Appendix I. Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment Procedures | Faculty Handbook

Preamble

These procedures implement Michigan Technological University's Board of Trustees Policy on Tenure and Promotion and apply in all aspects of the process of tenure, promotion, and reappointment of tenure-track faculty of the university.

A well-designed tenure and promotion system attracts capable and highly qualified faculty, strengthens the university by enhancing faculty members' institutional loyalty, and encourages academic excellence by retaining and rewarding the most able scholars and researchers. Tenure and promotion imply selectivity and choice; they are awarded for academic and professional merit, not merely for longevity.

Tenure, promotion, and reappointment should also contribute to academic excellence. An equitable and widely-understood tenure, promotion, and reappointment system ensures that considerations of academic quality will be the basis for academic personnel decisions.

Procedures must be explicit and well understood, give consideration to individual privacy of candidates, and be equitable. The general policies and procedures to be used should be widely known within departments, schools, and colleges. Annual review of faculty members will help to ensure openness of tenure and promotion processes, and provide feedback crucial to faculty development and growth.

A formal statement of the areas in which candidates for tenure, promotion, and reappointment (TPR) will be evaluated, is necessary, but not sufficient, for the TPR task. The wide variety of academic and professional fields, and the broad range of programs within Michigan Technological University ("the University"), make the development of detailed performance criteria that are equally applicable to all fields an impossible task. Rather, general and broad guidelines will permit the exercise of skilled professional and academic judgment.

Faculty members and administrators share an important responsibility in providing evaluations of merit that guide decisions about academic tenure, promotion, and reappointment. This responsibility involves the application of academic and professional judgment, in a framework of shared authority, among various levels of review and between faculty and administrative bodies. At each level of the review process all recommendations from prior levels of review should be given serious consideration in all tenure, promotion, and reappointment recommendations. External peer reviews by knowledgeable colleagues should be understood to be an important feature of all tenure and promotion cases. All persons involved in the tenure, promotion, or reappointment processes should act in a professional manner and respect the candidate's rights to privacy.

It is likely that the specific expectations for granting of tenure, for reappointment, and for promotion will differ among academic units ¹. Also, the University standards for tenure, promotion, or reappointment may change with time. Within an academic unit, expectations shall be consistent for contemporaneous cases, except for cases involving early granting of tenure (See Sec. 5.6. Early Tenure).

A faculty member holding the academic rank of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor, and with an appointment of seventy five percent of full-time or greater, is eligible for tenure, provided the applicable letter of appointment specifies the position as "tenure-track." Only those members of the Michigan Tech faculty who are either (i) tenured, or (ii) whose appointments are specified as "tenure-track" are covered by these procedures.

Responsibilities of Each Academic Unit

Each academic unit (department or school) is responsible for defining the procedures it will use within the unit to formulate tenure, promotion, and reappointment recommendations. These procedures will form part of the unit's charter and must be consistent with the policies and procedures of the University.

The following issues must be addressed in the unit's procedures:

Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment (TPR) Committee. A single, standing Tenure Promotion and Reappointment committee will be established with responsibility for all tenure, promotion, and reappointment recommendations.
Membership of the TPR committee. The eligibility, terms of office, method of selection, and number of members must be defined. Only tenured faculty members are eligible to serve on the committee. Department chairs and school deans and those holding administrative appointments outside the department are not eligible for service.
Role of the academic unit's chair or school dean and faculty in the recommendation process. The procedures must specify the roles of the committee and the unit administrator in tenure, promotion, and reappointment recommendations consistent with the procedures described in the University Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment Procedures.
Areas for evaluation and guidelines for performance. Each academic unit will identify in its procedures the areas in which candidates for reappointment, tenure or promotion will be evaluated. The identified areas must include instructional quality and contribution to the Michigan Tech educational mission, independent research and other scholarly activities, professional service (both internal and external to the University), and the academic responsibility and academic citizenship required for these activities. Other areas consistent with the University mission may also be included. The procedures will give performance guidelines for reappointment, tenure and promotion to each academic rank and will list the types of accomplishments that will be considered in formulating recommendations in each area. The performance guidelines will not normally state specific criteria for performance.
Letters of Appointment. Letters of appointment address issues such as particular duties and expectations for performance, start dates in title, the start of the tenure probationary period, the mandatory tenure review date and define the academic unit in which tenure will be considered for those faculty having split appointments. Letters of appointment must be in accord with academic unit charters and with University policies and procedures concerning tenure, promotion, and reappointment. Letters of Appointment will include as attachments copies of the Procedures of the academic unit, the University Tenure and Promotion Policy and the Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment Procedures. Letters will include the statement that no oral representations can modify the written Letter of Appointment or the written Charter, Policy or Procedures.
External Evaluations. External evaluations are important in cases involving tenure and/or promotion. Units will identify procedures for identifying and soliciting scholars external to the university to evaluate candidates and will utilize such evaluations in making recommendations for promotion and/or tenure. Normally all letters received will be included in the candidate's review folder. Promotion and tenure folders will contain information identifying the scholars, the relevance of their evaluation for the recommendation in question and any relationship between the external evaluator and the person being evaluated. Letters from external reviewers will be considered confidential personnel communications and will be available for use by only those parties directly involved in the review process. Candidates for promotion and/or tenure will not have access to external evaluations. The University will hold such letters in confidence to the fullest extent consistent with law.
Progress Evaluations. The unit will define procedures for administering progress evaluations. It is essential that probationary faculty receive assessments of their progress toward tenure. Each non-tenured, tenure-track faculty member must receive a written, individual evaluation on at least an annual basis. This evaluation will be based, in part, on an assessment by the unit TPR committee. It will be the responsibility of the chair or school dean of the candidate's principle academic unit to provide the written evaluation. The annual review of the year prior to the last year of the tenure probationary period year will remind candidates that they will be required to complete a tenure review in the following year. The faculty member being evaluated will be presented with the evaluation and asked to acknowledge its receipt by signing and dating the original. This acknowledgment does not imply agreement with the evaluation. If candidates refuse to sign the evaluation they will be informed that the evaluation will still form a part of their permanent record. Candidates for promotion and/or tenure are reminded that satisfactory annual reviews do not imply that promotion and/or tenure will be granted. Unit TPR committees and chairs/deans are reminded that frank evaluation of progress will be most useful to candidates in achieving tenure and/or promotion.

Time Table

The Provost will establish a timetable for Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment reviews during August or early September of each academic year. This timetable will list deadlines for candidates to express their intention to be considered for promotion and or tenure, for submission of the application packet by the candidate to the academic unit, for completion of academic unit and college or inter-school committee reviews and for recommendations by deans. Sufficient time will be allowed for each level of review.

Start Dates of Appointments and Probationary Periods

For all purposes of Promotion, Tenure and Reappointment, a faculty member whose initial appointment commences on or after November 1 is considered to have begun service with the start of the subsequent academic year, unless it is specified otherwise in the applicable letter of appointment. A tenure-track faculty member joining the University prior to November 1 is deemed to have begun service at the beginning of the same academic year. In no case will the probationary period start later than the beginning of the subsequent academic year.

Reappointment

"Reappointment" is the offer of a new contract (other than a terminal-year contract) to a current, non-tenured, tenure-track faculty member during the tenure probationary period.

Annual reviews of tenure-track faculty members who are within the probationary period are mandatory prior to a decision on reappointment. This does not preclude consideration for tenure prior to the mandatory year. (See Sec. 5.6. Early Tenure)

Within the probationary period, reappointment is normally based on individual performance as defined by the academic unit. Offers of reappointment may be constrained by financial exigencies of the University, or major shifts in programmatic emphasis that diminish the faculty member's ability to contribute to the goals of the unit.

4.1. Lengths of Appointments and Reappointments

Initial probationary appointments of tenure-track faculty are for two academic years. Renewals of such appointments, up to the mandatory time for tenure consideration, normally are for two academic years.

