Range elevation is not an equity increase or requesting a "raise." It is a specific process defined in Article 12 of the CSU faculty collective bargaining agreement. Eligibility to apply for a range elevation is limited to temporary faculty who:
1. Are no longer eligible for SSIs in their current range and,
2. Have been in their current range for five (5) or more years
CSUF's range elevation evaluation policy is described in UPS 210.070.
The portfolio prepared for the application for a range elevation evaluation is similar to the portfolio prepared for a periodic evaluation. The most notable differences are that the portfolio should cover performance from the previous 5 years and include "development" (see UPS 210.070, Section VII.C)
EVALUATION FOR RANGE ELEVATION
The following excerpt is from UPS 210.070, Section VI
UPS 210.070 - SECTION VI. Comprehensive Evaluation for Range Elevation
The purpose of this evaluation shall be to determine whether the faculty member is eligible for appointment in the range higher than the current range, which shall be based on a consideration as to whether the faculty member has shown sufficient development while in range and whether his or her performance in all assigned areas while in range has been satisfactory or better. Eligibility for range elevation is defined in the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the CSU and the CFA; faculty members who wish to review eligibility criteria should refer to the Agreement.
B. Period of Review
Evaluations for range elevation consideration shall involve a review of the faculty member's performance in the current range, but because the time in range can be extensive (e.g., up to a decade or more), a range elevation evaluation shall normally focus particular attention on the most recent five years. A faculty member under review will normally document in his or her C.V. all accomplishments over the entire period in the current range. The period of review for range evaluation consideration shall be defined as the time period between the start of the academic year five years prior to the current academic year and the date on which the file is submitted. The faculty member will be expected to highlight the most recent five years when preparing the WPAF for review.
If a faculty member wishes to include in the WPAF evidence of performance outside this five-year period, he or she shall limit such additional material to material that (a) is relevant to performance while in the current range and (b) provides evidence of performance or accomplishments that cannot otherwise be documented within the most recent five-year period.
Applications for range elevation shall be accompanied by the WPAF that includes evidence of effective instructional performance as well as evidence of currency in the field, consistent with the faculty member’s work assignment. It is also expected that a faculty member will have developed as an instructor and as a professional during the time in a given range.
Therefore, evidence of this development during the period in range should also be provided for range elevation consideration. A terminal degree (or equivalent) may not be required of a faculty member for range elevation unless explicitly required for the position when he or she was initially appointed, required by an external accrediting body, or otherwise required by Department or College policy.
C. Range Elevation Evaluation Process
Temporary faculty members under consideration for range elevation shall be evaluated by the appropriate Department peer review committee, the Department Chair or School Director, and the Dean. The appropriate Vice President, as the President’s designee, shall make the final determination on range elevation.
Annually, at least sixty days before the file due date, the Faculty Affairs and Records office shall publish a list of, and notify, all temporary faculty members eligible for range elevation. In addition, the Faculty Affairs and Records office shall notify all temporary faculty that the period for range elevation consideration is open and inform them whom to contact if they are unsure of their eligibility. Those faculty members who wish to be considered for range elevation shall submit the WPAF (as described below) to the Department Chair by the published due date. On that date, the file shall be considered closed for the purpose of the evaluation. The Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs may extend this deadline under extraordinary circumstances.
At all levels of review in the evaluation process, reviewers are responsible for evaluating the faculty member’s performance of assigned duties based on the materials presented in the WPAF and other relevant information and documentation outlined in Section VIII.C and for making a recommendation regarding range elevation in light of the specific criteria (outlined below) and any approved College or Department policies on range elevation. An evaluation of “Satisfactory” or better shall be required for a positive recommendation for range elevation.
Range elevation shall be accompanied by a salary increase of at least 5%, effective at the beginning of the academic year following the range elevation review.
Faculty members considered for range elevation shall be notified of the Vice President’s decision no later than June 15 of the current academic year. Range elevation decisions are subject to appeal, as outlined in the CSU/CFA Collective Bargaining Agreement. Appeals shall be due in the office of Faculty Affairs and Records by September 1 (i.e., shortly after the start of the following semester). The Faculty Hearing Committee shall review all range elevation decisions for which an appeal was filed, based on this policy and any approved College and Department policies on range elevation. A majority vote of the committee is required to overturn a denial of range elevation; decisions of the FPC are final and binding on all parties.
The following excerpt is from UPS 210.070, Section VII.C. Range Elevation - for additional information please read Sections VII.A and VII.B.
UPS 210.070 - SECTION VII.C Range Elevation
For range elevation consideration, an additional criterion is development as an instructor and, where relevant to the work assignment, as a professional, during the time in a given range. This development may be demonstrated by a variety of activities over the review period, including but not limited to:
1. the refinement and improvement of instructional and assessment materials;
2. the revision of course content and materials based on assessment activities;
3. the creation of new course materials (such as texts, student study guides, and the like) aimed at increasing student success;
4. the refinement and improvement of teaching and professional practices as appropriate to the work assignment;
5. self-reflection and self-assessment that lead to changes in practice, accompanied by some indication of the efficacy of those changes;
6. collaborative teaching or collaborative research/scholarly/creative activity that has led to new or innovative content or methods;
7. adaptation of new/varied pedagogical strategies to reach diverse student populations;
8. participation in conferences, workshops, seminars and symposia related to teaching and/or the discipline; and,
9. when a faculty member is particularly active in the profession, publication or other dissemination of original contributions to the discipline or to discipline-based pedagogy.
The activities listed for range elevation consideration are meant to be representative of the kinds of endeavors an instructional faculty member might undertake to develop as an instructor; it is not expected that all faculty members will engage in all of these activities. Rather, it is expected that individuals will engage in some of these activities, as appropriate to their assignments and to their disciplines.
PREPARING THE WPAF
The following excerpt is from UPS 210.070, Section VIII - The WPAF and Other Relevant Evidence.
UPS 210.070, Section VIII
A. Faculty Preparation of the WPAF
The faculty member under review is responsible for submitting evidence of satisfactory performance of assigned duties, in the form of the WPAF (as described below). The WPAF shall include documentation for whichever performance areas will be reviewed, as appropriate to the temporary faculty member’s work assignment during the period under review. Annually, the Faculty Affairs and Records office issues a Review Calendar that indicates the file due dates for each type of evaluation. Faculty who will be reviewed shall be notified at least sixty days prior to the file due date that they are to submit the WPAF to the Department Chair. The notification shall include reference to this evaluation policy and applicable College and Department policies.
For faculty members who receive units for non-teaching duties (e.g., faculty members appointed for 15 weighted teaching units (WTU) but teaching only 12 WTU or less), evidence submitted shall include an indication of the performance in other areas of assigned duties during the review period, such as non-instructional duties, scholarly/professional activity, and/or service to the Department. Where duties include assignments such as advising, assessment activities, lab or course coordination, and the like, evidence submitted shall include evidence of effective performance of those duties. Temporary faculty members who wish to include evidence of professional achievement and/or service to the University, the profession, or the community may do so insofar as these activities are either assigned or relevant to performance in their assignment.
The faculty member is responsible for providing the following information/documentation in the WPAF, as appropriate to the work assignment:
1. Updated C.V. covering the entire academic and professional employment history.
Note: With the exception of the C.V., all documentation below is for the period of review as defined above.
2. A summary of assigned duties, including (for instructional faculty) a list of teaching assignments for each semester, including number of students per class. For those with non-instructional duties such as course coordination or assessment activities, the summary shall indicate expected activities and/or products associated with the assignment.
3. A narrative summary (not to exceed 1000 words), that provides a self-assessment of accomplishments in all aspects of assigned duties, including the primary assignment (teaching performance or performance as librarian or professional counselor) as well as related activities. If the WPAF includes evidence not directly related to the primary assignment(s), the narrative shall explain the relevance of such evidence to those assigned duties. For Range Elevation evaluations, the narrative shall summarize the ways in which the faculty member has developed while in the current range. The narrative may be supplemented for any of the following reasons (a faculty member may choose all that apply); each “supplemental area” shall increase the word limit by 500 words:
a. If any weaknesses or problem areas have been identified (either in earlier reviews, in SOQs, or by the faculty member him or herself), the narrative shall include any plans or prior efforts to address these areas and (if known) the results of those efforts.
b. If the faculty member is expected to render service to the profession, the University, the College, or the Department as part of his or her work assignment, the narrative shall summarize those service activities.
c. If the faculty member is expected to be professionally active and/or to engage in scholarly or creative activity as part of his or her work assignment, the narrative shall summarize those professional, scholarly, or creative activities. Note that all faculty members in the Mihaylo College of Business and Economics are expected to meet AACSB (Association for Advancement of the Collegiate Schools of Business) accreditation standards for faculty as implemented by the College; narratives provided by temporary faculty in MCBE shall include this area.
For temporary faculty with non-instructional duties, including librarians and counselors, the WPAF shall include evaluations from students, where available. (As explained in Section VIII.C, Student Opinion Questionnaires are available to reviewers online and incorporated into the PAF by reference therein.)
5. Other supporting materials that are directly relevant to teaching performance (or performance as librarian or professional counselor). Examples include a representative syllabus for each course taught, class assignments, sample papers and/or exams, other instructional material, evidence of grading practices, classroom visitation reports, and (where available) signed letters from students. Supporting materials shall emphasize quality and representativeness over quantity.
6. Evidence of currency in the field, as demonstrated by, for example, professional achievement or activities, curricular innovations or other relevant instructional material, consistent with College and Department policy documents and the faculty member’s work assignment.
7. If appropriate to the work assignment, supporting materials that evidence scholarship or creative activity, and/or professional, university, and community service.
It is the responsibility of the temporary faculty member to ensure the completeness of the WPAF.
B. Submission of the WPAF and Added Materials Policy
Once the WPAF is submitted to the Department Chair and the due date is past, the evaluation cycle begins. After this date, a faculty member may add material only as follows:
1. If required documents are missing from the WPAF, they shall be provided in a timely manner and placed in the WPAF by the Department Chair; and
2. If material that documents a substantial change in the status of an activity referenced in the narrative summary described above becomes available after the due date, this material may be added with permission from the appropriate Department peer review committee. The committee shall approve addition of material only if the material is judged to be relevant to the review in progress and the material was not available to the faculty member under review prior to the file submission date. Before consideration at subsequent levels of review, material added to the WPAF shall be returned for review, evaluation, and comment by all previous levels.
C. Other Relevant Evidence
All reviews shall be based not only upon evidence provided by the faculty member in the WPAF, but also upon other relevant information and documentation provided by the Faculty Affairs and Records office, the Dean’s office, and the Department office, provided that additions to the PAF have been made in compliance with the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Such documentation shall include, at a minimum, all of the following materials that are available at the time the file is submitted:
1. Evaluations and recommendations, responses and rebuttals, if any, and decisions from the most recent review cycle;
2. Summary reports of Student Opinion Questionnaires from all terms evaluated during the current review period;
3. Completed Student Opinion Questionnaires from all classes taught during the review period, including summer/intersession instruction, if any (which will be available to reviewers electronically); and
4. Statistical summaries of grade distributions for all courses taught, including summer/intersession instruction, if any.
Questions? please contact Phil Lee, Faculty Affairs and Records, at email@example.com.