APPENDIX C-2: UTIA Procedures for Periodic Post-Tenure Performance Review (PPPR)

1. Introduction: In its Policies on Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Tenure (Board Policy BT0006), the Board of Trustees has recognized and affirmed the importance of tenure in protecting academic freedom and thus promoting the university’s principal mission of discovery and dissemination of knowledge through teaching, research, and service. The Board has also recognized its fiduciary responsibility to students, parents, and all citizens of Tennessee to ensure that faculty members effectively serve the needs of students and the university throughout their careers. To implement these principles, the University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture (UTIA), with the approval of the President and the Board, has established these procedures under which every tenured faculty member shall receive a comprehensive performance review no less often than every six years.
2. Periodic Post-Tenure Performance Review (PPPR) Period: Except as otherwise provided in these procedures, each tenured faculty member must undergo some form of comprehensive performance review no less often than every six years. The PPPR shall not substitute for the Annual Performance and Planning Review in the year a faculty member is scheduled for PPPR. The post-tenure review period begins at the granting of tenure, and a faculty member’s PPPR will occur no less often than every six years thereafter unless one of the following circumstances results in a different timetable:
   1. 1. Suspension of PPPR period: A faculty member’s PPPR period is suspended during any year in which the faculty member is granted a leave of absence or a modified duties assignment, such as a temporary assignment that differs from the primary, regular appointment.
      2. Restarting of PPPR period due to alternative comprehensive review: A comprehensive review of a faculty member’s performance restarts the faculty member’s PPPR period under the following circumstances:
         1. If a tenured faculty member undergoes a successful promotion review or a promotion is in progress during the year scheduled for PPPR, the promotion review fulfills the PTR requirement, and the PPPR period is modified to require PPPR six years after the promotion review. Since promotions are effective July 1 of each year, the next PPPR review must be conducted beginning with the review period that is initiated 5.5 years after the promotion (e.g., promotion on July 1, 2019, results in a PPPR beginning in December 2024 and completed in March 2025).
         2. If a tenured faculty member undergoes an Enhanced Post-Tenure Performance Review (EPPR) and is either rated as meeting expectations or successfully completes the terms of the EPPR improvement plan, the EPPR process fulfills the PPPR requirement.
      3. Start of the PPPR period upon conclusion of an administrative appointment: Full-time administrators and faculty members with a majority administrative appointment (more than 50 percent, as determined by the chief academic officer) are not subject to PPPR; faculty members holding a less- than-majority administrative appointment (50 percent or less, as determined by the chief academic officer) are subject to PPPR regarding their faculty duties based on expectations consistent with their faculty duty allocation. When a full-time or majority-time administrator leaves his or her administrative position to assume a tenured faculty position, the faculty member’s initial PPPR shall occur within six years after leaving the administrative post. A faculty member’s scheduled PPPR may be waived if the faculty member submits a written and binding commitment to retire no later than one year after the year in which the PPPR was scheduled. A faculty member’s scheduled PPPR may be otherwise deferred or modified only for good cause approved by the chief academic officer.
3. Annual Schedule for Periodic Post-Tenure Performance Review: All post tenure reviews will be conducted and completed during the spring semester according to the following schedule:
   1. The chief academic officer shall appoint all PPPR Committees as set forth in Section D. below no later than December 1 prior to the spring semester in which the review will occur.
   2. Each PPPR Committee shall be provided with the materials required by Section F. below no later than December 31.
   3. Each PPPR Committee shall submit its report required by Section H. below no later than March 31.
   4. Extensions of these deadlines will be granted only for good cause approved by the chief academic officer.
4. Composition of PPPR Committee: All post tenure reviews will be conducted by a committee established for the sole purpose of PPPR. Each PPPR committee shall include three members, appointed by the chief academic officer after consultation with the faculty member under review and her or his department head. The chief academic officer shall avoid choosing PPPR committee members who have an obvious or apparent conflict of interest. Faculty members who hold administrative appointments at 50 percent or greater, as determined by the chief academic officer, are not eligible to serve. In addition to these general principles of inclusion, the composition of the PTR Committee must meet the following requirements:
   • Each PPPR committee member must be a tenured, full-time faculty member who is at the same or higher academic rank and whose locus of tenure is at the same campus as the faculty member being reviewed
   • One, and only one, PPPR committee member must hold an appointment in the same department as the faculty member being reviewed, unless there is no such faculty member eligible to serve.
   • The committee chair will be chosen by the chief academic officer from among the members of the committee who are not from the same department as the faculty member being reviewed.
   • The three-member PPPR committee for a given faculty member under review is selected from a standing pool of UTIA faculty of professorial rank serving a three-year term selected by the deans and appointed by the chief academic officer. The pool shall include at least one member from each department. The PPPR committee will include one departmental representative and balanced representation of the responsibilities (e.g., teaching, research, Extension, clinical practice) associated with the faculty member’s appointment. For example, a faculty member with a majority research appointment will have at least one PPPR committee member appointed who also has a majority research appointment.
5. Written Charge to the PPPR Committee: The chief academic officer will provide a written charge to members of PPPR committees. The charge will include the following elements:

• • Purpose of PPPR, as described in Section A above;
  • Scope of PPPR, as described in Section F below;
  • Process of PPPR, as described in Section G below;
  • Materials to be reviewed in PPPR, as described in Section E below; the chief academic officer will emphasize that only in rare circumstances, and where expertise to evaluate the faculty member’s scholarly output cannot otherwise be obtained, will the committee request external letters of assessment.
  • Obligation to provide a fair and objective review;
  • Obligation to keep confidential the committee’s deliberations and findings; and
  • Any other instructions that the chief academic officer deems necessary to carry out the review. These elements will be discussed with the pool of faculty members serving on PPPR committees to promote consistency and clarity of the charge, the responsibilities, and the outcomes of the reviews. Meetings of the PPPR committees shall follow Robert’s Rules of Order. The chair is responsible for organizing and running the meetings. The chair shall ensure committee members have access to all pertinent review documents and will liaise with the chief academic officer, including transmitting committee findings in writing.

6. Materials to be Reviewed by PPPR Committee: The PPPR committees must review the following documents:
   • APPR materials: Annual review materials for each year since the last comprehensive review or for the last six years in cases where this is the first review, including the following (supplied by the department head):

1. 1. 1. APPR summary rating forms from the online faculty review system and the Faculty Annual Report (supplied by the chief academic officer);
      2. Any and all evaluation narratives written by the department head during the PPPR period (supplied by the chief academic officer);
      3. Any and all responses by the faculty member, deans, and chief academic officer for each APPR (supplied by the chief academic officer);
      4. Any end of course survey forms for the PPPR period (supplied by the department head); and
      5. Any peer evaluation of teaching for the PPPR period (supplied by the department head).

• • Department and college performance criteria for faculty according to rank, as published in the bylaws of the respective units (supplied by the department head);
  • A current curriculum vitae (supplied by the faculty member);
  • A narrative, not to exceed two pages of 12-point text, prepared by the faculty member describing the faculty member’s milestone achievements and accomplishments since the last review as well as goals for the next review period (supplied by the faculty member);
  • If this is not the first PPPR, a copy of the narrative submitted as a part of the faculty member’s previous PPPR (to be supplied by the faculty member);
  • External reviews only when deemed necessary by the PPPR committee, a supervising dean, or when requested by the faculty member undergoing PPPR.

1. 1. 1. Letters from no more than three external reviewers may be considered by the PPPR committee;
      2. Requests for external letters by faculty undergoing PPPR must be made in writing to the committee chair at the time their materials are submitted to the PPPR committee;
      3. The chief academic officer, or their designee, shall request the external reviews, in conformity with the following requirements:

• • • • One reviewer will be chosen from a list provided by the faculty member undergoing PPPR;
      • One or more reviewers will be chosen from a list provided by the tenured faculty in the department of the faculty member undergoing PPPR;
      • Reviewers shall be selected in the same manner as described in Appendix E – Assembly of the Tenure and/or Promotion Dossier.
  • Each member of the PPPR committees will record the time devoted to the review process.

7. Criteria for Periodic Post-Tenure Performance Review: The post tenure review process must assess the faculty member’s continuing professional growth and productivity in the areas of teaching, research (including scholarly, creative, and artistic work), service, and/or clinical care pertinent to his or her faculty responsibilities. The criteria for assessing the faculty member’s performance must be consistent with established expectations of the department, school/college, and campus and provide sufficient flexibility to consider changes in academic responsibilities and/or expectations. The expectations for faculty performance may differ by college, department, and even among subdisciplines within a department or program. Those expectations may be commonly held standards in the discipline or subdiscipline. Those expectations may be stated explicitly in the faculty member’s own past annual performance reviews, work assignments, goals or other planning tools (however identified), as well as department or college bylaws, this handbook, this policy, and in other generally applicable policies and procedures (for example, fiscal, human resources, safety, research, or information technology policies and procedures).
8. PPPR Committee’s Conclusions and Report: The PPPR committee is charged to assess the faculty member’s performance during the review period and to conclude whether the faculty member’s performance satisfies the expectations for the faculty member’s discipline and academic rank. The PPPR committee voting must be conducted by anonymous ballots. Voting is to be done in person as part of a committee’s deliberations; neither proxies or in absentia votes are allowed. All conclusions and recommendations shall be adopted upon the vote of a simple majority of the PPPR committee. No member of the PPPR committee may abstain or recuse himself or herself from voting. Based on the judgment of its members, the PPPR committee must conclude that the faculty member’s performance either:

1. 1. satisfies the expectations for the faculty member’s discipline and academic rank, or
   2. does not satisfy the expectations for the faculty member’s discipline and academic rank.

