In accordance with Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) requirements for presumptive renewal covered under Articles 17.1.3, 17.1.5 and 17.1.6, the University has accepted the Union's understanding that presumptive renewal only applies to those faculty members who have held previous full-time (FT) faculty appointments at the University of Pittsburgh. Consequently, a faculty member who transferred from one full-time faculty position to another full-time faculty position at a different rank would still be subject to presumptive renewal during their initial appointment in the new rank. For example, a full-time visitor transferring to a full-time teaching faculty position (e.g., from Visiting Lecturer to Teaching Assistant Professor) would fall under presumptive renewal.
For renewal and reappointment of non-bargaining-unit faculty members in the appointment stream, our office will follow the same procedures and policies as for bargaining-unit faculty. For these purposes, no distinction is made between the two groups of faculty (including presumptive renewal).
Presumptive renewal for FT AS faculty does not apply to:
- Faculty on their initial appointment at the University
- Faculty who have been subject to disciplinary action in excess of a written warning within 12 months prior to their renewal date
- Faculty who are on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) and not making significant progress
- Faculty who are retired from Pitt
- Faculty holding a visiting appointment
- Faculty under investigation for specified misconduct
The Dietrich School is implementing the following guidelines:
Teaching assessment for these reviews follows the DSAS Teaching Assessment Plan (approved by Dietrich School Council), which implements the CBA's teaching-assessment requirements under Article 23.1.a. The documentation described below for faculty not covered by presumptive renewal reflects the requirements of that plan for appointment stream faculty in their initial, probationary appointment. The plan also provides best practices and sample rubrics (in its appendix) that units may adapt. Note that under the plan, OMET student surveys may not be the sole or primary basis for evaluating teaching (CBA 23.1.f).
For faculty not covered by presumptive renewal (including visiting faculty who are being considered for renewal):
A vote will need to be taken by all T/TS faculty members in the unit (including the unit head) and any appointment stream faculty members of higher rank. Note: the vote can be taken electronically (a meeting to vote is not required).
In order to take a vote, voting faculty will be required to review at least the following documentation:
- Peer evaluation letters. For appointment stream faculty in their initial (two-year, probationary) appointment, a minimum of one letter per academic year is required — normally one letter from the first year and one letter from the fall semester of the second year. Letters must be from two different courses (where possible) and from two different evaluators, and each should include a class observation as well as a review of course materials. A total of three peer letters is strongly recommended by the time of review. (Visiting faculty being considered for renewal should have at least one peer letter generated during their first year.)
- OMETs for each course taught, including summary pages. All OMETs must be submitted for all courses in the period under review.
- Materials provided by the faculty member (listed below)
- Annual evaluations (if available)
Consistent with the Teaching Assessment Plan, a majority of the required peer letters should normally come from faculty at the associate rank or higher, but letters may be written by evaluators from any department or program and with any rank; and most letters should draw on a class observation and connect specific observations to broader pedagogical principles. Note that formative observations conducted by the Center for Teaching and Learning cannot, per Center policy, be included as evaluations in review or promotion files.
Unit heads may choose to request feedback from program directors, faculty supervisors, faculty mentors, or other appropriate individuals in support of the renewal or non-renewal of the faculty member.
For a vote, the faculty member will need to provide the following materials:
- The faculty member's updated CV (date-stamped).
- A teaching statement concerning the faculty member's goals, accomplishments, and approaches in teaching, and including the candidate's response to peer and student feedback (peer evaluations and OMETs). For research faculty without teaching duties, the statement should focus on research and/or other assigned duties.
- Course materials for teaching faculty (syllabi and other materials supporting instructional activities). Sample student work may also be included.
- A brief statement of service contributions (may be included in the statement above).
A teaching portfolio is strongly recommended (though not required) for non-presumptive renewals. A teaching portfolio consolidates evidence of teaching across the period under review — for example, the teaching statement/narrative together with course materials, peer letters, OMET results and the faculty member's responses to that feedback, and other evidence of teaching effectiveness and investment. A guide to the typical components of a teaching portfolio, and a sample evaluation rubric, are provided in the Teaching Assessment Plan appendix.
Although the following are not required, faculty members may choose to provide the following as supplementary materials (or include these in the teaching statement or portfolio):
- A history of teaching assignments that records the course numbers, course names, and enrollments for each course taught during the evaluation period. If any course is team-taught, this can be noted.
- Evidence of participation in national, regional, and/or local pedagogical organizations or workshops.
- Statement of related non-classroom activity, such as student mentoring, undergraduate research projects supervised, papers and presentations, software development, or teaching seminars developed or presented.
- Statement of activities related to diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) within the areas of teaching or service.
- Statement of activities related to community engagement within the areas of teaching or service.
For faculty covered by presumptive renewal:
This process is meant to shift focus to continuous performance management throughout the year so that renewal is automatic unless there is a performance concern.
Faculty should not submit any materials for review, and a vote for renewal should not be taken at the unit level. Consistent with the Teaching Assessment Plan, no peer letters, OMETs, or teaching statements are required for faculty covered by presumptive renewal. Unit heads should have a process in place that confirms that there are no performance concerns and may want to review the following materials which are readily available at the department or program level:
- peer evaluations
- OMETs (for each course taught)
- annual evaluations (if available)
Submission process:
To initiate the renewal, units will upload the following materials into Perceptive Content and assign to the Faculty Actions Manager for formal processing:
For faculty not covered under presumptive renewal,
- The unit head's letter of support, with tally of faculty vote and rationale for renewal. The documentation used to make the determination should be noted.
- The draft reappointment letter
- The faculty member's updated CV
For faculty covered under presumptive renewal,
- The unit head's letter of support which includes a brief acknowledgment that there are no performance concerns*** (no more than one page, and could be as few as one to two sentences)
- The draft reappointment letter
- The faculty member's updated CV
Any questions regarding this process should be directed to dsfacultyaffairs@pitt.edu.
***If there are performance concerns, unit heads should reach out to the appropriate Associate Dean with the faculty member's name and a summary of the situation as early as possible. Please note: Newly identified performance concerns will not stop the presumptive renewal process but will serve as an alert to our office for continued discussions and possible future action.
Updated September 2026.