SUBJECT: UNIVERSITY POLICY ON ACADEMIC PROMOTIONS

APPLICABILITY: FACULTY AND ACADEMIC ADMINISTRATORS

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Goals of the University

The goals of a university may be thought of as consisting of certain outputs along with various activities in support of these outputs. These goals are conveniently placed in three groups.

Student-oriented output goals are those which relate to changes that are produced in the identity or character of the student through cultivation of intellect, ability to think critically, and sense of values; and those which train the student to do something specific for society or to assume a specific role in society. These goals are accomplished through the teaching function.

A second output of the university is the production of new knowledge or new methods of problem solving, or the creation of new artistic or literary works through research and other creative activity.

A third output is the provision of leadership and services to society which the university is uniquely equipped to give.

Additionally there are certain support goals which enable the university to produce its outputs. Among these are the management and internal service functions which provide a favorable environment and facilitate realization of the goals of teaching, research and service.

B. Faculty Development

It is recognized that the strength of a university resides in its faculty and that development of a strong faculty is essential to realization of the goals of the university. The development of a faculty is accomplished first through critical consideration of initial appointment, tenure and promotion, and secondly by providing a working environment that is favorable to professional growth.

Initial appointments necessarily must be based on potential for contribution as indicated by academic record and prior experience. University appointments may be considered to fall generally in four categories:

1. Terminal: no expectation of reappointment; at any rank.

2. Temporary: not eligible for tenure; renewable at the option of the university; at any rank.

3. Probationary: eligible for tenure; renewable at the option of the university; as instructor or above only; with potential for achieving tenure and full rank, but with no automatic assurance of either.

4. Continuing: with tenure.

The granting of tenure is perhaps the most critical decision involved in faculty development. Approval of tenure is recognition of the individual as a continuing member of the faculty and is based on performance during a trial period which indicates a high probability of long-term contribution to the goals of the university. The decision is based on the same considerations as promotion and must, in addition to professional competence, recognize the requirements for membership in a community of scholars: the necessity for high standards of professional ethics and integrity and ability and willingness to work as a member of a group while retaining the right of individual expression. Promotion is recognition of accumulated past achievement and the high probability of continuing success. Promotions and salary increments comprise the principal elements of the reward system of the university.

Thus, while this document addresses itself primarily to the question of policies for promotion, it should be emphasized that similar considerations must of necessity apply to appointments, the granting of tenure and the fixing of salary increments. It is essential that those at all levels of responsibility consider these decisions critically, with maturity, and with the realization that these decisions are basic to the building of a strong faculty.

II. PROMOTION POLICY

A. General

Institutional goals and purposes are realized primarily through the collective efforts of the faculty. The promotion policy of the university is one instrument for building and maintaining a faculty of the highest possible quality.

Appointment to the faculty as an assistant professor is made principally on the basis of the anticipated potential suggested by academic records, credentials and perhaps experience, and such appointment carries with it no assurance of future promotion. Rather, it is the policy of the university continuously to evaluate the pool of talent available to it and to retain and promote only those whose potential has resulted in achievement which is clearly outstanding. Thus, promotion is neither routine nor automatic. Promotion is earned; it is based on merit; it is a declaration of the individual's unusual professional success and increasing usefulness to the university.

Not only are promotions based on clearly superior performance, but the measures of superior performance must of necessity become more stringent as the institution matures.

Inasmuch as promotion is not only a recognition of substantial past contributions to the goals of the university but is also a sign of confidence that the individual is judged capable of greater responsibilities and accomplishments, no candidate should be recommended for an associate professorship unless there is an expectation that he or she will eventually merit a professorship.

The university offers equal employment opportunities and does not discriminate against any employee applying for promotion because of sex, age, race, color, creed, national origin, disability, disabled veteran status, or Vietnam Era veteran status. All promotions shall be on the basis of qualifications and criteria outlined below and in keeping with the University's Affirmative Action Policy of nondiscrimination, Federal and State employment laws and regulations, and the regulations of the University.

B. Criteria

Recommendations for promotion are based on critical appraisal of the contributions of candidates to the goals of the university, and those charged with the responsibility are expected to gather explicit evidence on all pertinent factors before making recommendations.

Continuing evaluation of a faculty member will focus on three principal functions: teaching; scholarly, creative and professional activities; and service. Definitions of evaluative criteria should be comprehensive in nature. For example, effective teaching includes not only classroom performance but also instructionally related responsibilities such as advising and the supervision of graduate students. Research/creative/professional activities may include publication, presentations at scholarly meetings, exhibitions, and performances as well as participation in the professional activities of the respective disciplines, including editing, serving as a referee for a journal, chairing sessions at scholarly meetings, etc. Service includes service to the department or division, the school or college, and the university, as well as professionally related external service activities.

Quality teaching is a minimum expectation for the granting of tenure and for promotion. No recommendation should be forthcoming in case of any reasonable doubt.

If a university is worthy of its name, the members of the faculty must show continuing growth through research or writing or other creative activities, and through participation in the professional activities of their disciplines. Quality as well as quantity of effort must be judged. Such growth and development must be evidenced for all promotions.

Opportunities for public service vary considerably from one discipline to another and indeed may not be available in some areas. Therefore, public service cannot be expected of all members of the faculty. In any case, however, public service should be related to the mission of the university in order to serve as a basis for promotion.

Service to the department, college and university is expected of all members of the faculty in developing and implementing the instructional program. It is the policy of the university to recognize exceptional service of this nature, but such service will not ordinarily serve as a primary basis for promotion.

Outstanding achievement, an absolute essential for promotion, implies that the candidate is clearly superior in at least one area of his or her contributions to the university; but outstanding contribution in one area alone will not qualify an individual for promotion.

Balance among the primary factors will vary from one discipline to another and, as a matter of choice, interest and talent, from individual to individual; but balance implies some breadth rather that narrowness. Therefore, effective teaching is a highly prized quality in members of the faculty, and scholarly or artistic production, even of exceptional quality, when combined with indifferent teaching will not qualify an individual for the higher ranks. At the same time, unusually effective teaching or an unusually large contribution to the university's well being cannot compensate for a total absence of accomplishments (scholarly, creative, professional) which demonstrate the candidate's continuing professional growth and vitality.

The doctorate is expected generally for appointment as assistant professor or at a higher rank. It is recognized, however, that in some disciplines (e.g., creative or performing arts) professional achievement and recognition may serve in lieu of the doctorate. Likewise, nationally recognized eminence in a field in which a doctorate is ordinarily expected might also serve.

The responsibility of the university for building a faculty of the highest quality is accompanied by a commensurate responsibility for maintaining such a faculty through just recognition and encouragement of achievement. Therefore, while insisting on high standards for promotion, it is at the same time the policy of the university to promote faculty members as rapidly as possible in the light of their individual contributions. The university does not specify any fixed minimum time in rank as a criterion for promotion. It does insist that the performance which merits promotion be not only superior but demonstrated on a continuing basis. Thus, promotions with less than three or four years in rank must be considered most unusual. Length of service per se cannot be a basis for promotion.

As is the case in the granting of tenure, recommendation for promotion should carry with it the assurance that the individual understands the nature of membership in a community of scholars; that he or she adheres to high standards of professional ethics and integrity; and that he or she has the ability and the desire to work as a member of a group while retaining all rights of individual expression.

A recommendation for promotion is normally strengthened when it is accompanied by a consistent recent history of above-average salary increases.

III. EVALUATION

A. General

An evaluative process is essential to decision making generally, and accumulated systematic annual evaluations of the faculty constitute the information base used in arriving at decisions regarding tenure, promotions and salary increments. These evaluations have the added value of keeping the individual faculty member informed of his or her performance and progress. It is essential that the peer evaluations referred to in this document (see C-1 below) be considered in making decisions regarding tenure and salary increments as well as promotions.

Evaluation of a faculty member's contribution to the goals of the university focuses on his or her performance in the three functions of teaching, research and service. The faculty member's performance must be judged by colleagues who are engaged in similar activities. Evaluation by the departmental chair* is essential since the chair is responsible and accountable for the progress and development of the department. Because students are in a unique position to evaluate teaching, the use of student input in this area as a basis for evaluation by colleagues and the chair is considered by the university to be essential.

By their very nature academic activities are not as suited to objective, quantitative appraisal as might be desired, and yet at the same time decisions must be based on as explicit evidence as can be obtained. Accumulated peer evaluations comprise a major part of this evidence. The evaluations which result are a collection of subjective judgments, and the study of such judgments by a group of peers has validity. The comparison of performance and the recording of evaluations may be facilitated by the use of rating scales. Caution should be exercised in the use of such ratings to develop quantitative measures of faculty performances since the numerical results may imply greater validity than is justified by the original data.

In the final analysis success in arriving at rational decisions concerning appointments, tenure, promotion and salary increments depends on the wisdom and good judgment of those who evaluate and make recommendations, and these judgments inevitably are subjective.

_________

*It will be understood in this document that "departmental chair" may also refer to deans who serve as chairs of departments or schools.

B. Policy

1. Each faculty member shall be evaluated annually by a group of peers, which may, in a small or medium-sized department, be the tenured faculty acting as a committee of the whole or, in a large department, consist of an elected committee of tenured faculty (Personnel Affairs Committee).*

a. The process of evaluation shall focus on teaching, research or other scholarly or             creative activity, and service.

b. No faculty member shall evaluate himself or herself.

c. The departmental chair may participate in the peer evaluative process on the invitation of the departmental faculty.

d. In the evaluation of teaching, substantial consideration must be given to systematic student evaluation.

e. Newly appointed faculty members shall be evaluated at the end of the first and second semesters of service.

f. Summary results of evaluation must be made known annually to those evaluated.

2. The departmental chair is to prepare for the dean and academic vice president a narrative statement of evaluation for each faculty member.

C. Procedures for Evaluation

1. Peer Evaluations

a. The faculty member fills out Faculty Annual Update to update his or her record files with the departmental chair.

b. The department chair completes the personnel file for each faculty member which will include Professional Record Forms, annual updates (a. above), accumulated results of peer evaluations, accumulated summaries of student evaluations and any other supporting information.

c. Individual members of the Personnel Affairs Committee will prepare an evaluation for each faculty member (excluding themselves) reporting on an instrument which results in ratings on a graded scale and using as an information base the faculty file (1-b, above). This set of evaluations together with any summaries derived therefrom will become a part of the faculty file.

d. Peer evaluation of the chair as a faculty member shall be sent directly from the PAC to the dean.

________________

*See "Policy Statement on Departmental Personnel Administration."

2. Chair's Evaluation

The departmental chair, using the faculty file (1-b and 1-c above), will prepare an evaluation for each faculty member for the dean and the vice president for academic affairs consisting of

a. A completed rating instrument as referred to in 1-c above.

b. A narrative statement of evaluation.

IV. PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES FOR PROMOTION

A. General

Recommendations for promotion and the burden of justification for the promotion are the responsibility of the department. The importance of this decision calls for critical analysis and responsible decision at all levels. The recommendation of the department must represent an unequivocal decision with doubtful or borderline cases not being recommended. Failure to exercise critical judgment simply shifts the decision-making process to other levels and results in frustration for those involved. Continuing failure to secure approval for recommendations at higher administrative levels should be cause for re-examination of departmental criteria in conference with the dean or provost and vice president for academic affairs.

The departmental chair is responsible and accountable both to his or her faculty and to the university administration for the well-being, progress and development of the department. An important part of his or her duties is, with the advice and counsel of the faculty, to prepare recommendations which will recognize those who are making the greatest contribution to the department and the university and who are clearly qualified for promotion.

The Promotion and Tenure Committee* is to screen nominations and recommend those qualified for promotion and to serve as an advisory group to the departmental chair in the preparation of the departmental report.

Review by the dean is concerned with adequacy of the evidence and some uniformity of expectation of achievement between departments. Because of differences in individuals and between departments, it is not expected that each department will maintain the same distribution in ranks.

Review by the provost and vice president for academic affairs likewise is concerned with adequacy of evidence and some uniformity of expectation of achievement. Similarly, differences in distribution between colleges and schools are to be expected.

___________________

*See "Policy Statement on Department Personnel Administration"

B. Preparation of Departmental Recommendation for Promotions

While some flexibility must be left to the department in the implementation of details, the following outline is recommended. Other procedures are permissible provided they are consistent with the spirit of these recommendations.

1. Members of the Promotion and Tenure Committee and the departmental chair shall review the file for each faculty member and nominate individuals for consideration for promotion.

2. Members of the Promotion and Tenure Committee who are nominated for promotion shall be disqualified from participation in discussions and decisions concerning their own promotions.

3. The committee, using the faculty file, shall study all nominations, certify to the departmental chair those who are unequivocally qualified for promotion based on the three major areas of activity, and prepare a narrative statement of justification for its action on each person nominated.

4. The departmental chair, with due consideration of the committee report, shall prepare a tentative departmental recommendation with a statement of justification for his or her action on each person certified by the committee. This tentative departmental recommendation may or may not include all those certified by the committee and may request the committee to reconsider any persons nominated but not certified.

5. The department chair and the committee shall discuss the tentative recommendation with a view to resolution of any differences.

6. The department chair shall prepare the final departmental report which will include the following.

a. Recommendations for promotion, listed in priority order. (The final recommendation may or may not include all of those certified by the committee, but must be restricted to those certified.)

b. Chair's narrative statement of justification (4 above).

c. Accumulated summaries of peer and student evaluations.

d. Committee report (3 above).

e. Chair's and committee's statements regarding any unresolved differences.

7. The departmental chair shall notify the faculty of the departmental recommendation sufficiently in advance of the date of transmittal to the dean that any faculty member not recommended may discuss his or her case with the chair and/or the committee and secure a hearing if desired. Summary reports of such hearings shall be included with the departmental report.

8. The chair shall transmit the departmental recommendation and supporting documentation to the dean.

C. The Dean's Procedures for Recommending Promotions

The dean shall

1. Evaluate the case presented by each department for each individual;

2. Prepare the recommendations of the college in priority order, which may or may not include approval of those recommended by a department;

3. Discuss and note exceptions with the departmental chair; and

4. Forward complete report to the provost and vice president for academic affairs.

D. Final Recommendation Procedures

The provost and vice president for academic affairs shall

1. Review the case of each individual;

2. Prepare a list of those to be recommended to the provost and executive vice president and to the president;

3. Discuss with the dean exceptions to the dean's recommendations;

4. Notify those faculty members recommended by the department whose promotions were not approved; the faculty members may request the reasons for disapproval; with the consent of the faculty member, the reasons for disapproval of promotion by a dean or by the provost and vice president for academic affairs shall be transmitted in writing to the departmental chair and the chair of the department promotion committee;

5.     Forward final recommendation to the president for transmittal to the Board of Regents for final approval; and

6. Notify faculty members of final action.

 

*Policy reviewed with no changes (refering to dates with *)