• Home
  • School of Law Faculty Evaluation Plan

School of Law Faculty Evaluation Plan

Policy
Purpose: 

Evaluation Plan is a means to ensure that members of the Law School Faculty perform at a high level in pursuit of the Law School’s mission to further the knowledge and understanding of law and legal systems through a balanced and integrated program of teaching, scholarship, and service.

Applies to: 

School of Law faculty.

Campus: 
Lawrence
Policy Statement: 
Introduction
 
In accordance with Board of Regents’ requirements, the “Document on Faculty Evaluation,” and the directives of the Provost of the University of Kansas, the Faculty of the University of Kansas School of Law (“Law School Faculty”) has adopted this amended Faculty Evaluation Plan. This Faculty Evaluation Plan is a means to ensure that members of the Law School Faculty perform at a high level in pursuit of the Law School’s mission to further the knowledge and understanding of law and legal systems through a balanced and integrated program of teaching, scholarship, and service. This Plan supersedes and replaces all prior faculty evaluation plans previously adopted by the Law School Faculty.
 
The Law School Faculty serves law students, the State of Kansas, the University of Kansas, other Board of Regents schools, the legal profession and the legal academy. The Law School’s students are drawn from the State of Kansas, the rest of the United States, and countries around the world. Here, they are prepared to protect and uphold the rule of law on which democratic societies are based. Through classroom and clinical instruction, skills training, and professional example and mentoring, the Law School Faculty prepares law students to become highly qualified, ethical professionals prepared to lead and able to use their legal education in a wide range of endeavors in a dynamic, global legal environment. The Law School also extends its teaching, scholarship, and service missions to its other constituencies in the state, the nation, and the world, by providing continuing legal education to the Bar and Bench, offering legal expertise to local, regional, national, and international law- and policy-makers, and creating knowledge through academic work with other law schools and in other disciplines. The Law School assists the general public to gain a better understanding of the rule of law and legal institutions, both domestic and foreign.
 
Statement of Performance Expectation
 
The Dean and the Law School Faculty set high standards of performance for teaching, scholarship, and service. The standard allocation of effort among teaching, scholarship, and service for full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty members is 40 percent allocated to teaching, 40 percent allocated to scholarship, and 20 percent allocated to service. The standard allocation for full-time clinical faculty is 80 to 90 percent allocated to teaching and the remainder divided between scholarship and service. Because faculty members serve as role models for future members of the legal profession, every faculty member is expected to adhere to the highest standards of professionalism. In their teaching and other interactions with students, faculty members should impart a respect for the rule of law and convey the high ethical standards demanded of those granted the privilege of a license to practice law.
 
Teaching
 
The Law School Faculty commits to excellence in teaching. A faculty member shall meet with and be well prepared for his or her classes, establish an appropriate classroom or other teaching environment, and maintain academic rigor in methods used to teach and to evaluate student performance. A faculty member shall possess an in-depth knowledge of and stay current with the subject matter of his or her courses and should strive to anticipate trends in the subject area. A faculty member shall employ teaching methods designed to impart substantive knowledge and develop in law students an ability to address legal problems in the subject area. A faculty member shall evaluate student performance in a manner that enables the faculty member to determine the level of each student’s mastery of the subject matter and ability to analyze legal problems in the area of law covered by the course.
 
The Law School’s expectations of teaching assignments (or teaching “load”) for full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty reflect an allocation of 40 percent effort, absent an approved differential allocation. Teaching assignments are not static. In any given year, teaching assignments of individual faculty members depend on the degree of research activity, the number of different courses taught, the number of new course preparations, the intensive nature of the course(s), the number of students taught, as well as the significance of any administrative or special non-classroom responsibilities. Tenure-track professors who are new to the classroom and who are developing their scholarly agenda meet their teaching obligations with a reduced teaching load. A full-time, tenured faculty member during a period of substantial scholarly work can meet his or her teaching obligation with a teaching load equal to the greater of 10 credit hours of classroom teaching or three courses per academic year. A full-time, tenured faculty member, who has been teaching the same courses for a number of years and during a period in which his or her scholarly agenda is less ambitious or productive, has an expected teaching load of an average of at least six credit hours per semester and no fewer than four courses per academic year.
 
Because of the distinctive features of clinical supervision and skills training, clinical faculty engage primarily in teaching activities and professional performance related to teaching. Such activities constitute 80 to 90 percent allocation of effort for full-time clinical faculty members.
 
