Progress & Reappointment Reviews of Untenured Faculty

 

 

Progress and Reappointment Reviews of Untenured Regular and Special Title Series Faculty

Department chairs are required by Administrative Regulation AR3:10 on Faculty Performance Review to conduct progress reviews of untenured regular and special series faculty members in the second and fourth years of their probationary period. The College has received permission from the Provost’s Office to follow a different procedure, namely, to require a third year progress review for all untenured regular and special title series faculty and to give them the option of doing a second year review. The third year review constitutes a major assessment of the faculty person's record of achievement. The written input of senior faculty in the department is required. This review provides for a mid-cycle evaluation that gives chairs a greater period of faculty performance on which to judge achievement and junior faculty enough time before the sixth year review to address areas of deficiency.

Untenured professors are on two year contracts until they receive tenure. Departments must conduct reappointment reviews of untenured faculty members in any semester that their contracts run out (typically the spring semester of the second or fourth year), even if no progress review is scheduled for them that semester. The only exception is when a faculty member's tenure application has been considered the prior semester.  If a progress review is scheduled for a semester in which a reappointment review is required, one review can serve as both.  If no progress review is scheduled for this semester, the reappointment review basically involves making FMER materials available to the tenured professors and giving them the opportunity to opine regarding reappointment.  A description of the reappointment review process is found below after the description of the second year reviews.  I have re-amended the materials required for second, third, and fourth year progress reviews so that the contents of FMER, progress review, and reappointment dossiers largely overlap.

Whenever current FMER materials are used as part of a progress or reappointment review, the faculty person shall be given the opportunity to update them.

 

Combined Second Year Progress Review/Second Year Reappointment Dossier

A second year progress review is optional.  It should be conducted in a regular title series faculty’s person’s fourth semester of service only if he or she has elected to undergo it.  All second year faculty, however, must undergo a reappointment review in their fourth semester.  We will treat the required reappointment review and the second year progress review as one if the latter has been requested.   If a second year progress review has been declined, see the procedure below concerning self-standing reappointment reviews.  Progress review materials and reappointment letters are due in the dean's office by April 3, 2017.

The responsibilities of the chair in conducting a second year progress review that is also a reappointment review are as follows:

1. Prepare a dossier that includes:

  • Copies of all previous two-page chair's FMER rating sheets
  • Updated FMER materials: cv, Statement on Research, Teaching Reporting Form, course syllabi, Statement on Teaching, FMER Merit Evaluation Form, previous fall TCE results
  • Any other materials that the chair and candidate deem appropriate
  • Departmental P&T Guidelines

2. Once the dossier is complete, invite all tenured regular and special title series departmental faculty to review the dossier and call a meeting of these faculty members to discuss it.

3.Write a review summary that includes a recommendation to reappoint the candidate.

The alternative procedure to be followed if the chair decides that a terminal reappointment should be issued is found below after the description of the fourth year progress review.

4. Meet with the faculty person to communicate and discuss the review results. The candidate should be given a copy of the chair's review summary.

5.Submit to the dean for review and formal response the progress review dossier and the chair's review summary.

 

Self-Standing Reappointment Review

1.  Prepare a dossier that includes the following.

  • Updated FMER materials: cv, Statement on Research, Teaching Reporting Form, course syllabi, Statement on Teaching, FMER Merit Evaluation Form, previous fall TCE results
  • Any other materials that the chair and candidate deem appropriate.
  • Departmental P&T Guidelines

2.  Make the dossier available to the tenured faculty in the department and consult with them about reappointment.  Consultation requires only that tenured faculty be given the opportunity to share their opinions on reappointment, either via email or at a department meeting.

3.  Write a one sentence letter to the effect that, on the basis of the faculty’s favorable review of the dossier, the chair recommends that the candidate be reappointed.

The alternative procedure to be followed if the chair decides that a terminal reappointment should be issued is found below after the description of the fourth year progress review.  If the chair has any suspicions that the balanced opinion of the tenured faculty will come down on the side of a terminal reappointment, then the chair must call a meeting of the tenured faculty to discuss the case.

4. Submit the chair’s reappointment letter to the Dean.

 

Third Year Progress Review

Third year progress reviews are mandatory. They should be conducted in an untenured faculty member’s sixth semester of service.

The responsibilities of the chair in conducting a third year review are as follows:

1. Prepare a progress review dossier that includes:

  • Copies of all previous two-page FMER chair's rating sheets and Teaching Reporting Forms,
  • The candidate's second year progress review summary, if any.
  • CV
  • Other current FMER materials: Statement on Research, course syllabi, Teaching Statement, previous fall semester TCE results
  • Departmental P&T Guidelines
  • Any other material that the chair and candidate deem appropriate

2. Make the dossier available to tenured regular and special title series departmental faculty and call a meeting of these faculty to discuss the dossier. Solicit verbal comments from tenured faculty and obtain written assessments from at least three senior faculty.

3. Prepare a review summary. While the summary may borrow from the language used in the chair's comment section of the FMER, the content of the review summary should amplify and extend those remarks. If the faculty member is up for reappointment, include a recommendation to reappoint in the summary

4. Meet with the faculty person to communicate and discuss the review results. The candidate should be given copies of the chair's review summary and each letter of evaluation obtained from senior faculty within the department.

5. Submit to the dean for his review and formal response:

  • The progress review dossier
  • The chair's review summary and the letters of evaluation from senior faculty

Additionally, the chair should ask the candidate to prepare a one page research proposal in which the faculty person outlines the scholarly activities that would be undertaken were a teaching release be granted in the fourth year. Along with the materials just mentioned, the chair should submit to the dean a copy of the candidate's research proposal and a brief memo in which the chair assesses the merits of the proposal. The strength of the research proposal and the chair's support of it will largely determine whether or not the special assignment is granted. Preference will be given, however, to faculty members who have not had a prior course release.

Third year progress review materials are due in the dean's office no later than April 3, 2017.

 

Combined Fourth Year Progress Review/Reappointment Review

Fourth year progress reviews are mandatory. Normally, a fourth year progress review will coincide with and be the same as a reappointment review.  Combined fourth year progress-reappointment reviews are conducted in an untenured faculty person’s eighth semester of service.  Any person in the eighth semester of service who is not undergoing a fourth year progress review must still undergo a self-standing reappointment review.

The responsibilities of the chair in conducting a combined fourth year progress-reappointment review are as follows:

1. Prepare a progress review dossier that includes:

  • Copies of all previous two-page chair's FMER rating sheets
  • Updated FMER materials: cv, Statement on Research, Teaching Reporting Form, course syllabi, Statement about Teaching, TCE results from previous fall semester
  • Any other materials that the chair and candidate deem appropriate.
  • Departmental P&T Guidelines

2. Once the dossier is complete, invite all tenured regular and special title series departmental faculty to review the dossier and call a meeting of these faculty members to discuss it.

3. Write a review summary that includes a recommendation to reappoint the candidate (should the candidate be up for reappointment).

The alternative procedure to be followed if the chair decides that a terminal reappointment should be issued is found below.

4. Meet with the faculty person to communicate and discuss the review results. The candidate should be given a copy of the chair's review summary.

5. Submit to the dean for review and formal response the combined reappointment/progress review dossier and the chair's review summary.

Progress review materials are due in the dean's office no later than April 3, 2017.

 

FOR ALL PROGRESS REVIEW SUMMARIES: Progress review summaries must be free of language which, on the basis of performance and achievement to date, alludes to the likely outcome of the faculty member's tenure review. The language of a progress review should be evaluative and prescriptive (in that constructive suggestions for addressing areas of deficiency are offered), but never predictive. Statements such as "You are on the road to tenure," or "One more article and your tenure is assured" preempt the tenure review process and are, therefore, inappropriate and potentially grounds for litigation.

 

PROCEDURE FOR ISSUING TERMINAL REAPPOINTMENTS OF PROBATIONARY REGULAR TITLE SERIES FACULTY

It is the chair who decides, after considering the discussion of a reappointment dossier at a faculty meeting, whether to issue a terminal contract. If she or he decides to do this, then

  1. Immediately notify the dean’s office of this decision,
  2. Add to the dossier (1) copies of the untenured faculty person’s annual DOEs, (2) a roster of departmental faculty with ranks, (3) copies of the untenured faculty person’s publications, and (4) a copy of this person’s statement on service (if any exists).
  3. Notify the tenured regular and special title series faculty that a terminal reappointment dossier has been constituted and request that they expeditiously submit written opinions on the chair’s intention to recommend a terminal reappointment.
  4. After considering the faculty’s written judgments, either

i. Write a review summary recommending terminal reappointment and send this summary, the (terminal) reappointment dossier, and the faculty’s written judgments to the dean, or

ii. Write a review summary recommending reappointment and send this summary and the original reappointment dossier to the dean.

Meet with the faculty person to communicate and discuss the review results. He or she should also be given a copy of the chair's review summary.

Terminal Reappointment materials are due in the dean’s office by no later than April 3, 2017.

Re-amended 3-5-12  

X
Enter your linkblue username.
Enter your linkblue password.
Secure Login

This login is SSL protected

Loading