91短视频

3. GENERAL PROVISIONS

3.1 Sequence of Evaluation

Faculty considered for retention, tenure, and promotion shall be evaluated by their faculty colleagues. This judgment shall be rendered by elected Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committees at appropriate levels. The recommendations of these Committees, together with the separate recommendations of Department Chairs and College Deans, shall be forwarded to the President of the University. The President of the University shall make the final decision in each case. 

3.1.1. Evaluation of faculty shall begin at the department level. The general sequence of recommendations shall be from the Department, to the College, to the University level. In the special case of faculty with appointments in programs outside of regular departments, the evaluation process shall begin with the College Committee. 

3.1.2. In retention cases, the Department Committee shall first make its recommendation, which will be transmitted to the Department Chair. The Chair shall forward the Committee's recommendation together with his or her own recommendation, to the College Dean. If the Department Committee and the Department Chair disagree on their retention recommendations, or if the College Dean requests it, the College Committee shall consider the recommendations of the Department Committee and the Department Chair and formulate its own recommendation, which will be transmitted to the College Dean. The College Dean shall separately evaluate the faculty member and forward his or her recommendation, together with the recommendations of the other reviewing bodies, to the President. The University Committee shall be consulted in retention cases only where bias is charged, according to the procedures specified in Sections 11.2.9 and 12.2.4(b).

3.1.3. In cases of tenure and/or promotion, the sequence of evaluations shall be identical at all levels for candidates and shall consist of the following stages: (1) separate evaluations first by the Department Committee and then by the Department Chair; their recommendations are to be forwarded by the Department Chair to the College Committee via the Office of the College Dean; (2) separate evaluations first by the College Committee and then by the College Dean; their recommendations are to be forwarded by the Dean to the University Committee via the Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs; and (3) evaluation by the University Committee, which shall make its recommendations to the President of the University. 

3.1.4. Having received the documentation and recommendations from lower levels, the President shall notify the candidate, in writing, of his or her decision. The President's notification shall be made in conformity with the appropriate deadline date as specified on the final page of this document.

3.2. Conflicts of Interest

3.2.1. Regarding candidates for promotion: The procedures for election of faculty Committees at each level are specified in Sections 10.1, 11.1, and 12.1 of this document. However, no faculty member who is a candidate for promotion shall serve in any capacity on any Tenure and Promotion Committee during the period between July 1 and June 30 when he or she is a candidate for promotion.

3.2.2. Regarding Department Chairs:

a. No Department Chair or College Dean who is currently a candidate for promotion shall write an official letter of evaluation in his or her own behalf.

b. No Department Chair shall write a letter of evaluation for any candidate in the department seeking promotion to a higher rank than the Department Chair currently holds. The Chair of the Department Committee shall include a notice in the WPAF of each affected candidate accounting for the absence of a letter from the Department Chair, and shall forward the recommendation of the Department Committee for each such candidate to the College Committee via the Office of the College Dean.

3.3. Candidate's Personnel Action File (PAF), Working Personal Action File (WPAF), Dossier, and Related Materials

3.3.1. Definitions of Terms

a. "Personnel Action File" (hereafter abbreviated as "PAF") refers to the official personnel file containing employment information and other information relevant to personnel recommendations or actions regarding a faculty unit employee. These materials normally include the candidate’s letter of appointment, numerical scores of teaching evaluations submitted annually by the candidate’s department, and other materials relating specifically to the faculty member’s employment at the University. The PAF remains at the Provost’s Office during the cycle of evaluation and will be available to all levels of review. No material may be added to the PAF without the candidate’s knowledge.

b. “Folder # 1” refers to the folder containing copies of materials from the PAF circulated to different levels of review, along with the candidate’s dossier, in a cycle of evaluation. Folder # 1 normally contains the candidate’s letter of appointment and numerical teaching evaluations from the start of the period of eligibility; as well as all materials generated during the evaluation cycle, such as the dossier index, curriculum vitae, and evaluations by the faculty Committees, the Department Chair, and the College Dean. Other materials may be added during the cycle with the permission of the University Committee. In cases of tenure and promotion, Folder # 1 refers to the tenure folder; and Folder # 2 refers to the promotion folder, which contains the same material as the tenure folder but in reference to promotion.

c. The "dossier" refers to the evidence provided by the candidate. 

d. The “dossier index” refers to the table of contents of the dossier, which forms the official record of the evidence in the dossier.

e. "Working Personnel Action File" (hereafter abbreviated as "WPAF") refers to Folder # 1 (and Folder # 2 where relevant) and the dossier combined, and is circulated to the different levels of review in an evaluation cycle. 

f. “Evidence” refers to all materials in the WPAF and PAF, including both folder # 1 and the dossier.

