University of Wisconsin
Madison		 Faculty Document 1001b
5 April 1993

POLICY ON REVIEW OF TENURED FACULTY
Substitute Motion jointly offered by the University Committee and
Professors Eric Rothstein and Cyrena Pondrom, English Department
(AS ADOPTED AND AMENDED APRIL 19, 1993)

Each departmental executive committee shall establish written criteria and procedures governing the periodic review of each tenured faculty member.

  1. PURPOSE

    The purpose of the review of tenured faculty is to assess periodically each faculty member's activities and performance, in accordance with the mission of the department, college, and institution in such a way as to determine that the faculty member is meeting his or her obligations to the university and the State of Wisconsin. The review is to be appropriately linked to the merit process, and "should not involve the creation of unnecessary additional bureaucracy."

  2. CRITERIA

  3. The criteria should reflect the overall mission of the department and should be sufficiently flexible to accommodate faculty with differing responsibilities. In developing such criteria, departments may draw on statements used in their current faculty review procedures, such as merit or promotion review.

  4. The executive committee of each department shall ensure that the criteria governing faculty review do not infringe on the accepted standards of academic freedom of faculty, including the freedom to pursue novel, unpopular, or unfashionable lines of inquiry. Nothing in the criteria or application of these policies shall allow the review to be prejudiced by factors proscribed by applicable state or federal law, such as race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity, age, and handicap.

  5. PROCEDURES

  6. Reviews shall occur at least once every five years unless delayed because the faculty member is on leave or because his or her promotion to full professor is anticipated for the following year. These reviews may be incorporated into the annual merit review process or combined with promotion or other reviews including but not limited to nominations for chaired professorships, major teaching awards, and national professional honors or awards. In the case of combined reviews, the department may require supplementary documentation from the faculty member, which meets the criteria of C.1 below, that would not otherwise be required for the other review.

  7. Each review, as determined by each department's executive committee, shall be carried out by one or more tenured faculty members. No individual shall serve as a reviewer if the faculty member under review formally objects to his or her service in that capacity. Such formal objections should be kept confidential. In the case of a faculty member with appointments in more than one department, the department chairs of the affected departments shall agree on procedures for the conduct of the review.

  8. Review procedures shall include

    1. A review of qualitative and quantitative evidence of the faculty member's performance over at least the previous five-year period. The evidence should include a current curriculum vitae, annual activity reports, teaching evaluations or summaries of evaluations, and other materials providing evidence of the faculty member's accomplishments and contributions that the department or the faculty member feel are relevant to the review. The faculty member should provide the reviewer(s) with a brief summary of career plans for the future. Letters from outside the University would not ordinarily be a part of the review process. The faculty member under review, however, may submit appropriate letters if she or he so chooses. The reviewer(s) shall examine materials to the degree needed to accomplish the purposes of this review, which are to assess whether the faculty member is satisfactorily performing his or her duties to the university and the State of Wisconsin, and to encourage the improvement of faculty skills.

    2. Discussion with the faculty member about his or her contributions to the profession, the department and the University if either the reviewers or the faculty member so desire.

    3. Appropriate consideration of a faculty member's contributions outside the department to interdisciplinary and other programs, governance, and administration.

    4. Other steps the reviewers consider useful in making a fair and informed judgment, including but not limited to consultation with individuals who have knowledge of the faculty member's work.

  9. The reviewer(s) shall provide the faculty member with a written summary of the review. The faculty member shall have the opportunity to prepare a written response to the summary. A copy of the summary and any written response to it shall be given to the department chair and shall be placed in the personnel file of the faculty member for uses deemed appropriate by the departmental executive committee. Any recommendations for action in response to the results of the review should be forwarded by the department chair to the appropriate individuals or bodies.

  10. The department shall also preserve in the faculty member's personnel file all documents that played a substantive role in the review (other than documents such as publications that are readily accessible elsewhere), and a record of any action taken as a result of the review.

  11. ACCOUNTABILITY

  12. Copies of the departmental criteria and procedures for reviews of tenured faculty shall be filed with the appropriate dean.

  13. Departments shall maintain a record of reviews completed, including the names of all reviewers.

  14. At the end of each academic year, the appropriate dean shall receive a report from the department chair listing the names of faculty members reviewed during the academic year and summarizing the outcomes of those reviews.

  15. Any exceptions to this review process must be approved by the appropriate dean.

  16. The periodic review of each department, in which the department's mission, personnel, and development are now evaluated, shall include review of the process for review of tenured faculty in the department.

  17. IMPLEMENTATION

    The executive committee of each department shall prepare a plan for scheduling reviews of tenured faculty. This plan shall provide for the first five-year cycle of reviews to begin during the 1993-94 academic year.

UW-Madison Fac Doc 1001b - 5 Apr 93