Faculty Handbook: Full View

Our Mission

Lewis & Clark is a premier private higher education institution offering an exceptional education in an inclusive environment. By fostering critical thinking, innovation, creativity, civic engagement, and leadership, both inside and outside of the classroom, we prepare our students for lifelong success in a connected, rapidly evolving world. Lewis & Clark’s educational programs, including meaningful engagement with research and scholarship, equip students with the knowledge and skills to advance their careers, promote justice, and address urgent societal challenges facing our communities and the world.

Our Values

We believe in the power of higher education as both an individual benefit and a public good.

We strive to be a driver of socioeconomic mobility, improving opportunities for economic and social advancement, through individualized educational programs that support students from enrollment through graduation.

We are guided by a commitment to diversity, equity, sustainability, global-mindedness, and the pursuit of a more just society.

Legally established under a self-perpetuating Board of Trustees, in whose hands the direction of the institution finally rests, Lewis & Clark College in practice adheres to age-old principles of shared governance. Through explicit delegations of authority and with mutual trust, the trustees, officers, faculties, and students of the College discharge their separate responsibilities and work together to ensure that its mission is upheld and its best possible future achieved.

Under authority delegated by the Board of Trustees, each of the three faculties of the College, operating under approved bylaws, determines the curriculum for the degrees it offers, admits students to degree candidacy, and recommends students for receipt of the degrees for which they have qualified. Each also conducts searches for new faculty, and evaluates their performance for promotion and tenure. Each faculty advises its dean on the development and use of resources, and on other matters of school business that are brought before it.

The faculty of each of the three schools consists of those individuals appointed in writing to faculty positions, as defined in the duly-adopted bylaws of each school. The voting rights of faculty are also established in the duly-adopted bylaws of each school.

• Bylaws of the College of Arts and Sciences 
• Bylaws of the Law School 
• Bylaws of the Graduate School of Education and Counseling

Faculty from the various schools serve on several standing institutional committees. These committees are noted in the bylaws for the College of Arts and Sciences, the Graduate School of Education and Counseling, and the Law School.

Up to six faculty members—two each from the College of Arts and Sciences, the Graduate School of Education, and Counseling and the Law School—are appointed by the board chair to serve as non-voting faculty representatives to the Board of Trustees.

In addition, the president may establish ad hoc institutional committees, composed of faculty from all three schools, to address specific issues of institution-wide concern.

Committee on Honors and Prizes

The Committee on Honors and Prizes ensures full faculty and student participation in the determination of the recipients of college-wide prizes and honorary degrees. It reviews all nominations for college-wide prizes and honorary degrees and makes its recommendations to the Committee on Academic Affairs of the Board of Trustees, which, in turn, makes its recommendations to the full board.

To be considered, nominees should have made distinguished contributions to society through scholarship or achievement in the arts and sciences, in the professions, in business, in politics, or in community service.

Nominations for honorary degrees may be submitted by trustees, faculty, and other members of the College community. Complete information should be furnished with a letter of nomination, including curriculum vitae or resume, qualifications, and reason for the nomination.

Honorary degrees are usually conferred at commencement but may be given on other special occasions.

The committee includes two faculty representatives each from the College of Arts and Sciences, the Graduate School of Education and Counseling, and the Law School, and a student from each, to be appointed by the president. It is chaired by the Chief of Staff or other other designee of the President.

Students’ participation in governance is broad and significant. Six students—two each from the College of Arts and Sciences, the Graduate School of Education, and Counseling and the Law School—are appointed by the board chair to serve as non-voting student representatives to the Board of Trustees. Students also serve on many standing and ad hoc operational committees of the College at large and participate extensively in the governance of their respective schools.

College of Arts and Sciences

Student representatives serve as voting members on most administrative searches and routinely sit on search committees for faculty positions. Two student members are voting members of the Committee on the Curriculum and others serve with the Curriculum subcommittees on Course Proposals and Overseas and Off-campus Programs. One student participates on the Committee on Enrollment and one on the Committee on the Library and Educational Technology. Nomination and/or appointment of student representatives to committees is overseen by the Associated Student Body (ASB) and forwarded to the dean of the College of Arts and Sciences for final approval.

Graduate School of Education and Counseling

Students in the Graduate School of Education and Counseling routinely serve on faculty search committees. Nomination of the representatives to search committees is overseen by the respective departments. All nominations are forwarded to the associate dean of the Graduate School of Education and Counseling for final approval.

Law School

Two student representatives participate in and vote at meetings of the faculty except as provided in Article II, Sec. 4 of the Law School bylaws pertaining to executive sessions of meetings of the law faculty and except for promotion and tenure decisions as set forth in Article II, Sec. 7 of the bylaws and other Law School documents. Except for the Sabbatical and Leave Committee, students serve as student representatives on the standing committees of the Law School.

Alone among professions in modern society, the academic profession enjoys a set of personal freedoms claimed as fundamental to its full and proper exercise. These protections have evolved with the academy itself, deriving from the earliest days of universities in the European Middle Ages and developing into our day under the collective rubric of “academic freedom and tenure.” The protections implied in this phrase are accorded to professors as rights, claims they make on their peers and institutions simply by virtue of the profession they share. Only the most serious circumstance or failing could lead to the forfeiture of these rights.

A profession that accords rights of this magnitude expects of its members corresponding duties of commensurate breadth and seriousness. Though separate and distinct from such rights, academic responsibilities are largely implied by them and are intended to protect, nurture, and advance the profession that requires them for its own best end. Accordingly, except as otherwise provided in this handbook, the faculty of Lewis & Clark College assert and accept, individually and collectively, the following principles of academic freedom and responsibility:

1. Institutions of higher learning exist to discover, advance, and disseminate knowledge for the common good. Unfettered academic freedom is essential to the free search for knowledge and its free exposition. Academic rank and tenure are conferred as a means of ensuring the economic security indispensable for academic freedom and to enable the institution to fulfill its obligations to its students and to society. Academic freedom applies to all who exercise teaching responsibilities, including nontenured, part-time, visiting, and temporary teaching staff. Faculty reviews for promotion, tenure, compensation, leaves, academic support, reappointment, and other perquisites of employment shall be conducted in accordance with these principles of academic freedom.
   
   Academic freedom carries with it duties correlative with rights, and does not preclude the adoption of minimum affirmative standards such as publication, teaching effectiveness, and institutional and community service requirements. Academic freedom and responsibility apply in the classroom, in scholarly research and publication, in institutional governance and operations, and in activities in the larger community.
2. In the classroom, academic freedom includes but is not limited to freedom of discussion and freedom to select course materials, content, methodology, and sequence within course objectives established in the official curriculum as approved by the applicable faculty. This freedom extends to controversial matters related to or connected with the course subject in the reasonable and good-faith judgment of the faculty member.
   
   Faculty should, however, take care not to abuse this freedom. It is the mastery teachers have of their subjects and their own scholarship that entitles them to their classrooms and to freedom in the presentation of their subjects. It is improper for an instructor persistently to intrude material that has no relation to the subject, or to fail to present the subject matter of the course as announced to the students and as approved by the faculty in their collective responsibility for the curriculum. Faculty prepare each course with care, review its content regularly in light of growing knowledge in their discipline, and refine their teaching methods to suit the needs of the students they teach. They respond to the criticism and suggestions of their students and peers. In the exercise of their freedom as teachers, faculty will establish and foster a climate of academic integrity. Students are entitled to an atmosphere conducive to learning and to nonarbitrary and nondiscriminatory treatment in all aspects of the teacher-student relationship.
   
   Professors may not refuse to enroll or teach students on the grounds of their beliefs or the possible uses to which they may put the knowledge to be gained in a course. Students should not be forced by the authority inherent in the instructional role to make particular personal choices as to political action or their own part in society. Evaluation of students and the award of credit must be based on academic performance in the good-faith judgment of the faculty member and not on irrelevant matters.
   
   As teachers, professors encourage the free pursuit of learning in their students. They hold respect for students as individuals and adhere to their proper roles as intellectual guides and counselors. Professors make every reasonable effort to foster honest academic conduct and to ensure that their evaluations of students reflect each student’s true merit in the professor’s good-faith judgment. They respect the confidential nature of the relationship between professor and student. They will not exploit, harass, or be responsible for discriminatory treatment of students. They acknowledge significant academic or scholarly assistance from them.
3. In research, publication, and other scholarly activities, academic freedom includes but is not limited to full freedom to select topics, methodologies, forums, format, approach, and content. Scholarly activities, however, should not interfere with other academic duties.
   
   Guided by their conviction of the worth and dignity of the advancement of knowledge, professors recognize the special responsibilities placed upon them. Their primary responsibility to their subject is to seek and to state the truth as they see it. To this end, professors devote their energies to developing and improving their scholarly competence. They accept the obligation to exercise critical self-discipline and judgment in using, extending, and transmitting knowledge. They practice intellectual honesty. Although professors may follow subsidiary interests, these interests must never seriously hamper or compromise their freedom of inquiry. As colleagues, professors have obligations that derive from common membership in the community of scholars. Professors do not discriminate against or harass colleagues. They respect and defend the free inquiry of associates. In the exchange of criticism and ideas, professors show due respect for the opinions of others. Professors acknowledge academic debts and strive to be objective in their professional judgment of colleagues.
4. In matters of institutional governance and operations, academic freedom includes but is not limited to freedom to express such views and advocate such positions as the faculty member deems to be in the best interest of the Lewis & Clark community or its constituent parts. This freedom extends to institutional goals, policies, programs, processes, and structures.
   
   As members of an academic institution, professors seek above all to be effective teachers and scholars. Although professors observe the stated regulations of the institution, provided the regulations do not contravene academic freedom, they maintain their right to criticize and seek revision. In criticizing policies or decisions, professors avail themselves of established processes and forums, and take care to argue their positions with reason and restraint, and to avoid personal attacks on colleagues.
   
   Professors are available for normal duties during the academic year. They meet their classes on a regular basis throughout the year, make themselves available for academic advising and counseling, and hold final examinations as scheduled. They provide good-faith evaluations of student work, maintain records for all courses taught, provide letters of recommendation as appropriate, and submit final grades in a timely fashion. As good College citizens, they attend meetings of the department, division, and full faculty, and take part in faculty retreats. They honor their students by participating in convocations and commencements.
   
   Professors give due regard to their paramount responsibilities within their institution in determining the amount and character of work done outside it. When considering the interruption or termination of their service, professors recognize the effect of their decision upon the program of the institution and give due notice of their intentions.
5. As members of their community, professors have the rights and obligations of other citizens. Professors measure the urgency of these obligations in the light of their responsibilities to their subject, to their students, to their profession, and to their institution. When they speak or act as private persons, they avoid creating the impression of speaking or acting for their college or university and may not deliberately misrepresent their position in the academy or their authority to speak for the institution. As citizens engaged in a profession that depends upon freedom for its health and integrity, professors have a particular obligation to promote conditions of free inquiry and to further public understanding of academic freedom.
6. Academic tenure ensures that professors may remain in their positions until retirement. While a normal retirement age may no longer be legally mandated, professors remain responsible for the health of their disciplines and the good of their institutions. They weigh their personal needs against those of the academy for regular renewal of talent and ideas. At the appropriate time they seek partial or full retirement, opening the way to a new generation of scholars who will assume the same rights and responsibilities they have enjoyed throughout their careers.

Tenure-Track Appointments

There are three ranks to which faculty holding tenure or on tenure track may be appointed: assistant professor, associate professor, and professor. The procedures for the awarding of tenure and promotion are different in the three schools. The relevant documents on promotion and tenure are found in the portion of the handbook applicable to each school. Faculty on tenure track should hold the terminal degrees in their respective fields.

Non Tenure-Track Appointments

Instructor

Teaching faculty without the terminal degree appropriate to their field normally hold
the title of instructor. An instructor should have completed at least 18 semester hours (27 quarter hours) in the subject or field in which he or she is hired to teach and hold the master’s degree. Appointments to this rank are for a stated term of service.

Lecturer

This title is used for faculty with renewable term appointments in areas of the curriculum not staffed by tenure-track faculty. Lectureships are half time or more and may be renewed for as long as the staffing need exists. Persons may be initially appointed as senior lecturers based on their record of achievement or may advance to that position upon review and after five years of service. Persons holding these positions usually carry some administrative responsibilities in addition to teaching and often carry an additional descriptive designation such as “Director of Orchestra” or “Program Head of Photography.”

Faculty with Term

This title (e.g., associate professor with term) refers to faculty appointed for multiyear (generally more than two years) half-time to full-time contracts with specified or indefinite term, but not on tenure track. Qualifications are generally comparable to those for appointment at the corresponding tenure-track rank and compensation will be determined by the relevant dean. The rank to which term faculty are appointed will range from instructor to professor, as appropriate.

Clinical Faculty (Graduate School of Education and Counseling)

This title (clinical instructor or clinical assistant, associate, or full professor) refers to faculty appointed on an annual basis, with an FTE of .5 or greater. They are voting members of the Graduate School faculty. Reappointment or renewal is based on the decision of the dean.

Visiting Faculty

Visiting faculty generally occupy a full-time (or full-time for one-half year) position that is temporarily vacant. The title (e.g., visiting assistant professor) may also be used for a faculty member hired from another institution to hold a specifically funded temporary position. In the latter case, the visiting faculty member is assigned to a school over and above the number of tenured positions in the staffing plan of the school. Qualifications are generally comparable to those for appointment at the corresponding tenure-track rank and compensation will be determined by the relevant dean. Visiting faculty will be appointed at the appropriate rank from instructor through professor. Visiting appointments are not normally renewed beyond three years and in no case may be renewed beyond six years.

Adjunct Faculty

An adjunct position is created to meet a specific need on a course-by-course basis. Appointments are for a specified period of one year or less, and may be renewed provided the College needs the adjunct’s services and performance meets the College’s standards. Adjunct appointments may be made at any appropriate rank.

Determination of Initial Rank

• The dean of the College of Arts and Sciences determines the academic rank of a newly appointed faculty member in the College of Arts and Sciences.
• The dean of the Graduate School, upon recommendation from the appropriate department chair, determines the academic rank of a newly appointed faculty member in the Graduate School.
• The dean of the Law School, upon recommendation of the voting faculty, determines the academic rank of a newly appointed faculty member in the Law School.

The terms and conditions of every initial appointment shall be stated in writing and available to the faculty member before the commencement of duties. Any changes in the terms of the initial appointment must be stated in writing by the person with hiring authority and given to the faculty member.

The tenure status of each faculty member should be clearly stated in each contract. Appointment to any stated rank at Lewis & Clark does not carry with it the assumption that the position carries tenure or is tenure-track.

Tenure-Track Appointment Terms

A faculty member hired on “tenure track” is on probationary appointment and becomes eligible for consideration for tenure only if the faculty member completes the probationary period designated in the letter of appointment or subsequently negotiated with and approved by the appropriate dean. A tenure-track contract that is not renewed or extended automatically terminates upon the expiration of the stated period.

Appointments with Continuous Tenure

A faculty member granted tenure has a right to be reemployed for succeeding academic years until the faculty member resigns, retires, is discharged for cause, or is terminated or laid off as a result of a bona fide reduction in force for formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction, as provided elsewhere in this Handbook.

Special-Status Appointment Terms

Instructional faculty hired in special-status positions will not be considered for tenure unless they are appointed to a tenure-track position through normal faculty search procedures. Special-status faculty may work full-time or part-time and are appointed for a specific period. Renewal is at the discretion of the College; special status appointments carry no guarantee of renewal.

Special appointments may be made without the usual search procedures but must be made in the spirit of equal employment opportunity. All special-status faculty are evaluated annually according to the standards of the school in which they teach.

Tenure is a continuous appointment without stated term that is conferred on a faculty member after review.

Tenure is a clear recognition that the candidate is a valued and productive member of the faculty as indicated by teaching effectiveness, scholarship, and service to the institution and profession.

The decision reflects a comprehensive judgment about past performance and future potential based on a particular combination of strengths demonstrated by the candidate in relation to the needs of the respective school and the College. The College recognizes the importance of academic freedom and a sufficient degree of economic security, and the granting of tenure is therefore a commitment on the part of the College that the faculty member will be employed by the College, so far as its resources permit and, unless there is termination for adequate cause, until retirement or resignation.

The purpose of faculty reviews is to evaluate the faculty member’s contribution to Lewis & Clark in the areas of teaching, scholarship or creative activity, and institutional service.

Because of its commitment to its students, the College considers excellent teaching to be essential for reappointment, promotion, and tenure. In addition, the College expects excellent scholarship or creative activity, as appropriate to their discipline, of all faculty members both because of the inherent value of such work and because the College believes that such work enhances teaching and intellectual growth. Lewis & Clark also calls on its tenured faculty to provide service to the College, to their respective disciplines, and to the broader community, all of which contribute to the general welfare of the institution.

Although specific contributions in the categories of teaching, scholarship or creative activity, and institutional service may vary from one faculty member to another and although individual faculty members can demonstrate accomplishment in diverse ways, all faculty members are expected to show accomplishment in these areas. Specifically, the assessment of teaching should be based on such factors as peer and student evaluations, academic advising, the quality of course syllabi, and when appropriate, course development, contributions to the core curriculum, interdisciplinary teaching, overseas and other off-campus programs, student or faculty-student research, student-designed majors, and departmental honors projects. Scholarly work should be subject to peer review, e.g., articles in refereed professional journals, books published by presses employing peer review, book chapters, publications in non-refereed journals recognized by peers as of high quality, exhibits in juried shows, and performances for public audiences. Promotion and tenure should include an assessment of the faculty member’s scholarly or creative accomplishments by external reviewers who have achieved recognition in the discipline of the faculty member being reviewed. Examples of institutional service are administrative responsibilities, College and community service, and activities in professional organizations.

Faculty review at Lewis & Clark shall be consistent with the principle of peer review as articulated in the American Association of University Professors’ 1966 Joint Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities:

Faculty status and related matters are primarily a faculty responsibility; this area includes appointments, reappointments, decisions not to reappoint, promotions, the granting of tenure, and dismissal. The primary responsibility of the faculty for such matters is based upon the fact that its judgment is central to general educational policy. Furthermore, scholars in a particular field or activity have the chief competence for judging the work of their colleagues; in such competence it is implicit that responsibility exists for both adverse and favorable judgments. Likewise, there is the more general competence of experienced faculty personnel committees having a broader charge. Determinations in these matters should first be by faculty action through established procedures, reviewed by the chief academic officers with the concurrence of the board. The governing board and the president should, on questions of faculty status, as in other matters where the faculty has primary responsibility, concur with the faculty judgment except in rare instances and for compelling reasons which should be stated in detail.

The specific policies governing promotion, tenure and faculty reviews, as adopted by the faculties and dean of each school and approved by the president of the college, are found in the portion of the Faculty Handbook related to each school:

• CAS Promotion and Tenure Reviews and Developmental Reviews
• Law School Appointment Policy and Procedure and Promotion and Tenure Reviews 
• Graduate School Promotion and Tenure Reviews and Developmental Reviews

Use of Course/Instructor Evaluations

Faculty members teaching credit-bearing courses must allow students to fill out the course/instructor evaluations standard to each school as part of the College’s system for gathering information pertinent to faculty evaluation. These evaluations become part of all reviews for contract renewals, promotion and tenure, and salary decisions. The dean of each school should work with faculty and students to develop appropriate forms and procedures for evaluation. All forms must be kept for 10 years or until summarized in an official review process..

Faculty Review File Retention and Access

All who are performing faculty reviews have access to the relevant review files. When a review is concluded, the review file, after removal of confidential letters and material (to which the reviewee does not have access), shall be returned to the reviewee. The confidential material shall be maintained in a separate file in the office of the appropriate dean. Note that review files are not the same as personnel files. The College maintains personnel records for employees and past employees to document employment related decisions and benefit choices and to comply with government record keeping requirements.

The review of faculty members teaching in two or more schools, programs, or departments should be conducted as follows:

• Faculty members teaching in an undergraduate department, a graduate department, or the Law School, and in any institutional programs that are not located in one of the schools, are reviewed according to the procedures of the school to which they were appointed. The appropriate dean or associate dean is responsible for gathering and including in the faculty member’s file information pertaining to their activities in the institutional program.
• Faculty members with joint appointments or institutional appointments should be provided with an explanation of review procedures in the initial appointment letter.
• Faculty members with appointments in one school, but who occasionally teach in another school, are reviewed according to the procedures of the school to which they were appointed. The appropriate dean or associate dean is responsible for gathering information about the faculty member’s activities in another school and for including that information in the review file.

Faculty Appointed to Administrative Positions

Faculty members appointed to any administrative position should receive a joint administrative/faculty contract. This contract defines the portion of the faculty member’s time to be devoted to the administrative position and the amount of time to be devoted to teaching, research, and institutional service. The individual retains tenure, rank, and departmental or program affiliation while holding the administrative position. When the faculty member leaves the administrative post, he or she automatically returns to full-time faculty status in the department or program.

Non–Lewis & Clark Faculty Appointed as Administrators

Faculty members from other institutions who are appointed as administrators at Lewis & Clark may wish to retain their instructional faculty status and rank. Such individuals must be reviewed by the chair and tenured members of the department or program that corresponds most closely to the field in which the candidate holds the PhD, or its equivalent. In the Law School, the tenure and rank review shall be conducted by the tenured and tenure-track faculty. These reviewers may or may not recommend faculty status. If faculty status, rank, or departmental participation is recommended, the recommendation must also be approved by the appropriate dean. The letter of initial appointment to the administrator should include information on faculty status, rank, and departmental participation.

The following options exist for administrators seeking faculty status:

• Faculty Status: Department faculty may recommend tenure or tenure-track status. If tenure is recommended, the recommendation must go to the appropriate faculty committee on promotion and tenure and/or other pertinent body of the faculty in accordance with established practice.
• Faculty Rank: The department may not propose a faculty rank lower than the rank held by the individual at the previous institution. This restriction shall not apply at the Law School.
• Faculty Departmental Participation: On the recommendation of the department, or pertinent faculty body, the administrator may teach from time to time. The agreement to teach should also specify other duties such as advising student majors, participating in department meetings with or without vote, and sharing in the selection of department members.

Review of Faculty Holding Joint Faculty/Administrative Appointments

A faculty member who holds a joint faculty/administrative appointment and who continues to
teach may be reviewed both as a faculty member and as an administrator. The individual remains subject to the promotion/tenure review criteria and to salary adjustment review and procedures of the school to which he or she is appointed. The individual is also subject to review as an administrator according to procedures that exist in the relevant administrative area. Any administrative salary increase is independent of any faculty salary increase.

The Lewis & Clark College salary policy for faculty is designed to recognize and reward
meritorious performance. It is predicated on the assumption that most Lewis & Clark faculty
perform meritoriously and will be so rewarded. It also recognizes that while faculty may
emphasize different aspects of their professional lives at different moments in their careers, a
sustained commitment to teaching is at the heart of the College’s mission.

Each faculty member is reviewed in the areas of teaching, scholarship or creative work, and
professional service not in a formulaic way but for the strength of that individual’s contributions
to the College and to his or her own professional growth. Salary increases are based on
meritorious performance. Pre-tenure reviews, tenure and promotion reviews, and the periodic
reviews of tenured faculty are taken into account in assessing performance. Successful tenure
and promotion reviews normally result in special merit raises.

During the budgeting process, a pool of funds is normally reserved in each school for faculty
salary increases. The precise amount is determined as part of the annual budget process. The size of the pool is conditioned by available resources and the claims of other institutional and school needs, but appropriate faculty compensation is always a priority at Lewis & Clark College. The dean of each school is responsible for determining faculty salaries. In determining faculty salaries, the dean of each school is also responsible for reserving the funds needed to attract and retain superior faculty and for making appropriate equity adjustments based on merit.

Evaluations of performance for purposes of salary increases are conducted according to
procedures specific to each school.

More specific policies and procedures regarding faculty compensation, as adopted by the faculties of each school, and which are advisory to the dean of each school, are found in the portion of the Faculty Handbook related to each school:

• College of Arts and Sciences
• Law School
• Graduate School of Education and Counseling

Institutional Policy on Compensated External Activities of Faculty

Lewis & Clark faculty devote their time to teaching, scholarship, and professional service. Because of their expertise in various areas, they are from time to time invited to participate in externally compensated professional activities.

In order that such external activities are consistent with the College’s needs, the College has determined that Lewis & Clark faculty may devote the equivalent of no more than one day per week during the academic year to compensated activities outside the College over and above their normal responsibilities in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and institutional service. Such activities should contribute to the professional development of the faculty member and should not conflict with Lewis & Clark responsibilities.

Faculty are required to provide a written description of the activity to be compensated, the employer, the duration of the activity, and the approximate number of hours per week to be devoted to the project.

Review and approval of such external faculty activity shall be the responsibility of the dean of the relevant school.

Institutional Policy on Additional Lewis & Clark Compensation

With the exception of administrative stipends, externally funded projects, and activities performed in the summer, Lewis & Clark faculty members normally may not receive more than 100 percent of their annual salary for activities within the College including teaching additional courses and committee work. Exceptions may be made by the appropriate school dean where compelling programmatic needs exist. Such exceptions require the prior approval of the appropriate dean. Written appeals for exceptions to this policy must be submitted in advance to the appropriate dean.

As a component of the College’s faculty professional development program, academic leaves are designed to enrich teaching and support the curriculum. The academic leave program has two components: sabbatical leaves and professional leaves.

The purpose of sabbatical leaves is to provide opportunity for continued professional growth and new, or renewed, intellectual achievement through study, research, writing, or other creative work in a field that is related to the faculty member’s major scholastic interest.

Professional leaves have the additional purpose of providing, in appropriate circumstances, opportunity for projects of indirect benefit to the institution or for public or private service outside the institution. Professional leaves may be without pay when they carry no institutional duties or for pro rata pay when they carry a reduced workload.

Professional leaves must be negotiated on a case-by-case basis with the dean of the school to which the faculty member is appointed.

More specific policies and procedures regarding faculty academic leaves, as applicable to each school, are found in the portion of the Faculty Handbook related to each school:

• College of Arts and Sciences
• Law School
• Graduate School of Education and Counseling

All faculty are required to comply with the College’s Code of Ethics and all other institutional policies applicable to employees of the College.

Each of the schools of Lewis & Clark College shall elect three tenured or tenure-track faculty members to serve on the grievance panel for a period of three years with staggered terms.

Faculty members with grievances unrelated to reappointment, promotion, tenure, salary, or matters for which an appeal process is included in the policy or procedure shall raise their grievance with their dean. If discussion does not lead to an acceptable resolution, the faculty member should request of the president that a grievance committee be formed. The president shall choose a member from each of the three schools out of the grievance panel to serve as the grievance committee.

