Section B: Appointment, Retention, Tenure, Promotion, and Evaluation Recruitment of Faculty (Senate: 8/10/71, 11/15/77, 11/5/85, 10/17/89, 6/4/92, 3/11/03; President: 8/17/71, 11/21/77, 12/19/85, 11/10/89, 7/11/92, 5/7/03 ; Editorial Amendment:  9/99, 9/00, 8/01) Recruitment should be based on explicit long-term (three- to five-year) plans developed on the basis of careful forecasting of curriculum developments for each department/division/school, projected changes in class size limits related to changes in content and methods of instruction in each class, changing needs for each offering, projected student/faculty ratios, projected FTES, and the Statement of Diversity and Inclusivity.   Departments/divisions/schools shall be required to recruit faculty from a wide variety of institutions in order to provide significant breadth of background and experience in each department/division/school. No more than 25 percent of a department's/division's/school's probationary and tenured faculty should have their highest academic degrees from any single institution. Before making a new appointment at variance with this limit, the dean of the college must be satisfied that serious and persistent factors beyond the department's/division's/school's control make the exception necessary. Such factors would include, but not be limited to the consideration of the Statement of Diversity and Inclusivity.   Each college* shall strive to maintain a ratio of full-time to part-time faculty sufficient to ensure that activities requiring full-time faculty are adequately staffed. Specific limits on part-time faculty should be recommended by each department/division/school and approved by the corresponding college, with due consideration given to the requirements of appropriate accrediting agencies.   Before recruitment for any position takes place, explicit and reasonable criteria for evaluating applicants shall be established in writing by departments/divisions/schools and shall be made available in the individual departments/divisions/schools and colleges. Departments/divisions/schools may require additional professional training, vocational experience or education above and beyond the terminal degree. Departments/divisions/schools shall distinguish between required and desired criteria, and shall consider such factors as instructional ability, training, professional potential or achievement, research ability and quality of recommendations. All applicants for a position shall be judged by the same criteria.   The department/division/school shall develop the appropriate vacancy announcement which shall be approved by the college dean or appropriate administrator after consultation with the Office for Equity and Diversity. The vacancy announcement must include the name of the specific terminal degree that is required for tenure and promotion if the possession of that degree is not a requirement for appointment. (For information about equivalency statements, see the section of the Faculty Handbook entitled "Eligibility Criteria for Tenure and Promotion"). Vacancy announcements for tenure track positions shall be disseminated locally, regionally, and nationally. ____________ *Wherever applicable, the term "college" includes the Library. Appointment (Senate: 1/4/72, 1/12/81, 2/26/85, 2/4/92, 7/16/03; President: 1/13/72, 1/26/81, 3/22/85, 3/11/92, 4/6/04; Editorial Amendment: 9/00, 8/01) Vacancy announcements shall be developed by the department/division/school with the approval of the appropriate administrator and shall be widely disseminated.   Written information concerning personnel policies and procedures is given to each faculty member prior to the time of appointment.   Probationary appointments are normally made at the assistant professor or equivalent librarian rank in accordance with provisions of the Agreement:   Recommendations regarding probationary appointments shall originate at the department/division/school. Probationary appointment procedures shall include the following:   a.  Each department/division/school unit shall elect an appointments committee of tenured employees for the purpose of reviewing and recommending individuals for probationary appointments. b.  Each department/division/school appointments committee recommendation report shall be approved by a simple majority of the committee casting a vote. An abstention shall count as a negative vote. c.  The department/division/school appointments committee will forward its recommendation of one or more candidates to the college dean.  If the recommendation is not accepted by the dean, the appointments committee will be so informed and given the reasons for such action.  The appointments committee then will either continue to review potential candidates and make further recommendations or abort the search.   The President may appoint a faculty member at a higher rank on the determination of merit consistent with the foregoing provisions.   The appointment of new probationary faculty members is based upon procedures paralleling and anticipating those explained below in connection with retention, tenure, and promotion. Except for special cases, such as a faculty member employed specifically for one year only (normally as a replacement for a faculty member on leave), each newly appointed probationary faculty member is assumed to be a candidate for retention, tenure, and promotion in due course. Hence professional qualifications and performance are scrutinized according to criteria uniform for all faculty members.   Recommendations for probationary appointment to the faculty and for reappointment of non-probationary faculty originate with the department/division chair or school director after consultation with an elected peer review committee composed of tenured faculty members in that department/division/school.   No probationary appointments will be made without a personal interview by a qualified representative of the University. A personal interview is considered desirable as a condition of any faculty appointment and colleges are expected to adhere to this guideline except where special conditions (e.g., summer quarter staffing problems) interfere. Budgetary restrictions on out-of-state travel and interview money will not be considered a "special condition" in this sense.   After considering the recommendation of the department/division/school and the appropriate administrator, appointments of faculty members shall be made by the President. No faculty member shall be deemed appointed in the absence of an official written notification from the President which shall include: beginning and ending dates of the appointment, classification/rank, number of units, status, assigned department/division/school and other employment conditions.   Temporary appointments may be for one or more quarters or years. Their official notifications shall indicate an automatic expiration at the end of the stated period. Such appointments do not establish consideration for subsequent appointments or any further appointment rights. A temporary faculty member may be advanced to probationary status only with the approval of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs as well as the appropriate dean and college committee (i.e. Faculty Affairs Committee or RTP Committee).   The chief factors weighed in evaluating qualifications for appointment are instructional ability and success, training, professional achievement, research ability, and quality of recommendations. If satisfactory faculty members cannot be recruited under these guidelines, instructional positions will remain unfilled.   Faculty members may apply for an appointment at another campus in their  field of expertise; however, no faculty member shall be involuntarily appointed at another campus within the CSU.   No individual may be appointed to an academic position who previously had been dismissed for cause, either from a position in The California State University pursuant to the Education Code, section 89535, or from any other institution of higher education. Any proposal to appoint such individuals shall be submitted to the Office of the Chancellor, Division of Faculty and Staff Relations, together with supporting documentation. The matter will be reviewed and the campus involved will be advised of the determination in each case. (Chancellor's Executive Order 158, September 25, 1982) Personnel Information and Personnel Reports Once appointed, each faculty member is invited annually to record accomplishments and contributions to the University in a letter or on  a personnel information form provided by the college, with a copy submitted to the department/division chair or school director. The letter or statement is invited each year, whether the concern is with retention, tenure, promotion, a combination of these, or simply the recording of the faculty member's accomplishments and contributions to the University as a matter of general interest and value to the University and the faculty member. It is assumed that chairs, committees, and the University in general are most interested in each faculty member's significant accomplishments in the three general categories described below. The items included in the statement and the emphasis in each instance are at the faculty member's own discretion.   Failure to respond to this invitation shall not in itself be deemed prejudicial. However, the faculty member should be alert to the possibility that factual material may be difficult to acquire if not provided by the  individual. When submitted, the letter or statement is placed in the faculty member's personnel file, and is used in making retention, tenure, and promotion recommendations.   It is the duty of the department/division chair or school director to counsel faculty members concerning the factors that add strength or affect status. It is the right of every faculty member to request such counsel at any time. The first counseling of new faculty members shall be undertaken at the department/division chair's or school director's initiative, and must include but not be limited to verification that the faculty member has received a copy of the current Faculty Handbook and understands its purpose; verbal orientation to the department/division/school, college, and University as deemed appropriate; and answers to questions raised by the new faculty member. Thereafter, counseling of the faculty member shall be at the faculty member's option and initiative, except that reports prepared annually for purposes of retention, tenure, and promotion must be shown to the respective faculty members undergoing such evaluation. The department/division chair or school director shall initiate the meetings at which these evaluations are discussed. If the chair is dissatisfied with or has reason to question the performance of the faculty member, the faculty member must be notified promptly. It is the duty of the committee designated to survey the faculty member's accomplishments to summarize annually, in the form of a report to the dean, the committee's judgment of the faculty member's accomplishments and abilities, ending with a specific recommendation for or against retention or tenure. A similar report must be written in the years when the faculty member is eligible for consideration for promotion. The department/division chair or school director shall be presumed to share this opinion and recommendation unless specifically stated otherwise in a separate but accompanying report, which must be shown to the members of the committee with whom the chair/director differs.   The faculty member must be shown the report on behalf of the department/division/school committee, as well as the department/division chair's or school director's report of personal disagreement where it exists. The faculty member shall be given the right to object to any statement in either report, in which case a personal position of dissent shall be forwarded to the dean, along with the opinion of the department/division/school committee and the department/division chair's or school director's opinion if it differs from that of the department/division/school.   No numerical ratings shall be employed in the department's/division's/school's annual evaluations or recommendations as forwarded by the chair/director, or the chair's/director's separate recommendations, if any.*   Like the statement annually invited of the faculty member, the annual department/division/school report shall be placed in the faculty member's personnel file, which is maintained in the office of the dean. The entire file shall be made available to members of appropriate college and department/division/school personnel committees.   ____________ *Numerical ratings are used only for the Student Opinion Survey on Instruction. Expectations Regarding English Proficiency of Faculty (Senate:  6/4/96; President:  8/12/96; Editorial Amendment: 8/01)   At the time of initial appointment, instructional faculty, including graduate teaching associates, must be evaluated for oral and written proficiency in English through procedures to be developed by each department/division/school.  Current instructional faculty shall be evaluated by the same procedures, no later than the end of the next academic year following the approval of  this policy.  Upon completion of  the evaluation, the department/division chair or school director of the faculty member concerned will certify proficiency in English appropriate to the discipline, instructional setting, and material being communicated.  Such certification shall be placed in the faculty member's personnel file.  If a member of the instructional faculty is unable to demonstrate proficiency in oral or written communication in English, he or she shall be directed to courses, workshops, or programs designed for the improvement of  those skills. Personnel Files and Other Employment Records (Senate: 7/25/67, 3/31/70, 7/3/73, 7/22/75, 5/4/76, 4/5/77, 6/8/77, 1/12/82, 5/15/85, 3/7/89; President: 9/27/67, 4/20/70, 7/5/73, 7/28/75, 5/28/76, 7/18/77, 3/11/82, 7/9/85, 4/14/89; Editorial Amendment: 9/00)   Contractual rights relating to faculty personnel files are found in the Agreement (Article 11).   Personnel files and other employment records shall be open only to the faculty member concerned and to faculty committees and administrative personnel (as specified by the President) responsible for decisions requiring information normally available from such records. Upon request to the designated custodian (e.g., college dean, Director of Human Resources Management), the faculty member shall have the right of access to all personnel files and other employment records maintained by the University, including reports, documents, and correspondence collected under the faculty member's name or some other form of individual identification. In reviewing such records, the faculty member may be accompanied by one other person. If the need for confidentiality demonstrably outweighs the need for disclosure in the interest of justice, then records dealing with the faculty member as a student, medical and police records, communications with University Counsel, material obtained confidentially, and investigatory reports preliminary to discipline and grievance proceedings may be excluded. Denial of access on this ground may be challenged through normal procedures.   The college file shall be the official and complete personnel file. Each college shall establish detailed plans for preserving the security and integrity of the personnel files, which shall include but not be  limited to controlled access to locked files, situations under which the files leave campus, the transportation of files, and notification to the faculty member when the files are transported.   In deciding whether to remove materials from a faculty member's personnel file at the request of the individual, the dean may refer the request to the appropriate faculty committee. The committee shall recommend to the dean whether the material in question should be removed from the file. The dean shall honor the committee recommendation unless there are compelling reasons to the contrary. Departmental/Divisional/School and College Personnel Documents (Senate: 7/26/77, 8/16/77, 2/26/80, 12/9/80, 7/29/87; President: 7/29/77, 8/18/77, 3/10/80, 12/22/80, 7/25/88; Editorial Amendment: 9/00; 8/01) Each college and department/division/school shall establish a formal system of evaluating their faculty. Each system must include methods of collecting information about the evaluation of faculty activities in category A, instructional performance; category B, professional achievement; and category C all other contributions to the University, as described in the section immediately following. Complete department/division/school and college evaluation procedures must be submitted to the Faculty Policy Committee after each new Agreement for review, recommendation to the President, and formalization prior to the start of the next faculty evaluation.   Between the time the department/division/school documents have been approved and the time a new Agreement is signed, the department/division/school and college documents will be kept current by addenda to the standardized document. Addenda to university regulations will be sent to all departments/divisions/schools by the Faculty Policy Committee prior to the start of the evaluation cycle. New regulations which originate in the department/division/school during this period must be submitted, as addenda, to the Faculty Policy Committee for approval prior to the start of the evaluation cycle. Faculty Archives (Senate:  2/10/98; President:  4/24/98)   Files of all faculty unit employees who are on the faculty five or more years will be kept in the appropriate dean's office for a period of five years after the faculty member has ceased being an active member of  the faculty in any way (including FERPing).   If  however legal action involving the faculty member is pending, the file will be retained for five years following the termination of the legal action.  The faculty member, at the time of separation, shall review the file, indicate any material considered by the faculty member to be sensitive and sign an agreement that the rest may be kept after five years as an historical archive.  Once the five years have   passed the sensitive material will be removed and destroyed by the dean or designee, and the file shall be archived in the University Library in perpetuity.   Scholars and researchers will be granted access to the archived faculty files under special collections procedures. Handling of Materials in the Event of the Death of an Active Member of the Faculty In the case of the death of a faculty member prior to reviewing the file the next of kin or executor of the estate shall be allowed to review the faculty member's file to identify sensitive material for removal at the end of five years, consistent with archiving policies.  If no such person performs this function, the dean will do so.   Upon the death of a faculty member, the next of  kin or executor of the estate will be allowed to enter the faculty member's office, under the supervision of the dean or his/her designee, to identify and remove personal effects.  The dean or designee will then enter the office to identify and collect all university property and records.   The material remaining will be disposed of by the dean or designee in whatever he/she considers to be an appropriate manner. Personnel Committees (Senate: 5/30/89, 4/15/03, 5/31/11, 8/3/11 [EA]; President: 8/8/89, 9/25/03, 8/26/11; Editorial Amendment: 9/99, 9/00; 8/01) Collective Bargaining Agreement between the California State University and the California Faculty Association, especially Articles 2, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 27, 28, and 29.   A faculty personnel matter is defined as a matter pertaining to personnel recommendations and personnel actions regarding a faculty unit employee.  Such matters may include appointment, retention, tenure, promotion, retreat rights, discipline, grievance, appeals, personal and professional leaves of absence, sabbatical leaves, difference-in-pay leaves, and other awards involving a member of the faculty. Within this same context, a faculty personnel matter is further defined to include incompatibility of employment, nepotism, academic freedom and professional ethics, and other such matters.   In cases where department/division/school, college, and University policy or the CSU/CFA Collective Bargaining Agreement require or permit the involvement of a faculty personnel committee, the following policies on the formation and operation of personnel committees apply.   Eligibility for Membership on Personnel Committees   Membership on faculty personnel committees shall be limited to permanent faculty members.   Exceptions to this restriction shall be limited to those instances in which the CSU/CFA Collective Bargaining Agreement requires the participation of other faculty employees.   Faculty participating in the Faculty Early Retirement Program (FERP) may serve on personnel committees when the committee's work would normally be completed during the period of FERP employment.  However, personnel committees may not be comprised solely of faculty participating in the Faculty Early Retirement Program.   Faculty members on leave for one or more quarters will normally not serve on personnel committees, and must notify the committee chair prior to the beginning of the quarter in which they will be absent.  If a faculty member is available and willing to serve and if there are extraordinary circumstances that make the faculty member's attendance highly desirable, a faculty member may serve while on leave subject to the college dean's approval.   1.  Appointment Committees   When the President has authorized the recruitment of a permanent faculty member in a department/division/school, the department/division/school shall elect an appointments committee of three or more tenured faculty members for the purpose of reviewing and recommending individuals for probationary or tenured appointments.  At the discretion of the President and upon request of the department/division/school, these appointment committees may also include probationary faculty. If the President has authorized recruitment of a tenured faculty member, the appointments committee shall be limited to faculty members at a rank equivalent to or higher than the rank at which the faculty member will be appointed.   Each department/division/school and college shall establish procedures for the consideration of applicants for temporary appointments.  If these procedures involve personnel committees, such committees will be governed by this policy.   2.  Faculty Evaluation Committees   Each department/division/school and each college shall elect one or more personnel committees comprised of tenured faculty members to conduct evaluations of faculty members.  Each department/division/school committee shall have a minimum of three members and one alternate.  Each college committee shall have a minimum of five members and one alternate with no more than three members from any one department/division/school.  For faculty units that are not organized into departments/divisions/schools, the unit-specific evaluations policies will identify equivalents to personnel committees.  A faculty member cannot serve on more than one level of peer review for another faculty unit employee in any given academic year.  If a faculty member is elected to peer review committees at two levels, the faculty member may decline service on either the department/division/school or college committee.   When a member is to be absent from a substantial part of the committee's deliberations, the alternate will replace the member and will continue through the completion of all committee deliberations of that cycle.  A committee member on the college evaluation committee may not be present when the committee is deliberating and voting on candidates from his or her department/division/school.   As established by the department/division/school policy, the chair or director may serve on the department/division/school evaluation committee either as an elected or ex officio voting member, or as an ex officio non-voting member.  If the chair or director is not a voting member of the department/division/school evaluation committee, he or she has the responsibility to write an independent evaluation of the faculty member.   No member of an evaluation committee may participate in the evaluation of anyone who holds a rank higher than the member's rank.  Additionally, faculty members under promotion consideration are not eligible to serve on promotion or tenure peer review committees. 3.  Other Personnel Committee   Other personnel matters that require the involvement of faculty committees shall be handled by the appropriate department/division/school, college, or University committee.   Ballots for Committee Membership   It is the responsibility of the department/division chair or school director (for department/division/school committees) and the college dean (for college committees) to insure that the ballot contains only the names of faculty eligible to serve.  It is expected that all eligible faculty will be on the college and departmental/divisional/school ballot and shall serve if elected. When there are fewer than twice the number of faculty members eligible for election to a personnel committee as are required to serve, the faculty shall add the names of eligible nominees from closely related disciplines, in order to present a slate of nominees with at least twice the number to be elected. Each department/division/school or college shall establish procedures for the selection of additional candidates the ballot.   Committee Responsibilities   Once a personnel committee is constituted, each committee will elect its own chair.  Members of personnel committees shall be familiar with the University's Statement of Diversity and Inclusivity and make efforts to strengthen diversity and inclusivity through the retention, tenure and promotion process.   In matters related to appointment, retention, tenure, and promotion, the role of the faculty personnel committee shall be to make a recommendation to the President or the appropriate appointing authority.   1.  Appointment Committees   Each department/division/school appointments committee shall review and recommend individuals for probationary appointments.  Each committee's recommendation report shall be approved by a simple majority of the committee members.   The department/division/school appointments committee will forward its recommendation of one or more candidates to the college dean.  If the recommendation is not accepted by the dean, the appointments committee will be so informed and given the reasons for such action.  The appointments committee then will either continue to review potential candidates and make further recommendations or abort the search.   2.  Evaluation Committees   Evaluation committees are responsible for evaluating the work of the candidates in all areas based on the information provided in the personnel action file, for making a recommendation regarding retention/tenure/promotion, and for applying the specific criteria and standards of the department/division/school or of the college to the performance of their colleagues in the evaluation process.  When faculty have approved individualized professional plans on file, the committee shall review and take into account such plans in evaluating the faculty member's performance.   For all levels of review, the evaluation committee is expected to consider whether evaluation criteria and recommendations from previous years have been met.  Additionally, the expectation for future growth leading to tenure and/or promotion should be stated to provide guidance in future evaluations.  If deficiencies are found, committees are responsible for making recommendations for improvement.   In addition to the responsibilities detailed above, the department/division/school committee is responsible for conveying to other levels of review the relative merit of the individual candidate's performance from the perspective of the candidate's academic discipline.   The college evaluation committee is responsible for evaluating the materials submitted by the candidate and the recommendations forwarded by the department/division/school and for making a recommendation concerning retention, tenure and promotion the the college dean.   Each evaluation recommendation and report shall be approved by a simple majority of the membership of that committee.  The reservations of the minority may be written into the full committee report as qualifications or reservations or as a separate minority opinion, which shall always be included with the majority report.   Confidentiality of Personnel Matters   Except as otherwise provided by system-wide policy, the deliberations and recommendations of all faculty personnel committees shall be strictly confidential. The results of such deliberations shall be made known only to those to whom a committee is required to report and then only by the committee member or members charged with the responsibility.  The principle of confidentiality shall be observed by all committee members as well as by all other participants in the process.  Failure to preserve the confidentiality of personnel deliberations provides grounds for a charge of unprofessional conduct. In the event that the confidentiality of personnel deliberations is violated, the President may authorize such public statements as appropriate   In those cases where a participant in the process appears before a review committee, to provide testimony to a duly authorized authority, or to otherwise respond to a legally binding request, the principle of confidentiality is waived to the extent required.   In the event that any participant in the process perceives serious violations of University regulations in confidential procedures, that person is relieved of the requirement of confidentiality in order to report that concern to the Committee on Academic Freedom and Professional Ethics for the purpose of obtaining advice, or to those to whom the committee is required to report, for whatever action may be deemed appropriate. Calendar (Senate: 5/23/89; President: 8/8/89; Editorial Amendment: 9/00) The calendar for retention, tenure and promotion is prescribed by the Agreement which specifies the time of the notification of the presidential decision. Annually in the summer quarter the Office of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs shall publish the deadlines for the next review cycle. The deans in turn shall publish college deadlines. Evaluation of Permanent Instructional Faculty (Senate: 8/3/76, 5/24/77, 7/28/82[EA], 5/24/83, 11/3/87, 7/25/89, 11/7/89, 8/21/90, 7/30/91, 2/4/92, 10/26/93, 5/10/94, 8/22/95, 5/9/00, 5/10/11, 1/24/12; President: 8/16/76, 6/14/79, 9/8/82, 6/14/83, 6/22/88, 8/16/89, 11/24/89, 11/1/90, 10/7/91, 3/11/92, 12/13/93, 6/29/94, 6/24/96, 6/6/00, 7/14/11, 2/23/12; 6/27/12  the President withdrew approval of the early promotion to full professor language in the policy. Until the Academic Senate takes action and such action is approved, the language for early promotion to full professor reverts to the previous policy. [The change is incorporated in the document below.]  Editorial Amendment: 9/00, 8/01)   Governing documents:  Articles 13, 14, and 15 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the California State University and the California Faculty Association.   In keeping with the terminology utilized in the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the California State University and the California Faculty Association, the term "permanent faculty" shall refer to all probationary (tenure-track) and tenured faculty.  This evaluation policy governs permanent instructional faculty.  Although librarians, counselors, and coaches fall within the faculty bargaining unit, some aspects of their assignments differ from those of instructional faculty and thus they are subject to specific evaluation criteria.  Relevant evaluation policies for each of these groups can be found in their respective evaluation policies elsewhere in this handbook.   Overview The purpose of the University's instructional evaluation policy is to maintain and enhance the high quality of the academic programs at CSULA by assuring that all permanent faculty members meet and maintain high standards of performance as teachers, scholars, and members of the campus community.  The policy aims to achieve this objective by establishing criteria for fair, thorough, and consistent evaluation of individual faculty members.   Evaluations of tenure-track and tenured instructional faculty shall focus on the quality and effectiveness of educational performance, professional achievement, and other contributions to the University by the faculty member under review.   The evaluation of an instructional faculty member is based upon a comprehensive review of the individual's qualities, achievements, and promise during the year or years included in the review period.  Attention shall be given to forming a general "profile" or comprehensive estimate of the faculty member's performance and special professional interests and accomplishments.   All reviews shall be based on evidence in the two-part personnel action file, which includes the permanent personnel action file (PPAF) and the working personnel action file (WPAF).  All evaluations will be entered into the faculty member's permanent personnel action file (PPAF).  The permanent personnel action file (PPAF) is maintained by the University.  Reports of peer observations of instruction and quantitative summaries of student opinion surveys are maintained in the PPAF.  The candidate is responsible for providing the following materials to his or her working personnel action file (WPAF) before the published date of the file closure:  a current curriculum vitae, a personnel information form that summarizes and describes the candidate's activities and accomplishments during the period under review, and evidence of these activities and accomplishments.   I.  Types of Evaluation   There are two types of evaluations of permanent faculty members:   performance reviews, required for retention, tenure and promotion of permanent faculty, and   periodic evaluations, conducted when an evaluation is required, but in periods in which a faculty member is not under consideration for retention, tenure, or promotion.    Performance reviews serve the dual purposes of determining whether or not a faculty member's performance warrants retention, tenure, or promotion, and of providing the faculty member with constructive feedback on his or her performance in the areas under review.  Periodic evaluations are aimed primarily at providing the faculty member with feedback on his or her performance.  However, they may be considered in subsequent performance reviews.    Permanent (probationary and tenured) faculty members shall undergo a performance review when under consideration for retention, tenure, or promotion.  A permanent faculty member undergoing a performance review shall be reviewed by the appropriate department/division/school peer review committee, the department/division chair or school director (if not a member of the department/division/school peer review committee), the appropriate college peer review committee, the dean, the Provost and the President.   A permanent faculty member undergoing periodic evaluation shall be reviewed by the appropriate department/division/school peer review committee, the department/division chair or school director (if not a member of the department/division/school peer review committee), and the dean.  Periodic evaluations shall include review of a faculty member's performance in all of the same areas as during a performance review.   II.  Evaluative Standards    Permanent instructional faculty members at CSULA shall be evaluated on the basis of their educational performance, professional achievement, and contributions to the University.   Permanent faculty evaluations shall utilize the following official evaluative terms:    Outstanding - describes truly exceptional performance, for a faculty member at the particular rank and career stage. Commendable - describes performance that is better than satisfactory and that exceed expectations for a faculty member at the particular rank and career stage. Satisfactory - describes performance that meets expectations for a faculty member at the particular rank and career stage. Needs Improvement - describes performance that does not meet expectations for a faculty member at the particular rank and career stage, in one or more specified areas of concern. Unsatisfactory - describes performance that is seriously deficient for a faculty member at the particular rank and career stage. A review that finds a faculty member's performance to be satisfactory or better in all areas shall be accompanied by a favorable recommendation for retention, tenure, or promotion, when eligible and not applying early.   An evaluation of "needs improvement" does not preclude a reviewer/review committee from recommending retention.  To receive a favorable recommendation for tenure and promotion at least satisfactory performance must be demonstrated in all three categories.   A judgment of unsatisfactory in any one area shall entail a negative recommendation for retention, tenure, or promotion.   III.  Evaluation Timelines   Initial probationary appointments will normally be for two years.  Initial appointments of probationary faculty members who are appointed in a term other than fall shall end in spring term of the second academic year of service.    During the first year of an initial probationary appointment, a faculty member shall undergo a periodic evaluation, with the exception of those appointed in winter or spring term (who will not be reviewed in the first [partial] year of appointment).  During the second year of an initial probationary appointment, a faculty member shall undergo a performance review for retention.   For the purposes of calculating tenure eligibility, the first year shall begin with the first fall term in which a probationary faculty member is employed.    During any probationary year in which a faculty member takes a personal leave of absence (of one or more terms' duration), the faculty member may request to extend the probationary period by one year.  If such an extension is desired, the faculty member must notify the Provost at the time of application for the leave.  If such a request is granted, the tenure eligibility date will be moved forward by one year.   If found to be satisfactory or better during a performance review for retention, probationary faculty members shall be reappointed for subsequent two-year appointment(s) unless they have only one year remaining in their probationary period, in which case they will receive a one-year appointment.  If a probationary faculty member is found to be less than satisfactory, he or she may receive a one-year appointment.  During each year between retention reviews probationary faculty shall undergo periodic evaluations.   Probationary faculty members may request a performance review during any year in which they would otherwise receive only a periodic evaluation.   Consideration for tenure normally occurs during the sixth year of service as a probationary faculty member minus any credit toward tenure.   A probationary faculty member may request to be considered for early tenure.   A faculty member shall not normally be promoted to associate professor and may not be promoted to professor during the probationary period.  Assistant professors who are awarded tenure shall be promoted concurrently to associate professor.   A faculty member must be employed by CSULA and in the current rank for at least two years before applying for tenure or promotion to a higher rank.  A faculty member applying for early tenure or early promotion to associate professor may be recommended for that action only if found to have a record of sustained outstanding performance in categories A and B, "educational performance" and "professional achievement," and at least satisfactory performance in category C, "contributions to the University."   Prior to the final decision for early tenure or early promotion, candidates may withdraw without prejudice from consideration at any level of review.  If a faculty member has applied for and been denied tenure or promotion, the faculty member cannot apply again for early tenure or promotion while in the same rank.   Post-Tenure Performance Reviews and Periodic Evaluations   Once tenured, a faculty member will typically undergo a performance review during the fifth year in rank as an associate professor, for consideration for promotion to the rank of professor.  A faculty member who does not wish to apply for promotion within five years of receiving tenure/promotion to associate professor, must undergo a periodic evaluation in the fifth year in rank.  All tenured professors (at any rank) shall be evaluated at intervals no greater than five years.   The faculty member's evaluation for promotion to the rank of professor emphasizes the scope and depth of teaching performance, the degree of professional recognition within and beyond the University, and the distinctiveness of contributions to the general welfare of the faculty members department/division/school, college, and University.  Such a review must necessarily include a careful evaluation of each individual achievement, with the aim of determining its value to the faculty member, the students and the University.  A candidate for early promotion to the rank of professor must have a sustained outstanding record in categories  A and B, "educational performance" and "professional achievement" and be at least satisfactory in category C, "contributions to the University."    Tenured faculty members may be evaluated more frequently at the request of the faculty member or the President. Review Periods Performance Review Periods: Review: Review Period Begins: Review Period Ends: Retention review for second year faculty Date of appointment to probationary position File closure (fall of second year) Retention (probationary performance review years other than second) File closure of previous performance review Current file closure (winter of performance review years) Tenure and Promotion Date of appointment to probationary position Current file closure (winter of tenure eligibility year) Promotion to Professor File closure of tenure and promotion performance review Current file closure (winter of promotion eligibility year) Periodic Evaluation Periods: Evaluation: Evaluation Period Begins: Evaluation Period Ends: First year evaluation Date of appointment to probationary position File closure (spring of first year) Annual evaluation (probationary years not requiring retention review) File closure of previous performance review Current file closure (spring of current year) Post-tenure review File closure of last review Current file closure (fall of current year) IV.  Criteria Governing Evaluations of Permanent Faculty   Reviews for retention, tenure, and promotion to associate professor are cumulative in the sense that the progress or growth of the faculty member since joining the faculty is a factor in evaluation.  Generally, the evaluation of a probationary faculty member will take into account all and only the activities and achievements since the initial probationary appointment.  Reviews are comparative in the sense that the faculty member is evaluated against the quality and effectiveness of performance of colleagues taking into account the broad range of activities in which different members of the faculty engage.   Performance reviews for promotion to the rank of professor are similarly cumulative and comparative - i.e., the progress or growth of faculty members while in their present rank is assessed against the quality and effectiveness of colleagues' performance, taking into account the broad range of activities in which different members of the faculty engage.   Permanent faculty members are evaluated on the basis of their performance in the following categories:   A.  Educational Performance B.  Professional Achievement C.  Contributions to the University. Of the three categories, category A normally shall have the greatest weight.  In the case of a faculty member who is appointed or elected to a non-teaching position, special consideration shall be given to performance in that assignment.  In such cases, a faculty member should consider preparing an individualized professional plan; the individualized professional plan is described in section V. B.   Although the criteria governing performance reviews are the same for retention, tenure, and promotion cases, reviewers should recognize qualitative differences between these types of reviews.  This difference, however, is one of degree, not kind, and it may be summed up under the concept of growth or progress.  At the time of the performance review of the faculty member for retention during the probationary period, judgment is based on demonstrated growth, performance and promise in categories A, B, and C.    At the time of candidacy for tenure and/or promotion, however, a faculty member is expected to have demonstrated substantive achievements in each of the three areas; promise of future growth will not be sufficient to warrant a positive recommendation for tenure or promotion.  Special consideration will be given to the continuity and growth of the activities comprising this total performance.   Category A, Educational Performance, consists of two elements: 1.  teaching performance, and 2.  related educational activities.   1.  Teaching performance includes those activities by the faculty member that directly contribute to student learning. Effective teaching can include many pedagogical approaches, such as lectures, individual and group exercises, inquiry-based learning, discussion sessions, and other techniques.  It can also include a wide range of activities such as supervising theses or projects; supervising student learning experiences in academic and community based settings; collaborating with students on research, performance, artistic, and other projects; mentoring students; and tutoring students.   The evaluation of teaching performance is an assessment of the quality and effectiveness of the efforts of faculty members that contribute to student learning.  This evaluation must include multiple measures:   a.  A summary of the quantitative responses to the "Student Opinion Survey on Instruction." b.  Evaluation of teaching performance based upon a peer observation of instruction.  c.  At least one other source of information, such a course syllabi, instructional materials,      assessment methods, assignments (including field assignments), evidence of student work      and accomplishments, and signed letters from students.    2.  Related educational activities include, but are not limited to:  academic advisement, curriculum/program development, programmatic assessment of learning outcomes, membership on thesis committees, the development and evaluation of comprehensive exams, and other academic support activities that enhance student retention and student achievement.   The evaluation of related educational activities is based upon such items as surveys of student opinions of advisement, student mentoring, tutoring, field activities, etc.; written reports from the department/division chair or school director, students, faculty, and/or other individuals with first hand knowledge of the faculty member's activities; and other such documentation provided by the faculty member regarding participation in program assessment, curriculum development, and other related educational activities.   Category B, Professional Achievement, is defined as performance of discipline-related activities that include, but are not limited to the following broad areas identified in no particular order: Academic and scholarly contributions to the faculty member's profession and field, that are externally evaluated and published or formally accepted for publication such as research, critical essays and analyses, and theoretical speculations. Innovative use of technology, textbooks, and original teaching or testing materials which are adopted for professional and/or instructional use outside the faculty member's department/division/school. Inventions, designs and innovations that have been favorably evaluated by authorities outside the University. Creation, exhibition, performance or publication in the arts or literature. Producing and directing events in the performing arts, including visual arts, music, dance, and theatre, beyond normal instructional duties. Presentations before meetings of scholarly and professional societies, and presentations as an invited authority in the faculty member's field before  scholarly and professional audiences. Participation in activities of scholarly or professional societies beyond mere membership, such as elective office, fellowship status, committee membership, receipt of special awards, organization of symposia, and chairing of conference sessions. Receipt of fellowships, grants, contracts or other subsidies and commissions for  scholarly activities in the faculty member's field. Holding special appointments such as visiting professorships, lectureships, or consultant assignments in other academic, scholarly, professional, or governmental institutions. Editing or reviewing of scholarly or professional publications. Professional practice that utilizes the faculty member's academic expertise. Service to one's profession, in such cases where the activity is based on one's disciplinary expertise (for example, appointment to a granting agency's review board or service on a professional board). Community based participatory research, community service, and community based activities that involve the academic expertise of the faculty member. In evaluating these contributions as to their relative merits, the quality and effectiveness, and not only the quantity of the contributions in category B shall be the primary consideration. Category C, Contributions to the University, is defined as all other service to the University, profession, or community that contributes to the mission and governance of the University such as, but not limited to, those activities listed below. Contributions to academic governance such as membership and participation in the activities of department/division/school, college, university, and system committees, and service in administrative capacities. Participation in any student, faculty, professional, or community organization or engagement in any service to colleges and/or the community or engagement in other activities that bring positive recognition to the faculty member and to the University. Delivery of speeches, conducting of colloquia, or otherwise conveying information about the faculty member's scholarship, profession, field and university to community groups. Organization of and engagement in significant university, college and department/division/school activities that improve the educational environment and/or student, staff, or faculty life, such as organization of retreats, conferences, or orientations. In evaluating these contributions in category C as to their relative merits, the quality and effectiveness, and not only the quantity of the contributions shall be the primary consideration.   V.  Additional Evaluation Policies   A.  External Review   A request for an external review of materials in one's personnel file may be made by any of the parties involved in the review.  Any request for an external review must be directed to the President or his designee and must indicate (1) the extraordinary circumstances warranting external review, and (2) the materials to be reviewed.  For such a review to take place, the faculty member under review must concur with the request for external review.  The dean of the college shall select appropriate external reviewer(s), with the approval of the President or designee and the concurrence of the faculty member under review, and transmit to the reviewers the materials to be reviewed.  A copy of the relevant parts of this policy shall accompany the materials to be reviewed.   Once the external reviewer(s)' report is received, the file is returned to the initial stage of review and the review commences from that level forward with the reviewers' report added to the permanent personnel action file (PPAF).    B.  Individualized Professional Plans (IPP)    Each faculty member shall have the discretion to develop, in collaboration with his or her chair or director and the appropriate department/division school personnel committee, an individualized professional plan (IPP).  Such plans shall specify the candidate's goals and objectives and may alter the balance or focus of performance among categories A, B, and C for a specified period of time.   A faculty member may choose to prepare an IPP when either his or her work assignment or area of specialization warrants a departure from the usual evaluation criteria, or when the faculty member's work is of a nature that it makes it difficult to apply the established evaluation criteria articulated above.  Such a plan must indicate the time period during which it will apply to the evaluation of the faculty member's performance.  No IPP may be retroactively applied, and in no case shall an IPP exceed three years in duration.  However, an IPP may be renewed.  An IPP must be approved by the faculty member, the department/division chair or school director, the dean, the Provost and the President.  The IPP must indicate (1) the unusual circumstances or work assignment that warrant(s) the creation of the plan, (2) the work plan (and expected outcomes) for the faculty member over the course of the IPP's duration, and (3) where necessary, the criteria by which the faculty member will be evaluated.  An individualized professional plan will still require that a faculty member be evaluated in all areas of expected performance.  Whenever an IPP is approved, it must be placed in the permanent personnel file.  An IPP will be effective upon its approval and will govern only that part of the evaluation period during which it is in place.   C.  Evaluation of Faculty Active in Interdisciplinary Programs   When a faculty member with an appointment in a specific department/division/school devotes all or part of his or her efforts to instruction in or participates in the development and administration of an interdisciplinary program, that faculty member may request an assessment of his or her performance in the activities associated with the interdisciplinary program.  In that case, prior to the file closure date, the coordinator of the interdisciplinary program shall provide a written assessment of the contributions of the faculty member to that program for the faculty member's permanent personnel action file.  This assessment shall be part of the evidence upon which the evaluation is based.   D.  Evaluation of Faculty with Joint Appointment   The criteria for evaluating faculty with joint appointments shall be consistent with those used for comparable evaluations of faculty members appointed to a single department/division/school.   Faculty with joint appointments in two or more departments/divisions/schools or equivalent units shall be evaluated either by the peer review committee, in each department/division/school or by a joint committee of faculty from each department/division/school.  If a joint committee is utilized, this committee will consist of members of all academic units within which the candidate holds a joint appointment.  Each academic unit shall elect the committee members representing the unit and each unit shall be represented in as close to equal proportion as possible to proportion of the candidate's time assigned to that unit.  If not a member of the peer review committee, the chair or director of each academic unit shall write an independent evaluation.  A faculty member appointed in two different colleges will be evaluated by the college-level peer review committee in each college in which he or she is appointed.    College dean(s), in consultation with the faculty member holding a joint appointment and the department/division chair(s) or school director(s), shall determine whether the faculty member will be evaluated in each department/division/school or by a joint committee; this determination should be made at least 30 days prior to the file closure date for the faculty member's first evaluation.  In subsequent years, changes to the department/division/school-level review process can be effected either at the recommendation of the faculty member with dean's approval or at the discretion of the dean after consultation with the faculty member.  Such changes will become effective for any review cycles beginning 30 days after the change is instituted.   In every case, the department/division/school and college-level recommendations shall be forwarded to the respective dean(s) of the college(s) in which an appointment is held; each dean shall conduct an evaluation and forward a recommendation to the Provost.  For individuals holding a joint appointment, the President shall make a single decision regarding retention, tenure, or promotion. Evaluation of Permanent Counselor Faculty (Senate:  5/8/12; President:  7/23/12) Governing documents:  Articles 13, 14 and 15 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the California State University and the California Faculty Association; the California State University system E. O. 1053:  Policy on Student Mental Health; and the CSU Classification and Qualification Standards for Student Services Professional Academic-Related Series, Part B. Counselor faculty at CSULA are appointed as members of the faculty.  In keeping with the terminology utilized in the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the California State University and the California Faculty Association, the term "permanent faculty" shall refer to all probationary (tenure-track) and tenured counselor faculty.  This evaluation policy governs  permanent counselor faculty.   Counselor faculty members have the following classifications: Student Services Professional, Academic Related (SSP-AR) I SSP-AR II SSP-AR III The purpose of the University's counselor faculty evaluation policy is to maintain and enhance the quality of the mental health services and academic programs at CSULA by assuring that all counselor faculty members meet and maintain appropriate standards for performance as clinicians, educators, scholars, and members of the campus community.  The policy aims to achieve this objective by establishing criteria for fair, thorough, and consistent evaluation of individual counselor faculty members.   Evaluations of tenure-track and tenured counselor faculty shall focus on the quality and effectiveness of counseling performance, professional achievement, and other contributions to the University by the faculty member under review.   The evaluation of a counselor faculty member is based upon a comprehensive review of the individual's qualities, achievements, and promise during the year or years included in the review period.  Attention shall be given  to forming a general "profile" or comprehensive estimate of the faculty member's performance and special professional interests and accomplishments.   All reviews shall be based upon evidence in the two-part personnel action file, which includes the permanent personnel action file (PPAF) and the working personnel action file (WPAF).  All evaluations will be entered in the counselor faculty member's PPAF, which is maintained by the University.  For counselor faculty members who serve as instructors in courses, quantitative summaries of student opinion surveys and classroom observations are maintained in the PPAF. The counselor faculty member is responsible for providing the following materials to his or her WPAF before the published date of file closure:  a current curriculum vitae, a personnel information form that summarizes and describes the counselor faculty member's activities and accomplishments during the period under review, and evidence of these activities and accomplishments.   I.  Types of Evaluation   There are two types of evaluations of counselor faculty members:   performance reviews, required for retention, tenure and promotion of counselor faculty, and   periodic evaluations, conducted when an evaluation is required, but in periods in which a faculty member is not under consideration for retention, tenure, or promotion.   Performance reviews serve the dual purpose of determining whether or not a counselor faculty member's performance warrants retention, tenure, or promotion, and of providing the counselor faculty member with constructive feedback on his or her performance in the areas under review.  Periodic evaluations are aimed primarily at  providing the faculty member with feedback on his or her performance.  However, they may be considered in subsequent performance reviews.   Counselor faculty members shall undergo a performance review when under consideration for retention, tenure, or promotion.  A counselor faculty member undergoing a performance review shall be reviewed by the department of counseling and psychological services (CAPS) peer review committee, the CAPS director or other supervising administrator, the Assistant Vice President for Student Affairs, the Vice President for Student Affairs, and the President.    A counselor faculty member undergoing periodic evaluation shall be reviewed by the CAPS peer review committee, the CAPS director or other supervising administrator and the Assistant Vice President for Student Affairs.  Periodic evaluations shall include review of a counselor faculty member's performance in all of the same areas as during a performance review; the primary difference is that there are fewer levels of review for a periodic evaluation.   II.  Evaluative Standards, Evaluation Timelines, Post Tenure Performance Reviews and Periodic Evaluations, and Review Periods   The policies for counselor faculty regarding evaluative standards, evaluation timelines, post tenure performance reviews and periodic evaluations, and review periods are the same as those for the permanent instructional faculty.   III.  Criteria Governing Evaluations of Counselor Faculty   Reviews for retention, tenure, and promotion of counselor faculty are cumulative in the sense that the progress or growth of the counselor faculty member since joining the counselor faculty is a factor in evaluation.  Generally, the evaluation of a probationary counselor faculty member will take into account all and only the activities and achievements since the initial probationary appointment. Reviews are comparative in the sense that the counselor faculty member is evaluated against the quality and effectiveness of performance of colleagues taking into account the broad range of activities in which different counselor faculty engage.   Counselor faculty members at CSULA shall be evaluated on the basis of their performance in the following categories:   A.  Counseling Performance B.  Professional Achievement C.  Contributions to the University   Of the three categories, category A normally shall have the greatest weight.  In the case of a counselor faculty member who is assigned to a non-counseling position, special consideration shall be given to performance in that assignment.  In such cases, a counselor faculty member should consider preparing an individualized professional plan.  The policy governing individualized professional plans for counselor faculty is the same as that for permanent instructional faculty.   Although the criteria governing performance reviews are the same for retention, tenure and promotion cases, reviewers should recognize qualitative differences between these types of reviews.  This difference, however, is one of degree, not kind, and it may be summed up under the concept of growth or progress.  At the time of the performance review of the counselor faculty member for retention during the probationary period, judgment is based on demonstrated growth, performance and promise in categories A, B, and C.   At the time of candidacy for tenure and/or promotion, however, a counselor faculty member is expected to have demonstrated achievements in each of the three areas;  promise of future growth will not be sufficient to warrant a positive recommendation for tenure or promotion.  Special consideration will be given to the continuity and growth of the activities comprising this total performance.   Student Input in Academic Personnel Process   For counselor faculty members who serve as course instructors, the policy governing student input in the academic personnel process is the same as that for permanent instructional faculty.   Category A:  Counseling Performance   In accordance with classification and qualification standards of the California State University system, counselor faculty in the classifications covered by this policy are expected to perform work of sensitive and unusual difficulty and responsibility, requiring advanced professional training and experience which has demonstrated a comprehensive knowledge of an academic or academic-related field within the student services area.  The contributions of counselor faculty members may include any mental health- related and educational activities for the student population; however, the role of the counselor faculty is predominantly clinical in nature.   All counselor faculty members who are currently licensed shall maintain their license.  Those hired after July 1, 2011 in the classification of SSP-AR must be either currently licensed in California or if unlicensed must be licensed within 24 months of their first employment.  If licensed within another state, they shall obtain licensure in California within one year.  Those who are unlicensed or possess a license within another state may provide care during the interim period of obtaining a license.   Counselor faculty members shall spend at least 60% to 65% of their base time providing direct services, which include assessment, counseling, crisis intervention, and other clinical services as assigned.  The responsibilities of counselor faculty generally fall into the following categories, including but not limited to and in no particular order: providing individual, couples and group clinical counseling/psychotherapy for students; developing workshops to meet student needs; providing for the enhanced academic achievement and retention of students who seek counseling and/or psychological services; responding to campus emergencies and conducting critical incident debriefing; providing services to the campus community in response to local natural disasters and national and international incidents; responding to special issues relating to campus climate as they emerge; providing substance-abuse services; presenting workshops for students, faculty, staff, and administrators relating to psycho-social issues; and /or providing assessment, referral and consultation with faculty, staff and administrators and others in the campus community regarding student issues. Included in the assessment should be evidence of counselor faculty member's knowledge of the counseling process in their primary assignments.  Counselor faculty members should be assessed relative to the following aspects of their jobs: ability to work independently in assisting students with their problems; knowledge of the legal and ethical aspects of counseling; ability to be analytical, creative and constructive in making and taking suggestions for improving CAPS services; ability to communicate effectively with a wide range of students, faculty, staff, and adinstrators; ability to assist colleagues in the resolution of student problems; and/or pursuits to obtain or maintain the appropriate professional requirements for licensure.   When the counselor faculty member's responsibilities include serving as a course instructor, the policies governing the assessment of teaching performance are the same as those for permanent instructional faculty.   Category B: Professional Achievement       Professional achievement is defined as activities that maintain or advance the counseling discipline and the professional development of the counselor faculty, and improve the on-campus resources available to students.  Professional achievement may be demonstrated in a variety of ways, including, but not limited to, program development and innovation, continuing education, workshops and presentations, development of new areas of expertise, creative work, research, publications, or similar work in progress.   The professional achievement activities of counselor faculty fall into the following categories, including but not limited to, and in no particular order: development and implementation of best practices in counseling; participation at professional conferences and workshops; leadership or service on committees for professional organizations; participation on editorial boards or refereeing for professional journals; services provided as a consultant; academic and scholarly contributions to the counselor faculty member's profession and field that are externally evaluated and published or formally accepted for publication, such as research projects, case studies, critical essays and analyses, and theoretical speculations published in a book, chapter, or journal; community-based participatory research, community service, and community-based activities that involve the expertise of the counseling faculty member; receipt of peer reviewed grants, awards, honors, or other professional recognitions; and/or volunteered supportive services in the community.   The quality and effectiveness and not only the quantity of the contributions in category B shall be the primary consideration in evaluating these contributions as to their relative merits.   Category C:  Contributions to the University   This category includes all other contributions to the mission and governance of the University.  The types of activities in this category, which are not identified in any particular order, include, but are not limited to: contributions to academic governance, such as memberships and participation in the activities of Student Health Center, CAPS, university, and system-wide committees; service in administrative capacities; special advising assignments; sponsorship and/or service as faculty advisor of student organizations; supervision of activities and projects outside of the scope of counseling performance that are related to student achievement and retention; and/or organization of and engagement in significant University, College, Student Health Center, and CAPS activities that improve the educational environment and/or student, staff, or faculty life, such as organization of retreats, conferences, or orientations.   The quality and effectiveness and not only the quantity of the contributions in category C shall be the primary consideration in evaluating these contributions as to their relative merits.   IV.  External Review   The policy for counselor faculty regarding external review is the same as that for permanent instructional faculty.   V.  Individualized Professional Plans   The policy for counselor faculty regarding individualized professional plans is the same as that for the permanent instructional faculty.   Evaluation of Temporary Instructional Faculty (Senate:  11/30/99, 5/24/11, 1/24/12; President:  2/11/00, 6/17/11, 2/23/12; Editorial Amendment: 9/00, 8/01)   Governing documents: Articles 12 and 15 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the California State University and the California Faculty Association.   Full- and part-time temporary faculty are normally hired to meet specific instructional needs at a rank consistent with their professional qualifications, such as highest academic degree earned, teaching or field experience, status in the discipline, publications, and so forth.  In every case, the evaluation of a temporary faculty member shall be appropriate to his or her assignment and based on the faculty member's performance of the essential duties of the position. A.  Frequency and Types of Evaluation of Temporary Faculty Members   Temporary faculty with appointments of one year or more (whether full-time, 12/15, or less) shall be evaluated at least once during the term of appointment.  Those faculty members with multi-year appointments may be evaluated more frequently at the request of the faculty member or the President.  All other temporary faculty, at a minimum, shall be evaluated at the completion of three quarters of teaching or at the end of two years from the time of initial appointment or last review, whichever comes first.   There are two types of evaluations of temporary faculty members:   Periodic Evaluations Conducted for Reappointment of Temporary Faculty Members.  Evaluations for reappointment consideration will involve a review of the faculty member's performance since the previous review.  If the faculty member is undergoing a first review, the review period shall be defined as the time period between the date of initial appointment and current file closure date; the review period for all other reviews (beyond the first) shall be defined as the time period between the file closure date of the last review and the current file closure date.   Performance Reviews Conducted for Temporary Faculty Members Applying for Range Elevation.  Evaluations for range elevation consideration will involve a review of the faculty member's performance for the entire period in the current range.  The period of review shall be defined as the time period between the date of initial appointment into the current range and the current file closure date.   B.  Evaluation Standards   Temporary faculty evaluations shall utilize the following official evaluative terms:   Outstanding - describes truly exceptional performance.   Commendable - describes performance that is better than satisfactory or that exceeds expectations.   Satisfactory - describes performance that meets expectations.   Needs Improvement - describes performance that does not meet expectations.   Unsatisfactory - describes performance that is seriously deficient.   A review that finds a temporary faculty member's performance to be satisfactory or better shall be accompanied by a favorable recommendation for reappointment and/or range elevation.   An evaluation of Needs Improvement does not preclude a reviewer/review committee from recommending reappointment, but such an evaluation does preclude a positive recommendation for range elevation.   A judgment of Unsatisfactory shall entail a negative recommendation for reappointment or range elevation.   C.  Criteria for Evaluation of Temporary Faculty   Criteria for evaluation of temporary faculty members shall be appropriate to their appointment.   Temporary faculty members exclusively assigned to teaching shall be evaluated solely on the basis of educational performance, which includes instructional performance and currency in their field(s).  All reviews shall be based upon evidence in the two-part personnel file.  The permanent personnel action file (PPAF) is maintained by the University.  Reports of peer observations of instruction and quantitative summaries of student opinion surveys are maintained in the PPAF.  The working personnel action file (WPAF) is the responsibility of the faculty member.  Faculty who will be reviewed will be notified at least 30 days prior to the file closure date that they are to submit a WPAF.  The notification shall include reference to this evaluation policy and applicable college and department/division/school policies. The faculty member is responsible for providing the following materials to his or her WPAF before the published date of file closure:  a current curriculum vitae, a personnel information form that summarizes and describes the candidate's activities and accomplishments during the period under review, and evidence of these activities and accomplishments.  Temporary faculty members being evaluated shall submit the file to the college dean's office in which their qualifying appointment is housed.   The evaluation of instructional performance must be based on an assessment of multiple forms of evidence, including student opinion surveys, a peer observation of instruction, and at least one other source of information, such as:  course syllabi, class assignments, sample papers and/or exams, other instructional material, evidence of grading practices, and signed letters from students.  Prior to the file closure, the department/division/school shall solicit input from students concerning the faculty member(s) under review.  In cases in which a faculty member is appointed to a position that involves responsibilities other than classroom instruction, evaluations shall be based on performance relevant to assigned duties.   The evaluation of a temporary faculty member's performance shall include an assessment of the individual's currency in the field, which may, for example, be demonstrated by professional achievement or relevant instructional material, consistent with each college and department/division/school policy documents.  Additional criteria for evaluation may be stated in college and department/division/school policy documents.  These shall be provided to each temporary faculty member within fourteen days of his or her initial appointment and again when changes occur.   Temporary faculty members who wish to include evidence of professional achievement and/or service to the University, the profession, or the community should do so insofar as these activities are relevant to performance in their assignment.    Temporary faculty shall be considered eligible for review for range elevation if (1) they have no more service-based salary increases (SSI) eligibility and (2) have served five years in their current range.   Applications for range elevation should include evidence of effective teaching performance as well as evidence of currency in the faculty member's field.  A terminal degree (or equivalent as specified in department/division/school "in lieu" statement) is required for elevation to lecturer range C.   D.  Levels of Review for the Evaluation of Temporary Faculty.   1.  Periodic Evaluation to Temporary Faculty Members for Reappointment   A temporary faculty member undergoing a periodic evaluation but not applying for range elevation shall be assessed by at least two levels of review, which must include the appropriate department/division/school peer review committee and the department/division chair or school director.  Full-time temporary faculty members must also be reviewed by the dean.  Part-time temporary faculty members may be reviewed by the college dean at his or her discretion.   Each level of review shall make a determination as to whether the faculty member's educational performance has been satisfactory, which will incorporate a determination as to whether or not he or she is current in the field.  These recommendations shall be considered by the appointing authority when making reappointment decisions.   2.  Performance Reviews of Temporary Faculty Members for Range Elevation   Annually, at least thirty days before the file closure date, the Provost's office shall publish a list of all temporary faculty members eligible for range elevation.  Those faculty members who wish to be considered for range elevation shall submit a WPAF (as described in section C, above) to the college dean's office no later than January 15.  On that date, the file shall be considered closed for the purpose of the evaluation.  The Provost may extend this timeline for extraordinary circumstances.   Temporary faculty members under consideration for range elevation shall be reviewed by the appropriate department/division/school peer review committee, the department/division chair or school director (if not a member of the department/division/school peer review committee), the college committee, the dean, the Provost, and the President.   At all levels of review in the evaluation process, reviewers are responsible for evaluating the work of the candidates and for making a recommendation regarding range elevation in light of the specific criteria and standards of the college and department/division/school.  Reviewers are, therefore, responsible for conveying to other levels of review the relative merit of the individual candidate's performance from the perspective of the candidate's academic discipline.  If deficiencies are found, the reviewers are responsible for making recommendations for improvement.   The candidate for range elevation shall be notified of the President's decision no later than April 30.   Range elevation decisions are subject to appeal, as outlined in Article 12 of the Agreement.  The Senate shall elect, annually, during spring quarter, an Appeals Committee consisting of five tenured faculty members, with no more than one from any one college.  The committee shall review all range elevation decisions for which an appeal was filed, based on the relevant University, college, and department/division/school range elevation policies.  A vote of the majority of the committee is required to overturn a denial of range elevation; decisions of the committee are final and binding on all parties. Evaluation of Temporary Counselor Faculty (Senate:  5/8/12; President:  7/23/12) Governing documents:  Articles 13, 14, and 15 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between California State University and the California Faculty Association; the California State University system E. O. 1053:  Policy on Student Mental Health; and the CSU Classification and Qualification Standards for Student Services Professional Academic-Related Series, Part B. Full- and part-time temporary counselor faculty are normally hired to meet specific needs consistent with their professional qualifications, such as highest academic degree earned, counseling experience, licensure, status in the discipline, and so forth.  In every case, the evaluation of a temporary counselor faculty member shall be appropriate to his or her assignment and based on the counselor faculty member’s performance of the essential duties of the position. A. Types of Evaluation for Temporary Counselor Faculty Members Temporary counselor faculty with appointments of one year or more (whether full- or part-time) shall be evaluated at least once during the term of appointment.  Those counselor faculty members with multi-year appointments may be evaluated more frequently at the request of the faculty member or the President.  All other temporary counselor faculty, at a minimum, shall be evaluated at the completion of three quarters of service or at the end of two years from the time of initial appointment or last review, whichever comes first. Evaluations for reappointment consideration will involve a review of the faculty member's performance since the previous review.  If the counselor faculty member is undergoing a first review, the review period shall be defined as the time period between the date of initial appointment and current file closure date; the review period for all other reviews (beyond the first) shall be defined as the time period between the file closure date of the last review and the current file closure date. B.  Evaluation Standards The evaluative standards for temporary counselor faculty are the same as those for the temporary instructional faculty. A review that finds a temporary counselor faculty member’s performance to be satisfactory or better shall be accompanied by a favorable recommendation for reappointment. An evaluation of needs improvement does not preclude a reviewer/review committee from recommending reappointment.  A judgment of unsatisfactory shall entail a negative recommendation for reappointment. C.  Criteria for Evaluation of Temporary Counselor Faculty Criteria for evaluation of temporary counselor faculty members shall be appropriate to his or her appointment.  The contributions of temporary counselor faculty members may include any mental health-related and educational activities for the student population.  Temporary counselor faculty members assigned exclusively to counseling activities shall be evaluated solely on the basis of such performance, which includes currency in their field(s).  Temporary counselor faculty members are expected to obtain and/or maintain licensure appropriate to their positions, as described in the policy on evaluation of permanent counselor faculty. All reviews shall be based upon evidence in the two-part personnel file.  The permanent personnel action file (PPAF) is maintained by the University. The working personnel action file (WPAF) is the responsibility of the counselor faculty member.  Counselor faculty members who will be reviewed will be notified at least 30 days prior to the file closure date that they are to submit a WPAF.  The notification shall include reference to this evaluation policy and applicable department of counseling and psychological services (CAPS) policies. The counselor faculty member is responsible for providing the following materials to his or her WPAF before the published date of file closure:  a current curriculum vitae, a personnel information form that summarizes and describes the candidate's activities and accomplishments during the period under review, and evidence of these activities and accomplishments.  Temporary counselor faculty members being evaluated shall submit the file to the office of the assistant/associate vice president for student affairs. The temporary counselor faculty member’s assignment must be clearly explained, and documentation provided on the quality of his or her performance.  Responsibilities of temporary counselor faculty are outlined under category A:  counseling performance in the evaluation policy for permanent counselor faculty.  The evaluation of temporary counselor faculty must be based on an assessment of multiple forms of evidence and include an assessment of the individual's currency in the field, which may, for example, be demonstrated by professional achievement or relevant instructional material, consistent with caps’ policy documents.  These shall be provided to each temporary counselor faculty member within fourteen days of his or her initial appointment and again when changes occur. Temporary counselor faculty members who wish to include evidence of professional achievement and/or contributions to the University, the profession, or the community should do so to the extent that these activities are relevant to performance in their assignment. For temporary counselor faculty members who serve as course instructors, the policy governing student input in the academic personnel process is the same as that for permanent instructional faculty.  D.  Levels of Review for the Evaluation of Temporary Counselor Faculty. Part-time temporary counselor faculty members undergoing a periodic evaluation shall be reviewed by the CAPS peer review committee and the CAPS director or other administrator serving in that capacity. Full-time temporary counselor faculty members must also be reviewed by the assistant/associate vice president for student affairs.  Part-time temporary counselor faculty members may also be reviewed by the assistant/associate vice president for student affairs at his or her discretion.  Each level of review shall make a determination as to whether the faculty member's counseling performance has been satisfactory, which will incorporate a determination as to whether or not he or she is current in the field.  These recommendations shall be considered by the appointing authority when making reappointment decisions. At all levels of review in the evaluation process, reviewers are responsible for evaluating the work of the candidate and for making a recommendation regarding reappointment in light of the CAPS criteria and standards.  Reviewers are, therefore, responsible for conveying to other levels of review the relative merit of the individual candidate's performance from the perspective of his or her counseling performance.  If deficiencies are found, the reviewers are responsible for making recommendations for improvement. Peer Observations of Instruction   (Senate:  5/24/2011; President:  6/14/2011)   Governing document: Article 15 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the California State University and the California Faculty Association.   Instructional faculty members undergoing periodic evaluations for performance review must be evaluated in the area of educational performance which includes teaching performance and related educational activities.   The evaluation of teaching performance is an assessment of the quality and effectiveness of the efforts of faculty members that directly contribute to student learning.  This evaluation must include multiple measures, one of which is a written report of a peer observation of instruction by a member of the department/division/school personnel committee, or by the department/division chair or school director or his or her designee.   There shall be notification of not less than five days given to the faculty member being observed, indicating the date upon which the observation will be made and indicating who will conduct it.  In addition, there shall be consultation between the faculty member being observed and the individual who visits his or her class(es).  The observation report shall be provided to the faculty member within fourteen days of the peer observation of instruction.  When observations are made for evaluation purposes, reports are included in the faculty member's permanent personnel action file.   For permanent faculty members, observations shall be conducted prior to each performance review.   For tenured faculty members, an observation shall be conducted at least once during each post-tenure review period.   For temporary faculty members with appointments of one year or more, an observation shall be conducted at least once during the term of appointment.  Temporary faculty members with multi-year appointments may be observed more frequently at the request of the faculty member or the President.   All other temporary faculty members, at a minimum, shall be observed at the completion of three quarters of teaching or at the end of two years from the time of initial appointment or last review, whichever comes first. Oral Testimony (Senate: 7/5/89, 7/29/97, 5/31/11; President: 8/16/89, 10/27/97,7/14/11; Editorial Amendment:  8/01) Personnel recommendations relating to retention, tenure, and promotion shall be based on material contained in the faculty member's personnel file. When, under extraordinary circumstances, a personnel committee needs clarification of material in a candidate's personnel file, the committee may choose to invite appropriate person(s) to testify before the committee about the material in the personnel file. A request for testimony is initiated by the personnel committee and shall be provided before the committee makes its recommendation.   Any request for oral testimony will be made in writing by the chair of the committee to the invited party.  Whenever a party other than the candidate is invited to give testimony, the candidate shall also be invited to be present for the oral testimony.  Any person invited to provide testimony may decline to do so; the committee cannot compel testimony.  In any case in which oral testimony is provided to the committee, a summary of that testimony shall be recorded by the committee.  The candidate and the person who testified must be shown the summary of the oral testimony and shall be given the right to reply to any statement in the summary.  Such a reply shall be attached to the oral testimony summary and both the summary and reply shall be placed in the candidate's personnel file.   A request for oral testimony shall not delay the transfer of the personnel file to the next level of review.   Pursuant to Article 15 of the Collective bargaining agreement between California Faculty Association and the California State University, a faculty member has the right to request a meeting with a personnel committee or appropriate administrator within 10 days following the receipt of their recommendation.  If such a meeting is held, the discussion therein does not constitute oral testimony and thus does not fall within the scope of this policy. Resignation Faculty members who wish to terminate an existing appointment or to decline reappointment must give appropriate notice before the end of their duties for the academic year. For instructors or assistant professors, the notice interval must be at least three months; for those of higher rank, the notice interval must be at least four months. Faculty members may request a waiver of this requirement in case of hardship. (Administrative Code, Section 43569)