4.2. Academic Review

Consideration for reappointment begins with a review performed by the TPR committee of the academic unit where the candidate's principal academic appointment resides (i.e., the department or school where the candidate holds an appointment of fifty percent or more of full-time). The TPR committee will apply professional and scholarly judgment in evaluating the candidate's academic performance. The committee sends its written evaluation and recommendation to the chair or school dean of the academic unit; the chair or dean also makes a written recommendation on reappointment of the candidate. All recommendations must indicate whether reappointment is recommended.

4.2.1. College of Sciences and Arts, College of Engineering

The department TPR committee's recommendation and the department chair's recommendation go to the dean of the college. The dean formulates a separate written recommendation on reappointment for each candidate and sends it, along with the department committee's and chair's recommendations, to the Provost. The dean's statement must indicate whether reappointment is recommended. Simultaneously, the dean is to inform the candidate, in writing, whether or not reappointment is recommended. In cases where the recommendation is against reappointment, the dean may, upon the request of the candidate, provide a written statement of the reason(s) for the negative recommendation, specifying areas where the candidate's performance is deficient.

4.2.2. School of Forest Resources and Environmental Science, School of Business and Economics, School of Technology

The school committee's written recommendation and the dean's written recommendation on reappointment go to the Provost. Simultaneously, the dean is to inform the candidate, in writing, whether or not reappointment is recommended. In cases where the recommendation is against reappointment, the dean may, upon the request of the candidate, provide a written statement of the reason(s) for the negative recommendation, specifying areas where the candidate's performance is deficient.

4.2.3. University Review

Following receipt of the dean's recommendation on reappointment, the Provost recommends to the President either (i) a one-year (terminal) appointment, or (ii) a two-year reappointment. The President will decide on the reappointment recommendation to the Board of Trustees.

The President will inform the Provost of the recommendation to be presented to the Board of Trustees. The Provost will promptly notify the candidate of the recommendation. In cases where the recommendation is a one-year, terminal appointment, the Provost may, upon the request of the candidate, provide a written statement of the reason(s) for the recommendation, specifying areas where the candidate's performance is deficient.

Tenure

Tenure is a status that may be granted a faculty member after a probationary period and appropriate review. Only the Board of Trustees may grant tenure.

The status of being tenured is one form of protection from summary dismissal. In addition, tenure is designed to protect those rights associated with academic freedom. Tenure should serve to safeguard the right of free expression and risk-taking inquiry, and the integrity of decision-making in the academic community. Both tenure and academic freedom are bound to an implicit social compact which recognizes they serve important purposes and provide fundamental benefits to society. Tenure does not protect a faculty member from dismissal for cause as defined in the Policy on Academic Tenure and Promotion or for financial emergencies as defined in the Policy on Financial Emergencies.

5.1. Tenure Probationary Periods/Mandatory Tenure Review

The tenure probationary period for a faculty member initially appointed at the rank of Assistant Professor is six years, unless it is extended according to Sec. 5.1.1 and Sec. 5.1.2. of these procedures. The tenure probationary period for a faculty member initially appointed at the rank of Associate Professor is four years, unless it is extended according to Sec. 5.1.1. and Sec. 5.1.2. The tenure probationary period for a faculty member initially appointed at the rank of Professor is two years, unless it is extended according to Sec. 5.1.1. and Sec. 5.1.2.

For purposes of these tenure procedures, periods of continuous appointment as a tenure track faculty member are included in the total period of service for the tenure probationary period. This generally includes unpaid periods such as summer terms and approved leaves of absence within otherwise continuous employment and service.

Periods of service under non-tenure-track appointment at Michigan Tech are excluded from the probationary period.

A faculty member in the final year of the tenure probationary period is to receive a tenure review, encompassing reviews at the levels of the academic unit, college or inter-school (See Sec. 5.4.2.2), and the University. This does not preclude consideration for tenure prior to the final year of the tenure probationary period (See Sec. 5.6. Early Tenure).

