Introduction

The faculty members of the Department of Dance at the University of Kansas are committed to excellence in teaching/advising, scholarly and/or creative activity, and service. The concept of regular, rigorous faculty review is a critical part of the department’s commitment to maintaining a vital and productive program.

The foundation of faculty evaluation is the annual performance review. Its purpose is to assess the effectiveness of performance, to support continued effectiveness, and to assure that personnel decisions are sound and justifiable. We view systematic and rigorous evaluation as a continuing responsibility of the chair and faculty colleagues (those closest to the day-to-day performance of duties). The annual evaluation process provides an opportunity for the chair to review progress toward performance of responsibilities in the context of professional and institutional goals, and to identify performance issues and strategies for development, renewal, or change.

The consideration and evaluation of a faculty member's record are a confidential personnel matter, and all steps will be taken to ensure full confidentiality in all stages of evaluation, promotion, and tenure.

The process of a faculty member's annual review and evaluation for tenure and promotion shall be conducted impartially and fairly. The faculty member being evaluated may also petition for the recusal of any member of the process who the candidate feels may jeopardize the impartiality of the evaluation.

The Department of Dance affirms the principle of academic freedom, the right to express oneself according to the truth as one sees it. Faculty members have the obligation, however, to exercise academic freedom responsibly.

Faculty members are expected to be actively engaged in all three areas of teaching/advising, scholarship and/or creative activity, and service. The Department of Dance subscribes to the University of Kansas Faculty Code of Rights, Responsibilities, and Conduct, as adopted by the Faculty Senate in 1971 and subsequently amended. Faculty duties are set forth in Article IV Faculty Responsibilities, and the Department of Dance expects its faculty to live up to those responsibilities. Within the context of the Faculty Code of Conduct, the duties and expectations of dance faculty and the means by which they are evaluated are presented below. Faculty undergo four kinds of evaluations: (1) an Annual Performance Evaluation review performed by faculty peers (an outcome of this evaluation is data for the annual merit salary process), (2) a Progress Toward Tenure Review (PTTR) carried out by an appointed faculty review committee typically during the faculty member’s third year,

3. a review for Promotion and/or Tenure (P&T), and a Post-tenure Review every seven years. Whereas evaluation criteria are generally the same across the different reviews, administration responsibilities and procedures vary.

Statement of Performance Expectations

1.Unit Expectations

The Department of Dance expects faculty to devote equal attention to teaching/advising and scholarly and/or creative activity. When evaluating faculty performance, the department applies the weights of 40 percent for teaching/advising, 40 percent for scholarly and/or creative activity, and 20 percent for service to the University, community, and profession. These weights are the same for tenured and non-tenured faculty, although the department recognizes that the specific contributions of faculty members to the department’s mission will differ depending on career stage.

Teaching and Related Activities

The normal teaching duties of a faculty member include, but are not limited to, teaching four courses per academic year, choreographing a minimum of one work for the University Dance Company per year (may be reduced or increased to allow for other commitments as determined by the chair), advising students, serving on and chairing undergraduate senior projects, and participating in auditions and student assessments.

Factors considered in developing an overall evaluation of teaching performance may include, but are not limited to: [1] Standardized Teaching Evaluation Form (i.e., the University approved “Student Survey of Teaching” form); [2] peer reviews; [3] teaching awards; [4] enrollment figures; [5] advising; [6] development of new courses; [7] updating courses; [8] new and innovative approaches; and, [9] course coordination (multiple sections).

Academic Advising

All faculty members in residence are expected to advise undergraduate students during the advising period and throughout the year. Faculty generally are expected to be familiar with the appropriate catalogs, timetable, and program requirements; keep scheduled office hours; assist students in making academic and career choices; and refer students to campus support offices when appropriate. To further a community of scholars and students, faculty members are responsible for mentoring students. Mentoring establishes a trust between faculty and students in which confidence-building and the fruitful exchange of ideas can take place.

