Stonehill College — Revised May 2024
Except for where noted below, the procedure to apply for tenure is the same as the procedure to apply for promotion. This procedure allows candidates to demonstrate their proficiencies in teaching, scholarship, and service, and to provide the information needed for their evaluation.
Tenured and Tenurable:
In 1973, the Board of Trustees capped the number of tenured faculty at 65% of the full-time faculty. If the current number of tenured faculty is at 65% or greater, candidates who are approved by the Board of Trustees are declared “tenurable” until such time when they can be granted tenure within the 65% cap. In such cases, “tenurable” faculty are granted three-year contracts until such time they are tenured. “Tenurable” faculty enjoy all the rights, privileges and benefits of tenured faculty including eligibility for sabbatical and promotion.
Probationary period:
The probationary period for tenure-track faculty is that time under contract to Stonehill College before becoming tenured; it lasts usually six years. The probationary period for Professors of Practice is that time under contract to Stonehill College before… A faculty member may request from the Vice President for Academic Affairs a shortening of the probationary period if the faculty member has already taught full-time at the college level after having earned the doctorate or equivalent terminal degree in his or her field. Any shortening of the probationary period is determined during the first year of the appointment and is stated in writing.
When does one apply for tenure or promotion?
Table 1 gives a timeline for the typical route to tenure or promotion. It assumes that a new faculty hire is made without any previous full-time college-level teaching and upon completion of the doctorate. Any adjustment in the timing of the application for tenure or promotion is made against this timeline.
Tenure-stream and Term-renewable Faculty: During the year in which a candidate is being evaluated for tenure or promotion to associate professor, the candidate will have completed at least five years of full-time college teaching, including two years at the rank of assistant professor, and will have taught full-time for at least two years at Stonehill College.
Tenure-Track faculty: During the year in which a candidate is being evaluated for tenure or promotion to professor, the candidate will have completed at least eleven years of full-time teaching, including five years at the rank of associate professor, and will have taught full-time for at least three years at Stonehill College.
Professor of Practice: A Professor of Practice with no previous teaching experience will be required to teach sixteen semesters before being eligible to apply for Senior Status. This time may be shortened for previous teaching or work experience outside of Stonehill and is determined by the School Dean, in consultation with the Vice President of Academic Affairs. If credit is awarded for previous teaching experience, a Professor of Practice must teach at Stonehill a minimum of six semesters before being eligible to apply for senior status.
Faculty who have interrupted their full-time teaching because of a parental leave, sabbatical, or a grant, etc., will discuss with their Dean how their leave will have an impact on the tenure or promotion timetable. Any agreement is stated in writing.
When hiring faculty, endowed chairs, or administrators with faculty rank at the rank of professor, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, after consultation with the Rank & Tenure Committee and the appropriate department, may reduce or waive the requirement for three years of teaching at Stonehill College.
Criteria for Tenure or Promotion
Introduction:
The criteria for tenure or promotion guide the evaluation of candidates by academic administrators, the Rank & Tenure Committee, the President, and the Board of Trustees. The intent of these criteria is to assure the highest quality faculty, objectivity in tenure and promotion decisions, and the vitality of the College. The criteria for tenure and for promotion to associate professor are the same; criteria for promotion to professor that differ from them are noted.
Faculty seeking tenure and/or promotion ordinarily will have attained a doctorate or equivalent terminal degree in their field. Faculty seeking promotion to professor must have achieved distinction and continued accomplishment in their professional and academic activities. In order of importance, tenure-track or term-renewable candidates for tenure or promotion are evaluated on their teaching, scholarship, and service. In order of importance, candidates for promotion to Senior Professor of Practice and Senior Laboratory Instructor & Coordinator are evaluated only on their teaching and service. One exception is that since advising students is not part of the job responsibilities, that criterion will be satisfied by the evaluation of their mentoring laboratory assistants to teach them laboratory skills and pedagogical skills for working with fellow students who are taking the labs they support.
Teaching:
Effectiveness in teaching is the most important criterion for the candidate and is a necessary prerequisite for tenure and promotion. Faculty applying for tenure and promotion are encouraged to use techniques that maximize response rates for student evaluations of their classes. Strong teaching may be demonstrated through a variety of formats, and applicants should confer with their Chair and Dean on demonstrating their teaching effectiveness. Department Chairs should make an effort to assist candidates in ensuring as high a response rate as possible in their course evaluations by encouraging students to complete the evaluations. Sustained effectiveness in teaching is necessary for promotion to professor. An effective teacher is knowledgeable in the subject matter, is enthusiastic about teaching, and uses a variety of teaching methodologies to promote student learning. Given the dynamic nature of learning, an effective teacher creates an environment that engages students’ intellectual curiosity, critical thinking, and capacity for lifelong learning.
Documentation of effective teaching:
- The candidate’s self-assessment, course evaluations, formal or informal peer reviews, departmental assessments, and other materials provided by the candidate.
- The departmental recommendation letter may include summaries of letters of support from students who wish to comment on the candidate’s teaching effectiveness —particularly those who have worked closely with the candidate, for example, teaching assistants, directed study students, or graduates.
Evidence of course content, rigor, and organization:
- Candidates submit syllabi, examinations, and assignments from the same semesters as those for which they requested teaching evaluations. Teaching materials illustrate topics covered in each course, learning objectives and expectations, the grading mechanisms, and other materials documenting course content and rigor.
- Student evaluations indicate student opinion of the candidate’s teaching materials, content, and rigor.
- The candidate’s departmental evaluation and peer review address the appropriateness of the candidate’s teaching materials and the content and rigor of the course relative to the departmental curriculum. Does the course, for example, meet the needs of students, whether majors or non-majors? Are there ways in which the candidate may address concerns raised in student course evaluations?
- Candidates should be able to describe both how they tried to maximize student response rates for evaluations and to describe how they have addressed student concerns (e.g., as identified in student evaluations or in departmental evaluations).
Evidence of facilitating learning:
- The departmental evaluation addresses the level of the candidate’s teaching success as reflected in student learning. The nature of the evaluation is influenced by the candidate and his or her discipline. Indicators of success include the performance of students in advanced classes and internships that use the candidate’s class as a prerequisite; student proficiency in the candidate’s subject area on standardized tests; feedback from graduates after they have begun careers; or the number of the candidate’s students who enter graduate school or distinguish themselves in their field.
- Departmental peer review includes classroom visits to observe the candidate’s encouragement of student involvement and interaction and the stimulation of intellectual curiosity. How effective is the candidate’s teaching style and methodology? Is there an appropriate use of instructional technologies? Is the candidate sensitive to diversity regarding learning styles or students’ backgrounds?
- Student evaluations indicate student opinion of the candidate’s facilitation of their learning. If teaching is effective, many students will respond that course expectations are appropriate; that the professor provides an environment and opportunities to learn the material, and that the evaluation mechanisms are fair.
- The candidate is willing to supervise directed studies or independent studies.
- The candidate includes other materials that address pedagogical issues.
Evidence of ongoing development and improvement as a teacher:
- The candidate’s statement addresses mechanisms of self-evaluation of teaching and of attempts to improve teaching effectiveness and includes other materials that address these issues: a series of syllabi for a specific course, examples of newly developed instructional technologies or methods, descriptions of new assessment methods, participation in teaching and pedagogy workshops.
- The departmental evaluation of the candidate specifically addresses how the candidate has improved his or her teaching. This assessment is based upon peer review and upon the department’s evaluation of the candidate’s willingness to improve his or her teaching given the feedback from students and peers.
Evidence of mentoring and advising:
- The candidate’s application materials include evidence of his or her commitment to advisement: remaining in regular contact with advisees, writing effective letters of recommendation, providing guidance and accurate information about academic progress and career preparation.
- The candidate’s application materials include evidence of non-traditional and informal teaching or mentoring within the department or the wider college community; for example, the supervision of international internships, or informal non-credit groups.
Scholarship: (applies to tenure-stream and term-renewable candidates only)
In order to be tenured or promoted, tenure-stream and term-renewable candidates must have a record of scholarship that contributes to their discipline and strongly indicates future accomplishments. A successful candidate for promotion to professor has a sustained record of acknowledged professional contributions within their field that includes national and/or international scholarly accomplishments, and also strongly indicates future accomplishments.
The critical elements of scholarship include the following: discipline-specific expertise and methodology, documented and disseminated results, and process or results judged to be significant or meritorious through peer review.
While publication in one’s field remains the hallmark of scholarly excellence, the nature of scholarship varies by discipline.
- Advancement of knowledge through published research;
- Integration or synthesis of knowledge: creation of textbooks, edited anthologies or volumes; interdisciplinary research; education of non-specialists within and outside the college; reviewing the work of others; developing technology to assist faculty in their work;
- Application of knowledge: public programming, collaboration with other institutions and groups, designing and leading workshops and seminars;
- Transformation of knowledge through pedagogical and curricular development: museum catalogues and exhibits, film and radio presentations, other public programs, research and writing designed to improve teaching at the college or K-12 levels, development of assessment tools, education of faculty peers in web-based or other instructional technologies.
The quality and type of scholarly accomplishment that is appropriate for the granting of tenure or promotion depends on the candidate’s academic discipline, level of training, postdoctoral experience, and the characteristics of his or her teaching load, or access to specialized facilities such as libraries or laboratories. The College expects a consistent pattern of ongoing, productive work that leads to significant scholarship in the candidate’s field. Departmental reviews and external evaluators are important sources of information in the assessment of a candidate’s level of scholarly accomplishment.
Each department provides criteria for the type and amount of scholarly accomplishment required for granting tenure or promotion. These criteria are maintained by Department Chairs and are posted by the Office of Academic Affairs in the Scholarship Criteria for Tenure and/or Promotion document, which is maintained and updated in myHill. Departmental metrics for scholarship are reviewed by the Rank & Tenure Committee and submitted to the Faculty Senate for approval. If not approved by the Faculty Senate, the criteria will be sent back to the department for discussion and clarification. Upon approval by the Faculty Senate, the criteria will be submitted to the Vice President for Academic Affairs for final ratification. Departments review these criteria every five years and amend them to reflect changes in the academic discipline, the needs of the College, or available facilities. The criteria should then be reviewed by the Rank & Tenure Committee prior to being submitted to the Faculty Senate for approval even if no changes are made. All changes are subject to the review process as previously indicated. Department Chairs must notify all department members when new criteria have been approved.
If a department changes its criteria during the probationary period (or, for candidates for promotion, within five years of the date of application) candidates may choose to use the original criteria rather than the revised criteria without penalty. If a candidate chooses to use the original criteria, this must be indicated in both the candidate’s application letter and the departmental letter.
Service to the College:
For tenure or promotion to associate professor, service to the College consists of contributions of time and effort that help to advance the College’s mission. Service includes many activities; those involving leadership are particularly important, for promotion to professor.
Faculty service in the first two years of appointment normally focuses on service to the department, and naturally advances in further years to college-wide committees and to include positions of greater responsibility.
When describing service activities, the candidate should include the time commitment (e.g., approximate number of meetings per year, number of semesters of service) and the outcomes (e.g., number of seminars organized, number of students mentored). For example:
- Membership in standing or ad hoc College committees;
- Departmental service, e.g., department chair, committees, curriculum development, faculty search committees, recruitment of students, assessment, accreditation, program development;
- College activities, e.g., development of or participation in college-wide activities such as seminars, symposia, exhibitions, film series;
- Academic or student activities, e.g., development and active participation in activities such as the Honors Program, Community Associates, Encountering Stonehill, HOPE, SURE;
- Other service to the College’s mission, within or beyond the campus.
Table 1: Timeline for tenure & promotion in typical cases
Year | Semester | Applying for Tenure; Promotion to Associate Professor | Applying for Professor |
| 1 | 1 | Beginning of probationary period | |
| 2 | |||
| 2 | 3 | ||
| 4 | |||
| 3 | 5 | Pre-tenure review during this year. | |
| 6 | |||
| 4 | 7 | ||
| 8 | |||
| 5 | 9 | ||
| 10 | To apply or not? This is the semester to decide. | ||
| 6 | 11 | College evaluation: Rank & Tenure Committee and Academic Administration | |
| 12 | Board of Trustees decision. End of probationary period. | ||
| 7 | 13 | Tenured status and promotion starts. This semester begins the count for promotion to professor. Did you get a one-year extension? If so, College evaluation is this semester | Sabbaticals occur sometime around now. These semesters count towards the semesters needed to apply for promotion. Other types of leave probably do not count towards the ten semesters needed to apply for promotion. |
| 14 | For those with extensions, the Board decides this semester and it is the last semester of your probationary period. | ||
| 8 | 15 | ||
| 16 | |||
| 9 | 17 | ||
| 18 | |||
| 10 | 19 | ||
| 20 | |||
| 11 | 21 | ||
