Academic Affairs

Print this Page

02:19:02 Faculty Evaluation and Promotion

Promotion in rank is recognition of past achievement of the individual being considered for promotion. In addition, the advancement in rank is recognition of future potential and a sign of confidence that the individual is capable of even greater accomplishments and of assuming greater responsibilities. The policy of the Tennessee Board of Regents (TBR) is to make promotions strictly on consideration of merit tempered by College and fiscal considerations. The purpose of this policy is to help ensure that promotions are made objectively, equitably, impartially, and as recognition of merit consistent with the following policy guidelines.
Definitions: For the purposes of this policy, teaching, service/outreach, and scholarship/creative activities/research will be defined as follows.
1. Teaching - Teaching applies to any manner in which information is imparted so that others may learn, and may include, but is not limited to, a variety of techniques including instruction, development of course materials and courseware, and development of innovative approaches to teaching.
2. Service/Outreach - Service applies to service within the community as defined by the college’s role and mission; service to the college, as in student advising and/or mentoring; and service within the bounds of the applicant’s academic discipline and budgeted assignment.
3. Scholarship/Creative Activities/Research - Research applies to the studious inquiry, examination, or discovery that contributes to disciplinary and interdisciplinary bodies of knowledge. Scholarship/creative activities/research may include, but is not limited to, typical professional growth and development activities, disciplinary and interdisciplinary activities that focus on the boundaries of knowledge, community-based scholarship, creative activities (e.g., performances or other artistic creations), and the development of cutting-edge teaching approaches.
4. A more detailed description of these activities and the criteria to be applied in assessing performance in these three areas may be found in TBR policy 05.02.03.70 “Academic Tenure for Community Colleges.”
Policy
1. Introduction
  1. The President of the College is responsible for the master-staffing plan of the College.
  2. In developing such a plan, the president will consider the fiscal impact of each promotion recommended to the Board.
2. Promotion Guidelines
  1. It is the responsibility of the faculty member to initiate consideration for any change in rank. By the end of August, candidates notify their immediate supervisor in writing of their intent to apply for promotion. Extended leave taken by candidates may affect the time in rank required for eligibility for promotion.
  2. To be eligible for promotion, a faculty member must provide evidence that they meet the rank criteria and must demonstrate a cycle of continuous improvement in their performance through implementation of approved goal development and completion. Evidence of meeting minimum rank criteria and continuous improvement must be available for the three most recent years including the current year in which they have taught.
  3. All documentation must be submitted through the ePortfolio evaluation process.
3. Minimum Rank Criteria
  1. The following define minimum criteria that distinguish between academic ranks. Faculty must demonstrate minimum criteria to be eligible for promotion in rank. Promotion must be sequential in each rank.
    1. Instructor
      1. Potential ability in teaching, service/outreach, and scholarship/creative activities/research.
      2. As determined to be appropriate for the instructional discipline, either an Associate or Baccalaureate degree (i.e., Career Studies) or an earned Master’s degree or higher from an accredited institution in the discipline or related area.
      3. Evidence of good character, mature attitude, and professional integrity.
    2. Assistant Professor
      1. Documented evidence of ability in teaching, service/outreach, and scholarship/creative activities/research.
      2. As determined to be appropriate for the instructional discipline, either a Baccalaureate degree (i.e., Career Studies) or an earned Master’s degree or higher from an accredited institution in the instructional discipline or related area.
      3. After completion of two consecutive years in the rank of Instructor, application for promotion may occur at the beginning of the third academic year.
      4. Evidence of good character, mature attitude, and professional integrity.
    3. Associate Professor
      1. Documented evidence of high quality professional productivity in teaching, service/outreach, and scholarship/creative activities/research.
      2. As determined to be appropriate for the instructional discipline, either a Baccalaureate degree (i.e., Career Studies) or an earned Master’s degree or higher from an accredited institution in the instructional discipline or related area plus at least three years in rank.
      3. After completion of three consecutive years in the rank of Assistant Professor, application for promotion may occur at the beginning of the fourth academic year.
      4. Evidence of good character, mature attitude, and professional integrity.
    4. Professor
      1. Documented evidence of teaching excellence, quality service/outreach activities, and a superior contribution to scholarship/creative activities/research. The absence of such evidence may prevent advancement to the rank of professor. Since there is no higher rank, promotion to professor is taken with great care and requires a superior and sustained level of achievement. This rank is not a reward for long service; rather it is recognition of superior achievement within the discipline with every expectation of continuing contribution to the College and the larger academic community.
      2. Earned doctorate or TBR recognized terminal degree from an accredited institution in the instructional discipline or related area plus five years in rank.
      3. After completion of four consecutive years in the rank of Associate Professor, application for promotion may occur at the beginning of the fifth academic year.
      4. Evidence of good character, mature attitude, and professional integrity.
    5. Rejoining the Pipeline
      1. Faculty who are fully promoted and tenured in the Associate Professor rank may rejoin the promotion pipeline to apply for the rank of Professor.
      2. To be eligible to rejoin the pipeline, faculty must start or continue work toward an earned doctorate or TBR recognized terminal degree from an accredited institution in the instructional discipline or related area. When rejoining the pipeline, the faculty member must restart their peer committee and continue with the portfolio process.
      3. To be eligible to apply for promotion to Professor, the faculty member must:
        
