tenure and promotion processes arlene earley carney vice provost for faculty and academic affairs
TRANSCRIPT
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
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