View full policy

Procedure

  • The faculty member receives a comprehensive review that covers the entire period since the initial appointment. University policy states that this review will "evaluate the faculty member's teaching effectiveness, scholarly productivity, and ongoing development and provide feedback with respect to the departmental expectations for promotion" (Policy Manual, III-10.5a(7)). The review addresses the question, "Is this individual making appropriate progress toward a tenure review that is likely to have positive results?" 

  • The process used in this review parallels the process described in the CLAS/UI Procedures for Promotion and Tenure Decision Making, with important differences being that external evaluations of the faculty member’s creative or scholarly work are not sought, the DCG is not required to write a report, and the DEO letter is always shown to the faculty member. The DEO creates a timeline for the review that allows the process to be completed, including the submission of the faculty member’s response to the review report, by the college’s deadline, which falls early in March each year. 

  • With the advice of the DEO, the faculty member being reviewed for contract renewal compiles and submits a dossier (see below for required dossier contents).

  • The departmental review committee's report (ordinarily not to exceed four pages) addresses the criteria of the department, the college, and the university for the rank of associate professor. It provides informative and useful evaluation of progress made to date and work that remains before the faculty member reaches tenure review. The review report includes as appendices the written records of classroom observations conducted for this review. 

  • The faculty member has the right to respond within five days of receiving the review report, and the response will be included in the record available to the departmental consulting group. 

  • The departmental consulting group (DCG), consisting of all associate and full professors in the department, meets to discuss the report and the faculty member’s record, with the chair of the review committee chairing the DCG. The DCG votes by secret ballot on whether to renew the contract through the year of the tenure decision or to offer the faculty member a one-year terminal contract. A 60% majority of those present for the discussion and vote defines a positive recommendation for contract renewal. No formal DCG report is required.

  • In a letter to the Dean (copied to the faculty member under review), the DEO reports the vote of the DCG and makes their independent assessment and recommendation. (No separate summary of the DCG discussion is required.) The DEO’s letter is forwarded to the Dean's Office early in March, with the materials specified in the Checklist of Third-year Probationary Review Materials. The faculty member has the right to respond in a letter to the Dean (with a copy to the DEO), within five days of receiving the DEO’s letter. 

  • The Dean and Associate Deans of the College discuss these materials and then transmit them to the Office of the Provost with the College's recommendation on contract renewal. The Area Associate Dean writes a response to the review, addressed to the DEO and copied to the faculty member, concerning issues raised in the review. 

  • The Provost makes the final decision on contract renewal. 

Departments may establish additional requirements for faculty reviews, provided such requirements do not conflict with any university or collegiate policy.

Review period

The entire period since the initial appointment

Classroom observation required?

Reviewer(s)

Departmental review committee made up of at least three tenured faculty members (preferably four)

Form

Probationary third year reappointment review form

Responsibilities of faculty member under review

  • Submit the following materials to department prior to review:

    • Updated CV (in CLAS Standard CV format)

    • SPOT teaching chart (requested through departmental administrator)

    • SPOT teaching evaluations by students for each course taught

    • a statement of accomplishments and future plans in teaching, scholarly/creative work, and service (ordinarily not to exceed four pages)

    • Course materials

    • Completed scholarly/creative work

    • Scholarly/creative work in progress (in cases where a book not yet in print will be part of the eventual promotion and tenure dossier, the dossier must include the current draft, with the College's Checklist on Progress toward Publication of a Book)
    • Other materials allowed under the Collegiate/University Procedural Guidelines for Promotion and Tenure Decision-making

  • Participate in classroom observation(s)

  • Read and respond, if applicable, to review and DEO letter

  • Acknowledge review in workflow

Responsibilities of the reviewer(s)

Write a report (ordinarily not to exceed four pages) that addresses the criteria of the department, the college, and the university for the rank of associate professor

  • The report provides informative and useful evaluation of progress made to date and work that remains before the faculty member reaches tenure review

  • The review report includes as appendices the written records of classroom observation(s) conducted for this review

Responsibilities of the Departmental Consulting Group (DCG)

  • Meet to discuss the report and the faculty member’s record, with the chair of the review committee chairing the DCG
  • Vote by secret ballot on whether to renew the contract through the year of the tenure decision or to offer the faculty member a one-year terminal contract (60% majority of those present for the discussion and vote defines a positive recommendation for contract renewal)

(Note: no formal DCG report is required)

Responsibilities of the DEO

  • Inform the faculty member under review of the timeline of the review and the materials they must submit
  • Form review committee and DCG
  • Oversee faculty review process and ensure review results in substantive assessment and recommendations
  • Write DEO letter, describing the review procedures followed, reporting the vote of the departmental consulting group, and giving the DEO’s independent assessment and recommendation
  • Provide a copy of the DEO letter to the faculty member
  • Ensure department meets the deadline for review submission

Joint appointment handling (if applicable)

  • Faculty member’s MOU should define review procedures

  • In the absence of an MOU:

    • The primary and secondary units should collaborate to produce a single review with representation on the review committee proportional to the faculty member's appointment in each unit. Depending on the size of the units, there may be separate DCG votes, or the DCG of both departments may meet for a single vote. The DEO assessment may either be a single report written by the primary DEO including feedback from the secondary DEO, or both DEOs may write individual assessments.

    • For reviews of faculty jointly appointed in another college, the two units should collaborate in a joint review that assess the faculty member’s entire contribution to the University’s mission. The review report(s) should be forwarded to the Deans of both colleges. 

Materials required to be submitted to the Dean’s Office

Submit all materials in FRAP as PDFs.
  • A letter from the DEO, describing the review procedures followed, reporting the vote of the departmental consulting group, and giving the DEO’s independent assessment and recommendation (Note: no separate summary of the DCG discussion is required)
  • DCG vote tally, with a list of faculty eligible to participate in the DCG and signatures of those attending the meeting
  • The CV that was available to the review committee and departmental consulting group, with the chart summarizing the teaching record
  • The candidate's statement of accomplishments and future plans in teaching, scholarly/creative work, and service (ordinarily not to exceed four pages)
  • The review committee’s written report on the faculty member’s teaching, scholarly and/or creative work, and service (ordinarily not to exceed four pages), addressing the criteria for faculty rank (the report must include as appendices the written records of classroom observation(s) conducted for this review)
  • The written response of the faculty member to the review committee’s report, if they have chosen to prepare one
  • A list of the materials in the dossier (including course materials, student evaluations of teaching, published work, work in progress, and other materials allowed under the Collegiate/University Procedural Guidelines for Promotion and Tenure Decision-making) (Note: the materials themselves remain in the department unless the Dean’s Office requests that they be shared)

Deadline

Submission deadlines are posted on the Faculty Review Schedule.

Key contact

If you have questions, please contact Rachel Spengler.