5. Faculty Evaluation

Faculty are evaluated in several basic areas, according to their job descriptions:

• research and creative activity
• teaching
• service/leadership
• community-engaged scholarship
• interdisciplinary activity

Not all faculty are necessarily engaged in all of these areas at all times.  However, with only very few exceptions, all faculty are engaged in teaching.

According to state policy, faculty are evaluated on an annual basis.  For more information, see: Annual Evaluation

Faculty members on the tenure-track undergo reviews for reappointment, tenure and promotion to associate professor, promotion to full professor and tenured faculty performance, according to contract.  For more information, see: Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure

Faculty members at the rank of lecturer or senior lecturer undergo reappointment reviews according to contract.  Lecturers may be promoted to senior lecturers after six years of college level teaching.  For more information, see: Reappointment and Promotion (Lecturers)

1. Research and Creative Activity

Research and Creative Activity are assessed, both in terms of productivity and of impact.  Departments should provide guidance to their faculty, regarding how these two aspects should be weighted.  Impact can be demonstrated in a number of ways, for example, peer-reviewed publications, juried exhibitions, patents, software, digital resources including internet-delivered projects, performances, presentations of scholarly papers, plenary addresses, community-engaged scholarship, research awards, and successful grantsmanship, as defined by the department (this is not an inclusive list). The Department should also look for evidence that the work is of high quality and supports the department, college, and university mission.

2. Teaching

Teaching is evaluated as it relates to classroom teaching, direction of theses and dissertations, academic advisement, and extension programs. The following areas can be assessed, as appropriate:

• Evidence of competence and currency in subject matter, of proper organization and design of courses taught, of ability to present the subject matter in an interesting and clear manner that is appropriate for students at the level for which that course is designed;
• evidence of effective advising;
• effective direction of student research;
• expertise in development of curriculum;
• Evidence that teaching contributions are effective in light of the Department’s teaching mission.

Teaching effectiveness can be evaluated, using the following evidence:

• course evaluations;
• peer evaluation;
• construction of syllabi, assignments, classroom activities, etc.;
• pedagogical innovation.

Departments are cautioned to use course evaluations as demonstrating only one particular aspect of a faculty member’s teaching effectiveness, and not to rely solely on these numbers to assess a faculty member’s effectiveness.

3. Service/Leadership

At the University level service and leadership  include evidence of sustained and significant contributions to program and curriculum development and governance. At the community level this is most often based on professional expertise in areas related to the University’s public-service objectives. At the professional level this is based on the leadership roles within disciplinary organizations or the profession as a whole.

4. Community-Engaged Scholarship

Introduction

The University’s mission is to “discover, create, transmit, and apply knowledge to address the needs of individuals and society. This mission is accomplished through instruction, through research, scholarship, and creative activities, and through public service.”

In 2012, UNC Charlotte’s Faculty Council adopted language in the Academic Personnel Procedures Handbook (Section VI.C: Areas of Performance to be Reviewed) to “integrate community-engaged scholarship within the institution as an optional component to the criteria used in reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions.” This is consistent with the university’s recognition as an Engaged University by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

To advance these university goals, the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences has adopted the following definition of community-engaged scholarship, and recommends the following steps for departments and chairs to use in evaluating faculty records to support the use of community-engaged scholarship as a criterion in reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions of faculty members who choose to engage in this type of scholarship.

Definition of Community-Engaged Scholarship

Community-Engaged Scholarship is scholarship that connects the faculty member with the community, whether local, national, or international, in an integrative approach to research.  This type of scholarship should include the pursuit and creation of new knowledge within the context of solving community issues and needs.  To qualify as scholarship, the activities should include specific components such as clear goals, appropriate methods, reflective critique, rigor, and peer review. The intent is not to replace other forms of scholarship but rather to expand the way scholarship is viewed within the college.  (For more information about definitions of community-engaged scholarship, see the Community Campus Partnerships for Health website  http://depts.washington.edu/ccph/scholarship.html, or Barker, D. (2004). The Scholarship of Engagement: A Taxonomy of Five Emerging Practices. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, Volume 9, Number 2, p. 123).

Documenting Community-Engaged Scholarship in Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Decisions

Description and Documentation: Faculty should include an integrated analytical description of Community-Engaged Scholarship as part the Personal Narrative. In addition, the Appendix on Scholarship and Discovery should include evidence of this scholarship such as policy documents or government recommendations; practice-based and community accessible publications that arise out of collaborations; community forums developed to inform research processes; educate or transform structures; websites developed to engage broad constituencies in research based efforts; innovative and sustainable intervention programs with evaluated outcomes and documented impact, or other relevant materials.

External Letters: In addition to the documentation submitted by the faculty member the chair and DRC should identify appropriate external reviewers who can offer critical evaluation of the engaged scholarship as part of the normal process of consultation with the Dean on identifying the pool of potential external reviewers. Letters to these external reviewers would be similar to those evaluating traditional scholarship but must emphasize in particular the specific ways in which the faculty member’s scholarly contribution to a program, project, or product proved essential to its success and resulted in identifiable results that contributed to the public good

Community-Engaged Scholarship is scholarship that connects the faculty member with the community, whether local, national, or international, in an integrative approach to research.  This type of scholarship should include the pursuit and creation of new knowledge within the context of solving community issues and needs.  To qualify as scholarship, the activities should include specific components such as clear goals, appropriate methods, reflective critique, rigor, and peer review. The intent is not to replace other forms of scholarship but rather to expand the way scholarship is viewed within the college.  (For more information about definitions of community-engaged scholarship, see the Community Campus Partnerships for Health website  http://depts.washington.edu/ccph/scholarship.html, or Barker, D. (2004). The Scholarship of Engagement: A Taxonomy of Five Emerging Practices. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, Volume 9, Number 2, p. 123).

Examples of Community-Engaged Scholarship

These examples are intended to be suggestive only and not definitive for the wide range of possible contributions one might make in this area.

1. A faculty member of history, in collaboration with a local museum, oversees the collection of over 100 oral histories of local elder millworkers.  The faculty member then performed archival research and used this in developing several exhibitions with the museum relating to the industrial history of the region.  Documentation of the project includes letters from the museum board indicating the faculty member’s specific and key role in the project, as well as information on the exhibit and its impact, including duration of display and attendance numbers.
2. A faculty member of geology, specializing in hydrogeology, collaborates with the local government and communities to take several years of measurements of water levels in local streams and lakes.   The data collected is used by the collaborators to predict the effects of major new land development on the local aquifer.   Documentation of the project includes letters from local government officials describing the faculty member’s specific and key role in the project, as well as any official government documentation and reports created presenting the results of the study.
3. A faculty member in psychology who had been working with the county to change how mental health services are provided to children and families was asked by the county administration to write a major grant proposal for federal funds to support the initiative.  The faculty member, working with a team of county staff and others from different agencies, wrote the proposal, which provided $9 million for the county to change how services are provided.  The faculty member was also involved in the implementation of the project. Documentation for this project included the request from the county, the proposal, comments from reviewers, and a statement from the county administrator indicating how this improved mental health services.
4. A sociologist has established partnerships with agencies that address the needs of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) communities. These partnerships give voice to marginalized groups and help the agencies improve their data collection methods and enhance funding opportunities. One example involves community-based participatory research that engages members of the transgender community in qualitative research by identifying research problems and analyzing interview transcripts. The faculty has co-published reports and articles with these partners, helping improve their reputations and bringing greater visibility to issues that impact the LGBT community.

5. Interdisciplinary Activity

Departments should have a set of procedures by which they can evaluate the interdisciplinary contributions of their faculty.

Faculty should document their contributions to interdisciplinarity as follows;

• List any interdisciplinary programs, departments, and centers faculty are formally or informally associated with;
• Identify/describe the teaching contributions/accomplishments (e.g., courses taught, student mentorship, etc.) faculty have made to an interdisciplinary program;
• Identify/describe the service/leadership contributions/accomplishments (e.g., committees chaired, committees served on) faculty have made to an interdisciplinary program;
• Identify/describe scholarship contributions/accomplishments that are interdisciplinary in nature (e.g., interdisciplinary research groups; interdisciplinary journal editorial boards; interdisciplinary conferences attended/presented at; publications in journals outside of primary discipline; publications in interdisciplinary journals) In the case of publications, provide information on journal quality/impact.