North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University College of Arts and Sciences Performance Review Committee Workshops October 27 and 28, 2014

North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University

College of Arts and SciencesPerformance Review Committee Workshops

October 27 and 28, 2014


Goals of the Workshop

Provide a thorough review of the Post Tenure Review

Policy.

Come away with a set of “best practices” for evaluating

faculty for post tenure review.

Come away with a set of “best practices” for writing the

post tenure review report.

Answer questions about the process and your role in it.


Overview: Purpose and Frequency

In 1997, the UNC BOG mandated a periodic performance review

of all tenured faculty.

At NCA&T, the review is to take place no less often than every five

years following the award of tenure (or promotion to Full

Professor).

A “peer-coordinated process” whose purposes are to: Assure continuous improvement in performance of the faculty in the areas of

teaching, research/creative work and service. Recognize and reward exemplary performance. Identify and plan to improve less than satisfactory performance. Provide administrative sanctions for faculty whose performance remains deficient.


I. PTR Evaluation ProceduresA. Standards for Performance

PTR Standards written and approved by tenured members of the

Department shall be the basis for evaluating tenured faculty for PTR.

(However, Standards must be consistent with standards for Annual

Performance Evaluations and the Faculty Handbook.)

Departmental PTR Standards should establish criteria for Exemplary,

Satisfactory or Deficient ratings in each of the areas of (1)Teaching,

(2) Research/Creative Works and Professional Growth, and (3)

Service.

For faculty whose responsibilities are in only one or two of these

areas, the PTR and recommendations should take this allocation into

account. Documentation is required.

Faculty undergo PTR under the Standards that were in place in the

first year of their five-year cycle of PTR, except for standards imposed

by the BOG.www.ncat.edu

4


B. Schedule of Evaluation Faculty undergo PTR no less than every five years following the

awarding of permanent tenure.

An application for promotion to Full Professor can serve in lieu of the

scheduled PTR. If application for promotion is successful, the next PTR would take place in five

years. If the application for promotion is unsuccessful, PTR would occur in the next

year.

A faculty member who is required to undergo a Performance

Review/Development Plan (PDP) undergoes PTR five years after

completing the PRP.

The PTR clock stops for (1) official leave of absence and (2)

administrative appointments.

Request for delay of PTR clock must follow the Provost’s schedule.

Request begins with request letter to Department Chairperson.

A faculty member who submits a certified letter of intent to retire and/or

resign within one year of PTR is exempt from PTR. This includes

Phased Retirement. www.ncat.edu

5


III. PTR Evaluation Timeline and ProceduresA. Selection of PRC

Consists of three tenured faculty members, selected in

accordance with Departmental policy/practice.

One additional member should be selected as the Alternate.

Faculty up for PTR may participate in selection process.

Administrative tenured faculty (including Chairpersons) are not

eligible to serve.

The Department Chairperson sends names of PRC members

to the Dean who, in turn, sends the names to the Provost.

The PRC selects a Chairperson.

www.ncat.edu

6


C. The Portfolio

Portfolios are submitted to Department Chairperson the last

Friday in October. Portfolio is forwarded to PRC Chairperson.

Failure to submit a portfolio may result in disciplinary actions,

including dismissal, suspension, reduction in rank or reduction

in rank with commensurate reduction in salary.

PTR faculty are to follow guidelines of the Submission Form on

p. 104 of PTR Policy.

Faculty members have the right and obligation to submit all

documents related to their review, per their Standards.

Portfolios contents should include: Evidence of teaching, research/creative work, professional growth and

service Updated CV Copies of the last four annual reviews. Optional: up to six letters of support Additional materials at the discretion of the PTR faculty and Standards.

www.ncat.edu

7


IV. The Review ProcessA. Evaluation of the Portfolio: Best Practices

PRCs are to render judgments of Exemplary, Satisfactory or Deficient

in each of the three areas of Teaching, Research/Creative Works and

Service, per Departmental Standards.

Detailed justification must be provided if the PRC’s judgments differ

substantially from the last four annual evaluations.

Informed and candid feedback should be provided for each of these

judgments re quality of contributions, weaknesses, deficiencies in

performance, along with constructive recommendations for the PDP,

when the PDP is required.

All PRC members review a draft of the report and sign the final report.

The report usually takes the form of a hard copy letter addressed to the

PTR faculty member, with a hard copy to the Department Chairperson.

PRC Committee Chair uploads the letter into the electronic SharePoint

folder labeled “PRC Committee.”

www.ncat.edu

8


B. PTR Overall Assessments: Best Practices

Three possible overall assessments: Exemplary, Satisfactory or

Deficient. Overall assessment of Deficient >>> PDP.

