Annual Faculty Reviews, Promotions and Tenure, and Third-Year Reviews

Introduction

Probably the most important responsibility of department chairs is the evaluation of faculty, whether for hiring, tenure, retention, promotion, or salary increase. These decisions are often complicated, in part because there are a number of faculty classifications or ranks, and different sets of review criteria, review processes, review dates, and collective bargaining agreements.  Evaluations of faculty and the decisions that result from them are not only critical to the health and success of the department and the college, but also affect the lives and careers of the faculty members that are being evaluated.  It is therefore of great importance that chairs understand the principles of the evaluation processes and the specific steps and timelines, as well as the larger issues involved in building and keeping a high-quality faculty.   

Faculty reviews, evaluations, and promotions are also valuable components of faculty development.  It is the goal of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences to hire highly qualified faculty and to give them the opportunities they need to be successful in their careers.  This means that we should also approach faculty evaluations and reviews as developmental tools, providing the chair, the department and the faculty members with feedback and input on their academic performance so that they can improve and perform their jobs better.   

Annual Reviews

All faculty above .5FTE, except those who have received tenure or multiple year contracts, must be reviewed on an annual basis. Tenured faculty should be reviewed every three years through the peer review process.  It is recommended, but not required, that adjunct faculty, those below .5 FTE, be reviewed regularly as well. 

Tenure-Track Faculty

Tenure-track faculty who are not yet tenured serve on annual appointments and therefore must be reviewed each year.  When and how to conduct annual reviews for tenure-track faculty is discussed on the CLAS website (see annual reviews).  These reviews may be done at the end of the academic year in spring, or in the fall of the following year.  Annual reviews may be conducted by the department chair or the departmental P&T committee, according to the rules and procedures of the department.  The annual reviews are for internal use only; that is, the department is not required to send a copy to the Dean's office, except in the case of the third-year annual review.  It is, however, important that departments conduct annual reviews in a timely manner and have the reviews on file, in part because faculty deserve feedback on their performance and also because they are required by State and University regulation.  The annual review, like all reviews, should be honest and helpful, discussing how the faculty member is doing in relation to his or her contract of hire, and evaluating the faculty member's progress towards tenure.

It must be stressed that annual reviews are a contractual obligation.  Faculty members who have not received annual reviews may, and have, used the lack of reviews to successfully grieve denial of  promotion or tenure. 

Third-Year Reviews

The third-year annual review of the tenure track faculty is especially important.  This review should be conducted in the spring of the third year, although specific hiring contracts may specify a different review date.  This review is seen as a "mid-term" evaluation of how a faculty member is progressing towards tenure and promotion.  As such, the third-year review should specifically review the expectations of the faculty member as laid out in the supplemental letter of hire, and highlight where the faculty member has succeeded or fallen short of those expectations.  The review should also, in as specific terms as possible, describe what the faculty member must do in the next three years to receive tenure and promotion.  

If the department and the chair determine from the third-year review that a faculty member has not lived up to the agreements specified in the supplemental letter of hire, the department may choose to recommend termination of the faculty member at that time. 

The third-year reviews are forwarded to the Dean's Office for review, and the Dean will meet with each faculty member reviewed.  A third-year review checklist and the third year review signature sheet are available on the CLAS website.

Fixed-Term Instructional and Research Faculty

The procedure, timing, and process for the annual reviews of fixed-term instructional and research faculty have been determined in collective bargaining with the American Association of University Professors and are described in Article 18 of the collective bargaining agreement.  An electronic version of the current Collective Bargaining Agreement can be found at www.oaa.pdx.edu under Reference Documents.  Section 3 of this article outlines requirements for the regular review of fixed-term instructional and research faculty.  Article 18 specifies that each department must have in place guidelines (approved by the Dean's Office and the Provost's Office) for these reviews.  Department chairs should be familiar with Article 18.  Several points are important to note.

