2025 Reimagining Annual Reviews: A Path Toward Clarity, Equity, and Excellence

by Teresa Mastin, Ph.D.
Vice Provost and Associate Vice President for Faculty & Academic Staff Affairs

Let’s be honest: annual reviews are rarely anyone’s favorite part of the academic year. Faculty dread them. Academic leaders often feel burdened by them. And yet, these reviews are essential—not just for merit raises or promotion decisions, but for fostering a culture of growth, accountability, and recognition across our university.

We are committed to making the annual review process more meaningful, equitable, and aligned with our institutional mission. That means moving beyond checkboxes and toward conversations—conversations that support faculty development, clarify expectations, and celebrate excellence.

Why Annual Reviews Matter
Annual reviews serve multiple purposes, and when done well, they can:

• Clarify performance expectations and align them with promotion and tenure guidelines.
• Provide constructive, actionable feedback that helps faculty grow in their roles.
• Recognize outstanding contributions and encourage leadership development.
• Document challenges and support solutions.
• Foster mentoring relationships and succession planning within departments.

These reviews are not just about evaluation—they’re about engagement. They’re an opportunity for unit leaders to understand the full scope of a faculty member’s work, especially in interdisciplinary contexts where traditional metrics may fall short.

Making the Process Work
To improve the annual review experience, we recommend:

• Aligning reviews with both unit mission/values and promotion expectations for each academic appointment type.
• Offering feedback sessions to collaboratively address gaps and build on strengths.
• Communicating transparently, especially when processes change.
• Being honest and kind—clarity is a form of compassion.

When expectations aren’t being met, it’s critical to say so clearly and constructively. For example:

“You’re not meeting expectations and thus are not making progress toward tenure and promotion.”

This is a legitimate statement—especially when paired with guidance on how to improve.

Special Considerations for Fixed-Term Faculty
Fixed-term faculty deserve the same clarity and fairness in evaluation. Reviews should reflect the assignment percentages outlined in their offer letters, and any changes over time must be documented. Our revised Form on Progress and Excellence and accompanying guidelines support consistency and transparency in the process.

Tying It All to Mission
Every review should connect back to our shared mission—unit, college, university, and land-grant. At MSU, our land-grant values include:

• Access to high-quality education
• Research that addresses real-world challenges
• Community engagement that builds strong public partnerships
• Economic development that supports our communities
• Social responsibility that drives positive change

When we evaluate faculty work through this lens, we reinforce the broader purpose of our institution and the impact of our collective efforts.

Final Thoughts
Annual reviews don’t have to be painful. They can be powerful tools for growth, recognition, and alignment. At FASA, we’re here to support you in making this process work—for your faculty, your unit, and our university.

October 2025 Newsletter