FSRR ARTICLE VI. TENURE AND PROMOTION RECOMMENDATIONS

Section 1: General Provisions

6.1.1.  Scope and Purpose.   This Article establishes standards and procedures for making recommendations to the Chancellor concerning the award of tenure and/or promotion in rank.  The final authority to make decisions concerning tenure and promotion rests with the Chancellor.

6.1.1.1.  The award of tenure and/or promotion in rank are among the most important decisions made by the University because the excellence of the University depends on the quality of its faculty.  In addition, tenure and promotion decisions have a profound effect on the lives and careers of faculty.  Recommendations concerning tenure and promotion must be made carefully, based upon a thorough examination of the candidate’s record and the impartial application of clearly articulated standards pursuant to prescribed procedures.  It is the purpose of this Article to promote sound decisions concerning tenure and promotion through the rigorous and fair evaluation of faculty teaching, research, and service.  

6.1.1.2.  Recommendations concerning tenure and promotion shall be made solely in accordance with the standards and procedures in this Article and the written criteria, procedures, and guidelines adopted pursuant to it.  Criteria, procedures, and guidelines adopted pursuant to this Article shall further its purposes and be consistent with its provisions.

6.1.1.3.  The University of Kansas subscribes to the 1940 AAUP statement on Academic Freedom and Tenure or such amendment or revision by the AAUP as may be adopted by the Kansas Board of Regents.

6.1.2.  Tenure and Promotion Standards.  The award of tenure and/or promotion in rank acknowledges meritorious performance in the areas of teaching, research (including creative activity), and service.  Teaching and research should normally be given primary consideration.  In the case of non-teaching faculty, comparable professional responsibilities as defined by their department and the standards of their disciplines, shall be evaluated instead of teaching.  The standards set forth in this section and written criteria adopted pursuant to it shall be the controlling standards and criteria for evaluating the teaching, research, and service record of a candidate.

6.1.2.1.  Teaching is a primary function of the University, which strives to provide an outstanding education to its students.  In evaluating the quality of teaching, student and peer evaluations shall be administered and considered, along with other sources of information about a candidate’s teaching ability.

(a) For the award of tenure and/or promotion to associate professor, the record must demonstrate effective teaching, including command of the subject matter, the ability to communicate effectively in the classroom, and a commitment to providing advice and support for students outside the classroom.

(b) For promotion to the rank of professor, the record must demonstrate continued effectiveness and growth as a teacher, including mastery of the subject matter, strong classroom teaching skills, and an ongoing commitment to providing advice and support for students outside the classroom.                       

6.1.2.2.  Research and creative activity are essential components of the University’s development as a center of learning and the award of tenure and/or promotion in rank must be based on a record of scholarly accomplishment and potential.  While the nature of scholarship varies among disciplines, the University adheres to a uniform standard of quality in its research and creative activities to which all units, regardless of  discipline, are held. 

(a) For the award of tenure and/or promotion to the rank of associate professor, the record must demonstrate a successfully developing scholarly career, as reflected in such factors as the quality and quantity of publications or creative activities, external reviews of the candidate’s work by respected scholars in the field, the candidate’s regional or national reputation, and other evidence of an active and productive research agenda.

(b) For promotion to the rank of professor, the record must demonstrate an established scholarly career, as reflected in such factors as a substantial and ongoing pattern of publication or creative activity, external reviews of the candidate’s work by eminent scholars in the field, the candidate’s national or international reputation, and other evidence of an active and productive research career.

6.1.2.3.  Service is also an important responsibility of all faculty members that contributes to the University’s performance of its larger mission.  Although the nature of service activities will depend on a candidate’s particular interests and abilities, service contributions are an essential part of being a good citizen of the University.

(a) For the award of tenure and/or promotion to associate professor, the record must demonstrate a pattern of service reflecting significant contributions to the department, school, or University, to the discipline or profession, and/or to the local, state, regional, national, or international communities.

