Promotion And Tenure

Principles and Procedures

 November 3, 2004

Introduction

Tenure

Master Teacher

Full Professor

Procedures Following the Faculty Review

Guidelines for Appeal

Tenure Clock

1. Introduction

This document sets forth principles and procedures for tenure and promotion in the Gallatin School. It is designed to support high academic and professional standards consistent with the special mission of the School, and to provide a comprehensive and fair review of the candidates in the process of awarding tenure and promotions. The successful implementation of the guidelines to achieve and maintain high standards depends on the full participation of the faculty as well as on the leadership of the deans, the provost and the president. After stating some general standards and responsibilities, the document presents the procedures, materials and criteria for three types of cases: the award of tenure, with promotion to associate professor (section 2); promotion to master teacher (section 3); and promotion to full professor (section 4).

1.1 Standards

The Gallatin School is based on the concept of individualized study: Gallatin students plan their own programs with their faculty advisers, and the curriculum emphasizes various forms of individualized and interdisciplinary teaching and learning. The school’s raison d’être is a central concern for students’ intellectual development, and the major activity of its faculty is to teach and mentor students. Faculty members in Gallatin are therefore expected first of all to be outstanding teachers, mentors and advisors. They must demonstrate a strong commitment to close work with students in a variety of educational formats and to the implementation of innovative and high­quality forms of teaching and learning, all in the context of a small liberal arts college in a large research university. A high standard of excellence and effectiveness in teaching and advising is thus required for tenure and promotion, and the criteria for granting promotion and tenure express and support this particular mission of the school.

Because the success of Gallatin also depends on the active participation of its faculty in the collective enterprise of the school, faculty members must also contribute substantially to the work of the school, the university and the outside community. These contributions represent another important requirement for tenure and promotion.

Finally, excellent scholarship or creative work in the arts is a requirement for tenure (and promotion to full professor). Scholarly and artistic activity are regarded as integral to the educational mission of Gallatin and indispensable to the enrichment of the classroom and

the intellectual environment of the school. Thus, in order to have a reasonable prospect of gaining tenure or promotion in Gallatin, a candidate must have a record of outstanding achievement and recognition in teaching and advising, service to the School, and (for the tenure­track faculty) scholarly research or creative work in the arts. In the absence of such a record, tenure or promotion will not be granted.

It is neither desirable nor possible to define an abstract and universal standard of measurement. Each case must be examined in detail by making explicit comparisons, by delineating special strengths, and by acknowledging limits or weaknesses. Context may be a criterion in judging the strength of a particular candidate. The current and future shape of programs in the Gallatin School may be relevant considerations. All these factors must be carefully discussed and weighed in reaching a recommendation on tenure or promotion.

1.2 General Procedures

The Dean of the Gallatin School makes recommendations to the Provost regarding tenure or promotion. The recommendation of the Dean must be informed by the eligible members of the faculty of the school and by experts in the candidate's field.

The School will publish and submit to the Provost its annual tenure and promotion process calendar before May 15 of each year. Relevant dates are a mixture of those required to guarantee adequate consideration and those that ensure the process moves in a timely fashion. These include the date by which:

• Candidate submits the portfolio to the Promotion and Tenure (P&T) Committee;
• Chair of the P&T Committee, working with the Dean's office, submits names of outside reviewers to the Dean’s office;
• Outside letters are solicited by the Dean’s office;
• The P&T Committee reviews case;
• The P&T Committee submits a recommendation and report to the Dean;
• The Dean informs the P&T Committee of her/his proposed recommendation to the Provost.

1.3 Mandatory Review

A docket and recommendation must be submitted to the Dean for all faculty in their mandatory review year, whether the recommendation is positive or negative. The Dean must send the candidate a letter on or before August 31 of the year prior to the mandatory review year detailing the process. If, however, the candidate resigns on or before August 31 of the year prior to the mandatory review, effective on or before August 31 of the final probationary year, the Dean must forward a letter by August 31, stating explicitly that the resignation was freely tendered without duress.

1.4 Cross Appointments

1.4.1 If a candidate for tenure or for promotion (to master teacher or full professor) has a Joint Appointment in another program or department in the University, the Promotion and Tenure Committee in Gallatin will negotiate an appropriate procedure enabling both faculties and both Deans to review the candidate; to the extent possible, the Gallatin procedures will be consistent with those outlined for full¬time faculty in the school. If Gallatin and the other unit arrive at significantly different judgments, the Dean of Gallatin will ordinarily invite the Chairperson of the P&T Committee to discuss the case with representatives selected by the dean of the other school, and the two deans will then make their recommendations to the Provost.

1.4.2. When the candidate has an Associated Appointment in a secondary department or program, the Gallatin review must include a written evaluation from the secondary department explaining, among other matters thought relevant, the particular contribution of the candidate to that program's mission and to its administration. This evaluation may be written by the Chair of the secondary department after formal consultation with departmental or program members.

1.4.3. In the case of Affiliated Appointments, written evaluations on the secondary appointment are recommended but not required.

1.5 Faculty Responsibilities

1.5.l The duty of the tenured faculty to give advice on tenure and promotion decisions is perhaps its highest responsibility. The evaluation process begins with their review, and it is highly dependent upon their thoroughness, fairness, and rigor. To give weak advice to the Dean on the assumption that the difficult decisions will be made at a later stage subverts the principle of peer review and faculty governance and is an abdication of faculty responsibility. Reports that are considered by the Dean to fall into this category will be returned to the P&T Committee with a request that the problem be corrected.

1.5.2. Assessments must not ignore candidates' defects. Lack of perfection is not a bar to promotion or tenure, and "advocacy" assessments that attempt to gloss over imperfections are more likely to arouse suspicion than admiration. It is far more helpful to the candidate, the Dean and the School to have a balanced discussion of a candidate's strengths and weaknesses.

1.5.3. It is essential that tenured faculty members who participate in the P&T process uphold high standards of responsibility and ethical behavior. Responsibility includes the obligation to give careful attention to the materials of a tenure case and to share the results of that deliberation with eligible colleagues in the school. Ethical behavior includes a clear obligation to maintain the confidentiality of the proceedings, since confidentiality makes honest and open discussion possible.

 

2. Tenure Cases

2.1 Faculty Procedures

2.1.1. The initial review of candidates for tenure will be conducted by a P&T Committee elected by the members of the full­time faculty. The Committee will consist of five tenured associate or full professors. The election of the members of the P&T Committee will be done by closed ballot at the first faculty meeting of each academic year; those elected will serve for one year and will deliberate on all tenure cases arising during that period.

2.1.2. When the P&T Committee has conducted its thorough review of the candidates (see procedures below), it will present its findings and recommendations in a detailed, formal, written report and recommendation to the other tenured professors. The file and the written report must be made available for inspection well in advance of the meeting of eligible faculty at which the case is discussed and the vote taken. The numerical vote of the Committee must also be contained in the report. The entire tenured faculty of the school is authorized to vote and to make a collective recommendation for or against tenure at the rank of associate professor. The vote should be by closed ballot and reported by numbers.

2.1.3. A reasonable effort must be made to enable eligible faculty on leave to receive all relevant materials and to participate in the discussions and vote. When a faculty member is unable to attend the meeting because of a leave or other absence, he or she may make his/her views known to the other eligible members through written or electronic communication, and cast a vote; the report to the Dean should indicate which members did not take part in the discussion of the case.

2.1.4. When the tenured faculty has discussed the case and voted, the chairperson of the P&T Committee will forward to the Dean the final committee report along with the vote and recommendation of the faculty.

2.1.5. When a search committee in Gallatin recommends the hiring of a faculty member at the rank of associate professor with tenure, the committee will submit the candidate’s materials to the P&T Committee, which will review them, conduct an investigation similar to that described below and make a report and recommendation to the full cohort of tenured professors for a thorough review, discussion and vote. The Chairperson of the P&T Committee will submit a written report and recommendation, along with the numerical vote, to the Dean, who will make the final decision on hiring and rank.

2.2 Materials for the P&T Committee

2.2.1. When a faculty member is being reviewed for tenure, the P&T Committee must prepare a Promotion and Tenure docket for examination by the senior faculty, the Dean and the Provost. This docket must contain materials relevant to an assessment of all three major criteria. Some of the materials will be submitted by the candidate in the form of a docket; others will be collected by the Dean’s office and/or the P&T Committee to complete the portfolio.

2.2.1.1 The candidate will submit the materials to the docket by the by the stipulated time, as well as any additional materials he or she believes are relevant to the case:

General

• A current curriculum vitae, outlining teaching activities, publications, presentations, appointments, research activities, community and university services, etc.;
• Candidate's general personal statement (8­10 pages) articulating his/her development as a teacher/scholar in Gallatin, and the future directions it might take.

Teaching (classroom instruction, individualized advising and instruction, and mentoring)

•  A brief (2­3 page) summary of his/her philosophy and accomplishments relative to teaching, individualized instruction, academic advising and mentoring, thesis advisement, etc., and the criteria the candidate uses to judge the success of individual programs of study and individualized projects;
• A list of courses taught;
• Course syllabi and other teaching­related materials (handouts or visual aids, assignments, comments on student papers, etc.);
• A list of representative courses­of­study designed with individual advisees, as well as selected student descriptions of concentrations (IAPCs), and rationales;
• Examples of assistance and mentoring to students beyond the classroom, such as written comments on colloquium rationales, thesis proposals and theses;
• A representative list of independent studies and internships supervised (including evaluations of students’ work);
• List of advisees (graduate and undergraduate);
• List of MA thesis supervisions;
• List of MA thesis committees (and, if appropriate, MA or PhD committees in other schools in NYU);
• Descriptions of MA theses supervised (with sample comments and evaluations).

Service

•  A brief (2­3 page) statement about the candidate’s role in (a) the development and administration of the Gallatin curriculum and program, (b) school and university committee service, (c) service to the profession or field, and (d) service to the outside community (whether at the local, national or international level); and a statement of the candidate’s ideas about and vision of Gallatin’s future;
• A list of committees in Gallatin and NYU, as well as other service activities, with details about particular contributions;
• A list of scholarly and professional service, editorial boards, consulting activities, professional memberships, awards, etc.

Scholarship

•  A brief (2­3 page) statement discussing the candidates perception of his/her achievements and goals as a scholar and/or as a public intellectual; how they have contributed to the teaching mission of Gallatin as well as to the candidate’s discipline or field; what the candidate has done, is doing and plans to do in his or her chosen field of scholarship. The candidate’s statement on scholarship should narrate the trajectory of his/her career, including a description of the relationships among works already published, distributed or performed, a description of new projects planned or underway, and a description of the ways in which his/her scholarship and teaching are related. The statement may make reference to scholarly, intellectual and professional work based on original research, on the integration or application of existing research, and/or on studies of teaching and learning in the candidate’s field;
• Copies of all peer­reviewed publications in scholarly, professional or artistic journals, and of books or book chapters;
• Copies of non­refereed publications (trade books, popular magazines and newspapers, international journals, professional newsletters, policy reports, etc.) indicating the candidate’s performance as a public intellectual;
• Evaluations of scholarly and other public work, whether reviews written by academics or testimonials from appropriate figures in the candidate’s community of practice;
• Copies of journals or newsletters edited by the candidate;
• Materials representing conferences the candidate has organized;
• Copies of peer reviews the candidate has written of grants or journal articles;
• Where appropriate, a list of artistic/creative productions, writings, performances, along with copies or recordings of those productions when possible
• Academic, professional or popular­press reviews of books;
• Readers' reviews of unpublished books, reports or studies;
• Published reviews of productions or performances, videos, published art work, screenplays, etc.

2.2.1.2 The Dean’s office will solicit and coordinate the collection of the following materials along with the chairperson of the P&T Committee:

General

• Letters from current and past students commenting on the candidate’s performance as a teacher, advisor, mentor and general member of the Gallatin community;
• Letters from full­time and part­time Gallatin faculty commenting on the candidate’s performance as a colleague and member of the community;
• A copy of candidate's Third-­Year Review.

Teaching, advising and mentoring

 

• Student evaluations (both statistical and narrative) of courses the candidate has taught;
• Reports of peer observations of classes, including formal assessments of teaching effectiveness
• Student evaluations (both statistical and narrative) of the candidate’s advising and mentoring.

Service

 

• Letters from colleagues describing and evaluating the candidate’s contributions to various service­related activities in the School and in the rest of the university: committees, task forces, work groups, etc.;
• Letters or testimonials from groups or individuals with whom the candidate has worked either in the profession or in the wider community;
• Memoranda, reports and other materials bearing on the evaluation of the candidate’s service work.

Scholarship

• A list of evaluators, together with their scholarly credentials and an explanation for why they were chosen.

 

2.2.1.3 Solicitation of Letters from Outside Evaluators

The P&T Committee, in consultation with the Dean’s office, will select the names of at least five (5) highly qualified external evaluators, who must be recognized leaders in the candidate's field of work, and will direct the Dean’s office to solicit letters of evaluation from those people. The selection of evaluators and the solicitation of their reviews will follow these principles and procedures:

• Evaluators must be representative of their subject, broadly defined, and not be drawn exclusively from narrow specializations. The list of evaluators need not be restricted to those at United States institutions; when appropriate, evaluations may be solicited from abroad;
• The external evaluators should not have a close relationship with the candidate. If the Dean’s office inadvertently solicits an opinion from someone the committee later learns is close to the candidate, this must be noted in the committee report;
• The committee may also choose to include additional letters from outside evaluators as it sees fit, provided that this information is clearly noted in the docket;
• The letter of solicitation, which must come from the Dean of the Gallatin School, must follow the prototype attached to this document. The letter must explain the particular role of scholarship within Gallatin as well as Gallatin’s place in NYU. It must not in any way imply that a positive or negative response from the evaluator is desired;
• The docket must include specific explanations for the choice of particular referees contacted. The explanations must consist of more than the CVs of the referees; they must state why this particular referee's opinion matters (she is the most widely published author in the candidate's field; he is in a different discipline but edits the premier journal in the candidate's field, etc). It is particularly important to identify referees, such as former advisors or collaborators, who have a personal or professional connection to the candidate; such letters cannot be accepted by P&T without being noted as such;
• All evaluators must be provided with the same C.V., personal statement, and copies or descriptions of the candidate's work. If unpublished work is to part of the docket, the committee must ask all evaluators to comment on its quality;
• The confidentiality of letters from outside evaluators must be preserved; only the Dean, the Dean’s office, members of the P&T Committee and eligible members of the faculty (i.e., tenured faculty) must be allowed access to the letters. Neither the names of writers nor the content of the letters may be communicated to the candidate or anyone else beyond eligible members of the School, not even in summary form. In all communications with them, writers of letters must be assured that their letters will be held in such confidence, except as required by law; and that they will be seen only by the school’s committee on promotion and tenure, other eligible members of the faculty, the relevant dean(s), and the Provost's Office. (The University's policy regarding the confidentiality of such external letters and other tenure decision materials is found in Section C of the statement on Legal Protection for Faculty Members, Faculty Handbook (1999 ed.) p.85)

2.2.2 In addition, the Dean’s office and the P&T Committee may solicit or collect additional materials considered informative and useful for the assessment of the case, under a section of the docket titled "Supplementary Materials." Examples might be reader's reports for unpublished works; reports of grant review panels, published reviews of scholarship or artistic works, testimonials from additional persons, etc.

2.3 Assessment of the Candidate and Writing the Report: Criteria and Procedures

2.3.1. After gathering all the materials from the candidate, from the Dean’s office, from colleagues and students, the Promotion and Tenure Committee will review them all carefully and thoroughly, and will produce a report and recommendation for the senior faculty and the Dean. The report will address each of the major criteria in depth, citing relevant materials from the docket (see above) as evidence for the ultimate judgment reached by the committee.

2.3.2 The assessment of teaching should apply such criteria as the following:

•  A high quality of teaching: innovative, rigorous, challenging, flexible, engaging, responsive, logically organized, etc.;
• Effectiveness in communication;
• Extensive knowledge of and enthusiasm for the subject matter;
• Positive and constructive attitude toward and interactions with students;
• Fairness in assessment and grading;
• The ability to offer courses appropriate to the overall mission of the Gallatin School, providing instruction in desirable areas and fields.

Evaluation of the candidate’s performance in advising and mentoring should apply such criteria as the following:

• Accessibility to students;
• Good rapport and productive, positive interactions with students;
• Knowledge of university resources, programs and requirements;
• Knowledge of Gallatin resources, programs and requirements;
• Ability to stimulate independent thinking and activity by students;
• Ability to conduct effective individualized forms of study (independent studies, tutorials, internships) with academic quality and creativity;
• Ability to help students focus their studies and design concentrations.

2.3.3 The assessment of service should indicate the quality and significance of service in four general areas, with priority given to the first: service within Gallatin; service within the university; service within the professional community; service within the broader community of New York, the United States and the world. It includes serving on school or university committees, but also includes, for example:

• Assuming effective leadership within Gallatin for creating or improving school programs and practices;
• Holding leadership positions in university committees, professional associations or activities;.
• Representing the institution on external committees, task forces and commissions;
• Working as a consultant for or otherwise assisting citizens’ groups, government agencies, businesses and industries, etc.

Specific comments, including testimony from fellow committee members, specification of authorship of particular reports and the like, are helpful in the final report. The report should analyze the impact of the candidate’s service work on the health and growth of Gallatin as an educational community, and of NYU as a larger institution.

2.3.4. The assessment of scholarship should analyze the quality of the candidate’s scholarly and/or creative work, applying such criteria as the following:

• the depth and solidity of the candidate’s mastery of the chosen field;
• the innovation and creativity of the work; its capacity to expand the conception of the field, to push the boundaries and add new concepts;
• the interdisciplinarity of the work; its ability to draw on insights and methods from a variety of perspectives and sources;
• the quality of the candidate’s work in organizing conferences, editing journals or reviewing grants or articles;
• the importance of the candidate's field of expertise to the mission of the school; a potential to advance the reputation of the school in the wider academic community;
• the quality and significance of the venues and media through which the work is disseminated;
• in the case of artistic/creative work, the originality of the output, its ability to push boundaries in its domain, and its contribution to the mission of the school;

In general, then, the assessment of a candidate's scholarly research or artistic contributions must address issues of quality, significance, impact, and future development. The report must indicate what parts of the candidate's work are based on the dissertation, and for such work, what advances have been made after the dissertation. In fields where external funding is important, the candidate's success at securing grants must be evaluated in relation to reasonable expectations for scholars in the same field and at the same stage of professional development. The assessment must list and appraise the relative competitiveness of grants and fellowships received by the candidate.

The report must include a description for non­specialists of the place the candidate's work occupies in the relevant discipline or field; and explain why it is important to the school that this field be represented on its faculty. It may also be helpful for this statement to include information about the usual criteria for excellence in the candidate's discipline.

2.3.5 The Report of the Committee must include a list of all potential evaluators who were asked to write on behalf of the candidate, including those who declined. All communications with potential evaluators must be documented and included in the docket. A brief rationale for the selection of the evaluators who have written must be included with the docket, as well as an explanation for each of the declinations.

2.3.6 The evaluation by the P&T Committee must not be an advocacy document; it must strive to provide a fair assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the candidate. It must indicate, with reasons, the basis for the P&T Committee’s recommendation.

3. Master Teacher Cases

• 3.1 Faculty Procedures

  3.1.1 The initial review of candidates for promotion from teacher to master teacher will be made by the P&T Committee, chosen according to procedures in Section 2.1.1 with the exception that the faculty will also elect one master teacher to sit on the committee for that case.

  3.1.2 When the augmented P&T Committee has thoroughly reviewed the candidate’s materials, it will present its findings and recommendation to the entire senior faculty (tenured professors and master teachers). The guidelines and procedures indicated for the consideration of a tenure case (Sections 2.1.2, 2.1.3) will be followed with the addition of master teachers to the discussion and vote.

3.1.3 When the senior faculty has discussed the case and voted, the chairperson of the P&T Committee will forward to the Dean the final committee report along with the vote and recommendation of the faculty.

3.1.4 When a search committee in Gallatin recommends the hiring of a faculty member at the rank of master teacher, the committee will submit the candidate’s materials to the P&T Committee, which will review them, conduct an investigation similar to that described below, and make a report and recommendation to the entire senior faculty, which will conduct a thorough review, discussion and vote. The P&T Chairperson will submit a written report and recommendation, along with their numerical vote, to the Dean, who will make the final decision on hiring and rank.

3.2 Materials for the P&T Committee

3.2.1. When a faculty member is being reviewed for promotion to master teacher, the P&T Committee must prepare a Promotion docket for examination by the senior faculty and the Dean. This docket must contain materials relevant to an assessment of teaching/advising and service. Some of the materials will be submitted by the candidate in the form of a docket; others will be collected by the Dean’s office and/or the P&T Committee to complete the portfolio.

3.2.1.1 The candidate will submit the materials related to the teaching and service criteria itemized in Section 2.2.1.1 for candidates for tenure, as well as any additional materials he or she believes are relevant to the case.

3.2.1.2 The Dean’s office will solicit and collect the same materials itemized in Section 2.2.1.2 for candidates for tenure except for those related to scholarship.

3.3 Assessment of the Candidate and Writing the Report: Criteria and Procedures

3.3.1. After gathering all the materials from the candidate, from the Dean’s office, from colleagues and students, the Promotion and Tenure Committee will review them all carefully and thoroughly, and will produce a report and recommendation for the senior faculty and the Dean. The report will address each of the two major criteria in depth, citing relevant materials from the docket (see above) as evidence for the ultimate judgment reached by the committee.

3.3.2 The assessment of teaching should apply the same criteria as those itemized in Section 2.3.2 for candidates for tenure.

3.3.3 The assessment of service should apply the same criteria as those itemized in Section 2.3.3 for candidates for tenure.

4. Full Professor Cases

4.1 Standards and procedures for promotion to full professor

The inquiry for such cases is essentially the same as for a tenure candidate. A high standard of excellence and effectiveness in teaching is required, as are significant contributions toward the work of the school and university communities and ongoing participation in scholarly or artistic activities in one’s field. The docket must clearly indicate which work distinguishes the candidate’s achievements since the last review for promotion.

4.1.1 When a tenured associate professor applies for promotion to full professor, the initial review will be conducted by a P&T Committee composed of three Gallatin full professors elected by the faculty in a closed ballot at the first meeting of the academic year. If three full professors are not available, the Dean will appoint a member to the panel from another faculty within New York University appropriate to the candidate’s field.

4.1.2 When the P&T panel has conducted a thorough review of the candidate’s application for promotion and has reached a decision, it will present its findings and recommendations either (a) to the complete set of full professors in the school (who will be given adequate notice and access to the relevant materials as in Sections 2.1.2­2.1.4) or (b) if the committee comprises all the full professors in the school, directly to the Dean. In situation (a), the full complement of eligible professors will discuss the case and cast closed ballots, and the numerical vote will be forwarded to the Dean along with the P&T panel’s recommendation.

4.1.3 When a search committee in Gallatin recommends the hiring of a faculty member at the rank of full professor, the committee will submit the candidate’s materials to the cohort of full professors for a thorough review. The members of that group will submit a written report and recommendation, along with their numerical vote, to the Dean, who will make the final decision on hiring and rank.

4.2 Materials for the P&T Committee

4.2.1 When a faculty member is being reviewed for promotion to full professor, the specially selected P&T Committee must prepare a docket for examination by the cohort of full professors, the Dean and the Provost. This docket must contain materials relevant to an assessment of the candidate’s accomplishments in teaching, advising and mentoring, in service, and in scholarship. Some of the materials will be submitted by the candidate in the form of a docket; others will be collected by the Dean’s office and/or the P&T Committee to complete the portfolio.

4.2.1.1 The candidate will submit the following materials relevant to the principal criteria:

General

• ·  A current curriculum vitae;

• ·  A personal statement documenting continued development in teaching, service

  and scholarship, identifying and describing in detail the especially notable achievements that constitute the grounds for the application; the candidate may choose to focus this case on any or all of these major criteria. The essays and materials below related to those special grounds should be particularly thorough.

  Teaching, Advising, Mentoring

• ·  The same kinds of materials itemized in Section 2.2.1.1 under Teaching for

  candidates for tenure.

  Service

• ·  The same kinds of materials itemized in Section 2.2.1.1 under Service for

  candidates for tenure.

  Scholarship

· The same kinds of materials itemized in Section 2.2.1.1 under Scholarship for

candidates for tenure.

4.2.1.2 The Dean’s office, along with the chairperson of the special P&T panel, will solicit and coordinate the collection of the same kinds of materials itemized in Section 2.2.1.2 for candidates for tenure.

4.3 Assessment of the Candidate and Writing the Report: Criteria and Procedures

4.3.1 After gathering all the materials from the candidate, from the Dean’s office, from colleagues and students, the Promotion and Tenure Committee will review them all carefully and thoroughly, and will produce a report and recommendation for the other full professors and the Dean. The report will address each of the major criteria, determining whether the candidate has maintained his or her level of performance since tenure. But the committee will focus its attention particularly on the grounds proposed by the candidate, determining whether he or she has produced particularly notable achievements in those areas. The report will cite relevant materials from the docket (see above) as evidence for the ultimate judgment reached by the committee.

4.3.2 The assessment of teaching will apply the same basic criteria as those itemized in Section 2.3.2 for candidates for tenure.

4.3.3 The assessment of service will apply the same basic criteria as those itemized in Section 2.3.3 for candidates for tenure.

4.3.4 The assessment of scholarship will apply the same basic criteria as those itemized in Section 2.3.4 for candidates for tenure.

5. Procedures Following the Faculty Review

5.1 Presenting the Committee Report to the Dean

5.1.1 The members of the Promotion and Tenure Committee must present the case to the Dean in a formal written report no later than the specified date. Submission of dockets in a timely fashion is strongly urged in order to prevent delays from unforeseen complications that may arise, especially for dockets received near the end of the academic year.

5.1.2 Reasonable doubt for granting tenure precludes a favorable recommendation. If a reasonable doubt exists, the P&T Committee must indicate as much to the Dean. Re­ voting must not be undertaken for the sole purpose of achieving near consensus or unanimity or to avoid reporting a split committee or departmental vote.

5.1.3 The report must be a balanced assessment of the candidate's performance. Documents that do not deal with evident weaknesses, in the case of a positive recommendation, or that do not deal with evident strengths, in the case of a negative recommendation, will not be accepted. Properly prepared, detailed, and well­documented dockets are the most effective instrument for conveying the essence of the committee’s evaluation of the candidate. Indeed, it is the thorough and honest appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses of the candidate that is most useful to the Dean, often more so than the final vote, for it gives substantive meaning and texture to the evaluation.

5.1.4 The Chair and all members of the P&T Committee must sign the Signature Page of the Docket, attesting that they have read the docket and that it represents the opinions of the committee clearly and fairly, including those which dissent from the majority. The completed docket is then forwarded to the Dean along with the committee vote to initiate the succeeding stages of the review process.

5.2 Responsibilities of the Dean

5.2.1 The Dean of the School may also solicit additional reviews. To ensure that the Dean does not solicit evaluators already contacted by the department, the Chair of the P&T Committee is required to provide the Dean with a list of all evaluators being solicited by the department.

5.2.2 The Dean will receive the advice provided by the Committee on Promotion and Tenure in the written report. After due deliberation and investigation, s/he will advise the P&T Committee of his or her own proposed recommendation to the Provost. In the case of a Dean's recommendation contrary to that of the faculty committee, the Dean will provide the committee with the reasons. The committee will then have ten days in which

to provide further information or counter­argument before the Dean's final recommendation is made to the Provost.

5.2.3 The Dean will ordinarily make his or her recommendation to the Provost by March 1. This constitutes the definitive recommendation and will be accompanied by the docket

and the P&T Committee report. (In cases when a professor began teaching in the spring semester and decision must be rendered by December 31, the Dean will make a recommendation by October l.)

5.2.4 Upon notification of the Provost's decision, the Dean will write to the P&T Committee chair and to the candidate informing them of the decision.

5.3 The Role of the Provost

The Provost shall evaluate each tenure and promotion docket and recommendation submitted by the Dean. In evaluating a promotion or tenure recommendation submitted by the Dean, the Provost may solicit additional information and/or letters of evaluation, and may in unusual cases appoint an ad­hoc advisory committee composed of tenured faculty to seek further counsel. The Provost shall support or oppose the Dean's recommendation in his/her final decision. The Provost will inform the Dean of his/her pending decision. In those cases in which that the Provost's decision.will be contrary to

the recommendation of the Dean, the Provost will provide the Dean with the reasons and give the Dean an opportunity to provide further information or counter­argument before the Provost's final decision. The Provost shall notify the Dean of the final decision, along with reasons thereof if the Dean's recommendation is disapproved.

6. Guidelines for Appeal

In the event of a negative decision, the candidate has the right to file a grievance in accordance with the provisions of the University's Faculty Grievance Procedures appearing at pp. 61­63 of the Faculty Handbook (1999 ed.).

7. Tenure Clock

The tenure clock for faculty is set forth in formal University rules adopted by the Board of Trustees. The current rules are found in the University's statement on Academic Freedom and Tenure, Title I and II reprinted in the Faculty Handbook (1999ed) at pp. 25­35.

7.1 Acceleration of Schedule

Proposals for early promotion to associate professor and for tenure or for promotion to master teacher must be considered extraordinary actions. Indeed, it is not normally in the best interest of a candidate or of the institution to propose candidates for tenure or promotion ahead of schedule. The Dean must be consulted prior to the preparation of an early case. The best reason for proposing early consideration is a record of extraordinary

accomplishment that can be readily distinguished from strong cases. 1t must be noted that external letter writers must be asked to comment specifically on the special grounds for an early decision. The Dean and the P&T Committee must also specifically address this issue. Even with these affirmative recommendations, the Dean will not recommend early tenure unless the case is extraordinary and compelling in relation to the already high expectations for candidates reviewed under the usual schedule.

7.2 Stopping the Tenure Clock

Tenure clock stoppage may be granted, under conditions cited below, for a maximum of two semesters during the probationary period for any one of, or a combination of, the following personal reasons:

• ·  Tenure clock stoppage may be authorized during a period of full service, to women or men who are primary caregivers of a child; and to primary caregivers of a parent or of a spouse or same­sex domestic partner in a health crisis of extended duration. A same­sex domestic partner qualifies if he or she is registered with the University for the purposes of benefits. "Primary care" assumes day­to­ day responsibilities for the care of a child/parent/ spouse/same sex domestic partner for a substantial portion of the period.

• ·  Tenure clock stoppage may be authorized to a faculty member who is granted one or more full semesters of leave, for any one, or combination of, illness/disability leave, parental leave, or personal leave.

  A request for tenure clock stoppage requires advance approval by the Dean and the Office of the Provost. Requests must be made as early as possible. Tenure clock stoppage may not be granted for any semester of the period when a tenure review is mandated.