|No. 8-17||Rev. 01-19-05||Date 11-12-80 (formerly 8-29)|
The following procedures shall be followed in giving consideration to a candidate for advancement in rank or for tenure:
A. A written explanation of the findings and recommendations at all levels (department, college, dean) shall be sent to the candidate and the candidate's department chair. A copy shall become part of the candidate's professional file.
B. The department Ranking Tenure Evaluation Committee shall meet in compliance with the dated guidelines contained in PPM 8-12 to consider recommendations for candidates for tenure and advancement in rank and to review progress of probationary faculty members.
C. Prior to the convening of the department Ranking Tenure Evaluation Committee, the department chair shall invite departmental faculty members to submit, in writing, recommendations on the candidates to be evaluated stating as specifically as possible the reasons for the recommendations. Such recommendations shall be shared with the candidates whom they respectively concern. Such recommendations shall be placed in the candidate's permanent file by the department chair.
D. The department Ranking Tenure Evaluation Committee may serve as a peer review group; its members may therefore visit classes of candidates and otherwise evaluate their teaching.
E. Each candidate shall be given one week's advance notice of the meeting of the department Ranking Tenure Evaluation Committee by the Committee chair. Each candidate shall have an opportunity to submit a written statement to the department Ranking Tenure Evaluation Committee which shall be duly forwarded by the department Committee chair to be placed in the candidate's permanent file.
A. The Ranking Tenure Evaluation Committee shall consider recommending advancement in rank, or recommending tenure for any faculty member in the final probationary year, and shall review progress of all probationary faculty members in their third year of probation. The department Committee shall complete the review process in accordance with the dated guidelines contained in PPM 8-12. The department Ranking Tenure Evaluation Committee shall also review the progress of a candidate in any other year of probation upon the request of the candidate, the department chair, the dean or the provost. The request must be made in writing according to the dated guidelines in PPM 8-12.
To be recommended for advancement in rank, or for the awarding of tenure, an individual must receive a majority vote of the total membership of the Committee. A quorum, for voting purposes, shall consist of 75% of the Committee membership. Members of the department Ranking Tenure Evaluation Committee may issue a separate dissenting or concurring evaluation.
B. For probationary candidates, the Committee chair, after adding the written recommendation to the file, shall inform them of the action taken to that point (including a report of strengths and weaknesses). In the event that progress toward tenure is deemed unsatisfactory, the faculty member shall be notified through the Committee chair as to the areas of deficiency.
C. The chair of the department Ranking Tenure Evaluation Committee shall forward the recommendations of the Committee to the chair of the Ranking Tenure Evaluation Committee in accordance with the dated guidelines contained in PPM 8-12. Candidates disagreeing with the recommendations of the department Committee may submit a written statement to the Ranking Tenure Evaluation Committee within the time constraints as established in the dated guidelines contained in PPM 8-12 and shall have the opportunity to appear before that Committee.