Tenure and Promotion Processes

Arlene Earley CarneyVice Provost for Faculty and Academic

Affairs

Regents Policy: Faculty Tenure

• New revision approved on June 8, 2007

• Key sections were changed for promotion and tenure.

Substantial Modifications to Faculty Tenure

• Section 7.11 General Criteria (for Tenure)

• Section 7.12 Departmental Statement• Section 5.5 Exceptions For New Parent

Or Caregiver, Or For Personal Medical Reasons

Additions to Faculty Tenure

• Section 9.2 Criteria For Promotion To Professor

Modified Section 7.11

• Criteria for tenure are more rigorous.• Old 7.11 (2001) discussed potential• New 7.11 (2007) discusses:

– Demonstrated performance– Distinguished record of achievement

likely to result in national or international reputation

– Likely to become a professor

Modified Section 7.11

• New 7.11 (2007):– Mentions interdisciplinarity,

technology transfer, public engagement, international issues, diversity issues as possible bases for tenure evaluation

– Defines teaching, scholarly or creative work, and service in footnotes

Modified Section 7.12

• Specifically requires that the departmental statement fall in line with 7.11 and the new 9.2

• Departmental statements are approved by votes of all tenured and probationary faculty.

New Section 9.2

• First time establishes criteria for promotion to professor– Added substantially to distinguished

record– Established national or international

reputation or both– Refers to new areas in 7.11

Modified Section 5.5

• Allows probationary faculty to extend clock for personal illness or injury in addition to childbirth/adoption or caregiver responsibilities

• Allows for a one-year period to make the request

New Procedures Document

• New title and scope• Procedures for Reviewing Candidates

for Tenure and Promotion: Tenure-Track and Tenured Faculty

• Includes procedures for reviewing faculty for promotion to professor as well as for tenure and promotion to associate professor

New Procedures Document

• Specifies that when 7.12s change, need a memorandum of understanding (MOU) from each faculty member affected (probationary and associate professors) noting the 7.12 to be used for the P & T review

New Procedures Document

• Clarified voting rules:– Absentee ballots– Disqualifications– Quorums and abstentions

• Confidentiality of materials• Clarified annual review procedures

– Mentions stopping the tenure clock

New Procedures Document

• Section 12 – preparation of file for tenure decision– Now specifies a minimum number of

external reviews and the relationship that these reviewers must have to the candidate

– Requires that external reviewers be told about stopping the tenure clock

New Procedures Document

• Specifies the review process at collegiate and central levels

• Specifies the promotion to full professor– Who can vote– Case of chairs/heads who are

associate professors

Issues to Consider

• Current faculty– Only Carlson has final approval of

7.12.– Others are still in process.– Those up for P & T in fall 2007 fall

under the old Faculty Tenure Policy.– Will fall under parts of new

Procedures

Issues to Consider

• Current faculty under review– External reviewers already in process– Dossiers already in process– Section 1.A. says: “These procedural

rules apply to individuals regardless of the date of their initial appointment.”

Issues to Consider

• Current faculty under review for P & T– Old Procedures would apply

• Current probationary faculty– New annual appraisal procedures

would apply for fall, 2007 and winter, 2008, including attention to stopping the tenure clock

Issues to Consider

• Provost’s office will send a letter to each department chair/head and each dean and chancellor clarifying this process.

Issues to Consider

• Which 7.12 to use?– Current faculty (probationary and

associate professors) have one year from the approval date to decide which 7.12 to use for review

– Bound by old tenure code unless they opt for the new code, depending upon their rank

– Choice recorded on MOU

Issues to Consider

• Which 7.12 to use?– New faculty are bound by the new

Faculty Tenure policy if appointment begins after June 8, 2007.

– Can choose between old or new 7.12 but bound by new 7.11

– Choice recorded on MOU

Vulnerable Parts of the P & T Process

• Annual reviews of probationary faculty– Often very short and non-specific– Mention a weakness without a

remedy or plan for change– Should clearly establish pattern of

performance– If performance is problematic, it

should be documented

Vulnerable Parts of the P & T Process

• Annual review meetings & reviews– Should be done in view of the 7.12

statement– Discourage covert standards

• Meeting with probationary faculty– Should be clear

Vulnerable Parts of the P & T Process

• Choice of external reviewers– Should use list of candidate’s choice

as well as department’s choice• Document everything even if it seems

like a clear case– Use e-mail as a record– Avoid e-mail for sensitive topics

Vulnerable Parts of the P & T Process

• Departmental report– Chair or head may write it or a

designated faculty member– Report must be shared with faculty

for input– Document this carefully