|
328
DOCUMENTS OF THE GENERAL FACULTY
MID-PROBATIONARY REVIEW POLICY
Alan K. Cline (computer sciences) filed with the Secretary
of the Faculty Council the following report of the Committee of Counsel
on Academic Freedom and Responsibility.
<signed>
John R. Durbin, Secretary
The Faculty Council
MID-PROBATIONARY REVIEW POLICY
Mid-Probationary Period Review of Assistant Professors
During the tenure track probationary period, assistant
professors shall receive a formal review. The purpose shall be developmental
and advisory and is to provide feedback to the faculty member and the
department regarding the faculty member's progress
toward meeting the standards for promotion with tenure. The review
should begin no later than the beginning of the sixth semester of employment
and should be concluded by the end of that semester. A favorable review
should not be read by candidates as an implied assurance that tenure
will
be granted.
For the review, the faculty member's teaching, research,
and service records will be evaluated. Evidence reviewed should
parallel
the categories and materials typically included in promotion and tenure
files (see HOP 3.17).
The review shall be conducted by the department's
Budget Council or an appropriate faculty committee which shall produce
a written
draft of its recommendations. The report should include appropriate
recommendations to address problem areas.
The department chair will
communicate the draft results of the Budget Council/committee's
evaluations to the faculty member in
a meeting with the faculty member and one other member of the Budget
Council/committee chosen by the faculty member under review. The
faculty member under review
will have an opportunity to respond to the draft. After the meeting,
the department chair and faculty member from the Budget Council/committee
will inform the Budget Council/committee of the responses of the
faculty
member under review. The Budget Council/committee and the department
chair will produce a final written version of their recommendations.
The faculty
member under review may provide a written response to the final written
evaluation if he/she chooses. The department chair will communicate
to
the dean that the review has occurred.
The department must have a written
document explaining the guidelines and procedures to be followed in
the conduct of the review.
The faculty member should be given this at the time of his/her initial
appointment to a tenure-track position as well as updates as they occur.
Rationale for Mid-Probationary Review Proposal
Reasons for formal mid-probationary reviews generally
stress providing clear, productive, and informative guidance to a candidate
during the probationary period toward tenure and promotion. Annual reviews
are not usually adequate for giving candidates an overall assessment of
their progress toward tenure. Additionally, cursory or uncritical mid-probationary
reviews may not give candidates signals they need in time to make
329
improvements. It was
for these reasons that the primary recommendations of the UT System Committee
on the Advancement of Women, fall 1996, included a recommendation that "each institution shall adopt a policy establishing a mandatory formal
mid-probationary period review." Chancellor William H. Cunningham endorsed
this recommendation in March 1997. Guidelines for such a policy were
suggested,
and this proposal from the ACCFR follows those guidelines.
This report was posted on the Faculty
Council Web site ( http://www.utexas.edu/faculty/council/)
on March 8, 2000. Paper copies are available on request from the Office
of the General Faculty, FAC 22, F9500.
|