demystifying promotion and tenure

Demystifying the Promotion & Tenure Process

for Chairs

Arlene CarneyVice Provost for Faculty and Academic

Affairs

Regents Policy on Faculty Tenure

• Initially adopted in 1945• Last change was in 2007• Previous version approved in 2001• New document – Procedures for Reviewing

Candidates for Tenure and/or Promotion: Tenure-Track and Tenured Faculty

Implications of Changes

• Chairs/heads will be working with both the 2001 and the 2007 Faculty Tenure policies for several years.

• Which version will depend upon the year a probationary faculty member was hired or the year a tenured associate professor was last promoted.

Criteria for Tenure

• Section 7.11 of the Tenure policy- general statement of criteria for the entire university

• Section 7.12 of the Tenure policy- refers to the department criteria for tenure and promotion in a unit

Section 7.11 of the Tenure Policy(2001)

• Basis for awarding indefinite tenure:

- “achievements of an individual have demonstrated the individual’s potential to continue to contribute significantly to the mission of the University and to its programs of teaching, research, and service”


• Basis for awarding indefinite tenure:

the determination that each has established and is likely to continue to develop a distinguished record of academic achievement that is the foundation for a national or international reputation or both.


• Qualitative evaluation of scholarly research or other creative work, teaching, or service

• Primary emphasis on demonstrated scholarly or creative achievement and teaching effectiveness

• Service alone not sufficient


• Take into account when applicable- interdisciplinary work- public engagement- international activities & initiatives- attention to questions of diversity- technology transfer- other special kinds of professional activity


• Strong promise of achieving rank of professor

• Only modest service expected

Section 9.2 of the Tenure Policy (2007)

• New section• Promotion to professor• Added substantially to already

distinguished record• Established national or international

reputation• Substantially more service expected

Section 7.12 of the Tenure Policy (2007)

• Department statement of criteria for promotion and tenure

• Must be shown to new faculty according to the tenure policy

• Should reflect the values of the faculty for promotions and conferral of indefinite tenure

7.12 Statement

• Indices & standards used to evaluate whether a candidate has met or exceeded criteria of section 7.11

• Developed by the faculty of a unit• Approved by the Dean and the Senior

Vice President for Academic Affairs and Provost (SVPP)

7.12 Statement

• All 7.12 Statements are being revised across the University.

• Approved by Provost’s office

Changes and Faculty

• Tenure Code Interpretation 6- probationary and tenured faculty can choose the 7.12 statement by which they will be evaluated (old or new)- have one year from time the new 7.12 is approved- each faculty member will sign an agreement about the form to be used

Changes and Faculty

• Probationary faculty can also choose 7.11 by which they will be evaluated depending upon their date of hire.

• If hired after June 8, 2007, they are bound by the new Regents Policy on Faculty Tenure.

• Once promoted to associate professor, bound by new section 9.2 for promotion to professor

Process of Choice of 7.12

• A memorandum of understanding will be generated by the Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs for non-AHC faculty.

• Each faculty member (probationary and tenured associate professors) will be contacted with a copy to the chair/head and the associate dean of the college.

Process of Choice of 7.12

• Faculty get a copy of both the old and new 7.12 statement and the old and new Faculty Tenure policy.

• The e-mail explains the process.• Faculty respond with their choice.• AHC faculty will be contacted by

Assistant Vice President Barbara Brandt in the AHC.

Specific Criteria for Tenure

• Teaching• Research• Service

Teaching Effectiveness

• Evaluated in a variety of ways- student ratings- peer observation and evaluation- letters from students- teaching awards- curricular development- syllabi

Professional Distinction in Research, Scholarship, & Creative Work

• Peer-reviewed publications• Books• Scholarly presentations• Evidence of impact (citation index)• External funding from grants• National and international venues for

artistic work

Service

• Professional association/offices and committees

• Editorial boards of journals• University committees• Departmental committees• External community service• Faculty advisor

Section 5.5 of Faculty Tenure

• Extension of probationary service is allowed for one year at the request of the probationary faculty:

- on the occasion of the birth of that faculty member’s child or adoptive/foster placement of a child with that faculty member



- when the faculty member is a major caregiver for a family member who has an extended serious illness, injury, or debilitating condition (can use this no more than 2 times)



- when the faculty member has an extended serious illness, injury, or debilitating condition


• Extended the time window to make the request from 3 months to 12 months of the events giving rise to the claim

Stopping the Tenure Clock

• Form provided and available on line• Goes from the department chair to the

senior vice chancellor • Available for both female and male

faculty for all areas

Tenure Cases

• Annual review of probationary faculty• Tenured faculty review curriculum vitae

and activity reports• Annual conferences with chair or head• Completion of Form 12• Sent to Dean and SVPP

Tenure Cases

• Tenure decision may be made at any time.

• A decision to terminate the appointment can be made at anytime.

Department Level: Dossier

• Selection of external reviewers

- number varies by department & campus- new Procedures document specifies how many reviewers are needed and their backgrounds- selection by both candidate & the department


• Selection of external reviewers

- distinguished scholars in the field- peer institutions- individuals who will write evaluative letters- given enough time- have sufficient materials to evaluate


• Best practices:

- dossier “caseworker”- mentoring or synopsis committee


• Provide information to the “caseworker” of the dossier

- journals & publishers- scholarly & creative venues- conferences


• Provide information to the “caseworker” of the dossier

- accurate list of scheduled & unscheduled teaching- teaching evaluations- teaching materials


• Finished dossier should be:

- clear to the campus readers- complete according to instructions- provide an accurate picture of who you are

College level

• Each dean makes a recommendation to the provost about promotion and tenure.

• Colleges differ in their processes.

Campus Level

• P & T committee

- made up of senior faculty- across disciplines in the campus- make a recommendation to the senior vice chancellor and chancellor

Provost’s Office Review

• Each dossier is reviewed by several vice provosts.

• SVPP reviews array of cases with particular emphasis on cases with negative votes or variance in voting.

Most Common Departmental Errors in the Tenure Process

• Poor annual reviews– Sketchy reviews– Do not address the 7.12 criteria– Address performance issues not in the

7.12– Address collegiality issues– Avoid problems until the very end


• Departmental report at the tenure decision time– Includes discussion of criteria not in

the 7.12 statement or disregards criteria that exist

– Includes erroneous information


• Actions of the chair– Does not share the departmental

report with all faculty– Uses language in the chair’s report

that suggests a poor climate for the candidate


• Failure to recognize what extension of the probationary period means– Put the correct probationary year on

the President’s Form 12– Address the expectation of

performance correctly in the annual review (i.e. you cannot expect a year’s progress when the clock is stopped)


• Failure to recognize what extension of the probationary period means– Make sure that you use the language

recommended by the provost for external reviewers regarding the length of the probationary period


• Choice of external reviewers– Chair/head should work with the

candidate to choose reviewers.– Document this process in the dossier.– Choose enough reviewers.– Make sure that at least half but no

fewer than 4 reviewers have no professional connection with the candidate.


• Extreme care in tenure denial cases or split votes– Follow every procedure in the tenure

policy, Procedures document, and your 7.12 to the letter.

– Work with your associate dean and with me about procedure (but not evaluation)


• Extreme care in tenure denial cases or split votes– Make sure that the file also reviews

the positive performance on criteria in the 7.12 statement.

– Avoid having duplicate faculty votes. If they happen, have a clear and compelling rationale and document this in the dossier.

Contact for Questions:

• Arlene CarneyVice Provost for Faculty and AcademicAffairs220 Morrill [email protected]

Contact for Questions:

• Karen Zentner BacigAssociate to the Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs220 Morrill Hall624-5082

demystifying promotion and tenure

Education