Top Menu

Evaluation and Promotion – NTTF

NTTF Evaluation and Promotion

Adjunct NTTF must be evaluated on an annual basis. Please note that NTTF holding adjunct appointments are not eligible for promotion, but they are welcome to apply to announced national searches for career NTTF. If adjuncts are appointed in areas for which very few applicants are available, leading to the high probability that a new search would lead to selection of the candidate currently holding the position, the academic unit and dean will be engaged in a serious discussion about the merits of reclassification of the position as career rather than adjunct. Should such a reclassification occur, a national search will be required; the current holder of the adjunct position will of course be eligible to apply to this national search.

Career NTTF must be evaluated on an annual basis prior to consideration for promotion. After promotion to Senior NTTF rank, Career NTTF must be evaluated no less frequently than their contract duration and no less frequently than once every three years (i.e., annually for senior-rank NTTF with annual contracts; at least every two years for senior-rank NTTF with 2-year contracts; at least every three years for senior-rank NTTF with 3-year or longer contracts). The details and structure of NTTF evaluation are the responsibility of the immediate academic unit in which the appointment is made, but evaluations must follow some general guidelines:

  • NTTF in instructional appointments are expected to have student course evaluations completed for all courses taught, and they are expected to undergo at least one peer review of teaching each year.
  • NTTF in research appointments will be evaluated for the quality of the effort expended and the outcomes of their contributions to the research program.
  • NTTF will be asked to discuss their efforts and performance with their immediate supervisor at least once each academic year.

Eligibility for Promotion

Only career NTTF are eligible for promotion. Career NTTF will be eligible for promotion to the first senior level after accumulating 18 terms (consecutive or not) of service (or 12 terms for the Law School) at 0.50 FTE or greater, accrued at no greater than 3 terms per academic year (or 2 terms per academic year for the Law School).

Candidates with exceptional records may apply for early promotion, but this step should be carefully considered and initiated only after consultation with the Unit Head, Associate Dean (if any), and Dean or Director. For those seeking promotion to Senior I level, an early promotion review is not a “free” opportunity to test the promotion waters – an unsuccessful early promotion consideration will result in timely notice (if eligible for it), not in the opportunity to have the file considered again later. For Senior I level NTTF seeking promotion to the Senior II level, the process again parallels that for tenure-track faculty – unsuccessful promotion attempts do not result in timely notice, but rather simply continuation at the current rank.

The first level review, from initial appointment to its corresponding Senior appointment, is a required review and will be an “up-or-out” review, meaning that the successful candidate will be promoted and an unsuccessful candidate provided timely notice, if eligible, and a terminal, non-renewable contract.

Promotion to the second level (Senior II) parallels the process for promotion to full professor. This promotion is elective and does not involve an “up-or-out” decision. Candidates ordinarily would be reviewed during their sixth year after promotion to Senior (at 0.50 FTE or greater). (In parallel with the process for promotion from associate to full professor, it is not inconceivable that a Senior I level NTTF could receive a contract renewal – typically based on excellent performance – yet not be successful in applying for promotion to the Senior II level, the standards for which will be explicitly identified in the departmental NTTF promotion criteria statement.)

Evaluation Process

Departmental review

Academic and research units must have on file and provide to their career NTTF statements of criteria for evaluation and promotion of career NTTF. A unit’s review process will commonly include a review committee, and this committee should include NTTF at or above the rank sought by the candidate in addition to tenure-track faculty. These criteria statements must be reviewed and approved by the appropriate dean/director, then forwarded to Academic Affairs for review and approval, including approval by the Office of the Vice President for Research and Innovation for units reporting to the VPR and employing NTTF in research positions.

Each unit, with appropriate communication with the appropriate dean/director, should determine whether or not external review will be included as part of the review and promotion process for career NTTF. If external reviewers are included, please note that the most appropriate reviewers are those who can present an unbiased, knowledgeable, and objective evaluation of the candidate and his/her qualifications. Provision of a brief biography of each reviewer, along with a statement about any potentially biasing relationship with the candidate – co-author, personal friend, classmate in graduate school, or whatever – will allow placement of evaluation letters in appropriate context. Internally, it is to be expected that those serving in supervisory roles to the candidate (e.g., department head for Instructors, research mentor for Research Assistants, etc.) – will provide letters of evaluation.

Required elements of a promotion file include:

  • Candidate’s signed and dated CV and statement
  • Conditions of appointment (generally the most recent contract).
  • Signed waiver/non-waiver statement.
  • An appropriate slate of peer reviews of teaching and/or of research activity.
    • Checklist for Evaluation of Teaching for NTTF [PDF]
  • Student course evaluations for all courses taught, including a summary table.
  • Any additional information required by departmental guidelines (could include external evaluations).

Following the unit’s review and evaluation of the promotion file, the unit head or director will prepare a report on the merits of the promotion case, including a voting summary and his/her independent recommendation. If the unit chooses to have a unit-level review committee prepare a report and recommendation, this report should be included with the unit head or director's report.

The file will then be sent to the dean of the academic unit in which the department is located. [What if a unit has no dean? Mouseover for more info.]

Review by the dean of the academic unit in which the department is located

Individual colleges may or may not choose to include a review by an advisory committee prior to the dean’s recommendation. If so, it will be necessary for that college to constitute an appropriate NTTF Dean’s Advisory Committee (NTTF-DAC), comprised primarily of tenured or tenure-track faculty, but also including members who are themselves NTTF.

The dean (or other appropriate administrative head, for those units not reporting through an academic dean) will prepare a report on the merits of the promotion case, including a recommendation.

The file will then be sent to Academic Affairs.

Final review and decision by the Provost or designee

The Provost, or a designee of the Provost, will review the file, with input from Academic Affairs and/or the Office of the Vice President for Research and Innovation, and make a decision as to whether to grant or deny promotion.

This notification will be provided in writing to the candidate by June 15.

Final actions and timing

Successful candidates for promotion will assume their new rank beginning with the following Fall term, or the nearest next term of employment should their contract not begin with the Fall term.

Successful candidates for promotion will receive a salary adjustment of at least 6%, effective simultaneously with assumption of the new rank, except in cases of mandated salary freezes, in which case the salary adjustment will be made as soon as allowable thereafter.

Whereas most initial rank career NTTF (e.g., Instructor) receive one-year contracts, every effort will be made to provide Senior rank NTTF (e.g., Senior Instructor I) with longer-term contracts.

Unsuccessful candidates for Senior I rank will receive timely notice and a terminal contract. If NTTF have served 3 or more years at 0.5 FTE or greater, they will receive the same timely notice as tenure-track faculty (i.e., a year's notice of non-renewal). Consistent with the Oregon Administrative Rules, in situations of financial exigency, it may not be possible to provide timely notice as described in this policy, but it is the university's policy to provide as much notice as possible. See Oregon Administrative Rules 580-21-315 through 318 for more information.

Unsuccessful candidates for Senior II rank will continue in their positions, assuming continuing need and support for the position, and may reapply for promotion in a later review cycle. Discussions with colleagues and the candidate’s dean or director will help to identify deficiencies leading to the negative promotion decision and to guide the candidate regarding timing of a new application for promotion.

Negative promotion decisions are grievable under the Oregon Administrative Rules for academic employees (OAR 571-007).

Transition Issues

Implementation of these formalized procedures for NTTF evaluation and promotion will recognize the unique issues of current career NTTF, particularly those who will be facing the critical promotion to Senior I level.

  • Credit will be awarded for prior service, either at the University of Oregon prior to the implementation of these new NTTF policies or for prior service elsewhere. This calculation, which will be negotiated as for tenure-track faculty hires, will typically take into account the number of terms in which the candidate was employed and the FTE at which the candidate was employed, with three terms per year at 1.0 FTE in general constituting a full year of service. Candidates will be allowed to use as much as all of the assigned credit for prior service, or as little as none of it. Contracts will include wording along the lines of “eligible for consideration for promotion during academic year 20xx-20yy; must be considered for promotion by June 15, 20qq.”
  • Career NTTF with 1-5 years of service at the rank of Instructor (or other non-Senior level career NTTF rank) will be assigned corresponding credit for prior service; those with 6 or more years of service will be assigned five years of credit, allowing for immediate consideration for promotion, but also permitting them to choose to delay the promotion review for up to 5 years.
  • For career NTTF with >12 years of service at the rank of Instructor (or other career non-Senior level NTTF rank), the promotion process will be “no-risk” rather than “up-or-out,” allowing these long-term NTTF to be considered for recognition in the form of promotion without requiring them to gamble their employment for this recognition.
  • Career NTTF holding the rank of Senior Instructor (or other Senior level career NTTF rank) will be assigned corresponding credit for prior service; those with 6 or more years of service will be assigned five years of credit, allowing for immediate consideration for promotion if desired. (Recall that promotion to Senior II rank is not an “up-or-out” process.)
  • All new hires and all those NTTF who have been here for less than 6 years will receive evaluation and consideration for promotion in accord with these newly codified timelines.
  • For those career NTTF who have held their positions for 6 or more years, we will generate a list of backlog NTTF, sorted by College, and request input regarding anticipated file preparation date. If these do not distribute in a manageable way, Academic Affairs will develop a review plan in consultation with the academic deans, attempting to address as the highest priorities those longest-serving in non-Senior rank and those longest-serving in Senior I rank.


This website is currently under revision to make it current and consistent with the new collective bargaining agreement and other relevant UO policies.  Please refer to the Collective Bargaining Agreement for current information on associated faculty matters.