CHAPTER 3 / FACULTY APPOINTMENT, TENURE, PROMOTION, and

B / TENURE AND PROMOTION AND EVALUATION POLICIES - PART 1

3.09/ Interpretative Statements on Tenure at Wichita State University
3.10 / Terminations
3.11 / Nontenurable Positions
3.12 / Regents Tenure Policy
3.13 / Probationary Period
3.131 / Time Limit
3.132 / Annual Evaluation of Nontenured Faculty
3.133 /Early Consideration for Tenure
3.134 / Initial Appointment with Tenure

3.14 / Guidelines and Criteria for Tenure and Promotion
3.141 / General Policies for Awarding of Tenure
3.142 / College/School/Library Guidelines and Criteria
3.143 / University Guidelines and Criteria
3.1431 / Promotion
3.1432 / Tenure
3.1433 / University Committee Procedures
3.1434 / Tenure and Promotion Review Process
3.1435 / Presidential Review of Nominees for Tenure & Promotion
3.1436 / Policy of Nondiscrimination and Affirmative Action

3.16 / Policies and Procdeures for Tenure & Promotion
3.161 / Outline of the Process of Review for Tenure & Promotion
3.17 / Review for Tenure and Promotion: Procedures
3.171 / Nomination for Review for Tenure and Promotion
3.172 / Department Review for Tenure and Promotion
3.173 / College/School/Library Review for Tenure and Promotion
3.174 / Nomination and Review of Academic Services Faculty
3.175 / University Review for Tenure and Promotion
3.176 / Use of External Evaluation
3.177 / Appeal of Decisions Related to Tenure and Promotion
3.18/ No Publication of Names
3.19/ Confidentiality
3.20/ Disposition of Dossiers
3.21/ Precedence of University Procedures
3.22/ Student Members
3.23/ Definition of Terms
3.24/ University Tenure and Promotion Committee

3.26/ University Faculty Evaluation Policy
3.261 / General Policy
3.262 / Procedures
3.2621/ Departmental Faculty
3.2622/ Departmental Chairs
3.2623/ Academic Vice President & Deans
3.263 / Evaluation of Teaching
3.264 Voluntary Full Professor Incentive Review Policy
3,2641 Full Professor Incentive Review Cover Sheets

C / LEAVING THE UNIVERSITY

3.27/ Resignation
3.271 / Statement of Resignation
3.262 / Resignation Procedures
3.28 / Retirement
3.28 / Termination Procedures
3.281 / Resignation/Retirement/Termination Procedures
3.29 / Dismissal for Cause
3.30 / Financial Exigency
3.301/ Financial Exigency Background
3.302 / Policies and Procedures for the Reduction of Faculty

3.01 / Appointment Notice
Faculty appointments are formalized by an appointment form or notice that states the term of employment, salary, faculty rank, and appointment status. Appointment notices for the next academic year are issued by the President's Office as soon after the legislative session as possible.

3.021 / Academic Year Appointments
The following guideline on academic year appointments was adopted by the Council of Presidents on February 16, 1978:

Academic year appointments are for a period of approximately nine months beginning just prior to fall registration and extending through spring Commencement. Faculty duties include teaching, advising and counseling, research, scholarly, and creative activities, other university duties, and community and public service. Periods when classes are not in session are normally devoted to the above listed non teaching functions or to other specially scheduled activities.

3.022 / Annual Appointments
Some faculty and most administrative personnel receive annual appointments, including vacation and holidays as described in Section 4.

3.023 / Summer Session Appointments
Some members of the faculty are appointed to teach in the Summer Session. Assignment to Summer Session teaching is a matter of college and departmental policy and decision, subject to guidelines established by the director of the Summer Session.

3.024 / Employment Oath
Kansas law requires that all state employees sign the following Employment Oath:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Kansas, and faithfully discharge the duties of my office or employment. So help me God. (The final sentence may be deleted.)

The oath is included in papers that must be signed at the time of employment. It must be on file before any checks in payment of salary or wages may be issued by the state treasurer.

3.025 / Emeritus Appointment
Emeritus status recognizes meritorious service to the university and may be conferred upon a retiring individual who has served The Wichita State University for a minimum of ten continuous years. To be considered in the determination of meritorious service are the person's contributions in the areas of teaching, scholarly activity, service or leadership.

Recommendations for the award of emeritus status must be made by the department, with the concurrence of the appropriate Dean, and forwarded to the University President.

Exceptions to the above criteria may be granted by the University President. (3-89)

3.03 / Faculty Ranks and Titles
The principal titles and ranks granted by the University to academic faculty are those normally bestowed by institutions of higher education: professor, associate professor, assistant professor, and instructor. Full-time faculty holding less than the minimum credentials for instructor rank are occasionally appointed as assistant instructors. Titles used to designate part-time instructional personnel include lecturer and adjunct/faculty associate. The term visiting is used in conjunction with the basic academic titles for individuals who join the faculty for a short period of time, usually with the intent of returning to a position at another academic institution.

The University has various special professorships that it bestows upon faculty in recognition of distinguished scholarly achievement and distinguished contribution to the University. The special professorships include Regents distinguished professorships, established by the Kansas Board of Regents; Trustees distinguished professorships, funded by the Board of Trustees; University professorships, funded by the University; distinguished professorships, endowed by donors or the Endowment Association; and professorships emeriti, awarded to outstanding retired faculty.

3.04 / Types of Appointments
Faculty appointments are of three basic types: temporary, probationary, and with tenure. Temporary appointments are for a specified period only, and carry no expectation of reappointment. Adjunct/faculty associates and lecturers have temporary appointments for one semester, subject to renewal on the basis of need for instruction. Probationary appointments are those appointments that may, on the basis of continuing satisfactory performance, lead to review for the award of tenure. However, probationary appointments carry no expectation or promise that review for the award of tenure will be undertaken or that tenure will be awarded. Probationary appointments are reviewed on an annual basis, and may or may not be renewed. Probationary appointments will not be continued for more than seven years. Tenured appointments will be annually renewed unless the faculty member is dismissed through proper actions and procedures.

3.05 / Special Conditions of Appointment
Any special conditions of appointment will be included in the appointment form signed by the employee. Special conditions of appointment include but are not limited to: date by which a terminal degree and/or field registry is expected and the consequences of non-attainment, or special conditions for nomination for tenure review consideration (such as an additional degree or field registry). It is the responsibility of the employee to inform the department and dean of accomplishment of the conditions of appointment.

3.051 / Joint Faculty Appointment
A primary academic objective of Wichita State University is the search for and development of new knowledge which will enhance institutional programs and contribute to the University's research responsibilities. Recognizing the contribution of interdisciplinary studies in meeting the objective, the University may offer joint appointments for faculty where appropriate.

The joint appointment may provide greater program flexibility, the enhancement of intellectual stimulation, and broader insights into matters under faculty investigation and research.
Definition:
Joint appointments as used herein shall mean either term or continuous appointments to at least one regular academic position in more than one academic department, research unit, or other administrative unit. Such appointments may be approved by the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research, provided they do not total more than 1.0 full-time equivalent (eft) and are recommended by all colleges, departments, and units involved.

Determination of Primary Department:
Any joint appointment shall have one position assigned as the primary position and the department or unit (such as administrative and research units) within which that position is situated shall be deemed to be the primary department or unit as herein defined.

