From time to time, special review of any faculty member may be required in response to perceived difficulties. No individual shall be evaluated through special review more frequently than once in three years, except in follow-up of an earlier review or when special review is requested in response to a different alleged problem with the individual's performance. Special review will not substitute for other regular evaluations. A special review may be instituted upon written request to the Faculty Status Committee by:
- the faculty member,
- the faculty member's dean,
- two faculty members who carry full-time instructional duties, or
- the Vice President for Academic Affairs.
When special review is initiated, the Faculty Status Committee coordinates appointment of a three-member evaluation panel, naming one member (designated as convener) and inviting the faculty member and the faculty member's dean each to select another panel member (if a dean is under review, the Vice President for Academic Affairs selects the third panel member). All members shall be tenured Seattle Pacific faculty. At least one shall be chosen from within the individual's school, and at least one shall be from outside the individual's school. The individual's own dean and any faculty member originally requesting the evaluation shall be excluded. No one will serve on more than one special evaluation panel in any one year. Other qualified persons, as determined by the evaluation panel and with concurrence of the faculty member under review, including persons not affiliated with the University, may also be consulted.
The special review will evaluate performance with the goal of renewing the commitment and accountability of the individual and the University to each other. The evaluation panel will consider the progress of the individual, as revealed in various evaluation reports, and the success of the institution in providing the necessary material support for that progress. The panel initially will invite the faculty member to prepare a documented self-assessment summarizing the individual's progress and contributions and evaluating institutional support. At the individual's option, the most recent self-assessment from a regular review may serve as a response to this invitation.
The panel will then consider relevant evidence of individual performance (e.g. syllabi, PDPs and self-assessments), and institutional support (such as course loads, committee responsibilities, awards, sabbaticals). The panel will draft a report consisting of a summary evaluation, an explanatory narrative identifying strengths and weaknesses of the individual and the institution, and a packet of supporting documents. The faculty member will be shown the report (not including materials which identify the evaluators) and invited to append a response.
The Faculty Status Committee, upon receipt of the panel report, will convene to recommend appropriate action to the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The recommendation could, in an extreme case, call on the one hand for a dismissal hearing or, on the other, for a faculty censure hearing vis a vis the University or one or more of its administrative officers. Less extreme recommendations might entail, for example, a memorandum of understanding between the faculty member and the University specifying actions to be taken and objectives to be met, a one-year probationary period with a follow-up review, or no action whatever in acknowledgment of satisfactory findings.
The report and recommendations will be kept confidential, as provided for other confidential documents in Section 4.3, and shall be available as evidence in any subsequent grievance, censure, or dismissal hearing. The Vice President for Academic Affairs will personally consult with the faculty member (in the presence, if either party wishes, of the dean and/or the convener of the evaluation panel), to develop a course of action consonant with the recommended actions.