Annual Review

LA/PPS No. 04.02.10 (2.01)
​​​​​​​Issue No. 02
​​​​​​​Effective Date: September 1, 2025
​​​​​​​Next Review: September 1, 2030 (E5Y)
​​​​​​​Senior Reviewer: Dean

POLICY STATEMENT

This PPS refers to the annual performance evaluation of continuing tenure-line (i.e., tenured and tenure-track) faculty, nontenure-line faculty (i.e., lecturers, senior lecturers, and practice, clinical, research and instructional faculty at all ranks), graduate instructional and teaching assistants, 50 percent+ FTE program faculty, and non-continuing faculty.

01. PURPOSE

01.01 The College of Liberal Arts is committed to effective performance evaluation processes and outcomes for faculty. The purpose of annual faculty evaluation is to provide guidance for meaningful faculty development. Faculty are expected to contribute to the goals of their departments, the college, and university through teaching, scholarly and creative activities, and leadership and service (as appropriate to faculty title and rank). Performance evaluation in these areas is the basis for decisions concerning promotion, tenure, merit, and retention.

02. TIMELINE

02.01 As per university policy (§01 AA/PPS No. 04.02.10 Performance Evaluation of Faculty and Post-Tenure Review), all continuing faculty will be evaluated annually. Annual performance evaluation is the responsibility of shared governance and a duty of department chairs, personnel committees, and the dean. Evaluation is based on the preceding calendar year.

02.02 Faculty submissions and reviews are done in Faculty Qualifications. February 1 is the deadline for continuing faculty to submit their annual evaluation. Personnel committees should meet in early to mid-February to complete their reviews. Chair reviews are due by March 1. By March 15, faculty certify receipt of their reviews and may, at that time, enter comments. The annual review process must be completed in Faculty Qualifications by March 15.

02.03 Graduate instructional (GIA) and teaching assistants (GTA) and non-continuing faculty (per course faculty, temporary lecturers, and visiting faculty) are required to have an annual or semester review (for one-semester-only faculty), preferably in Faculty Qualifications. The timeline for these reviews is the same as the timeline for continuing faculty.

03. EXPECTATIONS FOR CONTINUING FACULTY

03.01 The college uses a rating system of meets and does not meet in annual evaluation. Faculty are evaluated on the primary duties appropriate to their faculty title and rank. For example, while tenure-line faculty are evaluated on teaching, scholarly and creative activities, and service, instructional faculty, senior lecturers, and lecturers are primarily evaluated on teaching, and clinical, practice, and research faculty have varying expectations based on department and university policies.

03.02 Faculty are encouraged to provide additional comments, attach documents, etc., in their annual review reports to expound on and illustrate their activities over the previous calendar year. This is especially important if faculty had workload credits for a non-instructional activity listed in Section 2 of the report (e.g., Research Activity Adjustment, Sponsored Program Development Activity Adjustment, Administrative Activity Adjustment, Graduate Mentoring Adjustment, etc.; see §05-07 AA/PPS No. 04.01.40 Faculty Workload). Faculty also should take care to explain their plans and goals for the next calendar year (Section 9) in their annual review report. Doing so is important when faculty will have workload adjustments in the next calendar year’s spring and fall semesters as chairs are required to provide justifications for adjustments in workload reports, which are due prior to the next annual evaluation of faculty.

03.03 Evaluation by personnel committees, chairs and the dean will reflect the following general expectations listed below as well as other specifics from appropriate department, college, and university policies (i.e., policies pertaining to annual evaluation, workload, merit, tenure, promotion, etc.).

a. Teaching. University policy (§15.01 AA/PPS No. 02.03.01 Conduct and Planning of Courses) requires departments evaluate each organized course section taught in fall, spring, and summer semesters. To meet annual expectations in teaching, faculty will demonstrate evidence of effective teaching based on the department’s student evaluation instrument, which may be quantitative, qualitative, or a mixed method. Based on department policy, peer-review of teaching, teaching narratives, syllabi, assignments, course redesigns, teaching workshops and other professional development activities, student advising, etc., may also be used to demonstrate effective teaching.

b. Scholarly and Creative Activities. To meet annual expectations in scholarly and creative activities, faculty will demonstrate accomplishments explained in their department policies. The following are some examples: presentation of scholarly or creative activity; submission or publication of work; initiation of a new scholarly or creative area; implementation or completion of a portion of a long-range or large-scale endeavor; draft or submission of sponsored program proposal; participation in or implementation of a sponsored program or grant-related activity; or, mentoring of undergraduate and graduate student academic projects (e.g., honors thesis, master’s thesis, doctoral dissertation, or similar academic projects).

c. Leadership and Service. The college defines leadership and service as collegial contributions to the positive functioning of the department, college and university (§05.02 LA/PPS No. 04.01.40 Tenure and Promotion). To meet annual expectations in leadership and service, faculty will demonstrate activity appropriate to their faculty title and rank. For tenure-line faculty, an outstanding record of leadership and service is normally expected for promotion to professor; a sustained level of effective service is necessary for promotion to associate professor (§04.01.a AA/PPS No. 04.02.20 Tenure-Line Faculty Tenure and Promotion Review. Examples include leading/serving on department, college, and university committees; holding office in professional organizations; chairing sessions at professional meetings; and in general, any other activity that advances the best interests of the university. The quality of leadership/service is more significant than the quantity (e.g., a long list of committee memberships).

04. EXPECTATIONS FOR OTHER FACULTY TITLES

04.01 The following describes the annual evaluation or semester review (for one-semester-only faculty) of 50 percent+ FTE program faculty, graduate instructional (GIA) and teaching assistants GTA), and non-continuing faculty (per course faculty, temporary lecturers, and visiting faculty). The university encourages the use of Faculty Qualifications in the evaluation of these faculty.

a. Fifty Percent+ FTE Program Faculty. Fifty percent+ FTE program faculty are not instructors of record, but are assigned duties within a department, center, or institute that require faculty credentials (§04.05 AA/PPS No. 04.01.20 Faculty Qualifications, Responsibilities, and Titles). They will be evaluated on their advanced knowledge and specific job duties.

b. GIAs, GTAs, Non-Continuing Teaching Faculty. Because GIAs, GTAs, per course faculty, and temporary lecturers are not expected to engage in scholarship and perform service. The evaluation of these individuals will be based solely on teaching using the expectations written in section 03.03.a of this policy and their department policies.

c. Visiting Faculty. Visting faculty (visiting lecturer, visiting assistant professor, visiting associate professor, visiting professor) have temporary appointments (§04.02.q-t AA/PPS No. 04.01.20 Faculty Qualifications, Responsibilities, and Titles). Because they are expected to have prominent industry ties but may also be appointed to teach, their evaluations will reflect the purpose of their individual appointments. A visiting scholar appointment is reserved for individuals visiting from an outside institution or organization and sponsored by a faculty host. The evaluation of a visiting scholar will be based on the purpose of the temporary appointment and the benefit to the university (§04.06 AA/PPS No. 04.01.20 Faculty Qualifications, Responsibilities, and Titles).

05. LIST OF REVIEWERS OF PPS

04.01 This PPS has the following reviewers and cycle.

Position
Date
Liberal Arts Council
September 1 E5Y
Dean of the College of Liberal Arts
September 1 E5Y

06. CERTIFICATION STATEMENT

This LA/PPS has been approved by the following in their official capacities and represents College of Liberal Arts policy and procedure from the date of this document until superseded.

Liberal Arts Council
Dean, College of Liberal Arts