Faculty Affairs and Records

Review Step Introduction

Updated

Part Time Lecturer Annual Periodic Evaluation Workflow

Lecturer Evaluation Review Steps Breakdown - Word

All Other Lecturer Evaluation Workflows

Lecturer Evaluation Review Steps Breakdown - Word

Range Elevation Workflow

Range Elevations typically occur in the Spring Semester and are ultimately decided by the Provost.  When these cases come through your Interfolio dashboard, they are on a very strict timeline.  Please make sure to complete all responsibilities in each case and forward all of them onto the next review level by the due date listed in the annual FAR evaluation timetables.

Lecturer Evaluation Review Steps Breakdown - Word

Ineligible Department Chairs

For full details on eligibility please reference UPS 210.070, section VII.B.

When a Department Chair within your college is either un-tenured, on leave during the semester when Lecturer Evaluations are occurring, or has some other conflict of interest (i.e. Nepotism) then he or she is considered ineligible to evaluate Lecturer WPAFs for a given cycle.  When this occurs the Department Chair review level will be skipped, and the Dean will need to evaluate the case(s) as the appropriate administrator.  

Candidate Role in Review Step

Responding to the rebuttal period set up by the College Dean or the Dean's office.  

Responsibilities for the Review Step

  1. Login
  2. Evaluate each WPAF in each case against UPS 210.070 or the appropriate Department Standards for Lecturer Faculty (DSLF)
  3. The evaluation shall be prepared on the Lecturer Evaluation Form (or college equivalent) and contain, at a minimum:
    1. Details on the candidate/type of evaluation
    2. The Dean’s name
    3. Date the evaluation was completed
    4. The overall rating of the candidate
      1. Summary of Lecturer Ratings
    5. A written statement on the candidate’s performance
  4. Upload the completed Evaluation to the“Required Items”box on the“Case Details”page of each case
  5. Share the Evaluation with the DPRC & Department Chair
  6. Share the evaluation with the candidate and administer the rebuttal period*
    1. *While most Deans administer rebuttal periods for Lecturers, they are not technically required by the appropriate administrator as faculty can add a response to their PAF at any time
  7. Share any rebuttals to the Dean's Evaluation with the DPRC & Department Chair
  8. Forward case to the next review level by the due date listed in the Annual FAR Timetables

*PLEASE NOTE: FAR will not be creating binders this year, all paperwork that would normally have to go into the binder will be assigned as “Required Documents” at each review level.  The process for satisfying these requirements will be discussed below

Summary of Review Periods for Lecturer Evals

Part-time Lecturers might not have the SOQ and Grade Distribution Data for the entire period of review, because they do not always work for the entire Academic Year.  

Often Part-time Lecturers will work only 1 semester in an Academic year.

Full-time Lecturers/Part-time Lecturers
Review Type  Interfolio Status  Required Volume of Documentation 
Initial Annual Periodic  Lecturer - Annual Periodic  This type of review applies only to Lecturer faculty undergoing their first evaluation at CSUF
  • 1 Semester's worth of documentation and data, dating from the initial hire date 
Subsequent Annual Periodic  Lecturer - Annual Periodic 
  • 2 Semester's (1 Academic Year's) worth of documentation and data
Year 3 of 3 Periodic (3-Year Periodic) Lecturer - 3YR Periodic 
  • 5 Semester's (2 1/2 Academic Year's) worth of documentation and data, dating from the start of the contract
6-Year Comprehensive  Lecturer - 6YR Comprehensive
  • 11 Semester's (5 1/2 Academic Year's) worth of documentation and data, dating from the initial hire date
Range Elevation Range Elevation
  • 10 Semester's (5 Academic Year's) worth of documentation and data

Summary of Lecturer Ratings

Part-Time Lecturer Evaluations 
Review Type Rating #1 Rating #2 Rating #3 Rating #4
Annual Periodic  N/A - the Dean does not typically weigh in on these.  You should be notified if someone had a "needs improvement" or "unsatisfactory" overall rating  N/A N/A
N/A
Year 3 of 3 Periodic  Satisfactory (3-year appointment) Unsatisfactory (No 3-year appointment) N/A N/A
6-Year Comprehensive  Satisfactory (3-year appointment)
Unsatisfactory (No 3-year appointment)
N/A N/A
Range Elevation  Exceeds Expectations  Satisfactory  Needs Improvement  Unsatisfactory 
Recommend Range Elevation Do Not Recommend Range Elevation
Full-time Lecturer Evaluations 
Review Type Rating #1 Rating #2 Rating #3 Rating #4
Annual Periodic  Exceeds Expectations  Satisfactory
Needs Improvement  Unsatisfactory
Year 3 of 3 Periodic  Satisfactory (3-year appointment)
Unsatisfactory (No 3-year appointment)
N/A N/A
6-Year Comprehensive Satisfactory (3-year appointment)
Unsatisfactory (No 3-year appointment)
N/A N/A
Range Elevation Exceeds Expectations Satisfactory Needs Improvement  Unsatisfactory 
Recommend Range Elevation
Do Not Recommend Range Elevation
Previous Article Conducting the Rebuttal Period Through Interfolio
Next Article Log In Options