Please refer to Appendix W of the University Handbook for university policy on Post Tenure Review. The information below is intended to provide examples and prompts to help tenured faculty navigate the Post Tenure Review process.
The candidate shall clearly articulate, in no more than two pages, the primary achievements during the evaluation period. The statement should emphasize quality, significance, and impact, rather than serving as a comprehensive inventory of activities. Because evaluative expectations and forms of evidence vary across disciplines and appointment types, this statement plays an essential role in promoting equitable review by helping readers understand how the candidate’s record should be interpreted within the appropriate context.
This narrative allows the candidate to:
Highlight major contributions and outcomes across areas of responsibility
Explain the significance of scholarly, creative, professional, or extension work using discipline appropriate standards
Describe progress toward establishing a sustained and coherent program of work
Address the relationship between assigned responsibilities and demonstrated accomplishments
The candidate shall provide, in no more than one page, a forward-looking perspective on their anticipated professional development and scholarly direction. This statement is not evaluated as a contractual obligation, but rather as an indicator of planning, intellectual trajectory, and alignment with the mission of the Department, College, and University. Goals should be realistic, flexible, and appropriate to the candidate’s rank, discipline, and appointment, recognizing that professional trajectories evolve and that institutional and disciplinary contexts may change over time.
The candidate shall summarize, in no more than two pages, the scope and nature of their instructional responsibilities and contributions during the evaluation period. The statement should present a concise narrative, supported by evidence (e.g., tables, lists) addressing instructional activities. The reflective narrative may explain workload, instructional context, or changes over time. The goal of this section is to establish the breadth, scope, and consistency of instructional engagement during the review period.
Evidence of instructional activities should follow approved departmental documents. Items may include, but are not limited, to the following:
Courses taught (including modality, level, and role)
Student advising and mentoring (either formal or informal), including graduate students (serving as major professor, committee member, supervision of GTAs, etc.)
Thesis, dissertation, or capstone supervision
Curriculum or course development and revision
Instruction related leadership or coordination roles
Clinical instruction (when applicable), such as supervision of student clinicians in clinical or diagnostic settings, observation of student evaluation/treatment sessions (directly or via recording) and feedback, case management instruction, review of student documentation, and participation in student performance reviews or consensus grading
Clinical teaching embedded in service delivery (e.g., VDL diagnostic training, counseling supervision)
Other instructional responsibilities appropriate to the discipline and appointment
The candidate shall summarize, in no more than one page, the quality and effectiveness of their instruction accompanied by a reflective narrative that addresses instructional effectiveness, development, and improvement over time. Candidates may use the reflective narrative to contextualize the evidence, explain trends or patterns, and describe instructional development efforts.
Evidence of instructional quality should follow approved departmental documents and may include, but are not limited, to the following:
Summarized student ratings of instruction (e.g., tables across courses and terms)
Peer evaluations of teaching
Evaluation of advising or mentoring effectiveness
Outcomes of instructional innovations or reforms
Teaching awards or recognitions
Evidence of responsiveness to feedback and continuous improvement
When including student comments, follow approved departmental/college documents
Clinical instruction evidence (when applicable), such as summarized student clinician evaluations of supervision, documentation of live supervision provided (hours/percent time), sample observation feedback forms or end-of-semester feedback letters (de-identified), summaries of peer review of clinical teaching/supervision, and evidence of compliance with accreditation/licensure standards in supervision practices
Other evidence of instructional quality appropriate to the discipline and appointment
The candidate shall include a narrative, in no more than one page, that highlights scholarly, creative, or innovative activities that contribute to excellence in instruction and student learning. This section captures work that enhances instruction beyond routine teaching responsibilities. When appropriate, candidates may describe how scholarly or creative work informs instructional design or how instructional innovation contributes to broader educational or disciplinary impact.
Scholarship and Creativity in Instruction should follow approved departmental documents. Items may include, but are not limited, to the following:
Instruction related scholarship (e.g., scholarship of teaching and learning)
Development of innovative instructional methods or materials
Instruction focused publications, presentations, or workshops
Professional development in teaching that has informed practice
Clinical instruction innovation and dissemination (when applicable), such as development of supervision models, competency-based clinical skill rubrics, simulation/standardized-client activities, inter-professional training modules, or evidence-based feedback tools; assessment of learner outcomes in clinical settings; presentations or publications on clinical education/supervision; and contributions to accreditation-related curriculum or supervision standards
Other scholarship and creativity in instruction activities appropriate to the discipline and appointment
The candidate shall provide a concise narrative, in no more than two pages, that summarizes research, scholarly, creative, design, and/or discovery activities during the evaluation period. This statement should articulate the focus, direction, and significance of the candidate’s work and how individual activities contribute to a coherent body of scholarly effort. Rather than duplicating lists or supporting materials, this narrative should provide context and interpretation of the research and other creative endeavors.
The statement may address:
The intellectual or creative agenda guiding the work
Major accomplishments and their significance or impact
The role of peer review, professional recognition, or external validation
Contributions to the discipline, profession, or broader community
Progress toward establishing a sustained and independent program of scholarship or creative activity
Candidates shall provide a list, limited to one page, of research publications and/or creative achievements completed during the evaluation period. The list should be organized clearly and presented in a manner consistent with disciplinary norms and may include links to media of scholarly achievements. Candidates may identify authorship roles, review processes, dissemination venues, or other contextual information as needed to clarify the nature and significance of the work. Candidates should refer to departmental expectations for this section.
Items should follow approved departmental documents. Items may include, but are not limited, to the following:
Peer reviewed articles, book chapters, exhibition catalogues, or other scholarly/creative outputs
Scholarly or professional books
Creative works (e.g., exhibitions, performances, designs, built works, etc.)
Refereed or externally reviewed works
Juried or invited professional presentations and posters
Design or implementation of evidence-based programs
Engagement in interdisciplinary teams and community/university partnerships
Patents or other intellectual property resulting from scholarly and/or creative activity
Exhibitions of creative scholarship in juried international, national, and regional exhibitions, conferences/meetings
Other scholarly or creative outputs appropriate to the discipline and appointment
The candidate shall provide a list, of no more than one page, that documents submissions for externally funded and internally supported grants and contracts relevant to the candidate’s research, scholarly, creative, design, and discovery activities during the evaluation period. Where relevant, candidates may include brief contextual information to clarify the scope or competitiveness of funding opportunities.
For each grant or contract, candidates should include:
Investigators
Funding agency or sponsor
Title of the project
Funding amount and duration
Role of the candidate (e.g., principal investigator, co-principal investigator)
Status (e.g., submitted, not funded, awarded, active, completed)
The candidate shall provide a narrative summary, in no more than two pages, of service activities undertaken during the evaluation period. While service expectations may evolve over time, candidates should focus on service that is substantive, sustained, and relevant to institutional and professional missions. This statement should describe the nature, level, and impact of service and may be organized by the following categories, as applicable to the faculty appointment and departmental documents:
Institution-based service (i.e. University, College, and/or Departmental level service and committees)
Professional or disciplinary-based service
Public-based professional service related to professional expertise
Directed service (applicable to CVM and CSD faculty, i.e. assigned clinical practice, hospital-based and/or laboratory service, as applicable)
Independent clinical, diagnostic, or laboratory services that do not include a primary instructional component
Non-directed service (i.e. institution, profession, and public-based)
Other service contributions appropriate to the discipline and appointment
The narrative may address:
Leadership roles and responsibilities
Time intensive or high impact service
Contributions to institutional initiatives
The relationship between service activities and the candidate’s expertise or appointment
Demonstration of engagement (refer to Continuum of Engaged Scholarship)
Candidates with cooperative extension responsibilities shall provide a statement, no more than two pages, summarizing their extension and outreach activities during the evaluation period, not to exceed two pages unless otherwise defined in approved departmental documents. This statement should include the focus, audience, methods, and impact of extension work, and how extension activities align with their scholarly expertise, departmental mission, and institutional priorities.
Activities may include, as appropriate, and may reflect planning, preparation, delivery, and evaluation/accountability processes:
Planning (e.g., participation in formal program planning; coordination with local agents and other professionals to identify and document educational needs; review of relevant state and national data; interdisciplinary program planning; pursuit of grant opportunities; obtaining internal or external funding to support Extension work)
Preparation (e.g., development of new educational resources; translation/adaptation of evidence-based strategies, programs, or products to meet client needs; contributions to materials developed by interdisciplinary teams or state/regional/national initiatives)
Delivery (e.g., in-service training for local agents and other professionals; direct delivery of programs and technical assistance to clientele; consultations via phone/electronic/face-to-face methods; development and dissemination of information tools such as newsletters, articles, web pages, briefs, white papers, infographics, blog posts, podcasts, or media interviews; mixed-media strategies and campaigns; administration of special projects)
Evaluation/Impact/Accountability (e.g., integration of evaluation components into program design; conducting evaluation with agents/colleagues/clientele; preparation of required federal, state, or other reports; communication of results to stakeholders and decision makers; presentation or publication of findings relevant to Extension)
Candidates shall provide a list of cooperative extension activities and evidence of contributions completed during the evaluation period, that may include:
Audience/clientele contacts and reach (e.g., number of contacts/participants, resources distributed, geographic distribution, size of media market, leaders trained, measures of effort)
Program outcomes and impact (e.g., evidence of adoption or behavior/practice change; short- and long-term consequences; case studies; self-reports; evaluative research; letters of confirmation from knowledgeable colleagues or stakeholders)
Peer, leader, and stakeholder evaluations (e.g., evaluation data; solicited or unsolicited letters from peers/partners familiar with the candidate's Extension leadership or expertise)
Reputation and dissemination (e.g., invited presentations, keynote speeches, out-of-state workshops; publications and Extension resources; media coverage; awards and recognitions)
Efficiency and sustainability (e.g., cost-benefit evidence; consumer utilization; likelihood of sustainability; evidence that work inspired new innovations among colleagues and clientele)
Survey data (e.g., grower data, audience surveys, etc.)