Periodic Review Template
I. Annual Review
Consistent with Appendix A UWS 3.05, Appendix A UW-Sup 3.05, and the Unclassified Staff Handbook 7.4.2, the performance of all peer faculty in each department will be reviewed annually.
Definition of faculty peer: A faculty peer shall be defined as a ranked member (professor, associate professor, assistant professor, or instructor, as defined in the Unclassified Staff Handbook 7.4.4) with at least a half-time teaching, research, and/or Outreach appointment in the department. Department faculty with more than half-time administrative reassignment shall not be considered peer faculty for the duration of the assignment. Academic staff members designated as having faculty status and academic staff with back-up appointments are not faculty peers. The department chair shall be considered peer faculty as long as he or she meets the peer faculty definition.
A. Meeting
Meeting the University timelines for periodic review, the peer faculty in the department will meet face to face as a group to review faculty performance. See Appendix A UW-Sup 3.01(2). The meeting is closed unless the faculty member being evaluated requests an open meeting, subject to the provisions of the Wisconsin Open Meeting Law. See Unclassified Staff Handbook 5.7.
B. Areas of Review
The three areas of review shall include (1) teaching, (2) scholarship, and (3) professional and public service as well as contribution to the Institution.
C. Materials to be Submitted
Materials to be submitted for this decision must include the following:
1. A brief written summary of accomplishments in the three areas listed above.
a. Teaching
(1). Describe teaching load including preparations, enrollment, labs, studios, etc.
(2). Summarize independent studies, theses, or other student activities directed during the
year.
(3). Describe improvement of instructional materials or new courses during the current
academic year.
(4). Describe leadership in curricular/teaching development.
b. Scholarship
(1). Describe artistic performances or scholarly presentations.
(2). Detail scholarly publications or presentations.
(3). Describe ongoing programs of scholarly work.
c. Service
(1). Describe service to the department and the university.
(2). Describe service to professional organizations.
(3). Describe professional service to the community.
2. Written student evaluations for all formal courses taught that year (consistent with the
Unclassified Staff Handbook 6.13).
3. Additional supporting documents, as required by the department. Examples may include course syllabi, course assessments, peer teaching observations, articles and books published and/or submitted for publication, conference presentations, performance, exhibits, and documentation of service.
D. Notification
Following the review by the department faculty peers, the department chair will fill out and sign the Faculty Performance Evaluation form and forward it to the Provost’s office.
II. Post Tenure Review
Consistent with the Unclassified Staff Handbook 7.4.6, “the performance of each tenured faculty member is reviewed in a comprehensive fashion at least every five (5) years. The department, in consultation with the Dean of Faculties, determines the procedure and timetable for this comprehensive review.” In those cases where a tenured faculty member has an assignment outside of the department, the faculty member will include input from the supervisor of the assignment. The post tenure review will be conducted by the tenured department faculty peers.
Definition of faculty peer: A faculty peer shall be defined as a ranked member (professor, assistant professor, associate professor, or instructor, as defined in the Unclassified Staff Handbook 7.4.4) with at least a half-time teaching, research, and/or Outreach appointment in the department. Department faculty with more than half-time administrative reassignment shall not be considered peer faculty for the duration of the assignment. Academic staff members designated as having faculty status and academic staff with back-up appointments are not faculty peers. The department chair shall be considered peer faculty as long as he or she meets the peer faculty definition.
A. Meeting
Meeting the University timelines for post tenure review, the tenured peer faculty in the department will meet face to face as a group to review faculty performance. See Appendix A UW-Sup 3.01(2). The meeting is closed unless the faculty member being evaluated requests an open meeting, subject to the provisions of the Wisconsin Open Meeting Law. See Unclassified Staff Handbook 5.7.
B. Areas of Review
This is a performance review. The three areas of review shall include (1) teaching, (2) scholarship, and (3) professional and public service as well as contribution to the Institution. This review is based on the results of the annual reviews for the five preceding years.
C. Materials to be Submitted
Materials to be submitted for this decision shall be the following:
1. The same as those submitted for the annual reviews for the five preceding years;
2. A summary in each of three areas for review;
3. A reflective self-evaluation in each of the three areas of review.
The department may also require goals.
D. Notification
Following the review by the department faculty peers, the reviewers will send a brief summary of the discussion to the Dean of Faculties along with the submitted materials from the faculty under review. In cases of unsatisfactory performance, a list of areas of concern will be included in the brief summary to the Dean of Faculties and presented to the faculty member.
1