REG 05.20.03 – Annual Reviews of Faculty Members

Authority: Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

History: First Issued: April 1998. Last Revised: June 25, 2024.

Contact Info: Senior Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs (919-513-7741)

1. INDIVIDUAL REVIEWS

1.1 Individual reviews of all full-time faculty–tenured, tenure-track, professional track–are to be conducted annually. Faculty with contract lengths less than one year are not subject to this regulation. It is the responsibility of each department head or designee to review the performance of each faculty member and to keep the appropriate dean apprised of the status of the reviews.

2. PROCEDURES

2.1 The faculty member provides to the department head or designee the written statement of faculty responsibilities (SFR) (or contract or other equivalent documentation – see REG 05.20.27 Statements of Faculty Responsibilities), annual activity report (section 3 below), and in all cases where applicable, departmental teacher/course evaluations, results of any peer review of teaching, and other pertinent information.

2.2 Given the importance of ensuring progress within the first years of a faculty career, department heads (and not designees) shall conduct direct, synchronous consultations for the annual reviews of all assistant professors on the tenure track, and of all professional-track assistant professors who are within their first two contract cycles.

2.3 The department head may consult with the tenured faculty and senior professional track faculty of the department as appropriate and may seek such other advice as he or she deems appropriate in the conduct of the review.

2.4 The faculty member and department head shall discuss any changes in activities or relationships since the last annual review that could require a new or revised COI or NOI disclosure or conflict management plan.

2.5 The department head will provide a written summary of the review; the summary should indicate that a review of COI and NOI disclosures and conflict management plans, where applicable, was completed. The faculty member may provide a written response. The written summary and any response will become part of the personnel file.

2.6 In the review of jointly-appointed faculty, the head of the department of primary appointment will consult with the head(s) of the department(s) in which the faculty member is jointly appointed per NCSU POL05.20.01 – Appointment, Reappointment, Promotion and Permanent Tenure.

3. ANNUAL FACULTY ACTIVITY REPORTS

3.1 An annual activity report (or substitute – see NCSU REG05.20.34 – Professional Faculty Ranks and Appointments, section 7.4) is a required part of the annual review. Annual activity reports also assist faculty in providing information about accomplishments which can be used in describing accomplishments university wide.

3.2 All faculty members shall submit to their department head an annual activity report concerning their professional activities and achievements during the previous year. This report shall be included in each faculty member’s personnel file and electronically stored) in RPTOnline or other Faculty Activity Reporting Software used by the College.

3.3 For this purpose each college or other academic administrative unit having faculty shall develop an appropriate annual activity report format, guidelines and submission dates subject to the approval of the department head and dean.

4. FACULTY WORKLOAD REVIEW

4.1 Within the annual review, the department head shall review the work of the faculty member relative to their approved Statement of Faculty Responsibilities (SFR). Consistent with requirements set out in UNC System Policy 400.3.4, a faculty member who does not adequately satisfy their workload expectations for the review period shall be subject to a faculty success plan.

4.2. The department head and faculty member will review the SFR for prospective adjustment to incorporate the identified changes in workload during the annual review process.

5. FACULTY SUCCESS PLANS

5.1 The faculty success plan will address the specific realm(s) identified as needing improvement and must include specific steps designed to lead to improvement, a specified timeline in which improvement is expected to occur, and a clear statement of consequences should improvement not occur within the designated timeline. These plans must be approved by the dean or dean’s designee.

5.2 A faculty success plan may: a) include recommendations for meeting the current SFR, or b) recommend adjustments to the current SFR to align with the faculty’s current scholarship.

5.3. The faculty member may request periodic success plan progress reviews with the department head and/or their mentoring team to ensure their efforts are leading to successful completion of the goal(s) within the specified timeline. The faculty member may also consult with their departmental mentoring committee drawn from the department voting faculty. Periodic progress reviews are not required but available as an aid to the faculty member in accomplishing the specified goal(s).

5.4 The faculty success plan will be stored at the department level and the university level electronically in RPTOnline or equivalent university level online system.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

A professional development plan is future oriented and focused on the faculty member’s goals and plans for professional growth. Professional development plans are neither required nor considered in the evaluation of faculty performance; however, at the time of each annual review, the faculty member and department head should discuss the professional goals and aspirations of the faculty member and the relationship of these individual goals to plans for continuing development of the department and college and, where appropriate, to the goals of the university. The faculty member and department head may elect to formalize a professional development plan or related agreement to describe shared understandings around details such as activities, timelines, resource requirements and commitments, and/or expected outcomes. Such documentation may be particularly appropriate when professional development activities are directly related to expectations in the individual’s Statement of Faculty Responsibilities (e.g. training in online course development to support a quality transition to online teaching, per the SFR).