DEPARTMENT OF MUSIC FACULTY POLICY MANUAL:
Department Criteria/Evaluation for Post-Tenure Review

(Approved Spring 2000; updated Fall 2007)

 

departmental procedure for post-tenure review

See "Activity Profile–Post-Tenure Review" (PDF, 16KB).

 

Unm faculty handbook

The following is a statement of criteria and procedures for the annual evaluation of the performance of tenured faculty members as required by section 4.9.4 of the University of New Mexico Faculty Handbook:

Faculty Data
Criteria for Evaluation
Process for Annual Evaluation
Process for Complete Review (if needed)

Faculty Data

Following the guidelines in section 4.9.3 of the Faculty Handbook, annual evaluations will be based upon but not limited to the following materials:

• Workload Reports
• Biographical Updates
• Student Evaluations
• Report on Recruitment Activities

If workload reports already include all pertinent biographic information and/or recruiting information or if a biographical update already includes recruitment information, there is no need to duplicate information by filing all four of the above. In addition, peer evaluations may also be used, though not necessarily on an annual basis, and any faculty member may write a self-evaluation letter annually if there is concern that the above documents don't accurately reflect the individual performance record.

Individual reports will be compiled and put in a summary form which will be available to those faculty requesting aggregate information for purposes of appeal or rebuttal.

Criteria for Evaluation

Criteria for evaluation are those specifically outlined for tenure-track faculty in "Policy Concerning Promotion and Tenure for Faculty Members of the Department of Music of the University of New Mexico". The relevant criteria for evaluation set standards for teaching, creative and research activity, and "academic service and general faculty responsibilities" and are suitable for tenured faculty members as well. These are detailed on pp.2-5 of the current document, first adopted in 1980, and amplified by the former Dean of the College of Fine Arts on pp.8-9. Any change in this policy must be approved by a majority of the Department of Music Faculty (unless superceded by the University Faculty Handbook). Any future changes to the criteria for evaluation will immediately become the relevant criteria for Post-Tenure Review as well.

:: back to top ::

Process for Annual Evaluation

After all relative data have been collected, the chair will examine materials relating to each tenured faculty member and evaluate these according to the criteria established above. The chair may, at his/her discretion, instead form an annual review committee that includes the chair, associate chair, and/or another selected tenured faculty member serving on the Administrative Committee to oversee the entire annual review process. If the annual review is done by committee, however, the entire committee is obligated to evaluate every tenured faculty member in the review process for that year. Other aspects of the annual review process will follow the faculty handbook, particularly as stated in sections 4.9.4, 4.9.5, and 4.9.6.

Process for Complete Review (if needed)

The process for a more complete review, if necessary, will follow what has been stated in the faculty handbook with particular emphasis in sections 4.9.7 through 4.9.10. In the case where a more complete review is needed, the chair will be obligated to form a committee of all tenured faculty to oversee the more complete review as would occur in a mid-probationary review. The tenured faculty may choose to elect a smaller committee of at least three representatives to oversee the process and report back to the entire body of tenured faculty.

In all cases, procedures that have not been specifically identified in the above policy are those specifically stated in Section 4 of the Faculty Handbook.