Members of the clinical faculty are responsible for the classroom component of the clinical program in which they teach. Each full-time clinical faculty member who teaches in a “live client clinic” is responsible for supervision of 8 to 10 law students each semester. Clinical faculty members are permitted but generally not required to teach outside the clinical program.
 
A faculty member shall be available to students outside of class to answer questions and to provide formal and informal advising and mentoring, as reasonably required by the faculty member’s teaching obligations. As part of overall teaching responsibilities, a faculty member shall make a contribution to the extracurricular and intellectual life of the Law School and its students.
 
Research and scholarly activities
 
A full-time tenured or tenure-track faculty member should pursue an active scholarly agenda. The standard allocation of effort to scholarship for a full-time tenured or tenure-track faculty member is 40 percent. Legal scholarship requires the analysis of an ever-growing and ever- changing body of cases, statutes, regulations, and other sources of law from both academic and professional perspectives. It may take a variety of forms and be directed at a variety of audiences, including not only other scholars but also the Bench and Bar. Accordingly, research and scholarship in this context are defined broadly to include a wide range of activities designed to make an intellectual contribution to the Law School, the legal academy, or the legal community.
 
Legal scholarship involves investigation of issues and developments of interest concerning the law, including interdisciplinary work. Scholarship also entails the communication and dissemination of the investigation results in an appropriate forum and format to local, state, regional, national, or international constituencies. Tenured and tenure-track faculty members are expected to publish the results of at least some of their work in academic or scholarly professional journals, including law student-edited publications, and in books published by academic presses or in other legal texts with substantial scholarly content, such as treatises or casebooks.
 
Research agendas are by their nature long-term. Although annual reports are part of the faculty evaluation process, an evaluation system that relied on annual scholarly output for tenured faculty could have the unintended effect of encouraging such faculty members to focus on the short-term to have something to report each year. Therefore, a tenured faculty member’s scholarly activities will be evaluated based on a rolling three-year cycle. A tenure-track faculty member’s scholarly productivity will be examined each year and evaluated comprehensively as part of a third- year review and at the time of tenure as provided in the third-year review and promotion and tenure procedures and policies respectively.
 
Full-time clinical faculty members have some, but limited, scholarship obligations, due to the intensive hands-on nature of clinical teaching and supervision. A full-time clinical faculty member may elect to fulfill his or her scholarship obligations entirely through continuing legal education materials, publications related to clinical teaching, and articles in state or local bar journals. Clinical faculty members who aspire to achieve (full) clinical professor status must meet the additional promotion standards required by the Promotion and Tenure Standards and the University-level promotion and tenure committee.
 
Service
 
A full-time faculty member should engage in service to the Law School, the University, the legal profession, and the local, state, national, or international communities. Service to the Law School includes assistance to its admissions, career services, and development functions and mentoring of its current students, alumni, and tenure-track or “junior” faculty, as well as service on faculty committees. Absent an agreed-upon differential allocation of effort, a full-time tenured, tenure track, faculty member’s standard allocation of effort for service is 20 percent. A full-time clinical faculty member may allocate 10 or 20 percent of his or her effort to service.
 
The critical role of law in society imposes on Law School Faculty a heightened service obligation, not only within the university, which often draws upon the legal expertise of the law faculty, but also to society at large. As the law school for the flagship university of the State of Kansas, the School of Law has a special service obligation to the Bar, Bench, and political leaders of the State. “Service” in this context, therefore, is broadly defined and intended to reflect a faculty member’s individual interests and expertise.
 
At a minimum, each full-time faculty member shall serve on assigned committees within the Law School and appropriate service on university-wide committees. Such service obligations shall be performed in a timely and professional manner, including but not limited to, attendance and participation in assigned committees and satisfactory completion of assigned tasks. A full-time faculty member is also encouraged to participate in professional associations and to provide service related to their academic expertise.
 
Allocation of Effort
 
The Dean and Law School Faculty recognize that a faculty member might not maintain a constant balance of effort among teaching, research, and service over the course of a career. The Dean may, in consultation with the faculty member involved, reallocate the weight of effort assigned to teaching, scholarship, and service to take advantage of a faculty member’s strengths and current interests. In all cases, reduction of effort in one area should be augmented by additional effort in other areas. Differential allocation shall be documented.
 
Such adjustments may include, but are not limited to, assignment of additional classes with a consequent reduction of scholarship and service expectations, or relief from teaching responsibilities to facilitate the completion of major research or service projects. The process for any such adjustment will be informal and cooperative, and its precise contours will depend upon each individual case. To the extent that differential allocation of effort is the result of the evaluation process described below, then those procedures apply.
 
