Skip to Main Content

Digital Measures User Guide: PTR Process

Welcome! This manual is designed to help you navigate and utilize the powerful features of Digital Measures, a cutting-edge platform for academic institutions and professionals to manage, document, and showcase accomplishments.

Post-Tenure Review (PTR) Process

Post-Tenure Review (PTR) is a systematic process that provides for the periodic, comprehensive review of the performance of all faculty members having tenure. Its purpose is to recognize and affirm the importance of tenure and ensure that faculty members effectively serve the needs of students and the university throughout their careers.

Around 1999, the UT Board of Trustees established a policy stipulating that there shall be comprehensive, formal, cumulative performance reviews of all tenured faculty members to promote faculty development and to ensure professional vitality. Known then as the Sixth-Year Cumulative Performance Review, this process occurred for a few short years before it was halted and removed from the UT Health Science Center Faculty Handbook.

As a result of the above policy, UT Health Science Center’s faculty and administration collaborated to implement a PTR process consistent with the University of Tennessee (UT) system policy and guidelines, and that fits the needs of our campus. The President recommended the UTHSC procedures to the Board in November 2018, resulting in a vote of approval and the implementation of PTR in the 2019-2020 academic year.

To learn more about the UT Health Science Center PTR Process for Faculty, please read Appendix O, Page 134-143, provided in the UT Health Science Center Faculty Handbook.

PTR Workflow Deadlines - General

  • Process Launch Date - The day faculty can begin submitting their materials and committee member nominations
    • July 1, 2025
  • Procedural DeadlinesThe completion of each step triggers the next in the workflow process, with deadlines based on procedural timelines rather than fixed dates. If a step is completed early, the next deadline is calculated from that completion date.
    • Faculty PTR Submission - Four weeks (28 calendar days) to complete
      • First step in the workflow process, begins July 1, 2025Faculty member submits materials and committee member nominations
    • Department PTR Submission - Two weeks (14 calendar days) to complete
      • Department Chair reviews materials and submits committee member nominations
    • Administrative Review and Committee Assembly - Two weeks (14 calendar days) to complete
      • The UTHSC Office of Faculty Affairs reviews documents and the CAO assembles the PTR Committees
    • Final Faculty Review - seven calendar days (auto-advance) to complete
      • The faculty member has seven (7) days to review the materials before the documents are passed to the selected PTR Committee
    • PTR Committee Report - Six weeks (42 calendar days) to complete
      • PTR Committee reviews the documents, completes required voting, and prepares comments regarding overall performance and APPRs
    • CAO and Chancellor - Eight weeks (56 calendar days) to complete
      • The CAO and Chancellor review the PTR Committee Report and prepare/send the final determination letter
    • Final Determination Letter - One month (30 calendar days) to review or appeal
      • The faculty member reviews the final determination letter and either approves or begins the appeal process

Questions?

  • For questions regarding Digital Measures, contact the DM team by emailing digitalmeasures@uthsc.edu
  • For questions regarding faculty processes, contact the UTHSC Office of Faculty Affairs by emailing afsa@uthsc.edu

Role of PTR Participants

The key responsibilities of the faculty member being reviewed include:

    • Submitting nominations for the PTR Committee, per a provided template.
    • Providing materials required for the PTR Committee’s review (current CV, 2-page narrative, APPRs).
    • Completing required PTR training.
    • Acknowledging receipt when provided with the PTR Committee’s report.
    • Responding, if desired, to the PTR Committee’s report. These responses are sent to the Chief Academic Officer.
    • Participating in the development and enactment of a PTR Improvement Plan, in the case of a PTR report that finds the faculty member’s performance did not satisfy the expectations for his or her discipline and academic rank.

Once PTR Committee members are selected, they first complete the required PTR training. Then they select their committee’s chair who will have responsibility for the following:

    • Ensuring adherence to the timeline for the PTR Committee’s work
    • Drafting the initial report of the PTR Committee, using a standardized template
    • Editing, distributing, revising, and obtaining approval from the PTR Committee for the PTR Committee’s report
    • Serving as the official communicator of the PTR Committee with the chief academic officer
    • If needed, managing the process in the event an external review is deemed necessary or requested

The committee then gathers appropriate information, assesses its implications, and formulates a coherent evaluation of performance. The group then compiles its findings into a report, which includes an assessment of each relevant area of the faculty member’s performance, ultimately providing two determinations, with supporting reasons for their conclusions:

    • The faculty member’s performance satisfies or does not satisfy the expectations for the faculty member’s discipline and academic rank and
    • The six annual performance reviews satisfy or do not satisfy the expectations of being reasonable, fair, accurate, and high quality.

 

The PTR Committee must provide their recommendations in writing using a standard format prepared by the chief academic officer. Once completed, the PTR Committee provides its report to the faculty member under review, his or her department chair/division chief, dean, and chief academic officer.

The key responsibilities of a department chair/division chief include:

    • Submitting nominations for the PTR Committee, per a provided template.
    • Completing required PTR training.
    • Acknowledging receipt when provided with the PTR Committee’s report.
    • Responding, if desired, to the PTR Committee’s report. These responses are sent to the Chief Academic Officer.
    • Participating in the development and enactment of a PTR Improvement Plan, in the case of a PTR report that finds the faculty member’s performance did not satisfy the expectations for his or her discipline and academic rank.

If it is agreed that the faculty member’s performance does “not satisfy expectations,” the Department Chair/Division Chief will engage the faculty member in the early stages of development of the PTR Improvement Plan that will be evaluated quarterly for a minimum of four quarters and then evaluated as part of the faculty member’s next annual performance review. More details on the PTR Improvement Plan are provided as an additional training module, in the event a plan is required.

The typical key responsibilities of a college dean include:

    • Provides input to the Department Chair/Division Chief to submit nominations for the PTR Committee.
    • Complete required PTR training.
    • Acknowledges receipt of PTR report.
    • Responds, if desired, to the PTR report.
    • Reviews and approves a PTR Improvement Plan if performance is found to “not satisfy the expectations for the faculty member’s discipline and academic rank.”
    • Supports implementation of required training for evaluators (Department Chairs/Division Chiefs) in the event that the chief academic officer, based on the PTR Committee reports, concludes that deficiencies exist in the departmental annual performance review process.
    • Fulfills the PTR responsibilities of a department chair in the event that the department chair is the faculty member under review.

The typical key responsibilities of the chief academic officer include:

    • Oversees the PTR process by providing required training and notifications to all parties, developing templates for the PTR process, adhering to timelines, and ensuring effective communication of the process.
    • Conducts the annual selection procedure, with participation of the Faculty Senate.
    • Selects the PTR Committee, based on nominations from the faculty member and the Department Chair/Division Chief.
    • Reviews the PTR Committee’s report and any written responses.
    • Makes an independent determination to accept or reject the PTR Committee’s determinations as to the faculty member’s performance and the annual performance reviews.
    • Provides his or her determination to the Chancellor.
    • Prepares an annual assessment report of the PTR processes, procedures and outcomes for submission by the Chancellor to the Board of Trustees, through the President, no later than June 1 of each year.
    • Shares the annual assessment report of the PTR process with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, Deans, Department Chairs/Division Chiefs.

The Chancellor makes an independent determination to concur, or not, with the chief academic officer’s determination. In those instances where a faculty member under review appeals a conclusion with which she or he disagrees, the Chancellor will hear the appeal.

Post-Tenure Review (PTR) Resources

PTR Committee Nominations

Each PTR Committee member must be an active tenured full-time faculty member who is at the same or higher academic rank, and whose locus of  tenure is at UT Health Science Center.

The faculty member will nominate three (3) committee members:

  • one (1) from within division/department
  • two (2) from outside division/department

The department chair will nominate (6) committee members to serve on the PTR Committee for the faculty member under review:

  • two (2) from within the division/department and
  • four (4) from outside the division/department (either in the college or outside the college).