|
The review of promotion and tenure documents begins with the Department P&T Committee. Documents are then reviewed in turn by the department chair and the college dean. Promotion and tenure of department chairs/school directors begins at the level of the Department P&T Committee, then proceeds to a committee of department chairs from the college (composition of this committee follows procedures outlined in College Bylaws), and finally proceeds to the dean with the remainder of the process to follow as ordinary cases of promotion and tenure (see KSU Faculty Handbook Section 3.13).
Promotion and tenure portfolios without any negative recommendations among required levels of review proceed from the dean to the Provost. In the event of any negative recommendations among required levels of review, the portfolio goes to the College P&T Committee that serves as the appeals committee for promotion and tenure cases (composition of this committee follows procedures outlined in College Bylaws). The college committee may request written clarification from previous levels of review and will have access to all portfolios in the current year in that college to see examples of successful portfolios in that year.
After the review and recommendation of the college committee (when such a review is necessary), the portfolio proceeds to the Provost for a recommendation. In cases where the portfolio did not go to the College P&T Committee, the Provost may choose to send it to the appropriate College P&T Committee for review and recommendation.
Within 10 calendar days from the date of Advance of each review recommendation, the faculty member has the right to respond to the committee’s or administrator’s recommendation and justifications by submitting a letter written by the faculty member to the reviewing committee or administrator for the information of the next level of review. The faculty member will place the response letter into the digital portfolio workflow. The response letter should address the interpretation of the information in the portfolio, but it should not include new evidence to be considered in the review process. The reviewer (committee or administrator) does not respond to this letter. The Provost makes a recommendation, and the portfolio then goes to the President, who makes a final decision. If, after the Provost review, a candidate for tenure or promotion believes that the process of review has been violated, the candidate may request review under the provisions of the KSU Grievance Policy.
If a tenured faculty is under review for promotion and post-tenure review, simultaneously, the portfolio is reviewed by the department’s promotion and tenure committee for the promotion review only. The portfolio is then reviewed by the department chair and dean for promotion and post tenure review. The portfolio is subsequently sent to the Provost for a promotion consideration and post-tenure review. If the Provost is inclined not to support a recommendation of previous levels for promotion, if previous levels of review are discrepant for promotion, or if previous reviews are consistently negative for promotion, the Provost sends the portfolio to the college committee for a promotion review. The Provost then provides a promotion and post-tenure review and finally the President provides a promotion and post-tenure decision.
If a faculty member has a joint appointment in two or more academic departments or across two or more divisions, the faculty member’s joint appointment Memorandum of Understanding, which delineates how the academic home unit and the sharing unit(s) will provide input during promotion and tenure processes, will be followed.
At each level, review committees and administrators must make a positive or negative recommendation on the question of tenure and/or promotion and must write a letter to be placed in the digital portfolio workflow [for administrative faculty, recommendation letters must be copied to the candidate’s academic supervisors (e.g., department chair, dean) and administrative supervisors (Director of Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning, Director of Global Education, etc.) if the supervisor is not included in the electronic workflow during the review process]. The letter includes the recommendation for tenure and/or promotion and articulates the strengths and weaknesses that contributed to the recommendation. Within 10 calendar days from the date of Advance of the review recommendation at each level, the faculty member has the right to respond to a committee’s or administrator’s recommendation and justifications by submitting a letter written by the faculty to the reviewing committee or administrator for the information of the next level of review. The faculty member will place the response letter into the digital portfolio workflow. The response letter should address the interpretation of the information in the portfolio, but it should not include new evidence to be considered in the review process. The reviewer (committee or administrator) does not respond to this letter.
|
Search
Menu
