4.4 Appointment, Promotion, Tenure, and Termination
The general provisions and regulations governing tenure, promotion, and termination of employment as adopted by the Board of Regents are given in the Regents' Rules and Regulations, Rule , , , , and . These regulations, as applicable to 成人头条, are paraphrased below. Procedures and criteria to be used at 成人头条 are given specifically in 4.4.2 and 4.4.3 below. All faculty members should familiarize themselves with these promotion and tenure regulations.
4.4.1 Tenure and Promotion
Tenure denotes a status of continuing appointment as a member of the faculty at 成人头条. Only members of the faculty with the academic titles of Professor, Associate Professor, or Assistant Professor may be granted tenure. Tenure may be granted to Associate Professors and Professors at the time of appointment, or tenure may be awarded following satisfactory completion of a probationary period of faculty service.
4.4.1.1 Only full-time service in the academic ranks of Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor, and Instructor, or any combination thereof, shall be counted toward the maximum probationary period for earning tenure. Periods during which a faculty member is on leave of absence shall not be counted toward fulfillment of the maximum probationary period.
4.4.1.2 Prior service at other academic institutions, whether inside or outside the U. T. System, shall not be counted toward calculation of the maximum probationary period.
4.4.1.3 The maximum period of probationary faculty service in nontenured status in any academic rank or combination of academic ranks specified in 4.1.2.1 above shall be seven (7) years of full‑time academic service. No later than August 1st of the sixth academic year of the probationary period, all nontenured faculty serving in a rank that accrues time toward the maximum probationary period shall be given notice that the seventh academic year will be the terminal year of employment, or that beginning with the subsequent academic year, tenure will be granted. In the event that the employment of a nontenured faculty member is to be terminated prior to the end of the maximum probationary period, notice shall be given in accordance with 4.4.3.1 below.
4.4.1.4 For purposes of calculating the period of probationary service, an “academic year” shall be the period from September 1st through the following August 31st. If a faculty member is initially appointed during an academic year, the period of service from the date of the appointment until the following September 1st shall not be counted as academic service toward the calculation of the maximum probationary period. A faculty member shall be considered to be in full-time academic service if he or she is in full compliance with requirements pertaining to minimum faculty workloads at the University.
4.4.1.5 No later than August 1st of the sixth academic year of the probationary period all tenure-track faculty will be given notice that the seventh year is either the terminal year of appointment or that beginning with the subsequent academic year tenure will be granted. In some cases full-time tenure-track faculty may be granted an extension to the seven year probationary period under the guidelines provided by the Regents' Rules and Regulations Rule . Only full-time faculty holding tenure-track rank (Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or full Professor) as defined by the Regents' Rules and Regulations Rule and are eligible to apply for an extension to the tenure-track probationary period.
A faculty member who determines that certain personal circumstances may impede his or her progress toward achieving demonstration of eligibility for recommendation of the award of tenure must request in writing an extension of the probationary period outlining the details of the request. Personal circumstances that may justify the extension include, but are not restricted to, disability or illness of the faculty member; status of the faculty member as a principal caregiver of a preschool child; or status of the faculty member as a principal caregiver of a disabled, elderly, or ill member of his or her family. Requests must be made in advance of the academic year or semester for which the extension is justified and must be made at least three months before the faculty member initiates the mandatory tenure-review process. All requests shall be limited to one academic year. A request for an additional academic year’s extension may be requested; however the maximum duration of the extension, whether consecutive or nonconsecutive, shall be two academic years.
The written request should specify the reason(s) for the extension and time period requested and be supported by appropriate documentation to adequately demonstrate why the extension request should be granted. The written request and all supporting documentation should be forwarded to the Chair of the faculty member’s Department, who will review it and forward a written recommendation to the Academic Dean. The Dean’s written recommendation will be forwarded to the Provost, who will make the final decision on the requested extension. At all levels the review of the extension request will be considered in accordance with established policies and procedures for evaluating a candidate for tenure. The faculty member shall be notified in writing of the recommendation made at all levels of review. At any stage of the review process, additional supporting documentation may be requested or added to the extension request, or the extension request may be withdrawn by the faculty member. The denial of an extension request must be appealed within 30 days of the final decision and will be handled in accordance with policies and procedures established for faculty evaluation appeals.
Additional information regarding faculty probationary period extensions or appeals may be obtained by contacting the Provost’s Office.
Following the approval of an extension request, a plan for the faculty member to meet his or her instructional and other academic responsibilities during the period of extension should be developed.
4.4.1.6 All faculty appointments are subject to the approval of the Board of Regents. No nontenured member of the faculty should expect continued employment beyond the period of his or her current appointment as approved by the Board of Regents. Any commitment to employ a nontenured member of the faculty beyond his or her current appointment shall have no force and effect until approved by the Board of Regents.
4.4.1.7 A person appointed to a faculty position with the title of Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor at the University may not, during the term of such appointment, hold a tenured or tenure-track position on the faculty of another educational institution outside the U.T. System or any of the institutions outside the U.T. System.
- Appointments to the faculty with the titles of Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor, or Instructor shall be conditioned upon the appointee having resigned any tenured position that the appointee may then hold on the faculty of any other educational institution outside the U.T. System or any of the institutions outside the U.T. System. Such resignation must be completed and effective prior to the effective date of the appointment at the University; otherwise, such appointment shall be void and of no effect.
- The acceptance of an appointment to a tenured position on the faculty of an educational institution outside the U.T. System shall be considered as a resignation of any faculty position with the title of Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor that such appointee may hold at the University.
4.4.2 Termination
Termination by the University of a tenured faculty member's employment or of any other faculty members before the expiration of the stated appointment period, except as otherwise provided in 4.4.3, by resignation or retirement, or as otherwise provided in Regents' Rules and Regulations, will be only for good cause shown. In each case, the issue will be determined by an equitable procedure, as outlined below and in accordance with the Regents’ Rules and Regulations (Rule 31008), affording protection to the rights of the individual and to the interests of the University.
4.4.2.1 Review of Allegation. The President shall assure that all allegations against a faculty member involving the potential for termination are reviewed under the direction of the Provost unless another officer is designated by the President. The faculty member who is the subject of the allegations shall be given an opportunity to be interviewed and shall have the right to present a grievance, in person or through a representative, to the Provost on an issue or subject related to the allegations under review. The Provost or another individual designated by the President, if the allegations pertain to the Provost shall take the grievance if any, into consideration prior to making a determination whether the allegations are supported by evidence that justifies the initiation of termination procedures. Upon making that determination, the Provost or other appropriate designee will recommend to the President whether to proceed with charges for termination. Failure to present a grievance to the Provost or other appropriate designee prior to his or her recommendation shall not preclude the faculty member from presenting an issue or subject to the special hearing tribunal in defense of charges for termination that may result from the review. A tenured faculty member who is recommended for termination on the basis of periodic evaluation must be given the opportunity for referral of the matter to nonbinding alternative dispute resolution, as required by applicable legislation and policies and procedures for alternative dispute resolution within The University of Texas System and the University, prior to referral of the charges to a hearing tribunal.
4.4.2.2 Response to Allegations. If the President determines that the allegations are supported by evidence that justifies the initiation of termination procedures, the President will meet with the faculty member, explain the allegations and supporting evidence, and give the faculty member a reasonable amount of time, as determined by the President, to respond either orally or in writing.
4.4.2.2.1 The President may in the best interest of the institution suspend an accused faculty member with pay pending the completion of the hearing and a final decision.
4.4.2.2.2 In cases of incompetence, gross immorality, or felony, where the facts are admitted, summary dismissal will follow.
4.4.2.3 Hearing Tribunal. In cases where other offenses are charged, and in all cases where the facts are in dispute, the accused faculty member will be informed in writing of the charges. The charges will be heard by a special hearing tribunal comprising at least three (3) faculty members whose academic rank and tenure are at least equal to that of the accused faculty member. The hearing tribunal members shall be appointed by the President from a standing pool of members of the faculty. At least 50% (fifty percent) of the standing pool members shall be selected by a procedure established by the faculty senate; the remaining standing pool members shall be selected by the President. A minimum of one (1) member of the hearing tribunal appointed by the President is to be from among standing pool members selected by the Faculty Senate for the standing pool.
4.4.2.3.1 The accused faculty member will be notified of the names of the faculty members selected for the hearing tribunal, and the date, time and place for the hearing. Notice of such shall be provided at least eight (8) work days prior to the hearing.
4.4.2.3.2 In every such hearing the accused will have the right to appear in person and by counsel of choice and to confront and cross-examine witnesses who may appear. If counsel represents the accused faculty member, the institution is entitled to be represented by counsel from System's Administration’s Office of General Counsel.
4.4.2.3.3 The accused faculty member shall have the right to testify but may not be required to do so, and may introduce all evidence, written or oral, that may be relevant or material to the defense.
4.4.2.3.4 An electronic record of the proceedings will be taken and filed with the Board of Regents, and such record shall be made accessible to the accused.
4.4.2.3.5 A representative of the University may appear before the hearing tribunal to present witnesses and evidence against the accused faculty member in support of the charge(s) brought against such faculty member, and such representative shall have the right to cross-examine the accused faculty member (if the faculty member testifies) and the witnesses offered on behalf of the faculty member. The University has the burden to prove good cause for termination by the greater weight of the credible evidence.
4.4.2.3.6 The hearing tribunal shall not include any accuser of the faculty member. If the accused faculty member is not satisfied with the fairness or objectivity of any member or members of the hearing tribunal, he or she may challenge the alleged lack of fairness or objectivity, but any such challenge must be made prior to the submission of any evidence to the hearing tribunal. The accused faculty member shall have no right to disqualify any such member or members from serving on the tribunal. It shall be up to each such challenged member to determine whether the member can serve with fairness and objectivity in the matter. In the event of voluntary disqualification, the President shall appoint a substitute member of the tribunal from the panel described in 4.4.2.3.
4.4.2.3.7 The hearing tribunal, by a majority of the total membership, will make written findings on the material facts and a recommendation of the continuance or termination of the accused faculty member's employment. The hearing tribunal, by a majority of its total membership, may make any supplementary suggestions it deems proper concerning the disposal of the case. The original copy of such findings and the basic recommendation, together with any supplementary suggestions, shall be delivered to the President with a copy thereof to the faculty member. If minority findings, recommendations, or suggestions are made, they shall be similarly treated. The original transcript of the testimony and the exhibits shall also be forwarded to the President.
4.4.2.4 President’s Report. Within fourteen (14) work days after receipt of the findings and recommendations of the hearing tribunal, the President shall make one of the following decisions based solely on the evidence of record in the proceedings and report that decision in writing to the accused faculty member:
4.4.2.4.1 The President may decide to dismiss the matter or impose sanctions short of termination. In this case, the President’s decision is final and the Board of Regents will not review the matter.
4.4.2.4.2 If the allegations are supported by evidence that constitutes good cause for termination, the President may decide to recommend termination to the Board of Regents. If so, the President shall forward the findings and recommendations of the hearing tribunal, the original transcript of the testimony, and the exhibits to the Board of Regents for its review, along with the President’s report. If the President’s recommendation is not the same as the majority recommendation of the hearing tribunal, the President shall state the reasons for the President’s decision to recommend termination in his or her report. The accused faculty member may, within seven (7) work days after receiving the President’s report, submit a written response to the Board of Regents. The response must be based solely on the evidence of record in the proceeding.
4.4.2.5 Board Review. The Board of Regents, by a majority of the total membership, will approve, reject, or amend such findings, recommendation, and suggestions, if any, or will recommit the report to the same tribunal for hearing additional evidence and reconsidering its findings, recommendation, and suggestions, if any. Reasons for approval, rejection, or amendment of such findings, recommendation, or suggestion will be stated in writing and communicated to the faculty member.
4.4.2.6 Reasons for Termination Not Required. Full-time faculty members, other than tenured faculty members, who are notified that they will not be reappointed or have not been reappointed are not entitled to a statement of the reasons upon which the decision for such an action is based.
4.4.2.6.1 Full-time faculty members, other than full-time tenure-track faculty members, may, however, present a grievance concerning the decision, in person, through the procedures described in Section V. Chapter 7 of this Handbook of Operating Procedures.
4.4.2.6.2 Full-time faculty members who, in accordance with 4.4.3.1, are notified that they will not be reappointed or that the subsequent academic year will be the terminal year of appointment, are not entitled to a statement of the reasons upon which the decision for such action is based. Such a decision shall only be subject to review pursuant to the following procedures:
4.4.2.6.2.1 Grievance. The affected faculty member may present a grievance, in person or through a representative, to the Provost or another individual designated by the President if the allegations pertain to the Provost on an issue or subject related to a nonrenewal decision. The Provost shall meet with the faculty member. Unless a review by a hearing tribunal is requested and granted pursuant to Section 4.4.2.6.2.2 below, the nonrenewal decision shall not be subject to further review.
