1. General Process

   Guidelines for faculty review are outlined in Article 20 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, which all faculty should consult regarding the faculty review process. According to Article 20.1.2, evaluations for RTP and Post-TR shall be made on the basis of approved university, college and department criteria. Below you will find the University Faculty Performance Standard and the College of Arts and Humanities RTP and Post-TR criteria. Departmental criteria should be codified and made available to all faculty.

   Professional records for RTP and Post-TR should be submitted in a three-ring binder, which is provided by the College to all new probationary faculty.

   In all performance reviews, it is the candidate's responsibility to assemble and present a professional record of performance and accomplishments. The professional record will include the documents indicated by the coversheet for each type of review, in the order noted. For helpful information on completing a professional record, see "Tips for Completing Faculty Review Dossiers", 8.3A at the end of this section.

   It is the Department Personnel Committee's and Chair's responsibility to check the professional record for completeness and correct organization before it is sent forward for college level review. The Department Personnel Committee Chair and Chair should go through each dossier carefully and check off every item listed on each coversheet before signing.

   1. Dossier preparation by candidates should be meticulous, using the following guidelines:

      Candidates :

      1. The professional record includes a primary notebook and a support notebook. In the primary notebook are the major documents of the review. Most of these items should be submitted in duplicate (indicated on the coversheet by a ** following the listing). The support notebook includes material documenting the candidate's performance in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service.
      2. Please put documents in the order they are listed on the coversheet in loose-leaf format directly into the three-ring binder provided. Items should NOT be stapled together or put into pockets or clear plastic inserts .
      3. An up-to-date and detailed vita should follow the recently developed CAH format. While disciplinary protocols differ, the usual order for arranging material in the humanities and arts is to list items in descending chronological order (most recent listed first).
      4. A self-statement is required and should be succinct (4-6 pages at most if the review period is 5 years or more), specific, non-defensive, and provide context and explanation of the evolution of the candidate's professional profile, expressly addressing teaching, scholarship/creativity, and professional service in the context of departmental and college criteria. The self statement should not be simply a list of activities; it should be a narrative discussion of goals and accomplishments and plans for improvement. Try to convey how your teaching, scholarship and service are connected in a larger, purposeful professional plan.
      5. To document effective teaching, faculty must include student evaluations of teaching, course syllabi, as well as supplementary materials such as evidence of: teaching recognitions and awards, pedagogical development, curricular design, advising, serving on graduate committees, undergraduate research oversight, reports from colleagues or supervisors, unsolicited student testimonials, etc. SEOI's, the standard student evaluation tool used by the University, are one key means by which faculty document their teaching effectiveness. Therefore, as part of this documentation, all faculty within the College of Arts and Humanities will have all classes, each quarter, evaluated using the University SEOI form. (See CAH Standards For Use of SEOI's", 8.3C at the end of this section.)
      6. To document scholarship/creativity, copies of publications, manuscripts, letters of acceptance, conference programs, correspondence, professional citations, or other material indicating scholarly accomplishments and work-in-progress should be provided.

      Departments :

      1. The department personnel committee and Chair independently write formal statements indicating their recommendations on the action under review, accompanied by a narrative rationale for the recommended action addressing the candidate's documented record of performance in the areas of teaching, scholarship, service, and other pertinent qualifications. All evaluations of candidates must be based on departmental standards and criteria.
      2. In cases where department Chairs are up for review, the Dean will appoint a designated person to act in lieu of the Chair in evaluating the dossier and shepherding the materials through channels. The department will conduct its review according to standard practices.
      3. Any written and signed comments/ballots from department faculty must be submitted to the chair or personnel committee and will become part of the candidate's professional record.
      4. Appropriate confidentiality should be observed by all parties.
2. University Faculty Performance Standard for RTP and Post-TR

   Central Washington University faculty members contribute to the mission and goals of the university in the three areas of faculty work: instruction, scholarship, and service. This work is framed by university and program accreditation standards and conducted with collegiality and professionalism (CBA Article 11). College criteria for faculty performance in these areas will reflect disciplinary standards within the college. Department criteria will, in turn, align with college and university criteria and standards. Professional librarians shall constitute a college for administrative purposes, in accordance with CBA Article 13.4.4.

