• Home
  • Post-tenure Review Criteria and Procedures, Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science

Post-tenure Review Criteria and Procedures, Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science

Policy
Procedure
Purpose: 

To articulate the criteria and procedures for post-tenure review for faculty within the Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science.

Applies to: 

Tenured faculty in the Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science

Campus: 
Lawrence
Policy Statement: 

General Principles:

In accordance with Board of Regents requirements (II.C.8), Article 7 Section 4 of the Faculty Senate Rules and Regulations, and the University Policy on Post-tenure Review, the Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science, has adopted these expectations and procedures for conducting post-tenure review. Post-tenure review is a process for periodic peer evaluation of faculty performance that provides an opportunity for a long-term assessment of a faculty member’s accomplishments and future directions in the areas of teaching/advising, scholarship, and service.

Post-tenure review must be conducted in a manner that respects the rights of faculty members involved, including academic freedom, tenure, and due process. In addition, all those involved in the evaluation process must recognize that it is a confidential personnel matter and take appropriate steps to protect confidentiality.

Period for Review:

Post-tenure review is conducted on a seven-year cycle and covers the seven-year period leading up to the review, including the six prior annual evaluation letters and activities since the last annual evaluation. The cycle is restarted if a faculty member is evaluated for promotion or is awarded a distinguished professorship. Some years may be excluded from the period in accordance with the University policy, and the review may be postponed if the faculty member is on leave during the year of review. The Dean of the College of Liberal Arts & Sciences will notify faculty members scheduled for post-tenure review no later than March 15th in the spring semester proceeding the academic year of review.

Unit Expectations:

All tenured faculty members must meet academic responsibilities in the areas of teaching/advising, scholarship, and service. Unless otherwise specified by the job description or differential allocation of effort, the ordinary allocation of effort is 40% teaching/advising, 40% scholarship, and 20% service.

The Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science has defined its standards and expectations for teaching/advising, scholarship, and service in its annual evaluation procedures. The expectations for post-tenure review are consistent with these standards, with overall productivity commensurate to the seven-year period under review. The following specific criteria shall apply for purposes of post-tenure review.

Criteria for Meeting Expectations in Teaching/Advising:

In the Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science, each faculty member is expected to teach four courses (or their equivalent) per year and receive acceptable performance evaluations. Faculty members are expected to teach courses in accordance with the needs, requirements, and expectations of the Department. These ideally include a number of introductory, advanced, and specialty courses and seminars in the faculty member's area of specialization. Teaching responsibilities include:

  • Responsibly meeting with classes and preparation of course materials.
  • Keeping abreast of developments related to the individual's specific specialties.
  • Communicating information and knowledge in the faculty member's specialties to students and professionals in the field.
  • Preparing relevant and fair exams.
  • Being available and prepared to advise students in curricula, scholarship, and professional, and applied interests.
  • Being polite, courteous, and respectful towards students and colleagues.

The quality of lectures and in-class performance is evaluated using the University’s “Student Survey of Teaching” and peer evaluations by faculty (by invitation and consent only). Ideally, peer evaluations should be done multiple times for multiple courses. In addition, the quality may be judged by supporting material such as the following (by invitation and consent only):

  • Video tapes of lectures.
  • Student evaluations (e.g., at mid-semester) that complement the “Student Survey of Teaching.
  • Evidence of assistance and mentoring from the Center for Teaching Excellence.

Student advising is expected from every faculty member and includes the counseling of undergraduate majors and graduate students. While the Chair of the Undergraduate Studies Committee serves as advising coordinator for undergraduate majors, individual faculty members carry out career advising for geography and atmospheric science majors and other undergraduates. Successful undergraduate advising is judged by the availability of individuals to advise on an equitable basis.

Graduate students are advised by their thesis and dissertation mentors. Graduate advising also is judged on the basis of willingness to assist students. Naturally, the professional success of graduates is one of the best indicators of the quality of advising and instruction.

High quality teaching is serious intellectual work grounded in a deep knowledge and understanding of the field and includes the ability to convey that understanding in clear and engaging ways.

The conduct of classes is the central feature of teaching responsibilities at KU, but teaching also includes supervising student research and clinical activities, mentoring and advising students, and other teaching-related activities outside of the classroom.

The record must demonstrate effective teaching, as reflected in such factors as command of the subject matter, the ability to communicate effectively in the classroom, a demonstrated commitment to student learning, and involvement in providing advice and support for students outside the classroom.

Criteria for Meeting Expectations in Research and Creative Activity:

The concept of “scholarship” encompasses not only traditional academic research and publication, but also the creation of artistic works or performances and any other products or activities accepted by the academic discipline as reflecting scholarly effort and achievement for purposes of promotion and tenure. While the nature of scholarship varies among disciplines, the University adheres to a consistently high standard of quality in its scholarly activities to which all faculty members, regardless of discipline, are held. In the Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science, scholarship is defined as investigation or experimentation aimed at the discovery and interpretation of the world’s physical and social variety. Such research may include critical evaluations and artistic creations, and is expected to culminate in some combination of books, refereed journal articles and book chapters, conference proceedings papers, maps, geodatabases, grants, and other similar works.

For associate professor, the record must demonstrate a successfully developing scholarly career, as reflected in such factors as the quality and quantity of publications or creative activities, external reviews of the candidate’s work by respected scholars or practitioners in the field, the candidate’s regional, national, or international reputation, and other evidence of an active and productive scholarly agenda.

On average productivity should be equivalent to one-to-two major publications per year in refereed journals or books. Faculty are expected to exhibit leadership roles in their research programs as demonstrated through primary investigator status on grants, single-authored/first-authored publications and maps, geodatabases, and/or coauthored papers led by a student. For collaborative projects, faculty are expected to supply evidence that coauthorship and co-PI roles are of an equivalent leadership status.

For professors, the record must demonstrate an established scholarly career, as reflected in such factors as a substantial and ongoing pattern of publication or creative activity, external reviews of the candidate’s work by eminent scholars or practitioners in the field, the candidate’s national or international reputation, and other evidence of an active and productive scholarly career.

On average productivity should be equivalent to one to two major publications per year in refereed journals or books. Faculty are expected to exhibit leadership roles in their research programs as demonstrated through primary investigator status on grants, single-authored/first-authored publications and maps, geodatabases and/or coauthored papers led by a student. For collaborative projects, faculty members are expected to supply evidence that coauthorship and co-PI roles are of an equivalent leadership status. Furthermore, a candidate must demonstrate recognition for his/her research at an international level.

Criteria for Meeting Expectations in Service:

Service is an important responsibility of all faculty members that contributes to the University’s performance of its larger mission. Although the nature of service activities will depend on a candidate’s particular interests and abilities, service contributions are an essential part of being a good citizen of the University. The Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science accepts and values scholarly service to the discipline or profession, service within the University, and public service at the local, state, national, or international level.

In the Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science service includes, but is not limited to, a record of substantial engagement in any or all of the following activities: membership in departmental, college, and university committees; an active role in professional organizations, including committee membership; invited presentations; public outreach (e.g., community presentations, unpaid professional consultation); organizing conferences; reviews of research articles, grant proposals, and book manuscripts for journals, publishers, and funding agencies, respectively; membership on editorial boards; and/or editing of a journal. This record shall reflect a sustained and constructive effort that contributes to advancing the mission of the Department, College, University, and/or the discipline.

For associate professors, the record must demonstrate a pattern of service to the University at one or more levels, to the discipline or profession, and/or to the local, state, national, or international communities.

For professors, the record must demonstrate an ongoing pattern of service reflecting substantial contributions to the University at one or more levels, to the discipline or profession, and/or to the local, state, national, or international communities.