g. The “period of eligibility” is the time during which a candidate is being considered for retention, tenure, and/or promotion. For probationary faculty, this includes (1) each annual retention cycle from the candidate’s appointment to his or her period of eligibility for tenure and/or promotion; and (2) the year in which the candidate applies for tenure and/or promotion to Associate Professor. For faculty at the Associate rank, this is the period beginning in their fifth year following promotion to Associate Professor.

h. An “evaluation cycle” is the period of time during which a candidate is being considered for retention, tenure, and/or promotion. For probationary faculty, the cycles are equivalent to the periods of a candidate’s eligibility. For faculty at the Associate rank, an evaluation cycle is the year in which a candidate chooses to apply for promotion to Full Professor.

3.3.2. Building the Dossier

a. In accordance with Section 2.0, it is the responsibility of the candidate to prepare and maintain a dossier containing evidence which shall provide a basis for informed judgment on his or her qualifications. It is the responsibility of the Department Chair or the Chair's designee to advise the candidate on the proper selection, organization, and presentation of material in the dossier according to the relevant criteria, and on the preparation of an adequate dossier index.

b. The candidate is also strongly urged to include an introductory narrative letter regarding the materials in his or her dossier and a narrative description at the start of each section explaining the significance of his or her achievements and improvements since the previous cycle of review.

c. The candidate should include evidence in the dossier that is strictly relevant to the five categories of the retention, tenure, and promotion process (see 4.0 below). Quality and clarity are highly valued; excessive quantity and repetition are not.

d. The same evidence may be discussed under more than one section of the dossier, but only one copy of the evidence should be included in the dossier.

e. A candidate may include a separate section containing representative evidence of achievement for which he or she received service credit at the time of appointment, but the preponderance of evidence must substantiate achievements at CSUEB.

f. Regarding the inclusion of teaching evaluations:

(1)  The candidate’s dossier must document teaching performance according to evaluation techniques appropriate to the candidate's discipline and using impartially administered student evaluation forms. In accordance with the CBA and the University’s current policy on student evaluations, all classes for each faculty unit employee shall have such student evaluations. 

(2)  Any documentation must include for each class or other instructional assignment evaluated a statement which specifies the class, date, number of students in the class and number of respondents, and which summarizes the results of the evaluation.  See the current Uiniversity policy on student evaluations for details. The instructor may also include analyses of the data and evaluation forms of a different type and may include reports of classroom visits by other faculty members and other appropriate evidence.

(3)  The candidate may choose which student evaluations he or she places in the dossier but is encouraged to demonstrate teaching capacity across a variety of courses and to include copies or summaries of student comments from the original evaluations. The complete numerical summaries submitted by the candidate’s Department to the PAF will be included in Folder # 1 and need not be replicated in the dossier.

3.3.3. Submission of Materials to the WPAF:

a. Significance of the dossier index: In accordance with Section 15 of the CBA, materials for evaluation submitted by the candidate shall be deemed incorporated by reference in the PAF, but need not be physically placed in the file. Thus the dossier index represents the formal record of the dossier and will be permanently placed in the PAF and appropriately updated to reflect any material added to the file during the course of the evaluation cycle for the WPAF. Materials incorporated by reference in this manner shall be considered part of the WPAF.

b. Deadline for submission of dossier and dossier index: The candidate will submit his or her dossier to the department and his or her dossier index to the Provost’s Office according to the timelines at the end of this document.

c. Other potential materials for PAF: The candidate may also wish to submit the curriculum vitae and introductory narrative letter from his or her dossier for inclusion in the WPAF.

3.3.4. Disposition of Materials in the WPAF

a. Regarding the dossiers:

(1)  It is expected that for tenure, and for each successive instance of retention and promotion, a candidate's PAF and dossier will be augmented by evidence of intervening achievement appropriate to the instance at hand, and that outdated or otherwise superfluous documentation will be removed.

(2)  The dossier shall be returned to the candidate at the end of each evaluation cycle.

b. Regarding Folder # 1:

(1) Prior to the award of tenure, letters of recommendation on retention shall remain in Folder # 1 of the WPAF.

(2) After the award of tenure, no letters of recommendation pertaining to earlier considerations for retention, tenure, or promotion shall be placed in the PAF unless the candidate himself or herself chooses to do so.

(3) Department and College Offices shall not maintain a cumulative file of copies of past letters of recommendation; such copies of letters of recommendation as are kept by Department and College Offices shall be destroyed by the Department Chair and College Dean respectively at the end of the academic year in which they were written.

(4) The original letters of recommendation in tenure and promotion actions shall be disposed of by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs according to the provisions of Section 12.3.5.