(b) For promotion to the rank of professor, the record must demonstrate an ongoing pattern of service contributions reflecting substantial contributions to the department, school, or University, to the discipline or profession, and/or to the local, state, regional, national, or international communities.

6.1.2.4. Consistent with the standards in this section and subject to the review and approval of the Provost, each department, college, or school shall adopt written criteria for evaluating a faculty member’s teaching, research, and service.  Written criteria shall articulate, within the context of the discipline, the expectations of the department, college, or school for teaching, research, and service, including their relative weights.  The criteria shall provide for the evaluation of teaching, research, and service as “excellent,” “very good,” “good,” “marginal,” or “poor.”

6.1.2.5. The normal interval from initial appointment until award of tenure and/or promotion is six years, and from appointment as or promotion to associate professor until promotion to full professor is six years.  A recommendation for award of tenure or promotion in rank before the completion of the normal interval shall be based on exceptional merit.  Pursuant to Board of Regent’s policy, faculty must receive tenure before the end of their seventh year (the “terminal year”), and consideration of tenure must occur no later than the sixth year (the “mandatory review year”). 

6.1.3.1.  Responsibility for the initial tenure and promotion review, which shall be conducted  pursuant to section 3 of this Article, lies with the department or school (if there is no departmental structure) in which the candidate has his or her principal appointment.  The College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and each school having a departmental structure shall conduct an intermediate tenure and promotion review pursuant to section 4 of this Article.  Each department, college or school shall adopt, in accordance with its decision-making processes, written procedures for conducting initial and intermediate tenure and promotion review.  The procedures adopted by a department, college, or school shall establish a committee or committees (which may be a committee of the faculty as a whole or of all faculty of a specified rank) to evaluate candidates for award of tenure or promotion in rank.  All procedures shall be submitted to the Provost for review and approval.

6.1.3.2.  Responsibility for conducting the tenure and promotion review at the University level lies with the University Committee on Promotion and Tenure (UCPT), which shall conduct its review pursuant to section 5 of this Article. To facilitate UCPT review, the Provost may provide guidelines for compiling and evaluating a candidate’s record of teaching, research, and service, including a standardized form for the collection, organization, and presentation of relevant documents by the department, college, or school.  These guidelines interpret and implement the provisions of the Faculty Senate Rules and Regulations (FSRR), and do not create substantive or procedural rights or requirements for award of tenure or promotion in rank.  In developing and amending the guidelines, the Provost shall consult with the appropriate committees of the Faculty Senate.

6.1.3.3.  To the extent consistent with the requirements of Article VII of the FSRR, a candidate shall have access to the contents of the tenure and/or promotion record.  Written tenure and promotion procedures adopted by a department, college, or school may limit a candidate’s access to the record as necessary to provide for confidential assessments of the candidate’s work or to protect confidential deliberations concerning a candidate.  Procedures limiting access shall provide a means of informing the candidate of the substance of any adverse comments or information in the record to ensure that the candidate has a fair opportunity to respond.

6.1.4.  Conflicts of Interest.  No person should participate in making recommendations concerning the award of tenure and/or promotion in rank to a candidate when participation would create a clear conflict of interest or compromise the impartiality of the recommendation.

6.1.4.1.  No person shall serve simultaneously on more than one committee (department, college or school, or university) considering tenure and promotion, except when all faculty, or all of faculty of a given rank, serve as the committee of the department or school/College.

6.1.4.2.  Department chairs and others having supervisory responsibilities over a candidate shall not shall not serve as members of the college or school committee conducting intermediate review or on the University Committee on Promotion and Tenure.

6.1.4.3.  A faculty member who is the current or former spouse or partner of a candidate for the award of tenure and/or promotion in rank shall not participate in any evaluation or recommendation concerning the award of tenure or promotion in rank with regard to the spouse or partner.

6.1.5.  Confidentiality.  Consideration and evaluation of a faculty member’s record is a confidential personnel matter.  The record compiled for purposes of evaluation and all recommendations made pursuant to the process should be treated accordingly.  Only the Chancellor’s final decision concerning non-reappointment, the award of tenure, and/or promotion in rank is to be made public.

Section 2: Pre-Tenure Matters

6.2.1.  Department, College, and School Responsibilities.  Prior to the award of tenure, it is the responsibility of each department, college, and school to provide appropriate information and guidance to assist faculty members in the development of successful careers in teaching, research, and service, and in documenting a record of their careers for purposes of the tenure process.

6.2.1.1.  As soon as practicable following appointment, a department, college, or school shall provide faculty members with information concerning the standards and procedures for award of tenure and promotion in rank, including copies of the written criteria and procedures approved by the department, college, or school and of the Provost’s guidelines.

6.2.1.2.  Each department, college, or school shall, on an ongoing basis, generate and compile the documentation necessary to evaluate a faculty member’s teaching, research and service, including peer and/or student evaluations of teaching, information on scholarly activities, and material relevant to service.

6.2.2.   Progress Toward Tenure Review.  Under guidelines issued by the Provost, a department, college, or school shall conduct a formal review of a non-tenured faculty member’s progress toward tenure during his or her third year.  The progress toward tenure review is not part of the tenure and promotion process.  Neither the record of the review nor its results shall be included in a faculty member’s tenure and promotion record and recommendations for or against tenure and promotion should not be influenced by favorable or unfavorable results of the progress toward tenure review.

6.2.3.  Non-reappointment. Because an untenured faculty member is considered to be serving a probationary period, the decision not to reappoint the faculty member may be made at any time prior to the tenure decision.

6.2.3.1. Non-reappointment may be justified by a faculty member's poor performance as a teacher, scholar, and member of the University community; by criteria based upon departmental, school or college plans for future faculty development; by budgetary considerations; or by a departmental, school or college decision that its needs should be filled with a different individual. (See the AAUP's 1968 Recommended Institution Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure).

6.2.3.2.  Pursuant to Board of Regents policy (adopting the AAUP statement of 1964), written notice of non-reappointment shall be provided to a faculty member as follows:

(a)  Not later than March 1 of the first year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that academic year; or, if a one-year appointment terminates during an academic year, at least three months in advance of its termination.

(b) Not later than December 15 of the second year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that academic year; or, if the appointment for a second year of service terminates during an academic year, at least six months in advance of its termination.

(c) At least 12 months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years of service in the University. This places the notification deadline on the last day of the academic year for faculty on nine-month appointments, and on June 30 for those on 12-month appointments.

6.2.3.3.  The normal procedure for forwarding recommendations for non-reappointment shall be from the chairperson of the department,(in the College or schools with a departmental structure), to the dean of the College or the school and from the dean to the Provost. The legally effective notice of non-reappointment shall be issued over the signature of the Provost and shall include a statement of the reasons for the decision.

6.2.3.4.  Non-reappointment is a distinct decision from the denial of tenure that involves different grounds and procedures.  Absent exceptional circumstances, non-reappointment should not occur once a faculty member is under consideration for tenure during his or her mandatory review year.

Section 3: Initial Review by Departments or Schools

6.3.1 Initiation of Review.  The process for conducting an initial review concerning the award of tenure and/or promotion in rank shall be initiated as follows:

6.3.1.1 Prior to the beginning of the spring semester, the Provost shall notify all faculty whose mandatory review year will be the following academic year, with copies provided to their department chairs and/or deans.  Upon receipt of notice or if a faculty member requests it, the department or school (if there is no departmental structure) shall initiate procedures for evaluating the candidate for the award of tenure.

6.3.1.2.  During the spring semester, each department or school (if there is no departmental structure) shall review the qualifications of all tenured faculty members below the rank of full professor, with a view toward possible promotion in rank.  Review is not required for those who have joined the faculty or been promoted within the last year or who request that their qualifications not be reviewed.  After reviewing a faculty member’s qualifications, if the department or school determines that those qualifications may warrant promotion in rank, it shall initiate procedures for evaluating the faculty member for promotion.

6.3.2.  Committee Responsibilities.  When review has been initiated pursuant to FSRR 6.3.1, the department or school committee responsible for the initial review shall compile the record of a candidate’s teaching, research, and service in accordance with the Provost’s guidelines.  The committee shall follow the approved written procedures for initial review.

6.3.2.1.  The committee shall inform the candidate of his or her right to submit materials to substantiate his or her qualifications and shall assist the candidate in preparing or acquiring those components of the tenure and/or promotion record that are the candidate’s responsibility.

6.3.2.2.  When soliciting external reviews of a candidate’s scholarship, the committee shall inform prospective reviewers of the department or school’s rules concerning the candidate’s access to the review.

6.3.2.3  Prior to making any recommendation, the committee shall give the candidate an opportunity to respond to adverse information in the record.  As required by, FSRR 6.1.3.3, the committee shall inform the candidate of the substance of any adverse information in confidential documents.

6.3.3.  Recommendations.  Upon completion of the record, the department or school committee conducting the initial review shall evaluate the candidate’s record of teaching, research, and service in light of the applicable standards and criteria and make recommendations concerning the award of tenure and/or promotion in rank. 

6.3.3.1.  If the department or school procedures so provide, the committee recommendation shall be forwarded to the faculty as a whole or to all faculty having a given academic rank for consideration.

6.3.3.2.  The department chair or dean of the school shall indicate separately in writing whether he or she concurs in or disagrees with the recommendations of the committee and/or faculty.

6.3.3.3.  The chair or dean shall communicate the recommendations of the committee and faculty to the candidate.  Adverse recommendations shall be communicated in writing, which shall include a statement of the grounds for an adverse recommendation and inform the candidate that he or she may request that the record be forwarded for further evaluation notwithstanding the adverse recommendation.

6.3.3.4.  Favorable departmental recommendations shall be forwarded to the college or school committee conducting the intermediate review.  If the initial review is conducted by a school without a departmental structure, favorable recommendations shall be forwarded to the Provost for consideration by the University Committee on Promotion and Tenure.  Adverse recommendations resulting from an initial review shall be forwarded only if the candidate requests it.

Section 4: Intermediate Review by College or School

6.4.1.  Record for Review.  In the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and schools having a departmental structure, the college or school committee shall evaluate a candidate’s teaching, research, and service on the basis of the record compiled at the departmental level.  No new material may be submitted as part of the record except as follows:

6.4.1.1.  The candidate may submit a written response to adverse recommendations from the  department and may submit additional documentation that directly responds to the grounds for adverse recommendations.  The college or school procedures may set reasonable time limits for submissions.

6.4.1.2. The college or school committee may request that the candidate or department provide additional information or materials that the committee considers necessary to evaluate the teaching, research, or service of the candidate.

6.4.1.3.  If, after consideration of the candidate’s record, the college or school committee decides upon a recommendation that differs from the recommendation of the department, the college or school committee shall “check back” with the department and invite additional documentation or comment before finalizing the recommendation.

6.4.2.  Check Back Procedure.  If the college or school committee checks back with the department, the committee shall inform the chair of the department and provide a written statement of the specific grounds for the committee’s disagreement with the department’s recommendations.

6.4.2.1.  The department chair shall inform the department committee.  The chair and/or committee shall prepare the department’s response in accordance with the department’s procedures.

6.4.2.2.  The department chair shall inform the candidate that there has been a check back and the specific grounds for it.  The candidate shall be afforded an opportunity to participate in the preparation of the department’s response and/or to submit his or her own documentation or comment to the college or school committee.

