An initial-stage review of the progress of individual staff in the initial period of office should be held towards the end of the second year of the appointment. An assessment should be made and considered by the appointing body itself (or at least a major subcommittee of it): warnings about unsatisfactory progress should be given and remedial action taken if necessary. The individual's senior tutor should be consulted as part of this process.
A full review of performance during the whole of the initial period of office should also be undertaken (this should not be based wholly or even mainly on the initial-stage review). For this purpose appointing bodies should establish a review committee or a set of assessors to consider and make a recommendation on the question of reappointment (in the light of the individual's own formal report on the initial period of office, which is requested centrally and made available to appointing bodies at the start of the last year of office). Review committees/ assessors may request further information from the individual beyond that contained in their report (for example, evidence of unpublished work). Review committees/assessors may hold discussions with the individual: and must consult their Senior Tutor.
Arrangements should be made for one or more individuals personally to witness and report in writing on the teaching competence of the individual. Account should be taken of attendance at sessions organised by the Centre for Learning and Teaching. The assessment of teaching competence should occur in advance of the individual's submission of the report on the initial period of office. The assessor of teaching competence should not be the representative who attends sessions organised by the Centre for Learning and Teaching.
A written report should be made, incorporating the written testimony on teaching competence, for transmission to the divisional board along with the individual's report.
This report should:
- be evaluative/qualitative
- compare the individual's progress in advanced study or research, and publications, with what might normally be expected from someone in the initial period of office in the subject area, and for whom reappointment is appropriate
- contain a report on departmental duties from the head of department, where applicable
Evidence of substantial progress in research and of lecturing competence are prerequisites for reappointment to the retiring age. Appointing bodies will have their own guidelines on what constitutes adequate progress in research to justify reappointment to the retiring age, and these should be made clear to individuals on appointment, to those conducting the initial-stage review, and to review committees/assessors.