Ohio State Navbar

Sign In

Performance Evaluation

Annual Review

All faculty members must receive an annual review, conducted by their Department Chair or his or her designee, which must be in narrative format.  Probationary faculty (all tracks) will receive a written review as well as notification about whether their probationary appointment will be continued. In addition to these annual reviews, faculty members also receive formal reviews at designated times during their careers. Please see the Policy on Annual Review for more information.

Fourth Year Review - Tenure Track

In addition to the annual review, probationary faculty members receive a more formal review during their fourth year of service.  This review requires the submission of a dossier created with Vita.  The process for the fourth year review is identical to the promotion process with the exception that external letters of evaluation are not solicited. This includes the comments process.

After review by the Department the dossier is also reviewed by the College. The purpose of this review is to independently evaluate that the faculty member continues to be on track to receive promotion and tenure. 

For tenure track faculty with patient-care responsibilities, the probationary period is eleven years. Therefore, an identifcal review is also conducted during the eighth year of appointment.

Reappointment Review - Clinical Track and Research Track

In addition to the annual review, clinical and research track faculty members receive a formal re-appointment review, which is conducted in the penultimate year of the initial contract (which is typically 3-5 years in length), and in the penultimate year of each subsequent contract year to determine if another contract will be offered. The reappointment review entails a review and vote by the eligible faculty, the recommendation by the chair, and the Dean. 

Evaluation of Teaching 

All tenure track and clinical track faculty are expected to teach. As with all aspects of academic performance in the College of Medicine, teaching is broadly defined and can involve formal didactic teaching as well as clinical teaching and supervision, and mentoring of undergraduate or graduate students as well as post-doctoral fellows. Teaching also includes presentations to other faculty members at grand rounds, department research seminars, visiting professorships at other universities, continuing medical education programs, or national scientific or professional meetings.

Documentation of teaching evaluations is critically important for faculty reviews, and particularly for promotion evaluations. University regulations require peer review of teaching, as well as evaluations by students or trainees. The documentation of peer-reviews of teaching can be accomplished in many ways that require little or no additional effort.  Peer evaluation of teaching may entail another faculty member attending a faculty member’s classroom teaching, or observing their teaching in a clinical or laboratory setting. Faculty who present at departmental grand rounds or research seminars can obtain peer evaluations of teaching at the end of those sessions. Departments should organize these efforts so that the information is collected independently and then summarized for the faculty member and the department chairman. For faculty who present at other universities or scientific or professional meetings, those organizations typically gather teaching evaluations from those programs. Faculty who participate in such activities should request summaries of the evaluations of their presentations.