Implementation:
Before a faculty member first receives a joint appointment, the faculty member and the appropriate academic units must mutually determine, record in writing, and secure administrative approval for all conditions of the appointment. The offer of appointment should include the following:

3.06 / Notice of Nonreappointment
The Kansas Board of Regents has adopted the following policy regarding timely notice of nonreappointment for faculty members holding probationary appointments.

Notice of nonreappointment should be given in writing in accordance with the following standards; however, such standards shall not be applicable to any administrative assignments:

1. Not later than March 1 of the first academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or if a one-year appointment terminates during an academic year, at least 3 months in advance of its termination.

2. Not later than December 15 of the second academic year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if an initial two-year appointment terminates during an academic year, at least 6 months in advance of its termination.

3. At least 12 months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years in the institution.

These statements shall apply even during periods of declared financial exigency, unless impossible, in which case notice shall be provided as early as possible.

3.07 / Recruitment Policy
The university has established procedures and policies concerning the recruitment of new faculty. These procedures and policies can be obtained from the Equal Employment Officer ~~Affirmative Action Office.~~ All units of the university are responsible for following those procedures and policies. The academic rank conferred at the time of initial appointment should be consistent with the appropriate college guidelines for promotion to that rank.

Negotiations looking to the possible appointment for the following fall of persons who are already faculty members of other institutions, in active service or on leave of absence and not on terminal appointment, should be begun and completed as early as possible in the academic year. It is desirable that, when feasible, the faculty member who has been approached with regard to another position inform the appropriate officers of his institution when such negotiations are in progress. The conclusion of a binding agreement for the faculty member to accept an appointment elsewhere should always be followed by prompt notice to his institution.

3.08 / Policy Concerning Employment of Relatives
Persons may be appointed to classified or unclassified positions without regard to family relationship to other members of faculty or staff. If a person is in a position that requires an evaluation on a personnel decision such as those concerning appointment, retention, promotion, tenure, or salary of a close relative, such condition shall be deemed a conflict of interest, and that person shall not participate in such a decision, and that person shall not participate in any group or body that is considering any such decision.

3.09 / Interpretative Statements on Tenure at Wichita State University
TENURE AND PROMOTION POLICIES [changes in bold with date accepted by Faculty Senate-Forwarded to the President for acceptance]

Acting under the provisions of the Kansas Board of Regents' Tenure policy ~~on tenure~~ and promotions in Academic Rank Policy, the university may award tenure or promotion to faculty members based on demonstrated excellence in scholarship, teaching/librarianship, and community and professional service. The granting of tenure or promotion is at the initiative of the university and is based on sustained achievements demonstrating that the faculty member meets the qualitative standards of the appropriate discipline and the requirements of the university. Tenure or promotion is not acquired simply y meeting assigned duties with a record free of deficiencies.

Tenure or promotion is conferred on the basis of: a) the qualifications of the individual, b) the objectives and needs of the university's academic programs, and c) the resources of the university as these are determined by faculty committees and administrator's reviews at departmental, college, and university levels.

In cases of termination of tenured faculty not involving termination for cause, the university has the obligation to make every effort to find a suitable position within the institution for the affected faculty member. The suitability of any proposed position shall be by mutual agreement of the faculty member and the receiving department or equivalent unit. Faculty relocated within the university will not automatically, by virtue of their tenure, displace tenured, probationary or temporary faculty within the receiving department or equivalent unit.

Positions at Wichita State University that are not eligible for tenure are those which are part-time, carry the rank of assistant instructor, have less than a 50 percent responsibility for teaching, librarianship, research, scholarship, and/or creative activities, or are designated as temporary.

~~Effective June 1987,~~ The Kansas Board of Regents ~~approved~~ has adopted the following amended policy concerning tenure and academic freedom of faculty at regents' institutions, as contained in the Kansas Board of Regents' Policy and Procedures Manual. Regents' tenure policy is substantially based on the 1940 Statement on Academic Freedom and Tenure of the American Association of University Professors, which is extensively quoted in section a and b.

b. In the interpretation of the principles contained in Section a of this policy, the following is applicable:

e. The names of individual who have been hired with a continuous appointment upon employment shall be submitted by the institution to the Board for its information.

f. Decisions of the chief executive officer shall be final and are not subject to further administrative review by any officer or committee of the institution or by the Board of Regents. (4-18-47; 2-15-80; 5-15-81; 4-16-82; 1-20-84; 2-16-89)

The regents' tenure policy defines the time limit for the probationary period in 3.12.b,2, above.

The following university regulations apply to the probationary period as defined in Kansas Board of Regents policy:

All faculty members holding half-time or more appointments who have not attained tenure will be evaluated at least once a year. Faculty members will have the opportunity to present documentation of performance for the purpose of this evaluation. The evaluation will be recorded on official university forms provided by the office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research by department chairpersons. In addition to reviewing the faculty member's performance during the preceding year, these annual reviews will also contain a section on "progress toward tenure" in which the faculty member's overall performance at WSU will be evaluated in the context of the tenure review which will occur at the end of the probationary period. All annual reviews should be submitted; however, these annual reviews do not constitute a definitive review for tenure. The chairperson will review with the faculty member the results of the evaluation and transmit them to the dean. Copies will be retained by the faculty member, the department, the college dean's office, and the office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research.

In order to ensure as consistent a review process as possible prior to tenure decision, the annual review of probationary members of a department is to be conducted exclusively by the tenured members of the department or the elected tenure committee of the department. The chairperson of the department will be present. Abstentions will not be registered except when a faculty member declares he/she has a conflict of interest concerning a case. The chairperson of the committee of tenured members records the evaluation and the vote of the group. The department chairperson shall provide a separate evaluation and recommendation. The vote count, evaluations, and recommendation will be shared with the person being reviewed, who shall be afforded the opportunity to submit a written rebuttal to the evaluations. In departments in which two or fewer members are tenured, an ad hoc review committee, consisting of tenured faculty members who might be involved in the ultimate tenure decision, shall be appointed by the dean of the appropriate college. Untenured chairpersons shall not participate in their own reviews.

The annual evaluation is an important activity for which faculty members should be well prepared. It is a cumulative record of performance that in the case of probationary faculty shows progress toward consideration for continuous tenure.

Within the usual probationary period, a faculty member who demonstrates exceptional merit may be afforded one opportunity to stand for tenure prior to mandatory review. In such cases, the faculty member, in consultation with the chairperson, shall determine the advisability of early nomination according to the following criteria of eligibility:

Should the faculty member decide to stand for early tenure review, the following conditions shall apply:

In exceptional circumstances an individual may be awarded tenure at the time of initial appointment. Individuals being considered for appointment to an administrative position can be granted tenure at the time of appointment only on the basis of their scholarly and academic credentials. Review for the award of tenure with initial appointment shall be initiated by the tenured faculty of the relevant academic department in accord with college and university guidelines in force at the time.

Department faculty recommendations for award of tenure with initial appointment shall be forwarded for action through the chairperson to the dean and the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research. In such cases where additional consultation is deemed desirable, the dean or Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research may convene the college or university-level committees to effect an ad hoc tenure review.

The Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research shall convey the recommendations to the president who shall review the recommendations and make the final decision. The President shall notify the individual in writing of the award of tenure.

CHAPTER 3 / FACULTY APPOINTMENT, TENURE, PROMOTION, and RETIREMENT POLICIES
revised 11/29/99

B / TENURE AND PROMOTION AND EVALUATION POLICIES - PART 2 [changes in bold with date accepted by Faculty Senate-Forwarded to the President for acceptance]

Guidelines and criteria related to tenure and promotion are developed by all the constituencies involved in the review process, including the president, the university tenure and promotion committee, the college, and in some instances the departments. The subsections that follow identify the guidelines and criteria that are operative at the university level. Reference is also made to college guidelines and criteria.

The judgments of all faculty committees in tenure decisions are to be based on the academic credentials, qualifications, and merits of the candidate. These judgments will always be made primarily at the departmental and college levels. Ranking of candidates for tenure is neither necessary nor appropriate.

Detailed guidelines and statements of criteria for tenure and promotion have been adopted by all the colleges and academic services, and in some instances at the departmental level. Each statement should include explicit statements of expectation for teaching, librarianship, research, scholarship, or creative activities, and academic and professional service. These statements should define the relative significance of different activities within each area and the nature of documentation which candidates must provide to establish their accomplishments in each area.

The statements may specify guidelines for faculty with unusual appointments, consistent with the university guidelines for tenure or promotion contained in section 3.143 below. It is acceptable to establish differential criteria for tenure or promotion for faculty with different assignments, so long as the differential criteria and the nature of the faculty assignments are clearly identified.

The college and academic services guidelines and statements of criteria shall be submitted in the spring for review by the university tenure and promotion committee on a three-year cycle. The purpose of this review is to ensure that the guidelines and statements are consistent with university guidelines and provide an adequate degree of clarity and specificity so that candidates for tenure and promotion will understand the criteria which will be utilized to evaluate their cases.

[The Dean of each college will forward a copy of their College Guidelines and Criteria for Tenure and Promotion to the Chair of the University Tenure and Promotion Committee by February 1 as follows: (9-27-99)Forwarded to the President for acceptance]]

The college and university libraries ~~academic services~~ guidelines and statements of criteria developed for tenure and promotion shall be distributed annually to all untenured faculty at the time of their annual evaluation. The evaluation of individual candidates at the university level should take into account the degree to which the individual has met the guidelines as well as his/her role statement and annual performance criteria identified in the annual evaluation of untenured faculty. [Consideration, in context of the candidate's entire career, will be given to teaching, librarianship, research, scholarship, creative activities, and service conducted while the candidate has been employed at Wichita State University. (11-29-99)Forwarded to the President for acceptance]] If the guidelines in effect at the time of initial probationary appointment differ from those in place at the time a tenure case comes forward for consideration, the current guidelines can be used in place of the earlier guidelines only if both the candidate and the department agree.

[In cases where Department and/or College policy contradicts University policy, the appropriate department administrator, the Dean of the College, the College Tenure & Promotion Committee and the Vice President for Academic Affairs & Research will be notified by the University Tenure & Promotion Committee that the contradiction needs to be corrected, and that University policy will take precedence until the correction is in place. (11-29-99)Forwarded to the President for acceptance]]

1. A terminal degree in a field appropriate to the discipline in which the candidate teaches or conducts research, scholarship, or creative activities is normally required for appointment or promotion to the rank of assistant professor, associate professor or professor. Exceptions to this guideline will require careful documentation based upon an adequate rationale.

2. Under normal circumstances, a faculty member should not expect to be considered for promotion with less than six years in rank.

3. The standards for teaching, librarianship, scholarship, and service for each rank are indicated below. The relative significance of teaching; librarianship; research, scholarship, or creative activities; and service may vary from case to case. [Consideration, in the context of the candidate's entire career, will be given to teaching, librarianship, research, scholarship, creative activities, and service conducted while the candidates has been employed at Wichita State University. (11-29-99)Forwarded to the President for acceptance]]

Assistant Professor: Evidence is normally expected of the following: (1) demonstrated adequacy in teaching/librarianship; (2) potential for achievement in research, scholarship, or creative activity; and (3) some university service appropriate to the mission of the department and college.

Associate Professor: Evidence is normally expected of the following: (1) documented effectiveness of teaching/librarianship; (2) a record of research, scholarship, or creative activities which has earned recognition n professional circles at the regional or national level; and (3) some professional or university service.

Professor: Evidence is normally expected of the following: (1) sustained effectiveness in teaching/librarianship; (2) a record of substantial accomplishment in research, scholarship, or creative activities which has led to recognition in professional circles at the national level; and (3) demonstrated academic leadership in the form of service to the university and the profession.

All full-time faculty with 50 percent or more responsibility for teaching, librarianship, research, scholarship, and/or creative activities with the rank of instructor or higher must undergo review for tenure during their sixth year of employment at Wichita State University unless their employment at the university is to be terminated at the end of their seventh year of service. Those individuals given credit for prior experience in higher education at the time of initial appoint shall undergo review for tenure according to the policies stated.

Expectations of performance in and the relative importance of teaching; librarianship; research, scholarship, or creative activities; and service will be defined at the time of the initial appointment. Specific performance goals will be established each year during the annual evaluation of untenured faculty. These expectations and goals form the foundation for evaluation for tenure in the context of the tenure criteria established by the faculty of the college, but do not constitute a definitive review for tenure. The terminal degree is preferred for the granting of tenure except in exceptional and well documented cases. The award of tenure normally requires documented evidence of effective teaching/librarianship and a record of research, scholarship, or creative activities which has earned recognition in professional circles at the regional or national level.

In the process of reviewing tenure and promotion cases according to its charge, the University Tenure and Promotion Committee applies the respective college guidelines as approved by the college and university tenure and promotion committees. It is important to emphasize that these guidelines are not rigid rules.

The tenure and promotion review process is governed by the "Tenure, Promotion, and Appeals Procedures" document, which was adopted by the university faculty, May 1994. The text of this policy follows:

"Individual units may adopt by vote of the faculty of the college additional procedures, policies, and interpretive statements to govern their internal review of tenure and promotion cases, so long as those procedures, policies, and interpretive statements are consistent with all higher level procedures, policies, and interpretive statements, as determined in the triennial review of policies and procedures conducted by the university committee. These additional statements should be provided in writing to all candidates for tenure and promotion and to all probationary faculty at the time of their initial appointment and at each annual review."

The laws of the State of Kansas provide that, subject to the board of regents, the president shall appoint employees and administer the affairs of Wichita State University. In matters of tenure and promotion, the president has delegated the authority to make recommendations to certain faculty committees and administrators. However, the president retains the authority to make the final decision on the tenure and promotion of faculty members.

A person dissatisfied with committee or administrator recommendations concerning his/her tenure or promotion may, after exhausting the procedures and appeals in the tenure and promotion review process, petition the President of Wichita State University for a favorable decision on tenure or promotion.

Wichita State University does not practice nor condone discrimination with regard to the use of factors made unlawful or prohibited by law (i.e. race, gender, disability, etc.) in tenure and promotion practices.

3.15 / Tenure and Promotion Calendar (9/27/01 rev) (accepted by President Beggs, 10/4/01) --- This calendar will be effective March 2005

March

2^nd Friday Deadline for Director of the Office of Institutional Research to notify deans of faculty scheduled for mandatory tenure review with copies of institutional planning and analysis.

April

1^st Friday Deadline for dean of college to notify faculty scheduled for mandatory tenure review with copies to Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research

3^rd Friday Deadline for faculty applying for promotion and/or early tenure review to notify chair.

3^rd Friday Deadline for candidates requesting external review to notify chair and dean.