During the two-week period in the middle of the official University’s advising period, faculty members will provide a detailed schedule of their available advising times. These schedules will be placed in the main office, and students will sign up for specific open times. Each faculty member will allocate open time for advising. It is suggested that at least ten hours over the two week period be open for potential advisees.

Research: Scholarly/Creative Activity

Research may include any of a wide variety of activities depending upon the field of specialization and the interests of the faculty member. It is expected that each faculty member will pursue research or professional activities appropriate to his or her field of specialization and will achieve significant national recognition among his or her peers in one or more such fields of activity.

For a complete, detailed listing of the criteria for scholarly/creative activity see Portfolio or Annual Report Preparation, Review, and Evaluation.

Service

Departmental service is required of all faculty members including, but not limited to, attendance at faculty meetings as well as participation on departmental committees. Faculty should also contribute appropriate service to SOTA, the College, University, and the profession (locally, nationally, and internationally). Especially important in evaluating faculty service are the following:

• University service, including participation on departmental, SOTA, College, and/or University committees.
• Professional service outside of the University, including participation in community, state, regional, national, and international activities.

For a complete, detailed listing of the categories for the faculty evaluation process see 3b. Portfolio or Annual Report Preparation, Review, and Evaluation.

2.Standards for Acceptable Performance for Faculty Members

On the basis of information provided in the evaluation portfolio (Appendix B), the Chair will assess each faculty member’s performance in the responsibilities of teaching/advising, research/scholarly activity, and service on a scale of:

5 points: excellent 4 points: very good 3 points: good

2 points: marginal

1 point: poor

Evidence of “marginal” or “poor” performance in any of the three areas of responsibility will lead to intervention or will trigger the process for failure to meet academic responsibilities. If a faculty member receives a score of 2 or below in any category, the chair will record an “unsatisfactory” for that category in the formal annual evaluation letter that is sent to the faculty member. Sustained failure to show progress following a period of corrective action or intervention or three (3) consecutive ratings of “unsatisfactory” will place an individual at risk for a recommendation for dismissal.

3.Differential Allocation of Effort

The Department of Dance expects faculty to devote equal attention to teaching and research. When evaluating faculty performance, the department applies the weights of 40 percent for teaching, 40 percent for scholarly and/or creative activity, and 20 percent for service to the University, community, and profession. These weights are the same for tenured and non-tenured faculty, although the department recognizes that the specific contributions of faculty members to the department’s mission will differ depending on career stage.

Changes in the standard 40/40/20 allocation of effort for a set period of time can be initiated by the tenured faculty member or department chair. These changes can be short- or long-term and must correspond to changes in work-load not just evaluation criteria. Reasons for alterations can include short-term items such as funded research or longer term career-stage issues. Faculty members are not allowed to reduce their teaching or research to less than 10 percent on permanent DAE agreements. Departmental needs take precedent over individual needs when making decisions to alter a faculty member’s allocation of effort; such redistribution must be consistent with the best interests of the unit. The most likely occasion for consideration of such changes is in discussion between the chair and the individual faculty member following annual performance evaluations, or sooner so that appropriate arrangements may be made at the unit level for the coverage of course offerings. Changes in faculty effort are to be negotiated and agreed upon before the start of the next academic year. Any individualized changes in faculty allocation of effort will be negotiated with the chair and documented in the faculty member's personnel file.

For short-term DAE agreements (one academic year or less), the DAE is ultimately approved by the unit director or chairperson, with a copy of this endorsement sent to the contact associate dean. For long-term DAE agreements (lasting one year or beyond), approval must also be sought from the appropriate contact dean in the college. All DAEs are reported annually to the College Dean’s Office. Agreements for long- term DAEs must be reviewed every three years, although either the faculty member or chairperson/director may request an earlier review in response to changed circumstances or performance. At that time, the agreement may be revised, terminated, or continued.

The selection among these options should be made following the guidelines and process for approval of long-term DAEs contained in the University Policy on Differential Allocation of Effort (DAE).

Annual Evaluation System

1.Overview

The Department of Dance will conduct an annual evaluation of its faculty that will yield information for departmental planning, merit salary decisions, progress toward tenure and promotion and/or tenure review, differential allocation of effort, and strategies for renewal or development. The Department's criteria for evaluation and promotion and tenure will serve as the standard by which accomplishments are evaluated.

