4.07 Faculty Review

Six Year Review Procedures

  1. The dean will ensure that every six years, the previous annual review documents will be compiled along with supporting material furnished by the faculty member for a comprehensive six-year review to be conducted by a school review committee. The annual review at six years will be conducted prior to the six-year review to allow evaluation and input by the chair/equivalent and peers prior to review by the school review committee. The faculty member will be notified at least six months in advance of the intent to perform the six month review.  In rare circumstances (such as approved leave or comprehensive review for tenure, promotion or appointment to an endowed position), the six-year review may be delayed with the approval of the dean for up to one year from the regularly scheduled review. In no case will review of a tenured faculty member be waived. For faculty who are also academic administrators, the six-year review will be held in conjunction with the review of administrators described in the Introduction section of the Handbook of Operating Procedures titled Review of Administrators.
  2. Reviews will be “track appropriate.”  For non-tenured, tenure-track faculty, the review will focus on the progress of the faculty toward tenure.  Corrections, if needed, to the tenure-track faculty member’s goals and assignments should be in line with achievement.  For those faculty members with tenure, the six-year review process will not be a repeat of the tenure process, but an assessment of academic activities in the ensuing six year period.
  3. The faculty member will submit, along with a current curriculum vitae, a summary of professional accomplishments, annual reports and teaching evaluations. The faculty member is encouraged to submit a summary of professional objectives and any additional appropriate material.  During the review, the faculty member may meet with the review committee, according to guidelines established by the individual schools.
  4. The six-year review will be conducted by a school-wide faculty committee approved by the dean with input from the school faculty and department chair/equivalent. The review process will take into account the statements of expectations and assignments from letters of appointment and annual reviews, and will include review of the faculty member's professional responsibilities in teaching, research, service, patient care and/or administration. The committee should review scholarly activity from the broad perspective of the scholarship of discovery, integration, application and teaching.  The committee must consider factors beyond the individual faculty member’s control that may have impacted performance.  Further information may be requested at any step from the faculty member under review.  All of the material provided to the committee will be maintained in a confidential manner. 
  5. The review outcome will be communicated in writing to the faculty member, the chair/equivalent and the dean within a specified time, to be determined by the school. The dean and chair/equivalent will review the outcome of the review and take appropriate action as described below.
  6. Information obtained in the review will be used to recognize level of performance and determine appropriate action:
  7. Faculty in Category 2 must receive specific advice from the chair/equivalent in conjunction with the dean on how to improve. The faculty member will receive in writing the guidelines for improvement along with assistance to be provided and a time line for accomplishments. Improvement will be monitored in subsequent annual evaluations.
  8. Faculty in Categories 2 and 3 will have the opportunity to submit additional information to the chair/equivalent and/or the dean.
  9. Faculty in Category 3 will have appropriate action initiated by the department chair/equivalent or the dean that may include the following:
  10. Faculty in all three categories whose performance indicates they would benefit from additional institutional support may be provided such support (e.g., teaching ineffectiveness assistance, counseling, or mentoring in research issues/service expectations).
  11. Copies of completed six-year reviews for each faculty member will be sent to the dean of the school who will forward a copy to the Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs. Additionally, the dean will report annually to the Executive Vice President of Academic Affairs the number of reviews, outcomes and any action to be taken as a result of the reviews (e.g., plan for remediation or termination for cause).
  12. The six-year comprehensive review will occur in conjunction with the annual reviews. Tenured faculty members will be evaluated on a six-year cycle determined by the academic year of their award of tenure or the academic year of their last comprehensive review. Non-tenured faculty will be evaluated on a six-year cycle determined by the academic year of their hire or the academic year of their last comprehensive review.

Additional Procedures Related to the Review of Department Chairs/Equivalents

The dean will evaluate the chairs/equivalents on their performance in faculty appointments, development and retention.  Each department or equivalent will conduct an initial six-year retrospective analysis of faculty appointment, development and retention history to serve as a baseline for comparison with annual/biennial reviews in evaluating the effectiveness of the departmental/equivalent leaders in these parameters.  Additionally, the dean will determine if the chair/equivalent had made and implemented strategic plans to encompass goals and outcome measures to ensure an ongoing focus on recruitment, development, career planning and succession planning for faculty.

Updated 01/05; 08/07; 04/08

HOOP Policy 4.07 Faculty Review