S97-9 APPOINTMENT, RETENTION, TENURE AND PROMOTION CRITERIA, STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES FOR REGULAR FACULTY EMPLOYEES

Legislative History:

At its meeting of May 5, 1997, the Academic Senate approved the following Policy Recommendation presented by David McNeil for the Professional Standards Committee.

Replaces University Policy S94-6

ACTION BY THE UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT:

"Appoved as University Policy." Signed Robert Caret, 7-24-97.

WHEREAS: University Policy on ARTP for regular faculty has been reviewed by the Professional Standards Committee since the fall of 1994; and

WHEREAS: A number of procedural clarifications have been proposed; and

WHEREAS: Certain aspects of the policy are not always given the emphasis they deserve in personnel decisions; and

WHEREAS: Clarifying the intent of provisions that define criteria and standards to be used in ARTP for regular faculty is an ongoing and necessary activity; therefore be it

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of San Jose State University recommends implementation of the following policy.

APPOINTMENT, RETENTION, TENURE AND PROMOTION CRITERIA,

STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES FOR REGULAR FACULTY EMPLOYEES

(Replaces S94-6)

I. Preamble

A.Overview:

The present document is the policy of San José State University concerning the appointment, retention, tenure, and promotion for all regular or tenure-track Unit 3 faculty in the university. The policy is organized by setting forth the goals of the policy, how the criteria are to be applied in all personnel decisions, and certain general procedures which apply to all decisions. Procedures and standards to be employed for the different personnel actions are subsequently specified.

This policy is meant to provide for flexibility in the university's approach to achieving the stated goals of the policy. It is important to note that all faculty -- even all faculty in the same department -- need not conform to the same model. San José State University seeks diversity within its faculty and in the ways individual faculty members seek to be effective in furthering the educational mission of the university. When making recommendations on faculty personnel matters, committees and administrators should use common sense and flexibility in applying standards and criteria, keeping this policy's goals firmly in mind.

Individual departments and colleges (units) are encouraged to generate and issue advisory guidelines or supplemental statements that relate this university-wide policy to the professional standards and breadth of activities of particular disciplines. Non-teaching units are required to develop such guidelines. Such guidelines or statements should assist committees and administrators outside the department or college in understanding the standards appropriate to the applicant's profession and to ensure fair and equitable application of these standards to the broader procedures, standards, and criteria of the university policy. Such statements or guidelines may specify the sorts of documentation that are normally expected to be especially relevant to the evaluation of professional effectiveness of faculty in the particular academic area. Such statements or guidelines should be included in the dossier, after having been approved by the Associate Vice President for Faculty Affairs in consultation with the Professional Standards Committee of the San José State University Academic Senate. Advisory guidelines and supplemental statements that are adopted should be reviewed, updated, and, if modified, resubmitted for approval every three years.

B. Goals and the Two Basic Criteria

Excellence in education is dependent above all upon the quality of the faculty. The purpose of these procedures for recruitment, retention, tenure and promotion is to provide just recognition and encouragement of genuine achievement. The basic evaluation of faculty members' potential, performance and achievement should be made by their peers both within their departments and their disciplines at large.

But evaluations alone, no matter how just and weighty the procedures, cannot ensure excellence in education. The aim of the evaluation process should be to inform faculty members of the appropriate criteria, standards and expectations, to apprise them of their strengths and weaknesses, and to recognize those who have earned tenure or promotion by their achievements. To this end, college deans and department chairpersons should meet regularly with individual faculty members -- especially with probationary faculty -- to discuss their review and, if necessary, to suggest possible means of improvement.

San José State University seeks faculty who have achieved distinction in teaching and in their disciplines or professional communities. To achieve this goal we must evaluate each other with certain standards of achievement in mind. There are two basic criteria for evaluation: effectiveness in academic assignment and scholarly or artistic or professional achievement. "Service" to students and the university is generally subsumed under the first criterion, while "service" to the larger community and/or to a discipline or professional community is generally subsumed under the second criterion.

C. Application of the Two Basic Criteria

Effectiveness in academic assignment is the primary, but not the only, consideration in evaluating a faculty member's performance. For most faculty, academic assignment consists primarily, but not exclusively, of teaching. Thus, contribution to the teaching mission of the university is the essential condition for continuation and advancement within the university

However, teaching effectiveness is normally not sufficient without appropriate scholarly or artistic or professional achievement. Although service to the university is ordinarily evaluated as part of a faculty member's academic assignment, truly outstanding service to the university which is characteristically informed by genuine scholarship -- such as distinguished teaching, curricular development, or advising of student scholarly or creative activity -- shall be counted in the category of scholarly or artistic or professional achievement. The dossier should clearly document the activity and support its consideration within this criterion. In any case, significant service to students and university -- or to one's profession or discipline, to public education, or to the community at large -- must be recognized under one basic criterion or the other.

