ÃÛèÖÊÓƵ

1. Purpose

This Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is issued under University Policy 18.012 (Tenure). It provides the required procedures and timelines for implementing promotion and tenure processes for all eligible faculty at ÃÛèÖÊÓƵ.

2. Definitions

1. Faculty. For the purposes of this SOP, faculty are employees with faculty status at ÃÛèÖÊÓƵ.
2. Promotion. All advancement in academic rank shall be granted by the President upon the recommendation of the department, the dean involved, and the Provost. This recommendation shall be made upon the basis of performance associated with duties and workload.
3. Tenure. Tenure is awarded to those individuals who are eligible for tenure and whose records indicate that they are likely to continue to make significant positive contributions to the academic life of the University throughout their professional careers. Eligibility for tenure is reserved for those who are engaged in academic activities, including research, and/or scholarly activity, and/or creative activity (which may include activities leading to commercialization), teaching, and service. Tenure shall be granted by the President upon recommendation of the department, the dean involved, and the Provost.
4. Probationary Appointment. The probationary period is the maximum time a faculty member may serve in a tenure-track appointment before a final decision on tenure is required. It normally begins with an appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor and may not exceed seven years, except when formally extended under approved circumstances.
5. Promotion and Tenure (P&T) Committee. The promotion and tenure (P&T) committee is a body of eligible faculty within a department or school that reviews candidates for promotion and/or tenure and progress towards tenure/promotion. The committee evaluates dossiers, applies established criteria, and submits a written recommendation with a recorded vote.
6. Promotion and Tenure (P&T) Home. A faculty member’s promotion and tenure home is the academic unit (typically a department or school) in which promotion and/or tenure recommendations originate and through which such actions are formally advanced. This unit holds primary responsibility for applying criteria, conducting reviews, and forwarding recommendations through the appropriate administrative channels. Faculty may hold joint or affiliated appointments in other academic units; however, the promotion and tenure home remains the unit of record for all evaluative and procedural purposes.

3. Guiding Principles

Promotion and tenure reviews should be conducted in accordance with the following guiding principles.

1. Academic Freedom. Promotion and tenure reviews should safeguard academic freedom in research, publication, teaching, and public expression.
2. Adequate Consideration. Dossiers should receive full and conscientious review under the criteria of the academic unit.
3. Clarity. Criteria and procedures should be written in clear language so that expectations can be readily understood.
4. Consistency. Once established, criteria for promotion and/or tenure within an academic unit should be applied uniformly to all candidates.
5. Due Process. Candidates should be given notice of applicable standards, an opportunity to present their case, and assurance that established procedures are followed.
6. Evidence. Decisions should be based on documented evidence provided in the candidate’s dossier, supported by appropriate external and internal evaluations where required.
7. Fairness. Candidates should be evaluated equitably, without bias or favoritism, based on the professional judgment of the reviews.
8. Professional Ethics. Faculty should uphold standards of intellectual honesty, respect for students and colleagues, avoidance of discrimination, fair evaluation of work, and integrity in advancing knowledge.
9. Professional Judgment. Reviewers should exercise informed professional judgment, grounded in disciplinary standards, and the criteria of the academic unit.
10. Timeliness. Reviews, recommendations, and decisions should adhere to published deadlines. Units may set earlier internal dates, but university-level deadlines must be met, unless there are unusual circumstances that force extensions of deadlines. Such extensions must be approved by the Provost and communicated to the candidate(s).
11. Transparency. Procedures and criteria for promotion and/or tenure should be available to all participants in the review process.

These guiding principles apply to all faculty classifications, including tenure-track, instructional, and clinical.

4. Eligibility and Ranks

4.1 Tenure-Track Faculty

The Tenure Track consists of persons with appropriate credentials, on full-time or part-time appointments, specifically designated as tenure track faculty who, except when on unpaid leave granted upon request, are employed in at least two semesters of a fiscal year and who are so employed from the date of receiving an appointment in the Tenure Track category until that appointment terminates. A person may not change to Instructional or fixed term contract faculty categories once the initial appointment in Tenure Track is made.

Faculty shall be categorized into three ranks: Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor.

Tenure Track faculty may be hired on differential workload distributions consistent with University Policy 18.009 as appropriate to meet the needs of the department/ school, college (or equivalent), or campus, but all must contribute to the teaching, research, and service missions of the University.

4.1.1 Probationary Appointments

Probationary appointments may be made for one year, or for any other stated period, subject to renewal. The total period of probationary service prior to the acquisition of continuous tenure shall not exceed seven years, except when formally extended under circumstances approved by the Provost (or designee). Maximum periods of probationary service shorter than seven years must be negotiated prior to the initial appointment. Faculty members commencing service to ÃÛèÖÊÓƵ in the Spring semester of an academic year will have the length of their probationary period determined as if they had commenced service in the ensuing Fall semester.

