his/her contributions or accomplishments.
An applicant might, for example, comment on the relative importance
of an exhibit in a gallery or on the professional reputation of
a journal which features the applicant's work. A new statement
must be prepared each year that the applicant is considered for
promotion.
2. List of departmental/unit criteria for promotion,
including the date faculty approved the departmental/unit criteria.
3. The departmental promotion committee recommendation.
4. The department chair's recommendation.
5. The college promotion committee's recommendation.
6. The college dean's recommendation.
7. The University Promotion Committee's recommendation.
8. The provost's recommendation.
9. Statements of responsibilities negotiated between
the applicant and the chair for the years under consideration.
10. Vita
a. Personal information
b. Education
c. Areas of expertise within a discipline
d. Courses taught: 1) Since last promotion; 2) Other
e. Date of appointment to the faculty at Fort Hays State University
and date of last promotion
f. Prior service at other institutions
g. Departmental and institutional service: 1) Since last promotion;
2) Other
h. Scholarly submissions, publications, and presentations: 1)
Since last promotion; 2) Other
i. Research grants received: 1) Since last promotion; 2) Other
j. Honors and distinctions: 1) Since last promotion; 2) Other
k. Community service: 1) Since last promotion; 2) Other
11. A chart summarizing course information for all
of the applicant's classes since the last promotion or at least
the last three years. The chart should indicate course level,
the number of students enrolled and grade distribution (A - 12%,
B - 27% etc.). Syllabi for at least two courses of the most recent semester should be included. The applicant should keep copies of all syllabi in one’s office, or available on-line, and be prepared to make them available should any level of review ask to see them.
12. Evidence of teaching excellence: Student ratings
are only one source of data regarding the applicant's teaching
skills. It is the responsibility of the applicant to include other
sources of validation as deemed appropriate by the applicant and
the department chair. Items "a." through "c."
listed below must be included in the applicant's promotion file;
item "d." is an item for the applicant to consider.
The chair and faculty member will determine what weight will be
given to each of the items. Departmental policy shall establish
weighing of each of these items.
a. Student rating summaries for the last three years should be presented in summary form, e.g., bar graphs, student rating summaries, as well as comparisons across departmental faculty and courses for the last three years along with an explanation of the comparisons, if appropriate, are to be included in the file. Student’s written comments for the last three years, if available, should be typed and included in the file. Any exceptions to this rule must be explained in the chair’s letter of recommendation. The applicant may include a
statement of explanation regarding the student ratings of a
particular class or particular student, if so desired.
b. Statements from the chair or colleagues who
have systematically observed classroom teaching or reviewed
the applicant's classroom materials, e.g., course syllabi, assignments,
tests, etc. This statement may be contained in a letter of recommendation
from colleagues, and hence would be located in section 15 of
this file; if so, the applicant should include a statement here
referring to the letter.
c. Description of steps taken by the applicant
in order to improve instructional and evaluation techniques
generally, and in one's field in particular. Items that could
be included are such things as participation in workshops, seminars,
training sessions (local, regional, national, international)
pertaining to one's field, to education generally, or to the
use of technology in the classroom, etc. If these items are
documented elsewhere, then merely refer to them and briefly
explain them in this section.
d. Statements by alumni on the quality of the
instruction in the applicant's classes.
13. Examples of scholarly writing/creative activity/research. Only a sampling of scholarly work should be presented; work that exemplifies the applicant at his or her best. The applicant should keep copies of all other such works (listed in the Vita) in one’s office, or available on-line, and be prepared to make them available should any level of review ask to see them.
14. Documentation of service to one's discipline,
to the university and the community. Only service for the last year should be presented. Other documentation should be kept in one’s office, or available on-line, and the applicant should be prepared to make them available should any level of review ask to see them.
15. Colleague letters of evaluation: Local letters
must have been written in the current school year for this particular
promotion, but letters from off campus may be used for two years.
It is recommended that there should be a minimum of three letters
in this section of the file with a maximum of five letters. The
department chair should explain any exceptions to this requirement
in the chair's letter of recommendation written for the applicant.
If the applicant wishes to keep older letters in the file, then
the letters should be transferred to section 15 of the file (Other
materials), but only letters of recommendation written since the
last promotion are permitted anywhere in the file.