In applying common sense and flexibility to the criteria, it should be recognized that faculty who are outstanding in one area but less active or successful in other areas may well be contributing more to the university than someone who is adequate in all areas but outstanding in none. While competent teaching of assigned classes or competent performance in academic assignment, modest scholarly or other professional activity in an academic discipline, and a normal amount of committee work may represent "threshold" levels of accomplishment in these areas, something more in at least one area will be expected for tenure and promotion; individual faculty can and will differ in how they balance these roles or dimensions of their professional careers and relate them to the criteria outlined in the present policy. The guiding principle should be thorough and candid evaluation for the sake of encouraging and recognizing achievement. Outstanding accomplishment is sufficient reason for an exception to the normal expectations for appointment, retention, tenure, or promotion.

II. Criteria

A. Effectiveness in Academic Assignment

Faculty members shall be evaluated within the scope of their academic assignment. Contribution to the teaching mission of the University is normally the primary consideration in the evaluation of academic assignment. For most faculty members then, appraisal of "effectiveness in academic assignment" will involve evaluation primarily of teaching. In addition, academic assignment may involve instructionally related activities: e.g., student advising; participation in department, college, and university governance; and curricular development. For some faculty, such as department chairpersons, coordinators, counselors and field supervisors, part or all of their assignment is of a non-teaching nature, and they should be evaluated accordingly.

1. Effectiveness in Teaching

A judgment of a faculty member's teaching effectiveness requires evaluation, by one's faculty peers, of classroom and laboratory teaching, course development, development of appropriate teaching materials, supervision of graduate and undergraduate student research, coordination of multisection courses, or training and supervision of teaching and graduate assistants. Contributions such as the development or initiation of new courses, and carefully evaluated and properly supervised experimentation with pedagogical techniques or instructional technology may also be considered in evaluating a faculty member. Evidence of involvement with and effectiveness in interdisciplinary courses and other activities related to general education may also be included.

Evidence of teaching effectiveness shall include, for the period under review, a list of courses taught, peer evaluations and, in accordance with university policy on student opinions of teaching effectiveness⁽¹⁾ all available standardized student data. Evidence of teaching effectiveness may also include selected course materials, statements of course objectives, student success in postgraduate activities (professional schools, research, graduate programs, job performance), and signed letters from colleagues and from present or former students. Faculty members under review may include an analysis of any of the materials in the dossier and a statement of their teaching methods and goals. Faculty who engage in team-teaching, interdisciplinary approaches to learning, and pedagogical experimentation are encouraged to submit documentation of the value of these approaches. All available evidence shall be evaluated by the department committee reviewing the candidate; a holistic approach to this must be taken, and while the standardized student opinion surveys shall be employed as mandated by policy, they shall not be the sole basis for evaluating teaching effectiveness, professional competence, knowledge, the appropriateness of course materials, or other factors. For non-teaching Unit 3 faculty employees, effectiveness in the professional assignment will be evaluated in conformity with guidelines developed by the unit of assignment, with appropriate components of peer evaluation and evaluation of impact on students.

2. Service to Students and the University

Faculty members shall also be evaluated for their contributions to their department's instructional program(s) and for significant service to the department, college, or university. Such service may include academic advising, committee service at all levels, career and personal counseling, and participation in the Academic Senate or the California Faculty Association as well as administrative activities such as scheduling, program coordination or other special assignment, or service as department chairperson, area coordinator, or associate dean. Such service may also include contributions made to student welfare through participation in educational equity activities, membership on student-faculty committees, service as advisor to student organizations, and related activities. Significant service should be systematically evaluated and, when judged to be exceptional in its quality or extent, recognized as such and rewarded appropriately. Ordinarily, time in rank per se shall not be a criterion for promotion; however, in cases where faculty members have made a significant contribution to the university over a number of years, that total contribution should be taken into account.

For non-teaching assignments, evidence of effectiveness should include evaluations by professional people, on- and off-campus, who are in a position to judge a faculty member's performance of his or her assigned duties.

B. Scholarly or Artistic or Professional Achievement

The second basic criterion for appointment and advancement within the university is scholarly or artistic or professional achievement. Such contributions to a faculty member's discipline or professional community are normally expected for continuation and advancement in the university. The nature of the expected contributions will vary according to the nature of a faculty member's discipline and professional interests. The expected scholarly or artistic or professional contributions should be clearly stated in duly established college, school, or departmental guidelines. Scholarly or artistic or professional achievements must be documented and evaluated if they are to be properly used in faculty personnel decisions; departmental and/or college guidelines may address the extent and nature of the documentation that is appropriate.

