Departments may formulate departmental procedures for appointment of faculty, annual review of probationary faculty, and review of tenured faculty. These procedures must be approved by the Dean and the Provost and must conform with the College's procedures (as described on the College's website) and with University criteria and procedures (outlined in the Policy Manual and the University's Faculty Handbook). Departments are responsible for making documents containing departmental procedures available to all faculty.

The College has also approved some department-specific variations to the Collegiate/University Procedural Guidelines for Promotion and Tenure Decision Making. These department-specific variations are posted on the College's website.

Both the faculty member and the reviewers consult the departmental, College, and University procedures during each review.

In addition to the various types of review outlined in this chapter, all faculty are also evaluated annually for merit salary increases. The DEO recommends to the Dean the salary to be paid to each departmental faculty member in the following year.

Each faculty member must submit materials for use in their periodic reviews. For this purpose, the faculty member must maintain an updated curriculum vitae (CLAS Standard CV), keep student evaluations of teaching on file, and preserve copies of scholarly publications, records of creative work, and copies of teaching materials as applicable to the review type. The dossier to be submitted in reviews for tenure and/or promotion is described in the CLAS/UI Procedures for Promotion and Tenure Decision Making, section I.B (department-level procedures).

The College requires that evaluations of teaching be solicited from students in every course. (See Student Evaluation of Teaching on this website). Departments generally use standardized evaluation forms that are appropriate to the types of instruction in their courses. The faculty member is ordinarily responsible for keeping their student evaluations on file for use in faculty reviews. These evaluations are necessary evidence of teaching effectiveness in all reviews of tenure-track and non-tenure-track faculty.

As required by the review type, peer evaluation of teaching must include classroom observation. At a minimum, one class session must be observed and reported on as part of the review of teaching in each annual review of probationary (not-yet-tenured) faculty, each review for promotion and/or tenure, and each peer review of tenured faculty. The peer evaluation of teaching must also include a review of syllabi and other materials from a variety of levels of instruction, evidence of successful supervision of graduate students (if applicable), and other evidence of teaching quality. Under Regents’ policy, the assessment of teaching must explicitly consider the oral communication competence of the candidate (Operations Manual, III-13).

The DEO oversees faculty review processes and ensures that the department meets the deadline for reporting on the review and making recommendations. The DEO informs the faculty member under review of the timeline of the review and the materials the faculty member must submit. The DEO also sees that review committees are formed where required by University, collegiate, or departmental procedures.

In all review processes, the DEO or review committee shares the review report with the faculty member under review. The faculty member has the right to respond to the review, and that response becomes a part of the review file forwarded to the Office of the Dean.

All reviews of faculty are confidential personnel matters. Issues relating to reviews are not to be discussed outside of meetings of the review committee or meetings of the faculty participating in the review (in reviews for promotion and/or tenure, these are meetings of the departmental promotion and tenure committee and meetings of the departmental consulting group). Questions from those not eligible to participate in the review may be answered only if they relate to the review procedures (for example, the timeline for the review, materials considered in the review).

No information about the substance of the review may be communicated, either formally or informally, to those ineligible to participate in the decision. When a review has a specific outcome (e.g., a decision to promote and/or tenure), the outcome is communicated to the department (including staff and students) by the DEO. Consistent with the University Operations Manual, section III.29.5.d(7), no evaluative documents from the review (including, in promotion and tenure reviews, recorded votes of the departmental or collegiate consulting groups and redactions performed to protect the writers' expectation of confidentiality) may be disseminated either before or after a review has been completed.

Disclosure of confidential review matters by faculty participating in the process may be considered a violation of the University Policy on Professional Ethics and Academic Responsibility (Operations Manual, III-15).