The following proposed post-tenure review document has been approved unanimously by members of the Academic Affairs Committee in attendance on Sept. 24, for submission to the Faculty Senate.

The committee also passed a motion that this revised document be sent again to the AAUP for their review and opinion. The full Faculty Senate voted at the Nov. 4 meeting to submit this policy to all faculty for review.

A vote for approval is scheduled for the Dec. 2 Faculty Senate meeting.

Post-Tenure Review Preamble: At every stage of a faculty member's career, (the annual review process, reviews for promotion and tenure, as well as post tenure review) all efforts should be made to identify strengths and weaknesses in performance, and through appropriate advice and action, provide opportunities for faculty to correct weaknesses and realize their full professional development.

1. All tenured faculty members shall normally be subject to a review of professional performance and progress ("post tenure review") every six years. The process will be based upon the performance of the faculty member during the previous six years as assessed by annual faculty evaluations which are summarized on a five point scale (unsatisfactory, marginal, satisfactory, very good, outstanding) using the standard Faculty Performance Evaluation Form for all colleges and units of the university.

2. The initial phase of the post-tenure review process will be conducted by the chair or supervising administrator who will review the performance records of the faculty member and take action according to the following guidelines:

• A faculty member who has been rated as satisfactory or above in the majority of applicable categories in all annual performance evaluations in the preceding six years will be considered as satisfying the criteria for meeting the standards of the university for a tenured faculty member of the given rank. The departmental chair or supervising administrator shall send to the Appointment, Promotions and Tenure (APT) Committee of the faculty member's college a letter stating that the faculty member has received satisfactory or above in the majority of applicable categories on all of the annual performance evaluations in the preceding six years and, thus, is performing in accordance with standards of the university for a tenured faculty member. Copies of this letter shall also be sent to the dean and faculty member under review. No further action will be required.
• If a faculty member has been rated unsatisfactory in a majority of applicable performance categories in one of the six preceding annual evaluations, and the deficiencies have subsequently been corrected, the chair or immediate supervising administrator shall send to the APT Committee of the faculty member's college a letter stating that the faculty member has received satisfactory or above in the majority of applicable categories on all but one of the annual performance evaluations in the preceding six years, that deficiencies have subsequently been corrected, and that the faculty member is performing at a level in accordance with standards of the university for a tenured faculty member. Copies of this letter shall also be sent to the dean and faculty member under review. No further action will be required.
• If a faculty member has been rated unsatisfactory in a majority of applicable performance categories in more than one annual evaluation in the preceding six years, post-tenure review of the faculty member's performance shall be conducted by the APT Committee of the faculty member's college. To initiate action, the chair or supervising administrator must submit a letter to the APT Committee of college indicating that the faculty member requires a full six year review of performance and progress ("post tenure review"). A copy of the letter shall also be sent to the faculty member under review.
• Whenever a tenured faculty member has been rated unsatisfactory in any category on an annual evaluation, the chair or immediate supervising administrator shall meet with the faculty member to document the deficiencies, to outline the steps of improvement to be taken to correct the deficiencies and the source of the resources (funds) that will be provided to support the plan. The goal shall be to restore satisfactory performance. A written summary of the meeting, including a reasonable timetable for correcting deficiencies and a statement of the resources provided, shall be prepared for the faculty member. If the chair or supervising administrator finds that the tenured faculty member fails to make substantial progress toward meeting the performance goals that had been set and continues to be rated unsatisfactory in a majority of applicable performance categories on two succeeding annual evaluations, a special review by the College APT Committee may be requested by the chair or supervising administrator independent of the six year review cycle. To initiate action, the chair or supervising administrator must submit a letter detailing the deficiencies of the faculty member under review with corroborating documentation and appropriate documents as described under section three to the College APT Committee. A copy of the letter detailing the deficiencies will also be sent to the faculty member under review.

3. When a review of a faculty member's performance and progress is requested, the College APT Committee will utilize:

• A full report on the faculty member from the department chair, consisting of copies of the previous six years' annual performance evaluations conducted by the chair for the period in question using the standard Faculty Performance Evaluation Form for all colleges and units of the university (See Appendix I), written summaries that document deficiencies and plan(s) of remediation, plus the chair's written analysis of the faculty member's performance, and supplemented by any other documents and information that the chair wishes to submit.
• The faculty member's curriculum vitae, plus a copy of the faculty member's annual reports for the period in question detailing his/her activity and progress, and including such aspects as the outcome of any sabbatical leave, professional development courses taken, etc. The faculty member under review shall be given the opportunity to appear before the committee and/or submit any documents that he/she wishes to be considered.
• Evaluations of teaching performance, in addition to those provided in the annual review by the department chair. These would typically include such evaluations as PACE, and comments by the directors of courses in which the faculty member has taught.
• Any other documents or reports relating to the performance of the faculty member in any of the areas of professional activity that the department chair, the faculty member, or the members of the APT Committee wish to be considered.

4. The College APT Committee will review the faculty member's performance based upon written standards and criteria which are developed and periodically reviewed by the faculty. The basic standard for appraisal shall be whether the faculty member under review discharges conscientiously and with professional competence the duties appropriately associated with his or her position, not whether the faculty member meets the standards for the award of tenure as those will have changed since initial granting of tenure to that faculty member. The review must also be flexible enough to acknowledge different expectations in different disciplines and changing expectations at different stages of faculty careers. In reviewing a faculty member's performance, the College APT Committee will recognize not only the diverse talents, activities and accomplishments of faculty within that college, but also that individual faculty are expected, in consultation with their chairs, to focus their efforts in selected areas of endeavor. The APT Committee shall, after completing their review, make a report to the department chair. The report, which shall be a permanent part of the faculty member's personnel file, will contain:

• An appraisal of the faculty member's performance and progress, including the perceived strengths and weaknesses.
• An analysis of the faculty member's potential for further professional development. Opportunities for development should be identified (e.g.; encouragement of research initiatives, granting of sabbatical leave, potential mentorships in teaching and research, appropriate professional development courses that could be taken, etc.).

5. A clear recommendation shall be made to the dean on whether the faculty member's performance, in the committee's judgment, meets the standards of the university for retention of tenure. A failure to meet these standards shall result in a recommendation for remediation of the faculty member or for removal of tenure. A recommendation by the College APT Committee for retention of tenure, for remediation, or removal of tenure of a faculty member shall be forwarded to the dean. Upon receipt and consideration of the report of the APT Committee, the dean shall make a determination of the action(s) to be taken. The dean reviews a recommendation for removal of tenure and, if in agreement, forwards the approved recommendation to the vice president for academic affairs and provost for review and action by the University Tenure Committee. The dean shall provide to the faculty member and College APT Committee memoranda indicating his/her action.

6. If the University APT Committee, after a full hearing of the case, supports the recommendation for removal of tenure, this recommendation will be forwarded to the vice president for academic affairs and provost and will activate the Grievance and Appeal Procedure for the faculty member as described in the Faculty Handbook (8.1).

• 7. If the Grievance and Appeal Procedure results in an unfavorable decision for the tenured faculty member, the faculty member will then function under the guidelines for non-tenured faculty.

8. The outcomes of evaluations shall be confidential, that is, confined to the appropriate college or university persons or bodies and faculty member being evaluated, and shall be released only at the discretion or with the written consent of the faculty member.

9. This policy becomes effective immediately upon approval of the Board of Trustees and shall apply to all tenured faculty after the effective date.