• The Departmental Committee that conducts that annual review of fixed-term faculty must contain at least one member who is on a fixed-term appointment.


• The reviews are meant to be "developmental," i.e. the reviews should attempt to help fixed-term faculty develop their full potential, and are not meant as part of an "up-or-out" decision-making process.


• The reviews must be completed by March 15 of each year.

Promotion and Tenure

Tenure-Track Faculty Promotion and Tenure

The criteria and procedures for the promotion and tenure of tenure-track faculty are specified in the Policies and Procedures for the Evaluation of Faculty for Tenure, Promotion, and Merit Increase (see Promotion and Tenure Guidelines).  These guidelines were approved by the Faculty Senate in 1996.  There have been minor updates or clarifications, but guidelines remain in effect (see P&T Clarification 06).  In addition, departments are required to have their own procedures and requirements for promotion and tenure that may expand on or supplement the University's guidelines.  The University promotion and tenure guidelines specify what is meant by scholarship, how to determine its quality and significance, and how to evaluate it.  These guideline identify four areas in which faculty should be judged:

• Research and other Creative Activities


• Teaching, Mentoring, and Curricular Activities


• Community Outreach


• Governance and Professional Related Activities

A note on tenure:  The decision to tenure usually takes place during the sixth year of full-time service, or the FTE equivalent thereof, although faculty members may be considered earlier if the department feels they are especially meritorious.  In some cases, faculty with prior experience are allowed to come up for tenure or promotion after less than six years of service at PSU, if their prior service combined with their PSU service totals at least six years.  It is important to note that faculty who start their seventh year on the tenure track automatically receive tenure, whether they have been considered or not.  It is therefore important to make sure that all tenure-track faculty are considered for tenure before entering their seventh year of service.

Academic Ranks

Assistant Professor: Appointees to the rank of Assistant Professor ordinarily hold the highest earned degree in their fields of specialization.  Rare exceptions to this requirement may be made when there is evidence of outstanding achievements and professional recognition in the candidate's field of expertise.  In most fields, the doctorate will be expected.

Associate Professor: A faculty member will not be eligible for consideration for promotion to Associate Professor until the third year in rank as an Assistant Professor.  In the usual course of events, promotion to Associate Professor and granting of indefinite tenure are considered concurrently in the sixth year in rank as an Assistant Professor.  Exceptions which result in the consideration for promotion immediately upon eligibility should occur only on the basis of extraordinary achievement. Length of time in rank is not a sufficient reason for promotion. 

Promotion to the rank of Associate Professor requires the individual to have made contributions to knowledge as a result of the person’s scholarship, whether demonstrated through the scholarship of research, teaching, or community outreach.  High quality and significance of academic scholarship are the essential criteria for evaluation.   Effectiveness in teaching, research, or community outreach must meet an acceptable standard when it is part of a faculty member’s responsibilities.   Finally,  promotion to the rank of associate professor requires the faculty member to have performed his or her fair share of governance and professionally-related service activities to the University.

Professor: The rank of Professor is equivalent to the rank of Full Professor at other institutions. A faculty member will normally not be considered for promotion to Professor until the fourth year in rank as an Associate Professor.  Exceptions will be made only in extraordinary cases.  Consideration for the promotion immediately upon eligibility should occur only on the basis of extraordinary achievement.  Length of time in rank is not a sufficient reason for promotion. 

Promotion to the rank of Professor requires the individual to have made significant contributions to knowledge as a result of the person’s scholarship, whether demonstrated through the scholarship of research, teaching, or community outreach.  The candidate's scholarly portfolio should document a record of distinguished accomplishments using the criteria for quality and significance of scholarship.  Effectiveness in teaching, research, or community outreach must meet an acceptable standard when it is part of a faculty member’s responsibilities. Finally, promotion to the rank of professor requires the faculty member to have provided leadership or significant contributions to the governance and professionally-related service activities of the university.

