Plant Pathology
Procedures for Review of Tenured Faculty
- Purpose
The purpose of this review is to examine, recognize, develop and enhance the performance of tenured faculty of the Department of Plant Pathology at the University of Georgia. - Selection of Faculty Members for Post-Tenure Review
The Department of Plant Pathology currently has a total of 21 tenured faculty members. Our goal is to conduct post-tenure reviews for tenured faculty members over the next four academic years by reviewing five individuals next year (1997-98) and four individuals in each of the following three years. We propose to use the following approach to select tenured faculty for review.
Any tenured faculty member going up for promotion to full professor or nomination for a major award in a given year will be reviewed that year.
A randomized drawing conducted among the remaining eligible faculty will be used to select additional individuals for review each year until all tenured faculty have been reviewed once. Thereafter, tenured faculty will be reviewed every five years after their last review or five years after receiving tenure. - Coordinator of Post-Tenure Review Process and Selection of Review Committees
In the summer of 1997 the tenured members of the faculty will vote to select two individuals from among their ranks to coordinate the departmental post-tenure review process for the year. One individual will be elected for a one-year term and will be referred to as the "Post-Tenure Review Leader." The other will be elected for a two-year term, initially as "Post-Tenure Review Assistant," and then in the following year, will serve as the Leader. In future years the only election needed will be for the Assistant. Neither the Leader nor the Assistant will be eligible for post-tenure review themselves during their terms of service.
The Leader and Assistant will begin the review process by using a randomized drawing to select separate three-person committees, each being responsible for the review of one faculty member. Only tenured faculty not up for review themselves in a given year will be eligible to serve on review committees that year. Openings created by "objections" will be filled by additional drawings until the Committee is either acceptable to the faculty member being reviewed or all objections have been used. Depending upon the number of individuals to be reviewed in a given year, it is possible that some faculty members may have to serve on more than one review committee in the same year. Once established, the Review Committee assigned to a particular faculty member will elect a Chair, conduct its review and report its findings to the Leader. As outlined in Section V below, the Leader will provide a concise written summary of the findings of the Committee to the faculty member under review and to the Department Head. - Information to be Considered by the Post-Tenure Review Committee
The Committee will review qualitative and quantitative evidence of the faculty member's performance over at least the previous five-year period. The following information will be made available to the Committee:- Faculty member's Staff Activity Report
- Student/client evaluations (numerical summaries) of the last five years as appropriate to appointment
- Two-page summary of accomplishments during review period and future plans prepared by the faculty member
- Report of the Post-Tenure Review Committee
The Post-Tenure Review Leader will provide the faculty member and the Department Head with a concise written summary of the review and a conclusion as to whether the faculty member's performance is deemed satisfactory or unsatisfactory. If the faculty member's performance is deemed unsatisfactory, the Committee' summary shall identify the area(s) of weakness and suggest actions that might strengthen the faculty member's performance. The faculty member shall have the opportunity to prepare a written response to the summary which will be provided to the Committee with a copy to the Department Head. - Appeals
A faculty member may appeal in writing a Post-Tenure Review Committee action or decision within fifteen days of the final action of the Committee. The appeal will go to the UGA Faculty Post-Tenure Review Appeals Committee. The UGA Faculty Post-Tenure Review Appeals Committee will be a seven-member faculty committee elected by the University Council for two-year staggered terms. The Executive Committee of the University Council shall nominate faculty members at the rank of Professor with tenure from within and outside of the University Council as candidates for election to the UGA Faculty Post-Tenure Review Appeals Committee. - Accountability
Copies of these procedures shall be filed with the Dean of the College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences.
Departmental procedures for post-tenure review will be reviewed periodically by the tenured members of the Department.
The Department Head shall maintain in the faculty member's personnel file a record of the completed review including names of all reviewers as well as all documents that played a substantive role in the review.
At the end of each academic year, the Department Head shall provide a report to the Dean of the College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences listing the names of faculty members reviewed during the academic year and summarizing the outcome of those reviews. - Procedures for Unsatisfactory Review
If a faculty member's performance is deemed not satisfactory in the review, once all requests for reconsideration and appeals have been exhausted, the Department Head, the faculty member and the Leader of the Post-Tenure Review Committee, must establish a formal plan of faculty development. This plan must be approved by the majority of the faculty member's Post-Tenure Review Committee. The plan should a) define specific goals or outcomes to be achieved; b) outline activities that will be undertaken to achieve the goals or outcomes; c) set appropriate times within which the goals or outcomes should be accomplished; and d) indicate appropriate criteria by which the faculty member will monitor progress. The Department Head will be responsible for forwarding the formal faculty development plan to the Dean of the College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. The Department Head, the Dean and the appropriate Vice President are jointly responsible for arranging suitable resources for the development plan, if required. The Department Head will meet with each faculty member whose performance was deemed unsatisfactory at the time of the annual evaluation to review progress toward achieving the goals or outcomes of the development plan. A progress report, which will be included in the annual review, will be forwarded to the Dean. It will be responsibility of the Department Head and a peer review committee to determine if, after three years, the faculty member, whose performance was deemed not satisfactory, has been successful in completion of the faculty development plan. The Department Head will report that finding to the Dean, who will proceed in accordance with University and Board of Regents' policies.
Post-Tenure Review Appeals Committee Operating Policy
The post-tenure review appeals committee (PTRAC:) shall hear only appeals from a post-tenure review in which the faculty member has received an evaluation of "unsatisfactory" by the post-tenure review unit. Before an appeal may be filed with the PTRAC, the faculty member must have exhausted all appropriate administrative remedies within the school or college. If the faculty member then wishes to file an appeal with the PTRAC, he/she must submit a written request for appeal to the PTRAC stating fully the grounds on which the appeal is based. This written request must be filed with the PTRAC within 15 days after a final decision has been rendered by the school or college under the appropriate administrative appeals procedure.
In extraordinary cases, the PTRAC, in its sole discretion, may grant a variance from the exhaustion requirement if the appellant petitions the PTRAC for such a variance in writing and shows good cause why the exhaustion requirement should not apply. The written request for variance must be filed with the PTRAC within 15 days of receiving the unsatisfactory post-tenure evaluation.
In considering appeals, the PTRAC will act as a committee of the whole. The Chair shall be a voting member of the committee. A final decision requires a simple majority of the whole committee (4/7). To avoid conflicts of interest, members of the PTRAC shall not serve on any other post-tenure review committee during their term as a PTRAC-member.
Once an appeal is filed, the PTRAC may consider the fairness of the evaluation process within the post-tenure review unit, the reasonableness of the determination, as well as the appropriateness of the plan or course of action suggested by the post-tenure review unit. In addition to the written appeal, the committee, in its sole discretion, may hear and consider oral testimony.
If the PTRAC decides that the decision of the post-tenure review unit is fair and valid, and that the suggested plan of improvement is appropriate, the decision of the post-tenure review unit will then be final and binding on the appellant. If, instead, the PTRAC decides that the evaluation process was flawed or that the determination of unsatisfactory is invalid, the PTRAC may (1) order that the matter be reheard by the post-tenure review committee as if the matter had not previously been heard before and as if no decision had been previously rendered, or (2) it may
recommend that the decision of the post-tenure review unit be reversed outright.
If the PTRAC decides that the evaluation itself is fair and valid, but the suggested plan of improvement is not appropriate, the PTRAC may 1) hold hearings with the appellant and the dean or department head in order to reach a satisfactory solution, 2) remand to the post-tenure review unit with recommendations, or 3) recommend outside mediation.
The decision of the PTRAC is final and binding. The prior decision of any other committee is not binding on the PTRAC, although the PTRAC may take such a decision into consideration. If issues before the PTRAC are being considered simultaneously by the Faculty Grievance Committee, the Faculty Grievance proceeding shall be stayed until the PTRAC renders its decision.