All faculty members at the University are expected to perform at a high level in all their areas of responsibility. Considerations for tenure, promotion, or salary increases are all, in large part, driven by an evaluation of a faculty member’s performance. For more information regarding the various ways in which faculty members are evaluated, see the following policies:
The University’s Promotion and Tenure (P&T) policy, overseen by the provost, explains all aspects of the P&T process, including the probationary period and how faculty members can request an extension to their probationary period (also known as “clock stopping”), the deans’ annual reports on P&T recommendations from the schools and the actions that may be taken by the Provost’s Office in response to those recommendations, the institutional qualifications for tenure (including instruction, research, and service), the institutional qualifications for promotion, and the process that may be followed for an expedited review when necessary. Faculty members should also consult the P&T policy published by their school for details regarding the P&T process and criteria in their school.
The Employment of Academic General Faculty Members is the primary employment policy for academic general faculty members, and also defines the performance expectations, performance review process, and standards of notice of nonrenewal for this group of faculty members.
The Employment of Administrative or Professional General Faculty Members is the primary employment policy for administrative or professional general faculty members, and also defines the performance expectations, performance review process, and standards of notice of nonrenewal for this group of faculty members.
The Annual Performance Reviews policy defines the requirements for annual performance reviews and stipulates that every school or unit is required to publish written policies describing how it meets these requirements and implements an annual review of each faculty member’s performance. The policy also explains how deans, department chairs, or unit heads should respond when the annual review reveals unacceptable performance in any area of a faculty member’s responsibilities.