The committee must report its conclusions and recommendations in writing using a standard format prepared by the chief academic officer, including:

1. 1. 1. 1. An enumeration of the anonymously cast vote,
         2. the reasons supporting the committee’s conclusion,
         3. a record of the grounds for any dissenting vote, as those grounds were expressed in the committee’s deliberations,
         4. identification of any incongruences observed between the faculty member’s performance and his or her annual evaluations,
         5. a statement of any additional concerns identified or actions recommended,
         6. if applicable, an identification of areas of extraordinary contribution and/or performance, and
         7. a summary of the time spent by the PPPR committee in conducting the report and developing the report and recommendation.

9. Review of the PPPR Committee Report by Academic Administrators: The detailed PPPR committee report shall be provided to the faculty member, department head, appropriate deans, Senior Vice Chancellor (or designee), and chief academic officer. The department head will write a response indicating support or dissent with the PPPR committee report and send it to the faculty member, appropriate deans, and the chief academic officer. Following the receipt of the department head letter, the appropriate deans will write a response indicating support or dissent with the PPPR committee report and the department head, and send it to the faculty member, the department head, and the chief academic officer. Upon receipt of the report and each subsequent response by department heads and deans, faculty members, department heads, and deans must have the opportunity to provide a written response to the PPPR committee report. The chief academic officer shall either accept or reject the PPPR committee determination that the faculty member’s performance satisfies or does not satisfy the expectations for the faculty member’s discipline and academic rank after considering the responses of the department head and the dean(s). If the PPPR committee report is not unanimous, the chief academic officer shall provide the supporting reasons for his or her determination. If the chief academic officer does not concur in a determination, then he or she shall provide the supporting reasons for the non-concurrence. The chief academic officer’s determination – and any written responses of the faculty member, department head/chair, and the dean – will be maintained with the PPPR committee report in the chief academic officer’s office and submitted electronically to the University of Tennessee Office of Academic Affairs and Student Success, with copies provided to the dean(s) and the department head.
10. Further Actions: If, as a result of PPPR, the chief academic officer concludes that the faculty member’s performance has not satisfied the expectations for the faculty member’s discipline and rank, a PPPR improvement plan must be developed. A peer review committee to develop the improvement plan will be appointed as specified in Section 3 of Board Policy BT0006-Appendix E. This committee will be provided the review materials submitted as outlined in Section V above and the results of the PPPR Review as outlined in Section VII above. This peer review committee will be charged with the development of an improvement plan, following the procedures and timeline as detailed in Board Policy BT0006-Appendix E, as included in Chapter 3 of this handbook. If, as a result of PPPR, the chief academic officer concludes that deficiencies exist in the departmental annual performance review process (including failure of department heads to conduct rigorous annual performance reviews) or other incongruences are observed between the PPPR performance review and rankings assigned through the annual performance review process, the chief academic officer must develop a process for addressing the issues. Any such process developed by the chief academic officer will have no bearing on the requirement that a PPPR improvement plan be developed for a faculty member who has not satisfied expectations for rank. All documents related to the PPPR process will be submitted electronically to the University of Tennessee Office of Academic Affairs and Student Success.
11. Appeal: The faculty member under review may appeal the chief academic officer’s determination regarding the outcome of PPPR within thirty days of notification of that outcome. The procedure for appeal is described in Chapter 5 of this handbook, except that a final decision on the appeal shall be made within ninety days of the faculty member’s appeal, and the final decision of the Chancellor on an appeal shall not be appealable to the President.
12. Annual Report to the Board of Trustees: The chief academic officer shall prepare an annual assessment report of campus PPPR processes, procedures, and outcomes for submission by the Chancellor to the Board of Trustees, through the President, no later than June 1 of each year. The report shall include a description of any deficiencies identified in departmental annual performance review processes and the plan for addressing the issues. The annual report will also include a summary of the time and resources devoted to PPPR conducted during the year. A public version of the report will be produced that protects individual identities of PPPR results. The public version will be made available to all faculty.