Faculty Review Types

Annual Merit Review

EDP faculty are reviewed annually by a committee comprised of tenured faculty. The purposes of the review include: evaluation for promotion and tenure, merit salary recommendations, and teaching award recommendations. All faculty may be considered annually for merit review based on an updated CV and completion of the FAR.   

1st Year Review

Faculty in their first year at UT will participate in an abbreviated review process which takes place during the Spring semester. This review will be conducted by the Review Committee and will provide early feedback on teaching, research, and service. 1st-year faculty members will submit an updated CV and a self-completed merit summary sheet by March 1^st.

Mid-Probationary (3^rd Year) Review 

This review is completed in the third year of rank for Assistant Professors. The purpose of the 3^rd year review is to determine the degree to which the faculty member is “on track” for promotion. A comprehensive written evaluation of the faculty member’s research, teaching (including the 2^nd year peer teaching observation) and service should be included. The 3^rd year review will be submitted in the faculty member’s dossier when they are considered for promotion & tenure.

Post-Tenure Comprehensive Review 

A post-tenure comprehensive faculty review evaluating a faculty member’s teaching, service and research record, is required every 6^th year. This review will be conducted in the Fall semester following 6 full years in rank, and every 6^th year following. The review shall be based on evaluation of the CV, student evaluations of teaching, annual reports and/or merit review reports, a recent (5^th year, ideally) peer teaching evaluation, and any additional materials provided to the committee by the faculty member. The annual review committee shall either deem performance satisfactory or unsatisfactory in the relevant areas. Unsatisfactory performance requires additional written documents. Faculty due for a post-tenure comprehensive review shall receive at least 6 months’ notice of intent to review. Notice shall be provided no later than March 31^st that the review will be conducted the following Fall. 

Peer Teaching Observations

Peer review of teaching is required in the 2^nd and 5^th year for Assistant Professors, and in the 5^th year of a tenured faculty member’s six-year review cycle. These reviews aim to enhance teaching and learning, and provide a tool in addition to CIS for evaluating effective and strong teaching. A committee of at least two faculty will be assigned to complete a peer teaching evaluation of the faculty member consistent with guidelines. Peer teaching reviews follow four steps:

1. Pre-Observation – Includes closely examining the course materials an instructor has compiled, and conducting a pre-observation conversation with the instructor about class expectations and context. 
2. Observation – Each reviewer should attend 2-3 class sessions to observe individual and group behaviors in a specific class, as well as to gain a thorough understanding of the instructor’s interactions with the class.
3. Post-Observation – The post-observation meeting between the observer(s) and instructor provides an opportunity to discuss the observations/impressions/recommendations and to have a mutual conversation about teaching and learning. 
4. Peer Teaching Observation Report – A written report of the faculty member’s teaching should be drafted, including comments on what the instructor does well and suggested areas for improvement. A list of observations conducted (with course, observer, and date) should also be included.