Faculty Appointments & Review — Five-Year Peer Review of Tenured Faculty

Purpose of the Five-year Peer Review
Schedule of Five-year Peer Reviews
Distribution and Use of the Five-year Peer Review
Collegiate Standards for Five-year Peer Review
Departmental Standards for Tenured Faculty Review
Processes for Five-year Peer Review
Outcomes of the Five-year Peer Review
Reviews of Jointly Appointed Faculty

These procedures were approved by vote of the CLAS Faculty Assembly on November 16, 2011, and approved by the Office of the Provost on June 26, 2012, as consistent with the UI Policy on Review of Tenured Faculty (UI Operations Manual, III.10.7.c and d).

Purpose of the Review

Under University policy, each faculty member undergoes a review by their faculty peers every five years subsequent to the most recent tenure or promotion review.  These peer reviews are, in the main, formative and developmental and should facilitate and encourage professional vitality. 

The five-year review provides an assessment that re-enforces or strengthens the work of the tenured faculty member. It also informs course staffing, distribution of responsibilities for departmental service, professional development and leaves of absence, nomination for teaching awards, and other decisions under the department's or the College’s purview.

Schedule of Five-year Peer Reviews

The DEO is not included on the review schedule during his or her term in office. Faculty who have announced in writing that they intend to retire within a year need not be included on the review schedule; faculty on phased retirement are not exempt until their final year of service. A review for promotion during the five-year period postpones the next tenured faculty review by five years.

Distribution and Use of the Five-year Peer Review

The five-year review is confidential and the materials are shared only with the faculty member, the review committee, the DEO, the Dean, and others directed by the faculty member.  The materials are also made available to the subsequent five-year peer review committee.

Collegiate Standards for Tenured Faculty Review

The departmental and collegiate standards must be distributed to faculty undergoing Five-year Tenured Faculty Review and to the peer review committees.

The College's “Standards for Tenured Faculty Review” are published here. Each department shall have written standards, approved by the College and the Provost, that are consistent with the collegiate document and that set forth the expectations for the ranks of associate professor and professor in the discipline or subdisciplines represented in that department.

Departmental Standards for Tenured Faculty Review

The following departments have departmental criteria for tenured reviews approved by the College as consistent with the University and Collegiate Criteria.


Processes for Five-year Peer Review

Review committee for a Five-year Peer Review

The DEO, in consultation with the faculty member under review, appoints the committee and a committee chair.  The review is performed by a committee of at least two tenured faculty members in CLAS at or above the rank of the individual under review, at least one of whom is at the rank of professor.  The committee may include all departmental faculty at or above rank.  The DEO and collegiate or university administrators may not serve as members of the review committee.

Materials to be reviewed in the Five-year Peer Review

(a) An updated curriculum vitae is required for the review.

(b) The review committee performs at least one classroom observation and assesses teaching materials, student evaluations, and other evidence of the quality of teaching and student mentoring in the period since the previous five year peer review.  (Under College policy, evaluations of teaching must be solicited from students at the end of every course. All faculty must obtain these evaluations and keep them on file as evidence of teaching effectiveness.)

(c) The review committee receives the materials from the faculty member's most recent five-year peer review and annual tenured faculty reviews since the most recent five-year peer review. 

(d) The DEO and/or the review committee may request additional materials from the candidate and these materials must be listed in the Summary Assessment review.

Steps in the Five-year Review Process

  • The review is conducted using the unit’s standards for tenured faculty review, as approved by the College and the Provost.
  • The review is conducted in the spring semester.
  • In early spring, the peer review committee transmits the review to the DEO, using the College’s “Summary Assessment” form for tenured faculty.
  • Within three working days, the DEO transmits the summary assessment to the faculty member under review. 
  • Within five working days of receiving the summary assessment, the DEO discusses the summary assessment with the faculty member.
  • Within five working days of discussing the summary assessment with the DEO, the faculty member may respond in a letter to the DEO.
  • The DEO writes a DEO assessment addressed to the Area Associate Dean and transmits the letter to the faculty member. The letter must:
    • Refer to the report to assess whether the faculty member has met departmental standards in all reviewed areas.
    • Provide recommendations to the faculty to mentor future success in areas reviewed. In the event the assessment report indicates performance has fallen below unit standards in any area, the DEO must summarize recommended actions.
  • Within five working days of receiving the DEO's assessment, the faculty member may respond in a letter to the DEO.
  • In mid-spring (date announced by CLAS), the DEO submits the following review materials to the College via Workflow:
    • Summary Assessment review
    • The response (if any) of the faculty member to the review
    • The DEO's assessment
    • The response (if any) of the faculty member to the DEO assessment
    • The faculty member's curriculum vitae that was used in the review

Outcomes of the Five-year Peer Review

Among the actions that follow from the review, the Dean may ask the faculty member for a progress report at a specified time following the conclusion of the review, to ensure that recommendations from the review are being acted upon and goals established during the review are being achieved.

In the special case where the Dean, in consultation with the DEO, concludes on the basis of the standard peer review’s findings that the faculty member's performance has fallen for a significant period of time below the expected standard of performance for the unit, the procedures outlined in the UI Policy on Tenured Faculty Review (Operations Manual, III-10.7.d) will be followed.

A faculty member who believes that they have been treated unfairly at any point during the five-year peer review process may seek redress of her or his grievance under the Faculty Dispute Procedures (UI Operations Manual III.29.6).

Reviews of Jointly Appointed Faculty

For faculty members holding joint appointments, the primary and secondary units should collaborate to produce a single review. 

For reviews of faculty jointly appointed in another college, the two units should collaborate in a joint review that assesses the faculty member's entire contribution to the University's mission. The review report(s) should be forwarded to the deans of both colleges.