Section X. Evidence for Appointment, Promotion, and/or Tenure

A. General Considerations (Modified from the Handbook: Vol. II, Chapter 24, Section 24-32):
Scholarship, the essence of effective teaching and research, is the obligation of all members of the faculty. The scholarship of faculty members may be judged by the character of their advanced degrees and by their contribution to knowledge in the form of publication and instruction; it is reflected not only in their reputation among other scholars and professionals but in the performance of their students, both elementary and advanced. The Handbook requires evidence of "substantial success in both teaching and research" for appointment at, or promotion to, the rank of Associate Professor and "national recognition" for the rank of Professor.

The creative function of a university requires faculty devoted to inquiry and research, whose attainment may be in the realm of scholarly investigation, in constructive contributions in professional fields. Some elements in evaluating the scholarly ability and attainments of faculty members include the quality of their published and other creative work; the range and variety of their intellectual interests; the receipt of grants, awards, and fellowships; their success in directing productive work by advanced students and in training graduate and professional students in scholarly methods; their participation and leadership in professional associations and in the editing
of professional journals; the judgment of professional colleagues; and membership on boards and committees.

The educational function of a university requires faculty who can teach effectively. Instruction must be judged according to its essential purposes and conditions which they impose. Some elements in assessing effective teaching include the ability to organize and conduct a course appropriate to the level of instruction and the nature of the subject matter, the consistency with which the teaching brings to the classroom the latest research findings and professional debates within the discipline; the ability to stimulate intellectual inquiry so that students develop the skills to examine and evaluate ideas and arguments; the extent to which the teacher encourages discussion and debate within the course to enable students to articulate the ideas they are exploring; the availability of the teacher to the student beyond classroom environment; and the regularity with which the teacher examines or re-examines the organization and readings for a course and explores new approaches to effective educational methods. The assessment of teaching effectiveness should include qualified student opinion, the informed judgment of colleagues, and, where possible, measures of student performance. Each faculty member shall have at least one (1) course evaluated by students in any academic year and collegial evaluation shall be conducted "every year" for Instructors and Assistant Professors, and "at least every 3 years" for Associate Professors and Professors (Handbook, Section 24-57). With respect to merit pay, annual student and peer evaluations are essential.

Contributions to a profession through published discussion of methods or through publicdemonstration of an achieved skill should be recognized as furthering the University's educational function. The scope of the University's activities makes it necessary for some members of the faculty to engage in many activities outside the fields of teaching and research. Competence in professional service to the University and the public should be considered in judging such a faculty member's qualifications. This may include participation in university committee work and other administrative tasks, clinical duties, special training programs, continuing education and community service. The internal services as well as extramural professional services to school, to industry, and to local, state, national and international organizations.

Competence in professional service to the University and the public should be considered in judging a faculty member's qualifications, but except in unusual circumstances skill in instruction and research should be deemed of greater importance.

***School of Dentistry procedures require that a summary of the chairperson/faculty member conference shall be transmitted to the faculty member being consulted.

University Handbook, Vol. II, Chapter 24, Section 24-57 and Footnote follow on next three pages.

Section 24-57. Procedural Safeguards for Promotion, Merit-Based Salary, and Tenure Considerations

All procedures regarding promotion, merit-based salary, and tenure considerations outlined in the relevant sections of the Faculty Code must be followed. Open communication among faculty, and between faculty and
administration, must be maintained in order to insure informed decision making, to protect the rights of the individual and to aid the faculty in the development of their professional and scholarly careers.

Each faculty member must be allowed to pursue those areas of inquiry which are of personal scholarly interest; at the same time, however, each faculty member must be informed of the expectations a department holds for him or her and of the manner in which his or her activities contribute to the current and future goals of the department, school, college, and University. In order to enable the faculty member to establish priorities in the overall effort of professional career development and to fulfill the University's obligations of fair appraisal and continual monitoring of faculty development, the following procedural safeguards shall be adopted in each department, school, or college.

A. Assessment of Teaching Effectiveness

To implement the provision stipulated in Section 24-32.C, the standardized student assessment of teaching procedure which the University makes available may be used for obtaining student evaluation of teaching effectiveness, unless the college, school, or department has adopted an alternate procedure for student evaluation, in which case the latter may be used. Each faculty member shall have at least one course evaluated by students in any academic year during which that member teaches one or more courses. The teaching effectiveness of each faculty member also shall be evaluated by colleagues using procedures adopted within the appropriate department, school, or college.

