History of Guilford's discussions about faculty reviews New proposed review processes

1. GUILFORD STANDARDS
FOR
PROMOTION AND TENURE
A BRIEF HISTORY AND UPCOMING PROPOSALS

2. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
Spring 2006
• Controversial tenure decision prompts
call for review

3. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
Spring 2007-Fall 2008
• Faculty Evaluation Process (FEP)
committee established to review
tenure and promotion

4. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
November 2008
• FEP recommendations submitted
• Change in review schedule to 3rd and 6th year
reviews
• Change in descriptions of four areas for review
• Use Boyer model for scholarly growth
• Link promotion to associate professor and tenure

5. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
Spring 2009-Spring 2012
• FAC phase:
• FAC reviews FEP proposals. FAC does not agree
with all of them.
• Clerk’s and FAC sponsor faculty forums.
• FAC crafts new proposals, some of which are
based on FEP’s work, and some of which are not.

6. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
January 2011
• Faculty approve criteria for teaching
excellence
• Teaching Excellence (Section 2.341)

7. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
February 2011
• Academic Affairs committee of the
Board approves revised Teaching
Excellence standards.

8. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
November 2012
• Faculty approve several sets of new review criteria:
• Advising (Section 2.343)
• Service (Section 2.344)
• Growth as a Scholar or Creative Artist (2.342)

9. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
March 2013
• Faculty approve language covering promotion
to associate and full professor ranks
• Discussion is difficult, but leads to approval with
edits

10. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
June 2013
• Trustee Academic Affairs committee
reviews new approved standards for
Advising, Service, and Growth as a
Scholar and also standards for
promotion.
None are approved.

11. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
February 2014
• Faculty look again at review criteria for
Growth as a Scholar or Creative Artist and
approve a revised document.

12. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
February 2014
• Trustee Academic Affairs committee
reviews revised proposals in executive
session. Their published minutes do not
include details of this discussion. They
communicate to the Clerk that no
proposals will be brought to the full
trustees for approval.

13. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
April 2014
• Faculty approve changes to several
handbook sections dealing with review
procedures, mostly to streamline and
organize, but with a few changes to
process recommended by FEP.
These do not require Board approval
and are implemented immediately.

14. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
August 2014
• Clerk (Dave) contacts chair of Academic Affairs
and asks about progress. The response indicates
that the Trustees on AA have had difficulty
agreeing on standards, and they have elected to
table the discussions until after college
leadership transitions are complete.

15. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
2014-15
• No further progress is made on these
issues. Academic Affairs does not discuss
them (and in some trustee meeting
sessions does not meet).

16. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
2015-16
• FAC and Beth Rushing take up revisions
to the review process. They go back to
FEP work and to the approved
documents, attempting a broader
revision rather than merely
implementing already approved
documents.

17. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
February 2016
• Dave and Beth meet with Academic
Affairs (under new leadership) and discuss
the possibility of new proposals.
Prospects for approval of new policies
appear more promising.

18. 2005-
06
2006-
07
2007-
08
2008-
09
2009-
10
2010-
11
2011-
12
2012-
TIMELINE
March-April 2016
• Revised handbook language drafted,
shared with faculty.

19. ELEMENTS OF NEW PROPOSALS
• Review schedule shifts from 2nd/4th/6th year to 3rd/6th, with
less formal developmental reviews conducted by Faculty
Development in other years (2nd, 4th, 5th). Similar to FEP
recommendations.
• First post-tenure review (in 10th year) focuses on readiness
for promotion to full and is conducted by FAC.
• Reviews for tenure and promotion to associate are linked
by default, although reviewers can recommend tenure
without promotion. Similar to FEP Recommendations.
• Faculty choose when to stand for promotion rather than
having to be nominated by others. Previously approved.

20. ELEMENTS OF NEW PROPOSALS
• Review Criteria:
• Teaching section unchanged (was largely the FEP
recommendation)
• “Growth as a scholar or creative artist” changed to “Scholarship
and Creative Activity” and incorporates FEP model (discovery,
application, integration, teaching)
• Advising section changed to FEP description
• Service section changed to FEP description
• Criteria for promotion to associate and full changed to FEP
recommendations