Article III - Evaluation, Promotion, and Tenure

The basic values held by Keuka College, as set forth herein, remind the faculty of the variety of their obligations. These values provide the starting point for professional evaluation.

SECTION 1 - Evaluation Overview

Membership on the faculty carries with it special responsibilities to the College, students, and the profession. For faculty in tenure-track positions, a probationary period is instituted in order to give faculty members time to grow into their position at the College and create an academic routine consistent with the level of teaching, service, scholarship, and professional development expected of Keuka College faculty. For tenured faculty, ongoing evaluation assists them in their professional development.

SECTION 2 - Ensuring a Fair Faculty Evaluation Process

Administrators, division chairs, and faculty must have accurate knowledge about the obligations, rights, and responsibilities of all faculty members.
Each nontenured faculty member should be provided with a written statement as to their responsibilities. The annual Guidelines for Faculty Performance (Form 3) document, which is written in consultation with the division chair, should therefore be a jointly written agreement that clearly describes the College's expectations of the faculty member's duties for that year.
Since no two faculty positions are identical, there should be flexibility in the responsibilities assigned.
The division chair will informally evaluate new faculty members during their first semester. Consultation with the faculty member will occur as needed over the course of the semester.
Multiple evaluation sources should be used by each evaluator. Evaluators at all levels - the division chair, the Professional Standards Committee, and the provost - have access to the same information in the faculty member's evaluation file.
Each evaluator should reach an independent decision.
Evaluations should be regularly scheduled and be based on complete, cumulative, and documented information.
The results of evaluations should be promptly given to faculty members.
Specific and valid reasons should be given to faculty members for adverse decisions.
Faculty members have the right to respond in writing to any evaluation in regard to accuracy, relevance, and completeness, and must do so within 10 business days of receiving the evaluation by email or mail.
Differing decisions should be discussed between the groups making decisions, with the understanding that the Board of Trustees is responsible for the final decision.

SECTION 3 - Evaluation Policy

The basic values held by Keuka College, as set forth herein, remind the faculty of the variety of their obligations. These values provide the starting point for professional evaluation. See Appendix G for procedures related to faculty evaluation.

Membership of the faculty caries with it special responsibilities to the College, students, and the profession. For faculty in tenure-track positions, a probationary period is instituted in order to give faculty members time to grow into their position at the College and create an academic routine consistent with the level of teaching, service, scholarship, and professional development expected of Keuka College faculty. For tenured faculty, ongoing evaluation assists them in their professional development.

Faculty members will be advised by the provost and their respective division chairs, at the time of initial appointment, of the substantive standards and procedures generally employed in decisions affecting renewal and, as applicable, tenure.
All nontenured faculty will complete the annual Guidelines for Faculty Performance (Form 3) document, which is written in consultation with the division chair, and submit to the provost by the stated academic year deadline. All nontenured faculty have the right to performance review and evaluation as specified.
Tenured faculty will be reviewed every five years by the division chair, Professional Standards Committee, and provost as part of the post-tenure review (PTR) process. In addition, the faculty member may request a formal review by the Professional Standards Committee and the provost at any time. The division chair may also initiate a triggered review, as described under the post-tenure review policy.
The Professional Standards Committee will notify those faculty members who are scheduled for review for reasons of reappointment, promotion, tenure (RPT), or five-year post-tenure review (PTR), as well as the appropriate division chairs by the stated academic year deadlines.
Unless otherwise noted, the formal evaluation of faculty will begin in January each year.
1. The faculty member will submit Form 5: Faculty Self-Evaluation to the Provost's Office by the stated deadline.
2. The division chair will submit their evaluation of the faculty member to the faculty member for review prior to submission to the Provost's Office by the stated deadline.
3. The Professional Standards Committee will submit its recommendation to the Provost's Office by the stated deadline.
4. The provost will submit their recommendation to the president by the stated deadline.
5. Letters of Appointment - which include obligation period, responsibilities, and compensation - will be issued by the stated deadline for the next employment cycle.
If the College determines, at its sole discretion, that a faculty member with tenure has violated any applicable laws, rules, ordinances, or regulations, including, but not limited to, the laws, rules, ordinances, or regulations prohibiting discrimination, harassment, and retaliation, the faculty member may be immediately terminated. See Part E in this handbook for more information.

SECTION 4 - Pillars of Evaluation

The primary values pertinent to professional performance are reflected in the three categories of criteria for all evaluations. These categories, fundamental to the integrity of the academic programs at Keuka College, are:

Teaching - First and foremost, Keuka College expects faculty members to hold before students the best scholarly standards of their discipline, to act as intellectual guides, to encourage critical thinking, and to evaluate students fairly. Therefore, effective teaching is paramount in any evaluation of performance. Additionally, as a College which prides itself in the close relationship between students and faculty, Keuka College expects faculty to open doors to opportunity by providing realistic and thorough guidance to students, as well as assistance and support for the many aspects of student life through academic advising.
Service - Keuka College expects faculty members to accept their share of responsibility for the governance of the College, to contribute to the community in light of their responsibilities to the College, and to participate in regular functions of the College.
Scholarship - Keuka College values curiosity, scholarly activity, and professional knowledge and growth. The College supports those faculty members who have a sound intellectual background, who assume proper responsibility for their subject area, and who continue to develop in their discipline and as professional educators. Part of maintaining professional development and growth is scholarship. The faculty of Keuka College have adopted the Boyer Model of Scholarship as the foundation for scholarly activity. See Appendix J for Keuka College definition of scholarship across the disciplines.

The College employs the following ratings (added from Guidelines for Faculty Performance (Form 3) document).

OUTSTANDING - A clearly outstanding faculty members shows maximum effectiveness and exceeds a rating of "excellent". This rating is limited to an extremely small number of highly talented faculty, masters by any collegiate standards.
EXCELLENT - An excellent faculty member shows superior performance, which exceed the rating of "effective".
EFFECTIVE - An effective faculty member meets the criteria expected by students, peers, and institutional administration for performance expected of a qualified faculty member.
NEEDS IMPROVEMENT - A faculty member who needs improvement is one who shows potential or promise but falls somewhat below expected levels of accomplishment.
UNSATISFACTORY - An unsatisfactory faculty member performs below the expected level of effective faculty. This rating is given to those who have not shown sufficient growth after professional consultation.
UNABLE TO JUDGE - This rating may be used when the evaluator does not feel qualified to make a judgment because of insufficient information.

SECTION 5 - Tenure and Promotion Policies

In completing the self-evaluation component of the tenure review, a faculty member must consider and reflect upon their performance for each of the contracted areas of professional responsibility: teaching, service, and professional development and scholarly work. It is expected that the self evaluation will be analytic, comprehensive, thoughtful, and evidence-based.

Tenure-track faculty are encouraged to plan for their progression to tenure and for promotion through full professor from the time they begin at the College. See Appendix H for procedures related to tenure and promotion.

Ratings required for positive recommendation:
1. First Year - For a positive recommendation, all three areas must be rated at least Needs Improvement.
2. Second and Third Year - Teaching and one other area must be at least Effective. The remaining category can have a rating of not less than Needs Improvement.
3. Fourth Year - For a positive recommendation, all three areas must be rated at least Effective.
4. Fifth Year, until tenure evaluation - The candidate must be rated as least Excellent in one area of evaluation and Effective in the remaining two areas of evaluation.
A faculty member is eligible for promotion if they meet the following criteria:
1. From Instructor to Assistant Professor
  1. Faculty seeking advancement to assistant professor will be evaluated according to expectation at that rank. All three areas of faculty performance (e.g., teaching, service, and scholarship) must have a rating of at least Effective.
  2. Appropriate terminal degree as determined by the division in accordance with standards appropriate to the discipline.
  3. Special recommendation from the division chair and the provost.
2. From Assistant Professor to Associate Professor
  1. Teaching and one other pillar must have a rating of at least Excellent. The remaining evaluated pillar must be rated at least effective
  2. Appropriate terminal degree and the equivalent of six years of faculty appointment in a college or university, of which the equivalent of four years must be at the rank of assistant professor, OR
  3. Master's degree and the equivalent of eight years of faculty appointment in a college or university, of which the equivalent of five years must be at the rank of assistant professor, OR
  4. Special recommendation from the division chair and/or provost.
3. From Associate Professor to Full Professor
  1. All three of the major pillars of evaluation must be rated at least Excellent
  2. Appropriate terminal degree and the equivalent of 10 years of full-time teaching in a college or university, of which the equivalent of five years must be at the rank of associate professor, OR
  3. Special recommendation from the division chair and/or provost.
Special Considerations Toward Rank and Promotion
1. Credit Toward Promotion - At the time of initial appointment, the provost, in consultation with the division chair, may consider awarding credit toward promotion and rank for appropriate professional experience. See Part C - Article II for terms of appointment for tenure-track faculty.
2. Special Recommendation Considerations - When special circumstances exist, the division chair and/or provost can initiate the evaluation process leading to promotion for a faculty member who does not meet the eligibility requirements for that consideration. The PSC may play a consultative role upon the request of the faculty member, division chair, or provost. Special considerations are defined as:
  1. Performance consistent with or exceeding expectations for the next higher rank, OR
  2. Outstanding performance in one or more categories.

SECTION 6 - Post Tenure Review

When tenure is granted, there is an expectation of continued professional growth and productivity in the areas of teaching, professional development/research/creative work, and service. The purposes of the post-tenure review (PTR) are: (1) to facilitate continued faculty development, consistent with academic needs and goals of the College and with the most effective use of institutional resources; and (2) to ensure professional accountability by a regular, comprehensive evaluation of every tenured faculty member's performance. See Appendix I for procedures related to PTR.

Five years form the granting of tenure or most recent promotion, each tenured faculty member will complete a self-evaluation reflecting upon their professional activities and accomplishment. While in normal circumstances reviews will occur every five years, when it is in the best interest of the individual and the College, the provost, upon petition of the individual with agreement from the division chair, may delay post-tenure review. A promotion will restart the PTR clock. Faculty on sabbatical or leave of absence during the scheduled year of review shall participate in the post-tenure review process upon their return to campus. The typical five-year review will, additionally, explicitly identify goals for future professional activities and/or development. It is the intent that this process be reflective, developmental, supported by institutional resources, and flexible enough to respect the diverse expectations of different disciplines and changing expectations at different stages of faculty careers. Subsequent post-tenure reviews will occur at regular five-year intervals. Oversight for this formative process lies with the Professional Standards Committee.

The professional development component will anticipate the next five years of professional activity. Such plan should not only identify professional goals and objectives but also, as appropriate, specify the resources needed to achieve the identified professional outcomes. It is expected that the self-evaluation and goal planning be analytic, comprehensive, thoughtful, and evidence-based.

Up one level

PART D - FACULTY POLICIES: HIRING, FACULTY FILES, EVALUATION, PROMOTION, AND TENURE