Revised August 19, 2009
Each tenure track member of the faculty will be reviewed in the Spring Semester of the faculty member's third academic year at the College of Law. This review will coincide with the annual spring reappointment process. In the case of persons with prior teaching credit at other institutions, the cumulative review will occur in the spring semester one full year prior to the first year in which they would first be eligible to seek tenure.
The review will be conducted by a Committee of three tenured faculty members (the "Committee"). For 1994-95, two members of this Committee will be elected by the full Promotion & Tenure Committee early enough in the Spring semester for the reviews to be completed in a timely manner, and the third member of the Committee will be an outgoing Co-Chair of the Promotion & Tenure Committee. For years following 1994-95, two members of this committee will be elected by the Promotion and Tenure Committee at the same time the election for Chair of the Promotion and Tenure Committee is held. The third member of the Committee will be the newly elected Chair or Co-Chair of the Promotion & Tenure Committee.
The review will assess progress toward promotion or tenure. In the spirit of the University Policy, this review should provide tenure track faculty members with a constructive evaluation of their progress. The review should identify strengths and accomplishments and pinpoint areas in need of improvement in which tenure faculty may provide assistance to tenure track colleagues.
The Committee will review the annual reports submitted by the faculty member to the Dean for the years in question and report on the faculty member's progress in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service. The Committee will also review the annual faculty teaching evaluations of the tenure track candidate. No additional class visitation will be necessary for the cumulative review. The Committee will also consider any outside peer evaluations of the candidates's scholarship. The Committee will also interview the faculty member in order to gain information as to the faculty member's achievements and goals.
The cumulative review shall reflect the conclusions of a discussion of the candidate's progress toward promotion or tenure. This discussion will take place at the spring Promotion and Tenure Committee meeting in the year of the review after a vote on renewal of the candidate's teaching contract.
The reports generated for all tenure track faculty members under review from year to year will be uniform and in substantially the format which follows. The Committee is to compile the report after the discussion at the Promotion and Tenure Committee meeting. The report will be based on the review of annual reports (copies of which should be appended to the Committee Report), faculty teaching evaluations, scholarship reviews, the Promotion and Tenure Committee discussion and the interview with the faculty member. The faculty member will be given a copy of the draft report and be given the opportunity to suggest additions or corrections to the report. However, the content of the final report remains within the sole discretion of the Committee.
1. Overview of the Review Period: Listing of the faculty member's activities for each semester (including summer semesters) during the period, limited to: full-time teaching at GSU College of Law; full-time teaching at another institution; research leaves (including whether paid or unpaid); reduced or expanded teaching loads; summer grants and summer teaching (e.g., "Summer, 1993: one-half research grant, one three-hour course").
2. Evaluations of Teaching:
3. Scholarship: publications in press or published; manuscripts submitted; research in progress; grant applications pending.
4. University Service: at the College, Central or Chancellor's levels including committees, task forces, advising student organizations, etc.
5. Professional Service: including papers or presentations at conferences, advisory or drafting roles for public officials or entities, bar association participation and/or leadership roles, etc.
6. Public and Community Service: including appointive or elective office, leadership roles in community organizations, etc.
7. Grants and/or Fellowships Awarded
8. Awards and Honors
9. Other Evidence of Achievements
10. Committee Evaluation: Evaluation by the Committee, reflecting the Promotion and Tenure Committee's discussion of a faculty member's progress toward promotion or tenure, including strengths and achievements and suggestions as to areas of improvement for the faculty member. The suggestions for improvement should, in the spirit of the University Policy, identify areas in which a tenure track faculty member can change orientation and activity in pursuit of tenure.
11. Current vita of faculty member; copies of faculty member's annual reports for the review period; and copies of evaluations of classroom teaching based on annual class visitations that are conducted by other faculty members for the reappointment process in accordance with the College's Promotion & Tenure document.
In addition to the faculty member's consultative role in the review process, if the faculty member disagrees with any portion of the Committee report or the Dean's review, he or she may submit a written response which will be attached to the report and made a part thereof. The faculty member is to be given a reasonable opportunity to prepare the response prior to submission of the report to the Dean and prior to the submission of the Dean's review and the Committee report to the Provost.
The Dean is to provide promptly a written review of the Committee report, copies of which are to be submitted to the Committee and the faculty member. The Dean is then to submit the report, along with the Dean's review, to the Provost of the University.
