Appendix J

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS (COB)

PROMOTION AND TENURE PROCEDURES

This appendix contains the criteria and the procedures for faculty evaluation for tenure and promotion within the College of Business. These provisions supplement those in Section 6 of the University Faculty Handbook as revised effective August 2011.

J.1  Individual Criteria for Promotion    

Faculty performance is evaluated in three areas of endeavor:  teaching effectiveness, research, scholarship and professional development, and service to the University, the college and department.  The first area, teaching, is preeminently important.

J.1.1  Individual Criteria for Promotion to the rank of Senior Lecturer    The candidate must:

.1  demonstrate effective teaching by showing that he or she has exhibited effort, skill, reflection, dedication to student learning, flexibility, and current knowledge of the discipline.  Effective teaching is, in and of itself, a significant achievement, and the University gives it first priority in evaluating every faculty member’s performance.  The candidate must demonstrate a pattern of effective teaching during the evaluation period, as indicated by evidence from multiple sources, including (but not limited to):  student feedback, colleagues’ testimonials, quality of syllabi, assignments, and tests.  The University also recognizes the value of substantial contributions to the curriculum, course improvement through revision of content and method, development of new courses, and development of across-the-curriculum courses.

.2  demonstrate a consistent record of continuing contribution to the department and/or college, and service to the college and/or University.

.3  demonstrate that he or she has engaged in Research, Scholarship and Professional Development that goes beyond the expected reading one must do and the conferences and workshops one must attend to maintain currency in one’s profession or discipline. The candidate and his or her department shall provide information about the kinds of activities that have accomplished the Research, Scholarship and Professional Development appropriate for a faculty member seeking promotion to this rank.  Examples of Research, Scholarship and Professional Development include but are not limited to: teaching development and/or participation in professional credential development activities; public presentations, exhibitions, and/or performances; active involvement in professional (or performing or scholarly) societies, associations, boards, or groups; consulting activity; and scholarly activity (e.g., publications or book reviews in scholarly and/or professional journals and presentations at scholarly and/or professional conferences).

J.1.2  Individual Criteria for Promotion to the rank of Associate Professor    The candidate must:

.1  demonstrate effective teaching by showing that he or she has exhibited effort, skill, reflection, dedication to student learning, flexibility, and current knowledge of the discipline.  Effective teaching is, in and of itself, a significant achievement, and the University gives it first priority in evaluating every faculty member’s performance.  The candidate must demonstrate a pattern of effective teaching during the evaluation period, as indicated by evidence from multiple sources, including (but not limited to):  student feedback, colleagues’ testimonials, quality of syllabi, assignments, and tests.  The University also recognizes the value of substantial contributions to the curriculum, course improvement through revision of content and method, development of new courses, and development of across-the-curriculum courses

.2  demonstrate a consistent record of contribution to the department and/or college, and substantive service to the University.  The candidate must also demonstrate some leadership in the service area, such as:  advising, substantial contribution to a committee’s work, organizing college events, holding committee offices, and bringing motions to committees, departments, college, or the faculty

.3  demonstrate that he or she has contributed to his or her discipline and/or profession through activities that are directed toward professional peers beyond the campus.  The University expects to see a pattern of producing research, scholarship and professional development that goes beyond mere attendance at meetings and conferences.  Following is a list of examples of the kinds of activities that would be considered significant within the traditional disciplines:  conference paper presentations and program participation; holding office in professional organizations which results in research and scholarship activities; editing a journal; publishing book reviews, journal articles, or other printed works; winning a grant.  The University expects the candidate and his or her department to provide information about the kinds of activities appropriate to the discipline that constitute equivalent Research, Scholarship and Professional Development.

J.1.3  Individual Criteria for Promotion to the rank of Professor    The candidate must:

.1  demonstrate effective teaching by showing that he or she has exhibited effort, skill, reflection, dedication to student learning, flexibility, and current knowledge of the discipline.  Effective teaching is, in and of itself, a significant achievement, and the college gives it first priority in evaluating every faculty member’s performance.  The candidate must demonstrate a pattern of effective teaching during the evaluation period, as indicated by evidence from multiple sources, including (but not limited to):  student feedback, quality of syllabi, assignments, and tests.  The University recognizes the value of substantial contributions to the curriculum, course improvement through revision of content and method, development of new courses, and development of across-the-curriculum courses

.2  demonstrate a consistent record of continuing contribution to the department and/or college, and substantive service to the University during the evaluation period.  The candidate must also demonstrate some leadership in the service area, such as:  substantial contribution to a committee’s work, organizing events, holding committee offices, and bringing motions to committees, departments, college, or the Faculty.  The committee also recognizes the value of lending one’s professional expertise to the community beyond the University.

.3 demonstrate the achievement of recognition within the discipline. The successful candidate for the rank of professor will demonstrate, as well as support with argument and other evidence, that he or she has received such recognition. The candidate will include in the file three or more letters from external evaluators that address this issue of recognition.   Following is a list of examples of the kinds of activities that would be considered significant within the business disciplines: frequent and regular conference paper presentations and program participation; publishing peer-reviewed journal articles (candidate is expected to provide an inventory of citations of published works to establish research impact on the discipline), books or other printed works holding office in associations and organizational committees which results in research and scholarship activities; serving as editor, editor in chief, member of an editorial board of indexed/listed journals that are included in ABDC list EBSCO, Scopus, etc.: winning external grants and serving as principal investigator (PI).  Fulbright or similar grants will also fall under external grant category.  The University expects to see recognition within the discipline established by a pattern of producing research, scholarship and professional development within the evaluation period.

J.1.4 Institutional Rank Structure Policy    The existing distribution of full-time faculty members by rank shall always be a critical factor in promotion considerations.  As a basic policy, not more than seventy percent of the full-time teaching faculty of the University shall comprise the ranks of associate professor and professor (including those with the title of distinguished professor).  Only under very exceptional circumstances should consideration be given to exceeding this limitation.

J.2 Promotion Procedure

.1  By May 1, the candidate must submit a letter to the Dean requesting consideration for promotion in the next academic year.  Additionally by May 1, in order for individuals writing letters of recommendation to have sufficient time to review the file, candidates for promotion will submit to their department chair documents that demonstrate  the candidate’s record of Teaching Effectiveness, Research, Scholarship and Professional Development, and Service to the University, College and Department by including: (1) current Curriculum Vitae, (2) all Faculty Annual Activity Reports to date, (3) performance evaluations to date, (4) course evaluations to date, and (5) any other pertinent information.  Also by May 1, candidates for promotion shall submit to their department chair a list from which to solicit letters of recommendation.  [This list shall include three to five individuals who are faculty or professionals outside the College of Business, and may include tenured members of the College of Business who are not members of the Promotion and Tenure Committee. Upon request by the candidate, the chair will solicit letters from other individuals on the candidates list, including faculty or professionals outside the College of Business.  Additionally for those being considered for promotion to professor, the chair shall solicit letters of recommendation from external reviewers in the candidates discipline that are not on the candidate’s list.  All of the letters solicited shall be from individuals knowledgeable about the candidate’s Teaching, Research, Scholarship and Professional Development, or Service to the University, College and Department or professional Discipline.   The department chair’s request for letters of recommendation shall include the College of Business criteria for promotion.  Letters of recommendation should clearly identify accomplishments of the candidate that substantiate specific criteria for promotion.  All persons asked to write letters of recommendation shall be informed that these letters will be accessible to the faculty member.  The department chair shall promptly provide the candidate with a list of those from whom letters have been requested.  The deadline for receipt of letters is August 22.  The department chair shall be responsible for transmitting these recommendations to the candidate for inclusion in the candidate’s promotion file.

.2  The faculty member being considered for promotion and/or his or her department chair shall solicit by August 15 from institutional colleagues letters of recommendation as to whether or not promotion to the next higher rank should be granted to the faculty member.

.3  By August 26 (or subsequent business day), the chair (or the appointee of the dean, in the case of a chair seeking promotion) shall review his or her written recommendation regarding promotion and the reasons for the recommendation with the faculty member.  The faculty member may submit a letter of exception to the dean by August 31.  The chair shall submit the candidate’s request for promotion, the chair’s recommendation and reasons for the recommendation, and all letters submitted to the chair to the dean by August 31 for inclusion in the promotion credentials file.

.4  By August 31 (or subsequent business day), the candidate shall submit to the dean all other supporting documents.  It is the candidate’s responsibility to insure that the promotion credentials file is complete by this date.

.5  Each faculty member requesting promotion shall prepare a promotion credentials file. It shall be the responsibility of the faculty member to submit all pertinent data he or she wishes to have included in the file.  For the remainder of the decision-making process, this file shall constitute the exclusive official written record of the procedure. The file must contain copies of all the faculty member’s APRs since the last promotion.  The file also contains a faculty data sheet providing information contained in the candidate’s state personnel file (see §3.12.3) concerning the individual’s degrees and dates received, terms of service, promotion record, and other personnel data as deemed appropriate:  this faculty data sheet must be reviewed by the candidate, countersigned by the candidate, and is inserted in the candidate’s promotion credentials file.  The file shall include all communications and documents developed as part of the process beginning with the initial letter requesting promotion.  The file shall be accessible only to the faculty member involved, the P&T Committee, Promotion Appeal Advisory Committee, the dean, the Provost, the President, and the Board of Visitors.  All persons asked to write evaluations and/or recommendations should be informed by the requester that these documents will be accessible to the faculty member.  This file is due in the dean’s Office by August 31.

.6  From August 31 until the file is conveyed to the P&T Committee on September 7, the candidate has the right to review all materials in the file and write a letter of exception or explication to be included in the file.  The candidate may not during this time remove materials from the file or modify them in any way.   The file shall not be accessible to the candidate from the time that it is conveyed to the P&T Committee until the promotion process and all appeals are complete.

 .7  On September 7, or the following Monday if September 7 falls on the weekend, the dean shall transmit the faculty member’s promotion credentials file to the P&T committee.  For the remainder of the decision making process, this file shall constitute the exclusive official written record of the procedure.  After the file is transmitted to the P&T committee, no additional material will be added to, included in the file, or used in the tenure consideration to insure the same documentary record forms the basis for promotion recommendations at each level of review.

.8  The P&T Committee shall study carefully each promotion credentials file and shall formulate and submit by January 5 a recommendation to the dean on whether promotion should be granted or withheld, together with a written justification for each recommendation.  The number of faculty members recommended for promotion to each rank shall not exceed the numbers in the guidance provided by the dean.  The recommendations and justifications of the committee shall be included in the appropriate credentials files and, ultimately, in the faculty members’ University personnel file.

.9  Within one week (five working days), the dean shall inform each faculty member requesting promotion of the P&T Committee’s recommendation, of the justifications for the recommendation pertaining to him or her, and of the faculty member’s right to appeal.

.10  No later than  January 17,  (or the subsequent Monday) faculty members requesting promotion may appeal the recommendations of the P&T Committee by submitting a request for reconsideration and justification for such reconsideration on the basis of procedural or substantive grounds to the dean.

.11  In each instance when an appeal is requested, the dean shall, within on working week, establish a Promotion Appeal Advisory Committee (PAAC).    All members serving on the PAAC shall be full-time faculty members of the University and have at least the aspirant rank of the appellant.  Members of the committee shall be selected as follows:

  1. One member appointed by the appellant.
  2. One member, who shall be from the College of Business and be tenured, appointed by the Promotion and Tenure Committee.
  3. One member appointed by the Dean.
  4. One member appointed by the Provost.

No person on the PAAC, with the possible exception of the person selected by the appellant, should be a faculty member who has written a letter of recommendation for the candidate’s promotion and/or tenure file.  In the event of multiple appeals, the three members appointed respectively to the P&T committee, the dean and the Provost shall serve on each appeal committee; the member selected by the appellant shall serve only on the committee reviewing the appeal of his or her selector. All members serving on the PAAC shall have the rank that exceeds the current rank of the applicant.

.12  The PAAC, with access to all information available to the original P&T Committee for all applicants to the rank sought by the appellant, shall reconsider the recommendations of the original committee.  The PAAC shall report to the dean within four weeks, either endorsing the original report or presenting an alternative recommendation in writing.  The dean shall inform the appellant of the PAAC’s recommendation within two working days.

.13  The dean shall review all information and recommendations contained in the promotion credentials file of each faculty member, shall formulate and state in writing his or her recommendations, with reasons, and shall forward these and the promotion credentials files to the Provost by March 10. A copy of this letter will be sent to the faculty member and his or her department chair. When the dean recommends that promotion be withheld, the recommendation letter from the dean shall inform the faculty member of his or her right to appeal the dean’s recommendation, in writing, within seven days to the Provost.

.14 The Provost shall review the recommendation letter from the promotion and tenure committee along with the recommendation letter from the dean.  The Provost shall formulate and state in writing his or her recommendation and shall submit this letter to the President by April 1. A copy of this letter shall be sent to the faculty member, his or her department chair, and the dean. When the Provost recommends that promotion be withheld, the recommendation letter from the Provost shall inform the faculty member of his or her right to appeal the Provost’s recommendation, in writing, within seven days to the President and the Board of Visitors.

.15  The Board of Visitors (or the Executive Committee thereof) in consultation with the President shall, no later than May 15, review all information of record, as well as any written appeals, and shall render a final decision in the matter and so notify each candidate, his or her department chair, the dean, and the Provost in writing.  Action by the Board of Visitors (or the Executive Committee thereof) shall be final.  After the appeals are exhausted, the material supplied by the dean and the letters of recommendation (and of exception, if any) shall be inserted in the University personnel file (see §3.12.4) maintained by the Office of the Provost; material submitted by the faculty member shall be returned to him or her.

.16  All official notification of administrative action shall be by certified mail.

J.3 Criteria for Tenure  

All persons involved in the tenure determination process are expected to weigh with care all of the following institutional and individual criteria in arriving at each tenure recommendation.

J.3.1  Institutional Criteria

.1  To consider each application according to criteria expressed in the Faculty Handbook.

.2  To consider carefully the rank and tenure profiles of the University, projected enrollment patterns, staffing needs of the University, current and projected mission of each department and college, the specific academic competence of the faculty member, and the preservation of opportunities for the infusion of new talent.  The institution, while not maintaining tenure quotas, shall be mindful of the dangers of losing internal flexibility and institutional accountability to the citizens of the Commonwealth as the result of an overly-tenured faculty.

J.3.2  Individual Qualifications   Possession of the doctorate, special competence, or a terminal degree appropriate to the teaching field.

J.3.3  Performance Criteria     Faculty performance is evaluated in three areas of endeavor:  1) teaching effectiveness 2) Research, Scholarship, and Professional Development and 3) service to the University, the college, department, discipline, and profession including professional service activity and community at large.  The first area, teaching, is preeminently important.  In order to be granted tenure, the candidate must:

.1  demonstrate effective teaching outcomes by showing that he or she has exhibited effort, skill, reflection, dedication to student learning, flexibility, and current knowledge of the discipline.  Effective teaching is, in and of itself, a significant achievement, and is given first priority in evaluating every faculty member’s performance.  The candidate must demonstrate a pattern of teaching effectiveness during the evaluation period, as indicated by evidence from multiple sources, including (but not limited to):  student feedback from course evaluations, quality of syllabi, assignments, tests, and contributions to the teaching profession, such as innovation.  The University also recognizes the value of substantial contributions to the curriculum, course improvement through revision of content, development of new courses, development of writing and speaking intensive courses, and innovative teaching methods.

.2  Demonstrate that he or she has contributed to his or her discipline and/or profession through activities that are directed toward professional peers beyond the campus. The committee expects to see a pattern of producing research, scholarship and professional development activities and output that goes beyond mere attendance at meetings and conferences. Following is a list of examples of the kinds of activities that would be considered significant within the traditional disciplines: publication of articles in peer reviewed journals, conference proceedings, books, edited books, chapters in edited books, monographs and paper presentations at the regional, national or international conferences; program development and participation; holding office in professional organizations which results in research and scholarship activities; editing a journal; publishing book reviews or other printed works; winning a grant. The P&T Committee expects the candidate and his or her department to provide information about the kinds of activities appropriate to the discipline that constitute activities entailing research, scholarship and professional development.  Generally, professional service activities are not considered research, scholarship or professional development.  Organizational and managerial activities while holding office in professional organizations would be considered service to the profession.

A candidate for tenure is required to provide the Promotion and Tenure Committee with evidence of publications and scholarship appropriate to the time allocated for promotion and tenure. However, as expressed in §J.7, under the definition of professional development, the Promotion and Tenure Committee should take into consideration the time spent in this area when considering the amount of research and scholarly activity of the candidate.

For specific definition and types of items entailing research, scholarship, and professional development (see §J.7)

.3  demonstrate a consistent contribution to the department, and substantive service to the University and/or college.  The University also recognizes the value of effective leadership in service, including substantial contribution to a committee’s work, advising, organizing events, lending one’s professional expertise to the community beyond the University, holding committee offices, and bringing motions to committees, departments, college, or the faculty.

These may include activities pertaining to the faculty member’s professional expertise being used for providing service to the community or professional discipline.  The following categories will be considered for evaluating service component;

  1. Departmental, college, and university service
    1. Advisement and counseling to students
    2. Special service arrangements
    3. Sponsoring of student activities
    4. Cooperation with Grants/Funding Office
    5. Service on department, college and university committees and taskforces
    6. Cooperation with the Office of admissions in recruitment
    7. Other departmental, college and university service
    8. Leadership and substantial contribution in the departmental, college or university service activities
  2. Community service
    1. Service to the outreach programs
    2. Workshops, projects and colloquia
    3. Speaking activities – generally considered a service activity, but in some cases may be considered a professional development activity or even scholarship activity provided it involves some degree of juried review process lesser than publication activity.
    4. Any other ways in which the faculty member is using professional knowledge to serve the community
  3. Service to the professional discipline
    1. Service to scholarly/ professional societies/organizations – holding office, active as a member, organize sessions etc.
    2. Service as a member of the advisory board for a scholarly journal in the field of business disciplines. But, service as a member of the editorial board for the purpose of reviewing scholarship works, would be classified as scholarship.  The differentiation is made on the basis of the nature of services rendered – organizational, management or scholarly.
    3. Contribution to the advancement of the discipline
    4. Serve on governance boards

J.4 Tenure Procedure

.1  During the years preceding the sixth probationary year (or the year in which the tenure decision is made), the department chair will be a mentor to the tenure candidate.  The tenure candidate will be apprised in writing of strengths and areas that need improvement as part of his or her performance evaluation.  If the formative evaluation and assistance do not improve the level of performance of a candidate, he or she may be dismissed before the sixth probationary year (see §3.17).

.2  By May 1, the candidate must submit a letter to the Dean requesting consideration for tenure in the next academic year.  Additionally by May 1, in order for individuals writing letters of recommendation to have sufficient time to review the file, candidates for promotion will submit to their department chair documents that demonstrate  the candidate’s record of Teaching Effectiveness, Research, Scholarship and Professional Development, and Service to the University, College and Department by including: (1) current Curriculum Vitae, (2) all Faculty Annual Activity Reports to date, (3) performance evaluations to date, (4) course evaluations to date, and (5) any other pertinent information.  Also by May 1, candidates for tenure should submit to their department chair a list from which to solicit letters of recommendation.  This list shall include, three to five individuals who are faculty or professionals outside the College of Business. Upon request by the candidate, the chair will solicit letters from other individuals on the candidates list, including faculty or professionals outside the College of Business.  All of the letters solicited shall be from individuals knowledgeable about the candidate’s Teaching, Research, Scholarship and Professional Development, or Service to the University, College and Department or professional Discipline.   The department chair’s request for letters of recommendation shall include the College of Business criteria for tenure.  Letters of recommendation should clearly identify accomplishments of the candidate that substantiate specific criteria for tenure.  All persons asked to write letters of recommendation shall be informed that these documents will be accessible to the faculty member.  The department chair shall promptly provide the candidate with a list of those from whom letters have been requested.  The deadline for receipt of letters is August 22.  The department chair shall be responsible for transmitting these recommendations to the candidate for inclusion in the candidate’s tenure file.

.3  At his or her discretion, the chair may solicit a maximum of five additional letters from faculty members inside or outside of the department.  When the chair requests recommendations on the matter of a candidate’s promotion or tenure, he or she will promptly provide the candidate with a list of those from whom letters have been requested.  The department chair shall be responsible for transmitting these recommendations to the dean for inclusion in the tenure credentials file.   The faculty member requesting tenure may solicit letters of recommendation from other faculty members inside or outside of his or her assigned department, and at the faculty member’s request such letters shall be included by the in the tenure credentials file.  The faculty member requesting tenure also may include in the file such other documents and materials, including publications, as he or she may desire.

.4  By August 26 (or subsequent business day) the chair  shall review his or her written recommendation regarding tenure and the reasons for the recommendation with the faculty member.  The faculty member may submit a letter of exception to the dean by August 31. The chair shall submit the candidate’s request for tenure, the chair’s recommendation and reasons for the recommendation, and all letters submitted to the chair to the dean by August 31 for inclusion in the tenure credentials file.

.5  Each faculty member requesting tenure shall prepare a tenure credentials file. (Appendix F offers guidance about the preparation of the file.  Persons applying simultaneously for promotion and tenure prepare only one file.)  It shall be the responsibility of the faculty member to submit all pertinent data he or she wishes to have included in the file, and the file must include copies of the APRs for each of the preceding academic years of the faculty member’s probationary period (normally five years but sometimes fewer). The file also contains a faculty data sheet providing information contained in the candidate’s state personnel file (see §3.12.3) concerning the individual’s degrees and dates received, terms of service, promotion record, and other personnel data as deemed appropriate:  this faculty data sheet must be reviewed by the candidate, countersigned by the candidate, and is inserted in the candidate’s tenure credentials file.  For the remainder of the decision-making process, this file shall constitute the exclusive official written record of the procedure.  The file shall include all communications and docu­ments developed as part of the process beginning with the initial letter requesting promotion.  The file shall be accessible only to the faculty member involved, the P&T Committee, PAAC, the dean, the Provost, the President, and the Board of Visitors.  All persons asked to write evaluations and/or recommendations should be informed by the requester that these documents will be accessible to the faculty member.

.6  By August 31 (or subsequent business day), the candidate shall submit to the Dean all other supporting documents.  It is the candidate’s responsibility to insure that the tenure credentials file is complete by this date.

.7  From August 31 until the file is made available to the P&T Committee on September 7, the candidate has the right to review all materials in the file and to write a letter of exception or explication for inclusion in the file.  The candidate may not during this time remove materials from the file or modify them in any way.  The file shall not be accessible to the candidate from the time that it is made available to the P&T Committee until the tenure process and all appeals are complete.

.8  On September 7, or the following Monday if September 7 falls on the weekend, the dean shall transmit the faculty member’s promotion credentials file to the P&T committee.  For the remainder of the decision making process, this file shall constitute the exclusive official written record of the procedure.  After the file is transmitted to the P&T committee, no additional material will be added to, included in the file, or used in the tenure consideration to insure the same documentary record forms the basis for tenure recommendations at each level of review

.9  The P&T Committee shall study carefully each tenure credentials file and shall formulate and submit a recommendation to the dean as to whether tenure should be awarded or withheld for each faculty member together with a written justification for each recommendation.  The recommendations and justifications of the committee shall be included in the appropriate credentials files.

.10  Within one week (five working days), the dean shall inform each faculty member requesting tenure of the P&T Committee’s recommendation, of the justifications for the recommendation pertaining to him or her, and of the faculty member’s right to appeal.

.11  No later than January 17, faculty members requesting tenure may appeal the recommendations of the P&T Committee by submitting a request for reconsid­eration and jus­tification for such reconsideration on the basis of procedural or substantive grounds to the dean.

.12 In each instance when an appeal is requested, the dean shall, within on working week, establish a Tenure Appeal Advisory Committee (TAAC).    All members serving on the TAAC shall be full-time faculty members of the University and have at least the aspirant rank of the appellant.  Members of the committee shall be selected as follows

  • One member appointed by the appellant.
  • One member, who shall be from the College of Business and be tenured, appointed by the Promotion and Tenure Committee.
  • One member appointed by the Dean.
  • One member appointed by the Provost

No person on the TAAC, with the possible exception of the person selected by the appellant, should be a faculty member who has written a letter of recommendation for the candidate’s promotion and/or tenure file.  In the event of multiple appeals, the three members appointed respectively to the P&T committee, the dean and the Provost shall serve on each appeal committee; the member selected by the appellant shall serve only on the committee reviewing the appeal of his or her selector.

.13  The TAAC, with access to all information available to the original P&T Committee, shall reconsider the recommen­dations of the original committee.  The TAAC shall report to the dean within four working weeks, either endorsing the original report or else presenting an alternative recommendation in writing.  The dean shall inform the appellant of the TAAC’s recommendation within two working days.

.14  The dean shall review all information and recommendations contained in the tenure credentials file of each faculty member; shall formulate and state in writing his or her recommendations, with reasons; and shall forward these and the tenure credentials files to the Provost by March 10. A copy of this letter will be sent to the faculty member and his or her department chair.

.15  When considering tenure decisions, the dean must consider each application according to criteria expressed in the Faculty Handbook.  The dean must also consider carefully the rank and tenure profiles of the college, projected enrollment patterns, staffing needs, current and projected mission of each department, the specific academic competence of the faculty member, and the preservation of opportunities for the infusion of new talent.

.16  When the dean recommends that tenure be withheld, the recommendation letter from the dean shall inform the faculty member of his or her right to appeal the dean’s recommendation, in writing, within 7 days to the Provost.

.17 The Provost shall review the recommendation letter from the promotion and tenure committee along with the recommendation letter from the dean. The Provost shall formulate and state in writing his or her recommendation and shall submit this letter to the President by April 1. A copy of this letter shall be sent to the faculty member, his or her department chair, and the dean. When the Provost recommends that tenure be withheld, the recommendation letter from the Provost shall inform the faculty member of his or her right to appeal the Provost’s recommendation, in writing, within 7 days to the President and the Board of Visitors.

.18  The President and the Board of Visitors (or the Executive Committee thereof), shall, within one month, review all information of record, as well as any written appeals and shall render a final decision in the matter and so notify the faculty member, his or her department chair, the dean, and the Provost in writing.  Action by the Board of Visitors, or the Executive Committee thereof, shall be final.  If tenure is denied, a one-year contract will be offered to the faculty member.  The Board of Visitors may offer additional one-year contracts but such additional contracts carry no right to tenure.  No materials received after the file is transmitted to the P&T Committee will be included in the file or used in the tenure consideration, to insure that the same documentary record forms the basis for tenure recommendations at each level of review.  After the appeals are exhausted, any materials supplied by the dean, the letters of recommendation, and any letters of exception shall be inserted in the faculty member’s university personnel file (see §3.12.4); materials submitted by the faculty member shall be returned to him or her.

.19  All official notification to the candidate of administrative action shall be by certified mail.

J.5  Contents of the Promotion And Tenure File   

The file that accompanies a candidate’s request for tenure and/or promotion must contain specific evidence and supplementary materials that will enable the committee to read, understand, and act on the request. The candidate is responsible for ensuring that the file is complete and that it clearly communicates to the committee all evidence of meeting the relevant criteria.

The file should contain: (1) Table of Contents; (2) letter of application to chair/dean; (3) personnel data sheet; (4) curriculum vitae; (5) Faculty Annual Activity Reports and Annual Performance Reviews; (6) letters of recommendation; (7) rationale; and (8) appendices.  The amount of material should fit within one two-inch binder.  The candidate should not use plastic sleeves and folders with pockets.  Pages should be numbered in an organized fashion, and the file should be organized into sections with appropriate section dividers.

.1  Letter of Application to Chair/Dean    This should be no longer than one paragraph, describing the basic criteria that have been met (i.e. the length of service here or in the rank, the completion of degree requirements, etc.).

.2  Personnel Data Sheet    This is inserted by the dean’s office and carries your signature.

.3 Curriculum Vitae    The CV should be recent, complete, and organized in a conventional format appropriate to one’s discipline.

.4  Faculty Annual Activity Reports (FAARs) and Annual Performance Reviews (APRs) by the Chair/Dean    All FAARs and APRs must be signed.  If any are missing or late,  the chair/dean must address this in his/her letter.

.5  Letters of Recommendation    Letters should be from multiple sources (chair, departmental colleagues, faculty colleagues, professional colleagues) clearly substantiating specific claims related to the criteria.

.6  Rationale    The candidate should explain as clearly and concisely as possible (in no more than ten pages) how he or she meets all the general (§7.2) and specific (§7.3) criteria for promotion and/or tenure.  In many instances the explanation could be as short as a sentence.  Discussion of performance in the areas of teaching, research, scholarship and professional development, and service will normally be fairly lengthy.

.7  Appendices    Include representative materials that attest to effectiveness and achievement, not merely meeting normal expectations of the faculty

.8  Student Evaluation Computer Sheets from the Dean’s Office and/or Tables Providing Descriptive Evidence    Because teaching is very difficult to evaluate, the candidate should make a concerted effort to include other useful sources of information about quality of teaching.  Such sources might include classroom visitation reports, awards, publications or presentations about teaching, and formal involvement in programs focused on improving teaching.  The candidate should present converging lines of evidence instead of depending upon a single measure.  If the candidate includes student comments, he or she should provide a clear interpretation of them. The inclusion of selected favorable student comments is unpersuasive.

.9  Representative Syllabi, Tests, and Assignments    The candidate should provide select examples that, with appropriate annotation, will help the committee understand his/her goals, expectations and process in the classroom.

.10  Proof of Achievement in Research, Scholarship and Professional Development   The candidate should include only the material relevant to the period under review at the University (for tenure) or at the current rank (for promotion). Photocopies of the first page of an article or a table of contents from a book (rather than an offprint or photocopy of the full text) is sufficient. Visual work produced in media other than print can be represented by photographs. The candidate should describe electronic or digital products clearly, explaining what they do and their design. The file should not include books, videotapes, films, or computer programs.


J.6  Expectations for the Constituents in the PROMOTION AND TENURE Process

.1  Departmental Colleagues    Departmental colleagues should explain the candidate’s role in the department. In addition, the departmental colleagues’ letters should help to explain the significance of the candidate’s research, scholarship and professional development. Recommendations should be based on specific information.

.2  Department Chair    The chair’s letter should explain the candidate’s role in the department. The chair should take extra care to explain the department’s style of operation, so that the candidate’s important roles can be more adequately understood. The chair’s letter should also explain the significance and quality of the candidate’s research, scholarship and professional development.  The chair’s letter should then give an honest summative evaluation of the candidate’s work in all three areas. The committee asks for the chair’s best, most careful judgment of the candidate’s work over an extended time. That judgment should be based on specific information reported in the letter and (usually) reflected in the series of evaluations that the file contains.  Finally, the committee assumes that the chair has verified the accuracy of all substantive claims on the candidate’s curriculum vitae.

.3  Institutional Colleagues    Institutional colleagues should explain the specific contexts in which they have worked with the candidate and evaluate her/his performance in those areas. Recommendations should be based on specific information that is reported in the letter.

.4  Colleagues in the Discipline    Candidates should see that these references address the context in which the candidate’s work has become known and the standing of the candidate’s work within the discipline or the profession.

.5  Dean    The dean should verify that materials are submitted on time and, on the specified date, close the file. The dean should make files available to the committee promptly in a way that facilitates the committee’s work and protects the confidentiality of the files. The dean should brief the committee clearly on relevant institutional constraints before it begins deliberating and assist both the committee and the candidates in protecting the confidentiality of the process. After the committee forwards its recommendations, the dean may meet with them to clarify the recommendations. In reaching her/his own recommendations, the dean should consider first whether or not the candidate’s record of achievement as represented in the file satisfies the relevant criteria. The dean may also consider two other factors: institutional constraints on promotion or tenure; and additional information about the candidate’s performance which s/he has learned through formal processes and which is clearly represented in the candidate’s personnel folder. In no case is the dean to grant any credence to anonymous or informal claims about the candidate’s performance.

.6  Provost    The Provost shall review the recommendation letter from the promotion and tenure committee along with the recommendation letter from the dean, and may also consider institutional constraints that may bear on promotion or tenure decisions.  As necessary during this stage of the process, the Provost may examine the candidate’s record of achievement as represented in the file when formulating his or her recommendation that will be submitted to the President.

J.7  Definitions of Research, Publication, Scholarship and Professional Development

J.7.1  Definition of Research

.1  Contribution to knowledge Generally considered appropriate to a discipline having gone through a quality peer reviewed assessment, and resulting  in publications in the form of journal articles, books, research reports, conference proceedings, poster sessions at academic or professional practice conferences.

.2  Definition of a Publication    The presentation of research in forms appropriate to the discipline—books, chapters in books, articles, research reports, on-line publications etc., that have been subject to a process of peer review. Publications should be in peer reviewed journals. Tenure and promotion candidates are responsible for ensuring quality peer review. Tenure and promotion candidates should include evidence that their publications have undergone adequate peer review in their respective dossiers. Potential indicators of quality peer review include Australian Business Deans’ Council, EBSCO Host, Scopus, and Cabell’s. The UMW library website also contains a useful guide for determining whether a journal has a quality peer review: http://libguides.umw.edu/content.php?pid=623011&sid=5635870. Tenure and promotion candidates could use information in these sources as evidence of quality peer review.

.3  Definition of Scholarship   It constitutes activities as a result of engagement in the research process, study or professional knowledge or skills related to a discipline involving some form of peer exposure or consideration, but will not have the blind peer review scrutiny as research publications do.

.4  Definition of Professional Development    These activities are neither considered research nor scholarship, but are activities primarily in the faculty member’s discipline.  Business disciplines, such as law and accounting, are considered practices, and as such, require application to remain current and effective in the field.  The hours required to remain current can range widely, and could require several hundred hours annually.  The amount of time spent by the faculty member performing professional activities, including activities such as paid consulting, should be considered when evaluating research and scholarship production.  This is not to suggest that professional activities is a substitute for research and scholarship, but rather could reduce the amount of time a faculty member may devote to it.  Other professional activity could include activities primarily organizational or managerial in development and execution, and may not be in faculty member’s discipline per se. These could include teaching material development, skill development workshops, university or community service or service to a professional organization.

There are activities that could stem from professional development which contribute to the body of knowledge in a given field.  These items could be considered research or scholarship provided those are appropriately juried.  Examples of professional development would include changes in operating methods in the field in which the faculty member practices, such as a change in tax law for an attorney or creation of a new accounting standard from an accountant.  The change in the fields body of knowledge should be attributable to the specific faculty member.

J.7.2  Items and Activities Considered Publication

.1  The first edition of authored books of all types (e.g., monographs, textbooks, dissertations turned into a book, book-length works of creative writing)

 .2  For subsequent and revised editions of textbooks and other books— Evidence must be provided that these new or revised editions were peer reviewed.

.3  Editing a book with one or more contributions (articles/chapters) by the editor – Note:  An edited book should not be equivalent to an authored book.

.4  Peer-reviewed articles, book chapters, research notes, conference proceedings, case studies etc.   This includes those published electronically if peer reviewed.

Note: A paper presented at a conference and subsequently included in the conference proceedings will be counted once only.  That is, it cannot be counted under the category of scholarship as well as under the category of publications.

.5  Peer-reviewed, collaboratively written articles, books, or chapters— multiple authors of a published works would be assigned lesser value as compared to single authored publications.

J.7.3  Items and Activities Considered Scholarship (Not Considered Publication)

.1  Papers and poster sessions presented at national and international conferences at which a paper is required – This does not include other forms of presentation equivalent to a paper or poster presentation when they are the accepted form of conference presentation in certain disciplines such as education.

.2  Paper is not required at a poster session.

.3  Papers and poster sessions presented at regional and local conferences where a paper is required as well as where paper is not required at a poster session

Note: A paper presentation at a conference that is subsequently included in the conference proceedings can be counted once only.

.4  Works published by a third party but not peer reviewed: book reviews, reference book articles, research notes, co-authored articles, case studies, bibliographies, and other scholarly publications.

.5  Acting as a discussant or respondent on a conference panel.

.6  Securing Grants:  This provision applies to grants awarded on a competitive basis of an amount above $1,000.  Thus, automatically awarded grants, such as UMW – COB summer stipends, are excluded from this provision.  It is incumbent upon the faculty member to demonstrate that the grant was competitively awarded and preferably peer-reviewed.

Note:  If the grant is a University of Mary Washington grant (an additional award for the same grant will not be considered as a separate grant and will be counted only once).

.7  External grants— (similarly, a supplementary award for the same grant will not be considered as a separate grant and will be counted only once).

.8  Unpublished articles and manuscripts— if evidence can be shown that the faculty member is actively working toward publication (e.g., a “revise and resubmit” letter from an editor) it would be considered a scholarship activity for the purpose for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor and for promotion to Full Professor

.9  Editing a journal or annual review for at least one year.

.10  Membership on the editorial board of a journal or annual review that involves faculty for the purpose of peer reviewing scholarship works such as articles, monographs and research.

.11  Reviewing manuscripts – for journals, publishers and for conference proceedings;   This type activity cannot be used in lieu of published research of scholarship works.

.12  Newspaper articles: but only if evidence can be provided that they were commissioned based on the faculty member’s discipline and expertise broadly defined—lesser weight would be assigned to this type of scholarship activity.

.13  Unpaid consulting:  Only if the faculty member obtains acceptance from his/her faculty group about the value of the project to the faculty member’s academic advancement.  However, this provision does not preclude the faculty member from obtaining data/information from the project that can be used for publications or scholarship.

.14  Unpaid or paid applied research/collaborative research with a government or non-profit agency: Similar to consulting, faculty members must obtain acceptance from their faculty group of the value of the project to their academic advancement.   Again, this provision does not preclude the faculty member from obtaining data/information from the project that can be used for other scholarship or publications.

J.7.4  Items and Activities Considered Professional Development (Not Considered Research or Scholarship)

.1  Explanation/Definition    Items and activities not considered publication or other scholarship are those not subject to the peer review process or some form of peer exposure.  They may be items or activities, primarily organizational or managerial in development and execution, or those that would not generally be viewed as scholarship within the faculty member’s discipline.  Such items and activities may more appropriately be considered as teaching or developing teaching materials, University or community service, or service to a professional organization. These items are listed below:

.2  Paid consulting and applied/collaborative research, unless the results of this are presented in a form and through a medium appropriate to the faculty member’s discipline.

.3  An identical or very similar piece of research published in a second outlet or presented in a second forum.  In other words, the same piece of work cannot be counted twice.

.4  Books, articles, works of creative writing, and collections which are not peer reviewed.

.5  Self-published books, articles, reports, etc. which are not peer reviewed will not be considered published research or scholarship.

.6  Publications and scholarship not related to a faculty member’s discipline broadly defined.  This provision should not discourage interdisciplinary work and interdisciplinary collaboration if the faculty member is using his/her discipline or the substantive knowledge from that discipline in the research or creative activity.  The provision is meant to apply to products that are outside the faculty member’s field (such as a business faculty member is writing a novel or producing a landscape painting) that cannot be reasonably considered as publication, scholarship and professional development activity.

.7  Newspaper articles which are not commissioned and/or not based on the faculty member’s discipline and expertise.

.8  Letters to the editor.

.9  Chairing conference panels.

.10  Supervising students on research projects or mentoring faculty on research and scholarly projects.

.11 Presenting seminars, delivering speeches, etc. unpaid or paid are not considered research or scholarship instead a professional development or activity.

.12  Materials placed on a personal or other Internet Website including academic Websites unless these materials have been subject to peer review.

J.8  COB Promotion and Tenure Committee

The committee consists of five faculty members elected by the College of Business faculty. If feasible, all members must have attained the rank of associate professor or above with tenure, at least three of whom shall have attained the rank of full professor, by the date of election. If there are not enough available ranked faculty members from within the College of Business, the College of Business may – at the discretion of the College of Business faculty – elect College of Business faculty who do not meet the normal qualifications and/or elect faculty who meet these criteria from outside the College of Business.  Members will serve staggered 3-year terms. The committee’s duties are to:

.1 Make recommendations in the matters of promotion according to College and University faculty promotion policy and procedures. In making its recommendations, the primary responsibility of the committee is to evaluate all candidates’ applications according to the criteria stated in the Faculty Handbook §7 and in Appendix J.

.2 Make recommendations to the Dean in matters of tenure according to College faculty tenure policy and procedures.  In making its recommendations, the primary responsibility of the committee is to evaluate all candidates’ applications according to the criteria stated in the Faculty Handbook §7 and in Appendix J.

.3 Recommend changes in promotion and tenure policy or procedure to the College of Business Faculty Council.