Emeritus: The Emeritus rank may be awarded upon retirement in recognition of outstanding performance.

Procedures for Promotion and Tenure

The process for promotion and tenure is complicated and long.  The following is a summary of the steps. Although there are specific procedures and deadlines set by the University, the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences has its own procedures and dates  Specifically, since the College has many cases to process each year, it starts the tenure and promotion process earlier, usually in the spring of the year before the decision is to be made.  The CLAS promotion and tenure calendar dates are posted each year on the CLAS website (CLAS Promotion and Tenure Schedule).  A checklist of all the items that must be part of the promotion or tenure file forwarded to the Dean's Office is found on the CLAS website (Checklist).

Some of the important steps include:

• Notification of Eligibility:   In May of the year before the promotion decision, the Dean's Office will send to the department chairs a presumed list of who is eligible for promotion and/or tenure.  Department chair are asked to review this list and, working with the Dean's Office, make a final determination of who is eligible for promotion or tenure the following year. The department chair should then notify the departmental promotion and tenure committee of who will be eligible.  Faculty members on sabbatical or other approved leaves of absence are to be given equal consideration for promotion in rank with faculty members who are on campus.

• External Peer Review.  To substantiate the quality and significance of a faculty member’s scholarship, a representative sample of an individual’s scholarly work must be evaluated by professional peers from outside the university.  The purpose of the external reviews is not to evaluate the candidate's service or contributions to Portland State University, but to evaluate the quality and significance of the candidate's academic scholarship in the profession at large. External peer reviews must be conducted for all recommendations for tenure and for promotion to associate and full professorships. 

  To select a set of external reviewers the department chair will ask the candidate for a list of reviewers (at least four) from outside the University.  The faculty member may also provide a list of possible reviewers perceived as negative or biased; although inclusion of a name on this list will not preclude a request for evaluation, the faculty member's exception will be included as a matter of record, if an evaluation is requested.  At least three additional external reviewers will be selected by the department chair or the chair of the departmental promotion and tenure committee.  The chair will send this list of six or seven potential external reviewers to the dean's office for approval. The dean's office may add names to the list. The chair of the department or the chair of the departmental promotion and tenure committee will select six external evaluators from the combined list of outside reviewers.   A sample letter of solicitation is provided in Appendix II.  (Please note: As suggested in the sample letter, evaluators should be advised that their evaluations are not confidential and will be available for the faculty member to read.)  Requests for external evaluations should include a copy of the University and departmental criteria for promotion and tenure. 

  The faculty member being reviewed, in consultation with the departmental promotion and tenure committee or the department chair, will prepare a packet of information regarding the candidate's academic scholarship to send to the external reviewers.  This packet should include a letter of explanation from the chair, a copy of the candidate's curriculum vitae, a selection of the candidate's writing and scholarship, and, in some cases, a narrative written by the candidate describing her scholarly goals.  This material should be completed by early summer, and the external reviewers should be asked to return their evaluation, usually a two or three page letter, by the fall. Upon receipt of the evaluations, the external reviews will become a part of the candidate's tenure and/or promotion file.  A complete evaluation file must include at least three letters from external reviewers; six is preferred.  In cases when promotion or tenure decisions are deferred, external evaluations may be used in subsequent considerations for a period of three years.

  The external review letters and an external letter report (external letter report form) should be included in the materials that are forwarded from the department to the Dean's Office as part of the tenure or promotion file.

• Departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee: All recommendations for promotion and tenure originate with formally established departmental committees.  The department as a whole shall determine the composition of the committee and the method of selection for its members and chairperson. For faculty members involved in interdisciplinary teaching and/or research, or those who have split appointments, the departmental promotion or tenure committee will include a faculty representative from a mutually agreed-upon second department or program. Since the department chair is required to make a separate evaluation of the department faculty, the department chair cannot be a member of the promotion and tenure committee.  The committee may invite other faculty members to participate in its deliberations. This committee acts as an independent reviewer of the performance of departmental faculty and initiates recommendations for all department faculty except the department chair.  Committee members being considered for promotion or tenure should not participate in the committee review of their cases.

