Evaluation for Reappointment, Continuance & Tenure
- Evaluation System
- Annual Reappointment
- Tenure Track Evaluation
- Continuing Track Evaluation
- Teaching Track Evaluation
- Visiting Appointment Evaluation
- Limited Term Appointment Evaluation
- Librarian Evaluation
- Part-Time Faculty Evaluation
- Faculty Appeal
- Termination of Employment
Evaluation System
- Introduction
- Types of Review
- Criteria for Evaluation
- Student Perceptions of Teaching
- The Faculty Personnel File
- Schedule of Activities for Evaluation
- Schedule for Librarians
Introduction
The Evaluation Process
So that personnel decisions may be systematic and equitable, a process for evaluating teaching faculty has been developed. This system provides for the periodic collection of information regarding faculty performance based on the University Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching Faculty in the areas of teaching, contributions to the life of the University, and professional activity for the rank held, and for the subsequent review and evaluation of this information. On the basis of these materials, decisions concerning employment, retention, salary, tenure, and promotion are made. The process provides for multiple evaluations to give a broad and fair base of information for evaluation. It is not necessary that all evaluations be completed, but that the evaluation be comprehensive and substantive.
The Senior Faculty Review Committee
Some processes include evaluation by a Senior Faculty Review Committee. The following defines the membership and duties of that group:
- “Senior faculty” are full-time teaching faculty who hold the rank of Associate Teaching Professor, Teaching Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor.
- A committee will consist of a minimum of three senior faculty members (as defined above) from one’s department, when possible; appointed by the Dean, in consultation with the Chair.
- Where there are an insufficient number of senior faculty members in a department, senior faculty from other departments will be appointed by the Dean, in consultation with the Chair.
- A Chair may serve as a senior faculty member on the review committee of another department within a school/division. However, a Department Chair may not serve on her or his department’s review committee.
- Appointments to the senior faculty review committee will be for one year on an as-needed basis.
- Senior faculty review committees evaluate the teaching, service, and professional activity of candidates as is appropriate for renewal of their appointment. The committee prepares a written recommendation summarizing the conclusions of the committee and submits it to the Dean by January 30.
Types of Review
Teaching Faculty Member’s Annual Self-Review
Unit I
Each faculty member will write a summary and review of their activities and accomplishments during the previous 12 months and submit it to the Chair by December 31 for inclusion into the faculty personnel file which can be accessed by the Dean and Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs. Information in the Teaching Faculty Member’s Annual Self-Review will be used by the Chair, Dean, and Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs in personnel decisions, including decisions on salary and merit. Information will also be available to members of the Promotions and Tenure Committee for their personnel deliberations.
The Teaching Faculty Member’s Annual Self-Review should be guided by the Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching Faculty that relate to the faculty member’s appointment type. Faculty members are encouraged to be clear and concise in their self-evaluation statements, and critical self-assessment should be goal-driven and evidence-based.
More than a listing of activities, the Teaching Faculty Member’s Annual Self-Review should build a narrative showing how accomplishments relate to the faculty member’s professional plans and goals. Materials that may accompany this narrative include letters of commendation, reprints of articles, descriptions of new courses, comments from the Students Perception of Teaching or Students Evaluation of Teaching, etc.
(Unit I) Teaching Faculty Members Annual Self Review
Annual Chair Review
Unit III
Each teaching faculty member is reviewed annually by the Department Chair (Unit III), whose evaluation reflects material included in the Teaching Faculty Member’s Annual Self-Review (Unit I) and the Student Perceptions of Teaching. The Dean will indicate that they have reviewed all Unit IIIs by signing the Unit III report that is placed in the faculty member’s personnel file. The Dean will complete the Unit III for Department Chairs in their college/school.
(Unit III) Evaluation of Teaching Faculty Member by the Department Chair
Second Year Review-MidPoint Review
Unit V
This review occurs during the second year for teaching faculty on continuing track or teaching track and for those appointed to tenure track when the probationary review is scheduled for the fourth year of appointment. The faculty member’s performance is thoroughly evaluated by the Dean in consultation with the faculty member’s Department Chair, following the probationary midpoint review – Midpoint Unit III. This review may include input from one or more classroom observations, annual evaluation material, probationary midpoint review – Midpoint Unit III, and a conference between the faculty member and the Dean. Results are forwarded from the Dean to the faculty member and also are placed in the faculty member’s personnel file.
(Unit V) Evaluation of Teaching Faculty Member by the Dean
Third Year Review-MidPoint Review
Unit V
This review occurs during the third year for teaching faculty appointed to tenure track when the probationary review is scheduled beyond the fourth year of appointment. The faculty member’s performance is thoroughly evaluated by the Dean in consultation with the faculty member’s Department Chair following the probationary midpoint review – Midpoint Unit III. This review may include input from one or more classroom observations, annual evaluation material, probationary midpoint review – Midpoint Unit III, and a conference between the faculty member and the Dean. Results are forwarded from the Dean to the faculty member and also are placed in the faculty member’s personnel file.
(Unit V) Evaluation of Teaching Faculty Member by the Dean
Probationary MidPoint Review-MidPoint
Unit III
This review occurs during the halfway-point year between the date of hire and the final year of the agreed upon probationary period. The faculty member’s performance since their date of hire is evaluated by the Chair. This probationary midpoint review will serve as the Midpoint Unit III. This review will detail with rationale the faculty member’s strengths and weaknesses based on the University expectations of faculty in the areas of teaching, contributions to the life of the University, and professional activity for the rank held.
Faculty members who have a joint appointment or have significant responsibility in two or more departments or programs (for example, a math faculty member teaching in education) should have the Chair/Director from the secondary department or program submit an addendum to the Midpoint Unit III.
(Unit III) Evaluation of Teaching Faculty Member by the Department Chair
Continuance Decision Review for Continuing track and Teaching Track
This review occurs during the fourth year for teaching faculty on continuing track or teaching track appointments. The decision to grant a renewal of their appointment rests with the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs. Results are forwarded from the Dean to the candidate and also are placed in the candidate’s personnel file.
Those candidates not offered a renewal of their continuing track or teaching track appointment may be given an additional year of employment.
Tenure Review for Tenure Track
This review occurs during the final year of the agreed upon probationary period (four, five, or six years) for all teaching faculty on tenure track appointments. Upon successful completion of this review, with the recommendation of the President and approval of the Board of Trustees, tenure will be awarded. The review is outlined below in the Schedule of Activities for Evaluation of Teaching Faculty. The applicant is responsible for meeting the guidelines in place at the year of application.