The collegial evaluation of teaching effectiveness shall be conducted prior to recommending any renewal of appointment of a faculty member. For faculty at the rank of instructor or assistant professor the collegial evaluation shall be conducted every year. For faculty at the rank of associate professor or professor the collegial evaluation shall be conducted at least every three years. A written report of this evaluation shall be maintained and shared with the faculty member.

B. Yearly Activity Report

Each department (or undepartmentalized college) shall adopt a suggested format by which each faculty member will have the opportunity to provide information on professional activities carried out during the prior year. These
reports shall be prepared in writing by each faculty member and submitted to the chair (or dean) in a timely fashion each year, and shall be used as reference and as a source of information for consideration of promotion, merit salary, or tenure. These forms shall be used as evidence for recommendations of promotion, merit salary, or tenure. Such information may be updated by a faculty member at any time during the academic year.

C. Regular Conference with Faculty

Each year the chair, or where appropriate the dean, shall confer individually with all lecturers and assistant professors. The chair (or dean) shall confer individually with the Associate Professors at least every two years, and with the Professors at least every three years.

At each such conference, the strengths and weaknesses of the faculty member's record shall be discussed; the emphases the department or the school or college places on the various elements of academic function
described in Section 24-32 shall be explained; specific duties and responsibilities for the faculty member during the coming year(s) shall be discussed; and suggestions shall be made, if necessary, as a means to improve or aid the faculty member. In most cases, the faculty member will contribute to teaching, research, and service but the emphases on individual components may vary to maximize the individual's contribution but not to minimize the effects of poor performance.

D. Documentation

The department chair, or where appropriate the dean, shall document in writing, with a copy to the faculty member, that such conferences occurred, and shall list the subject matter discussed.

This document shall also articulate in sufficient detail the discussed commitments and responsibilities of the faculty member for the coming year(s).

Should the faculty member not agree with the summary or statements in this document, he or she shall indicate so in writing. The failure of a faculty member to object in writing to the chair's (or dean's) document within ten
days of receiving it (unless upon the faculty member's request and for good cause the period is extended by the chair or dean) shall constitute his or her official acceptance of its terms and conditions.

If the faculty member disagrees with the document, the chair (or dean) shall either withdraw it and issue a revised one to which both parties can agree, or reaffirm the accuracy of the original conference document.

A faculty member's record upon the stated duties and responsibilities in the document will be assessed in accordance with Section 24-55.

S-A 64, May 29, 1981; S-A 79, May 31, 1989; S-A 99, July 9, 1999: all with Presidential approval

Footnote: Documentation for Recommendations for Promotions, Tenure, and Merit Increases

In submitting to the President's Office a recommendation for promotion in rank or the granting of tenure or merit salary increase, the dean of the school or college is requested to present a detailed documentation of the recommendation. The primary data would originate from the department. Faculty and chairpersons are directed to give careful attention to all phases of the candidate's service to the school or college and the University. Characteristic types of contributions to the University are described in the following terms:

Teaching. An essential qualification for the granting of tenure or for promotion is the ability to teach effectively. Some elements in assessing effective teaching are: the ability to organize and
conduct a course appropriate to the level of instruction and the nature of the subject matter; the consistency with which the teacher brings to the classroom the latest research findings and
professional debates within the discipline; the ability to stimulate intellectual inquiry so that students develop the skills to examine and evaluate ideas and arguments; the extent to which the
teacher encourages discussion and debate within the course to enable students to articulate the ideas they are exploring; the availability of the teacher to the students beyond the classroom
environment; the regularity with which the teacher examines or re-examines the organization and readings for a course and explores new approaches to effective educational methods. A major activity related to teaching is the instructor's ability to participate in academic advising and counseling, whether this takes the form of assisting students select courses or discussing the students' long-range goals. The faculty member's concern for the progress and well being of the students is an inseparable adjunct to the classroom.

Research. All members of the faculties must demonstrate scholarly ability and attainments. Their qualifications are to be evaluated on the quality of their published and other creative work, the range and variety of their intellectual interests, their success in training graduate and professional students in scholarly methods, and their participation and leadership in professional associations and in the editing of professional journals. Attainment may be in the realm of scholarly
investigation in the realm of constructive contributions in professional fields, or in the realm of the creative arts.