The faculty member shall submit to the committee a written petition setting forth in detail the nature of the grievance and against whom the grievance is directed. The petition should contain any factual or other data that the faculty member deems pertinent to the case, including evidence, if any, of improper discrimination.

Submission of a petition will not automatically entail investigation or detailed consideration thereof; the Grievance Committee will decide whether or not the facts merit a detailed investigation. If so, it will proceed to investigate and take evidence as necessary. After its investigation, the committee may seek to bring about a settlement of the issue satisfactory to the parties. If in the opinion of the committee such a settlement is not possible or is not appropriate, the committee will report its findings to the faculty member and to the president.

A faculty member on a tenure-track appointment is hired for a probationary period, normally no
longer than six years, and is given a series of term appointments.

Tenure-track faculty share the academic freedom and responsibilities common to all other members of the voting faculty. During the probationary period, a tenure-track faculty member cannot be dismissed before the end of the term appointment except for cause or for financial exigency as provided in Termination of Tenured Faculty Due to Discontinuance of Program or Department or Financial Exigency.

During the probationary period of tenure-track faculty, the College may decide prior to the year of tenure consideration not to renew the appointment. A decision not to reappoint does not necessarily reflect adversely on the faculty member, but may be a reflection of programmatic or other College needs. When the decision is made not to renew, the tenure-track faculty member shall be informed in writing.

Notice of Nonrenewal of Tenure-Track Faculty

Absent termination for cause or for financial exigency, a faculty member is entitled during the probationary period to timely notice that he or she will not be reappointed with a term contract. Similarly, the faculty member is entitled to timely notice of intention not to recommend reappointment with tenure. The faculty member will be informed in writing according to this schedule:

•  First Academic Year of Service: Not later than March 1 if the appointment expires at the end of that academic year. If an appointment expires at a time other than at commencement, then notice must be given at least three months prior to termination.
•  Second Academic Year of Service: Not later than December 15 if the appointment expires at the end of the year. If the appointment expires during an academic year, notice must be given at least six months prior to termination.
•  After Two or More Years of Service: At least 12 months before the expiration of an appointment.

Faculty with special-status contracts, term appointments, and contract appointments have the academic freedom and responsibilities that all other members of the faculty have. They cannot be dismissed before the end of a term appointment except for cause or for financial exigency as provided in Termination of Tenured Faculty Due to Discontinuance of Program or Department or Financial Exigency.

Contracts and letters of appointment for special-status faculty should state the date of the conclusion of the term of appointment and should inform the faculty member that there is no expectation for renewal of the contract or continuation of employment. Special-status faculty may have their contracts renewed at the discretion of the College, but they do not become eligible for tenure or tenure review.

Any nontenured faculty member may be dismissed with or without cause at the end of the term of his or her appointment. Tenure-track faculty will receive notice in accordance with the notice requirements set forth in Termination of Tenured Faculty Due to Discontinuance of Program or Department or Financial Exigency.

Termination of Employment Due to Discontinuance of Program or Department Termination

Termination of an appointment with tenure, or of a probationary term or contract, or special appointment before the end of the specified term, may occur as a result of bona fide formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction. Before the College issues notice to a faculty member of its intention to terminate an appointment because of formal discontinuance of a program or department of instruction, the institution will make every reasonable effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position in the College. If no suitable position is available. within the institution, the faculty member’s appointment may then be terminated. A faculty member terminated under this section will be permitted after receiving notice of termination, to remain in the employ of the College for one academic year (nine months) or to receive the equivalent in severance pay.

Termination of Employment for Financial Exigency

A faculty member may be dismissed for reasons of financial exigency. Termination of a faculty appointment because of financial exigency shall be demonstrably bona fide. Before the administration issues notice to a faculty member of its intention to terminate an appointment because of financial exigency, the institution will take due account of considerations related to tenure and seniority within the constraints of programmatic need.

A tenured faculty member, or a nontenured or a non-tenure-track faculty member whose term of appointment has not yet expired, may be dismissed for cause, but such dismissal shall be carried out only after the faculty member has received notice that their conduct is unacceptable and only after the procedures set forth below are followed. Cause for dismissal shall be as follows:

1. Seriously inadequate performance on the part of a faculty member in the discharge of professional duties.
2. Physical or mental incapacity, provided the same renders the faculty member unfit to teach or to engage in scholarship; and further provided that reasonable accommodation without undue hardship to the College of Arts and Sciences, Law School, or Graduate School shall first be attempted.
3. Repeated or egregious dishonesty.
4. Repeated or egregious violation of criminal laws.
5. Repeated or egregious violation of duly adopted policies of the College or the school in which the faculty member is employed.

Dismissal Procedures

1. Informal Consultation:
   When reasons arise to question the fitness of a College faculty member who has tenure or whose term appointment has not expired, the dean of the school in which the faculty member is appointed shall discuss the matter with the faculty member in personal conference.
2. Preliminary Inquiry:
   If the matter is not resolved, the dean may request that an Advisory Committee be formed. The committee shall consist of six faculty members, two from each of the College’s three schools selected by their respective dean. Any member of the Advisory Committee may be deemed ineligible at the member’s own initiative. The faculty member under consideration by the Advisory Committee may also request that a proposed member or members of the Advisory Committee be deemed ineligible because of potential bias or interest. The deans of the three schools shall rule on such requests by majority vote. A statement with reasonable particularity of the grounds proposed for the dismissal shall be formulated by the dean of the relevant school and provided to the faculty member and to the Advisory Committee. This committee will be charged with determining whether formal proceedings to consider the faculty member’s dismissal will be instituted. If the Advisory Committee, by majority vote, recommends such formal proceedings, action will be commenced under the procedures outlined below. The decision of the Advisory Committee shall be communicated by the dean to the president, together with any additional materials relevant to the case.
3. Formal Proceedings:
   Formal proceedings to dismiss a faculty member for cause shall be commenced by a letter addressed to the faculty member by the president, informing the faculty member of the grounds proposed for dismissal and the timing and location of a hearing. The hearing will be initiated not less than 30 days after receipt of said letter, by a Hearing Committee at which the faculty member may present a case in their defense if they so desire. Any written reply by the faculty member must be submitted to the Hearing Committee not less than one week before the date set for the hearing. The voting members of the Hearing Committee shall consist of five tenured faculty members selected as follows: all three members of the Hearing Committee panel (see Section 4 below) from the school in which the faculty member is appointed and one member from each of the other two schools selected by the president from the members of the Hearing Committee panel representing the other two schools. Members of the Hearing Committee may not have served on the earlier Advisory Committee. Any member of the Hearing Committee may be deemed ineligible at the member’s own initiative. The faculty member under consideration by the Hearing Committee may also request that a proposed member or members of the Hearing Committee be deemed ineligible because of potential bias or interest. The president shall rule on such requests. In the event that a proposed member of the Hearing Committee is deemed ineligible, the president shall appoint another tenured faculty member from the school in which the ineligible faculty member holds an appointment. In the unusual circumstance where eligible faculty members cannot be identified in the challenged faculty member’s school, the president may appoint panel members from the other schools to constitute the Hearing Committee. The hearing shall commence no later than 60 days after receipt by the faculty member of the letter giving notice of formal proceedings. At its first meeting, the Hearing Committee shall elect a chair from among its members.
4. Hearing Committee Panel:
   The deans of the three schools shall each select three tenured full professors to staggered three-year terms on a panel that will serve as the source of Hearing Committee members if and when needed. If a vacancy occurs on this panel, the vacancy shall be filled by the dean. If one of the panel members is the faculty member facing dismissal, the dean shall select a replacement for that member of the panel for that particular case.
5. Consideration by Hearing Committee:
   The Hearing Committee will proceed in private pursuant to fair procedures, but it shall not be necessary to follow formal rules of court procedure. A full record of the committee’s proceedings shall be maintained, including audiotapes of oral presentations. The dean and/or legal counsel or other representative designated by the dean will present the case for termination. The faculty member shall be entitled to appear before the Hearing Committee, and may be assisted by a faculty colleague or by legal counsel employed at the faculty member’s expense. If written briefs would be helpful, the Hearing Committee may request them. In the hearing of charges of incompetence, the committee may seek testimony of reputable teachers and scholars from other institutions.
   
   The Hearing Committee shall reach its judgment by majority vote, on the basis of clear and convincing evidence in the hearing record. The committee may proceed to a judgment promptly, without having the record of the hearing transcribed, when it feels that a just conclusion can be reached by this means; or it may await the availability of a transcript if its judgment would be aided thereby. It shall make explicit findings with respect to each of the grounds of removal presented.
   
   Except for informational announcements covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, there shall be no public statements about the case by or on behalf of either the faculty member or the College until the proceedings have been completed. At the conclusion of its deliberations, the Hearing Committee shall transmit copies of its judgment to the president and to the faculty member. The president may either sustain the judgment of the Hearing Committee, or return it to the Hearing Committee and the faculty member with specific objections. If returned, the Hearing Committee shall then reconsider, taking into account the stated objections and receiving new evidence if necessary, after which it shall return its judgment to the president and to the faculty member.
6. Consideration by President and Board of Trustees:
   The Hearing Committee will proceed in private pursuant to fair procedures, but it shall not be necessary to follow formal rules of court procedure. A full record of the committee’s proceedings shall be maintained, including audiotapes of oral presentations. The dean and/or legal counsel or other representative designated by the dean will present the case for termination. The faculty member shall be entitled to appear before the Hearing Committee, and may be assisted by a faculty colleague or by legal counsel employed at the faculty member’s expense. If written briefs would be helpful, the Hearing Committee may request them. In the hearing of charges of incompetence, the committee may seek testimony of reputable teachers and scholars from other institutions.
   
   The Hearing Committee shall reach its judgment by majority vote, on the basis of clear and convincing evidence in the hearing record. The committee may proceed to a judgment promptly, without having the record of the hearing transcribed, when it feels that a just conclusion can be reached by this means; or it may await the availability of a transcript if its judgment would be aided thereby. It shall make explicit findings with respect to each of the grounds of removal presented.
   
   Except for informational announcements covering the time of the hearing and similar matters, there shall be no public statements about the case by or on behalf of either the faculty member or the College until the proceedings have been completed. At the conclusion of its deliberations, the Hearing Committee shall transmit copies of its judgment to the president and to the faculty member. The president may either sustain the judgment of the Hearing Committee, or return it to the Hearing Committee and the faculty member with specific objections. If returned, the Hearing Committee shall then reconsider, taking into account the stated objections and receiving new evidence if necessary, after which it shall return its judgment to the president and to the faculty member.
7. Consideration by President and Board of Trustees 
   If both the Hearing Committee and the president conclude that there are not sufficient grounds for termination, the charges shall be dismissed. In all other cases the president shall transmit to the Board of Trustees the final judgment of the Hearing Committee, the record of the proceedings, and the separate recommendation of the president, if any. The Board of Trustees shall communicate its decision to the parties.

Continuation of Duties and Pay During Formal Proceedings

Suspension of the faculty member by the president during the proceedings shall occur only if the president is satisfied that there is reasonable concern that immediate harm to the faculty member or others is threatened by the faculty member’s continuance. Any suspension shall be with pay.

Continuation of Duties and Pay Following Formal Proceedings

Except in cases of egregious misconduct, a tenured faculty member, or a faculty member on unexpired term appointment, who is dismissed shall receive their current salary for not more than one year from the date of notification of dismissal whether or not the faculty member is continued in their duties. The faculty member shall be continued in their duties for that period unless the welfare of the faculty member or that of the institution requires that the faculty member be granted a leave of absence.

Resignation

Early notification of intended resignation is important for the continuity of academic programs and is a matter of fairness to colleagues and students. Faculty members contemplating resigning should discuss this possibility with their dean as early as possible, preferably one year in advance. They should also schedule an appointment with the Office of Human Resources to discuss financial and other matters associated with resignation.

A faculty member should not resign in order to accept other employment as of the end of the academic year later than May 15. Except by agreement with their dean, faculty members should not leave their positions during an academic year for which they hold an appointment.

Retirement

The College has no mandatory retirement age. Faculty choose when to retire. Their choices
should be based on their own circumstances, taking into account the interests of their students, their colleagues, and their institution, in the best tradition of faculty responsibility. Ordinarily retirement should occur at the end of the academic year. Faculty should notify the administration of their decision to retire as far in advance as possible. They should also schedule an appointment with the Office of Human Resources to discuss financial and other matters associated with retirement.

The College should help retired faculty members remain a part of the academic community and facilitate timely retirement by providing, where possible, such amenities as lclark.edu email; online Internet access; library, athletic, and campus events privileges; institutional publications; access to other facilities; and participation in ceremonial events such as convocations and commencements. The honorary rank of emeritus or emerita professor is conferred by the College’s Board of Trustees at the recommendation of the appropriate dean.

In order to have a transition period between full-time teaching and retirement, some faculty may opt for a reduction in workload as they approach retirement. The duration and workload of such a transitional phase should be determined by mutual agreement between the faculty member and the College, and should be based on the needs of the individual and the requirements of the educational program. Under such an agreement, the following conditions shall apply:

1. the individual shall receive pro-rata pay according to the individual’s workload;
2. the individual shall have full status (including normal salary advancement);
3. both the College and the individual shall continue contributions toward that individual’s retirement program, provided the individual holds at least a half-time appointment;
4. if the faculty member elects, both the College and the individual shall contribute toward coverage under a group health and dental plan for which that individual is eligible in accordance with College policies and provider contracts; and
5. the individual shall remain eligible for all other benefits in accordance with College policies and provider contracts. If the faculty member is tenured, there shall be no loss of the protections of due process and the other entitlements that accrue with tenure.

1. Nonrenewal of Tenure-Track Faculty During Probationary Period
2. Nonrenewal of Special-Status Contracts, Term Appointments, and Contract Appointments
3. Termination of Nontenured Faculty
4. Termination of Tenured Faculty Due to Discontinuance of Program or Department or Financial Exigency
5. Termination of Faculty for Cause
6. Resignation and Retirement

The College of Arts and Sciences of Lewis & Clark deeply values teaching. Its faculty is a community of scholars and artists who care passionately about teaching and recognize teaching and scholarship or creative activity as mingled expressions of a single vocation. As representatives of the liberal arts and sciences, the faculty participate in and contribute to the broader academic discourse within and across disciplinary lines both inside and outside Lewis & Clark. That larger continuing conversation that the faculty engage in with their peers in turn informs teaching and learning at Lewis & Clark College.

Under the institution’s principle of shared governance, the operation of the college is dependent upon active and sustained faculty engagement in the life of the campus. College faculty are encouraged to contribute their expertise to the operation and continual renewal of the college, to their professional community, and to the public.

History of CAS Promotion and Tenure Reviews and Developmental Reviews Policy (I-VII)

• Approved by the CAS Faculty May 31, 1991
• Amended by the Faculty November 2, 1993
• Editorial changes September 1, 1995
• Amended by the Faculty April 23, 1996
• Amended by the Faculty November 4, 1998
• Amended by the Faculty November 6, 2002
• Amended by the Faculty February 7, March 7, and May 2, 2007
• Amended by the Faculty December 2, 2007
• Amended by the Faculty March 5, 2013
• Amended by the Faculty April 2, 2024
• Amended by the Faculty December 2, 2024

Back to Section III.A home

All faculty are reviewed for the purpose of determining their salary. There are three types of faculty review:

1. developmental reviews,
2. tenure reviews, and
3. promotion reviews.

Whenever a chair undergoes a review, the appropriate associate dean appoints a tenured faculty member to fulfill the chair’s role in the review process. That person is hereafter referred to as the “surrogate.”

Developmental Reviews 

Before tenure, assistant professors are normally reviewed twice, once in their second year, and again in their fourth year. The purpose of these developmental reviews is to provide candidates with advice about whether they are making satisfactory progress toward meeting the CAS’s standards for tenure. These reviews are conducted by a developmental review committee. At each developmental review, the committee also makes a recommendation to the dean about whether the faculty member’s 3-year appointment should be renewed.

Tenure Reviews

An assistant professor granted tenure will also be promoted to the rank of associate professor. Assistant professors normally undergo a tenure review in their sixth year at the College. However, at the time of their hire, individuals with experience as a faculty member or postdoctoral fellow at another institution may negotiate with the dean of the College for an earlier tenure review. This date is specified in their letter of appointment.

The probationary period specified in a faculty member’s letter of appointment can be extended only if the dean of the College, after consulting the department chair (or surrogate) and the associate deans, approves such a request by a faculty member. Such approval will be granted for a maximum of one year, and only when it is clearly in the interests both of the College and of the faculty member, for example, when a faculty member has taken a leave of absence for health or other personal reasons. The probationary period can be shortened only if the department chair (or surrogate) recommends that an earlier tenure review than that specified in the letter of appointment is clearly in the best interests of both the College and the faculty member, and such recommendation is endorsed by the dean of the College.

Faculty may be appointed at the rank of associate professor or professor without tenure. In such instances, the schedule for their tenure review and any developmental reviews will be specified in their letter of appointment, with the only exceptions being those noted above.

In rare instances, the College may appoint new faculty at the rank of associate professor or professor with tenure. In such cases, the authorization for the position must stipulate that an appointment may be made with tenure. Before being appointed with tenure, individuals must undergo a tenure review by the Committee on Promotion and Tenure (CPT). In consultation with the dean, the department, and the search committee, the candidate will submit a dossier for review by the CPT, which will recommend to the dean of the College whether the candidate meets the CAS’s criteria for the granting of tenure and the appropriateness of the proposed rank. This review will be conducted according to the procedures described in Procedures for Tenure Reviews.

Promotion Reviews

A promotion review is required for an associate professor to be promoted to the rank of professor. This review normally takes place in the sixth year of service at the rank of associate professor. However, the specific timing of this review is determined in consultation with the associate dean of the College. The sequence of steps is outlined below:

1. During the first year of their appointment as associate professor, the associate dean will convene a meeting with the faculty member to informally discuss their ongoing professional goals, opportunities, challenges, and resource needs. At this meeting, a mentorship plan will be discussed as appropriate to the faculty member’s goals, opportunities, challenges, and resource needs. This could include mentorship by a full professor at the college.
2. The faculty member will typically complete a triennial performance review during their third year at the rank of associate professor. The performance reviews provide an opportunity for the faculty member to revisit, clarify, and discuss their progress, goals and pathway for promotion.
3. In the spring of the fifth year as associate professor, the faculty member is encouraged to contact the associate dean to initiate the process of promotion to professor. If the faculty member chooses not to apply at that time, the faculty member will complete the triennial performance review on the regular schedule and will notify the associate dean when the faculty member is ready to initiate the promotion process.

Triennial Performance Reviews

Each faculty member undergoes a triennial performance review. In years when the faculty member undergoes a developmental review, a tenure review, or a promotion review, the materials prepared for that review will substitute for the materials called for in a triennial review (see Faculty Salary Policy). No faculty member will be formally reviewed more than once each academic year.

Back to Section III.A home

The developmental review committee is responsible for providing advice to a reviewee about whether they are making appropriate progress toward meeting the CAS’s standards for tenure, and for recommending to the dean of the College whether a reviewee should receive an additional 3 year appointment. The sequence of steps in this evaluation is as follows:

1. The appropriate associate dean appoints a 3-person developmental review committee. The committee is chaired by the reviewee’s department chair. After consulting the dean of the College, the chair, and the reviewee, the associate dean will appoint two additional tenured faculty to the committee, one from outside the reviewee’s department but from within their division, and one from outside their division. The chair of the developmental review committee will consult with the other tenured members of the reviewee’s department to bring the departmental perspective to the committee. Whenever possible and appropriate, the members of a reviewee’s second developmental review committee will be the same as that of previous developmental review committee.
2. The reviewee prepares a file containing the following and submits it to the chair of the developmental review committee:
   
   1. current curriculum vitae,
   2. list of courses taught and student teaching evaluations for those courses (faculty may exclude evaluations for one course section during the review period),
   3. materials that allow an evaluation of the reviewee’s pedagogical approach, such as course syllabi, assignments, and exams,
   4. statement of teaching philosophy, which includes responses to any issues revealed in teaching evaluations, new strategies implemented as a result of attendance at teaching workshops and/or mini-courses, and future plans,
   5. narrative overview of the reviewee’s scholarly and/or creative work and of their future plans, explaining the place of the work in the reviewee’s discipline. The statement should be accessible to nonspecialists such as faculty members in other disciplines. The statement should also explain how the reviewee’s ongoing work differs from that pursued for their dissertation.
   6. statement of service contributions to the College and to the reviewee’s profession,
   7. copies of all publications, papers, abstracts, and performance and exhibit programs,
   8. any other material that the reviewee deems relevant, such as (i) evaluations of teaching by peers, former students, or alumni; (ii) peer reviews of the reviewee’s work; (iii) research grants and research proposals; (iv) work in progress; (v) letters from chairs of interdisciplinary programs in which the reviewee has participated.
3. The chair of the developmental review committee convenes a meeting of the committee to assess the materials in the file, to make a judgment about whether the faculty member under review is making satisfactory progress toward tenure, and to consider what advice to offer the reviewee. At each developmental review, the committee also makes a recommendation to the dean about whether the reviewee should be reappointed for another 3-year term. After reviewing the materials in the file, the committee may meet with the reviewee as part of the process. The developmental review committee then prepares a detailed written report for the associate dean, assessing the quality of the faculty member’s teaching, scholarly and/or creative activity, and service, and outlining the rationale for its recommendation.
4. Before the report is submitted to the associate dean, the reviewee receives a copy. The reviewee has a week to acknowledge to the chair in writing that they have read the report and to correct any factual errors it may contain. Their response and the committee’s report are then submitted to the associate dean. If the developmental review committee does not recommend reappointment, the reviewee shall be given 10 days to respond in writing to the chair, who submits the committee report and the reviewee’s letter to the associate dean.
5. The dean of the College, in consultation with the associate dean, evaluates the review materials and the report of the developmental review committee. The dean of the College writes a letter to the reviewee providing their own assessment of the reviewee’s progress and the decision whether to reappoint.

Back to Section III.A home

The president of the college is responsible for tenure decisions, and the decision is based on the recommendations of the dean of the college, the Committee on Promotion and Tenure, and the department of the tenure candidate. At each level, a recommendation is based on the candidate’s accomplishments in teaching, scholarship, and/or creative activity, and on the candidate’s service to the college and their profession. The sequence of steps in the evaluation is as follows:

1. The associate dean, in consultation with the department chair and the faculty member under review, solicits external reviews of the candidate’s scholarly and/or creative activity. The reviewers are recognized experts in the candidate’s discipline.
   
   1. The identities of the reviewers and the contents of their letters are confidential with respect to the candidate, unless the College is compelled by legal action to breach confidentiality.
   2. Normally, the tenure file will contain no fewer than four external reviews. For a candidate who engages in multi-disciplinary work, it may be appropriate to have more than four reviewers. When possible, there should be at least one external reviewer from peer or aspirant liberal arts colleges. Normally, external reviewers will be tenured faculty members at other institutions.
   3. In the letter of solicitation for external reviewers, the associate dean will provide guidance for the external reviewers by explaining in detail the College’s criteria for evaluating scholarship and creative work.
   4. The following individuals should not normally be chosen to serve as reviewers: (i) the candidate’s doctoral and postdoctoral mentors; (ii) individuals who have served as coauthors, collaborators, or co-investigators on scholarly or artistic projects; and (iii) individuals with whom the candidate has had an intimate personal relationship.
2. The candidate prepares a file containing the following:
   1. current curriculum vitae,
   2. list of all courses taught since hiring, their enrollments, and student teaching evaluations for those courses (faculty may exclude evaluations for one course section from each of the two developmental review periods),
   3. materials that allow an evaluation of the candidate’s pedagogical approach, such as course syllabi, assignments and exams,
   4. statement of teaching philosophy, which includes responses to any issues revealed in teaching evaluations, new strategies implemented as a result of attendance at teaching workshops and/or mini-courses, and future plans,
   5. description of advising activity,
   6. statement of scholarship and/or creative activity that provides an overview of the candidate’s past scholarly and/or creative work, and of their future plans. The overview should also explain the place of the work in the candidate’s discipline. The statement should be accessible to non-specialists such as faculty members in other disciplines, the dean, and the president. It should also explain how their ongoing work differs from that pursued for their dissertation.
   7. statement of service contributions to the College and to the candidate’s profession,
   8. copies of all publications, papers, abstracts, and performance and exhibit programs, including the candidate’s dissertation,
   9. other material that may be relevant to an assessment of teaching and scholarship and/or creative activity, such as (i) evaluations of teaching by peers, former students, or alumni; (ii) published reviews of the candidate’s work; (iii) research grants and research proposals that have been peer-reviewed; (iv) works in progress; (v) letters from chairs of interdisciplinary programs in which the candidate has participated.
3. The department chair or surrogate convenes a meeting of the tenured members of the department (who are not on leave) to assess the candidate’s teaching, scholarship and/or creative activity, and service. The assessment is based on the candidate’s review file and the external review letters. The department chair or surrogate writes a letter that will be submitted to the dean. The letter must include a summary of the departmental discussion and a specific recommendation about tenure.
   
   1. All tenured department members are asked to affirm, by their signature, that they have read the letter and that it accurately summarizes the departmental discussion. For this purpose, emeriti faculty are not considered to be tenured department members. If a tenured department member believes that the letter does not accurately summarize the department discussion, they must submit an individual letter. Any such letters become part of the candidate’s file and are seen by the candidate, who is entitled to submit a response.
   2. The candidate has an opportunity to read the department letter and within one week must acknowledge in writing the receipt of the letter. This acknowledgement is also an opportunity for the candidate to correct any factual errors contained in the letter. This response becomes a part of the review file.
4. The associate dean prepares a full tenure review file that includes the following.
   1. the candidate’s review file
   2. the department recommendation letter and any response from the candidate
   3. past developmental reviews of the candidate
   4. the external review letters

   No other material, such as unsolicited letters from interested individuals, may be added to the file at this point.

5. The Committee on Promotion and Tenure (CPT) makes a tenure recommendation to the dean, based exclusively on the material in the tenure review file. The dean of the College is present, as a non-voting observer, for the deliberations of the CPT.
   
   1. The assessment of a candidate’s scholarly and/or creative activity is based on work that has been published, submitted for publication, displayed, and/or performed at the time the file is submitted to the dean. However, a candidate may add relevant material to the file that becomes available after this date, including letters of acceptance from publishers, published critical reviews of exhibitions or performances, reviews of submitted articles, books, or grant proposals, and notifications of honors and awards.
   2. At its discretion, the CPT may ask the department chair or surrogate to meet with the committee to answer clarifying questions. If the recommendation of the CPT differs from that of the department, the CPT letter will clearly explain the rationale for the differing recommendation, and a copy of this letter will be sent to the department chair or surrogate.
   3. The candidate will receive a copy of the CPT letter to the dean at the same time as the dean.
6. The dean of the College makes a tenure recommendation to the President, based on the full tenure review file and the recommendation of the CPT.
   
