June 1, 1994
UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI
POLICY AND PROCEDURES FOR ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWOF FACULTY
This policy is intended to aid the faculty and academic Unit Heads in compliance with H.B. 152’s prescription to have in place an annual performance review for all members of the faculty (and all administrative employees). The language of the current contract between the University of Cincinnati and the American Association of University Professors, University of Cincinnati Chapter, specifies annual performance meetings between Academic Unit Heads and non-tenured faculty (Article 7.1.2) following an initial meeting within the first three months of a new faculty member’s appointment (Article 7.1.1). The contract also encourages annual meetings between faculty and Academic Unit Heads to promote professional growth and development (Article 31.2.4). The annual performance review is seen as complementary to each unit’s workload policy and procedures and its mission statements. The annual performance review provides an opportunity to review what was expected of a faculty member as set forth by the workload procedures of that unit as well as the extent to which the mission of the unit is enhanced and supported by the faculty member’s activities. The annual performance review allows the faculty member and the Academic Unit Head to discuss changes in the interests and skills of the faculty member that would change the contributions that the faculty member could make to the unit. It would also allow a discussion of the resources needed by the faculty member to develop or maintain skills, interests, research, scholarship and the like focusing on teaching, research, professional, University, and public service. In this way the annual performance review is both a setting for anticipating the next year and a review of the past. The annual performance review also allows for the accumulation of evidence for the performance of the faculty member who may be tenured but has not achieved all the promotions available. Others may find it helpful to have a record of review and performance when supervisors and Academic Unit Heads change. While the review may include accumulating evidence of a faculty member’s performance (teaching evaluations, teaching portfolios, new course offerings, grants obtained, papers given and published, contracts negotiated, and the like), the primary purpose for the review is not simply to record an evaluation of a faculty member’s performance for the year. The annual performance review works best when it is an instrument for faculty and unit development. There is no one format that would work best for all units. A good many examples already exist on campus of annual performance reviews that are supported by the faculty of units and have proven to be useful. Such past practices should be continued and encouraged.
HB PAGE I 43
FACULTY REVIEW I PAGE 1
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs