SoMSS Evaluation and Salary Adjustment Plan (Oct 27, 2011) This document shall take effect upon approval by a majority vote of the tenure-track faculty and academic professionals in a secret ballot, and upon approval by the University. If any of the policies described below are not consistent with college, university, or Board of Regents policies, the latter shall prevail. I. Overview of Performance Evaluation The periodic review of performance of tenure-track faculty, lecturers, instructors, academic professionals and faculty associates serves three purposes. First, it provides School members with feedback on the quality and impact of their performance. Second, it provides information for decisions about retention and post-tenure review. Third, it provides a basis for salary adjustment decisions. The evaluation of performance is a complex process that must take into account a School member's contributions in research, teaching and service. Because a person can serve the School in many ways, and because each person's activities may change as interests and career goals change, evaluation procedures must contain sufficient flexibility to provide valid assessments of each School member. II. Performance Evaluation for Tenure-Track Faculty A. Faculty Responsibility Profiles Tenure-track faculty are expected to make substantial contributions in teaching, research and service. Normally, a tenure-track faculty member will devote 40% of his/her effort to instructional activities, 40% to research and creative activities, and 20% to service activities. 1. Responsibility Profile for Instructional Activities Tenure-track faculty have comprehensive instructional responsibilities that include classroom teaching, student advising and mentoring, curriculum development and other collegial, cooperative and interdisciplinary efforts supporting instruction. It is assumed that these responsibilities will be carried out effectively, fairly, and professionally. 2. Responsibility Profile for Research and Creative Activities Tenure-track faculty have comprehensive responsibilities involving research and creative activity appropriate to their respective fields. Each faculty member's research/creative activity is expected to result in contributions to scholarship which include refereed publications, invitations to make presentations at conferences, symposia and other meetings, and other visible indicators of high quality research. In addition, research activity is expected to have a positive impact on the School's graduate education program. 3. Responsibility Profile for Service and Outreach Activities Tenure-track faculty are expected to share in service responsibilities that support School, College and University programs, the profession, and the community. Service responsibilities include, but are not limited to, membership on committees and panels, administrative positions, serving as official representatives of the university, outreach efforts, community partnerships, high-school and community college liaison, and service activities in the mathematical sciences communities. 4. Procedures for Determining Prospective Responsibility Profiles (Workplans) Annually, each faculty member has a responsibility profile specifying distribution of effort in the coming year. It is expected that responsibility profiles for most tenure-track faculty members will specify 40% of effort for each of instructional and research/creative activities, and 20% for service. In general, 10% of effort shall be assigned to instructional activities per course taught. An assignment of 40% of effort devoted to instructional activities presupposes teaching 4 courses (12-14 credit hours) per academic year. Assignment of 0% effort for instructional activities will only be permitted for faculty on leave or on sabbatical from the School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences. An assignment of 40% to research and creative activity requires that the faculty member make contributions to the mathematical sciences in accordance with the performance criteria defined in II.B.2. The research mission of a major public university cannot be overemphasized. For this reason it will only be under truly exceptional circumstances in which a person devotes 0% effort to research and creative activities. Such an assignment can only be made after approval by the School Director and the Personnel and Budget Committee has been obtained. An assignment of 20% to service assumes that the faculty member will contribute substantially to School and University goals through service activities described in II.B.3. It is expected that most faculty will have the 40-40-20 distribution of effort. However, to encourage faculty in their efforts to deliver maximum value in support of School and University goals, individual faculty members may have assigned responsibility profiles that differ from School averages. Faculty requesting a responsibility profile that differs from the School norm are strongly encouraged to submit a statement of planned activities for the upcoming academic year. This statement will be used by the School Director, in consultation with the faculty member and the PBC, to determine percentages that more appropriately represent the distribution of effort. Such performance agreements do not supersede established promotion criteria. The responsibility profiles for faculty on sabbatical leaves will take into account the nature of the sabbatical proposal as well as ongoing commitments to graduate and undergraduate students. The responsibility profiles for each