Career faculty review and promotion for bargaining unit members are covered by Article 19 of the United Academics Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). Departmental/unit-level policy documents can be found on the Department and Unit Policies page.
Evaluation and review for career faculty includes:
- Pro tem annual evaluation
- Contract renewal evaluation for career faculty
- Promotion review for career faculty
Pro tem faculty must undergo performance evaluation on an annual basis. Please note that faculty holding pro tem appointments are not eligible for promotion, but they are welcome to apply to searches for career positions. Please refer to departmental/unit-level policy documents outlining the criteria for performance evaluation for non-tenure-track faculty, including pro tem faculty members.
The details and structure of contract renewal evaluation are the responsibility of the academic unit in which the appointment is made, but these evaluations must follow some general guidelines, which are applicable to career faculty regardless of United Academics bargaining unit status.
Performance evaluation must occur once in each contract period or every three years, whichever is sooner, and consider performance since the faculty member’s last review. The performance evaluation process will include an opportunity for career faculty to discuss efforts and performance with a supervisor at least once during a contract period.
Each performance evaluation will include an opportunity for submission of a personal statement with information relevant to the faculty’s performance of assigned duties and responsibilities.
When evaluating the performance of required professional development activities, the review will consider the availability of professional development funds and opportunities, and the faculty member’s efforts to secure funding.
Career faculty performance evaluations will use only the approved criteria made available to the faculty member.
Instructional career faculty teaching reviews will be conducted according to the 2019 Memorandum of Understanding between the University and United Academics, as well as the related 2020 amendment, using the Teaching Evaluation Criteria. Teaching will meet expectations when it is professional, inclusive, engaged and research-informed, as described in the 2019 MOU. The numerical scores provided from student Course Evaluations or Student Experience Surveys cannot be used as the sole standard for assessing teaching quality. Instead, review of teaching will consider insights from peer review of teaching and from the faculty own statement or instructor reflections, in addition to student comments and other materials provided.
There are two new Cognos reports that pull together both old and new student feedback data, as well as any instructor reflections completed during the review window. Both the Teaching Overview Report and the Teaching Detail Report can be accessed by academic unit managers through cognos.uoregon.edu, Team Content > Departmental Folders > Provost’s Office > Teaching Evaluation Reports. Signed student comments from courses prior to Fall 2019 can be downloaded from CollegeNET in the “Pre-2019 Student Comment Report”. These are accessed via duckweb.uoregon.edu, and Course Surveys link on the main page which transfer the user to CollegeNET. From CollegeNET select Reports > Report Browser > (Select Instructor and all courses in the review window) > Create Batch File > Click Batch Reports > Select “Pre-2019 Student Comment Report” as the Report. These instructions provide screen shots from CollegeNET to assist you.
Research career faculty will undergo performance evaluations using established procedures to assess quality of work performed and the outcomes of their contributions.
Librarians will undergo performance evaluation of their achievements in professional roles in the library, according to library policy on review and promotion
When applicable, the evaluation of scholarship, research, and creative activity for instructional, research or librarian career faculty will include assessment of work quality, impact on field nationally and internationally, and overall contribution to the discipline or program.