FOR REVIEW ONLY

Fifth Draft 08-23-04

In considering probationary faculty for reappointment, tenure and promotion the Department of Educational Technology accepts as its own the policies and criteria established by the San Diego State University Senate (Periodic Evaluation of Probationary Faculty Sections 1 through 4), as well as The College of Education (Sections II-B-1 through 4).

San Diego State University Senate, Periodic Evaluation of Probationary Faculty sections 1 through 4

1.0 A probationary faculty employee shall receive either a periodic evaluation or a performance review during each year of probation but shall not receive both in the same academic year.

1.1 To be considered for reappointment, promotion, or tenure in an academic year, a faculty employee shall undergo a performance review in that academic year.

1.2 Each school or department shall develop procedures and criteria for periodic evaluations of probationary faculty.

2.0 Probationary faculty shall normally receive a periodic evaluation in the first year of a two-year appointment or in the first and second years of a three-year appointment.

3.0 For those with teaching responsibilities, procedures shall include at least the consideration of student evaluations of teaching performance.

4.0 The probationary faculty employee shall be provided a copy of the written record of the periodic evaluation, and a written record of a periodic evaluation shall be placed in the employee's Personnel Action File.

Review Criteria

The criteria established by the University Senate are effectiveness of teaching, professional growth and service to the University, the community, and professional organizations. The College of Education policy states "For reappointment, tenure, and promotion, the College gives greater weight to demonstrated competence in teaching and scholarship. To a lesser but significant degree, the College also gives weight to service within the University, community, and profession."

The relative weights of the three criteria in the Department of Educational Technology are:

• Teaching effectivenes 50

• Professional growth     40

• Service to the University 10

The department of Educational Technology requires that faculty shall establish a clear focus on their work in all the three areas of teaching effectiveness, professional growth, and service to the university and articulate his/her area of concentration.

Teaching effectiveness

Teaching effectiveness shall be evaluated based on student evaluations, peer evaluation, and other evidence of effectiveness.

Peer Evaluation

The College of Education policy states "At least two tenured peer evaluations related to teaching effectiveness and performance of assigned duties must be conducted during the probationary period and subsequent applications for promotion." However, the Department of Educational Technology goes beyond the College policy and requires that probationary faculty shall invite tenured faculty, or professional practitioners from other departments or institutions, to evaluate their teaching effectiveness at least once per academic year  

Peer evaluators shall observe the following criteria:

• Command of subject

• Skill in managing instruction

• Quality of instructional and learning materials

• Student rapport and general learning environment

Student Evaluations

Student evaluations shall be conducted for each course a faculty teaches, using the Student Instructional Rating Form provided by the College of Education, plus uncensored comments. In addition, the College of Education policy allows for:

• Solicited or unsolicited statements regarding the candidate's performance. Assigned duties other than teaching may include: recruitment of underrepresented students, supervision of students, course or program development, administrative assignments, or other duties for which time is assigned. However, teaching should be a part of each candidate's assignment in the three years immediately preceding promotion consideration.

• Mitigating circumstances regarding the classes taught may be included, e.g., size of class, topic, time, etc.

Other Evidence of Effectiveness

Faculty may provide additional evidence of teaching effectiveness such as instructional, or assessment materials, including software productions as well as significant honors and distinctions related to teaching.

Professional Growth

The Department of Educational Technology expects that the candidate articulates his or her area of professional growth and explicates its relationship with teaching.

College of Education policy states:

Evidence of externally reviewed professional growth activities shall be required for retention, promotion, and tenure. In the field of education, professional growth is most readily evidenced through first or sole authorship on refereed journal publications, reviewed scholarly books, chapters in reviewed scholarly books, and/or refereed external grants. The College, however, also places great value on significant contributions to collaborative research and other professional works and activities of substance that are independently evaluated. The following factors will be considered holistically as contextual dimensions of professional growth:

•  The quality, significance, and potential impact of the candidate's works, especially as evaluated by peers.

•  The degree to which the candidate's works have been disseminated among professional and academics in the candidate's discipline and/or community of practice.

•  The extent to which the candidate's works reflect a clearly articulated professional growth agenda.

•  The degree to which the candidate has integrated aspects of her or his research, scholarship, and/or creative activity with his or her teaching and service responsibilities.

The indicators listed within the following priorities will be addressed in terms of professional competence, impact on the profession, and professional currency. These indicators are not listed in any rank order within each priority statement and are examples of the types of activities that are considered within that priority.

Promotion and tenure typically require evidence from Priority 1 and may include evidence from Priority 2. Retention typically requires evidence from Priority 1, 2, or 3 as appropriate to the faculty member's years of service.

Priority 1: Major works externally and independently reviewed by appropriate professionals selected by persons other than the candidate.

•  Publications with first or sole authorship.

•  Publications with multiple authorship and significant contribution by the candidate.

•  Publications with data-based research.

•  Publications offering theory development.

•  Publications with practical applications.

•  Scholarly books.

•  Chapters in scholarly books.

Priority 2: Additional works externally and independently reviewed by appropriate professionals selected by persons other than the candidate.

•  Textbooks (reviewed by other than publisher).

•  Chapters in textbooks.

•  Papers in refereed conference proceedings.

•  Editorship of major publications.

•  Major published reviews.

•  Principal Investigator or Co-Principal Investigator designation, development of and/or major participation in grants/contracts competitively awarded.

•  Major media productions, including computer software appropriately reviewed.

Priority 3: Other professional activities

•  Articles published in non-refereed journals.

•  Non-reviewed books.

•  Chapters in non-reviewed books.

•  Presentations competitively selected at major national or regional conferences.

•  Awards and honors received.

•  Participation in awarded grants/contracts.

The Department of Educational Technology requires that the candidate shall provide a statement about publications and creative works in which his or her work has been published. The statement should include the impact of the publication on the targeted professional community, as well as its circulation and rejection rate.

Service activities

The College of Education Policy states that service for the University is considered an integral part of the duties of all faculty at San Diego State University. Examples of service include:

•  Leadership in departmental, College, and University committees. The relative importance of the committee(s) will be considered.

•  When a faculty member distinguishes himself or herself in performance of such duties for the significant benefit of the University, and this performance is appropriately documented over a significant length of time, service for the University may have more than the usual bearing on promotion.

•  Membership and participation in professional and other committees, organizations, or activities in the greater community outside the University. Professional organizations or relevant community organizations or activities that have a relationship to the University or its interests will be viewed more favorably than non-related organizations that have no real connection with education.

•  Advising of students: This is an important aspect of service for the University and shall include but not be limited to student outreach and retention and student mentoring.

Offices in University-associated organizations: Service in the University Senate and in other University organizations is considered important.

Other Department Policies
Crashing Policy
Personnel Policy
Admission Policy

Your browser does not support web standards, including Cascading Style Sheets (CSS). This site (and many others) will look better if you upgrade your browser. We recommend Mozilla - it's free, standards-compliant, and fast.