individual faculty member will be recorded and acknowledged on the Faculty Annual Prospective Responsibility Assignment Form, Appendix A. If a faculty member does not acknowledge the assigned profile in writing, the standard School responsibility profile, 40%, 40%, 20% to instructional, research/creative and service activities, respectively, will take effect. B. Performance Evaluation Procedures Faculty performance in all areas of assigned responsibility will be rated as unsatisfactory (1), satisfactory (2), meritorious (3), or highly meritorious (4). After an individual faculty member's performance has been evaluated in these areas, a weighted average is computed, using the weights specified in the performance agreement. The Director, in consultation with the PBC, assigns the overall rating, using the weighted average as a guide. A faculty member whose contribution in any area is deemed especially positive or negative (with particular emphasis on teaching) will be considered for special adjustment of the overall performance rating. A faculty member who has behaved in an unprofessional manner, such as by plagiarism, shall receive an overall rating of unsatisfactory, regardless of other contributions. To insure that each faculty member's performance is fairly and fully considered, faculty members are asked to submit the following materials each year at the dates specified by the latest university and college policies for the most recent year of the review period, namely, from January 1 to December 31 of that year: - A "Summary of Activities" form, Appendix B, or an electronic Faculty Activity Report as required by the latest university, college and school policies. - An updated curriculum vita including a list of publications. - Additional material appropriate for documenting special contributions to instruction, research, or service. In addition, the School Director and the PBC will solicit input from Associate Directors, Directors, and other faculty members, as appropriate, concerning details of School members' performance. It is recognized that some activities normally listed in one of the categories below may, on occasion, involve a significant contribution to another category as well. Each faculty member is encouraged to use the optional narratives in the relevant sections of the Summary of Activities form or the Faculty Activity Report to point out when such overlaps occur and give any relevant justification. In cases in which a faculty member feels that the nature of her/his contributions is not accurately represented by the categorization given below, a precise description of his/her contributions should be given in his/her prospective responsibility profile. 1. The Evaluation of Instructional Activity The following activities provide evidence of faculty members' performance in instructional activities - Effective classroom teaching. The primary criterion for evaluation of instructional activity is the faculty member's performance in the teaching of courses in the School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences. Faculty being evaluated should provide a one-page narrative describing their classroom activities, including items such as i) unusual preparation demands of a class (for instance, a topics class with no textbook), ii) the amount of homework assigned and grading done by the faculty member, and iii) innovative instructional approaches (or traditional approaches that are effective). For supporting material, faculty members may include syllabi for recent classes taught, and examples of handouts, software, or other noteworthy instructional material. In evaluating the performance, the Director and PBC shall consider all available sources of evidence, including: student teaching evaluations, results from peer evaluations based on classroom and/or seminar visitations (when available), written comments by students, and honors and awards for teaching. - Development of instructional materials, including computer software, for use at ASU. - External funding for development of instructional materials. - Participating in degree development or curriculum enhancement. - Invited talks on teaching related matters; relevant publications. - Offering workshops or seminars related to teaching. - Directing graduate students' research. - Serving on Master's or Ph.D. examining or supervisory committees. - Supervising undergraduate honors theses. - Providing research experiences for undergraduates. - Providing independent study or directed reading courses. - Advising students or student organizations. - Contributions to the education of prospective high school and elementary school teachers. 2. The Evaluation of Research and Creative Activity Researchers in the mathematical sciences take different approaches to scholarship. Consequently, the School Director and the PBC shall consider the overall quality and importance of the contributions to the discipline, rather than the quantity of publications, when evaluating research and creative activity. The Director and PBC shall consider all available sources of evidence attesting to the quality of scholarship, including: - Refereed research journal articles. - Refereed articles in conference proceedings. - Research monographs. - Textbooks relating to mathematics, statistics, and mathematics education. - Survey articles. - Other research and scholarly publications. - External funding. - Invited presentations at conferences and symposia. - Invited lectures at universities and research laboratories. - Contributed presentations at conferences and symposia. - Honors