Appendix 8

Post-Tenure Review Procedures

In keeping with BOT-24, all tenured Media School faculty [1] shall receive a post-tenure review every five years as follows.

Procedure

1. The School and individual faculty members who are undergoing PTR will be notified in the Fall semester.  The campus determines who goes up each year for the first five years, after which the reviews will continue every fifth year.  Leaves during the five year period do not pause the clock, unless the faculty member is on leave during the spring in which they are scheduled to go up for PTR. In that case, PTR is pushed back one year.  Faculty who have signed a phased retirement agreement do not have to go through PTR.
2. The faculty member will provide a CV and a single page per productivity area (e.g., teaching, scholarship, and service). The focus of the post-tenure review is the five-year period, which the faculty member may discuss within the context of their academic career.  The candidate can also submit additional information that was not included in the annual reports regarding community engagement, sponsored research, performances, etc. The unit director will review the following items:
   • The candidate’s CV, single page narrative summaries, and any additional materials submitted.
   • The last five years of annual reviews (if available)
   • The faculty member’s workload allocation of the previous 5 years.
   • The total number of students the faculty member teaches at the graduate and undergraduate level.
   • The time spent on instructional assignments and the time spent on overseeing graduate students.
3. The unit director will provide a written assessment of the overall productivity of the faculty member based on the above materials.  The collection of these materials will then be sent to the Media School PTR committee, who will review the materials and make a recommendation to the Dean of the School using the criteria listed in BOT-24.  The Dean will review these materials and the faculty member’s disciplinary record and will write a brief letter that assesses and recommends the overall productivity rating for the five-year period.
4. The Dean’s letter and all other materials in the PTR packet will be given to the faculty member for their review.  The faculty member will have five business days to submit an optional response that can then be added to the packet before it moves to the campus Chief Academic Officer (CAO) for review. 
5. The CAO will review the PTR Packet and accept, reject, or modify the Dean’s recommended rating. The packet will then proceed to the Chancellor and the President for review at each level.
6. In the event of a final rating of “does not meet expectations,” the faculty member will be placed on probation.  The School Dean, in consultation with the faculty member, the AD for Faculty Affairs, and the unit director, will develop a performance improvement plan, which is then submitted to the CAO for review.  Once approved, the final version will be sent to the Dean, the AD for Faculty Affairs, the unit director, and the faculty member. The faculty member will meet regularly during the year with their unit director to review the faculty member’s progress toward completing the PIP.  At the end of the 12-month period following the approval of the PIP, both the unit director and the Dean will provide a written statement to the faculty member about whether the faculty member has met the conditions of the PIP. Acceptance of the performance improvement plan and resolution of the probationary period will follow BOT-24. 
7. A candidate for PTR can't get an "unsatisfactory" rating unless they've had previous performance improvement plans put in place following negative annual reviews and they didn't successfully complete them.

Appeals process

If a faculty member would like to appeal any rating that is assigned in the PTR process, they should produce a statement that outlines the nature of the appeal: violations of university policy, violations of school policy, violations of unit review procedures or a bias or misinterpretation of the review criteria. In the event of an appeal:

1. The unit director and school dean will respond in writing to specific points in the faculty member’s appeal within five days of receiving the appeal and revise the rating or indicate the reason for not revising the rating.
2. The faculty member may choose to continue the appeal. The AD for Faculty Affairs would convene an ad hoc committee of three faculty to review specific claims cited in the appeal and produce a report for the dean and faculty member within two weeks of being notified. This action should either revise the rating or indicate the reason for not revising the rating.
3. Faculty members who believe that their rights under this policy have been denied have the right to appeal under BL-ACA-D22 and ACA-17. If the faculty member requests further appeal after the conclusion of the School-level appeal, then the faculty member shall submit their appeal to the Bloomington Faculty Board of Review.

[1] Tenured faculty members holding administrative roles (chairs, directors or higher with faculty supervisory role or 0.5 or greater administrative full-time equivalent, FTE) shall be reviewed annually by their supervisors. These tenured faculty members shall undergo post-tenure review in the fifth year after their administrative appointment drops below 0.5 FTE.