Lecturers, Range Elevation

This policy has been developed in accordance with section 12.15 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the California Faculty Association and the Board of Trustees of the California State University, and which states procedures for range elevation on the salary schedule [for lecturers] shall be established at each campus by the President, after recommendation by the appropriate Academic Senate Committee.

1. Eligibility
   Lecturers eligible for range elevation on the salary schedule shall be limited to those who have no more service step increase eligibility in their current range, and have served five (5) years in their current range.
   1. Each year the associate vice-president for faculty affairs shall compile a list of lecturers eligible for range elevation. On or before November 1, each eligible lecturer shall be notified of eligibility and each department shall receive a list of lecturers eligible in that department.
   2. Each eligible lecturer shall be considered for a range elevation on the salary schedule unless he or she informs the department chair in writing of his or her desire not to be considered at this time.
2. Establishing Evaluation Procedures for Departments 
   The award of a range elevation on the salary schedule may be made by the dean of the school after consultation with the pertinent department. That consultation shall be in the form of a written recommendation to the dean from the department.
   1. Departments may determine their own procedures for evaluating their lecturers and preparing recommendations regarding range elevation.
   2. All current Unit 3 employees are eligible to participate in all departmental discussions and decisions pertaining to procedures for range elevation. All such employees must be fully informed of their right to participate and of the days, times and locations of the meeting at which these issues will be discussed. Such notification must be in writing and must be given five working days before any meeting to discuss these issues.
   3. Departments may choose one of the following configurations to evaluate lecturers for the purpose of making a recommendation on range elevation:
      1. The departmental chair,
      2. A designee,
      3. An elected range elevation review committee, or
      4. Any combination of one or more of the above.
   4. If a department chooses to use a range elevation review committee, all Unit 3 employees are eligible to serve on such a committee.
   5. The voting franchise for the purpose of establishing range elevation procedures and the department policy governing elections related to range elevation shall be proportional to the time base of each Unit 3 member. For example:
      1. A Unit 3 member on .20 appointment casts 1 ballot
      2. A Unit 3 member on .40 appointment casts 2 ballots
      3. A Unit 3 member on .60 appointment casts 3 ballots
      4. A Unit 3 member on .80 appointment casts 4 ballots
      5. A Unit 3 member on 1.0 appointment casts 5 ballots
         For purposes of determining the number of ballots an individual receives, appointments that fall between those listed shall be rounded upward.
   6. In any subsequent election regarding the procedures for range evaluation and/or the election procedures pertaining to range elevation, the proportional vote allotted to any employee cannot be less than the proportions described in II.E.
   7. In any election relating to range elevation, all voting must be by mailed secret ballots. Such elections must be held over a period lasting at least five working days.
   8. In the case of lecturers who do not hold an appointment within a department, department-level evaluation shall be by an ad hoc committee of faculty appointed by the dean of the appropriate college after consultation with the lecturer(s) as in II.B.
   9. Each department shall forward its initial procedures on range elevation to the office of the Academic Senate within 10 working days of approving the procedures. Any subsequent changes to the department's procedures on range elevation must be forwarded to the Academic Senate by November 1 of the academic year the procedures take effect.
3. Evaluation Criteria 
   To be recommended for range elevation, a lecturer must show professional growth and development appropriate to the lecturer's work assignment and the mission of the university during the period between the date of initial appointment or, where applicable, the date of the last range elevation and the time of the current request. This is the only review period in which candidates' professional achievements shall be evaluated.
   1. This section lists examples of activities that may be used to demonstrate appropriate professional growth and development. It is neither exhaustive nor minimal, but simply a listing of the typical professional activities engaged in by lecturers in a wide range of disciplines. In all cases quality of performance and appropriateness of the activity shall be the primary consideration when evaluating the merit of a specific activity. Participation alone, in one or more of the activities listed below, does not certify a lecturer for a range elevation. Activities are listed alphabetically, and no weighting shall be inferred from the order.
      1. active participation at professional meetings and conferences
      2. activities enhancing the effective teaching of the discipline
      3. advising and mentoring student associations
      4. collaborative research and creative activity involving the campus and the community
      5. collaborative teaching
      6. contributions to improving the campus climate: the promotion of mutual respect and
      7. acceptance of diversity in all its forms
      8. creative activities in support of effective teaching
      9. curriculum and program development
      10. development of instructional materials
      11. development of standards and/or outcomes assessment
      12. editing of publications
      13. external fundraising and resource development related to the mission of the university
      14. fostering of collegiality
      15. grant proposals to conduct research in the discipline, to support pedagogy, or to further the mission of the University
      16. increased mastery of the discipline evidenced by additional relevant education or an additional degree
      17. involvement of students in the research and creative processes
      18. leadership and active participation in service activities of professional associations
      19. leadership and special contributions to the basic instructional mission of the university
      20. leadership in faculty governance and campus life at the department, college, university, or CSU system level
      21. maintenance and technical support of university labs, equipment, materials, supplies, safety standards and any other support of environments that require advanced professional attention
      22. mentoring of colleagues
      23. organizing events and activities for the sharing of ideas and knowledge presentations at conferences
      24. professional contributions to the community, including professional efforts which bring the community and the campus together
      25. program advising
      26. publications, exhibitions, and/or performances that advance knowledge
      27. recruitment and retention of students
      28. research and/or creative activity in discipline related pedagogy
      29. research and/or creative activity in the discipline
      30. teaching and instructionally related activities
      31. thesis research and supervision
4. Application and Evaluation
   1. Application
      1. The candidate: To be evaluated for range elevation, each candidate must submit application materials that conform to the requirements of his or her department.
      2. The department: As part of its range elevation procedures, each department may define the collection of materials to be considered in an application for range elevation. At a minimum, the candidate shall provide the following materials:
         1. a current curriculum vitae,
         2. a description of the candidate's work assignments for each semester of the period under consideration,
         3. a narrative describing his/her professional growth and development, and
         4. student evaluation summaries for all evaluated courses taught by the candidate in the department during the period of evaluation.
   2. Evaluation
      1. The Department
         1. Each department shall prepare a recommendation regarding range elevation for each eligible candidate considered. This recommendation shall be a written report that includes the department's decision as well as the reasons for reaching that decision. A copy of this recommendation shall be forwarded to the candidate, department chair and dean.
         2. The department must assess the quality and appropriateness of the candidate's experience. Materials submitted by the candidate shall be evaluated in relation to the candidate's work assignment while employed in the department. Departments may not require, but may consider, evidence of performance outside of the area of the candidate's work assignment
         3. Department evaluators may seek additional information to verify a candidate's claims. The candidate may be required to provide additional documentation. Evaluators may also solicit written comments from the department chair or faculty peers to clarify information provided by the candidate. Any comments that are used to determine a recommendation must be included as supplemental attachments to the final written report and must be available to the candidate.
         4. When a candidate is asked to provide additional documentation, the burden of supplying this documentation in a timely manner resides with the candidate. Failure to provide requested information shall not delay either the evaluation process nor the preparation of the department's recommendation.
      2. The Dean
         1. Once the department has prepared its recommendation, it shall be forwarded to the dean of the school who shall make the final decision on awarding a range elevation to the candidate.
         2. The decision of the dean shall be forwarded to the candidate and the department.
         3. When a candidate's request is denied, the dean must provide the candidate and department with a written explanation of the reasons for the denial.
   3. Timetable: The office of faculty affairs shall provide a timetable for all deadlines related to range elevation. This will be distributed each year prior to October 1.
5. Handling Disputes 
   Denial of range elevations shall be subject to the peer review process pursuant to section 10.11 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, except that the peer panel's decision shall be final. On each campus the pool for funding successful lecturer range elevation appeals is limited to 4 steps per each 50 lecturer faculty eligible for range elevation.

Updated June 29, 2000 by SSU.policies@sonoma.edu