Policy Register
3342-6-16 University policy and procedures regarding faculty reappointment.
(A) Purpose. All tenure-track faculty members are considered to hold probationary appointments for one year, subject to annual renewal. The total period of full-time tenure-track service at the university prior to continuous tenure will not exceed six years. Scholarly leaves of absence for one year or less will count as part of the probationary period. Faculty members with probationary appointments in the tenure track will be reviewed annually until the academic year in which they are considered for tenure. Reappointment reviews have as their primary purpose the preparation of probationary faculty members for a successful tenure review, and annual reviews will help to prepare them in the following ways:
(1) Probationary faculty members will be given information about unit and/or regional campus goals, culture, and professional and collegial standards and expectations;
(2) Probationary faculty members will participate in regular, complete, and specific formative evaluations during the probationary period to foster their scholarship (discovery, integration, application, teaching) and university citizenship;
(3) Probationary faculty members will be given the opportunity to discuss the review and to respond to suggestions for improvement in scholarship and university citizenship, and they will receive a timely, fair evaluation of their responses;
(4) Probationary faculty members will have the opportunity to establish a mentoring relationship as an aid in satisfying unit and/or regional campus requirements and conditions for tenure;
(5) Finally, probationary faculty members will have the opportunity to establish a clear and consistent record from which the university may confidently draw conclusions about their future performance.
(B) Initial Procedure. Reappointment review is a deliberate and important process. During the course of appropriate reappointment reviews, the chairs and deans will communicate to both the probationary faculty member and the evaluators clear understandings about the requirements and conditions of tenure. Eventually, at the time of tenure review all parties should be sufficiently informed of these requirements and conditions so that the process occurs in an atmosphere of fairness and is based on well-documented employment practices. To help make sure this takes place, the format of the file (or portfolio) to be submitted at the time of application for tenure and promotion should be shown to the probationary faculty member early in the probationary period.
(C) Criteria. The Criteria used in assessing the quality of scholarship and university citizenship in the review of faculty seeking reappointment should conform to the unit’s tenure guidelines in the unit’s handbook. Guidelines concerning the weighting of those criteria will be applied consistently at all levels of review and will come from the probationary faculty member’s home unit or campus of appointment. Thus, all reappointment evaluations of Kent campus probationary faculty members should follow the unit’s guidelines concerning the weighting of the unit’s tenure criteria, and all reappointment evaluations of regional campus probationary faculty members should follow the campus’ guidelines concerning the weighting of the unit’s tenure criteria. To prevent annual reappointment reviews from becoming an undue burden on probationary faculty members and the colleagues who evaluate their files, units shall develop reasonable guidelines for the construction of reappointment files and the presentation of documentation and evidence.
(D) Affirmation Principle. The principle to affirm at reappointment review is, “Given the years of service to date and the number of years until mandatory tenure review, it is reasonable to expect that the probationary faculty member will eventually undergo a successful tenure review.” To help the probationary faculty member accomplish this and to aid the reappointment committee in making such an affirmation, expectations about how the scholarships of discovery, integration, application, and teaching, and university citizenship are applicable should be outlined in the letter of appointment, and specific criteria should be detailed in the unit handbook and shared with the faculty member early in the probationary period.
(E) Procedures at the department and independent school level. The reappointment committee of a “unit,” i.e., a department or school, will be composed of all tenured members of the unit’s advisory committee and any tenured full professors who may not be members of the advisory committee. No member of the committee may be present when the committee deliberates or votes on the reappointment of an individual in a rank higher than that of the individual member of the reappointment committee, or on the reappointment of a spouse or relative. The unit administrator serves as the non-voting chairperson of the reappointment committee.
(1) In the first year of the probationary period the unit administrator will notify the probationary faculty member in the appointment letter that a reappointment review will occur shortly after the end of the first semester. At that time the probationary faculty member will submit only a two to three page letter describing his or her accomplishments and plans for the remainder of the academic year. All parties participating in the review should be aware that a full review is not required at this time, but that two things should be accomplished during this first review.
(a) The unit administrator and the unit’s reappointment committee should review the probationary faculty member to make certain that the terms of the initial appointment have been satisfied.
(b) The unit administrator and the unit’s reappointment committee should apply those criteria in paragraph (C) of this rule which are appropriate or are available (e.g., first semester peer and student teaching evaluations) for the reappointment review. Probationary faculty members in the first year will not be reviewed by the college advisory committees, but will be reviewed only at the unit level with a recommendation by the unit administrator and college/school dean.
(2) For every following annual review, near the end of the spring semester the unit administrator will notify all probationary tenure-track faculty members in the unit, Kent campus and regional campus faculty members alike, that a reappointment review will begin early in the fall semester of the next academic year.
(3) The unit administrator will make available copies of the guidelines, timetables and other information concerning reappointment review to all probationary faculty members in the unit no later than three weeks before the deadline for submission of materials, which is at the end of the first week of the fall semester.
(4) Probationary faculty members are responsible for developing, organizing and submitting to the unit administrator the evidence supporting their reappointment. However, the unit administrator, as well as colleagues, should aid probationary faculty members in the preparation of their files, especially in their early years of service.
(5) The unit administrator will review the file with the probationary faculty member to insure that it is complete. The unit administrator is responsible for inserting past reappointment letters and the original letter of appointment in the file. If judged as complete, a statement indicating that the file is complete shall be prepared and signed by both the unit administrator and the faculty member. Thereafter, the probationary faculty member must be informed of anything added to the file and provided with the opportunity to insert written comments concerning that new material.
(6) Before convening the reappointment committee, the unit administrator will inform all tenured faculty that the files are available for inspection , and will formally invite written comments from all tenured faculty members who are not members of the reappointment committee. The unit administrator will provide those comments to the reappointment committee, copy the probationary faculty member, and place the comments in the file.
(7) Members of the reappointment committee on leave of absence shall vote by absentee ballot, or they may request from the committee the right to abstain from voting. If the reappointment committee consists of fewer than four members, excluding the non-voting chair, then a special procedure for enlarging it shall be developed by the unit administrator or the regional campus dean in the case of regional campuses, with the advise of the faculty advisory committee and the assistance of the college dean or, where appropriate, the executive dean for regional campuses and the provost.
(8) The unit administrator will comment on the strengths and weaknesses of, and the extent to which the probationary faculty member has responded to issues raised in previous reappointment letters, especially suggestions about improvement in the applicable scholarships of discovery, integration, application, and teaching, and university citizenship. Finally, the unit administrator should provide his or her judgment of how well the probationary faculty member is progressing toward a successful tenure review.
(9) After candid and confidential discussion by the committee, each voting member will say “yea,” “yea with reservations,” or “nay” concerning the reappointment of the probationary faculty member. The unit administrator will record the vote tally and report this to the committee, which has the option of voting a second time.
(10) Shortly thereafter, each voting member will record his or her vote by completing a signed evaluation form. The reappointment committee members should consider their remarks carefully when they prepare them because such peer evaluations are crucial to the reappointment process.
(11) A simple majority of the reappointment committee members will constitute an endorsement to the unit administrator for reappointment. A vote of “yea with reservations” will count as a positive vote to reappoint the probationary faculty member, but it shall carry an additional message of concern.
(12) The unit administrator will weigh and assess all relevant information and decide whether to recommend the reappointment of the probationary faculty member. He or she will record that decision, along with a signed statement supporting it. The statement should be a detailed written assessment, clearly conveying the strengths and weaknesses of the probationary faculty member’s performance in the scholarships of discovery, integration, application, and teaching, and university citizenship. The assessment should follow the unit’s standards as specified in the unit’s tenure policy and also individual expectations for a given probationary faculty member. Specific suggestions concerning performance necessary to achieve a positive tenure decision should be conveyed in the letter.
(13) The unit administrator should extend an invitation to the probationary faculty member to meet in order to discuss the assessment and recommendation. This meeting should take place as soon as possible. In all cases that are not unanimously positive, the unit administrator must meet with the probationary faculty member within five working days from the date of the submission of the unit administrator’s letter to the administrator at the next level of review. The probationary faculty member has five working days from receipt of the written notification of the unit recommendations to respond to any procedural errors or errors of fact.
(14) In the case of a Kent campus probationary faculty member in one of the four undergraduate colleges, the unit administrator submits the unit’s recommendation to the college dean. In the case of a regional campus probationary faculty member, the unit administrator submits the unit’s recommendation to the appropriate regional campus dean. For probationary faculty members in independent schools administered by the regional campus system, the unit administrator submits the recommendation to the executive dean for regional campuses. For probationary faculty members in all other independent schools, the unit administrator submits the unit’s recommendation to the provost. The file must be completed and closed at the unit level and no material added except as provided for in paragraphs (E)(5), (E)(6), (E)(15), (F)(5), (F)(6), (F)(12), (F)(16), (G)(6),( H)(2) and (J) of this rule.
(15) No later than the date when the unit administrator submits the unit’s recommendation, he or she will provide a copy of the recommendation, a summary of the reappointment committee’s recommendation, copies of the committee members’ signed evaluation forms, and the vote with the probationary faculty member. The unit administrator’s letter will inform the probationary faculty member that he or she has the right, within five working days after receipt of the letter, to add a letter to his or her file responding to any procedural errors or errors of fact that the faculty member believes have been included in either the unit administrator’s letter or the committee members’ statements. If the unit’s recommendation is negative, the probationary faculty member will be notified that he or she has ten working days after receipt of the unit administrator’s letter to appeal the decision to the administrator at the next level of review.
(F) Regional campus level. Faculty members at the regional campuses will have reappointment reviews occur at both the regional campus level and unit level (as described in paragraph (e) of this rule). The reappointment committee of a regional campus will be composed of tenured members of the campus’ faculty council and the campus’ tenured full professors. No member of the committee may be present when the committee deliberates or votes on the reappointment of an individual in a rank higher than that of the individual reappointment committee member, or on the reappointment of a spouse or relative. The faculty council chairperson conducts the deliberations and voting and is a voting member of the campus reappointment committee.
(1) In the first year of the probationary period the campus dean will notify the probationary faculty member in the appointment letter that a reappointment review will occur shortly after the end of the first semester. At that time the probationary faculty member will submit only a two to three page letter describing his or her accomplishments and plans for the remainder of the academic year. All parties participating in the review should be aware that a full review is not required at this time, but that two things should be accomplished during this first review at the campus level.
(a) The campus dean and the campus reappointment committee should review the probationary faculty member to make certain that the terms of the initial appointment have been satisfied.
(b) The campus dean and the campus reappointment committee should apply those criteria and weighting in paragraph (c) of this rule which are appropriate or are available (e.g., first semester peer and student teaching evaluations) for the reappointment review.
(2) For every following annual review, near the end of the spring Probationary faculty members in the first year will not be reviewed by the college advisory committees, but will be reviewed only at the campus and unit levels with a recommendation by the campus dean and college/school dean/semester the unit administrator will notify all probationary tenure-track faculty members in the unit, Kent campus and regional campus faculty members alike, that a reappointment review will begin early in the fall semester of the next academic year.
(3) The unit administrator will make available copies of the guidelines, timetables and other information concerning reappointment review to all probationary faculty members no later than three weeks before the deadline for submission of materials, which is at the end of the first week of the semester. At the same time, the campus dean will make available to the probationary faculty member and the unit copies of those sections of the campus handbook concerning the campus’ method of weighting unit criteria.
(4) Probationary faculty members at the regional campuses are responsible for developing, organizing and submitting to the unit administrator two identical files that present the evidence supporting their reappointment. However, it is expected that the campus dean, unit administrator, and campus and unit colleagues will aid probationary faculty members in the preparation of their files, especially in their early years of service.
(5) The unit administrator will review the files with the probationary faculty member in order to insure that the files are complete. The unit administrator is responsible for inserting past reappointment recommendations, and the campus dean is responsible for inserting past reappointment letters and the original letter of appointment in the files. If judged as complete, a statement indicating that the files are complete shall be prepared and signed by both the unit administrator and the probationary faculty member. The unit administrator then immediately forwards one file to the faculty member’s regional campus, keeping the other for the unit’s review. Thereafter, the probationary faculty member must be informed of anything that is added to the files.
(6) Before convening the reappointment committee, the faculty council chairperson will inform all tenured faculty that the files are available for inspection, and will formally invite written comments from all tenured faculty members who are not members of the reappointment committee. The chairperson will provide these comments to the reappointment committee, copy the probationary faculty member, and place the comments in the file.
(7) Members of the campus reappointment committee on leave of absence shall vote by absentee ballot, or they may request from the committee the right to abstain from voting. If the campus reappointment committee consists of fewer than four members, including the voting faculty chairperson, then a special procedure for enlarging it shall be developed by the unit administrator or the regional campus dean in the case of regional campuses, with the advice of the faculty advisory committee and the assistance of the college dean or, where appropriate, the executive dean for regional campuses and the approval of the provost.
(8) The reappointment committee will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of each probationary faculty member. The committee will evaluate the probationary faculty member’s response to previous reappointment letters, especially to suggestions about improvement in the applicable scholarships of discovery, integration, application, and teaching, and university citizenship, and judge how well the faculty member is progressing toward successful tenure review.
(9) After candid and confidential discussion by the committee, each voting member will say either “yea,” “yea with reservations,” or “nay” concerning the reappointment of the probationary faculty member. The faculty chairperson will record the vote tally and report this to the committee, which has the option of voting a second time.
(10) Shortly thereafter, each voting member will record his/her vote by signed evaluation form. The reappointment committee members should consider their remarks carefully when they prepare them because such peer evaluations are crucial to the reappointment process.
(11) A simple majority of the reappointment committee will constitute endorsement to the campus dean for reappointment. A vote of “yea with reservations” will count as a positive vote to reappointment the probationary faculty member, but it shall carry an additional message of concern.
(12) The faculty chairperson will then summarize the committee’s vote, deliberations, signed evaluation forms, and recommendation in a letter to the regional campus dean. Copies of the letter and the committee members’ signed evaluation forms are given to the probationary faculty member. Copies of the letter are also sent to the unit administrator, college/school dean, and executive dean for regional campuses. The letter should address the strengths and weaknesses of the probationary faculty member’s performance in the scholarships of discovery, integration, application, and teaching, and university citizenship. The assessment should follow the unit and campus standards as specified in the unit and campus tenure policies as well as individual expectations for a given probationary faculty member. The letter will also inform the faculty member that he or she has the right, within five working days after receipt of the letter, to add a letter to his or her file responding to any procedural errors or errors of fact that the faculty member believes have been included in either the faculty chairperson’s letter or the committee members’ statements. If the reappointment committee’s recommendation is for non-reappointment, the probationary faculty member has ten working days from the receipt of the letter to respond by letter to the regional campus dean and the unit administrator.
(13) The regional campus dean will assemble the records, along with supporting statements, evaluation forms, and other relevant documents. The campus dean will then review the file and the advisory recommendations of the campus reappointment committee and the unit administrator, weigh and assess all relevant information, and decide whether to recommend reappointment. He or she will record that decision, along with a signed statement supporting it. The statement should be a detailed written assessment, clearly conveying the strengths and weaknesses of the probationary faculty member’s performance in the scholarships of discovery, integration, application, and teaching, and university citizenship. The assessment should follow the unit and campus standards as specified in the unit and campus tenure policies as well as individual expectations for a given probationary faculty member. Specific suggestions concerning performance needed to achieve a positive tenure decision should be communicated.
(14) The regional campus dean should extend an invitation to the probationary faculty member to meet in order to discuss the assessment and recommendation. This meeting should take place as soon as possible. In all cases that are not unanimously positive, the campus dean must meet with the probationary faculty member within five working days from the date of the submission of the campus dean’s letter to the college/school dean. The probationary faculty member has five working days from receipt of the dean’s recommendations to respond to any procedural errors or errors of fact.
(15) The regional campus dean’s recommendation concerning reappointment is submitted to the college/school dean, with copies to the unit administrator, the executive dean for regional campuses, and the provost. The file must be closed at the regional campus level and no material added except as provided in paragraphs (E)(5), (E)(6), (E)(15), (F)(5), (F)(6), (F)(12), (F)(16), (G)(6),(H)(2), and (J) of this rule.
(16) No later than the date the regional campus dean submits his or her recommendation, the campus dean will notify the probationary faculty member of this recommendation by letter. This notification will include copies of the campus dean’s recommendation letter to the college/school dean. The campus dean’s letter to the candidate will inform the probationary faculty member that he or she has the right, within five working days after receipt of the letter, to add a letter to his or her file responding to any procedural errors or errors of fact the faculty member believes have been included in the campus dean’s letter. The letter will also indicate that if the probationary faculty member wishes to appeal a negative decision, such intent will be expressed to the college/school dean within ten working days after receipt of the campus dean’s letter. The probationary faculty member should send copies of an appeal letter to the unit administrator, campus dean, executive dean for regional campuses and the provost.
(G) The college level. The dean will conduct a review of the unit/regional campus actions and will convene the college advisory committee, which will function as the college reappointment committee. Based on the evidence of the probationary faculty member’s progress toward tenure as presented in the supporting materials and the unit/regional campus level recommendations, this committee will recommend to the dean either reappointment or non-reappointment. In the four undergraduate colleges, tenured members of the elected college advisory committee will serve as the college reappointment committee to review recommendations and evaluations from the departments/schools and regional campus, if appropriate, and recommend to the dean in each case whether reappointment should or should not be granted. Members of the college committee may not vote on faculty members from their own unit, nor may a member be present, participate or vote while the committee deliberates on the reappointment of a spouse or relative.
(1) The dean will be the chairperson and a nonvoting member of the college reappointment committee. The committee shall have available to it all data developed at the unit level. In the case of the regional campus faculty, the appropriate regional campus dean will submit a recommendation to the college dean. The available data will be the subject of candid and confidential discussion by the committee.
(2) In the cases of positive recommendation from the unit’s reappointment committee and the unit administrator, and positive recommendations from the regional campus reappointment committee and the campus dean where applicable, the college reappointment committee may move to approve all such recommendations without reviewing each individually. Each voting member will say either “yea” or “nay”. The dean will record the vote tally and report this to the committee.
(3) In the case of:
(a) a negative reappointment decision by the unit’s reappointment committee or the unit administrator, or the campus’ reappointment committee or campus dean where applicable, or
(b) any individual case not acted on in paragraph (G)(2) of this rule, the probationary faculty member’s file will be the subject of candid and confidential discussion by the committee. After the discussion, each voting member will say “yea,” “yea with reservations,” or “nay” concerning the reappointment of the probationary faculty member. The dean will record the vote tally and report this to the committee, which has the option of voting a second time. Shortly thereafter, each voting member will record his/her vote by completing a signed evaluation form. The college reappointment committee members should consider their remarks carefully when they prepare them because such peer evaluations are crucial to the reappointment process.
(4) Approval by a simple majority of the members of the college reappointment committee will constitute a recommendation for reappointment to the dean. A vote of “yea with reservations” will count as a positive vote to reappointment the probationary faculty member, but it shall carry an additional message of concern.
(5) The dean will prepare a written statement in which is recorded the recommendation of the college reappointment committee. In the case of a block vote, the dean will report whether the college reappointment committee supports the unit or regional campus recommendation. In the case of votes on individual cases, the dean will report the numerical vote. In addition, the dean will forward a recommendation for approval or disapproval. For a Kent campus probationary faculty member, the dean’s statement and the faculty member’s file are forwarded to the provost (paragraph (i) of this rule). For a regional campus probationary faculty member or for a faculty member in an independent school administered by the regional campus system, the dean’s statement and faculty member’s file are forwarded to the vice provost for regional campuses (paragraph (h) of this rule).
(6) No later than the date the collegial recommendation is submitted to the provost or vice provost for regional campuses, the dean will notify the probationary faculty member of the recommendation by sending him or her a copy of this statement and recommendation, a summary of the college reappointment committee’s recommendation, and copies of the committee members’ signed evaluation forms. The unit administrator and regional campus dean, if appropriate, will receive copies as well. This notification letter will also include a statement informing the probationary faculty member that he or she has the right, within five working days after receipt of the letter, to include a letter in the file responding to any procedural errors or errors of fact that the faculty member believes are in any of the college level recommendations and supporting documents. The letter will also indicate that if the probationary faculty member wishes to appeal a negative decision, notification of such intent shall be sent in writing to the provost or vice provost for regional campuses, if appropriate, with copies to the college dean and unit administrator, within ten working days of the probationary faculty member’s receipt of the dean’s recommendation.
(H) The vice provost for regional campuses level. In the case of regional campus probationary faculty members or faculty members in independent schools administered by the regional campus system, the college or school dean will make available to the vice provost for regional campuses the files, recommendations and supporting materials from all levels of the faculty member’s review.
(1) The vice provost will conduct a review of the college/school, regional campus, and unit actions and will make a recommendation to the provost for reappointment or non-reappointment.
(2) No later than the date the vice provost submits his or her recommendation to the provost, the vice provost will notify the probationary faculty member by sending a copy of the recommendation to the faculty member. In a letter to the probationary faculty member, the vice provost will inform him or her that he or she has the right to include, within five working days after receipt of the letter, a letter in the file addressing any procedural errors or errors of fact the faculty member believes are in any of the recommendations and supporting documents from the vice provost. The letter will also indicate that in the case of a negative decision, the probationary faculty member has ten working days from the receipt of the vice provost’s letter within which to appeal the decision to the provost.
(I) The provost level. The provost will review the reappointment recommendations at the college/school and unit/regional campus levels. Unless reversed by the provost, the recommendation of the college/school dean or vice provost for regional campuses will stand. The unanimous recommendations of the college/school dean and his or her reappointment committee and the unit administrator and his or her reappointment committee, or where applicable the campus dean and his or her reappointment committee, will stand unless the provost can provide compelling reasons for reversing them. Probationary faculty members receiving a negative recommendation at the provost level must be notified in accordance with guidelines established in the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
(J) New material may be added as requested by a review committee or the responsible academic administrator at any level of review or appeal in order to correct or more fully document information contained in the reappointment file. In such instances, the affected faculty member will be notified of, and given the opportunity to review, such new material as is added to the file and also provided the opportunity to include written comments relevant to this material and/or the appropriateness of its inclusion in the file.
(K) Any faculty member who has been recommended for non-reappointment at any level will have the right to appeal to the next highest academic administrative officer. All appeals must be initiated by the probationary faculty member in writing within ten working days after the probationary faculty member’s receipt of the non-reappointment notification. Appeals should be heard in a timely manner (e.g., thirty calendar days). At each level of appeal at which a faculty advisory body is designated to hear an appeal and make a recommendation to the responsible academic administrative officer, the appellant will be offered the opportunity to appear in person to present his/her case orally before the appropriate reappointment committee. At the college level, appeals are heard by the college reappointment advisory committee. The appellant may be accompanied by a colleague who may assist in presenting her/his case. The academic administrator in question will consider the vote of this body seriously before making his/her recommendation and will inform both the appellant and the academic administrator at the next highest level of the results of this vote.
(L) Any faculty member who has been recommended for non-reappointment by the provost may appeal that decision to the Joint Appeals Board, or may waive this right and appeal directly to the President.
Effective: June 1, 2007
Prior Effective Dates: March 7, 2000; November 20, 2004
