College Department Heads Timeline for Review and Notification
This timeline applies to Tenure-track
Instructors/Assistant Professors with no prior teaching service. (For those
with prior teaching service – ask Dean to clarify evaluation schedule)
Refer to the current version of the Faculty Handbook
(available online) for official policies related to the condition of faculty
employment at Washington and Lee University. All department heads should
familiarize themselves with University policies pertaining to term
appointments and the quest for a tenured appointment. They should also be
familiar with the timeline and procedures associated with scheduled reviews,
including the relevant roles of
* the candidate
* the department head
* tenured members of the department
* the Tenure Committee
* the Dean
* the President’s Advisory Committee
* the Faculty Review Committee
* the President and Board of Trustees
Questions about each party’s respective role, or the
interpretation of relevant University policies should be directed to the
Dean of the College.
Year 1 (first term appointment is for 2 years)
Beginning of academic year
Department head and new faculty member discuss
nature of evaluation process at Washington and Lee. Discuss notion of
“Teaching Effectiveness” and identify the types of evidence that will
support claims of effective teaching. Discuss range of activities that may
constitute “Scholarly Activity” in the first year.
The faculty member or department head writes a
summary of the discussion (and the other party should review and edit the
document) including any Goals established – add hard copy of summary to
faculty member’s file.
Note that questions arising from this or any
discussion between the faculty member and department head may be brought to
the attention of the Dean for clarification.
Late spring
Department head confers with faculty member.
a. Review Goals identified at early fall meeting,
and review Faculty Activities Report
b. Ask faculty member to discuss past year in terms
of goals met/unmet, strengths/weaknesses, successes/failures in
teaching/scholarship
c. Identify any areas of concern that need special
attention of either department head, senior member of department, or dean.
Plan steps for improvement of specific issues.
d. Identify/set new goals for the upcoming summer
and next academic year, incorporating the faculty member’s specific
aspirations related to Teaching Effectiveness and Scholarly Activity.
Department head writes summary of meeting, then:
* shares copy with faculty member
* adds copy of summary to faculty member’s file
* sends hard copy of year-end letter to Dean.
The faculty member always has the right to draft a
reply to non-confidential correspondence, and to have the written reply
shared with the dean and added to his/her file.
Year 2 (2nd year of first term appointment; Year 2 procedures also apply
to anyone who is due for the first term review)
September 30
Deadline for department head to inform faculty
member of December 15 deadline for notification of renewal/non-renewal (AAUP
requires six months notice of non-renewal for faculty member in second year
of service).
November 1
Target date for candidate to create a file
containing
* the candidate’s current vitae
* first F.A.R.
* first year-end letter
* evidence of the faculty member’s teaching
effectiveness
* statement of scholarly activity
* other materials that either the candidate or the
department head deem to be relevant
Tenured members of the department should review
evidence of teaching effectiveness and any scholarship/research in progress
prior to the department head’s consultation with faculty member regarding
reappointment.
Mid-November
Department head confers with all tenured department
members, and drafts a memo to the dean containing a written summary of the
group’s feedback, as well as a recommendation concerning
reappointment/non-reappointment. A copy of the memo is added to the faculty
member’s file, shared with tenured members of the department, and forwarded
to the Dean.
December 1
Department’s recommendation regarding
reappointment/non-reappointment is forwarded to Dean. Department head meets
with the faculty member to discuss the content of the memo that was sent to
the dean. The faculty member should feel free to meet with the dean as well
to discuss the content of the letter.
The Dean will provide the faculty member with an
official letter of reappointment/non-reappointment. The faculty member who
is not reappointed may request reconsideration of a negative decision within
30 days, as described in the Faculty Handbook.
Late spring
Department head confers with faculty member and
conducts an exit interview if the faculty member was not reappointed. The
faculty member may also choose to have an exit interview with the Dean.
For a reappointed faculty member:
a. Review Goals identified at the last spring
meeting, and review Faculty Activities Report
b. Ask faculty member to discuss past year in terms
of goals met/unmet, strengths/weaknesses, successes/failures in
teaching/scholarship
c. Identify any areas of concern that need special
attention of either department head, senior member of department, or dean.
Plan steps for improvement of specific issues.
d. Identify/set new goals for the upcoming summer
and next academic year, incorporating the faculty member’s specific
aspirations related to Teaching Effectiveness and Scholarly Activity.