Each tenured member of the faculty will be reviewed in the Spring semester of the fifth anniversary of the academic year in which the faculty member's most recent promotion or tenure decision became effective. Subsequent reviews will occur on every fifth anniversary of the first review.
The review will be conducted by committee of three Full Professors. Two Full Professors will be elected by the full Promotion and Tenure Committee each spring to serve on the review committee for all post-tenure reviews scheduled for the upcoming academic year. The third member of each reviewing committee will be appointed by the individual faculty member who is being reviewed. No faculty member who has been the subject of a post-tenure review within the previous two years shall serve on a Committee to conduct a post-tenure review of any member of the Committee which reviewed such faculty member.
There are two purposes to the five-year review of tenured faculty: first, to review and summarize the faculty member's contributions and achievements since his or her last review; and second, to assist the faculty member in creating a statement of professional goals for the next five years.
The review period will cover the years since the faculty member's last post-tenure review or, in case of initials reviews, the years since the last promotion or tenure decision regarding the faculty member. There are five stages to the review:
1. Summary of Review Period: The Committee, using the faculty member's annual progress reports to the Dean, the faculty member's resume, and any other information, prepares a report listing:
The committee also shall review the faculty member's student teaching evaluations. This information does not go into the report since this is a peer review process. The information may be helpful to the Committee, however, in understanding the helping the faculty member form his or her professional plan for the next five years.
2. Faculty Member's Report: Within two weeks of receiving a copy of the Committee's Summary of the Review Period, the faculty member shall submit a report to the Committee including: any corrections or additions to the Committee's report; a draft of the faculty member's professional plans for the next five years. The Committee shall incorporate any additional relevant information provided by the faculty member in its Summary of the Review Period.
3. Meeting: The Committee shall meet with the faculty member to discuss the report and the faculty member's plans for the next five years. The Committee should share their general assessment of the faculty member's contributions in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service and the faculty member's five-year plan.
4. Faculty Member's Professional Plan: Within one week after meeting with the Committee, the faculty member will send the Committee a final statement of his or her professional plan for the next five years. The statement should cover current projects and responsibilities and whether the faculty member plans to continue them, as well as new projects and specific scholarship, teaching, and service goals for the next five years. The faculty member's plan also should address any deficiencies in scholarship, teaching, or service that were raised by the Committee.
5. Committee Report to the Dean: The Committee shall send to the Dean its Summary of the Review Period and the faculty member's five-year professional plan.
For each faculty member, the Committee shall prepare a written review summarizing the strengths and accomplishments or weaknesses and plans for improvement in teaching, scholarship and service. The Committee may incorporate relevant sections of the Summary of Review Period and the faculty member's professional plan where relevant to its summary.
The College of Law is dedicated to maintaining the highest levels of classroom performance and teaching standards. Apart from any post-tenure review process, faculty are encouraged to continually improve their teaching through ongoing, long term collaboration with other faculty and responsiveness to student comments. It is not contemplated that the post-tenure review will attempt to evaluate all the strengths and weaknesses of a faculty member's teaching or to rank that teaching in relation to the rest of the faculty. The post-tenure review should identify, however, any significant deficiencies in a faculty member's teaching.
In identifying deficiencies, the Committee shall consult:
If the Committee believes there may be a significant teaching problem, at least two members of the Committee shall visit the faculty member's classes and review with the faculty member what could be causing his or her teaching reputation or student evaluations to be so negative and how the problems might be addressed. It is contemplated that a faculty member who has been made aware of significant deficiencies in his or her teaching will include in his or her five-year plan a specific course of action for seeking the assistance of colleagues in reviewing and commenting upon the faculty member's classroom performance.
In addition to the faculty member's consultative role in the review process, if the faculty member disagrees with any portion of the Committee report or the Dean's review, he or she may submit a written response which will be attached to the report and made a part thereof. The faculty member is to be given fifteen (15) calendar days to prepare the response prior to submission of the report to the Dean and prior to the submission of the Dean's review and the Committee report to the Provost.
The Dean is to provide promptly a written review of the Committee report, copies of which are to be submitted to the Committee and the faculty member. The Dean is then to submit the report, along with the Dean's review, to the Provost of the University.
