Home / Academics / Academic Affairs / Annual Faculty Review Process

Annual Faculty Review Process

The Annual Faculty Review is an evaluation of faculty performance, standard practice in higher education, designed to provide feedback to faculty in their areas of responsibility. At SCNM, the process has four goals: (1) to promote a culture of continuous improvement, fairness, and consistency, (2) to provide a meaningful assessment of faculty productivity, (3) to foster and support faculty development and mentorship, and (4) to recognize outstanding faculty accomplishment.

Faculty performance is reviewed in the three categories of teaching, service, and scholarship. Evaluations occur in accordance with the governing policies and procedures of SCNM and are standardized across all departments. The evaluation process includes both a self-reflective component as well as a summative evaluation process, that when taken together provides a meaningful assessment of faculty productivity and serves to foster and support faculty development. The process also guides faculty in professional advancement through formative discussions with their dean(s) and goal setting for improvement in subsequent years.

Annual Faculty Review Process (FRP)

There are three forms to be submitted by faculty, all of which are available year round to help faculty track their activities as they pertain to their primary areas of responsibility.  These forms are the Faculty Annual Report, the Faculty Performance Evaluation Form, and the Faculty Professional Development Plan.

The Faculty Annual Report Form serves as a summary of each faculty member’s work performed over the last academic year in each of the three primary areas of responsibility: Teaching and Learning, Service and Scholarship.  It is on this form that faculty members list their activities and provide descriptions of their levels of involvement, participation and leadership roles. 

Faculty Annual Report

The Faculty Performance Evaluation Form asks each faculty member to evaluate whether they meet, exceed, or do not meet expectations in each of the three primary areas of responsibility. The competencies for evaluation are directly derived from the Full-time Faculty Duties and Responsibilities document, which is available in the Faculty Handbook. This self-evaluation process facilitates faculty reflection on each strength and area for improvement, and provides space to comment as well as the opportunity to attach supporting documentation.

Lastly, the Faculty Professional Development Plan aids faculty in establishing goals for the upcoming academic year, as well as identifying related professional activities to achieve these goals. Goal setting promotes professional development, and faculty members are expected to develop a plan for each of the three primary areas of responsibility. In addition to developing a plan for the coming year, faculty members are afforded the opportunity to reflect on the goals of the past year and record progress.

In summary, the FPE is designed to encourage faculty continuous improvement in teaching, scholarship, and service.

Annual FRP Workflow

The annual FRP cycle follows the academic calendar. While all documents prepared by faculty are to be submitted to the dean(s) no later than the end of the academic year, faculty members are encouraged to begin the process well in advance of the due date. In brief, once all forms are submitted, each faculty member then meets with the dean(s) to discuss the previous year’s accomplishments, and the coming year’s goals. This discussion supports faculty reflection, development and performance and results in a Composite Faculty Performance Evaluation Form that is signed and filed as part of the faculty member’s file. An illustration of the process is below:

Annual Faculty Review

Assessment and Continuous Improvement

The efforts made by faculty in the annual FRP are intended to be meaningful. In order to ensure the process is perceived as valuable and constructive, faculty members have been instrumental in the creation and refinement of the process. Assessment of the process occurs annually through the Office of Academic Assessment and includes feedback gathered from all participants. The feedback data are then reviewed and used to inform and continually improve the process.


Arreola, R. A. (2006). Developing a comprehensive faculty evaluation system: A handbook for college faculty and administrators on designing and operating large-scale faculty evaluation systems (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Braskamp L. A. & Ory, J. C.  (1994). Assessing faculty work: Enhancing individual and institutional performance. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Buller, J. L. (2012). Best practices in faculty evaluation: A practical guide for academic leaders. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Gusic M. E.,  Baldwin C. D., Chandran L., Rose S., Simpson, D., Strobel H.W., Timm, C., & Fincher, R. M. (2014). Evaluating educators using a novel toolbox: Applying rigorous criteria flexibly across institutions. Academic Medicine. Published ahead of print.  Accessed 4/9/14 here

Selden, P. (2006). Evaluating faculty performance: A practical guide to assessing teaching, research, and service. San Francisco, CA: Anker Publishing.