Overview

Section 9-15 of the Board of Regents Policy and Bylaws provides for the evaluation of every faculty member at least once every five years.  Faculty are specifically excluded from evaluation if during the previous five year period they have received a merit salary increase or have been evaluated for reappointment, tenure, or promotion.   Faculty will be evaluated using the following “reasonable expectations” and procedure.

Reasonable expectations

Each faculty member is presumed to satisfy the minimum qualifications for his/her rank.  Nevertheless, each faculty member is expected:

  • To strive to exceed the minimum qualifications for his/her rank.

Furthermore, in addition to the duties and responsibilities in Section 9-15 of the Board of Regents Policy and Bylaws, each faculty member is expected:

  • To be willing and prepared to teach all 400-level and graduate course and seminars in his/her academic specialty, and most of the 100-, 200-, and 300- level courses offered by the department.
  • To conduct competently his/her assigned courses and seminars.
  • To keep a reasonable number of office hours.
  • To serve on and chair department committees, and to serve on college and university committees.

In addition to these duties and responsibilities, an Assistant Professor is expected:

  • To conduct research in a manner that demonstrates substantial achievement.

An Associate Professor is also expected:

  • To chair college and university committees when asked.
  • To conduct research in a manner that appears likely to receive significant recognition.

A Professor is also expected:

  • To chair college and university committees when asked.
  • To conduct research in a manner that maintains his/her national and international reputation.

Evaluation Procedure

ICS Faculty are classified into one of the following four categories for the purpose of determining when they are evaluated by this process:

  1. Probationary:  These are tenure-track faculty who are not currently tenured nor are currently applying for tenure or promotion. Probationary faculty are evaluated yearly.
  2. Applicants: These are tenure-track faculty who are currently applying for tenure or promotion.  Their application process serves as their evaluation and they are not evaluated by this procedure.
  3. Tenured Faculty:  These faculty are evaluated every five years from the date of their last review, tenure, or promotion.
  4. Limited Contract:  These are non-tenure track faculty.  They are evaluated yearly.

The evaluation procedure consists of the following steps:

(1) The Department Chair will notify the Faculty Member (FM) of the pending evaluation and the deadline for the submission of materials to aid in the evaluation process.  The FM should prepare a dossier consistent with their terms of employment.  For Probationary faculty, the dossier should contain materials at least since their date of hire.  For Limited Contract faculty, the dossier should contain materials at least since their last evaluation.  For Tenured faculty, the dossier should contain materials documenting his/her professional activities during the previous five year period.

The dossier materials should include but need not be limited to:

For teaching:

  • A list of the courses taught by the FM each year.
  • Student evaluation and comment sheets for all of these courses.
  • A list of teaching materials developed by the FM.
  • A list of all teaching awards received.

For research:

  • A list of all articles and books published.
  • A list of all students supervised for M.S. or Ph.D. theses.
  • A list of all research talks presented indicating those invited.
  • A list of all proposals submitted indicating those granted funding.
  • A list of all research awards and prizes received.

For service:

  • A list of all department, college, and university committees served on.
  • A list of other service activities relevant to his/her academic specialty.

(2) The DC will gather additional information as required including information from other faculty members.

(3) The DC will meet with the FM for an evaluation conference during which the FM will be invited to present additional information and to answer questions regarding his/her professional activities.

The remaining steps follow the “Procedures for Evaluation of Faculty at UH Manoa”.  These include:

(4) When the DC determines that the professional activities of the FM being evaluated meet reasonable expectations as recognized by the faculty of the department, she/he will so inform the FM and the Dean.

(5) When the DC determines that the professional activities of the FM being evaluated do not meet reasonable expectations as recognized by the faculty of the department, the DC will confer with the FM to develop a mutually agreeable plan for meeting departmental expectations.  The Dean will be informed of the plan that has been agreed upon.

(6) Where such a plan cannot be agreed upon, or where the FM does not concur with the determination of the DC, the Dean will be informed and will attempt to mediate the matter and arrive at a plan or a revised determination that can be agreed upon by  the three parties: the FM, the DC, and the Dean.

Policy regarding review of Graduate Faculty

On 3/22/89 the Graduate Senate approved a policy regarding periodic review of graduate faculty.  The policy requires that each “graduate field… develop specific criteria for graduate faculty performance, consistent with the standards of their discipline.”  Graduate faculty will be evaluated according to the following criteria.

A graduate faculty member is expected to strive to exceed the minimum qualifications and to fulfill the duties and responsibilities for his/her rank.  These include:

  • Remaining current in the field (for example, participating in curriculum development, design new and revising existing courses as the field evolves).
  • Being active in scholarship (for example, conducting original research, producing designs and analyses of computer hardware, software, or algorithms, publishing research results, soliciting research grant support).
  • Participating in teaching and guiding graduate students (for example, being willing and prepared to teach competently all 400-level and graduate courses and seminars in his/her academic specialty, serving as academic advisor and member of M.S./Ph.D. committees, and supervising independent study.)

Policy on Course Evaluation

All ICS Faculty must use the eCAFE online course and instructor evaluation system. In addition:

  • All non-tenure track faculty must specify the current ICS Chair and appropriate Associate Chair (currently Philip for ICS courses and Andrew for LIS courses) as result recipients for the eCAFE surveys.
  • All pre-tenure faculty must submit eCAFE results for their 2 and 4 year reviews (5, 6 year as needed) and for their tenure/promotion applications.
  • All tenured faculty must include eCAFE results in their periodic 5-year reviews and in their promotion applications.

If you have a TA for your course, please add a few questions about the TA to your surveys. Please encourage your students to fill out the eCAFE surveys. Everyone is also invited to publish eCAFE results for the world to see.

Approvals:

The  tenure and promotion policy, faculty evaluation policy, reasonable expectations, and evaluation procedure were approved by the faculty unanimously on 10/28/87.  The graduate faculty policy was approved by the faculty unanimously (with Abramson and Chin absent) on 8/23/89. The Policy on Course Evaluation was approved by ICS Faculty at the January, 2014 Department Meeting.