1. Types of Achievements

Scholarly achievement includes, but is not limited to, books, articles, reviews, technical reports, computer software, application for and/or awards of grants, or papers read to scholarly associations -- in general, work based on research and entailing theory, analysis, interpretation, explanation, or demonstration. Noting the particular requirements for curricular development in a period of changing information technologies, multicultural education, and the necessity of incorporating into higher education students from varied and diverse backgrounds, faculty members may demonstrate scholarly achievement through the development of curricula and curricular materials for one's disciplinary field and/or General Education courses. Curricular development, contributions to technologically mediated instruction, or other pedagogical innovation informed by genuine scholarship may be included within this criterion, as may genuine scholarly achievement in the course of supervising student research.

Artistic achievement includes, but is not limited to, the creation of original work in poetry, fiction, drama, dance, the aural and visual arts; or performances or direction in music, theatre and dance requiring interpretation and the mastery of a skill in addition to research.

Professional achievements include, but are not limited to: active participation or leadership in professional associations and meetings; service to the K-14 educational segments; professional involvement with other groups and institutions related to the institutional mission of a "metropolitan" university; panels, activities or workshops; patented inventions or discoveries; consulting; service on editorial boards or as editor of a professional journal or newsletter; adjudicator, translator or reviewer for publishers or other agencies and associations; public lectures; honors and awards. Professional achievement generally includes active participation or leadership in the CSU or in professional associations related to a faculty member's discipline. Service to other associations and to the community, state, nation, or international community in a capacity related to the faculty member's discipline and requiring the application of the faculty member's professional knowledge or skills shall also be recognized as a professional contribution or achievement.

2. Evaluation of Achievements

Scholarly or artistic or professional achievement should be thoroughly evaluated by one's disciplinary peers, within and/or outside one's department, not merely enumerated. Acceptance of scholarly or artistic work by an editorial or review board (or jury) constitutes an evaluation of that work. Work in progress and unpublished work should be assessed whenever possible. When appropriate, professional contributions should be evaluated by professional persons in a position to assess the quality and significance of the contributions. Ordinarily the number or length of publications per se shall not be a criterion for tenure or promotion. In cases where a faculty member has made significant contributions to his/her discipline or professional community over a number of years, that total contribution should be taken into account.

3. Grants

In recognition of the nature of San José State University, a comprehensive university as distinct from a research-oriented institution -- and of the teaching load of the faculty as they carry out the primary teaching mission of the university -- these criteria, although encouraging and rewarding faculty members for successfully obtaining research grants and other external financial support, explicitly exclude any requirement that faculty members must obtain such support as a condition for retention, tenure, or promotion, with one exception: when external funding is explicitly designated as part of a particular academic assignment (such as director of a research center, or gallery), for which appropriate assigned time is provided. Work done under such circumstances must be evaluated.

III. General Procedures

A. Policies Governing All Personnel Committees

1. Membership on personnel committees for the purpose of deliberating or voting on personnel recommendations is limited to tenured full-time faculty members. Departments may decide whether they wish to establish separate committees for retention, tenure, and promotion. This decision shall be made by the tenured and probationary faculty of the department. No faculty member shall serve on the department committee who is on either the college or university committee. Faculty members who are candidates for retention, tenure or promotion are ineligible to serve on any promotion or tenure peer review committees; faculty members, including department chairs, who are candidates for promotion may not serve on promotion committees. Participants in the Faculty Early Retirement Program may not serve on any recruitment/appointment, retention, tenure, or promotion committees. Tenured associate professors may be members of personnel committees, but no faculty member, including department chairs (or equivalent), below the rank of full professor shall participate in promotion deliberations about colleagues of equal or higher rank.

All committee members must be thoroughly trained in the use of the present university policy on Appointment, Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Criteria, Standards, and Procedures for Regular Faculty Employees. Department chairs, college deans, and the Associate Academic Vice President for Faculty Affairs shall arrange for appropriate training in the application of this policy.

2. In departments of sufficient size, personnel committees shall be composed of at least five (5) tenured full-time faculty members. In no case shall a personnel committee be composed of fewer than three (3) tenured full-time faculty members. In departments with fewer than three tenured full-time faculty members eligible to serve on the personnel committee, additional tenured full-time faculty members from related academic disciplines outside the department shall be selected to serve on departmental personnel committees as needed. A mutually acceptable list of nominees shall be selected by the college dean and the probationary and tenured faculty of the department; the probationary and tenured faculty shall elect the additional committee members from that list.

