Tenured Faculty Annual Evaluation Practice

Original: November 15, 2021
Revision approved by Policy Committee: December 17, 2024
Revision effective: CY2025 performance evaluation

College of Agriculture, Food & Natural Resources (CAFNR) tenured faculty members are evaluated annually on quantitative and qualitative measures of productivity. This document describes this process and will be reviewed periodically.

Every tenured faculty member is expected to contribute to at least two of the three missions of research, teaching and extension. According to CRR 310.080.C and CRR 20.110.A.1.d, Division Directors (DDs) have authority to assign faculty workload distribution annually with input from the faculty member at their annual review (CRR 310.015 Procedures for Review of Faculty Performance).

The MU workload/productivity standards assume a faculty member on 9-month appointment with a 40% (teaching, research, or Extension)/40% (teaching, research, or extension)/20% (service) workload allocation. For a faculty member on 12-month appointment, a commensurate level of workload is expected relative to a 9-month faculty appointment. As it is common for a CAFNR faculty member to deviate from 40% FTE in teaching, research, or extension, the expectations for those faculty are proportional to the percentage FTE.

The following practice is intended to aid faculty in achieving equitable contributions towards the collective missions and goals of the Division and College.

1) Administrative Evaluation Process

  1. Procedures articulated by CRR 310.015 will be followed and pursuant to CRR 320.030.F (Criteria-Based Salary Reductions for Tenured Faculty) and for purposes of implementing this policy, the CAFNR Associate Deans (ADs) and DDs will independently assess tenured faculty.
  2. The AD associated with the specific appointment (teaching, research or extension) will assess each faculty member’s quantitative productivity objectively and equitably relative to the corresponding workload policy (teaching, research or extension) as defined and published by the faculty member’s Division. Based upon this assessment, faculty members not meeting expectations are identified.
  3. Simultaneously, the DDs will independently review tenured faculty in their Division with respect to their workload policies. The DDs identify faculty members from their Divisions that fall below workload policy expectations or qualitative performance standards.
  4. After both the ADs and DDs complete their separate analyses, the Vice-Chancellor and Dean (VCD) will convene a meeting for the DDs and ADs to discuss the lists.
  5. In consultation with the ADs, the DD will make the final determination of a faculty member’s overall performance rating and complete the myVITA annual evaluation of faculty. A rating of Satisfactory – Needs Improvement, Satisfactory with Warning or Unsatisfactory will be accompanied by specification of the deficiencies per division standards for the annual performance review and the faculty member’s workload distribution.
  6. The DD will inform the VCD in writing of any faculty who receive an Overall Unsatisfactory rating.
  7. If a faculty member disputes an Overall Unsatisfactory rating, the VCD will review the evaluation and decide whether to affirm the rating or return it to the DD for revision.
  8. The VCD will share the final list of faculty with Overall Unsatisfactory ratings with the Provost’s Office.
  9. A second Satisfactory – Needs Improvement rating of a tenured faculty member occurring within a five-year period of post-tenure review will result in an overall Satisfactory with Warning rating involving implementation of an improvement plan as described in CRR 310.015 B.1.c and an avenue for appeal (see CRR 310.015.B.1.h).
  10. The DD initiates the process for performance improvement for any faculty member receiving an overall Unsatisfactory rating, an overall Satisfactory with Warning rating in a category, or its equivalent (see i.).
  11. Faculty who dispute the findings of the DD and VCD have the right to appeal to the Provost pursuant to CRR 310.015.B.1.h.

2) Faculty Expectations and Options

  1. Teaching: A faculty member with a teaching appointment should teach sufficient credit hours or course sections or engage in other teaching activities to meet teaching workload policies as established by the Division. Teaching and advising workload data for the prior year will be made available by the CAFNR AD for Academic Programs to the DDs by February 1 of each year.
    1. A faculty member failing to meet this standard may be subject to actions described in section 3.
    2. With DD approval, a faculty member may reduce teaching workload by buying out a specific course assignment at the level of the workload expectation of that course and proportional to the faculty member’s annual salary, or, more generally, may reduce teaching workload by buying out a course assignment at the level of 10%, 9-month FTE, or by adding extension responsibilities commensurate to the teaching FTE reduction.
  2. Research: A faculty member with a research appointment should fulfill expectations established in the Division workload policy for research. The prior year research data will be made available by the CAFNR AD for Research to the DDs by February 1 each year.
    1. A faculty member failing to meet this standard may be subject to actions described in section 3.
    2. A faculty member may reduce research workload by adding course teaching assignments or extension responsibilities commensurate to the level of the research FTE reduction. The reduction supported by additional course teaching assignments will be measured in accordance with the level of the workload expectation of the specific course.
  3. Extension: A faculty member with an extension appointment should fulfill expectations established in the Division workload policy for extension. The prior year extension data will be made available by the CAFNR AD for extension to the DDs by February 1 each year.
    1. A faculty member failing to meet this standard may be subject to actions described in section 3.
    2. A faculty member may reduce extension workload by being assigned additional course teaching assignments at the level of the workload expectation of the specific course, or by buying out for research at a level proportional to the faculty member’s annual salary.

3) Consequences of Overall Unsatisfactory Performance

Unless the faculty member requests a reduction in FTE, the salary may be increased in subsequent years based upon an appropriate increase in the faculty member’s productivity.

Effective AY2021-22 and continuing in subsequent years, when a tenured faculty member engaged in a performance improvement plan, outlined in paragraph 1.i, fails to achieve the written performance milestones, an overall Unsatisfactory rating will be given in the following year per CRR 310.015 B.1.c.  The following consequences may unfold for overall Unsatisfactory rating issued on that basis or any other overall Unsatisfactory rating issued in accordance with CRR 310.015:

Salary reductions based on these criteria will be implemented in a manner consistent with CRR 320.030.F. Accordingly, written notice will be provided to the faculty member of the amount of salary reduction and the reason(s) for it based on these criteria. The salary reduction will go into effect September 1 of the academic year following that notice. A faculty member subject to salary reduction under these criteria may seek review by the Provost in accordance with CRR 320.030.F.

Pursuant to criteria stated above in section 1, salary reductions may occur in subsequent years but will not in aggregate exceed 25% of the faculty member’s base salary in the AY before the initial reduction.

Consistent with CRR 320.030.F, if the amount of the reduction is 10% or more, the reduction may be accompanied by a permanent and commensurate reduction in FTE upon the faculty member’s request.

Previous version in effect for evaluation of CY2024 performance