Policy: TENURE and TENURE-TRACK FACULTY ANNUAL REVIEW
Effective date: July 1, 2017
Review date: July 1, 2024
Revised: July 1, 2021
Responsible Party: Office of the Provost
An annual review assesses a faculty member's performance over the preceding calendar year and is based upon the faculty member's letter of hire, assigned percentages of effort, annual assignments, annual productivity report using the reporting method approved by the Provost and evaluations of teaching. Reviews are conducted as outlined in the applicable Role and Scope documents and must be completed by the date specified by the Provost. The annual review with ratings and any written appeals of the review shall be included in the faculty member's personnel file.
An annual review is an assessment of the faculty member's performance over a one-year period. This is in contrast to retention, tenure, and promotion reviews which are based upon the cumulative performance of the faculty member in each area of responsibility (teaching, scholarship, and service) over the entire review period appropriate to the review. Thus, a record of having favorable annual reviews does not guarantee the candidate has assembled and demonstrated a cumulative record that meets the standards for retention, tenure, or promotion.
a. The faculty member and the unit supervisor and/or department annual review committee shall annually review the faculty member's performance relative to the faculty member's assigned percentages of effort and current assigned responsibilities, and as further delineated in the applicable Role and Scope documents. Reviews assess the faculty member’s performance in each of the major areas of responsibility (teaching, scholarship and service) over the preceding calendar year. Student evaluations of teaching must be collected and considered in the evaluation of teaching. Faculty members shall participate in the annual review process, including completing an annual written self-evaluation pursuant to the applicable method and format. The faculty member will have the opportunity to meet with the reviewer(s).
b. Faculty members on extended sick leave, faculty modified duties or leave without pay will be evaluated on the duties that were performed during the review period. Faculty on approved sabbatical leave during the review period will be reviewed for any period during the review period that they were not on sabbatical leave. A faculty member who is on sabbatical, extended sick leave or extended leave without pay at the time the annual review is performed will be reviewed no later than thirty (30) days after the start of the following fall semester. The annual review form should include a statement explaining any period that is not subject to review and provide a review for the remaining period of time in which the faculty member is under contract.
c. If the faculty member has a split or joint appointment with 20% or more effort assigned to another unit, input from the appropriate administrator in the other unit must be solicited and considered in the evaluation and rating of the faculty member.
d. For Extension Specialists within academic departments, the Director of Extension will provide the unit supervisor or reviewing committee a letter addressing the faculty member’s work for Extension, which will be considered in the evaluation and rating of the faculty member’s performance.
e. The unit supervisor and/or department annual review committee rates the performance of each faculty member in each area of responsibility (teaching, scholarship and service), in conjunction with any applicable Role and Scope documents, and determines an overall rating for the faculty member’s performance for the year using the weighted geometric mean –weighted by the assigned percentages of effort– using the Annual Review form approved by the Provost. The faculty member will be given a copy of the completed form or access to the completed electronic form.
f. The head of the primary unit and the faculty member will develop goals and assignments for the next calendar year. The goals and assignments for individual members of the faculty will reflect departmental needs and professional opportunities consistent with departmental strategic plans or articulated departmental priorities.
g. If the assigned percentages of effort are inconsistent with the faculty member’s current activities and levels of performance, a revision of the assigned percentages of effort should be discussed. If a modification of the assigned percentages of effort is made as outlined in Section 5, it will be documented using the Faculty Assigned Percentages of Effort Update form.
h. The faculty member and the Dean (or Provost if the faculty member’s review was conducted by a Dean) will be provided with a copy of or access to the annual review, ratings and any revision of the assigned percentages of effort. Copies of all annual reviews and the performance ratings of each faculty member in each area of responsibility will be maintained in the faculty member's personnel file in the department. These files shall be kept confidential and maintained as outlined in the Faculty Personnel Files
i. Failure or refusal of the faculty member to participate in the annual review process, or to acknowledge receipt of the annual review, shall not invalidate the annual review and shall be governed by the Corrective Action and Discipline Policy.
A faculty member who disagrees with an annual review or individual rating assigned to areas of responsibility may appeal by submitting a rationale for their disagreement and forwarding it to the Dean (or Provost if the faculty member’s review was conducted by a Dean). The rationale must be filed with the Dean (or Provost if the faculty member’s review was conducted by a Dean) within ten (10) calendar days of the receipt of the annual review. The Dean (or Provost, as applicable) shall consider the appeal and may support or assign a different performance rating in any area of responsibility. The Dean (or Provost, as applicable) shall notify the faculty member and unit supervisor, in writing, of the decision regarding the appeal within ten (10) calendar days of receipt of the request.
4. PEFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT PLANS
A tenured faculty member who receives a rating of below expectations or unacceptable performance in an area of responsibility (teaching, scholarship or service) will be given a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP). The PIP shall be focused on the identified area(s) of underperformance but may also address other areas. Prior to the award of tenure, a faculty member may be given a PIP if the faculty member is renewed for an additional contract year.
The PIP will be developed by the unit supervisor (e.g., department head, director or equivalent) in consultation with the faculty member and approved by the Dean (or Provost if the faculty member’s review was conducted by a Dean). If the faculty member has a split or joint appointment with 20% or more effort assigned to another unit, input from the other unit must be solicited and considered in the preparation of the PIP.
The PIP will provide guidance on the expected improvements in performance that are necessary to attain at least an “Acceptable Performance” rating on the following annual review. The PIP will describe the deficiencies in the faculty member’s performance; describe the benchmarks and performance goals designed to address the deficiencies; and outline support or resources that may be available to the faculty member to assist with achieving acceptable performance. The PIP shall also specify the period to be covered by the PIP. The PIP is usually designed to be completed within one calendar year but may be designed to be completed over a longer period if reasonable and necessary to address the deficiencies, but in no case shall the PIP extend beyond two (2) calendar years. For faculty who have not attained tenure, the PIP, if offered, will not extend beyond the next scheduled retention review or tenure review, whichever is applicable.
The PIP should be completed within thirty (30) days after the faculty member has received the "Below Expectations” or “Unacceptable Performance" rating or denial of the faculty member’s appeal, whichever is later. If the parties cannot agree to the terms of the plan, the Dean (or Provost, as applicable) has the discretion to modify and approve the PIP, as may be appropriate.
The faculty member who has received the "Below Expectations” or “Unacceptable Performance" rating will meet with the unit supervisor within ten (10) calendar days of the annual review or the Dean’s (or Provost, as applicable) decision on the faculty member’s appeal. The purpose of this meeting is to allow consultation on the actions that will be taken to address the deficiencies identified in the Annual Review, which form the basis of the PIP. The faculty member may consult with colleagues regarding the PIP and may submit recommendations for benchmarks and performance goals. After the PIP is finalized, the faculty member is responsible for achievement of the requirements of the PIP. Failure of the faculty member to participate in the development of the PIP shall not impede the ability of the unit supervisor or Dean to develop, approve and implement the PIP. Additionally, failure of the faculty member to participate in the development or performance of the PIP or failure to submit required materials, shall be governed by the Corrective Action and Discipline Policy.
The unit supervisor shall conduct a review of the PIP, and whether the standards have been met, within thirty (30) days of conclusion of the PIP period. For tenured faculty, failure to attain at least an “Acceptable Performance” rating in each of the areas of responsibility covered by the PIP, as well as any disagreement regarding whether the standards have been met, shall be governed by the Performance Review Post-Tenure Policy.
Prior to the award of tenure, faculty members are subject to BOR Policy 706.1; therefore reappointment shall be “at the discretion of the employer” with or without a PIP.
Either the faculty member or the unit supervisor can propose changing the faculty member’s percentages of effort, but mutual agreement must be reached before the change can be made. The revised percentages of effort might be for a specified term or might reflect a long-term change of focus for the faculty member and the department. If the revised percentages are for a specified term, the end date will be noted, and the percentages of effort will revert back to the assignments and assigned percentages of effort in place before the term.
Changes to a faculty member’s assigned percentages of effort are made using a Faculty Assigned Percentages of Effort Update Form. Any changes require approval by the faculty member, unit supervisor, and Dean (or Provost if the faculty member’s review was conducted by a Dean).