Element 5F: Unit Evaluation of Professional Education Faculty Performance
Consistent with the Conceptual Framework and three of the six elements – Scholarship, Reflective Practice, and Inclusive Community – each faculty member's performance is based on three criteria: scholarship, teaching, and service to the institution, to the unit, and to the profession (see Exhibit S5-8 for documentation of Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure By-Laws).  The contexts of this report are in accordance with the University Model Unit Peer Review Plan (Rev.2002) and the SOE Governance Document (Rev. 2004).  These are presented as Exhibits S5-9 and S5-10.

The unit Peer Review Committee consists of full-time tenured faculty elected to the committee by each department. The review process is normally conducted for faculty reappointments, tenure, promotion in rank and promotion to senior-level adjunct faculty.

Criteria For Evaluation of Full—Time Faculty 

• For tenure and promotion to Associate Professor the criteria are specified in Article XI, Section 2 of the University's CBA as follows:

1. possession of the appropriate terminal degree;
2. demonstrated ability as a teacher or professional librarian or equivalent professional proficiency;
3. noteworthy scholarly, artistic, professional or clinical achievement;
4. service to the University;
5. demonstrated potential for continued academic and/or professional growth.
   Note: All are important criteria, however as stated in the CBA, teaching or librarianship and scholarship have primary consideration.

• For promotion to Full Professor criteria are specified in Article XI, Section 2 of the University's CBA as follows:

1. Outstanding accomplishment as a teacher or professional librarian with continued noteworthy scholarship and service; or,
2. Sustained and exceptional scholarly, artistic, professional or clinical achievements as recognized by the candidate's peers with continued noteworthy teaching and service.
   Note: The criteria of teaching or librarianship, scholarship and service are all Important criteria for promotion, with teaching or librarianship and scholarship being the primary consideration.  

Each candidate completes the university-wide application for reappointment tenure and promotion.  As part of the application process, each candidate also submits a professional portfolio to the unit Peer Review Committee which includes documentation of their personal progress in the areas of teaching, service and scholarship.  A draft of the Peer Review Committee Operating Codes, to be reviewed and voted on by the unit faculty in Fall 2006, is offered as Exhibit S5-11.  The unit's responsibility for the performance of professional education faculty includes a systematic and comprehensive evaluation by both candidates and peers through reappointment, promotion and tenure reviews.  These reviews are used to critically evaluate faculty member's progress toward reappointment and promotion using the three criteria of scholarship, teaching, and service. Evaluations are designed to collect data on the quality of faculty teaching, scholarly contributions, and service. These reviews are also used to improve faculty performance as well as the quality of professional education programs through curriculum changes and the provision of professional development activities (see below).

Adjunct faculty are reviewed by program directors through review of syllabi, course evaluations by candidates, and testimony of full-time faculty colleagues.  These faculty members are encouraged to meet with program directors and faculty colleagues to review their performance and professional development through, for example, voluntary observations of their classes.