Post Tenure Review of Academic Faculty

How the PTR Process Works

All tenured academic faculty, except faculty who have an administrative appointment of 50% or greater, undergo a Post Tenure Review (PTR) every five years. This review assesses effectiveness in teaching, scholarship and creative activities, student success activities, and service. It is conducted by a committee of faculty peers that are elected by the unit. Administrators undergo a different review process that can be found in Section 3.3.10 of the GT faculty handbook.

The Purpose of PTR

PTR is aimed at facilitating faculty development and ensuring intellectual vitality and competent levels of performance by all faculty throughout their professional careers. In both regards, the goal is to maximize the talents of tenured faculty within the broad array needed for effective performance of the Institute and its Units.

A Post Tenure Review is both retrospective and prospective because it recognizes past contributions and provides the means for continuous intellectual and professional growth. It is recognized that, within the traditional mix of professional activities, different emphases may be appropriate at different stages in a faculty member’s career. As a faculty development tool, PTR provides an opportunity to assist a tenured faculty member in formulating a multi-year plan of professional growth and activity in teaching, scholarship and creative activities, student success activities, and service based on his or her interests and the needs and mission of the Unit and the Institute. To assure professional competence, PTR provides an opportunity to assess the tenured Faculty member’s effectiveness in teaching, scholarship and creative activities, student success activities, and service over a multi-year period. Assessment of professional activities over a relatively long time span encourages Faculty members to undertake projects and initiatives that do not readily lend themselves to annual evaluation.

Process and Package Contents for Post Tenure Review

See Section of the Faculty Handbook for further details.

  1. The Post Tenure Review Committee must be elected by the school faculty via a secret ballot. The school level PTR committee is comprised of tenured academic faculty. The committee should consist of at least three members. The school faculty specifies the composition of the committee. The school faculty should also determine if faculty holding administrative appointments are eligible to serve on the school level PTR committee. The decision about whether administrative faculty can serve on the PTR committee is a decision that has to be reviewed by the unit every five (5) years.
  2. Packages including the following items are prepared by the candidate and submitted to the school chair :
    1. Approved Individualized Evaluation Criteria (if applicable) – This plan should be between the school chair and the faculty member undergoing review. Default criteria are 40% teaching, 40% research, and 20% service with student success activities embedded within each criterion. Alternative criteria may be applied depending on a faculty member’s shifting roles at the institute. When the default criteria are not used, this section should include any written communications between the School Chair and the faculty member describing the alternative review criteria.
    2. Faculty Statement of Accomplishments and Goals – This statement should focus on the candidate’s most noteworthy accomplishments for the years under consideration, as well as, a multi year plan for the next five years of professional growth and activity in teaching, service, and research; five page maximum. If this is a second or subsequent PTR, the statement must include information on how goals from the previous PTR have been met along with goals for the next five years.
    3. Current Vita – Preferably in standard institute format used for promotion and tenure, but not required.
    4. Course/Instructor Opinion Survey (CIOS) Results – For a faculty member’s first PTR, all evaluations should be included.  For subsequent, reviews teaching effectiveness scores for the last 5 years should be included in a table summary format. This summary format is the same format as for P&T. Other information that is relevant to evaluate teaching effectiveness may be included as well.
    5. Annual performance evaluations for the previous five years.
    6. Input into the PTR committee composition – A faculty member undergoing PTR may a.) select a member of the committee to serve as an advocate or choose another tenured faculty member that meeting committee membership criteria to serve as an advocate with voice and vote, b.)remove one person from the committee without cause, and c.) request the removal of any other committee member in the case of a documented conflict or issue. The members of the PTR committee, with the member subject to the objection, will determine whether to honor the request to remove the committee member.
  3. School Chair Assessment Letter (provided by the school chair)
    The PTR package will be provided to the School Chair who will prepare a summary and assessment letter of the faculty member based upon the agreed review criteria. The letter should be supported by the annual evaluations. The school chair does not provide a recommendation of a PTR result. This letter is provided to PTR candidate for an opportunity to provide a rebuttal to the letter. Once complete, the School Chair will deliver the entire PTR package to the PTR committee.
  4. Institute PTR Cover Sheet (provided by school RPT coordinator)
  5. School Level PTR Committee Letter (provided by PTR committee chair)
    A committee of tenured, academic faculty of the school in which the faculty member has primary appointment will prepare a letter addressed to the reviewee, to include performance commendation, critique of substandard performance, recommendations for corrective action, an overall evaluation score (5 years or Needs Improvement), and a record of the committee vote. All members of the PTR committee will sign the coversheet and the letter. This letter will be added to the PTR package and forwarded to the dean.
  6. Office of the Dean
    The letter of the school level review committee, along with all supporting documentation including the school chair’s assessment of reviewee’s goals, will be transmitted to the dean. The dean will then transmit a copy of the package along with the review results to the reviewee and the Office of Faculty Affairs.

Criteria for Post Tenure Review

The default criteria for PTR are education (teaching and mentoring), scholarship and creative activities, and service, with student success activities embedded in each of these. The conventional workload distribution is 40-40-20% (education-research-service). Alternative criteria and/or distribution of effort may be applied, but an understanding, confirmed in writing, must be reached between the school chair and the faculty member before the evaluation begins.

Eligibility for Post Tenure Review

Tenured faculty, reviewed every five years.

Decisions for PTR

Review outcomes will include a decision that the next review will occur after either 5 years or Needs Improvement. Reviewees identified by the review committee as having deficiencies will be judged as Needs Improvement and must undergo a Performance Improvement Plan for the following year. In this case, the committee must clearly state the basis for that decision. A 5-year decision indicates no deficiencies; the faculty member’s next review will be in 5 years. Faculty members receiving a “Needs Improvement” decision are required to meet with the school chair and dean to create a performance improvement plan (PIP).

Performance Improvement Plan (PIP)

The Performance Improvement Plan is used to document deficiencies based on an unfavorable PTR. In the event of an unsuccessful PTR, the faculty member’s School Chair shall work with the faculty member to develop a formal Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) in consultation with the PTR committee based upon the deficiencies found by the committee. Consistent with the developmental intent of the PTR, the PIP must be designed to assist the faculty member in achieving progress towards remedying the deficiencies identified in the PTR, so as to scaffold faculty growth and development and to strengthen future promotion possibilities. The PIP must contain the following:

  1. Clearly defined goals or outcomes
  2. An outline of activities to be undertaken
  3. A timetable
  4. Available resources and support
  5. Expectations for improvement
  6. Monitoring strategy.

The PIP must be approved by the Dean and submitted to the Office of the Vice Provost for Faculty. The School Chair and the faculty member must meet formally twice during each of the fall and spring semesters to review progress, document additional needs/resources, and planned accomplishments for the upcoming time period. After each meeting, the School Chair shall summarize the meeting and indicate if the faculty member is on trach to complete the PIP. This summary should be provided to the faculty member and placed in the faculty member’s file within the unit.

Review of the Performance Improvement Plan (PIP)

At the conclusion of the academic year, the PTR committee shall convene to review the Faculty member’s progress and submit the committee’s feedback to the School Chair and Dean. After considering the feedback from the PTR committee, the School Chair and Dean will determine if the faculty member has remediated the deficiencies identified by the PTR committee or made substantial progress towards remediation. A positive assessment will indicate the successful completion of the PIP and the next PTR will take place at the next regularly scheduled PTR i.e., four (4) years after successful completion of the PIP.