Process for Promotions for Junior Tenure-Track Faculty

The tenure track means that all assistant professors are guaranteed a promotion review to associate professor and all associate professors are guaranteed a promotion review to professor.

Promotion from assistant professor to associate professor requires promotion committee review with external letters, followed by departmental review, Senior Faculty Council review, recommendation by the dean, and approval by the provost. The departmental senior faculty may serve as the promotion committee if requested by the department chair and approved by the dean.

For promotions to associate professor: Prior to the formation of a promotion committee, departments normally conduct an internal Third-Year Review as part of the Junior Faculty Mentoring Program.

For promotions to professor with tenure: Prior to the formation of a promotion committee, departments normally offer to conduct a Pre-Tenure Consultation, typically in the 8th year, as part of the Junior Faculty Mentoring Program.

It should be understood that the guarantee of a promotion review is not the same as a guarantee of promotion. Candidates for promotion review may decide for whatever reason not to seek a promotion review.

Timing of Reviews

For promotion to associate professor: Candidates will normally be reviewed for promotion in the fifth year of their assistant professor appointment, although the department chair and senior faculty of the department, with the agreement of the candidate, may decide that the promotion review may occur earlier than the fifth year. If a review conducted in the fifth year is unsuccessful, the candidate may be offered a one-year contract extension, after which the assistant professor appointment is terminated.

For promotion to professor with tenure: Candidates will normally be reviewed for promotion to tenure in the ninth year of their 10-year tenure clock, or the fourth year of the term as associate professor, if the initial appointment was to associate professor. If the initial appointment was to associate professor, the tenure review may be conducted in the fifth year of the term with the approval of the dean and department chair. In this case, the candidate may be offered a one-year contract extension if the review is unsuccessful. If the review occurs earlier than the ninth year, the appointment will conclude one year after the year the review was conducted, superseding the end date of the contract.

For all promotion reviews, dossier materials must be submitted on or before the deadline (usually July 1 of the summer prior to the review year). Notice concerning the outcome of the review may not be provided within the usual timeframe if the deadline is missed.

Formation of Promotion Committee

Promotion reviews for junior tenure-track faculty from assistant professor to associate professor and from associate professor to professor commence with the formation of a promotion committee to review the case. Promotion committees are not required for promotion to associate professor. Promotion committees are recommended for the review for promotion to professor with tenure, or the tenured faculty of the department may serve as a committee of the whole. The dean, in consultation with the department chair, forms promotion committees, normally composed of four faculty members from the department in which the position resides along with one faculty member from another department in the school. The dean, in consultation with the department chair, shall select one faculty member from the department in which the position will reside to chair the promotion committee. Alternatively, contingent on approval by the dean, departments can decide that their senior faculty as a whole serve as a promotion committee.

Candidate Submissions, Presentations, and Meetings

The candidate shall be asked to submit a curriculum vitae, a statement about the candidate’s past accomplishments, a statement about the candidate’s intellectual agenda for the future, and materials documenting the candidate’s creative work in scholarship, design/research work, or professional practice, or a combination thereof.

The candidate shall give a presentation that shall be publicized to faculty and students unless the promotion committee and candidate agree that the promotion aspect of the presentation must remain confidential. The chair of the promotion committee and administrator in charge of faculty affairs shall solicit faculty and student views of the candidate’s presentation and report the results to the promotion committee. All senior faculty shall be given the opportunity to meet individually with the candidate. Students shall be given an opportunity to meet with the candidate unless the promotion committee and candidate agree that the promotion review must remain confidential. The chair of the promotion committee and administrator in charge of faculty affairs should solicit faculty and student views and report the results to the promotion committee.

External Letters

Unless the promotion committee after the presentation is unanimously not in favor of the promotion, letters from at least 8 letter writers in the case of promotion from assistant professor to associate professor and at least 12 letter writers in the case of promotion from associate professor to professor shall be sought. If the promotion committee or department unanimously decides NOT to seek external letters, the case is not advanced, the candidate shall be notified of the outcome in writing, and the review process is ended.

If letters will be sought, candidates shall not be asked to provide names of potential letter writers. Reviews for promotion from assistant professor to associate professor shall require evaluation letters and reviews for promotion from associate professor to professor shall require comparison letters. A dossier of the candidate’s materials shall be provided to the letter writers.

Professor: 12 or more Comparison Letters

Associate Professor: 8 or more Evaluation or Comparison Letters

The promotion committee, in consultation with the administrator in charge of faculty affairs, shall select external letter writers, who should be prominent scholars and/or practitioners knowledgeable about the field of the candidate who are likely to hold diverse perspectives. External letter writers typically are tenured full professors at peer schools or practitioners who are recognized as at the top of their profession. Letter writers shall be asked to reveal in their letters any advising, professional, collaborating, or personal relationship with any individual named in the letter. Yield from invited letter writers is a factor to consider so the choice of letter writers should be made carefully. The invitation to write a letter sent to external letter writers should be issued on behalf of the dean or department chair with responses returned to the administrator in charge of faculty affairs.

Promotion Committee Deliberation

After the letters have been received, the promotion committee shall deliberate and vote on the candidate. The chair of the promotion committee, in consultation with members of the promotion committee and the administrator in charge of faculty affairs, shall prepare the promotion committee’s report that includes the following:

A detailed evaluation of the candidate’s record of creative work and teaching and proposed future creative work and teaching

A detailed analysis of the external letters and other indicia of the candidate’s standing in the field

A description of the promotion committee vote and reasons expressed by any committee members who dissented or abstained from the committee’s vote.

The promotion committee report, along with appropriate materials such as curricula vitae, exhibits of creative work, and teaching evaluations assembled by the administrator in charge of academic affairs, shall be submitted to the relevant department for departmental review as the next step in the promotions process.

Departmental Review

The department chair shall convene the departmental senior faculty to discuss the report of the promotion committee and to vote on the candidate. In cases where the departmental senior faculty as a whole served as the promotion committee, a separate meeting is not necessary. The department chair, or a designated member of the senior faculty, shall prepare a letter describing the discussion and vote of the departmental senior faculty. The letter, along with the promotion committee report, external letters, and other relevant materials shall be submitted to the dean and, in cases where the department has voted in favor of a candidate, to the Senior Faculty Council.

Senior Faculty Council Review

In cases where the departmental senior faculty has voted in favor of a promotion, a letter prepared by the department chair describing the discussion and vote of the departmental senior faculty, along with the promotion committee report, external letters, and other relevant materials, shall be submitted to the Senior Faculty Council at least one week before the next scheduled meeting. At the meeting, the Senior Faculty Council shall discuss the case and vote at that time or after the meeting. If the vote is taken after the meeting, the dean shall announce the results of the vote at the next Senior Faculty Council meeting. A quorum for attendance shall be met if at least fifty percent of the senior faculty in residence during the semester in question is present. Each member of the Senior Faculty Council shall provide the dean with a brief letter announcing their vote and reasons for it. Senior faculty members of the candidate’s department are expected to write more detailed letters than senior faculty from other departments. Such letters shall be included with any recommendation that the dean submits to the president or provost.

Recommendation by the Dean

Upon a favorable vote of the Senior Faculty Council or a vote of the senior faculty of the department in cases where only notification of the Senior Faculty Council is required, the dean may recommend or not recommend to the president or provost that the candidate be approved for promotion.

Provost’s Approval

Promotions from assistant professor to associate professor require approval by the Provost’s Appointments Review Committee which is administered by the Office of the Senior Vice Provost for Faculty Development and Diversity.

President’s Approval

An appointment to a tenured position requires the president’s approval. The dean shall confer with the president or the president’s designee and agree upon the form of the review and the faculty and/or outside consultation, if any, that will be sought. In those instances where the president or the president’s designee convenes an “ad hoc committee” to advise on the appointment, the dean shall not reveal their recommendation for or against the appointment until after the presidential review has been conducted. At the conclusion of the presidential review, the dean shall recommend to the president or the president’s designee for or against the appointment. The approval of the president or the president’s designee must be obtained before an appointment can begin or be announced.