Evaluation Processes for Instructional Faculty

Instructional FTNTL faculty include Professors of the Practice and Teaching Professors at the rank Assistant, Associate, and Full Professor. This section describes the evaluation and promotion processes for these faculty members.

Academic units will regularly evaluate instructional FTNTL faculty members at each rank and track.

There are three types of evaluation for instructional faculty:

  1. Annual evaluations
  2. Renewal/Non-renewal evaluations 
  3. Promotion evaluations

This section also explains Salary Adjustments for each type of evaluation.

Annual Evaluations 

Academic units must conduct annual evaluations of all FTNTL faculty members on the basis of their contractual obligations. Academic units must conduct these evaluations guided by the following principles, and may implement the evaluations in accordance with the procedures and practices of the academic unit.

  1. Academic Units will evaluate all FTNTL faculty members annually on the basis of their contractual obligations.
  2. Three inputs for annual evaluations for Professors of the Practice and Teaching Professors include:
    1. Specialized Faculty Review Forms (developed by and available from the Provost’s office) for Professors of the Practice (new window) and Teaching Professors (new window) completed by faculty members (required for all FTNTL faculty). Professors of the Practice and Teaching Professors must submit these annual reports for the preceding academic year no later than October 1 of the following academic year.
    2. Course evaluations from the Registrar.
    3. Report(s) of classroom observations during the term of the first contract. (After the first contract, classroom visits and evaluations may be initiated by the unit head or upon request by the faculty member).
  3. Annual evaluations must be carried out by at least two people (the unit head or designee and one more person) and then approved by the responsible Dean(s).
  4. FTNTL annual assessment criteria will generally parallel the annual assessment criteria for TL faculty, but using the weights for teaching, service and professional development determined by the contractual obligations and time allocations of each faculty member.
  5. The faculty member can request an in-person meeting to discuss the annual evaluation.

Renewal/Non-Renewal Evaluations

In general, renewal/non-renewal evaluations will take place in the final year of the FTNTL’s contract so that the review can be based on the completed annual review materials for the prior years of the current contract.

Please note: The deadlines for notification for renewal/non-renewal are February 1st for multi-year contracts and May 1st for one-year contracts.

  1. Renewal/Non-renewal evaluations will be carried out by the unit head or designee and at least one more person.
  2. Renewal/Non-renewal evaluation will be based on: (i) annual evaluations, and (ii) the faculty member’s CV. Individual units may use additional materials (e.g., statements provided by the faculty member).
  3. Four criteria will be considered for renewal:
    1. High standards in the quality of service/teaching and continued reputation and visibility in professional standing.
    2. Fulfillment of Faculty Handbook responsibilities and obligations.
    3. Consistency with programmatic needs.
    4. Financial solvency/budget feasibility.
  4. The deadlines for notification for renewal/non-renewal are February 1st for multi-year contracts and May 1st for one-year contracts.
  5. The faculty member can appeal the decision to the next higher administrative unit within 30 days of receipt of the decision.
  6. Upon request by the FTNTL faculty member, the Unit head or designee will provide feedback on the faculty member’s progress towards promotion following his/her renewal/non-renewal evaluation.

Promotion Evaluations

Promotion should be based on:

  • Excellence in teaching. Quality of teaching is assessed in terms of a thorough knowledge of the subject(s) being taught, a demonstrated ability to communicate that knowledge to students, and the skill to stimulate students to reach their potential. Consistency, pedagogical innovation and diversity of courses are all aspects that can be considered in evaluating excellence.
  • Service. Effective professional or institutional service is judged by its contribution to the candidate’s field, to the missions of his or her unit, and to the University as a whole. Administrative leadership, university committee service, participation and leadership in professional organizations, and the use of the faculty member’s academic expertise for public welfare are all factors that can be considered in evaluating excellence.
  • Professional development and contributions. This requires substantial contributions to the field of expertise of the faculty member. The quality of a candidate’s scholarly work, including contributions to collaborative activities, is crucial. Quality is judged by the contribution that the work makes to a specific body of knowledge and is usually indicated by its scholarly impact or recognition (nationally and often internationally). The candidate’s corpus of scholarly work must demonstrate creativity and originality. Factors to consider include program and course building, a body of scholarship beyond the university, the organization of conferences and events, and participation and leadership roles in national and international professional organizations.

