Skip to main content

Workload and Yearly Evaluation Policy

School of Public Service Workload and Yearly Evaluation Policy Statement for Tenured and Tenure-Eligible Faculty Members

Boise State’s School of Public Service (SPS) is dedicated to excellence in innovative teaching, cutting edge scholarship, and meaningful community outreach. SPS serves the state of Idaho as well as regional, national and global communities. The vision of the School is to (1) empower students to become innovative and responsive public service leaders within local, state, national, and global communities, (2) achieve national and international recognition for relevant theoretical and applied research, (3) promote and facilitate informed discourse and civic engagement across diverse groups, and (4) serve as a recognized and trusted resource for policymakers searching for effective solutions to pressing public concerns.

This policy statement deals specifically with workloads for all full-time tenured, and full-time tenure-eligible faculty in the School of Public Service. Instructional planning requires an annual determination of faculty workloads—including teaching loads—for the coming academic year. This determination, ideally, is made during the annual faculty planning and evaluation process that occurs each spring semester.  This process is explained in the “Process for Determining Workload” section below.

The purpose of this policy statement is to provide guidance to faculty, program leads, personnel committees, and administration in making assignments of workload to faculty. These workload guidelines are in accordance with the University Policy on Faculty Tenure and Promotion (#4340) and the University Policy on Workload for Tenured and Tenure Track Faculty (#4560).

Connecting Workload with Promotion & Tenure Evaluation

According to Boise State policy, workload is tied to both promotion and tenure and annual evaluations. As such, according to “Guidelines for Awarding Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor, School of Public Service,” tenure-eligible candidates must meet satisfactory assessment standards set forth in teaching, research, and service. Candidates should demonstrate both teaching effectiveness and commitment to teaching. Candidates can meet satisfactory assessment in research through a combination of peer reviewed, professional, and public service scholarship. Finally, candidates must demonstrate a record of sustained, effective service related to university, school, program, discipline and/or public outreach.

While successful tenure-eligible candidates for promotion and tenure must meet satisfactory assessment in all three areas, the relative percentage of time devoted to each criterion is based on faculty members’ agreed-upon workload in the areas of teaching, research, and service. In addition, annual evaluations of faculty members are framed around an agreed-upon workload distribution and the metrics of does not meet expectations, meets expectations, and exceeds expectations.

General Decision Rules Guiding Workload Assignment

  • The base teaching load at Boise State University is 3-3 (60% effort).
  • Full time faculty should have comparable total effort, although individual distributions of teaching, research, and service will vary across faculty members.
  • This policy should be flexible and responsive to the needs of individuals and units, given individual faculty expertise and preferences.
  • Equity in workloads across individuals and programs in SPS is valued.
  • Academic peer-reviewed, professional, and public service scholarship are all desired across the school’s research portfolio, and funded research is particularly encouraged.
  • Credit hour production is important for the School in the new budget model.
  • Tenure-eligible faculty should be afforded additional time to establish their research agendas.
  • Workloads will be consistent with tenure and promotion and annual evaluation guidelines.
  • SPS promotes a much-needed balance between home and work responsibilities through a combination of school and university-wide policies (e.g. flexible workload policy, parental leave policy, etc).

The SPS Flexible Workload

The SPS Flexible Workload is designed to promote faculty members’ career goals, program needs and the School vision.  As such, the relative distribution of teaching, research and service may vary from one faculty member to another, but the comparable total effort among faculty will be similar.  For example, some faculty will teach more courses than others, but their percentage of time devoted to research, service and/or administration will be less.  Conversely, others may engage in more service, administration and/or research, but will teach fewer courses.  In each instance, the comparable total effort will be similar. Flexible workloads are always predicated on the ability of the program and School to offer high quality courses to our students, and to do so in a manner that does not create delays in degree progression.

Yearly performance evaluations (as well as progress toward promotion and tenure reviews) are based on individual workloads of SPS faculty. For tenure-eligible faculty, it is important to note that one can achieve tenure and promotion with any of the workload tracks. Tenured faculty can also achieve promotion to the rank of full professor with any of the workload tracks. For all tenure-eligible and tenured faculty, if a teaching load higher than 60% is requested, that may be negotiated with the Program Lead(s) and Faculty Director(s), with Faculty Director(s) making the final determination. See ”Process for Determining Workload” below.