Annual Evaluation System
 
The Dean is responsible for conducting the evaluation of each Law School Faculty member pursuant to this Faculty Evaluation Plan. The Dean may, in his or her discretion, seek the assistance of an associate dean holding tenure or other tenured Law School Faculty member in the evaluation of a faculty member, especially of scholarship in fields outside the Dean’s area of expertise or for peer evaluations of teaching from time to time.
 
Upon call of the Dean, each faculty member shall submit to the Dean a written annual report describing his or her teaching and service activities in the preceding year, and research in the preceding three years. The annual report shall take the form and format directed by the Dean from time to time.
 
The annual report shall call for information concerning the courses taught, approximate class size, teaching materials used, teaching methods, and examination or other evaluation technique employed. Faculty members shall also include any other information specifically requested by the Dean related to their teaching or any other information relevant to their teaching activities, such as the use of innovative teaching techniques, the preparation of teaching materials, or other factors that may reflect on the level of effort involved in teaching a course.
 
The annual report shall call for information, in a form specified by the Dean, concerning publications, presentations, and other scholarly or research activities completed during the evaluation period and works in progress at the time of the annual report.
 
The annual report shall require each faculty member to identify all significant Law School, University, community, and professional service. Where appropriate, faculty members should indicate the time commitment entailed in a particular service activity, or describe the importance of the service activity for the Law School, University, community, or profession.
 
In evaluating a faculty member’s performance, the Dean shall review the faculty member’s annual report, student evaluations from the faculty member’s courses, and any peer feedback on scholarship or teaching that was performed during the evaluation period. The Dean may consider any other applicable information brought to his or her attention. This review shall be conducted in a timely fashion and considered in connection with the faculty member’s merit salary determination.
 
Because of the varied and highly individualized nature of faculty members’ activities, the Law School Faculty has not established formal rankings or any set formula for evaluating faculty performance, leaving such matters to the discretion of the Dean. The Dean shall meet with each faculty member at least annually to discuss the faculty member’s allocation of effort, performance in the preceding year, and expectations for the subsequent year. The Dean shall provide a written indication of satisfactory performance. In the event the Dean’s evaluation of a faculty member is unsatisfactory or a faculty member is deemed to be underperforming in any area of responsibility, the Dean shall provide a more extensive written evaluation to the faculty member outlining areas of under-performance. The faculty member shall be given an opportunity to supplement his or her annual report with additional information, respond to any specific deficiencies identified in the evaluation, and invoke the procedures for conflict resolution, if necessary.
 

Conflict Resolution Process

The Law School Faculty believes that the procedures for resolving disputes arising out of the annual evaluation process should be as informal as possible while protecting a faculty member’s rights. This document sets forth the basic procedures and requirements for conflict resolution arising under this Faculty Evaluation Plan. These basic procedures may be supplemented as appropriate in individual cases with additional procedures that are consistent with these general requirements and other applicable requirements under University or Board of Regents rules and regulations and applicable state and federal law.

Any faculty member has the right to meet with the Dean concerning:

a. the Dean’s annual evaluation of the faculty member’s performance;
b. a conclusion that the faculty member appears to be failing to meet the expectations and overall level of performance as expressed in this Faculty Evaluation Plan;
c. a recommendation to the Provost that the faculty member be dismissed for a sustained overall failure to meet academic responsibilities.

At any such meeting the faculty member is entitled to notice of the grounds for the Dean’s action or conclusions, and an opportunity to respond to those grounds. However, such a meeting is not a formal hearing for the taking and consideration of evidence.

After meeting with the Dean, the faculty member may appeal the Dean’s decision concerning any of the listed events to:

a. The Law School Promotion and Tenure Committee; or
b. A three-person committee composed of a tenured faculty member chosen by the Dean, a tenured faculty member chosen by the person seeking review, and a third tenured faculty member chosen by the previous two members.

The nature and scope of procedures to be followed in conducting such review shall be within the discretion of the committee, which may adopt the formal procedures applicable to faculty grievances or such other procedures as the committee deems appropriate. Any such procedures, however, shall be consistent with the requirements of University and Board of Regents rules and regulations, as well as the requirements of state and federal law.

After meeting with the faculty member who sought the review, the committee shall make a recommendation to the Dean as to whether the Dean’s decision should be sustained, modified in some manner, or reversed. After receiving the committee’s recommendation, the Dean retains sole responsibility and discretion whether to affirm, reverse, or modify the initial decision.

Outcomes of Annual Performance Evaluation:

The integration of the annual evaluation process with the achievement of departmental and individual professional goals, differential allocation of effort, personnel decisions (with the exception of promotion and tenure), and merit salary decisions is committed to the sound discretion of the Dean. Integration of annual evaluations with the process for promotion and tenure shall be in accordance with those processes, as duly adopted from time to time. The Dean shall consult with the involved faculty member and any other personnel directly affected in connection with any action that would have a significant impact on that person’s responsibilities.
The Dean retains the discretion to consult with associate deans who are members of the tenured faculty as necessary or appropriate to the evaluation of a faculty member.

Faculty Development Opportunities

The Dean, in consultation with the responsible associate dean(s) and subject to budgetary constraints, shall make available to faculty members options and resources to support a faculty member’s professional development, enhancement, and renewal. These opportunities for faculty development may be facilitated through appropriate shifts in teaching responsibilities, research expectations, and service obligations.

If the Dean determines that a faculty member is failing to meet departmental expectations and the overall level of performance expressed in this Faculty Evaluation Plan, the Dean and the faculty member shall develop a written plan to improve the faculty member’s performance. Such a plan shall specify areas for improvement and may include the provisions for faculty development stated above, or other appropriate interventions, such as counseling or medical leave. The Dean may call upon the University administration for assistance in constructing such a plan, including seeking additional resources, if needed. A faculty member may reject any plan recommended to aid his or her performance, subject to the caveat that a sustained overall failure to meet academic responsibilities is a basis for dismissal.

Amendment

Any faculty member may petition the Law School Faculty to change this Faculty Evaluation Plan at any time. Any amendments shall be adopted by a majority vote of the members of the Law School Faculty present and voting at a regularly scheduled meeting provided notice was given of the intent to amend the Faculty Evaluation Plan, in whole or in part, or at a specially called meeting for the purpose of amending the Faculty Evaluation Plan, in whole or in part. Add: Before becoming effective, any amendments to the Faculty Evaluation Plan are subject to review and approval by the Provost.

Faculty Evaluation Plan Addendum: Allocation of Effort: Approved by Faculty, March 25, 2014

The School of Law has a responsibility to serve numerous constituencies, including students, legal academia, alumni, practicing lawyers, judges, government agencies, Kansas citizens, the national and international community, and the University. We have a longstanding tradition of recognizing that it is appropriate for faculty members to vary widely in their service to these respective constituencies.   This diversity of effort typically becomes manifest after tenure is granted, and for that reason the promotion and tenure standards do not constitute an appropriate or sufficient standard for evaluating post-tenure activity. Specifically, the traditional 40% teaching, 40% scholarship, and 20% service allocation of time may not accurately reflect the actual allocations employed by teaching faculty. Likewise, the activities and expectations for library faculty may vary depending on position and job description.

All full-time teaching and library faculty of course have a responsibility to discharge their Law School duties on a full-time basis. It is important, however, to recognize that faculty members may vary widely in the way in which they choose to fulfill that obligation.

The attached “Faculty Activity Templates” are designed to recognize that diversity. Each  template sets forth a different allocation of the faculty member’s time. Prior to the beginning of each academic year, each faculty member, in consultation with the Dean and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs or Library Director, elects the appropriate template for the forthcoming academic year. A faculty member may vary his or her template election from year to year. In conjunction with the Dean, a faculty member may create a unique template, so long as that template represents full-time effort.

Each template describes the activities that would be expected of a faculty member as to each time allocation. Evaluation of faculty for purposes of post-tenure review will be based on the extent to which the faculty member has achieved those expectations. These expectations will also be taken into account as part of the Dean’s annual evaluation. To that extent, the Faculty Activity Templates supplement the Faculty Evaluation Plan adopted May 12, 2009.

The templates are effective only as to the academic year 2015-2016 and subsequent years. Evaluation of faculty activities undertaken during academic years prior to 2015-2016 will continue to be based on the Faculty Evaluation Plan adopted May 12, 2009. During the 2014- 2015 academic year faculty members who wish to adopt a template other than the Standard Allocation should discuss this with the Dean and plan appropriate adjustments for 2015-16.

Membership on the law faculty of course carries additional responsibilities that are not listed on the templates and that apply to everyone. One might say that these are the duties of a citizen of the Law School community. This would include such items as attendance at faculty meetings, supervision of student Review and Journal works, and timely and appropriate dissemination and recording of scholarship. In addition, good citizenship involves support for events at which the Law School interacts with outsiders, including faculty workshops, Law School sponsored symposiums, presentations by outside speakers, and alumni gatherings. No faculty member has time to attend all these events, but attendance at a reasonable number is a legitimate expectation.