2.Portfolio or Annual Report Preparation

NOTE: Faculty are responsible for annually maintaining their PRO record, which is also accessed by administration for reports such as the College snapshot of departmental productivity. PRO provides an annual activity report and faculty are advised to view and update their PRO reports before submission of the faculty member’s portfolio to the unit. In classifying your work as major and minor, please bear in mind the definitions in the unit’s Promotion and Tenure Guidelines.

Faculty performance evaluations are conducted annually by the Chair. At the last faculty meeting of the fall semester, the chair will announce deadlines for the submission of materials for the Annual Performance Evaluation Review. Faculty members submit Annual Performance Evaluation Reviews to the Chair by mid-April. The Chair uses the period from April 15-May 15 to evaluate faculty submissions. The results of each faculty member’s evaluation are then summarized by the chair in a formal letter to the faculty member based on the quality, quantity, significance and impact of the work in the three areas of responsibility. The scores and written comments, as well as any information about expectations of the position, progress toward tenure review, promotion and/or tenure review, and any suggested strategies for improvement or renewal, etc. are also documented in the letter. The letter is provided to the faculty member so that any opportunity for discussion of the report occurs prior to the timelines established for merit salary decisions. The Chair sends the letters to faculty on May 15.

3.Portfolio or Annual Report Review and Evaluation

Each faculty member is responsible for submitting a portfolio documenting both quantity and quality of effort in teaching/advising, research, and service for the previous calendar year in accordance with Appendix B: Categories for Annual Faculty Performance Evaluation Review.

If a tenured or tenure-track faculty member fails to submit information for the previous calendar year, that person's performance shall not be evaluated. Furthermore, the recommendation from the evaluation committee to the chair will be that no merit salary increase should be recommended. In addition, that faculty member’s performance for the year will be deemed unsatisfactory in all three categories (scholarly and/or creative activity, teaching/advising, and service).

The portfolio materials are submitted annually for review by each faculty member according to Appendix B: Categories for Annual Faculty Performance Evaluation Review; each faculty member is evaluated on the basis of an account of activities in teaching, research, and service supplied by that faculty member. In the Department of Dance, the Chair evaluates the faculty member’s portfolio. The quantity, quality, significance, and impact of performance are assessed within the context of the faculty member’s specific academic responsibilities, including consideration of differential allocation of effort, and discipline expectations and standards.

Each faculty will be assigned the weight of 40:40:20 to the responsibilities of teaching/advising, scholarly and/or creative activity and service respectively for the evaluation. The exception would be those faculty members who have a different DAE that has been negotiated and agreed upon by the faculty member and chair. In this case, the agreed upon DAE will be used to evaluate the faculty member’s contributions to the University and to later recommend the awarding of any merit.

The evaluation consists of a score from a minimum of 1 to a maximum of 5 in each of the categories of teaching/advising, research, and service. These scores, together with any written comments, are recorded on the Faculty Evaluation Results form (see Appendix C) by the Chair.

Teaching/Advising

Teaching is a primary function of the University, which strives to provide an outstanding education for its students. The evaluation of teaching includes consideration of syllabi, course materials, and other information related to a faculty member’s courses; peer and student evaluations; and other accepted methods of evaluation, which may include external evaluations.

All faculty members are expected to do advising. The Chair will consider advising in its annual evaluation of each faculty member. Faculty are expected to be familiar with the appropriate catalogs, keep regularly scheduled office hours, be available during the advising period each semester, assist students in making well informed academic and career choices, and refer students to the appropriate campus support offices. Faculty advising is also assessed through peer letters and student feedback.