        Complete a minimum of four consecutive years in the rank of Associate Professor.
        
        Complete a minimum of four years of pipeline portfolios with peer committee reviews.
        
        Earn a doctorate or TBR-recognized terminal degree from an accredited institution in the instructional discipline or related area.
        
        Meet all other criteria that apply for promotion to Professor.
    6. Note: Minimum criteria may be waived if approved by the College President when a candidate offers extraordinary qualifications in lieu of the stated minimum rank criteria. Such approval must be supported by evidence of the extraordinary nature of the qualifications.
      1. For example, a candidate with recognized, national prominence and expertise might qualify for such a waiver.
      2. An exception to the minimum rank criteria must be recommended by the President to the Chancellor or designee.
      3. Upon approval of such an exception by the Chancellor, the faculty member’s recommendation for promotion will go forward to the Board as meeting the minimum rank criteria.
4. Terminal Degree Designation
  1. The Board will use national discipline standards to determine which degrees are considered to be “terminal” within each discipline. Terminal degrees recognized by the Board are:
    1. Earned Doctorates
    2. Masters
      1. M.F.A. (Studio Art, Creative Writing)
      2. M.L.S. or Master’s in Library Science (Library Science)
      3. Masters in Engineering or Masters with Major in Engineering (Engineering Technology, University or Community College)
    3. Note: National practice does not recognize the J.D. as a doctorate.
  2. The College may request blanket exceptions to these standards by classification based upon its mission and hiring practice.
  3. The College may also petition the Board for “equivalent work experience credit” when a candidate has not obtained a terminal degree but has a record of extraordinary achievement in a given field.
  4. The equivalent work experience credit may include relevant teaching experience or other experiences such as experience gained as an administrator, counselor, librarian, journeyman, or the like.
5. Promotion Criteria for all Academic Ranks
  1. Faculty will be evaluated in teaching, service/outreach, and scholarship/creative activities/research. The college assigns teaching a minimum of fifty-one percent of the weight of the evaluation and the other two criteria are assigned an equal amount of the remaining forty nine percent of the weight of the evaluation. Evaluation should be based on all three criteria, although it is realized that differences in emphasis may exist. The nature of the emphasis should be mutually agreed upon by the faculty and their supervisor.
  2. The faculty evaluation process requires candidates applying for promotion to provide documented evidence that all criteria have been met.
  3. The faculty evaluation process and documents are available in the campus ePortfolio system.
  4. These guidelines should be distributed to all new faculty members and should be easily available to all faculty at all times, including via the Web. Whenever the guidelines are revised, the faculty should be notified of the availability of the revised guidelines. Should guidelines be revised they will be implemented at the beginning of the academic year. Guidelines should use the following general criteria as minimum requirements.
  5. Peer Committee members and supervisors must use the following general criteria as minimum requirements.
    1. Teaching - Evaluation of teaching shall be conducted by the department chair /division head, dean, peers, and students. The evaluation shall be based on the following criteria (evidence of each should be submitted):
      1. Curriculum and/or program development.
      2. Development and application of current instructional techniques (including development of online and computer-assisted course development), etc.
      3. Honors and recognition for contributions to teaching.
      4. Documentation of teaching methodologies.
      5. Documentation of staying current in his/her field of discipline/specialization.
      6. Student evaluations of the teaching performance.
      7. Classroom observations by peer committee members.
    2. Service Outreach
      1. Evaluation of the service component should be based on performance in three areas:
        
        Service to the College;
        
        Public service to the community as defined by the College’s role and mission; and
        
        Service within the bounds of the applicant’s academic discipline and budgeted assignment.
      2. Evaluation should be based on all three areas although it is realized that differences in emphases may exist. The nature of the emphasis should be mutually agreed upon by the faculty and their supervisor.
      3. Due to the many differing forms of potential service outreach that can be offered by faculty, the process for determining specific criteria based on the individual’s aspect of work will be founded on the following criteria.
        
        College committee and administrative responsibilities;
        
        Community service programs;
        
        Public service consultation; and
        
        Active contributions to professional associations.
      4. Specific evaluative criteria may be developed using the following guidelines:
        
        Performance in relation to assigned and budgeted duties (as described in the candidate’s position description which includes a statement of the mission or purpose of the position and of the objective(s) of the nominee’s service unit, as well as the specific assigned tasks and responsibilities of the nominee).
        
        The candidate’s effectiveness, as judged by his/her impact on the institution, individuals, groups, or organizations served. This should include documentation of the success of his/her internal and external service, in terms of improvement of communities, programs, operating agencies, production processes, or management practices. It should also include indications of satisfaction with the service provided by the nominee, and of the magnitude and complexity of his/her work (as opposed to perfunctory activity that does not lead to useful results).
      5. Service/outreach work is sometimes not publishable. The results may be in the form of direct consultations, planning reports, or instructional time directed largely to the recipients of college service programs.
      6. Certain aspects of service work are suitable for publication in professional journals. For example, unique techniques developed to motivate students or others or new approaches to the transfer and application of knowledge, would be of interest to peers in other public service programs.
      7. Performance in the advisement and mentoring of students.
    3. Scholarship/Creative Activities/Research - The following are examples of, but not limited to, appropriate activities for this criterion:
      1. Scholarly pursuits in support of the discipline or the teaching profession, which should include typical professional development activities such as taking classes, active participation in professional organizations, workshops, seminars, conferences relating to discipline or improvement of teaching, additional certification, awards, or achievement.
      2. Implementation and use of innovative teaching approaches, such as instructional technologies and learning theories, implementing a new piece of equipment and training colleagues, creating a new lab (write and/or pilot), writing an in house published lab manual or journal, and sharing information from conference.
      3. Performances, compositions, and other artistic creations that are evaluated by written reviews and by qualified peers, either in person or aided by other forms of reports, or both.
      4. Professional or scholarly papers presented at international, national, or regional/state meetings.
      5. Publication of research or scholarly works such as books, journal articles, and other scholarly papers.
      6. Faculty Fellows selection and participation.
6. General Process Guidelines at the College Level
  1. The nature and relative importance of the criteria for promotion are related to the nature, mission, and goals of Chattanooga State Community College and of the division/department in which the faculty member is employed. Additional criteria to be considered include demonstrated potential for continuous professional growth and the ability to achieve the objectives of the faculty member, the division/department, and Chattanooga State Community College.
  2. In order to assure objectivity, each recommendation will be accompanied by complete and careful documentation of the candidate’s teaching, service/outreach, and scholarship/creative activities/research as delineated in the annual evaluation document.
  3. Although these areas are all considered important, certain exceptions may exist when evaluation occurs in one or the other areas exclusively. The appropriate supervisory personnel will clearly and adequately document facts which justify promotion. The initiating supervisor may include information relative to the candidate’s other contributions.
    1. At the beginning of the academic year the promotion and tenure calendar is published by the office of the Vice-President for Academic Affairs and uploaded to ePortfolio.
    2. Candidates notify their immediate supervisor in writing of their intent to apply for promotion by the date established in the Faculty Evaluation Calendar.
    3. The immediate supervisor will notify the dean in writing of eligible candidates by the date established in the Faculty Evaluation Calendar.
