Section 5C: Faculty Evaluation

Seven General Recommendations for Faculty Evaluation Processes

1. Department chairs and faculty committees need to give conscientious and honest evaluations. The ultimate goal is effective performance, not avoiding controversy.
2. During the probationary period, faculty members should receive regular and thorough evaluations that provide realistic assessment of their prospects for tenure. An especially intensive review is appropriate in the third or fourth year, preferably involving the senior members of the department, the chair, and body above the department that would be involved in a subsequent tenure review.
3. Department chairs and deans should convey concerns about performance to all faculty in a timely manner. Documentation should be the rule rather than the exception.
4. Any post-tenure evaluation procedures should be carefully coordinated with existing disciplinary procedures.
5. If a decision against reappointment may be based on allegations of sexual harassment or other misconduct, consider whether the candidate received fair warning of the perceived problems and an opportunity to respond in writing and orally.
6. Department chairs and deans deserve ongoing support and training in how to conduct evaluation processes. They may, or some would argue should, be held accountable for the conscientiousness and timeliness of their evaluations. Evaluation systems are only as good as the evaluators.
7. Faculty members who are denied reappointment or tenure deserve institutional support and assistance even after the adverse decision. They should not be ostracized as if stricken by a contagious disease. The department chair and other colleagues should provide assistance in identifying professional opportunities appropriate for the individual.