16. Other material deemed appropriate by the applicant.
E. Eligible faculty who are approved for promotion, under the terms and processes above, to the next professorial level, will receive the following amounts of payment added to their salary base in the next contract year:
Instructor to Assistant Professor: $2,000
Assistant Professor to Associate Professor: $3,500
Associate Professor to Professor: $5,000
Revision consistent with 2008 AAUP MOA (07-01-07)
Part V: Tenure
A. After the expiration of a probationary period, teachers or instructors should have permanent or continuous tenure, and their services should be terminated only for adequate cause, except in the case of program or unit discontinuance or under extraordinary circumstances because of financial exigency. (2-19-97)
B. In the interpretation of the principles contained in Section A. of this policy, the following is applicable:
1. The precise terms and conditions of every appointment should be stated in writing and be in the possession of both institution and teacher before the appointment is consummated.
2. Beginning with appointment to the rank of full-time instructor or a higher rank, the probationary period should not exceed seven years, including within this period full-time service in all institutions of higher education; but subject to the proviso that when, after a term of probationary service of more than three years in one or more institutions, a teacher is called to another institution it may be agreed in writing that his new appointment is for a probationary period of not more than four years, even though thereby the person’s total probationary period in the academic profession is extended beyond the normal maximum of seven years; except when the interests of both parties may best be served by mutual agreement at the time of initial employment, institutions may agree to allow for more than four years of probationary service at the employing institution provided the probationary period at the institution does not exceed seven years. Notices should be given at least one year prior to the expiration of the probationary period if the teacher is not to be continued in service after the expiration of that probationary period.
3. If an untenured faculty member becomes a parent through birth, adoptive placement, or adoption of a child under the age of 5 prior to May 1 st of the fifth year of the probationary period, that faculty member, upon notification to the institution’s chief academic officer, shall be granted a one-year delay of the tenure review. Notification must occur within 90 days of the birth, adoptive placement, or adoption. Faculty members retain the right to opt out of this interruption policy. (3-20-06)
4. Under unexpected special and extenuating circumstances, prior to the sixth year of service, and at the request of the faculty member and the appropriate dean, the Chief Academic Officer of the university may grant an extension of the tenure clock for a maximum of one year. (9-18-97)
5. No more than two extensions of the tenure clock may be granted to a faculty member for any reason. Nothing in this provision shall be construed to guarantee reappointment of an untenured faculty member. (3-20-06)
C. Within this general policy, each Regents institution may make such operating regulations as it deems necessary, subject to the approval of the Board.
D. Any tenure approved by the institution shall be limited to tenure for the recommended individual at the institution consistent with the tenure policies of that institution. (Effective 11-14-02)
E. In exceptional cases, the chief executive officer at the Regents institution may hire a faculty member with tenure without their having completed a probationary period. (6-24-99)
F. Decisions of the chief executive officer shall be final and are not subject to further administrative review by any officer or committee of the institution or by the Board of Regents. (4-18-47; 2-25-80; 5-15-81; 4-16-82; 1-20-84; 2-16-89; 6-29-95)
Kansas Board of Regents: Policies and Procedures Manual (3-20-06)
G. The granting of tenure by the Board of Regents
is a privilege and not a right. Tenure will be granted when the
faculty member has been shown to have the proper qualifications
and when it is in the long-term interest of the university. Department (or unit) criteria for tenure must be developed by the department faculty and be approved by the faculty, the department chair, dean, and Provost. The official listing of the department criteria must include the date approved by faculty. University statements, goals and interests, policies of the Kansas Board of Regents, and any applicable accreditation requirements will be considered during the process of defining tenure criteria.
1. Only faculty members in a tenure-track position
are eligible for tenure. A faculty member in a tenure-track position,
with the exception of tenure–track faculty in Forsyth Library,
will be reviewed for continuation in tenure track in the first
and second years of appointment at the departmental level; in
the third and fourth years at the departmental and college levels;
and in the fifth and sixth years at the departmental, college,
and university levels. Some faculty members may be appointed with
one or more years’ credit for prior experience, so that
they proceed at a faster pace through the tenure process. The
number of years credited in this manner shall be agreed upon between
the faculty member and the appropriate chair, with review and
approval by the appropriate dean and the provost, and shall be
specified in writing as part of the written agreement governing
the faculty member’s initial appointment. Faculty members
whose initial conditions of appointment include a specification
of a number of years credited toward tenure shall proceed to the
appropriate step in the tenure review process. For example, a
faculty member whose initial appointment includes a provision
of three years’ credit toward tenure will have a first review
according to the procedure for the fourth-year review.