Service. The scope of the University's activities makes it necessary for members of the staff to engage in many activities outside of the fields of teaching and research. These may include
participation in University committee work and other administrative tasks, clinical duties, and special training programs. The University recognizes the value of its staff in rendering these internal services as well as extramural professional services to schools, to industry, and to local, state and national organizations.

Other Considerations. In arriving at recommendations for promotion or tenure, faculty and chairpersons are directed to study the whole record of candidates. To warrant recommendation for the granting of tenure or for promotion in the professorial ranks, a candidate must have shown outstanding ability in teaching or research, an ability of such an order as to command obvious respect from colleagues and from professionals at other universities; and substantial contribution
in other phases. The qualifications of teaching and research must remain unequivocally the central functions of the faculty, but administrative and other internal and extramural professional
services must also be recognized.

The factors with reference to the granting of tenure or for promotion thus far mentioned have to do with the qualifications of the candidate as an individual and may be regarded as the intrinsic factors. Consideration must also be given to the way in which the candidate will fit into the present and foreseeable future of the department. Does there appear to be a place for a
candidate with these special interests? Will a given candidate help to bring the department into balance or throw it out of balance? It does happen that individuals whose performance would otherwise warrant the granting of tenure should not, and cannot, become tenured here because the special nature of staff requirements in the department makes it impractical.

Executive Order No. 45 of the President, June 1, 1972 (formerly University Memorandum No. 70, June 15, 1964); revised March 21, 1978; April 20, 1979

C. Evidence Which may Be Submitted to Demonstrate Qualifications for Appointment, Promotion, and/or Tenure: Evidence should be provided in the areas of scholarship, teaching, administration and/or school service, community service, personal qualities and the way in which the candidate will fit into the present or foreseeable future of the department. Among criteria used as the basis for appointment or promotion, performance in teaching and research (or other scholarly activity) will carry the greatest weight. Performance in other areas used as criteria for promotion, i.e. administration, service, etc. will be considered but will carry less weight than the overall record in teaching and research.

Scholarship: Scholarship is the diligent and systematic inquiry into a subject to discover, organize or revise theories or facts. Objective evidence of scholarship includes the following:
1. Publications: Significant research is usually published and therefore, it is available for evaluation. The quality of publications is far more important than quantity. Considerations in judging quality include the opinion of experts in the relevant field, reputation of the journal in which the paper appears and whether or not the journal is juried. Research and publication are considered in their broadest sense, i.e. library research of significant quality is as acceptable as laboratory or clinical research. Papers, monographs, book chapters and other manuscripts which have not been published but are considered to be of high quality can be submitted for review. Contributions to theory are as valued as contributions to fact. Textbooks and other books which the candidate has authored, coauthored
  or to which s/he has contributed may provide evidence of considerable scholarly activity.
2. Support for research: The awarding of a grant for the purpose of conducting original research provides evidence of scholarly capabilities. Grant applications which have been approved but remain unfunded, or which have been seen as meritorious, but do not fit in with funding program requirements may be submitted for committee evaluation.
3. Presentations before scholarly meetings and conferences: A paper presented at such a conference can be submitted for evaluation. Documentation of lectures, seminars, and programs given for study groups or at other institutions may also be considered by the committee.
4. Academic training: Scholarly pursuit beyond the level Ph.D., D.D.S., D.M.D. or D.H. will be evaluated. This may include additional degrees, certificates awarded, courses of study in
  progress or completed or postdoctoral training.
5. Election to editorial boards of major journals: Evidence indicating a commitment to the editing of major professional journals may be submitted as evidence of one's stature within a discipline.
6. Training of graduate and professional students in scholarly methods: Evidence which demonstrates that graduate and professional students have been successfully trained in scholarly methods may be submitted for evaluation. Examples of such evidence include student's papers accepted for publication, papers presented at scholarly conferences, awards won by students that were based on the scholarly training, etc.
Teaching: For a faculty member to be an effective teacher, s/he must be capable of organizing and presenting her/his material in a logical, comprehensive manner. In evaluation of teaching activity and capability, evidence of constructive activity to improve instruction will be given more weight than maintenance of instruction status quo, even when instruction is effective. Objective evidence which can be considered include the following which should be assembled in a Teaching Portfolio (refer to Appendix 2 in these Guidelines for specific guidelines and examples):
1. Student performance: What students learn is the ultimate criterion in effectiveness of instruction. Proper evaluation of this accomplishment requires that course objectives, copies of pertinent examinations, teaching materials, and records of class performance be submitted.
2. Systematic and standardized student evaluation of instruction: It is the responsibility of the department chairperson and faculty to see that systematic and standardized student evaluation of instruction is carried out annually, on at lease one course, with particular attention to the year prior to the tenure or promotion recommendation. Student evaluations of instruction obtained via standardized University or School forms and procedures -- for example, University Educational Assessment Center forms and procedures -- shall carry significantly greater weight than unstandardized evaluations designed by the candidate or others, although the latter may be submitted. The results of standardized evaluations will significantly influence APT decisions when the candidate is consistently judged by students to be at either extreme of the distribution of instructional effectiveness. The results of all formal standardized course evaluations conducted must be submitted to the APT Committee, including evaluations of postdoctoral, predoctoral, didactic, clinical, and laboratory instruction. The results of student evaluation of instruction shall be transmitted to
  the Committee by the department chairperson or the Dean.
3. Instructional material collected or devised: Teaching aids such as slides, syllabi, teaching modules, audio and video tapes, motion pictures, computer programs, and other material can
  be evaluated for organization, accuracy, and effectiveness in meeting specific objectives.
4. Course responsibilities: Detailed documentation of clinical and didactic teaching responsibilities of a candidate must be provided by the chairperson or, when the candidate is a chairperson, by the Dean. The documentation should present a clear picture of the relative magnitude of teaching efforts of the candidate.
5. University of Washington-sponsored Continuing Education: Detailed documentation of teaching effectiveness is required as indicated above for didactic, preclinical laboratory or clinical instruction. Course activity submitted without documentation will be considered under Professional and Community Service.
6. Systematic appraisal of instruction by other faculty members: Collegial evaluation of teaching is required. Such evaluation will be conducted every year for Instructors and Assistant Professors, and at least every three years for Associate Professors and Professors. The results will be used to help reach a decision on promotion and tenure, and merit pay increases.
  
