Skip Navigation

Pos-tenure Review 98

Pos-tenure Review 98


1. A post-tenure review system should incorporate all the indicators identified in the'Best Practices for a Performance Review System for Faculty' document.

2. The post-tenure review should be as rigorous and comprehensive in scope as aninitial tenure review.

3. The post-tenure review should incorporate annual performance reviews accumulatedsince the initial tenure review or since the last post-tenure review.

4. Whereas the focus of an initial tenure review tends to be on past performance, equalemphasis should be given to future development and potential contributions in thepost-tenure review.

5. Statewide, each tenured faculty member will have a post-tenure review conducted atpre-established, published intervals of no more than six years, unless the faculty memberis participating in a development/improvement process in which case the review may beconducted more frequently.

6. If reviews for promotion (e.g., a tenured associate professor is reviewed forpromotion to tenured full professor) fall within the appropriate time interval andencompass all the indicators in this document and in the 'BestPractices for a Performance Review System for Faculty 'document, they mayconstitute a post-tenure review.

7. The post-tenure review must include evaluations from peers external to thedepartment and/or institution as appropriate to the role and function of each facultymember (usually to evaluate the quality of research), as well as internal peerevaluations, student evaluations, and administrative evaluations.

8. The post-tenure review must provide detailed information about the outcomes of anysabbatical leave awarded during the six-year post-tenure review period.

9. The institution must identify the means by which the post-tenure review is linkedwith faculty reward systems, including merit raises and promotion.

10. The institution must display a commitment to provide funds to reward high achieverson post-tenure reviews as well as to provide assistance to faculty members needingimprovement.

11. If a faculty member receives an unfavorable post-tenure review, the faculty memberis immediately subject to a development process as described in the 'BestPractices for a Performance Review System for Faculty ', as outlined in10(b) and 10(c) of that document.

12. The institution should develop an appeals procedure for those faculty who do notagree with the results of the post-tenure review evaluation and/or the resultingrecommendations or requirements for improvement.