Guidance for evaluation of Teaching Professors and for the application of the campus Special Salary Practice

---

October 08, 2020

By Lori Kletzer, Campus Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor 
By Junko Ito, Chair, Senate Committee on Academic Personnel 

To: SENATE FACULTY

Guidance for evaluation of Teaching Professors and for the application of the campus Special Salary Practice

Dear Colleagues:

As of 2019-20, faculty in the Teaching Professor (Lecturer with Security of Employment) series are evaluated in a process that parallels that of ladder (tenure/tenure-track) faculty, with slightly different criteria. APM 210-3-c lists the performance areas for evaluation as: (1) Teaching excellence, (2) Professional and/or scholarly achievement and activity, including creative activity, and (3) University and public service. While the evaluation of service is largely the same for teaching professors as for ladder faculty, the other two areas present some differences. This document is intended to provide guidance to faculty and to all levels of review in this evaluation.

APM 210-3-c notes that teaching excellence is particularly important for teaching professors. The types of activities that are considered as teaching are the same as for ladder faculty, and these include classroom teaching, formal and informal mentoring including independent studies and mentoring of Graduate Student Instructors, course development, and pedagogical innovations applied to their own classes. Evaluation will be based on at least two sources of evidence, and must incorporate Student Experience of Teaching (SET) surveys. The expected quantity of teaching will generally be higher for teaching professors, with a nominal instructional workload of six five-unit classes per year, although reduced course loads may be given for various administrative duties. Departments with teaching professors should address norms in their departmental instructional workload policy. As teaching excellence is noted as particularly important, a teaching professor shall not be advanced in rank or step without demonstration of excellence in teaching.

The category of “professional and/or scholarly achievement and activity” is a broad category, and some activities may overlap with the area of teaching excellence. Faculty may meet or exceed expectations in this category based on traditional disciplinary or interdisciplinary research/creative activity, analogous to that of ladder faculty, although the expected quantity of research is lower than that of ladder faculty. Research/creative activity may be in the form of peer-reviewed publications, artistic performance or exhibits, and may also be in the form of invited and contributed presentations. Traditional research is not required or expected, and this category may also be met with scholarly or professional work related to pedagogy, teaching, and student learning. In order to be considered for this category, rather than the teaching category, this work must have impact beyond the faculty member’s own classes, and the extent of the impact shall be considered in the review. Examples include research on teaching methods, research on student learning, design of instructional materials used by multiple instructors, development of techniques for assessment of student learning, professional/administrative work for teaching programs and learning centers, attracting external funding to support the improvement of formal teaching and learning, and the professional dissemination of this work through peer-reviewed publications, professional society communications and presentations, formal presentations at other universities, and online media with an intended audience that includes other instructors. This work may relate to teaching and learning at any level, including K-12 and lifelong learning.

Teaching professors are also evaluated on university and public service. They should be afforded opportunities to participate in departmental, campuswide, and senate committees to the same extent as ladder faculty. For teaching professors, university and public service activities may overlap with professional activities or teaching. Such activities may be evaluated in only one category, and will not be counted in multiple categories. Examples of service listed in APM 210 include: service related to the improvement of elementary and secondary education; participation in Academic Senate and campus committees and initiatives; and contributions furthering diversity and equal opportunity within the University through participation in recruitment, retention, and mentoring of scholars and students. 

Security of employment comes with promotion to Associate Teaching Professor (Lecturer with Security of Employment), and is analogous to tenure. Per APM 210, appointment or promotion to this rank requires “evidence of sustained professional and/or scholarly achievement and activity; a profile of excellent teaching; and evidence of service within the professional field, department, or campus. Under no circumstances will security of employment be conferred unless there is clear documentation of consistent and sustained excellence in teaching.”

For promotion to Teaching Professor (Senior Lecturer with Security of Employment), Step 6, or Initial Advancement Above Scale, there are heightened expectations for the scale of impact of the professional and/or scholarly achievement and activity. Per APM 210, Promotion to Teaching Professor requires “evidence of consistent and sustained professional and/or scholarly achievement and activity and a profile of excellent teaching that have made the candidate a leader in the professional field and/or in education.” Thus, a promotion file should contain evidence of professional impact or stature, and the external letters may be helpful in this regard. Files for advancement to Step 6 should show evidence of impact beyond the campus. Advancement to Above Scale requires impact on a broad scale, such as national or international leadership roles, or widespread usage of the scholarly work of the candidate.

Application of the Campus Special Salary Practice

The campus Special Salary Practice distinguishes between excellence in each criterion, and outstanding performance in each criterion, with additional salary or step advancement awarded for outstanding performance. Generally, an acceleration (additional step) may be awarded when all three areas are deemed outstanding, a G2 (one step plus two-thirds of a step of additional off-scale salary) may be awarded when two of the three areas are outstanding and one is excellent, and a G1 (one step plus one-third of a step of additional off-scale salary) may be awarded when one of the three areas is outstanding and the other two are excellent. An A1 (advancement of two steps plus additional one-third of off-scale salary) shall be appropriate in rare and exceptional circumstances that significantly exceed the level of achievement for an acceleration. This framework applies to both ladder faculty and teaching professors, although the implementation has some differences.

The basic expectations of teaching excellence are higher for teaching professors than for ladder faculty. For assessment of teaching of a teaching professor, an evaluation of outstanding shall be based on the candidate significantly exceeding these expectations, based on at least two sources of evidence. Evidence could include superlative course evaluations, demonstration of outstanding student learning (especially among groups that are underrepresented in higher education), development and implementation of new teaching techniques, teaching awards, or other documentation of outstanding teaching.

Due to the heavier emphasis on teaching and higher instructional workload, the expectations for professional/scholarly productivity are lower for teaching professors than for ladder rank faculty. Outstanding professional/scholarly activity can be demonstrated through impactful pedagogical work such as that described above; or traditional research/creative activity in the discipline, of a quantity and quality that would meet the level of excellence for ladder faculty; or a combination of types of work (e.g., some traditional scholarship and a significant amount of pedagogical work).

Service shall be assessed in the same manner as for ladder faculty.

Similar to ladder faculty, contributions to diversity, equity, and inclusion shall be recognized in the context of the assessment of professional and/or scholarly achievement and activity, teaching, and service.

Sincerely,

Junko Ito, Chair, Senate Committee on Academic Personnel

Lori Kletzer, Campus Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor

cc:

Academic Senate Office
Committee on Academic Personnel
Deans
Department Chairs
Department Managers
Divisional Academic Personnel Coordinators