5.1.1. Extension of the Probationary Period

The probationary period will be extended by one year, but not more than 2 years total, for each child: 1) Born to or legally adopted by the Candidate or his or her spouse during the probationary period; or 2) over whom full time physical custody is awarded to the Candidate or his or her spouse during the probationary period by any court having jurisdiction. Written notification must be given by the Candidate or the Candidate's Chair or Dean to the Provost prior to November 15 of the final year of the tenure probationary period to entitle the Candidate to this extension.

5.1.2. Exceptional Extension of the Probationary Period

Exceptional circumstances may sometimes effect a prolonged disruption of professional responsibilities during the tenure probationary period, requiring extensive sick leave, unpaid leave, or substantial formal reduction of professional responsibilities. A faculty member encountering such circumstances may request a one-year extension of the tenure probationary period. The Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment considers all such requests and makes a recommendation to the Provost on each.

This request should be made within a reasonable period of time following the period of exceptional circumstances, and in no case after November 15 of the final year of the tenure probationary period. It should be accompanied by a recommendation from the cognizant department chair and the dean of the college, or from the dean of the cognizant school. The request should clearly demonstrate that both of the following conditions are satisfied:

the exceptional circumstances requiring the extension were such that normal conduct of professional responsibilities could not reasonably be expected;
exclusive of the period of exceptional circumstances, the faculty member had made reasonable progress toward achieving tenure.

Notification of the final decision in each case will be made in writing to the faculty member, department chair, and dean by the Provost who has the sole discretion to approve such extensions. Application for extension of the tenure probationary period does not extend the period. The faculty member's original probationary period will continue to apply unless an extension of the probationary period is granted.

An individual's tenure probationary period at Michigan Technological University may be extended by only one year per request, for up to a maximum of two years total, regardless of the combination of circumstances.

5.2. Promotion at Time of Tenure

Granting of tenure to a faculty member with the rank of Assistant Professor level carries with it promotion to the rank of Associate Professor.

At the Associate Professor level, tenure may or may not be coincident with promotion to the rank of Professor.

5.3. Tenure Applications

The preparation of the application file for promotion and/or tenure is the responsibility of the candidate. Candidates are also responsible for assuring the accuracy and completeness of all information contained in their application file. Files are to be prepared in a standard format established by the Provost. In no case shall the file be assembled by the department chair, school dean or unit TPR committee. Candidates should seek advice from their department chair or school dean regarding the information to be included in the file. Files will be considered complete once they are submitted to the academic unit for consideration. Inclusion of new information by the candidate during the review process shall be limited to notification that papers or books listed as submitted have been accepted for publication or pending grants have been funded. External peer evaluation letters which arrive after the beginning of the review process may be added to the file but the application must be reevaluated at all previously completed levels of the review process. Once the application is submitted the candidate will not have access to the file or recommendations added by reviewing committees or individuals. Unless otherwise required by law, deliberations and recommendations of reviewing parties will not be subject to discovery until the review process is completed.

5.4. Reviews of Tenure Applications - Overview

There are three sequential levels of review: academic unit, college or inter-school, and university. All levels of review shall be concerned in some measure with both substance (e.g., teaching, scholarship, service) and procedure (consistency, adequacy and equity). Participants at each level of review have as their primary responsibility evaluation of the qualifications and potential for further development as a scholar of each candidate for tenure, exercising professional judgment regarding the accomplishments and productivity of the candidate. All recommendations must clearly indicate whether tenure is recommended. Recommending parties are reminded to give the case of each candidate all due consideration in the evaluation of their qualifications and to apply relevant standards.

5.4.1. Review by the Academic Unit

The academic unit's review is performed by the TPR committee of the academic unit where the candidate's principal academic appointment resides (i.e., the department or school where the candidate holds an appointment of a least fifty percent of full-time). This review will bring the professional and scholarly judgment of the committee to an evaluation of the candidate's academic performance.

For cases involving early tenure (i.e., consideration prior to the mandatory year), the review process is the same as in the mandatory year, except when the TPR committee of the candidate's academic unit chooses not to advance the file. (See Sec. 5.6. Early Tenure)

A candidate who does not hold an appointment of a least fifty percent of full-time in any one academic unit or who holds two appointments of fifty percent of full time in two different academic units, must have it specified, at the time of initial tenure-track appointment to the Michigan Tech faculty, the academic unit which will consider the tenure application(s). Under no circumstances will an individual be considered, either simultaneously or sequentially, for tenure by more than one academic unit. To provide consistency in joint appointment promotion procedures, the following process should be followed:
a. The majority unit TPR committee, in writing, asks the chair of the minority unit for a letter with specific topics the letter should address, and with specific topics the letter should not address (see Senate Procedure 712.1.1).
b. The chair of the minority unit should seek and obtain input from the minority unit TPR committee and take that input into account when preparing the letter.
c. The minority chair submits the letter, addressing the topics and adhering to the constraints, to the majority unit TPR committee for their consideration.
d. The majority unit will provide the minority unit with a minimum of two weeks to prepare and submit their letter to the majority unit. This deadline should be timed no later than two weeks before the TPR recommendation is due to the Dean or majority unit Chair.
e. The letter is not placed in the dossier; it is only reviewed by the majority unit TPR committee and used by that committee to inform their recommendation.
f. In addition to the letter request, the majority unit is encouraged to solicit referees from the faculty member and minority unit that can speak to the body of work contributed to the minority unit.

5.4.2. Review by the College or by the Inter-school Committee

Reviews at the college or inter-school level and at the administrative level bring broader faculty judgments to bear on the merit of the case, will apply general standards of quality across academic units, and will check the equity and adequacy of procedures at prior levels of review. At each level of review the reviewing committee or administrator may seek clarification from prior reviewing committees or administrators.

5.4.2.1. College of Sciences and Arts, College of Engineering

Within each college, each department selects one representative to serve as a member of the respective College Promotion and Tenure Committee. Each department establishes the procedure for selecting its representative. All members of the College Promotion and Tenure Committee must hold tenure. No member of the college committee may concurrently serve on both a departmental TPR committee and the college committee. No member of the College Promotion and Tenure Committee should participate at the department level in any votes on candidates for tenure.

5.4.2.2. Inter-School Committee

Each school (School of Forest Resources and Environmental Science, School of Business and Economics, School of Technology) selects two representatives to serve on the Inter-school Promotion and Tenure Committee. Each school establishes the procedure for selecting its representatives. All members of the Inter-school Promotion and Tenure Committee shall hold tenure. No member of the inter-school committee may concurrently serve on both a departmental TPR committee and the inter-school committee. No member of the Inter-school Promotion and Tenure Committee should participate at the school level in any votes on candidates for tenure.

5.5. Review Sequence - Tenure Recommendations

5.5.1. College of Sciences and Arts, College of Engineering

5.5.1.1. Department review.

Recommendations on tenure come from the department TPR committee and from the department chair. The committee makes a written recommendation on the granting of tenure for each faculty member in the department who is under consideration for tenure. The recommendation of the TPR committee is forwarded to the department chair. The chair will then make a separate, independent written recommendation for each case and forward it, along with the department TPR committee's intact recommendation, to the college promotion and tenure committee. The recommendations of the TPR committee and the chair must indicate whether tenure is recommended. Both the department TPR committee's recommendation and the chair's recommendation become part of the candidate's tenure application file.

5.5.1.2. College review.

The college promotion and tenure committee considers all tenure applications submitted by the departments and develops recommendations on each. The promotion and tenure committee's written recommendation on each tenure application is added to the candidate's tenure application file and forwarded to the dean of the college.

The dean formulates a separate written statement on each case, to be presented to the Provost. In formulating a recommendation, the dean may seek clarification of issues and advice only from the candidate, members of the department TPR committee, the chair of the department, members of the college committee, external referees, the university bodies charged with investigation of misconduct or responsible for implementation of policy/procedures, or legal counsel.

The dean's statement must indicate whether the granting of tenure to the candidate is recommended. Simultaneously, the dean is to inform the candidate, in writing, whether or not the granting of tenure was recommended. In cases where the recommendation is against the granting of tenure, the dean may, upon the request of the candidate, provide a written statement of the reason(s) for the negative recommendation, specifying areas where the candidate's performance is deficient.

5.5.2. School of Forest Resources and Environmental Science, School of Business and Economics, School of Technology

5.5.2.1. School review.

Recommendations on tenure come from the school TPR committee. The committee formulates a written recommendation indicating whether tenure is recommended for each faculty member in the school who is applying for tenure.

The candidate's tenure application file is then transmitted to the dean of the school who forwards the application, without comment, to the inter-school tenure committee.

5.5.2.2. Inter-school committee review.

The Inter-school Promotion and Tenure committee considers all tenure applications submitted by each of the schools and develops a recommendation on each case. The Inter-school Promotion and Tenure committee's written recommendation indicating whether tenure is recommended for each tenure application is added to the candidate's tenure application file and forwarded to the dean of the cognizant school.

5.5.2.3. Dean's recommendation.

The dean formulates a separate written statement on each tenure application from the school. The statement is added to the candidate's tenure application file and presented to the Provost. In formulating a recommendation, the dean may seek clarification of issues and advice only from the candidate, members of the school TPR committee, members of the inter-school committee, external referees, the university bodies charged with investigation of misconduct, or legal counsel.

5.5.3. University review.

The candidate's tenure application file, including the dean's recommendation statement, is transmitted to the Provost. The Provost examines the tenure application file for adequacy and consistency of review, and reviews each case on its merit before making a recommendation to the President. The President decides whether a recommendation for tenure will be presented to the Board of Trustees, and transmits that decision to the Provost. The Provost notifies the candidate promptly as to whether the granting of tenure will be recommended to the Board of Trustees. In cases where the granting of tenure is not recommended, the Provost may, upon the request of the candidate, provide a written statement of the reason(s) for the negative decision, specifying areas where the candidate's performance is deficient.

5.5.4. Transmittal to the Board of Trustees.

The President will transmit to the Board of Trustees all positive recommendations for tenure. Only the Board of Trustees is authorized to grant tenure.

5.6. Early Tenure

A faculty member may be considered for tenure prior to the mandatory year. Candidates for tenure must meet the same cumulative standards of performance as candidates in their mandatory years. Candidates should consult their chair or school dean and unit TPR committee chair about their chances of successfully achieving early tenure prior to application.

The following procedures are used for early tenure cases:

The candidate begins the early tenure process by submitting a complete promotion application file to the TPR committee of the academic unit.
After the TPR committee completes its review of the early tenure application, the candidate is notified of the committee vote. The candidate then decides whether the process should stop or should continue and the application be submitted to the department chair/school dean.
Once a candidate's application has been forwarded to the department chair/school dean, the process, including appeals, is exactly the same as it is in the mandatory year.
Applicants for early tenure may withdraw their application for early tenure, without prejudice, at any time during the process.

A faculty member is not limited in the number of times he or she may be considered for early tenure by the academic unit's TPR committee. However, beyond the departmental or school TPR committee, a faculty member may go through the early tenure process only once. Thus, a faculty member will receive full tenure consideration (beyond the department or school TPR Committee) at most twice: once prior to the mandatory year and once during the mandatory year. Applications withdrawn by the candidate that have been reviewed at levels beyond the academic unit TPR committee count as a tenure consideration. (Exception: See Sec. 7.3. Duties and Powers of the Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment)

5.7. Unsolicited Information

Unsolicited information and informal opinions received by reviewers in the process of a tenure review complicate the review process. If such information concerns the academic performance of the candidate as defined in the unit's charter in accord with Section 1.d., the information should not be made a part of the tenure file and should be given no weight in the decision process. Candidates will not be informed of such communications. However, copies of the unsolicited information must be retained by the party receiving them. If unsolicited information alleges a violation of university policy or procedures by any party in a tenure, promotion or reappointment application or review, the party receiving the information should immediately inform the Provost who will decide if the allegation merits a review by the Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment. Unsolicited information alleging discrimination against a candidate should be immediately brought to the attention of the Provost who will forward the allegation to the appropriate university body.