The above departmental criteria are used but the record should reflect a leadership capacity or expanded scope of effort demonstrating initiative and a national or international reputation.

Relation to the Annual Evaluation.

Post tenure review will be conducted by the Faculty Affairs committee as part of the annual evaluation process. For the faculty members to be evaluated, the Faculty Affairs committee will provide a PTR evaluation in addition to the standard annual evaluation.

The committee report will be considered as part of the annual evaluation process and the chair will discuss the review with the faculty member in conjunction with that process. This discussion should concentrate on the future professional development of the faculty member with an aim toward enhancing meritorious work and improving less satisfactory performance, including adoption of a performance improvement plan, if necessary. Any action on the review that is within the scope of the Faculty Evaluation Policy must be taken under that policy.

Joint Appointments.

The faculty member will provide both units with copies of the Faculty Member’s Statement section of the Post-Tenure Review File (reflecting the representative effort in each unit) and a current curriculum vitae. The review goes forward with each unit preparing a separate committee evaluation summary and considerations by each chair and/or director to the dean. Each unit will submit their review materials directly to the College Dean’s Office. In the case of a jointly appointed faculty and unclassified academic staff member outside of the College, the primary unit is responsible for the administrative protocols of engaging the secondary unit in the solicitation and collection of feedback relative to the evaluation of performance expectations in the secondary unit.

Review Committee:

The post-tenure review is conducted by the Faculty Affairs Committee which shall be selected as provided in the Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science bylaws.

No person may serve on the committee if his or her spouse or partner is scheduled for review. If the chair/director is the spouse or partner of the faculty member under review, the “Chair or Director Evaluation Summary” shall be conducted by the Divisional Associate Dean. A committee member who believes that there may be a conflict of interest should withdraw from the committee. If a faculty member who is undergoing review believes that there is a conflict of interest, he or she may object to the inclusion of a member. If the member declines to withdraw, the remaining committee members shall consider the basis for the alleged conflict and decide the matter. If a committee member withdraws or is removed based on a conflict of interest, the chair will name a replacement.

Preparation of the File: Review will be conducted on the basis of a file that summarizes a faculty member’s teaching/advising, scholarship, and service. In contrast to evaluation for promotion and tenure, copies of publications and original student evaluations are not required. Also, outside reviews of scholarship should not be submitted.

Using the Faculty Member Statement,the faculty member under review shall provide a brief narrative statement of his or her accomplishments in teaching/advising, scholarship, and service during the review period as they relate to his or her long-term career path and goals. In addition, the faculty member shall submit a current curriculum vitae and a list of additional activities not covered on the curriculum vitae. The chair will furnish copies of the faculty member’s annual evaluation letters for the six years during the review period.

Evaluation and Report:

The committee will review the file and evaluate the faculty member’s overall performance and his or her contributions in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service. Applying the expectations defined above, the committee will determine whether the faculty member’s performance in each area, as well as whether his or her overall performance meets expectations, exceeds expectations, or fails to meet expectations. In making its evaluations, the committee must bear in mind that (1) faculty members have differing responsibilities and make different kinds of contributions to the mission of the Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science, the College, and the University; (2) a faculty member’s activities vary over time according to his or her strengths, interests, and career path; and (3) innovative work may take time to reach fruition and may sometimes fail.

Using the Unit Committee Report, the committee will prepare a written report summarizing its evaluation. The report should provide a narrative description of the faculty member’s activities, an explanation of the committee’s ratings, and recommendations or suggestions for acknowledgement of contributions and future development of the faculty member. The committee will provide a copy of the report to the faculty member, who may submit a written response for inclusion in the post-tenure review file before it is forwarded to the chair.

Consideration by the Chair/Director:

The committee’s report (along with any faculty response) will be provided to the chair. If the chair agrees with the report, he or she will indicate that agreement in writing to the faculty member and place a copy in the post-tenure review file. Using the Chair/Director Evaluation Summary, if the chair or director disagrees with the committee’s evaluation, he or she shall explain the reasons for any disagreement in writing, with a copy to the faculty member and the committee. The chair may ask the committee to provide additional information or reconsider the review. If the chair disagrees with a positive evaluation by the committee, the faculty member may submit a written response. The chair will forward the file to the dean of the College. Post-tenure review files are due in the College Dean’s Office by no later than noon, on the second Friday of March.

Consideration by the Dean:

The faculty member’s post-tenure review file, including the unit committee’s report (along with any faculty response) and the chair’s agreement or disagreement, is forwarded to the dean. Post-tenure review files are due in the College Dean’s Office by no later than noon, on the second Friday in March. The dean will consider the report and using the Dean’s Evaluation Summary, express his or her agreement or disagreement in the same manner as the chair. Following the completion of review by the dean, if the dean agrees with the report, he or she will indicate that agreement in writing to the faculty member and place a copy in the file. If dean disagrees with the committee’s evaluation, he or she shall explain the reasons for any disagreement in writing, with a copy to the faculty member and the unit committee. The dean may ask the committee to provide additional information or reconsider the review. If the dean disagrees with a positive evaluation by the unit committee, the faculty member may submit a written response. The dean will forward a summary of post-tenure review outcomes and copies of the post-tenure review files to the Provost, to ultimately be placed in the faculty member’s personnel file.

Appeals:

Following the completion of the review by the dean, if a disagreement between the committee and the chair or dean cannot be resolved or if the faculty member wishes to appeal the evaluation, the matter will be handled as an appeal under the Department of Geography’s and Atmospheric Science Annual Faculty Evaluation Policy.

Report to the Provost:

The dean will provide a summary of the results in the College and copies of the post-tenure review file to the Provost. The post-tenure review file will be placed in the faculty member’s personnel file.

Contact: 

Department of Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science
University of Kansas
1475 Jayhawk Blvd
213 Lindley Hall
Lawrence, KS 66045-7316
kugeog@ku.edu

Department Chairperson
785-864-5143

Approved by: 
The faculty in the Department of Geography
Approved on: 
Friday, May 9, 2014
Effective on: 
Friday, May 9, 2014
Review Cycle: 
Annual (As Needed)
Keywords: 
Post-tenure review, seven-year review, faculty review, performance, PTR, GEOG, ATMO, Atmospheric Science
Change History: 

10/20/2015: Name changed throughout document from Geography to Geography and Atmospheric Science per Board of Regents of name change approval on October 10, 2015.

10/12/2015: Per the Interim Dean of the College of Liberal Arts & Sciences, the following was added to the template under Committee Review: If the chair/director is the spouse or partner of the faculty member under review, the “Chair or Director Evaluation Summary” shall be conducted by the Divisional Associate Dean.  Also added Dean’s review/acceptance under “Rank/Status/Change/History.”

08/18/2015: Updated links to CLAS PtR Forms

04/24/2015: Updated CLAS PtR forms and added links to each form within the policy statement.

04/02/2015: Fixed broken link to Board of Regents Policy Manual.

02/18/2015: Updated joint appointment section to include new boilerplate language.

12/18/2014: Updated to provide the current link to the Board of Regents Policy Manual.

11/21/2014: Updated to provide the current link to the Board of Regents Policy Manual.

05/23/2014: Reviewed and accepted by the College of Liberal Arts & Sciences Dean’s Office

05/09/2014: Approved by a vote of the Department of Geography faculty.


Can't Find What You're Looking For?
Policy Library Search
KU Today
One of 34 U.S. public institutions in the prestigious Association of American Universities
Nearly $290 million in financial aid annually
44 nationally ranked graduate programs.
—U.S. News & World Report
Top 50 nationwide for size of library collection.
—ALA
23rd nationwide for service to veterans —"Best for Vets," Military Times