6.4.3.  Recommendations.   In conducting intermediate review, the college or school undertakes its own review of a candidate’s record and makes its own recommendations concerning the award of tenure or promotion in rank.  The college or school neither affirms nor reverses the recommendations of the department, which remain part of the record that will be forwarded to the Chancellor for final decision. 

6.4.3.1.  The college or school committee shall evaluate the candidate’s teaching, research, and service in light of the applicable standards and criteria and make recommendations concerning the award of tenure and/or promotion in rank.  If the college or school procedures so provide, the committee recommendation shall be forwarded to the faculty as a whole or to all faculty having a given academic rank for consideration.

6.4.3.2.  The dean of the college or school shall indicate separately in writing whether he or she concurs in or disagrees with the recommendations of the college or school committee and/or faculty. 

6.4.3.3.  The dean shall communicate the college or school’s recommendations to the candidate.  Adverse recommendations shall be communicated in writing, which shall include a statement of the grounds for an adverse recommendation and inform the candidate that he or she may request that the record be forwarded for further evaluation notwithstanding the adverse recommendation.

6.4.3.4.  Favorable recommendations shall be forwarded to the Provost for consideration by the University Committee on Promotion and Tenure.  Adverse recommendations shall be forwarded only if the candidate requests it.

Section 5: University Level Review bv the University Committee on Promotion and Tenure

6.5.1.  The University Committee on Promotion and Tenure.  The University Committee on Promotion and Tenure (UCPT) is a committee of eleven members, which shall be broadly representative of the faculty. 

6.5.1.1.  The UCPT shall be comprised of (1) the Provost, who shall serve as chair and who shall vote only in case of a tie; (2) one member of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee selected by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee; and (3) nine members of the faculty who serve overlapping three year terms.  The nine members of the faculty shall be selected by the Chancellor, who shall fill vacancies each year from a list of nominees prepared by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, which may not exceed twice the number of vacancies. No Dean or Assistant, Associate or Vice Dean shall serve as faculty members of the UCPT.

6.5.1.2.  Early in the fall semester, the Office of the Provost shall notify members of the faculty of the dates by which recommendations concerning the award of tenure and/or promotion in rank must be forwarded to the Provost for consideration by UCPT. 

6.5.1.3.  Early in the fall semester, each department, college or school shall provide to UCPT a copy of the written criteria it uses in evaluating teaching, research and service.  UCPT shall request that the deans of the College and schools or their designated representatives appear in person to explain and discuss the criteria.  UCPT may request that department chairs or their designated representatives appear in person to explain and discuss the criteria.  These requirements are inapplicable if a department, college, or school does not anticipate recommending a candidate to UCPT.

6.5.2.  Record.  UCPT shall evaluate a candidate’s teaching, research, and service on the basis of the record compiled by the department and/or college or school.  No new material may be submitted as part of the record except as follows:

6.5.2.1.  The candidate may submit a written response to adverse recommendations from the college or school and additional documentation that directly responds to the grounds for adverse recommendations.  UCPT may set reasonable time limits for submissions.

6.5.2.2.  UCPT may request that the candidate, department, and/or college or school provide additional information or materials that UCPT considers necessary to evaluate the teaching, research, or service of the candidate.

6.5.2.3.  If, after consideration of the candidate’s record, UCPT decides upon a recommendation that differs from the recommendation of the college or school on intermediate review, or if UCPT decides upon an adverse recommendation, it shall “check back” with the college or school and invite additional documentation or comment before finalizing the recommendation.

6.5.3.  Check Back Procedure.  If UCPT checks back with the college or school, it shall inform the dean of the college or school and the chair of the department, if any, and provide a written statement of the specific grounds for UCPT’s disagreement with the recommendations of the college or school.

6.5.3.1.  In schools without a departmental structure, the dean shall inform the school  committee and the dean and/or committee shall prepare the school’s response in accordance with the school’s procedures.

6.5.3.2.  In the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and in schools having a departmental structure, the dean and/or college or school committee shall prepare a response.  In cases where the college or school recommendations agree with those of the department, the department shall be given an opportunity to participate in the preparation of the response.  In cases where the college or school recommendations disagree with the departmental recommendations, the department shall be given an opportunity to provide supplemental information and comment in response to the check back.

6.5.3.3.  The dean shall inform the candidate that there has been a check back and the specific grounds for it.  The candidate shall be afforded an opportunity to participate in the preparation of the college or school’s response and/or to submit his or her own documentation or comment to UCPT.

6.5.4.  Recommendations.   UCPT shall evaluate the candidate’s teaching, research, and service in light of the applicable standards and criteria and make recommendations concerning the award of tenure or promotion in rank.  An affirmative recommendation by UCPT requires the approval of a two-thirds majority of those voting.  In conducting University level review, UCPT undertakes its own review of a candidate’s record and makes its own recommendations concerning the award of tenure or promotion in rank.  UCPT neither affirms nor reverses recommendations resulting from initial and intermediate review, which remain part of the record that will be forwarded to the Chancellor for final decision.

Section 6: Decision by the Chancellor

6.6.1.  Consideration of the Record.  When UCPT has completed its evaluations and made its recommendations, the entire record, including the recommendations of the department (if any), the college or school, and UCPT shall be forwarded to the Chancellor for decision.

6.6.1.1.  The Chancellor shall decide based on the record, but may seek information or consultation as he or she deems appropriate to ensure the decision is fully informed.

6.6.1.2. The Chancellor’s decision  concerning non-reappointment, tenure, and promotion represents a final determination by the University. 

6.6.2.  Notification. The Provost shall officially notify the faculty member of the Chancellor’s decision.  Adverse decision shall be communicated in writing, which shall include a statement of the grounds for an adverse decision and inform the candidate of the process for initiating an appeal to the Committee on Tenure and Related Problems.

6.6.3. Effective Date. The award of tenure and/or promotion in rank become effective with the faculty member's next regular appointment (i.e. academic or fiscal year).

Section 7: Appeal

6.7.1.  Jurisdiction. The Committee on Tenure and Related Problems (TRP) may consider appeals from decisions of the Chancellor denying tenure, promotion, or reappointment when those decisions are within its jurisdiction under Article XV, section 3 of the University Code, as specified in this section.  No other basis for appeal exists to TRP or to any other body within the University.

6.7.1.1.  TRP has jurisdiction to determine whether, because of a violation of established University procedures, the merits of a case could not be fairly heard.

6.7.1.2.  TRP has jurisdiction to determine whether there has been an abridgment of a faculty member’s academic freedom.

6.7.2.  Initiation of Appeals.  A faculty member who wishes to have TRP review a decision by the Chancellor to deny tenure and/or promotion must file a written request with within two weeks of receiving notification under FSRR 6.6.2.  The request for review must specifically state the basis for TRP jurisdiction and identify the matters in the record supporting it.

6.7.3.  Procedures.  TRP shall consider appeals using written procedures developed and adopted pursuant to its authority under the University Senate Code.  Such procedures shall be published in an appropriate location so as to be broadly available to all faculty. 

6.7.4.  Decisions.  If TRP finds that a violation of established procedures prevented a fair consideration of the merits of a case or that a faculty member’s academic freedom has been abridged, TRP may require that the department, College or school, and/or UCPT re-evaluate the faculty member’s tenure, promotion, or reappointment and reconsider its recommendations to the Chancellor.

6.7.4.1.  In accord with the Recommended Procedures of the AAUP, the complaining faculty member bears the burden of proving a violation of established procedures or an abridgment of academic freedom.

6.7.4.2.  In the case of tenure decisions in the mandatory review year, TRP shall act in a timely fashion so as to permit re-evaluation to occur during the terminal year.