Template 1: Tenured Faculty Standard Allocation of Effort

Category Percent Core Equivalencies Explanation
Teaching 40%
Per academic year, faculty teach:
a) 12 credit hours composed of 4 courses; and
b) An additional for-credit teaching experience (e.g., journal advisor, moot court coach, independent study supervisor, or SJD chair).
The dean may designate courses as the equivalent of teaching additional credit hours due to their time- intensive nature. For example,
a) Drafting-intensive courses;
b) Non-clinical, simulation courses;
c) Multiple-assessment courses;
d) Newly prepared courses, during the first semester such courses are offered; or
e) Faculty teaching 13 credit-hours under sub (a), may be deemed to have satisfied the sub (b) requirement.
The allocation of effort to teaching includes student-contact time (e.g., office hours, meetings, emails). Teaching includes being an academic and professional advisor and mentor, as well as regular presence of the faculty member in Green Hall beyond instructional hours and limited office hours. For PTR purposes, faculty teaching 13 credits a year and completing the sub (b) requirement have demonstrated performance beyond the base 40% allocation of effort.
Scholarship 40% Per academic year, faculty produce 1 major article.
The dean, in consultation with the faculty member, may determine that other types of scholarship are equivalent to one major article, which include but are not limited to:
a) Substantial progress on a book, as defined relative to the scope of the project.
b) A substantial new edition of a book, treatise or casebook.
c) 2-3 minor publications, such as bar journal pieces, response essays, or annual updates.
d) 4-5 academic, CLE, or other professional presentations with significant substantive content prepared by the faculty member, not coupled with publication, if each is a new preparation and not otherwise counted as service.
e) Annual updates to 2-3 books, treatises or casebooks.
f) In relation to an empirical project, the construction and coding of a large data set or the conducting of interviews.
g) The drafting of several pro bono appellate briefs.
h) Some combination of the above.
The list of equivalencies is strictly illustrative. The dean and faculty member may find any alternative scholarly output as meeting the 40% allocation of effort with a showing that the scholarly output is equivalent, in effort, to the production of 1 major article.
Service

20%

Per academic year, faculty fully and attentively:
a) Serve on 2 KU committees (either university or law school); and
b) Perform substantial additional service to the Law School, University, public, profession, legal academy, the region, the national, or the international community.
 
Service means unpaid work, de minimis payments excepted. The scope of service that may fall under sub (b) is vast and will be determined by each faculty member in consultation with the dean. A few non-exhaustive examples follow:
a) Service to the academy (such as AALS section leadership, peer reviewer, publisher board of editors, ALI service, or conference organizer)
b) Service to the profession (such as pro bono work, or active involvement in a bar organization, or CLE that is not otherwise counted as scholarship)
c) Service to the public (such as work for the legislature or other government body or board service for a public interest group)
d) Additional service to the school or University (such as exceptional student recruiting, fostering international relationships, or extra committee work).

Template 2: Tenured Faculty Teaching Emphasis

Category Percent Core Equivalencies Explanation
Teaching 60%
Per academic year, faculty teach:
a) 18 credit hours composed of 6 courses; and
b) An additional for-credit teaching experience (e.g., journal advisor, moot court coach, independent study supervisor, or SJD chair).
The dean may designate courses as the equivalent of teaching additional credit hours due to their time-intensive nature. For example,
a) Drafting-intensive courses;
b) Non-clinical, simulation courses;
c) Multiple-assessment courses;
d) Newly prepared courses, during the first semester such courses are offered; or
e) Faculty teaching 19 credit-hours under sub (a), may be deemed to have satisfied the sub (b) requirement.
The allocation of effort to teaching includes student-contact time (e.g., office hours, meetings, emails). Teaching includes being an academic and professional advisor and mentor, as well as regular presence of the faculty member in Green Hall beyond instructional hours and limited office hours. For PTR purposes, faculty teaching 19 or more credits a year and completing the sub (b) requirement have demonstrated performance beyond the base 60% allocation of effort.
Scholarship 20% Per academic year, faculty make substantial progress toward completion of 1 major article.
The dean, in consultation with the faculty member, may determine that other types of scholarship are equivalent to one major article, which include but are not limited to:
a) Progress on a book, as defined relative to the scope of the project.
b) Substantial progress toward completion of a new edition of a book, treatise or casebook.
c) An annual update to a book, treatise or casebook.
d) 1-2 minor publications, such as bar journal pieces, response essays, or annual updates.
e) 2 academic, CLE, or other professional presentations with significant substantive content prepared by the faculty member, not coupled with publication, if each is a new preparation and not otherwise counted as service.
f) In relation to an empirical project, substantial progress toward the construction and coding of a large data set or the conducting of interviews.
g) Some combination of the above.
The list of equivalencies is strictly illustrative. The dean and faculty member may find any alternative scholarly output as meeting the 20% allocation of effort with a showing that the scholarly output is equivalent, in effort, to substantial progress completion of 1 major article.
Service 20%
Per academic year, faculty fully and attentively:
a) Serve on 2 KU committees (either university or law school); and
b) Perform substantial additional service to the Law School, University, public, profession, legal academy, the region, the national, or the international community.
 
Service means unpaid work, de minimis payments excepted. The scope of service that may fall under sub (b) is vast and will be determined by each faculty member in consultation with the dean. A few non-exhaustive examples follow:
a) Service to the academy (such as AALS section leadership, peer reviewer, publisher board of editors, ALI service, or conference organizer)
b) Service to the profession (such as pro bono work, or active involvement in a bar organization, or CLE that is not otherwise counted as scholarship)
c) Service to the public (such as work for the legislature or other government body or board service for a public interest group)
Additional service to the school or University (such as exceptional student recruiting, fostering international relationships, or extra committee work).

Template 3: Tenured Faculty Scholarship Emphasis

Category Percent Core Equivalencies Explanation
Teaching 30%
Per academic year, faculty teach:
a) 10 credit hours composed of 3 courses; and
b) An additional for-credit teaching experience (e.g., journal advisor, moot court coach, independent study supervisor, or SJD chair).
The dean may designate courses as the equivalent of teaching additional credit hours due to their time-intensive nature. For example,
a) Drafting-intensive courses;
b) Non-clinical, simulation courses;
c) Multiple-assessment courses;
d) Newly prepared courses, during the first semester such courses are offered; or
e) Faculty teaching 11 credit-hours under sub (a), may be deemed to have satisfied the sub (b) requirement.
The allocation of effort to teaching includes student-contact time (e.g., office hours, meetings, emails). Teaching includes being an academic and professional advisor and mentor, as well as regular presence of the faculty member in Green Hall beyond instructional hours and limited office hours. For PTR purposes, faculty teaching 11 credits a year and completing the sub (b) requirement have demonstrated performance beyond the base 30% allocation of effort.
Scholarship 50% Per academic year, faculty produce 1 major article plus additional substantial scholarly contributions.
The dean, in consultation with the faculty member, may determine what production meets this heightened expectation, which include but are not limited to:
a) Substantial progress on a book, as defined relative to the scope of the project, a minor publication and 1-2 substantial presentations.
b) A substantial new edition of a book, treatise or casebook, and 2 academic, CLE, or other professional presentations with significant substantive content prepared by the faculty member, not coupled with publication, if each is a new preparation and not otherwise counted as service.
c) 5-6 minor publications, such as bar journal pieces, response essays, or annual updates.
d) 1 major article and 1 annual update to a book, treatise or casebook.
e) Some combination of the above.
The list of equivalencies is strictly illustrative. The dean and faculty member may find any alternative scholarly output as meeting the 50% allocation of effort with a showing that the scholarly output is equivalent, in effort, to the production of 1 major article and an additional substantial scholarly contribution.
Service 20%
Per academic year, faculty fully and attentively:
a) Serve on 2 KU committees (either university or law school); and
b) Perform substantial additional service to the Law School, University, public, profession, legal academy, the region, the national, or the international community.
 
Service means unpaid work, de minimis payments excepted. The scope of service that may fall under sub (b) is vast and will be determined by each faculty member in consultation with the dean. A few non-exhaustive examples follow:
a) Service to the academy (such as AALS section leadership, peer reviewer, publisher board of editors, ALI service, or conference organizer)
b) Service to the profession (such as pro bono work, or active involvement in a bar organization, or CLE that is not otherwise counted as scholarship)
c) Service to the public (such as work for the legislature or other government body or board service for a public interest group)
d) Additional service to the school or University (such as exceptional student recruiting, fostering international relationships, or extra committee work).