(5) All student evaluation materials for each course evaluated more than five academic years before the current consideration shall be returned to the candidate. This shall not preclude the candidate from adding these evaluations to the dossier.

3.4. Maintenance of a Uniform WPAF

In making recommendations neither the faculty Committees, nor the Department Chair, nor the College Dean, nor the President shall take into account evidence which has not been available to each of the reviewing bodies.

3.4.1. Ideally, a candidate's appeal at any level should be finished before the transmittal of the WPAF to the next level. In the event a deadline requires that the WPAF be sent forward before an appeal is concluded, the written responses to the appeal shall follow the WPAF as soon as possible.

3.4.2. The deadline for insertion of documentation into the PAF (for Folder # 1) and the dossier will be October 23 for candidates for promotion or tenure; November 15 for first and second year retention candidates; and February 1 for third, fourth, and fifth year retention candidates. Such documentation may include information provided by the candidate, faculty unit employees, students, academic administrators, and the President. Faculty unit employees and academic administrators may submit statements and opinions about the qualifications and work of the candidate provided by other persons identified by name.

3.4.3. Any new evidence submitted after the deadline shall be limited to items that became accessible after the deadline and must have the approval of the University Committee for inclusion. This new evidence will be submitted in proper sequence to each reviewing body so that each body in turn may indicate the extent, if any, to which the new evidence has modified its previous recommendation. WPAFs will not be returned for such reviews.

3.4.4. The candidate will receive copies of all materials submitted to the WPAF by any person other than himself or herself.

3.5. Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committees

Throughout this document, the “Committees” shall be deemed to include: the Department Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee; the College Tenure and Promotion Committee; and the University Tenure and Promotion Committee.

3.5.1. The Department Committee may be a single Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committee; or a separate Retention Committee and a separate Tenure and Promotion Committee, depending on the availability of eligible faculty to serve.

3.5.2. The College Committee is a Tenure and Promotion Committee only, but may be asked to evaluate applications for retention under certain circumstances.

3.5.3. The University Committee is a Tenure and Promotion Committee only, but may be asked to evaluate applications for retention under certain conditions.

3.6. Committee Operations at All Levels

3.6.1. The Committees shall serve for a term of one year, from July 1 through June 30. Those eligible may not serve at more than one level simultaneously.

3.6.3. Eligibility to vote: Those eligible to vote for members of the Committees are the probationary and tenured Regular Faculty of Departments and Colleges as defined by the Constitution of the University Faculty. No person not a member of the faculty unit under provisions of the CBA shall be eligible to vote in elections for the Committees.

3.6.3. Eligibility to serve:

a. Tenured Regular Faculty who hold the rank of Associate Professor are eligible to serve on their Department Retention Committees; and may serve on one other Retention Committee in a department other than their own.

b. Tenured Regular Faculty who hold the rank of Full Professor are eligible to serve on any Department Committee, and may serve on one other Committee in a department other than their own.

c. Department Chairs who are tenured Full Professors may serve on no more than two Committees in a department or departments other than their own.

d. Department Chairs, College Deans, and Associate Deans, although members of the Regular Faculty, are not eligible to serve on the College and University Committees.

e. Eligibility for service on Promotion and Tenure Committees will reflect the faculty member's status as of September of the evaluation year.

3.6.4. Each member of a Committee shall vote on every case before the Committee. A majority of the total Committee membership must vote in favor of the candidate in order for the Committee's recommendation to be an affirmative one.

3.6.5. A Committee's recommendation shall be in written form, as a letter to be included in the WPAF. Every member of the Committee shall sign the letter.

3.6.6. A Committee's letter shall state the Committee's recommendation. Ordinarily, the letter will also summarize favorable and unfavorable views according to each of the criteria. For each category of criteria – instructional achievement, professional achievement, university service, and community service – the letter shall indicate whether the candidate “meets expectations,” “exceeds expectations,” or “does not meet expectations.” In the absence of a unanimous recommendation, the letter shall include two separate sections: one for the majority opinion and one or more for minority opinions. The Committee members shall sign only the single letter of the Committee as a whole, with no separate indications of which viewpoint any individual member favors.

3.6.7. Members of Committees and administrators at all levels shall maintain the confidentiality of all substantive business of the Committee. Inquiries from other faculty members about the work of the Committee should be directed to the Committee Chair.

