(A) Purpose
The faculty bylaws concerning appointment,
promotion and tenure of tenure track faculty (the "bylaws") are set
forth herein and are designed to cultivate a diverse body of faculty that
demonstrates sustained excellence and distinction in scholarship, education,
service and clinical care, if appropriate. To this end, the bylaws define the
nature of tenure; the faculty who are eligible for appointment and
consideration for promotion and/or tenure; the process for the comprehensive,
fair and orderly consideration of appointments and the granting of tenure;
criteria that are to be applied in making these decisions; and mechanisms for
the assurance of due process and good faith resolution of conflicts arising out
of the bylaws.
(B) Scope
The bylaws concerning appointment, promotion and
tenure of tenure track faculty apply only to tenure track and tenured
faculty.
(C) Definitions
(1) "Academic rank." The
university has established in rank order, the ranks of assistant professor,
associate professor and professor (sometimes referred to as full professor) for
faculty on the tenure track. The rank of instructor is reserved for persons
completing customary preparation in a given field, or persons without a
terminal degree. This rank is only available to faculty in the non-tenure
track.
(2) "Candidate." A candidate is
an applicant for appointment, promotion and/or tenure.
(3) "College." The term
"college" includes all the colleges organized under the authority of
the northeast Ohio medical university ("NEOMED" or "the
university").
(4) "Curriculum vitae (CV)."
The curriculum vitae is one of the documents submitted by the candidate for
consideration by independent external evaluators. The CV should include, but
does not need to be limited to, information on contributions to the educational
program of the university or college(s), research and scholarly
accomplishments, service related to the college(s), university or profession,
and professional standing.
(5) "Days." Days as used in
this document are business days of the university.
(6) "Dossier." A dossier is a
comprehensive set of documentation prepared and submitted by the candidate when
seeking promotion and/or tenure. This documentation is critical in assessing
the candidate's achievements and readiness for promotion and/or tenure.
The completed dossier must be signed by the candidate along with an attestation
of veracity and completeness.
(7) "Essential functions."
Duties or principal functional responsibilities of a particular faculty
position that are regarded as being crucial to that position. They also include
mental and physical qualifications that are required to perform the duties or
principal functional responsibilities delineated in the job description. A
faculty member with an impairment caused by a physical or mental disease or
disability that substantially limits a major life activity may request
accommodations in the performance of these duties and principal functional
responsibilities in accordance with the university's rule on disabilities
and accommodations.
(8) "Evaluation year." The
evaluation year is the final year of the probationary period.
(9) "Fitness for duty
assessment." A mental or physical health evaluation in which a qualified
health professional performs tests and provides feedback about an
employee's mental or physical qualifications that are required to perform
the duties or principal functional responsibilities delineated in the job
description. A fitness for duty assessment should provide an in-depth analysis
of the employee's core competencies to successfully perform the duties or
principal functional responsibilities delineated in the job
description.
(10) "Independent external
evaluator." An independent external evaluator is an individual who is not
a first degree relative of the candidate or does not have a comparable close
personal relationship with the candidate; or; has no substantive financial ties
to the candidate; is not dependent in some way on the candidate's
services; does not have a close professional relationship with the candidate
(e.g. dissertation advisor, postdoctoral mentor, or collaborator); has not in
the past three years co-authored an original research publication or
presentation with candidate, or collaborated on research or funding including
funding proposals (e.g., as a co-investigator or consultant on a research
grant) with the candidate that would be defined as a conflict in accordance
with the foregoing guidelines; or has not collaborated so extensively with the
candidate that an objective review of the candidate's work either is not,
or appears not to be possible. An independent external evaluator is not
employed by and does not have a faculty appointment at the university, or its
affiliated hospitals and health departments, and is qualified to assess the
candidate's scholarly achievements and reputation. An independent external
evaluator must hold faculty rank equivalent to or higher than the rank to which
the candidate seeks promotion (i.e. must be at least associate professor for
associate professor candidates, and full professor for full professor
candidates).
(11) "Leave of absence." A
period of time for which a faculty member has been approved to be absent from
the workplace and is not completing work-related duties. A leave of absence
will toll the probationary period.
(12) "Letter of offer." The
letter of offer is a document initiated by a given college dean that sets forth
certain terms and conditions of the candidate's appointment and/or
employment but does not constitute a contract. Any previous experience to be
counted toward a faculty member's probationary period may be negotiated
prior to appointment and will be delineated in this document. Any modifications
to the document must be in writing and signed by the dean of the respective
college that initiated the appointment, the faculty member's department
chair and the affected faculty member.
(13) "Notice of
non-reappointment." Notice of non-reappointment is a written notification
by the dean of the respective college to the affected faculty member that the
college intends to terminate a faculty member's appointment at a specified
time. Notice of non-reappointment will generally be given on or before March
fifteenth. For the first year of service, the last day of service will be June
thirtieth of the calendar year in which the notice is given. After one or more
years of service, the last day of service will be June thirtieth of the next
calendar year.
(14) "Probationary period." The
probationary period is the initial period of a tenure track appointment during
which faculty members must demonstrate that they are capable of performing at
the level of excellence and distinction required to be awarded tenure. The
probationary period lasts from the date of the initial tenure track appointment
to the date of the award of tenure by the board of trustees or notice of
non-reappointment.
(15) "Promotion." Promotion is
the shift of a faculty member from one academic rank to a higher academic rank.
(16) Recognition of faculty
distinction
The following titles have been established to
recognize outstanding, meritorious or exceptional tenured or tenure track
faculty.
(a) "Distinguished"
(i) The title "distinguished" is a non-salaried
designation of distinction.
(ii) The title distinguished university professor is the highest
honor the university can confer. It is reserved for faculty members who have
made exceptional contributions and extraordinary achievements in the areas of
teaching, scholarship and research.
(iii) When the title "distinguished" is conferred, it
precedes the faculty member's academic rank.
(iv) Recommendations for the award of distinguished status may
originate with the department chair, dean, provost, or the president. If the
recommendation originates with the chair, it must be reviewed by the respective
college dean and provost, and if approved forwarded to the
president.
(v) The president may forward recommendations directly to the
board of trustees for approval.
(b) "Emeritus"
"Emeritus" is a title of
distinction that is used to recognize university faculty and senior
professional staff who have provided meritorious service to the university and
who have terminated full-time service to the college or university. The
university recognizes emeritus faculty and senior professional staff as a
continuing valuable resource and as such encourages them to maintain an active
ongoing relationship with the university. The conferral of this title is
governed by a separate board of trustees rule and as such, is beyond the scope
of university bylaws.
(17) "Tenure." Tenure is a
privilege and not a right. Tenure is the commitment of a given college of the
university to a faculty member for continuous and ongoing faculty appointment.
Tenure provides protection against involuntary suspension or termination except
for financial exigency, just cause when a faculty member receives a negative
post-tenure review or is so substantially impaired by a physical or mental
disease or disability such that the faculty member is unable to fulfill the
essential functions of the faculty member's position. Tenure automatically
ceases upon the faculty member's voluntary or involuntary termination,
retirement or death.
(18) "Tenure track position." A
tenure track position is a full-time salaried faculty appointment that includes
the eligibility to apply for tenure. The appointment to a tenure track position
is set forth in the letter of offer.
(19) "Tolling." Tolling is the
suspension of the time period (granted in year-long increments) that comprises
a tenure track faculty member's probationary period, for which there is no
expectation of productivity. Tolling of the probationary period must be
requested by the faculty member and approved by the department chair and the
dean of the respective college. Any such suspension of time will not be counted
toward the probationary period.
(D) Body of the bylaws
(1) Appointments
(a) Appointment to the faculty is a privilege not a right. An
appointment is the designation of a candidate for a given academic rank, that
is based upon the candidate's competence in a given field and the
expectation that the candidate will maintain and increase mastery and
creativity in this field. The letter of offer will state the kind of
appointment the candidate will hold, the conditions under which the appointment
is made and held, and any special considerations that may affect the
appointment.
(b) Appointments to the tenure track will be made upon the
positive recommendation of a duly constituted search committee, the respective
college dean, provost, the university president, and final action by the board
of trustees.
(c) Considerations include, but are not limited to:
(i) Possession of an appropriate terminal academic or
professional degree;
(ii) Expertise in an appropriate academic field and evidence of
dedication to continuing advancement of this field of knowledge;
(iii) Ability and dedication as an effective teacher;
(iv) Creativity and competence in an appropriate field of research
and scholarship; and
(v) Ability to assume responsibility for service to the college,
university or profession.
(d) "Appointments with tenure" are appointments for
senior level faculty (associate or full professor) from comparable institutions
where they have had tenure and a commensurate faculty rank. For these faculty,
the probationary period is waived, and tenure commences at the time of initial
appointment. Appointments with tenure are made only after positive
recommendations by the department chair, respective college dean, and
consultation with the vice president for academic affairs. The vice president
for academic affairs shall forward positive recommendations to the university
president for review and approval. The university president shall forward
positive recommendations to the board of trustees for ratification or
approval.
(e) While prior tenure status and faculty rank at another
institution will be considered at the time of initial appointment, the college
dean in consultation with the university vice president for academic affairs
will determine the appropriate faculty rank and the length of any probationary
period for a faculty member within the guidelines established herein. The
length of the probationary period if any, will be set forth in the letter of
offer.
(f) An appointment is made with the expectation that it will
continue until notice is given and that it may be terminated either upon the
retirement or resignation of the faculty member or by the college or university
in accordance with the university bylaws and/or the faculty
bylaws.
(2) Tenure
(a) Basic principles of tenure
(i) The conferral of tenure is a commitment of the resources of a
given college within the university. Tenure assists the university and its
respective colleges in attracting and retaining a high quality, and diverse
faculty. The conferral of tenure necessitates an assessment of university and
college needs and resources. The university will consider documented evidence
of the candidate's professional excellence in teaching, research and
scholarly activities, and academic/public/professional/clinical service; and
demonstrated professional dedication and outstanding ability necessary to
substantiate the potential for future contributions justifying the degree of
permanence afforded by the award of tenure.
(ii) Tenure may be awarded only to a full-time, salaried candidate
with a tenure track appointment. Tenure may be awarded at the time of initial
appointment or after the successful completion of the probationary period.
Except under extraordinary circumstances, any time accrued under non-tenure
track appointments at the university or elsewhere will not count toward the
established probationary period. Any exceptions must be approved by the
respective department chair and dean and must be noted in the letter of offer
or an amendment thereto.
(iii) Tenure is a privilege not a right.
(iv) Tenure shall not be awarded unless, after rigorous review,
the candidate has been found to meet the standards described herein. Attainment
of tenure may not result from inaction, inadvertence, or any procedural error
on the part of the college or university.
(v) A candidate for promotion must first have been awarded tenure
or must seek tenure at the time he/she seeks promotion.
(vi) If tenure is not awarded, a candidate shall be given a notice
of non-reappointment as defined herein.
(b) Tenure track
Only faculty appointed to the tenure track
are eligible to apply for tenure. Tenure track status will be identified in the
faculty member's letter of offer.
(c) Terminal degree
The candidate must hold an appropriate
terminal degree. Exceptions can be made in particular cases provided that such
exceptions are justified by the candidate's department chair and approved
by the respective college dean and university provost.
(d) Award must result from positive action
The conferral of tenure is a positive act by
the college and the university. A faculty member shall not be awarded tenure by
default. Any failure in procedural matters shall not be sufficient cause for
the conferral of tenure. If the university or the college makes a procedural
error, the error will be corrected, and the procedure will continue without
prejudice to the candidate.
(e) Probationary period
(i) Typically, the probationary period begins at the time an
appointment commences and ends on the date of the award of tenure by the board
of trustees. In determining eligibility for tenure and promotion, initial
appointments commencing on or before October first will be counted as a full
year. Partial years of appointment will not be used unless so requested in
writing by the faculty member. The probationary period will be identified in
the letter of offer or the amendments thereto.
(ii) Upon written request of a faculty member and approval by the
department chair and the dean, a faculty member may be allowed to apply for
tenure before the maximum number of years of the probationary period. If the
faculty member is not awarded tenure when he/she is reviewed before the maximum
number of years provided herein, he/she may re-apply for tenure once more.
However, he/she may only re-apply in the year when he/she has completed the
maximum number of years of the probationary period.
(iii) Leaves of absence and other reasons approved by the chair and
the dean for which the probationary period has been tolled will not be counted
as part of the probationary period.
(iv) In extenuating circumstances, at the written request of the
faculty member and with the concurrence of the respective department chair and
dean, extensions of up to no more than three years in total may be given to
those probationary faculty who demonstrate a high probability of being awarded
tenure at the end of the extension. The request must be made before May
fifteenth of the evaluation year. Requests for extension and the approval of
such extension must be in writing. Approval of an extension will be considered
an amendment of the letter of offer.
(v) Faculty who have received an extension of the probationary
period can apply for promotion only once during the period of the extension,
either during or at the end of the probationary period. The recommendation of
the university tenure and promotions committee, dean, and provost has the same
standing as recommendations in which the probationary period was not
extended.
(3) Promotion of tenure track assistant
professor to associate professor with tenure and promotion of tenure track
associate professor to full professor
(a) Candidates will be simultaneously reviewed for promotion and
tenure.
(b) If tenure is awarded, then promotion to the next higher
academic rank is also granted.
(c) The probationary period is generally no more than seven years
for assistant professors and no more than five years for associate professors.
A faculty member must submit a written notification of intent to stand for
promotion with tenure to the respective department chair by May fifteenth of
the year specified in the letter of offer or amendments thereto.
(d) If notification of intent to stand is not given by the
faculty member as required, notice of non-reappointment will be issued as
specified herein.
(e) Each candidate for promotion with tenure is evaluated
individually based upon the achievements described in the dossier according to
the criteria and standards appropriate to the candidate's field and any
appropriate terms and conditions cited in the candidate's letter of
offer.
(f) In evaluating the candidate's performance, the weighting
of the evaluation areas may vary. Consideration in weighing will be given to
the mission of the university and college, the department, and the demands of
the appropriate discipline. Both quality and quantity of the individual's
contribution will be taken into consideration.
(g) In order to achieve promotion with tenure, the candidate must
exhibit sustained excellence and distinction in at least one of the two areas
of faculty activity; research or teaching. Proficiency is required in all other
areas of faculty activity. Convincing evidence for these must be exhibited in
the candidate's tenure and promotion dossier and must reflect the
weighting of the effort distribution. See paragraph (I)(1) of this rule
(tenure/promotion dossier for tenure track faculty).
(h) There is no requirement for a faculty member to be promoted
to a higher rank following promotion to associate professor and the award of
tenure.
(4) Promotion of tenured associate
professors to full professor
(a) Faculty must be tenured prior to seeking promotion to
professor.
(b) Five years in rank is generally the minimum time in rank
before which a faculty member may be considered for promotion to professor. The
dean may, after consultation with the department chair, reduce the time in rank
requirement for a faculty member whose outstanding performance would justify
the reduction in time prior to consideration for promotion.
(c) Each candidate for promotion is evaluated individually based
upon the achievements described in the dossier (refer to paragraph (I)(1) of
this rule (tenure/promotion dossier for tenure track faculty) according to the
criteria and standards appropriate to the candidate's field.
(d) Promotions are made after contributions commensurate with the
higher rank have been achieved. The tenure and promotions committee will
consider any specific exceptions or requirements set forth in the faculty
member's letter of offer or any amendments thereto, and the annual written
reviews.
(e) A successful candidate for promotion to full professor should
be recognized as an authority in a given field and be regarded as a national or
international expert and leader. Promotion from associate professor to full
professor is based upon recognition of the candidate's academic maturity;
sustained and distinguished accomplishments in education, scholarship and
service; strong university commitment; and distinction in leadership roles in
education, scholarship and service at the university.
(5) Standards and documentation for
tenure and promotion
Standards and documentation for tenure and
promotion include, but are not limited to:
(a) Research and scholarly accomplishments
(i) The standard
(a) Research and scholarly activities are central to the mission
of the university. Given the complexity of the university and its component
colleges and the great diversity of talent within them, it is imperative that
various kinds of academic work be recognized through a broad vision of
scholarship. Scholarship includes, but is not limited to, the scholarship of
discovery, integration, application, and teaching. Scholarship and research may
also include participation in clinical trials and commercialization, patent and
technology transfer activities. Participation in clinical trials,
commercialization, patent and technology transfer activities are primarily
supportive for promotion decisions and, while they weigh importantly in tenure
decisions, are not solely sufficient for the granting of tenure. Clinical
improvement and innovation activities done in a scholarly manner and
acknowledged to be of regional, national or international importance are
important indicators of distinction and merit consideration. Regardless of the
type of scholarship, it should possess the quality of excellence, be
peer-reviewed and be disseminated in the public domain.
(b) Creative scholarly activity includes both original research
resulting from investigative work or other peer reviewed contributions to the
professional and scientific literature. Faculty shall conduct original research
and other scholarly activity. The hallmark of creative scholarly activity lies
in the peer reviewed "written" word. Written work which is not peer
reviewed may support a faculty member's dossier, but by itself is
insufficient evidence of excellence in scholarly activity. Similarly, oral or
poster presentations may support a faculty member's dossier but are
insufficient evidence of proficiency or excellence in scholarly
activity.
(c) Original research is studious inquiry or
examination.
(d) Faculty shall conduct research and other creative scholarly
activity that clearly demonstrates high quality and conforms to the highest
ethical and legal standards. Quality is stressed over quantity.
(e) Standards and expectations for scholarship may differ from
one field to another. The standards and expectations should be clearly
identified for faculty by the department chair and during the tenure advisory
committee consultations and for the tenure and promotion committee in the
tenure advisory committee's summative letter.
(f) Clinical innovation and improvement performed in a scholarly
fashion and acknowledged to be of regional, national and international
importance are additional evidence of readiness for promotion.
(ii) Documentation
There must be evidence that the candidate
is engaged in creative scholarly activity in areas appropriate to the faculty
member's appointment(s), letter of offer, and if appropriate, graduate
faculty status. Such activities include, but are not limited to:
(a) Scholarly publications. These include publications in
journals, books, chapters, monographs, case reports, literature reviews,
annotated bibliographies, abstracts and technical reports. Publications will be
assessed in terms of quality and quantity and the candidate's role in the
work. The quality of the publications will be evaluated by criteria such as:
whether the publication was refereed; whether the publication was invited; the
metrics that evaluate excellence in a field of science, reputation and
circulation of the journal or book or monograph; the scope of the
periodical's audience; the number of citations; originality, creativity
and impact on the field; unsolicited independent reviews; or solicited outside
professional reviews.
(b) Research support. This includes financial support generated
through grants, contracts and other peer reviewed awards.
(c) Scholarly presentations. These include, but are not limited
to: lectures, poster presentations or educational displays at professional
meetings, colloquia, workshops, seminars and conference
presentations.
(d) Research collaborations. These include, but are not limited
to collaborations between departments, colleges and universities regionally,
nationally or internationally.
(e) Research consultations. These include, but are not limited
to, providing consultation in: study design, data analysis, measurement and
evaluation.
(f) Intellectual property development and activities in support
of technology transfer and commercialization. Documentation of the development
of new intellectual property including patents, conduct of clinical trials, and
commercialization of university intellectual property provide additional
positive evidence for promotion and tenure decisions.
(g) Documentation of innovative clinical activities supported by
scholarly publications, presentations and grant and contract activity;
commercialization efforts; clinical trial excellence, and recognition by peers
such as fellowship in professional organizations or recognition of clinical
acumen, leadership in quality improvement efforts on a large scale and
regional, national and international reputation are also important elements for
consideration.
(b) Educational accomplishments
(i) The standard
Teaching is central to the mission of the
university and its component colleges. A faculty member's teaching is
reflected in part by students' achievements. Furthermore, teaching quality
is documented by recognition and feedback from students, alumni and peer
evaluation. Positive contributions to the learning environment and curriculum
may support a faculty member's record of teaching. Service on and
recognition by national educational bodies are also important aspects of
teaching excellence. The extent and effectiveness of educational
accomplishments will be evaluated through review of relevant evidence, which
may include student performance on examinations; recognition of excellence in
teaching; service on nationally prominent tack forces, committees, or study
sections; supervisor, peer, and student evaluations.
(ii) Documentation
There must be evidence that the candidate
is engaged in educational activities that are appropriate to the faculty
member's appointment(s), letter of offer, and if appropriate, graduate
faculty status. Such activities include, but are not limited to:
(a) Course or clerkship director;
(b) Presentation of lectures, seminars and
tutorials;
(c) Preparation of syllabi, course and examination materials;
remediation;
(d) Academic advising and career guidance;
(e) Obtaining external funding for educational
activities.
(f) Demonstrating substantial ability: in presenting concepts
and information; in teaching problem solving, research and laboratory
techniques; developing professional attitudes; evaluating students and
conducting remediation, innovative curriculum and teaching initiatives,
nationally or internationally prominent educational activities.
(c) Service accomplishments
(i) The standard
Service oriented to the needs of the
university, college and the respective departments, are expected for faculty,
regardless of rank and academic appointment.
(ii) Documentation
(a) Service activities. Faculty members are expected to be active
participants in service activities. Service activities include, but are not
limited to:
(i) Membership on committees, boards, councils,
etc.;
(ii) Professional service activities such as service on research
review committees, ad hoc research reviews, editorial board membership,
editorship, editorial reviews, etc.;
(iii) Service to the community; and
(iv) Service to governmental bodies on biomedical, public health,
and community health topics.
(b) Planning, organizing and implementing service
projects.
(c) Service support. This includes support for service activities
generated through grants, contracts and other sources.
(E) Structure and function of tenure advisory
committee
(1) Purpose
The purpose of the tenure advisory committee is
to establish a structure for progressive, comprehensive assessment and
consistent guidance for a probationary faculty member. The tenure advisory
committee must provide probationary faculty with a sound understanding of all
criteria and standards, a realistic evaluation of the faculty member's
progress toward achieving necessary performance benchmarks and assist the
faculty member by making recommendations concerning academic and professional
development during the probationary period. This committee is advisory to the
faculty member and to the respective department chair.
(2) Composition
(a) A tenure advisory committee will be appointed for each
probationary faculty member. Depending on the number of tenured faculty and the
academic disciplines of the faculty within a given college or department, the
respective dean may appoint a single college advisory committee for all
probationary tenure track faculty or the dean may delegate this authority to a
department chair who may construct more discipline specific tenure advisory
committees for each individual faculty member in a given
department.
(b) The advisory committee will be composed of at least three
tenured faculty of the university who are knowledgeable of the tenure process,
criteria, and standards. The tenure advisory committee may include tenured
faculty from outside the probationary faculty member's department but may
not include the faculty member's department chair.
(3) Meetings
(a) The tenure advisory committee will meet at least annually
with the probationary faculty member. To the extent possible, meetings should
occur in time to allow for input into the annual review of the faculty
member's performance by the department chair.
(b) The tenure advisory committee will be chaired by a member
selected by the dean or the department chair as appropriate.
(4) Reports
(a) The probationary faculty member shall submit a progressively
updated tenure dossier to the tenure advisory committee chair at least two
weeks in advance of the meeting with the committee. The dossier should, to the
extent appropriate, mirror the format of the "tenure/promotion dossier for
tenure track faculty" outlined in paragraph (I)(1) of this
rule.
The dossier will be reviewed with the faculty
member at the time of the advisory committee meeting to help the probationary
faculty member gain a better understanding of all of the criteria and standards
and to assist the faculty member to submit information more comprehensively and
uniformly to the tenure and promotion committee.
(b) The tenure advisory committee chair will provide an annual
written report to the department chair which will include an assessment of the
faculty member's progress toward tenure and promotion The report is to be
evaluative with specific recommendations for promoting the faculty
member's progress toward standing for tenure and promotion. The report
must not be a simple listing of the faculty member's achievements. The
committee chair will keep a record of all the reports submitted to the
chair.
(c) The department chair will consider the tenure advisory
committee report when conducting the annual performance review of the faculty
member, and when formulating a letter of recommendation at the time of tenure
review.
(d) The committee chair shall submit a summative report that sets
forth the committee's assessment of the candidate's readiness to
stand for tenure and promotion to the candidate's department chair, in an
unalterable electronic file, in sufficient time to allow for the chair to
include this information a recommendation to the university tenure and
promotion committee.
(F) Structure and function of the university tenure and
promotions committee
(1) Standing committee of the
university
The university tenure and promotions committee
(UTPC) is a standing committee of the university. The rules of the university
standing committees (per rule 3349-3-72 of the Administrative Code) will apply
unless superseded herein.
(2) Composition and chair
(a) Voting membership includes:
(i) Nine tenured faculty members appointed by the president;
there shall be no more than two members at the associate professor rank and no
faculty at the assistant professor rank or below. There will be no department
chairs on the committee.
(ii) A diversity of members representing the breadth of
departments and faculty with at least one from each department with tenure
track faculty, and with at least two from each college which grants
tenure.
(b) Officers
(i) The chair shall be a tenured professor elected by a majority
vote of the UTPC. The chair is a voting member of the committee who will
abstain from voting unless the votes of the other committee members are
tied.
(ii) A vice chair shall be a tenured professor elected by a
majority vote of the UTPC. The vice chair plays the same role as any other
member of the committee if the chair of the committee is chairing the meeting.
If the chair is absent at a meeting, the vice chair assumes the
responsibilities of the chair, including not voting unless the votes of the
other committee members are tied.
(3) Conflict of interest -
criteria
Any member of the UTPC must disclose all real
and/or perceived conflict of interest of any of its members to the committee. A
committee member has a conflict of interest if he/she:
(a) Is related to the person who is evaluated or has a close
comparable relationship;
(b) Has a substantial financial interest in any evaluated
activities by the person who is evaluated, both personal and
professional;
(c) Within the past three years, has collaborated with or has
been in a close mentoring relationship with the person who is evaluated, or is
dependent in some way on the candidate's services;
(d) Within the past three years, has played a major professional
role as part of a funded research project with the person who is
evaluated;
(e) Is preparing to enter into a relationship that would be
defined as a conflict in accordance with the above guidelines.
(4) Conflict of interest - tenure
advisory committee (TAC)
No conflict of interest is presumed to exist if
the UTPC member is currently part of the TAC for the candidate. However, if the
UTPC member is the chair of the TAC and the single author of a final TAC
report, that member will recuse themself from a formal vote on the
candidate.
(5) Conflict of interest - evaluation
procedure
The UTPC shall evaluate a member's
declared or perceived conflict of interest to determine if the conflict is
substantial enough to exclude the member from discussion and/or voting on a
pending tenure case. This evaluation shall include:
(a) Examination of the factors that surround the potential
conflict;
(b) In the presence of the affected member and with the
member's participation, discussion of these factors;
(c) In the absence of the affected member, discussion of these
factors and related circumstances and a vote on whether the affected member
can:
(i) Contribute to the discussion of the pending tenure case;
and
(ii) Vote on the pending tenure case.
(6) Criteria for candidate review and
voting
(a) Each candidate for tenure and/or promotion will be reviewed
by no fewer than five voting members.
(b) The chair, with the concurrence of the committee, may appoint
an ad hoc member or members who meet(s) the criteria for voting membership to
review and vote on candidates in order to meet the minimum number of
members.
(c) When the committee is considering a candidate for tenure and
promotion to associate professor, associate professors who are committee
members will discuss and vote.
(d) When the committee is considering a candidate for promotion
to professor, associate professors on the committee may participate in the
discussion but will not vote.
(7) Confidentiality
(a) In order to assure that candidates for promotion and tenure
receive a thorough and fair review of their qualifications and accomplishments,
tenure and promotion committee materials and deliberations must be accorded the
highest degree of confidentiality.
(b) Committee members agree:
(i) To accept the responsibility to protect the integrity of the
tenure and promotion process for all candidates.
(ii) That tenure and promotion materials are crucial to the
consideration of candidate's tenure and that it is necessary to maintain
the highest degree of confidentiality for these materials. Specifically,
members agree to:
(a) Not discuss any information about candidates except in tenure
and promotion meetings.
(b) Be fair; accurate and honest in the management of information
germane to the review process.
(c) Guard against inaccuracies, carelessness, bias, and
distortion made by either emphasis or omission of information.
(d) Strive to treat issues impartially and handle controversial
subjects dispassionately.
(e) If requested, provide accurate and complete reports on
candidates to the respective college dean, provost, president or university
counsel.
(c) A breach of this confidentiality will be considered a serious
violation of the faculty code of conduct.
(8) Responsibilities
(a) The tenure and promotions committee reviews and evaluates the
credentials of applicants for tenure or promotion.
(b) Evaluation. The tenure and promotions committee
may:
(i) Interview appropriate individuals and/or;
(ii) Request additional information from further outside
references; and/or
(iii) Request any additional information pertinent to its
evaluation.
(9) Recommendations.
The tenure and promotions committee
recommendation shall be supported by the majority of members. The chair of the
committee will generally abstain from voting except in the case of a
tie.
(a) The tenure and promotions committee, after its evaluation,
may recommend to award or deny tenure and promotion to an assistant professor;
recommend to award or deny tenure and/or promotion to an associate professor;
and recommend to award or deny tenure to a full professor and will forward its
recommendation to the respective college dean.
(b) The dean will review the candidate's dossier and the
recommendation of the tenure and promotions committee and formulate a
recommendation. The dean will forward the tenure and promotion committee's
recommendation along with a recommendation to the provost, the candidate and
the candidate's department chair.
(c) In the case of a negative recommendation by the dean, the
dean will notify the candidate of the right to appeal as set forth
herein.
(10) Appeal by the candidate
(a) By December first, the candidate must notify the dean and the
provost in writing of the intent to appeal or the right is waived. The appeal
will be scheduled in December.
(b) The provost may hear the appeal personally or may appoint a
three-member appeal committee of tenured faculty from the ad hoc appeal pool
(see paragraph (K) of this rule) to consider the matter. If appointed, the
committee will elect its own chair and will decide by majority vote to
recommend upholding of the recommendation of the university tenure and
promotions committee and/or the dean.
(c) The appeal committee review should be concluded within thirty
days from the date the committee is charged by the provost.
(d) Recommendation by the provost
(i) The provost shall review the recommendations from the tenure
and promotions committee, the department chair, the dean and the appeal
committee, if appropriate.
(ii) By February first, the provost will notify the candidate and
the department chair and dean in writing of the final
recommendation.
(iii) By February first, the provost will transmit all positive
recommendations for the award of tenure and/or promotion to the president for
transmittal to the board of trustees for consideration at their next scheduled
meeting.
(iv) Following board of trustee approval, the office of the vice
president for academic affairs and the candidate, department chair and dean
will be notified.
(v) The department chair is responsible for notifying human
resources and accounting of any changes in status.
(G) Annual performance evaluation (APE)
(1) The performance of tenure track
faculty will be evaluated annually by the department chair. An APE is a process
that will include a dialogged between the department chair and the faculty
member concerning the faculty member's job description, annual goals, and
performance during the evaluation period. The APE will be an opportunity for
constructive feedback to the faculty member about performance and
career/faculty development. The APE includes an evaluation of the following
faculty performance categories:
(a) Teaching;
(b) Research and scholarship; and
(c) Service, including leadership and/or administration if
applicable.
(2) During an annual APE meeting between
the faculty member and department chair, the faculty member's job
description will be consulted to establish annual performance goals and per
cent efforts for each of the performance categories for the upcoming
performance year and documented in the APE form. Input from sources external to
the department that may have bearing on the faculty member's performance
may be considered (e.g., supervising authority in the COGS or teaching
authorities within the college). These goals and per cent efforts may be
revised as needed through the performance year and documented. Any changes to
the job description will only occur if there are major or over-reaching changes
in job-related duties and must be documented in the office of human
resources.
(3) Faculty will be evaluated in each
established performance category based on the following rating scale. Faculty
will be rated on a one (min/low) to five (max/high) scale with two decimal
place for each performance category.
(a) Four to five equals outstanding performance: performance
consistently and significantly above standards in virtually all areas; far
exceeds normal expectations; outstanding achievements and contributions plus
outside recognition of effort.
(b) Three to three point nine nine equals exceeds performance
expectations: performance generally well above standards in many important
aspects; frequently exceeds normal expectations.
(c) Two to two point nine nine equals meets performance
expectations: performance fully meets standards in all important aspects; a
good contributor.
(d) One to one point nine nine equals below performance
expectations: performance below standards in a number of areas; improvement
needed to achieve functional performance level.
(4) A per cent of effort will be
established for each of the faculty performance categories.
(a) Teaching - the teaching workload calculation involves hours
spent with learners modified by workload weighting (based on the complexity of
teaching) and whether teaching is new or particularly innovative. Workload
weighting and credit for new/innovative teaching is determined by the
department chair in consultation with the faculty member. The teaching workload
for a faculty member will be determined by the department chair after
consultation with the respective associate dean for education or educational
supervisor within the COGS.
(b) Research and scholarship - research and scholarship
expectations (e.g., status as a PI, number and quality of publications,
presentations, grant applications, and grants awarded, etc.) are established
annually by the department chair and the faculty member at the beginning of the
performance year. These expectations are framed in a balanced perspective
knowing the peaks and valleys associated with academics and research.
Expectations are titrated to a faculty member's per cent of effort in
research. One size does not fit all. The research and scholarship calculation
involves an analysis of the outcomes of the faculty member's research
activity and per cent effort by the department chair.
(c) Service - faculty members are expected to have at least one
NEOMED academic service activity (e.g., active membership on a NEOMED
committee, advising a student organization, director of a research focus area,
core research facility director, etc.) and to have at least one activity in
public/professional service (e.g., active involvement in state/national
organizations related to health care or professional development, editorial
board and/or reviewer for scientific publications and granting agencies,
support of community organizations improving health, health care, and health
professions education, etc.) as agreed upon by the department chair and the
faculty member. Service responsibilities may be adjusted annually by the
department chair, in consultation with the faculty member, in accordance with
the faculty member's rank and workload in teaching and research. Tenured
faculty may be required to assume a higher per cent of service
effort.
(5) An overall score between one and five
will be calculated based upon the weightings and ratings of each performance
category determined by the department chair.
(a) Faculty members must have an overall score that meets,
exceeds, or is rated at outstanding performance to meet overall performance
expectations for the performance year.
(b) During the probationary period, faculty members:
(i) Will meet at least annually with the tenure advisory
committee as stated in paragraph (E)(3)(a) of this rule.
(ii) Whose overall score meets, exceeds, or is rated at
outstanding performance will continue to be evaluated annually through the APE
process.
(iii) Whose overall score is below performance expectations shall
be required to meet with the respective department chair to develop a
performance improvement plan (PIP) to address specific improvement strategies,
identify resources for faculty development, and establish performance
expectations for the upcoming performance year.
(a) If a probationary faculty member is unable to meet
performance expectations, the faculty member may receive a notice of
non-reappointment from the dean after consultation with the department
chair.
(c) Tenured faculty members:
(i) Whose overall score meets, exceeds, or is rated at
outstanding performance will continue to be evaluated annually through the APE
process.
(ii) Whose overall score is below performance expectations shall
meet with the department chair to develop a PIP to address specific improvement
strategies, identify resources for faculty development, and establish
performance expectations for the upcoming performance year.
(iii) Whose overall score is below performance expectations in
three out of four successive performance years will be reviewed using the
procedures for comprehensive post-tenure review.
(6) Performance may be reviewed mid-year
or at other intervals at the discretion of the department chair.
(H) Procedures for comprehensive post-tenure review
(1) The post-tenure review process is not
a disciplinary process and is not subject to the procedures set forth in rule
3349-3-40 of the Administrative Code.
(2) A comprehensive post-tenure review
shall be initiated upon the recommendation of the department chair and approved
by the respective dean.
(3) Review materials
(a) The faculty member under review shall submit a current
curriculum vitae, a listing of all courses taught over the previous six years,
a summary statement of professional and scholarly activities and
accomplishments, annual performance and teaching evaluations, faculty
improvement leave reports, a summary of significant administrative
accomplishments, and other materials deemed appropriate by the faculty member.
Failure to submit materials for review constitutes a waiver of the right to do
so.
(b) The department chair of the faculty member under review shall
submit the letter of offer, job description, APE forms (including teaching
evaluations for the previous six years), and PIPs.
(c) The committee will consider the prior six years of faculty
performance with focused attention on the three out of four years that
triggered the initiation of a post-tenure review.
(4) Review process
(a) The provost is the responsible party for administering the
review and appeal processes.
(i) A designee is appointed by the president if the provost and
the dean are one and the same.
(ii) The office of the provost provides administrative support
for the review process. the office of general counsel provides consultation as
necessary.
(b) The review shall be conducted by a sub-committee of the UTPC
(PTRC) comprised of three to five tenured faculty at or above the rank of the
faculty member under review from among its membership. At least one member must
be included from the college of the faculty member under review.
(i) The faculty member under review has the right to object to
the appointment of a given university tenure and promotion committee (UTPC)
member to the post-tenure review committee (PTRC) due to a real or perceived
conflict of interest. The faculty member will share the nature of the conflict
with the UTPC chair. If the conflict of interest is with the chair of the UTPC,
the vice chair of the UTPC will preside over discussion of the conflict. The
membership of the UTPC shall evaluate the declared or perceived conflict of
interest to determine if the conflict is substantial enough to exclude the
member from the post-tenure review committee.
(ii) The faculty member under review has the right, but is not
obligated, to meet with the sub-committee. If the faculty member chooses not to
meet with the sub-committee, the right is waived.
(iii) The sub-committee shall review and consider the materials
provided by the faculty member and department chair. To complete its review,
the sub-committee may solicit materials and interview individuals who may
provide information relevant to the review.
(c) The sub-committee shall render a final written report of its
findings, materials reviewed, and interview summaries within sixty business
days of its formation.
(i) The report shall support a positive or negative finding of
whether a faculty member has met performance expectations.
(ii) Copies of the final report shall be submitted to the faculty
member under review, department chair, dean or dean's designee, office of
faculty affairs, and the provost.
(d) If a positive final report concludes that the faculty member
has met the performance expectations during the period under review, the
department chair, in consultation with the faculty member under review and the
dean, will determine the re-entry point into the APE cycle for the upcoming
performance year. The department chair will meet with the faculty member to
develop a plan to support and promote the success of the faculty member in the
following performance year.
If the faculty member does not meet
performance expectations in the performance year following a positive post
tenure review, the dean, in consultation with the department chair, will
determine if the faculty member will be required to undergo another post-tenure
review.
(e) If a negative final report concludes that the faculty member
did not meet performance expectations during the period under review, the dean,
in consultation with the department chair, may revise the terms and conditions
of the faculty member's appointment, including revocation of tenure, or
issue a letter of non-reappointment including the condition and timing of the
faculty member's termination.
(f) If the faculty member accepts the decision of the dean, the
matter is concluded.
(5) Appeal process
(a) Faculty members who dispute the findings of the PTR
committee, may submit a written appeal to the provost within ten business days
of receipt of the decision of the dean which outlines their rationale for the
appeal.
(b) The provost will appoint a PTR appeal committee within ten
business days after receipt of the appeal consisting of three tenured faculty
members at or above the rank of the faculty member under review, from the
membership of the ad hoc appeal pool.
(c) Findings of the PTR appeal committee will be based on all
materials made available to the original PTR committee and any other materials
determined to be relevant by the PTR appeal committee.
(d) The PTR appeal committee will render a written report to the
office of faculty affairs within thirty business days of appointment. The
office of faculty affairs will forward the report to the provost. The provost
will forward the report to the dean and department chair. The written report
will either support or not support the findings of the original PTR committee
and provide a written justification to support the findings.
(e) If the report of the PTR appeal committee does not support
the findings of the original PTR committee and finds that the faculty member
has met performance expectations during the period under review, the department
chair, in consultation with the faculty member under review and the dean, will
determine the re-entry point into the APE cycle for the upcoming performance
year. The department chair will meet with the faculty member to develop a plan
to support and promote the success of the faculty member in the following
performance year. If the faculty member does not meet performance expectations
in the performance year following a positive post tenure review, the dean, in
consultation with the department chair, will determine if the faculty member
will be required to undergo another post-tenure review.
(f) If a negative final report concludes that the faculty member
did not meet performance expectations during the period under review, the dean,
in consultation with the department chair, may revise the terms and conditions
of the faculty member's appointment, including revocation of tenure, or
issue a letter of non-reappointment including the condition and timing of the
faculty member's termination.
(6) The office of faculty affairs will
serve as the repository for all documents pertaining to faculty performance and
post-tenure review.
(I) Performance of essential functions
(1) The fitness for duty assessment is
not a disciplinary process and is not subject to the procedures set forth in
rule 3349-3-40 of the Administrative Code.
(2) Faculty members must perform the
essential functions of their position as set forth in their job description,
letter of offer, and any amendments thereto. If the faculty member's
inability to perform those essential functions is the result of a documented
disability, it is the responsibility of the faculty member to request
reasonable accommodations as set forth in the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA).
(3) If a faculty member, in the judgment
of the department chair, is not performing the essential functions of the
position, the department chair will consult with the director of the office of
human resources. The annual performance evaluation (APE) will be suspended
until it is determined by the department chair, in consultation with the office
of human resources, that the faculty member is or is not fit for duty.
(4) The director of human resources
shall consult with the general counsel to determine if the faculty member
should undergo a fitness for duty assessment. the fitness for duty assessment
will be conducted by an appropriate healthcare professional.
(5) Following the fitness for duty
assessment, the faculty member will engage in an iterative process with the
office of human resources to determine the nature and extent of reasonable
accommodations following the guidelines established by the ADA and amendments
thereto.
(6) If the faculty member is able to
perform the essential functions of the position as set forth in the job
description by employing reasonable accommodations, the faculty member will
re-enter the annual performance evaluation process, as determined by the
department chair, in consultation with the dean.
(7) If it is determined that a faculty
member is unable to perform the essential functions of the position as set
forth in the job description despite the provision of reasonable
accommodations, tenure may be revoked and/or employment may be
terminated.
(8) The office of general counsel will
serve as the repository for all documents pertaining to a fitness for duty
assessment.
(J) Required dossier template for tenure and/or promotion
review
The dossier template may be amended as necessary
by the UTPC to provide for appropriate criteria for tenure and promotion
(1) Tenure/promotion dossier for tenure
track faculty
The dossier must be complete at the time of
submission. It is the responsibility of the faculty candidate to present
sufficient evidence of the scope and quality of their involvement in the
curriculum, their scholarship, and their service. For paragraph (D) of this
rule (contributions to the educational programs of the university), candidates
should designate each activity as related to the professional programs (i.e.,
medicine or pharmacy) or graduate programs (i.e., Ph.D., master's or
graduate certificate) or another program. The dossier shall include the
following:
(a) Cover page - page one of the dossier
(i) Full name.
(ii) Current department.
(iii) Current rank.
(b) Table of contents - page two of the dossier
All pages of the dossier must be numbered.
All sections must be referenced by page number in the table of contents.
(c) Dossier narrative
Write approximately two pages for each of the
three evaluation areas describing how the candidate has developed as an
academician in each area.
(d) Contributions to the educational programs of the university
(i) List all lecture, seminar, and tutorials in which the
candidate was involved. Specify course name, dates taught, sponsoring
institution, role in the activity and whether the activity was at the
professional program (i.e., medicine or pharmacy), graduate program (i.e.,
Ph.D., master's or graduate certificate) or other programs. List all
activities separately specifying the graduate degree program or
certificate.
(ii) Document the candidate's involvement in the preparation
of syllabus, course and examination materials. Specify the course name,
sponsoring institution and the candidate's role in the activity. List all
activities separately specifying the graduate degree program or certificate.
(iii) Describe the candidate's involvement in remediation. (do
not use student names.)
(iv) Describe the extent of any academic advising. List any
graduate students; advisees and their current status (degree candidate or
recipient, recipients of awards, other special recognition). List graduate
level activity separately specifying the graduate degree program or
certificate.
(v) Describe any career guidance activities. (do not use student
names.) List all activities separately specifying the graduate degree program
or certificate.
(vi) List all external funding the candidate has ever received for
educational activities; include funding from years at the university and
funding from years before coming to the university. Include source, title,
period and amount of award. List any grant proposals currently pending.
(e) Research and scholarly accomplishments
(i) Describe in two pages or less any active interests in
research and other forms of scholarship. Include collaborations with other
faculty (NEOMED and other institutions), postdoctoral associates, and graduate
or medical students.
(ii) List all publications and other scholarly output. Separate
them into the categories (e.g., journals, books, chapters, monographs, case
reports, literature reviews, annotated bibliographies, technical reports, and
abstracts. Note whether the publication was refereed, invited or otherwise
outstanding. Provide evidence of the quality of publications as previously
indicated in this appendix. Provide up to five publications that are
significant and representative of all scholarly activities. (attach copies to
back of dossier.)
(iii) List all lectures, invited addresses, poster presentations or
educational displays at professional meetings, colloquia, workshops, seminars
and conference presentations.
(iv) List all professional consultations in study design, data
analysis, measurement and evaluation.
(v) List any support generated through grants, contracts and
other sources. List the source, title, period and amount of award. Priority
scores/percentile rankings of any proposals approved but not funded may also be
included. List any grant proposals currently pending.
(vi) List all intellectual property development and activities in
support of technology transfer and commercialization. Documentation of the
development of new intellectual property including patents, conduct of clinical
trials, and commercialization of university intellectual property. Provide
additional positive evidence for promotion and tenure decisions.
(f) Service related to the university
(i) List memberships on NEOMED/consortium committees, boards,
councils, etc. List other service to NEOMED.
(ii) List professional service activities such as service on
research review committees, ad hoc research reviews, editorial board
membership, editorship, editorial reviews, etc.
(iii) Document service to the community on biomedical topics.
(iv) Document service to governmental bodies on biomedical topics.
(v) Describe any involvement in planning, organizing and
implementing service projects.
(vi) List support for service activities generated through
grants, contracts and other sources. Include the source, title, period and
amount of award,.as well as any priority scores of approved but not funded
proposals. List any grant proposals currently pending.
(g) Professional standing
(i) List all degrees earned. List the complete name and address
of the institution granting the degree and dates of attendance.
(ii) List all professional licenses or certificates.
(iii) List all honorary degrees. List the complete name and
address of the institution granting the degree and dates of
attendance.
(iv) List all fellowships and post-doctoral experiences. List the
complete names and addresses of past professional employment, including the
names of supervisors and dates of appointment.
(v) List all honors and awards.
(vi) List all offices held in professional
societies.
(vii) List all invited memberships in honorary
societies.
(h) Any other information or materials that supports the
candidate's application.
(i) Attestation
This statement must appear as the final entry
of the dossier (before copies of any publications).
"I hereby submit this dossier to the
university tenure and promotions committee as evidence in support of my
candidacy for tenure. I attest that the information provided herein is true and
accurate to the best of my ability. I further certify that this dossier was
complete when submitted and contains ___ pages."
__________________________________
Signature
Date
(j) Sample "cover page"
Name of faculty member
Current rank
Department
Application for tenure or promotion
Date submitted
Date received
(k) Sample "table of contents"
| Page |
| Contributions to the educational program of thecollege | .................... |
| Research and scholarly accomplishments | .................... |
| Service related to the college ofmedicine | .................... |
| Professional standing | .................... |
| References | .................... |
| Other materials | .................... |
| Attestation | .................... |
(K) Procedures for processing appointments, promotions, and
tenure
(1) Initial appointment
(a) When recommended by the dean of a given college, the provost
may approve the creation of a tenure track position.
(b) Where appropriate, when a tenure track position has been
authorized, the respective department chair will propose a search committee to
the dean.
(c) The search committee after comprehensive review of the
candidates shall forward its recommendation for appointment to the respective
department chair. The department chair will forward a recommendation to the
dean along with the recommendation of the search committee.
(d) Appointments, which have been approved by the dean, shall be
forwarded to the provost. If the provost concurs, the recommendations will be
forwarded to the president for transmittal to the board of trustees for final
approval or ratification.
(2) Tenure and/or promotion
A candidate has the right to:
(a) A full, impartial and confidential review of the
candidate's credentials;
(b) Receive a copy of the tenure and promotions committee's
report and the recommendation of the dean; and
(c) Appeal to the provost a recommendation of the dean to deny
promotion or tenure.
(d) Notification for eligibility to stand for tenure and/or
promotion
(i) Notification
The department chair will confer in May
with faculty who will or must stand for tenure and/or promotion consideration
in the calendar year.
(ii) Intent to stand for tenure or promotion
(a) The process of review for tenure and/or promotion will begin
on May fifteenth of the year specified in the candidate's letter of offer
or amendments thereto.
(b) By May fifteenth, a candidate for tenure and/or promotion
shall notify the department chair in writing of the intent to stand for tenure
and/or promotion.
(iii) Process of evaluation for tenure and/or
promotion
(a) Independent external evaluators
(i) By May fifteenth, the candidate must submit a list of at
least three suggested independent external evaluators to the department
chair.
(ii) By June first, a list of at least five independent external
evaluators will be identified by the candidate's department chair and
transmitted by the chair to the candidate. This list may or may not include
independent external evaluators from the candidate's list.
(iii) Within five working days, candidates have the right to review
the list of independent external evaluators and provide, in writing, reasons
why any of the proposed evaluators should not be contacted.
(iv) The department chair, in consultation with the dean, will
determine whether the candidates challenge to an independent external evaluator
will be upheld, and whether any independent external evaluator should be
removed from the list and replaced with another independent external
evaluator.
(v) If an independent external evaluator is removed from the
list, another may be added and the same right of the candidate to challenge
will apply.
(vi) By June fifteenth, this process shall be
completed.
(b) Preparation of materials for independent external
evaluators
(i) By May fifteenth, the candidate will submit to the department
chair and the office of the provost an unalterable electronic file (e.g., pdf
with a security setting) containing a curriculum vitae and an unalterable
electronic (e.g., pdf) file of up to five significant and representative sample
publications of the candidate's work, for external review. The candidate
will also include a two page or less narrative summary providing a synthesis of
the importance of their work.
(ii) Each candidate will be asked to sign a waiver of access form
for all independent external evaluations.
(iii) The office of the provost will transmit the unalterable
electronic file by June fifteenth to the independent external evaluators. The
office of the provost should request confirmation from the independent external
evaluator verifying receipt.
(iv) Evaluation letters must be returned to the office of the
provost by August fifteenth.
(iv) Transmission of completed dossier and associated
files
(a) By August fifteenth, the candidates shall submit a complete
and unalterable electronic (e.g. pdf with a security setting) dossier to the
respective department chairs. The original dossier must be reviewed for its
veracity and completeness and attested to and signed by the candidate. The
chair of the candidate's tenure advisory committee will transmit to the
candidate's department chair a summative letter of evaluation in an
unalterable electronic file.
(b) By September fifteenth, the department chair will transmit to
the tenure and promotions committee chair via the office of the vice president
for academic affairs a letter of evaluation, candidate's dossier,
curriculum vitae, and tenure advisory committee summative report in an
unalterable electronic file (e.g. pdf with a security setting). A copy of the
candidate's initial letter of offer shall be provided to the committee by
the office of the vice president for academic affairs.
(c) By the end of the first full week in November, the tenure and
promotions committee chair will forward in writing the committee's
recommendation and reasons therefore to the respective dean.
(d) The dean may seek confidential advice and counsel to obtain
further information prior to rendering a final recommendation to the
provost.
(e) On or about November twenty-first, the dean will notify the
candidate, the department chair and the provost in writing of the following and
will provide a copy of:
(i) The tenure and promotions committee's
recommendation,
(ii) The respective dean's recommendation and the reasons
therefore; and,
(iii) Notification of the right to appeal a negative recommendation
by the dean to the provost.
(L) Ad hoc appeal pool
Paragraph (F)(10)(b) of this rule requires the
provost to hear an appeal or to appoint a three-member appeal committee of
tenured faculty to consider the matter.
(1) Procedure to appoint ad hoc appeal
pool
To ensure the availability of qualified faculty
to review an appeal, the provost will appoint of pool of:
(a) Six NEOMED tenured faculty members, of which no more than two
should be at the associate professor rank; and,
(b) Two non-NEOMED faculty members who hold tenure at their
respective institutions.
(2) Members
(a) Members of this pool may be activated to serve on the appeal
committee of tenured faculty, but no more than one non-NEOMED faculty member
from this pool is to be appointed to the appeal committee.
(b) Any member of the pool who is appointed to hear the appeal
will adhere to the same conflict of interest guidelines as set forth in
paragraph (F)(3) of this rule.
(c) Any member of the pool will use the same criteria and rigor
for review of the appeal as those used by the UTPC.
