LIFT evaluations from W20, F20, and W21 are considered "formative" for faculty and thus are "not to be included in the annual review or future personnel actions, unless the faculty member chooses to include them in the process" (Temporary Policies, 2020-21). If you wish to have LIFT evaluations from W20, F20, or W21 semesters included in your portfolio, contact the PC chair to request the formative evaluations to be added to the official list along with a note explaining that they were included at the candidate's request per the temporary policies cited above.

Note: Spring/Summer 2021 is described in the temporary policies as "summative" (i.e. applicable to formal evaluations). The temporary policies do not mention Spring/Summer 2020, so they are also being treated as "summative".

No CVRs were completed for W20 or F20 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

For W21, eligible faculty were given two options:

1. An official Class Visit Record (CVR) "for potential use in future personnel actions" that "would be considered supplementary, would only be placed in the portfolio at the request of the candidate, and would not be considered required unit materials" (see W21 CVR Policy Memo). 
2. A formative teaching dialog (with no written record produced). 

Faculty who opted for a W21 CVR and wish to have it included their portfolio should notify the PC chair, who will take care of uploading it to the candidate's Blackboard site with the W21 Memo attached.

The tenure clock was extended for a one-year period for all non-tenured regular faculty due to the COVID-19 pandemic. (This means "postponement of the time period of a contract renewal and/or tenure review; the new review date will be stipulated in the Dean's approval letter."). Furthermore, if 2020, or its aftermath, results in a regular faculty member not having enough scholarship/creative activity, the regular faculty member can request to pause the contract renewal/tenure clock for up to two years. 

A tenure pause letter dated August 27, 2020, was sent by the CLAS Dean's Office to all affected faculty. The letters provided details about each candidate's new tenure timeline, how to request an extension for a second year, and how to opt out of the new timeline and be considered for tenure at the normally scheduled time in their original appointment letter. The process involves notifying the unit head in writing and cc'ing Heidi Nicholson ([email protected]) and Associate Dean Donovan Anderson ([email protected]).

The deadline for submitting written requests to either opt out or extend the pause to a second year was August 15, 2021.

Regular faculty members who are applying for full professor "do not have to count the year 2020 as part of the six-year assessment period, although they can do so if desired" (temporary policies for 2020-21). With that policy in mind, in Fall 2021, the personnel committee adopted the following modification (bolded) to Step 5 of our personnel procedures document, effectively allowing a longer period of time from which valid CVRs may be drawn for tenured faculty going up for full professor when it overlaps with AY20-21: 

• Step 5. Class Visit Records: Untenured faculty who are under consideration for contract renewal, tenure, and/or promotion must include in their portfolios all Class Visit Records produced by the PC prior to their review. Tenured faculty who are under consideration for promotion must include all Class Visit Records produced by the PC in the three years prior to their review. If any candidate (untenured or tenured) has not been visited by the PC at least twice in the three years prior to their review, then the PC will conduct classroom visitations during the semester prior to the review (winter semester for promotions to Professor; fall semester for all other personnel actions) to ensure that the candidate’s portfolio includes at least two Class Visit Records from the three years prior to their review, or four years if one of those years is 2020-21 and at least one CVR comes from F21 or later.  

See the other panels in this FAQ for additional information related to the use of LIFT evaluations and annual performance reviews.

The Department of Mathematics requires the electronic submission of materials.  If you need assistance creating PDF files, please talk with the PC Chair or office staff for guidance on how to do this. 

Use the specified file structure to organize your electronic portfolio.

Please follow the guidelines in the Electronic Portfolio Organization document when you prepare your electronic portfolio.

The candidate must upload their candidate materials to their Personnel Blackboard site (Candidate Materials folder).  The PC Chair will ensure that required student evaluations, Class Visit Records, Faculty Activity Plans, Faculty Activity Reports, Written Performance Summaries, and external letters are uploaded to each candidate's Personnel Bb site (Unit Materials folder).

Use the following paper recommendations to make a page estimate for the length of your portfolio: The College Personnel Committee recommends that the portfolio (if printed and in a binder) be no thicker than 3 inches for contract renewal, and no more than 5 inches for tenure, promotion to Associate Professor, and promotion to Full Professor (excluding student evaluations).

The portfolio should be in final form prior to the submission deadline. Normally, these materials should not be revised after the submission deadline unless new information has become available (e.g., an article listed on the CV as under review was accepted for publication after the submission deadline).

See the CPC Guidelines for Personnel Portfolios for more information about what to include in your Candidate Materials folder of your portfolio.  Each item listed should be saved as an individual pdf file.

• Personal Statement
• Curriculum Vita
• Examples of Relevant Work to Support Personal Statement:
  • Teaching Supporting Materials
  • Scholarly/Creative Activity Supporting Materials
  • Service Supporting Materials
• Documentation of Years Toward Tenure or Joint Appointment (if applicable)
• Unit Recommendation Report from prior contract renewal(s) (recommended, but not required)

The PC will add the following documents to the portfolio you submit:

• Student evaluations
• Class Visit Records (CVRs) after December 2013 (minimum of 2)
  • Exception for W20, F20, and W21: No CVRs were completed for W20 or F20 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The CVRs for W21 were optional, and if completed, the candidate decides whether or not they will include it in their portfolio: See W21 CVR Policy Memo for details.
• External letters
• Faculty Activity Reports (FARs), Faculty Activity Plans (FAPs), and Written Performance Summaries (WPS) (one file, organized chronologically)
  • Exceptions for 2020 and 2021: The 2020 FAR followed the temporary personnel policies (click for details), and the 2021 FAP (originally due Nov. 2020) was postponed and only described work for Fall 2021. Any salary adjustments in summer 2021 were based on evaluations from 2019. 

See the Procedure for the Evaluation of Tenure-Track Faculty document for more information.

Yes. This documentation should be placed in the applicable “Supporting Materials” file.

For contract renewals and tenure/promotion to Associate Professor, the PC must include all FAPs (or workload plans) and FARs since your initial hire at GVSU. For promotion to Full Professor, you must include all FAPs and FARs from the previous 6 years at GVSU or the length of service as a tenured or tenure-track faculty member normally not to exceed 6 years. (See BOT Policies 4.2.10.5D)

Note that special policies applied to the FAPs and FARs for 2020 and 2021. See other areas of this FAQ or the Provost's temporary policies page for details.

The PC will include all Written Performance Summaries since the 2015 calendar year. (See #9 in the Procedure for Evaluation of Tenure Track Faculty and page 3, Faculty Activity Reports, in the CPC Guidelines for Personnel Portfolios.)

Note that special policies applied to faculty activity reports and annual evaluations for 2020 and 2021. See other areas of this FAQ or the Provost's temporary policies page for details.

No. For untenured faculty, the PC will include all Class Visit Records completed after December 2013*. For tenured faculty considering promotion, all Class Visit Records produced by the PC in the 3 years prior to review will be included. If any candidate (untenured or tenured) has not been visited twice in the 3 years prior to the review, then the PC will conduct 2 visits in the semester prior to the review. (See #5 in the Procedure for the Evaluation of Tenure-Track Faculty).  The candidate may choose to include class visit records conducted prior to December 2013 in their supplementary material in the portfolio.

*Note that special policies applied for CVRs in 2020 and 2021. See other areas of this FAQ or the Provost's temporary policies page for details.

The College Personnel Committee recommends that the PC normally includes student evaluations from the past 6 years*.

COVID-19 Notes:

• LIFT Evaluations for W20, F20, and W21 were considered "formative" for faculty and thus are "not to be included in the annual review or future personnel actions, unless the faculty member chooses to include them in the process" (Temporary Policies, 2020-21). If you wish to have LIFT evaluations from W20, F20, or W21 semesters included in your portfolio, contact the PC chair.
• Regular faculty members who are applying for full professor do not have to count the year 2020 as part of the six-year assessment period, although they can do so if desired (Temporary Policies, 2020-21).

See the CPC Guidelines for Personnel Portfolios (p. 2) for a list of items to include in your CV. Be sure to clearly indicate when you began working at GVSU and your position(s) held. The PC recommends that you list your accomplishments in reverse chronological order

Yes. The Board Policies (formerly the Administrative Policies) now uses the language of “personal statement.” We formerly called this document an integrative statement.

The purpose of the personal statement is to document how you have met university, college and departmental standards associated with the personnel action in each of the evaluation criteria (teaching, scholarly activity, and service). The CPC Guidelines for Personnel Portfolios (p.2) state the following:

“The Personal Statement should not simply repeat information already contained in the CV. Rather, the most effective statements are those in which candidates discuss accomplishments as they relate to unit and college standards, and reflect upon teaching, scholarly/creative activity, and service in ways that help the reader to understand the significance of his/her accomplishments and goals in the context of the unit, the university, and the discipline.”

See the CPC Guidelines for Personnel Portfolios (pp. 2-3) for more information about personal statements.

The college and university administration and faculty governance committees have provided guidance regarding the ways LIFT surveys may and may not be used in the evaluation of teaching.

The CLAS newsletter from July 14, 2021 states:

• Negative action in a personnel case may not be taken based on LIFT scores alone, units and colleges should not use LIFT data to construct a cut off point for being considered an effective teacher, and the Challenge and Engagement Index (CEI) should no longer be used. 

The Provost's memo "LIFT Scores – FPPC Recommendation" (pdf) dated 7/23/21 states: 

1. Board of Trustees Policy BOT 4.2.9.1.A states, “Effective teaching must be documented by: a) self-evaluation b) peer evaluation, and c) student evaluations.” Therefore, LIFT results should not be the major method of teaching evaluation, but rather one of the methods. Adverse action in a faculty personnel review should not be taken due to LIFT results only; any teaching issues should also be identified through another method of evaluation.
2. LIFT is an ordinal data scale; units and colleges should not use LIFT to construct a rating scale or establish a cut-off point for being considered an acceptable teacher. Colleges not in compliance must revise their use of LIFT results by May 5, 2022.
3. The Challenge and Engagement Index (CEI) score should not be used as the LIFT Management Committee has concluded that it is not a meaningful measurement. This change is effective immediately.

And the CLAS Personnel Committee View On Student Evaluations (pdf) dated 2010-11 concludes with the following guidance: 

• "It is not necessary for faculty to lower their standards or pander to students out of fear of negative student evaluations. It is necessary for faculty to show that they take the evaluations seriously, reflect on what they have to say about the effectiveness of the instruction, and respond when changes are appropriate. The CPC looks for evidence of that reflection and pedagogical evolution, not for an absence of complaints." (Please refer to the CPC's full statement for important context and other details.)

Yes. The CPC Guidelines for Personnel Portfolios (p. 3) state the following:

“Personal statements should include reflections on patterns of student responses to teaching. For example, candidates may wish to comment on ways that assignments or course structure changed in response to student feedback, to comment on patterns of success, or to discuss concrete plans to address concerns raised in the evaluations.”

See the related FAQ item on this page, "How are student evaluations (LIFT surveys) used in the evaluation of teaching?" for additional information, including a link to the document “CPC View on Student Evaluations,” available on the CLAS website, which provides guidance in interpreting student evaluations.

The CLAS PC states the following page limits for personal statements:

• 5 pages for contract renewal
• 7 pages for tenure and/or promotion to Associate Professor
• 9 pages for promotion to Full Professor.

The CPC also recommends 12 point font and single spacing. See the CPC Guidelines for Personnel Portfolios (pp 2-3) for more information about personal statements.

Yes. The CPC Guidelines for Personnel Portfolios (p. 3) state that "comments/claims in a well-written Personal Statement are supported by evidence in the supporting documents, ideally with direct links to numbered attachments or tabs.”

Within the text of the integrative statement, the PC recommends, when applicable that you specify where evidence can be found (either by referring to specific page numbers if you have paginated your portfolio or by referring to a specific file/folder).  For example, if you are explaining how you assess your students’ understanding, you might write something like: “See Appendix 4: Rubrics and Formal Assessments (Supplementary Material: Teaching pp. 54-65) for examples of homework and exam rubrics I use to assess students’ work.”

Yes. The candidate has an opportunity to share a draft of his/her personal statement with the PC (personnel committee) and their Advocate. The PC and Advocate will meet with the candidate to provide oral formative feedback. The choice to meet with the PC and receive feedback on the personal statement rests with the candidate; this choice will not be viewed favorably or unfavorably in subsequent steps of the evaluation process. (See #7 in the Procedure for the Evaluation of Tenure-Track Faculty.)

Yes. According to our Procedures for the Evaluation of Tenure-Track Faculty (#10), each department member is expected to review at least the candidate’s vita (CV), personal statement, Class Visit Records, numerical student evaluation data, and external letters. In addition, faculty should seek additional information/clarification from the candidate’s materials when necessary to ensure an informed and responsible participation in the candidate’s review. 

All tenure-track faculty members are invited to submit 1 - 3 suggested bullet items (1-2 sentences each) for each of the 3 areas of evaluation (teaching, scholarly activity, service). The PC and Advocate will review the entire portfolio and will submit several bullet items for each of the 3 areas of evaluation.  Faculty are encouraged to include a brief rationale for their suggestions, but the rationale will not be included in the agenda.

These suggestions will be sent to the Unit Head, PC, and Advocate. The candidate will also receive an edited copy of the compiled suggested bullet items, with names redacted, when the Initial Agenda is shared with the department so the candidate has full information in order to address questions/concerns/issues at the unit discussion meeting. (See #10, #11, and #15 in the Procedures for the Evaluation of Tenure-Track Faculty.)

Section 4.2.10.7B of the BOT Policies (formerly Administrative Manual) states that "only unit regular faculty in attendance may vote, except those tenure track, unit regular faculty who have not completed two (2) years of full-time, uninterrupted service as a unit regular faculty member (except as provided by Section 4.2.7.2)."

In addition, Section 4.2.10.6.A of the BOT Policies excuses faculty with conflicts of interest from all aspects of the unit personnel procedures, as described below:

For purposes of Section 4.2.10.6 and 4.2.10.7, unit regular faculty members who have a Conflict of Interest with a candidate under consideration for a personnel action shall be completely excused from all aspects of involvement and participation in the unit procedures as it relates to the candidate for which there is a Conflict of Interest. Should a question arise as to whether there is a Conflict of Interest, the Dean of the College/Library shall make the final determination. A Conflict of Interest includes, but is not limited to, one or more of the following:

1. A familial relationship, including Household Member and their dependents, with the candidate;
2. A financial or business relationship exists with the candidate outside of the University; or
3. Unit regular faculty members who are in their terminal year of employment due to non-renewal of a contract or denial of tenure.

Section 4.2.10.7.B  of the BOT Policies states:

At least two thirds of the members of the unit regular faculty must be present for a valid vote on a motion regarding a personnel action to be taken. For the purpose of determining the required quorum or majority, the count of the number of the members of the unit regular faculty will not include the candidate or those absent because they are on sabbatical or approved leave of absence, those tenure track, unit regular faculty who have not completed two (2) years of full-time, uninterrupted service as a unit regular faculty member, or those with a Conflict of Interest. To pass, the personnel vote must be carried by a majority of the members of the unit regular faculty eligible to vote unless they are on sabbatical or approved leave of absence, or those with a Conflict of Interest. If a vote does not obtain the required majority for any reason, this will be reflected in the minutes of the meeting, and the process will continue on to the College Personnel Committee. 

Section 4.2.10.9.A of the BOT Polices states “In making personnel recommendations, the Dean will normally be expected to recommend in favor of the appointee if the appointee has the support of the College Personnel Committee. If, in any case, the Dean does not accept the recommendation of the College's Personnel Committee, the Dean will present the reasons in writing to the appointee, the unit, and the Committee.