A list of criteria by which a tenure track professor will be evaluated. The criteria will be discussed and signed in the first meeting with the dean after acceptance of the call.

At the beginning of their professorship, tenure track professors look for a professorial mentor. The mentor is to give the candidate critical collegial feedback, to be available as a contact person and for advice for the candidate, and to accompany the preparation of the self-report for the evaluations in an advisory capacity. The mentor is not involved in the evaluation, but participates in all status meetings.

The mentor may not be a member of the Faculty Tenure Committee at the same time.

External mentoring is used to discuss development, prioritization, and strategic handling more broadly. Because this person is outside of the candidate's field, they can provide a broader career perspective and guidance. Typically, the frequency of meetings with collegial mentoring is once per semester. The collegial mentor does not participate in the annual status meetings.

Status meetings take place at least annually and start after about one year. The progress of the qualification and/or the individual development goals are discussed on the basis of the candidate's previous performance and progress in the areas of research, teaching and academic self-administration. Recommendations for the further qualification of the candidate are to be derived from the status meeting. Possible undesirable developments should thus be counteracted at an early stage. Participants are the candidate, the vice dean for research, the managing director of the institute, the mentor and a minute taker from the dean's office. The following items will be addressed, in addition an appendix will be completed by the candidate:

- Scientific achievements including publications, lectures, conference contributions, clinical achievements etc.

- Type and amount of third-party funds acquired

- Evaluation of the quality of teaching and the commitment to teaching as well as its didactic underpinnings

- Supervision of theses and dissertations

- Participation in academic administration

- Other services: Awards, transfers, memberships, editorships, etc.

- Possibilities of connection to existing and planned cooperative projects in the Faculty

- Recommendations and career prospects

The Faculty Tenure Commission (FTC) is the body responsible for the faculty's procedures and has an advisory and supportive function towards the Faculty. It oversees evaluations from the Faculty side and prepares recommendations for the Faculty and the Rectorate Tenure Commission. The following are discussed there:

Aptitude Evaluation and Tenure Evaluation:

1st meeting: Opening of the procedure, review of the documents (self-report), selection of the reviewers.

2nd meeting: Discussion of the evaluations, recommendation for the Faculty.

Mentors are not allowed to be part of the FTC.

The task of the Rectorate Tenure Commission (RTC) is to make a recommendation to the Rectorate regarding the extension or continuation of the employment relationship of the candidate. In addition, the Rectorate Tenure Commission is to provide the Rectorate with suggestions for continuous improvement of the process based on its experience and feedback from the Faculty Tenure Commissions.

Mentors are not allowed to be part of the RTC.

The self-report documents the candidate's performance. It must be written in English, unless the Faculty decides otherwise in individual cases. The language in which it is to be written must be bindingly communicated to the candidate upon request for submission. In particular, it must be ensured that international reviewers can participate in the procedure without hindrance.
The self-report includes at least:
General
- CV
- List of publications (reporting period, structured by type of publication)
- List of scientific presentations
- A max. 10-page description of the goals achieved, taking into account the three areas of research, teaching (including a brief explanation of teaching forms and methods), academic self-administration, and future research plans.

In addition, the following overviews are to be listed in a tabular appendix:
I. Research
- Mention and brief explanation of the most important research topics
- Applications for third-party funding, third-party funding obtained (public, private sector)
- Description of cooperation (internal/external)
- Awards, prizes, scholarships
- memberships
- Cooperation with practice
- Transfer/Patents
II. Teaching
- List of courses, brief description of teaching content
- List of supervision of theses and doctoral dissertations and activities for the promotion of young academics
- Information on the internationality of teaching (e.g. courses offered in foreign languages, supervision of foreign students)
- Results of teaching evaluations
- Other evidence of teaching qualifications: e.g., teaching projects, continuing education courses,
- teaching research
III. academic self-administration
- Brief description of activities in self-administration and own contribution
- Membership in scientific societies and professional associations
- Editorship of scientific journals, series, etc.
- Review activities
- Other activities as an expert witness, reviewer, or at administrative, legislative, and judicial hearings, etc.
IV. Expert proposals for the evaluations (not for the status discussions)

The Faculty Tenure Committee seeks at least two (after TT-O Plus; at least three after TT-O) detailed external reviews of the candidate's scientific development from internationally renowned reviewers, one of which preferably from a reviewer from abroad. Based on the subject orientation, the international reputation of the reviewer can be replaced by a national reputation in individual cases and with justification. In this context, individual delays in the academic career path are to be taken into account appropriately, in particular child-rearing and care periods. The reviewers shall attach a declaration of impartiality to their review.
The reviewers should classify the performance comparatively on the basis of the evaluation scheme provided by the Faculty. The reviews will be discussed at the FTC meeting. For candidates in the new TT-O Plus order, an assessment of pedagogical suitability/academic self-administration is also requested by the institute. In the old order, this assessment is carried out by the reviewer.

In the MNF tenure track program, regular teaching evaluations are required at the latest for the evaluations. It is therefore recommended that courses are evaluated annually (instead of normally every 2 years) so that sufficient data is available for self-reports.

In addition, it is required that your courses are deposited in Klips. If you are involved in a course with several lecturers, please make sure that your name/contact data are also stored in Klips (there is also the possibility to provide a separate short questionnaire). For more information, please contact your study program coordinator. In accordance with data protection regulations, we can only provide final evaluations if a response rate of at least five questionnaires is achieved.

Further information can be found on the pages of the Faculty-QM (German language). .