3. Administrators holding full-time positions outside the department or involved in making personnel recommendations at the college or university levels shall not participate in departmental actions.

4. The personnel recommendations of small colleges containing no departments shall be considered initial recommendations. For those small colleges or divisions which need to constitute a second level review committee, the first level committee and the Provost or his/her designee shall prepare a mutually acceptable list of nominees. The probationary and tenured faculty unit members shall elect the members of the second level review from that list.

5. Personnel recommendations for retention, tenure or promotion of each faculty member shall be based upon written information and documentation contained in his/her personnel file or dossier. (In the Agreement, the dossier is known as the Working Personnel Action File.) According to the Agreement (Section 15.12.b.), if, during the review process, the absence of materials required by this policy is discovered, the dossier shall be returned to the level at which the requisite documentation should have been provided. Insertion of other material after the dossier has been officially closed (see Subsection 8 below) must have the approval of a committee consisting of one member elected from and by each college committee and shall be limited to items that became accessible after the dossier is closed. If members of a personnel committee, the department chair, or a university administrator inserts material without the candidate's permission, the candidate must be afforded the opportunity to insert a response to the material. Material inserted in this fashion shall be returned to the initial personnel committee for review, evaluation and comment before consideration at subsequent levels of review.

6. In all personnel recommendations, a simple majority of those voting prevails; abstentions are to be treated as absences and will not be counted when determining the committee recommendation. The committee may decide to count abstentions as "present" for the purposes of establishing a quorum. When personnel committee recommendations are not unanimous, reasons shall be stated for all votes cast. A statement of the reasons shall be included in a single report from the committee, with the possibility of a separate "minority" report. In either case, the confidentiality of voting shall be maintained, and signatures on the report(s) shall not indicate how individual members voted when recommendations are not unanimous.

7. All personnel materials, proceedings, and recommendations are confidential, except (a) that positive final decisions may be announced; (b) that each faculty member shall have access to materials in his/her personnel files as provided by law, the Agreement, and Trustee policy; and (c) that any individual may voluntarily disclose materials from his/her personnel file at an appropriate proceeding, such as a grievance or court hearing.

8. Deadlines for the procedural steps provided herein shall be established at the start of the academic year by the Associate Vice President for Faculty Affairs, following consultation with the elected members of the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate. Deadlines shall include a specific closing date "at which time the Personnel Action File is declared complete with respect to documentation of performance for the purpose of evaluation," as required by the Agreement(Section 15.12.b). If any stage of the review has not been completed within the specified time, the performance review shall automatically be transferred to the next review level and the faculty member shall be so notified. The calendar with deadlines shall be communicated to all faculty subject in a given academic year to personnel actions governed by this policy.

9. The President has the authority to make appointments, continue faculty members on probationary status, grant tenure, and grant promotions. It is understood that this authority will normally be exercised in consultation with the Provost.

B. Period of Review and Contents of Dossier:

For retention and tenure candidates, the period of review shall begin with appointment to probationary service and continue to the time of the review. For promotion candidates, the period of review shall begin on the effective date of their last promotion or, if there has been no prior promotion, on the date of their initial appointment to tenure-track service and continue to the time of the review. The dossier shall contain material which documents achievements during the period of review which includes the years for which any service credit was granted. The dossier shall not include documentation of achievements outside the review period except on a comprehensive vita.

IV. Initial Appointment

A. Procedures for Initial Appointment

1. All recruitment shall be carried out in accordance with the university's Affirmative Action Policy.

2. Department recruitment committees shall be composed of elected full-time tenured faculty members, and shall be chaired by the department chair or a designee of the department chair.

3. Recruitment committees shall evaluate all candidates for appointments to regular positions and determine the order of desirability of finalists for the position.

4. Hiring of faculty during recess periods shall be accomplished in consultation with all available recruitment committee members, the department chair, and the college dean.

5. Persons to be employed initially in academic-administrative assignments with retreat rights to a department or program shall be reviewed and must receive a favorable recommendation from the appropriate personnel committee of the department in which tenure must be acquired before retreat rights are granted.

6. No person shall be offered a probationary appointment unless such an appointment has been recommended by an appropriate faculty committee, generally the department's elected recruitment committee.

7. Appointment letters shall be written by the college dean in consultation with the chair of the department. Appointment letters must be approved by the Office of the Associate Vice President for Faculty Affairs as consistent with the present policy.

B. Standards for Initial Appointment

Candidates for initial appointment to probationary positions should be carefully reviewed so that new faculty members will not merely fill positions but will bring to the university intellectual distinction and the potential for tenure and eventual promotion to advanced rank. Candidates for appointment should come fully prepared and ready for a university career, with the promise of excellence and a commitment both to teaching and to contributing to their professional communities. Initial appointment to a probationary position normally requires possession of the doctorate or appropriate terminal degree from an accredited institution. In unusual circumstances, persons may be appointed who are close to completing the required terminal degree. An exception to the terminal degree requirement may also be made in the case of distinguished individuals with significant scholarly or artistic or professional accomplishments in their field, or whose achievements make a unique ability available to the campus. In such cases, the basis of the exception shall be made a permanent part of the faculty member's file, and the decision recorded whether or not possession of the terminal degree is to be expected for tenure or promotion to advanced rank.

Probationary credit of up to two years may be awarded by the President at the time of appointment. This award may be made only upon the recommendation of the department and the dean, following 1) their consideration of previous service and achievement in teaching and in scholarly or artistic or professional activities at a post-secondary education institution, previous CSU employment, or comparable experience; and 2) upon their assurance that the candidate has been advised of possible hazards of receiving this award, which include the provision that only accomplishments during the one or two years preceding the appointment to regular faculty status may be listed and considered in tenure and promotion decisions. Because recipients of probationary credit will be subject to a four- or five-year tenure review period, they are advised that they will have less time to achieve the standards required for tenure, as outlined below.

Appointment to an advanced rank requires that candidates shall show evidence of the accomplishments normally expected for promotion to that rank.

The initial letter of appointment shall specify any particular character of the faculty member's academic assignment and shall bring to the faculty member's attention the appropriate university criteria and college and/or department guidelines for retention, tenure, and promotion. Any subsequent change in the particular character of the academic assignment shall be made in writing and signed by the faculty member, the department chair, and the college dean. The appointment letter shall also indicate the range of activities by which one may fulfill the expectations for scholarly or artistic or professional achievement in university policy. Such appointment letter(s) shall be placed in the dossier.

V. Retention and Tenure

A. Procedures for Retention and Tenure

1. Persons to be Reviewed for Retention and Tenure

Normally, probationary faculty shall be reviewed for retention and tenure in their second, fourth, and sixth years. If, however, committees or administrators believe that it is in the best interest of the university to require a yearly review, they may so recommend to the President. These performance reviews shall be conducted by department, college and, when appropriate, university committees and administrators, whose respective roles and qualifications are specified elsewhere in this document. Performance reviews shall not be required for newly appointed faculty who have been given one year of probationary credit. However, periodic evaluation is required annually of all probationary faculty by the Agreement.

Second-year probationary faculty shall be notified of the President's decision regarding retention by February 15. Other probationary faculty shall be notified of the President's decision by June 1; if terminated, third-through-sixth-year probationary faculty shall receive a terminal year appointment.

During the years in which reviews are not conducted for retention or tenure (normally, the first, third, and fifth probationary years), department committees (constituted pursuant to Section III.A.1, above), department chairs, and college deans shall consider an annual summary of achievements prepared by the faculty member, evaluations of teaching, and any previous evaluations and recommendations by committees and administrators. Copies of their observations and suggestions shall be given to the faculty member; the original evaluation shall be placed in the official Personnel Action File, and copies included in subsequent years' dossiers.

A tenure decision should normally be made in a faculty member's sixth probationary year. The probationary period may be extended for an additional year under circumstances specified in the Agreement. Tenure may be awarded earlier than the sixth year in the case of faculty members with 1) exceptional effectiveness in academic assignment at San José State University and 2) significant scholarly or artistic or professional achievements at San José State University or other institutions of higher education. Documentation of achievements during the one or two years preceding the probationary period shall not be included in the dossier except for faculty who are awarded probationary credit upon appointment to probationary status. However, all important scholarly and professional accomplishments should be listed in a comprehensive vita.

2. Departmental/School/Division Procedures

a. The department chair or school or division director shall inform in writing faculty members who are to be reviewed of the nature of materials required by the retention and tenure committee and the date by which these materials must be received for the committee's consideration. Candidates shall be responsible for preparing their dossiers. It is the responsibility of the chair to ensure that a detailed description of the academic assignment of the faculty member for the period under review be placed in the dossier at least one week before the submission date of the dossier, in order to establish a frame of reference for evaluation of the candidate by persons from outside the department. The faculty member may attach a response to this statement, before the closing date; any such response shall also be included in the dossier. It shall be the primary responsibility of the faculty member under review to gather the necessary evidence and to prepare an index to the material placed in the dossier. That index shall be placed in the faculty member's permanent personnel file at the close of the year's deliberations, to provide an accurate record of all materials reviewed. During the period that the dossier is open, it is the responsibility of the chair to ensure that the evidence necessary for a full and fair evaluation is contained in the dossier.

Recommendations and statements of reasons from previous years' committees and administrators shall be considered by the department retention and tenure committee and, if requested by either the candidate or the committee, discussed with the candidate. These past recommendations and statements of reasons, and the President's letters, shall go forward with the dossiers.

b. The department chair shall schedule the retention and tenure committee, which shall elect its own chair. The vote of the committee shall be recorded. A member of the committee shall be selected to write the evaluation of the faculty member for the committee, which shall be forwarded with the committee's recommendation to the college committee.

c. The chair shall write separate recommendations unless he/she has served as a duly elected member of the department retention and tenure committee. Such recommendations shall be forwarded to the college level along with the recommendations of the department committee and any responses to the departmental level recommendation(s) supplied by the faculty member.

d. Faculty members shall indicate that they have read the recommendations of the department retention and tenure committee and the department chair (if such a separate recommendation is submitted). If they disagree with the recommendation of the departmental committee or the recommendation of the department chair, they shall have the right to respond to or rebut in writing those recommendations within seven calendar days after receiving the recommendations. Responses or rebuttals should be addressed to the college committee but should be delivered to the department office for placement in dossiers. Faculty members may also request a meeting be held to discuss the recommendations within seven days after receipt of the recommendations. Dossiers shall be forwarded to the next level no earlier than the eighth day after faculty unit members have been notified of the recommendations made. Responses or rebuttals received within the seven-day limit must accompany the dossiers.

3. College Procedures

a. The college retention, tenure, and promotion committee shall be composed of tenured full professors from departments within the college or, if augmentation is required, from related disciplines outside the college, and shall be elected by the probationary and tenured faculty unit employees of each department. Each college shall determine the number to be elected from each department and the minimum size required for department representation on the college committee. Department chairs and faculty serving on a college committee may not serve on a departmental committee in that college or on the university committee. The college committee shall elect its own chair and prepare its own report.

b. The college dean shall schedule the college retention, tenure, and promotion committee. The dean or his/her designee may meet with the committee as a non-voting member only if invited to do so.

c. The college dean shall write an evaluation of and recommendation for the faculty member under review.

d. Department representatives on the college retention, tenure, and promotion committee may participate in the deliberations and vote on all faculty under review including those from their department.

e. The recommendation of the college retention, tenure, and promotion committee, a statement of reasons for its recommendation and the recommendation and evaluation of the dean shall be included in the dossier, and a copy sent to the candidate and to the department chair and committee. The committee and/or the dean must thoroughly explain in writing any disagreement with the recommendation of the department committee.

f. A faculty member shall have seven calendar days after notification of the college level recommendations in which to respond to or rebut those recommendations in writing. Responses or rebuttals should be addressed via the college dean to the next level of review (i.e., either to the University Retention and Tenure Committee or the President) but should be delivered to the college office for placement in dossiers. A faculty member may also request a meeting be held to discuss with the college dean the recommendations within seven days after notification. Dossiers shall be forwarded to the next level on the eighth day after notification, accompanied by any response or rebuttal materials.

4. University Committee Procedures

a. The University Retention and Tenure Committee shall consist of one tenured full professor from each college with more than 25 FTE/F. No member of a department or college retention, tenure, or promotion committee shall serve concurrently on the university committee. The members of the committee shall serve for two-year, staggered terms, and the committee shall elect its chair.

The members of the university committee will be elected by the probationary and tenured faculty unit employees from each college with more than 25 FTE/F. Each department in the college shall be informed of the pending selection and shall nominate one person. The Provost or his/her designee shall meet with the college retention, tenure, and promotion committee, which will select three of those nominated to place before the electorate of each college. No one elected may serve as a member of a department or college retention, tenure, or promotion committee.

b. The Associate Vice President for Faculty Affairs shall schedule the university committee. He/she may meet with the committee only if invited to do so.

c. The university committee shall review the dossiers of all fourth and sixth year probationary faculty and of all other probationary faculty who were recommended for tenure or for special third- or fifth-year retention review by the department, college, or dean.

d. The recommendation of the University Retention and Tenure Committee, and a statement of reasons for its recommendation, shall be included in the dossier, and copies sent to the candidate, the college dean and committee, and the department chair and committee.

e. The Associate Vice President for Faculty Affairs may make a recommendation in any case reviewed by the university committee, and that recommendation shall be made in writing and included in the dossier, with a copy sent to the candidate, the college dean and committee, and the department chair and committee. When the recommendation is contrary to the recommendation of the university committee, a statement of reasons shall also be given in writing.

f. The affected faculty member shall have the right to respond to or rebut the university-level recommendations in writing to the President within seven days after notification of the recommendations. (Responses or rebuttals should be delivered to the Office of the Associate Vice President for Faculty Affairs, for placement in dossiers.) The faculty member may also request a meeting to be held to discuss the recommendations within seven days after notification. Dossiers shall be forwarded to the President via the Office of the Associate Vice President for Faculty Affairs no earlier than the eighth day after faculty unit members have been notified of the recommendations made. Responses or rebuttals received within the seven calendar day limit must accompany the dossiers.

g. The President shall notify the candidate in writing, giving the reasons for the decision. A copy of the decision shall be given to the faculty member and all review levels and shall be placed in the personnel file.

h. When the presidential action is not consistent with the recommendation of the university committee, the President shall meet with the committee to discuss the reasons for the action.

B. Standards for Retention and Tenure Decisions

1. Retention

The review process should be rigorous throughout the probationary period. It is expected that a candidate show increasing effectiveness in teaching, or consistent effectiveness in the case of individuals whose teaching is fully satisfactory from the start. Faculty members should not be retained if their performance in teaching and in the other aspects of their academic assignment is not sufficient to warrant a reasonable expectation that tenure will be granted at the end of the probationary period. Retention committees should in their recommendations indicate whether faculty progress is sufficient to warrant a reasonable expectation that tenure will be granted at the end of the probationary period. Throughout the probationary period, personnel committees at all levels should be aware of the existence of any narrative statements or faculty professional development or probationary plans that the candidate may have established according to departmental or college guidelines.

2. Tenure

The tenure decision is perhaps the most important decision the university must make with respect to its faculty since, in effect, it represents a mutual commitment shared by the faculty member and the university which may entail many years of service on the part of the faculty member. The award of tenure brings with it the right to continued permanent employment as a faculty member unless terminated according to the provisions of the Agreement. The granting of tenure is not solely a reward for services performed during the probationary years, but also represents an explicit expectation that a faculty member will continue to be a valued colleague, a good teacher and an active scholar, artist or leader in his or her profession, and a contributor to the university's mission, including collegial governance of the University. Accordingly, tenure decisions should be based upon thorough review of faculty members during their probationary years. In cases where probationary credit has been given for previous service in the one or two years for which such credit was granted, the achievements in teaching and in scholarly or artistic or professional activities that led to such credit shall be evaluated. All prior experience should be listed in a comprehensive vita. Tenure should be granted only to individuals whose record of teaching and contributions to their profession indicates a commitment to ongoing activity and professional achievement of high quality and the potential to earn promotion to higher rank.

A tenure decision should normally be made in a faculty member's sixth probationary year. The probationary period may be extended for an additional year under circumstances specified in the Agreement, Section 13.7.

Tenure may be awarded earlier than the sixth year in the case of faculty members with significant scholarly, artistic or professional achievements and excellence in teaching. Faculty members may request an early consideration for tenure based on having already achieved the levels of achievement required for the award of tenure.

In extraordinary cases, when a candidate for appointment has already earned tenure and promotion to the rank of full professor at another college or university, or has otherwise demonstrated achievements in the areas of teaching and scholarly, artistic, or professional activity conclusively indicating that university standards for tenure and promotion to the rank of full professor have been met, the "President may award tenure to any individual, including one whose appointment and assignment is in an administrative position, at the time of appointment. Appointments with tenure shall be made only after an evaluation and recommendation by the appropriate department" (Agreement, Section 13.16).

The award of tenure requires more than potential or promise. It requires:

a. Possession of the required terminal degree, unless an exception to this requirement had been granted and noted at the time of appointment as provided above.

b. Demonstrated effectiveness in academic assignment, above all in teaching. Tenure should not be granted without evidence of good, solid performance in the variety of the courses taught during the probationary years.

c. Contributions to the candidate's discipline or professional community. Scholarly or artistic or professional contributions should be of good quality and evidence both the commitment to and the potential for continued development and accomplishment throughout the candidate's career.

d. The promise of significant contribution to the university's mission, including the collegial governance of the university.

VI. Promotion

A. Procedures for Promotion Decisions

Procedures for promotion will be the same as for retention and tenure with the following exceptions:

1. Timing of Promotion Decisions:

Most probationary faculty members shall be considered for promotion to associate professor at the same time they are considered for tenure. Tenured faculty members shall normally be reviewed for promotion after completing four years in rank unless they request, in writing, not to be so reviewed. Upon application, a faculty member with an extraordinary record of accomplishments in rank may be promoted having spent four or fewer years in rank.

2. Committee Membership

No faculty member shall participate in promotion deliberations about colleagues of equal or higher rank. A department chair who has not achieved the rank of full professor shall not be a member of the departmental promotion committee but shall write a separate evaluation as department chair.

3. Levels of Review

The review of candidates for promotion will be limited to department and college levels only, with their recommendations forwarded to the President.

4. Recommendations -- Previous Years

Recommendations or decisions and statements of reasons made by committees and administrators in previous evaluations during the period under review shall be included in dossiers.

5. Recommendations

Recommendations shall be as follows:

a. Recommended

b. Not Recommended.

6. Ranking

The department and college committees may rank all recommended candidates and the individual's ranking shall be included in each dossier.

7. Responses or Rebuttals

Unless a faculty member requests that the dossier not be forwarded, all dossiers shall be forwarded to the President via the Office of the Associate Vice President for Faculty Affairs. Dossiers shall be forwarded no earlier than the eighth day after faculty members have been notified of the recommendation. Responses or rebuttals filed within the seven calendar days limit shall accompany the dossiers.

8. Presidential Decision:

The President shall notify the candidate in writing, giving reasons for any unfavorable decision, by June 1. The reasons given should indicate the area or areas in which the candidate's efforts, performance, or accomplishments should be strengthened. A copy of the presidential decision and the statement of reasons shall be provided to the faculty member and to all levels of review.

9. Denial of Promotion:

At the conclusion of the process, faculty members denied promotion shall be apprised, by the department chair or an appropriate administrator, of their strengths and weaknesses, and advised of what they might do to improve their chances for promotion in the future.

B. Standards for Promotion Decisions

1. Appointment to Assistant Professor

The rank of assistant professor shall normally be used for appointment of persons who are just beginning their academic or professional careers.

2. Promotion to Associate Professor

Associate professor is the second highest academic rank, and promotion to it normally requires tenure or the simultaneous award of tenure. The rank of associate professor presupposes that a faculty member has had considerable academic or professional experience and accomplishments during the probationary period. Promotion to associate professor requires a well-established, consistent pattern of good teaching and general effectiveness in academic assignment which normally should include contributions to collegial governance. Normally, a candidate for promotion to associate professor is expected to have contributed to the effectiveness of the department and/or college through curriculum development, advising, committee work or other appropriate service. In addition, there should be evidence that scholarly or artistic or professional activity is a continuing part of a faculty member's professional life. Although promotion to associate professor does not require the extent of scholarly or artistic or professional contributions expected for the rank of professor it does require demonstrable achievement or contribution to the candidate's discipline or professional community as well as to the mission of the university. Professional contributions should demonstrate the development of a candidate's potential for leadership in his or her professional community, or other valuable contributions to the profession. Similarly, a candidate's scholarly or artistic achievements should exhibit qualities of intellectual, artistic or professional competence and the promise of continuing development and growth on the part of the faculty member.

3. Promotion to Professor

Probationary faculty shall not be promoted to the rank of professor. The rank of professor is the highest academic rank and should represent potential realized and genuine achievement. The period of review shall be the period since a faculty member's last promotion or, in the case of those appointed at the associate professor rank, since appointment to probationary status. A comprehensive vita should, however, be included in the dossier to indicate earlier achievement.

Promotion to professor requires a continuing pattern of good teaching and, normally, increasing effectiveness in the other aspects of academic assignment; for example, significant contributions to university collegial governance or other appropriate service. Candidates for promotion to full professor should show evidence of having assumed a degree of responsibility at the departmental and/or college level for such things as curriculum, student advising, mentoring of junior faculty, and leadership roles in committee work. Normally, competent university-wide service is also expected for promotion to full professor. Such service may include membership on university search and review committees, the Academic Senate and its policy and operating committees, special agencies, and other documented service activities that focus on the whole university, including Statewide governance, curriculum, and faculty collective bargaining organizations. As with other expected accomplishments in this policy, a holistic evaluation should be done, so that faculty with extensive responsibilities for service at the departmental and/or college level should not be expected to contribute as much at the university-wide level. In addition, it is expected that candidates for promotion to professor will present evidence of substantial achievement and of continuing activity in their profession, either through scholarly or artistic or professional contributions in their field, or through leadership in their professional communities.

1. ^*

*Called "student questionnaire evaluations" in the Agreement between the Board of Trustees of the California State University and the California Faculty Association, Unit 3, Faculty, July 1, 1995 - June 30, 1998 and its successor agreements (hereinafter referred to as the Agreement).