   Tenure and/or Promotion in Rank:

   Tenure is the right to continuous appointment at the University with an assignment to a specific department in accordance with the provisions of CBA Article 9.2. The tenure decision is based upon faculty performance and the potential benefit to the university. Performance towards tenure is annually reviewed through the reappointment process. A positive tenure review requires a pattern of productivity that promises sustained contributions in all three areas of faculty performance throughout a career, and is based on the benefits to the university of entering into the commitment to tenure. For an Assistant Professor, tenure is awarded with promotion to Associate Professor.

   Promotion to the rank of Associate Professor recognizes an established record of effective teaching, a demonstrated ability to lead independent, peer-reviewed scholarship to dissemination outside the university, and a substantive contribution to university, professional and/or community service.

   Promotion to the rank of Professor recognizes excellent teaching that commands the respect of the faculty and students; an accumulated record of superior peer-reviewed scholarship since the previous promotion; and sustained contributions to university life, and increasing service to professional organizations and/or the community.

   Post-tenure review:

   Post-tenure review assures continued performance in assigned areas of faculty work at appropriate rank and consistent with the university mission and accreditation standards. Performance in the three areas of faculty work is typically expected during any three-year post-tenure review cycle.

   College and department standards will articulate discipline-specific expectations for tenure, promotion, and post-tenure review.

   Performance

   Instruction:

   Effective instruction is the central element of faculty work. It requires thoughtful and responsive course design, development of appropriate instructional techniques, articulation of student learning objectives, assessment of student learning, general advising, and is informed by active scholarship. Effective teaching is shaped by formal evaluation using multiple measures and by ongoing professional development.

   Instruction activities are specified in Article 13.3.1 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

   College and department standards shall articulate multiple measures of review that include peer evaluation of content, pedagogy, and responsiveness to assessment; student feedback; and other measures appropriate to the content area.

   Scholarship:

   Faculty scholarship informs instruction and service, contributes to professional development, and advances knowledge. It includes sustained professional activities leading to regular publication, performance, formal presentation, or external funding in the field of the faculty member's academic assignment. It may include contributions in the four basic areas of discovery, integration, application and teaching, as appropriate to that assignment. Scholarship is characterized by external peer review and dissemination outside the university.

   Scholarship activities are specified in Article 13.3.2 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

   College standards shall articulate periodically expected activities in two or more categories.

   Category A includes disciplined-recognized products that are formally peer-reviewed and disseminated outside the university. e.g.:

   • refereed journal articles
   • research monographs
   • scholarly books and chapter
   • textbooks
   • juried exhibitions and performances
   • peer-reviewed external grant (for the lead principal investigator)

   Another category or other categories specified by the colleges include formal activities that lead to or support such products or other scholarly contributions, e.g.:

   • peer-reviewed conference proceedings
   • proposal submission for peer-reviewed external grant (lead principal investigator)
   • serving as co-investigator or co-principal investigator on funded external peer-reviewed grant
   • principal investigator on other grants and contracts
   • authoring publicly available research and technical papers
   • conference presentations
   • textbook chapters
   • externally published study guides
   • book reviews

   Department standards shall align with university and college criteria.

   Service:

   Faculty service contributes academic and professional expertise and effort to the university community, to professional communities of scholars, and to the citizenry.

   University, professional, and public service activities are specified in Article 13.3.3 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement .

   College and department standards shall articulate professional and public service activities appropriate to the academic discipline, and the basis for their evaluation.

3. College of Arts and Humanities Faculty Performance Standards for RTP and Post-TR

   The mission of the College of Arts and Humanities (CAH) is to advance knowledge, promote intellectual inquiry, and cultivate creative endeavor among faculty and students through teaching, scholarship, artistry, and public and professional service. All parts of our mission - teaching, scholarly or artistic achievement, and service - are integral ventures that support and cross-fertilize each other, enriching the education we provide our students.

   To fulfill this mission, to develop and maintain high quality programs, and to encourage and support faculty growth and advancement, it is necessary that faculty performance be evaluated periodically in accordance with Article 20 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). This document outlines the general expectations for faculty reappointment, tenure and promotion, and post-tenure review and provides guidance for the development of department-specific criteria. Because the College of Arts and Humanities is composed of a diverse group of disciplines with different activities and goals, each department will, in conformity with these guidelines, determine what activities in the areas of teaching, scholarship, artistry, and service are appropriate to their department.