The maximum length for the probationary service period shall be conveyed to the faculty member in writing at the time of the initial appointment. Written notice should be given at least one year before the end of the probationary period if the faculty member will not be continued in service beyond that term.

A faculty member's probationary period may be extended beyond the maximum time only in the event of a procedural error, as the result of a period of leave of six months or longer, or because of significantly reduced capacity for six months or longer. Typical requests are for a one-year extension; longer extensions may be requested but are limited to highly exceptional circumstances. Requests should originate from the faculty and must be supported by the department chair/school director and dean. Requests must be made in writing to the Office of the Provost before the first day of the fall semester of the penultimate year of the probationary appointment. Requests to extend the probationary period are subject to approval by the Provost (or designee).

4.2 Instructional Faculty

The Instructional Faculty consists of experienced persons holding full-time or part-time appointments who are primarily considered instructional personnel and may also have service responsibilities related to the teaching mission of the department, college, campus, or university but no expectation for research or creative activity.

Instructional faculty are categorized into three ranks: Assistant Professor of Instruction, Associate Professor of Instruction, and Professor of Instruction.

4.3 Clinical Faculty

The Clinical Faculty Track consists of faculty in the Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine (HCOM) or the College of Health Sciences and Professions (CHSP) who may hold clinical licenses/credentials and whose work is primarily teaching/mentoring students in clinical knowledge, skills, and professional domains appropriate to their individual disciplines.

Clinical faculty may hold the rank of Assistant Clinical Professor, Associate Clinical Professor, or Clinical Professor.

5. Criteria for Promotion and Tenure

The criteria used to make decisions on promotion and/or tenure must originate in the department or school in consultation with the dean. Criteria must be in writing.

Transparency, clarity, consistency, timeliness, and fairness should be overriding goals for all colleges, schools, and departments as they establish guidelines and procedures governing tenure and promotion. Department/school (or equivalent) faculty should review these criteria periodically (at least every five years) in consultation with the dean of the college (or equivalent). These criteria and any changes made to them must be approved by a simple majority of the tenure-track faculty of the department or school. In the event of an impasse between the department or school and the dean, the Promotion & Tenure Appeals Committee (described in Section 9) shall act as arbiter.

To ensure recognition of faculty with a single home department/school who engage in interdisciplinary and/or campus activities, the home department/school promotion and tenure committee must ensure that the department/school promotion and tenure guidelines and peer evaluation policies explicitly clarify how interdisciplinary and/or campus workload and efforts will be evaluated and to what extent such activities will be included in all annual evaluations and promotion and tenure decisions.

5.1 Tenure-Track Faculty

Tenure is awarded to those individuals whose records indicate that they are likely to continue to make significant positive contributions to the academic life of the University throughout their professional careers. Eligibility for tenure is reserved for those who are engaged in research, scholarly activity, and/or creative activity (which may include activities leading to commercialization), teaching, and service defined by their workload.

Tenure shall be granted by the President upon recommendation of the department, the dean involved, and the Provost.

Under exceptional circumstances, tenure may be granted by the President to a person who is newly appointed to an administrative position at ÃÛèÖÊÓƵ and who has not been previously a member of the ÃÛèÖÊÓƵ faculty. Such a grant of tenure must have been approved by the department concerned, the dean concerned, and the Provost of the University.

5.1.1 Progress toward Tenure/Promotion

Annually, the department chair shall ensure that a departmental promotion and/or tenure committee evaluates all probationary faculty, and all tenured faculty eligible for promotion who have requested a progress-toward-promotion evaluation using the departmental criteria for promotion and tenure. Tenured faculty status is required for membership on departmental/school/division promotion and/or tenure committees.

The progress toward tenure letter that probationary faculty receive should include clear, transparent, and formative information on progress towards tenure. Departments/schools may choose to do a midpoint formal evaluation and/or annual cumulative evaluations that afford the candidate feedback in terms of teaching, research/scholarship/creative activity (RSCA), service and professional activities.  Those who provide this feedback should be representative of all faculty who will eventually decide on promotion and/or tenure.

For probationary faculty not yet eligible for tenure, annual written evaluations will provide progress-toward-tenure feedback. These progress letters are designed to give faculty members a clear sense of their standing relative to tenure expectations and must be provided by February 1 of each year.

Tenured faculty eligible for promotion shall receive a similar evaluation if they request it before September 15.

Although these progress towards tenure/promotion evaluations may be indicators of progress toward tenure and promotion, favorable annual reports do not guarantee positive tenure or promotion decisions. This annual evaluation must result in recommendations with respect to the reappointment of all probationary faculty and must also result in decisions whether or not to consider actively each eligible faculty member for tenure and/or promotion.

5.1.2 Changes to Criteria

Typically, faculty should know in advance, ideally at the time of hire, the relevant criteria that will be used to arrive at a tenure decision as well as workload and balance between expectations for teaching, RSCA, service, and professional activities. Changes in the criteria for tenure may be applied to those faculty members who are already in the tenure track only if those individuals agree in writing to be considered under the new criteria.

For changes in the criteria for promotion of a faculty member with tenure, a grace period of at least three academic years from the start of the academic year in which the changes are implemented should be allowed. During the grace period, faculty members who are already on a tenure track contract in the department may opt in writing to be considered under either the old or the new criteria.

Newly hired faculty members and those who are promoted during the grace period would immediately come under the new promotion and tenure criteria. Procedural changes in departmental tenure and promotion policy may generally be implemented without delay, if so decided by the department faculty.

5.2 Instructional Faculty

Instructional Faculty may be promoted (without tenure).

Criteria for promotion should be established at the department or school level (or equivalent), in consultation with the dean, and should reflect transparency, clarity, consistency, timeliness, and fairness. Criteria must be in writing.

Following revision of promotion criteria, units are expected to provide a reasonable (approximately three years) grace period in which faculty already employed at ÃÛèÖÊÓƵ may elect in writing to be considered under the earlier criteria.

Typically, an individual is expected to spend a minimum of five years in the rank of Assistant Professor of Instruction before being considered for promotion to Associate Professor of Instruction and have qualifications of the previous title, as appropriate for their teaching/service distribution. Similarly, an individual is expected to spend a minimum of five years in the rank of Associate Professor of Instruction before being considered for promotion to Professor of Instruction and have qualifications of the previous title, as appropriate to their teaching/service distribution.

5.3 Clinical Faculty

Clinical Faculty may be promoted (without tenure). Criteria for promotion must be established in writing at the departmental or school level, in consultation with the dean, and should reflect transparency, clarity, consistency, timeliness, and fairness.

Following revision of promotion criteria, units are expected to provide a reasonable (approximately three years) grace period in which faculty already employed at ÃÛèÖÊÓƵ may elect in writing to be considered under the earlier criteria

Typically, an individual is usually expected to spend a minimum of five years in the rank of Assistant Clinical Professor before being considered for promotion to Associate Clinical Professor. Similarly, an individual is usually expected to spend a minimum of five years in the rank of Associate Clinical Professor before being considered for promotion to Clinical Professor.

6. Composition of Committees

Promotion and tenure reviews are conducted by department or school-level committees composed of eligible faculty appointed by the department chair. The following requirements apply:

1. Committee Size. Promotion and/or tenure committees should consist of at least five eligible faculty members. If the department or school does not have enough qualified faculty to meet this minimum, membership must be supplemented by faculty from a related discipline, selected by the department chair or school director in consultation with the dean (or designee).
2. Rank Requirements. Only faculty members holding the same or higher rank than that sought by the candidate may serve on a promotion and/or tenure committee. For example, when an Assistant Professor is being considered for promotion to Associate Professor, only Associate Professors and Professors may serve. When a candidate is being considered for promotion to Professor, only Professors may serve.
3. Tenure Requirement. When tenure and/or promotion for a tenure-track faculty member is being considered, only tenured faculty members may serve on the committee.
4. Status Requirement. All members of the committee must be full-time and have both faculty rank and faculty status.
5. Instructional and Clinical Representation. When an instructional faculty member is under consideration for promotion, qualified instructional faculty must be included when appropriate to the rank under consideration. For clinical faculty, qualified clinical faculty must be included when appropriate to the rank under consideration.
6. Conflict of Interest. Faculty who have family or business relationships with the candidate, or who otherwise fall under documented conflicts of interest, must recuse themselves from committee service. It is the responsibility of the academic units to determine and document in writing additional conflicts of interest so that they are applied consistently across candidates.
7. Voting Procedures. Voting must be conducted by ballot (virtual or in-person). All committee members are expected to cast a vote. The tally of votes must be recorded in the committee’s report, along with the committee’s written rationale. In cases where both promotion and tenure are being considered, separate votes must be taken on each action. The recommendation should reflect the majority of votes cast, with any minority views summarized in the report. In the case of a tie vote, the outcome should be treated as not recommending promotion and/or tenure. Unless otherwise instructed by an appropriate authority, committee deliberations are confidential, and details should not be disclosed outside the review process. Academic units are responsible for determining mechanisms for how to manage abstention votes.
8. College-Level Promotion and Tenure Committee. At the discretion of the college (or equivalent) dean, the dean may utilize a college-level promotion and tenure committee in an advisory capacity. The department- or school-level committee requirements for rank, tenure, status, conflict of interest, and voting procedures apply.

7. Annual Timeline and Process

Promotion and tenure reviews proceed sequentially through multiple levels of evaluation. At each stage, written recommendations and documentation are required, and deadlines must be met to ensure timely completion. Departments and colleges may establish earlier internal deadlines for any step in the process, but all submissions and evaluations must meet the university-level deadlines specified in this section.

All stages of review should be conducted in accordance with the guiding principles of this SOP. Evaluations should reflect adequate consideration of the dossier, ensure due process by adhering to established procedures, and safeguard academic freedom in teaching, scholarship, service, and public expression.

Step 1: Candidate Dossier Preparation

Timeline: Summer and Early Fall Semester. Faculty members who wish to be considered for promotion and/or tenure must prepare a dossier in accordance with the guidelines outlined in this SOP and departmental or school criteria. The dossier must include documentation of teaching, research, scholarship, or creative activity where applicable, service, and any other relevant contributions.

Faculty are responsible for ensuring that the dossier is complete and submitted to the department chair or school director prior to September 15, or other deadline established by the department/school.

Step 2: Department/School Promotion and Tenure Committee Review

Timeline: Between September 15 and Fall Semester Exam Week. The department/ school promotion and tenure committee serves as the first level of review. The committee evaluates the dossier according to established criteria and applies professional judgment in light of disciplinary expectations. All eligible members are expected to participate in deliberations and to cast a ballot (virtual or in-person). If both promotion and tenure are under consideration, separate votes must be taken for each action. The committee prepares a written report that records the numerical tally of votes, presents the majority recommendation and rationale, and summarizes any minority views. The report, signed by the committee chair, is forwarded to the department chair or school director by the last day of the fall semester exam week and becomes part of the dossier.

Step 4: Chair/Director Review and Notifications

Timeline: Between September 15 and Fall Semester Exam Week. The department chair or school director reviews the dossier in its entirety, including the committee’s report. The chair or director then prepares a separate written recommendation that clearly states whether promotion and/or tenure is supported. This recommendation must provide a rationale based on the dossier and established criteria. The report is appended to the dossier and forwarded to the dean on or before the last day of Fall Exam Week.

Timeline: On or before the Last Day of Fall Semester Exams. The department chair or school director notifies candidates under review for tenure and/or promotion, in writing, of departmental decisions regarding their promotion/tenure applications.

Timeline: On or before the First Day of the Spring Semester. The department chair or school director forwards approved dossiers, along with their own written recommendations, to the college (or equivalent) deans. If the candidate is not recommended for promotion and/or tenure, the dossier does not move to the next step in the process.

Step 5: Dean Review

Timeline: First Day of Spring Semester – March 1. The college (or equivalent) dean (or designee) reviews the dossier along with the recommendations from the committee and the chair or director. The dean prepares an independent written evaluation indicating whether promotion and/or tenure is supported. The dean may, at their discretion, convene a college-level advisory committee to provide additional review. If the Dean recommends promotion and/or tenure, the dean’s recommendation and college-level advisory committee (if applicable) is appended to the dossier and forwarded to the Provost no later than March 1.

Timeline: On or before March 1. Dean sends written notification to candidates, and their chairs or directors, regarding any rejections of recommendation for tenure and/or promotion.  If the candidate is not recommended for promotion and/or tenure, the dossier does not move to the next step in the process.

Step 6: Provost and President Review

Timeline: On or before March 1. Upon receiving materials, staff in the Office of the Provost review dossiers and forward them to the Executive Vice President and Provost and President.

Timeline: March 1 – April 1. The Provost reviews the recommendations from the dean, chair/director, and the department/school committee, and determines whether to recommend or not recommend promotion and/or tenure. The Provost then forwards the recommendation to the President. The President considers the recommendations from prior levels of review and makes the final determination whether to recommend promotion and/or tenure.

Timeline: On or before April 1. The Provost notifies dean, chair, and candidate in writing of rejection of recommendation for promotion/tenure.

Timeline: First week in April. The Provost notifies dean, chair, and candidate in writing of approval of recommendation for promotion/tenure.

Step 7: Board of Trustees Notification

All promotion and tenure actions approved by the President are submitted to the ÃÛèÖÊÓƵ Board of Trustees for formal notification. Typically, notification occurs during the June meeting. Promotions and tenure take effect at the beginning of the following academic year.

Step 8: Notification to Candidate

Following the Board of Trustees meeting, candidates receive formal written notification of the final decision regarding promotion and/or tenure.

8. Outcomes

Promotion and tenure reviews may result in a recommendation for approval, a recommendation for denial, or progress feedback in the case of probationary faculty. All outcomes must be communicated in writing and documented in the candidate’s dossier.

When promotion and/or tenure is granted, the action is formally approved by the President and recognized by the ÃÛèÖÊÓƵ Board of Trustees. Promotions take effect at the beginning of the next academic year or at the start of the next contract period, except in cases of extenuating circumstances.

When promotion is denied, the candidate typically continues in their current appointment rank, unless otherwise stated in the appointment agreement. For probationary faculty in tenure-track positions, denial of tenure at the end of the probationary period typically results in a terminal contract year of employment, unless otherwise stated in the appointment agreement. Faculty denied promotion or tenure may pursue appeal procedures as outlined in the Appeals section of this SOP.

9. Appeals

If a faculty member believes there is cause for an appeal relative to non-reappointment or denial of promotion and/or tenure, an appeal of a negative decision may be initiated at the level at which the decision was made, i.e., within the department/school, or at the level of the dean, or of the Provost. Should the appeal be denied at any of these levels, the faculty member may take the appeal to the next administrative level. The appeal may involve one or more of the following allegations: inadequate consideration; denial of due process (including failure to follow designated procedures); or infringement of academic freedom.

9.1 Appeal Format

The written appeal shall be no more than five pages (with 12-point font and one-inch margins) and consist of the following.

• Name, department/school, college and contact information of the individual submitting the appeal.
• Justification of the appeal based on one or more of the following allegations: inadequate consideration; denial of due process (including failure to follow designated procedures); or infringement of academic freedom.
• Explicit reference to promotion and tenure guidelines and/or operating procedures that are being alleged to have been violated.
• A statement by the faculty member concerning how the appeal should be resolved in a fair and equitable manner.

Relevant appendices may be used for supportive materials. Appendices must be hyperlinked in the body of the written appeal.

9.2 Appeal Steps

If the denial occurs at the department or school level, the faculty member must direct their appeal to the appropriate departmental or school committee through the department chair or school director.

• If the appeal is denied by that committee, the faculty member may then appeal to the dean.
• If the dean supports the appeal, the case will be returned to the department or school for reconsideration.
• If the department or school again denies the appeal, the faculty member may continue by appealing the case to the Provost.

If the department or school voted in favor of granting promotion or tenure but the dean denies the case, the faculty member may appeal to the Dean.

• If the appeal is denied by the dean, the faculty member may then appeal to the Provost.
• If the Provost supports the appeal, the case will be forwarded to the President for consideration.
• If the Provost denies the appeal, the faculty member may appeal to the Promotion and Tenure Appeals Committee.

If the department/school and dean were in favor of granting promotion or tenure but the Provost denies the case, the faculty member may appeal to the Provost.

• If the appeal is denied by the Provost, the faculty member may then appeal to the Promotion and Tenure Appeals Committee.
• If the Promotion and Tenure Appeals Committee supports the appeal, the case will be returned to the Provost for reconsideration.
• If the Provost again denies the appeal, then the faculty member may request a formal hearing.

9.3 Role of the Promotion and Tenure Appeals Committee

The Promotion and Tenure Appeals Committee serves as the body responsible for impartial review of appeals that reach the University level. The committee’s role is to determine whether the case warrants reconsideration based on evidence of inadequate consideration, denial of due process, or infringement upon academic freedom.

The committee is composed of faculty members appointed by the Provost (or designee) who hold tenure and appropriate academic rank. Members are expected to review the record carefully, maintain confidentiality, avoid conflicts of interest, and apply consistent standards across cases. The committee does not substitute its academic judgment for that of the department, dean, or Provost. Instead, it ensures that established procedures were followed and that the faculty member’s case received fair and adequate consideration.

Allegations of Denial of Due Process. Insofar as the petition for review alleges denial of due process, the functions of the Promotion and Tenure Appeals Committee shall be as follows:

• To determine whether the department, dean, or Provost followed the procedures that were in effect at the time of the decision.
• To determine whether the faculty member was provided with notice of standards and procedures.
• To determine whether the faculty member was provided with the opportunity to present a case for promotion and/or tenure in accordance with established procedures.

Allegations of Inadequate Consideration. Insofar as the petition for review alleges inadequate consideration, the functions of the Promotion and Tenure Appeals Committee shall be as follows:

• To determine whether the department, dean, or Provost provided adequate consideration to the evidence in the faculty member’s dossier.
• To determine whether the faculty member’s qualifications and contributions were reviewed conscientiously, in good faith, and in light of the applicable criteria.

Allegations of Infringement of Academic Freedom. Insofar as the petition for review alleges infringement of academic freedom, the functions of the Promotion and Tenure Appeals Committee shall be as follows:

• To determine whether the faculty member has been penalized for the exercise of rights guaranteed under the principles of academic freedom.
• To determine whether the evidence shows that denial of promotion and/or tenure was substantially influenced by considerations that violate academic freedom.

The role of the Promotion and Tenure Appeals Committee is not to substitute its judgment on the merits of the faculty member’s record for that of the department, school, dean, or Provost. Its role is limited to assuring that all decisions were reached in accordance with established standards, that due process was followed, that academic freedom was not violated, and/or that the candidate received fair and adequate consideration.

When an appeal is accepted, the committee issues a written report of its findings and recommendations, which is provided to the Provost, the appellant, and the relevant administrators.

9.4 Deadlines for Appeals

The initial appeal by the faculty member must be made within 30 calendar days, excluding holidays and breaks, from the date of notification of non-reappointment or denial of promotion and/or tenure.

Subsequent appeals to higher administrative levels, including to the Promotion and Tenure Appeals Committee, must be made within 30 calendar days of receipt of the response at the previous level. Deadlines do not include winter intersession, the summer term, or breaks between terms. If a deadline falls on a weekend or holiday, the next workday shall be considered the deadline.

Responses from the dean or Provost must be made within 30 calendar days of receipt of the appeal, using the same rules for holidays and breaks. Responses from the department/school or the Promotion and Tenure Appeals Committee must also be made within 30 calendar days of receipt of the appeal (excluding holidays and breaks).

9.5 Formal Hearing

If, after exhausting all appeal levels (department, dean, Provost), the faculty member remains dissatisfied, the faculty member may within 30 calendar days petition the Promotion and Tenure Appeals Committee to recommend that a formal hearing be conducted. The Committee will review the petition and determine whether sufficient grounds exist for a hearing based on allegations of inadequate consideration, denial of due process, or infringement of academic freedom.

If the Promotion and Tenure Appeals Committee supports the petition, it shall recommend that a formal hearing be convened. A Formal Hearing Committee will then be appointed by the Provost (or designee), consisting of five tenured faculty members holding rank at or above that of the faculty member under review, none of whom may come from the faculty member’s department or school.

The Formal Hearing Committee schedules a hearing to commence not later than 30 calendar days from its appointment and provides the faculty member with written notice of the time, place, and procedures. At the request of the faculty member, the hearing may be open or closed. At the hearing, the faculty member bears the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the action taken violated due process, was based on inadequate consideration, or infringed upon academic freedom.

The role of the Formal Hearing Committee is not to substitute its judgment on the merits of the faculty member’s record for that of the department, school, dean, or Provost. Its role is limited to assuring that all decisions were reached in accordance with established procedures, that due process was followed, that academic freedom was not violated, and that the candidate received fair and adequate consideration.

Following the hearing, the Formal Hearing Committee issues a written report of its findings and recommendations to the President, with copies provided to the faculty member, the Provost, the dean, and the department chair or school director.

Within 30 calendar days of receiving the report, the President makes the final decision regarding the appeal and communicates it in writing to all parties.

10. Recordkeeping

All promotion and tenure materials must be preserved as part of the faculty member’s official personnel record. The personnel file must contain the full dossier, the written recommendations and reports from each level of review (committee, chair or director, dean, Provost, and President), the results of all committee votes, and the final action of the ÃÛèÖÊÓƵ Board of Trustees. If an appeal is filed, the appeal documents, reports, and decisions must also be retained in the personnel file.

Records relating to separate evaluations or reviews—such as overload assignments outside of the appointment period, administrative appointments, or compensation augmentations (e.g., endowed chairs)—are distinct from the promotion and tenure process and must be maintained in accordance with the relevant policies and procedures. These records are not to be included in the promotion and tenure dossier or personnel file for purposes of promotion and tenure review.

All records must be maintained in compliance with University records management policies and State of Ohio public records requirements.

Revision History

• November 7, 2025 – Initial Draft

Appendices

Appendix A: Dossier Guidelines – Tenure-Track Faculty

Provide the following documents from dossiers to submit for President and Provost review.

Provide an electronic PDF (or other approved format) of the dossier materials.

• Submit only the documents listed, in the order shown, for review by the Executive Vice President and Provost and the President.
• Remove documents from the promotion/tenure documentation and assemble them in the order indicated.
• Submit all documents for faculty from each college through an approved file sharing format.

Section One - Introductory Documents

1. Review form for promotion and/or tenure (signature sheet) signed as appropriate
2. College dean letter
3. College promotion and tenure committee letter (optional, if applicable)
4. Chair/Director letter
5. Department/School promotion and tenure committee letter
6. Annual evaluations by chair/director, departmental promotion and tenure progress letters, etc.
7. Copy of the faculty member's Tenure-Track offer letter (most recent if it was ever modified) – Do not send the annual reappointment letters sent by the president’s office.

Section Two - Promotion/Tenure Summary Documents
(Note: For sub-section 4b (below), faculty should follow the guidelines described in Version 1 or Version 2. Faculty with start dates prior to August 15, 2024, may choose either Version 1 or Version 2. Faculty with start dates after August 15, 2024, are required to use Version 2.)

1. Table of Contents
2. Academic Preparation
3. Professional Experience
4. Instruction and Advising
   1. Teaching Load – List of courses taught over the past 3 years (include teaching assignment changes)

   2. Teaching Effectiveness (Version 1)

      • Evidence of course organization, presentation, and requirements (Example: send ONE or TWO course syllabi)
      • Student evaluation results/reports with one or two sets of course evaluations
      • List of teaching awards and recognition
      • Selection for teaching in special programs
      • Participation, as a student, in teaching enhancement programs
      • Other evidence of teaching effectiveness (Example: supporting letters from faculty peers)

      Teaching Effectiveness (Version 2)

      Evidence (e.g., self-assessment narratives, sample course materials, teaching observations, student evaluations of teaching, peer reviews of teaching, student achievement of learning outcomes, participation in continuing education programs, participation in teaching enhancement programs, and/or teaching honors/awards) must be included to support at least one of the following criteria to demonstrate teaching effectiveness:

      • Preparation (i.e., planning for teaching)
      • Engagement (i.e., delivering content and managing the student learning process)
      • Inclusion (i.e., serving the learning needs of all students)
      • Subject Expertise (i.e., maintaining/developing expert subject knowledge)
      • Pedagogical Competence (i.e., maintaining/developing timely knowledge and skills in the theories and practice of teaching and learning)
      • Outcome (i.e., achieving desired teaching results)
      • Improvement (i.e., revising teaching practices over time)
      • Adaptability & Innovation (i.e., navigating the evolving nature of teaching and learning)
   3. Interdisciplinary Teaching – List of interdisciplinary activities
   4. Advising and Supervision Activities
5. Research and Scholarly Accomplishments – Submit a list of the following, not the actual publications
   1. Articles in professional journals
   2. Other publications and presentations
   3. Books or portions of books
   4. Sponsored research projects and grants
   5. Theses and dissertations directed
   6. Proposals
   7. Other
6. Professional Associations
7. Committees and Service
8. Interdisciplinary Contributions
9. Other Factors

Section Three – External Review

• Both the faculty candidate and the department/school promotion and tenure committee should be involved in the process of selecting external reviewers.
• The committee should NOT select only reviewers proposed by the faculty candidate.
• Reviewers should NOT be the faculty candidates’ thesis/dissertation advisor(s); former teachers, co-authors, and collaborators; friends, relatives or other persons closely aligned with the faculty candidate.
• The external reviewers should have appropriate academic accomplishments, rank (in the case of promotion to Professor should be similarly ranked) and be from appropriate institutions.

External review materials include:

1. External Review Process description
2. Letters from external reviewers (normally in the range of four to six letters)
3. A short biographical summary of each reviewer, but do NOT include their curriculum vitas
4. A description of how the reviewers were contacted
5. List of the information sent to the reviewers

Section Four - Curriculum Vitae and Promotion and Tenure Guidelines

1. Current, comprehensive curriculum vitae
2. Department/School promotion and tenure guidelines
3. College promotion and tenure guidelines

Appendix B: Dossier Guidelines – Instructional Faculty

Provide the following documents from dossiers to submit for President and Provost review.

Provide an electronic PDF (or other approved format) of the dossier materials.

• Submit only the documents listed, in the order shown, for review by the Executive Vice President and Provost and the President.
• Remove documents from the promotion/tenure documentation and assemble them in the order indicated.
• Submit all documents for faculty from each college through an approved file sharing format.

Section One - Introductory Documents

1. Review form for promotion (signature sheet)
2. College dean letter
3. College promotion committee letter (if applicable)
4. Chair/Director letter
5. Department/School promotion committee letter
6. Annual evaluation letters and any promotion progress letters
7. Copy of the faculty member's offer/appointment letter (most recent if it was ever modified)

Section Two - Promotion Summary Documents
(Note: For sub-section 4b (below), faculty should follow the guidelines described in Version 1 or Version 2. Faculty with start dates prior to August 15, 2024, may choose either Version 1 or Version 2. Faculty with start dates after August 15, 2024, are required to use Version 2.)

1. Table of Contents
2. Academic Preparation
3. Professional Experience
4. Instruction and Advising
   1. Teaching Load – List of courses taught over the past 3 years (include teaching assignment changes)

   2. Teaching Effectiveness (Version 1)
      Evidence of course organization, presentation and requirements. Student evaluation information. Teaching awards and recognition. Selection for teaching in special programs. Participation as a student in teaching enhancement programs. Other evidence of teaching effectiveness (Example: supporting letters from faculty peers)

      Teaching Effectiveness (Version 2)
      Evidence (e.g., self-assessment narratives, sample course materials, teaching observations, student evaluations of teaching, peer reviews of teaching, student achievement of learning outcomes, participation in continuing education programs, participation in teaching enhancement programs, and/or teaching honors/awards) must be included to support at least one of the following criteria to demonstrate teaching effectiveness:

      • Preparation (i.e., planning for teaching)
      • Engagement (i.e., delivering content and managing the student learning process)
      • Inclusion (i.e., serving the learning needs of all students)
      • Subject Expertise (i.e., maintaining/developing expert subject knowledge)
      • Pedagogical Competence (i.e., maintaining/developing timely knowledge and skills in the theories and practice of teaching and learning)
      • Outcome (i.e., achieving desired teaching results)
      • Improvement (i.e., revising teaching practices over time)
      • Adaptability & Innovation (i.e., navigating the evolving nature of teaching and learning)
   3. Interdisciplinary Teaching
   4. Advising and Supervision
   5. Professional Associations
   6. Committees and Service
   7. Interdisciplinary Contributions
   8. Other Factors

Section Three - Curriculum Vitae and Promotion Guidelines

1. Attach a current, comprehensive, curriculum vitae.
2. Department/School promotion guidelines.
3. College promotion guidelines.

Appendix C: Dossier Guidelines – Clinical Faculty

Provide the following documents from dossiers to submit for President and Provost review.

Provide an electronic PDF (or other approved format) of the dossier materials.

• Submit only the documents listed, in the order shown, for review by the Executive Vice President and Provost and the President.
• Remove documents from the promotion/tenure documentation and assemble them in the order indicated.
• Submit all documents for faculty from each college through an approved file sharing format.

Section One - Introductory Documents

1. Review form for promotion (signature sheet)
2. Letter from college dean regarding merit of the promotion proposal
3. College promotion committee letter (if applicable)
4. Chair/Director letter
5. Department/School promotion committee letter
6. Chair/Director's annual evaluation letters and any promotion progress letters
7. Copy of the faculty member's faculty offer/appointment letter (most recent if it was ever modified)

Section Two - Promotion Summary Documents
(Note: For sub-section 4b (below), faculty should follow the guidelines described in Version 1 or Version 2. Faculty with start dates prior to August 15, 2024, may choose either Version 1 or Version 2. Faculty with start dates after August 15, 2024, are required to use Version 2.)

1. Table of Contents
2. Academic Preparation
3. Professional Experience
4. Instruction and Advising
   1. Teaching Load - Courses taught over the past 3-5 years. Any changes in teaching assignments
   2. Teaching Effectiveness (Version 1)
      Evidence of course organization, presentation and requirements. Student evaluation information. Teaching awards and recognition. Selection for teaching in special programs. Participation as a student in teaching enhancement programs. Other evidence of teaching effectiveness (Example: supporting letters from faculty peers)
      
      Teaching Effectiveness (Version 2)
      Evidence (e.g., self-assessment narratives, sample course materials, teaching observations, student evaluations of teaching, peer reviews of teaching, student achievement of learning outcomes, participation in continuing education programs, participation in teaching enhancement programs, and/or teaching honors/awards) must be included to support at least one of the following criteria to demonstrate teaching effectiveness:
      • Preparation (i.e., planning for teaching)
      • Engagement (i.e., delivering content and managing the student learning process)
      • Inclusion (i.e., serving the learning needs of all students)
      • Subject Expertise (i.e., maintaining/developing expert subject knowledge)
      • Pedagogical Competence (i.e., maintaining/developing timely knowledge and skills in the theories and practice of teaching and learning)
      • Outcome (i.e., achieving desired teaching results)
      • Improvement (i.e., revising teaching practices over time)
      • Adaptability & Innovation (i.e., navigating the evolving nature of teaching and learning)
   3. Interdisciplinary Teaching
   4. Advising and Supervision
5. Research and Scholarly Accomplishments
   1. Articles in Professional Journals
   2. Other Publications and Presentations
   3. Books or Portions of Books
   4. Sponsored Research and Grants
   5. Proposals
   6. Other
6. Clinical Practice - Evidence of clinical practice (when clinical services are compensated for by ÃÛèÖÊÓƵ) considered for promotion may include, but is not limited to:
   1. Evidence of expanded clinical services and/or new service lines created in practice area
   2. Evidence of clinical quality outcomes; indicators selected and reported by the applicant
   3. Evidence of annual patient satisfaction data/ratings that illustrate trends over time (e.g. 3-5 years)
   4. Demonstrated timeliness/adequacy of completion of medical records and other documentation
   5. Attainment of board certification or recertification
   6. Implemented patient safety and continuous quality improvement measures
   7. Development of clinical and community program(s) increasing access to community service
   8. Demonstrated ability work in and/or lead interprofessional teams of health care providers
   9. Developed patient education materials from clinical expertise and the evidence-based practices
   10. Leadership position within the practice, such as medical director, or clinical practices consultant; sustained track record of exemplary clinical leadership
   11. Peers external to the college/department have judged the activity as exemplary and leading to the improvement of practice
   12. Letter from employer substantiating candidate is in good standing in the practice
7. Committees, Professional Associations and Service
   1. Department or School, College, University committee service
   2. State and national professional service
      1. Member of professional association committees, taskforce, workgroup, etc.
      2. Elected office, board of directors, etc.
      3. Contributor to improvement of clinical practice standards
      4. Consultant to clinical practice or clinical product development
      5. Editorial consultant/reviewer
      6. Member of accreditation organization
8. Interdisciplinary Contributions
9. Other Factors

Section Three - Curriculum Vitae and Promotion Guidelines

1. Attach a current, comprehensive, curriculum vitae
2. Department/School promotion guidelines
3. College promotion guidelines