   1. If the recommendation of the dean differs from the recommendation of the CPT, the dean will discuss with the CPT the rationale for the differing recommendation, and this discussion will occur prior to submitting the letter to the president.
   2. The candidate and the members of the CPT will receive a copy of the dean’s letter to the president.
   3. If the dean recommends against tenure, the candidate has 10 days from the receipt of the dean’s letter to submit a written request to the dean for a grievance procedure. Any grievance must be based on (a) discrimination, (b) specific violations of academic freedom, or (c) the failure of the review process to follow the stated procedures. The dean will refer the grievance to a committee composed of three recent past chairs of the CPT who are not directly involved in the case. The Grievance Committee will assess the merits of the grievance and submit a recommendation to the president, and will provide copies of their report to the dean and to the members of the CPT.

Back to Section III.A home

In its assessment of a candidate’s case for tenure, the CPT considers three areas: teaching, scholarship and/or creative work, and service. To receive a recommendation in favor of tenure, a candidate must demonstrate excellence in teaching, excellence in scholarly and/or creative activity, and a moderate amount of quality service to the College and the professional community. Excellence in both teaching and scholarship and/or creative activity is necessary for a recommendation in favor of tenure; a superlative performance in one area cannot substitute for lack of excellence in the other area.

A. Excellence in Teaching

The CPT assessment of a candidate’s teaching is based on several types of material in the tenure review file.

• Student teaching evaluations, both numerical scores on the standard questions and written comments.
• Course materials such as syllabi, assignments, and exams.
• The candidate’s statement of teaching philosophy and practice.
• Peer evaluations of teaching.
• Other information concerning: (i) course development, (ii) contributions to the general education program, (iii) interdisciplinary teaching, (iv) participation in overseas and other off- campus programs, (v) student-designed majors, (vi) collaborative research or creative projects with students, and (vii) departmental honors projects.

In reviewing this material to assess teaching excellence, the CPT will use the following guiding principles. Excellent teachers:

1. Foster classroom, laboratory, field, and studio environments that are conducive to student engagement and learning.
2. Promote student proficiencies in critical inquiry, including disciplinary and interdisciplinary argumentation, analysis, research, writing, creative activity.
3. Consider and respond collaboratively to student concerns and needs that impact their academic success.
4. Actively promote equity and inclusion through pedagogy, curricular choices, and/or mentorship.
5. Engage in reflective practices, pedagogical and curricular experimentation, and ongoing professional development.

Although classroom performance is the primary basis for the assessment of a candidate’s teaching, there are a number of other questions concerning teaching beyond the classroom.

1. What have been the candidate’s contributions as a sponsor of independent study work, practica, senior thesis work, or independent research with students?
2. If the candidate led an overseas or off-campus program during the review period, did participation in the program affect the candidate’s scholarship and/or creative activity, or service?
3. What have been the candidate’s contributions as a major or pre-major academic advisor?
4. If the candidate engaged in non-departmental teaching, such as teaching interdisciplinary courses or in the general education program, what was the candidate’s contribution?
5. If a candidate was hired with explicit responsibilities for program development, what was the candidate’s contribution? Did this work affect the candidate’s scholarship and/or creative activity, or service?

    B. Excellence in Scholarship and/or Creative Activity

The CPT’s assessment of a candidate’s scholarship and/or creative activity is based on the following material in the tenure review file:

• The external review letters are the most important source of information about the candidate’s scholarship and/or creative activity. The associate dean’s letter soliciting review letters of scholarship and/or creative activity encourages reviewers to:
  
  1. Assess the quality and significance of the candidate’s work, and the importance of its contribution to the candidate’s discipline
  2. Compare the candidate’s work to that of their cohort
  3. Assess whether the candidate’s work suggests a trajectory of continued accomplishment.
     
     In addition, external reviewers are asked to:
      
  4. Assess the quality and significance of the outlets (journal articles, monographs, conference proceedings, book chapters, exhibition or performance venues, etc.) in which the candidate’s work has appeared
  5. Describe the nature of the peer review process those outlets employ
  6. Explain any disciplinary conventions that might differ from those in other fields.

• The candidate’s statement of scholarship and/or creative activity
• Publications and presentations
  1. 1. Publications of work initiated before the candidate’s time of hire are considered as part of their scholarly output, but publications of work initiated since a candidate’s hire are an essential demonstration of their ability to balance this work with teaching and performing College service.
     2. Peer-reviewed publications receive the largest weight in the CPT assessment. They include (i) articles that are published in peer-reviewed professional journals, and (ii) books published by presses that employ peer review.
     3. Other publications that receive smaller weights in the CPT assessment include (i) book chapters, (ii) articles in non-refereed journals that are recognized by peers as high-quality journals, (iii) book reviews.
     4. Presentations at conferences are useful to demonstrate the status of work in progress and, when such contributions are invited, to demonstrate a candidate’s standing in their field.

• Creative activity, including (a) exhibits in juried shows and (b) performances for public audiences.

The CPT will use this material to answer the following questions about the candidate’s scholarship and/or creative activity:

1.  What is the candidate’s contribution to his or her discipline?
2. Has the candidate’s scholarship and/or creative activity moved beyond the dissertation to demonstrate the candidate’s ability to initiate new work at Lewis & Clark College?
3. In addition to completed and ongoing scholarly and/or creative work, is the candidate involved in other professional activities such as editorial service or review work that provides evidence that scholarly peers have high regard for the candidate’s work?
4. Are there particular challenges that must be overcome in engaging in scholarly and/or creative activity in this field at a liberal arts institution such as Lewis & Clark College?
5.  Has the candidate received grants or fellowships that require an assessment of the contribution of the candidate’s work?
6.  Is there a clear trajectory of accomplishment that demonstrates a strong likelihood of continuing into the future?

C. Institutional and Professional Service

The CPT’s assessment of a candidate’s service activity is based on the candidate’s statement regarding institutional and professional service. The candidate lists his or her contributions, including active service on committees, review assignments for scholarly outlets such as journals and books, and organizing efforts for professional conferences. To meet the standard of a moderate amount of college service, the candidate will perform normal service in his or her department and take on one or two college committee assignments. For example, college service could include service on departmental committees, search committees, or work with student organizations. In evaluating service activity, the CPT will rely on the department letter to assess the quality of the candidate’s contributions.

Back to Section III.A home

VI. PROCEDURES FOR PROMOTION REVIEWS

The president of the College is responsible for promotion decisions, and the decision is based on the recommendations of the dean of the college, the Committee on Promotion and Tenure, and the department of the promotion candidate. At each level, a recommendation is based on the candidate’s accomplishments in teaching, scholarship and/or creative activity, and service to the college and the profession. The sequence of steps in the evaluation is as follows.

1. The associate dean, in consultation with the department chair (or surrogate) and the faculty member under review, solicits external reviews of the candidate’s scholarship, creative activity, and/or professional contributions. The reviewers will be experts in the candidate’s area(s) of scholarship and/or creative activity, and may include no more than one expert outside of academia.
   
   1. The identities of the reviewers and the contents of their letters are confidential with respect to the candidate, unless the College is compelled by legal action to breach confidentiality.
   2. Normally, the promotion file will contain at least three external reviews.  In some cases it may be appropriate to have more than three reviewers. When possible, there should be at least one external reviewer from peer or aspirant liberal arts colleges. Normally, external reviewers will be full professors at other institutions.
   3. In the letter of solicitation for external reviewers, the associate dean will provide guidance for the external reviewers by explaining in detail the College’s criteria for evaluating scholarship, creative activity, and/or professional contributions.
   4. The following individuals should not normally be chosen to serve as reviewers: (i) the candidate’s doctoral and postdoctoral mentors, (ii) individuals who have served as coauthors, collaborators, or co-investigators on research or artistic projects, and (iii) individuals with whom the candidate has had an intimate personal relationship.
2. The candidate prepares a file containing the following material. In all cases, materials to be included should date from the time tenure was awarded.
   
   1. current curriculum vitae,
   2. a statement of teaching philosophy that includes
      1. a list of all courses taught in the past six years or since tenure, whichever is less, and their enrollments,
      2. responses to any issues revealed in teaching evaluations,
      3. description and evaluation of new pedagogical approaches or developments, and
      4. future plans,
   3. student teaching evaluations from the past six years or since tenure, whichever is less. Faculty may exclude evaluations for one course section from each triennial review period, constituting no more than two excluded courses,
   4. materials from the past six years or since tenure that allow an evaluation of the candidate’s pedagogical approach, such as course syllabi, assignments and exams,
   5. a statement of scholarship and/or creative activity that provides an overview of the candidate’s professional trajectory since achieving tenure and future plans. The statement should be accessible to non-specialists such as faculty members in other disciplines, the dean, and the president,
   6. copies of publicly shared and reviewed work since tenure related to the candidate’s expertise,
   7. a statement of service that includes
      
      1. reflection on the role service (broadly defined) has played in their professional development since tenure,
      2. contributions made to the College, to the life of the College, to the candidate’s profession and/or to the community at large. Candidates may indicate whether the service was elected, appointed or voluntary, and should indicate whether the service was compensated (e.g. course release or stipend),
      3. a count of all advisees for the previous six years, indicating pre-major, major, and other advisees,
   8. other material that may be relevant to an assessment of teaching professional development, and service, such as (i) evaluations of teaching by peers, former students, or alumni, (ii) published reviews of the candidate’s work, (iii) research grants and research proposals that have been peer-reviewed, (iv) works in progress, and (v) letters from chairs of interdisciplinary programs in which the candidate has participated.
3. The department chair (or surrogate) convenes a meeting of the tenured members of the department (who are not on leave) to assess the candidate’s teaching, scholarship and/or creative activity, and service since the time of tenure. The assessment is based on the candidate’s review file and on the external review letters. The department chair or surrogate submits to the dean a letter that includes a summary of the departmental discussion and a specific recommendation about promotion.
   
   1. All tenured department members are asked to affirm, by their signature, that they have read the letter and that it accurately summarizes the departmental discussion. For this purpose, emeriti faculty are not considered to be tenured department members. If a tenured department member believes that the letter does not accurately summarize the department discussion, he or she must submit an individual letter. Any such letters become part of the candidate’s file and are seen by the candidate, who is entitled to submit a response.
   2. The candidate has an opportunity to read the department letter and within one week will acknowledge in writing the receipt of the letter. This acknowledgement is also an opportunity for the candidate to correct any factual errors contained in the letter. This response becomes a part of the review file.
4. The associate dean prepares a full promotion review file that includes only the following. No other material, such as unsolicited letters from interested individuals, may be added to the file at this point.
   
   1. The candidate’s review file
   2. The external review letters
   3. The department recommendation letter and any response from the candidate
   4. Tenure letters from the CPT, dean, and president
5. The Committee on Promotion and Tenure makes a promotion recommendation to the dean, based exclusively on the material in the promotion review file. The dean of the College is present, as a non-voting observer, for the deliberations of the CPT.
   
   1. The assessment of a candidate’s scholarly and/or creative activity is based on work that has been published, submitted for publication, otherwise publicly shared and critically reviewed, displayed, and/or performed at the time the file is submitted to the dean. However, a candidate may add relevant material to the file that becomes available after this date, including letters of acceptance from publishers, published critical reviews of exhibitions or performances, reviews of submitted articles, books, or grant proposals, and notifications of honors and awards.
   2. At its discretion, the CPT may ask the department chair or surrogate to meet with the committee to answer clarifying questions.
   3. If the recommendation of the CPT differs from the recommendation of the department, the CPT letter will clearly explain the rationale for the differing recommendation, and a copy of this letter will be sent to the department chair or surrogate.
   4. The candidate will receive a copy of the CPT letter to the dean at the same time as the dean.
6. The dean of the College makes a promotion recommendation to the president, based on the full promotion review file and the recommendation of the CPT.
   1. If the recommendation of the dean differs from the recommendation of the CPT, the dean will discuss with the CPT the rationale for the differing recommendation, and this discussion will occur prior to submitting the letter to the president.
   2. The candidate and the members of the CPT will receive a copy of dean’s letter to the president.
   3. If the dean recommends against promotion, the candidate has 10 days from the receipt of the dean’s letter to submit a written request to the dean for a grievance procedure. Any grievance must be based on (a) discrimination, (b) specific violations of academic freedom, or (c) the failure of the review process to follow the stated procedures. The dean will refer the grievance to a committee composed of three recent past chairs of the CPT who are not directly involved in the case. The Grievance Committee will assess the merits of the grievance and submit a recommendation to the president and will provide copies of their report to the dean and to the members of the CPT.

VII. CPT ASSESSMENT OF PROMOTION FILES

In its assessment of a candidate’s case for promotion, the CPT considers the same three areas as it considers in tenure reviews: teaching, scholarship and/or creative work, and service. Excellence in teaching is essential to a recommendation in favor of promotion. Candidates for promotion are also expected to continue a trajectory of substantive scholarly and/or creative work and substantive service. The College acknowledges that patterns of strength across service and scholarly and/or creative work can vary both between candidates and over time for a single candidate; however, candidates must demonstrate excellence in at least one of the two. Assessment criteria remain the same regardless of the time of application.

1. Teaching
   A candidate for promotion must demonstrate excellence in teaching during the post-tenure period. For details of how the CPT assesses excellence in teaching, refer to section III.A.5.A.
   
   
2. Scholarship and/or Creative Activity
   A candidate for promotion must demonstrate a record of accomplishment in scholarly and/or creative activity during the post-tenure period that indicates a strong likelihood of continuing into the future. In addition to the scholarly and/or creative activities outlined in section III.A.5.B, the CPT also recognizes and values taking risks and pursuing new areas of scholarly and/or creative activity post-tenure. Professional activities that are publicly shared, subject to critical or peer review, and facilitate the exchange of discipline-based ideas within a scholarly or public community are included within scholarly and/or creative activity. This includes, but is not limited to: interdisciplinary collaboration, activity related to the development of pedagogy, undergraduate involvement in research, activities that advance equity and inclusion, the communication and/or collaboration of scholarly and/or creative activity beyond academia (e.g., governmental agencies, nonprofit agencies, the professional and/or creative arts community), editing professional publications and/or creative collections, contributing to invited publications, activities conducted with the support of grants earned, and the pursuit of grants through a competitive or peer-reviewed process. These professional activities represent a broadening of recognized scholarly and/or creative activities after post tenure, not an additional requirement for promotion.
   
   
3. College and Professional Service
   Tenured professors serve an essential role in the operation and vision of the college. The CPT’s assessment of a candidate’s post-tenure service activity is based on the candidate’s statement regarding their institutional and professional service and on an assessment of the quality and quantity of the candidate’s service contained in the departmental letter. These service categories represent a broadening of recognized service activities post-tenure, not an additional requirement for promotion.
   1. “Service contributions to the College” would include official roles such as chairing departments or programs; serving on standing or ad-hoc committees, steering committees, search committees, developmental review committees, scholarship selection committees, Faculty Council, task forces, and the like; serving as Faculty Clerk or Secretary; directing symposia; developing and leading off-campus programs; academic advising; and similar formal service. Such service contributions are of particular importance to the operation of the College.
   2. “Contributions to the life of the College” would include more unofficial roles such as mentoring students or other faculty, advising a student-led organization, regularly attending campus events (cultural, athletic, academic), and other community-building activities.
   3. “Contributions to the candidate’s profession” would include such activities as organizing a conference, writing promotion letters, editing or reviewing for a scholarly journal, or serving in an official capacity in a professional organization.
   4. “Contributions to the community at large” would include such things as public relations activities, volunteer work, and other situations in which candidates apply their professional skills outside of academic communities.

   Some service contributions may overlap significantly with scholarship and candidates may choose to categorize them as such. Candidates may note whether the service was elected, appointed, or voluntary, and should indicate whether the service was accompanied by a course release or other form of compensation.

   Service that demonstrates leadership and initiative, and service that promotes equity and inclusion, are especially valued. While recognizing that the quality and quantity of service may fluctuate over time, the CPT values indications that significant service will continue into the future.

Back to Section III.A home

Schedule

All teaching at Lewis & Clark is subject to review. For visitors and adjuncts teaching at the College for the first time, that review should normally take place after the first term or year of teaching, whichever is latest. Administrators or other College employees who teach occasionally should follow this same cycle.

The procedure described below should be followed by those who want to be considered for future teaching at the College or who might like a future reference. For adjuncts or visitors who elect to not participate in this review process, the department chair, program director or surrogate should send the Director of Operations and Finance a brief letter (normally no more than 500 words) assessing the quality of the teaching, especially commenting on any problems. Please include the statistical summary sheet from the relevant course or courses.

In circumstances when a contract renewal is under consideration for the following year, this review may take place after only one semester of teaching at the college, and will inform the decision to rehire. In circumstances in which the instructor begins teaching at the college during the spring semester, however, a new contract will be issued only after the completion of the review process in May.

Reviews will take place after the first semester or year of teaching, and then after every two subsequent years in which any teaching takes place. So for instance, if a faculty member teaches one course every spring, they should expect a review after the first spring, and again two years later. At a minimum, however, intermittent visitors should expect to be reviewed every five calendar years.

Procedure

The faculty member prepares a file consisting of all course evaluations for the review period, the statistical summary sheet, a c.v., syllabi, and a brief cover letter (less than 500 words). This letter should also contain the faculty member’s own evaluation of the course or courses taught at Lewis & Clark. Faculty members may also want to respond to and contextualize student comments in this letter. Such files should be completed within two weeks of the receipt of evaluations. (Please consult the chairs’ or academic calendar for suggested dates for all the following steps.)

Those teaching in two programs (e.g. the CORE and a regular department) should report to both program chairs or directors, supplying relevant evaluations for each. Faculty members may choose to use the same letter for both purposes as long as it addresses both sets of courses.

The file is presented to the relevant department chair, program director or surrogate, who completes a brief letter of evaluation (less than 500 words), to be completed within two weeks of receipt of the file. A copy of the letter is shared with the faculty member, who may respond in writing if he or she wishes. (The faculty member has a week for any such response.)

The entire file, along with the summary sheet from the evaluations (omitting the evaluations themselves), is initially sent to the Director of Operations and Finance. After review, it is forwarded to the office of the dean of the college, where it will remain on file. (Evaluations themselves should be retained by the faculty member, and should be available for future consultation if needed.) This file may be used to inform decisions about future teaching, and/or letters of reference when requested by the faculty member. Files should arrive at the dean’s office as soon as is practicable, but no later than five weeks after the receipt of the evaluations.

In circumstances when the review is taking place during the spring term (as described above), the faculty member’s letter may reflect on current teaching, as well as that of the preceding term. The chair’s letter should include an assessment of the ongoing spring teaching as well. This assessment should be informed by a class visit and/or mid-semester student evaluations, at the discretion of the chair.

Criteria

Lecturers are evaluated on the basis of their teaching and the other responsibilities outlined in their letter of appointment or subsequent modification of those responsibilities.

A standard of excellence in teaching is required for renewal of contract. A standard of excellence in administrative and other contractual obligations is required for renewal of contract.

Lecturers are expected to maintain an active professional life in their area of teaching competence.

Back to Section III.A home

Schedule

All teaching at Lewis & Clark is subject to review. For visitors and adjuncts teaching at the College for the first time, that review should normally take place after the first term or year of teaching, whichever is latest. Administrators or other College employees who teach occasionally should follow this same cycle.

The procedure described below should be followed by those who want to be considered for future teaching at the College or who might like a future reference. For adjuncts or visitors who elect to not participate in this review process, the department chair, program director or surrogate should send the Director of Operations and Finance a brief letter (normally no more than 500 words) assessing the quality of the teaching, especially commenting on any problems. Please include the statistical summary sheet from the relevant course or courses.

In circumstances when a contract renewal is under consideration for the following year, this review may take place after only one semester of teaching at the college, and will inform the decision to rehire. In circumstances in which the instructor begins teaching at the college during the spring semester, however, a new contract will be issued only after the completion of the review process in May.

Reviews will take place after the first semester or year of teaching, and then after every two subsequent years in which any teaching takes place. So for instance, if a faculty member teaches one course every spring, they should expect a review after the first spring, and again two years later. At a minimum, however, intermittent visitors should expect to be reviewed every five calendar years.

Procedure

The faculty member prepares a file consisting of all course evaluations for the review period, the statistical summary sheet, a c.v., syllabi, and a brief cover letter (less than 500 words). This letter should also contain the faculty member’s own evaluation of the course or courses taught at Lewis & Clark. Faculty members may also want to respond to and contextualize student comments in this letter. Such files should be completed within two weeks of the receipt of evaluations. (Please consult the chairs’ or academic calendar for suggested dates for all the following steps.)

Those teaching in two programs (e.g. the CORE and a regular department) should report to both program chairs or directors, supplying relevant evaluations for each. Faculty members may choose to use the same letter for both purposes as long as it addresses both sets of courses.

The file is presented to the relevant department chair, program director or surrogate, who completes a brief letter of evaluation (less than 500 words), to be completed within two weeks of receipt of the file. A copy of the letter is shared with the faculty member, who may respond in writing if he or she wishes. (The faculty member has a week for any such response.)

The entire file, along with the summary sheet from the evaluations (omitting the evaluations themselves), is initially sent to the Director of Operations and Finance. After review, it is forwarded to the office of the dean of the college, where it will remain on file. (Evaluations themselves should be retained by the faculty member, and should be available for future consultation if needed.) This file may be used to inform decisions about future teaching, and/or letters of reference when requested by the faculty member. Files should arrive at the dean’s office as soon as is practicable, but no later than five weeks after the receipt of the evaluations.

In circumstances when the review is taking place during the spring term (as described above), the faculty member’s letter may reflect on current teaching, as well as that of the preceding term. The chair’s letter should include an assessment of the ongoing spring teaching as well. This assessment should be informed by a class visit and/or mid-semester student evaluations, at the discretion of the chair.

Back to Section III.A home

1.  Preamble
2. Types and Schedules of Review
3.  Developmental Reviews
4.  Tenure Reviews
5. Assessment of Tenure Files 
6.  Promotion Reviews  
7.  Review Policies and Procedures for Lecturers  
8. Review Policies for Adjunct and Visiting Faculty  

Back to Section III home

Every third year each faculty member submits to the department chair or surrogate a review file consisting of a current curriculum vitae, answers to the Professional Activities Questionnaire, a review file consisting of a current curriculum vitae, answers to the Professional Activities Questionnaire, student teaching evaluations for those courses taught during the review period (faculty may exclude evaluations for one course section in each triennial review period), copies of publications or papers, and other materials referred to in the Professional Activities Questionnaire. In the event that the chair is the subject of the review, the associate dean shall appoint a tenured faculty member to fulfill the chair’s role in the review process. After reviewing these materials, the department chair or surrogate shall write a letter to the dean assessing the faculty member’s performance in the areas of teaching, scholarship or creative activity, and institutional service. A copy of the chair’s letter shall also be given to the faculty member under review, who shall have a week to add a response to the file.

Faculty have the option of submitting their files in the second year after a review.

After reviewing the files, possibly in consultation with department chairs (or surrogates) and the associate dean, and taking into account the most recent salary reviews, the dean of the College shall make recommendations to the president regarding salary. Thereafter, the dean shall inform the faculty member of the decision, including a written rationale for the decision.

The dean of the College shall review the performance of the associate dean, including relevant teaching and scholarly activities, by following the procedures for review of members of the administrative staff.

Each year, prior to review, the dean of the College shall provide the faculty with the current distribution of tenured Faculty, tenure-track Faculty and Faculty With Term salaries.

Salary increases are awarded based on two separate components.

The first component is a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) expressed as a percentage of a faculty member’s salary equal to the previous year’s rate of inflation measured by the increase in the national Consumer Price Index (CPI). The COLA adjustment is added to the faculty member’s base salary. COLA adjustments shall be the first priority of the Dean’s Office in awarding salary increases. Only when all faculty have been awarded a COLA adjustment may the Dean award adjustments based on merit.

The second component is a merit adjustment expressed as a fixed dollar amount. Each merit level (1-3) is assigned a dollar amount. The merit adjustment is added to the faculty member’s base salary. Merit adjustments are awarded at one of three levels (1-3) with the exact dollar amounts for each level to be determined annually by the Dean of the College.

Excellent teaching, excellent scholarly or creative activity, and quality service are expected of all faculty members in all reviews. Merit increases are to recognize those faculty members who exceed expectations in one or more areas of their review. A faculty member who is evaluated as clearly surpassing the expected standards of performance in teaching, scholarly or creative activities, and institutional service will be awarded the highest merit increase. Those evaluated as surpassing expected standards in some, but not all three, areas will be awarded either an intermediate or low merit increase. It is important to note that even superlative performance in scholarly, creative, or service activities will not be a substitute for excellent teaching in any review.”

In extraordinary circumstances the dean of the College may award special merit raises for truly outstanding performance or, contrariwise, in the event of clearly unmeritorious award no raise. In either of these two extraordinary cases, the faculty member will be reviewed again the following year.

Consistent with the strategic mission of the College and the well-being of the institution, the faculty strongly advocate that every year the salary pool is at least equal to the inflation rate as measured by the national Consumer Price Index. If the administration cannot meet this policy, the Dean, in consultation with the Budget Advisory Committee, should make salary decisions with an emphasis on promoting equity.

Back to Section III home

Purpose

A sabbatical leave is offered by Lewis & Clark College to its faculty for the purpose of research, writing, or other creative scholarly activity contributing to the professional development of the recipient as a teacher and a scholar.

Eligibility

Only tenure-track or tenured members of the faculty are eligible for sabbatical leaves.

Eligibility for sabbatical leaves is determined by the number of years or semesters of full-time service. A semester of full-time service is any semester in which the faculty member 1) teaches what is considered a normal full-time load minus possible course releases for College administrative duties (e.g., department chair, program director, or associate dean); 2) leads a College overseas or off-campus program; or 3) is on a sabbatical, family, or medical leave.

Nontenured Tenure-Track Faculty:

Junior faculty may apply for a one-semester sabbatical leave at full salary to be taken in the pre-tenure period, normally in the fourth year of full-time service.

Tenured Faculty:

Full-time tenured faculty with 12 semesters of full-time service since the last sabbatical are eligible for a one-semester sabbatical at full salary or a two-semester sabbatical at two-thirds normal annual salary. There is one exception to the 12-semester interval between sabbaticals. Faculty who took a junior sabbatical are eligible to apply in the year following a successful promotion and tenure decision.

