APPALACHIAN'S PROCEDURE FOR POST-TENURE REVIEW The following points will guide Appalachian State University's response to the mandate of the Board of Governors to initiate post-tenure review at the constituent institutions of the University of North Carolina. 1. A Post-Tenure Review Committee consisting of the department chair (who serves as ex- officio chair of the committee), two peers* chosen by the faculty member and one peer chosen by the department chair will be appointed for each tenured faculty member to be reviewed. 2. Tenured faculty will be reviewed in reverse order from the date of their last formal review by the Departmental Personnel Committee, Approximately one-fifth of the tenured faculty m a department will be reviewed in any one year. Once the rotation is established, the faculty member will be reviewed every five years barring any intervening formal review by the Departmental Personnel Committee. 3. One month prior to the date of the formal review of the tenured faculty member, the faculty member will submit a portfolio that MUST include information from the preceding five years and cover the following areas: all student evaluations from a minimum of three years during the past five years when possible, results of direct classroom observations conducted since the last formal review, copies of course syllabi, copies and/or citations of scholarly presentations, publications and/or creative activities, documentation of professional services and goals for the immediate future. 4. Each member of the review committee, within one month of the receipt of the portfolio, will provide a written evaluation to the chair on each of the three areas of responsibility which are In consonance with the mission of Appalachian State University (teaching, research or creative activity, and public service). Forms for this purpose may be developed by the departments. Comments on each of these area of responsibility should be brief and to the point. 5. The department chair will provide both the committee and the individual faculty member a written summary of the evaluation. Both positive and negative results will be shared with the faculty member in a conference with the chair. (it Is suggested that this conversation be a part of the existing annual Spring conference). In the instance of a particularly strong positive evaluation, appropriate rewards will be considered. In the instance of a decidedly negative evaluation, the committee will recommend remediation including the possible allocation of additional resources, a time-line not to exceed four years for demonstrated improvement, and a clear statement of the consequences of failure to improve. These consequences must be m compliance with the criteria and procedures for due process and for discharge or other disciplinary action established in Chapter IV of the Facultv Handbook and Chapter VI of The Code of the University of North Carolina. 6. An appeals committee consisting of at least three but no more than seven faculty members will be elected for each college, school and Library. The appeals process must be initiated within 90 days of the date of the conference with the Chair. Findings of the appellate hearing will be shared with the faculty member and chair. If either party does not accept the findings of the Appeals Committee, the grievance process as outlined in Chapter IV of the Facultv Handbook may be evoked. *Each department is to determine its peers. (Peers may be restricted to the department or come from an allied department if the faculty so decides). POST TENURE REVIEW FORM / ART DEPARTMENT Date Due Reviewer Faculty Member Please carefully review the portfolio (in the Art Office) and submit your written evaluation to the Chairperson/s on the form below by the indicated due date and in accordance with the attached guidelines (see last page). For each area of responsibility and based on the materials provided by the faculty member's performance in the following areas: 1. Teaching: Reviewer Faculty Member 2. Research/Creative Activity: Reviewer Faculty Member Service: 3. Reviewer Faculty Member