The University of Texas at Tyler School of Education Procedures and Guidelines for Tenure and Promotion Procedures This document complies with section 3.3.4 and 3.3.5 of the UT Tyler Handbook of Operating Procedures (HOP, Revised, 2009). If a University procedure or guideline as stated in the HOP conflicts with a procedure of the School of Education, the HOP will prevail. Responsibility of the Candidate and the Promotion Packet It is the responsibility of all faculty to be aware of departmental, college, UT Tyler and UT System rules and regulations regarding tenure. The faculty member who is to be considered begins compiling his or her files in the summer. A recommendation for tenure must include supporting evidence that the individual's contributions have had an impact on the discipline;; that is, the research/scholarship/creative activity should have made a significant contribution to candidate s discipline and be recognized by professional colleagues. To that end, the dossier for tenure of all candidates must include a minimum of three (3) outside review letters, with a minimum of one (1) letter from the candidate s list of external reviewers. Candidates will prepare an organized packet of materials to demonstrate teaching, scholarship, service, collegiality and other credentials in accordance with university and School of Education guidelines in the HOP for the pre-tenure review and the tenure and promotion evaluation. The packet will contain a letter of application and the candidate s curriculum vitae. The documentation of professional accomplishments shall be submitted in accordance with the criteria, standards and guidelines established by the department and/or college. Once the candidate submits the packet to the Director, no additional materials may be submitted, unless permission to do so is given by the College Dean. However, the candidate may answer questions posed by and may provide specific documents at the request of the Faculty Evaluation Committee. Representatives and Committees Department Representative to the College Faculty Evaluation Committee The Director will conduct an election of the School of Education representative to the College of Education and Psychology Faculty Evaluation Committee following nominations from the eligible faculty. The representative will meet the eligibility requirements specified in the HOP.
School of Education Tenure and Promotion Chair The School of Education Tenure and Promotion committee will conduct an election of the Chair of the Tenure and Promotion Committee (Committee Chair) following nominations from the eligible faculty. Nominees for Committee Chair must be eligible to vote on all candidates considered within a given year. School of Education Tenure and Promotion Committee The School of Education Tenure and Promotion committee will consist of all School faculty members who are at or above the rank of the applicant and eligible according to the provisions of the HOP. The School Committee does not include the Director. The Committee Chair will call meetings of the School Committee at times when all eligible faculty are able to attend. [The School Committee may act only when no less than the majority of eligible faculty are present for a meeting.] In years in which more than one candidate is considered for promotion for tenure, multiple ballots will be cast. Faculty eligible to vote for one but not another candidate will be excused from the meeting at appropriate times. Procedures for Tenure and Promotion Evaluation The Director will conduct an election of an eligible Committee Chair who will convene a meeting of the School Committee, as presented earlier. With the Committee having reviewed the candidate s packet, the Committee Chair will lead a discussion of the candidate s credentials. Following the discussion, the Committee Chair will produce ballots which bear his or her signature and which indicate the categories for, against and abstain. The Committee Chair will distribute the official ballots at the meeting and deliver an official ballot to any eligible Committee member who did not attend the meeting due to illness, travel or other approved reason. Ballots from those members who did not attend the meeting must be submitted within five business days. Ballots will be secret. In years in which more than one candidate is considered for promotion or tenure, multiple ballots will be cast in succession (not simultaneously). The ballots will be shuffled, opened, authenticated and counted aloud by the Committee Chair in the presence and view of the committee. The Committee Chair will communicate the vote count, the recommendation, and the rationale for the recommendation in writing to the Director. Teaching To qualify for tenure, faculty members must have a consistent pattern of effectiveness in teaching. Tenure will not be granted unless the candidate is deemed to be a strong teacher and demonstrates a commitment to lifelong improvement of his or her teaching skills. Thus it is vital that information concerning teaching effectiveness, gathered from multiple and flexible assessment methods, be part of the tenure review. Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness
Because teaching is a multifaceted activity, evaluating teaching may require examination of various kinds of information. Elements of effective teaching include: (a) mastery of the course content;; (b) currency in the subject;; (c) clear communication of course material;; and (d) high standards for students academic performance. As stated in the HOP, it is vital that teaching effectiveness be evaluated through multiple and flexible assessment methods including peer observations of teaching. Teaching effectiveness may involve innovative techniques for enhancing student interest and performance as well as traditional pedagogical techniques (e.g., information technology, laboratory classes, demonstrations, etc.). Student judgments of teacher effectiveness are considered in accordance with the policy of the Board of Regents. Course and teacher evaluations provide information regarding student satisfaction and constitute one important gauge of teaching effectiveness. However, because student evaluations can be influenced by factors other than the quality of teaching, other evidence of instructor effectiveness which complement student evaluations, is considered. This includes course syllabi, student performance outcomes, use of technology, innovation, continuous development of courses, peer review and awards and honors. Professional Development A continuing obligation of scholars is to update their knowledge. Attending and presenting at scholarly meetings, contributing to online professional activities, participating in workshops, seminars, and institutes are all considered professional development. Scholarship Research/Scholarship/Creative Activity The purpose of research/scholarship/creative activity is to make a substantive contribution to the body of knowledge and understanding in one's discipline. For tenure to be granted, a faculty member must have established a strong, consistent, and progressive program of research/scholarship/creative activity and must provide evidence of a commitment to continue making contributions throughout his or her career. Evaluating Scholarly Merit All scholarly contributions have merit. The central and irreplaceable feature of evaluating the substance of a fellow scholar s work is to read it and carefully review its creativity, sophistication, rigor and other aspects of scholarly merit. Scholarship should be anonymously refereed by peers in the field. Scholarship in which the candidate is not listed as the first author should be evaluated with respect to the candidate s contribution. (See Faculty Evaluation Rubric) Service To qualify for tenure, the candidate must display evidence of commitment to service to the University and to the profession and/or the civic community. Although teaching and scholarship are the primary considerations in tenure and promotion decisions, service is
integral to the effective operation of the University and contributes to community development. University Service University service involves membership, participation and leadership in committees, task forces and governance. Candidates may be elected to the Faculty Senate or serve in Faculty Senate committees. Candidates may also serve in standing University, College and Department committees and in ad hoc committees. Candidates may serve in administrative positions. University service at the departmental level includes recruitment, administering undergraduate or graduate programs, conducting examinations, and developing new projects such as clinics, laboratories, and programs. Other service which sustains departmental vitality includes bringing guest speakers to campus, developing workshops and network organizations for alumni, and hosting social events for students and faculty. Another category of departmental service is collecting information through archives and surveys. Participation in and compliance with accreditation initiatives, data collection and related activities is expected for department service. The expenditure of time and effort is an important consideration in evaluating service at the departmental and other levels. Professional Service Professional service involves membership, participation and leadership in professional organizations. Professional service is taken into consideration in tenure and promotion decisions when the candidate s scholarly and professional assets are used for the benefit of a local, state, or national professional organization. Professional service can take a variety of forms depending on the nature of the candidate s expertise. Excellence in professional service is sometimes marked by the receipt of honors and awards. Community Service Community service is taken into consideration in tenure and promotion decisions when the candidate s scholarly and professional assets are used for the benefit of the community. Therefore, community service may take a variety of forms depending on the nature of the candidate s expertise. Excellence in community service is sometimes marked by the receipt of honors and awards. Collegiality UT Tyler defends the concept of academic freedom, which assures each faculty member the freedom to criticize and advocate changes in existing theories, beliefs, programs, and policies, and guarantees faculty the right to support any colleague whose academic freedom is threatened. Collegiality is a professional, not personal, criterion relating to the performance of duties within a department. Collegiality should not be confused with sociability, likability or conformity to certain views. Instead collegiality addresses such issues as the faculty member s compatibility with department missions and goals, an ability and willingness to work cooperatively within the department and college, a willingness to engage in shared governance, and a high standard of
professional integrity in dealing with colleagues and students on a professional and personal level. The University subscribes to the following description of collegiality from the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) statement on professional ethics: As colleagues, professors have obligations that derive from common membership in the community of scholars. Professors do not discriminate against or harass colleagues. They respect and defend the free inquiry of associates. In the exchange of criticism and ideas, professors show due respect for the opinions of others. Professors acknowledge academic debt and strive to be objective in their professional judgment of colleagues. Professors accept their share of faculty responsibilities for the governance of their institution. Promotion Criteria Summarized by Rank Assistant Professor Appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor normally requires that individuals hold the highest earned degree or its equivalent appropriate to their discipline. Appointment to this rank is made on the judgment that the individual has the potential for an award of tenure within the maximum six-year period. Evidence of potential for excellence in scholarship and teaching is required. Associate Professor Appointment or promotion to the rank of Associate Professor is recognition that the faculty member has a clearly defined record of strong teaching and research/scholarship/creative activity, a commitment to continued growth in both activities and a commitment to responsible and conscientious participation in service activities. A strong record of achievement in teaching and research/scholarship/creative activity requires evidence. Evidence of strong research/scholarship/creative activity is documented not only through peer-reviewed publications, professional presentations, exhibits, performances, etc. but also through input of colleagues in the department as well as peer recognition of the candidate s reputation by independent scholars outside of the University. External letters of review from peers outside the University will be required for faculty members applying for Associate Professor and/or tenure who began their service at UT Tyler on or after August 1, 2007. All departmental/school and college tenure and promotion policies must adhere to this same implementation date. Professor Appointment or promotion to the rank of Professor is recognition of demonstrated achievement and distinction over the span of a faculty member's academic career in teaching and research/scholarship/creative activity. The faculty member must also have actively participated in professional service and been actively involved in department, college and university service. Evidence of strong research/scholarship/creative activity is documented not only through peer-reviewed publications, professional presentations, exhibits, performances,
etc. but also through input of colleagues in the department as well as peer recognition of the candidate s reputation by independent scholars outside of the University. External letters of review from peers outside the University will be required for faculty members applying for Professor who were hired as tenured Associate Professor or promoted to Associate Professor in Fall 2005 and thereafter. Tenure A candidate for tenure must meet the criteria specified for Associate Professor at a minimum. Except in special circumstances of hiring, the criteria are met by work performed at UT Tyler. Procedures for Pre-Tenure Review Purpose and Overview Procedure The purpose of the Pre-tenure Review is to inform candidates of strengths and weaknesses so the candidate may maintain or enhance strong points and address shortcomings. Thus, the purpose of the pre-tenure review is to provide guidance. All tenure track faculty will participate in a pre-tenure review during the third year of employment. The pre-tenure review will be conducted in the spring semester. The Director shall notify faculty at least six months in advance of the deadline for submission of a pre-tenure review dossier. Pre-tenure track candidates should prepare and submit a professional dossier that follows the university s guidelines for a tenure and promotion application. The Director or an assigned faculty mentor shall provide the applicant with assistance in compiling the dossier if assistance is requested. Procedure The Director will conduct an election of an eligible Committee Chair who will call a meeting of the School Committee. This committee will include all tenured faculty in the School of Education. The Committee will review the candidate s packet and discuss the candidate s progress. The responsibility of the committee is to share its collective judgment about whether the trajectory of performance at the time of the review and a continuation of that historical trajectory is likely to be sufficient for the tenure-track faculty member to earn promotion and tenure when he/she must apply for promotion and tenure. The Committee Chair will conduct a vote by show of hands or other public method. Committee s members may vote that the candidate s progress is satisfactory or unsatisfactory. The Chair will prepare a written summary of the conclusions of the committee. The written summary should clearly indicate whether the committee believes the individual s performance through the time of the pre-tenure review appears to be on track for a successful application for promotion and tenure or whether improved performance is needed in order to meet the standards for promotion and tenure. The written summary from the committee shall be provided to the Director and to the Dean of the College of Education and Psychology within 21 days of the deadline established for submission of the pre-tenure review dossier. The Dean will submit a written
statement to the Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs regarding the recommendations from the College of Education and Psychology. Periodic Performance Evaluation of Tenured Faculty Purpose The purpose of this policy is to provide guidelines for the periodic evaluation of tenured faculty. Persons Affected Tenured faculty, Department Chairs, Deans. This policy refers to all tenured faculty members who have any teaching or research assignment or expectation during the period of evaluation regardless of any administrative appointment. Policy and Procedures The performance of tenured faculty will be reviewed in a more comprehensive manner every six (6) years. This performance evaluation shall include, but not be limited to, a compilation of the five previous yearly reviews, combined with the sixth annual review;; reasonable individual notice of at least six months of intent to review will be provided by the Director. At a reasonable time prior to the review, the Director shall give the faculty member a copy of previous annual reports, student teaching evaluations for the review period, and the results of previous annual reviews for the review period. The faculty member shall submit a resume and annual reports, and may provide any additional materials he or she wants considered. The six (6) year review will be carried out by the Director of the School. Evaluation material shall include review of the resume, student evaluations of teaching for the review period, annual reports for the review period, and all materials submitted by the faculty member. Upon his or her request, the faculty member will be provided with the opportunity to meet with the Director. The Director shall communicate the result of the review in writing to the faculty member, to the Dean, the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President for review and appropriate action. If in the opinion of the Director and the Dean the result of the review is satisfactory, no further action will be taken except for determining merit raises and other forms of recognition. If the result of the review is unsatisfactory, there are two possible courses of further action. 1. If it is determined that a more intensive review of a faculty member is needed, or if the faculty member requests it, the Dean, in consultation with the faculty member, shall appoint a peer committee whose members shall be representative of the School and who will be appointed on the basis of their objectivity and academic strength. In all schools and divisions, the committee appointed to perform the more intensive review shall be, if possible, comprised of faculty of the same or higher rank as the faculty member being reviewed. The committee may request further information from the faculty member under review. Upon his or her request, the
faculty member will be provided with the opportunity to meet with the review committee. The committee shall report its findings within six months of its being constituted. The result of the review will be communicated in writing to the faculty member, the Director, the Dean, Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President for review and appropriate action. 2. Alternately, if it is determined that a faculty member would benefit from a remedial plan, with the agreement of both parties a remediation plan, the period of which is not to exceed two years, will be developed. The purpose of the plan is to give the faculty member the opportunity to correct the deficiencies in the faculty member's performance that were identified in the evaluation. If at the end of the plan period it is the opinion of the Dean that adequate progress toward correcting the deficiencies has not been made, the matter will be referred to a peer committee for further review as listed above. Variances The six (6) year review may not be waived but may be deferred in rare circumstances when the review period will coincide with approved leave, comprehensive review for tenure or promotion, or appointment to an endowed position. No deferral of review of an active faculty member may extend beyond one year from the scheduled review. Faculty members appointed temporarily to part-time administrative positions, regardless of the percentage time of the appointment, shall be reviewed under this process, with appropriate consideration given to the demands of administrative assignments and their impact on the level of research activity, courses taught and the extent of service contributions. Such individuals will be provided notice at the time of appointment to the temporary administrative position that they will be subject to periodic review. Monitoring The Faculty Senate is charged with monitoring this performance review process and with reporting its findings annually to the faculty and the UT Tyler administration. If its findings warrant, the Faculty Senate may recommend revisions of the procedures for faculty review at UT Tyler, the UT System Guidelines for Periodic Performance Evaluation of Tenured Faculty, or both. Grievances If the reviewed faculty member believes that the annual review or periodic evaluation was conducted arbitrarily, capriciously, unfairly, or with bias, then he or she may appeal to the extent authorized in the "Faculty Grievance Procedure" as provided in the Handbook of Operating Procedures to the extent consistent with Regents' Rules and Regulations 30602.