Those applicants not awarded tenure may be given an additional year of employment.
Promotion Review
This review occurs no earlier than the first year in which a faculty member is eligible to stand for promotions appropriate to appointment. The Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs will notify an eligible faculty member in the summer prior to the academic year in which they are first eligible for promotion. The faculty member must submit a formal letter of application to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs indicating their desire to be reviewed for promotion.
Faculty members who choose not to stand for review in a given year will continue to be eligible in subsequent years. No further notification shall be sent to these faculty members. The faculty member must submit formal application in any subsequent year they wish to be reviewed. The applicant is responsible for meeting the guidelines in place at the year of application.
Those teaching faculty not recommended for promotion should confer with their Dean to understand the rationale for the recommendation. Faculty members who are denied promotion in a given year will continue to be eligible in subsequent years. These faculty members must wait at least one additional academic year following the academic year during which they applied before reapplying for promotion. The Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs will notify the faculty member of eligibility to reapply in the summer prior to regained eligibility.
Post-Probationary Review-Post-Probationary
Unit III
This review occurs in the spring of the third year past successful tenure review for tenure track or past successful promotion review for continuing track faculty. The faculty member’s performance since past successful tenure review for tenure track or past successful promotion is evaluated by the Chair. This review shall detail with rationale the faculty member’s strengths and weaknesses in accordance with the provisions as set out in the Probationary Review. If the faculty member is the Department Chair, the evaluation letter will be written by a senior member of the department appointed by the Dean.
(Unit III) Evaluation of Teaching Faculty Member by the Department Chair
Long Range Professional Development Review
This review occurs in the fourth year after successful completion of probationary review and every four years thereafter, or until one is promoted to Professor or Teaching Professor, at which time this review is done in the year immediately following promotion and every five years thereafter. The review should produce a professional development plan and a Unit V by the Dean for each faculty member. These will be placed in the personnel file, and the professional development plan will be updated annually in the faculty member’s annual self-review (Unit I).
Criteria for Evaluation
Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching Faculty
- Full-time teaching faculty at Elon University are evaluated annually according to the criteria listed below and by the guidelines found in the Statement of Professional Standards.
- Teaching is given top priority. The second level of priority is contributions to the life of the University and professional activity. All criteria for evaluation are considered.
- A teaching faculty member is not expected to be accomplished in all indicators to fully meet the criterion. The list of indicators under each criterion is not intended to be a set of requirements, nor is the list exhaustive.
For annual (Unit I and III) and midpoint (Midpoint Unit III, Post-Probationary Unit III, and Unit V) evaluations, and post-probationary Long Range Professional Development Review, a teaching faculty member is evaluated according to the expectations of rank currently held in addition to the criterion listed below. Teaching faculty members are expected to have met the standards of the promotional rank sought before they apply for promotion in rank.
First Level Criterion – Teaching
Effective teaching is activity which promotes the intellectual vitality of the University and the wider community. While the primary focus of this activity is transmission of knowledge and the development of new skills, insights, and sensitivities within the classroom, teaching is not limited to that setting. It also includes the advising, supervising, and mentoring of students; the sharing of personal and professional growth with others; and the presentation of intellectual and moral concerns within the University community. Evidence of effective, high quality teaching may be seen through peer and student assessments related to a variety of possible indicators, as well as goal-driven, evidence-based critical self-assessment. Some indications of effective teaching are given below, and more information can be found in the 2022 Final Report of the High Quality Teaching Working Group:
- Fostering respect for diversity
- Facilitating intellectual opportunities for students
- Integrating scholarship and teaching
- Conveying the foundation of established knowledge and theory
- Creating class environments of mutual respect
- Challenging students to be engaged learners
- Cultivating informed critical thinking and creative expression
- Integrating knowledge across disciplines
- Extending learning beyond the classroom
- Encouraging translation of knowledge into practice and service
- Demonstrating an ability to communicate effectively with students
- Being available to students
- Demonstrating command of the subject matter
- Demonstrating a commitment to improvement of teaching
- Using appropriate and varied methods and strategies of teaching, assessing, and grading
- Using current and relevant materials that enhance our understanding of the world
- Being concerned for the wholeness and wellbeing of students
- Using technology to meet course objectives
Second Level Criteria – Contributions to the Life of the University and Professional Activity
Faculty must contribute meaningful, high-quality accomplishments in both service and professional activity, although an individual’s accomplishments may be stronger in one area than the other. Levels of activity may vary over the course of a faculty member’s career, relative to reassigned time, funding, and other opportunities and responsibilities.
For further description of the types of and characteristics of peer-reviewed scholarship of high quality in various disciplines, see each department’s scholarship statement.
Contributions to the Life of the University
Faculty members are an integral part of the University through their commitment to the institution and its mission, their presence and involvement, and their responsibility for the life of the university. Contributions to the life of the University at the Assistant Teaching Professor and Assistant Professor ranks typically begin with service on the program and departmental levels that progress to service on the college/school and university levels with experience. Service should include leadership roles as a faculty member progresses through faculty ranks. Participating in activities such as department meetings, faculty meetings, convocations and commencements is expected of all faculty members and is not considered service. University service includes activities such as:
- Service and leadership in the department, to academic programs, and to the college/school
- Service and leadership on University committees, task forces, and advisory groups
- Mentoring and leadership provided to student organizations
- Presentations and participation in activities that serve the University such as admissions, development, and alumni events
- Service and leadership that connect the University to the wider community
Professional Activity
Peer-reviewed scholarship of high quality, as defined in a document generated by the department and approved by a special ad hoc committee consisting of the Deans and a representative body of the teaching faculty to be appointed by Academic Council’s Committee on Committees, is a necessary but not sufficient condition for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor or Professor.
