• Home
  • Policy Library
  • Browse for Policy:
  • Promotion and Tenure UNIT Policy Check list for Initial Reviews

Promotion and Tenure UNIT Policy Check list for Initial Reviews

Policy
Purpose: 

This guidance document is intended to assist units and is not a binding policy.  While not a policy document, the Standards and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure committee thinks it can be useful to units as they work on their promotion and tenure policies.  This document is a tool to be used by units that carry out initial reviews to determine the degree to which their promotion and tenure policies and procedures are consistent with Article VI.  Typically, departments and nondepartmentalized schools carry out initial reviews.

Applies to: 

Units conducting initial reviews.

Policy Statement: 

Promotion and Tenure Unit Policy Checklist for Initial Reviews (updated April 2011)

 

The purpose of the checklist is to allow units conducting initial reviews to self-evaluate their policies and procedures for promotion and tenure in relation to Article VI of the Faculty Senate Rules and Regulations (FSRR).  Initial reviews – the first level of review – are conducted by departments, schools when undepartmentalized, and other administrative units. The Self Study Checklist is divided into two major categories, 1) Procedures; and 2) Policies and Criteria.  When units are revising their policies and procedures they should be as specific as possible about their criteria for tenure and promotion.  Article VI of the FSRR creates the floor rather than ceiling for policies and procedures.  Another guidance document will identify many of the ways units might go above the floor.  The absence of a policy or procedure on this checklist should not be interpreted as a prohibition.

 

Promotion and Tenure Unit Policy Checklist for Initial Reviews (updated April 2011)

Does the document:

FSRR

YES/NO

COMMENTS

1. Include a statement that recommendations concerning promotion and tenure shall be made solely in accordance with the standards and procedures in Faculty Senate Rules and Regulations Article VI?

6.1.1

 

2. State that consideration and evaluation of a candidate’s record is a confidential personnel matter and ensure this confidentiality?

6.1.3

 

3. Indicate that these written procedures and criteria have been adopted by vote of eligible faculty or faculty body?

6.3.2 and 6.3.3

 

CRITERIA (as applicable in the unit)

 

 

4. Define “professional performance,” if applicable, for non-teaching faculty/unclassified academic staff, and include the expectations of the discipline? [Each administrative unit with non-teaching faculty/unclassified academic staff shall establish standards of professional performance, commensurate with the standards for the equivalent areas of teaching, scholarship and/or service established in FSRR Article VI to evaluate for promotion to equivalent ranks.]

6.2.2.4

 

5. Establish written criteria consistent with the standard, stating that the record for the award of tenure and/or promotion to associate professor must demonstrate effective teaching?

6.2.2.2

 

6. Establish written criteria consistent with the standard that the record for promotion to the rank of professor must demonstrate continued effectiveness and growth as a teacher?

6.2.2.3

 

7. Establish written criteria consistent with the standard that for the award of tenure and/or promotion to the rank of associate professor the record reflects a sustainable program of scholarly activity and must demonstrate a successfully developing scholarly career?

6.2.3.2

 

8. Establish written criteria consistent with the standard that for promotion to the rank of professor, the record must demonstrate an established scholarly career?

6.2.3.3

 

9. Establish written criteria consistent with the standard that for the award of tenure and/or promotion to associate professor, the record must demonstrate a pattern of service to the University at one or more levels, to the discipline or profession, and/or to the local, state, national, or international communities?

6.2.4.2

 

10. Establish written criteria consistent with the standard that for promotion to the rank of professor, the record must demonstrate an ongoing pattern of service reflecting substantial contributions to the University at one or more levels, to the discipline or profession, and/or to the local, state, national, or international communities?

6.2.4.3

 

COMMITTEE COMPOSITION

11. Establish a committee or committees (which may be a committee of all faculty holding the necessary rank) to evaluate candidates for recommendation of award of tenure or promotion in rank?

6.3.3.1

 

12. Include provisions that prevent participation of persons with a clear conflict of interest or persons who would compromise the impartiality of an evaluation or recommendation?

6.1.4

 

13. Include provisions for a candidate to petition for the recusal of a committee member and if a committee member does not recuse himself/herself, a decision about whether that person has a conflict of interest shall be made by a majority of the other committee members?

6.1.4.4

 

14. Assure that no students or untenured faculty members, except unclassified academic staff with rank equivalent to or higher than associate professor, shall serve, participate, or observe on any promotion and tenure committee or vote on any recommendation concerning promotion and tenure?

6.3.3.3

 

INITIAL PROCEDURES

15. Describe the process for initiation of review: A) notification by the Provost for mandatory review; B) Department, school, or administrative unit initiated review; C) Candidate initiated review?

6.5.1

 

16.  Clarify that the candidate is responsible for completing the appropriate portions of the form and provide necessary documents and information in accordance with the Provost’s guidelines, with assistance from the department, school, or administrative unit conducting the initial review as provided in its procedure?

6.5.2

 

COMMITEE PROCEDURES

17. Establish that the committee responsible for the initial review shall receive the form and accompanying materials from the candidate and finish compiling the record of a candidate’s teaching, scholarship, and service in accordance with the Provost’s guidelines?

6.5.3

 

18. Provide for the solicitation of outside reviews to assist in the evaluation of a faculty member’s scholarship or equivalent professional performance?  [Procedures should emphasize selecting reviewers who hold academic rank or professional position equal to or greater than the rank for which the candidate is being considered and assure that prospective reviewers will be informed of the extent to which the candidate will have access to the review.]

6.5.3.1

 

19. Establish that the committee conducting the initial review shall evaluate the candidate’s record of teaching, scholarship, and service in light of the applicable standards and criteria and make recommendations concerning the award of tenure and/or promotion in rank?

6.5.4

 

20. (If applicable) provide that the committee recommendation shall be forwarded for consideration to a committee of the whole consisting of all faculty holding the appropriate academic rank (if the unit has opted for this arrangement)?

6.5.4.1

 

CHAIR/DEAN PROCEDURES

21. Provide for the chair, dean, or head of the administrative unit to indicate separately in writing whether he or she concurs with or disagrees with the recommendations of the committee and/or faculty?

6.5.4.2

 

22. Include provisions for the chair, dean, or head of the unit to communicate the recommendations of the initial review to the candidate and to provide the candidate with a copy of the corresponding summary evaluation section of the promotion and tenure form?

6.5.4.3

 

23. Provide that in the event of a negative recommendation that will not be forwarded automatically, the candidate will be informed that he or she may request that the record be forwarded for further review?

6.5.4.3

 

24. Include provisions informing the candidate to submit to the next level of review a written response to a negative recommendation at the initial review level, or to a final rating of teaching, research, or service below the level of “good”?

6.6.1.1

 

POST INITIAL REVIEW PROCEDURES

25. Include provisions whereby the chair of the department or head of the administrative unit immediately provides a copy of a request for information to the candidate and informs the initial review committee (if such request is sent by the intermediate review committee or UCPT)?

6.6.2.2

 

26. Afford the candidate an opportunity to participate in the preparation of the department’s or administrative unit’s response to the request for information and/or to submit his or her own documentation or comment to the higher committee?

6.6.2.3

 

Contact: 

University Governance

33 Strong Hall

1450 Jayhawk Blvd

 Lawrence, KS 66045

785-864-5169

Approved by: 
Standards and Procedures on Promotion and Tenure Committee, Faculty Senate Executive Committee
Approved on: 
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Effective on: 
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Review Cycle: 
Annual (As Needed)
Background: 

This document is a tool to be used by units that carry out initial reviews to determine the degree to which their promotion and tenure policies and procedures are consistent with Article VI.  Typically, departments and nondepartmentalized schools carry out initial reviews.

Keywords: 
Promotion and Tenure, policies and procedures, initial reviews, FSRR Article VI, Self Study checklist
Change History: 

11/06/07: Standards and Procedures for Promotion & Tenure

11/20/07: Faculty Executive Committee
February 2011: Standards and Procedures for Promotion & Tenure
February 15, 2011: Faculty Senate Executive Committee

Personnel: Faculty/Academic Staff Categories: 
Promotion & Tenure

Can't Find What You're Looking For?
Policy Library Search
KU Today
One of 34 U.S. public institutions in the prestigious Association of American Universities
Nearly $290 million in financial aid annually
44 nationally ranked graduate programs.
—U.S. News & World Report
Top 50 nationwide for size of library collection.
—ALA
23rd nationwide for service to veterans —"Best for Vets," Military Times