University of Houston System Board of Regents Policy on Post-Tenure Performance Review
Preamble
The Board of Regents of the University of Houston System affirms the principle that the quality of its universities is inextricably tied to the quality of its faculty, and that the ability of a university to serve its public is dependent upon the creation of an environment that nurtures the development of its faculty so as to increase the likelihood of success in the pursuit of teaching, research and service. Furthermore, the Board reaffirms its commitment to the institution of tenure, recognizing that the public interest is best served in a climate in which faculty members are free to pursue the creation and dissemination of knowledge.
At the same time, the Board recognizes the need to create an environment of accountability and public trust in both the institution as a whole and in individual faculty members.
The policies promulgated below are intended to ensure that a tenured faculty member consistently performs at an acceptable professional level, to provide for a plan of faculty development where necessary, and finally, in the instance of failure to correct deficiencies, to provide for the revocation of tenure or other appropriate disciplinary action.
Delegation of Authority
Each university within the University of Houston System shall adopt policies and procedures providing for a periodic performance evaluation process for all tenured faculty members. Such institutional policies and procedures, and any subsequent amendments thereto, must be approved by the Chancellor and the UH System Board of Regents. Institutional policies and procedures may be designed to fit the particular mission, traditions, and circumstances of the individual universities and must in all cases adhere to the following set of principles and procedures.
Fundamental Principles
1. Institutional post-tenure performance review policies must conform to any and all relevant state statutes, including procedures for alternative dispute resolution (Chapter 154, Civil Practice and Remedies Code) and to other applicable policies of the Board (Board of Regents Policy 11:07 -- Faculty Dismissal).
2. Post-tenure performance review policies and procedures at both the system and university levels and any subsequent amendments thereto (hereinafter referred to as "post-tenure performance review policies") are grounded in three principal academic values: peer review, academic freedom, and due process.
A. Peer Review
1) The formulation of post-tenure performance review policies shall include substantive and meaningful consultation with appropriate faculty bodies.
2) The review of individual faculty members shall include provisions for involvement by appropriate faculty colleagues in order to ensure that peer review is an essential component of the post-tenure performance review process.
B. Academic Freedom
Post-tenure performance review policies shall reflect the system's long-standing and sustained commitment to the traditional value of academic freedom. It is the intent of the Board that the implementation of post-tenure performance review policies would not result in compromising this value in any way.
C. Due Process
Post-tenure performance review policies shall incorporate academic due process rights, including notice of the manner and scope of the evaluation, the opportunity to provide documentation, notice of specific charges, and an opportunity for hearing on those charges before disciplinary action is instituted on the basis of such an evaluation.
3. Evaluations shall be based on the professional responsibilities of the faculty member in the areas of teaching, research, and service. The evaluation process shall be directed toward the professional development of the faculty member. Toward that end, the institution, through its appropriate academic officers and in concert with the affected faculty member, shall devise an individual plan of professional development for faculty members for whom a determination of unsatisfactory performance is made. Such a professional development plan shall be specific with regard to expectations, actions, timeline, resources, and the consequences of non-correction of the identified deficiencies. In the event that implementation of the professional development plan does not result in substantial improvement of performance, the faculty member may be subject to disciplinary action, including possibly the revocation of tenure and dismissal. A tenured faculty member subject to the revocation of tenure and dismissal on the basis of an unsatisfactory performance evaluation must be given the opportunity for referral of the matter to a non-binding alternative dispute resolution process.
Procedures
1. A comprehensive performance evaluation process, which must include peer review, shall be conducted for each tenured faculty member no more often than once a year, nor less often than once every six years after attaining tenure.
2. Administrators who also hold a tenured faculty position shall be subject to the established review procedures for administrators as codified in Board by-laws, Board policies, System administrative memoranda, and component university policies on this subject.
3. The records of actions taken to comply with these policies shall reside in the Office
of the Provost of each university. Deans must provide an annual written report to the Provost with regard to the status of faculty members for whom a professional development plan has been established.
Send questions or comments to: Mary Brantley, Faculty Senate Program Manager.