Other professional activities are also expected. These activities should promote the exchange of ideas and acquisition of knowledge that enrich one’s teaching and contribute to the advancement of learning in the profession at large. Indications of scholarly or artistic activity may be:
- Participation in academic presentations, exhibitions and creative performances of a professional nature that are not defined as peer-reviewed scholarship
- Grant proposal writing
- Leadership roles in a professional organization related to one’s field
- Research and experimentation, including that which involves undergraduate research associates
- Consulting
- Service as a judge of artistic or scholarly works (e.g., reviewer)
- Faculty internships
- Participation in workshops and seminars
- Professional involvement with the community
- Attendance at professional meetings and conferences
Student Perceptions of Teaching
Introduction
In the faculty evaluation system at Elon University, teaching is of paramount importance and the undergraduate Student Perceptions of Teaching is a necessary tool in assessing learning in the classes of teaching faculty and others in the University community who serve a teaching role. This component of the evaluation system is discussed below. However, reflecting the broadening scope of teaching and learning activities at the University, evaluation of faculty members’ overall teaching effectiveness should always be considered in relation to at least one other form of teaching evaluation including teaching portfolios, peer evaluations, and other devices.
Students at the graduate level complete a separate, but similar form, Student Evaluation of Graduate Courses.
Purpose
The purpose of the Student Perceptions of Teaching is to assess and record the opinions of students regarding their learning experience in each course. The instrument is separated into three parts. Part one includes 13 Likert-type questions about the course and the instructor, with the option for five instructor-supplied items. Part two asks seven questions related to student effort and demographics. Part three contains two open-ended items for student response, with an optional third item for an instructor-supplied prompt.
Scheduling
Unless exception is granted by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, each faculty member will gather student perceptions of teaching/learning for all class sections taught on campus during each semester/term for each academic year. Perception instruments should normally be administered to students prior to the last day of regular classes. The same, or a modified version of the student perception form, may be used for online and study abroad courses. While the Student Perceptions of Teaching is administered every semester, the purposes for which the results are used may vary, as described below.
An overview of scheduling for Student Perceptions of Teaching includes the following:
| Academic Unit Type | Fall Semester | Winter Term | Spring Semester | Summer Terms |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| For academic units that do not require data from all semesters (typically Arts and Sciences) | Results seen by:
Report includes:
|
Results seen by:
Report includes:
|
Results seen by:
Report includes:
|
Results seen by:
Report includes:
|
| For academic units that do require data from all semesters (typically Schools for professional accreditation purposes) | Results seen by:
Report includes:
|
Results seen by:
Report includes:
|
Results seen by:
Report includes:
|
Results seen by:
Report includes:
|
| For part-time faculty | Results seen by:
Report includes:
|
Results seen by:
Report includes:
|
Results seen by:
Report includes:
|
Results seen by:
Report includes:
|
Administration
The Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs electronically distributes the Student Perceptions of Teaching instrument. Faculty members can request students to fill out the instrument at the time of the faculty members choosing, including class time. If faculty members choose to administer the instrument during class time, they must leave the classroom during the administration of the instrument. Faculty members will administer the instrument for each class in accordance with instructions from the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs. The instructions include a prepared statement explaining the nature and purpose of the instrument.
Once perception instruments are completed, results will be collected by the Provost’s Office.
Presentation of Data
Data generated by these responses generally include the following:
- A summary for each class for each faculty member
- Summative information for all classes for each faculty member
- Summative data for each department and the University
Uses of the Data
Results from the perception instrument are handled differently depending on the semester/term. Data from the Student Perceptions of Teaching are to be made available to faculty members for all semesters the perception instrument is completed. These data provide information to faculty members and assist in their self-analysis of teaching effectiveness. Data from semesters other than fall, and other semesters/terms where departments, colleges, or schools require it, may be submitted by a faculty member in their application for tenure/promotion or other personnel decisions.
In the fall semester, and in other semesters/terms where departments, colleges, or schools require it, results of the Student Perceptions of Teaching data are to be shared with the faculty member’s Department Chair and Dean.
Faculty Members
Data from the Student Perceptions of Teaching are to be made available to faculty members for all semesters the perception instrument is completed. These data provide information to faculty members and assist in their self-analysis of teaching effectiveness. Data from semesters other than fall, and other semesters/terms where departments, colleges, or schools require it, may be submitted by a faculty member in their application for tenure/promotion or other personnel decisions.
Chair and Dean
In the fall semester, and in other semesters/terms where departments, colleges, or schools require it, results of the Student Perceptions of Teaching data are to be shared with the faculty member’s Department Chair and Dean.
Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs
In the fall semester, the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs will receive results of the Student Perceptions of Teaching, and these results will be included in the faculty member’s personnel file.
Promotion and Tenure Committee and Senior Faculty Review Committee
In the fall semester, and in other semesters/terms where departments, colleges, or schools require it, these data are to be included by the faculty member into their personnel application materials and used for summative or evaluative purposes in decisions of tenure, promotion, and continuance.
The Faculty Personnel File
For Librarians
The Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs maintains a file for each librarian containing a transcript for the person’s highest academic degree and a current curriculum vitae. Other documents, including annual evaluations, are kept by the Dean of the Carol Grotnes Belk Library.
For Teaching Faculty
The personnel file of each teaching faculty member is maintained in the Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs. The faculty personnel file is available to the following people: the individual faculty member, the Department Chair, Dean, the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, the Promotions and Tenure Committee, Senior Faculty Review Committee, and President.
The Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs is responsible for collecting and storing the materials that comprise the faculty personnel file. The faculty member is responsible for keeping their file updated. The file should be placed in proper form by September 15 of each year.
The faculty personnel file generally includes the following material:
- Current curriculum vitae.
- The Teaching Faculty Member’s Annual Self-Review (Unit I) contains the faculty member’s account and self-assessment of activities and accomplishments during the past calendar year.
- Normally, the annual Report for Teaching Faculty Member will be guided by the Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching Faculty. Faculty members are encouraged to be clear and concise in their self-evaluation statements, and critical self-assessment should be goal-driven and evidence-based.
- Appropriate materials such as letters of commendation, reprints of articles, descriptions of new courses, comments from student evaluation forms, etc., may be submitted with the annual report.
- The annual report should also present an annual plan for professional development. The plan should focus on the upcoming calendar year and relate to a long-range professional development plan, and be directly referenced when assessing progress and development.
- The Department Chair’s Evaluation (Unit III) is kept in each department member’s personnel file. A conference with candidates who are eligible for promotion, tenure, or continuance is required. The Chair will normally observe at least one class session of first year faculty.
- Summaries of Student Perceptions of Teaching (Unit IV) and grade distribution.
- Other relevant materials added by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs or faculty member.
- The Dean’s evaluation of the faculty member (Unit V).
Schedule of Activities for Evaluation
| Target Completion Date[1] | Person Responsible | Activity | Year of no review or decision | Tenure track Midpoint review year | Tenure Decision | Continuing Track | Continuation Decision | Lecturer Midpoint Review | Lecturer Decision | Promotion Decision | Long Range Review |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| September 1 | Faculty Member | If eligible, submit notice of intent to apply for promotion to Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | applies | – |
| September 1 | Department Chair/Dean | Conferences conducted with candidates applying for tenure and/or promotion, and candidates applying for continuation | – | – | applies | – | applies | – | – | applies | – |
| September 15 | Faculty Member | Digital portfolio submitted for tenure, continuance or promotion | – | – | applies | – | applies | – | – | applies | – |
| December 1 | Faculty Member | Unit IV – Student Perceptions of Teaching | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies |
| December 23 | Provost/VP for Academic Affairs | Summary of Student Perceptions of Teaching forwarded to faculty and included in personnel file | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies |
| December 31 | Dean | Promotion and tenure recommendations sent to Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs | – | – | applies | – | – | – | – | applies | – |
| December 31 | Promotion and Tenure Committee | Promotion and tenure recommendations sent to Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs | – | – | applies | – | – | – | – | applies | – |
| December 31 | Faculty Member | Unit I completed and sent to department chair, Dean, and Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs (to be included in personnel file) | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies |
| January 30 | Department chair, departmental senior faculty | Fourth year probationary review conducted for faculty on continuing track and lecture track. Completed and sent to Dean | – | – | – | applies | – | applies | – | – | – |
| February 15 | Dean | Fourth year probationary review conducted for faculty on continuing track and lecture track. Completed and sent to Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs | – | – | – | applies | – | applies | – | – | – |
| February 21 | Department Chair | Conference conducted for faculty members scheduled for mid-point review and Unit III completed, and sent to faculty member, Dean, and Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs (to be included in personnel file). Dean conducts Unit III evaluation for department chairs scheduled for midpoint review in their college/school. | – | applies | – | applies | – | applies | – | – | – |
| February 28 | Dean | Midpoint review conferences conducted for faculty on tenure track, continuing track, and lecture track. | – | applies | – | applies | – | applies | – | – | – |
| February 28 | Department Chair | Conference conducted and Unit III completed for each faculty member not scheduled for a midpoint review and sent to faculty member, Dean, and Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs (to be included in personnel file). Dean conducts Unit III evaluation for department chairs in their college/school. | applies | – | applies | – | applies | – | applies | – | applies |
| February 28 | Dean | Conference conducted with each department chair regarding departmental faculty. | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies | applies |
| Spring board meeting (March) | President and Provost/ VP for Academic Affairs | Notification of faculty regarding tenure and promotions actions. Notification of continuing track and lecture track faculty of decisions regarding removal of probationary status. | – | – | applies | – | applies | – | applies | applies | – |
| May 15 | Dean | Written midpoint Unit V submitted to Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs and copy sent to faculty member and chair (to be included in the personnel file) | – | applies | – | applies | – | applies | – | – | – |
| May 15 | Dean | Long range professional development conferences conducted. Unit V completed and sent to faculty member and Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs (to be included in personnel file) | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | applies |
| July 15 | Provost/VP for Academic Affairs | Notification of faculty in line for tenure, continuance review, promotion, midpoint conferences, or long-range professional development review. | – | applies | applies | – | applies | – | applies | applies | applies |
[1] While the University aims to complete the activity by the target date, depending on circumstances, the completion date may be later.
Schedule for Librarians
| Target Completion Date | Activity |
|---|---|
| May | Promotion Review Committee members elected |
| September 1 | Notice of Intent due |
| September 15 | Applications for Promotion due |
| December 31 | Promotion Review Committee submits promotion recommendation to Provost/VPAA |
| December 31 | Dean of the Carol Grotnes Belk Library submits promotion recommendation to Provost/VPAA |
| After Spring Board Meeting | Applicants notified of decision |
Annual Reappointment
In a year when there are no special reviews or decisions, each full-time permanent teaching faculty member will complete the steps for reappointment according to the Schedule of Activities for Evaluation, which includes the following:
- Collecting student perception of teaching for all courses (Unit IV Student Perceptions of Teaching)
- Completing and submitting a Teaching Faculty Member’s Annual Self-Review (Unit I Teaching Faculty Members Annual Self Review)
- Participating in a meeting with the Chair to discuss the Chair’s evaluation (Unit III Evaluation of Teaching Faculty Member by the Department Chair)
Faculty members on appointments categorized as temporary (limited term and part-time) must administer the Student Perceptions of Teaching (Unit IV Student Perceptions of Teaching) for all courses taught at Elon. These data will be reviewed by the Department Chair and the Dean.
Tenure Track Evaluation
- Evaluation Schedule for Faculty on Tenure Track
- Criteria for Tenure and Tenure Track Evaluation
- Tenure Review
- Tenure Evaluation System
- Digital Portfolio for Tenure Decision
- Considerations Following the Tenure Decision
Evaluation Schedule for Faculty on Tenure Track
Following consultation with the Dean, the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs will determine the length of the faculty member’s probationary period for a tenure track appointment at the time of the initial appointment. The Dean should consult with the faculty member in making this decision.
The probationary period is four, five, or six years, depending on the faculty member’s prior full-time college teaching experience.
A faculty member with no full-time college teaching experience normally will have a six year probationary period. A faculty member with one year of full-time college teaching experience will have a five or six year probationary period. A faculty member with two or more years of full-time college teaching experience will have a four, five, or six year probationary period.
When eligible, tenure track faculty members have a one-time only opportunity during their second year of appointment to request a change in their probationary period. Before Letters of Agreement are issued in April of year two, faculty members, in writing to the Dean, may request to change their pre-selected probationary period following the same guidelines as when initially appointed.
| Length of Probationary Period | Year 1 | Year 2[2] | Year 3 | Year 4 | Year 5 | Year 6 | Year 7 | Year 8 | Year 9 | Year 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Four Years |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
– |
| Five Years |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Six Years |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[2] Eligible tenure track faculty members have a one-time only opportunity during their second year to request a change to the length of their probationary period.
Unit reports are described in the Faculty Evaluation System.
Additional information on tenure and stop the clock for tenure may be found elsewhere in this Handbook.
Criteria for Tenure and Tenure Track Evaluation
(Also used for evaluation of Professional Status faculty)
Full-time tenured, tenure track, and professional status faculty at Elon University are evaluated annually according to the criteria listed in the Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching Faculty and by the guidelines found in the Statement of Professional Standards.
Review of full-time tenured, tenure track, and professional status faculty includes an evaluation of teaching, that is given top priority, and second level priorities including contributions to the life of the university and professional activity. All criteria for evaluation are considered.
Tenure Review
The tenure review occurs during the final year of the agreed upon probationary period of four, five, or six years for all teaching faculty on tenure track appointments. Upon successful completion of this review, with the recommendation of the President and approval of the Board of Trustees, tenure will be awarded. The full review process is outlined in the Schedule of Activities for Evaluation. The applicant is responsible for meeting the guidelines in place at the year of application.
Tenure Evaluation System
The evaluation system for teaching faculty applying for tenure involves six stages and follows the Schedule of Activities for Evaluation.
Stage 1 involves the creation of a digital portfolio, consisting of material drawn from the faculty personnel file as well as additional information included by the candidate. When tenure and promotion are sought simultaneously, a single digital portfolio will suffice for both reviews. The individual candidate is responsible for seeing that the digital portfolio is in finished form by September 15 so that the process may proceed to stage two.
Stage 2 involves the separate evaluation of this digital portfolio by the respective Deans and by the Promotions and Tenure Committee. Each independently makes a recommendation regarding tenure and communicates that to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
Stage 3 involves the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs holding one meeting with both the Promotions and Tenure Committee and the respective Dean to discuss their independent recommendations and rationales.
Stage 4 involves a recommendation on tenure by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs to the President.
Stage 5 involves a recommendation on tenure by the President of the University to the Board of Trustees.
Stage 6 involves personnel decisions made by the Board of Trustees on tenure recommendations.
Digital Portfolio for Tenure Decision
Teaching faculty members standing for tenure will create a tenure digital portfolio, which will serve as the basic resource in the tenure decision. When tenure and promotion are sought simultaneously, a single digital portfolio will suffice for both reviews. The digital portfolio is drawn from material in the faculty personnel file, but may be supplemented by material of the candidate’s choosing (e.g., personal recommendations). The digital portfolio will include material organized in sequential order from Part 1 through Part 8 described below. The digital portfolio shall be in PDF format and the organization should include tabbed, linked sections to facilitate review. The peer-reviewed scholarship statement from the candidate’s department or school and the Elon Teacher-Scholar-Mentor Statement must be inserted as the first page, preceding Part 1. Once this process has been completed, the digital portfolio is returned to the candidate.
Part 1: This part includes a letter of consideration for tenure that focuses on the candidate’s activities and reviews while at Elon and subsequent to any successful promotion application. The letter should summarize the candidate’s case for tenure with specific reference to the candidate’s performance relative to the Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching Faculty.
Part 2: This part includes a current curriculum vitae. Candidates are asked to provide clear indications of the types of scholarship listed in their curricula vitae. In particular, reviewers of portfolios must be able to distinguish peer-reviewed and refereed scholarship from other kinds of academic products. It is also important that candidates follow accepted professional documentation guidelines (e.g., APA, CBE, MLA style) in formatting each entry. Candidates should be particularly careful to follow these guidelines when listing multiple authors and researchers.
Part 3: This part includes the Teaching Faculty Member’s Annual Self-Review (Unit I) for the faculty member’s term of employment at Elon University or the previous six years, whichever is shorter.
Part 4: This part includes a description, self-evaluation, documentation, and representative samples of the candidate’s achievement relative to the Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching Faculty. The primary focus should be upon activity at Elon and subsequent to any successful promotion application. Evidence as to the status of scholarship that is not yet public, such as “in press,” or “under contract,” must be provided, if that scholarship is listed in support of the candidate’s application. Such evidence might include galleys, letters from editors, and so on.
Part 5: This part includes the Department Chair’s annual evaluation (Unit III), including probationary midpoint review – Midpoint Unit III for each year of the candidate’s term of employment at Elon University or for the previous six years, whichever is shorter.
Part 6: In this part the candidate will include a letter from the candidate’s Department Chair assessing the candidate’s performance relative to the Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching Faculty and concluding with an overall recommendation.
If the candidate standing for tenure is the Department Chair, they, in consultation with the Dean, will determine which senior colleague in the department should write the letter. If a candidate’s Department Chair is serving on the Promotions and Tenure Committee, the Chair will not write the letter for the candidate. Rather, a senior member of the department, selected by the Dean and in consultation with the Department Chair, will write the letter.
Candidates who have a joint appointment or have significant responsibility in two or more departments or programs (for example, a math faculty member teaching in education) should have the Chair/Director from the secondary department or program submit an addendum to the Chair’s letter.
Part 7: The candidate will submit annual summaries of Student Perceptions of Teaching (Unit IV) for the candidate’s term of employment at Elon University or for the previous six years, whichever is shorter.
Part 8: The candidate will include the most recent Dean’s evaluation of the candidate (Unit V) from a midpoint review during the candidate’s term of employment at Elon University or the previous six years, whichever is shorter.
Part 9: A candidate being considered for tenure may include letters of support for teaching, service, and professional activity from colleagues at Elon University and other institutions, not to exceed 15 letters. Letters required in Parts 1-8 above are not included in the 15-letter maximum.
A candidate being considered for tenure may include self-solicited letters from external reviewers that address the candidate’s professional activity, but such letters are not required. These letters are included in the 15-letter maximum stipulated above.
Considerations Following the Tenure Decision
Subject to the financial resources of the University, academic tenure implies continuation of employment until retirement, provided that the faculty member continues to adhere to the standards of teaching and scholarship that are essential to the mission and goals of the University.
Those applicants not awarded tenure may be given an additional year of employment.
Continuing Track Evaluation
- Evaluation Schedule for Faculty on Continuing Track
- Criteria for Review of Continuing Track Faculty
- Continuance Review for Continuing Track
- Continuing Track Evaluation System
- Digital Portfolio for Continuance Decision for Continuing Track
- Considerations Following the Continuance Decision
Evaluation Schedule for Faculty on Continuing Track
The length of the probationary period for a faculty member on continuing track is four years. Faculty members on continuing track are reviewed annually by their Chair. During the probationary period, continuing track appointments are of fixed term length, normally one academic year, with no guarantee of reemployment.
| Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Year 4 | Year 5 | Year TBD | Year 8 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unit reports are described in the Faculty Evaluation System.
Criteria for Review of Continuing Track Faculty
Full-time continuing track teaching faculty members at Elon University are evaluated annually according to the criteria listed in the Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching Faculty and by the guidelines found in the Statement of Professional Standards. Review of a continuing track faculty member is based primarily on demonstrated teaching, with considerable weight also given to contributions to the life of the University. Professional activity appropriate to rank is also considered.
Continuance Review for Continuing Track
Continuing track appointments include a probationary period of four years. During the probationary period the continuing track appointments are of a fixed term length, normally one academic year, with no guarantee of employment. In the fourth year the faculty member on continuing track is reviewed by their Chair, Dean, and Senior Faculty Review Committee.
Continuing Track Evaluation System
The evaluation system for teaching faculty on continuing track during the fourth year involves five stages and follows the Schedule of Activities for Evaluation.
Stage 1 involves the creation of a digital portfolio consisting of material drawn from the faculty personnel file as well as additional information included by the candidate. The individual candidate is responsible for seeing that the digital portfolio is in finished form by September 15 so that the process may proceed to stage two.
Stage 2 involves the separate evaluation of this digital portfolio by the respective Chair and Senior Faculty Review Committee. Each independently makes a recommendation regarding continuance and communicates that to the respective Dean.
Stage 3 involves a recommendation on continuance by the Dean to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
Stage 4 involves a recommendation on continuance by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs to the President.
Stage 5 involves personnel decisions made by the President of the University.
Digital Portfolio for Continuance Decision for Continuing Track
Teaching faculty members on continuing track who are applying for continuance will create a digital portfolio which will serve as the basic resource for the decision. The digital portfolio is drawn from material in the faculty personnel file but may be supplemented by material of the candidate’s choosing (e.g., personal recommendations). The digital portfolio will include material organized in sequential order from Part 1 through Part 8 described below. The digital portfolio shall be in PDF format and the organization should include tabbed, linked sections to facilitate review. If applicable, the peer-reviewed scholarship statement(s) from relevant department(s) or school(s) and the Elon Teacher-Scholar-Mentor Statement[NT1] may be inserted as the first page, preceding Part 1. Once this process has been completed, the digital portfolio is returned to the candidate.
Part 1: This part includes a letter of consideration for removal of probationary status that reflects on the candidate’s time at Elon and on reviews of the candidate prepared in the most recent four years. The letter should summarize the candidate’s case for removal of probationary status, with specific reference to the candidate’s performance relative to the Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching Faculty.
Part 2: This part includes a current curriculum vitae. Candidates are asked to provide clear indications of the types of scholarship listed in their curriculum vitae. In particular, reviewers of portfolios must be able to distinguish peer-reviewed and refereed scholarship from other kinds of academic products. It is also important that candidates follow accepted professional documentation guidelines (e.g., APA, CBE, MLA style) in formatting each entry. Candidates should be particularly careful to follow these guidelines when listing multiple authors and researchers.
Part 3: This part includes the Teaching Faculty Member’s Annual Self-Review (Unit I)) for the faculty member’s term of employment at Elon University or the previous four years.
Part 4: The candidate will include a description, self-evaluation, documentation, and representative samples of the candidate’s achievements relative to the Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching Faculty. The primary focus should be upon activity at Elon. Evidence as to the status of scholarship that is not yet public, such as “in press,” or “under contract,” must be provided, if that scholarship is listed in support of the candidate’s application. Such evidence might include galleys, letters from editors, and so on.
Part 5: This part includes the Department Chair’s annual evaluation (Unit III), including Midpoint Unit III for each year of the candidate’s term of employment at Elon University or for the previous four years.
Part 6: The candidate will submit annual summaries of Student Perceptions of Teaching (Unit IV) for the candidate’s term of employment at Elon University or for the previous four years, whichever is shorter.
Part 7: The candidate will include the most recent Dean’s midpoint evaluation of the candidate (Unit V).
Part 8: The candidate may submit letters of support for teaching, service, and professional activity from colleagues at Elon University and other institutions, not to exceed 15 letters. Letters required in Parts 1 – 7 above are not included in the 15-letter maximum.
Considerations Following the Continuance Decision
Following the probationary period, and upon favorable decision by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, a teaching faculty member with a continuing track appointment will receive a two-year annually renewable appointment.
Teaching faculty on continuing track appointments whose initial appointment was at the Associate Professor rank will receive a three-year annually renewable appointment and an annual $3,000 salary supplement following the probationary period and upon favorable decision by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
Those individuals not offered continuance on a continuing track appointment may be given an additional year of employment.
Teaching Track Evaluation
- Evaluation Schedule for Faculty on Teaching Track
- Criteria for Teaching Track Evaluation
- Continuance Review for Teaching Track
- Teaching Track Evaluation System
- File for Continuance Decision for Teaching Track
- Considerations Following the Continuance Decision
Evaluation Schedule for Faculty on Teaching Track
Teaching track appointments provide for fixed-term periods of employment with no expectation of tenure. During the four-year probationary period these appointments are of a fixed term length, normally one academic year, with no guarantee of reemployment. Following the probationary period and upon favorable decision, a faculty member with a teaching track appointment will receive a two-year annually renewable appointment. Faculty members on the teaching track are reviewed annually by their Chair.
| Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Year 4 | Year 5 | Year 8 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unit reports are described in the Faculty Evaluation System.
Criteria for Teaching Track Evaluation
Full-time teaching track faculty members are evaluated annually according to the Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching Faculty and by the guidelines found in the Statement of Professional Standards. Review of teaching track faculty members is based primarily on teaching and secondarily on contributions to the life of the University and professional activity. Teaching track faculty members are expected to provide engaged and effective pedagogical instruction per the First Level Criterion – Teaching, which may include advising, supervising, and mentoring students. Teaching track faculty members are also expected to actively engage in service and to participate in professional activity that keeps them current in their field and develops their contributions to the institution, principally their teaching. Peer-reviewed scholarship is not an expectation or requirement for evaluation or promotion within the teaching track.
Continuance Review for Teaching Track
Teaching track appointments include a probationary period of four years. During the probationary period the teaching track appointments are of a fixed term length, normally one academic year, with no guarantee of reemployment. In the fourth year, the faculty member on teaching track is reviewed by their Chair, Dean, and Senior Faculty Review Committee.
Teaching Track Evaluation System
The evaluation system for teaching track faculty during the fourth year involves five stages and follows the Schedule of Activities for Evaluation.
Stage 1 involves the creation of a file consisting of material drawn from the faculty personnel file as well as additional information included by the candidate. The individual candidate is responsible for seeing that the file is in finished form by September 15 so that the process may proceed to stage two.
Stage 2 involves the separate evaluation of this file by the respective Chair and Senior Faculty Review Committee. Each independently makes a recommendation regarding continuance and communicates that to the respective Dean.
Stage 3 involves a recommendation on continuance by the Dean to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
Stage 4 involves a recommendation on continuance by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs to the President.
Stage 5 involves personnel decisions made by the President of the University.
File for Continuance Decision for Teaching Track
Teaching track faculty who are applying for continuance will create a file which will serve as the basic resource for the decision. The file is drawn from material in the faculty personnel file but may be supplemented by material of the candidate’s choosing (e.g., personal recommendations). Generally, the file will include the following material organized according to these guidelines:
Part 1: This part includes a letter of consideration for removal of probationary status that reflects on the candidate’s time at Elon and on reviews of the candidate prepared in the most recent four years. The letter should summarize the candidate’s case for removal of probationary status, with specific reference to the candidate’s performance relative to the Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching Faculty.
Part 2: This part includes a current curriculum vitae.
Part 3: This part includes the Teaching Faculty Member’s Annual Self-Review (Unit I) for the faculty member’s term of employment at Elon University or the previous four years.
Part 4: The candidate will include a description, self-evaluation, documentation, and representative samples of the candidate’s achievements relative to the Criteria for Evaluation of Teaching Faculty. The primary focus should be upon activity at Elon.
Part 5: This part includes the Department Chair’s annual evaluation (Unit III, including midpoint Unit III) for each year of the candidate’s term of employment at Elon University or for the previous four years.
Part 6: The candidate’s file will contain annual summaries of Student Perceptions of Teaching (Unit IV) for the candidate’s term of employment at Elon University or for the previous four years, whichever is shorter.
Part 7: The candidate will include the Dean’s midpoint evaluation of the candidate (Unit V).
Part 8: The candidate may include letters of support for teaching, service, and professional activity from colleagues at Elon University and other institutions, not to exceed 15 letters. Letters required in Parts I – VII above are not included in the 15-letter maximum.
Part 9: The candidate must prepare a digital copy (PDF) of the complete file and must include it with the file.
The file becomes the basic resource in the review. However, if further clarification becomes necessary, those involved in the decision may consult and use the candidate’s personnel file (described above).
The file exists only for the duration of the evaluation process. Once this process has been completed, the file is returned to the candidate.
Considerations Following the Continuance Decision
Following the probationary period, and upon favorable decision by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, a teaching faculty member with a teaching track appointment will receive a two-year annually renewable appointment.
Teaching faculty whose initial appointment was at the Associate Teaching Professor rank will receive a three-year annually renewable appointment, a raise equivalent to that of a promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor, and a one-time four-semester hour course reduction following the probationary period and upon favorable decision by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
Those individuals not offered continuance on a teaching track appointment may be given an additional year of employment.
Visiting Appointment Evaluation
- Evaluation Schedule for Faculty with Visiting Appointments
- Criteria for Visiting Appointment Faculty Evaluation
Evaluation Schedule for Faculty with Visiting Appointments
Visiting appointments are of fixed term length, normally one academic year with no guarantee of reemployment, and can be renewed annually for a maximum of three years of service. If needed, visiting appointments may be renewed annually for up to an additional three years.
A teaching faculty on a visiting appointment is reviewed by their Chair and Dean yearly according to the Schedule of Activities for Evaluation.
| Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Year 4 | Year 5 | Year 6 (Final Year) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unit reports are described in the Faculty Evaluation System.
Faculty on visiting appointments may apply for teaching track, continuing track, or tenure track appointments when they become available through the regular faculty recruitment process.
Criteria for Visiting Appointment Faculty Evaluation
Full-time visiting faculty at Elon University are evaluated annually according to their primary assignments, normally teaching and service, and by the guidelines found in the Statement of Professional Standards.
Limited Term Appointment Evaluation
- Evaluation Schedule for Faculty with Limited Term Appointments
- Criteria for Limited Term Appointment Faculty Evaluation
Evaluation Schedule for Faculty with Limited Term Appointments
Limited term appointments are of fixed term length, normally one academic year with no guarantee of reemployment, and can be renewed annually.
Unit IVs for faculty on limited term appointments are reviewed by their Chair and Dean yearly. Unit reports are described in the Faculty Evaluation System.
Faculty on limited term appointments may apply for teaching track, continuing track, or tenure track appointments when they become available through the regular faculty recruitment process.
Criteria for Limited Term Appointment Faculty Evaluation
Full-time limited term faculty at Elon University are evaluated annually according to their primary assignment, which includes teaching and service, and by the guidelines found in the Statement of Professional Standards.
Librarian Evaluation
- Evaluation Schedule for Librarians
- Criteria for Librarian Continuance Review
- Librarian Evaluation System
- Continuance Decision Review
- Considerations Following the Continuance Decision
Evaluation Schedule for Librarians
New librarian appointments at the Assistant Librarian rank include a probationary period of four years. During the probationary period these appointments are of a fixed term length, normally one academic year, with no guarantee of reemployment.
Librarians are evaluated annually by the Dean of the Carol Grotnes Belk Library. Librarians housed outside the library are evaluated annually by their supervising Dean. Completed evaluations are reviewed by the office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs and submitted to the Office of Human Resources.
| Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Year 4 | Year 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Annual evaluation
|
Annual evaluation
|
Annual evaluation
|
|
|
Criteria for Librarian Continuance Review
Professional development in areas of librarianship, professional activity and service will be reviewed.
Librarian Evaluation System
A review for continuation with the Dean of the Carol Grotnes Belk Library is required after four years of employment. For librarians housed outside the library, review for continuation is performed by their supervising Dean, in consultation with the Dean of the Carol Grotnes Belk Library.
Candidates for continuance are also reviewed by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs and the President.
Continuance Decision Review
The continuance decision review occurs during the fourth year for all librarians. The decision to grant a continuing contract rests with the President. Results are forwarded from the Dean of the Carol Grotnes Belk Library or supervising Dean to the candidate and also are placed in the candidate’s personnel file. Upon a favorable decision, librarians will receive a two-year annually renewable contract. Those candidates not offered continuing appointment may be given a one-year contract with no guarantee of reemployment.
The evaluation system for librarian continuance during the fourth year involves five stages:
Stage 1 involves the creation of a digital file consisting of material drawn from the faculty personnel file as well as additional information included by the candidate. The digital file shall be in PDF format and the organization should include tabbed, linked sections to facilitate review. It is the responsibility of the individual candidate to see that the file is in finished form by September 15 so that Stage 2 may proceed.
Stage 2 involves the evaluation of this file by the Dean of the Carol Grotnes Belk Library.
Stage 3 involves a recommendation on continuance by the Dean of the Carol Grotnes Belk Library to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
Stage 4 involves a recommendation on continuance by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs to the President.
Stage 5 involves a decision on continuance by the President of the University.
Considerations Following the Continuance Decision
Upon a favorable decision, librarians will receive a two-year annually renewable appointment.
Those individuals not offered continuance may remain on a one-year appointment with no guarantee of reemployment.
Part-Time Faculty Evaluation
Part-time faculty members without other responsibilities are evaluated by their Department Chair and Dean only in the area of teaching, and submit Unit IVs.
Unit reports are described in the Faculty Evaluation System.
Faculty Appeal
Faculty members who believe that a decision which violates University procedures has been made in their case should consult the Grievance and Appeals section of this Handbook.
Termination of Employment
- Non-Renewal of Probationary Faculty
- Removal for Cause
- Dismissal of Tenured Teaching Faculty
- Retirement
- Phased Retirement
Non-Renewal of Probationary Faculty
Faculty in their first year of full-time teaching at Elon will be notified by January of the current academic year if their appointment will not be renewed for a second year.
After completing the first year, faculty will be notified by April of the current academic year if their appointment (employment) will not be renewed beyond the next academic year.
Removal for Cause
The President of the University, in consultation with the Dean and Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, may remove a faculty member for cause without regard to the faculty evaluation schedule. “For cause” may include any or all of the following:
- Illegal activity
- Bona fide financial exigency
- Abolition of the faculty member’s discipline or department
- Action inconsistent with the University goal of maintaining fairness with regard to sex, race, religion, national origin, and individual disabilities
- Professional incompetence
- Gross personal or professional misconduct
- Other actions by a faculty member that are detrimental to the goals and missions of the University and which require prompt removal
Faculty members who believe that a decision has been wrongfully made in their case may request a hearing as described in this Handbook.
Dismissal of Tenured Teaching Faculty
When reason arises to question the retention of a teaching faculty member who has tenure, the Department Chair, the Dean, and the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs will discuss the matter with the faculty member. The procedure may be terminated at this point by mutual consent.
If the issue is not resolved by mutual consent, the faculty member has the right to request a hearing by the Academic Council. The faculty member requesting the hearing may present the grievance and/or may be represented by any other faculty member they select. The faculty member has the right to secure counsel and the right to question witnesses.
Recommendations of the Academic Council concerning disposition of the case will be made to the President of the University.
If requested by the faculty member, the President shall take the full report of the Academic Council to the Board of Trustees stating the Council’s recommendation, together with the President’s own recommendation. The Board may accept the President’s recommendation or the recommendation of the Council, or the recommendation may be returned to the Council for reconsideration.
Retirement
Faculty members are eligible for retirement when they have reached 59.5 years of age and have at least 10 years of service at Elon University. There is no mandatory retirement age. Faculty members considering retirement should consult with their Department Chairs and Deans and contact the Office of Human Resources.
Phased Retirement
Introduction
Phased retirement is an arrangement for reducing a faculty member’s workload prior to retirement, as provided in a phased retirement agreement between the University and the faculty member. This transitional reduced-load phase will normally extend for a two year period prior to retirement. During phased retirement, the faculty member’s appointment will be as a Senior Faculty Fellow, defined as a full-time teaching faculty member whose overall workload has been reduced as a means of transitioning into retirement. The reduced teaching load, ordinarily consisting of three courses, is expected to be carried out over the full academic year. Other Senior Faculty Fellow responsibilities include advising and service to the department and institution. The Senior Faculty Fellow will draw half of normal salary during the phased retirement period.
Eligibility
To be eligible for participation in phased retirement a faculty member must:
- Be a full-time teaching member of the University faculty
- Be at least 59½ years of age
- Have completed at least 10 years of service to the University immediately prior to entering into the phased retirement program
Criteria for Decisions
While participation in the phased retirement program is not a right automatically available to all people who meet the eligibility criteria, the University will give serious consideration to all requests. Factors that will guide these decisions include:
- The faculty member’s most recent reviews (Unit Is and Unit IIIs)
- Departmental needs
- Institutional needs and resources
Replacements for faculty who are granted phased retirement will be determined based on department needs and institutional resources.
Application and Decision Processes
Eligible faculty members may initiate the application process by submitting a letter of intent to their Dean and Department Chair. Ordinarily, this letter will be submitted one year prior to the faculty member’s anticipated entry into the phased retirement program in order to facilitate department planning.
The Department Chair will consult with the Dean regarding the impact on departmental resources.
In the case of joint appointments, both Department Chairs must receive the written request and consult with their appropriate Deans.
If approved, the Dean will forward the request to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs for final review and approval. After which the applicant will be informed whether their request has been approved. Upon receiving approval, the applicant should make an appointment with the Human Resources Department to obtain complete details of phased retirement. The Office of the Provost will prepare a phased retirement agreement between the applicant and the University during the annual letter of agreement (LOA) process, to be signed by the President.
The decision of the University to permit phased retirement in each case is at the University’s discretion, and its decision is final. Denial of a request, however, does not preclude the approval of a subsequent request.
Phased Retirement Agreement
The written phased retirement agreement will contain the following provisions:
- The faculty member agrees to formally retire from Elon University on an agreed-upon date (usually the end of the appropriate academic year).
- Unless specific provisions to the contrary are included in a Senior Faculty Fellow’s agreement with the University, that person will retain faculty privileges, responsibilities, and benefits as outlined in this Faculty Handbook. During the phased retirement period, faculty members will be considered full-time faculty and will receive all appropriate fringe benefits.
- The faculty member, Chair, and Dean will mutually agree on the responsibilities for teaching, service, and advising during the Senior Faculty Fellow’s phased retirement.
- The faculty member will draw half of their normal salary.
- Phased retirement cannot begin until it has been recommended by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs and approved by the President.