    4. By the date established in the Faculty Evaluation Calendar, peer mentoring committees will be established for all new faculty and for those who have not attained tenure and/or their maximum rank. Peer mentoring committees’ structure, functions and responsibilities are outlined in the Policy on Academic Tenure (Chattanooga State Policy 02:19:01).
    5. The Academic Deans notify the Vice President for Academic Affairs in writing of eligible faculty intending to apply for promotion by the date established in the Faculty Evaluation Calendar.
    6. The office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs confirms the eligibility of the candidates in consultation with Human Resources.
    7. By the date established in the Faculty Evaluation Calendar, the chair of the Tenure and Promotion Committee will initiate a meeting with the Vice President for Academic Affairs to review college policies, guidelines and procedures and to discuss committee responsibilities, and recommendation timelines.
    8. Under the mentorship of the peer committee, candidates compile portfolios that address promotion criteria according to guidelines provided by the Vice President for Academic Affairs, supervisors, and the peer committee. Candidates submit portfolios to their peer committee which review and verify that guidelines for content and format have been met and can be documented as specified in the faculty portfolio document. The peer committee provides summative comments after review. The peer committee can make recommendations for or against promotion.
    9. The supervisor completes the Supervisor Evaluation Form with recommendations for or against promotion during the annual evaluation and then meets with the faculty member to review the portfolio and discuss goals for the upcoming year.
    10. The Dean of the Division then reviews the candidate’s portfolio and submits a recommendation for or against promotion. The Dean notifies the candidate of her/his recommendation. After reading the comments of the Dean, the candidate then has the opportunity to respond to their evaluation.
    11. The Tenure and Promotion Committee then reviews the candidate’s portfolio and a recommendation is made. The Vice President for Academic Affairs then reviews the candidate’s portfolio and submits a recommendation.
    12. The Vice President for Academic Affairs submits written comments and recommendations to the President and candidate.
    13. The President recommends candidates for promotion to the Chancellor and informs the candidates of the recommendation.
    14. If a negative recommendation is received from the Dean and/or supervisor, the candidate has the right to an appeal to the Faculty Appeals Committee. Appeals may be based only on improper evaluation or unfair and biased evaluation of an application.
      1. Failure of Supervisors and/or Peer Committees to follow the recommended procedures.
      2. Belief that the Dean, Department Head, Supervisor, or members of the peer committee are significantly biased against the faculty member. Such claims must be substantiated with documented evidence that the bias exists.
      3. Belief that the denial of tenure is unjustified based on ePortfolio documentation.
    15. All denial of promotion appeals are made through the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The VPAA in collaboration with the President of the Faculty Senate, will request that the Faculty Appeals Committee and an Academic Affairs Administrator, chosen by the VPAA, review the request. No member of the Faculty Appeals committee can serve if they have submitted a tenure or promotion application in the same year as the faculty member who is appealing their decision. That committee member is deemed ineligible to hear the faculty’s denial of tenure. In such circumstances, the Faculty Senate President shall appoint an eligible faculty member from the same academic division to the Faculty Appeals Committee for hearing this specific faculty’s appeal.
    16. The Faculty Appeals Committee will submit a report of its findings to the VPAA within five working days after the committee reviews the appeal. After receiving the report from the committee, the VPAA will determine whether to rescind or uphold the original recommendation and notify the faculty member of the final decision. The VPAA’s decision is final.
    17. The President reviews the recommendations from the VPAA by the due date established in the Faculty Evaluation Calendar, or upon the completion of the Faculty Appeals process.
7. General Process Guidelines at Board Level
  1. A list of promotional recommendations should be forwarded by the President of the College to the Chancellor for his/her review. The Chancellor’s recommendation will be forwarded to the Committee on Personnel and their recommendation forwarded to the Board.

Source: TBR Policy 5:02:02:30

Submitted to Policy Review Committee on February 20, 2023

Submitted to Policy Review Board on March 27, 2023

Approved by Policy Review Board on April 12, 2023

Submitted to Policy Review Committee on September 19, 2022

Submitted to Policy Review Board on October 21, 2022

Approved by Policy Review Board on November 16, 2022

Previous Version(s):

Submitted to Policy Review Committee on June 14, 2019

Submitted to Policy Review Board on July 22, 2019

Approved by Policy Review Board on July 31, 2019

Source: Original Approved by Executive Staff, President’s Cabinet, and President, May, 2009

Revised by Academic Affairs and approved by Policy Review Board, July, 2018

Print this Page

Search form

Academic Affairs

02:19:02 Faculty Evaluation and Promotion