| 22 | To apply for promotion to professor or not? This is your first opportunity. Is this at least your tenth semester as an associate professor? Is this at least your sixth semester at Stonehill? | ||
| 12 | 23 | College evaluation | |
| 24 | President’s decision on promotion; Board of Trustees decision on tenure | ||
| 13 | 25 | Promotion to professor begins |
Table 2: Timeline for promotion for Professor of Practice
| Year | Semester | Applying for Promotion to Senior Professor of Practice |
| 1 | 1 | Beginning of probationary period |
| 2 | ||
| 2 | 3 | |
| 4 | ||
| 3 | 5 | Pre-tenure review during this year. |
| 6 | ||
| 4 | 7 | |
| 8 | ||
| 5 | 9 | |
| 10 | To apply or not? This is the semester to decide. | |
| 6 | 11 | College evaluation: Rank & Tenure Committee and Academic Administration |
| 12 | Board of Trustees decision. End of probationary period. | |
| 7 | 13 | Tenured status and promotion starts. This semester begins the count for promotion to professor. Did you get a one-year extension? If so, College evaluation is this semester |
| 14 | For those with extensions, the Board decides this semester and it is the last semester of your probationary period. | |
| 8 | 15 | |
| 16 | ||
| 9 | 17 | |
| 18 | ||
| 10 | 19 | |
| 20 | ||
| 11 | 21 | |
| 22 | ||
| 12 | 23 | |
| 24 | ||
| 13 | 25 |
Procedure for Application for Tenure
Initiating The Tenure Review:
- By February 1
- The Associate Vice President for Academic Operations identifies and informs tenure-track faculty who have fulfilled the minimum requirements for teaching, rank, and time of service at Stonehill College that they are eligible for tenure review in the coming fall term. The department chairs of the identified faculty are also notified.
- The Associate Vice President for Academic Operations creates a OneDrive dossier folder for each candidate who is eligible to apply for tenure review.
- By March 1
- The candidate uploads a current curriculum vitae to their OneDrive dossier folder.
- A faculty member whose probationary period is ending must upload their curriculum vitae by March 1 to their OneDrive dossier folder. If it is not uploaded by March 1, the faculty member and their Department Chair will be contacted by the Dean and a final deadline of March 15 will be established. If the curriculum vitae is not submitted by March 15, the faculty member will be given a one-year extension of the probationary period. A faculty member who has already received a one-year extension will be given a one-year terminal contract for the following academic year.
- By April 1
- The candidate, after consultation with their department Chair and Dean, uploads to the Scholarship Materials folder within their OneDrive dossier folder a completed External Reviewers’ Information form that contains the names of at least six people from outside of Stonehill College who can evaluate the candidate’s professional stature and accomplishments, quality of scholarship, and likelihood of continued productivity. The candidate should not contact any of the reviewers in advance. Outside reviewers should be recognized scholars in the discipline. At least four out of the six reviewers should be “arms-length” reviewers, that is those with whom the candidate has not had a close personal or professional relationship (e.g., family, friends, went to school together, collaborators, coauthors, co-presenters/panelists, previous colleagues, advisors, mentors/supervisors, etc.), who can provide an objective review of the candidate’s scholarship, and who do not have a stake in the candidate’s career. In order to avoid apparent or actual conflicts of interest, no more than two of the reviewers may be professionally and personally well-known to the candidate (e.g. former supervisors, advisors, or colleagues) as determined by the Department Chair and Dean in consultation with the candidate. The fact that an external reviewer may be a research collaborator, co-author, conference panel participant with the candidate, etc., does not constitute an actual conflict of interest, but the Department Chair and the Dean in consultation with the candidate should discuss the nature of the interactions of the candidate with potential external reviewers to determine if an apparent or potential conflict of interest may exist. A conflict of interest occurs when personal considerations may compromise or bias professional judgment and objectivity. An apparent conflict of interest is one in which a reasonable person would think that the professional’s judgment is likely to be compromised.
- External reviewers with a faculty rank of Assistant Professor are discouraged unless they have a significant publication/research/ artistic profile. Professionally Qualified faculty who will not use academic scholars as external reviewers should consult with the Dean of their School and their Department Chair to determine appropriate qualifications for reviewers.
- The Dean reviews the curriculum vitae, the pre-tenure review, and annual faculty reviews of the candidate, and, after consultation with the Dean, the candidate chooses to:
- Submit a tenure application to the Rank & Tenure Committee. The Dean informs the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Associate Vice President for Academic Operations who will be applying for tenure and/or promotion. By April 1, the Dean informs the candidate and the candidate’s chairperson of the deadlines for submission of the tenure application and related materials. The deadline for the submission of the application is August 15. The Rank & Tenure Committee is not obliged to review materials submitted after this date.
- Request a one-year extension of the probationary period. The request for this extension, including the justification for it, is submitted in writing to the Vice President for Academic Affairs before May 1 in the year before the end of the probationary period. After the Vice President for Academic Affairs consults with the candidate’s Dean and judges that the weaknesses of the candidate’s case are likely to be addressed successfully within one year, the Vice President for Academic Affairs grants the extension. A faculty member is rarely granted more than one extension of the probationary period.
- Withdraw from the tenure review any time before the August 15 deadline for submission of the application to the Rank & Tenure Committee. If the candidate has not reached the end of their probationary period, no record of this application is kept. If the candidate is applying during the next-to-last year of their probationary period and does not receive a one-year extension, the candidate is given a one-year terminal contract at the end of the probationary period. If the candidate has already received a one-year extension, they will be given a one-year terminal contract at the end of the next spring semester.
- For those candidates who will continue through the tenure review process, three of the six reviewers will be selected and contacted by the Associate Vice President for Academic Operations and asked to provide a review of the candidate’s submitted scholarship materials. The letters received from the reviewers will remain confidential and will not, at any time, be made available to the candidate.
- By April 15
- The Dean meets with the Chair or designee to discuss the process of preparing the departmental letter. If a department chair is a candidate for tenure or promotion, the Dean selects a tenured member of the department to organize and write the departmental letter of recommendation. If a department has no tenured faculty who can discharge this duty, the Dean selects a tenured faculty member from another department.
- By May 1
- The faculty member submits scholarly/creative works to be reviewed by the external reviewers to the Scholarship Materials folder within their OneDrive dossier folder. The Faculty member should indicate on the External Reviewers’ Information form what work each outside reviewer should be asked to review.
- By June 15
- The faculty member will have uploaded into their OneDrive dossier folder their personal statement, curriculum vitae, faculty reviews, pre-tenure review materials, and all the teaching, scholarship, and service materials supporting their case for tenure and have shared the OneDrive dossier folder with their department chair or the department’s designee.
The Tenure Application:
A tenure application consists of the following materials uploaded into their OneDrive dossier folder by August 15:
- Outside letters of review. (Please see above under Initiating the Tenure Review.) Copies of all work to be reviewed by external reviewers, and an indication of what work each outside reviewer should be asked to review.
- Departmental letter of recommendation. The Dean requests a departmental letter of recommendation from the candidate’s department; this letter is written by the candidate’s department chair or by another member of the department designated by the Dean. Normally, the Dean meets with the Chair or designee by April 15 to discuss the process of preparing the departmental letter. The Chair or designee writes this letter in consultation with the tenured faculty of the department; the Chair and all the tenured faculty of the department should sign this letter. The letter is written in accordance with the “Guidelines for Annual Evaluation of Faculty” as found in the “Faculty Handbook.” At the candidate’s request and with the approval of the Dean, the Chair may consult untenured members of the department or faculty from other departments. So that the department may meet this requirement, the candidate should upload all required dossier materials to the OneDrive dossier folder and share the folder with their department Chair or designee by June 15, who will make these materials available to the tenured members of the department. Normally, departments strive for consensus in recommending a colleague for tenure and/or promotion. If consensus is difficult or even impossible to obtain, the letter should reflect the differences of opinion in the department. In the rare case of strong departmental disagreement, individual department members may submit a minority recommendation by means of a separate letter. The department letter or letters are to be uploaded into the Departmental, R&T Comm, Vice President for Academic Affairs and President Letters folder in the candidate’s OneDrive dossier folder by August 1, two weeks before the application deadline, to allow the candidate time to review the letter or letters and have the option to provide a written response to any issues raised. If the candidate writes a response, they should upload it to the Departmental, R&T Comm, Vice President for Academic Affairs and President Letters folder in the candidate’s OneDrive dossier folder by August 15 so that it will be included as part of the application.
If a department chair is a candidate for tenure or promotion, the Dean selects a tenured member of the department to organize and write the departmental letter of recommendation. If a department has no tenured faculty who can discharge this duty, the Dean selects a tenured faculty member from another department to write the departmental letter of recommendation.
- Candidate’s dossier. By August 15, the candidate uploads to the OneDrive dossier folder:
- A statement matching the candidate’s activities to the criteria for tenure;
- A current curriculum vitae;
- Representative course syllabi, tests, and assignments; and any other relevant materials the candidate wishes to include.
- Copies of all scholarly work to be reviewed as part of the application, referred to in the curriculum vitae; and,
- Materials related to their service to their department, the College, professional, and/or local communities;
- Materials from the Office of Academic Affairs that will be uploaded to the Course Evaluations & Grade Distribution folder of the candidate’s OneDrive dossier folder:
- Course Evaluations. The Rank & Tenure Committee reviews student evaluations for four out of the last five semesters of teaching at Stonehill College. The candidate notifies the Associate Vice President for Academic Operations by June 15 which four semesters are to be reviewed by the Rank & Tenure Committee. If a candidate does not select the semesters, the last four semesters are used. A summary of the candidate’s course evaluation ratings in comparison to the department and school average will also be included.
- Grade distributions. The Associate Vice President for Academic Operations provides to the Rank & Tenure Committee the candidate’s grade distribution for the courses for which evaluations have been requested, as well as departmental and college-wide grade distributions for the semesters selected to be reviewed.
- Pre-tenure review. The pre-tenure committee’s and department’s evaluations and recommendations are made available to the Rank & Tenure Committee.
- Most recent and up to date faculty review.
- Additional information. In response to specific questions from the Chair of the Rank & Tenure Committee, the candidate may supply additional information. Questions or requests for additional information are communicated to the candidate by the Chair of the Rank & Tenure Committee. If new material becomes available after the application deadline, for example, a submitted manuscript is accepted for publication, the candidate informs the Chair of the Rank & Tenure Committee.
Evaluation by the Rank & Tenure Committee: After reviewing and evaluating the candidate’s materials, the Rank & Tenure Committee recommends either granting or denying tenure. The Rank & Tenure Committee’s evaluation and vote are sent to the Vice President for Academic Affairs.
Evaluation by the Vice President for Academic Affairs: The Vice President for Academic Affairs reviews the Rank & Tenure Committee’s evaluation and vote. The Vice President for Academic Affairs may request a meeting with the Rank & Tenure Committee if clarification of their report is needed. The Vice President for Academic Affairs also evaluates the candidate and then recommends either granting or denying tenure. The recommendation of the Vice President for Academic Affairs is uploaded into the Departmental, R&T Comm, Vice President for Academic Affairs and President Letters folder in the candidate’s OneDrive dossier folder.
Response of the Candidate to the Rank & Tenure Committee and to the Vice President for Academic Affairs: The Associate Vice President for Academic Operations notifies the candidate that the evaluation, vote, and recommendation of the Rank & Tenure Committee as well as the recommendation of the Vice President for Academic Affairs is available in the Departmental, R&T Comm, Vice President for Academic Affairs and President Letters folder in their OneDrive dossier folder. Within one week of receiving this information, the candidate may send in writing to the Associate Vice President for Academic Operations any correction of factual errors. The Associate Vice President for Academic Operations shares this letter with the Chair of the Rank & Tenure Committee and/or to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and asks for a revised evaluation or a correction of the original report. Any revisions or corrections are communicated to the Associate Vice President for Academic Operations who informs the candidate. At this time in the tenure review process, the candidate chooses to:
- Continue the review;
- Request a one-year extension of the probationary period; or,
- Withdraw from the review.
Evaluation by the President: For those candidates who continue the tenure review, the Associate Vice President for Academic Operations creates a OneDrive folder for the President that contains the evaluation, votes, and recommendations of the Rank & Tenure Committee and of the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The President reviews the materials in the OneDrive folder and may request a meeting with the Rank & Tenure Committee or with the Vice President for Academic Affairs. The President evaluates the candidate and recommends either granting or denying tenure.
Response of the Candidate to the President: The President’s evaluation and recommendation is uploaded into the Departmental, R&T Comm, Vice President for Academic Affairs and President Letters folder in the candidate’s OneDrive dossier folder. The Associate Vice President for Academic Operations notifies the candidate that the President’s recommendation is available in the Departmental, R&T Comm, Vice President for Academic Affairs and President Letters folder in their OneDrive dossier folder. At this time, the candidate chooses to:
- Continue the review;
- Request a one-year extension of the probationary period; or,
- Withdraw from the review.
Evaluation by the Board of Trustees: For those candidates who continue the tenure review, the Associate Vice President for Academic Operations creates a OneDrive folder that contains their materials for the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees.
- The Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees establishes its own procedure to review tenure applications. Changes in this procedure are communicated to the President, who informs the Vice President for Academic Affairs, the Rank & Tenure Committee, and the College.
- The Board of Trustees grants or denies tenure.
- The Vice President for Academic Affairs informs the candidate of the Board of Trustees’ action, usually by the end of the next working day following their decision.
- A candidate who is denied tenure is given a one-year terminal contract.
- If tenure is denied by the Board of Trustees, the faculty member may appeal the decision by submitting in writing their intent to appeal to the Vice President for Academic Affairs within 30 days of being notified that tenure was denied (see Policy 2506 in the College’s Online Policy Manual).
The Hiring of Faculty with Tenure:
- When a search committee recommends that a candidate be hired with tenure, the President determines a schedule within which the home department, the Rank & Tenure Committee, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President evaluate the candidate, demonstrate the extraordinary nature of the appointment, and recommend to the Board of Trustees that it grant or deny tenure.
- The candidate’s dossier and the recommendations of the Department, the Rank & Tenure Committee, and the President are made available to the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees. Academic Affairs Committee members are expected to respond to the Chair of that Committee within forty-eight hours of receiving the application in a manner determined by the Chair of that Committee.
- The Chair of the Academic Affairs Committee sends the Committee’s recommendation to the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees. Whenever possible, the Executive Committee will reach a decision within forty-eight hours. In these extraordinary cases, the Board of Trustees delegates to the Executive Committee the authority to decide the candidate’s tenure status.
Procedure for Application for Promotion
The procedure to apply for promotion is the same as that used to apply for tenure, except for the following points:
- By February 1
- The Associate Vice President for Academic Operations must inform all faculty who are eligible for promotion review in the coming fall term (i.e., all full-time faculty who meet the requirements as noted above, or as stated in their contract, must be notified each year) and their department chairs.
- By March 1
- Faculty who plan to apply for promotion must notify the Associate Vice President for Academic Operations of their intentions.
- The Associate Vice President for Academic Operations creates a OneDrive dossier folder for each candidate who is eligible and intends to apply for promotion.
- The candidate uploads a current curriculum vitae to their OneDrive dossier folder. If a curriculum vitae is not submitted, the faculty member is not considered for promotion. After consultation with the Dean, the faculty member may postpone an application for promotion.
- By April 1
- The candidate, after consultation with their department Chair and Dean, uploads to the Scholarship Materials folder within their OneDrive dossier folder a completed External Reviewers’ Information Form that contains the names of six external reviewers as defined above.
- A tenure-track Assistant Professor is evaluated for promotion to Associate Professor normally as part of a tenure review. Under some circumstances, however, an application for tenure may be separated from an application for promotion to Associate Professor.
- Before the end of their probationary period, a tenure-track Assistant Professor may apply for promotion to Associate Professor without applying for tenure. Candidates may withdraw from this review without change in contract or tenure status.
- A non-tenure-track Assistant Professor may apply for promotion to Associate Professor. The granting or denying of promotion does not change his or her non-tenure-track status.
Candidates for promotion may without prejudice withdraw their application after learning the results of the review by the Rank & Tenure Committee.
- The final approval of promotion recommendations is made by the President of the College.
Table 2: Summary of Application Deadlines
| Date | Action | Recipient |
| February 1 | Associate Vice President for Academic Operations informs faculty eligible for applying for tenure and/or promotion and the Chairs of their departments | Eligible Faculty |
| March 1 | Candidate provides curriculum vitae and names of six external reviewers | Dean and Department Chair |
| April 1 | Candidate provides completed External Reviewers’ Information form | Associate Vice President for Academic Operations, Dean, and Department Chair |
| April 15 | Outreach to recruit three external reviewers | Associate Vice President for Academic Operations |
| May 1 | Candidate provides scholarly/creative works to be reviewed | Associate Vice President for Academic Operations |
| June 15 | Candidate provides statement, curriculum vitae, and all teaching, scholarship, and service materials | Department Chair |
| August 1 | Department Chair or designee provides department letter | Dean & Candidate |
| August 15 | Candidate provides response to the departmental letter, if desired, and/or provides final application dossier | Office of Academic Affairs and Rank & Tenure Committee |