Guidelines for Third Year Review

Criteria shall become effective only after adoption by the Provost and his/her designees.

Introduction

The Guidelines for the Third Year Review for tenure-track faculty will clarify the expectations for promotion and tenure. These guidelines:

• Are tailored to the Departments within the Charles E. Schmidt College of Medicine while maintaining consistency with the University guidelines.
• Define the procedure, the timeline of the third year review, the portfolio materials and the levels of review.
• Provide guidance for faculty who may demonstrate readiness for promotion and tenure within the College.
• Should also help prepare faculty for career planning at the University while assisting faculty in regular discussions with their mentors and Department Chairs.

Procedure

• All tenure-track faculty in the College shall be subjected to a comprehensive third year review of their progress towards promotion and/or tenure.
• The College shall distribute written guidelines for third year review to all new tenure- track faculty members when they begin work.
• The annual evaluations of tenure-track faculty must include a separate component that fairly appraises the faulty member's progress toward tenure and, if the candidate is an Assistant Professor, promotion to Associate Professor.
• An appointee to a tenure-track position shall receive, in the third year of his or her service, a formal written review at both the Department and College level.

Timeline

The faculty tenure timeline, completed at the time of hire, should indicate when the third year review will be conducted. The intention is to review the progress during the candidate’s initial three years of work. The review may be conducted at the end of the third year, or no later than the beginning of fall semester of the fourth year.

Appropriate adjustments will be made for faculty who were granted years towards tenure at the time of hire. Faculty members receiving credit for years towards tenure need to be advised that those years must be part of the third year review. If a faculty member is hired with three or more years of credit toward tenure, they may undergo a third year review as part of the hiring process, immediately upon arrival, or after one year of service at the University. These options need to be discussed and agreed upon at the time of hire.

It is the responsibility of the Chair to ensure that any candidate in their department is aware of and follows the procedures for completing the third year review, as presented in the College guidelines, in an expeditious manner. Except in unusual circumstances, the timetable to be followed is as follows:

• In January, the Dean will request the names of candidates whose third year review(s) is (are) due in the beginning of Fall from the Chair of the Department hosting the primary appointment of the candidate.
• The portfolios will be reviewed by the Department and submitted to the Dean's Office, together with the letter from the Chair, according to the College's timetable for third year reviews.
• The College Promotion and Tenure Committee will review the portfolios and present a report to the Dean normally within two to three weeks of submission to the Dean's Office.

Portfolio Materials

The candidates are responsible for producing a portfolio describing their achievements and accomplishments in the past three years using the "University Tenure and Promotion Portfolio Preparation" document as a guide.

Specifically, the materials that must be included in the portfolio will include:

• An up-to-date curriculum vitae along with documentation of all activities with a focus on those activities which constitute the major portion of the faculty member’s assignment, i.e., teaching, research and scholarship, administration and service, and/or clinical work. Information can include, but is not limited to, courses taught and developed, curriculum development and evaluation, graduate student supervision, grants submitted or funded, papers published, participation at conferences, clinical teaching, service, etc., during the years subject to review.
• A self‐evaluation.
• An outline of future work and plans.
• Two in‐class evaluations of teaching carried out by senior faculty members.
• Table of student assessments of teaching, i.e., the rating of instructor.
• Copies of Annual Assignments.
• Copies of Annual Evaluations, which include statements on progress towards tenure.
• A copy of the Department Criteria for Promotion and Tenure and these guidelines for third year review.

Two copies of the portfolio should be prepared: one to be returned to the candidate after the review and one to be retained by the Department until the completion of the tenure review.

Review Process/Levels of Review

Departmental process: the candidate's portfolio will be reviewed first by the faculty of the Department. In general, the Departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee or the tenured faculty will perform the review and add a report to the portfolio. Afterwards, the Chair will review and append a letter to the portfolio before sending the materials to the Dean's office.

College process: the College Promotion and Tenure Committee will review all of the documentation and provide a report to the Dean. The Dean will report to the candidate and the Chair and provide whatever information and advice they feel is appropriate, in writing, concerning the progress of the candidate towards promotion and tenure. These reports will be added to the portfolio and a copy will be provided to the faculty member.

The Departmental and College Criteria for Promotion and Tenure must be used in the respective level of review process. Annual assignments and performance evaluations are important considerations during evaluation of the candidate's record.

No Guarantee of Tenure or Promotion

Per the guidelines of Third Year Review from the Provost Office, a positive or negative appraisal of progress toward tenure and/or promotion is not binding on any level of review or recommendation in the tenure and promotion process, and is not binding on the President’s discretion and ultimate decision, but is meant to provide guidance from the department/college.

Faculty Assembly approved 12.16.15
Dean Approval 12.17.15
Provost Approval 01.22.16