  Student input.  Student input must be included in the promotion and tenure decision process.  It is not required that students participate directly as members of the the departmental promotion and tenure committee, although some departments do have students serve in that role.  However, students generally find it intimidating to serve on faculty committees, and often do not understand the larger context in which these decisions are being made.  Student input can better be obtained through teaching evaluations, forums, or other methods.  The College of Liberal Arts and Sciences requires that all candidates for promotion and tenure include teaching evaluations as a part of their promotion file.

• Committee Decision and Narrative Report: The Departmental Committee's report to the department chair should be in the form of a written narrative for each faculty member under consideration.  The report must address the following areas: contributions to knowledge as a result of the person’s scholarship; effectiveness in teaching, research, or community outreach when it is part of a faculty member’s responsibilities; and governance and professionally-related service.  

  Each member of the departmental committee must make one of four decisions about the candidate being considered, and the decision of each voting member of the committee must be marked on the recommendation form (CLAS Signature Sheet). 

  The choices are:

  Ineligible:  This decision is appropriate for faculty who do not have minimum time in rank or who are on fixed-term appointments. 

  Deferral:  This decision is appropriate for faculty who have met the minimum time in rank to qualify for promotion, but who request not to be considered, and for faculty whose requests for promotion are not accepted.   A request for deferral by a faculty member should not be accepted by the committee without consideration. The committee should indicate, in writing, that such a discussion was held.  Deferrals for faculty who have requested evaluation for promotion must be accompanied by a written report. 

  Positive Decision:  This decision is appropriate for faculty whose attainments warrant promotion and/or tenure.  For faculty members recommended for tenure, the committee's evaluation report should consider all years being counted toward tenure, including years of prior service that have been extended to the faculty member in his or her original letter of offer.  For faculty members recommended for promotion, the committee's evaluation should survey the faculty member's years at Portland State.  Where a positive recommendation is being made, a written report following the format in Appendix II must accompany the recommendation form.

  Negative Decision: This decision is appropriate for faculty on annual tenure when, in the committee's judgment, termination should be recommended.  If in its review of a faculty member on an annual appointment, even within the first five years of such an appointment, the committee does not find that a faculty member is making satisfactory progress toward tenure, the committee may indicate a negative decision. Negative recommendation must be accompanied by a written report following the format in Appendix II (Promotion and Tenure Guidelines).

• Department Chair Decision and Narrative  The department chair must be satisfied that the departmental committee has followed the departmental guidelines and that the appraisals are complete and in proper form. The chair makes a separate written recommendation, adding her own written narrative to the committee's.  The narrative must address the following areas: contributions to knowledge as a result of the person’s scholarship, effectiveness in teaching, research, or community outreach when it is part of a faculty member’s responsibilities, and governance and professionally-related service. It should also address the general expectations of your discipline’s promotion and tenure guidelines and for the candidate in relation to these expectations.  If the recommendation of the chair differs significantly from the committee's recommendation, the chair shall state in writing the reason for specific difference.

• Notifying the Candidate.  The department chair should inform each faculty member in a timely manner, in writing, of the departmental committee's and of his or her own recommendations.  Faculty members should be given the opportunity to review their files before they are forwarded to the Dean and Provost, and should indicate they have done so by signing the Appraisal Signature and Recommendation Form.  A copy of the complete appraisal, and any additional material added by the department chair, should be in the file for review by the affected faculty member.  The department chair must discuss with a faculty member, when requested, the reasons for the recommendations by the departmental committee and the department chair.  If a department member questions either departmental recommendation, he or she may request a reconsideration of that recommendation.

