selected with approval of the Department Chair. If the faculty member is the Department Chair, consultation regarding peer reviewers will take place with the Dean. The Dean may not be a reviewer. Peer review consists of an examination of course syllabi, selected materials, and classroom observations for knowledge, accuracy, appropriateness and command of content, planning and organization, use of teaching strategies that create a learning environment, clarity and effectiveness of communication. In a written report, the reviewer will also identify the faculty member’s strengths and areas for continuing development. During the year prior to submission of the application for promotion, the three-peer panel review substitutes for the individual peer review. iii. The faculty teaching shall be reviewed by three peer candidate’s reviewers in the academic year prior to the academic year in which the faculty member will be a candidate for promotion to Associate Professor. The candidate shall select the first reviewer. If the person selected by the candidate declines to be a reviewer, the candidate shall make another selection. The departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee shall select the second reviewer. The Dean shall select the third reviewer. The Dean may not be a reviewer. Reviewers shall be selected from among the tenured faculty in the School of Law. In special circumstances, with approval of the Chair of the departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee and the Dean, the faculty candidate may select a tenured faculty member from elsewhere in the University or from outside the University. Before visiting a class session, the reviewer should meet with the faculty candidate to discuss the syllabus, text, and general philosophy of what the faculty candidate is trying to accomplish in the course, as well as the goals of the specific class session to be observed. After visiting the class session, the reviewer should meet again with the faculty candidate to briefly discuss the class session. The criteria for the peer review are those set forth in “Promotion and Tenure: Specific Standards for the Law Section School,” Based on these criteria, the faculty reviewers shall write a joint report which reflects the observations each of them has made and which becomes part of the portfolio. candidate’s A copy of the peer review report shall be provided to the faculty candidate, who may file a written response that will be included in the portfolio. Copies of any response must be sent to candidate’s
selected with approval of the Department Chair. If the faculty member is the Department Chair, consultation regarding peer reviewers will take place with the Dean. The Dean may not be a reviewer. Peer review consists of an examination of course syllabi, selected materials, and classroom observations for knowledge, accuracy, appropriateness and command of content, planning and organization, use of teaching strategies that create a learning environment, clarity and effectiveness of communication. In a written report, the reviewer will also identify the faculty member’s strengths and areas for continuing development. During the year prior to submission of the application for promotion, the three-peer panel review substitutes for the individual peer review. iii. The faculty candidate’s teaching shall be reviewed by three peer reviewers in the academic year prior to the academic year in which the faculty member will be a candidate for promotion to Associate Professor. The candidate shall select the first reviewer. If the person selected by the candidate declines to be a reviewer, the candidate shall make another selection. The departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee shall select the second reviewer. The Dean shall select the third reviewer. The Dean may not be a reviewer. Reviewers shall be selected from among the tenured faculty in the School of Law. In special circumstances, with approval of the Chair of the departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee and the Dean, the faculty candidate may select a tenured faculty member from elsewhere in the University or from outside the University. Before visiting a class session, the reviewer should meet with the faculty candidate to discuss the syllabus, text, and general philosophy of what the faculty candidate is trying to accomplish in the course, as well as the goals of the specific class session to be observed. After visiting the class session, the reviewer should meet again with the faculty candidate to briefly discuss the class session. The criteria for the peer review are those set forth in “Promotion and Tenure: Specific Standards for the Law School,” Section Based on these criteria, the faculty reviewers shall write a joint report which reflects the observations each of them has made and which becomes part of the candidate’s portfolio. A copy of the peer review report shall be provided to the faculty candidate, who may file a written response that will be included in the candidate’s portfolio. Copies of any response must be sent to
AcademicPolicyManual2016.docx