A Forsyth Library faculty member in a tenure–track
position (must be teaching at least one course per academic year)
will be reviewed for continuation in tenure track in the first
and second years of appointment at the library level; and in the
third through sixth years at the library and university levels.
2. All faculty members in a tenure track should
become familiar with the structure of the tenure file that each
candidate (probationary years one through six) must prepare and
the procedures regarding tenure review. College deans should
do what is reasonable to insure that new faculty and department chairs are familiar
with the guidelines, procedures, and schedules of the tenure review process well in advance of the
deadline for application. It should be noted that leave time other
than scholarly leave is not counted as time for achieving tenure.
3. In general, Fort Hays State University follows
the notification procedure for tenure as stated in the Memorandum
of Agreement between FHSU Chapter of the American Association
of University Professors and FHSU/Kansas Board of Regents (FY
2008-2010). A probationary appointment carries with it an expectation
of renewal. Hence, if the appointment is not to be renewed, the
faculty member needs to be informed of this in writing on the
following timelines:
a. Not later than March 1 of the first
academic year of FHSU service, if the appointment expires at
the end of that year; or, if a one-year appointment terminates
during the academic year, at least three months in advance of
its termination.
b. Not later than December 15 of the second academic year of FHSU service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if an initial two-year appointment terminates during the academic year, at least six months in advance of its termination
c. At least twelve months before the expiration
of an appointment after two or more years in the institution.
H. Tenure Procedures: The candidate for tenure should
read and be familiar with all steps of the tenure procedure with
special attention given to section I, Format of Tenure File and
the schedules of PART VI.
1. The faculty member submits his or her application
for tenure (in the form of tenure file--see Item I. below) to
the department chair. The chair forwards the candidate's file
to the department tenure committee (as described in step 2 below).
2. A tenure committee shall be established at the
department level by the chair in consultation with the faculty
and the college dean. The department chair shall determine the
size of the committee, and it will be composed of some or all
of the tenured faculty members of the department, but will not
include the department chair. In a department with few tenured
members, the committee may include tenured faculty of other departments.
All committee members shall be familiar with the guidelines of
this policy. After examining the candidate's file, the committee
shall vote affirmatively or negatively regarding the continuation
of the candidate on the tenure track. The committee should strive
for unanimity in its vote, but a simple majority is all that is
necessary. The committee recommendation shall include a description
of the procedures and criteria followed in making the recommendation,
including the numerical vote of the committee. Though addressed
to the chair, a copy of the recommendation will be sent only to
the candidate at this time.
a. Candidates for tenure should note that at each
level of review a pattern is followed as described above and
is essentially a pattern of: review of the file, informing the
candidate of the findings, appeal if desired by candidate, placing
the recommendation into the file, and forwarding the file to
next level of review. The candidate shall have 3 days
after receipt of the final recommendation to respond in writing
to any unresolved differences regarding the evaluation. The
candidate's response must be sent to the next level of review
and will become a part of the tenure file.
b. If the faculty member being evaluated for tenure
is the chair of the department, the dean of the college will
establish the department tenure committee, and that committee
will report directly to the dean.
3. The candidate may insert additional materials
in the file at this point. Within 5 days after receipt
of the recommendation and upon request, the candidate will receive
a hearing by the department committee. The committee will then
send its initial and final recommendations to the chair and forwarding
a copy of the final recommendation to the candidate. The candidate
shall have 3 days after receipt of the recommendation
to respond in writing to any unresolved differences regarding
the evaluation. The candidate's response must be sent to the department
chair and will become a part of the tenure file in the back of
the department tenure committee's recommendation section.
4. The chair shall make an independent evaluation
of the faculty member's file that includes the committee recommendation.
Though addressed to the dean, copies of the chair's recommendation
will be sent only to the candidate and department tenure committee
at this time.
5. Within 5 days after receipt of the recommendation and upon request, the applicant will receive a hearing by the chair. The chair will then place the initial and final recommendation in the file, forward the file to the dean and send copies of the final recommendation to the applicant and chair of the department tenure committee. The applicant shall have 3 days after receipt of the recommendation to respond in writing to any unresolved differences regarding the evaluation. The applicant’s response must be sent to the dean and will become part of the tenure file in the back of the chair’s recommendation section.