May

1^st. Friday Deadline for chair to notify dean of faculty applying for tenure and/or promotion.

3^rd Friday Deadline for sending initial request for external reviews, if any are to be solicited.

3^rd Friday Deadline for dean of college to notify Vice President of Academic Affairs and Research of faculty scheduled for early tenure review and/or promotion.

June

1^st Friday Deadline for course data to be delivered to applicants for tenure and/or promotion by Shocker One Stop

September

2^nd Friday Deadline for completion of basic documents and secondary dossiers

2^nd Friday Deadline for chair to notify eligible faculty tenure and/or promotion files are available for review.

October

1^st. Friday Deadline for departmental reviews and votes on tenure and/or promotion.

2^nd Friday Deadline for department to notify dean of recommendations, and within two (2) working days after the department’s notification, the dean will notify nominees of the department’s recommendation, the chair’s independent recommendation, and the candidate’s right to appeal a negative decision.

3^rd Friday Deadline for candidates to sign departmental cover sheet in dean’s office indicating they have reviewed all documents being forwarded by the department.

4^th Friday Deadline for submission of appeals of or rebuttals to department-level recommendations to the dean.

4^th Friday Deadline for inclusion of letters from external reviewers.

November

3^rd Friday Deadline for college committee to transmit recommendations to dean.

December

1^st Friday Deadline for dean to notify candidates and department chairs of committee’s and dean’s independent recommendations and the candidate’s right to appeal a negative decision or to rebut an evaluation statement.

2^nd Friday Deadline for candidates to sign college cover sheet in the dean’s office indicating that they have reviewed all documents being forwarded by the college and within two (2) working days after the signing, the dean will transmit materials to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research

3^rd Friday Deadline for Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research to transmit materials to the university tenure and promotion committee.

3^rd Friday Deadline for appeal of or rebuttal to college-level recommendations to Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research

3^rd Friday Deadline for adding materials to the secondary dossier.

January

^4th Friday Deadline for university tenure and promotion committee to report recommendations to Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research and to notify candidates and department chairs of the committee’s recommendations and the candidate’s right to rebut the committee’s evaluation.

February
1st Friday Deadline for submission of rebuttal statements by candidates to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research of the university committee’s evaluation

3^rd Friday Deadline for notification of candidates of recommendations to be made by the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research to the President. (accepted Faculty Senate 9/10/01)

4^th Friday Deadline for university committee to identify problems in tenure policies and tenure and promotion guidelines for the faculty affairs committee.

March

1^st Friday Deadline for appeals, rebuttals, and/or petitions to the President of negative recommendations. (accepted Faculty Senate 9/10/01)

April

1^st Friday Final transmittal of Wichita State University decisions to the candidates.

These procedures are adapted from sections 10 and 2f, respectively, of the 1972 AAUP Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure of the American Association of University Professors.

3.16/ Policies and Procedures for Tenure and Promotion

3.161/Outline of the Process of Review for Tenure and Promotion

Any faculty member may nominate himself or herself for review for tenure or promotion.

Nominations may also be made by the chairperson. For faculty members with probationary appointments, review for tenure must occur during or before the year prior to the last year of the probationary period. No review for tenure will occur during the last year of a faculty member's probationary period.

The process of review for tenure and promotion involves these steps:

1. Nomination for review.

2. Departmental review of nominees by the departmental committee and by the chairperson.

3. In favorable or appealed cases, college review of department nominations by the college tenure and promotion committee, and by the college dean.

4. In favorable or appealed cases, university review of college nominations by the tenure and promotion committee, and the vice president of academic affairs.

5. In favorable or appealed cases, review of recommendations by the president of the university for final decision.

Procedures have been established for appeal in the case of an adverse tenure or promotion recommendation at the department and at the college level.

The calendar for the tenure and promotion review process is in the Wichita State University Handbook for Faculty, section 3.15.

3.17/Review for Tenure or Promotion: Procedures

3.171/Nomination for Review for Tenure and Promotion

1. The department chairperson will write to all full-time faculty members of the department to tell them that nominations of persons to be reviewed that year for tenure or for promotion must be given to the chairperson by a specified date. The chairperson must nominate all faculty whose tenure review is mandatory for that year. All others may be nominated by the chairperson or by the faculty member himself or herself.

2. The department chairperson will send copies of the list resulting from Step 1 to all full-time departmental faculty and specify a second date by which any additional nominations must be provided in writing to the chairperson.

3. The department chairperson will confer individually with all nominated faculty members and provide information about departmental, college, and university criteria for tenure or promotion.

4. Except for those whose review for tenure is mandatory, faculty who have been nominated must inform the department chairperson in writing by a date specified by the department chairperson (which will be no sooner than two days after their conference) of the faculty member's decision to remain in nomination or to withdraw.

5. The final, typed list of those nominated will be sent to the dean and to all members of the department electorate. Each person on the list will be notified in writing by the dean that he or she is officially a candidate for promotion or tenure. In addition, the dean will inform the candidate of the criteria for tenure or promotion and will instruct the candidate to give his/her supporting materials to the department chairperson by a specified date.

3.172/Department Review for Promotion and Tenure (1)

The candidate will present a primary dossier and may prepare a secondary dossier.[ Only material contained in the primary and secondary dossiers and additional materials appropriately obtained and added to the dossiers may be used by the Tenure & Promotion Committee at each level. (2-28-00)]

Primary Dossier: The primary dossier consists of the basic document, the required cover sheet which records each step of the review process, copies of the annual reviews (and rebuttals if are filed) for untenured faculty, the chairperson's non-evaluative role statement, statements of evaluation by the committee and administrator at each level of review and rebuttals (if any are filed),[optional external reviews (2-28-00)] and items added during the review process.

The basic document will follow the standard format recommended by the university tenure and promotion committee and approved by the faculty senate. Deviations from the established format should be clearly explained. The basic document may be no more than 25 pages.

The chairperson will provide a statement of the role of the candidate in the department which is purely descriptive and not evaluative. If the candidate's role involves a weighted distribution of responsibility among the three categories of professional activity, that should be indicated in the role statement.

The chairperson will make copies of the primary dossier available for all voting faculty.

Secondary Dossier: A secondary dossier may be submitted to the chairperson by the candidate. It consists of such additional materials as the candidate wishes to submit. Examples might include, but are not limited to, copies of publications or other evidence of scholarship, copies of student evaluations or course materials, etc. The candidate may add items to the secondary dossier during the review process (see calendar in section 3.17). [Should documentation significant to your case arrive after the deadline for adding materials to the secondary dossier (the 3^rd Friday in December), please notify the Dean and the Chair of your college committee who will add the material to the dossier. The chair of the committee will bring it to the attention of the next higher committee.(2-28-00)]

As the review proceeds through the various levels, the primary dossier and the secondary dossier will be in the custody of the administrator at each level. Items may be added to the primary dossier by the administrator as called for in these procedures, but the administrator must give the candidate a copy of the additions and provide the candidate an opportunity to write a rebuttal that will also be included in the primary dossier.

The complete files of all faculty members under review in the department must be available for a reasonable time (at least five working days) to all voting faculty.