   Reappointment:

   Performance toward tenure and promotion is annually reviewed through the reappointment process. Probationary faculty are reappointed to another year of service when they demonstrate a pattern of development in the areas of teaching, research, and service that indicates they are making clear progress toward tenure. Probationary faculty who do not meet minimum standards, as defined by their department (criteria), may be reappointed with reservations.

   Tenure and/or Promotion in Rank:

   Tenure is the right to continuous appointment at the University with an assignment to a specific department in accordance with the provisions of CBA Article 9.2. The tenure decision is based upon faculty performance and the potential benefit to the university. A positive tenure review requires a pattern of productivity that promises sustained contributions in all three areas of faculty performance throughout a career, and is based on the benefits to the university of entering into the commitment to tenure. For an Assistant Professor, tenure is awarded with promotion to Associate Professor. Department standards will articulate discipline-specific expectations for tenure.

   Promotion to the rank of Associate Professor recognizes an established record of effective teaching; a demonstrated ability to lead independent, peer-reviewed scholarship to dissemination outside the university; and a substantive contribution to university, professional and/or community service. Department standards will articulate discipline-specific expectations for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor.

   Promotion to the rank of Professor recognizes excellent teaching that commands the respect of the faculty and students; an accumulated record of superior peer-reviewed scholarship since the previous promotion; and sustained contributions to university life, and increasing service to professional organizations and the community. Department standards will articulate discipline-specific expectations for promotion to the rank of Professor

   Post-tenure review:

   Post-tenure review assures continued performance in assigned areas of faculty work at appropriate rank and consistent with the university mission and accreditation standards. Performance in the three areas of faculty work is typically expected during any three-year post-tenure review cycle. Department standards will articulate discipline-specific expectations for post-tenure review.

   Performance

   The periodic performance review of CAH faculty is to provide effective feedback for faculty development and growth. It is coordinated at the departmental and college levels in accordance with Article 20 of the CBA.

   As outlined in Article 13.3 of the CBA, the faculty workload will typically consist of three parts, instruction, scholarship and service. However, it is understood that a faculty member may or may not participate in all of these activities during a given academic year.

   Instruction:

   Effective instruction is the central element of faculty work. Informed by active scholarship, it requires thoughtful and responsive course design, development of appropriate instructional techniques, articulation of student learning objectives, assessment of student learning, and general advising. Effective teaching is shaped by formal evaluation using multiple measures and by ongoing professional development.

   Given the variety of disciplines in CAH, the college values and encourages a broad range of instructional methods and activities. Instruction activities are outlined in Article 13.3.1 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

   Teaching effectiveness shall be evaluated using multiple measures that include peer evaluation of content, pedagogy, and responsiveness to assessment; student feedback; and other measures appropriate to the content area. The basis of the evaluation shall be the quality of and effectiveness of instruction relative to departmental and college standards.

   CWU Student Evaluation of Instruction (SEOI) forms shall be administered in all courses with five or more students, and the results submitted for evaluation in accordance with Article 20.4 of the CBA. Departments shall maintain copies of SEOI summaries including student comments. Faculty should also submit other evidence of effective instruction appropriate for their department.

   Each department will articulate the measures used to evaluate instruction and establish standards of performance that faculty must meet for reappointment, tenure and promotion, and post-tenure review. These standards shall align with university and college criteria.

   Scholarship:

   Faculty scholarship informs instruction and service, contributes to professional development, and advances knowledge and creative expression. It includes professional activities leading to regular publication, performance, formal presentation, or external funding in the field of the faculty member's academic assignment. It may include contributions in the four basic areas of discovery, integration, application and teaching (Boyer model), as appropriate to that assignment. Scholarship is generally characterized by external peer review and dissemination outside the university.

   Scholarship is multi-faceted and may take many forms. National practice and accreditation standards recognize a variety of scholarly activities for specific disciplines, and different ways for disseminating work outside the university.

   Scholarship is defined in Article 13.3.2 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

   For reappointment, tenure and promotion to Associate Professor, faculty must demonstrate sustained peer-reviewed scholarly activity that includes work in both categories A and B below, as defined by the University Performance Standards. The category entries may be revised to meet discipline-specific standards provided the principles underlying each category are adhered to. The quality and quantity of scholarship-creative activity shall be taken into consideration.

   Candidates for promotion to Professor are expected to have achieved an accumulated record of superior peer-reviewed scholarship since the previous promotion. The quality and quantity of scholarship-creative activity shall be taken into consideration.

   Tenured faculty are normally expected to maintain some scholarly activity during the post-tenure review period. However, the balance of teaching, scholarship and service may evolve during a faculty member's career and performance expectations in each category may shift correspondingly.

   Faculty shall produce scholarly-creative work in the following two categories, as defined by the University Performance Standards.

   Category A includes discipline-recognized products that are formally peer-reviewed and disseminated outside the university. e.g.:

   • refereed journal articles
   • research monographs
   • scholarly books and chapters
   • scholarly creative works or equivalent contributions
   • textbooks
   • juried exhibitions
   • peer-reviewed external grants (for the lead principal investigator)
   • peer-reviewed performances, compositions, and recordings

   Category B includes formal activities that lead to or support such products or other scholarly contributions, e.g.:

   • peer-reviewed conference proceedings
   • proposal submissions for peer-reviewed external grants (lead principal investigator)
   • serving as co-investigator or co-principal investigator on funded external peer-reviewed grants
   • principal investigator on other grants and contracts
   • authoring publicly available research and technical papers
   • conference presentations
   • textbook chapters
   • externally published study guides
   • book reviews
   • reviews of external performances and technical reviews
   • non-peer-reviewed performances, compositions and recordings

   Each department will articulate the measures used to evaluate scholarship and establish standards of performance which faculty must meet for reappointment, tenure and promotion, and post-tenure review. These standards shall align with university and college criteria.

   The department RPT Committee shall evaluate the significance of an achievement as a contribution to the discipline. The standing within the discipline of the publisher, journal, meeting, performance or exhibition shall be taken into consideration when gauging the significance of the achievement. Full citations are required for each achievement listed. Citations shall indicate whether the accomplishment is juried, refereed, invited, externally reviewed, etc..

   Service:

   Faculty service contributes academic and professional expertise and effort to the university community, to professional communities of scholars, and to the citizenry.

   University, professional, and public service activities are outlined in Article 13.3.3 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement .

   Each department will articulate the measures used to evaluate service and establish standards of performance that faculty must meet for reappointment, tenure and promotion, and post-tenure review. These standards shall align with university and college criteria.

   Adopted September 16, 2006

1. As stated in Article 10.2 of the CBA, "Non-tenure-track faculty shall be evaluated by their department chair and personnel committee at least once per academic year and their evaluations will be forwarded to the Dean."
2. The annual review shall be based on approved departmental criteria.

In the interest of standardization and ease of reviewing the professional records, the Office of the Dean will distribute a binder to all new faculty. The binder is to be used for all faculty review actions, including reappointment, tenure, promotion, merit, and post-tenure review. The binder should provide an easy way to build a comprehensive professional record from year to year.

The professional record will include the documents indicated by the coversheet for each type of review. The cover sheets contain guidelines for the format and context of your professional record and can be found at: http://www.cwu.edu/~cah/forms.html. Please follow the cover sheet guidelines carefully.

8.3B Standards For Use Of SEOI's

The SEOI form is the standard student evaluation tool used by the University and is one key means by which faculty document their teaching effectiveness. Article 20.4 of the CBA requires their inclusion in the professional record for all faculty evaluations. Therefore, as part of this documentation, all classes taught by all faculty members in the College of Arts and Humanities are to be evaluated each quarter using the University SEOI form.

The following standards, devised in collaboration with the department Chairs, the Associate Dean, and the Dean have been set for the use of SEOI forms, in an effort to provide consistency among departments and as an aid to faculty in compiling their dossiers:

• SEOI forms are to be distributed, administered, and submitted by a designated proctor for each class. Neither the instructor of the class nor any other faculty member may be involved in the process or serve as proctor.
• Normally, the proctor will bring all forms to the department secretary immediately following the student evaluation process. If the secretary is unavailable, the forms are to be delivered to the department chair.
• After grades are submitted, only the summary sheets and compiled comments are distributed to faculty.
• A copy of the summary sheet and compiled typed comments for each class evaluated are to be kept in departmental personnel records .
• Faculty may wish to solicit additional commentary from students to assist them in pedagogical development. Such commentary may be solicited as the instructor sees fit, separately from the SEOI process described above.