6. For candidates in first or second year of tenure
track, the dean will write a final recommendation to the provost.
Copies will be sent to the candidate, department chair, and department
tenure committee chair. The candidate may appeal the “final recommendation” to the provost and president, respectively. The candidate has 3 days to submit the appeal to the next level after receiving the previous decision. The provost and president should respond to the candidate’s appeal within 10 days after the appeal is received. The provost’s office will issue
a continuing or terminal contract based on the final recommendation.
7. A tenure committee shall be established at the
college level by the dean in consultation with the department
chairs. It shall be composed of tenured faculty members that are
not serving on a department or other tenure committee. The dean
shall determine the size and distributional representation of
the committee and shall chair the committee. All committee members
shall be familiar with the guidelines of this policy. The committee
shall make an independent evaluation of the faculty member's file
and shall include in its recommendation to the dean the procedures
and criteria followed and numerical vote. Though addressed to
the dean, the committee's recommendation will be sent only
to the candidate, department chair, and department tenure committee
chair at this time. If the committee’s recommendation is
not unanimous, members who wish to do so may provide written dissenting
opinions.
8. Within 5 days after receipt of the recommendation
and upon request, the candidate will receive a hearing by the
college tenure committee. The committee will place its initial
and final recommendations in the file and forward the file to
the dean. Copies of the final recommendation will be sent to
the candidate, department chair, and department tenure committee
chair. The candidate shall have 3 days after receipt of
the recommendation to respond in writing to any unresolved differences
regarding the evaluation. The candidate's response must be sent
to the dean and will become a part of the tenure file in the
back of the college tenure committee's recommendation section.
9. The dean shall make an independent evaluation of the faculty member’s file that includes the previous recommendations. Though addressed to the provost, the dean’s recommendation will be sent to the applicant, department chair, and the chairs of the department and college tenure committees.
10. Within 5 days after receipt of the recommendation and upon request, the applicant will receive a hearing by the dean. The dean will then place the initial and final recommendations in the file, forward the file to the provost and send copies of the final recommendation to the applicant, department chair, and chairs of the department tenure and college tenure committees. The applicant shall have 3 days after receipt of the recommendation to respond in writing to any unresolved differences regarding the evaluation. The applicant's response must be sent to the provost and will become a part of the tenure file in the back of the dean's recommendation section.
11. For candidates in the third or fourth year of the tenure track, the dean’s review is the final tenure review step. The candidate may appeal the “final recommendation” to the provost and president, respectively. The candidate has 3 days to submit the appeal to the next level after receiving the previous decision. The provost and president should respond to the candidate’s appeal within 10 days after the appeal is received. The provost’s office will issue a continuing or terminal contract based on the final recommendation
12. A University Tenure Committee shall be established.
There will be five members on the Committee who will serve two-year
terms. Terms will be staggered so that approximately half of the
members will change each year. Two members will be chosen from
the College of Arts and Sciences and one member from each of the
other three colleges. To fill vacancies and to maintain a balanced
representation on the University Tenure Committee, the president
of the Faculty Senate will submit the name of a tenured faculty member to the provost (normally in
late Spring) for each
of the vacancies on the Committee. The provost will initially convene the Committee. Committee members shall select a chair
who will prepare the recommendations that will be sent to the
provost. If Committee members feel that a written ballot should be used,
the chair will tabulate the results. All committee members
shall be familiar with the guidelines of this policy. Upon request,
the dean, chair and/or department chair will attend a hearing of
the University Tenure Committee to answer questions pertaining
to the candidate and the tenure file. The Committee shall make
an independent evaluation of the faculty member's file and shall
include in its recommendation the procedures and criteria followed
and the numerical vote. Though addressed to the provost, copies
of the Committee's recommendation will be sent only to the candidate,
department chair, and chairs of the department and college tenure
committees at this time.
13. Within 5 days after receipt of the recommendation
and upon request, the candidate will receive a hearing by the
University Tenure Committee. The Committee will then place its
initial and final recommendations in the file and forward it to
the provost. Copies of the final recommendation will be sent to
the candidate, department chair, and chairs of the department
and college tenure committees. The candidate shall have 3
days after receipt of the recommendation to respond in writing
to any unresolved differences regarding the evaluation. The candidate's
response must be sent to the provost and will become a part of
the tenure file in the back of the University Tenure Committee's
recommendation section.
