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 1st.
Mid-Probationary (3rd Year) Review
This review is completed in the third year of rank for Assistant Professors. The purpose of the 3rd 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 2nd year peer teaching observation) and service should be included. The 3rd 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 6th year. This review will be conducted in the Fall semester following 6 full years in rank, and every 6th 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 (5th 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 31st that the review will be conducted the following Fall.
Peer Teaching Observations
Peer review of teaching is required in the 2nd and 5th year for Assistant Professors, and in the 5th 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
EDP Peer Teaching Template
Purpose of Peer Teaching Observations
There are many benefits to conducting routine peer teaching observations, including:
- To provide continual feedback and give instructors an opportunity to consider, modify, and reexamine their teaching with the support of their colleagues.
- Peer review of teaching can be used to evaluate and assess as part of a formal reward system used in merit, promotion, and tenure decisions.
Frequency of Peer Teaching Observations
Faculty at the Assistant and Associate ranks (including non-tenure track faculty) should be reviewed in their 2nd and 5th years in rank. At the Full Professor rank (or equivalent non-tenure track rank), a peer teaching observation should occur during the 5th year of each 6-year post-tenure cycle.
Composition of Peer Teaching Observation Committee(s)
Peer teaching observation assignments will be determined by the Department Chair, in conjunction with the Faculty Annual Review Committee. Each faculty member under review will be given the opportunity to “veto” one of the recommended peer reviewers.
Overview of the Peer Teaching Observation Process
Each peer teaching observation consists of four steps:
Step 1: Pre-Observation. Pre-observation is a two-part process consisting of 1) closely examining the course materials an instructor has organized to support student learning, and 2) engaging in purposeful conversation with the instructor (a pre-observation interview) about class expectations and context; these will provide the necessary background for the observation.
Step 2: Observations. A focused and purposeful inquiry into observable individual and group behaviors in a specific class to help both instructor and observer “see” teaching and learning from a different perspective. More than one peer observation is expected. EDP expects multiple observations across multiple courses (at different levels), if possible. If the faculty member is only teaching one course during the year due to substantial buyout/administrative responsibilities, that course should be observed multiple times.
Step 3: Post-Observation. The post-observation is a follow-up meeting of the observer and instructor to bring impressions from the materials’ review and observation together in a mutual conversation about teaching and learning.
Step 4: Reflective Summary. A reflective summary is a brief, written analysis by the instructor and possibly the peer observer of what was learned about teaching and student learning. It is an opportunity to turn teaching experience into learning.
Components of a Peer Teaching Observation Report
Once the four steps listed above are completed, the peer observation committee is responsible for writing up a comprehensive assessment of their peer teaching review. These reports should cover the instructor’s presentation, course content, organization, clarity of written materials, rigor and fairness of written examinations, appropriateness of methodology, and student outcomes. In order to ensure that these peer teaching observations can be used for our University’s promotion process, they must include the following information:
- Number and title of courses observed
- Date of report
- Date of classroom observation
- Description of methods by which instructor engages students in learning
- Date on which the observation was discussed with the candidate
- Constructive advice
- Any specific improvement from previous peer observation reports
- Names and signatures of observers
A copy of the Peer Teaching Observation reports should be delivered to the faculty member being reviewed, the Department Chair & the Executive Assistant.