Policy

Purpose

This policy ensures compliance with the requirements of section 3345.451 of the Ohio Revised Code, which mandates that each state institution of higher education shall establish a written system of peer evaluations for faculty members with emphasis placed on the faculty member's professional development regarding the faculty member's teaching responsibilities.

Scope

This policy applies to all full-time tenured, tenure-track, and TCPL faculty at Miami University. Full-time faculty refers to those with a faculty appointment of .80 or greater.

Definitions

Peer reviewer: Faculty members of any rank from the same department or from a cognate area.

Best Practices

Faculty members who serve as peer reviewers should be recognized as having completed this work as a form of professional service within the annual evaluation process.

Procedure

All faculty members who are governed by this policy must participate in this form of peer evaluation of their teaching development at least every six years. Additional peer reviews of professional development in teaching may be conducted as deemed necessary by the department chair.  The cycle by which this will take place is as follows: 

Year A1: Half of all fully promoted tenured and TCPL faculty
Year B1: Hall of all associate-level tenure-track and TCPL faculty
Year C1: Half of all assistant tenure-track and TCPL faculty
Year A2: Half of all fully promoted tenured and TCPL faculty
Year B2: Hall of all associate-level tenure-track and TCPL faculty
Year C2: Half of all assistant tenure-track and TCPL faculty

The department chair is responsible for ensuring that all the faculty members in their unit who are scheduled to be reviewed participate in this process. Faculty members are expected to, at a minimum, include theElise– results of this process as part of the annual review materials. 

The department chair will notify those scheduled to be reviewed. The peer reviewer must be approved by the department chair.

Step 1: To facilitate this matching, the faculty member being reviewed will complete a form (PRTD: Form 1/Pre-Review) that outlines their teaching development goals, details the context of those goals (i.e., general course information), and includes relevant course materials. 
Step 2: The department chair reviews Form 1 and uses this to identify, in collaboration with the faculty member, an appropriate peer reviewer who is aligned with their teaching development goals.
Step 3: The peer reviewer meets with the faculty member to discuss the information provided in Form 1.
Step 4: The peer reviewer reviews the evidence provided and completes (PRTD: Form 2/Peer Review Feedback).
Step 5: The peer reviewer meets with the faculty member to discuss Form 2. The peer reviewer submits the completed form to the department chair. 
Step 6: The faculty member prepares a brief action plan that outlines their plans for teaching-related professional development and submits this to the department chair. 

Related Form(s)

Additional Resources and Procedures

FAQ

Policy Administration

Next Review Date

Responsible Officer

Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs

Legal Reference

ORC 3345.451

Compliance Policy

Recent Revision History

Effective January 1, 2026