Research

In the Department of Dance, scholarship in the area of creative activity is defined as refereed (adjudicated, peer-reviewed) or commissioned performances or the presentation of choreography in national/international festivals (festivals that draw participants nationally/internationally); choreography or performances with or on national/international dance companies (a dance company whose work is seen, publicized, or recognized by the field beyond its geographic base of operation can be considered “national” and/or “international”); significant externally funded projects for which the faculty member serves as PI; artistic work receiving published reviews by critics in recognized national or international geographic dance centers; rehearsal direction, staging, and/or coaching of choreography/performance with or for national/international dance companies; individual or collaborative commissions with nationally/internationally recognized emerging or established choreographers; refereed (adjudicated, peer-reviewed) artistic work in electronic and/or digital formats such as DVDs and films screened in national and international venues; and national/international recognitions/awards for artistic achievement.

In the Department of Dance, scholarship in the area of dance studies is defined as distributed films, published books, monographs, chapters in books, edited books, and electronic media including research-based DVDs and websites, and critical reviews of same; refereed (adjudicated, peer- reviewed) presentations at national and international scholarly conferences; significant externally funded projects for which the faculty member serves as PI; refereed (adjudicated, peer-reviewed) publications in journals recognized within the field of dance and with national/international distribution; invited keynote addresses/lectures/symposia for national or international conferences and/or organizations recognized within the field of dance; editor of a peer-reviewed research journal with national and/or international circulation; and national/international recognition/awards for scholarly research.

When a faculty member applies for promotion and/or tenure, it is necessary to classify research accomplishments as major or minor. The following criteria are to assist the faculty number in making that determination. The classification of the results of research as major or minor is based on several factors: the topic being considered and its relative scope and importance; the length, form and style of the final product; and the audience for whom it is intended.

• Major activities in dance performance typically include: dancing a major role in a refereed (adjudicated, peer-reviewed) or commissioned performances; presentation of choreography in regional/national/international festivals (festivals that draw participants nationally/internationally); choreography or performances with or on national/international dance companies; significant externally funded projects for which the faculty member serves as PI; artistic work receiving published reviews by critics in recognized national or international geographic dance centers; rehearsal direction, staging, and/or coaching of choreography/performance with or for regional/national/international dance companies; individual or collaborative commissions with nationally/internationally recognized emerging or established choreographers; refereed (adjudicated, peer-reviewed) artistic work in electronic and/or digital formats such as DVDs and films screened in national and international venues; and regional/national/international recognitions/awards for artistic achievement.
• Minor activities in dance performance typically include: dancing subordinate roles, presenting choreography in local festivals with local audiences, choreography or performance with local dance companies with local audiences, serving as assistant choreographer, internally funded projects for which the faculty member serves as PI; and presenting lectures or demonstration programs in local venues.
• Major publications typically fit at least one of the following criteria: a book, monograph, textbook, book chapter or work in electronic media of substantial significance and scope; a scholarly article published in a refereed journal; or a lengthy, scholarly article based on original research written for a major dictionary or encyclopedia.
• Minor publications typically fit at least one of the following criteria: a relatively brief monograph, textbook, or work in electronic media; an article on a less substantial topic, published in a magazine or regional journal; a brief article based on widely available materials, written for a general dictionary or encyclopedia; or a review of a book or work in electronic media.
• Major papers or lectures typically fit at least one of the following criteria: a substantial, scholarly paper or lecture selected by committee, presented at a regional, national, or international meeting of a professional society; or a substantial, invited paper or lecture presented at a meeting of a professional society or at another university.
• Minor papers or lectures typically fit at least one of the following criteria: a paper or lecture of lesser significance, presented at a state or regional meeting; or a paper or lecture presented at a University function or an invited guest lecture in another department of the University.
• Funded grants that may be considered major research are typically large, externally funded grants made available to the faculty member by a state, national or international agency. Funded grants that may be considered minor research are normally smaller, internally funded grants from within the University.

Service

Departmental service is required of all faculty members, including, but not limited to, participation on department committees as well as attendance at faculty meetings. Service to the University; College; SOTA; profession; and local, national, and/or international communities is expected. Especially important in evaluating faculty service are the following:

• University service, including participation on departmental, SOTA, College, University, or professional committees.
• Professional service outside the University, including participation in local community, state, regional, national, and international activities.
• Service outside academia is also recognized.

4.Annual Evaluation of Feedback Process

Each faculty member is provided with a Faculty Evaluation Letter from the chair that summarizes scores and narrative from the three categories of evaluation. Faculty have the right to meet with the chair to review the evaluation in case of disagreement. At this time, the faculty member also has the right to add additional information, as appropriate, to the evaluation record.

In cases where improvement in a faculty member’s performance is warranted, the chair will indicate, in specific terms, in writing, where the faculty member’s evaluations are unsatisfactory (i.e., marginal and poor.) The faculty member and the chair will meet to discuss any extenuating circumstances associated with the unsatisfactory evaluation and develop a written plan outlining strategies for self-improvement or external intervention and development strategies. A copy of the written evaluation summary is then maintained in the faculty member’s personnel file.

5.Post-tenure Review and Integration into the Annual Evaluation Process

This section includes information for faculty members undergoing Post-tenure Review.

• The post-tenure review will be conducted separately from the annual evaluation by the Post- tenure Review Committee. The committee will forward the post-tenure review file to be included in the documentation for the annual evaluation.
• The Post-tenure Review committee will provide a copy of their 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 for his or her review. 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. If the chair 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.
• Unit procedures for how Post Tenure Review will be integrated into the Annual Evaluation Process as outlined below in #6.

Additional information can be found in the Unit’s Post-tenure Review Policy.

6.Outcomes of the Annual Performance Evaluation

The evaluation process of the Department of Dance, seen in all its aspects, yields multiple outcomes. It acknowledges faculty accomplishments or shortcomings and makes them matters of record. It initiates discussions that influence the planning of both individual career development and unit evolution. It assists in the identification of opportunities for faculty improvement and renewal. It provides annual as well as cumulative data for merit-salary recommendations, sabbatical-leave and grant applications, tenure and promotion decisions, post-tenure review, and reassignments of responsibilities. And it provides documentation that may be used, at extremes, in support of either recognition or dismissal.

Procedures for developing performance improvement plans

If the chair ascertains that a faculty member's performance seems to be failing to meet academic responsibilities, the administrator and the faculty member shall develop a written plan of methods to improve the faculty member's performance. The plan may include appropriate provisions for faculty development, such as campus opportunities for faculty continued renewal and development, or for other appropriate interventions. The chairperson may call upon the University administration for assistance in constructing such a plan, including provision for additional resources, where needed. A faculty member may reject any plan recommended to aid performance levels, but the faculty member must understand that a sustained overall failure to meet academic responsibilities is a basis for dismissal.

Procedures for addressing failure to meet academic responsibilities

If the faculty member disagrees with the evaluation, the member may add written comments to the evaluation and submit these for further consideration by the chair.

If a faculty member has been informed that his/her performance still fails to meet academic responsibilities, the faculty member may request a review by a faculty committee designated to hear such matters in the College. The review committee will issue a non-binding recommendation on the appropriateness of this conclusion to the unit administrator. The administrator may change the evaluation after receiving the committee's decision, or may choose not to do so. In any event, the report of the committee will become a permanent part of the faculty member's personnel file within the academic unit and shall be available to the faculty member.

Department chairs shall consult annually with the dean, and the dean shall consult annually with the Provost on the progress of any faculty member who fails within this category of failure to meet academic responsibilities.

Sustaned failure to meet performance expectations

Based upon the judgment that there has been a sustained failure to meet academic responsibilities, the Dean may recommend to the Provost that a tenured faculty member be dismissed. In making this determination, the Dean shall consider the nature of the failure to meet academic responsibilities, the reason or reasons for this failure, the number of years that the faculty member has failed to meet academic responsibilities, the level of discernible improvement in the faculty member's performance after being notified of any failure in performance, and the extent to which the faculty member has complied with the terms of any plan developed to improve the faculty member's performance. The Provost will review the case and, if the Provost agrees with the Dean's recommendation, the Provost will recommend to the Chancellor that the faculty member be dismissed. If the Chancellor agrees and recommends dismissal, this recommendation will go to the Faculty Rights Board.

Should any recommendation to dismiss be brought against a tenured faculty member based exclusively or in part on grounds of sustained failure to meet academic responsibilities, both the report(s) of the review committee(s), the annual written evaluation(s) of the unit administrator concerning the faculty member, any outside evaluations, and any germane written response by the faculty member to the charges shall be made available to the Faculty Rights Board.

7.Faculty Development Initiatives

The Department of Dance aims to provide guidance and mentoring for new and junior faculty. Facilitated by the chair, senior faculty mentor junior members. Each annual faculty evaluation provides untenured faculty with feedback on their progress toward tenure and/or promotion, recognizing their strengths and accomplishments and making specific recommendations for addressing any shortcomings. For all tenure- track faculty members, a progress toward tenure review is typically conducted during the faculty member’s third year. This progress toward tenure review is to provide an evaluation of the faculty’s research, teaching/advising, and service activities toward fulfilling tenure requirements. In consultation with the chair, the Promotion and Tenure Committee prepares the evaluation packet following the guidelines and using the forms required by the College and University. The chair will then forward the completed report to the College Committee on Appointments, Promotion, and Tenure. The chair then meets with the tenure-track faculty member to discuss the progress toward tenure review. This evaluation should be used by the candidate to guide professional activities as he or she moves toward the formal tenure review.

Other faculty development opportunities include:

• ACE Fellows Program: Acquaints mid career faculty with the issues and challenges of higher education administration and provides an opportunity for them to assess their interests and talents in a career shift to administration. The University encourages selected faculty to apply for participation in this national program and contributes full salary and benefits for individuals who are selected.
• Center for Teaching Excellence: Offers instructional development support, networking opportunities for professional dialogues on effective learning and innovation in teaching, and encourages collaborative activities emphasizing the scholarship of teaching and research on learning. Faculty will be provided videotaping and instructional consultation services.
• Colleague to Colleague Teaching Enhancement Program (Teaching Fellows, Teaching is a Shared Experience, Campus Dialogs): Provides an opportunity for faculty from diverse disciplines to share ideas and classroom techniques through campus dialogs. Interested colleagues and new faculty are provided consultation on effective teaching strategies through an informal mentoring process and classroom observations.
• External Proposal Development Workshop: Provides an understanding of the process of proposal development from identifying potential funding sources and developing a concept through the preparation of the narrative and budget development and peer review.
• Faculty Travel and International Travel Funds: Supports the presentation of papers at professional meetings and conferences.
• General Research Fund: Provides research support on a competitive basis to individual faculty and groups of investigators.
• Hall Center for the Humanities Programs: Promotes excellence in scholarship through research and creative fellowships, travel support for research and scholarly consultation in the humanities, funding for collaborative projects designed to have a sustained impact on teaching in the humanities, assistance with grant preparation, interdisciplinary study in the humanities through lecture series, forums, research discussion groups, and mini classes and seminars.
• Hall Fund for the Improvement of Teaching: Provides funding for collaborative projects designed to have a sustained impact on teaching. Recent projects include Teaching Students to Do Library Research: A Faculty Development Workshop for Classroom Instructors and Librarians, Western Civilization Writing Fellows Program, Integrative Seminar on Curriculum Diversification, and Emerging Technologies and Foreign Language Education.
• Information Technology Services: Conducts workshops and seminars to develop basic skills and knowledge in the use of microcomputers and new directions in technology. Initial and advanced training is provided for the use of graphics software, navigation of the Internet and World Wide Web, development of Web pages, and electronic mail and discussion lists.
• IntraUniversity Professorships: Provides mid career faculty an opportunity to strengthen their knowledge of an academic specialty, to broaden or achieve greater depth in a defined field of study, or to achieve competence in a new area of scholarly endeavor by spending a semester’s residence in another academic department.