General parameters for three common workloads in the School of Public Service are delineated below (see Table 1 for a summary):

Standard Workload (3-3 teaching load)

  • Teach the equivalent of 6 courses during the contract period (60% effort)
  • Demonstrate research productivity (judged in terms of quantity, quality and impact) compatible with 20% of total effort through some combination of peer-reviewed, professional, and public-service scholarship
  • Participate in service activities (program(s), school, university, discipline, public outreach)

Hybrid Workload (3-2 or 2-3 teaching load)

  • Teach the equivalent of 5 courses during the contract period (50% effort)
  • Demonstrate research productivity (judged in terms of quantity, quality and impact) compatible with 30% of total effort through some combination of peer-reviewed, professional, and public-service scholarship
  • Participate in service activities (program(s), school, university, discipline, public outreach)

Research Intensive Workload (2-2 teaching load)

  • Teach the equivalent of 4 courses during the contract period (40% effort)
  • Demonstrate research productivity (judged in terms of quantity, quality and impact) compatible with 40% of total effort through some combination of peer-reviewed, professional, and public-service scholarship, including one or both of the following:
    • Demonstrate the faculty member is seeking, has sought, or is training to seek external funding through a combination of mechanisms, including attending grant workshops, technical assistance trainings in proposal development, submitting grant proposals, and/or securing external funding
    • Mentor PhD students, specifically by serving on multiple committees as a content or methodological specialist or as a committee chair, or co-authoring scholarship with graduate students
  • Participate in service activities (program(s), school, university, discipline, public outreach)

\Note: If faculty undertake administrative leadership responsibilities and commitments, then there is also a potential reduction of teaching or a re-alignment of other workload areas, including research and service. Administrative workloads are determined using existing compensation policies and/or in consultation with the Faculty Director(s) and the Dean’s office.

Table 1: Summary of Baseline Workload Distributions*

Workload Track Teaching Research Service
Standard Track 60% 20% 20%
Hybrid Track 50% 30% 20%
Research Intensive Track 40% 40% 20%
*Does not include releases for administrative responsibilities, which are handled separately.

Process for Determining Workload

Initial workloads in the School of Public Service are determined at point-of-hire with the Dean’s Office and in consultation with the respective program(s) and the Faculty Director(s). The workload discussion is framed around a faculty member’s career goals, the needs of the program(s) with which the faculty member is affiliated, and the vision and mission of the School.

The goal is to create an individualized workload that represents 100% effort among the areas of teaching, research, and service (including administrative assignments, when relevant).  When possible, new tenure-eligible hires may receive a 10% workload reduction  (in terms of teaching or service) during their first year as a way to provide the necessary time to grow their research identity and support their teaching practice.

Faculty Director(s) are charged with keeping a record of up-to-date workloads. Each spring semester, as part of the annual evaluation and planning, workloads are discussed with faculty members, their mentors, their Program Lead(s) and the Faculty Director(s). These conversations ensure that workload aligns with a faculty member’s career path, the needs of the program(s), and the vision and mission of the School. After these conversations, Faculty Director(s) make the final determination and communicate workload changes in writing to the respective faculty member, the associated Program Lead(s), and the Dean’s Office. The final decision about workloads will be made by April 15 as part of the annual evaluation and planning process.

For tenure-eligible faculty members, progress toward tenure (PTT) reviews and annual evaluations (and ultimately applications for promotion and tenure) are considered in accordance with the agreed-upon workload of faculty members.  For tenured faculty members, post-tenure reviews and annual evaluations are considered in accordance with the agreed-upon workload of each faculty member.

Process for Determining Annual Evaluations

Faculty members have an annual performance evaluation as mandated by the State Board of

Education and University Policy 4290. Faculty members will be reviewed by the Faculty Director(s), who assess Faculty 180 reports and consult with related Program Leads on performance as related to a faculty member’s specific workload. The Faculty Director(s) will determine whether the faculty member has not met, met, or exceeded expectations.

There are a variety of ways that faculty members can make the argument, in their yearly F180 self-evaluations, that they have exceeded expectations in research, teaching, and service. Some illustrative, but not exhaustive, examples include:

  • The quality and quantity of teaching high-impact public service courses (e.g., service learning or courses with community projects)
  • The quality and quantity of teaching high-volume courses (e.g., courses with enrollments greater than 100)
  • The quantity and quality of publications, taking into account not only the number of peerreviewed and/or public service scholarship publications but also the impact and visibility of those publications
  • Contributing to service that goes beyond expected contributions (“expected” generally includes attendance at program and School meetings, participation on committees, and otherwise serving as a professional in one’s unit and discipline)
  • High-volume public service outreach activities with strong impact that contribute to the development of School identity
  • Service contributions across all areas, including university, school, program, and public outreach
  • Research, teaching, and/or public service engagement that influences policy or program change in the community and beyond
  • Undertaking trainings that advance and promote the mission and identity of the School (e.g., obtaining a BUILD certificate)
  • Receiving awards or award nominations from academic and non-academic audiences in research, teaching, or service
  • Participating in teaching pedagogy training and conferences through the Center for

Teaching and Learning or through other sources and outlets internal and external to the university.

This annual evaluation is tied to merit increases in years such increases are available. The School follows a process and calculation that is set by the State Board of Education and the State Department of Human Resources. The Dean’s Office translates annual evaluations into merit scores and the University then distributes any available merit funds based on a changing formula that is determined by the Provost’s Office and the State Department of Human Resources.

Corey Cook, Dean, School of Public Service 

Tony Roark, Interim Provost