Tenure cases will be reviewed at a meeting of the tenured faculty of the department or a committee of tenured faculty chosen by these faculty members. In departments having fewer than three voting tenured faculty members, the college faculty will develop appropriate procedures for the review, subject to the approval of the college dean. Each eligible person except the department chairperson will vote on each case under consideration and will sign the tally sheet. The tally sheet will not identify individual voters with their votes but must account for all eligible voters. If a committee wishes, straw ballots may precede the final ballot. Only the votes on the final ballot are binding and recorded. Abstentions will not be registered except when a faculty member on a committee declares he/she has a conflict of interest concerning a case. A positive recommendation by the committee results when more than 50 percent of those casting ballots other than abstention have voted to recommend tenure. A copy of the tally sheet will be kept in the departmental office for three years.

Promotion cases will be reviewed at a meeting of the departmental faculty who hold rank equal to or higher than that for which the candidate is being considered or of a committee of those with appropriate rank chosen by these faculty members. The limitation of voting to persons of equal or higher rank need not apply to votes at the college or university level. In departments having fewer than three faculty members with appropriate rank, the college faculty will develop appropriate review procedures subject to approval of the college dean. Each eligible person, excluding the department chairperson, will vote on each case under consideration and will sign the tally. The tally will not identify individual voters with their votes but must account for all eligible votes. Straw ballots may precede the final ballot. Abstentions may occur only in cases involving declared conflict of interest. A positive recommendation will result when more than 50 percent of those casting ballots (i.e., other than abstentions) have voted to recommend promotion. Copies of the tally sheets will be kept in the departmental office for three years.

Chairpersons do not participate in their own evaluation or in evaluations of faculty when the chair has a conflict of interest. Such cases automatically go forward without prejudice for review at the next level.

The results of the departmental deliberations and the chairperson's separate recommendation will be sent to the dean by the department chairperson. When the committee's discussion of a candidate is complete, the committee chair will summarize in writing the committee's evaluation of the candidate. The department chairperson will also provide a written evaluation to accompany his/her recommendation for each case. These statements will be included in the primary dossier. The candidate will be provided an opportunity to review these statements and to file a written rebuttal in the primary dossier. In cases where the chairperson's recommendation differs from that of the voting faculty, the case will go forward to the next higher level without prejudice, and that transmittal will not constitute an appeal. The chairperson will also send forward the copies of the primary dossier and the secondary dossier.

The dean will inform each candidate in writing of the department's recommendations, the chairperson's recommendation, the right to appeal, and the procedures for appeal. The dean will also notify the candidate that he/she may request meetings with the department chairperson and/or the chair of the departmental tenure and promotion committee, at the candidate's option, to discuss the decision.

3.173/College Review of Nominees for Tenure or Promotion

The dean will give a copy of the primary dossier of each faculty member favorably recommended for promotion and/or tenure and of all appealed cases to each member of the college committee and will indicate the location of the secondary dossiers. These materials must be available to the committee for at least five working days prior to deliberation.

The committee will meet with the dean to receive information about the schedule of meetings and about administrative matters related to the cases to be reviewed. The dean may also request other meetings with the committee. Each college shall adopt procedures regarding the role of the dean in these other meetings. If the committee discovers that information is lacking in a dossier, it can ask the dean to acquire the information. Consistent with the department procedures, the dean must provide the candidate a copy of the material and allow the candidate to write a rebuttal. The college committee may, at its option, adopt a policy which prohibits a committee member from the same department as a candidate for tenure and/or promotion from speaking or voting on the case during the committees deliberations. If such a rule is adopted, it must apply to all cases before the committee. If additional information about the departmental committee's deliberations is desired, the committee may request explanatory information to be submitted in writing from the chair of the departmental committee. This statement will be added to the primary dossier, and the candidate will be provided an opportunity to place a rebuttal in the primary dossier.

The committee will then consider the cases before it, whether regular or appealed. Straw ballots may be taken, but these are neither binding nor recorded. Abstentions will not be registered except when a faculty member on a committee declares he/she has a conflict of interest concerning the case. At a meeting without the dean each case will be discussed and the committee will conduct its final vote. A positive recommendation by the committee will result when more than 50 percent of those casting ballots other than abstention vote to recommend tenure or promotion.

The committee must notify the dean in writing of its final ballot on each case. (Note: The college committee may meet with the dean as it sees fit but it must hold a discussion on each case and take its final vote in the absence of the dean.)

The results of the college deliberations and the dean's separate recommendations will be sent by the dean to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research. When the committee's discussion of a candidate is complete, the committee chair will summarize in writing the committee's evaluation of the candidate. The dean will also provide a written evaluation to accompany his/her recommendation for each case. These statements will be included in the primary dossier. The candidate will be provided an opportunity to review these statements and to file a written rebuttal in the primary dossier. In cases where the college committee's recommendation differs from hat of the dean, the case will go forward to the next higher level without prejudice and the transmittal will not constitute an appeal. A positive recommendation requires the affirmative vote of more than 50 percent of those voting. The dean will also send forward the primary dossier and the secondary dossier.

The dean will notify each candidate in writing of the college committee's recommendation, the dean's recommendation, the right to appeal, if any, and the procedures for appeal. The dean will also notify the candidate that he/she may request in writing meetings with the dean and/or the chairperson of the college committee, at the candidate's option, to discuss the recommendation.

3.174/Nomination and Review of Academic Services Faculty

Faculty eligible for tenure or promotion review and not assigned to an academic college or department will be nominated and reviewed for tenure and promotion within their administrative units according to procedures consistent with those used in academic colleges.

3.175/University Review of Nominees for Tenure or Promotion

The Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research will give a copy of the primary dossier of each faculty member favorably recommended for tenure or promotion and of each appealed case to each member of the university committee. In addition, the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research will indicate the location of the secondary dossiers. The materials must be available to the committee for at least five working days prior to deliberations.

If the committee discovers that information is lacking in a primary dossier, it can ask the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research to acquire the information, which will be placed in the primary dossier. Consistent with college procedures the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research must provide the candidate a copy of the material and allow the candidate to write a rebuttal, which will also be placed in the primary dossier.

The committee will then consider the cases before it, whether regular or appealed. The committee may request a written response from the dean on matters of interpretation of evidence, the academic needs of the unit, or its current resources, but the committee will not invite the dean or other outside persons to meet with the committee. Consistent with college procedures, the candidate shall be provided a copy of any additional written material provided to the committee and shall be provided an opportunity to write a rebuttal. Both the statement and the rebuttal will be placed in the primary dossier. Straw ballots may be taken, but these are neither binding nor recorded. Abstentions will not be registered except when a faculty member on a committee declares he/she has a conflict of interest concerning a case. At a meeting without either the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research or the dean of the graduate school present, each case will be discussed and the committee will conduct its final vote. A positive recommendation will result when more than 50 percent of those casting ballots other than abstention vote to recommend tenure or promotion.

The committee must notify the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research in writing of its final ballot on each case. Any person not recommended by the university committee may request meetings with the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research and/or the chairperson of the university committee, at the candidate's option, to discuss the recommendations. The candidate may invite a faculty colleague to accompany him/her.

The results of university committee deliberations and the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research separate recommendations will be sent by the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research to the president. When the committee's decision of a candidate is complete, the committee chair will summarize in writing the committee's evaluation of the candidate. The Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research will also provide a written evaluation to accompany his/her recommendation for each case. These statements will be included in the primary dossier. The candidate will be provided an opportunity to review these statements and to file a written rebuttal in the primary dossier. In any case where the vice presidential recommendation differs from that of the university committee, the president and Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research will meet with the committee, before submitting his/her recommendations to the President (12-13-04) to discuss the reasons for his/her position.

The president will notify the candidate, the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research, (12-13-04) the candidate's dean, and the candidate's (12-13-04) chairperson, in writing, of his/her decision by the calendar date. Any person not recommended by the president may request a meeting with the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research and the president to discuss the recommendations. The candidate may invite a faculty colleague to accompany him/her, in either case.

3.176/The Use of External Evaluation

The use of external peer reviews is optional . In deciding whether or not to seek external peer reviews, candidates should assess how they can best make an effective case that they have met college and university criteria for tenure and/or promotion. For those candidates who elect to employ external review, a standard procedure should be followed. The dean's office will assume responsibility for obtaining the reviews in accordance with the procedures described below. The same questions will be asked of all reviewers. In general, the dean may ask reviewers to comment on (1) the originality and creativity displayed in the candidate's research, scholarship, or creative work and (2) the significance of the work and its impact on the field. Reviewers will be specifically instructed not to remark on the promotability or tenurability of candidates. Candidates will receive a copy of the reviews which identifies the reviewer. If they wish to do so, candidates may provide written rebuttals to the external reviews.

External reviewers should be distinguished scholars in their fields capable of providing an un-biased professional assessment of the quality of the candidate's work.

The process for obtaining external reviews should be started at least two months before the campus review begins. The following process should be followed if external reviews are to be obtained:

1. The candidate will give the departmental chair the names and addresses of five potential peer reviewers, six sets of reprints or copies of work that the candidate believes best represents his/her research, scholarship, or creative work, and six copies of a complete bibliography that clearly delineates the candidate's research, scholarship, or creative work. Any material that the candidate wishes to have returned should be so marked.

2. The department chair will forward to the dean information provided by the candidate along with five additional names and addresses of potential peer reviewers. The department chair may wish to seek the counsel of the faculty in developing this list. For cause, the candidate may challenge to the dean the names selected by the department chair.

3. The dean will draw by lot three reviewers from each list of names supplied. Individual colleges shall develop their own policies regarding pursuit of non-responding or late evaluators; these policies shall be applied consistently whenever external review is sought. If fewer than three responses are obtained within a reasonable time, the dean may send additional requests for reviews to other persons named on the original lists, in rotating order from both lists.

4. The dean will send to each reviewer a letter requesting a professional opinion of the quality of the candidate's work following the guidelines stated above, along with the material supplied by the candidate.

5. Copies of the reviewers' comments will be returned to the department chair and the candidate immediately upon receipt by the dean. The department chair will add the reviews to the candidate's secondary dossier. The chair, in consultation with the candidate, will place in the secondary dossier a brief summary of the reviewers' academic credentials. Candidates are permitted to place in the secondary dossier comments on or rebuttals to the letters provided by reviewers.

6. Reviews can be added to the candidate's secondary dossier up until the time that the college committee begins its deliberations on the candidate.

3.177/Appeal of Decisions Related to Tenure or Promotion

A candidate may make only one appeal during the entire review process. The appeal is made to the next higher level. No hearing is provided, and the appeal must be written. Some typical reasons for appeal are violation of academic freedom, failure to follow procedures concerning time periods or committee operations, inadequate consideration, discrimination, etc. [An appeal should not introduce evidence that was not referred to or included in the primary or secondary dossiers, but it may update or clarify information presented earlier. Department or College committee members may not file a minority report, even as part of the appeals process. (2-28-00)]

The committee to which the appeal is made will give full consideration without prejudice to the case in that the committee will review it in the same manner as favorably recommended cases and will apply similar standards.

3.18/No Publication of Names of Tenure and Promotion
Names of faculty being considered for tenure or promotion will not be published. The right of privacy of such faculty members was affirmed by vote of the faculty on March 6, 1978.

3.19/Confidentiality of Proceedings
All deliberations are confidential. However, confidentiality cannot be guaranteed if the case goes to litigation.

3.20/Disposition of Dossiers
The Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research in each case will keep a copy of the primary dossier for three years and return to the candidate the remaining copies of the primary dossier and the secondary dossier.

3.21/Precedence of University procedures
If department and college tenure or promotion procedures differ from those of the university, university procedures take precedent.

3.22/Student Members
Students will not cast a vote regarding the award of tenure or promotion to individual faculty members.

3.23/Definition of Terms
Committee: The tenure review committee at the departmental level will consist of all tenured members of the department or a committee of tenured faculty chosen by those faculty members and reported in writing to the dean. In departments with fewer than three tenured members, the college faculty will develop appropriate procedures for the review subject to the approval of the college dean.

The review committee at the college level is the college tenure and promotion committee. Members of these committees are all tenured, full-time faculty with the rank of assistant professor or higher. The total membership of the committee is an odd number, with a minimum of five members. The majority of the committee are elected by the faculty, according to a representational formula adopted by the college. Members are elected or appointed for either two or three year terms (depending upon the college policies), staggered to maintain continuity. If a replacement is required due to a resignation, the replacement is selected only for the duration of the unexpired term. The committee chairperson is elected by the committee. No person can serve on the committee in a year in which he or she is considered for promotion or for more than two consecutive terms.

The review committee at the university level is the faculty senate tenure and promotion committee, whose general charge is established in the faculty senate rules. No person may serve on the university level review committee in a year in which he or she is considered for tenure or promotion.

Administrator: The administrator at the departmental level is the department chairperson. The dean is the administrator at the college level. The Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research is the administrator at the university level.

Calendar: The tenure calendar developed by the faculty and published by the VPAA&R is contained in this Handbook, Section 3.15.

Documents: The basic document consists of the 25 page statement prepared by the candidate in accordance with the standard format. The primary dossier consists of this basic document, a standard cover sheet, a role statement from the department chairperson, the annual reviews for untenured faculty, and such other statements as may be developed during the review process. Candidates must be notified of any items added to the primary dossier and be provided an opportunity to submit a written rebuttal to such items, which will be included in the primary dossier. At each level of review, each committee member has a copy of the primary dossier. The secondary dossier consists of such additional materials as the candidate wishes to submit. Examples might include, but are not limited to, copies of publications or other evidence of scholarship, letters of external reviewers (if any were obtained), and copies of student evaluations or course materials, etc. Only one copy of the secondary dossier is maintained.

Mandatory Review Year: The next to the last year of the allowable probationary period is the mandatory review year.

Straw Ballot: A non-binding vote taken for the purpose of monitoring progress toward a final decision is a straw ballot.

Favorable Case: A favorable case occurs at any level of review if either the faculty committee or the administrator makes a positive recommendation concerning the case. Such cases automatically move forward for review at the next level.

Academic Services Faculty: Persons holding unclassified appointments carrying faculty rank who serve in units other than degree-granting colleges are academic services faculty.

Probationary Appointment: A probationary appointment is an appointment that may, on the basis of continuing satisfactory performance, lead to review for the award of tenure. However, probationary appointments carry no expectation or promise that review for the award of tenure will be undertaken or that tenure will be awarded. Probationary appointments are reviewed on an annual basis and may or may not be renewed. Probationary appointments may not be continued for more than seven years.

Temporary Appointments: A temporary appointment is for a fixed term. Such appointments carry no rights to the consideration for the award of tenure.

3.24/University Tenure and Promotion Committee:
Composition: 12

6 Chairs of Tenure and Promotion Committees for the degree-granting colleges
1 Chair of the Tenure and Promotion Committee for University Libraries
2 Faculty at-large
1 Student (non-voting)
President and President-Elect of the Senate (ex officio, non-voting)
Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research (ex officio, non-voting)
Dean of the Graduate School (ex officio, non-voting).
(Ex officio members shall not be present at the meeting when final votes are taken.)

