Evaluation of Faculty Performance

A. Criteria

“Merit” shall be determined by considering relevant criteria including the following as appropriate to the position:

  1. teaching effectiveness;
  2. scholarly and professional achievements;
  3. research, as evidenced by both published and unpublished works;
  4. direction of graduate studies;
  5. advisory and counseling service;
  6. success in generating external funding to support research or other programs;
  7. service to professional societies;
  8. service to the programs and administrative work of the University (other than teaching and research);
  9. professional activities in the community;
  10. attributes of integrity, industry, objectivity, leadership, collegiality, and cooperation;
  11. success in clinical practice.

These criteria are not listed in order of importance, nor are they to be rigidly applied. Persons making such evaluations should keep in mind, however, the primary interest of the University in retaining and rewarding persons of superior teaching ability and scholarly achievement.

    B. Procedures

    The procedures below are intended to be used to apply the criteria above in the evaluation of a faculty member’s performance for the purpose of reappointment and for the granting of salary increases. In reviews for Tenure and/or promotion, the criteria above are applied according to the procedures in the policies, “Tenure and Promotion on the Charles River Campus” and “Procedures for Promotions on the Medical Campus.”

    Upon request, each full-time faculty member shall prepare and forward to the chair of the department or division, or otherwise to the dean, an annual written report that will aid in the evaluation of the faculty member’s performance.

    This evaluation shall be made initially by the appropriate department or division chair or, if the chair so designates, by the head of a section within a department; otherwise it shall be made by the dean. The department or division chair, otherwise the dean, shall consider the faculty member’s report and other pertinent evidence in the chair’s or dean’s evaluation and recommendation. The department, School, or College may add to these procedures any such steps as will assist it in the evaluation process, e.g., consulting with the directors of Programs or Centers in which the faculty member participates, using a faculty review committee, consulting with qualified persons outside the University, and seeking information from faculty members and students according to procedures that will be determined by each School or College.

    The dean shall review all recommendations and shall make use of whatever further consultation is deemed to be of assistance in formulating recommendations to the University Administration. When the faculty member involved has an assignment in other Schools or Colleges, the dean shall consult with the dean of those Schools and Colleges.

    Adopted April 18, 2007, by the University Council.