The weight given to each of the three factors above will depend on the contractual obligations and the time allocation of the faculty member to teaching, service and professional development.

Time in rank and meeting minimum contractual obligations do not suffice for promotion.

Promotion to the rank of Full Professor requires a sustained level of achievement according to the same indicators of excellent in teaching, service and/or scholarship as those required for the rank of Associate Professor. This rank is awarded in the expectation that the faculty member’s entire professional career will live up to this standard. Substantial accomplishments since appointment or promotion to the prior rank should be clearly demonstrated. Promotion to Professor of the Practice and Teaching Professor is recognition of continued scholarly achievement, a commitment to excellence in teaching, and substantial service and leadership with every expectation of continuing contributions to the University.

Materials for review for promotion will include:

  1. Faculty Member’s CV;
  2. Personal Statement in support of promotion;
  3. Yearly evaluations;
  4. Renewal evaluations.

Any additional materials such as letters of recommendation from peers or former chairs are optional. As for the annual evaluation and renewal evaluations, these materials must be submitted on October 1st.

Promotion Process

The promotion process will consist of the following steps:

  • The unit head will inform the unit’s full-time faculty of the initiation of the promotion process.
  • The unit head will charge a promotion review committee composed of:
    • The unit head or designee;
    • A person selected by the unit head;
    • If possible, a FTNTL or TL faculty member at least one rank higher than the person being evaluated who is familiar with the area of study expertise of the person being evaluated.
  • The unit head will make a recommendation to the Dean and the Provost after receiving the assessment by the promotion committee. The full-time faculty will have the opportunity to vote on the promotion committee’s recommendation. This vote will accompany the committee’s recommendation to the Dean and Provost for consideration.
  • The Dean will then make a recommendation to the Provost who will make the final decision on promotion.
  • Promotion decisions will be made by the end of the academic year the faculty member applied for promotion.

Timing of Promotion

Generally, an Assistant can seek promotion to Associate for the first time after two three-year contracts (or the equivalent combination of contracts summing up to a total of six years), and/or at the point of renewal thereafter. An Associate may seek promotion to Full after five years at the rank of Associate, and/or at the point of renewal thereafter. Notwithstanding these time periods, a FTNTL faculty member can request to be considered for earlier promotion if there are special circumstances that might warrant earlier promotion, including if the faculty member has an outside offer. If the faculty member came with previous experience from another institution, at the time of hiring, the faculty member’s contract will specify the shortened period of time for which s/he will be considered for promotion. Generally, if a faculty member applies for promotion but is not promoted, he/she can reapply for promotion starting in the next academic year following a consultation with his/her unit head.

Request for Reconsideration

Within 30 days of receipt of a negative promotion decision, the faculty member can ask the Provost to reconsider the decision.

Salary Adjustments 

A. Merit Pay Adjustments

FTNTL base salaries are adjusted annually.  A unit must establish in writing a merit pay policy. This policy must be in place by January 1 each year for any adjustments to salary that would take effect at the beginning of the next academic year. The merit adjustment policy must be transparent and non-arbitrary.

B. Equity Adjustments

Once enough information is available on faculty performance and basic faculty members’ characteristics, FTNTL faculty equity adjustments will be determined by the Provost’s office using analysis to determine outliers and underpayments for equivalent FTNTL faculty at Georgetown University.

C. Salary Increases at Promotion

Additional salary increases will also be associated with promotion from Assistant to Associate and from Associate to Full. Just as the Provost determines salary increases associated with promotion for tenure-line faculty, the Provost will determine the nature and size of the salary increases for FTNTL faculty.