  A Peer Teaching Evaluation Review Committee (PTERC) must be formed to evaluate the candidate’s teaching. Please refer to Appendix 5 for specific guidelines regarding committee selection and function and the subsequent report that must be complete
Administration and/or University Service: The extent of participation, competence demonstrated and productivity in committee and administrative activity will be considered.
Examples of this type of service include:
- Administration of a department, segment of a department or a specific course within a department.
- Administration of a clinic or other aspects of patient management.
- Direction of special departmental or interdepartmental training or research program.
- Service as class advisor.
- Service on School or University governing and advisory bodies.
- Chairperson or member of School and University committees.
- Representation of the School, University, or profession on outside agencies.
- Chairperson of course committee(s).
Objective evidence of a candidate's contribution to the activities of these services could include letters submitted by the administrative superior of the candidate. For instance, a letter from a committee chairperson for a committee member, a letter from the departmental chairperson for someone administering an aspect of a departmental program, a letter from the Dean for someone administering a school-wide program, etc. In addition, a candidate may submit other evidence of committee or service activity, such as reports, documents, studies, etc., that s/he has prepared as evidence of a positive contribution to the service activity.

The Dean should direct Chairpersons of various committees to issue annual reports regarding the committee's activities and accomplishments, and department Chairpersons should be encouraged to secure letters documenting a candidate's contribution and productivity or lack thereof. These should be submitted to the APT Committee.
Professional and Community Service: Involvement and competence in community service provides an indication of a faculty member's interest and devotion to the community in which he/she resides. Examples of community service include the following:
1. Consultantship to hospitals, community colleges, high schools and other universities.
2. Participation on national, state or local dental society or other professional organizations.
3. Member of advisory committees of various educational and other institutions.
4. Organization and participation in community dental health education projects.
5. Presentation of continuing dental education courses, other than those sponsored by the University of Washington.
6. Contributions to cultural or other activities that assist the University and the community.
7. Professional service outside the University.
  Objective evidence concerning the candidate's qualitative and quantitative contributions to these activities should be provided. This evidence may be of the type previously described (C.3).
Personal Qualities (Handbook: Vol. II, Chapter 24, Section 24-33)
University Handbook, Vol. II, Chapter 24, Section 24-33 and Footnote follow on next two pages.

Section 24-33. A Statement of Principle: Academic Freedom and Responsibility

Membership in the academic community imposes on students, faculty members, administrators, and Regents an obligation to respect the dignity of others, to acknowledge their right to express differing opinions, and to foster and defend intellectual honesty, freedom of inquiry and instruction, and free expression on and off the campus. The expression of dissent and the attempt to produce change, therefore, may not be carried out in ways which injure individuals or damage institutional facilities or disrupt the classes of one's instructors or colleagues. Speakers on campus must not only be protected from violence, but given an opportunity to be heard. Those who seek to call attention to grievances must not do so in ways that clearly and significantly impede the functions of the University.

Students and faculty are entitled to an atmosphere conducive to learning and to evenhanded treatment in all aspects of the instructor-student relationship. Faculty members may not refuse to enroll or teach students on the grounds of students' beliefs or the possible uses to which students may put the knowledge to be gained in a course. The students should not be forced by the authority inherent in the instructional relationship to make particular personal choices as to political action or their own roles in society. Evaluation of students and the award of credit must be based on academic performance professionally judged and not on matters irrelevant to that performance. (Examples of such matters include but are not limited to personality, personal beliefs, race, sex, religion, political activity, sexual orientation, or sexual, romantic, familial or other personal relationships.)

It is the instructors' mastery of their subject and their own scholarship which entitle them to their classrooms and to freedom in the presentation of their subjects. It is the responsibility of the instructors to present the subject matter of their courses as approved by the faculty in their collective responsibility for the curriculum. Because academic freedom has traditionally included the instructor's full freedom as a citizen, most faculty members face no insoluble conflicts between the claims of politics, social action, and conscience, on the one hand, and the claims and expectations of their students, colleagues, and institutions, on the other. If such conflicts become acute, and the instructor's attention to his or her obligations as a citizen and a moral agent precludes the fulfillment of substantial academic obligations, he or she cannot escape the responsibility of that choice, but
should either request a leave of absence or resign his or her academic position.

Section 13-31, April 16, 1956 (formerly Section 24-37); S-A 83, April 30, 1991; S-A 85, May 27, 1992; all with Presidential approval

Footnote: Faculty/Student Relationships and Conflicts of Interest

Conflicts of interest resulting from romantic or sexual relationships are detrimental to the functioning of the University because, if present, the professional authority under which decisions are made may be called into question. The University's responsibilities to the public and to individual members of the University community may be compromised if such conflicts of interest are not avoided.

The faculty's decision-making responsibilities should not restrict the faculty's rights as citizens, including the personal rights of association and expression, unless the exercise of those freedoms conflicts with the institutional necessity of impartiality in academic and employment decisions. In that case, the faculty member must restrict his or her participation in such decisions.

State law and University rules preclude a faculty member from participating in decisions which directly benefit a member of his or her family. The same rules should apply to decisions involving
sexual or romantic relationships between faculty and students, since these relationships, like formal family relationships, may call into question the ability of the faculty member to assess the
performance of another solely on academic or professional merit.

Romantic or sexual relationships between faculty and students may in some instances infringe on the rights of that student or other students or colleagues. The possibility of sexual harassment may arise, if the faculty member's immediate power to influence a student's academic progress brings into question the ability of the student genuinely to consent freely to the relationship. The possibility of impeding the student's academic or professional progress may also arise if the

faculty member is already in a position of significant decision-making authority with respect to the student, since the faculty member must abstain from further participation in such decisions, thereby denying the student access to the faculty member's professional assessment. The possibility of an unwelcome, hostile or offensive academic environment may also arise if the faculty member fails clearly to separate personal interests from his or her professional decisionmaking.

Faculty members should be aware that the harms listed above do not arise only from existing relationships, but may also arise if an individual in a position of authority to a student makes overt
sexual or romantic advances upon that student. Even if the advances are welcome, the faculty member should remove him or herself from the teaching or supervisory role, which may impede the student's academic progress. If the advances are unwelcome, the student may suffer unneeded stress, and the academic relationship may suffer.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Faculty Senate of the University of Washington, that no faculty member, teaching assistant, research assistant, department chair, dean or other administrative officer should vote, make recommendations, or in any other way participate in the
decision of any matter which may directly affect the employment, promotion, academic status or evaluation of a student with whom he or she has or has had a familial, sexual, or romantic relationship.

S-C, February 27, 1992