Selection: Chairs of Tenure and Promotion committees in the degree-granting colleges and for University Libraries are chosen according to procedures established in their respective college or unit. They are elected to two-year staggered terms. Faculty at-large are selected according to standard procedures for naming members to Faculty Senate committees, except that they shall be from different Faculty Senate divisions, and shall be full-time, tenured faculty members with the rank of associate professor or higher. Faculty at-large members serve for three years. Ex officio and faculty at-large members may not serve while a candidate for promotion or incentive review, or while on sabbatical leave. Replacement appointments shall be made as needed, following standard procedures.

Charges:
1. Implement university-wide policies and procedures for awarding tenure and promotion.
2. Coordinate the Tenure and Promotion Calendar.
3. Specify the format for documentation in support of Tenure and Promotion Review, with a view to developing comparable standards throughout the University while recognizing essential college differences.
4. Formulate transmittal, reporting, and appeals procedures for awarding tenure and promotion.
5. Ensure that there are university-wide procedures for notifying the relevant administrators and those faculty members for whom tenure decisions must be made before reappointment.
6. Review tenure and promotion cases in accordance with the Tenure, Promotion, and Appeals Procedure.
7. Review annually the University guidelines for tenure and promotion in light of the various colleges' guidelines.
8. Report to the Faculty Affairs Committee for review issues of concern in tenure policies and tenure and promotion guidelines.

3.25 / Cover Sheet for Tenure and Promotion Dossiers
The policy of the University shall be to require that all tenure and promotion documents use a uniform cover sheet style. These cover sheets should be attached to the front of the primary document and should not be considered a part of the 25 pages. Sample cover sheets are available from the college office or from the office of Academic Affairs or on the web: http://webs.wichita.edu/senate/topcov1.htm

At the departmental and college levels, the candidate should sign after the action at each level indicating that he/she has seen all materials that have been forwarded to the committee for consideration. This signature will not constitute agreement with the action at that level, but will merely indicate that the candidate has seen the materials.

3.26 UNIVERSITY FACULTY EVALUATION POLICY
The following policy provisions are established from the perspective that variety in academic schools/ departmental (hereafter referred to as department) evaluation procedures shall be preserved, subject to providing a fair evaluation for each individual and subject to departmental mission.

3.261 General Policy
A. All faculty, with half time or more appointments, and those unclassified professionals who have teaching responsibilities amounting to 50% or more of their workload are to be evaluated at least once a year regardless of whether or not they are in the Academic Affairs division of the University

B. There shall be a common calendar for the evaluation of untenured faculty and for annual merit evaluation.

C. Department evaluation procedures shall focus on the year in question while providing for at least two contiguous years in each review, in order to make appropriate adjustments in salaries based on previous years with limited or no salary allocation moneys and to determine patterns and continuity in academic accomplishments.

D. The department shall be established as the primary site of evaluation. The chair of the department is responsible for maintaining the current departmental evaluation policy in an open file. The following records shall be established and maintained in individual faculty files kept in the departmental office:

1. Departmental instructions to persons being evaluated including the requirement to discuss flexible performance goals for the coming year with the chair. The understanding is that these goals can be re-discussed and modified during the course of the year.

2. Departmental evaluations for each person, including assessment of success in attainment of performance goals.

3. The relationship between evaluation and departmental pay recommendation for each person.

4. The rationale for changes in departmental evaluations and pay recommendations made by persons outside the department.

E. There shall be no information requested for annual evaluation that is not intended for that purpose.

F. Persons being evaluated should be informed of any submitted information that was not reviewed by the evaluators involved in the evaluation process.

G. There shall be developed procedures for an open information flow between affected parties as per the procedure outlined below, and an opportunity for the person being evaluated to appeal at each stage of the process that will meet the prevailing budget time line requirements.

H. The majority of any departmental review committee, if established according to the following procedure, must be tenured faculty.

3.262 PROCEDURES

3.2621. Departmental Faculty.
A. The faculty of each department shall establish a written policy for annual evaluation of all faculty, with half time or more appointments, and those unclassified professionals who have teaching responsibilities amounting to 50% or more of their workload.

B. Chairs and deans shall review departmental policy and meet with the departmental faculty in the interest of any changes that should be made.

C. The faculty of each department shall cast a secret ballot at least every third year on whether they desire to elect annually a faculty evaluation committee for the purpose of evaluating the department members with teaching/librarianship responsibilities and providing merit pay recommendations to the department chair. If such a committee is established, its chair will meet with the department chair to report on the committee’s recommendations for merit pay distribution within the department. If the departmental faculty elect not to established a committee, the department chair will have sole responsibility of evaluating the department’s teaching personnel/librarian personnel and generating the department recommendation for merit pay distribution within the department.

3.2622 Department Chairs\Directors( hereafter referred to as chairs).
A. Chairs shall transmit departmental pay recommendations for the entire department, according to faculty established policy, to each person being evaluated as soon as these are developed and ready for transmittal to the dean. At that time, each person being evaluated may appeal his/her individual pay recommendations to the department chair.

B. Chairs shall transmit departmental pay recommendations to their dean along with a prioritized list of individuals they recommend for any additional salary increases.

3.2623. Academic Vice President and Deans.
A. Deans shall transmit their pay recommendations to the Academic Vice President for the entire department. At the same time, the dean will explain to the chairs any changes recommended by the dean in the department’s salary recommendations. The chairs are responsible for immediately informing the person being evaluated.

B. The Academic Vice President shall transmit that office's departmental pay recommendations for the entire department to each dean who has the responsibility of informing the department chairs as soon as these are developed. The chair is responsible for informing the person being evaluated at that time.

C. Administrators above the department level shall prepare a written explanation, attaching any relevant documents, of all changes they make in pay recommendations sent to their office. The explanation shall be transmitted to the person being evaluated and to the department chair.

3.263 Evaluation of Teaching

The following policy provisions are established from the perspective that variety in academic schools/departmental (hereafter referred to as department) evaluation procedures shall be preserved, subject to providing a fair evaluation for each individual and subject to departmental mission.

GENERAL POLICY

All faculty, with half-time or more appointments, and those unclassified professionals who have teaching responsibilities amounting to 50 percent or more of their workload are to be evaluated at least once a year regardless of whether or not they are in the Academic Affairs division of the University.

There shall be a common calendar for the evaluation of untenured faculty and for annual merit evaluation.

Department evaluation procedures shall focus on the year in question while providing for at least two contiguous years in each review, in order to make appropriate adjustments in salaries based on previous years with limited or no salary allocation moneys and to determine patterns and continuity in academic accomplishments.

The department shall be established as the primary site of evaluation. The chair of the department is responsible for maintaining the current departmental evaluation policy in an open file. The following records shall be established and maintained in individual faculty files kept in the departmental office:

Departmental instructions to persons being evaluated including the requirement to discuss flexible performance goals for the coming year with the chair. The understanding is that these goals can be rediscussed and modified during the course of the year.
Departmental evaluations for each person, including assessment of success in attainment of performance goals.
The relationship between evaluation and departmental pay recommendation for each person.
The rationale for changes in departmental evaluations and pay recommendations made by persons outside the department.

There shall be no information requested for annual evaluation that is not intended for that purpose.

