Lecturer Faculty Periodic Evaluations

Resources

RTP Deadline Calendar (PDF)
Instructions for Lecturer Faculty Under Review
Periodic Evaluation of Lecturer Faculty Report Template
Periodic Evaluation of Lecturer Faculty Signature Page Template

Review Schedule Information

First Five Years of Appointment

Each lecturer faculty member neither eligible for nor currently holding a three-year appointment will undergo an annual review for the initial two personnel cycles of their appointment, followed by biennial rather than annual reviews. This requirement may be waived for lecturer faculty who are in their first semester of employment as described in CBA Article 15.25. At the discretion of the personnel committee, department chair, or upon the candidate's petition, a review may be scheduled in a year succeeding an annual or biennial review. The evaluation shall consider the faculty member’s work performance since the individual’s initial date of appointment or since the last evaluation, whichever is more recent.

(See CBA 15.25 and FPPP 9.1.4.a)

Year Six of Appointment

All lecturer faculty members eligible for an initial three-year appointment pursuant to CBA Article 12.12 shall be evaluated in the academic year preceding the issuance of the initial three-year appointment. The evaluation shall consider the faculty member’s cumulative work performance during the entire six or more years of consecutive service on the same campus that make up the qualifying period for the initial three-year appointment. The evaluation shall rate the lecturer faculty member as either satisfactory or unsatisfactory. Satisfactory ratings may include narrative comments including constructive suggestions for development.

When the appropriate administrator determines, based on the personnel action file, that an eligible lecturer faculty member has performed in a satisfactory manner, and absent documented serious conduct problems, an initial three-year appointment shall be offered when work exists in the department to support the appointment. The determination of the appropriate administrator shall be based on the contents of the Personnel Action File and any materials generated for use in any given evaluation cycle pursuant to CBA 15.8. Where the appropriate administrator determines that a lecturer faculty member has not performed their duties in a satisfactory manner, then the reasons for their determination shall be reduced to writing and placed in the Personnel Action File.

(See CBA 15.28 and FPPP 9.1.4.b & 9.1.4.c)

Three-Year Appointments

Lecturer faculty members holding three-year appointments pursuant to CBA Article 12 shall be evaluated at least once during the term of their appointment and may be evaluated more frequently upon the request of either the employee or the President. Lecturer faculty members holding a three-year appointment pursuant to CBA 12.13 shall be evaluated in the third year of the appointment. The evaluation shall rate the lecturer faculty member as either satisfactory or unsatisfactory. Satisfactory ratings may include narrative comments including constructive suggestions for development. This periodic evaluation shall consider the employee’s cumulative work performance during the entire three-year appointment.

When the appropriate administrator determines, based on the personnel action file, that a lecturer faculty member already holding a three-year appointment has performed in a satisfactory manner, and absent documented serious conduct problems, a subsequent three-year appointment shall be offered as long as there is sufficient work in the department. The determination of the appropriate administrator shall be based on the contents of the Personnel Action File and any materials generated for use in any given evaluation cycle pursuant to CBA 15.8. Where the appropriate administrator determines that a lecturer faculty member has not performed their duties in a satisfactory manner, then the reasons for their determination shall be reduced to writing and placed in the Personnel Action File.

If a lecturer faculty member is subject to a periodic evaluation pursuant to CBA provisions 15.28 or 15.29, and the lecturer faculty member is on an authorized paid or unpaid leave during the period in which the evaluation is scheduled, the employee may request a postponement of the evaluation. If the request is granted, the lecturer faculty member’s appointment shall automatically be extended through the academic term in which the rescheduled evaluation takes place. If the outcome of the evaluation is a determination by the appropriate administrator of satisfactory performance, the new three-year appointment shall be effective at the beginning of the academic year following the original expiration date of the prior appointment.

(See CBA 15.26, 15.29, 15.30 and FPPP 9.1.4.d & 9.1.4.e)

Review Evidence and Standards

Evaluation criteria and procedures shall be made available to the lecturer faculty member no later than 14 days after the first day of instruction of the academic term. Evaluation criteria and procedures shall be made available to the evaluation committee and the academic administrators prior to the commencement of the evaluation process. Once the evaluation process has begun, there shall be no changes in criteria and procedures used to evaluate the lecturer faculty member during the evaluation process. Faculty members teaching online are subject to all the rights and conditions set out in CBA Article 15 and applicable campus evaluation policies. The collection and use of online course quantitative data for evaluation purposes shall only occur when required in campus evaluation policies and procedures. The chair of the Department/Unit Personnel Committee shall notify the lecturer faculty at the beginning of each personnel cycle that it is the responsibility of the faculty member to update their personnel file and supporting materials on an annual basis regardless of whether the faculty member is scheduled for review during that cycle.

Periodic evaluations for lecturer faculty members shall include student feedback on teaching and learning for those with teaching duties, peer review by a committee of the department or equivalent unit, and evaluations by appropriate administrators and/or department chair. Teaching effectiveness is the first, minimum, and indispensable requirement for appointment, reappointment, and range elevation of lecturer faculty members who teach. Lecturer faculty members will be evaluated according to the professional standards of the disciplines in which they are appointed and as defined by the Department/Unit as appropriate to their work assignments.

The following shall provide the basis for evaluating lecturer faculty members, as documented by evidence in the personnel action file.