and awards for research and creative activity in the mathematical sciences. - Service as referee, editor, or associate editor for a journal, conference proceedings, or funding agency in the mathematical sciences 3. The Evaluation of Service Every faculty member is expected to participate in service activities that support the Mission of the School. Among the activities which provide evidence of service performance are: - Serving on School, College and University committees. - Consulting with ASU faculty and staff within the University. - Pro bono external consulting. - Collaborative and cooperative efforts with another department, school, or institution. - Conference, symposium or workshop organization; obtaining grants to organize a conference or workshop. - Serving on a national or international panel related to the School's Mission. - Serving as an officer of a scholarly society. - Participation on committees in appropriate professional organizations. - Liaison with local area high schools and community colleges. - Community outreach efforts. - Activities relating to the general improvement of the educational system, such as coordination with other institutions, colleges, etc. The Director and the PBC will consider all available information, including committee reports, in evaluating a faculty member's service contribution. Every such committee report will be made available to each member of the committee by the committee chair. III. Performance Evaluation for Lecturers, Instructors and Faculty Associates A. Responsibility Profiles Lecturers and instructors are expected to make substantial contributions in teaching and service, but do not have responsibilities in research. For the School as a whole, approximately 80% of the effort of lecturers and instructors is devoted to instructional activities and 20% of the effort is devoted to service. At the discretion of the Director and the PBC, individuals may have an assigned responsibility profile that differs from the school average. Faculty associates are expected to make their entire contribution in teaching. The normal teaching load for lecturers and instructors is four courses (12-16 credit hours) per semester, while faculty associates have appointments on a course by course basis. At the discretion of the Directors and the PBC, lecturers and instructors may have a reduced teaching load to enable them to take larger service responsibilities. For such persons, 10% of effort is allocated to instructional activities for each course taught. B. Performance Evaluation Procedures The procedures for the annual evaluation of lecturers, instructors and faculty associates are the same as tenure-track faculty except that in evaluating performance of lecturers, instructors and faculty associates, the School Director and PBC receive counsel and input from the two elected lecturers. Each person is evaluated separately for instructional activities and for service, and a weighted average is taken of the two scores for assistance in determining the overall evaluation. The weighting is according to the assigned workload in the performance agreement. The overall evaluation will result in an assignment to one of four performance categories: unsatisfactory, satisfactory, meritorious, or highly meritorious. To insure that each faculty member's performance is fairly and fully considered, faculty members are asked to submit the following materials each year (non-tenure-track faculty by the first workday after January 1, tenure-track faculty by January 31): - A "Summary of Activities" form, Appendix C, for the most recent year of the review period; namely, from January 1 to December 31 of that year. - An updated curriculum vita including a list of publications. - Any additional material appropriate for documenting special contributions to instruction, research, or service. In addition, the Director and the PBC will solicit input from Associate Directors, Directors, and other faculty members, as appropriate, concerning details of School members' performance. 1. Responsibility Profile for Instructional Activities Lecturers, instructors and faculty associates have teaching responsibilities concentrated in 100-level courses and to a limited degree, for qualified lecturers, in intermediate- level undergraduate courses. 2. Responsibility Profile for Service Activities Lecturers and instructors have service responsibilities concentrated in areas directly related to the School's instructional mission. Examples include course coordination, participating in committees related to 100-level instruction, participating in curriculum development, supervising tutors and graders, testing and placement, and aiding in graduate teaching assistant training. C. Contract Renewal of Lecturers, Senior Lecturers, and Principal Lecturers Each lecturer and senior or principal lecturer who wishes his or her contract to be renewed has a comprehensive review according to review cycles determined by the latest university policies. This review shall take into account all available information on the lecturer's instructional and service contributions, including the items listed in III.B.1 and III.B.2, as well as evaluations of classroom performance by tenure-track faculty and lecturers. The PBC and lecturer representatives to the PBC shall consider this evidence and recommend renewal or non-renewal of the contract. The School Director shall write a separate recommendation. These recommendations are presented to the Dean as specified in College and University procedures. D. Contract Renewal of Instructors In some years, the School may be authorized by CLAS to fill instructor positions, either, but not exclusively, by outside search or renewal of some current contracts. When a decision has been made to consider renewal of existing contracts to fill some or all of these positions, the following procedures will be adopted: 1. The pool of candidates will consist of those people currently employed in the School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences in the position of instructor who indicate in writing that they wish to be considered for renewal. 2. These instructors will be notified of the vacancies, and a deadline will be given by which time they must notify the School if they wish their contracts to be renewed. Also, a deadline will be given for the submission of any supporting material, such as an updated curriculum vitae, which the candidates may wish to provide. 3. After the first deadline has passed, the chair of the search committee will insure the following information is obtained: i) A listing of all courses taught by the candidate at ASU together with appropriate numerical ratings as well as verbal comments from student teaching evaluations for these courses. ii) Any information regarding the qualifications of the candidate which is available from the Director of Freshman Mathematics and the Associate Directors of the School. iii) Any available teaching evaluations coming from classroom visitations at the direction of the of officers of the School or the PBC. If an instructor has no such evaluations on record, then faculty will be designated to conduct classroom visitations and submit an appropriate evaluation of the teaching. 4. After the deadline for the submission of materials has passed, the search committee will evaluate the mathematical as well as teaching competence of each candidate. Based on these evaluations, this committee will submit the following to the School Director and the PBC: i) A list of those candidates who are recommended to be not reappointed under any circumstances. ii) A list of qualified candidates which is rank ordered in terms of priority for contract renewal. iii) A designation of which courses each qualified candidate is qualified to teach. 5. The School Director, in consultation with the PBC, will use the recommendations of the search committee to identify which candidates are best qualified to teach the courses that the School needs to staff, and (s)he will then convey recommendations for reappointment to CLAS. In the event that the number of positions for instructors becomes larger than the number of qualified candidates, a wider search must be performed to identify a larger pool of candidates. IV. Performance Evaluation for Academic Professionals In the School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, academic professionals have detailed job descriptions listing their duties and responsibilities. The annual performance evaluation of academic professionals will be conducted by the School Director and the PBC with input from individual tenure-track faculty as appropriate. This evaluation will result in an assignment to one of four performance categories: unsatisfactory, satisfactory, meritorious, highly meritorious. V. Review Cycle for Performance Evaluation Every tenure-track School member will receive an annual review in which performance is assessed over the past three calendar years. The evaluation is limited to that portion of the review period in which the person being evaluated is employed by ASU. Lecturers and instructors will receive an annual review in which performance is assessed over the previous calendar year. Faculty associates are hired on a course by course basis, and some aspects of evaluation procedures may not be applicable. It is intended that the evaluation of faculty associates and instructors serve as a basis for reappointment should the School need to make a temporary or one-year appointment later. VI. Salary Adjustment Procedures Determining salary adjustments for School members is the responsibility of the School Director, with advice from the PBC. Each School member is assigned a reference salary which is intended to represent a target salary under ideal circumstances. Individual reference salaries are determined by the School Director in consultation with the PBC. A baseline for reference salaries is provided by the median salaries of peer institutions, supplemented by survey data from the American Mathematical Society and the American Statistical Association. The baseline is then adjusted by considering performance, number of years at rank, marketability and other factors affecting salaries in the mathematical sciences. Unless otherwise mandated, salary adjustments will be made in two parts: 1. Fifty percent of the pool of funds available for salary adjustment will be used to encourage and reward consistency and durability by awarding every School member whose performance has been evaluated as satisfactory, meritorious or highly meritorious the same percentage increase of current salary. 2. The remaining fifty percent is used to encourage and reward outstanding performance as well as address parity with external markets, problems of salary compression and inversion and other salary inequities. The reference salary will be used as a goal. The actual formula for calculating the salary increase may vary from year to year and will be determined by the Director with advice from the PBC. School members will be informed about both the policy and the specific algorithm that is used to determine salary adjustments.