Third-Year Review Committee - Tips to Evaluate the Portfolio

Tips for Evaluating the Portfolio and Making Recommendations

Before you begin your review of the tenure-track faculty member, familiarize yourself with Section 5.5.10 of the Faculty Handbook. It will explain the purpose of the review process and give committee members a timeline. You will also want to be familiar with Section 6.6, Criteria for Tenure and Activities/Sources of Evaluation. This section gives details about the three areas for review (Teaching, Scholarship, and Service), including what would constitute evidence.

Think of the Third Year Review as the midpoint towards Tenure and Promotion. Therefore, ask yourself questions such as “what would the midpoint of a published book or article be?” For a book, which typically takes years to write, edit, and publish, it would logically be a contract in hand and possibly an already written section. For an article, which can typically be written and published in less than a year, it could be something as simple as a draft and a list of journals that a proposed article might fit. For teaching effectiveness, a midpoint would logically be mostly positive reviews, with some self-reflective plan of action for getting even more positive reviews, or it could be a plan to make a syllabus more DEIJ friendly. For service to the college and the community, the midpoint could be to already be serving on various college committees, with a plan to branch out and serve on more college committees or possibly committees of scholarly organizations in a given discipline. Or it could be evidence of community volunteerism with a plan to continue to do so, or even to increase the level of volunteerism, or possibly even a plan to create a new much needed service.

As you as a committee evaluate the tenure track faculty member’s progress in each of the three areas of the tenure criteria, think in terms of specific recommendations you can make to the faculty member under review for strengthening their performance in the three areas, as well as in building their Tenure and Promotion application dossiers. Such recommendations could include items such as to engage in more research, to publish, to visit a teaching clinic or a consultant if a need is evident, or to include more explanation of impact (or importance in the field) in each of the narratives for the three areas under review. The committee could also recommend that more evidence (e.g., copies of articles or books, conference proceedings, certificates received from webinars or training sessions) be provided.

The Chair of the Third Year Review Committee should feel free to contact the Chair of the Tenure & Promotion Committee. They can also request that a member of Tenure & Promotion act as a consultant to the Third Year Review Committee. Acting as a consultant, the Tenure and Promotion member can quickly review the faculty member under review’s dossier and suggest recommendations that you can make.