5.8. Allegations of Misconduct

Allegations of major misconduct, such as, but not limited to, scientific misconduct or sexual harassment, brought against a candidate after the review process begins immediately suspends the review process. Candidates will be informed of such allegations in accordance with the appropriate university policy. Such allegations will be investigated expeditiously by the appropriate university bodies. Reasonable time limits may be placed on the candidate to respond to the allegations in order that the investigation may be completed in time to continue the review process. If such allegations are deemed groundless, the review process will recommence at the point it was suspended. If the allegations are found to have merit, the report of the investigating body will be added to the candidate's record and the review process will start over at the departmental or school level. Delays in meeting the established time schedule for the review process due to the investigations of alleged misconduct will not be considered a violation of the procedures.

The Provost will set a date for completion of investigations of misconduct allowing time for an expeditious review of the tenure application by all parties in the review process. In the event that investigations of misconduct cannot be completed by the date set by the provost, the review process will recommence at the point it was suspended and the file will be evaluated without regard to the allegations.

Promotion

Academic promotion refers to an elevation in academic rank, either from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor, or from Associate Professor to Professor. Academic promotion may be conferred only by the Board of Trustees. Academic Promotion may or may not be simultaneous with the granting of tenure. (Exception: See Sec. 5.2. Promotion at Time of Tenure)

Academic promotion coincident with the granting of tenure (i.e., from Assistant Professor without Tenure to the rank of Associate Professor with Tenure, or from Associate Professor without Tenure to the rank of Professor with Tenure) is considered under the procedures in Sec. 5. Tenure. Other cases of academic promotion (i.e., from Assistant Professor without Tenure to Associate Professor without Tenure, or from Associate Professor with Tenure to Professor with Tenure) are considered under the procedures in this section.

A faculty member may request promotion consideration by the department's TPR committee in any year. The decision to pursue consideration, beyond the department level, should be made by the faculty member, in consultation with the department's TPR committee and the chair of the department or dean of the school. A faculty member is entitled to seek promotion review at the college and university levels against the advice of the department's TPR committee and/or the chair of the department. However, neither the TPR committee nor the chair of the department are under any obligation to endorse the case.

6.1. Review Procedures for Promotion: The review procedures for promotion exactly parallel those of application for tenure, Sections 5.4. and 5.5, with the substitution of the word Promotion for Tenure

Appeals

Candidates who are not reappointed, or who are denied tenure or promotion, may appeal, in writing, to the Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment. All appeals must be filed with the Committee within 30 calendar days following the date of notification by the Provost of a negative recommendation to the President. No other route of appeal is provided. Appeals must specifically list the basis for the appeal including the aspect of the policy or procedure that the candidate believes was violated. All such written appeals must be delivered to the Office of the Provost who will forward them to the committee.

7.1. Bases for Appeals

The only grounds for appeals of negative recommendation for reappointment, tenure or promotion are the failure of a recommending party or parties to follow the Tenure and Promotion Policy, the Faculty Staffing Policy and/or the Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment Procedures.

7.2. Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment

The Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment is a fact-finding and advisory body that functions independent of the University Senate and the administration. All appeals of negative recommendations on tenure, promotion or reappointment of tenure-track faculty, negative recommendations on promotion of tenured faculty, and dismissal of faculty members for cause, are under the jurisdiction of the Committee as are interpretation of university policy and procedures on tenure, promotion, and reappointment.

7.2.1. Eligibility for Service

Members of the faculty who hold tenure at Michigan Tech are eligible to serve on the Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment, with the following exceptions:

members of the faculty who hold administrative appointments. Administrative appointments are considered to include department chairs, deans, directors, the Vice Provost, the Provost, vice presidents, and the President;
members of the faculty who are on leave-of-absence (including sabbatical leave);
faculty members who hold emeritus status;
faculty members who have served on the Committee (other than as designated alternates) for more than two years of the immediately preceding four-year period;
no more than one faculty member from the same department.

All questions regarding eligibility for service on the Committee are referred to the Executive Committee of the University Senate. The ruling of the Executive Committee is final.

7.2.2. Composition and Terms

The Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment consists of five (5) members of the faculty of the University, each serving a two-year term. