Policy Number: E5.0
Policy Name: POLICY ON TENURE
(Current policy. Following this policy is the approved revised version effective with the start of the 2015-2016 academic year. Please note that section 2.c.4.a of the new policy is effective immediately.)
In the academic profession, tenure confers the right of self-direction for faculty members to teach, research, and pursue studies without concern for the stability of their position. Professors on a tenure-track should be guided in those activities by a written Statement of Expectations developed in consultation with the dean (or equivalent) and the department chair (or equivalent). The signed Statement of Expectations document included in the letter of offer is tailored for each individual faculty member to ensure that tenure expectations are understood by each party and clearly states that the expectations and norms for tenure and promotion can evolve. This Statement of Expectations serves as the basis to evaluate the faculty member’s tenure eligibility.
The RIT tenure policy seeks to cultivate faculty who demonstrate excellence in instructional skills and scholarship competencies as well as effective participation in the University’s academic and cultural life. The right to tenure is earned through the demonstration of high standards in those areas and concern for students' personal worth and advancement. Tenure-track faculty should recognize a unique responsibility to maintain quality performance as guided by their Statement of Expectations. The judgment of colleagues will be considered primary in the assurance that those who achieve tenure are of proven distinction.
Tenured faculty must continue to grow and develop professionally. The department chair (or equivalent) and other administrators share responsibility to nurture and support tenure-track faculty and other colleagues.
Tenure decisions should be based upon the criteria and documentation outlined in the following policy. Throughout this policy, the category of ‘college’ will include the nine colleges of RIT as well as campus-wide institutes.
(1) Appointment to the RIT faculty shall be consummated through explicit agreements stating specific criteria for being awarded tenure. This agreement is made between the dean (or equivalent) of the college, with input from the department chair (or equivalent) into which the candidate is being hired, and with the approval of the provost. Such agreements shall be final and binding only when confirmed by a signed, written contract issued by the Human Resources Department and signed by the appointee, dean (or equivalent) and provost. The contract shall clearly state whether the candidate is or is not to be granted a tenure-track appointment, and, in the case of a joint appointment, in which colleges the appointments shall reside.
(2) Statement of Expectations: When an appointment is to a tenure-track position, relevant university and college tenure policies shall be provided and a separate written Statement of Expectations for the achievement of tenure by the particular faculty member shall be agreed upon and signed by the dean (or equivalent) and the faculty member. This Statement of Expectations may be changed with the mutual consent of both parties. Such statements will be governed by university and college criteria. If the norms for tenure change during a tenure-track faculty member’s probationary period, the faculty member affected by the change will have reasonable opportunity to satisfy the new norms if he or she so desires. To ensure a reasonable opportunity to satisfy the new norms, after the Third Year Comprehensive Review, the Statement of Expectations cannot be changed unless initiated by the candidate. All revised Statements of Expectations must be agreed upon and signed by the dean (or equivalent) and the faculty member. All Statements of Expectations and revised Statements of Expectations will be governed by university and college criteria.
(3) This individual Statement of Expectations, along with all subsequent statements related to the conditions of the faculty member's employment, prospects for tenure, and evidence bearing on the faculty member's performance, shall be kept on file in the office of the dean (or equivalent) and in accordance with C22.0 Records Management Policy.
(4) Written notice of non-reappointment or of intention not to recommend reappointment, except in situations of financial exigency or program discontinuance, shall be given by the dean (or equivalent) as follows:
(a) Not later than 1 March of the first academic year of service on the tenure track (regardless of when the first contract commences).
(b) Not later than 15 November of the second academic year of service on the tenure track.
(c) After two or more years of tenure-track service, notice of intent not to reappoint must be given by 30 June of the current contract; in which case the tenure-track faculty member will receive a terminal contract for one additional academic year.
- Tenure Location
(1) A faculty member shall be granted tenure in one of the colleges or institutes of the University.
(2) In the case of a tenured faculty member changing from a single to a joint appointment or of a tenured faculty member who moves from one college to another, the location(s) and status of the faculty member's tenure should be established by following in general the provisions of E.21 - Policy on Assignment and Transfer of Tenure-Track Faculty at the time of the appointment or change of appointment. A written agreement shall specify the tenure location and status of the faculty member's tenure.
- Probationary Period
(1) The probationary period before granting of tenure shall be seven contract years for a faculty member who has had no teaching experience before appointment to the University faculty. The tenure consideration and evaluation shall be made in the sixth year.
(2) For each year of equivalent teaching experience, the probationary period may be reduced by one year, but the minimum probationary period shall be four years except by action of the provost in very unusual circumstances. In these very unusual circumstances a recommendation from the dean (or equivalent) to the provost will be developed following in general the provisions of section 2.c.4 of this policy. Equivalent teaching experience normally shall be full-time teaching at the rank of instructor or above in a regionally accredited institution of higher learning or full-time teaching in a non tenure-track position at RIT.
(3) Credit may also be given for scholarship, research, or for developmental activities in fields related to the subject matter field in which the candidate is expected to teach. The equivalency of previous teaching or other professional experience shall be evaluated by the dean (or equivalent) and approved by the provost.
(4) Faculty members who have received the maximum credit of three years' equivalent teaching experience may, before the time of their consideration for tenure and with the agreement of the dean (or equivalent), reduce their initial equivalency credit if they desire a longer probationary period.
(5) Suspension of the tenure clock may occur under special conditions agreed upon by the candidate, the department head (or the equivalent), the dean (or the equivalent), and the provost. A candidate may request that a previously granted suspension be retracted in favor of the original tenure schedule. The request must be made by 1 January of the academic year preceding tenure consideration.
a. An extension of the tenure probationary period will be given to tenure-track faculty who apply for and are granted an approved leave of absence as defined in E17.0, E33.0, and E34.0.
b. A similar extension may be provided for tenure-track faculty who move to a non tenure-track research faculty position as described in E6.0.
c. In rare circumstances, tenure-track faculty may request an extension of the probationary period for extenuating circumstances agreed to by the candidate’s department chair (or equivalent, dean (or equivalent) and provost. This request for extension shall be submitted in writing and accompanied by a detailed work plan to the department chair (or equivalent). If the department chair (or equivalent) approves, the request and the department chair’s (or equivalent) recommendation will be forwarded to the dean (or equivalent). The dean (or equivalent) will forward his or her recommendation accompanied by the original request and department chair’s (or equivalent) recommendation to the provost for approval. If the dean (or equivalent) and the provost both approve, the faculty member will be notified of the extension and the projected tenure review date.
- Criteria for Granting Tenure
(1) The criteria used for granting tenure, including specific qualities sought and achievements are defined in each college’s published tenure policies.
(2) In the Statement of Expectations, a dean (or equivalent), department chair (or equivalent) and a tenure-track faculty member might choose to weight items for subsequent annual Plans of Work. Each year, tenure-track faculty should reflect on the past year’s teaching, scholarship and service. In a written assessment, they should show how those activities met goals in the previous Plan of Work.
The basic consideration in initial appointments and salary adjustments, promotion, and tenure is the extent to which the Statement of Expectations is accomplished.
(3) Scholarship forms the foundation of a faculty member’s career activities. Its elements will tend to be activities centered on new developments, publication, peer-review, and dissemination. Each administrative unit may define specific standards or qualities related to pedagogy, scholarship, and research yet the overall goal of these activities should focus on the way the scholarship can hold the greatest benefit for the students.
(4) The view that teaching is the foremost activity of the RIT faculty is deeply rooted in the University’s traditions. Teaching will continue to be a hallmark of RIT; however, attention to other related responsibilities is also critical; e.g. a focus on scholarship or research.
(5) An effective teacher, among other things, communicates special knowledge and expertise with sensitivity towards students’ needs and abilities. This entails selection and use of appropriate instructional methods and materials and providing fair, useful, and timely evaluation of the quality of the learner's work.
(6) Evaluation of teaching must include a conscientious effort to obtain and consider information that relates directly to teaching and learning and makes effective classroom performance possible. This includes the review of student and peer evaluations.
(7) The University endorses the view that selective attainments in the areas outlined below undergird good teaching:
(a) Academic and Professional Qualifications
These achievements refer to past and present professional and career experiences, professional recognition in the form of licenses, honors, degree attainment, and sustained effort directed toward professional and career updates.
(b) Scholarship (see E4.0)
These include research and creative activity in a professional specialty, writing and publication in a specialized area, development of new courses and curricula, modification of existing courses or programs, and investigation of alternative learning strategies. All scholarship to be considered for both tenure and promotion must be peer reviewed and disseminated.
(c) Service (see E4.0)
These include working with students and colleagues outside the classroom such as might be found in college and university committee work, student advising, and student activities as well as linking the professional skills of members of the faculty to the world beyond the campus.
No faculty member has to be deeply engaged in all of the foregoing activities at any one time. Rather, specific forms of endeavor should be planned and agreed upon with the appropriate college authorities to the end that full opportunity is provided for individual development and enhancement of the teaching function.
Each college shall develop, approve, and publish its own additional specific tenure criteria as well as acceptable forms of evidence and documentation based on the previous general criteria and on section 2 of this policy. College criteria for tenure and for acceptable forms of evidence and documentation shall be no less than, and must be consistent with, sections 2 and 3 of this policy and those criteria listed in Policy E4.0.
The administration of the tenure granting process shall be consistent with university policy and under the direction of the provost.
- Documentation
(1) All tenure recommendations shall be supported by responsible available documentation. This should include all agreements relating to the faculty member's conditions of employment; Statement of Expectations (original and any modifications) and requirements with respect to tenure; annual reviews as well as appropriate and reliable documentation related to the faculty member's teaching performance, academic and professional qualifications, scholarship, and service; and such other matters as the faculty and the administration of a given college shall deem appropriate. Review committees and recommending administrators shall use this documentation at the appropriate and necessary points in the tenure process.
(2) The documentation for each faculty member with a tenure-track appointment shall be maintained in the office of that faculty member's college and access to it shall be governed by the University's policy on "Access to Official Professional Staff Files" (E31.0).
(3) In order to assure that recommendations are completely candid and accurate, all recommendations for or against the awarding of tenure made by the tenure committee and administrators shall remain confidential and not become a part of a candidate's documentation. The content of all letters of review and assessment from the chair (or equivalent), dean (or equivalent), committee, and provost shall be made accessible to the candidate at the end of the process, should the candidate request this documentation.
- Reviews
(1) Annual Reviews
Although the committees are not bound by any tenure implication contained in annual reviews, such reviews made during a candidate's probationary period are an important measure of a candidate's progress toward tenure. These reviews are furnished in writing to the candidate by the dean (or equivalent) or other administrator of the college. The annual reviews will be supported by responsible available documentation and must include student and faculty evaluations as well as accounts of professional development and creative or scholarly production. If the college has special areas of competence to be emphasized or if there is any change in the original Statement of Expectations with respect to tenure, candidates should be clearly informed of this.
The reviews will conclude with a statement indicating whether current performance would normally lead to a recommendation for tenure.
(2) Third Year Comprehensive Review
(These provisions when approved will apply only to faculty who enter the tenure-track in fall 2009 and after.)
Although the third year review committees are not bound by any tenure implication contained in annual reviews, such reviews made during a candidate’s probationary period are an important measure of a candidate’s progress toward tenure. As part of the tenure process, tenure-track faculty members will undergo a comprehensive review process during the third year of their seven-year probationary period. Tenure-track faculty who have been given credit towards tenure may choose to undergo the comprehensive review process when they have been at RIT at least one full year and have at least three years remaining in their probationary period.
The purpose of this review is to provide preliminary feedback to the candidate midway through his or her probationary period. The review will cover all performance in all the areas required for tenure and will be conducted by the college tenure committee or by another equivalent committee established by the college. The exact model for an equivalent committee must be developed and approved by the college faculty and dean (or equivalent).
Tenure candidates will provide materials and other documentation to the committee as specified in the college’s tenure guidelines. Each college will establish its own dates for receiving materials from tenure candidates and communicating with them, or the committee can choose to follow the dates used by the University for the tenure review process.
The college’s tenure committee shall seek a minimum of two external peer reviewers in the candidate’s field of scholarship who, according to criteria established by the college, shall evaluate the candidate’s scholarship in their respective field. In its review of the faculty documentation, the committee will prepare a letter that discusses its analysis of the candidate's strengths and weaknesses and states whether current performance would normally lead to a recommendation for tenure under current guidelines. The dean (or equivalent) will forward the committee’s letter and the candidate’s documentation, including external letters, along with a separate dean’s (or equivalent) recommendation letter to the provost. After review, the provost‘s comments on the candidate’s progress toward tenure will be sent in a letter to the dean (or equivalent). The dean (or equivalent) and the candidate’s department chair (or equivalent) will discuss the content of the letter with the candidate.
The letters from the third year review process must be included in the tenure documentation at the end of the pre-tenure period when the candidate is considered for tenure. Like annual reviews, the third year comprehensive review is an important measure of a candidate's progress toward tenure. However, a favorable third year comprehensive review does not imply that tenure will eventually be granted; nor does an unfavorable review imply that tenure will not be granted.
The content of all letters of review and assessment from the chair (or equivalent), dean (or equivalent), committee and provost shall be made accessible to the candidate at the end of the process.
(1) If an assistant professor is being evaluated for tenure, he/she must be simultaneously evaluated for promotion to the rank of associate professor. Each college or academic unit will have a procedure to ensure that it recommends to the provost either approval or denial of both tenure and promotion.
(2) The tenure candidate's department chair (or equivalent) shall submit a written recommendation to the dean (or equivalent) by 15 September based on the candidate's documentation as well as university and college tenure criteria.
The candidate's department chair (or equivalent) assesses the candidate’s performance during the probationary period. In addition, letters from tenured department members that contain comments that can be substantiated and supported with documentation can be sought. Letters and other documentation from the third year review process must be included in the tenure documentation. Based upon the documentation, the chair's (or equivalent) written assessment of a candidate's progress toward tenure shall be forwarded with other support materials and documentation to the college tenure committee.
Each college will establish a schedule to receive materials that support tenure review for tenure-track faculty within the academic unit. The tenure-track faculty member shall provide documents and other materials to show their efforts to fulfill the Statement of Expectations negotiated at hire and any modifications to the college tenure committee by 30 September or as specified in the college’s tenure guidelines. In turn, the committee shall weigh the strengths and weaknesses of the future tenure candidate’s efforts and seek a review of the faculty member’s work from outside experts in the respective field of scholarship, research, or creativity.
The college’s tenure committee shall seek a minimum of four external reviewers. The committee should strive to seek two reviews from individuals recommended by the candidate and two reviews not suggested by the candidate. The outside experts shall not have personal ties or conflicts of interest with the candidate. In all cases, the reviewers should have fields of study within the candidate's expertise. The committee shall send its evaluation of the faculty member's fitness for tenure to the dean (or equivalent) of the college by 30 January. The package should lay out the candidate's strengths and weaknesses, and state whether current performance merits a recommendation for tenure.
The dean (or equivalent) shall write a recommendation, based upon an assessment of the candidate, the tenure committee's analysis, and the opinions of the independent scholars consulted during the external review. The recommendation shall be forwarded along with the committee’s letter and the candidate's support materials to the provost.
The provost shall write a recommendation, based upon an assessment of the candidate, recommendation of the dean (or equivalent), the tenure committee's analysis, and the opinions of the independent scholars consulted during the external review. The recommendation shall be forwarded with the committee’s letter and the candidate's support materials, to the president for final approval.
(3) College Tenure Committees(a) When there are candidates for tenure in a college, a committee should be assembled - six tenured members from the candidate's college and another appointed by the Academic Senate from a list of nominees elected by the tenured and tenure-track faculty of each college. The group shall hold its initial meeting by 30 September. Each college shall determine its procedure for electing the members. College procedures shall, however, ensure that no less than one member was on the college tenure committee during the immediately preceding year to provide for continuity over time. The Academic Senate shall determine its procedure for appointing the outside member specified above.
Elections each academic year shall be conducted before 1 June of the prior year. Faculty members in colleges with six or more departments or academic units should choose one representative from each of six departments for the tenure committee. The committee shall review each candidate based on RIT's and the college's tenure criteria, the candidate's documentation, and comprehensive written evaluations of the external reviewers, department chair (or equivalent), and the dean (or equivalent).
All members of the tenure committee must be present for and not abstain from the committee’s vote. Recommendation for approval or non-approval of tenure, a written statement of reasons for approval or non-approval, and the vote shall be forwarded by the chair of the tenure committee to the dean of the college (or equivalent) and to the provost by 30 January.
(b) In the case of a joint academic appointment that crosses two colleges, a joint tenure review committee shall be formed and hold its initial meeting by 30 September, comprised of four tenured members of the faculty of the college in which the candidate’s primary appointment resides (and in which tenure will reside, if granted), two members from the college in which the candidate’s secondary appointment resides, and one tenured member of another college in the University. The committee shall review the candidate based on RIT's and the college's tenure criteria, the candidate's documentation, and comprehensive written evaluations of the external reviewers, department chairs (or equivalent) and deans (or equivalent).
(4) Dean (or equivalent) of the College
(a) Shortly after the membership of the college tenure committee is determined by the above process, the dean (or equivalent) shall:
- Announce to the college the names of the committee members. The records of the election process shall be kept on file in the dean's office (or equivalent) until 15 November and be placed at the disposal of those who wish to examine the process.
- Call the committee to its initial organizational meeting. This meeting shall be called prior to 30 September. During that meeting, the dean (or equivalent) shall:
- Announce to the committee the names of that year's candidates for tenure.
- Provide the documentation, the written recommendation of the department chair (or equivalent) and the comprehensive written evaluation of the dean (or equivalent) for each candidate.
- Instruct the committee to elect a chair from the faculty elected in 3.c (3)(a) above. The dean (or equivalent) shall depart before the election of the chair.
(b) The dean of the college (or equivalent) shall prepare a tenure recommendation, separate from that of the college tenure committee described in 3.c(2), based on university and college criteria and on the candidate's documentation, and forward it to the provost by 8 February along with the recommendation of the department chair (or equivalent) and the candidate's documentation.
(5) Expedited Tenure Review
An expedited tenure review can be requested in the infrequent case where the University wishes to offer a potential hire (the “candidate”) a faculty rank with tenure (also see E4.0.1 and E8.0). The faculty rank must either be associate professor or full professor. The candidate must hold (or have held) a tenured (or equivalent) faculty rank at an institution of higher learning.
The request for an expedited tenure review shall be initiated by the candidate’s department chair (or equivalent) and the request must be approved by either the provost or the president. Upon approval of the request for expedited tenure review, the provost or the president will ask the dean of the college (or equivalent) in which the tenure will reside to have the college’s tenure committee evaluate the candidate for tenure in an accelerated time frame. The dean (or equivalent) will provide the tenure committee with all the application materials collected by the search committee.
If one or more members of the college’s tenure committee are not available during this accelerated time frame, each such member can be substituted by an alternate elected by the faculty of the college. Each college shall ensure that a full tenure committee can be assembled as needed for the purpose of this expedited tenure review. Within one week of the receipt of the complete application materials, the tenure committee will evaluate the candidate and provide the dean (or equivalent) with an unequivocal recommendation on tenure for the candidate. The dean (or equivalent) will forward the tenure committee’s evaluation and recommendation to the provost.
(6) The Provost
To form a tenure recommendation, the provost may call upon the department chair (or equivalent), the college tenure committee, or the dean (or equivalent) for clarification or additional information and may meet with any of them to reconcile opposing views. In circumstances where the assessment of a candidate’s tenure portfolio is in conflict, the provost may convene the chairs of each of the college tenure committees.
This group will be convened only:
The convened group’s actions shall be guided by the specific tenure criteria outlined by the candidate’s college. Its role is to advise the provost toward a final decision.
The group will relate its findings in writing to the provost. When satisfied on all points, the provost shall make an official recommendation to the president that includes all prior recommendations received.
(7) The President
The president in turn shall in all cases make the final decision in granting or denying tenure.
- Granting or Denial of Tenure
The granting or denial of tenure shall be in the form of a written communication from the provost to the candidate no later than 15 March. In the case of denial, the letter shall set forth the specific reasons and the details of the college tenure committee vote.
If granted, tenure becomes effective on the first day of the following academic year; if tenure is denied, the candidate shall have a one-year contract for the following academic year.
If a candidate wishes to appeal a tenure denial, the university faculty grievance procedures are available to the extent provided in E24.0. Such appeal shall be limited to the question of whether the policies and procedures set forth in the tenure policy have been followed in the candidate's case.
a. If there are any perceived differences, tenure-track probationary years completed before adoption of this policy, May 2009, should be evaluated in accordance with the former tenure policy III-G.
b. Faculty granted tenure in two colleges under former tenure policy III-G may retain it.
c. Faculty formerly tenured at the department or school level will be adjusted to tenure at the college level.
d. During the implementation of this tenure policy, the provost may call on the Academic Senate chair to convene those elected as outside tenure committee representatives (see 3.c.(3)(a) ) to review and comment on individual college tenure criteria and procedures.
Responsible Office: Academic Senate and Office of the Provost and Senior Vice President
Effective Date: Approved September 23, 1963
Policy History:
Revised May 2009
Revised October 2009
Revised April 22, 2010
Edited August 2010
Revised April 15, 2014; effective with the start of the 2015-2016 academic year; with the exception of section 2.c.4.a which is effective immediately. See below.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Policy Number: E5.0
Policy Name: POLICY ON TENURE
(Effective with the start of the 2015-2016 academic year with the exception of section 2.c.4.a which is effective immediately.)
Tenure is a fundamental pillar that supports and protects RIT faculty members' freedom of inquiry and expression in teaching and scholarship, conferring the right of self-direction for faculty members without concern for the stability of their position.
The RIT tenure policy is designed to encourage and reward excellence in teaching, scholarship, and service and to promote the atmosphere of critical inquiry and creative expression that is vital to the academic and cultural life of the university. Tenure is earned by demonstrated achievements and ongoing pursuit of advancements in teaching, scholarship, and service, guided by concern for students' and colleagues' personal worth and advancement. The most important factor in the tenure decision process is the evaluation of the candidate by his/her colleagues, made in light of the candidate's individual Statement of Expectations. Colleagues' judgment of such achievements is primary, informed by an individual's Statement of Expectations.
The pursuit of excellence continues beyond the tenure decision. Tenured faculty, department heads, and other administrators share responsibility to ensure that all faculty continue to grow and develop professionally.
Tenure decisions shall be based upon documentation that meet the criteria outlined in the following policy.
Appointment to the RIT faculty shall only be consummated through a written contract approved by the provost. The contract shall clearly state whether the candidate is or is not to be offered a tenure-track appointment, and in the case of tenure-track appointments, in which college tenure would reside. In the case of a joint appointment the contract shall also clearly state in which college the secondary appointment would reside.
If an appointment is to a tenure-track position, an initial written Statement of Expectations describing specific criteria for being awarded tenure shall be provided to the faculty member with the written contract provided at the time of hire. This Statement of Expectations shall inform the candidate of published tenure criteria, as well as any additional expectations specific to the candidate. The Statement of Expectations is based on an agreement made between the candidate and the dean of the college, with the recommendation from the head of the department into which the candidate is being hired, and with the approval of the provost and the president of the university. The signed Statement of Expectations document ensures that each party understands tenure expectations and clearly states how policy allows these expectations for tenure to evolve before a candidate's mid-tenure review.
The Statement of Expectations may be updated to modify the candidate-specific expectations with the mutual consent of the candidate, the department head, and the dean. Before the Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review, the candidate, department head, or dean may initiate a modification. After the Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review, only the candidate may initiate a modification. In either case, a signed copy of the updated Statement of Expectations with the modified candidate-specific expectations, agreed to by all parties, shall be provided to the candidate. The initial Statement of Expectations, and any updates to that Statement, provides a frame of reference for those evaluating each faculty member throughout the tenure review process.
All Statements of Expectations shall be governed by university criteria and individual college expectations for meeting the criteria.
The initial Statement of Expectations, along with all subsequent updated Statements of Expectations, shall be kept on file in the office of the dean of the respective college and in accordance with C22.0 Records Management Policy.
- Length of the Probationary Period
The probationary period before granting of tenure is normally six contract years for a faculty member who has had no teaching experience before appointment to the university faculty. For candidates with no reduction of the probationary period, the tenure consideration and evaluation shall be made in the sixth year. If tenure is granted, it is effective at the start of the following contract year.
Reducing the Probationary Period
- Equivalency Credit
- For each year of equivalent teaching experience, the probationary period may be reduced by one year. Equivalent teaching experience normally shall be full-time teaching at the rank of Instructor or above in a regionally accredited institution of higher learning, or full-time teaching in a non-tenure-track position at RIT.
- A reduction in the probationary period may also be given for scholarship in the subject-matter field in which the candidate is expected to teach and conduct scholarship.
- The equivalency of previous teaching and/or scholarship shall be evaluated by the department head and dean, and approved by the provost.
- The probationary period may be reduced by a maximum of two years, except by action of the provost in special circumstances, or in accordance with the Expedited Tenure Process section of this Policy.
- Reduction in Equivalency Credit
Faculty members with equivalency credit may reduce their initial equivalency credit by one year by written notice to the dean. Such notice must be made before the first day of the spring term before their scheduled tenure review. Further reductions in equivalency credit may only be granted with the written agreement of the dean. The dean shall notify Human Resources and the office of the provost of any reduction in equivalency credit.
- Hiring with Tenure
A faculty member may only be hired with tenure under the provisions of Section 4 of this policy, "Expedited Tenure Process.
- Extension of Probationary Period
- A pre-tenured faculty member who becomes a parent by birth or adoption before the tenure documentation is due is automatically granted a one-year extension to the tenure probationary period upon providing written notice of each birth or adoption to the department head, dean, and provost within six months of the birth or adoption and before the tenure documentation is due. The automatic extensions may be waived if the faculty member so desires and so indicates in writing to the dean before the first day of the spring term preceding the requested tenure consideration date.
- An extension of the tenure probationary period shall be provided to tenure-track faculty who apply for and are granted an approved leave of absence as defined in E.17.0, E.33.0, or E34.0. The extension of the probationary period shall be for a minimum of one year.
- Pre-tenured faculty who wish to focus on research activities and who secure external funding to support those activities (including full salary and benefits) may request temporary assignment to a non-tenure track research faculty position for one year (See E6.0). Tenure-track faculty who are accepted to research faculty positions will be given a leave of absence from their tenure-eligible faculty positions for a maximum of one year. They may also request a one-year tenure-clock extension during that period. Any scholarship completed in this period shall be considered towards tenure and promotion should the faculty member return to their tenure-track position.
- In extraordinary cases, tenure-track faculty may request an extension of the probationary period for extenuating circumstances. A confidential written request, detailing the reasons for the extension, shall be submitted to the department head. The department head forwards the request, along with his/her written recommendation to the dean. The dean forwards the request, the department head's recommendation, and his/her written recommendation to the provost. The provost shall review the request and recommendations and make a determination. The faculty member, department head, and dean will be notified in writing of the extension decision and in the case of a positive decision, the projected tenure review date.
- A previously granted extension shall be reversed upon the candidate's request. Such a request must be made in writing to his/her dean before the first day of the spring term preceding the requested tenure consideration date. Once such a reversal is requested in writing, the extension is automatically reversed.
- Documentation associated with extensions of the probationary period for a pre-tenured faculty member as described within this section shall be maintained in the dean's office of that faculty member's college and access to it shall be governed by the university's policy on "Access to Official Professional Staff Files" (E31.0).
- Extensions to the probationary period for a pre-tenured faculty member as described within this section shall not increase the individual faculty member's expectations for achievement towards tenure.
- Advanced Notice of Non-reappointment During the Probationary Period
Except in situations of financial exigency (E22.0) or program discontinuance (E20.0), written notice of non-reappointment to the tenure-track or of intention not to recommend reappointment to the tenure-track shall be given to the affected faculty member by the dean as follows:
- Not later than 1 March of the first academic year of service on the tenure track.
- Not later than 15 January of the second academic year of service on the tenure track.
- After two or more years of tenure-track service, notice of intent not to reappoint to the tenure-track must be given by 30 June of the current contract year; in which case the tenure-track faculty member will be offered a terminal contract for one additional academic year.
The view that teaching is the foremost activity of the RIT faculty is deeply rooted in the university's traditions. While teaching will continue to be a hallmark of RIT, scholarship is of significant importance, and service is also central to the academic endeavor.
- Criteria
- University Criteria
- Teaching
Teaching, see E4.0: An effective teacher, among other things, communicates special knowledge and expertise with sensitivity towards students' needs and abilities. This entails selection and use of appropriate instructional methods and materials and providing fair, useful and timely evaluation of the quality of the learner's work.
Evaluation of teaching must include a conscientious effort to obtain and consider information that relates directly to teaching and learning and makes effective classroom performance possible. This includes the review of student and peer evaluations.
- Scholarship
Scholarship, (see E4.0): Documented, peer-reviewed, and disseminated disciplinary and interdisciplinary scholarship of discovery, teaching/pedagogy, integration, and/or application form a foundational component of a faculty member's career activities.
- Service
Service, (see E4.0): While teaching and scholarship are the fundamental tenure-track faculty responsibilities, service performed by faculty members is also an indispensable part of the university's daily life. Tenure-track faculty at all ranks are expected to engage in service, though the type and amount of service will vary over a faculty member's career.
Balance
No faculty member has to be deeply engaged in all of the foregoing activities at any one time. Rather, specific forms of endeavor should be planned and agreed upon to the end that full opportunity is provided for individual and professional development and enhancement.
- College Expectations
Each college shall develop and publish its own specific tenure expectations, as well as acceptable forms of documentation based on the general criteria of this policy. Expectations shall be approved by the tenure-track faculty of the individual colleges and then be approved by the Academic Senate. College expectations for tenure and for acceptable forms of documentation shall be no less specific than, and must be consistent with, this policy. The expectations used for granting tenure, including specific qualities sought and achievements shall be defined in each college's published tenure policies. Faculty within each administrative unit may define specific standards or qualities related to scholarship that are consistent with college policy. All college tenure policies shall be reviewed by the university president and made available through the provost's office.
- Statement of Expectations and Plan of Work
The initial Statement of Expectations provides the framework, or general parameters, for the faculty member's agreement for hire and initial appointment. Updated Statements of Expectations may modify the candidate-specific expectations, and changes to university and college tenure policy that take effect before a candidate's Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review may affect the policy and criteria used in evaluating that candidate. Changes to university and college tenure policy that take effect after a candidate's Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review will not be used in the candidate's tenure evaluation process. The annual Plan of Work (E7.0) includes specific annual goals toward meeting the Statement of Expectations. In the Statement of Expectations, the dean, department head and the tenure-track faculty member might choose to weight items for subsequent annual Plans of Work. Each year, tenure-track faculty should reflect on the past year's teaching, scholarship and service. In a written assessment, they should show how those activities met goals in the previous Plan of Work.
- The Tenure Process
The administration of the tenure granting process shall be consistent with university policy and under the direction of the provost.
- Documentation
- Content
All tenure recommendations shall be supported by available documentation. At a minimum, this shall include:
- all agreements relating to the faculty member's conditions of employment (provided by dean's office);
- the current and if applicable previous version(s) of the Statement of Expectations and requirements with respect to tenure (provided by dean's office);
- annual reviews on record (provided by dean's office);
- appropriate and reliable documentation related to the faculty member's teaching performance, academic and professional qualifications, scholarship, and service (provided by candidate);
- materials submitted by the candidate for mid-tenure review (provided by candidate);
- other material as specified in college tenure policies.
Additional information and guidance may be provided by the Office of the Provost. The candidate's complete tenure review file will be assembled by his/her dean's office.
All documents provided by the candidate will be available to all internal reviewers until the tenure decision is made. Review committees and recommending administrators shall use this documentation at the appropriate and necessary points in the tenure process.
- File Location
The documentation, as defined above, for each faculty member with a tenure-track appointment shall be maintained by the dean’s office of that faculty member's college and access to it shall be governed by the university's policy on "Access to Official Professional Staff Files" (E31.0).
- Confidentiality
In order to assure that recommendations are completely candid and accurate, all letters and recommendations for or against the awarding of tenure shall remain confidential and shall be made accessible only as specified in Tables 1 and 2. For access to Comprehensive Mid-tenure review documentation see Sec. 3.b.(2)(i) and for tenure review documentation see Sec. 3.c.(2)(e).
- Final Disposition of Documents
At the candidate's request, the Provost shall summarize the content of all letters of review or assessment with the candidate while maintaining the confidentiality of all internal and external evaluators. At the conclusion of the Mid-Tenure Comprehensive Review and the tenure review processes, all documentation shall be kept on file in the office of the dean of the respective college and in accordance with C22.0, Records Management Policy.
- Annual and Comprehensive Mid-tenure Reviews
- Annual Review
The content and process for annual reviews are given in E7.0. Although tenure-review committees are not bound by any tenure implication contained in annual reviews, such reviews made during a candidate's probationary period are an important measure of a candidate's progress toward tenure and must be considered along with all other evidence. If the college has special areas of competence to be emphasized or if there is any change in the original Statement of Expectations with respect to tenure, candidates must be clearly informed of this and they must be consistent with Section 2.a.2 of this policy.
During the tenure probationary period, the annual reviews will conclude with a statement indicating whether current performance would normally lead to a recommendation for tenure. Colleges that have their own annual tenure review process that leads to a separate annual tenure review letter for tenure-track faculty may use that letter in lieu of a statement in the annual review referenced in E7.0.
- Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review
The purpose of the comprehensive mid-tenure review is to provide preliminary feedback to the candidate midway through his or her probationary period on the degree to which the candidate is making satisfactory progress towards tenure. The review shall cover all performance in all the areas required for tenure. It will provide advice and counsel regarding achievement of tenure. [These provisions apply only to those who enter the tenure track in fall 2009 and beyond.].
- Timing: As part of the tenure process, tenure-track faculty members will undergo a comprehensive review process during the third year of their six-year probationary period. Tenure-track faculty who were granted credit towards tenure will undergo the comprehensive review process during the second year of their probationary period.
- Documentation: Candidates will provide documentation as specified in the college's tenure guidelines.
- Department Head: The department head shall provide a written assessment of the candidate's appropriate progress towards tenure from the perspective of colleague, supervisor, and administrator based upon the candidate's documentation. The department head's written assessment of whether the candidate is making satisfactory or unsatisfactory progress toward tenure shall be forwarded with the candidate's documentation to the college tenure committee.
- Input from Department Tenured Faculty: The committee shall seek letters from tenured department members that contain comments that can be substantiated regarding whether or not the candidate is making satisfactory progress towards tenure. Input from each tenured faculty member within the department shall be sought. If letters are not received from all tenured faculty members, the tenure committee should make an additional attempt to obtain input from all tenured faculty.
- Committee: The review will be conducted by the college tenure committee or by another equivalent committee established by the college. The exact model for an equivalent committee must be developed and approved by the college faculty and dean.
- Schedule: Each college will establish its own dates and process for receiving documentation from candidates and for communicating with them. The schedule shall ensure that input is received by the provost no later than April 1. Upon initial communication with the candidate regarding collection of documentation, the Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review begins.
- External Review Letters: The tenure committee chair shall seek a minimum of two external peer reviewers. The chair shall, at a minimum, seek a review from individuals recommended by the candidate and a review from individuals recommended by the candidate's department head. In all cases, the reviewers should have expertise in the candidate's field. At mid-tenure review, reviews from thesis advisors or co-authors may be included. However, the committee chair is encouraged to also seek letters from reviewers who are not thesis advisors or co-authors. Reviewers should be asked to comment on the overall quality of the candidate's work. The external reviewers are requested to evaluate the candidate's scholarship in their respective field according to university tenure criteria and college tenure expectations. The external review letters will be received by the dean's office of the candidate.
- Evaluation: In its review of the faculty documentation, the committee shall prepare a letter that discusses its analysis of the candidate's strengths and weaknesses, stating whether current performance would normally lead to a recommendation for tenure under current guidelines and offering guidance for continued improvement. The committee's letter shall include a summary of the departmental faculty letters and a summary of the external review letters. The committee letter should contain no information that could reveal the identity of an individual departmental faculty member or the external reviewers because the letter will be made accessible to the candidate at the end of the mid-tenure review process. If the faculty member had received a tenure probationary period extension, the reasons behind this extension will not be disclosed within the committee's letter. The committee shall forward its letter of review and all documentation to the dean.
After review of the candidate's complete file, the dean will forward the committee's letter, the candidate's documentation, the external letters, the department head's letter and a separate dean's recommendation letter to the provost.
After review of the candidate's complete file, the provost's comments on the candidate's progress toward tenure will be sent in letter form to the dean. The dean and the candidate's department head will discuss the Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review with the candidate.
Like annual reviews, a Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review is a measure of a candidate's progress toward tenure and an opportunity to provide guidance for continued growth. It cannot, however, predict the eventual tenure decision, whether positive or negative.
- Access to Comprehensive Mid-Tenure Review Documents: The letters of review or assessment from the department head, dean, committee, and provost shall be made accessible to the candidate by the dean at the end of the mid-tenure review process. However, all other letters, including those from individual department members and external reviewers shall remain confidential and will not be made accessible to the candidate. The purpose of the Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review process is to provide advice and council regarding the achievement of tenure. To maximize the value of that advice and council, at the conclusion of the process, the candidate's department head shall receive the department faculty letters and the external reviewer letters. The letters of review or assessment from the department head, dean, committee, and provost from the Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review shall be included in the tenure documentation at the end of the probationary period when the candidate is considered for tenure. See Table 1 of this policy for a table describing access to documentation.
Table 1: Access to Documentation for Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review
Access of each party:
Documentation
Candidate
Department Tenured Faculty
Department Head
Tenure Committee
(or equivalent)Dean
Provost
Candidate's Portfolio
-
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Department Faculty Letters
Summary provided by Tenure Committee (or equivalent)
No
Yes (at conclusion of review process)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Department Head Recommendation
Yes
No
-
Yes
Yes
Yes
Tenure Committee (or equivalent) Recommendation
Yes
No
Yes
-
Yes
Yes
External Review Letters
Summary provided by Tenure Committee (or equivalent)
No
Yes (at conclusion of review process)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Dean Recommendation
Yes
No
Yes
No
-
Yes
Provost Evaluation
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
-
- Tenure Review and Recommendations
When an Assistant Professor is being evaluated for tenure, s/he must be simultaneously evaluated for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor. Each college will establish a procedure to ensure that it recommends to the provost either approval or denial of both tenure and promotion. In addition, each college will establish a schedule consistent with university policy to receive and process materials that support the review for tenure and simultaneous promotion (when appropriate) of the tenure-track faculty within the academic unit. This schedule shall ensure that the College Tenure Committee's recommendation is forwarded to the college dean no later than 15 January and the dean's letter is forward to the provost no later than 8 February.
- Department
The candidate's department head assesses the candidate's performance throughout the probationary period as part of the annual review process. The department head shall provide a written assessment of the candidate's progress towards tenure from the perspective of colleague, supervisor, and administrator based upon the candidate's documentation. The department head's letter shall include a clear vote (yes or no) in regards to tenure attainment of the candidate followed by an explanation of the vote. The department head's written assessment of the candidate's progress toward tenure shall be forwarded to the college tenure committee according to the college schedule that ensures the committee can complete their review and letter to the college dean no later than 15 January.
- College Tenure Committee
The committee shall evaluate the dossier, weighing the strengths and weaknesses of the tenure candidate in fulfilling their personal Statement of Expectations and with respect to university tenure criteria, expectations of the candidate's college expressed in college tenure policy, and administrative-unit specific standards or qualities, where applicable.
- Membership: When there are candidates for tenure in a college, a committee shall be assembled - six tenured members from the candidate's college and another appointed by the Academic Senate from a list of nominees elected by the tenured and tenure-track faculty of each college. Department heads may serve on tenure committees except in cases where the faculty candidate's appointment resides within the same department as the department head. Each college shall determine its procedure for electing the members, ensuring that there is at least one continuing member to provide for continuity over time. The Academic Senate shall determine its procedure for appointing the outside member specified above. The committee shall hold its initial meeting according to college policy. It is recommended that the initial meeting be held by the end of the spring semester prior to the academic year in which the tenure evaluation is to occur, but no later than 15 September of the evaluation year. The committee shall select its chair from its membership.
Elections for each tenure committee shall be conducted before 1 March of the prior academic year. The college tenure policy shall ensure that the composition of the college tenure committee has broad representation and avoids undue weighting of a single unit.
In the case of a college with fewer than eighteen (18) tenured faculty eligible to serve on a tenure committee and with fewer than six departments or academic units, a special tenure committee shall be formed. The special committee shall be comprised of four tenured members of the faculty of the college, two tenured faculty with at least two years' experience on tenure committees from other colleges appointed by the Academic Senate from a list of nominees elected by the tenured and tenure-track faculty of each college, and another faculty member appointed by the Academic Senate from a list of nominees elected by the tenured and tenure-track faculty of each college. Colleges with fewer than eighteen (18) tenured faculty shall not provide representatives to other small college special committees, but those colleges may choose to nominate tenured faculty to serve as external members on other college tenure committees if desired.
- Input from Tenured Department Faculty: It is the responsibility of the tenured faculty to participate in the tenure process at RIT. The tenure committee, therefore, shall solicit a confidential letter from each tenured faculty member within the candidate's department. The letter should include a clear recommendation for or against tenure accompanied by a supporting explanation. If letters are not received from all tenured faculty members within the department, the tenure committee shall attempt to obtain input from those faculty who did not respond.
- External Review Letters: The committee, after consultation with the candidate's department head, shall seek to obtain a minimum of four letters from external reviewers in the candidate's field of scholarship.
The committee must seek letters from at least two reviewers suggested by the candidate. A maximum of one reviewer may be a co-author and all other external reviewers shall not have personal ties or conflicts of interest (C4.0) with the candidate. In all cases, the reviewers should have fields of study within the candidate's expertise. Letters from thesis advisors are not to be used in the official list of external letters; they may, however, be included in the dossier as further evidence of the candidate's work.
Each reviewer will be requested to evaluate the candidate's scholarship according to university tenure criteria and college tenure expectations. If fewer than four letters are received, the committee chair should make an additional attempt to obtain four letters. The external review letters will be received by the dean's office of the candidate.
- Evaluation: Recommendation for approval for tenure by the college tenure committee shall require a minimum 2/3 majority in favor as determined by secret vote. All members of the committee must vote; there shall be no abstentions or avoidances of voting by absence. Recommendation for approval or non-approval of tenure, a written statement of reasons for approval or non-approval, and the vote shall be forwarded by the chair of the tenure committee to the dean of the college by 15 January. If the candidate for tenure had received an extension to his/her tenure probationary period, the reasons behind this extension will not be disclosed within the committee's letter.
- Access to Tenure Review Documents: All letters of review or assessment shall remain confidential and will not be made accessible to the candidate. See Table 2 of this policy for a table describing access to documentation.
Table 2: Access to Documentation for Tenure Review
Access of each party:
Documentation
Candidate
Department Tenured Faculty
Department Head
Tenure Committee
Dean
Provost
Candidate's Portfolio
-
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Department Faculty Letters
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Department Head Recommendation
No
No
-
Yes
Yes
Yes
Tenure Committee (or equivalent) Recommendation
No
No
No
-
Yes
Yes
External Review Letters
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Dean Recommendation
No
No
No
No
-
Yes
Provost Evaluation
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
-
- Joint Appointments: In the case of a joint academic appointment that crosses two colleges, a joint tenure review committee shall be formed and hold its initial meeting according to college schedule of the candidate's primary appointment. The joint committee shall be comprised of four tenured members of the faculty of the college in which the candidate's primary appointment resides (and in which tenure will reside, if granted), two members from the college in which the candidate's secondary appointment resides, and another appointed by the Academic Senate from a list of nominees elected by the tenured and tenure-track faculty of each college. The committee shall review the candidate based on university tenure criteria and college tenure expectations of the primary college, the candidate's documentation, and the letters of review or assessment from the department head, dean, committee, and provost from the Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review.
- Dean of the College
- Shortly after the membership of the college tenure committee is determined by the above process, the dean shall announce to the college the names of the committee members. (The records of the election process shall be kept on file in the dean's office until 15 November and be placed at the disposal of those who wish to examine the process.)
- The dean will also call the committee to its initial organizational meeting. This meeting shall be called according to college schedule of the candidate's primary appointment, but no later than 30 September of the academic year in which the tenure evaluation is to occur, and preferably by the end of the spring semester prior. During that meeting, the dean shall:
- Announce to the committee the names of the candidates for tenure.
- Provide the documentation, the written recommendation of the department head and the letters of review or assessment from the department head, dean, committee, and provost from the Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review.
- Instruct the committee to elect a chair from the faculty elected in 3.c.2 above. The dean shall depart before the election of the chair.
- The dean of the college shall prepare a tenure recommendation, separate from that of the college tenure committee recommendation. The dean shall write a recommendation, based upon university and college tenure policy, an assessment of the candidate documentation, the tenure committee's analysis and the opinions of the external evaluators consulted during the external review. That document shall be forwarded with the committee's letter, the department head's letter, and the candidate's documentation to the provost by 8 February.
- The Provost
- The provost shall review the candidate's documentation, the recommendations of the college tenure committee, department head, and dean and form a tenure recommendation. The provost may call upon the candidate, the department head, the college tenure committee, and/or the dean for clarification or additional information and may meet with any of them to reconcile opposing views.
- University Tenure Review Committee: If a college tenure committee and dean are in dispute over a candidate's viability, and/or the provost disagrees with the conclusion reached by the dean as representative of the college regarding the candidate's viability, the provost may convene a meeting of the chairs of all the college tenure committees. That group shall review all the available documentation and advise the provost toward a final decision, guided by the specific tenure expectations outlined by the candidate's college. The group shall relate its findings in writing to the provost.
- When satisfied on all points, the provost shall make an official recommendation to the president that includes all prior recommendations received.
- The President
The president shall make the final decision to grant or deny tenure.
- Granting or Denial of Tenure
The granting or denial of tenure shall be in the form of a written communication from the provost to the candidate no later than 15 April. In the case of denial, the letter shall set forth the specific reasons, the college tenure committee vote, the university tenure review committee vote, if it was involved, and the recommendations from the department head and dean.
If granted, tenure becomes effective on the first day of the following contract year; if tenure is denied, the candidate shall have the option of a one-year contract for the following academic year.
If a candidate wishes to appeal a tenure denial, the Institute Faculty Grievance Procedures are available to the extent provided in E24.0. Such appeal shall be limited to the question of whether the policies and procedures set forth in this tenure policy have been followed in the candidate's case.
- Expedited Tenure Review
- Purpose
An expedited tenure review may be requested in the infrequent case where the university, as part of a faculty search process, wishes to hire a faculty member with tenure (see E4.0.1 and E8.0).
- Review Process
The request for an expedited tenure review shall be initiated by the person who would become the candidate's immediate administrative supervisor, and the request for review must be approved by either the provost or the president. Upon approval, the provost or the president will ask the dean of the college in which the tenure will reside to have the college's tenure committee evaluate the candidate for tenure in an accelerated time frame.
During the evaluation process, input from committee members can occur electronically however, if one or more members of the college's tenure committee are not available during this accelerated time frame, each such member shall be substituted by an alternate elected by the faculty of the college. If one or more members of the college's tenure committee are at a faculty rank lower than that sought for the incoming candidate, each such member shall be substituted by an alternate from the college's promotion committee or elected by the faculty of the college. Each college shall ensure that a full tenure committee can be assembled as needed for the purpose of this expedited tenure review and that the committee will be available to complete the expedited review process. If the tenure committee's external member is not available during the accelerated time frame the Academic Senate shall appoint a substitute.
This expedited process is normally considered in the case where the candidate currently holds tenure at an accredited institution of higher education. In these instances, the dean will provide the tenure committee with all the application materials collected by the search committee, including at a minimum the candidate's CV, list of scholarly work, reference letters, and teaching evaluations. The tenured faculty with equivalent or higher rank (of that sought for the faculty candidate) from the academic unit where this candidate would reside will be notified by the committee that the candidate's file is available for their review. Within seven (7) business days of the notification, each invited faculty member may submit a written recommendation (paper or electronic) to the committee. The letter should include a clear recommendation for or against expedited tenure at hire accompanied by a supporting explanation.
Within ten (10) business days of the receipt of the complete application materials from the dean, the tenure committee shall evaluate the candidate and provide the dean with a recommendation on tenure for the candidate, along with the committee vote and the signatures (physical or electronic) of all committee members. Recommendation for approval for expedited tenure by the college tenure committee shall require a minimum 2/3 majority in favor as determined by secret vote. The committee may alternatively make a recommendation for an appropriate expedited period of review for tenure upon hire.
The dean will forward the tenure committee's evaluation and recommendation as well as his/her recommendation to the provost. Based on those recommendations, the provost shall make a recommendation and forward it along with the other recommendations to the president. The president shall make the final decision on granting tenure or granting a reduced tenure probationary period in accordance with Section 2.c.2.i of this policy.
In rare and unusual cases where the candidate does not currently hold tenure at an accredited institution of higher education, the dean will provide the tenure committee with all the application materials collected by the search committee, as well as additional material provided by the candidate that is viewed by the tenure committee as necessary and consistent with the college's tenure policy. Within four weeks of the receipt of the complete application materials, using the process stipulated previously in this section, the tenure committee shall evaluate the candidate and provide the dean with a recommendation on tenure for the candidate. The dean will forward the tenure committee's evaluation and recommendation along with his/her recommendation to the provost. Based on those recommendations, the provost shall make a recommendation and forward it along with the other recommendations to the president. The president shall make the final decision on granting tenure or granting a reduced tenure probationary period in accordance with Section 2.c.2 of this policy.
- Addendum for Implementation of Tenure Policy
- Faculty hired prior to May, 2009 shall be evaluated for tenure according to the E5.0 policy in effect on the date of hire as the Comprehensive Mid-tenure Review was not required through E5.0 prior to May 2009.
- Faculty granted tenure in two colleges under former tenure policy may retain it.
Responsible Office: Academic Senate and Office of the Provost and Senior Vice President
Effective Date:; Approved September 23, 1963
Policy History:
Revised May 2009
Revised October 2009
Revised April 22, 2010
Edited August 2010
Revised April 15, 2014; effective with the start of the 2015-2016 academic year; with the exception of section 2.c.4.a which is effective immediately.