College of Liberal Arts

Annual Review of Faculty

Policy

The annual evaluation of faculty is required by Regents’ Rules 30501, 31102, and HOP 2-2150; is governed by the Provost Office; and is monitored by the Committee of Counsel on Academic Freedom (CCAFR).  The complete guidelines can be found here.

Procedure within the College

Because annual faculty evaluations are handled primarily at the departmental level, departments are responsible for overseeing the review process according to the Provost guidelines and for maintaining the review records.  Department chairs and academic program directors shall be evaluated as faculty members of their home department(s) unless otherwise exempted under the guidelines (3.b.). The dean will annually review the administrative performance of each chair or director who reports to him through a separate (informal) process.

Each department (or center, as applicable) shall report their faculty members’ overall review ratings to the Dean’s Office (c/o Ann Kelble) by May 1 of each academic year.  The report can be submitted by the chair or the senior staff member. 

Please include the following for each person: name, rank, EID, overall rating, and notes (if needed).

Annual Review template

FAQ:

Q: What if our department’s review period doesn’t match the academic year?  (E.g. In February 2016, we evaluated our faculty for their activities during 2014-15.)
A: For the annual review process, “2015-16” refers to the year these ratings are submitted, not the year(s) being reviewed.  Departments have the ability to evaluate as needed, just be sure to document the process within your unit and keep it consistent.

Q: As in the previous question, we will be submitting 2015-16 reviews that are based on 2014-15.  What should we do about faculty who started in Fall 2015?
A: Each department’s governing body (EC/EBC/BC) shall establish faculty annual review criteria and methods to ensure fair and consistent standards.  In each instance where a given individual’s record does not fit established review standards or parameters, the governing body should determine how they might most fairly accommodate the record and, as applicable, establish precedent(s) for subsequent review cycles. 

In the example above, the established practice would have the department not review the new faculty member until 2016-17.  While the department can make exceptions to their own practices, document under what circumstances would they do so and why.  Be sure to also consider how that decision would impact future review cycles.   

Q: If I have the review results in January, do I still wait until May to submit them?
A: No, you can submit the department’s annual faculty review ratings at any time before May 1 of an academic year. 

Q: Do I have to use the College’s template?
A: No, however please use it as a base to ensure all required information is included.

Q: Do I need to provide any explanations of ratings to the College?
A: No, you do not need to standardly report explanations to the Dean’s or Provost Office.  However, if someone was not rated, please note the departmental explanation. 

Q: What if I have a faculty member who spent only part of the review period in an administrative role (i.e. director)?
A: Policy states that chairs and program directors may be reviewed “by the department or the dean according to existing practice.”   For academic year 2014-15, COLA will be reviewing academic chairs and directors that report directly to the dean, however for 2015-16 going forward, all faculty (including academic chairs and directors) not appointed 100% in an administrative title should be reviewed at the department level.