• Procedures for Reconsideration of Department Decision:  Within two weeks of receiving written notice of department action, the faculty member must give written notice of intent to request a reconsideration of the recommendation.  If the request is for reconsideration of the departmental committee recommendation, both the committee chair and the department chair must be notified and the department chair must return all appraisal materials promptly to the committee chair.  Otherwise, only the department chair need be notified in writing.

The review may be requested on the basis of procedural or substantive issues.  The faculty member should prepare whatever supportive material is pertinent.  The supportive materials must be submitted to the committee chair or department chair, as appropriate, within two weeks of written notification of intention to request the reconsideration.

All materials submitted by a faculty member shall become part of the appraisal document.  The departmental committee and/or department chair, as appropriate, shall consider the materials presented by the faculty member.  The committee chair and/or department chair may attach to the appraisal additional documentation or statements with their recommendations.  The department chair shall forward the appraisal, which shall then proceed through the normal administrative review procedure in a timely manner.

• Chair's Report to the Dean:  The department chair must submit the following to the dean: statement of assurance that all eligible faculty have been reviewed; recommendation forms for each faculty member; and the committee's and the chair's written narratives for all faculty members who have received positive or negative recommendation for promotion and tenure.

Promotion of Fixed-Term Faculty

Fixed-term faculty are normally not eligible for tenure.  However, they are eligible for promotion, for seniority status, and for multiyear contracts.  The procedure for the promotion of fixed-term faculty is in Article 18 of the AAUP Collective Bargaining Agreement. 

Fixed-Term Ranks

Fixed-term faculty may be at any rank, including those ranks held by tenure-track faculty, depending on their qualifications and their role in the department.  There are also different ranks for fixed-term teaching faculty than for fixed-term research faculty.  The most common ranks for fixed-term teaching faculty are:

Instructor: Appointees to the rank of Instructor ordinarily hold an advanced degree in their fields of specialization or have comparable experience. An instructor at 0.50 or more is appointed for a period of one year, and may be reappointed. Normally persons appointed at the rank of Instructor are not eligible for consideration for promotion within the first year of their appointment.

Senior Instructor: The rank of Senior Instructor is used in those cases where the nature of the assignment requires special skills or experience in the instructional program, but does not warrant the rank of Assistant Professor, and in those cases where the performance of the individual could warrant the award of tenure.

Promotion to Senior Instructor:   Instructors who have more than six years of continuous service at PSU are eligible for promotion to the rank of Senior Instructor.  Such a recommendation should go through the same process as the promotion of tenure track-faculty, with the modification discussed above.  Each department should have guidelines for promotion to senior instructor.  These recommendations should follow the same deadlines as tenure-track recommendations.

Assistant Professor (Fixed-Term): Fixed-term faculty may be promoted to the rank of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor.  This may be appropriate in certain situations where a fixed-term faculty member holds a Ph.D.   However, departments should use the same standards and procedures used for tenure-track faculty when recommending the promotion of fixed-term faculty to these academic ranks.  Promotion of a fixed-term faculty to the rank of Assistant Professor or higher rank does not change their fixed-term status.

Multiyear Contracts:  Fixed-term faculty with 6 years of continuous service can be considered for multiyear contracts.  This status should be viewed as a meritorious status and the decision to grant this status should go through the same decision process described above.  Fixed-term faculty who have been promoted to senior instructor are automatically eligible for multiyear contracts.

Peer Review

Background and Goals

Peer Review, also called Institutional Career Support, is a process by which faculty who have received tenure are reviewed.  The details of the peer review program, including its justification and goals, are included in Article 16 of the AAUP-PSU Collective Bargaining Agreement (see Peer Review).  The intent of the peer review process is to encourage tenured faculty to remain productive by having a committee of their peers examine their career goals and accomplishments every three years, and make suggestions about how they might improve.  In addition, a sum of money is set aside each year to give out to faculty who have been identified in the peer review process.

    The stated goals of peer review, as taken from Article 16 of the PSU-AAUP Collective Bargaining Agreement, are as follows: