The mid-tenure review form can be found on the forms page under “Tenure and Promotion.”

Mid-tenure review is one of our most important mechanisms for providing tenure-track faculty with an assessment of progress during the early stages of their careers at Boston University. It provides a means for colleagues and mentors to offer clear-eyed and honest guidance and feedback to aid their tenure-track colleagues in advancing their academic careers.

All departments must ensure they have developed and can clearly communicate an understanding of appropriate expectations for tenure-track faculty members at this stage of career development. These expectations are the benchmarks against which departments and assistant professors themselves can evaluate progress toward tenure.

Regular peer evaluation of teaching should be an integral part of the review process. Tenure-track faculty members, along with their mentors and department chairs should arrange for regular classroom visits with constructive and critical written feedback. At least three reports from these visits must be submitted with the mid-tenure review. Peer class observations should be completed by faculty higher in rank than the candidate. If no such faculty are available in the department, please consult the tenure and promotion coordinator.

The mid-tenure review process should be initiated early in the sixth semester of the tenure-track period and should be completed by the end of the sixth semester, assuming a standard tenure clock. An earlier review will be arranged for those with a shortened tenure clock, whereas mid-tenure review may be delayed if the tenure review year has been deferred due to a parental leave or other circumstances (see Faculty Handbook).

The process is as follows:

  1. The assistant professor completes the Candidate Self-Report and submits it, along with a c.v., copies of papers, publications, teaching materials, and other relevant documents to the department chair (or chairs in the case of full joint appointments) early in the sixth semester of the tenure-track period. The candidate should be given a timely reminder and advice about this process during the fifth semester of the tenure-track period. Candidates should feel free to seek advice in compiling the Self-Report, especially from the department chair or assigned mentor.
  1. A review committee of at least 2 tenured faculty members reviews all of the submitted materials in depth. One committee member may be a tenured faculty member from another department or program, including those in another BU school or college in which the candidate participates. The review committee will read and evaluate the Candidate Self-Report, c.v., and other materials the department deems necessary for a thorough evaluation (which may include teaching materials, student and peer teaching reviews, papers and publications, citations, and grant applications and reviews), and present its conclusions in a mid-tenure evaluation report.In the case of assistant professors with full joint appointments, the department chairs should discuss and decide whether the mid-tenure review should be done jointly (with both departments reviewing and submitting the same document) or separately (with full consultation on the reports).

In the case of assistant professors with significant involvement in a second department or program (for example, those with joint programmatic appointments in another unit), the primary appointment unit should seek input from the chair/director of the secondary unit. The secondary unit’s input should be based on some consultation among senior faculty in the unit.

The mid-tenure evaluation report should provide descriptive and evaluative statements on: (1) teaching and mentoring; (2) scholarship and publication; and (3) professional service and contributions. Each section should note both strengths and weaknesses and make recommendations aimed at advising the candidate on progress that should be made during the pre-tenure period and any strategies for making that progress. A concluding summary section should briefly review the expectations the department has for successful candidates for tenure and highlight the major specific recommendations for the faculty member’s continuing career development in advance of tenure review. The report should be drafted on behalf of the tenured faculty, not as the particular views of the committee members. A minimum of three peer class visit reports should be included as part of the department’s report.

In the section on teaching, the report should include a table containing all teaching evaluation scores for each course taught by the candidate and average teaching scores across the department for undergraduate and graduate courses, respectively. It can also be helpful for the teaching section to address the candidate’s performance in specific courses that have been taught by others in the department.

  1. The mid-tenure evaluation report should be discussed at a meeting of the tenured faculty, and revised if necessary to accurately reflect the evaluation and advice of the tenured faculty.
  1. The department chair should give the candidate a copy of the department’s report and, along with the mentor, should discuss the contents of the report with the candidate.
  1. The department chair electronically submits the candidate’s c.v., Self-Report, the department’s Mid-Tenure Report, and at least three peer class visit reports to CAS, by posting the materials at https://casapps.bu.edu/tenure-promotions/. Please note that only the departmental chair and administrator will have access to post these materials. Teaching materials, course evaluation data, publications, and hard copy materials should not be submitted. The Dean will review these materials and may discuss the review and its outcome with the candidate and department chair.