 |
 |
 |
 |
3-30. Responsibility of Department Chair in the Academic Personnel Review Process The department chair is responsible for making certain that there is an annual informal review of the status of each faculty member in the department with regard to his/her time at rank and step. (See Appendix I for guidelines on computing time at rank and step.) It is suggested that this annual review take place in late spring in order to determine which faculty will be eligible for normal merit increases, promotions, or other mandatory reviews in the following academic year. The chair is asked to annotate the Annual Progress Report with the results of the preliminary review and to submit the report to Academic Personnel. The report form issued by Academic Personnel indicates the time at rank and step for each faculty member. The chair should verify this information and mark the report with the personnel action which the department intends to consider (including "none") for each faculty member. The Progress Report is reviewed by Academic Personnel to ensure that all mandatory reviews are conducted. (See Appendix II for more information on the Annual Progress Report.) A formal academic review is required for all individuals who are eligible for normal advancement or due for mandatory review and for those individuals who are judged by the department as deserving of acceleration. A review for an acceleration may be initiated either by the individual, the department, or the chair. Formal review should also be considered in cases of unsatisfactory performance. B. ACADEMIC ADVANCEMENT It should be stressed to the candidate and all departmental reviewers that advancement is dependent upon demonstration of achievement in areas of the candidate's responsibility. C. PROCEDURES TO ASSURE FAIRNESS In 1977 (Revised in 1992), the University adopted policies to assure fairness in the academic review process. These policies are contained in APM Policies 160, 160 Appendices A and B, 200, and 220 and in the local campus implementation of these policies in Section APP 1-12 of this manual. Department chairs are responsible for adherence to these policies and procedures and may wish to provide copies of the pertinent APM and APP sections to the candidate and to discuss them with the candidate. Chairs may find the checklist "Chair's Guide for Academic Personnel Reviews" (Form UCI-AP-15) useful in discharging this duty. D. DEPARTMENTAL RECOMMENDATION The department chair bears responsibility for presenting and documenting the departmental recommendation for subsequent review levels. In larger departments, however, it may be advantageous for a departmental committee to be appointed to draft the department letter. E. FORWARDING THE DOSSIER FOR SUBSEQUENT REVIEW The chair may also provide an independent assessment of the case that is separate from the department letter. The chair then forwards the completed dossier to the dean, including the appropriate publications and teaching evaluations. After the dean has provided his or her recommendation on the case, the dossier is sent to the appropriate analyst in Academic Personnel, who forwards it to CAP on behalf of the Chancellor. If the Executive Vice Chancellor or CAP nominates an ad hoc review committee, the case will be, in most cases, reviewed by the ad hoc, then by CAP. CAP recommends on the case to the Chancellor (for promotions and above scale merit increases) or to the Executive Vice Chancellor (for merit increases). F. RESPONDING TO TENTATIVE DECISIONS If, during the course of review, a recommendation is made which is different from the department recommendation, a notification will go back to the level of disagreement. This notice normally summarizes the reasons for the differing recommendation and asks if there is further information to be submitted on behalf of, or, by the candidate. If additional information is added to the file at this point, the chair is responsible for seeing that the candidate is kept informed of the department response, including any additional information that is added to the file at this point. The candidate shall be afforded the opportunity to make a written response for inclusion in the personnel review file. (See Section APP 1- 12). G. COMMUNICATING THE FINAL DECISION After the Chancellor's (or the Executive Vice Chancellor's) final decision on a review, a letter announcing the merit or promotion is sent to the candidate via the Dean's office. If the decision is for No Action, a memorandum will be sent to the chair via the Dean; it is then the chair's responsibility to forward this result to the candidate. References - University Policy
APPENDIX IHOW TO COMPUTE YEARS AT RANK AND STEP TO DETERMINE ELIGIBILITY FOR NORMAL ADVANCEMENT OR OTHER REQUIRED REVIEW (not to be used to determine years toward 8-year rule)
When reviewing each academic appointee within a department, it is important to know the number of years the individual has served at rank and step in order to determine whether the appointee is eligible for normal advancement or otherwise due for required review. Normal periods of service are assigned to the various ranks and salary steps in the Academic Salary Scales. Rank is indicated by the payroll title, and step is indicated by a Roman numeral after the title (for example, Assistant Professor, Step II; Associate Professor, Step II; Professor, Step II). The step is not part of the title or the rank. Rather, it is an indicator of the stage of advancement of the individual and is used primarily to keep a record of progress through the rank. Normal periods of service are tracked by calculating the candidate's years at rank and step. Years at rank and step are credited on July 1 to indicate the number of years of service as of the following June 30. This means, for instance, that an appointee hired July 1, 1996, is immediately credited with one year at rank and one year at step for purposes of determining whether review is due in the 1996-1997 review cycle. For statistical purposes, years at rank and step for appointees are recorded in the individual salary history records as follows:
2. An academic-year (9-month) appointee who is appointed mid-year and who serves just one quarter in the fiscal year (July 1 through June 30) will not receive credit for that year at rank and step. 3. A fiscal-year (11-month) appointee who is appointed during the period July 1 through January 1 will receive one year's credit at rank and step. 4. A fiscal-year (11-month) appointee who is appointed during the period January 2 through June 30 will not receive credit for that year at rank and step. (NOTE: The computation of years of service under the eight-year rule is based on slightly different rules, which may be found in APM Policy 133 and in APP 3-50, Appendix I.) SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR DETERMINING WHETHER MANDATORY REVIEW IS DUE
(NOTE: Service in an "acting" title does count toward determining years toward the eight-year rule; see APM Policy 133.) 2. Time served in a "visiting" title does not normally count toward years at rank and step but may be considered in the review process. (NOTE: Service in a "visiting" title does count toward determining years toward the eight-year rule; see APM Policy 133.) 3. If a person is reappointed after an official separation, accruals of time at rank and step are counted only from the date of reappointment. (NOTE: If nonreappointed, a person may not be reappointed to certain titles for five years. See APM Policy 133-0-a-(3).) 4. If a faculty member transfers to UCI from another UC campus without a break in service, continuous time in eligible titles at the other UC campus counts toward time at rank and step at UCI. 5. Periods of leave, with or without salary, normally count toward service in computing the number of years at rank and step. Whether or not the time will count depends on the nature of the leave (e.g., research leave normally will count, medical leave normally will not count). The issue of whether or not the time on leave counts for rank and step (and additionally on the eight-year clock) needs to be resolved at the time the leave is requested. (See APM Policy 200-19-3.) References - University Policy APM 200-19, Normal Periods of Service at Rank and Step
APPENDIX IIANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT
Each year Academic Personnel sends the Annual Progress Report to all academic units. This report lists (a) all persons in the Professor Series and equivalent ranks, (b) all non- student academics employed in teaching titles other than the Professor Series, (c) persons in research titles, and (d) Academic Coordinators. Each unit is responsible for verifying the current status of the individuals listed on the report. In case of additions, corrections, or other discrepancies, please contact the appropriate analyst in Academic Personnel to reconcile the record. After verifying the present status, the unit should indicate anticipated action for these individuals for the upcoming review cycle in the "Proposed Action" column. Please be aware that the report is of an action which the unit anticipates proposing, and it is not binding. If the anticipated action changes, the unit should inform Academic Personnel. A list of actions which may be proposed is provided below.
|