Post Tenure Review Standards

CAFNR subscribes to the belief that standards for post tenure review evaluations should not fall below what is expected to earn tenure. Accordingly, the CAFNR P&T guidelines for promotion to Associate Professor become the starting point for the Post Tenure Review process mandated by the UM System.  (See below for Associate Professor guidelines.)

Recognizing that the departments, divisions and disciplines represented in CAFNR are very different, and that the mix of responsibilities of any given faculty member can change markedly through the various stages of their career, it is appropriate that the general principles articulated in the promotion guidelines (the minimum standards for overall satisfactory performance) be applied at the division/department level.

Procedurally, unless divisions/departments specify an alternative process, each year, the division director will conduct an evaluation of all faculty members. For tenured faculty, the division director will make a judgment whether minimum standards for performance are being met. While not required, CAFNR supports a review by the department/division P&T committee (or a subset thereof) IF the division director determines that a tenured faculty member is NOT meeting minimum standards. Divisions/departments should determine the specifics of how this process will work.  (Note: University regulations require a face-to-face discussion between the faculty member and the chair when there is an unsatisfactory evaluation)

CAFNR Procedures for Meeting University Guidelines
For Post Tenure Review
(Starting in Year 2006)

  1. Using the standards from the P&T Guidelines, the division director will review the faculty member’s performance over the previous five years.  The information used for this evaluation will be the annual reports/evaluations and any other materials required by the Collected Rules and Regulations.  (Note:  In practice, it is anticipated that if all annual reviews are satisfactory, then only the annual reports/evaluations will be used by the division director for the post-tenure review.  However, if one or more of the annual reviews are unsatisfactory during the five-year period, then all information specified in the Collected Rules, current vitae and a summary of activities, will be requested from the faculty member, along with any other information the faculty member wishes to provide.)  On the basis of this information, the division director will make a determination whether the performance during the five-year period is satisfactory (meets minimum standards) or unsatisfactory.  If it is judged to be satisfactory, the process is complete.
  2. If the division director’s evaluation is unsatisfactory, then the case is referred to the designated division/department committee (e.g., the P&T Committee) for review.  The same information collected in #1 will be provided to this committee, along with any further information the faculty member wishes to provide.  If the committee determines that performance is satisfactory, the process is complete.  If the committee (by a two-thirds vote) determines that performance is unsatisfactory, the case, along with a report from the division director and committee, is referred to the CAFNR dean.
  3. Note:  At every level of review, the faculty member will be provided with a copy of any written report that is part of these proceedings and will have the right of appeal of any evaluations, decisions, or recommendations to the next level of the process.
  4. The dean will review the report and make a determination of the faculty member’s performance for the five-year period.  The dean may utilize a college-wide committee, such as the CAFNR Promotion and Tenure Committee, to assist with a recommendation.  If the dean determines the faculty member’s performance is satisfactory, the review process is complete.  If the dean determines the performance is unsatisfactory, a plan for professional development will be written.
  5. The professional development plan will be developed by the faculty member, the division committee, a mutually agreed upon mediator from outside the department, and the division director.  The plan will follow the guidelines outlined within the Collected Rules of the University.  In accordance with that plan, a faculty member may not appeal the process of the plan.  However, he/she may appeal to the next administrative level for help in the formulation of an acceptable development plan.
  6. A faculty member with a plan for professional development will submit an annual progress report to the division director for three successive years after the plan has been initiated.  The division director will review the report and provide a written annual evaluation on the progress of the faculty member toward the objectives stated in the development plan.  If the division director finds satisfactory progress for any two of the three years, the process will cease, and the faculty member will begin a new five-year cycle.
  7. If the division director does not find satisfactory progress in two of the three years of the development plan, the chair will provide the annual reports and evaluations to the division committee and the mediator.  If the division committee that includes the mediator finds satisfactory progress in two of the three years of the development plan, the process ceases, and the faculty member will begin a new five-year cycle.
  8. If both the division director and the division committee that includes the mediator do not find satisfactory progress in two of the three years of the development plan, the division director will provide annual reports and evaluations to the dean.  If the dean finds satisfactory progress in two of the three years of the development plan, the process ceases, and the faculty member will begin a new five-year cycle.  If the dean finds progress to be unsatisfactory, a report will be forwarded to the campus committee on Tenure and Promotion and to the Provost or Vice Chancellor for appropriate action.
  9. Any faculty member may request participation in a formal development plan (as described in #5) after two or more consecutive unsatisfactory annual evaluations.  In addition division directors will strongly encourage faculty who have had three consecutive unsatisfactory annual evaluations to participate in a development plan.

Associate Professor

The candidate for an academic position at the rank of associate professor should hold an earned doctoral degree or have demonstrated equivalent professional competence.  The candidate should be self-motivated and have leadership and creative abilities.  Evidence of these characteristics is to be demonstrated in the candidate’s resume, portfolio/dossier, reference letters and/or interviews.  The candidate must show developing excellence in the areas appropriate to the individual’s assignment.

Resident Instruction/Extension Outreach

An important part of the mission of the College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources is to facilitate learning among a broad range of students/clients.  These include traditional and nontraditional students as well as life-long learners.  Indeed, the Land Grant mission can be summed up by a charge “to take the university to the citizens of the state.”  Resident Instruction and Extension Outreach are partners in this goal.  Our faculty must design instructional practices to benefit our diverse audiences.  We must evaluate these activities within the context of the needs of the community they serve.  Thus, exemplary Resident Instruction/Extension Outreach should exhibit elements such as the following.

  • Effective resident instruction/extension outreach assessed by appropriate groups including students, clients, regional specialists, and colleagues.
  • Creative development and use of information delivery systems to support the learning process.  These may include new courses, innovative curricula or novel delivery systems.  Bulletins, computer programs, guide sheets, Internet publications, manuals, textbooks, and other media are additional examples of learning support materials.
  • Development and use of high quality educational activities that address the needs of specific learners when appropriate.
  • Sustained program of scholarship relevant to the demands of the discipline.
  • Professional development in both discipline specific and general education methodology.
  • Advising relevant to the clientele.  This may include undergraduate, graduate and postdoctoral students, student organizations, individuals, professional, or civic.


  • Evidence of excellence in research and promise of continued growth.
  • Published work could be demonstrated in a variety of forms that include:  refereed articles, completed theses, articles, books, films, video tapes, audio tapes, computer programs, public presentations, or other appropriate delivery channels for scholarly work.
  • Demonstrated ability to secure resources to support an independent research program.
  • Evidence of contributions to the research of colleagues.


  • Evidence of state and regional recognition as a leader in the profession.
  • Evidence of significant contributions to the profession.
  • Evidence of collaborative and cooperative relations with professional colleagues.
  • Linkages with international scientists and institutions are desirable.


  • Record of excellence in contributing to the goals of the CAFNR.
  • Record of excellence in serving on division, departmental, college and university committees.
  • Demonstrated excellence in providing information to the public.
  • Involvement with professional societies.