In general, successful annual reappointment reviews for non-tenured TT faculty will show evidence of progress toward the requirements for tenure on three measurable criteria: research and/or creative scholarship, teaching, and service to the institution and the profession. In addition to these, consideration is given to personal integrity and professional behavior as recognized by the University community and as demonstrated in all aspects of scholarship, teaching, and service. Specific concerns expressed by the RT&P review committee and/or the director during annual reviews must be addressed by the candidate in subsequent reviews.
Research and/or Creative scholarship (See Table 1. Evaluation Components for Research/Creative scholarship)
To attain a rating of “very good”, candidates should be professionally active as researchers or creative scholars, indicated by publications and/or exhibitions each year, with a clear research focus emerging over time. As an external indicator of this activity, candidates will have begun to establish a strong positive professional reputation, with publications, presentations, and exhibitions at the regional, and increasingly, national and international levels which shows promise for making a significant impact on the field (or discipline) during the pre-tenure years. Ratings of “excellent” are awarded only exceptionally at this stage, since reputation is still being built.
In order to be reappointed, candidates should attain a minimum rating of “good” in teaching by the end of the third year, recognizing that strong teaching takes time to develop. Candidates should demonstrate aspiration to “very good” ratings, even as differentials of assignment across The School mean that some assignments typically involve formats in which it is more difficult to achieve strongly positive results. Teaching quality will be evidenced in official teaching evaluation forms (SSIs), reports by peer reviewers based on observed classroom instruction, and/or other activity related to pedagogy, such as supervision of student research, advising, and curricular/course development.
In order to be reappointed, candidates will have demonstrated active and cooperative service at one or more of the following levels: the program, division, school, college, university, and profession. This service and collegiality will increase as experience grows.
The third-year review is particularly important: during this review, evidence for all three categories must rate minimally as “good,” with the understanding that a “very good” will be required for tenure. If at any time any criterion is assessed below the level of “good”, the candidate will, in consultation with the school director, devise plans for improvement and/or development, in order to attain levels of at least “very good.”