Matt Coker’s most recent update re the Dorner manhunt: FEB. 9, 12:50 P.M.: CBS News reports Dorner's burned truck sustained a broken axle and contained two assault rifles, a Glock and survival gear that lead authorities to assume he's still up on the mountain in Big Bear, where the manhunt resumed this morning with aerial support.

IRVINE VALLEY CHRONICLES: the tenure review process

Yet another innocent person attacked by a bumptious and officious
 individual at Irvine Valley College

     Lately, there’s been a certain amount of buzz on campus about the full-time faculty tenure process. Later this month, a set of district faculty who are in the tenure review process will learn their ultimate fate, tenure-wise.
     Here’s the list of those faculty (from a year-old SOCCCD board agenda, a public document):

     Some of us wonder about the integrity of the (district) process as it is being practiced here at Irvine Valley College. We worry about bullies throwing their weight around, pursuing personal agendas, driving others into submission or silence. Perhaps those and other failures of objectivity and fairness are afoot: helping friends, hurting enemies—that sort of thing.
     (I hold in my hand a photo of two families cavorting during their Hawaiian vacation. —Odd that. Friends!)

     But what is the process? I’ve tried to find a good description of the tenure review process. The following is from the 2010 IVC Accreditation self-study:

     ... For new faculty, a Tenure Review Committee [TRC], consisting of the dean and a minimum of two tenured faculty members from the department/school, follow the candidate through the four-year probationary period. The [TRC] conducts scheduled classroom/worksite/electronic visits as mutually agreed upon and written comments are submitted to the dean. The probationary faculty member is evaluated on his/her participation in curriculum development and review, and the development and assessment of student learning outcomes. Student evaluations are arranged through the appropriate Vice President’s Office. Based on the tenure review committee’s observations and post-visit discussions with the probationary faculty member, a written report and recommendations are submitted to the dean, Vice President of Instruction, and the President in each of the four probationary years. In order to ensure that the evaluations lead to improvement, if the probationary faculty member’s performance is unsatisfactory, a plan is developed, including follow-up activities, dates of completion, and measureable outcomes to address the issues.

     What follows is from the Saddleback College Faculty Handbook:

     Probationary faculty members will be evaluated by their division dean, as well as members of their Tenure Review Committee (TRC), on a yearly basis as part of the tenure review process. … Student evaluations will be conducted by the appropriate vice president’s office in at least one class, or its equivalent, per year during the probationary period….
. . .
     …The four-year probationary period is intended to provide sufficient time for new faculty members to understand the expectations for tenure, to develop the skills and acquire the experience necessary to participate successfully in the education process, and to use appropriate resources for professional growth and development. Faculty recommendation for tenure is a reflection of this standard of excellence in the performance of faculty duties and interaction with students and colleagues.
     The tenure review process is a three-step process that includes evaluation by a Tenure Review Committee (TRC), student evaluations …, and an administrative review.
     The TRC will be comprised of the division dean and a minimum of two tenured faculty members from within the same department/division or a closely related department/division. Throughout the probationary period, the TRC will conduct scheduled classroom or worksite evaluations …, review items relevant to the instructional duties assigned to the probationary faculty member, and complete evaluative reports.
     An annual administrative review of the documents compiled by the TRC will be conducted by the division dean and approved by the appropriate vice president, the President of the College, and the Chancellor. The review, including the written recommendations of all parties, will be forwarded to the Board of Trustees.

     The process yields a yearly report that finds its way to the BOT. Here’s the relevant agenda item from last February’s Board Meeting:

     The item includes this letter from head HR guy David Bugay:

     The next board meeting will be on Monday, Feb. 25. (The agenda will be posted here.)

One fellow in particular has been menacing denizens
of the IVC community for several years. President Roquemore
either approves or is oblivious. As per usual.

Some gals know how to get what they want. Others learn to stay the hell out of their way.