• Evaluations of teaching performance for those who teach. Student Feedback on Teaching and Learning (SFOT) shall be used but shall not weigh excessively in the overall evaluation of teaching performance and shall not be used to determine a candidate’s knowledge of their discipline. Consequently, it is in the candidate’s best interests to carefully provide supplemental evidence in a manner that allows evaluators to accurately assess teaching performance. The candidate must diligently provide meaningful evidence of teaching performance consistent with the candidate’s Range classification and teaching responsibilities.
• Evaluation of performance related to any other work assignment(s), besides teaching, as applicable. As there is no common basis for evaluating non-teaching work assignments, non-teaching assignments will be specified in the appointment letter along with clear expectations for satisfactory performance of these assignments. The candidate must provide supporting evidence of achievement related to non-teaching work, which may include advising; research; scholarship; creative activity; service to the University, profession, and to the community; or other professional responsibilities (See CBA Article 12).
• Evaluation of any activities by the faculty member that support currency appropriate to the individual’s appointment. Activities supporting currency in the discipline are defined by the Department/Unit. A variety of means may be used to support currency, including, but not limited to, continued education, research (broadly defined, including applied research in education), scholarship, and other creative and professional activities. Expectations for activities supporting currency must be consistent with the candidate’s Range classification and responsibilities.
• Evaluation of any other activities or achievements related to the individual’s work assignment(s) that contribute to the Strategic Plans and Goals of the Department/Unit, College and University as well as the Community. Such activities or achievements may include, but are not limited to, innovations in diversity, sustainability, service learning, civic engagement, and service to the North State.

(See CBA 15.23, 15.24, 15.3 and FPPP 9.1.2.a - 9.1.2.d)

Review Procedures

Evaluations shall be conducted in either the fall or spring semester and reports shall be concluded with copies delivered to the faculty member and to the personnel action file on or before the Friday immediately preceding final exams. The Department/Unit Personnel Committee shall submit a written report to the candidate and to the Department Chair. The Department Chair shall concur, with or without comments, or not concur, with comments. The Department Chair shall transmit the report and their comments, if any, to the candidate and to the appropriate Dean for review and entry into the personnel action file.

The report:

• Shall contain an evaluation of the effectiveness of the faculty member in their work assignment(s) and a statement as to whether the performance is satisfactory. If the faculty member has not performed satisfactorily, then the reasons for this conclusion shall be included in the report.
• May include constructive suggestions for the faculty member’s development related to their work assignment(s).
• Should acknowledge other activities by the faculty member, not part of their work assignment(s), which result in positive contributions to the Strategic Plans and Goals of the Department/Unit, College, and University as well as to the Community. While service is not required, evidence of these contributions may include service on Department, College, and/or University committees.
• Shall not contain any recommendation regarding future employment.

At all levels of review, before recommendations are forwarded to a subsequent review level, faculty unit employees shall be given a copy of the recommendation and the written reasons therefore. The faculty unit employee may submit a rebuttal statement or response in writing and/or request a meeting be held to discuss the recommendation within ten (10) days following receipt of the recommendation. A copy of the response or rebuttal statement shall accompany the Working Personnel Action File and also be sent to all previous levels of review.

(See CBA 15.27 & 15.5, FPPP 9.1.1.b, 9.1.3.a - 9.1.3.e)

Counselor Lecturer Faculty Evaluations

Evaluation of temporary Counselor Faculty Unit Employees shall include an opportunity for peer input and evaluation by appropriate administrators. Full-time temporary counselor faculty evaluation will follow procedures similar to the periodic evaluation for tenure-track counselor faculty except that the criterion for evaluation shall be that of professional performance. The criterion for evaluating part-time temporary counselor faculty is professional performance. This includes effective provision of psychological and educational services as described briefly below. These are described with more detail within the Department’s policy and procedure document. Classroom teaching is generally not the primary focus of the counselor faculty member’s professional duties. Where classroom teaching is a part of those assigned duties, SFOT procedures and the FPPP policies pertaining to SFOT’s are to be utilized in appropriate proportion to the counselor faculty’s assigned instructional time. 

Evaluation Criteria for Clinical Faculty includes:

• Knowledge and skills necessary for the provision of appropriate and effective psychological treatment of diverse student populations and for provision of other psychological services to the University. This is to include individual, couple, and group counseling, crisis intervention, psychological consultation, and educational outreach.
• Ethical and legal comportment in the execution of duties and services provided to the University and in general behavior which may reflect upon the University and/or the counselor faculty’s status within the University.
• Managing case load, including charting, correspondence, and documentation, in a timely manner in accordance with the standards of the profession.
• Working cooperatively and effectively as a member of a multidisciplinary team in provision of services to the University community.
• Supervision and training of graduate interns may be also required of more senior licensed clinical faculty.

In evaluating professional performance, such evidence will be used as outlined in FPPP section 8 and as modified in FPPP 16.11.2. Per FPPP 16.10.5.a, the candidate will submit a case presentation including videotape from a recent client.

Note: For the counselor faculty evaluations, the role of Department Chair is replaced by the Director, and the role of the Dean is replaced by the Vice President for Student Affairs.

(See CBA 15.23 & 15.24 and FPPP 16.10.1 - 16.10.5)