Template 4: Tenured Faculty Service Emphasis

Category Percent Core Equivalencies Explanation
Teaching 40%
Per academic year, faculty teach:
a) 12 credit hours composed of 4 courses; and
b) An additional for-credit teaching experience (e.g., journal advisor, moot court coach, independent study supervisor, or SJD chair).
The dean may designate courses as the equivalent of teaching additional credit hours due to their time-intensive nature. For example,
a) Drafting-intensive courses;
b) Non-clinical, simulation courses;
c) Multiple-assessment courses;
d) Newly prepared courses, during the first semester such courses are offered; or
e) Faculty teaching 13 credit-hours under sub (a), may be deemed to have satisfied the sub (b) requirement.
The allocation of effort to teaching includes student-contact time (e.g., office hours, meetings, emails). Teaching includes being an academic and professional advisor and mentor, as well as regular presence of the faculty member in Green Hall beyond instructional hours and limited office hours. For PTR purposes, faculty teaching 13 credits a year and completing the sub (b) requirement have demonstrated performance beyond the base 40% allocation of effort.
Scholarship 20% Per academic year, faculty make substantial progress toward completion of 1 major article.
The dean, in consultation with the faculty member, may determine that other types of scholarship are equivalent to one major article, which include but are not limited to:
a) Progress on a book, as defined relative to the scope of the project.
b) Substantial progress toward completion of a new edition of a book, treatise or casebook.
c) An annual update to a book, treatise or casebook.
d) 1-2 minor publications, such as bar journal pieces, response essays, or annual updates.
e) 2 academic, CLE, or other professional presentations with significant substantive content prepared by the faculty member, not coupled with publication, if each is a new preparation and not otherwise counted as service.
f) In relation to an empirical project, substantial progress toward the construction and coding of a large data set or the conducting of interviews.
g) Some combination of the above.
The list of equivalencies is strictly illustrative. The dean and faculty member may find any alternative scholarly output as meeting the 20% allocation of effort with a showing that the scholarly output is equivalent, in effort, to substantial progress completion of 1 major article.
Service 40%
Per academic year, faculty fully and attentively:
a) Serve on 4 KU committees, likely as a chair of 1-2 (either university or law school); and
b) Perform extraordinary additional service to the Law School, University, public, profession, legal academy, or the regional national, or international community.
 
Service means unpaid work, de minimis payments excepted. The scope of service that may be deemed extraordinary is vast and will be determined by each faculty member in consultation with the dean. A few non- exhaustive examples follow:
a) Leadership in the academy (such as AALS leadership, ABA site visit leader, or large-scale scholarly conference organizer ).
b) Leadership in the profession (such as KBA or ABA leadership).
c) Leadership in service to the public (such as substantial legislative drafting).
d) Non-decanal leadership to the school or University (such as directing a center or interdisciplinary group, or leadership in faculty governance).

Template 5: Library Faculty with Teaching Component

Category Percent Core Equivalencies Explanation
Professional Performance 70%
Per fiscal year, the allocation of effort for professional performance is based on the demonstration of competence, effectiveness, creativity and initiative in librarianship. The emphasis is on librarians as practitioners.
Law library faculty engage in activities which support the research and scholarly pursuits of faculty, students, the general public, practicing lawyers, pro se advocates, Kansas citizens and the University comprised of but not limited to:
a) development and maintenance of library resources, information systems and collections with a focus on the curricular needs of the law school
b) reference and outreach services for various constituencies
c) administration of budget, personnel and facilities, through planning and supervision of librarians, staff and student employees.
A librarian may be assigned duties by the dean and director, based on the needs of the library and law school in:
a) faculty research
b) instructional services
c) acquisitions, cataloging and technical services
d) public services
e) collection services
f) training students and patrons to use collections, databases and materials
This requirement is met through performance of specific duties set out in each librarian’s job description or professional assignments which may include a combination or selection of the above listed activities and equivalencies.
Scholarship 10% Per fiscal year, Law library faculty may produce professional publications, or engage in creative activity or research, which contribute to library science, law librarianship or the legal profession. The allocation may vary depending upon responsibilities or position description.
Law librarian scholarship may include traditional or nontraditional professional activities including:
a) progress on books or book length guides or reference materials
b) authorship or co-authorship of book chapters or articles
c) annotated bibliographies, indexes or reports
d) presentations at professional meetings, exhibitions, poster sessions or displays
e) bibliographic or technical documentation
f) website design
g) profession related blog postings
The list of equivalencies is strictly illustrative. The director, dean and librarian may find any alternative scholarly or research activity as meeting the 10% allocation of effort with a showing that the activity is equivalent, in effort, to the completion of any traditional or nontraditional professional activities listed above. Placement of publications and research work is normally in law library journals, special library journals and related venues. Activities may appear in print or electronically.
Teaching 10%
Per fiscal year law library faculty teach 1-4 credit hours composed of:
a) for-credit or non-credit components of courses (e.g., lawyering and labs),
b) seminars and research based courses; and/or
c) other for-credit teaching experiences (e.g., journal advisor, moot court coach, or independent study supervisor).
The dean may designate courses or activities as the equivalent of teaching credit hours due to their time-intensive nature. For example:
a) Collaborative teaching with University Libraries
b) Collaborative teaching with Emporia State University SLIM program or internship experiential learning activities in librarianship.
The allocation of effort to teaching includes student-contact time (e.g., office hours, meetings, emails).
Teaching includes being an academic and professional advisor and mentor, as well as regular presence of the law library faculty member in Green Hall beyond instructional hours and limited office hours.
Service 10%
Per fiscal year, law library faculty:
a) serve on 1 or more KU committees (either university or law school);
b) additional service to the Law School, University;
c) serve the public, law firms, law libraries, other academic and special libraries, legal academy, and or the regional, national or international community.
 
