Section 4 - Faculty Personnel Policies and Procedures

VII. Standards for Faculty Evaluation

St. Olaf College seeks to attract and retain a distinctive and competent faculty that serves the mission of the college by its expertise in the liberal disciplines and by its commitment to undergraduate teaching in a Christian context, incorporating a global perspective. The college gives primary emphasis to effective undergraduate instruction. It holds that high quality teaching is inseparable from scholarly and creative effort, and it expects that members of its faculty will ground their teaching in research, scholarship, and creative activity. It further expects that members of its faculty will be concerned with the religious and moral dimensions of life and learning. While there are no sectarian requirements for tenure nor sectarian limits on what can be expressed or taught, it is basic to the identity of the College that its faculty consist of persons who take seriously questions about the relation of religion to learning and who consider their work and the work of the College in the light of such questions.

In the light of this general conception of the kind of faculty the College wishes to have, certain criteria or standards by which members of the faculty will be judged are set forth below to illustrate the College's values and priorities. These criteria shall be applied within the context of the welfare and goals of the College as a liberal arts institution and as a college of the Christian Church.

The following criteria for judgment are qualitative standards in terms of which candidates for jobs, tenure, and promotion will be evaluated. The goal in applying the criteria is distinction as well as competence. The three areas of criteria are listed in descending order of priority. The third area is subordinate to the first two, but it is a category in which faculty are expected to make a contribution. Within each category the specific criteria are to be understood as together being standards of measurement of the area of which each is a part, and the list in each category in descending order of priority. These criteria are neither inclusive nor exclusive, nor is there priority binding with equal force in all cases; exceptions may be justified by unusual circumstances, and the listing of these criteria shall in no way preclude a warranted exception.

1. Categories for Evaluation of Faculty with Normal Teaching Appointments
   
   1. Effective Teaching
      
      1. Extent of mastery of subject matter.
         
      2. Ability to stimulate the intellectual development of students in the area of one's own discipline; effectiveness in communicating the skills, methods, and intellectual content appropriate to one's discipline.
         
      3. Effectiveness in classroom teaching, in informal academic contact with students, in supervision of tutorials and independent study, and in evaluation of student work.
         
      4. Effectiveness in advising students, including being available for advisee meetings and being well-informed about college and departmental requirements and programs.
         
      5. Demonstrated concern for the role of one's discipline in liberal education, for its relationship to other intellectual perspectives, and, where appropriate, for its bearing on questions with moral, social, and religious dimensions. This concern may be demonstrated by work in the general education programs and in interdisciplinary areas as well as in one's own discipline.
         
      6. Ability to relate professional goals to the needs and goals of one's students as whole persons.
         
   2. Significant Professional Activity
      
      1. Excellence and extent of public professional activity and other evidence of research, scholarship, and creative activities. When approved by the Board of Regents or its designee, department statements on Significant Professional Activities are binding on the College.
         
      2. Ability to relate scholarship, research, and creative activity to effective teaching.
         
      3. Success in stimulating the intellectual development of one's colleagues through disciplinary or interdisciplinary work.
         
   3. Other Contributions to the Purposes of the College
      
      1. Contributions to department and college planning and administration.
         
      2. Contributions to the life of the College as a community and leadership in achieving the goals of the College.
         
      3. Contributions to extending the resources of the College to the wider community.
2. Evaluation of Faculty with Released Time for Part-time Administrative Work
   
   Although administrative duties with released time will result in a reduced teaching load and a possible reduction in the extent of public professional activity, it is expected that the candidate will continue to demonstrate distinction in the categories in Section 4.VII.A. Faculty who receive released time to carry out part-time administrative assignments will also be evaluated for their work in this area. Administrative work shall be evaluated in light of the following criteria:
   
   1. Leadership skills, as demonstrated in the ability to create and sustain the unit's mission in relation to that of the College, promote innovative uses of College resources, and encourage professional/faculty development.
      
   2. Interpersonal skills, as demonstrated in the cultivation of effective working relationships to carry out the work of the administrative unit.
      
   3. Managerial skills, as demonstrated in organizing, delegating, and prioritizing work, exercising good judgment, and implementing College policies and procedures.
      
   4. As a general guideline, this area of evaluation is subordinate to the categories of effective teaching and significant professional activity.
      
3. Purpose of faculty evaluation.
   
   Faculty evaluation serves two primary purposes: First, it provides feedback to faculty to encourage continuous self-assessment, promote professional development, and lead to improved faculty performance. Second, the evaluation process also specifies the criteria, evidence, and standards used to make judgments regarding renewal of term appointments, reappointment of tenure-track faculty, and the granting of promotion and/or tenure.
   
   While many individuals are involved in the evaluation process, the authority for final judgments in all renewal, reappointment and promotion decisions shall rest with the President. The granting of tenure shall require approval of the Board of Regents, based on the President's recommendation.