Performance Review Process
Non-tenure track (NTT) faculty are subject to a performance review in the third consecutive year of appointments following any initial appointment or any previous performance review before any subsequent annual appointment can be anticipated or authorized. This performance review shall be conducted in the Department Ad Hoc RTP Committee for all NTT faculty on all campuses. Each academic year review guidelines and timelines are distributed by the Office of the Provost.
Each NTT faculty member undergoing a performance review shall prepare and submit a primary file together with a file of supporting materials for their performance review. The primary file shall include:
(a) an overview statement summarizing the candidate’s main accomplishments during the review period,
(b) an up‑to‑date curriculum vitae,
(c) a list of all courses taught during the review period,
(d) copies of all peer teaching evaluations and Student-Survey-of-Instruction (SSI; including all student comments) summary sheets for all classes taught during the review period.
The supporting file shall include the following materials for each course taught by the candidate during the review period:
(a) the course syllabus,
(b) course materials developed by the candidate,
(c) copies of all quizzes and exams.
If a particular course has been taught on more than one occasion, these supporting materials should be provided only for the most recent offering of that course. NTT faculty members are free to provide any additional materials or information beyond those stated here, as they deem appropriate, in support of their performance review.
The minimum satisfactory expectations for NTT teaching performance include a demonstration of effective instruction appropriate for the level of each course and strong perceptions of instruction as documented in peer teaching evaluations and Student Surveys of Instruction. The overall evaluation during the third-year full performance review shall also include consideration of the faculty member’s personal integrity and professional behavior as recognized by the University community. Ethical lapses have their greatest impact on students, but may also affect Departmental staff and Faculty colleagues as well as the larger research community. Professional behavior and integrity shall be evaluated in the context of University Policy regarding the Faculty code of professional ethics (see University Policy Register 3342-6-17) and giving consideration to any Faculty sanctions (see CBA Article VIII) that may have been applied.
At the conclusion of the review, the NTT Faculty member will be provided with a written summary of its outcome and conclusions and an indication of whether an additional appointment may be anticipated and, if so, under what programmatic, budgetary and/or anticipated staffing or projected enrollment circumstances. In the event that an additional appointment is not indicated, the NTT Faculty member is to be provided with an additional explanation of whether lack of adequate satisfaction with performance or the absence of anticipated continuing programmatic need or budgeted resources to support the position is the reason.
An additional appointment immediately subsequent to the completion of the performance review normally is expected to be part of a three‑year term of renewable annual appointments, provided that continuing programmatic need and budgeted resources supporting the position can be anticipated for the term in question.