Skip to secondary navigation
Skip to content

HSU Policies

04-11/12-FA Appendix J Amendment: Soliciting Student Letters

Applies To:
Printer-friendly version
Month/Year Posted: 
11-2011
Policy Number: 
04-11/12-FA

Resolution Regarding Appendix J and Soliciting Student Letters

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of Humboldt State University recommends that the following be added to Appendix J, “Faculty Personnel Policies and Procedures for Retention, Tenure and Promotion,” Section VII.A.2. (Performance Review, Student Evaluation), as a new part c):
c)   Due to the potential for the perception of a conflict of interest, candidates shall not  request signed student letters from current HSU students or from students working under them.  It is the responsibility of the IUPC to make requests for signed student letters on behalf of the candidate. A candidate shall not be penalized for the lack of such letters; in such a case, anonymous student course evaluations shall be considered as sufficient student commentary on teaching.
 
And be it further
 
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of Humboldt State University recommends that the following be added to Appendix J, “Faculty Personnel Policies and Procedures for Retention, Tenure and Promotion,” Section VIII.B.3. (Peer Review Committees, IUPC, Procedures), as a new part b), with following sections re-lettered:
 
a) The IUPC shall invite written statements from all available members of the unit at the rank of professor to ensure that there is adequate substantive collegial evaluation of candidates. Other faculty members of the unit will be notified of the deadline for receipt of these written statements, but are not required to provide such a statement.
 
(1) Statements from colleagues shall be based upon direct observations and analysis of a candidate's effectiveness and contributions in each performance area.
 
b) The IUPC shall invite written statements from the candidates’ current HSU students and current student employees to ensure that there is adequate notification and opportunity for substantive student evaluation. 
 
cb) The IUPC may provide a meeting where faculty and students can personally consult with the committee. All comments received shall be submitted or summarized in writing and identified by name before placement in the WPAF. 15.16, 15.17b
 
dc) Recommendations of the IUPC shall be based primarily upon written evaluations of candidates made by colleagues in the unit. Evaluations by colleagues within the unit shall be substantiated by other evidence such as written statements from colleagues outside the unit, peers outside the university, former students, and student classroom evaluations.
 
ed) The IUPC shall include in the WPAF a written description of procedures employed in making its recommendation.
 
fe) For candidates holding a joint appointment, evaluation shall be obtained from all affected IUPCs. 15.13
 
And be it further
 
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of Humboldt State University recommends that Appendix J, “Faculty Personnel Policies and Procedures for Retention, Tenure and Promotion,” Section VIII.B.3.d (Peer Review Committees, IUPC, Procedures), be revised as follows:
ed) The IUPC shall include in the WPAF a written description of procedures employed to solicit collegial letters and student letters and procedures employed  making its recommendation.
 
And be it further
 
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of Humboldt State University recommends that this change to Appendix J be forwarded to the General Faculty for a vote during the 2011/2012 academic year. 
 
RATIONALE: A concern has been expressed that there is the potential for the perception of a conflict of interest when a faculty member requests letters from current HSU students for his/her personnel file. These students might feel compelled to write a complimentary letter, because they may have to take a course from that faculty member in a future semester, or because they are doing research (or hoping to do research) under that faculty member.
 
Probationary faculty, on the other hand, might feel compelled to make such a request if their IUPC does not do an effective job soliciting such letters, because of the perception that signed student letters are required for a successful RTP application.
This change is intended to assert that it is the IUPC’s responsibility to solicit letters from candidates’ current students and current student employees on behalf of the candidate.
 
PASSED Without Dissent: Academic Senate, 11/01/11
APPROVED: General Faculty Election (Feb. 27-Mar. 2, 2012)
 
 

 

Office of the President • 1 Harpst St., Arcata, CA 95521 • 707.826.3311• Contact Us.