Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata



About This Policy

Effective Date: September 2010
Last Updated: November 2010
Responsible University Office: President's Office
Responsible University Administrator: President


Policy Contact:

Carrie Capella
Assistant to the President
ccapella@clarkson.edu

A. EVALUATIVE DOCUMENTATION AND ITS AVAILABILITY

Access to the various files that contain documentary evidence pertaining to individual faculty members is governed by the following guidelines:

  1. Personnel Files 
    1. The Human Resources Office, department offices, and the deans= offices maintain personnel files appropriate to their administrative functions. The information in the personnel file is available to the individual faculty member, the appropriate dean and department chair, Provost, and the president. It is also available to such internal groups as the University Tenure Committee, the University Promotions Committee, and the Office of Institutional Planning when their duties require such access. (Salary information will be removed from documents included in tenure and promotion files.) Others may see selected contents of personnel files on a need-to-know basis as determined by the Director of Human Resources. 
    2. Information in the personnel file is available as required by law to governmental agencies and to accrediting organizations in accordance with accepted professional practices. 
    3. Other groups or individuals, be they internal or external, who request information from a personnel file, will be referred to the individual faculty member. 
    4. Salary information is available only to the faculty member, to appropriate administrative officers, and to those authorized by the same. 
  2. Tenure Files and Promotion Files 
    1. Tenure files, promotion files, and any other personnel files which include professional evaluation material of a confidential nature from external or internal sources, are available only to appropriate administrative officers (i.e., the file preparer, dean, Provost, President and trustees) to the University Tenure or the University Promotions Committees (as appropriate), and to any advisory or special review committees assembled by the chair, dean, Provost, or president. 

      When a tenure or promotion review has been completed and the relevant tenure or promotion file has been secured by the President, all other copies of the professional evaluation materials of a confidential nature, specifically, the individual depositions from both external and internal sources, must be either forwarded to the President or destroyed. 
  3. University Counsel Access a. The University's legal counsel may have access to any materials in the personnel, tenure or promotion files when such access is deemed by the President to be necessary for the purpose of representing the University.

B. INITIAL APPOINTMENT PROCEDURES

  1. Search Procedures 
    1. The initiative for the recruitment of faculty is primarily the responsibility of the department chair or dean. 
    2. Searches for faculty in tenurable rank should be at least national in scope, and should be conducted in a fashion that attracts candidates who meet the standards described in 5.3. 
    3. Recruitment and hiring should conform to the University's Equal Employment Opportunity and Affirmative Action policies, as well as to such other procedures as the administration may from time to time implement. 
    4. A candidate for a faculty position should normally spend at least a full day on campus and lecture at a departmental seminar. The candidate should be interviewed by as many departmental faculty members as practicable, director of research and by members of the academic administration, and, if possible, a representative of the Human Resources Office. 
    5. Before recommending a candidate for appointment, the person directing the search should consult broadly with appropriate faculty for their assessment of the candidate. When possible, these assessments should be submitted in writing. The resulting recommendation prepared by the person conducting the search should reflect both internal as well as external assessments of the candidate.
  2. Appointment Procedures and the Initial Appointment Letter 
    1. The decision to appoint is made by the Provost. This decision should rely substantially on the recommendation received from the person conducting the search. 
    2. After a decision to appoint has been made, the chair (or other appropriate academic administrator) shall prepare and seek approval for all those documents required by the appointment implementation procedures that shall from time to time be established by the president. Necessary documents must include an initial appointment letter, and may include such other items as an Affirmative Action Report, a US government visa/citizenship status form (I-9), and a payroll authorization form. 
    3. An offer of employment is not valid until the President or Provost has approved the initial appointment letter and signed the payroll authorization form. 
    4. Those preparing and approving the initial appointment letter must ensure that its provisions conform to the requirements of these "faculty policies." Any agreement involving special responsibilities which may bear on reappointment, promotion, or tenure review must be stated in writing in the initial appointment letter. The initial appointment letter must also include a statement regarding the appointee'ss tenure status, specifically, an indication of the last academic year during which a tenure review should be completed. Likewise, this appointment letter shall inform the prospective faculty member of any restrictions on the granting of tenure not appearing in these "faculty policies". When conveyed to the appointee, the initial appointment letter should be accompanied by a copy of Section 5.0 of the Operations Manual: "Faculty Policies."

C. CONTINUING EVALUATION PROCEDURES

  1. Faculty evaluation is an on-going process. At least once a year each faculty member shall have an evaluation conference with the department chair or the person designated by the dean to perform this function. At this conference, the faculty member's professional progress for the year in terms of teaching, scholarship and service, and cumulative progress to date shall be reviewed. The evaluative standards employed will be those described in 5.3. Immediately following this review, the person who conducted it shall prepare a record of this discussion in memorandum form. This "annual evaluation memorandum" shall be initialed by the faculty member before being placed in the appropriate personnel file of the faculty member. The faculty member's initials merely indicate that the faculty member has seen the memorandum. If the faculty member refuses to initial the evaluation memorandum, the person conducting the annual evaluation conference must note that fact at the bottom of the memorandum before placing it in the faculty member's personnel file. Each faculty member may submit for inclusion in the personnel file a written response to the annual evaluation memorandum. This response shall be appended to the evaluation memorandum, and shall be treated as part of the latter. 
  2. One important datum for evaluation purposes is information about how students view the teaching of a faculty member. Every semester each student should be given the opportunity to make an anonymous evaluation of every class in which the student is enrolled. This evaluation should be collected in a systematic, quantitative and, as far as possible, uniform way, and a report of the results included in the faculty member's personnel file. 
  3. Another important evaluative measure is the assessment of teaching by a faculty member's colleagues. Classroom visits should be carried out on a regular basis for all faculty. Such visits are mandatory for untenured faculty. Arrangements for classroom visits will be coordinated by the chair, dean, or a delegated individual. Preferably tenured faculty members will be appointed as visitors in consultation with the faculty member. Visitors shall submit a written report to the chair, dean, or person responsible for conducting the annual evaluations. Before a written report of a classroom visit is included in a faculty member=s personnel file, the faculty member should initial the report as evidence of having read it. If the faculty member refuses to initial the report of a classroom visit, the person conducting the annual evaluation should note that fact at the bottom of the report before placing it in the personnel file. 
  4. Parenthetically, it should be noted that while the results of the annual conferences, classroom visits, and student evaluations of instruction are crucial, they may not be decisive in such matters as tenure review and promotion. For example, the faculty member being considered for tenure is not guaranteed tenure even with entirely favorable annual reviews during the pretenure period. Although the annual reviews play any important part in the tenure decision, they do not have a preemptive role.

D. REAPPOINTMENT PROCEDURES AND REAPPOINTMENT LETTERS

  1. Reappointment decisions and salary changes should reflect the conclusions of the annual evaluation conferences and such other evidence as is available to the person responsible for reappointment decisions. 
  2. Reappointment letters must indicate the faculty member's status with respect to tenure. In the case of non-tenured faculty, reappointment letters should indicate the last academic year during which a tenure review must be completed.

E. NON-REAPPOINTMENT PROCEDURES FOR NON-TENURED FACULTY IN TENURABLE RANK

Notice of non-reappointment must be given to non-tenured faculty in tenurable rank (i.e., untenured assistant professors, associate professors, and professors) in writing in accordance with the following schedule, except when a faculty member is dismissed for cause:

  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 the academic year, at least three 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 the academic year, at least six months in advance of its termination. 
  3. At least twelve months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years at Clarkson.

F. JOINT APPOINTMENT PROCEDURES

    1. Overview
      This document provides guidance for the appointment and review of faculty members with appointments in more than one unit. The critical aspects of managing joint appointments are commitment to mutual cooperation, open sharing of views, and fairness to the faculty member. The goal of this document is to ensure that all of the relevant issues are presented at the time of appointment or review, that effective communications are promoted between units and with the faculty member, and that there is a clear and orderly process for making decisions affecting faculty members with joint appointments. 
    2. Initial Appointment 
      1. New Faculty
        For an initial appointment, the heads of the appointing units must execute a joint letter to their dean if the units are within the same school or to the Provost if the appointment bridges between schools and/or institutes. The letter must describe the terms of the appointment, the individual’s responsibilities in each unit (e.g., instructional load, advising, committee service), the rights of the faculty in the units (e.g., voting) and which is the designated home unit (for administrative purposes). The letter must provide an option for any of the parties involved to request a reconsideration of the terms and conditions of the joint appointment. The designated home unit must be able to host tenure-track appointments and normally will be the unit with the larger percentage of the individual’s appointment, or that represents the individual’s primary discipline. In the case of appointments split equally between multiple units, the units will decide by mutual agreement, having taken the faculty member’s preferences into account, which unit will be designated as the home unit. The designated home unit will initiate the third-year review and the subsequent promotion and tenure reviews. The home unit also will initiate the processing of changes of status and other administrative actions. If the appointing units are housed in different schools or institutes, the appropriate deans and/or directors must approve the proposed appointment. The offer letter will describe the terms of the appointment, the individual’s responsibilities to each unit, and will indicate which of the units has been designated the “home unit.”
      2. Existing Faculty
        To create a joint appointment in another unit for a current faculty member, the heads of the units involved must write a joint letter to the dean is the appointments are within a school or to the Provost if between schools/institutes requesting the additional appointment. The deans/ directors must approve the proposed additional appointment. The letter must describe the terms of the appointment, the individual’s responsibilities in each unit (e.g., instructional load, advising, committee service), and certify the faculty member’s acceptance of the proposed additional appointment and division of responsibilities between the units. The letter must also describe any financial arrangements the units have agreed to concerning the proposed additional appointment. The letter must provide an option for any of the parties involved to request a reconsideration of the terms and conditions of the joint appointment.
    3. Mentoring
      The designated home unit will initiate a mentoring arrangement. This mentoring arrangement will involve the participation of and will represent the views of all appointing units. A collaborative mentoring process will be developed in consultation with the faculty member, and would employ mentors from each appointing unit. This arrangement should follow faculty mentoring procedures agreed to by the unit officers, typically adopting either those procedures of one unit or an amalgamation of procedures from multiple units. 
    4. Third-Year Review
      For all initial joint appointments, there must be a third-year review, whether or not this appointment is made with tenure. The designated home unit will initiate the third-year review. The review will involve the participation of and will represent the views of all appointing units. The appointing units would conduct a collaborative review, employing a committee comprised of members from all appointing units and jointly charged by the heads of the appointing units. The findings of the joint committee will be sent to the units for evaluation, and the units will confer about the report to be issued. A single joint report signed by the heads of the appointing units will be prepared and provided to the faculty member. If considerable discrepancies exist in the evaluations of appointing units at this stage of a faculty member’s career, the possibility of restructuring the appointment will be considered by the appropriate dean or by the Provost (see Section 5.4.F.b). 
    5. Annual Reviews and Salary Recommendations
      Each appointing unit should conduct an annual review of the performance of the faculty member using its regular evaluative procedures. The unit heads should then discuss the results of the reviews in order to ensure that pertinent information about performance in each unit is shared across the units. The unit heads should convey their assessment to the faculty member in a joint memo. The unit heads should confer on a recommended salary increment that is appropriate for the performance. If the units do not agree on the salary increment, one unit may provide a higher increment to be applied at the appropriate percentage with the understanding that the underlying percentage split in the appointment will not be changed. The unit providing the higher increment will continue to be responsible for the additional increment at such time as the faculty’s joint appointment ends unless some other agreement is made between the units. 
    6. Promotion and Tenure Recommendations
      The recommended guidelines for promotion and tenure review procedures parallel those of the third-year review. The designated home unit has the primary responsibility for initiating and overseeing the review process, but the review should involve the participation and represent the views of all appointing units. In developing their assessment, units must cooperate in securing external evaluations. The units should construct an ad hoc joint review procedure that uses a committee comprised of members from all appointing units and jointly charged by the unit heads. The appointing units then make their recommendations, jointly if they are in agreement and separately if they are not. These procedures also apply in cases of initial joint appointment with immediate tenure review.
      Every effort should be made to come to a joint position by all units taking account of each other’s assessments. If there is a recommendation for promotion, or for promotion and the awarding of indefinite tenure, the designated home unit will have the primary responsibility for preparing the dossier, in consultation with and representing the views of all appointing units. A joint recommendation to the dean(s) will be signed by all heads of the appointing units. Individual statements may be prepared by each unit officer or a joint statement can be prepared collaboratively. In either case, authorship of these statements must be clearly identified.
      If the appointing units differ with respect to their recommendation regarding promotion and/or tenure, the possibility of restructuring the appointment and then continuing the promotion and/or tenure review will be considered by the appropriate dean or by the Provost (see Section 5.4.F.b). 
    7. Leaves
      Any request for a leave, e.g., sabbatical, educational, or personal, shall be reviewed and jointly approved by all appointing units.

back to top

History

Approved by Administrative Council, September 1995

Approved by Faculty Senate, October 1995

Approved by Faculty Senate, September 2010

Approved by Administrative Council, November 2010

Approved by Administrative Council, December 2019

back to top

  • No labels