Guideline for the Evaluation of Junior Professors (incl. Tenure Track) at the TUHH

(passed by the Academic Senate at its 149th meeting on 22.04.2020)

I. Objective and legal basis

The interim evaluation serves to assess the performance of junior professors, especially in the areas of research and teaching. The assessment should take into account the respective framework conditions and the development potential of the post holders. The basis of this interim evaluation is the research and teaching concept presented in the course of the appointment procedure, which has been updated after a first year with the involvement of the mentor and own experience. 

According to § 19 of the Hamburg Higher Education Act, junior professors are appointed as temporary civil servants for a period of three years. The employment relationship shall be extended for a further three years with the consent of the junior professor in the course of the third year if he or she has proven himself or herself as a university teacher (interim evaluation). Otherwise, the employment relationship may be extended by up to one year with the consent of the junior professor. 

For junior professorships with tenure track, a second evaluation (tenure evaluation) must be carried out after the 5th year of service and no later than four months before the end of the junior professorship. If an external university W2 or W3 appointment is received or at the request of the junior professor in the second phase of the junior professorship, this second evaluation procedure may be initiated early. 

II. Responsibilities and course of the procedure

The responsibility for conducting the evaluations (interim and tenure evaluations) lies with the Presidential Board of the Hamburg University of Technology. 

The President shall appoint a central evaluation commission for the evaluation of junior professors, which shall consist of at least six members: two professors appointed by the President shall be permanent members of the evaluation commission. This evaluation commission is supplemented on a case-by-case basis by a subject-related representative from the professorate, one representative each from the group of academic staff and students from the deanery of studies in which the junior professorship is located. The Vice-President for Research is a member of the evaluation commission as a professor and is the chairperson qua office. 

Persons who act as mentors may not be involved in the interim evaluation or tenure evaluation.

The evaluation commission appoints at least two external experts to assess the performance in research and teaching and, on the basis of 

• a self-report by the junior professor (based on the defined evaluation criteria), 
• if applicable, a job shadowing or a public lecture/teaching demonstration at the university, and 
• the reports of the experts 

an evaluation report to be submitted to the Presidential Board.

The report of the interim evaluation should assess the performance of the junior professorship, i.e. the qualitative contribution to the development of the discipline in research and teaching, the performance in national and international comparison, the relevance of the scientific projects and, if necessary, make suggestions for improvement.

The report on the tenure evaluation should assess the contribution to research and teaching in the subject area, the performance in national and international comparison, the independence of the academic profile, teaching innovations and the eligibility for appointment to W2/W 3 according to the HmbHG. It should be possible to prove the teaching performance, for example, through teaching evaluation or teaching concepts as well as through a compulsory university-public demonstration of teaching.

The tenure evaluation includes a lecture or demonstration of teaching open to the public at the university. The invitation is issued by the evaluation commission.

Experts

Internationally recognised professional experts shall be involved in the evaluation procedure. If the professional profile of the professorship so requires, at least one of the experts should come from abroad.

Within the framework of the interim evaluation, the experts should primarily assess the research activities of the junior professorship, i.e. the qualitative contribution to the development of the discipline, the achievements in national and international comparison, the relevance of the scientific projects and, if necessary, make suggestions for improvement. The external experts should already address in the interim evaluation whether an appointment to W 2 / W 3 can be expected after a further three years.

The experts should assess the contribution to research in the subject area, the achievements in national and international comparison, the independence of the academic profile and the appointability to W2/W 3 in accordance with the HmbHG in the tenure evaluation.

III. Evaluation criteria for the interim and tenure evaluation

Due to the specifics of the career path of the tenure-track professorship of a probationary phase at the same university for the transfer to a permanent professorship, particularly high demands must be placed on ensuring the quality of the tenure evaluation procedure. The following criteria are to be used for the evaluation procedures.

1. Quality of research, demonstrated in particular by publication and lecture activity, third-party funding projects acquired and potential to give the university new impetus in research;
2. Quality of teaching, demonstrated in particular by teaching activities, supervision of theses and PhDs, advanced training in higher education didactics and potential to give the university new impetus in teaching;
3. Quality of other activities, in particular internationality, social responsibility, commitment within the framework of academic self-administration or the scientific community, personnel management skills.

The evaluation criteria apply to all junior professorships with and without tenure. The evaluation criteria can be specified - e.g. for professional reasons - in the course of the appointment. Adjustments are to be agreed in writing.

IV. Time schedule

The interim evaluation shall be initiated 2 years and 5 months after the start of the junior professor's employment. 

The following timetable should be adhered to:

Based on the recommendation of the Evaluation Commission for the interim evaluation, the Presidential Board decides on the extension of the junior professors' employment contract, taking into account the probationary nature of the junior professorship with or without tenure

Accordingly, the following time frame should be observed for the tenure evaluation for junior professorships:

The Presidential Board decides on the transfer to the lifetime professorship on the basis of a successful evaluation and the substantiated recommendation (with voting results) for appointment to a W2/W3 professorship by the Evaluation Commission.

V. Design of the self-report

V a: Interim evaluation

In the self-report, the junior professor should present and document his/her achievements. Problems and setbacks in the context of teaching and research activities may also be presented. 

The basis for the presentation of the achievements for the interim evaluation is the research and teaching concept updated after the first year and the evaluation criteria. 

In detail, the documentation shall include:

Research

• Curriculum vitae, complete list of publications and scientific presentations (patents, if applicable) 
• Naming and explanation of the research topics and projects carried out and planned for the future 
• Third-party funding applications submitted and third-party funds raised 
• Brief explanation of the objectives achieved 
• Presentation of the relevant collaborations with other researchers 
• Transfer activities, cooperation with industry and business 
• Supervision of doctorates and, where appropriate, promotion of young researchers 
• Reviewer for the DFG, e.g. 
• Other scientific activities, memberships in scientific committees 
• Awards and prizes in the reporting period. 

Teaching

• Explanations on the integration into teaching 
• List of courses held with number of participants (lectures, tutorials, practicals) and explanation of teaching methods, didactics and methodology applied, use of new media, further training in higher education didactics and certificates. 
• Disclosure and commenting on the lecture evaluations carried out within the university (if available) 
• Presentation of other activities such as counselling and support for students 
• Conducting examinations and supervising student research projects and theses 

Other activities, perspectives

• Participation in the self-administration of the university, membership in university working groups 
• Presentation of own development potentials or perspectives at the TUHH 

The self-report is to be limited to a maximum of 20 pages (without appendix).

V b: Tenure-Evaluation

In addition to the presentation of the achievements on the basis of the evaluation criteria, the following must also be submitted or proven for the tenure evaluation:

• Teaching and research concept for the future full professorship as well as
• Personnel management competence (proof of management experience, e.g. leadership of working groups; internal/external further training). 

The self-report is to be limited to a maximum of 20 pages (without appendix). 

VI. Evaluation results

The Presidential Board shall immediately inform the junior professor of the result of the interim evaluation or the tenure evaluation in the form of a binding document. 

The results of the evaluations are reported to the Academic Senate in the confidential part of its meeting.

Hamburg, March 22, 2023

Hamburg University of Technology

This version of the doctoral regulations of the Hamburg University of Technology is not legally binding. Only the German version is legally binding.