Department head writes summary of meeting, then:
* discusses content and shares copy with faculty
member
* adds copy of summary to faculty member’s file
* sends hard copy of year-end letter to Dean.
The faculty member always has the right to draft a
reply to non-confidential correspondence, and to have the written reply
shared with the dean and added to his/her file.
Reappointment of a tenure-track faculty member at
this stage is usually for a period of three years.
Year 3 (1st year of second term appointment)
Late spring
Department head confers with faculty member to do
the following:
a. Review Goals identified at the last spring
meeting, and review Faculty Activities Report
b. Ask faculty member to discuss past year in terms
of goals met/unmet, strengths/weaknesses, successes/failures in
teaching/scholarship
c. Identify any areas of concern that need special
attention of either department head, senior member of department, or dean.
Plan steps for improvement of specific issues.
d. Identify/set new goals for the upcoming summer
and next academic year, incorporating the faculty member’s specific
aspirations related to Teaching Effectiveness and Scholarly Activity.
Department head writes summary of meeting, then:
* discusses content and shares copy with faculty
member
* adds copy of summary to faculty member’s file
* sends hard copy of year-end letter to Dean.
The faculty member always has the right to draft a
reply to non-confidential correspondence, and to have the written reply
shared with the dean and added to his/her file.
Year 4 (2nd year of second term appointment; year of fourth-year review,
or second term review)
September 30
Deadline for department head to inform faculty
member of May 30 deadline for notification of renewal/non-renewal (AAUP
requires 12 months notice of non-renewal for faculty members with two or
more years of service at W&L).
If the department is likely to have fewer than 5
tenured members available to comprise the candidate’s tenure review
committee during year 6 (the minimum number required by University policy),
the department head and the candidate in consultation with the Dean may
choose to add one or more tenured faculty members from outside the home
department to the review committee this year, to permit the outside
reviewer(s) to contribute to both the pre-tenure and tenure reviews.
March 1
The faculty member assembles the pre-tenure review
file including:
* the candidate’s current vita
* all of the candidate’s F.A.R.’s
* all of the candidate’s year-end letters (and any
responses written by the candidate)
* materials related to Teaching Effectiveness
* materials related to Scholarly Activity
* information related to the candidate’s record of
service at the institution.
The department head makes the file available to all
tenured members of the department.
The department head confers with all tenured
department members after all have read the file, and drafts a memo to the
dean containing a written summary of the group’s feedback, as well as a
recommendation concerning reappointment/non-reappointment. The candidate
receives a copy of the summary letter, and s/he may draft a reply if
desired. A copy of the memo and any reply is added to the faculty member’s
file, and forwarded to the Dean.
April 1
Department’s recommendation regarding
reappointment/non-reappointment is forwarded to Dean. Department head meets
with the faculty member to discuss the content of the memo that was sent to
the dean. The faculty member should feel free to meet with the dean as well
to discuss the content of the letter.
May
The Dean will provide the faculty member with an
official letter of reappointment/non-reappointment. The faculty member who
is not reappointed may request reconsideration of a negative decision within
30 days, as described in the Faculty Handbook.
Late spring
Department head confers with faculty member to do
the following:
a. Review Goals identified at the last spring
meeting, and review Faculty Activities Report
b. Ask faculty member to discuss past year in terms
of goals met/unmet, strengths/weaknesses, successes/failures in
teaching/scholarship
c. Identify any areas of concern that need special
attention of either department head, senior member of department, or dean.
Plan steps for improvement of specific issues.
d. Identify/set new goals for the upcoming summer
and next academic year, as well as goals for the next 3 to 5 years for a
reappointed faculty member, incorporating the faculty member’s specific
aspirations related to Teaching Effectiveness and Scholarly Activity.
Department head writes summary of meeting, then:
* discusses content and shares copy with faculty
member
* adds copy of summary to faculty member’s file
* sends hard copy of year-end letter to Dean.
The faculty member always has the right to draft a
reply to non-confidential correspondence, and to have the written reply
shared with the dean and added to his/her file.
Reappointment of a tenure-track faculty member at
this stage is usually for a period of two years.
Year 5 (3rd year of second term appointment – last year of employment
for a faculty member who was not reappointed after the pre-tenure review)
Late spring
Department head confers with faculty member to do
the following:
a. Review Goals identified at the last spring
meeting, and review Faculty Activities Report
b. Ask faculty member to discuss past year in terms
of goals met/unmet, strengths/weaknesses, successes/failures in
teaching/scholarship
c. Identify any areas of concern that need special
attention of either department head, senior member of department, or dean.
Plan steps for improvement of specific issues.
d. Identify/set new goals for the upcoming summer
and next academic year, incorporating the faculty member’s specific
aspirations related to Teaching Effectiveness and Scholarly Activity.
Department head writes summary of meeting, then:
* discusses content and shares copy with faculty
member
* adds copy of summary to faculty member’s file
* sends hard copy of year-end letter to Dean.
The faculty member always has the right to draft a
reply to non-confidential correspondence, and to have the written reply
shared with the dean and added to his/her file.
Year 6 (1st year of third term appointment, year of the tenure review)
NOTE that this summary is NOT intended to substitute
for the details provided in the Faculty Handbook. Both department heads and
candidates should review the Faculty Handbook section on Conditions of
Faculty Employment at the start of the tenure year.
Either the candidate or the department head should
notify the Dean whenever there is a question about the interpretation of the
guidelines in the Faculty Handbook pertaining to the tenure review.
September 1
Department head informs faculty member that the
tenure decision will be made no later than May 30, according to the tenure
guidelines and procedures detailed in the Faculty Handbook.
Department head reviews with faculty member all
steps associated with the review; clarifies the candidate’s
responsibilities for assembling the file.
The faculty member and the department head must come
to agreement on who will serve on the tenure review committee (either all
tenured members of the department, or all tenured members plus additional
tenured faculty members from outside the department to reach the minimum
committee size of 5). When necessary to achieve a 5-member committee, the
candidate and the department head will agree upon a list of twice the
required additional faculty who will be competent to augment the tenure
committee and the Dean will select the requisite number from the list. If a
consensus cannot be reached, the Dean may proceed in consultation with the
candidate and the department head to select qualified non-departmental
members of the committee.
Where extra-departmental faculty must be added to
the tenure committee, the Dean must be consulted before the tenure
committee’s roster is finalized.
The department head informs all tenured department
members (and others outside the department who will serve on the tenure
committee) of their role as tenure committee members.
The department head must make known to the candidate
those methods that will be used in soliciting student and peer evaluations
for the tenure file. The evaluations themselves will be treated as
confidential materials – unavailable to the candidate.
October
The candidate assembles the tenure file according to
guidelines in the Faculty Handbook.
The department head solicits student and peer
letters for the confidential portion of the tenure file.
December 1
The fully assembled file is made available for
reading by committee members. The department head notifies the candidate of
the number of confidential letters included in the file.
If there are off-campus committee members who cannot
come to campus to read file, a copy should be sent to them for reading at
this time.
January
Every committee member independently reviews the
file and writes a confidential evaluation letter to be inserted into the
file. Once this is done, the file is circulated again to each committee
member.
February
The committee then meets to discuss the candidate's
qualifications for tenure and to vote. While the vote may be anonymous, the
tally shall be recorded and made part of the file.
The department head writes a report stating the
committee’s recommendation and explaining the basis of the recommendation.
A copy of the report is given to the candidate, who is informed of his/her
privilege to respond to the report. The committee reviews the response from
the candidate, and reconsiders its decision if appropriate. The department
head drafts a final letter which is added to the file along with the
candidate’s letter (if one is provided).
March 1
Deadline for complete file, including response, to
be submitted to appropriate dean.
April
The Advisory Committee, chaired by the Provost,
reviews and discusses the file and a recommendation is made to the
President.
May
The President makes recommendations on tenure to the
Board of Trustees, whose vote constitutes the university’s decision.
The faculty member receives official notification of
the University’s decision regarding his/her bid for tenure, and s/he has 30
days to petition the Faculty Review Committee for a review of the decision
not to grant tenure (see Faculty Handbook for appeal procedures).
Year 7 (2nd year of third term appointment)
Last year of employment for faculty members who were not granted tenure
First year of tenured appointment for faculty
members who were granted tenure
C:\Desktop\Heads\Fac Eval Procedures timeline.doc
revised 8/17/2003
|
