Chronicle of Higher Education, Why U. of Florida Professors Decry ‘Chaotic’ Post-Tenure Review That Failed Nearly a Fifth of Those Evaluated:

The striking results from the first round of Florida’s controversial state-mandated post-tenure reviews have confirmed the fears of many faculty advocates at its flagship campus, who criticized what they saw as a rushed and unfair process and top-down evaluation criteria. In interviews with The Chronicle, several scholars at peer institutions faulted the metrics as narrow and inflexible.

At the University of Florida, more than a quarter of faculty members who were identified for review either didn’t measure up, resigned, or retired.

The process, which took place this spring, initially identified 262 tenured faculty members to undergo post-tenure review, though 226 were ultimately evaluated. Of those who were formally reviewed, 17 percent didn’t pass muster: Five received the lowest possible ranking, “unsatisfactory,” and were issued a “notice of termination,” according to a July 1 memo obtained by The Chronicle through a public-records request. Thirty-four were classified as “does not meet expectations” and will be placed on a one-year performance-improvement plan. Ninety-eight were rated as “meets expectations” and 89 as “exceeds expectations.” Another 31 professors weren’t reviewed because they “either retired, entered retirement agreements, or resigned during the review period,” while five faculty members will be reviewed later because of a concurrent performance review or medical issue.

J. Scott Angle, Florida’s provost, said in a June meeting with the Faculty Senate that, for the “unsatisfactory” category, his decisions were fairly clear-cut. “Those that were defined as unsatisfactory really were not good teachers, they were not good researchers, and they weren’t doing any service. I found them to be quite easy and quite obvious,” Angle said. “The other categories were harder to define, and that’s where we really had to dig into the cases for each one.” …

The review, according to university-wide criteria, is based on each professor’s research, teaching, service, “history of professional conduct and performance of academic responsibilities,” and any noncompliance with state laws and university regulations, unapproved absences from teaching, or “substantiated” student complaints, among other factors. …

[T]he rate of unfavorable post-tenure review results was strikingly high at the flagship relative to other institutions in the state system. The proportions of faculty members in the “does not meet expectations” and “unsatisfactory” categories were notably lower in five of the State University System of Florida’s other institutions, according to data published by The Independent Florida Alligator. At the University of Central Florida, which had the next-highest proportion of professors in those categories, that figure was 11.1 percent. All professors reviewed at Florida State University either met or exceeded expectations.

Among the 39 faculty members in the “does not meet expectations” and “unsatisfactory” categories this year at the state flagship, about 60 percent were associate professors and 40 percent were full professors.

Editor's Note:  If you would like to receive a daily email with links to legal education posts on TaxProf Blog, email me here.