Use of Annual and Third-Year Reviews in Promotion and Tenure

Annual reviews and third-year reviews may provide useful context during promotion and tenure evaluations. However, reviewers should remember that these reviews serve purposes that differ from the summative assessment conducted during promotion and tenure review.

Candidate Use of Prior Reviews

Candidates may include annual reviews and third-year reviews in their promotion or tenure materials.

These documents may be submitted:

• As part of the original dossier; or
• At a later stage in the process through the Supplemental Materials section of the eDossier.

Candidates may choose to provide these materials if they believe they offer useful context, particularly when reviewer comments indicate a misunderstanding of the candidate's circumstances, opportunities, responsibilities, or expected rate of progress.

Reviewer Requests for Prior Reviews

Promotion and tenure committees and reviewing administrators may request copies of annual reviews or third-year reviews when they believe the materials are relevant to evaluating a particular case.

When requesting such materials, reviewers must:

• Notify the candidate that the documents have been requested; and
• Attach the requested reviews as an appendix to the review report in which they are referenced.

This ensures transparency and allows subsequent reviewers to consider the same information.

Use of Third-Year Reviews

The Office of Academic Affairs strongly discourages routine reliance on third-year reviews during promotion and tenure evaluations.

In most cases, third-year reviews are intended to be formative rather than summative. Their primary purpose is to provide guidance, identify areas for development, and assist faculty in planning for future success. Consequently, the assessments and recommendations contained in third-year reviews should not be treated as predictors or determinants of promotion and tenure outcomes.

Use of Annual Reviews

Candidates and reviewers may consult annual reviews when they provide helpful context regarding a faculty member's responsibilities, accomplishments, or progress over time.

However, annual review ratings should be interpreted with caution. Annual reviews assess performance during a specific review period, while promotion and tenure reviews evaluate a faculty member's cumulative record and overall trajectory.

As a result:

• Annual accomplishments should not be equated with a candidate's overall record.
• The central question in tenure review is whether the candidate demonstrates the trajectory and promise expected for a successful and sustained academic career.
• Ratings received in individual annual reviews do not determine promotion or tenure outcomes.

For example, a faculty member who was rated "excellent" in a particular year is not automatically considered "excellent" for promotion or tenure purposes. Likewise, a lower annual rating does not necessarily predict an unfavorable promotion or tenure decision. Reviewers must evaluate the complete record of achievement in light of applicable promotion and tenure criteria.

Guiding Principle

Promotion and tenure decisions should be based on the candidate's overall body of work, sustained accomplishments, and future trajectory, rather than on isolated assessments from annual or third-year reviews. Prior evaluations may provide context, but they should not substitute for an independent review of the candidate's cumulative record.