• Library Instructional Program: Integrating Library Research into Instruction: Assists faculty in integrating library research skills and services into instruction through providing assistance with assignment design and workshops for faculty on teaching students to do library research.
• National Fulbright Scholar Program: Provides an opportunity for faculty to teach or conduct research under the auspices of the Fulbright Scholar Program. To encourage participation, the University provides up to one semester’s salary to individual’s receiving grants under this program. This incentive supplements the basic stipend provided by the Fulbright Program.
• New Faculty General Research Fund: Assist new tenure-track faculty in initiating research and developing grant applications to sustain research programs through a mentoring and peer review process.
• Perspectives on promotion and tenure: A discussion with senior faculty, administrators, and members of the University Committee on Promotion and Tenure of institutional expectations, strategies for developing an academic career leading toward tenure, and the promotion and tenure process.
• Progress toward Tenure Review: Provides formative and summative feedback regarding progress toward tenure.
• Research Intensive Semesters (RIS): CLAS offers all junior faculty members in good standing a reduced teaching responsibility at some point during the faculty member’s pretenure employment. Faculty members will be released from classroom teaching duties for up to one semester, depending upon the relevant departmental teaching expectations, and will be expected to concentrate on research intensive activities. Faculty members are eligible for a research intensive semester assignment up to and including the spring semester before their publication dossiers are sent out to external reviewers in June, with the latest possible Research Intensive Semester (RIS) assignment typically being the second semester of the fifth year. Faculty members in good standing who have stopped their tenure clock remain eligible for a RIS assignment. The actual decision of which year/semester the individual is assigned a research intensive semester will be made in consultation with the department chair. Note that paid leaves and fellowships do not take the place of a RIS. Once the chair approves the RIS for the junior faculty member, the details concerning the RIS should be confirmed to the faculty member in writing and documented in their personnel file. The chair also provides a copy of this authorization to the College Dean’s Office so that RIS data can be tracked. Faculty members who are granted a RIS are expected to continue to meet their usual duties regarding departmental advising and other service activities.
• Sabbatical Leave: Provides opportunities for faculty development and enhancement activities.
• Senior Administrative Fellows Program: Acquaints mid career faculty with the issues and challenges of higher education administration so they may better understand the university and provides an opportunity for them to assess their interests and talents in university administrative matters.
• Consulting: Encourages continual scholarly development and renewal through sharing professional expertise outside the University when such activity is deemed in the best interest of the University.
• Leaves without Pay: Provides the opportunity to pursue unique experiences outside the university on a full time basis, when such experiences are deemed in the best interest of the University. Through leaves arranged through intergovernmental personnel agreements, faculty members are provided opportunities for renewal and expansion research or teaching directions through placement in a federal agency for a specified period.

See Faculty Development Programs for information about additional faculty development opportunities.

Appendices

Appendix A – Student Evaluation of Teaching Appendix B – Faculty Information Form Appendix C - Faculty Evaluation Results

Appendix A – Student Evaluation of Teaching

Instrument Used for Student Evaluation of Teaching: The Department of Dance utilizes the University’s “Student Survey of Teaching” form as this instrument.

Appendix B – Faculty Information Form

Department of Dance Annual Faculty Report Form

It is the responsibility of each faculty member to submit materials in the portfolio that accurately and effectively document the member’s activities in teaching, research/creative activity, and service for the calendar year under consideration. These documents should be submitted to the chair via email, either as Word documents or PDFs. Place the materials in the following order:

CLAS Annual Report-SOTA, generated by PRO Appendix B Annual Faculty Report

Summary of Teaching Evaluations (provided by Chair) Optional Response to Teaching Evaluations

Class Syllabi

This report is for the previous calendar year. Please return this completed report to the Chair of the Department of Dance, via email as a Word or PDF file by the date requested.

Teaching

Please describe your teaching goals for the year and describe any innovations that you may have incorporated into your courses.

Research

Please describe your research achievements for the year and relate them to your long-term research goals.

Service

Please summarize your service activities and describe how you allocate your effort in these areas.

Faculty Evaluation Results

Name:                                                                                                                             Rank:                                                             Years in Rank:             Years at KU:       

Teaching Score:                Comments:

Scholarly and/or Creative Activity

Score:          Comments: Service Score:          Comments: