Attachment to Resolution n:

Approval of Senior Faculty Appointments.

Section 4.1.1 of the Faculty Handbook (“Faculty Appointment Policy”) provides that the faculty in a department must approve any faculty appointment in that department: “To appoint any person to an academic rank requires a positive recommendation from the faculty of the academic unit to which the person is to be assigned.” Section 4.1.1 further provides that the academic rank of the new faculty member must be approved by the Provost, and appointments with tenure must be approved by the Provost and President. While the faculty in the department must approve the “appointment,” the language of Section 4.1.1 can be interpreted to mean that the Provost and President alone decide the rank and whether tenure will be granted; there is express no provision for faculty participation in the decision as to the academic rank or whether tenure will be granted. Moreover, the “faculty of the academic unit” who approve the “appointment” may include those who are below rank to the candidate, and in the case of an appointment with tenure, without tenure. Under this procedure, someone who has never been granted tenure in their current academic position can be awarded tenure and/or a promotion in rank by the University with no review by the department’s promotion and tenure committee. Likewise, the college and University promotion and tenure committees play no role at all in the review even though the appointment may include a promotion in rank and/or the granting of tenure to someone who does not already have tenure in their current position. Furthermore, when the department faculty vote on the appointment of a senior hire who may be offered a promotion and/or tenure, they make their decision without the benefit of a dossier, external letters of review, or teaching evaluations of the candidate. The candidate is reviewed solely on the resume they submitted and the letters of reference they provided to the search committee—letters that are not necessarily shared with the department as a whole (although that seems to have once been required under University policy). In short, those who come up for a promotion and/or tenure within the University undergo a rigorous review process that is missing in the case of an appointment of a senior lateral hire.

To remedy this shortcoming in the procedure as it applies to the appointment of senior faculty (i.e., those above the rank of assistant professor), the Handbook should be amended to require that the tenured faculty in the department must approve a faculty appointment where tenure will be granted and faculty at rank on the department’s promotion and tenure committee must approve the rank of the appointment. Likewise, a department may decide that more information than just the candidate’s resume should be provided to the department promotion and tenure committee so that faculty can make an informed decision. While a full dossier and review process comparable to that required for internal promotions and/or tenure decisions would not seem to be necessary, some evidence of excellence in research and/or teaching should be provided to the department promotion and tenure committee in cases where the candidate does not already have tenure in their current position or where a promotion in rank comes with the appointment. Departments that decide to require additional information must amend their promotion and tenure documents to specify what kind of evidence must be submitted by a candidate for a senior appointment to support the granting of tenure in cases where the candidate does not already hold tenure in their current academic position and/or a promotion in rank above that of their current academic position comes with the appointment. Departments may specify that candidates submit a “mini-dossier” that includes less information and fewer external letters of review compared to what is required of internal candidates for promotion and/or tenure.