Summary of Review Process for Non-Track Faculty in Arts and Sciences

Non-tenure-track faculty members may be considered for renewal, but there is no presumption of or entitlement to renewal of an appointment. Moreover, the fact that a non-tenure-track faculty member has earned the Expectation of Continued Employment (“ECE”) does not entitle the faculty member to continuing automatic renewal obviating the need for further review.  For non-tenure-track faculty members with one-year appointments, the annual performance evaluation may serve as the contract reappointment review. For all other non-tenure-track faculty, in the year prior to the terminal year of his/her contract, the supervisor has the responsibility to thoroughly review and evaluate the faculty member’s performance over the contract period. From the Provost’s Policy on Non-Track Faculty

The College is improving the renewal processes for non-track faculty with multi-year appointments.

Teaching & Research (T&R) Faculty

The standard for renewal for all non-track faculty members, including research faculty, is excellence in each area of job responsibility, as reflected in the initial and updated job descriptions. The renewal process for non-track Teaching & Research (T&R) faculty reflects the balance of teaching, research, and administrative service in the specific job description for the candidate under consideration.  The portfolio submitted by candidates for renewal shall be consistent with the job responsibilities and be defined in consultation with the Chair or supervisor in advance of the renewal review.  Portfolio materials may include all or some of the following:

  • Curriculum vitae
  • Evidence of teaching record, including teaching statement, syllabi, evaluations, etc.;
  • Scholarly accomplishments, as reflected by record of publication, citation, awards, and grants; and
  • Record of advising and administrative service

Department chairs and program directors will submit a written review made within the department, typically by an ad hoc committee, to the Dean. The review should address each of the principal duties of the candidate as defined by the job description, and include copies of all documents submitted as part of the process; the chair or director’s assessment of faculty member’s reputation in his/her field, department, and professional community; and evaluation letters from external reviewers (if applicable)1.

Non-track faculty who are ineligible for ECE will be given a review equivalent to the traditional third- year review each time they reach the year prior to the terminal year of their contract.  In these instances, the chair or supervisor will form a small committee to thoroughly review and evaluate the faculty member’s performance over the contract period. The chair/supervisor will submit a recommendation to the Dean’s Third-Year Review Committee as to whether to renew. The Dean makes a decision on renewal in late spring, a full year before the end of each three-year contract.

Non-track faculty eligible for but have not yet earned ECE (at first review, in second year) will go through the same review, with the same materials, except their recommendation to renew or not renew will be accompanied by a formal departmental vote. The Dean makes a decision on renewal in late spring, a full year before the end of each three-year contract.

1 External letters are required for reviews for Expectation of Continued Employment for faculty with research responsibilities. External letters may be requested at the Dean’s discretion for other reviews.

Non-track faculty eligible for but have not yet earned ECE (at second review, in fifth year) will go through the same review, with the same materials, except their renewals will be considered by the Promotion and Tenure Committee, rather than the Third-Year Review Committee, and the recommendation to renew or not renew will be accompanied by a formal departmental vote. The Dean makes a decision on renewal in late spring, a full year before the end of each three-year contract.

Non-track faculty on multi-year contracts who have already earned ECE will continue to receive a thorough review of their performance over the contract period through the annual review process. In the year prior to the terminal year of their contract, the chair or supervisor will examine the three most recent annual reviews and submit a recommendation on renewal to the Dean directly (not the Third-Year Review Committee). The Dean will make a decision on renewal based on this recommendation, providing this decision a full year before the end of the contract period.

For administrative and professional non-track faculty, regardless of ECE status, the contract review process will incorporate a comprehensive evaluation of the faculty member’s professional, administrative, and/or managerial performance from the perspective of constituents served, professional colleagues in the unit and across the University, the supervisor and other senior management, and if relevant, employees reporting directly to the candidate. The ad hoc committee designated by the department chair or unit head will normally include the faculty member’s supervisor. The committee should normally solicit no fewer than three written evaluations with representation from each of the designated groups. The Dean will make a decision on renewal based on this recommendation, again providing this decision a full year
before the end of the contract period.