4.4.2.6.2.2 Hearing Tribunal to Hear Grievance. A review by a hearing tribunal shall be granted only in those cases where the affected faculty member submits a written request for review by a hearing tribunal to the President and describes in detail the facts relied upon to prove that the decision was made for reasons that are unlawful under the Constitution or laws of Texas or the United States of America. If the President determines that the alleged facts are proven by credible evidence and support a conclusion that the decision was made for unlawful reasons, such allegations shall be heard by a hearing tribunal under the procedures established in Section 4.4.2.4 above as in the case of dismissal for cause, with the following exceptions:
4.4.2.6.2.2.1 The burden of proof is upon the affected faculty member to establish by greater weight of the credible evidence that the decision in question was made for reasons that are unlawful under the Constitution or laws of Texas or the United States of America.
4.4.2.6.2.2.2 The University administration need not state the reasons for the questioned decision or offer evidence in support thereof unless the affected faculty member presents credible evidence that, if unchallenged, proves the decision was made for unlawful reasons.
4.4.2.6.2.2.3 The hearing tribunal shall make written findings and recommendations based on the evidence presented at the hearing and shall forward such findings and recommendations with the transcript and exhibits from the hearing to the President.
4.4.2.6.2.2.4 The President may approve, reject, or amend the recommendations of the hearing tribunal or may reach different conclusions based upon the record of the hearing. The decision of the President shall be final.
4.4.3 Notice Requirements
4.4.3.1 Non-reappointment
In the event of a decision not to reappoint a nontenured faculty member, written notice will be given to him or her not later than March 1st of the first academic year of probationary service if the appointment expires at the end of that academic year, or not later than December 15th of the second academic year of probationary service if the appointment expires at the end of that academic year. After two or more academic years, written notice shall be given not later than August 1st that the subsequent year will be the terminal academic year of appointment. This required notice is not applicable where termination of employment is for good cause under 4.4.2 above.
4.4.3.2 Reappointment or Award of Tenure
Re-appointment of nontenured faculty members to a succeeding academic year, or the award of tenure, may be accomplished only by notice by the President or the President's delegate with the approval of the Board of Regents. Notwithstanding any provisions of 4.4.3.1 or to the contrary, no person shall be deemed to have been reappointed or to have been awarded tenure because notice is not given or received by the time or manner prescribed in 4.4.1.5 above. If no notice is received by the time prescribed, it is the duty of the academic employee concerned to make inquiry to determine the decision of the President, who shall without delay give the required notice to the academic employee.
4.4.3.3 Current Mailing Address
Each faculty member shall keep the President or the President's delegate notified of a current mailing address. All written notices required by this chapter shall be sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the last address given by the faculty member.
4.4.4 Program or Position Abandonment or Reduction
4.4.4.1 The President of the University is responsible for determining when it shall be necessary for bona fide academic reasons or an institutional financial exigency to eliminate or reduce occupied academic positions, or abandon academic programs, or both, subject to approval by the Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs of The University of Texas System. The decision of the President shall include full and meaningful faculty input as specified below and in the Regents' Rules and Regulations, and the implementation of that decision shall be subject to the following minimum procedural requirements.
4.4.4.2 Elimination for Academic Reasons.
An academic program under consideration for abandonment or any academic position that is under consideration for elimination for bona fide academic reasons should be reviewed in depth through a procedure determined by the President and as outlined below. Neither the procedures specified in Rule 31008 of the Regents' Rules and Regulations concerning termination of a faculty member, the notice requirements of Rule 31007, Section 5 concerning tenure, nor Rule 31002, Sections 1 and 2 concerning notice of nonrenewal to nontenured faculty members shall be applicable.
4.4.4.2.1 Committee Recommendations. Upon determining the need to reduce academic positions or academic programs, or both, the President shall appoint a committee composed of faculty and administrative personnel to make recommendations to the President as to which academic positions and/or academic programs should be eliminated. The faculty members of this committee shall be a majority of the total membership of this committee. At least one-half of the faculty members will be selected by the President from a slate of tenured faculty members developed by the Faculty Senate.
4.4.4.2.1.1 Notification. Tenured faculty in a program that is under consideration for abandonment or in an academic position that is under consideration for elimination will be notified and afforded an opportunity to contribute to the review process.
4.4.4.2.2 Assessment of Academic Program. The committee will review and assess the academic programs under consideration for possible elimination or reduction, and identify those academic positions that may be eliminated with minimum effect upon the degree programs that should be continued and upon other critical components of the University's mission.
The review will include, but not be limited to, as relevant: (a) an examination of the course offerings, degree programs, supporting degree programs, teaching specialties, and semester credit hour production; (b) an evaluation of the quality, centrality, and funding of research activities; (c) an assessment of the productivity, community service, and quality of clinical services (in relation to teaching, healthcare delivery, and scholarly activity); (d) the demand for graduates and/or (e) the ability to meet professional accrediting standards.
4.4.4.2.3 Review Consideration. Upon determining that one or more academic positions in a degree program or teaching specialty should be eliminated, the committee will recommend to the President, in writing the particular position or positions to be terminated after reviewing the academic, research, and clinical qualifications and talents of holders of all academic positions in those degree programs or clinical or academic teaching specialties, the needs of the program they serve, past performance, and the potential for future contributions to the development of the University. Tenure status of a faculty member shall not be a consideration in the determination of whether a particular position should be eliminated except as permitted below.
4.4.4.2.3.1 Tenure preference. If, in the opinion of the committee, two or more faculty members are equally qualified and capable of performing the same teaching, research, and/or clinical role, the faculty member or members having tenure shall be given preference over nontenured faculty. However, if such faculty members have the same tenure status and equal qualifications, consideration will be given to the other documented needs of the University.
4.4.4.2.4 Supporting Rationale. Upon completion of the review process, the committee will submit a recommendation with supporting rationale to the Provost for review and recommendation to the President.
4.4.4.2.5 Review by Executive Vice Chancellor. If the President determines that an academic program should be abandoned, a request for approval with supporting documentation shall be forwarded to the Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs of The University of Texas System.
4.4.4.2.6 Hearing Committee. The President shall appoint a hearing committee composed of faculty members to consider any appeals for reconsideration of termination decisions based upon bona fide academic reasons. At least one-half of the faculty members will be selected by the President from a slate of tenured faculty members developed by the Faculty Senate.
Within thirty (30) days from the date of notice of termination, a faculty member shall have the right to appeal to the hearing committee for reconsideration of the termination decision. The appeal for reconsideration shall be in writing and addressed to the President. A faculty member who appeals to the hearing committee (the appellant) shall be given a reasonably adequate written statement of the basis for the initial decision to reduce academic positions and, upon request of the person, shall be given any written data or information relied upon in arriving at such decision.
4.4.4.2.7 Appeal Procedure. The hearing committee shall set the date, time, and place for hearing the appeal for reconsideration. Such hearing shall be held within thirty (30) days of the date of the written request unless the appellant waives such time requirement; however, such hearing shall be held within ninety (90) days from the date of the request. The hearing committee shall conduct the hearing in accordance with the following procedures:
4.4.4.2.7.1 The hearing will be closed to the public unless requested to be open by the appellant.
4.4.4.2.7.2 The appellant may be represented by legal counsel at his/her expense.
4.4.4.2.7.3 The appellant and the University may offer any written evidence or oral testimony that is material to the issues.
4.4.4.2.7.4 The burden shall be upon the appellant to show by a preponderance of the credible evidence that the decision to terminate the appellant as compared to another individual in the same discipline or teaching specialty was arbitrary and unreasonable based upon the evidence presented.
4.4.4.2.7.5 No other issues shall be heard or considered by the hearing committee.
4.4.4.2.8 Establishment of date. The date for abandoning or phasing out an academic program shall take into consideration the time required for anticipated completion by students currently enrolled or for facilitation of their placement in acceptable alternative programs.
4.4.4.2.9 Requests for Reassignment. The President or designee will notify tenured faculty in the program to be abandoned and ask each faculty member to inform the President or designee in writing of the faculty member's request for reassignment to other academic program(s) and to provide details of their qualifications for appointment to such academic program(s).
4.4.4.2.10 Employment Alternatives. The President or designee will meet individually with tenured faculty who respond to discuss employment alternatives to termination.
4.4.4.2.11 Non-retention. If the decision is not to retain, the President or designee, will send a written response stating reasons for non-retention.
4.4.4.2.12 Displacement. If retention of a tenured faculty member results in displacement of a tenured faculty member in another program, the displaced faculty member is entitled to the above procedures.
4.4.4.2.13 Benefit Information. Any faculty member whose employment is terminated pursuant to this policy shall be informed of applicable benefits available upon termination, such as retirement, accrued leave, and opportunity to continue insurance coverage.
4.4.4.2.14 Employment Assistance. The University shall provide appropriate assistance to affected faculty members concerning available alternative employment opportunities.
4.4.4.3 Elimination Due to an Institutional Financial Exigency.
When such reductions are necessary as a result of financial exigency, the procedure for the selection and notification of those academic positions to be terminated shall be governed by this Handbook of Operating Procedures and Rule 31003, Section 3 of the Regents' Rules and Regulations. Neither the procedures specified in Rule 31008 of the Regents' Rules and Regulations concerning termination of a faculty member, the notice requirements of Rule 31007, Section 5 concerning tenure, nor Rule 31002, Sections 1 and 2, concerning notice of nonrenewal to nontenured faculty members, shall be applicable.
Financial Exigency shall be defined as: a demonstrably bona fide financial crisis that adversely affects the University as a whole and that, after considering other cost-reducing measures, including ways to cut faculty costs, requires consideration of terminating appointments held by tenured faculty.
4.4.4.3.1 Committee Recommendations. Upon determining the existence of a financial exigency and the need to reduce academic positions or academic programs, or both, the President shall appoint a committee comprising of faculty and administrative personnel to make recommendations to the President as to which academic positions and/or academic programs should be eliminated as a result of the financial exigency.
The faculty members of this committee shall be a majority of the total membership of this committee. At least one-half of the faculty members will be selected by the President from a slate of tenured faculty members developed by the Faculty Senate.
4.4.4.3.2 Assessment of Academic Program. The committee will review and assess the academic programs of the University, and identify those academic positions that may be eliminated with minimum effect upon the degree programs that should be continued and upon other critical components of the University's mission. The review will include, but not be limited to, as relevant: (a) an examination of the course offerings, degree programs, supporting degree programs, teaching specialties, and semester credit hour production; (b) an evaluation of the quality, centrality, and funding of research activities; (c) an assessment of the productivity, community service, and quality of clinical services (in relation to teaching, healthcare delivery, and scholarly activity); (d) the demand for graduates; and/or (e) the ability to meet professional accrediting standards.
4.4.4.3.3 Review Consideration. Upon determining that one or more academic positions in a degree program or teaching specialty should be eliminated, the committee will recommend to the President, in writing the particular position or positions to be terminated after reviewing the academic, research, and clinical qualifications and talents of holders of all academic positions in those degree programs or clinical or academic teaching specialties, the needs of the program they serve, past performance, and the potential for future contributions to the development of the University. Tenure status of a faculty member shall not be a consideration in the determination of whether a particular position should be eliminated, except as permitted in 4.4.4.3.4 below.
4.4.4.3.4 Tenure preference. If, in the opinion of the committee, two or more faculty members are equally qualified and capable of performing the same teaching, research, and/or clinical role, the faculty member or members having tenure shall be given preference over nontenured faculty. However, if such faculty members have the same tenure status and equal qualifications, consideration will be given to the other documented needs of the University.
4.4.4.3.5 Recommendation. Upon completion of its review, the financial exigency review committee shall promptly recommend in writing to the President those persons who may be terminated, ranked in order of priority, with the reasons for their selection.
The President shall, after consultation with such administrative officers as the President may deem appropriate, determine which academic positions from among those identified by the committee are to be terminated because of the financial exigency and shall give the holders of these positions written notice of the decision.
4.4.4.3.6 Notification of Vacancies. Any person terminated due to financial exigency will be notified when a vacancy occurs at the University in their field of teaching or expertise within the next two (2) academic years following the termination. If he or she makes timely application and is qualified for the position to be filled, he or she shall be offered employment in that position. If the vacancy is in a field of teaching or expertise in which two or more persons have been terminated because of financial exigency, all will be notified of the vacancy, and of those so notified and making timely applications, employment will be offered to the person who is the better qualified for the position to be filled.
4.4.4.3.7 Hearing Committee. The President shall appoint a hearing committee composed of faculty members to hear any appeals for reconsideration of termination decisions based upon financial exigency. At least one-half of the faculty members will be selected by the President from a slate of tenured faculty members developed by the Faculty Senate. Within thirty (30) days from the date of the notice of termination, a faculty member shall have the right to appeal to the hearing committee for reconsideration of the termination decision. The appeal for reconsideration shall be in writing and addressed to the President of the University. A faculty member who appeals to the hearing committee (the appellant) shall be given a reasonably adequate written statement of the basis for the initial decision to reduce academic positions and, upon request of the person, shall be given all written data or information relied upon in arriving at such decision.
4.4.4.3.8 Appeal Procedures. The hearing committee shall set the date, time, and place for hearing the appeal for reconsideration. Such hearing shall be held within thirty (30) days of the date of the written request, unless the appellant waives such time requirement; however, such hearing shall be held within ninety (90) days from the date of the request. The hearing committee shall conduct the hearing in accordance with the following conditions and procedures;
4.4.4.3.8.1 The hearing will be closed to the public unless requested to be open by the appellant.
4.4.4.3.8.2 The appellant may be represented by legal counsel at his or her own expense.
4.4.4.3.8.3 The appellant and the University may offer any written evidence or oral testimony that is material to the issues.
4.4.4.3.8.4 The burden shall be upon the appellant to show by a preponderance of the credible evidence that:
4.4.4.3.8.4.1 Financial exigency was not in fact the reason for the initial decision to reduce academic positions; or
4.4.4.3.8.4.2 The decision to terminate the appellant as compared to another individual in the same discipline or teaching specialty was arbitrary and unreasonable based upon the evidence presented.
4.4.4.3.8.5 No other issues shall be heard or considered by the hearing committee.
4.4.4.3.8.6 The hearing committee shall make written findings of fact and recommendations to the President as soon as practical following the hearing. The President shall have the final decision to either accept or reject the recommendation of the hearing committee.
4.4.5 University Procedures
4.4.5.1 Flow of Information
In the procedures outlined below, information flows from the Department Chair to the Dean of the College or School and then to the Provost and the President.
4.4.5.2 Appointment: Initiation and Terms
- Recommendations for appointments shall be initiated by the Chair of each department or comparable academic unit or comparable academic unit, after consultation with appropriate departmental committees. After review by the appropriate Academic Dean or Deans (including, where relevant, Dean of the 成人头条 School) and the Provost, the recommendations shall be submitted to the President.
- Each faculty member shall be provided with a written statement of the terms of his/her appointment. Any such statement of terms must be issued by the President or designee.
4.4.5.3 Initial Appointment and Promotion: Criteria
The following are minimum expectations for initial appointments and promotions. Individual departments may impose more stringent standards, as long as these standards are approved by the Academic Dean and the Provost, and the standards are applied consistently within the department. The framework for decisions concerning rank outlined in 4.4.6 below should also be consulted.
4.4.5.3.1 Assistant Professor
Under normal circumstances, the Assistant Professor should:
- Hold the terminal degree appropriate for the discipline.
- Show clear ability or competence in teaching at the university level.
- Show evidence of commitment and ability to contribute to the knowledge base of the discipline.
- Qualify for membership in the 成人头条 Assembly and show potential for continued membership.
4.4.5.3.2 Associate Professor
The criteria that must be satisfied for appointment as, or promotion to, Associate Professor are similar to those for the granting of tenure, and are listed in 4.4.6.1.
4.4.5.3.3 Professor
Under normal circumstances, the Professor should:
- Have demonstrated excellence in teaching. Evidence may include the effective presentation of courses; development of new methodology or courses; active involvement in departmental and college curricular matters; active participation in student‑related activities; demonstrated interest in the welfare of students; and student, ex‑student, and peer evaluation.
- Have actively and regularly contributed to graduate education through the teaching of graduate courses and through the supervision of graduate research. If the department lacks a robust graduate program, the candidate must provide other evidence of capability of teaching at the graduate level.
- Be judged to be a mature scholar in his or her discipline. Research accomplishments should be evidenced by continued publication of significant scholarly works in prestigious academic journals, or by continued appropriate artistic expression; by national and international fellowships and awards won; and by national and international positions held in professional organizations. Quality and frequency of published works, exhibitions, or performance should be comparable to those in the discipline holding professorial rank at high-quality academic institutions.
4.4.5.4 Initiation of Promotion or Tenure Review Procedures
Under ordinary circumstances, consideration of an individual for promotion or tenure will be initiated by the department.
4.4.5.4.1 The department shall review the performance of all tenure-track faculty annually to evaluate progress toward tenure. Normally, the recommendation for tenure shall be made only in the sixth year of an individual's probationary service. Recommendation of an individual for early awarding of tenure should be based only upon truly outstanding performance.
4.4.5.4.2 The department shall review the performance of all tenured and tenure‑track faculty annually to evaluate progress toward tenure and determine eligibility for promotion. Recommendation for promotion should be based only on the criteria specified in 4.4.5.3.
4.4.5.5 Departmental Procedures
4.4.5.5.1 Documentation related to tenure and promotion recommendations will be assembled by the Department Chair, a standing committee of the department, or an ad hoc committee appointed by the Chair. The candidate will supply items a) through h) listed below.
4.4.5.5.2 The documentation shall include:
- A curriculum vitae;
- Copies of all publications;
- Copies of any relevant unpublished works, e.g., grant applications, preprints, technical reports, presentations at meetings;
- Material related to teaching performance, including e.g., student and/or peer evaluations, syllabi, graded tests and papers, reflections on teaching and learning, evidence of professional development in teaching and learning, evidence of engagement in the scholarship of teaching and learning, advising and mentoring philosophy.
- Information related to Department, College, and University service, and to profession-related service outside the University;
- A summary, no more than three pages in length, of the faculty member’s teaching, research/scholarship, and service. The section on teaching should include a summary of student evaluations and peer observations of teaching.
- At least three (3) objective letters of evaluation from reputable individuals in the discipline who have never been closely associated with the candidate or the University. Each external reviewer must hold at least the rank for which the candidate is applying and be employed by at least a peer or aspirant peer institution. These letters shall be solicited by the Department Chair. The candidate may submit names of potential external reviewers for the Department Chair’s consideration. Additional potential external reviewers may be solicited from the Dean. External reviewers must be apprised that letters must systematically assess the quality of candidates’ research, scholarship, and creative work.
- Other optional information or supporting documents that may be relevant to the decision, e.g., national awards and citations of scholarly or creative work.
4.4.5.5.3 All department members participating in a tenure or promotion decision shall have an opportunity to study the candidate's file in advance. The primary criterion for recommendations of tenure or promotion is the performance of the individual. Factors to be considered shall include, but are not limited to, an evaluation of:
- Teaching effectiveness;
- Quality of publications, including quality of the journals or other publication outlets;
- Quality of research efforts (e.g., competitive proposals, external funding);
- Quality of shows, performances, national or international awards, etc. for those in the visual and performing arts;
- Quality of profession‑related service outside the University;
- External letters of evaluation;
- The candidate's contributions to the Department, the College or School, the University, and the discipline;
- The candidate's potential for future outstanding intellectual development and future positive contributions to the University.
4.4.5.5.4 Departmental Vote
Only the tenured faculty in a department are eligible to vote on recommendations for tenure. Only faculty members in a department of a rank higher than the candidate are eligible to vote on recommendations for promotion. If there is not a sufficient number (3 or more) of faculty eligible to vote, the Dean of the College or School, in consultation with the Department Chair, shall appoint additional voting members from related disciplines.
4.4.5.5.5 Department Chair's Report
The Department Chair shall make an independent recommendation and shall prepare the candidate's documents for transmittal to the Dean. The candidate's file will include all documents, letters, a summary of votes, and recommendations.
4.4.5.6 College Procedures
4.4.5.6.1 Upon receipt of the recommendations and supporting materials from all departments, the Dean shall appoint a College advisory committee. The committee may include Department Chairs for tenure and promotion of faculty in the College or School.
4.4.5.6.2 The committee shall review the departmental recommendations and supporting material and write a separate recommendation to the Dean for each candidate, including the vote tally and the reasons for the decision. Dissenting members of the committee may submit their own signed reports to the Dean.
4.4.5.6.3 The Dean shall transmit to the Provost the curriculum vitae of each candidate, a summary of the reports from departmental Chairs and College committees, the voting tabulations, and the individual written opinions of those who have participated in the review, if deemed appropriate. In addition, the Dean shall make an independent recommendation for each candidate.
4.4.5.7 Actions of the Provost
4.4.5.7.1 The Provost may seek additional opinions regarding the contribution of a candidate to the Department, College or School, and University and initiate any other review he or she considers appropriate.
4.4.5.7.2 The Provost shall make recommendations to the President regarding each candidate with supporting rationale for the recommendation.
4.4.5.8 Provision of Information to Candidates and Opportunity for Submitting Additional Information
4.4.5.8.1 Tenure Decisions
The candidate for tenure will be informed by the Department Chair of all decisions at the departmental level. The Dean of the College or School will inform the Department Chair, who will in turn inform the candidate, of all decisions at the College or School level. The candidate may present additional information pertinent to the decision up to the level of the Provost.
4.4.5.8.2 Promotion Decisions
The candidate for promotion will be informed by the Department Chair of all decisions at the departmental level upon transmittal to the Dean. The Dean of the College or School will inform the Department Chair, who will in turn inform the candidate, of all decisions at the College or School level. The candidate may present additional information pertinent to the decision up to the level of the Provost.
4.4.6 Criteria for Tenure and Promotion at 成人头条
Because of the subjective nature of judgments and the diversity of academic disciplines, the criteria for tenure and promotion cannot be specified in such detail that they can be applied automatically. Nevertheless, the following guidelines and principles should be adhered to whenever possible:
- All University faculty must satisfactorily perform the minimum duties specified in 4.3 above, however, satisfactory performance alone is not sufficient for the awarding of tenure or promotion.
- Similar criteria for recommendations for promotion and tenure should be used in all units of the University. Academic units are permitted to use such procedures as they devise, provided they do not conflict with the provisions of this Handbook and have been approved by the Dean of the College or School and the Provost. Those procedures shall be communicated to faculty.
- As the University’s academic reputation grows, the standard of performance for awarding tenure and promotion will increase concomitantly. If a faculty member's accomplishments do not keep pace with the current standards of performance for tenure and promotion, that individual may not be awarded tenure or advanced in rank. It is not appropriate to argue that a candidate be awarded tenure or promotion because he or she meets the performance standards that were in effect when others in that department received tenure or promotion.
- Years in service is a factor but is not to be used as a primary justification for tenure or promotion recommendations.
4.4.6.1 Tenure
The single most important decision made by the University with respect to individual faculty members is the granting of tenure. Tenure is awarded by the University as part of its larger pledge to protect the academic freedom of faculty, regardless of whether their work or ideas are unpopular or controversial. Tenure is an important commitment made only to those faculty members whose performance in research, teaching, and service exceeds the level of satisfactory, and who have demonstrated significant potential for continued performance at that high level, and for developing new knowledge and practice of national and international significance. The success of College and University programs depends upon the qualifications of the tenured faculty. Therefore, tenure decisions will include consideration of factors related to planned programmatic changes.
4.4.6.1.1 The recommendation to award tenure will generally be made during the sixth year of full-time academic service, unless an individual's performance is truly outstanding.
4.4.6.1.2 Normally, only those faculty members with the terminal degree appropriate for the discipline may be awarded tenure.
4.4.6.1.3 Only faculty members who have demonstrated their competence in teaching may be awarded tenure. This competence may be demonstrated in diverse ways, e.g., development of superior course materials or textbooks and excellence in the supervision of research, practica, or internship work; in individual instruction in the fine arts; or in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Student and/or peer evaluation of teaching performance is an essential part of the demonstration of teaching competence.
4.4.6.1.4 A faculty member will not normally be granted tenure without clear evidence of competence and willingness to teach at all available levels of instruction, i.e., lower division, upper division, and graduate. Justification must be provided for a tenure recommendation for any faculty member who cannot teach at all three levels.
4.4.6.1.5 Minimum performance standards require a faculty member to remain current in the discipline; therefore, this factor alone is not a sufficient basis for the recommendation of tenure.
4.4.6.1.6 A faculty member will not be granted tenure without a clear history of significant contributions to the advancement of knowledge in his or her discipline. The faculty member must also be judged to be likely to continue making such contributions for the rest of the career. Therefore, the following criteria are offered as guidelines in evaluating scholarly activity of a faculty member:
- A history of publication in refereed academic journals or other refereed outlets at a rate appropriate for the discipline. The quality of the published work, as well as the quality of the outlet, is to be judged. There should be no attempt to impose any particular number of contributions necessary for recommendation for tenure and promotion or to balance quantity of contributions against quality.
- Research scholarship is broadly defined as inclusive of the Scholarship of Discovery, Integration, Application, Teaching, and Engagement, with each form of scholarly contribution considered legitimate in the development of 成人头条’s scholarly and creative profile.
- The importance of the work to the discipline should be judged not only by the departmental faculty, but also by the outside evaluators. For example, no fewer than three (3) letters of evaluation are used to assess the merit of the candidate’s research and scholarship.
- In order for a scholarly effort to have made a demonstrable contribution to a discipline, it should have been brought into a public forum by a process that includes peer review and an evaluation of the importance of the work by nationally-known scholars or practitioners. Usually, this means that works must appear in recognized outlets appropriate for the discipline (e.g., publications, competitive external funding, national performances or exhibits.). Experiments completed but not published, books or articles in draft form, classified documents, and undisplayed works of art, for example, are considered to be private works and not yet in the public domain. They may, of course, be considered along with an individual's other accomplishments, but they may not be used to satisfy this criterion.
- Routine applications of already accepted knowledge or of theory are not normally considered to be contributions to the advancement of knowledge in the discipline. The distinction between what is and is not a contribution to the advancement of knowledge may, at times, be subtle, but the burden of proof falls on the candidate.
4.4.6.1.7 Since participation in Department, College or School, and University activities is expected of all faculty members, such involvement is not adequate justification for awarding tenure.
4.4.7 Promotion
Minimum criteria for promotion to the various academic ranks are specified in 4.4.5.3 above.
4.4.8 Evaluation of Tenured Faculty Members
In accordance with The University of Texas Board of Regents’ Rules and Regulations, Rule 31102, the following is University policy for evaluation of tenured faculty members.
4.4.8.1 Scheduled Evaluations
4.4.8.1.1 Each tenured faculty member will be subject to an annual evaluation. This evaluation may be conducted in connection with the determination of merit raises, in accordance with the procedures set forth in 4.5 Evaluation of Faculty for Merit Salary Increase.
4.4.8.2 Comprehensive Periodic Evaluation
4.4.8.2.1 Scheduled Reviews. Tenured faculty members will undergo a comprehensive periodic evaluation no less than every six (6) years. This evaluation may be combined with the sixth annual review of the faculty member. The evaluation may not be waived for any tenured faculty member but may be deferred when the review period coincides with approved leave, comprehensive review for tenure, promotion, or appointment to an endowed position. No deferral of the comprehensive periodic evaluation of an active faculty member may extend beyond one year from the scheduled review. Notwithstanding the schedule for comprehensive periodic evaluation, a faculty member who has an unsatisfactory annual evaluation may be subject to further review and/or appropriate administrative action.
4.4.8.2.2 Review Categories. Each faculty member being reviewed will be placed in one of the following categories: a. exceeds expectations; b. meets expectations (satisfactory); c. does not meet expectations; or d. unsatisfactory.
4.4.8.2.3 Responsibilities Reviewed. The evaluation will be based on the faculty member’s professional responsibilities in teaching, scholarship, research, creative activities, service, and administration with consideration to the time devoted to each.
4.4.8.2.4 Notice of Evaluation. Reasonable individual notice of at least six months of intent to conduct a comprehensive periodic evaluation will be provided by the Department Chair (or equivalent administrator in non-departmental academic units). The evaluation will normally occur at the time of the annual review process.
4.4.8.2.5 Material Submitted. At the time of notification of the evaluation, the Department Chair will give the faculty member a copy of previous annual merit reports for the review period. The faculty member being evaluated will submit a résumé, including a summary statement of professional accomplishments, previous annual reports for the evaluation period, and teaching evaluations. The faculty member may provide a statement of professional goals, a proposed professional development plan, and any other additional materials the faculty member deems appropriate.
4.4.8.2.6 Departmental Tenured Faculty Review Committee. The comprehensive periodic evaluation will be carried out at the level of the faculty member’s department (or equivalent unit) by a committee of tenured faculty, elected by the voting members of the departmental faculty. The Chair of the Departmental Tenured Faculty Review Committee will be elected by the committee members.
4.4.8.2.7 Review of Evaluation. Evaluation will include review of the current résumé, evaluations of teaching for the review period (including student evaluations and other supporting evidence provided by the faculty member), annual reports for the review period, and all materials submitted by the faculty member. Upon the request of a faculty member under review, that individual will be provided with the opportunity to meet with the review committee.
4.4.8.2.8 Communication of Tenured Faculty Review Committee Results. The committee chair will communicate the committee’s evaluation results in writing to the faculty member and to the Department Chair. The Department Chair will provide the evaluation results to the Dean for review and appropriate action. In addition, the evaluation results will be reported by the Dean to the Provost, who will provide the results to the President. If the comprehensive periodic evaluation result is satisfactory, no further action will be taken.
4.4.8.2.9 Tenured Faculty Peer Review Committee. If the faculty member, the department chair (or equivalent) requests, or if and when the Dean determines the comprehensive periodic evaluation is unsatisfactory and that more intensive review of a faculty member is needed, then the Dean, in consultation with the tenured faculty in his or her college, will appoint an Individual-Tenured Faculty Peer Review Committee. The peer review committee members will be representative of the college or school and will be appointed on the basis of their objectivity and academic strength. In all colleges or schools, committees appointed to perform a more intensive review will be comprised only of faculty of the same or higher rank as the faculty member being reviewed. Each committee will elect its chair. The committee may request additional relevant information from the faculty member under review including reviews external to the University from scholars in the discipline. The faculty member under review may also submit additional materials. Upon the request of the faculty member under review, that individual will be provided an opportunity to meet with the peer review committee. The peer review committee will report its findings within six months of its constitution.
4.4.8.2.10 Communication of Tenured Faculty Peer Review Committee Results. Peer review evaluation results will be communicated in writing to the faculty member and to the Department Chair, the Dean, the Provost, and the President for review and appropriate action.
4.4.8.2.10.1 In cases where the faculty member’s performance is found satisfactory by the peer review committee, no further action is required. In this case, the peer review evaluation may be used to determine salary recommendations, nomination for awards, or other forms of performance recognition.
4.4.8.2.10.2 For individuals whose performance indicates they would benefit from additional institutional support, the evaluation may be used to provide such support, the evaluation may be used to provide such (e.g., teaching effectiveness assistance, counseling, or mentoring in research issues/service expectations).
4.4.8.2.10.3 For individuals found to be performing unsatisfactorily, review to determine if good cause exists for termination under the Board of Regents’ Rules and Regulations may be considered. All proceedings for termination of tenured faculty on the basis of periodic performance evaluation shall be only for incompetency, neglect of duty, or other good cause shown and must be conducted in accordance with the due process procedures of the Regents’ Rules and Regulations Rule 31008, including an opportunity for referral of the matter to alternative dispute resolution. Such proceedings must also include a list of specific charges by the President and an opportunity for a hearing before a faculty tribunal. In all such cases, the burden of proof shall be on the institution, and the rights of a faculty member to due process and academic freedom shall be protected.
4.4.8.3 Nothing in this institutional evaluation policy, or its interpretation, will be interpreted or applied to infringe on the tenure system, academic freedom, due process, or other protected rights nor to establish new term-tenure systems or to require faculty members to re-establish their credentials for tenure.
4.4.9 Initial Appointment and Promotion for Non-Tenure Track Faculty
Initial Appointments: All initial appointments will generally be for a period of up to one year. Appointments will be eligible for renewal based upon satisfactory performance, University needs and funding, and the terms and rank of the appointment.
4.4.9.1 Clinical/Research/Instruction Faculty
4.4.9.1.1 The following are minimum qualifications for initial appointments to and promotions within lines for clinical faculty, research faculty, and faculty of instruction (C/R/I). Refer to 4.1.2.2 for the definitions of each title, including the primary domains of responsibility (i.e., teaching, service, research, creative activity, clinical practice, or administration). Individual colleges, schools, and departments may impose additional or more specific standards, as long as such standards do not conflict with those contained herein, are approved by the Dean and the Provost, and are applied consistently within the academic unit.
4.4.9.1.2 Clinical Instructor: The Clinical Instructor will generally possess the education necessary to meet the respective certification requirements as required by the discipline and/or regional accrediting bodies, and the potential for developing excellence in each domain of responsibility assigned.
4.4.9.1.3 C/R/I Assistant Professor: The C/R/I Assistant Professor will generally possess a terminal degree appropriate for the discipline and the potential for developing excellence in each domain of responsibility assigned.
4.4.9.1.4 C/R/I Associate Professor: The C/R/I Associate Professor will generally possess:
(1) A terminal degree appropriate for the discipline.
(2) Five years of experience at the level of C/R/I assistant professor or equivalent experience.
(3) A demonstrated record of excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned.
(4) Evidence of significant impact in the discipline beyond the University.
4.4.9.1.5 C/R/I Professor: The C/R/I Professor will generally possess:
(1) A terminal degree appropriate for the discipline.
(2) Five years of experience at the level of C/R/I associate professor or equivalent experience.
(3) A demonstrated record of leadership.
(4) A demonstrated record of excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned.
(5) Evidence of significant impact in the discipline beyond the University and the region.
4.4.9.2 Lecturers
4.4.9.2.1 The following are minimum qualifications for initial appointments to and promotions within lines for Lecturers. Individual colleges, schools, and departments may impose additional or more specific standards, as long as such standards do not conflict with those contained herein, are approved by the Dean and the Provost, and are applied consistently within the academic unit.
4.4.9.2.2 Lecturer: The Lecturer will generally possess the experience or education necessary to meet the respective certification requirements as required by the discipline and/or regional accrediting bodies, and the potential for developing excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned.
4.4.9.2.3 Senior Lecturer: The Senior Lecturer will generally possess:
(1) Five years of experience at the level of Lecturer or equivalent experience.
(2) A demonstrated record of excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned.
(3) Evidence of significant impact in the discipline beyond their own classroom.
4.4.9.2.4 Distinguished Senior Lecturer: The Distinguished Senior Lecturer will generally possess:
(1) Five years of experience at the level of Senior Lecturer or equivalent experience.
(2) A demonstrated record of leadership.
(3) A demonstrated record of excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned.
(4) Evidence of significant impact in the discipline beyond the University.
4.4.9.3 Faculty of Practice
4.4.9.3.1 The following are minimum qualifications for initial appointments to and promotions within lines for faculty of practice. Individual colleges, schools, and departments may impose additional or more specific standards, as long as such standards do not conflict with those contained herein, are approved by the Dean and the Provost, and are applied consistently within the academic unit. The Chair or Program Director in consultation with the Dean will consider teaching or instructional experience in the determination of rank.
4.4.9.3.2 Assistant Professor of Practice: The Assistant Professor of Practice will generally possess:
(1) At least ten years of significant relevant professional experience that qualifies him or her to teach within the field, or five years of professional experience in the field and a terminal degree; and
(2) The potential for developing excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned.
4.4.9.3.3 Associate Professor of Practice: The Associate Professor of Practice will generally possess:
(1) Significant relevant professional experience within the field; or five years as an Assistant Professor of Practice and a demonstrated record of excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned; and
(2) Evidence of significant impact in the discipline beyond the University.
4.4.9.3.4 Professor of Practice: The Professor of Practice will generally possess:
(1) Significant relevant professional experience within the field; or five years as an Associate Professor of Practice and a demonstrated record of excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned;
(2) A demonstrated record of leadership; and
(3) Evidence of significant impact beyond the University and the region.
4.4.9.4 Promotion
Deans have the option of filling higher-level Non-Tenure-Track positions through a promotion process. The promotion process for Faculty of Instruction, Lecturers, Clinical Faculty, and Faculty of Practice is as follows:
1. The promotion process is initiated by the faculty member in consultation with the Chair.
2. Promotion to a higher rank position requires satisfactorily meeting the requirements for the position as evaluated by:
a. A statement by the candidate regarding accomplishments within each major domain of responsibility assigned and evidence of achievement.
b. A written assessment by a faculty committee to the Chair or Dean of each major domain of responsibility assigned.
c. Other appropriate criteria as established at the discretion of the unit.
d. Chair or Program Director’s written recommendation to the Dean.
e. Approval by the Dean.
f. Review of the recommendation by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
3. The candidate for promotion will be informed by the Department Chair of all recommendations at the departmental level upon transmittal to the Dean, though individuals who do not receive a promotion are not entitled to a statement of the reasons upon which the decision is based.
4.4.9.5 Length of Appointments
4.4.9.5.1 For Lecturers, Assistant Professors of Instruction, Assistant Clinical Professors, and Assistant Professors of Practice, an appointment may be for a period of up to one academic year.
4.4.9.5.2 For Senior Lecturers, Associate Professors of Instruction, Associate Clinical Professors, and Associate Professors of Practice, employed by 成人头条 in that role for more than one year with a faculty appointment greater than 0%, in the event of a decision not to reappoint a faculty member outlined within this section, written notice will be given no later than August 1st that the subsequent year will be the terminal academic year of appointment, except in cases where termination is for good cause.
4.4.9.5.3 For Distinguished Senior Lecturers, Professors of Instruction, Clinical Professors, and Professors of Practice, employed by 成人头条 in that role for more than one year with a faculty appointment greater than 0%, in the event of a decision not to reappoint a faculty member outlined within this section, written notice will be given no later than August 1st that the appointment will end after two subsequent years, except in cases where termination is for good cause.