C. Faculty Evaluation Process

Faculty evaluation at Rochester University is designed to encourage faculty members to build on their strengths and contribute constructively to the mission of Rochester University. Furthermore, evaluations guide decisions concerning step increases, promotions, and tenure. The faculty evaluation process requires the active involvement of the faculty members, their colleagues, and the administrators to whom they report. The following processes are followed by all schools and programs; however, individual schools may choose to incorporate additional elements.

1. Process for faculty without tenure (this is an annual process):

• Annual Self-evaluation: Faculty members articulate annual goals in provided software and review with their supervisor by the end of August. Twice per semester, faculty members update their progress toward goals and meet with supervisor; supervisor records feedback. 
• Peer evaluation: This step is required during the first two years of faculty employment at Rochester University. For more experienced faculty, peer reviews are done either by faculty request or on an as-needed basis.
  
  Collaboration and mentoring are the basis of peer evaluations. When possible, peer evaluators should have tenure and be from the same department or school as the faculty member who is being evaluated. Peer evaluators review course syllabi and LMS courses, if applicable, and observe one class session. The class visit should generate conversations about clarity of expectations, pedagogy, and student engagement, and should be documented through provided forms.
• Faculty members complete end-of-year evaluation with their supervisor by the end of May, and record in provided software.

2. Process for faculty with tenure:

• Tenured faculty continue to complete annual self-evaluation as detailed above. Annual peer evaluation is no longer required.
  
  Tenured faculty who regularly maintain and update goals in the software provided can submit a petition to the Promotion and Tenure committee for exemption from post-tenure review. The petition should include:
  • A letter from the faculty member outlining a summary of their accomplishments throughout the lookback period.
  • A letter of support from their supervisor.

  Otherwise,  the finalized post-tenure review process and timeline are as follows:

• Finalized post-tenure review occurs every six years. Process and timeline are as follows:
  • By May 31: faculty evaluation completed and reviewed with direct supervisor.
  • By November 30: faculty submits material to Promotion and Tenure committee
    • Material includes evidence from last six calendar years (three years already documented in three-year tenured faculty evaluation).
    • The materials will be submitted through a portfolio, which is largely an updated version of the portfolio created for tenure application. It should include the following sections:
      • Position Summary: (This is a written reflection which addresses faculty understanding and application of vocation concepts in their work, engagement with on and off campus activities that are relevant to the University, demonstrated commitment to the University in fulfilling its mission, and demonstrated excellence in rank evaluation criteria)
      • Updated CV (should include scholarship)
      • Evaluations (includes course experience survey analysis)
      • Scholarship and Service - if not covered in CV or Position Summary (explain level of engagement)
      • Recommendations: Letter of support from direct supervisor. The letter should include supportive results from a departmental review of the application, including peer evaluation or teaching and faculty evaluations. When evidence of supervisory or departmental support is not included, an explanation addressing the absence is needed.
  • By February 28: Promotion and Tenure Committee reviews and decides “met” or “not met”
    • NOT MET results in loss of tenure → opportunity to improve → annual evaluation status
    • Faculty may re-apply for tenure after two years of demonstrated improvements with possibility for tenure reinstatement in year three.
    • Faculty may appeal the rating of NOT MET. Appeal process follows the path for dismissal proceedings for tenured faculty (President, Provost, Chair of FA).