Post-Tenure Review Process

Policy Memorandum No. 165

Recommended by the Commission on Faculty Affairs: March 8, 1996
Approved by University Council: April 1, 1996
Approved by the President: April 1, 1996
Approved by the Board of Visitors: April 22, 1996
Effective: Immediately

The University Council, on recommendation of the Commission on Faculty Affairs, approved a resolution to clarify and supplement sections of the Faculty Handbook related to faculty evaluation and post-tenure review.

Following is the text of the resolution as adopted by University Council.

WHEREAS, the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia has required all colleges and universities to develop regular, rigorous post-tenure review processes and ties their support of faculty salary increases to the development and implementation of such policies; and

WHEREAS, Virginia Tech conducts annual faculty performance reviews which are serious and deliberative, leading to recommendations for merit increases, and these annual reviews may be considered one element of an
Effective post-tenure review process affecting all tenured faculty; and

WHEREAS, peer review of unsatisfactory performance by tenured faculty is designed to identify and deal appropriately with the few cases of incompetence or willful non-performance among tenured faculty; and

WHEREAS, the Commission has kept the University community informed of its deliberations through Spectrum, by posting drafts electronically, through the close involvement of the Faculty Senate Working Group, and through discussions of the policy at Faculty Senate meetings, incorporating input from all parties as possible and appropriate;

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the following additions be made to section 2.9 of the Faculty Handbook which a) establish an Unsatisfactory rating for faculty who fail to meet departmental minimum standards; b) provide guidance to departments for the development of such standards; and c) provide a process for post-tenure review of faculty members who have received two successive Unsatisfactory performance reviews.

The text of relevant changes to the Faculty Handbook will be provided separately by the Provost's Office as inserts to the handbook.


President's Policy Memorandum