Full-Time Non-Tenure Track (FTNTT)
1. Renewal of Appointment
Appointments for full-time non-tenure track (NTT) teaching faculty are governed by the applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement and are made annually. Renewal of appointment is contingent upon programmatic need, satisfactory performance of previously assigned responsibilities, and budgeted resources to support the position.
2. Performance Review
Performance reviews will follow the procedures and time-table established by the University. Full-time continuing teaching faculty are employed primarily to teach 15 hours per term and thus the quality of teaching is the most important consideration in reappointing non-tenure track faculty. The faculty member being reviewed must provide the department Chair with a current vita, a summary of student evaluations from all courses that have been taught during the review period, and other representative course materials such as syllabi and examinations. A reflective memo on the faculty member's teaching, which should include a self-evaluation, should also be provided.
Full-time continuing hybrid (teaching and research) faculty are to be reviewed on the basis of both their teaching and research accomplishments. The faculty member being reviewed must provide the department Chair with a current vita, a summary of student evaluations from all courses that have been taught during the review period, and other representative course materials such as syllabi and examinations, and a summary of research publications, grants funded, and grant proposal reviews, etc. A reflective memo on the faculty member's teaching and research, which should include a self-evaluation, should also be provided. In evaluating the faculty member's teaching and/or research, the duties of the Ad Hoc Committee are as follows:
Paragraph revised (Sept 2017) to remove reference to SSI norms.
a. Evaluate the SSI results obtained for all courses taught by the faculty member being reviewed. Student comments should also be examined. The faculty member's performance should be explicitly noted, with an expectation of generally “good” or better for CORE classes and generally “very good” or better for non-CORE classes.
b. Review course syllabi, exams, and other course materials in order to make an informed judgment about the quality and appropriateness of the course content.
c. Consider peer evaluations of teaching over the period of review.
d. Examine the grading pattern in the courses that have been taught to ascertain the appropriateness of the distribution of grades.
e. Evaluate accomplishments in the areas of research and scholarship advising, and service.
The Ad Hoc Promotion and Tenure Committee will meet to discuss candidate’s performance and vote on reappointment. The discussion and vote provides the chair with a faculty perspective on reappointment. The Chair shall independently assess the whole record of the candidate and reach a separate recommendation regarding reappointment, which would usually be consistent with the vote of the Ad Hoc Promotion and Tenure Committee. The Chair will provide the faculty member being reviewed with a written summary of the review and an indication of whether or not an additional appointment may be anticipated and, if so, under what programmatic, budgetary and/or anticipated staffing or projected enrollment circumstances.
If the faculty member being reviewed is appointed in the Regional Campus System, the Chair's summary of the review and the reappointment recommendation will be forwarded to the Campus Dean, who has the final budgetary and staffing authority for reappointment.