Common use of Procedures to Address an Unsatisfactory Recommendation Clause in Contracts

Procedures to Address an Unsatisfactory Recommendation. An Reviewee whose Post-Tenure Review Report rated his or her performance as ‘unsatisfactory,’ shall collaborate with a Tenured Faculty Improvement Team by the sixth (6th) week of the quarter that follows the unsatisfactory recommendation (known as Quarter One (1)). The Improvement Team will be made up of a Student Learning Xxxx and two (2) Tenured Faculty as chosen by the CAO. The Improvement Team shall meet with the faculty a minimum of two (2) times each quarter. The Improvement Team shall utilize the same general procedure as outlined in Article 11.04 above as part of its process. The primary goal of the Improvement Team is to assist the faculty member in shifting her or his performance to satisfactory. The faculty member shall develop, collaboratively with the Improvement Team, a plan of action for improving the faculty member’s overall performance for the ensuing two (2) quarters (known as Quarters 2 and 3) (excluding summer). The initial draft of the action plan shall be completed by the end of the second (2nd) week of Quarter two (2). The action plan may be modified as needed during Quarter two (2) by mutual consent of the Improvement Team and the faculty member. The Improvement Team shall document areas needing improvement, areas of strengths, and modification to the plan of action as needed. At the end of Quarter 2, the Improvement Team shall provide a summary analysis of less than two (2) pages to the faculty member and the Chief Academic Officer. By the end of Quarter three (3), the Improvement Team will prepare a revised Post-Tenure Review Report, addressing those areas deemed “unsatisfactory” in the original Report. Data (as judged appropriate by the Improvement Team) may be collected from such sources as students, peers, administrator(s), and the faculty member’s self-evaluation. If additional unsatisfactory performance issues are identified by the Improvement Team, they will first meet with the faculty member and provide her/him an opportunity to respond prior to documenting in the revised Post-Tenure Review Report. The revised Post-Tenure Review Report draft will be shared with the faculty member and submitted to the Chief Academic Officer in the same manner as Article 11.06.04. Summary of Timelines if Performance Unsatisfactory Action Date By Whom Collaborate if performance rated ‘unsatisfactory’ By the 6th week of quarter following assessment (Quarter 1) Faculty member & Tenured Faculty Improvement Team Initial Draft of Action Plan By the end of the 2nd week of Quarter 2 Faculty member Summary Analysis By end of Quarter 2 Improvement Team Prepare revised Post-Tenure By end of Quarter 3 (after assessment year) Improvement Team If the Faculty member’s overall performance is rated “satisfactory,” then the Faculty member returns to the regular review process. If the Faculty member’s overall performance is still rated as “unsatisfactory,” then the Improvement Team shall forward a copy of all documentation to the Chief Academic Officer. After a review of the documentation and the recommendation of the Evaluation Team, the Chief Academic Officer shall:  have the Faculty member continue to collaborate with the Improvement Team for a specified number of quarters, or  develop a plan of improvement with the faculty member that includes outcomes, timeline, and resources available.

Procedures to Address an Unsatisfactory Recommendation. An Reviewee whose Post-Tenure Review Report rated his or her performance as ‘unsatisfactory,’ shall collaborate with a Tenured Faculty Improvement Team by the sixth (6th) week of the quarter that follows the unsatisfactory recommendation (known as Quarter One (1)). The Improvement Team will be made up of a Student Learning Xxxx and two (2) Tenured Faculty as chosen by the CAO. The Improvement Team shall meet with the faculty a minimum of two (2) times each quarter. The Improvement Team shall utilize the same general procedure as outlined in Article 11.04 above as part of its process. The primary goal of the Improvement Team is to assist the faculty member in shifting her or his performance to satisfactory. The faculty member shall develop, collaboratively with the Improvement Team, a plan of action for improving the faculty member’s overall performance for the ensuing two (2) quarters (known as Quarters 2 and 3) (excluding summer). The initial draft of the action plan shall be completed by the end of the second (2nd) week of Quarter two (2). The action plan may be modified as needed during Quarter two (2) 2 by mutual consent of the Improvement Team and the faculty member. The Improvement Team shall document areas needing improvement, areas of strengths, and modification to the plan of action as needed. At the end of Quarter 2, the Improvement Team shall provide a summary analysis of less than two (2) pages to the faculty member and the Chief Academic Officer. By the end of Quarter three (3), the Improvement Team will prepare a revised Post-Tenure Review Report, addressing those areas deemed “unsatisfactory” in the original Report. Data (as judged appropriate by the Improvement Team) may be collected from such sources as students, peers, administrator(s), and the faculty member’s self-evaluation. If additional unsatisfactory performance issues are identified by the Improvement Team, they will first meet with the faculty member and provide her/him an opportunity to respond prior to documenting in the revised Post-Tenure Review Report. The revised Post-Tenure Review Report draft will be shared with the faculty member and submitted to the Chief Academic Officer in the same manner as Article 11.06.04. Summary of Timelines if Performance Unsatisfactory Action Date By Whom Collaborate if performance rated ‘unsatisfactory’ By the 6th week of quarter following assessment (Quarter 1) Faculty member & Tenured Faculty Improvement Team Initial Draft of Action Plan By the end of the 2nd week of Quarter 2 Faculty member Summary Analysis By end of Quarter 2 Improvement Team Prepare revised Post-Post- Tenure Review Report By end of Quarter 3 (after assessment year) Improvement Team If the Faculty member’s overall performance is rated “satisfactory,” then the Faculty member returns to the regular review process. If the Faculty member’s overall performance is still rated as “unsatisfactory,” then the Improvement Team shall forward a copy of all documentation to the Chief Academic Officer. After a review of the documentation and the recommendation of the Evaluation Team, the Chief Academic Officer shall:  • have the Faculty member continue to collaborate with the Improvement Team for a specified number of quarters, or  • develop a plan of improvement with the faculty member that includes outcomes, timeline, and resources available.

Procedures to Address an Unsatisfactory Recommendation. An ‌ A Reviewee whose Post-Tenure Review Report rated his or her their performance as ‘unsatisfactory,’ shall collaborate with a Tenured Faculty Improvement Team by the sixth (6th) week of the quarter that follows the unsatisfactory recommendation (known as Quarter One (1)). The Improvement Team will be made up of a Student Learning Xxxx and two (2) Tenured Faculty as chosen by the CAOSenior Academic Officer. The Improvement Team shall meet with the faculty a minimum of two (2) times each quarter. The Improvement Team shall utilize the same general procedure as outlined in Article 11.04 above as part of its process. The primary goal of the Improvement Team is to assist the faculty member in shifting her or his their performance to satisfactory. The faculty member shall develop, collaboratively with the Improvement Team, a plan of action for improving the faculty member’s overall performance for the ensuing two (2) quarters (known as Quarters 2 and 3) (excluding summer). The initial draft of the action plan shall be completed by the end of the second (2nd) week of Quarter two (2). The action plan may be modified as needed during Quarter two (2) 2 by mutual consent of the Improvement Team and the faculty member. The Improvement Team shall document areas needing improvement, areas of strengths, and modification to the plan of action as needed. At the end of Quarter 2, the Improvement Team shall provide a summary analysis of less than two (2) pages to the faculty member and the Chief Senior Academic Officer. By the end of Quarter three (3), the Improvement Team will prepare a revised Post-Tenure Review Report, addressing those areas deemed “unsatisfactory” in the original Report. Data (as judged appropriate by the Improvement Team) may be collected from such sources as students, peers, administrator(s), and the faculty member’s self-evaluation. If additional unsatisfactory performance issues are identified by the Improvement Team, they will first meet with the faculty member and provide her/him them an opportunity to respond prior to documenting in the revised Post-Post- Tenure Review Report. The revised Post-Tenure Review Report draft will be shared with the faculty member and submitted to the Chief Senior Academic Officer in the same manner as Article 11.06.04. Summary of Timelines if Performance Unsatisfactory Action Date By Whom Collaborate if performance rated ‘unsatisfactory’ By the 6th week of quarter following assessment (Quarter 1) Faculty member & Tenured Faculty Improvement Team Initial Draft of Action Plan By the end of the 2nd week of Quarter 2 Faculty member Summary Analysis By end of Quarter 2 Improvement Team Prepare revised Post-Post- Tenure Review Report By end of Quarter 3 (after assessment year) Improvement Team If the Faculty member’s overall performance is rated “satisfactory,” then the Faculty faculty member returns to the regular review process. If the Faculty member’s overall performance is still rated as “unsatisfactory,” then the Improvement Team shall forward a copy of all documentation to the Chief Senior Academic Officer. After a review of the documentation and the recommendation of the Evaluation Team, the Chief Senior Academic Officer shall:  • have the Faculty faculty member continue to collaborate with the Improvement Team for a specified number of quarters, or  • develop a plan of improvement with the faculty member that includes thatincludes outcomes, timeline, and resources available.

Procedures to Address an Unsatisfactory Recommendation. An Reviewee whose Post-Tenure Review Report rated his or her performance as ‘unsatisfactory,’ shall collaborate with a Tenured Faculty Improvement Team by the sixth (6th) week of the quarter that follows the unsatisfactory recommendation (known as Quarter One (1)). The Improvement Team will be made up of a Student Learning Xxxx and two (2) Tenured Faculty as chosen by the CAO. The Improvement Team shall meet with the faculty a minimum of two (2) times each quarter. The Improvement Team shall utilize the same general procedure as outlined in Article 11.04 above as part of its process. The primary goal of the Improvement Team is to assist the faculty member in shifting her or his performance to satisfactory. The faculty member shall develop, collaboratively with the Improvement Team, a plan of action for improving the faculty member’s overall performance for the ensuing two (2) quarters (known as Quarters 2 and 3) (excluding summer). The initial draft of the action plan shall be completed by the end of the second (2nd) week of Quarter two (2). The action plan may be modified as needed during Quarter two (2) 2 by mutual consent of the Improvement Team and the faculty member. The Improvement Team shall document areas needing improvement, areas of strengths, and modification to the plan of action as needed. At the end of Quarter 2, the Improvement Team shall provide a summary analysis of less than two (2) pages to the faculty member and the Chief Academic Officer. By the end of Quarter three (3), the Improvement Team will prepare a revised Post-Tenure Review Report, addressing those areas deemed “unsatisfactory” in the original Report. Data (as judged appropriate by the Improvement Team) may be collected from such sources as students, peers, administrator(s), and the faculty member’s self-evaluation. If additional unsatisfactory performance issues are identified by the Improvement Team, they will first meet with the faculty member and provide her/him an opportunity to respond prior to documenting in the revised Post-Tenure Review Report. The revised Post-Tenure Review Report draft will be shared with the faculty member and submitted to the Chief Academic Officer in the same manner as Article 11.06.04. Summary of Timelines if Performance Unsatisfactory Action Date By Whom Collaborate if performance rated ‘unsatisfactory’ By the 6th week of quarter following assessment (Quarter 1) Faculty member & Tenured Faculty Improvement Team Initial Draft of Action Plan By the end of the 2nd week of Quarter 2 Faculty member Summary Analysis By end of Quarter 2 Improvement Team Prepare revised Post-Post- Tenure Review Report By end of Quarter 3 (after assessment year) Improvement Team If the Faculty member’s overall performance is rated “satisfactory,” then the Faculty member returns to the regular review process. If the Faculty member’s overall performance is still rated as “unsatisfactory,” then the Improvement Team shall forward a copy of all documentation to the Chief Academic Officer. After a review of the documentation and the recommendation of the Evaluation Team, the Chief Academic Officer shall:  have the Faculty member continue to collaborate with the Improvement Team for a specified number of quarters, or  develop a plan of improvement with the faculty member that includes outcomes, timeline, and resources available.

Procedures to Address an Unsatisfactory Recommendation. An Reviewee whose Post-Tenure Review Report rated his or her performance as ‘unsatisfactory,’ shall collaborate with a Tenured Faculty Improvement Team by the sixth (6th) week of the quarter that follows the unsatisfactory recommendation (known as Quarter One (1)). The Improvement Team will be made up of a Student Learning Xxxx and two (2) Tenured Faculty as chosen by the CAO. The Improvement Team shall meet with the faculty a minimum of two (2) times each quarter. The Improvement Team shall utilize the same general procedure as outlined in Article 11.04 above as part of its process. The primary goal of the Improvement Team is to assist the faculty member in shifting her or his performance to satisfactory. The faculty member shall develop, collaboratively with the Improvement Team, a plan of action for improving the faculty member’s overall performance for the ensuing two (2) quarters (known as Quarters 2 and 3) (excluding summer). The initial draft of the action plan shall be completed by the end of the second (2nd) week of Quarter two (2). The action plan may be modified as needed during Quarter two (2) by mutual consent of the Improvement Team and the faculty member. The Improvement Team shall document areas needing improvement, areas of strengths, and modification to the plan of action as needed. At the end of Quarter 2, the Improvement Team shall provide a summary analysis of less than two (2) pages to the faculty member and the Chief Academic Officer. By the end of Quarter three (3), the Improvement Team will prepare a revised Post-Tenure Review Report, addressing those areas deemed “unsatisfactory” in the original Report. Data (as judged appropriate by the Improvement Team) may be collected from such sources as students, peers, administrator(s), and the faculty member’s self-evaluation. If additional unsatisfactory performance issues are identified by the Improvement Team, they will first meet with the faculty member and provide her/him an opportunity to respond prior to documenting in the revised Post-Tenure Review Report. The revised Post-Tenure Review Report draft will be shared with the faculty member and submitted to the Chief Academic Officer in the same manner as Article 11.06.04. Summary of Timelines if Performance Unsatisfactory Action Date By Whom Collaborate if performance rated ‘unsatisfactory’ By the 6th week of quarter following assessment (Quarter 1) Faculty member & Tenured Faculty Improvement Team Initial Draft of Action Plan By the end of the 2nd week of Quarter 2 Faculty member Summary Analysis By end of Quarter 2 Improvement Team Prepare revised Post-Tenure By end of Quarter 3 (after assessment year) Improvement Team If the Faculty member’s overall performance is rated “satisfactory,” then the Faculty member returns to the regular review process. If the Faculty member’s overall performance is still rated as “unsatisfactory,” then the Improvement Team shall forward a copy of all documentation to the Chief Academic Officer. After a review of the documentation and the recommendation of the Evaluation Team, the Chief Academic Officer shall:  • have the Faculty member continue to collaborate with the Improvement Team for a specified number of quarters, or  • develop a plan of improvement with the faculty member that includes outcomes, timeline, and resources available.