Service means unpaid work, de minimis payments excepted beyond assigned library responsibilities. The scope of service that may fall under sub (b) is vast and will be determined by each law library faculty member in consultation with or by assignment from the dean and director. A few examples include:
a) Service to the academy, profession, or related fields (such as AALL, KLA or ALA section leadership, ABA site team work, or large-scale professional conference organization)
b) Service to the public (work for the bar, courts or other government body or board service for a public interest group or library)
c) Additional service to the school or University (such as collaborative work with KU Libraries, or consortia)

Template 6: Library Faculty without Teaching Component

Category Percent Core Equivalencies Explanation
Professional Performance 80%
Per fiscal year, the allocation of effort for professional performance is based on the demonstration of competence, effectiveness, creativity and initiative in librarianship. The emphasis is on librarians as practitioners.
Law library faculty engage in activities which support the research and scholarly pursuits of faculty, students, the general public, practicing lawyers, pro se advocates, Kansas citizens and the University comprised of but not limited to:
a) development and maintenance of library resources, information systems and collections with a focus on the curricular needs of the law school
b) (reference and outreach services for various constituencies
c) administration of budget, personnel and facilities, through planning and supervision of librarians, staff and student employees.
A librarian may be assigned duties by the dean and director, based on the needs of the library and law school in:
a) faculty research
b) instructional services
c) acquisitions, cataloging and technical services
d) public services
e) collection services
f) training students and patrons to use collections, databases and materials
This requirement is met through performance of specific duties set out in each librarian’s job description or professional assignments which may include a combination or selection of the above listed activities and equivalencies.
Scholarship 10% Per fiscal year, Law library faculty may produce professional publications, or engage in creative activity or research, which contribute to library science, law librarianship or the legal profession. The allocation may vary depending upon responsibilities or position description.
Law librarian scholarship may include traditional or nontraditional professional activities including:
a) progress on books or book length guides or reference materials
b) authorship or co-authorship of book chapters or articles
c) annotated bibliographies, indexes or reports
d) presentations at professional meetings, exhibitions, poster sessions or displays
e) bibliographic or technical documentation
f) website design
g) profession related blog postings
The list of equivalencies is strictly illustrative. The director, dean and librarian may find any alternative scholarly or research activity as meeting the 10% allocation of effort with a showing that the activity is equivalent, in effort, to the completion of any traditional or nontraditional professional activities listed above. Placement of publications and research work is normally in law library journals, special library journals and related venues. Activities may appear in print or electronically.
Service 10%
Per fiscal year, law library faculty:
serve on 1 or more KU committees (either university or law school);
a) additional service to the Law School, University;
b) serve the public, law firms, law libraries, other academic and special libraries, legal academy, and or the regional, national or international community.
 
Service means unpaid work, de minimis payments excepted beyond assigned library responsibilities. The scope of service that may fall under sub (b) is vast and will be determined by each law library faculty member in consultation with or by assignment from the dean and director. A few examples include:
a) Service to the academy, profession, or related fields (such as AALL, KLA or ALA section leadership, ABA site team work, or large-scale professional conference organization)
b) Service to the public (work for the bar, courts or other government body or board service for a public interest group or library)
c) Additional service to the school or University (such as collaborative work with KU Libraries, or consortia)
Contact: 

School of Law
Green Hall
1535 West 15th Street
Lawrence, KS 66045
785-864-4550

Approved by: 
School of Law Faculty
Approved on: 
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Effective on: 
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Review Cycle: 
Annual (As Needed)
Keywords: 
evaluation, addendum, law school
Change History: 

10/12/2021: Converted from PDF page to live web page.
03/25/2014: Allocation of effort approved.
05/12/2009: Faculty Evaluation Plan approved.

Academic Categories: 
Academic Work & Evaluations
Promotion & Tenure
Personnel: Faculty/Academic Staff Categories: 
Performance
Promotion & Tenure

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