3.7. Consultation with Students

3.7.1. Notification to Students

a. Chairs of Departments shall post the following notice on departmental bulletin boards:

It is the policy of 91短视频 that students may consult with Departmental Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Committees on the retention, tenure, and promotion of departmental faculty. If any student desires to meet with the Department of ___________________ Promotion, Tenure and Retention Committee to discuss the performance of a faculty member being considered by the Committee, arrangements can be made with the Department Chair in Room______ before ___________________.

b. The Department may adopt any procedure by which the names of faculty members being considered are made known to students, but in any case the names shall be available to students, upon request, from the Department Chair. Students desiring to testify shall make arrangements with the Department Chair before November 1.

c. The Department Chair shall arrange in cooperation with the Chair of the Department Promotion, Tenure, and Retention Committee, the time and place of the meeting(s) of the Committee for the purpose of hearing students.

3.7.2. Consultation Procedures

a. Committee meetings at which student consultation is to take place shall not include any faculty members not on the Committee and must include at least a quorum of the Committee.

b. Whenever possible, each student requesting consultation shall be heard individually. The Committee, however, may make exceptions when circumstances warrant.

c. The Committee shall keep a written summary of the comments of each student. Such summary shall specify the course(s) taken or the student's other involvement with the faculty member. In addition, an alphabetical list of the students who have testified before the Committee shall be kept. These summaries shall be retained in the Department office until the expiration of the period during which a grievance could be filed. A candidate has the right to see the summaries related to his or her case.

d. In its written recommendation on the faculty member, the Committee shall note whether or not student comments have been received and shall include a summary of comments received and the Committee's evaluation of such comments.

3.8. Rights of the Candidate

3.8.1. The candidate is entitled to be informed of and to have read all materials in his or her WPAF as it goes forward from one level to another.

3.8.2. The candidate shall be informed of the recommendation in his or her case at each stage of the reviewing process, and of the reasons for that recommendation. The candidate shall therefore receive copies of the letters of the Committees and of the Department Chair and the College Dean, regardless of whether the recommendation is positive or negative. The Department Chair and the College Dean have the responsibility for providing the candidate with such letters at the appropriate level in accordance with Sections 10.2.5 and 11.2.7 of this document.

3.8.3. The candidate shall have the right to respond to the decision at the Department, College, or University level and to add a letter of rebuttal to his or her WPAF in accordance with provisions of Section 10.2.5, 10.2.6, 11.2.7, 11.2.8, and 12.2.10 of this document.

3.8.4. Any candidate for promotion to any rank may withdraw his or her candidacy at any stage of consideration by requesting this action in writing, of the Department Chair, who shall take immediate steps to stop all further consideration.

3.8.5. When all provisions of this document have been exhausted, a candidate for retention, tenure, or promotion who has received a negative decision from the President may then appeal his or her case in accordance with Article 10 of the CBA ("Grievance Procedures"). In retention cases, this shall not be interpreted to mean that the candidate must first have requested an investigation of bias under provisions of Section 11.2.9 of this document.

3.8.6. The candidate will have supervised access to his or her WPAF upon request at any point in the evaluation cycle.

3.9. Coping with Bias

All reviewing bodies are charged with making their recommendations without bias. Nevertheless, it is recognized that personal prejudice may insert itself into personnel decisions. Section 12.2.4(b) of this document provides, with regard to tenure and promotion cases, that the University Committee be especially alert for this problem, and empowers it to undertake whatever special investigation may be necessary to evaluate the degree of bias at lower levels of review and to make appropriate recommendations to the President. A candidate for retention, notwithstanding the fact that his or her case does not ordinarily go to the University Committee, may have similar recourse to that Committee on charges of bias, as specified in Section 11.2.9 of this document.

3.10 Deadlines

3.10.1. Deadline dates for retention, tenure, and promotion proceedings are listed on the final page of this document. These deadlines are established not only for administrative convenience and legal requirements, but also to ensure equitable consideration of all cases.

3.10.2. The candidate must submit the completed dossier to the Department Chair and the dossier index to the Provost’s Office by the specified deadline date. Upon written request of the candidate, the Department Chair may extend the deadline, but only for the most compelling reasons, and for no more than two weeks.

a. A candidate who submits the dossier after the established deadline will not be considered for promotion that year, and the Department Chair shall so notify the College Dean in writing, with a copy to the candidate.

b. If a candidate for retention or tenure fails to comply with the obligation to provide a dossier of materials within the established deadlines, then in accordance with Article 15.12 of the CBA, the evaluation will proceed on the basis of material deemed appropriate by the Department Chair after consultation with the College Dean.

3.10.3. WPAFs shall be transferred to the next level of review or administrator as soon as possible, and in no case later than the deadline date. If a recommendation is unfinished by the deadline, the candidate shall be so notified, and a copy of the notification shall be attached to the WPAF. (See Article 15.44 of the CBA.) At any stage of the review process, if there are omissions of documentation, information, or recommendations, it may be returned for amplification. Such amplification shall be provided in a timely manner.