Faculty & Staff
Post-Tenure Review
Tenure protects academic freedom, not accountability — a five-year review cycle keeps every tenured faculty member’s performance on record.
Why tenure needs a review cycle at all
Tenure exists to protect a faculty member from being fired for an unpopular research finding or a controversial classroom opinion — not to exempt anyone from ever being evaluated again. Post-tenure review is the mechanism that keeps accountability in the system without reopening the tenure decision itself every time.
The five-year cycle
Every tenured faculty member goes through a comprehensive review of teaching, research or creative activity, and service every five years, conducted by the department chair with input from a peer committee. It is broader than an annual review — closer in scope to the original tenure case, but measured against the faculty member’s actual assigned workload rather than a fixed universal standard.
When a review finds a problem
A review rated unsatisfactory triggers a structured improvement plan with specific, time-bound goals, set jointly by the faculty member and the chair. A second consecutive unsatisfactory review can lead to a formal case for discipline up to dismissal — a real, if rare, way tenure can end, distinct from the for-cause dismissal process for misconduct.
Why this is not the same as annual review
Annual reviews (used for merit pay and assignment planning) happen every year and carry lower stakes; post-tenure review happens every five years and is the version that can actually put a faculty member on a formal improvement plan. Most tenured faculty complete their post-tenure reviews without incident — the process exists for the exception, not as an assumption of the rule.