Mid-Point
Review Policy
The University’s decision to
grant or refuse tenure is governed by the provisions of its Handbook for Faculty and will be made only at the
time, and under the procedures, described there. Nevertheless, during their
probationary period, untenured faculty members have a legitimate interest in
learning how their department chair and their dean view their progress towards
the goal of securing academic tenure. In addition to annual performance
reviews, therefore, the College of Arts and Sciences provides for Mid-Point
Reviews according to the policy outlined below. Mid-Point Reviews are advisory
only and cannot preempt the tenure review process.
(i) Timing. All tenure-track junior faculty members will
be provided with a Mid-Point Review of their progress towards tenure and
promotion. The Mid-Point Review will normally occur during the third
probationary year, but this timing may be altered due to specific circumstances
(e.g., when an individual has previously negotiated a shortened tenure clock as
a condition of employment). The Mid-Point Review will normally be conducted in
the spring semester of the third year, and will constitute the annual review
for that year. The dean is to be informed in advance and in writing of any
reasons why the Mid-Point Review is to be conducted at any other than the above
time.
(ii) Faculty member’s materials.
The Mid-Point Review should address the faculty member’s accomplishments not
only in the current year, but to date towards tenure and promotion. The faculty
member should complete the annual review form as usual, and submit it to his or
her department chair together with copies of all previous annual evaluations
conducted at Creighton. The faculty member should also submit a brief summary
of his or her areas of strength and of any areas which, in the opinion of the
faculty member, may need attention.
(iii) Chair’s review. The chair
should review the materials submitted by the faculty member and prepare a
summary evaluation of the faculty member’s progress towards tenure and
promotion. Areas of strength should be clearly noted, as well as any areas
which, in the opinion of the chair, may require attention. After this summary
evaluation has been prepared, the faculty member should be provided with a copy
and the faculty member and the chair should meet to discuss both the materials
forwarded by the faculty member and the chair’s evaluation.
(iv) Dean’s review. The
materials submitted by the faculty member and the chair’s evaluation should be
forwarded to the dean. After reviewing these materials, the dean will normally
meet with the faculty member and the chair to discuss the faculty member’s
progress towards tenure and promotion. Alternatively, the dean may, in his or
her sole discretion, choose to inform the faculty member in writing of
perceived strengths and weaknesses in writing, with a copy to the chair. If a
meeting is held, the dean should prepare a summary of the meeting, copies of
which should be provided to the faculty member and the chair. A copy should
also be retained in the faculty member’s personnel file along with all
materials forwarded to the dean as part of the Mid-Point Review.
The Mid-Point Review is designed
solely to assist the faculty member in her or his professional development and
is advisory only. The Mid-Point Review shall have no effect on the faculty
member’s subsequent consideration for tenure or promotion. No documents from
the Mid-Point Review may be included in the tenure or promotion dossier.
Policy approved by the Council
of Chairs, AY 2000-2001.
Revised with advice from General
Counsel, January 2002.