College of Education, Texas Tech University

INTRODUCTION

The College of Education's mission corresponds with the expectations of Texas Tech University as a research university; that is, to foster and support the creation, translation, and dissemination of knowledge through teaching, research and creative activities, and professional service. More specifically, the College of Education seeks to direct its efforts toward achieving national prominence as a research institution, and will build upon its current strong recognition in the state and region to achieve national and international distinction. All faculty members of the College of Education are expected to participate and be productive in support of the mission through teaching, research and creative activity, professional, and administration (as applicable) service. A faculty member should be fully cognizant of this threefold mission and most importantly of the fact that levels of performance in each of the three areas will be comprehensively evaluated on a periodic basis in accordance with OP32.31 (Comprehensive Performance Evaluations of Tenured Faculty Members and Faculty Members Who Receive an Academic Promotion).

Because of the diversity of appointment status and time commitment in the College, it is virtually impossible to establish quantitative specifications that are applicable to each and every individual; rather the expectation is that each individual will clearly demonstrate competency in each of the evaluated areas in line with his or her specific appointment.

CRITERIA

Criteria for comprehensive performance evaluations of tenured faculty members are as follow:

Demonstrated quality performance as an undergraduate and/or graduate instructor. Assessment will be based on the type, level and nature of courses taught, instructor-course evaluations, student academic advising, chairing or serving on graduate student committees, advising of student organizations, leadership and other contributions to teaching activities of the Program, College, and University.

Peer review and assistance may also be used as a part of evaluation of teaching effectiveness. This review may be initiated at the request of a faculty member seeking assistance, or by an administrator in response to a pattern of concerns about the teaching effectiveness of a faculty member. The Clinical Supervision Model (Goldhammer) is recommended for use in the process as it has been successfully utilized for many years in the college as a process for collegial collaboration in the improvement of instruction. Further, faculty members are encouraged to use a combination of review processes (peer, self, administrator, and student) throughout their professional career as a means to improve teaching/learning.

Research and Creative Activity

Demonstrated independent, collaborative, and interdisciplinary research and creative activities, which are documented by refereed publications, juried presentations, the development of published video, multi-media and computer software programs, or by way of other professionally prestigious outlets. Evidence of the individual's reputation and recognition for scholarly competence should be documented. Support and documentation may include evidence of invitations to contribute to national and/or international symposia, applying for and obtaining grants or external funding, participation in national professional societies, and continued professional development.

Professional Service

Documentation of service responsibilities to (1) the academic community, and (2) the professional community. Within the COE, expectations for service to the academic community - which includes committee assignments and participation in program-level, Department, College, and University activities - are differentiated by rank. Associate Professors are expected to demonstrate somewhat greater involvement in service than untenured faculty, whereas, Professors are expected to demonstrate significant participation in the governance and activities of the College and the University.

Expectations for service to the professional community are not differentiated by rank. Nevertheless, the COE faculty are expected to demonstrate continuing involvement in professional service. Leadership in the professional community may be evidenced through committee assignments, involvement with local schools, consulting activities, elected offices, national and international activities, and other appropriate service to the individual's professional societies.

Administration (as appropriate)

Documentation of effective administrative functioning. Evidence of effective leadership may be demonstrated by evaluation procedures already in place that are specifically related to the relevant program, department, college, or university academic unit (e.g., OP30.15, Academic Administrator Evaluation).

PROCEDURES

The Promotion, Tenure and Posttenure Review Committee for the College of Education will constitute the peer review body for purposes of conducting the comprehensive performance evaluations required under O.P. 32.31.

Comprehensive performance evaluations, for all tenured faculty members, will be conducted no less often than once every six years of service since the award of tenure or promotion, whichever event occurred most recently. Notice of the approaching comprehensive performance evaluation must be given to the faculty member involved by no later than September 1. The evaluation will begin no earlier than February 1, and end no later than May 1 of a given academic year. The Dean's Office maintains a list of all tenure/tenure-track faculty and the dates of their review.

The primary documentation for the post tenure comprehensive review process will consist of the faculty member's current complete vita and his/her six most recent annual performance reviews conducted pursuant to OP32.32 (Performance Evaluations of Faculty) for the period since the previous comprehensive performance evaluation or successful promotion/tenure decision. In the College of Education, the annual performance review regularly includes evaluations of teaching, documentation of research productivity and creative activities, and enumeration of service activities. Other items, such as letters of recommendation from peers or former students, should not be routinely submitted unless specifically requested by the review committee.

In cases where a member of the review committee is involved in the posttenure evaluation process, either as the individual being evaluated or as an administrator involved with the individual being evaluated, that member will be excluded from discussion and voting participation in committee deliberations regarding his/her own review.

If a faculty member receives an unsatisfactory posttenure review, he/she will be subject to being reviewed again the following year. A faculty member who receives unsatisfactory reviews in two consecutive years will be subject to the procedural guidelines for developing a professional development plan as outlined in Section 5 of O.P. 32.32 (Performance Evaluations of Faculty). The Dean's Office maintains a list of all tenured/tenure-track faculty and the dates of their review.

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION