Home (www2) > Compliance > Policy and Procedure Manual > PreTenure Review

PreTenure Review

Pre-Tenure Review


The Pre-Tenure Review’s purpose is to assess the candidate’s progress in the tenure track.

The academic dean’s Pre-Tenure Review will be accomplished during the candidate’s third year at Assistant Professor or higher at Georgia Highlands College.  The review will be based on the following criteria:

  • Superior teaching demonstrated by a classroom visit;

  • Outstanding service to Georgia Highlands College and the community;

  • Academic achievement; and

  • Professional growth and development

Each candidate will present a pre-tenure application package to their academic dean by October 1st which will consist of the following:

  • A curriculum vitae;

  • Statement of Accomplishments;

  • Statement of goals; and

  • Any additional information which may support the criteria


The academic dean will provide a copy of the candidate’s package to the Peer Review Committee.

A peer review will be conducted by three tenured members of the candidate’s division.  If the division does not have three tenured faculty members, the Peer Review Committee members may come from other divisions.  The Peer Review Committee will evaluate the candidate’s progress based on the criteria stated above.  The Peer Review Committee must send a written statement indicating satisfactory or unsatisfactory progress towards tenure to the academic dean.  In cases of unsatisfactory rating, this statement must include recommendations for activities required to upgrade the candidate’s performance to satisfactory standards.

The review will be based on the following performance indicators:

  • Satisfactory:  All criteria indicate that the candidate should be recommended for tenure at the first available opportunity.

  • Unsatisfactory:  In order to be recommended for tenure at the first available opportunity, the candidate must comply with a Development Plan and meet all criteria satisfactorily.

All pre-tenure documents, including the annual review, the peer review and the development plan will be forwarded to the Vice President for Academic Affairs (VPAA) for review.  The VPAA will indicate to the academic dean a concurrence or non-concurrence with the results of the Pre-Tenure Review.  In case of non-concurrence, the VPAA will submit to the academic dean a letter explaining the rationale for the decision.

If either the annual evaluation, the peer review, or the VPAA’s report indicate Unsatisfactory, a Development Plan will be required.  The Development Plan will be prepared by the academic dean and the candidate, and it will include:

  • Specific goals;

  • Activities that would help achieve the goals;

  • Timeline to achieve goals;

  • Time for an Interim Annual Evaluation (at least six months).  The candidate may request an additional peer review if he or she desires as part of this Interim Annual Evaluation process; and

  • A mutually agreeable mentor may be assigned at the discretion of the academic dean or the candidate.

The candidate has the right to appeal to the VPAA according to established policies.

Page last updated: May 1, 2014