14. The provost shall review the faculty member's
file and all recommendations and make an independent recommendation
to the president. Though addressed to the president, the provost's
recommendation will be sent only to the candidate, department
chair, dean, and chairs of the department, college, and university tenure
committees at this time.
15. Within 5 days after receipt of the recommendation
and upon request, the candidate will receive a hearing by the
provost. The provost will then place initial and final recommendations
in the file and forward the file to the president. Copies of the
final recommendation will be sent to the candidate, department
chair, dean, and chairs of the department, college, and university tenure
committees. The candidate shall have 3 days after receipt
of the recommendation to respond in writing to any unresolved
differences regarding the evaluation. The candidate's response
must be sent to the president and will become a part of the tenure
file in the back of the provost's recommendation section.
16. Given the information and recommendations described
above, the president of the university writes an initial recommendation
to the candidate, forwarding copies to the provost, department
chair, dean, and chairs of the department, college, and university tenure
committees. On request, the candidate will receive a hearing by
the president. The president then sends the final recommendation
to the candidate, forwarding copies to the provost, department
chair, dean, and chairs of the department, college, and university tenure
committees.
Approved by President Edward H. Hammond (06-13-99).
Revision consistent with 2008 AAUP MOA (07-01-07).
I. Format of Tenure File: Tenure files will normally
consist of a single, three-ring binder notebook (not more than 2 inches thick).
All publications or creative activities of the candidate need not be submitted as part
of the file, but a good representative sample is required. All publications and/or creative activities should be listed in the Vita. In the service category, committee meetings etc. attended could be listed, if the candidate wishes to do so. However, actual meeting announcements should not be included. Exceptions
taken to the one notebook limit should be explained in the department
chair's letter of recommendation. The emphasis should be on quality
and not quantity, and although the aesthetic appearance of the tenure
file is not paramount, the file represents the candidate and consequently
cannot be ignored by those evaluating the candidate's file. The
format indicated below shall be utilized in preparation of the candidate's
tenure file. Item 5 is not applicable for Forsyth Library tenure–track
faculty. In such exceptional cases the candidate in consultation
with the immediate supervisor may substitute other documentation
related to the specific nature of one's employment.
1. A tenure statement by the candidate: This would
normally be the last item the candidate prepares before submitting
the tenure file to the department chair. This letter should clearly
state the candidate's qualifications for tenure and focus attention
on the unique strengths and credentials of the candidate. The
candidate should recognize that members of the various committees
may not be entirely familiar with the candidate's field. It is
to the advantage of the candidate to explain the significance
of his/her contributions or accomplishments. A candidate might,
for example, comment on the relative importance of an exhibit
in a gallery or on the professional reputation of a journal which
features her/his work. The candidate should consider addressing concerns from prior tenure reviews in this statement or add an additional section at the end of the document to address problems and concerns from prior reviews or the current year. A candidate should show improvement in those areas of expressed concern. A new statement must be prepared each year
that the candidate is considered for tenure review. Old tenure statements will be removed from the file.
2. List of departmental/unit criteria for tenure,
including the date faculty approved the departmental/unit criteria.
3. The departmental tenure committee's report.
4. The department chair's recommendation.
5. The college tenure committee's recommendation.
6. The college dean's recommendation.
7. The University Tenure Committee's recommendation.
8. The provost's recommendation.
9. Statements of responsibilities negotiated between
the candidate and the chair for the years under consideration.
10. Vita
a. Personal information
b. Education
c. Areas of expertise within a discipline
d. Courses taught: 1) At FHSU; 2) Other
e. Date of appointment to the faculty at Fort Hays State University
f. Prior service at other institutions
g. Departmental and institutional service
h. Scholarly submissions, publications, and papers presented)
i. Research grants received
j. Honors and distinctions
k. Community service
11. Charts summarizing course information for all
courses taught at FHSU. The charts should indicate course level,
the number of students enrolled and the grades by distribution
(A - 12%, B - 27% etc.). Syllabi for two courses of the most recent semester should be included. Candidate should keep copies of all syllabi for courses taught and be prepared to make those available to any level of review that should request to see them.
12. Evidence of teaching excellence: Student ratings
and peer reviews are two important sources of data regarding the candidate's teaching
skills. The data inserted in this section of the
file will be accumulated from one cycle to another. Items "a."
through "c." listed below must be included in the candidate's
tenure file.
a. Student rating summaries for the last three years should be presented in summary form, e.g., bar graphs, student rating summaries, as well as comparisons across departmental faculty and courses for the last three years along with an explanation of the comparisons, if appropriate, are to be included in the file. Student’s written comments for the last three years, if available, should be typed and included in the file. Any exceptions to this rule must be explained in the chair's letter of recommendation. The candidate may include
a statement of explanation regarding the student ratings
of a particular class or particular student if so desired.
b. Statements from the chair or colleagues who
have systematically reviewed the candidate's classroom materials,
e.g., course syllabi, assignments, tests etc. This statement
may be contained in a letter of recommendation from colleagues,
and hence would be located in section 15 of this file; if so,
the candidate should include a statement here referring to the
letter.
c. Description of steps taken by the candidate
in order to improve instructional and evaluation techniques
generally, and in one's field in particular. Items that could
be included are such things as participation in workshops, seminars,
training sessions (local, regional, national, international)
pertaining to one's field, to education generally, or to the
use of technology in the classroom, etc. If these items are
documented elsewhere, then merely refer to them and briefly
explain them in this section.
d. Statements by alumni on the quality of the
instruction in the candidate's classes.
13. Examples of scholarly writing/creative activity/research. Only a sampling of scholarly work should be presented; work that exemplifies the applicant at his or her best. The applicant should keep copies of all other such works (listed in the Vita) in one’s office, or available on-line, and be prepared to make them available should any level of review ask to see them.
14. Documentation of service to the university and
community. Only service for the last year should be presented. Other documentation should be kept in one’s office, or available on-line, and the applicant should be prepared to make them available should any level of review ask to see them.
15. Colleague letters of evaluation: Local letters
must have been written in the current school year for this particular
tenure review cycle, but letters from off campus may be used for
two such cycles. It is recommended that there should be a minimum
of three letters in this section of the file with a maximum of
five letters. The department chair should explain any exceptions
to this requirement in the chair's letter of recommendation written
for the candidate. If the candidate wishes to keep older letters
in the file, then the letters should be transferred to section
16 of the file (Other materials). There shall be no letters of
recommendation in the file that are dated prior to the candidate's
employment at FHSU.
16. Other materials deemed appropriate by the candidate.
Revision consistent with 2008 AAUP MOA (07-01-07)
Part VI: Schedules
A. Promotion Pathways
1. Applicant applies to Chair
2. Department Promotion Committee
3. Rebuttal and/or hearing with Department Promotion
Committee (optional)
4. Chair
5. Rebuttal and/or hearing with chair (optional)
6. College Promotion Committee
7. Rebuttal and/or hearing with College Promotion
Committee (optional)
8. Dean
9. Rebuttal and/or hearing with Dean (optional)
10. University Promotion Committee
11. Rebuttal and/or hearing with the University
Promotion Committee (optional)
12. Provost
13. Rebuttal and/or hearing with provost (optional)
14. President
15. Hearing with president (optional)
Items 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11,13 and 15 are actions initiated
by the candidate.
B. Tenure Pathways
1. Candidate applies to Chair
2. Department Tenure Committee
3. Rebuttal and/or hearing with Department Tenure
Committee (optional)
4. Chair
5. Rebuttal and/or hearing with chair (optional)
6. College Tenure Committee (not applicable to Forsyth
Library tenure–track faculty)
7. Rebuttal and/or hearing with College Tenure Committee
(optional) (not applicable to Forsyth Library tenure–track
faculty)
8. Dean
9. Rebuttal and/or hearing with Dean (optional)
10. University Tenure Committee
11. Rebuttal and/or hearing with University Tenure
Committee (optional)
12. Provost
13. Rebuttal and/or hearing with provost (optional)
14. President
15. Hearing with president (optional)
Items 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, and 15 are actions initiated
by the candidate.
Approved by President Edward H. Hammond (07-01-04).
Kansas Board of Regents: Policies
and Procedures Manual (06-04).
Back to Chapter 3 |
