Academic Policy 1405.14
Report on Annual Review of Faculty Performance for Arkansas Department of Higher Education
Arkansas law and higher education policy require a report to be submitted each year by each institution on the annual review of faculty performance. The report submitted by the provost is a synthesis and summary of reports from the schools, colleges, and library. Deans of schools, colleges, and the library must submit reports to the Provost by May 15 each year describing the review and addressing the issues identified below as they relate to the school, college or library process. The report should include the review of both tenure-track and non-tenure track faculty and should include reference to peer review and student evaluation.
Elements of the Faculty Performance Review Process
- Summarize the overall faculty performance review process.
- How are faculty peers involved in faculty performance?
- How are students involved in faculty performance?
- How are administrators involved in faculty performance?
- How do faculty members self-evaluate their performance?
- Describe any other activities used to evaluate faculty performance.
Institutional Monitoring of the Faculty Performance Review Process
- Does the institution monitor the annual faculty review process?
- If yes, describe the procedures and persons responsible for the monitoring.
- If no, describe measures that are being taken to begin annual monitoring.
Use of Review Findings
- How are performance results used in decisions related to promotions, salary increases or job tenure?
English Fluency of Teaching Faculty
- How do students and administrators review the English fluency of all teaching faculty—full-time, part-time, and graduate teaching assistants?
- What measures are in place to assist deficient faculty in becoming English proficient?
- Summarize English deficiency findings and note action taken by the institution.
College of Education Support for Accredited Public Schools
- If applicable, how does the institution's College of Education and related discipline faculty members work collaboratively with accredited public schools in Arkansas?
Notable Findings and Future Plans
- List any notable findings from the annual faculty review process conducted during the year that may have implications for future annual faculty reviews.
- Describe any plans or revisions to the annual faculty review process that have been developed as a result of the findings noted above. (Any significant revision to an institution's annual faculty review plan must be submitted to ADHE separate from this report and received by June 1, 2011, in order to be considered for approval by the AHECB at the July 2011 board meeting.)
Level of Faculty Satisfaction with Current Process
- On the scale below, indicate the faculty's overall sense of satisfaction with the annual review process. If the rating is low (1 or 2), briefly describe corrective measures that will be implemented.
(low) 1 --- 2 --- 3 --- 4 --- 5 --- 6 --- 7 --- 8 --- 9 --- 10 (high)
Reports may be brief, but they should address the topics identified above. If it was NEW (different from the one in use during the previous academic year review cycle), a copy of the school, college, or library personnel document (and all forms) should be appended to the report. Reports should include specific illustrative or representative data as well as summary statements.
The basis for this reporting requirement is Arkansas statute (ACA 6-63-104) and policy of the Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board (AHECB) which require that each college and university conduct an annual review of faculty performance. Each institution operates under a revised review plan submitted in December of 1999 and approved by AHECB. Plans may be revised each year, with significant changes requiring approval by the AHECB and typically requiring submission to the Arkansas Department of Higher Education (ADHE) by June 1. In 1999, Act 1360 added the following language to the existing statute:
Each college and university shall continually make efforts to identify any English fluency deficiencies of the teaching faculty and shall take reasonable measures to assist deficient faculty members in becoming proficient in English; however, the responsibility for acquiring the level of English proficiency required for the faculty member's teaching, research, or service assignments rests with the faculty member [Section 1 c (1)].
Each college and university shall have a process for addressing concerns raised by students concerning language proficiency problems of faculty members [Section c (2)].
The statute also calls for ADHE to monitor the evaluation process and make a report regarding the review to the AHECB and the Legislative Council.
Reformatted for Web October 1, 2014