Exemplary requires: Exemplary in Teaching and Research and Exemplary or

Satisfactory in Service, or Exemplary in Teaching and Service when extraordinary and long-

term Service has been rendered in a particular are of the University’s mission.

Satisfactory requires: At least a Satisfactory in Teaching, Research and Service.

Deficient requires: Not judged Exemplary or Satisfactory in any of the three areas of

Teaching, Research and Service.

A deficiency in any one area >>>> An Overall PTR Rating of Deficient

www.ncat.edu

9


The PRC Report: Best Practices

The Report takes the form of a letter addressed to the faculty

member.

The PRC Chair uploads the letter into SharePoint under “PRC

Committee Report.” A hard copy is given to the faculty

member and to the Department Chairperson.

The Report must detail shortcomings as they relate to duties.

In the case of an overall Deficiency Rating, the Report must

make recommendations for the PDP.

The faculty member has 7 days within which to respond to

report. The response is uploaded into the “PRC Committee

Report.”

www.ncat.edu

10


C. The Faculty Member’s Responses

The faculty member is given 7 days within which to respond to

each of the following: Department PRC Chairperson’s Letter Dean’s Letter

The faculty member’s written response is included (uploaded)

in the PTR report/letter that is submitted for viewing by the

next highest administrative level.

www.ncat.edu

11


D. Department Chairperson and Dean’s Responses to PRC Report

Department Chairperson Writes (and uploads) a letter to the RPT faculty in response to the

PRC Report’s findings, copying the PRC members. Uploads the PRC Report, the Chairperson’s response letter, the

Departmental RPT Standards and any response from the RPT faculty member for the Dean’s review.

Dean Writes (uploads) a letter to the faculty member, with copies to the

PRC members and Department Chairperson, in response to the PRC’s findings.

Uploads his/her response letter, the PRC Report, the Chairperson’s response letter and any response from the faculty member for the Provost’s review.

www.ncat.edu

12


Resolution of Differences between PRC and/or Chairperson and Dean

Chairperson or Dean consults with the PRC members, using the

Departmental Standards as the frame of reference.

Either may ask the PRC to reconsider its findings only if it misapplied

the Standards or if information in the portfolio is inaccurate.

The resolution of each issue is based on consensus of a simple

majority vote, with the Dean, Chairperson and each PRC member

having one vote.

A tie is construed as a favorable vote for the faculty member.

The PRC determines whether or not to alter its report, based on this

consultation.

www.ncat.edu

13


V. Professional Development Plan

Developing the PDP Within 30 days of receiving the PRC’s finding of deficiency, the Department

Chairperson and faculty member meet to develop the PDP which: Identifies strengths and weaknesses, defines measurable objects and goals,

outlines activities to achieve goals, sets timelines, indicates criteria for monitoring progress, identifies supportive institutional resources, states consequences for not meeting goals according the timeline.

The Department Chairperson forwards/uploads copy to Dean who approves in writing. Dean forwards/Uploads copy for the Provost.

Failure to Reach Agreement on the PDP Necessitates the Dean’s mediation between the faculty member, the

Chairperson and the PRC. Voting is by simple majority between Dean, Chairperson and PRC.

The faculty member must comply with the revised PDP.

www.ncat.edu

14


VI. Assessment of PDP

Faculty member and Chairperson meet on a semi-annual basis to

review faculty member’s progress toward remedying deficiencies.

Disagreements are worked out in consultation with the PRC, the

Chairperson and the Dean.

At the end of the five-year cycle, the Chairperson writes a report

indicating whether or not objectives have been met.

If objectives have been met, the report is sent to the Dean. If

approved, the report is sent to the Provost. The faculty member

begins the five-year cycle for the next PTR.

If objectives have not been met, the Dean writes a letter to the Provost

indicating sanctions to be imposed. Provost approves or modifies

sanctions, all in accordance with procedures for due process and for

discharge or other disciplinary actions.

www.ncat.edu

15


VII. Appeal

If the faculty member believes that the PTR process and resulting

sanctions have been unjustly or arbitrarily applied, s/he can appeal in

writing to the Dean.

The faculty member and Dean meet in private consultation. The Dean

provides a statement indicating whether the original decision remains

in effect.

If the original sanctions remain in effect, the faculty member can

appeal the Provost. The faculty member and Provost meet in private

consultation. The Provost provides a statement indicating his/her

decision about the sanctions.

For a grievance pertaining to this process prior to a discharge or

imposition of other sanctions, the full faculty grievance process

becomes operable, per the Policy Manual of the UNC system.

www.ncat.edu

16

Documents

North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University College of Arts and Sciences Performance Review Committee Workshops October 27 and 28, 2014