Persons being evaluated should be informed of any submitted information that was not reviewed by the evaluators involved in the evaluation process.

There shall be developed procedures for an open information flow between affected parties as per the procedure outlined below and an opportunity for the person being evaluated to appeal at each stage of the process that will meet the prevailing budget time line requirements.

The majority of any departmental review committee, if established according to the following procedure, must be tenured faculty.

PROCEDURES

Departmental Faculty:
The faculty of each department shall establish a written policy for annual evaluation of all faculty with half-time or more appointments and those unclassified professionals who have teaching responsibilities amounting to 50 percent or more of their workload.

Chairs and deans shall review departmental policy and meet with the departmental faculty in the interest of any changes that should be made.

The faculty of each department shall cast a secret ballot at least every third year on whether they desire to elect annually a faculty evaluation committee for the purpose of evaluating the department members with teaching/librarianship responsibilities and providing merit pay recommendations to the department chair. If such a committee is established, its chair will meet with the department chair to report on the committee's recommendations for merit pay distribution within the department. If the departmental faculty elect not to establish a committee, the department chair will have sole responsibility of evaluating the department's teaching personnel/librarian personnel and generating the department recommendation for merit pay distribution within the department.

Department Chairs\Directors (hereafter referred to as chairs):
Chairs shall transmit departmental pay recommendations for the entire department, according to faculty established policy, to each person being evaluated as soon as these are developed and ready for transmittal to the dean. At that time, each person being evaluated may appeal his/her individual pay recommendations to the department chair.

Chairs shall transmit departmental pay recommendations to their dean along with a prioritized list of individuals they recommend for any additional salary increases.

Academic Vice President and Deans:
Deans shall transmit their pay recommendations to the Academic Vice President for the entire department. At the same time, the dean will explain to the chairs any changes recommended by the dean in the department's salary recommendations. The chairs are responsible for immediately informing the person being evaluated.

The Academic Vice President shall transmit that office's departmental pay recommendations for the entire department to each dean who has the responsibility of informing the department chairs as soon as soon as these are developed. The chair is responsible for informing the person being evaluated at that time.

Administrators above the department level shall prepare a written explanation, attaching any relevant documents, of all changes they make in pay recommendations sent to their office. The explanation shall be transmitted to the person being evaluated and to the department chair.

EVALUATION OF TEACHING

Kansas Board of Regents policy statements of April 1992 and December 1994 mandate that there be a formal evaluation of teaching as part of the annual merit salary review. In compliance with these policy statements, the University has developed the following steps in the evaluation of all University faculty with half-time or more appointments and those unclassified professionals who have teaching responsibilities amounting to 50 percent or more of their workload.

Each department shall develop an explicit statement of the appropriate information to be used for teaching evaluation in that department and an explicit statement of the criteria used for the evaluation of that information.
Multiple sources or kinds of information shall be used. Examples are cited in Regents policy statements and in the Faculty Evaluation Committee report to the Faculty Senate (5/95).
Student survey results must be included in the information sought.
The information presented must be evaluated by peers or knowledgeable colleagues.
To protect the broad faculty prerogatives explicit in Regents policy, department faculty shall act immediately to implement those policies. Accordingly, these faculty shall:
1. Determine the kinds of information appropriate for their disciplines or for the various subdisciplines represented in their department.
2. Describe the peer evaluation process with respect to the requisite information. Determine the appropriate criteria which are used to judge the information.
3. Determine the appropriate criteria which are used to judge the information.
4. Write a departmental policy statement incorporating items a. through c. above.
5. Insure that the unit operates in accord with its own policy.

Portions of Kansas Board of Regents policy statements have direct implications for faculty action and should be consulted for additional reference and guidance. (Faculty Performance Evaluation, 4/92 and Policy on Teaching Evaluation, 12/94, Kansas Board of Regents).

Since all faculty with half-time or more appointments and those unclassified professionals who have teaching responsibilities amounting to 50 percent or more of their workload must be rated by students at least once a year, the department faculty shall determine the form or forms appropriate to its discipline among those which conform to the criteria stated in the policies of the Board of Regents (Policy on Teaching Evaluation, Board of Regents, 12/94). Surveys intended for faculty evaluation must conform to certain administrative practices:

Persons being evaluated do not have access to blank survey forms and they have no responsibilities to administer the survey nor to tally survey results.
Personnel who distribute and collect the surveys will acknowledge by their signature that they conducted the survey for a particular class and they recorded the number of students present at the time the survey was taken.
Persons being evaluated shall have access to a copy of raw scores of any survey used for evaluation.

Note: The Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research will establish procedures in consultation with the Faculty Senate for implementation of this policy. These procedures will pertain only to the time and form of the evaluation policy.

3.264/ VOLUNTARY FULL PROFESSOR INCENTIVE

I. Preamble
The voluntary incentive review program is intended to provide an opportunity for a tenured faculty member holding the rank of Full Professor at Wichita State University for six (6) years to be considered for salary supplements based on the faculty member's continuing professional work.

II. Policy Statement
The voluntary incentive review program is available to all tenured faculty members who have held the rank of Full Professor at Wichita State University for six (6) years and who have not received an incentive supplement under this policy in the last six years. The applicable policies and procedures may be found in the WSU Policy Manual, chapter 4; and in the WSU Faculty Handbook, chapter 3. Both documents are available on the web: www.wichita.edu/Administration.

Eligible faculty members interested in participating in the voluntary incentive review program shall submit their names to the Chair of the department by the 3^rd Friday in April of their fifth (5^th) year in rank at WSU, at the same time as faculty seeking promotion to Full Professor as noted in the Tenure and Promotion Calendar. The candidate Full Professor will present a primary dossier comparable to a promotion dossier to the department, highlighting work completed since the last review and may prepare a secondary dossier.

Chairs interested in participating in the voluntary incentive review would submit their dossiers to the Full Professors of the department for review. Chairpersons do not participate in their own evaluation or in evaluations of candidate Full Professor(s) when the chair has a conflict of interest. Such cases automatically go forward without prejudice for review at the next level.

Salary supplements under this policy are part of the merit pay system, not the tenure and promotion process. The criteria for award of a salary supplement are the same as the criteria for promotion to Full Professor. In the interests of fairness and to assure comparable standards across campus, the process for review is the same as for promotion to Full Professor, and will proceed through the stages of the tenure and promotion review process.

The process of review involves these steps:

Nomination for Departmental review of nominees by the departmental committee* and by the chairperson.

In favorable or appealed** cases, college review of departmental nominations by the college tenure and promotion committee, and by the college dean.

In favorable or appealed** cases, university review of college nominations by the tenure and promotion committee.

In favorable or appealed** cases, approval by the president of the university.

*In departments having fewer than three faculty members with appropriate rank, the college faculty will develop appropriate review procedures subject to the approval of the college dean.
**Procedures have been established for appeal in the case of an adverse promotion recommendation at the department, college, and university levels.

Satisfactory completion of the voluntary incentive review program will result in payment of a salary supplement to the participating faculty member that equals the salary supplement paid to the person promoted to Full Professor at the same time.

III. Implementation

This policy shall be included in the University's Policies & Procedures Manual and shared with appropriate constituencies of the University.

The Vice President for Academic Affairs and Research shall have primary responsibility for publication and implementation of this University policy.

3.2641 Full Professor Incentive Review Cover Sheets: http://webs.wichita.edu/senate/fprof.htm