Conditions

A faculty member must agree to return to Lewis & Clark College for a minimum of one year of full-time teaching following a sabbatical leave. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, if a faculty member does not return for the minimum one-year period, the faculty member must repay all salary paid to the faculty member by the College during the sabbatical leave. Both the recipient and the College shall continue to make their regular contributions to the retirement program during the period of sabbatical leave, such contributions to be based upon the sabbatical-leave salary. Time spent on sabbatical leave shall be counted as time in rank for purposes of promotion and tenure.

Application

A complete and detailed description of the objectives of the sabbatical and the methods to be used in accomplishing those objectives is required. Applicants must include a statement as to how the sabbatical relates to prior experience and future professional activity. If the applicant has had a previous sabbatical at Lewis & Clark, a copy of the report of the most recent sabbatical must accompany the application. Appropriate outside sources of funds for projects of the type proposed should be identified. If application has been made for outside funding, the applicant may submit a copy of the funding request. The application should be signed by the chair of the department to indicate his or her approval.

Basis of Approval

Applications are submitted to the associate dean for consideration by the Faculty Council in the Fall semester of each year. The Faculty Council evaluates each application and ranks those it believes worthy of funding in priority order.

The scholarly merit of the project is the primary basis of approval. Factors that will also be considered include 1) the relationship between the sabbatical and the continuing professional development of the applicant and 2) the likelihood of achieving the goals of the sabbatical.

The priority ranking of worthy applications and the rationale for those rankings are considered by the Faculty Council for approval. The number of sabbatical leaves that can be granted will depend on three variables: 1) the total cost of the leaves being sought, 2) the ability of the department to function adequately in the applicant’s absence, and 3) the total number of regular faculty members away from the campus in one academic year. In weighing this last variable, the Faculty Council will consider overseas teaching assignments and other leaves of absence as well as the sabbatical applications.

In the case of one-semester sabbaticals, the home department will be expected to cover the absence without the expenditure of adjunct funding. In the case of full-year sabbaticals, the Faculty Council will review the matter of replacement on a case-by-case basis on programmatic grounds. In the context of a five-course annual teaching load, a one-semester sabbatical is considered to be the equivalent of two courses.

Other Remuneration

The faculty member is encouraged to seek outside grants to provide additional financial support for the sabbatical. If a faculty member proposes to work for a salary during all or part of the sabbatical, this plan must be specified in the application and approved by the Faculty Council.

Since the purpose of the sabbatical is scholarly work, such employment will not normally be approved.

Reports of Results

A written report to the Faculty Council and the department chair is required the first semester back on campus. If appropriate, arrangements should be made to present the results of a sabbatical leave to the campus at large through a seminar or faculty colloquium.

Back to Section III home

Section 1. Membership

Membership in the Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences shall consist of tenured and tenure-track Faculty; Faculty With Term, Lecturers and Senior Lecturers; others teaching at least half time (according to the teaching standards for their departments); the President of the College; the Dean of the College; the Associate Dean of the College; the librarians of the Aubrey Watzek Library, half-time or more and possessing the Master of Library Science Degree; Director of Spiritual Life; the Registrar; the Vice President of Admissions and Financial Aid; the Director of Student Financial Services; the Director of Athletics and Instructors in the Department of Physical Education and Athletics possessing the Master’s Degree; the Directors of the Writing Center and the Symbolic and Quantitative Reasoning Center; and Faculty Emeriti.

Section 2. Voting Rights

For purposes of Faculty business and elections, voting rights shall reside with tenured Faculty, tenure-track Faculty, and Faculty with Term. Faculty holding the rank of Lecturer or Senior Lecturer shall, upon notification to the Dean of the College, also have voting rights.

Back to Section III.D home

Section 1. The Chair

The Dean of the College is Chair of the Faculty and, with the President of the College, represents the Faculty on official and public occasions and to the Board of Trustees.

Section 2. The Clerk

1. The Clerk of the Faculty is a member of the voting Faculty and is elected by the Faculty.
2. The Clerk of the Faculty moderates all regular and special meetings of the Faculty.
3. Each spring the voting Faculty shall elect one of its members to serve a one-year term as Clerk of the Faculty. This term shall commence September 1 of the following academic year and shall continue for twelve months. Service by a Faculty member as the Clerk of the Faculty shall not preclude service by that faculty member on a Standing Committee.
4. The nominations and elections for Clerk of the Faculty shall be conducted according to the procedure established in the Bylaws for election of at-large representatives to a Standing Committee.
5. In the event that the Clerk of the Faculty is unavailable to moderate a faculty meeting, the faculty member who took second place in the election for Clerk of the Faculty will serve as Clerk Pro Tem.

Section 3. The Secretary of the Faculty

1. The Secretary of the Faculty is a member of the voting Faculty and is elected by the Faculty.
2. The Secretary of the Faculty is responsible for the minutes of the meetings of the Faculty, preserves a record of Faculty action, and acts as the Faculty’s correspondent. The Secretary of the Faculty, in cooperation with the Dean of the College, certifies the Faculty voting list, conducts all official Faculty elections, tallies the ballots, and notifies the Dean of the College of the results.
3. Each spring, the voting Faculty shall elect one of its members to serve a one-year term as Secretary of the Faculty. This term shall commence September 1 of the following academic year and shall continue for twelve months. Service by a Faculty member as the Secretary of the Faculty shall not preclude service by that faculty member on a Standing Committee.
4. The nominations and elections for Secretary of the Faculty shall be conducted according to the procedure established in the Bylaws for election of at-large representatives to a Standing Committee.
5. In the event that the Secretary of the Faculty is unavailable to record the minutes of a faculty meeting, the Dean of the College shall designate a member of the voting faculty to serve as Secretary Pro Tem.

Back to Section III.D home

Section 1. Divisions

1. The Faculty is organized into the following Divisions: Arts and Humanities; Mathematical and Natural Sciences; and Social Sciences.
2. Each division elects representatives to College committees, and one representative to the Faculty Council (see below).
3. Together with the Dean of the College, the directors of interdisciplinary programs in the College of Arts & Sciences shall form an Interdisciplinary Learning Council. The Interdisciplinary Learning Council shall be a locus of discussion about existing and new interdisciplinary programs. Ideas generated there shall be brought to departments, divisions, or the Faculty Council for further elaboration.

Section 2. The Dean and the Associate Dean

1. The Dean of the College is appointed by the President to serve as the chief academic officer of the College of Arts & Sciences. The Dean of the College is responsible for administering the curriculum and managing the faculty in collaboration with standing faculty committees, chairs of departments and programs, and the associate dean. The Dean of the College is a member of the Executive Council, attends meetings of the Board of Trustees, and represents the Faculty on official and public occasions. The Dean of the College also provides oversight for the Registrar’s Office, the Writing Center, the Math Skills Center, and the Aubrey R. Watzek Library.
2. The Associate Dean is responsible for facilitating faculty development processes, including: position requests and searches for tenure-line faculty positions; new faculty orientation and mentoring; faculty development programming; coordinating file review for developmental review, tenure and promotion, and salary reviews; soliciting applications for sabbaticals; and managing travel and research grants. As appropriate, the materials collected by the Associate Dean are forwarded to the Dean of the College, the Committee on Promotion and Tenure, or Faculty Council for deliberation.
3. The Associate Dean is appointed by the Dean of the College after considering a list of nominees forwarded by an ad hoc faculty committee. This committee seeks nominations (including self-nominations) from the faculty, ascertains that the nominees are willing to serve as Associate Dean, evaluates the qualifications of the nominees, and forwards a list of three or four top nominees to the Dean of the College.

Section 3. The Faculty Council

1. The Faculty Council advises the Dean of the College on allocation of faculty and staff positions, funds for capital projects and equipment, changes in by-laws and procedures, and other issues which affect the welfare of the College.
2. The Faculty Council shall have three elected representatives as voting members, with each division electing its representative from all ranks of its faculty. The Associate Dean and a representative of the Interdisciplinary Learning Council shall sit as permanent ex-officio members of the Faculty Council. Members of the standing committees of the CAS may be asked to participate in discussions of the Faculty Council as needed.
3. Members of the Faculty Council and the Dean of the College shall consult regularly with the Faculty and its constituencies, keep them informed of the Council’s deliberations, and provide the Faculty with timely explanations of recommendations made by the Faculty Council.

Section 4. Departments and Programs

For purposes of planning and administering the curriculum and requirements for majors, the Faculty is organized into Departments. The Dean of the College, upon consultation with the members of each Department, shall appoint one faculty member to chair each Department. Ordinarily, the Department Chairs shall serve three-year terms. The Dean of the College may also appoint various faculty members to head minors, general educational programs, interdisciplinary programs, or other curricular programs offered by the College of Arts and Sciences.

Back to Section III.D home

Section 1. Regularly Scheduled Meetings

1. Regularly scheduled meetings of the Faculty shall be held at least two times each fall and spring semester for the purpose of transacting pertinent business.
2. The schedule and agenda for regular faculty meetings are prepared and distributed by the Clerk of the Faculty after they are set by the Dean of the College, the chairs of standing committees, and the Faculty Council. The agenda shall include reports from the President, the Dean of the College, and the Standing Committee Chairs.
3. Other items to be included on the agenda requiring faculty action may be submitted by any voting member of the Faculty. Matters requiring faculty action should be in writing and in the hands of the Clerk of the Faculty at least seven days prior to the faculty meeting, and shall be circulated with the agenda to each member in the call to the meeting, which should be distributed to the faculty at least three days previous to the meeting.
4. The conduct of Faculty Meetings shall be according to the parliamentary procedures set forth in the latest version of Robert’s Rules of Order. The Dean of the College shall appoint a parliamentarian from the ranks of the voting faculty.

Section 2. Special Meetings

Special meetings may be called by the Dean of the College, or at the written request of five members of the voting Faculty, stating the purpose for which the meeting is called. Unless an emergency is declared by the Dean of the College, the call to the special meeting shall be distributed not less than three days in advance, and shall state the purpose of the special meeting. The agenda of a special meeting shall be limited to the specific purpose as stated in the call to the special meeting.

Section 3. Access to the Floor

Except as provided in Section 5 below, all members of the Faculty, voting and nonvoting, shall have access to the floor at meetings of the Faculty.

Section 4. Guests

Except as provided in Section 5 below, all members of the Lewis & Clark community—faculty from other schools within the College, students, administrators, staff—are welcome to attend faculty meetings. Access to the floor for any guests can be gained only through a member of the Faculty after his or her recognition by the Clerk.

Section 5. Executive Session

At the direction of the Clerk, or by a majority vote, the Faculty shall meet in Executive Session. Attendance at an Executive Session is limited to voting members of the Faculty.

Section 6. Quorum

A quorum shall consist of 50 percent plus one of the voting Faculty. If the calculation of the quorum results in a fractional number, the fraction shall be disregarded in setting the required quorum. Faculty on sabbatical or other official leave or excused from a particular meeting by the Dean of the College are not counted in determining the quorum.

Section 7. Important-Business Rule

Any piece of business designated as “important business” by the Clerk of the Faculty or by a majority vote of the Faculty cannot be both introduced and voted on at the same meeting. Important business can be voted on only at or after a second regular or special meeting of the Faculty.

Section 8. Rule for Extending Discussion

1. The Clerk shall attempt to end the meeting by the time stated on the agenda. Should it prove useful or even essential to continue discussion of an item during the same meeting, however, then the Clerk may allow the meeting to extend beyond the end-time stated on the agenda but shall not allow motions on business (other than adjournment) to come to a vote after the end-time stated on the agenda. The item of business then rolls over to the next faculty meeting or is discussed at a special faculty meeting.
2. If applying this rule prevents a motion to be made on business being discussed at the last faculty meeting of the academic year, then the Clerk shall ask for a motion to amend the rules so that discussion of the issue may continue as old business during the next academic year. This motion must pass by the meeting end-time stated on the agenda.

Back to Section III.D home

Section 1. Standing Committees

Standing Committees are: the Committee on Promotion and Tenure; the Committee on the Curriculum; the Committee on Enrollment and Student Experience; the Committee on the Library and Educational Technology; and the Budget Advisory Committee.

Section 2. Membership of Standing Committees

1. Faculty Members of Committees
   All members of the voting Faculty (except the President, the Dean of the College, and the Associate Dean) are eligible for service on a Standing Committee with the exception of the Committee on Promotion and Tenure, to which only tenured Faculty may be nominated and elected or appointed.
   
   No faculty member may serve on more than one Standing Committee at a given time.
   
   A term of service on the following four committees - the Committee on Promotion and Tenure; the Committee on the Curriculum; the Committee on Enrollment and Student Experience; and the Budget Advisory Committee Standing Committee - is three years. A term of service on the Committee on the Library and Educational Technology is two years. A faculty member may be elected to the same or to another Standing Committee for a second term, but after serving for two consecutive terms shall be ineligible for one year for service on any Standing Committee. Initial terms on Committees shall be staggered so that a proportionate number of the Committee members are selected each year.
   
   If a faculty member resigns or otherwise becomes unavailable for service on a Standing Committee other than the Committee on Promotion and Tenure, a special election to fill the remainder of the vacancy shall be held unless the remainder of the term of service on the committee is one semester or less, in which case, the Dean of the College shall appoint a replacement faculty member. In the case of the Committee on Promotion and Tenure, however, elected members who resign at any time shall be replaced via special election and members originally appointed by the Dean of the College shall be replaced via appointment by the Dean of the College.
2. Student Members of Standing Committees
   Student members of the Standing Committees shall be appointed annually to serve one-year terms. Student members of Standing Committees shall be nominated according to procedures established by the Associated Student Body and shall be appointed by the Dean of the College.

Section 3. Procedures for Committee Elections

Standing Committees may be comprised of both at-large and divisional representatives. A faculty member wishing to place in nomination another faculty member must obtain the consent of the nominee before such a nomination is certified. Eligible faculty may nominate themselves in writing to the Secretary. A faculty member may be a nominee for only one Committee in any given election.

1. Divisional representatives to Standing Committees shall be members of the Division they represent and shall be nominated and elected by each Division by the end of March of each year for service beginning the following academic year. Divisional representatives to Committees shall be nominated and elected by the voting Faculty members within each Division.
2.  At-large representatives to Standing Committees shall be nominated immediately following the completion of the election of the divisional representatives. Elections of at-large representatives shall occur in April of each year for service beginning the following academic year. As indicated in these Bylaws, at-large representatives to Committees may be or may not be required to be members of specified Divisions. Nominations for any at-large members of Committees may be made by any voting member of the Faculty. At-large representatives shall be elected by the voting Faculty as a whole.
   
   If there are more than two nominations for a particular Standing Committee vacancy, a primary election shall be held. If one candidate receives a majority of the votes cast in the primary election, that candidate shall be declared elected. Otherwise, a final election shall be held between the two candidates receiving the highest number of votes in the primary election.
   
   If the number of nominations for a particular Committee is equal to the number of vacancies to be filled, those faculty in nomination shall be declared elected.

Section 4. Procedures for Election of Standing Committee Chairs

Each Standing Committee shall elect its own Chair from among its voting members. All Committees shall conduct their meetings in accordance with parliamentary procedures as set forth in the latest edition of Robert’s Rules of Order. Adequate notice of meetings of any Committee shall be given to all of its members. Committee meetings may be called by the Chair or at the request of at least two Committee members. Committees other than the Committee on Promotion and Tenure shall circulate minutes in a timely fashion to voting and ex officio members of each Standing Committee, to the Department Chairs, and to the Faculty at large.

Section 5. Committee on Promotion and Tenure

1. Charge
   The Committee on Promotion and Tenure shall review all requests for tenure, promotion, or other major faculty reviews and make its recommendations to the Dean of the College in accordance with the procedures detailed in the College of Arts and Sciences Faculty Review Document.
2. Membership
   The Committee on Promotion and Tenure shall consist of six members of the tenured Faculty. Three Committee members, one from each Division, shall be elected at large by the tenured and tenure-track Faculty. Three Committee members shall be appointed by the Dean of the College. The Dean of the College shall be an ex officio, nonvoting member of the Committee.
   
   Each year, the faculty shall elect three alternate members of the Committee on Promotion and Tenure, one from each division of the College, for one-year terms. Nominees for these positions shall be chosen from among those faculty members with previous service on the Committee on Promotion and Tenure, to assure their experience of the process. When a member of the Committee on Promotion and Tenure is a departmental colleague of a candidate being reviewed for promotion or tenure, that member shall be recused from participation in discussion about and vote on that candidate’s case. The recused member shall be replaced by the alternate from that same division. In the event that two members of the Committee on Promotion and Tenure must be recused, or when an alternate is also from the same department as the candidate, alternates shall be chosen at random from among the other two. Alternates shall attend only those Committee on Promotion and Tenure meetings at which their service is required.
   
   The Dean of the College shall attempt to minimize the number of recusals that must occur in a given year, based on the anticipated schedule of promotion and tenure reviews.

Section 6. Committee on the Curriculum

1. Charge
   The Committee on the Curriculum shall have primary responsibility for the curriculum of the College of Arts and Sciences. In this regard, the Committee shall review all aspects of the educational program of the College; review and approve proposals for earned degrees to be offered and the requirements for them; review and approve proposals for the establishment or elimination of departmental, interdisciplinary, and general education programs in the College; review and approve all departmental, general educational, and interdisciplinary courses offered by the College; and formulate and review other academic policies and procedures. In addition, the Committee on the Curriculum shall consider curricular issues relating to the academic calendar. Recommendations of the Committee on the Curriculum shall be submitted to the Dean of the College. The Committee shall submit major recommendations such as changes in degrees, changes in College-wide requirements, or the establishment or elimination of departmental, interdisciplinary, and general educational programs to the voting Faculty for its approval, before recommending such proposals to the Dean of the College.
2. Membership
   The Committee on the Curriculum shall consist of seven members of the voting Faculty and two students. Three of the faculty members shall be divisional representatives, one elected from each Division. Four of the faculty members, one from each Division and also a representative of interdisciplinary studies, shall be elected at large. The Dean of the College, the Dean of Students, the Registrar, and the Director of the Aubrey Watzek Library shall be ex officio, nonvoting members. Ex officio members may designate a substitute if they are unable to attend Committee meetings.

Section 7. Committee on Enrollment and Student Experience

1. Charge
   
   The Committee on Enrollment and Student Experience shall review and inform the faculty about issues of enrollment, including recruitment and admissions, financial aid and retention. It will also consider aspects of student experience, both inside and outside of the classroom, that relate to the educational process and students’ ability to succeed at Lewis & Clark.
   
   The committee will work in partnership with the Dean of the College (or other faculty governance committees as appropriate), the Vice President of Admissions and Financial Aid, the Vice President of Student Life, and/or the President to identify and recommend policy, procedure, and co-curricular programming pertaining to enrollment and student success.
   
   The Committee on Enrollment and Student Experience shall coordinate faculty support of the College’s enrollment initiatives, and shall provide faculty representation on major enrollment committees constituted by the College. The Committee may designate a substitute to represent the faculty if no current committee member can attend.
   
   
2. Membership
   The Committee on Enrollment shall consist of five members of the voting Faculty and one student. The three divisions shall each have one representative, elected by the entire voting faculty, and two members shall be elected at large. Representatives from the Offices of Admissions and Financial Aid, First Year Experience, and College Advising shall serve as ex officio members.

Section 8. Committee on the Library and Educational Technology

1. Charge
   The Committee on the Library and Educational Technology shall consider issues relating to the acquisition, organization, and distribution of scholarly information through both traditional and electronic media. It shall also consider issues related to the use of educational technology by the College of Arts and Sciences. The Committee shall make its recommendations to the Dean of the College.
2. Membership
   The Committee on the Library and Educational Technology shall consist of four members of the voting faculty and one student. There of the faculty members shall be divisional representatives, one elected from each Division. One of the faculty members shall be elected at large. The Dean of the College, the Chief Technology Office, and the Director of the Aubrey Watzek Library shall be ex officio, nonvoting members. Ex officio members may designate a substitute if they are unable to attend Committee meetings.

Section 9. The Budget Advisory Committee

1. Charge
   The Budget Advisory Committee shall review, and inform the faculty about, budgetary policies, procedures, and trends of the College; recommend policy and procedure pertaining to the budget to the Dean of the College and the President; and, as appropriate, advise the Dean of the College and Divisional Deans on non-personnel budget expenditures in the College of Arts and Sciences.
2. Membership
   The Budget Advisory Committee shall consist of five members of the Faculty. The Dean of the College and the Vice President for Finance and Treasurer shall be ex officio non-voting members. Ex officio members may designate a substitute if they are unable to attend committee meetings. The three divisions shall each have one representative, elected by the entire voting faculty, and two members shall be elected at large.

Section 10. Other Committees

Other committees may be established for the purpose of facilitating business within the College of Arts and Sciences.

1. Committees
   These committees function as subcommittees of Standing Committees. The purpose, jurisdiction, and membership are determined annually by the Dean of the College in consultation with the Chairs of the Standing Committees. At least one member of such a Committee, usually the Chair, must be an elected member of the parent Standing Committee. These committees will continue to function until terminated or until superseded by new committees as established above.
2. Special Committees
   These committees are established by the Dean of the College as the need arises. They are appointed for a specified time period and are terminated at the end of the specified time.

Back to Section III.D home

1. Each spring, the voting Faculty shall conduct an election to provide one of two Faculty representatives to the Board of Trustees as specified in the Board bylaws. Service shall commence September 1 of the following academic year and shall continue for two years. Service as Faculty Representative to the Board of Trustees shall not preclude service by that faculty member on a Standing Committee.
   
   
2. The nominations and elections for Faculty Representatives to the Board of Trustees shall be conducted according to the procedure established in these Bylaws for election of at-large representatives to a Standing Committee.
   
   
3. The Dean of the College shall appoint members of the Faculty to serve as necessary on Institutional Committees.

Back to Section III.D home

These Bylaws shall become effective and any prior bylaws revoked upon approval by the Faculty, the President, and the Board of Trustees of Lewis & Clark College. Faculty approval shall be obtained by a two-thirds vote at a faculty meeting.

Back to Section III.D home

Proposed amendments to these Bylaws shall be submitted in writing with the agenda for a regular meeting of the Faculty and acted upon at the next regular meeting or at a special meeting called for that purpose. In the latter case, notice of the meeting shall be sent in writing to all members of the Faculty at least five days in advance. Amendments must be approved by a majority vote at a faculty meeting, and by the President.

Back to Section III.D home

1.  Article I: Faculty  
2.   Article II: Officers of the Faculty 
3.   Article III: Organization of the Faculty  
4.   Article IV: Meetings of the Faculty
5.   Article V: Committees of the Faculty 
6.   Article VI: Faculty Representatives to the Board of Trustees and to Other Institutional Bodies
7. Article VII: Ratification
8. Article VIII: Amendments

Back to Section III home

1. Promotion and Tenure Reviews and Developmental Reviews
   1.  Preamble
   2. Types and Schedules of Review
   3.  Developmental Reviews
   4.  Tenure Reviews
   5. Assessment of Tenure Files
   6.  Promotion Reviews
   7.  Review Policies and Procedures
   8. Assessment of Promotion Files
   9.  Review Policies for Adjunct and Visiting Faculty 
2.  Faculty Salary Policy
3.  Academic Leaves (Sabbatical) Policy
4.  Bylaws of the College of Arts and Sciences
   1.   Article I: Faculty
   2.   Article II: Officers of the Faculty
   3.   Article III: Organization of the Faculty
   4.   Article IV: Meetings of the Faculty
   5.   Article V: Committees of the Faculty
   6.   Article VI: Faculty Representatives to the Board of Trustees and to Other Institutional Bodies
   7. Article VII: Ratification
   8. Article VIII: Amendments

I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES

The objectives of Lewis & Clark Law School can be achieved only by the enlistment and retention of a distinguished faculty. Prospective faculty members should be, or should show promise of becoming, effective teachers, sound and creative scholars, and dedicated participants in the varied activities of legal education and the legal profession. A faculty member should possess a high degree of personal and intellectual integrity, and he or she should be dedicated to the search for truth in a climate of intellectual independence. It is expected that those who receive academic appointment shall have concern for both the intellectual and ethical growth of students.

II. INITIAL APPOINTMENT OR APPLICATION FOR TENURE

1. Appointment to a tenure-track faculty position requires a competitive search and an 80-percent vote of the voting faculty, and student representatives to the faculty, present and voting either in person or by electronic means at a regularly scheduled or duly noticed special meeting of the faculty [hereinafter “the 80% hiring rule”]; approval of the dean of the law school (the “dean”); and approval of the president of Lewis & Clark College (the “president”). Candidates for tenure-track faculty positions must have completed their professional or academic training as evidenced by a juris doctor or equivalent degree in law, or a doctorate in a related academic discipline. Ordinarily, candidates for appointment to the rank of assistant professor will be expected to have a record of successful teaching or practice in addition to their academic qualifications. Candidates for appointment to the rank of associate professor should have a record of substantial success as a teacher, scholar, practitioner, or judge. Ordinarily, candidates for appointment to the rank of professor must have demonstrated outstanding success as a teacher and as a scholar.
2. Clinical and Lawyering faculty who have received indefinite contracts as of December 31, 2024, may apply for tenure as specified in Section IV.B. Clinical faculty, Lawyering faculty, and the Library Director, who were hired before December 31, 2024, who have not yet received indefinite contracts may indicate if they wish to be considered for tenure, rather than indefinite contracts. If they opt into the tenure process, they will be subject to the promotion and tenure procedures set forth in Section IV.B. Faculty hired after December 31, 2024 may be hired as tenure-track faculty or through the indefinite contract procedures spelled out in Section IV.C, unless they are hired as instructors, visitors, lecturers, professors of practice, professors with terms, or adjuncts, as specified in part II.C immediately following.
3. The dean has the authority to appoint persons to the rank of instructor, visitor, lecturer, professor of practice, professor with term, or adjunct. Such appointment does not require compliance with the 80% hiring rule. Any individual holding an appointment as instructor, visitor, lecturer, professor of practice, professor with term, or adjunct is not eligible for appointment to tenure, tenure-track, indefinite contract, or indefinite-contract track unless they are hired through the appointments process spelled out in Section II.A (related to tenure track and tenure appointments) or Section IV.C (related to indefinite contracts).
   
   Candidates for appointment to the rank of instructor, visitor, lecturer, professor of practice, professor with term, or adjunct should have completed their professional training as evidenced by the juris doctor or equivalent degree in law, or a doctorate in a related academic discipline, and should demonstrate the promise of success in teaching and research. Appointment to the rank of adjunct professor requires a record of substantial success or promise as a practitioner, judge, or scholar.
   
   The dean may also award the title of professor emerita or emeritus to retiring faculty members of distinction. In such cases, the designation of a retiring faculty member as professor emeritus requires the approval of the dean, the president, and the Board of Trustees of Lewis & Clark College.

III. FACULTY CONTRACTS

The terms and conditions of every appointment shall be subject to the policies and procedures of Lewis & Clark Law School and any specific terms stated in an initial letter of appointment or thereafter in an annual contract or salary agreement between Lewis & Clark College, Lewis & Clark Law School, and the faculty member. Tenure-track appointments stated to be “without tenure” shall continue into the succeeding academic year unless:

1. the faculty member is notified in writing, prior to December 1, that his or her appointment will terminate at the end of the current academic year;
2. the faculty member has been previously notified in writing that his or her appointment will terminate at the end of the current academic year; or
3. the faculty member is terminated in accordance with Section II.M (Termination and Nonrenewal of Faculty Appointments).

Appointments “with tenure” or “tenure in position” may only be terminated in accordance with Section II.M (Termination and Nonrenewal of Faculty Appointments) with the additional considerations set forth in the tenure document of the Law School.

Non-tenure-track appointments shall only continue into a succeeding academic year if the faculty member is so notified by the dean.

Back to Section IV home

I. TENURE

1. As provided in Section II.D of the Institutional Faculty Handbook:
   
   “Tenure is a continuous appointment without stated term that is conferred on a faculty member after review. Tenure is a clear recognition that the candidate is a valued and productive member of the faculty as indicated by teaching effectiveness, scholarship, and service to the institution and profession. The decision reflects a comprehensive judgment about past performance and future potential based on a particular combination of strengths demonstrated by the candidate in relation to the needs of the respective school and the College. The College recognizes the importance of academic freedom and a sufficient degree of economic security, and the granting of tenure is therefore a commitment on the part of the College that the faculty member will be employed by the College, so far as its resources permit and, unless there is termination for adequate cause, until retirement or resignation.”
2. To receive tenure, a faculty member must demonstrate excellence in teaching, scholarship, and service as provided below:
   1. To receive tenure, a faculty member must demonstrate that he or she is an excellent teacher. Teaching includes classroom teaching and teaching activities outside of the classroom, such as the supervision of student papers and student advising. The evaluation of a candidate’s teaching shall be based upon peer review, student evaluations, and such other factors as the candidate or other faculty members deem appropriate to bring to the attention of the Promotion and Tenure Committee or the faculty.
   2. Excellence in Scholarship.
      Scholarship is a central component of the law school’s mission. The law school invests in scholarship because a faculty member’s scholarly works contribute to the development of legal theory and practice. Scholarship advances the law school’s public service mission by influencing, inter alia, judicial decision-making, legislative and regulatory change, policy design, and pedagogical innovation. In addition, scholarly engagement benefits classroom instruction by bringing deeper subject matter expertise and practical applications of contemporary legal problems to the classroom. As such, a tenure-track candidate must demonstrate a capacity for and a commitment to scholarship. A candidate’s scholarly output demonstrates ongoing intellectual engagement and likely future contributions to the candidate’s field.
      1. Quantity and Types of Scholarly Works
         To receive tenure, a faculty member must demonstrate excellence in scholarship. The scholarship shall be of sufficient quality and quantity as to demonstrate that the candidate has the requisite ability and commitment to remain a productive scholar throughout his or her academic life. Prior to receiving tenure, the candidate should have published, or have had accepted for publication, the equivalent of at least two articles in established law journals or peer-reviewed journals in other disciplines.
         
         The law school will consider the following publications as the equivalent of an article published in a law review or peer-reviewed journal in other disciplines, provided that the effort, quality, and quantity of research completed are comparable to an article: book chapters; book reviews; essays; monographs; symposium contributions; treatises; textbooks; and casebooks. Multiple works may be combined to amount to the work of a single law review article. Jointly authored works may also be counted, provided candidates can either identify portions of the work that they solely authored or, where contributions have been merged into an inseparable whole, demonstrate the candidate’s contribution to the entirety of the work.
         
         In the case of co-authored publications, the law school will solicit letters from co-authors estimating the nature, extent, and proportion of the candidate’s contribution to the co-authored work.
         
         In addition, the law school may consider the following works as supplements to, but not substitutes for, the publication of articles in law reviews, peer-reviewed articles, and comparable works: writings accepted for publication prior to commencement of work at the law school, grant applications; institutional white papers; legal briefs (including amicus briefs); and testimony before legislative bodies.
      2. Scholarship Review Standards
         The evaluation of a candidate’s scholarship shall be based upon both internal and external reviews. The Promotion and Tenure Committee shall arrange for works to be reviewed by peers within the Law School. In addition, the Promotion and Tenure Committee shall arrange to have the candidate’s scholarship evaluated by external reviewers selected in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section III, Procedure for Promotion and Tenure, below.
         
         To demonstrate excellence in scholarship, a candidate’s scholarship should advance the theory and practice of doctrinal law, pedagogy, lawyering, or legal research; critically analyze the implications of, justifications for, inconsistencies in, and significance of law or policy; describe emerging legal or social challenges and ways the law may address them; synthesize law, legal theory, and norms in a creative or novel fashion; and/or represent new knowledge, empirical or experimental study, or innovation.
         
         In evaluating whether scholarship satisfies the foregoing standards, the reviewers will consider the following criteria as relevant: the comprehensive nature of the work; the impact of the work on others in the field; the integration of understanding or information from other scholarly or technical disciplines; the originality of the viewpoint expressed; the national or international reputation of the research in the field; the rigor of the analysis; the significance of the subject matter; the soundness and thoroughness of the research; and the overall contribution to legal knowledge or thought.
         
         Judgments about a candidate’s scholarship are based on both the quality and quantity of scholarship and their relevance to the academic community. In evaluating the candidate’s scholarship, reviewers should take into account the candidate’s area(s) of specialization and professional goals.
   3. To receive tenure, a faculty member must demonstrate a commitment to service to the Law School, the community at large, and the profession. It is expected that each faculty member’s contributions in this area will necessarily differ and will reflect his or her special interests and talents.
3. A faculty member may receive a “tenure in position” appointment in cases where 1) the position is defined by the dean and the faculty or 2) the position is not funded through a long-term financial commitment of the law school. Tenure-in-position recognizes that the candidate is a valued and productive member of the faculty as demonstrated by their teaching, scholarship, service to the institution, and service to the profession. The position comes with all of the protections and responsibilities of academic freedom provided to all faculty members. It carries the potential ranks and privileges of assistant professor, associate professor, and professor. A faculty member who is tenured in position must receive an 80% vote either when initially hired or at a later date, consistent with Section IV.A.II.A.
   1. A faculty member with a tenure-in-position appointment shall be subject to the same promotion and tenure standards and procedures applicable to other tenure-track faculty members except for the following considerations:
      1. If the dean and the faculty member agree, the tenure consideration may be postponed beyond the time period specified in Section IV.B.I.D below.
      2. The evaluation of the faculty member’s teaching shall include both teaching activities appropriate to the position and the requisite administrative functions of the position.
   2. The letter or communication notifying the faculty member of the tenure-in-position appointment shall state the requirements and responsibilities of the position, including any administrative or fundraising requirements. Effective January 1, 2025, the letter must state that the tenure-in-position status is based on financial reasons.
   3. A faculty member who is tenured in position shall be accorded the same rights and privileges as other tenured faculty members, and their position is subject to the provisions of the Faculty Handbook governing termination of tenured faculty in Section II.M (Termination and Nonrenewal of Faculty Appointments). For purposes of “Termination of Employment Due to Discontinuation of Program or Department Termination,” the closing of a particular law school clinic because of the loss of outside funding for that clinic shall constitute “discontinuance of a program.”
   4. The dean may convert a faculty member’s tenure-in-position status to tenure status:
      1. When a faculty-approved budget demonstrates there are sufficient resources to provide long-term financial support for the faculty member’s position; or
      2. When the voting faculty otherwise agree to remove the in-position condition for faculty members who are tenured-in-position for defined reasons.
4. The annual contract or salary agreement of each faculty member shall state whether the appointment is “with tenure” (including “tenure in position”), “without tenure,” or “not on tenure track.” A faculty member appointed to the rank of assistant professor under an initial appointment specified to be without tenure shall be considered for tenure during his or her fifth year of full-time service to the Law School, or in the option of the Promotion and Tenure Committee, during his or her sixth year. A faculty member appointed to the rank of associate professor or professor under an initial appointment specified to be without tenure shall be considered for tenure during his or her fourth year of full-time service to the Law School or at the option of the Promotion and Tenure Committee during his or her fifth year. A faculty member may be considered for tenure at an earlier time than specified in these principles only if specified in the faculty member’s initial letter of appointment or when approved in writing by the dean and the Promotion and Tenure Committee. Except as provided in paragraphs C and E of this section, a tenure decision may not be postponed beyond the time periods specified above.
5. Any formal leave of absence granted to a faculty member for reasons of illness, disability, pregnancy, childbirth, parental, or other family needs shall at the option of the faculty member be excluded from the candidate’s tenure review period. Other approved leaves may extend the tenure review period only with the prior written approval of the dean.
   
   If tenure is denied, or if the faculty member elects not to be considered for tenure within the time periods specified in paragraph D above, the dean shall notify the faculty member that his or her appointment will terminate at the end of the succeeding academic year.

II. PROMOTION

1. Promotion to the rank of associate professor requires a record of excellence in teaching, a demonstration of scholarly ability, and a commitment to service to the Law School, the community at large, and the legal profession. Teaching will be evaluated by both peer review and student evaluations. Scholarship will be evaluated by peer review. While there may be varying ways of fulfilling the scholarship requirement, it is ordinarily expected that a faculty member will have published, or have had accepted for publication, the equivalent of at least one article in an established law journal before his or her promotion to associate professor.
2. Promotion to the rank of professor requires a continuing record of excellence in teaching as evaluated by peers and student evaluations. Promotion to the rank of professor also requires outstanding success as a scholar as evidenced by scholarly pursuits beyond those required for associate professors and in addition to those required for tenure. Ordinarily it is expected that a candidate for promotion to the rank of professor will have published, or have accepted for publication, the equivalent of at least one article in an established law journal in addition to the articles required for tenure. Candidates for promotion to the rank of professor must also demonstrate a continuing commitment to service to the Law School, the community at large, and the legal profession.
3. Unless otherwise specified in the initial letter of appointment, a faculty member appointed as an assistant professor shall ordinarily be considered for promotion to associate professor during his or her third year of full-time service to the Law School. Unless otherwise specified in the initial letter of appointment, a faculty member shall be considered for promotion to professor after serving as an associate professor for at least three years. While a faculty member may upon rare occasions receive an initial appointment as a professor without tenure, in no event shall a faculty member initially hired as an assistant or associate professor be promoted to professor before he or she receives tenure. A faculty member may not be promoted and tenured in the same academic year.

III. PROCEDURE FOR PROMOTION AND TENURE

1. The Dean shall appoint the Associate Dean for Faculty Development to chair a Promotion and Tenure Committee, consisting of the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and additional faculty as appointed by the Dean. It shall be the role of the committee to communicate with any faculty members eligible for promotion or tenure and to obtain from them a promotion or tenure file containing the evidence necessary to support a decision for promotion or tenure.
   
   1. A faculty member with an indefinite contract has no obligation to seek tenure. Faculty who have received indefinite contracts under Section IV.C and who choose to seek tenure shall notify the Associate Dean of Faculty Development of their intent to be considered for tenure no later than May 15 of the academic year preceding the year in which they wish to have their promotion or tenure application evaluated. Once a faculty member submits the notification, the decision to opt into the tenure process is irrevocable.
   2. A faculty member who is eligible for an indefinite contract has no obligation to seek tenure. Faculty members who are eligible for, but have yet to receive, indefinite contracts under Section IV.C and who choose to seek tenure shall notify the Associate Dean of Faculty Development of their intent to be considered for tenure no later than May 15 of the academic year preceding the year in which they wish to have their promotion or tenure application evaluated. The Associate Dean of Faculty Development has discretion to grant a reasonable time extension for a faculty member who is moving onto the tenure track to complete the tenure requirements. Once a faculty member submits the notification, the decision to opt into the tenure process is irrevocable.
   3. For any faculty member who has yet to receive tenure or an indefinite contract as of December 31, 2024, the candidate’s file shall include a tenure statement drafted by the candidate, a current curriculum vitae, relevant teaching evaluations, scholarly works, and any other information considered relevant by the candidate. Candidates shall also submit the names of suggested external scholarship reviewers to the committee. The committee shall be responsible for summarizing student evaluations of teaching effectiveness and for arranging peer review of teaching effectiveness and of scholarship.
   4. For any faculty member who has received an indefinite contract as of December 31, 2024, the candidate’s file shall include a tenure statement drafted by the candidate, a current curriculum vitae, and the candidate’s scholarly works. Candidates shall also submit the names of suggested external scholarship reviewers to the committee. The committee shall be responsible for arranging peer review of the candidate’s scholarship.
   5. For tenure considerations, the committee shall arrange to have the candidate’s work reviewed by at least two external reviewers for faculty who were voting members of the faculty as of December 31, 2024, and by at least three external reviewers for faculty who were not voting members of the faculty as of December 31, 2024. The external reviewers shall be selected after consultation with the Associate Dean of Faculty Development, the candidate, other faculty members, and an expert in the candidate’s field of interest, if any. The committee will seek to obtain at least one reviewer from the candidate’s suggested list of reviewers and at least one reviewer who is not from the candidate’s list. The candidate may solicit additional internal or external evaluations beyond those requested by the committee.
2. The contents of the candidate’s promotion or tenure file including any written evaluations by internal or external reviewers shall be open to the candidate unless the candidate agrees in writing that any particular evaluation shall be confidential. The candidate shall be entitled to respond to any evaluations of teaching, scholarship, or service. The committee shall communicate the results of the reviews of teaching and scholarship along with the candidate’s responses, if any, to the faculty.
3. The voting members of the faculty of the Law School who are superior in academic rank to the person under consideration (or, in tenure cases, tenured members of the faculty and members of the faculty with indefinite contracts) shall decide by majority vote of those present and voting whether to recommend the candidate’s promotion or tenure to the dean. In making this decision, the faculty members shall take into consideration the qualifications for promotion and tenure set forth in these principles, the information contained in the candidate’s promotion or tenure file, the information presented by the Promotion and Tenure Committee, and any other relevant information presented by the candidate or other members of the faculty. The faculty recommendation shall be forwarded to the dean, together with the reasons for, and the results of, the vote.
4. The dean shall forward the faculty recommendation for promotion or tenure, with reasons, along with his or her evaluation of the recommendation, and if different, with his or her own recommendation to the president, who shall make the final decision.
   
   If tenure or promotion is granted, the president shall notify the dean and the candidate in writing. A positive promotion or tenure decision shall be effective as of the beginning of the academic year following the positive decision. If tenure or promotion is denied, the president shall notify the candidate and the dean in writing. In the case of a negative tenure decision for any candidate who did not have an indefinite contract by December 31, 2024, the dean shall notify the faculty member that their appointment will terminate at the end of the succeeding academic year. In the case of a negative tenure decision for any candidate who had an indefinite contract as of December 31, 2024, the dean shall notify the faculty member of the denial and indicate that the faculty member cannot reapply for tenure. A negative tenure decision will not affect the indefinite contract of any faculty member who had an indefinite contract as of December 31, 2024.

Back to Section IV home

1. General Principles
   1. New Clinical and LAW faculty hires require a competitive search and the 80% hiring rule.
   2. Successful candidates will have:
      1. Full voting rights, commensurate with rank.
      2. Full access to, and responsibility for, attending faculty meetings, and participating on committees.
   3. All Clinical and LAW faculty hires will have academic titles as appropriate per appointment and promotion: Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor.
2. Hiring Process
   1. When hiring a Clinical or LAW faculty member, the dean shall appoint a Clinical and LAW Faculty Appointments Committee. The Committee will consist of an equal number of skills faculty and tenured or tenure-track faculty, as well as two students. The committee will conduct a national search, which will be completed, where feasible, during the academic year, and will provide an opportunity for all faculty members to interview candidates.
   2. A Clinical or LAW position shall be filled, whenever possible, using the process described in section B.1 above. When this is not possible, the dean, in consultation with the director of the LAW program or relevant clinic, may hire a visitor.
   3. A visitor hired pursuant to section B.2 above who thereafter wishes to be considered for a permanent appointment must participate in the subsequent national search process.
3. Review and Promotion
   1. LAW and Clinical faculty members will be evaluated using the process outlined in Section D below.
   2. Clinical faculty members will be evaluated on the requirements of their contracts, which include:
      1. Teaching,
      2. Service, and
      3. Practice.
   3. Scholarship by clinicians will be supported as appropriate, but is not required or expected.
   4. LAW faculty members will be evaluated on the requirements of their contracts, which will include:
      1. Teaching,
      2. Service, and
      3. Scholarship.
4. Evaluation Process - Clinical and LAW Faculty Review Process
   The dean shall appoint the Associate Dean of Faculty to chair a Promotion and Review Committee in each academic year in which a clinical or LAW faculty member is eligible for consideration for promotion. The Promotion and Review Committee must include clinical or LAW faculty as well as tenure track faculty, and all members shall be of sufficient seniority to be eligible to vote on the promotion of all clinical or LAW faculty under review.
   1. Year One
      1. Procedure - the clinic or LAW director assesses performance and makes a recommendation to the Dean whether to continue employment. In the event the person under review does not have a director, the Chair of the Promotion and Review Committee (in consultation with faculty and administrators who work with the person) assesses performance and makes a recommendation to the Dean whether to continue employment. The Dean reports his decision to the faculty.
      2. Substance - a determination that the person has successfully performed the duties of the position as judged according to the Evaluation Standards set forth in the Contract. There is no presumption of renewal and no presumption of non-renewal.
      3. Successful completion of this review process results in a two-year contract for the faculty member.
   2. Year Three
      1. Procedure - The committee assembles a review file with information relevant to the person’s performance of the contract responsibilities. This file or a summary of it is made available to the faculty, who may communicate their views or relevant information to the review committee. The committee assesses the performance of the person according to the contract responsibilities and presents the file to the full faculty. The voting faculty who are superior in academic rank to the person under consideration shall decide by majority vote of those present and voting whether to award a promotion.
      2. Substance – a determination that the person is successfully performing the duties of the position as judged according to the Evaluation Standards.
      3. Successful completion of this review process results in a (second) two-year contract for the faculty member and promotion to associate professor.
   3. Year Five
      1. Procedure - The committee assembles a review file with information relevant to the person’s performance of the contract responsibilities. This information should include peer assessment from those outside the Law School familiar with the person’s work. This file or a summary of it is made available to the full faculty, who may communicate their views or relevant information to the review committee. The voting faculty who either have tenure or an indefinite contract shall decide by majority vote of those present and voting whether to award an indefinite contract.
      2. Substance - a determination that the Law School will be well served by appointing this person to an indefinite appointment in light of the person’s performance of the duties of the position as judged according to the Evaluation Standards set forth in the Contract.
      3. Successful completion of this review process results in an indefinite contract and full voting rights, with the exception of voting on promotion and tenure of tenured and tenure-track faculty currently teaching at Lewis & Clark who have not completed the promotion and tenure process as of Fall semester 2009.
      4. If the candidate is not successful, the Dean shall notify the faculty member that his or her appointment will terminate at the end of the succeeding academic year.
   4. Year Seven
      A Clinical or LAW faculty member who has taught at the Law School for seven years will be reviewed under the same procedures as the three-year review process described in Section D3. Successful completion of this review process results in a promotion to full professor.
   5. Timing of the review
      1. If the Dean and the faculty member so agree, the promotion consideration may be postponed for an additional year beyond the time period specified.
      2. Any leave of absence granted to a faculty member for reasons of illness, disability, pregnancy, childbirth, parental, or other family needs may at the option of the faculty member be excluded from the candidate’s review period. Other approved leaves may extend the review period only with the prior written approval of the Dean.

    

Back to Section IV home

1. The Director of the Law Library (“Library Director”) is a member of the voting faculty with eligibility for an indefinite contract as the Director of the Law Library. The Library Director will have the academic titles, as appropriate per appointment and promotion, of Library Director and Assistant Professor, Library Director and Associate Professor, and Library Director and Professor. In addition to the academic title, the Library Director may also hold the title of Assistant or Associate Dean, at the Dean’s discretion.
2. The Library Director is a joint administrative/faculty position, governed by a contract which will set out the Library Director’s rights, duties, and responsibilities. The Library Director shall have the same protections and responsibilities of academic freedom afforded to other faculty members.
3. After January 31, 2025, appointment of the Library Director to the faculty requires a national search; an 80-percent vote of the voting members of the faculty and student representatives to the faculty, present and voting at a regularly scheduled or duly noticed special meeting of the faculty; and approval of the Dean of the Law School and the President of Lewis & Clark College (the “President”). The Dean shall determine the rank (assistant, associate, or full) at which the Library Director shall be appointed, consistent with the considerations in Part D, below.
4. A person hired as Library Director shall: (i) have full voting rights, commensurate with rank; (ii) have full access to and responsibility for attending faculty meetings and participating on committees; and (iii) be subject to the following promotion and indefinite contract standards.
   1. Responsibilities
      1. The primary responsibilities of the Library Director are management of the library and curation of library resources and collections.
      2. The Library Director oversees the legal research curriculum and teaches legal research classes as appropriate.
      3. The Library Director will be evaluated on the requirements of the position and the Evaluation Standards set out in their contract.
      4. Scholarship by the Library Director will be supported as appropriate, but is not required or expected.
   2. Evaluation Process
      The Dean shall convene a Promotion and Review Committee in each academic year in which the Library Director is eligible for consideration for promotion. All members of the Promotion and Review Committee shall be of sufficient seniority to be eligible to vote on the promotion of the Library Director under review. The Library Director shall go through the stages of review in subsections (a)-(c), below. Ordinarily, the Library Director will be hired at the rank of assistant professor. If, however, the Library Director is hired at an associate or higher ranking, the Dean may authorize the Library Director to forego one or more of the earlier evaluation stages.
      1. 1. Year Two
            1. Procedure - the Chair of the Promotion and Review Committee (in consultation with faculty and administrators who work with the Library Director) assesses performance and makes a recommendation to the Dean whether to continue employment. The Dean reports the decision to the faculty.
            2. Substance - a determination that the Library Director has successfully performed the duties of the position as judged according to the Evaluation Standards set forth in the contract.
            3. Successful completion of this review process results in a three-year contract for the Library Director. There is no presumption of renewal and no presumption of non-renewal.
         2. Year Five
            1. Procedure - The committee assembles a review file with information relevant to the Library Director’s performance of the contract responsibilities. This file or a summary of it is made available to the full faculty, who may communicate their views or relevant information to the review committee. The voting faculty who either have tenure or an indefinite contract shall decide by majority vote of those present and voting whether to recommend the award of an indefinite contract.
            2. Substance - a determination that the Law School will be well served by appointing the Library Director to an indefinite appointment in light of the person’s performance of the duties of the position as judged according to the Evaluation Standards set forth in the contract.
            3. The faculty recommendation shall be forwarded to the Dean, together with the reason for, and the results of, the vote. The Dean shall forward the faculty recommendation for promotion and indefinite contract, with reasons, along with their evaluation of the recommendation, and if different, with their own recommendation to the president, who shall make the final decision. If promotion and indefinite contract is granted, the president shall notify the dean and the candidate in writing. Successful completion of this review process results in an indefinite contract and promotion to associate professor, with the title of Library Director and Associate Professor.
            4. If the candidate is not successful, the Dean shall notify the Library Director that his or her appointment will terminate at the end of the succeeding academic year.
         3. Year Seven
            1. Procedure - The committee assembles a review file with information relevant to the Library Director’s performance of the contract responsibilities. This file or a summary of it is made available to the faculty, who may communicate their views or relevant information to the review committee. The committee assesses the performance of the Library Director according to the contract responsibilities and presents the file to the full faculty. The voting faculty who are superior in academic rank to the Library Director shall decide by majority vote of those present and voting whether to recommend award of a promotion.
            2. Substance – a determination that the Library Director is successfully performing the duties of the position as judged according to the Evaluation Standards set forth in the contract
            3. The faculty recommendation shall be forwarded to the Dean, together with the reason for, and the results of, the vote. The Dean shall forward the faculty recommendation for promotion, with reasons, along with their evaluation of the recommendation, and if different, with their own recommendation to the president, who shall make the final decision. If promotion is granted, the president shall notify the dean and the candidate in writing. Successful completion of this review process results in the Library Director receiving the rank of full professor and the title of Library Director and Professor.
   3. Timing of the review
      1. 1. If the Dean and the Library Director so agree, the promotion consideration may be postponed for an additional year beyond the time period specified.
         2. Any leave of absence granted to the Library Director for reasons of illness, disability, pregnancy, childbirth, parental, or other family needs may at the option of the Library Director be excluded from the candidate’s review period. Other approved leaves may extend the review period only with the prior written approval of the Dean.
5. A Library Director granted an indefinite contract may be terminated only as provided in those portions of Section II.M (Termination and Nonrenewal of Faculty Appointments) applicable to faculty with tenure.
6. The Library Director shall be accorded the same rights and privileges as other faculty members that have or are eligible for indefinite contracts, except that the Library Director is not eligible for sabbaticals. Section IV.F is therefore inapplicable to this position.

1. Compensation shall be based upon service for the regular academic year, which for the Law School consists of two (2) semesters of scheduled class time, together with examination and grading periods. It is also expected that faculty members will attend the graduation ceremony.
2. The salary of each member of the Law School faculty shall be determined annually by the dean with the approval of the president.
3. Additional assignments beyond the normal two-semester contractual arrangement shall be effected by individual written agreements.
   
   

Back to Section IV home

The sabbatical leave program is a component of the faculty professional development program and is designed to enrich teaching and research and to support the Law School curriculum. A sabbatical leave is for research, study, writing, or other academic or professional work contributing to the professional refreshment and effectiveness of the recipient as a scholar and teacher. It is an opportunity for development of the faculty member’s abilities for the benefit of both the school and the faculty member.

All tenured or tenure-track faculty members are eligible to apply for sabbatical leave after six years of full-time service as a tenured or tenure-track faculty member at the Law School. Upon completion of any sabbatical leave, a faculty member again becomes eligible for a sabbatical leave after another six years of full-time service. In the rare event that a faculty member postpones an approved sabbatical leave upon the written request of the Law School, the faculty member shall again become eligible for a sabbatical after five years of full-time service following the completion of the sabbatical leave. Compensation for faculty on sabbatical leave shall be at the following rates: full salary for a half year; 60 percent of salary for a full year. While on a sabbatical leave, a faculty member is entitled to all benefits then offered to faculty. Benefits (other than pension contributions) that are tied to salary shall be calculated on the basis of the full salary of the faculty member; pension contributions shall be calculated on the basis of the faculty member’s sabbatical leave salary. Time spent on sabbatical leave shall be counted as time in rank for purposes of promotion and tenure.

Faculty members who desire a sabbatical leave must submit an application to the Law School Sabbatical and Leave Committee by November 1 of each year. The application shall include a complete and detailed description of the objectives of the sabbatical and the methods to be used in accomplishing those objectives. The application should include a statement as to how the sabbatical relates to prior experience and future professional activity of the faculty member. The application should also discuss possible outside sources of funds for projects of the type proposed. If application has been made for outside funding, the applicant shall submit a copy of the funding request.

The committee shall evaluate each sabbatical application and when necessary place those it believes worthy of funding in a priority ranking. The worthiness of the project shall be the primary basis of approval and of priority ranking. In making its determination, the committee shall consider the following factors: 1) the relationship between the sabbatical and the continuing professional development of the applicant, 2) the likelihood of achieving the goals of the sabbatical, and 3) outside funding, if obtained.

The dean shall determine the number of sabbatical leaves that can be granted. The number will depend on three variables: 1) the total cost of the leaves being sought, 2) the ability of the Law School to function adequately in the applicants’ absence, and 3) the total number of full-time faculty members away from the Law School campus in one academic year. In weighing this last variable, the dean may consider competing teaching assignments and other leaves of absence as well as the sabbatical applications.

Faculty members are encouraged to seek outside grants to provide additional financial support for sabbaticals. If a faculty member plans to work for a salary during all of part of the sabbatical, this plan must be specified in the application and approved by the dean.

Unless otherwise agreed in writing, a faculty member must agree to return to the Law School for a minimum of one year following a sabbatical leave. If a faculty member does not return for the minimum one-year period, the faculty member must repay all salary paid to the faculty member by the Law School during the sabbatical leave.

Upon returning from a sabbatical leave, the faculty member must submit a written report to the dean. If appropriate, the faculty member should arrange to present the results of a sabbatical leave to the law faculty or the Law School community through a seminar or faculty colloquium.

Back to Section IV home

ARTICLE I. MEMBERSHIP

Section 1. Voting Faculty

The voting faculty consists of all tenured faculty, tenure-track faculty, tenured-in-position faculty, clinical faculty, lawyering faculty, and the Director of the Law Library, all of whom are entitled to participate in and vote at faculty meetings. For purposes of these bylaws, the voting faculty does not include emeriti or retired faculty, visiting professors, professors of practice, or lecturers. Appointment to a position on the voting faculty requires: 80 percent of the voting faculty and student representatives to the faculty, present and voting either in person or by electronic means at a regularly scheduled or duly noticed special meeting of the faculty, vote in favor of appointment; approval of the Dean of the School of Law (the “Dean”); and approval of the President of Lewis & Clark College (the “President”). In addition, except as provided in Article II, Section 4 below, two student representatives shall be entitled to participate in and vote at meetings of the faculty.

Section 2. Dean’s Term

The President shall appoint a new Dean to a defined term of service as Dean. It is expected that the term of service will be three to five years. In the fall semester of the final year of the Dean’s term, if the Dean desires to serve an additional term, a faculty member elected by the voting faculty at the first faculty meeting of the year shall collect feedback on the Dean’s performance and provide a report on that feedback to the Dean. The elected faculty member shall thereafter report to the faculty on the general results of this survey, and the voting faculty, after receiving that report, shall vote whether to recommend to the President that they appoint the Dean to an additional term of service. The elected faculty member shall submit the faculty recommendation to the President. The President shall appoint the Dean to an additional term of service, or not, at the President’s discretion. Any additional term of service will also be three to five years. Nothing in this section limits the President’s authority to remove the Dean or the faculty’s authority to otherwise provide feedback to the Dean.

Section 3. Student Representatives

Student representatives to the faculty may be selected by any means acceptable to the student body, although no student may serve as a student representative to two faculty committees or to the faculty and to a faculty committee during the same year.

ARTICLE II. MEETINGS OF THE FACULTY

Section 1. Regularly Scheduled Meetings

Regularly scheduled meetings of the faculty shall be held once each month and be noted on the law school calendar. The Dean shall circulate the agenda for such meetings to the voting faculty, student representatives, and invited staff members at least three days prior to such meetings.

Section 2. Special Meetings

Special faculty meetings may be called by the Dean or by five members of the voting faculty if the business of the law school requires a special session. The Dean shall determine an appropriate date and time for the special faculty meeting and shall provide at least two days’ notice of the meeting. The notice shall include the agenda for the special meeting.

Section 3. Attendance at Faculty Meetings

Except as provided in Section 4 below, all voting members of the faculty, as defined in Article I, sec. 1, are expected to attend faculty meetings. Other faculty and administrative staff members invited by the Dean, the student representatives to the faculty, and student representatives to each committee having business before the faculty may also be present at all faculty meetings.

Section 4. Executive Sessions

When the Dean determines that the matters to be considered are confidential, the Dean shall declare an executive session of the faculty. Attendance at an executive session is limited to voting faculty and other appropriate individuals designated by the Dean.

Section 5. Quorum

A quorum requires a majority of voting faculty members and student representatives who are entitled to vote to be present, either in person or by electronic means if the Dean determines that remote participation is appropriate.

Section 6. Minutes

The Dean shall ensure that minutes are kept for all meetings of the faculty, including executive sessions. Minutes from regularly scheduled meetings of the faculty shall be circulated to voting faculty, except for minutes of executive sessions. All statements of new policy decisions affecting students will be made available to students by the office of the Associate Dean for Student Affairs. The Dean’s Executive Assistant shall maintain an official file of all minutes and policy decisions.

Section 7. Promotion and Tenure

Faculty meetings concerning promotion and tenure shall be governed by the Law School’s procedures for promotion and tenure.

ARTICLE III. COMMITTEES

Section 1. Committee Structure

At the beginning of each academic year, the Dean shall establish the following committees: Admissions; Budget; Curriculum; Diversity, Equity and Inclusion; and when necessary, Faculty Appointments and Promotion and Tenure. The Dean, the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, the Associate Dean for Faculty Development, and the chair of the Budget Committee shall form the Sabbatical and Leave Committee. The Dean shall establish such additional committees, including subject area committees, as the Dean determines necessary and appropriate.

Section 2. Membership

After consultation with the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, the Associate Dean for Faculty Development, and the faculty, the Dean shall appoint the chairs and faculty members of each committee. Consistent with Article I, sec. 3, the students shall select up to two student representatives to serve on each committee designated in Section 1, other than the Sabbatical and Leave Committee and the Promotion and Tenure Committee. Other committees may also solicit one or two student representatives. Student representatives may vote and otherwise participate in meetings of committees named in Section 1, except for the Sabbatical and Leave Committee and the Promotion and Tenure Committee. The Dean shall designate appropriate members of the administrative staff to serve as nonvoting ex officio members of each committee.

Section 3. Committee Charge

At the beginning of each academic year, the Dean may prepare a memorandum for each committee outlining the duties and responsibilities of each committee for the year.

Section 4. Committee Procedures

(a) Whenever a faculty committee is to meet and discuss policy or formulate recommendations with respect to policy changes, a written notice and agenda for the committee meeting shall be circulated in advance to committee members and to appropriate members of the administrative staff.

(b) The chair of each committee has the discretion to invite faculty, students, and members of the administrative staff who are not on the committee to attend and participate in committee meetings.

(c) At the end of the academic year, the chair of each committee shall prepare a report for the Dean. The report shall include minutes of the committee’s meetings to the extent that the committee took minutes.

Section 5. Committee Policy Recommendations

Recommendations for policy changes developed by each committee shall be in writing and shall be circulated to the Dean’s Executive Assistant or directly to the voting faculty and student representatives to the faculty prior to the faculty meeting at which they will be discussed. If a committee recommends a minor change in or interpretation of a policy, it may circulate its recommendation directly to the voting faculty with the explanation that the policy change or interpretation shall go into effect unless within seven days a faculty member objects or requests discussion of the issue at a faculty meeting. If no objections are received within seven days and the Dean concludes that there is no need for discussion at a faculty meeting, the actions taken will be considered ratified by the full faculty. If an objection is registered within the seven-day period, the Dean shall place the proposed policy recommendation on the agenda of the next regularly scheduled faculty meeting.

ARTICLE IV. FACULTY REPRESENTATIVES TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, THE LAW SCHOOL BOARD OF VISITORS, AND INSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEES

The Dean shall select a faculty representative to the Board of Trustees and a faculty representative to the Board of Visitors prior to the beginning of each academic year. The Dean shall appoint faculty representatives as necessary for institutional committees.

ARTICLE V. RATIFICATION

These Bylaws shall be ratified upon the approval of a majority of the voting faculty, the President, and the Board of Trustees.

ARTICLE VI. AMENDMENTS

These Bylaws may be amended by a majority vote of the voting faculty and approval of the President.

1. Appointment Policy and Procedure

2. Promotion and Tenure Reviews

3. Appointment Policy and Procedure and Promotion and Indefinite Contract Reviews for Clinical and Lawyering (LAW) Faculty

4. Position of Library Director

5. Faculty Salary Policy

6. Academic Leaves (Sabbatical) Policy

7. Bylaws of the Law School

In rare but important circumstances, academic programs benefit from the conversion of non-tenure track appointments to tenure-track appointments without the requirement of a national search. This procedure is designed to facilitate the conversion from non-tenure track to tenure-track in a fair and open manner, where all eligible faculty in the department/school with pertinent background and expertise are given the opportunity to apply.

The conversion of a non-tenure track position to tenure-track must be justified in terms of program needs and productivity as well as the retention of uniquely qualified faculty within the Graduate School. In this case, the clinical faculty member must also meet the criteria outlined below in order to be considered for a tenure track position:

Criteria

1. The candidate must have been appointed to the current position after completion of a national search.
2. The candidate must meet the requirements for the tenure track position.
3. The candidate must provide evidence of demonstrated success in teaching and research performance, and positive evaluation of future potential necessary to meet the criteria for tenure and promotion.

Procedure

Approving such exceptions require the following process:

1. The department chair and program director where the position is housed agree that such an exception is consistent with Graduate School policy and would be a benefit to the program and department involved.
2. The department chair and program director present their case to the GSEC dean and GSEC Personnel Committee. If it is determined that the candidate meets the criteria, they will submit the professional materials for review.
3. A Candidate Review Process (CRP) will be conducted to review the request. The CRP will consist of all members of the GSEC Personnel Committee and with consultation with GSEC Promotion and Tenure (P&T) Committee to appoint two tenured faculty to provide consultation regarding the candidates propensity toward tenure. The Personnel Committee will meet and review the request and make a recommendation to the dean regarding the request to waive the national search requirement and appoint the clinical faculty member to the tenure-track position.
4. The GSEC dean makes the final determination regarding the appointment of the clinical faculty member to the new tenure-track position.

Professional materials to be reviewed

1. Current vita
2. Cover letter
3. Copies of annual evaluations
4. Teaching portfolio that includes courses taught and student course evaluations
5. Copies of scholarly work completed within the past five years

Recommendation

1. Following the Candidate Review Process, the GSEC Personnel Committee will submit their recommendation to the dean.
2. The GSEC dean reviews the recommendation and makes the final determination regarding the appointment of the clinical faculty member to the tenure-track position.

Back to section V.A home

I. General Overview: Purpose and types of review, areas of evaluation, and confidentiality requirements in the review of Graduate School tenure track faculty

A. Purpose: The purpose of faculty review is three-fold: (1) to evaluate a faculty member’s contribution to the mission of the Graduate School of Education and Counseling, the College, their academic program, and the profession; (2) to guide and support the professional growth of faculty; and (3) to provide a sound basis for decisions related to promotion and tenure, annual salary reviews, work plans, sabbatical awards, and faculty research and travel support.

B. Types of review: The types of review and associated processes described here differ by faculty category, and within each category, depending on where a faculty member stands in the review cycle. The purpose, schedule, and process for each review are described below.

C. Major areas of evaluation

1. Teaching: Faculty are expected to demonstrate excellence in teaching. Excellent teachers are knowledgeable in their field, effectively communicate their knowledge to others, and use appropriate pedagogy that fosters students’ intellectual growth. Excellent teachers are academically rigorous and demonstrate care for their students through their teaching and advising.
2. Scholarship: Faculty are expected to contribute to scholarship by the development, application, and dissemination of knowledge that improves professional practice. Such contributions include publication in their area of expertise and active involvement in their field.
3. Professional and institutional service: Candidates must demonstrate evidence of consistent and valued contributions to the program, the Graduate School, and the broader community.

D. Confidentiality: Confidentiality of information regarding individuals must be a primary consideration in all stages of review. The contents of the review file, the deliberation of the committee, and the recommendations are to be held in strictest confidence.

Back to section V.A home

II. Reviews for Tenure-Track Assistant Professors

1. Initial appointments
   1. Any appointment without tenure to a position in which tenure may be granted is a tenure-track appointment. The probationary period for tenure-track positions is normally six years unless otherwise stated in the letter of appointment. A faculty member may request an early review for promotion or tenure with the approval of the dean of the Graduate School. Assistant professors are normally given annual appointments, with renewal of their appointment contingent on satisfactory performance.
   2. Hiring with tenure: In some instances, a potential new hire with tenure in their present position may request an expedited timeline for tenure review. In such cases, the search committee, dean, and department chair shall meet with the Graduate Faculty Promotion and Tenure Committee (GFPTC) to create a timeline for such review prior to the contract being issued. Typically, the timeline for review will fall into one of three general categories: (1) review prior to the employment start date; (2) review on an expedited time frame; or (3) review on the standard time frame. The department chair and GFPTC shall also determine the type of materials required to be equivalent to full review. In such cases, it shall be stated in the contract that awarding tenure will be contingent upon satisfactory tenure review. This policy regarding tenure review shall be shared with potential hires by the search committee.
   3. Promotion without tenure: In rare instances faculty may be appointed at the rank of associate professor or professor without tenure. In such instances, the schedule for review, including the promotion and tenure review, will be specified in the letter of appointment.
2. Types of review: There are three types of review for assistant professors: annual review; developmental review; and review for promotion to the rank of associate professor with tenure.
3. Annual Review
   1. Purpose: The purpose of the annual review is to provide formative assessment to assistant professors, directed at supporting progress toward successful review for promotion to associate professor with tenure.
   2. Schedule: Annual reviews occur in the first, second, fourth, and fifth years of service at the rank of assistant professor.
   3. Process: There are three steps in the process of annual review for assistant professors.
      1. Annual self-evaluation: Assistant professors produce an annual self-evaluation (elements described in GSEC policy handbook).
      2. Chair evaluation: The department chair produces a written evaluation and forwards this to the assistant professor and the GFPTC peer review team. The assistant professor may write a response, to be forwarded with the chair’s evaluation.
      3. GFPTC peer review: For this review, two GFPTC members will meet with the assistant professor at least twice during the course of the academic year and then produce a formative assessment of the faculty member’s progress toward tenure. The faculty member will have an opportunity to respond in writing to the GFPTC peer review. The chair’s evaluation, the GFPTC peer review, and the candidate’s response(s) (if present) are forwarded to the Dean and included in the faculty member’s personnel file, to be available in subsequent developmental and tenure reviews.
4. Developmental Review
   1. Purpose of developmental reviews: The development review is a major review intended to provide assistant professors with an assessment of their progress toward promotion and tenure. The process is designed to meet the common goals of the faculty member, program, Graduate School, and College by identifying faculty strengths and suggesting areas for future development.
   2. Schedule for developmental reviews: Developmental reviews of tenure-track faculty members will typically be conducted during the third year. The dean will inform the candidate of the scheduled developmental review during the academic year preceding the scheduled review. The schedule for review will be provided to the candidate by the dean no later than the end of the preceding academic year.
   3. Developmental review process: The first level of review is conducted by the department chair; the GFPTC provides the second level; the dean provides the third.
      1. The candidate shall prepare a review file in a manner similar to that specified for the promotion and tenure review [see sections II.E (3), (4), (5), and (6) for standards, criteria, and evidence], with the exception that external reviews will not be solicited. The review file, which includes the candidate’s self-evaluation and GFPTC peer reviews (from the preceding two years), will be submitted to the department chair.
      2. The department chair then prepares a written report. The department chair has the option of soliciting additional information required to evaluate the candidate’s performance in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service. The department chair will inform the candidate of any formal requests for additional information.
      3. Before the report by the department chair is submitted to the GFPTC, the candidate shall have the opportunity to review the report. The candidate may submit within one week a written response to the GFPTC. The response will become part of the candidate’s review materials.
      4. The department chair submits the review file, additional materials, and a report reviewing the candidate to the GFPTC through the dean.
      5. Following its assessment and deliberation, the GFPTC submits to the dean the review file and its own report evaluating the candidate’s performance. This report shall include an evaluation of the progress being made toward tenure and promotion, and a recommendation regarding extension of the contract. A copy of this report shall be forwarded to the candidate.
      6. The candidate may request an additional review and consultation with the GFPTC.
      7. The dean shall review the faculty candidate’s file and all evaluations and recommendations. The dean shall send to the candidate a letter reviewing the candidate’s performance with appropriate recommendations.
   4. The developmental review will result in a recommendation as to whether the faculty member under review should be given a new appointment. In cases where a candidate is not offered a new appointment, the faculty member will normally be given a one-year terminal contract. The dean of the Graduate School, after consultation with the department chair, may approve a request by a faculty member to extend the probationary period by a maximum of one year, specifying a new schedule for review. Such approval will only be granted when it is clearly in the interest both of the Graduate School and of the faculty member, for example, when a faculty member has taken on a major short-term assignment or has taken a leave of absence for health or other personal reasons.
5. Review for promotion to associate professor with tenure
   1. Purpose: This review serves to evaluate the faculty member’s performance for the purpose of granting promotion to the rank of associate professor with tenure. The granting of tenure requires successful contributions in each of the following three areas:
      1. Teaching: The candidate must demonstrate excellence in teaching. (See section 3 below.)
      2. Scholarship: The candidate must make significant contributions to scholarship through the development, application, or dissemination of knowledge that improves professional practice. (See section 4 below.)
      3. Professional and Institutional Service: The candidate must demonstrate evidence of consistent and valued contributions to the program, the Graduate School, professional associations, and the broader community. (See section 5 below.)
   2. Eligibility, timing, and schedule: Faculty members hired in a tenure-track position will normally be reviewed for tenure during the sixth year of service. Credit may be given for previous employment and eligibility for tenure review may be negotiated in the letter of appointment. Faculty members awarded tenure shall meet the standards articulated in sections (3), (4), and (5) below. The faculty member will be notified by the dean regarding eligibility for review by the end of spring semester of the academic year preceding the scheduled review.
   3. Standards, criteria, and evidence concerning teaching
      1. Standards for excellent teaching: Excellent teachers inspire and challenge their students, communicate their knowledge of the field, use appropriate teaching methods, and foster students’ intellectual growth.
      2. Criteria for excellent teaching
         1. Carefully plans and teaches well-organized courses; clearly states goals, objectives, and standards of student performance; and uses appropriate course materials.
         2. Maintains current knowledge of the field.
         3. Seeks to improve teaching techniques and performance.
         4. Provides accurate and timely academic advising.
         5. Actively involves students in the classroom learning experience.
         6. Regularly assesses student performance and apprises students of the results.
         7. Creates and maintains an atmosphere conducive to learning.
         8. Contributes to the development of curriculum.
         9. Provides assistance and supervision to students in field-based courses such as practica and internships.
         10. Encourages students to participate in joint scholarship projects.
         11. Maintains accessibility to students.
      3. Evidence of excellent teaching. The following materials will be included in the review file:
         1. A syllabus for each course taught that includes goals, readings, explication of written assignments, and methods of student evaluation.
         2. All student course evaluations obtained since the last promotion or since date of employment including those developed by the faculty member and a summary and interpretation of the evaluations.
         3. A narrative explaining teaching accomplishments and goals.
         4. A narrative describing advising responsibilities, and, where applicable, supervisory activities and accomplishments.
         5. Evidence from peers, colleagues in the field, past students, and others as appropriate.
         6. Other materials, such as letters, may also be included.
   4. Standards, criteria, and evidence concerning scholarship
      1. Standards for scholarship: Scholarship contributes to professional and disciplinary knowledge.
      2. Criteria for scholarship: Significant contributions to scholarship may include the following, with priority given to refereed work as well as some combination of lead- and co-authorship:
         1. Peer-reviewed publications, which include (i) articles published in peer- reviewed professional journals, and (ii) book chapters, and (iii) books published by presses that employ peer review.
         2. Invited chapters in edited volumes, articles in non-refereed journals that are recognized by peers as high-quality journals, articles in non-refereed regional journals, bulletins, or digital publications, and book reviews.
         3. Refereed presentations accepted at professional conferences represent contributions to knowledge in the field and demonstrate the status of work in progress. Invited presentations are also evidence of a candidate’s standing among peers. Solicited and evaluated consultations, competitively reviewed grants and contracts, presentations to professional colleagues and practitioners, and other professional engagements that apply knowledge to improve professional practice are likewise evidence of scholarly impact.
         4. Creative works (literary, theatrical, or artistic) clearly related to the candidate’s field of inquiry, scholarship and/or teaching.
         5. Engaged scholarship constitutes work conducted in collaboration with communities or organizations outside the college, or institutional scholarship completed within the college, such that a faculty member’s expertise and research are applied in a specific context to demonstrable effect. Evidence of engaged scholarship must include a detailed description of the work, a clear connection to the faculty member’s research agenda, and evidence of significant impact. The publication or dissemination of such reports, media coverage of these activities, and documents from community members that specify the candidate’s contribution will be considered as measures of impact. Any of the following that have been prepared by the candidate or with the candidate’s input are examples of evidence that may be submitted for the purpose of documenting engaged scholarship: technical or advisory reports; policy papers or recommendations; data gathered to evaluate a project’s outcomes; proposals for organizational change or restructuring; and significant changes in educational practice or clinical treatment based on the candidate’s work and participation.
         6. Grant submissions are considered evidence of engagement in the professional field. Successful grant applications are evidence of positive peer review and achievement.
         7. Scholarly work initiated since a candidate’s hire is an essential demonstration of the candidate’s ability to balance this work with teaching and performing service at all levels required for promotion and tenure. Publications of work initiated before the candidate’s time of hire are considered as part of the candidate’s scholarly output.
      3. Evidence of scholarship provided by candidate: Evidence of scholarly work provided by the candidate includes a narrative explaining past, current, and future work, highlighting major areas of interest, research, and particular challenges. In addition, evidence of scholarship provided by the candidate may include:
         1. Copies of books, chapters, and articles published or currently under review.
         2. Reviews of books or articles published.
         3. Presentations at professional conferences.
         4.  Evidence of engaged scholarship
         5. Grant proposals written, with reviewers’ comments. Information concerning grants awarded, denied, and pending.
         6. Professional communications and/or artifacts indicating the quality of the candidate’s research program, publications, presentations, invited consultation and/or engaged scholarship.
      4. Contribution of external reviewers: External reviewers provide an outside, professional assessment of the candidate’s scholarly work. (More on these letters in “Process of Review” for promotion to associate professor with tenure). External review letters are an important source of information about how the candidate’s scholarship and/or creative activity is viewed by the larger field. The department chair’s letter soliciting review letters of scholarship encourages reviewers to:
         1. Assess the quality and significance of the candidate’s work, and the importance of its contribution to the candidate’s discipline
         2. Compare the candidate’s work to that of peers in the field at a similar point in their career
         3. Assess whether the candidate’s work suggests a trajectory of continued accomplishment
         4. Assess the quality and significance of the outlets (journal articles, monographs, conference proceedings, book chapters, exhibition or performance venues, etc.) in which the candidate’s work has appeared, including relevant information about the nature of the peer review process those outlets employ
         5. Explain any disciplinary conventions that might differ from those in other fields.
      5. Questions guiding the GFPTC’s review of evidence of scholarship: The GFPTC will use the materials provided by the candidate and the external reviewers to answer the following questions about the candidate’s scholarship:
         1. What is the nature, extent, and quality of the candidate’s contribution to the discipline?
         2. How has the candidate’s scholarship moved beyond the dissertation to demonstrate the ability to initiate new work?
         3. In addition to completed and ongoing scholarly publication, how has the candidate been involved in other professional activities that provide evidence of the high regard professional peers have for the candidate’s work?
         4. What, if any, contextual or institutional challenges has the candidate faced in pursuing their program of research?
         5. To what extent is there a clear trajectory of scholarly accomplishment that demonstrates a strong likelihood of continuing into the future?
   5. Standards, criteria, and evidence concerning professional and institutional service
      1. Standards for service: Faculty members are expected to contribute actively to their department, the Graduate School, the College, their professional associations, and the broader community.
      2. Criteria for service: A candidate’s service should include regular participation on at least one standing or ad hoc committee of the Graduate School or the College during each year of their appointment. It should include assuming responsibilities in support of the candidate’s program and department as well as the Graduate School and the College. Participation in program development and accreditation processes is also expected.
         In addition, candidates should participate in service related activities in their professional organizations and their community.
         
         Service may include various forms of leadership, including making substantial and ongoing contributions to the operation and development of a program, department, the Graduate School, or College. Examples of this service include, but are not limited to, serving as program director, clinical coordinator, department chair, or related leadership role. Leadership may also include developing new programs or undertaking significant changes in an existing program.
         
         Leadership is a distinct form of service and should be recognized as an essential and unique aspect of our professional work in the Graduate School, particularly when pre‑tenure faculty undertake such work.
      3. Evidence of professional and institutional Service
         1. A narrative explaining the significance of one’s service contributions to the department, the Graduate School, the College, professional associations, and the broader community. Wherever appropriate, the narrative shall include a description of the candidate’s accomplishments related to assigned departmental responsibilities, developing and maintaining ties with professional associations, and curriculum or program development and leadership.
         2. Letters of testimony indicating the significance of the faculty review candidate’s service contributions.
         3. Editorial and review responsibilities.
   6. Process of review for promotion to associate professor with tenure
      1. The candidate prepares a review file including: a self-evaluation letter, annual reviews by the department chair, GFPTC peer reviews, all reports from the developmental review, and supplemental materials addressing the three areas of review. [See Section (7) iii, below, on candidate responsibilities.]
      2. A mutually agreed upon list of at least nine potential external reviewers will be generated by the candidate, the department chair, a GFPTC peer reviewer selected by the candidate, and the dean of the Graduate School. The department chair and GFPTC peer reviewer selected by the candidate, in consultation with the dean of the Graduate School, determine the short list of external reviewers who will be asked to review the candidate’s materials.
      3. The department chair and GFPTC peer reviewer selected by the candidate shall consult with the candidate regarding which materials to send to external reviewers. These materials may include samples of scholarly work, the candidate’s curriculum vitae, and a statement from the faculty candidate. A cover letter from the department chair should describe the purpose of the review and the fact that the letter and its author will remain confidential. A sufficient number of reviewers should be contacted so that a minimum of four reviews are received.
      4. The department chair and GFPTC peer reviewer selected by the candidate may obtain additional information from colleagues within and outside the College and from scholar-reviewers and others, as necessary, to evaluate teaching, scholarship, and service. The candidate will be informed regarding the areas in which information is being formally requested.
      5. The department chair reviews the candidate’s file, including program and external letters, writes an independent report, and forwards these materials to the GFPTC through the office of the dean of the Graduate School. Before the report by the department chair is submitted to the GFPTC, the candidate shall have the opportunity to review the report. The candidate may offer corrections of any errors and may submit, within one week, a written response to the GFPTC, which will become part of the candidate’s review materials.
      6. Following their individual assessments and deliberations, the GFPTC makes a recommendation in writing and submits it to the dean. A copy of the GFPTC recommendation shall be sent simultaneously to the candidate. The candidate may submit within one week a written response to the GFPTC. The response will become part of the candidate’s review materials.
      7. The Graduate School dean makes a recommendation in writing to the president of the College. A copy of this recommendation shall be sent simultaneously to the candidate and to the GFPTC.
      8. Final decisions regarding matters of promotion or tenure rest with the president of the College.
   7. Responsibilities in the review process: The first level of review is conducted by the department chair; the GFPTC provides the second level; the dean provides third; the president of the College provides the fourth level of review and the final decision regarding promotion and tenure.
      1. The dean shall:
         1. Prepare the schedule for review.
         2. Notify faculty members in writing of their eligibility for promotion and for tenure by the end of the spring semester of the academic year prior to the review.
         3. Assure that the GFPTC is in place.
         4. Consult with the candidate, department chair, and the GFPTC peer reviewer selected by the candidate in the process of generating a list of potential external reviewers who have expertise in the candidate’s field. This list shall be of sufficient length to assure an adequate number of agreed-upon reviews and to protect the anonymity of the selected reviewers.
         5. Reach consensus with the department chair and GFPTC peer reviewer selected by the candidate regarding the final selection of external reviewers from the list of potential reviewers.
         6. Serve as a non-voting member of the GFPTC.
         7. Review the file and the report of the GFPTC and write an evaluation and recommendation, including rationale.
         8. Submit the dean’s and the GFPTC’s written evaluations and recommendations, along with the candidate’s review file, to the president of the College. If the dean’s recommendation dissents from the GFPTC recommendation, he or she must present a written report and discuss the nature of the dissent and its rationale with the members of the GFPTC, prior to forwarding these materials to the president.
         9. Notify the candidate of the GFPTC’s and the dean’s recommendations. The candidate shall have the opportunity to read and respond in writing to the department chair’s report, the GFPTC report, and the dean’s report. A candidate wishing to respond to a report must submit a response within one week from receiving a copy of the report. The response will become part of the review materials.
      2. The department chair shall:
         1. Work collaboratively with the candidate, the GFPTC peer reviewer selected by the candidate, and the dean of the Graduate School, to generate the extensive list of potential external reviewers.
         2. Consult with the candidate to decide which scholarly materials are to be sent out for review.
         3. In consultation with the GFPTC peer reviewer selected by the candidate and the dean of the Graduate School, select the external reviewers to be contacted. Personally contact reviewers from the approved list and send the materials selected for review to those reviewers who are willing to review the candidate’s work. These letters and their authors shall be designated as confidential and are not to be seen by the candidate.
         4. Reach consensus with the candidate and GFPTC peer reviewer selected by the candidate regarding the final selection of external reviewers from the list of potential reviewers.
         5. With the GFPTC peer reviewer selected by the candidate, solicit additional information as deemed necessary to evaluate teaching, scholarship, and/or service.
         6. Write a letter of recommendation for the granting of tenure or promotion based on specific evidence and provide a copy of this to the candidate.
         7. Review and forward the file to the GFPTC through the office of the dean.
      3. The candidate shall:
         1. Prepare the review file. [See Standards, Criteria and Evidence for Teaching, II.E (3); Scholarship, II.E (4); and Service, II.E (5)].
         2. Participate in generating a list of potential reviewers with the department chair, the GFPTC peer reviewer selected by the candidate, and the dean of the Graduate School.
         3. In consultation with the department chair, the GFPTC peer reviewer selected by the candidate, and the dean, select which scholarly materials are to be sent out for external review. Materials may include a curriculum vitae and a personal statement, if desired.
         4. Have the opportunity to review and provide a written response to the list of potential external reviewers.
         5. Have the opportunity to read and respond in writing to the department chair’s report, the GFPTC report, and the dean’s report. In each case, the candidate must submit a response within one week from receiving a copy of the report. The response will become part of the review materials.
      4. The Graduate Faculty Promotion and Tenure Committee shall:
         1. Review the contents of the file, additional materials, and the chair’s evaluation and make an individual assessment in keeping with the standards outlined in this document.
         2. Solicit additional information regarding the candidate’s performance, if desired. The candidate will be informed regarding areas in which information is being formally requested.
         3. Meet as a committee to review each case, with the aim of reaching consensus whenever possible.
         4. Formally record each member’s vote.
         5. Provide a written summary of evaluation for each area of review: teaching, scholarship, and service. The committee shall make a specific recommendation regarding promotion and tenure.
      5. The president shall: Inform the candidate of his or her decision regarding promotion and tenure in writing.
   8. Appeals
      1. Eligibility: The candidates may appeal to the dean of the Graduate School within two weeks of written notification of the president’s decision. An appeal to the dean of the Graduate School of Education and Counseling is granted only on grounds of:
         1. Errors in procedures
         2. Discrimination
         3. Violation of academic freedom
         4. Failure to consider existing evidence adequately
         
         A decision cannot be overturned on appeal unless the candidate has sustained the burden of proof on one or more of these four grounds. If the dean finds that there are sufficient grounds for appeal, he or she appoints an appeals board and gives the board 30 days in which to make a recommendation.
      2. Composition of the Appeals Board: The Graduate School Appeals Board shall consist of the three previous chairs of the GFPTC who are not currently serving on the GFPTC. In the event that the faculty under review held this position, or that three previous GFPTC chairs are not available, the other members of the appeals committee shall, in consultation with the dean of the Graduate School, select other members for the Appeals Board.
      3. Recommendation of Appeals Board: The Appeals Board makes its recommendation directly to the president, who informs the applicant of their decision within 30 days. In all cases, the president’s judgment shall be final.

Back to section V.A home

III. Reviews for Tenured Associate Professors

1. Types of review: There are four types of review for tenured associate professors: annual review; post-tenure review (first); post-tenure review (all subsequent at this rank); and review for promotion to the rank of professor.
2. Annual review: Associate professors produce an annual self-evaluation (elements described in GSEC policy handbook). Annual self-evaluations are reviewed by the department chair. No written response from the department chair is required, except in the case of the post-tenure reviews described below. A meeting can be held or a written report can be completed at the request of the faculty member or at the discretion of the department chair.
3. Post-tenure reviews occur every three years for associate professors. The process for the first post-tenure review after being granted promotion and tenure differs from those that follow; in this review, both the department chair and the GFPTC provide written evaluations of the faculty member’s performance. In subsequent reviews, department chairs produce a written evaluation of the associate professor’s performance.
4. First post-tenure review
   1. Purpose: The purpose of the first post-tenure review for associate professors is to provide feedback on the faculty member’s professional growth and contribution to the mission of the Graduate School since being awarded tenure, and to provide feedback on progress toward promotion of full professor.
   2. Schedule: The first post-tenure review occurs in the third year after a faculty member is granted promotion and tenure at the rank of associate professor.
   3. Process: The first post-tenure review for associate professors includes a comprehensive self-evaluation, chair evaluation, and GFPTC review.
      1. Comprehensive self-evaluation document: The candidate prepares a comprehensive self-evaluation with supporting documentation, using the elements contained in the annual self-evaluation, expanded to address the three-year period under review (elements described in GSEC policy handbook).
      2. Chair evaluation: The department chair produces a written evaluation and forwards this to the associate professor and the GFPTC. The associate professor may prepare a written response, to be forwarded with the chair’s evaluation.
      3. GFPTC evaluation: The GFPTC will produce a written evaluation that addresses the three-year period under review. The candidate will have an opportunity to prepare a written response to the GFPTC review. The chair’s letter, GFPTC review letter, and the candidate’s response(s) (if present) are forwarded to the dean of the Graduate School and included in the faculty member’s personnel file, to be available in subsequent reviews.
5. Subsequent post-tenure reviews
   1. Purpose: The purpose of post-tenure reviews for associate professors is to provide feedback on the faculty member’s professional growth and contribution to the mission of the Graduate School.
   2. Schedule: Post-tenure reviews occur every third year after a faculty member is granted promotion and tenure at the rank of associate professor.
   3. Process: Post-tenure reviews for associate professors (after the first) include a comprehensive self-evaluation and chair evaluation.
      1. Comprehensive self-evaluation document: The candidate prepares a comprehensive self-evaluation with supporting documentation, using the elements contained in the annual self-evaluation, expanded to address the three-year period under review (elements described in GSEC policy handbook).
      2. Chair evaluation: the department chair produces a written evaluation and forwards this to the associate professor and the dean of the Graduate School. The associate professor may prepare a written response, to be forwarded with the chair’s evaluation. The chair’s letter and the candidate’s response (if present) are included in the faculty member’s personnel file, to be available in subsequent reviews.
6. Reviews for promotion to the rank of professor
   1. Purpose: This review serves to evaluate the faculty member’s performance for the purpose of promotion to the rank of professor. The granting of promotion requires successful contributions in each of the following three areas:
      1. Teaching: The candidate must demonstrate excellence in teaching. [See section II.E (3) above.]
      2. Scholarship: The candidate must make significant contributions to scholarship through the development, application, or dissemination of knowledge that improves professional practice. [See section II.E (4) above.]
      3. Professional and institutional service: The candidate must demonstrate evidence of consistent and valued contributions to the program, the Graduate School, professional associations, and the broader community. [See section II.E (5) above.]
         To be promoted to professor, candidates must demonstrate continued excellence in teaching, significant scholarship, and a record of professional and institutional service consistent with expectations associated with the rank of professor.
   2. Schedule: Faculty members shall normally be eligible for review for promotion after six years at the associate professor rank. A request for an accelerated or delayed review must be approved by the dean prior to the submission of the review file.
   3. Standards for promotion: To be promoted to professor, candidates must demonstrate continued excellence in teaching and significant scholarship, and a record of professional and institutional service consistent with expectations associated with the rank of professor. [See section II.E (3) on teaching, II.E (4) on scholarship, and II.E (5) on professional and institutional service.]
   4. Process: See section II.E (6).
   5. Responsibilities: See section II.E (7).
   6. Appeals: See section II.E (8).

Back to section V.A home

IV. Reviews for Tenured Professors

1. Types of review: There are two types of review for professors: annual review and post-tenure review.
2. Annual review: Professors produce an annual self-evaluation (elements described in GSEC policy handbook). Annual self-evaluations are reviewed by the department chair. No written response from the department chair is required, except in the case of the post-tenure reviews described below. A meeting can be held or a written report can be completed at the request of the faculty member or at the discretion of the department chair.
3. Post-tenure reviews
   1. Purpose: The purpose of post-tenure reviews for professors is to provide feedback on the faculty member’s professional growth and contribution to the mission of the Graduate School.
   2. Schedule: Post-tenure reviews occur every six years after a faculty member is promoted to the rank of professor.
   3. Process: Post-tenure reviews for professors include a comprehensive self-evaluation, chair evaluation, and dean evaluation.
      1. Comprehensive self-evaluation document: The faculty member prepares a comprehensive self-evaluation, with supporting documentation, using the elements contained in the annual self-evaluation, expanded to address the six-year period under review (elements described in GSEC policy handbook).
      2. Chair evaluation: The department chair produces a written evaluation and forwards this to the professor and the dean. The professor may write a response, to be forwarded with the chair’s evaluation.
      3. Dean evaluation: The dean of the Graduate School produces a written evaluation based on the materials submitted by the faculty member and department chair. This evaluation is given to the faculty member, who may offer a written response. The evaluation letters and faculty response(s) (if present) are included in the faculty member’s personnel file, to be available in subsequent reviews.

Back to section V.A home

V. General Overview: Purpose and types of review, areas of evaluation, and confidentiality requirements in the review of Graduate School Clinical Faculty

1. Purpose: The purpose of faculty review is three-fold:
   1. to evaluate a faculty member’s contribution to the mission of the Graduate School of Education and Counseling, the College, their academic program, and the profession;
   2. to guide and support the professional growth of faculty; and
   3. to provide a sound basis for decisions related to promotion, annual salary reviews, work plans, and faculty research and travel support.
2. Types of review: The types of review and associated processes described here differ by faculty category, and within each category, depending on where a faculty member stands in the review cycle. The purpose, schedule, and process for each review are described below.
3. Major areas of evaluation
   1. Teaching: Faculty are expected to demonstrate excellence in teaching. Excellent teachers are knowledgeable in their field, effectively communicate their knowledge to others, and use appropriate pedagogy that fosters students’ intellectual and professional growth. Excellent teachers are academically rigorous, utilize inclusive and democratic pedagogical approaches, and demonstrate care for their students through their teaching and advising.
   2. Professional and institutional service: Candidates are expected to demonstrate evidence of consistent, meaningful, and impactful contributions to the program, the Graduate School, the professional community in which they work, and the broader community.
   3. Scholarship: At the rank of clinical associate professor and clinical professor, faculty are expected to contribute to scholarship in their field through the development, application, and dissemination of knowledge that improves professional practice. Further information regarding this form of engaged scholarship can be found in section VIII.D (2) below.
4. Confidentiality: Confidentiality of information regarding individuals must be a primary consideration in all stages of review. The contents of the review file, the deliberation of the committee, and the recommendations are to be held in strictest confidence.

Back to section V.A home

VI. Reviews for clinical assistant professors

Types of review: There are three types of review for clinical assistant professors: annual review, three-year review, and review for promotion to the rank of clinical associate professor. Clinical assistant professors must hold a terminal degree. Clinical assistant professors are not required to move toward promotion at either the clinical associate or clinical professor rank.

1. Annual Review
   1. Purpose: The purpose of the annual review is to provide formative assessment to clinical assistant professors, including progress toward successful review for promotion to clinical associate professor.
   2. Schedule: Clinical assistant professors complete a self-evaluation each year, unless they are scheduled for a three-year review or have submitted materials for promotion to clinical associate professor.
   3. Process: There are two steps in the process of annual review for clinical assistant professors.
      1. Annual self-evaluation: clinical assistant professors produce an annual self-evaluation.
      2. Chair consultation: The department chair reviews the annual self-evaluation and meets with the faculty member and/or produces a written evaluation If there is a written evaluation, the clinical assistant professor may write a response, to be included in the faculty member’s file for review in subsequent evaluations.
2. Three-year review
   1. Purpose: The three-year review is intended to provide clinical assistant professors with an assessment of their performance and progress toward promotion. The process is designed to meet the common goals of the faculty member, program, Graduate School, and College by identifying faculty strengths and suggesting areas for future development.
   2. Schedule: Three-year reviews of clinical assistant professors will take place every three years for the length of their appointment at this rank.
   3. Process: There are two steps in the three-year review process for clinical assistant professors.
      1. The clinical assistant professor, using the same format as the annual self-evaluation, provides documentation of their work over the previous three years.
      2. Chair evaluation: The department chair produces a written evaluation and shares this with the clinical assistant professor. The clinical assistant professor may write a response, to be included in the faculty member’s file for review in subsequent evaluations.
3. Review for promotion to clinical associate professor
   1. Purpose: This review serves to evaluate the faculty member’s performance for the purpose of granting promotion to the rank of clinical associate professor. The granting of this promotion requires successful contributions in the two following areas:
      1. Teaching: The candidate must demonstrate excellence in teaching. (See section 3 below.)
      2. Professional and institutional Service: The candidate must demonstrate evidence of consistent and valued contributions to the program, the Graduate School, professional associations, and the broader community. (See section 4 below.)
   2. Eligibility, timing, and schedule: Clinical assistant professor will normally be eligible for review for promotion to clinical associate professor beginning in their sixth year of full-time service. Timing for the review of part-time clinical assistant professors will be at the discretion of the department chair and dean. Faculty members awarded promotion shall meet the standards articulated in sections (3) and (4) below.
   3. Standards, criteria, and evidence concerning teaching
      1. Standards for excellent teaching: Excellent teachers inspire and challenge their students, communicate their knowledge of the field, use appropriate teaching methods, and foster students’ intellectual and professional growth.
      2. Criteria for excellent teaching
         1. Carefully plans and teaches well-organized courses; clearly states goals, objectives, and standards of student performance; and uses appropriate course materials.
         2. Maintains current knowledge of the field.
         3. Seeks to improve teaching techniques and performance.
         4. Provides accurate and timely academic advising.
         5. Actively involves students in the classroom learning experience.
         6. Regularly assesses student performance and apprises students of the results.
         7. Creates and maintains an atmosphere conducive to learning.
         8. Contributes to the development of curriculum.
         9. Provides assistance and supervision to students in field-based courses such as practica and internships.
         10. Encourages students to participate in joint scholarship projects.
         11. Maintains accessibility to students.
      3. Evidence of excellent teaching. The following materials will be included in the review file:
         1. A syllabus for each course taught that includes goals, readings, explication of written assignments, and methods of student evaluation.
         2. All student course evaluations obtained since the last promotion or since date of employment including those developed by the faculty member and a summary and interpretation of the evaluations.
         3. A narrative explaining teaching accomplishments and goals.
         4. A narrative describing advising responsibilities, and, where applicable, supervisory activities and accomplishments.
         5. Evidence from peers, colleagues in the field, past students, and others as appropriate.
         6. Other materials, such as letters, may also be included.
   4. Standards, criteria, and evidence concerning professional and institutional service
      1. Standards for service: Faculty members are expected to contribute actively to their department, the Graduate School, the College, their professional associations, and the broader community.
      2. Criteria for service: A candidate’s service should include regular participation on at least one standing or ad hoc committee of the Graduate School during each year of their appointment. It should include assuming responsibilities in support of the candidate’s program and department as well as the Graduate School and the College. Participation in program development and accreditation processes is also expected. In addition, candidates should participate in service-related activities in their professional organizations and their community. Service may include various forms of leadership, including making substantial and ongoing contributions to the operation and development of a program, department, the Graduate School, or College. Examples of this service include, but are not limited to, serving as program director, clinical coordinator, department chair, or related leadership role. Leadership may also include developing new programs or undertaking significant changes in an existing program. Leadership is a distinct form of service and is recognized as an essential and unique aspect of our professional work in the Graduate School, particularly when clinical faculty undertake such work.
      3. Evidence of professional and institutional Service
         1. A narrative explaining the significance of one’s service contributions to the department, the Graduate School, the College, professional associations, and the broader community. Wherever appropriate, the narrative shall include a description of the candidate’s accomplishments related to assigned departmental responsibilities, developing and maintaining ties with professional associations, and curriculum or program development and leadership.
         2. Letters of testimony indicating the significance of the faculty review candidate’s service contributions.
   5. Process of review for promotion to clinical associate professor
      1. The candidate prepares a review file including: a self-evaluation letter, three-year reviews by the department chair, and supplemental materials addressing the two areas of review. [See section (6) iii below]
      2. The department chair reviews the candidate’s file, writes an independent report, and forwards these materials to the GFPTC through the office of the dean of the Graduate School. Before the report by the department chair is submitted to the GFPTC, the candidate shall have the opportunity to review the report. The candidate may offer corrections of any errors and may submit, within one week, a written response to the GFPTC, which will become part of the candidate’s review materials.
      3. Following their individual assessments and deliberations, the GFPTC makes a recommendation in writing and submits it to the dean. A copy of the GFPTC recommendation shall be sent simultaneously to the candidate. The candidate may submit within one week a written response to the GFPTC. The response will become part of the candidate’s review materials.
      4. Final decisions regarding matters of promotion for clinical faculty rest with the dean of the Graduate School.
   6. Responsibilities in the review process: The first level of review is conducted by the department chair; the GFPTC provides the second level; the dean provides the fourth level of review and the final decision regarding the promotion of clinical faculty.
      1. The dean shall:
         1. Prepare the schedule for review.
         2. Assure that the GFPTC is in place and that the committee includes at least one clinical faculty representative for years during which reviews of clinical faculty occur. The clinical faculty representative on the GFPTC will only be responsible for evaluating clinical faculty files and not files related to tenure track faculty.
         3. Serve as a non-voting member of the GFPTC.
         4. Review the file, write an evaluation, and notify the candidate of the decision.
      2. The department chair shall:
         1. Solicit additional information as deemed necessary to evaluate teaching and service.
         2. Write a letter of recommendation for the granting of promotion based on specific evidence and provide a copy of this to the candidate.
         3. Review and forward the file to the GFPTC through the office of the dean.
      3. The candidate shall:
         1. Prepare the review file. [See Standards, Criteria and Evidence for Teaching, VII.D (3); and Service, VII.D (4) above].
         2. Have the opportunity to read and respond in writing to the department chair’s report and the GFPTC report. In each case, the candidate must submit a response within one week from receiving a copy of the report. The response will become part of the review materials.
      4. The Graduate Faculty Promotion and Tenure Committee shall:
         1. Review the contents of the file, additional materials, and the chair’s evaluation and make an individual assessment in keeping with the standards outlined in this document.
         2. Solicit additional information regarding the candidate’s performance, if desired. The candidate will be informed regarding areas in which information is being formally requested.
         3. Meet as a committee to review each case, with the aim of reaching consensus whenever possible.
         4. Formally record each member’s vote.
         5. Provide a written summary of evaluation for both areas of review: teaching and service. The committee shall make a specific recommendation regarding promotion.
   7. Appeals
      1. Eligibility: The candidate may appeal to the president of the college within two weeks of written notification of the dean’s decision.
      2. An appeal to the president of the college is granted only on grounds of:
         1. Errors in procedures
         2. Discrimination
         3. Violation of academic freedom
         4. Failure to consider existing evidence adequately
      3. A decision cannot be overturned on appeal unless the candidate has sustained the burden of proof on one or more of these four grounds. The appeal will be reviewed by the president of the college, who will issue a final decision. In all cases, the president’s judgment shall be final.

Back to section V.A home

VII. Reviews for clinical associate professors

Types of review: There are three types of review for clinical associate professors: annual review, three-year review, and review for promotion to the rank of clinical professor.

1. Annual review: Clinical associate professors produce an annual self-evaluation. Annual self-evaluations are reviewed by the department chair. No written response from the department chair is required. A meeting can be held or a written report can be completed at the request of the faculty member or at the discretion of the department chair.
2. Three-year review
   1. Purpose: The three-year review is intended to provide clinical associate professors with an assessment of their performance and progress toward promotion to clinical professor. The process is designed to meet the common goals of the faculty member, program, Graduate School, and College by identifying faculty strengths and suggesting areas for future development.
   2. Schedule: Three-year reviews of clinical associate professors will take place every three years for the length of their appointment at this rank, except in the case where a clinical associate professor is submitting a file for promotion to clinical professor.
   3. Process: there are two steps in the three-year review process for clinical associate professors.
      1. The clinical associate professor, using the same format as the annual self-evaluation, provides documentation of their work over the previous three years.
      2. Chair evaluation: The department chair produces a written evaluation and shares this with the clinical associate professor. The clinical associate professor may write a response, to be included in the faculty member’s file for review in subsequent evaluations.

3. Reviews for promotion to the rank of clinical professor
   To be promoted to clinical professor, candidates must demonstrate continued excellence in teaching, a record of professional and institutional service consistent with expectations associated with the rank of clinical professor, and significant engaged scholarship.

   1. Purpose: This review serves to evaluate the faculty member’s performance for the purpose of promotion to the rank of clinical professor. The granting of promotion requires successful contributions in each of the following three areas:
      1. Teaching: The candidate must demonstrate excellence in teaching. [See section VII.D (3) above.]
      2. Professional and institutional service: The candidate must demonstrate
         evidence of consistent and valued contributions to the program, the Graduate School, professional associations, and the broader community. [See section VII.D (4) above.
      3. Scholarship: The candidate must make significant contributions to scholarship through the development, application, or dissemination of knowledge that improves professional practice. This may be through traditional forms of scholarly publication (peer reviewed articles, book chapters, etc.) or through the production of engaged scholarship. (see section (2) e below).
   2. Standards, criteria, and evidence concerning scholarship
      1. Standards for scholarship: Scholarship contributes to professional and disciplinary knowledge.
      2. Criteria for scholarship: Significant contributions to scholarship may include any of the following, though expectations for clinical faculty scholarship (in contrast to expectations for tenure-track faculty) may focus on engaged scholarship (see section e below):
         1. Peer-reviewed publications, which include (i) articles published in peer- reviewed professional journals, and (ii) book chapters, and (iii) books published by presses that employ peer review.
         2. Invited chapters in edited volumes, articles in non-refereed journals that are recognized by peers as high-quality journals, articles in non-refereed regional journals, bulletins, or digital publications, and book reviews.
         3. Refereed presentations accepted at professional conferences represent contributions to knowledge in the field and demonstrate the status of work in progress. Invited presentations are also evidence of a candidate’s standing among peers. Solicited and evaluated consultations, competitively reviewed grants and contracts, presentations to professional colleagues and practitioners, and other professional engagements that apply knowledge to improve professional practice are likewise evidence of scholarly impact.
         4. Creative works (literary, theatrical, or artistic) clearly related to the candidate’s field of inquiry, scholarship and/or teaching.
         5. Engaged scholarship constitutes work conducted in collaboration with communities or organizations outside the college, or institutional scholarship completed within the college, such that a faculty member’s expertise and research are applied in a specific context to demonstrable effect. Evidence of engaged scholarship must include a detailed description of the work, a clear connection to the faculty member’s research agenda, and evidence of significant impact. The publication or dissemination of such reports, media coverage of these activities, and documents from community members that specify the candidate’s contribution will be considered as measures of impact. Any of the following that have been prepared by the candidate or with the candidate’s input are examples of evidence that may be submitted for the purpose of documenting engaged scholarship: technical or advisory reports; policy papers or recommendations; data gathered to evaluate a project’s outcomes; proposals for organizational change or restructuring; and significant changes in educational practice or clinical treatment based on the candidate’s work and participation.
         6. Grant submissions are considered evidence of engagement in the professional field. Successful grant applications are evidence of positive peer review and achievement.
         7. Scholarly work initiated since a candidate’s hire is an essential demonstration of the candidate’s ability to balance this work with teaching and performing service at all levels required for promotion and tenure. Publications of work initiated before the candidate’s time of hire are considered as part of the candidate’s scholarly output.
      3. Evidence of scholarship provided by candidate
         Evidence of scholarly work provided by the candidate includes a narrative explaining past, current, and future work, highlighting major areas of interest, research, and particular challenges. In addition, evidence of scholarship provided by the candidate may include:
         1. Copies of books, chapters, and articles published or currently under review.
         2. Reviews of books or articles published.
         3. Presentations at professional conferences.
         4. Evidence of engaged scholarship
         5. Grant proposals written, with reviewers’ comments. Information concerning grants awarded, denied, and pending.
         6. Professional communications and/or artifacts indicating the quality of the candidate’s research program, publications, presentations, invited consultation and/or engaged scholarship
   3. Schedule: Faculty members shall normally be eligible for review for promotion beginning six years after their promotion to the rank of clinical associate professor. A request for an accelerated or delayed review must be approved by the dean prior to the submission of the review file. Clinical assistant professors are not required to move toward promotion at either the clinical associate or clinical professor rank.
   4. Standards for promotion: To be promoted to clinical professor, candidates must demonstrate continued excellence in teaching and significant scholarship, and a record of professional and institutional service consistent with expectations associated with the rank of clinical professor. [See section VII.D (3) on teaching, VII.D (4) on professional and institutional service and VIII.D (2) on scholarship.]
   5. Process: See section VII.D (5).
   6. Responsibilities: See section VII.D (6).
   7. Appeals: See section VII.D (7).

Back to section V.A home

VIII. Reviews for clinical professors

Types of review: There are two types of review for clinical professors: annual review and six-year review.

1. Annual review: Clinical professors produce an annual self-evaluation. Annual self-evaluations are reviewed by the department chair. No written response from the department chair is required, except in the case of the post-clinical associate professor reviews described below. A meeting can be held or a written report can be completed at the request of the faculty member or at the discretion of the department chair.
2. Six-year clinical professor reviews
   1. Purpose: The purpose of the six-year clinical professor reviews is to provide feedback on the faculty member’s professional growth and contribution to the mission of the Graduate School.
   2. Schedule: Six-year clinical professor reviews occur every six years after a faculty member is promoted to the rank of professor.
   3. Process: Six-year clinical professor reviews include a comprehensive self-evaluation and chair evaluation.
      1. Comprehensive self-evaluation document: The faculty member prepares a comprehensive self-evaluation, with supporting documentation, using the elements contained in the annual self-evaluation, expanded to address the six-year period under review (elements described in GSEC policy handbook).
      2. Chair evaluation: The department chair produces a written evaluation and forwards this to the professor and the dean. The professor may write a response, to be forwarded with the chair’s evaluation.

Back to section V.A home

IX. Reviews for clinical instructors

There are three types of review for clinical instructors: annual review, three-year review, and review for promotion to the rank of clinical senior instructor. Clinical instructors are clinical faculty who do not hold a terminal degree.

1. Annual Review
   1. Annual review: Clinical instructors produce an annual self-evaluation. Annual self-evaluations are reviewed by the department chair. No written response from the department chair is required, except in the case of the three-year reviews described below. A meeting can be held or a written report can be completed at the request of the faculty member or at the discretion of the department chair.
   2. Purpose: The purpose of the annual review is to provide formative assessment to clinical instructors, including progress toward successful review for promotion to clinical senior instructor.
   3. Schedule: Clinical instructors complete a self-evaluation each year, unless they are scheduled for a three-year review or have submitted materials for promotion to clinical senior instructor.
2. Three-year review
   1. Purpose: The three-year review is intended to provide clinical instructors with an assessment of their performance, including progress toward promotion clinical senior instructor. The process is designed to meet the common goals of the faculty member, program, Graduate School, and College by identifying faculty strengths and suggesting areas for future development.
   2. Schedule: Three-year reviews of clinical instructors will take place every three years for the length of their appointment at this rank.
   3. Process: There are two steps in the three-year review process for clinical assistant professors.
      1. The clinical instructor, using the same format as the annual self-evaluation, provides documentation of their work over the previous three years.
      2. Chair evaluation: The department chair produces a written evaluation and shares this with the clinical instructor. The clinical instructor may write a response, to be included in the faculty member’s file for review in subsequent evaluations.
3. Review for promotion to clinical senior instructor
   1. Purpose: This review serves to evaluate the faculty member’s performance for the purpose of granting promotion to the rank of clinical senior instructor. The granting of this promotion requires successful contributions in the two following areas:
      1. Teaching: The candidate must demonstrate excellence in teaching (See section VII.D (3) above.)
      2. Professional and Institutional Service: The candidate must demonstrate evidence of consistent and valued contributions to the program, the Graduate School, professional associations, and the broader community (See section VII.D (4) Service.)
   2. Eligibility, timing, and schedule: Clinical instructors will normally be eligible for review for promotion to clinical senior instructor during the sixth year of their full-time appointment. Part-time clinical faculty will be eligible for promotion at the discretion of the department chair and dean. Faculty members awarded promotion shall meet the standards articulated in sections (3) and (4) below.
   3. Standards, criteria, and evidence concerning teaching
      1. Standards for excellent teaching
         Excellent teachers inspire and challenge their students, communicate their knowledge of the field, use appropriate teaching methods, and foster students’ intellectual and professional growth.
      2. Criteria for excellent teaching
         1. Carefully plans and teaches well-organized courses; clearly states goals, objectives, and standards of student performance; and uses appropriate course materials.
         2. Maintains current knowledge of the field.
         3. Seeks to improve teaching techniques and performance.
         4. Provides accurate and timely academic advising. Actively involves students in the classroom learning experience.
         5. Regularly assesses student performance and apprises students of the results.
         6. Creates and maintains an atmosphere conducive to learning.
         7. Contributes to the development of curriculum.
         8. Provides assistance and supervision to students in field-based courses such as practica and internships.
         9. Encourages students to participate in joint scholarship projects.
         10. Maintains accessibility to students.
      3. Evidence of excellent teaching. The following materials will be included in the review file:
         1. A syllabus for each course taught that includes goals, readings, explication of written assignments, and methods of student evaluation.
         2. All student course evaluations obtained since the last promotion or since date of employment including those developed by the faculty member and a summary and interpretation of the evaluations.
         3. A narrative explaining teaching accomplishments and goals.
         4. A narrative describing advising responsibilities, and, where applicable, supervisory activities and accomplishments.
         5. Evidence from peers, colleagues in the field, past students, and others as appropriate.
         6. Other materials, such as letters, may also be included.
   4. Standards, criteria, and evidence concerning professional and institutional service
      1. Standards for service: Faculty members are expected to contribute actively to their department, the Graduate School, the College, their professional associations, and the broader community.
      2. Criteria for service: A candidate’s service should include regular participation on at least one standing or ad hoc committee of the Graduate School or the College during each year of their appointment. It should include assuming responsibilities in support of the candidate’s program and department as well as the Graduate School and the College. Participation in program development and accreditation processes is also expected. In addition, candidates should participate in service-related activities in their professional organizations and their community. Service may include various forms of leadership, including making substantial and ongoing contributions to the operation and development of a program, department, the Graduate School, or College. Examples of this service include, but are not limited to, serving as program director, clinical coordinator, department chair, or related leadership role. Leadership may also include developing new programs or undertaking significant changes in an existing program. Leadership is a distinct form of service and is recognized as an essential and unique aspect of our professional work in the Graduate School, particularly when clinical faculty undertake such work.
      3. Evidence of professional and institutional Service
         1. A narrative explaining the significance of one’s service contributions to the department, the Graduate School, the College, professional associations, and the broader community. Wherever appropriate, the narrative shall include a description of the candidate’s accomplishments related to assigned departmental responsibilities, developing and maintaining ties with professional associations, and curriculum or program development and leadership.
         2. Letters of testimony indicating the significance of the faculty review candidate’s service contributions.

Back to section V.A home

The Graduate School of Education and Counseling at Lewis & Clark College is dedicated to serving the needs of professionals in a constantly changing society. The Graduate School is a community that values teaching, scholarship, and service as related expressions of a single vocation. Reviews of performance, especially those concerned with promotion and tenure, require careful consideration of candidates’ contributions to their students’ knowledge and professional practice, to the generation of new knowledge and research in the profession in which they serve, , and to the general good and mission of their school, institution, and broader professional community (i.e. service). While specific contributions and emphases may vary from one faculty member to another, and accomplishments might be presented in different ways, all faculty members are expected to demonstrate accomplishment in these areas. The assessment of these contributions shall include descriptions and evidence supplied by the candidates, faculty members in the professional program(s) in which the candidates serve, and others as specified in the document that follows.

1. Tenure Track Faculty - General Overview
2. Tenure-Track Assistant Professors
3. Tenured Associate Professors
4. Tenured Professors
5. Clinical Faculty - General Overview
6. Clinical Assistant Professors
7. Clinical Associate Professors
8. Clinical Professors
9. Clinical Instructors
10. Conversion of Clinical Faculty to Tenure-Track

REVISION OF DOCUMENT

The policies for faculty review, promotion, and tenure should be reviewed at least every five years. The dean, in consultation with the GFPTC, shall review the policies and determine if revisions are necessary. Proposed revisions will be subject to the approval of the Graduate School faculty and the president of the college and/or board of trustees, as appropriate.

History of Graduate School of Education and Counseling Promotion and Tenure Reviews and Developmental Reviews Policy (I-V):
Approved by the Faculty October 28, 2003
Amended by the Faculty February 22, 2005
Amended by the Faculty January 22, 2008
Amended by the Faculty March 30, 2010
Amended by the Faculty April 26, 2016
Amended by the Faculty March 19, 2024

Back to Section V home

1. Compensation shall be based on service for the regular academic year, which for the Graduate School consists of two (2) semesters of fifteen (15) weeks. With the approval of department chairs and the dean, faculty members may substitute an equivalent load of summer teaching, advising, and program development for the fall or spring semester. Faculty members are expected to participate in commencement exercises and activities.
2. The salary of each member of the graduate faculty shall be determined annually by the dean with the approval of the president.
3. Additional assignments beyond the normal two-semester contractual arrangement shall be effected by individual written agreements.

Back to Section V home

Eligibility

Only tenure-track, tenured, or term members of the faculty are eligible for sabbatical leaves.

Tenure-Track Faculty

In the third year of full-time service, junior faculty may apply for a one-semester sabbatical at full salary to be taken in the fourth year of full-time service, based upon a positive developmental review.

Tenured Faculty

Full-time tenured faculty with 12 semesters of full-time teaching since the previous sabbatical are eligible for a one-semester sabbatical at full salary or a two-semester sabbatical at two-thirds normal annual salary. An exception to the 12-semester interval between sabbaticals will be made in the case of faculty who took the junior sabbatical and were subsequently awarded tenure. In this case, the faculty member shall be eligible in the eighth year of service (i.e., after one year of service as a tenured faculty member provided that the tenure process took the usual seven years).

Conditions

A faculty member must agree to return to Lewis & Clark College for a minimum of one year of full-time teaching following a sabbatical leave. Unless otherwise agreed in writing, if a faculty member does not return for the minimum one-year period, the faculty member must repay all salary paid to the faculty member by the Graduate School during the sabbatical leave.

Both the recipient and the College shall continue to make their regular contributions to the retirement program during the period of sabbatical leave, such contributions to be based upon the sabbatical-leave salary. Time spent on sabbatical leave shall be counted as time in rank for purposes of promotion and tenure.

Application

A complete and detailed description of the objectives of the sabbatical and the methods to be used in accomplishing those objectives is required. Applicants must include a statement as to how the sabbatical relates to prior experience and future professional activity. If the applicant has had a previous sabbatical at Lewis & Clark, a copy of the report of the most recent sabbatical must accompany the application. Appropriate outside sources of funds for projects of the type proposed should be identified. If application has been made for outside funding, the applicant may submit a copy of the funding request. The application should be signed by the dean to indicate approval.

Basis of Approval

Applications are submitted to the Personnel Committee of the Graduate School, through the associate dean’s office, by February 15 of each year prior to the academic year for which the sabbatical is requested. The Personnel Committee evaluates each application and ranks those it believes worthy of funding in priority order.

The scholarly merit of the project is the primary basis of approval. Factors that will also be considered include 1) the relationship between the sabbatical and the continuing professional development of the applicant and 2) the likelihood of achieving the goals of the sabbatical.

The priority ranking of worthy applications and the rationale for those rankings are considered by the Personnel Committee for approval. The number of sabbatical leaves that can be granted will depend on three variables: 1) the total cost of the leaves being sought, 2) the ability of the department to function adequately in the applicant’s absence, and 3) the total number of regular faculty members away from the campus in one academic year. In weighing this last variable, the Personnel Committee will consider overseas or on-site teaching assignments and other leaves of absence as well as the sabbatical applications.

The Personnel Committee will review the matter of replacement cost on a case-by-case basis on departmental grounds. In the context of a five-course annual teaching load, a one-semester sabbatical is considered to be the equivalent of two courses.

Other Remuneration

The faculty member is encouraged to seek outside grants to provide additional financial support for the sabbatical. If a faculty member proposes to work for a salary during all or part of the sabbatical, this plan must be specified in the application and approved by the Personnel Committee and the dean. Since the purpose of the sabbatical is scholarly work, such employment will not normally be approved.

Reports of Results

A written report to the Personnel Committee, associate dean, and dean is required the first semester back on campus. If appropriate, arrangements should be made to present the results of a sabbatical leave to the campus at large through a seminar or faculty colloquium.

Back to Section V home

I. NAME

This document shall be known as “The Bylaws of the Graduate School of Education and Counseling.”

II. MEMBERSHIP

The Graduate Faculty shall consist of the Dean of the Graduate School of Education and Counseling, one Librarian to be designated annually by the Director of the Library, the President of the College, and all those holding tenured, tenure-track, or clinical faculty appointments in one of the Graduate School’s academic departments. For purposes of faculty business and elections, voting rights shall reside in tenured, tenure-track, and clinical faculty positions at half-time or higher.

In addition, the Graduate Faculty may extend membership to other individuals who participate significantly in the educational program of the Graduate School. Faculty membership so granted will be for a period of one academic year unless otherwise specified, and will be awarded upon recommendation of the Dean in consultation with Department Chairs and approval of the Faculty.

III. ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND RESPONSIBILITY

Each faculty member shall have the academic freedom and the responsibility to pursue knowledge and its free expression. Faculty members are entitled to freedom of inquiry and expression in the teaching of their courses and in research and publication.

When a faculty member speaks or writes as a citizen, he or she shall be free from institutional censorship or discipline, and shall avoid any implication that he or she is speaking for the institution.

Within and among the Faculty there shall be no discrimination based on race, color, gender, religion, national origin, physical impairment, sexual orientation, age, or beliefs.

IV. DEAN OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL

The Dean is Chair of the Faculty and, with the President of the College, represents the Faculty to the Board of Trustees and represents the School on official and public occasions. The Chair of the faculty moderates all regular meetings of the faculty. The Dean (through the faculty committees outlined in Section VI) shall be responsible for all policies and recommendations affecting personnel, budget, curriculum, and promotion and tenure for the Graduate School of Education and Counseling. The Dean shall work with the Dean of the Law School and the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences to strengthen institution-wide academic coordination and cooperation.

V. MEETINGS OF THE GRADUATE FACULTY

1. The Faculty shall meet periodically to discuss policies and procedures relating to the Graduate School of Education and Counseling. The Faculty shall also participate with Arts and Sciences and Law faculties in addressing issues of institutional concern.
2. The Faculty shall conduct the internal business of the School as a Committee of the Whole, unless such business comes within the specified jurisdiction of its designated standing committees or ad hoc committees. Such business includes, but is not limited to, evaluation or generation of proposals and recommendations from standing or ad hoc committees as well as the standards of student performance, financial aid, and other matters related to student welfare.
3. Schedule: Meetings of the Faculty shall be held at least once a semester except for the summer semester. Special meetings may be called at any time by the Dean, by written request of any committee (standing or ad hoc) established pursuant to these Policies and Procedures or any amendment thereof, or by the written request of 25 per cent of the members of the Faculty eligible to vote. Any such request shall be delivered to the Dean, who shall give three working days’ notice of any special meeting to the Faculty entitled to vote, together with specification of the items which may be brought before such a meeting. All meetings shall be governed by Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised.
4. Agenda: The Dean shall prepare the Agenda for all regular meetings of the Faculty. The Agenda for any special meeting shall be prepared by those who request the meeting and shall be delivered to the Dean with the request. The proposed form of resolution for each substantive proposal to be presented for voting at a Faculty meeting shall be circulated to each member entitled to vote, not less than three days prior to the meeting at which it will be considered (five days in the case of proposed amendments of this document). (This requirement will not preclude further amendment of the resolution at the meeting so long as, in the opinion of the Chair, the amendment relates solely to the subject of the circulated proposal.)
5. Executive Session: Faculty meetings are open to all who wish to attend unless an executive session is declared. An executive session can be declared upon a motion passed by a majority of the voting Faculty. When so declared, only members of the Faculty eligible to vote shall be entitled to attend.
6. Quorum: A quorum shall consist of a majority of faculty members certified to be available to vote according to an annual list prepared by the Dean and published by October 15 of each year.
7. Faculty meetings shall be governed by the procedures in Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised, except where those procedures are in conflict with specific procedures in these Bylaws.

VI. COMMITTEES

Section l. Standing Committees

The Standing Committees within the Graduate School shall consist of the following:

1. Graduate Curriculum Committee
   1. Charge: The Graduate Curriculum Committee shall have responsibility to generate, review, or evaluate and make recommendations to the Dean concerning any curricular matter or issue relating to the academic programs in the Graduate School, including addition, deletion, or alterations of programs, degrees, or courses offered, and admission and graduation requirements in the Graduate School; will formulate and review other academic policies and procedures, and will consider curricular issues relating to the academic calendar.
   2. Membership: The Faculty representing each department in the Graduate School shall perform the duties of the Graduate Curriculum Committee. The Dean, in consultation with the Faculty Executive Committee, appoints members to the Graduate Curriculum Committee.
2. Graduate Faculty Executive Committee
   1. Charge: The FEC shall coordinate the business of the faculty. This may include the coordination of the work of standing and other committees, and meetings of the faculty as a whole (except any infringement upon standing committee responsibilities expressly enumerated by the Bylaws). The FEC shall serve as a conduit of faculty representation to the Dean and as a sounding board for faculty views in response to decanal requests for consultation on diverse matters. The Secretary of the Faculty may serve as chair of general meetings of the faculty or may delegate this responsibility. The Secretary of the Faculty shall serve as leader and spokesperson of the faculty so far as permitted by the Bylaws. The FEC shall set forth slates of nominees for committee elections, normally held toward the end of the spring semester. Additional nominees can be forwarded by individual faculty members, as described earlier and as noted in the Bylaws.
   2. Membership: The Faculty Executive Committee (FEC) shall include one tenured member (who will serve as chair of the FEC) and two members from the eligible voting faculty. The three members must represent more than one department at the Graduate School. Eligibility shall include department chairs with roster faculty status who are not serving as members of the Graduate Dean’s Executive Council. Election to the FEC will occur in two stages, once every two years, in the spring semester. The faculty shall elect, from the tenured faculty, an FEC chair, also known as the Secretary of the Faculty. The Committee shall be elected for a two-year staggered term. If the Secretary of the Faculty is to be elected in a given year, that election shall be held first, with other members to be elected the following year. Elections for both the Secretary of the Faculty and FEC members will be held in the same manner. No member may serve more than two consecutive terms. Should a member resign or otherwise be unable to complete a term, an election shall be held to fill the vacancy for the remainder of the term.
      
      Any faculty member eligible to vote may nominate a candidate for the Secretary of the Faculty position by notifying the incumbent Secretary of the Faculty in writing at least one week prior to the election. If three or more persons are nominated, a primary election will be conducted to reduce the number to two candidates. The two candidates with the highest number of primary votes will be placed on a slate for election by the faculty.
      
      Any faculty member eligible to vote may also nominate candidates for the two other FEC positions by notifying the incumbent Secretary of the Faculty in writing at least one week prior to the election. If four or more persons are nominated, a primary election will be conducted to reduce the number to three candidates. The three candidates with the highest number of primary votes will be placed on a slate for election by the faculty.
3. Graduate Faculty Personnel Committee
   1. Charge: The Graduate Faculty Personnel Committee shall have the responsibility to generate, review, or evaluate and make recommendations to the Dean concerning matters of Faculty hiring, academic freedom, sabbatical leaves, or other personnel matters except matters related to Faculty review. All requests for sabbatical or other leaves, requests for creation or filling of new or old positions shall be submitted to the Graduate Faculty Personnel Committee. The Graduate Faculty Personnel Committee will forward its recommendations to the Dean.
   2. Membership: The Dean, in consultation with the Faculty Executive Committee, appoints faculty members representing each department to the Graduate Faculty Personnel Committee.
4. Graduate Faculty Committee for Promotion and Tenure
   1. Charge: The Committee shall conduct all major Faculty reviews, including reviews for promotion and tenure. The Graduate Faculty Committee for Promotion and Tenure shall forward its recommendations to the Dean.
   2. Membership: Voting members of the Graduate Faculty Committee for Promotion and Tenure shall include six tenured members of the Faculty, making every effort to assure representation from each department, on rotating two-year terms, and an outside member. The Dean shall serve as a nonvoting member. Committee assignments should be staggered so there is continuity. Faculty members shall be elected by a vote of the Faculty; the outside member shall be approved by the faculty. The outside member will be a practitioner, preferably with college or university experience. The Committee will elect its own Chair from among the elected Lewis & Clark Faculty members.
      
      Any Faculty member eligible to vote may nominate a candidate for a vacant Faculty position on the Committee by notifying the Dean in writing at least one week prior to the election. If more than three persons are nominated for any vacant position, a primary election will be conducted to reduce the number to two candidates per open position. The two candidates with the highest number of nomination votes will be placed on a slate for election by the Faculty.
5. Graduate School Admissions Committee
   1. Membership: The Graduate Admissions Committee shall include the department chairs and two members of the faculty at large. The faculty members shall be two members appointed by the dean in consultation with the Faculty Executive Committee. The dean of the graduate school or designee, director of Educational Career, Licensing, and Accreditation Services, and the director of Graduate Admissions shall be ex officio, nonvoting members. Committee members may designate a substitute if they are unable to attend a meeting.
   2. Duties: In consultation with the appropriate program and/or department, the Graduate Admissions Committee shall review all program-level recommendations for admission to the graduate school, and make final decisions regarding admission. The committee may request further information from program faculty prior to making final decisions. In addition, the committee shall review, analyze, and present data in order to formulate and recommend admissions policies and procedures that support the vision, mission, and conceptual framework of the graduate school and shall forward these recommendations to the faculty for approval.
6. Graduate School Equity and Inclusion Committee
   1. Charge:
      • The Equity & Inclusion Committee shall review and monitor the progress of the Graduate School’s ongoing and strategic efforts to recruit, retain, and support students, staff, and faculty to form a diverse community composed of individuals with intersecting identities and to foster an equitable and inclusive climate for all students, staff, and faculty.
      • The Committee is also charged with identifying challenges and opportunities to enhance equitable and inclusive practices in curricula, policy, program development and relations for the benefit of the Graduate School and its community.
      • The Committee shall work collaboratively with other standing committees to promote and monitor progress towards meeting equity-oriented goals as well as review and examine institutional efforts in this area, recommending changes as and when appropriate.
   2. Membership: The Equity & Inclusion Committee’s voting membership is representative of graduate faculty and exempt and non-exempt staff. Faculty membership is distributed across all departments and ranks. The Dean, in consultation with the Faculty Executive Committee, appoints faculty members to the Graduate Equity & Inclusion Committee. Exempt and non-exempt staff members are selected by their respective groups. The Committee will elect its own chair.

Section 2. Ad Hoc Committees

Other committees established for the purpose of facilitating Faculty business shall be deemed “Ad Hoc” Committees. Ad Hoc Committees shall be all committees created either by majority vote of the Faculty or by the Dean to consider matters of special interest within the Graduate School.

Section 3. Selection of Committee Members

During spring semester, the Dean shall call for nominations to the Graduate Faculty Committee for Promotion and Tenure. The Dean shall present to the Faculty a plan of Ad Hoc Committee organization including membership and chairs of any ad hoc committees for Faculty approval at the Faculty meeting of the fall semester.

Section 4. Committee Procedure

All committees shall conduct their meetings in accordance with parliamentary procedures. Adequate notice of meetings of any committee shall be given to all of its members. A committee meeting may be called by the Chair and shall be called at the request of at least two (2) of its members.

VII. FACULTY REPRESENTATIVES TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND INSTITUTIONAL COMMITTEES

1. Each spring, the voting Faculty shall elect one of its members to serve a one-year term as Faculty Representative to the Board of Trustees. This term shall commence September 1 of the following academic year and shall continue for twelve months. Service by a Faculty member as the Faculty Representative to the Board of Trustees shall not preclude service by that Faculty member on a Standing Committee.
2. The Dean shall appoint members of the voting Faculty to serve as necessary on Institutional Committees.

VII. RATIFICATION

These Bylaws shall become effective and any prior Bylaws revoked upon approval by the Faculty, the President, and the Board of Trustees of Lewis & Clark College. Faculty approval shall be obtained by two-thirds (2/3) vote at a faculty meeting assuming a quorum is present, or, alternatively, Faculty approval shall be obtained by two-thirds (2/3) of the Faculty voting by secret mail ballot provided that at least 55 percent of the ballots are returned.

IX. AMENDMENTS

Proposed amendments to these Bylaws shall be submitted in writing at a regular meeting of the Faculty and acted upon at the next regular meeting or at a special meeting called for that purpose. In the latter case, notice of the meeting shall be sent in writing to all members of the Faculty at least five days in advance. Amendments must be approved by a majority of the voting Faculty certified to be on campus and available to vote, and by the President.

Back to Section V home

1. Promotion and Tenure Reviews and Developmental Reviews
2. Faculty Salary Policy  
3. Academic Leaves (Sabbatical) Policy  
4. Bylaws of the Graduate School