Extended (Post-Tenure) Review of Faculty Performance

This information was prepared for implementing the extended review requirement of Penn State University Policy AC-40, Evaluation of Faculty Performance.

Jump to topic

Search

Extended Review Information

General Guidelines Expand answer

The extended review process is intended to help faculty members maintain scholarship in teaching, research, and outreach throughout their careers. The extended review process is distinguished from the annual review process by the requirement for a longer range (five years) assessment of performance and goals.

Extended review of faculty performance in the College of Medicine will occur at five-year intervals following the award of tenure. For example, if a faculty member was awarded tenure July 1, 2015, the first extended review will take place during the Spring Semester of 2020.

Department Chairs will prepare a list of future extended review dates for each of the faculty members in the department and will circulate the list to faculty by Jan. 1 of each year. Extended reviews in the College of Medicine will:

  1. Be performed at the Department level.
  2. Be constructive and conducted with the goal of faculty development.
  3. Include the annual allocation of effort reports by faculty for the current and past four years.
  4. Be conducted in conjunction with the HR-40 annual review for the year when the extended review is performed.
  5. Link faculty performance to available rewards.
Responsibility for Performing the Extended Review Expand answer

Extended reviews will be performed by the Department Chair and/or Division Chief. The results of the extended review, as will all annual evaluations, will be reported by the Department Chair to the faculty member.

Review Procedures Expand answer

Each faculty member will prepare a document for his or her extended review. This document will include:

  1. The five most recent annual reports of faculty effort (including a new one for the most recent year).
  2. A concise summary by the faculty member of his or her recent accomplishments, emphasizing program quality or impact (one- to two-page single-spaced statement).
  3. A statement of professional goals and plans for the next five years.
  4. Copies of the immediate past four annual performance evaluations which the Department Chair will provide to the faculty member.

Following receipt of all documents and materials, the Department Chair will review the materials and meet with the faculty member to discuss his or her performance during the past five years. This discussion will supplement the “annual” faculty evaluation for that year. As with all performance reviews, the Department Chair will provide written feedback via a letter to the faculty member about the outcome of the review. The written feedback will be constructive with the goal of faculty development. An additional paragraph summarizing the extended review will be added to the HR-40 annual review summary.

A copy of the written evaluation from the Department Chair will be provided to the faculty member. The faculty member has the option to append a written response to the Department Chair’s evaluation letter.

In the case of an extended review where the Department Chair has indicated unacceptable or poor performance, the faculty member has two options:

  1. To accept the results of the evaluation and to work with the Department Chair to develop a plan of action designed to help the faculty member; or
  2. To not accept the results of the evaluation and to request in writing a review by the Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs. This option is also available in cases where the performance has been judged acceptable but the faculty member has significant disagreement with statements and conclusions in the Department Chair’s letter.

If results of the review are not accepted by the faculty member, the Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs shall be provided with written documentation to include the following:

  1. the Department Chair’s evaluative letter;
  2. any written response by the faculty member; and
  3. all documentation used in the Department Chair’s evaluative report, including the Department Chair’s annual evaluation statements from the past four years.

At their discretion, the Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs may invite the faculty member and/or the Department Chair to a meeting. The Associate Dean will prepare a letter to the Department Chair and the faculty member stating agreement or disagreement with the Department Chair’s evaluation and the rationale for the decision. If the Associate Dean concurs with the Department Chair’s decision, the faculty member and the Department Chair shall prepare an updated development plan.

If the Associate Dean does not concur with the Department Chair’s decision, the Department Chair may request that the Dean review all documentation and render a decision. At their discretion, the Dean may invite the faculty member and the Department Chair to a meeting. The Dean will send a written decision to the Department Chair and the faculty member.

Revisions Expand answer

Adopted April 2005
Effective July 1, 2005
Revised February 4, 2010
Formatting revised August 2016