The Boulder Campus Reappointment of instructor-rank faculty guidance can be found on the Office of Faculty Affairs' Reappointment of Instructor Rank Faculty and Non Tenure-Track Faculty pages. In particular, please reference the Academic Affairs Guidelines for the Appointment, Evaluation, and Promotion of Lecturer and Instructor Rank Faculty document on the Office of Faculty Affairs' website.
The Office of Faculty Affairs considers non-tenure track rostered instructors to be part of the regular faculty, which is also comprised of the tenured and tenure-line faculty. Rostered instructors should be considered as continuing parts of their departmental, college, or school community; they should participate in the governance of the department, in particular in relation to curricular matters. As rostered faculty, they are reviewed as part of the annual merit process.
Such-non-tenure track faculty titles include Instructor, Senior Instructor, Scholar-In-Residence, and Artist-In-Residence, and clinical faculty. A description of instructor titles can be found on the Office of Faculty Affairs website and on this form: Boulder Campus Clinical Teaching Track Faculty.
Non-tenure track faculty must be hired at .50 FTE/50% time or greater. Appointments for 1 year or less, or percent of time below 50%, are to be made using the title and salary scale of "lecturer".
The rank of Senior Instructor (job code 1104) are not tenure-eligible. Individual schools and colleges may require Senior Instructors to perform scholarly and/or service activities.
The title Instructor (job code 1105) is granted to faculty who have their master's degree or its equivalent and should be otherwise well-qualified to teach at the undergraduate (primarily lower division) level. Instructors are not tenure-eligible. The College and its departments/programs typically require Instructors to perform service activities, unless otherwise specified.
The title Scholar-in-Residence (job code 1442) is given to non-tenure track/non-tenured faculty whose combination of academic background and career expertise in areas of business, industry, law, K-12 education, the arts, literature, or government makes them valuable contributors to the undergraduate or graduate curricula. These individuals normally hold the terminal degree appropriate for their disciplines, but have spent much or all of their career outside academia. The Scholar-in-Residence would be under contract primarily to provide classroom instruction in their area of expertise. In addition to those instructional activities, they also may have program management, fundraising, and/or student career advising responsibilities that require the talents and experiences developed in their careers outside academia. Scholars-in-Residence earn the same benefits as those earned by instructor-rank faculty, including membership in the Faculty. They are employees at will.
The title Artist-in-Residence (job code 1449) is given to individuals whose career experience as an artist makes them valuable contributors to the undergraduate or graduate curriculum of their primary unit. Artists-in-Residence usually hold the terminal degree in their discipline but have spent much or all of their careers outside academia. They are employees at will.
Clinical Professors (job code 1201) must have a terminal degree or equivalent and a record that, taken on the whole, is judged to be excellent and indicates substantial, significant and continued growth and development and accomplishment in teaching, research, clinical activity, and service.
Clinical Associate Professor
Clinical Associate Professors (job code 1202) must have a terminal degree or equivalent and demonstrated success in teaching, clinical activity, or research.
Clinical Assistant Professor
Clinical Assistant Professors (job code 1203) must have a terminal degree or equivalent and demonstrated professional experience to include teaching, clinical activity, or research.
Clinical Senior Instructor
Clinical Senior Instructors (job code 1204) permits higher recognition and salary than that of Clinical Instructor.
Clinical Instructors (job code 1205) usually have their master's degree or equivalent and should be otherwise well qualified to teach and have evidence of either clinical or research experience.
Non-tenure track faculty with 50% appointments or greater are eligible for benefits, including retirement benefits, and are eligible for leave as outlined on the old faculty and staff website.
Per the Background Check Policy found on the CU Boulder website, a background check must be conducted at reappointment or promotion review if a background check has not been processed within three years. The College interprets this to mean that if the background check was passed more than three years prior to the start of the reappointment period, the instructor must undergo a criminal background check at time of offer letter for the reappointment.
The date in which the most recent background check was processed is found in "HCM" in Personal Information on the "CU Personal Data" tab.
Standards for Instructor Rank Reappointment Evaluations
In response to recent policy recommendations from the BFA and Arts & Sciences Council, that emphasize rigorous and meaningful reappointment review for instructor rank faculty, this college regularized both its review processes and its processes for hearing appeals of unfavorable reappointment decisions. Hand in hand with those changes is the need to articulate a set of college-wide guidelines for criteria for successful reappointment of instructors.
The mission of the faculty with the College of Arts and Sciences is to provide instruction at the graduate and undergraduate levels and to carry out research, scholarship, and creative work in a wide variety of academic disciplines. Tenure stream faculty members have obligations to contribute to all aspects of this mission, and we have well-established criteria for evaluating those contributions. The instructor rank faculty (e.g., instructor, senior instructor, scholar-in-residence, artist-in-residence and clinical faculty) have a more defined subset of responsibilities with regard to our mission. Instructor rank faculty members are hired to fulfill focused needs within the teaching domain, usually at the undergraduate level, and to conduct variable amounts of service to their unit appropriate to their specific circumstance. The purpose of this information is to establish a terminology and definition appropriate for the reappointment evaluation of instructor rank members of the faculty within the College of Arts and Sciences.
Reappointment review of instructor rank faculty occurs at least every two to three years, depending upon the terms of the appointment letter. Except in unusual circumstances, the criteria for successful reappointment shall focus on affirmative assessments of performance in the areas of teaching and service.
Senior instructors up for reappointment can undergo what is called an “expedited” reappointment every other cycle. Senior instructors cannot undergo expedited reappointment in two consecutive cycles. Senior instructors who wish to forego the expedited process may opt to undergo a full reappointment evaluation by informing the Chair in writing at least three months in advance of the deadline to submit the dossier to the College of Arts and Sciences. An expedited reappointment requires evaluation of at least three measures of teaching: 1) a Faculty Course Questionnaire (FCQ) summary, 2) FCQs from each course taught since last reappointment and 3) one or more selected from: peer reviews of teaching, reports of class interviews, letters from randomly solicited students, or other materials defined by the candidate or unit. In expedited cases, a Primary Unit Evaluation Committee (PUEC) does not need to be formed; however, the chair may, at her or his discretion, appoint a PUEC of at least two members of comparable rank, which is charged with generating a brief report.
The Chair provides a letter with a brief summary of the senior instructor’s performance and PUEC assessment if a PUEC was formed, and a report of the department’s vote.
For successful evaluation of teaching, an instructor rank faculty member must be found to have a record of teaching that can be judged to be ‘highly effective’ or better. Operationally, highly effective is a standard that exceeds a finding of Meritorious. Meritorious teaching can be defined as acceptable FCQ scores, positive peer reviews of classroom teaching, clear syllabi, and patterns of workload and grading that are within the norms for the unit. If mentoring students is excepted, a meritorious teacher will have a steady record of mentoring over their appointment period. The same requirements for multiple measures of teaching accomplishments as applied to tenure stream faculty members shall apply to instructor rank faculty members.
To exhibit highly effective teaching, a dossier should document the characteristics of meritorious teaching described above. In addition, we can expect to see feedback on FCQs that indicates success and evidence of creative teaching exhibited either through pedagogical innovation or creative use of content. Incorporation of service learning, community service, or professional application components into a course may also indicate aspects of highly effective teaching, as might evidence of learning through pre-and post-testing. There should be evidence that the candidate actively stays current in his or her content and employs effective pedagogy. This may be meetings, using or developing contemporary pedagogical materials, participating in and applying the results of pedagogical research, or consulting. If mentoring students is expected, a highly effective rating will have a steady record of mentoring students who complete honors theses or research/creative work projects or who otherwise exhibit documented benefit from the mentoring experience.
Senior instructor reappointment, or promotion to senior instructor, should be accompanied by characteristics as described above plus exhibit evidence of teaching expertise of value beyond the primary unit (campus-wide or nationally/internationally). This quality can be documented through publication of textbooks, leadership in campus-wide educational programs, leadership in pedagogical societies or education arms of professional societies. When letters external to the unit are used (optional), solicitation of letters external to the campus to establish continuous growth and development as teaching scholar shall be made no more often than once every other reappointment period.
Instructor rank faculty, eligible for reappointment, should exhibit a meritorious service record, calibrated to the service expectations as defined by the most recent letter of appointment or reappointment. Evidence of meritorious service should include a recitation of committee work or other assignments, but in addition an assessment of participation or impact in those assignments by the primary unit evaluation committee. Service might include hosting co-curricular activities for students, leading workshops for students or other faculty members, course coordination, curricular scheduling and other activities that contribute to the curriculum and operation so the primary unit. Service of instructor-rank faculty that is limited to their primary unit may be sufficient depending upon the conditions of appointment. Service to the college, campus, or profession further enhances a meritorious service record.
Meritorious service for senior instructors shall include components of service that extend beyond the primary unit.
Policy on Review of Non-Reappointment Recommendations for Instructor-Rank Faculty Members
Decisions to non-reappoint instructor-rank faculty members are a regular feature of curricular and personnel management in the College of Arts and Sciences. Many of these are known in advance to the instructor and were planned at the onset to coincide with other faculty members returning from sabbatical or leave. In other cases, non-reappointment occurs because student demand for particular instruction fades, the curriculum of the unit is redesigned, or the dollars to support the appointment are no longer available. These circumstances are infrequently contested by the instructor as they are part of the ebb and flow of academic life. However, occasionally a non-reappointment decision is contested by an instructor despite the reasons mentioned above or because of a unit level assessment of unsatisfactory performance of the instructor in the teaching and/or service domains.
In order to provide a defined process for considering appeals associated with instructor rank non-reappointment, the Arts and Sciences Council has voted to adopt a procedure for review of adverse instructor-rank reappointment decisions. These procedures take effect immediately and are described below:
- We will inform all instructors of their ability to appeal a non-reappointment decision to the College as part of the appointment process and employment orientation documentation. The College will also post this procedure to the College website so as to make the information generally available to the college community.
- Reappointment review at the department or program level requires preparation of a dossier and a review and written assessment by a PUEC. This committee must be made up of at least two members, at least half of whom must be tenured or tenure-track faculty. The PUEC makes a written recommendation to the Unit as a whole or to the Chair/Director, as defined by Unit bylaws. The Chair/Director in turn makes a written recommendation to the Associate Dean.
- In cases of a negative recommendation by the Unit or PUEC, or at the discretion of the Associate Dean, the reappointment dossier will be submitted to a two-person subcommittee of the College Personnel Committee, who will consider the merits of the case and make a written recommendation to the Associate Dean, who will decide to reappoint or not to reappoint.
- Appeal of the Associate Dean’s decision regarding a non-reappointment recommendation may be made in writing by the faculty member to the Dean of the College within 30 days of written notification.
- Grounds for grieving a decision to non-reappointment shall include:
- the decision was unfair (i.e., arbitrary, capricious, retaliatory, based on personal malice, and/or inconsistent with treatment accorded to the grievant’ s peers in similar circumstances)
- Procedural errors of sufficient magnitude to affect the outcome
- In the case of appeal, the Dean will submit the reappointment dossier and all written materials to the College Personnel Committee. The Personnel Committee, minus the two members involved in the subcommittee recommendation, will deliberate on the case and provide a written recommendation to the Dean.
- The Dean will consider the recommendation of the College Personnel Committee, the arguments and body of evidence, and render a written decision regarding the appointment.
- This procedure is not intended to restrict the rights of an instructor to pursue other campus- or university-level appeal processes to which they are entitled.
Content approved by A&S Personnel Committee on February 17, 2011.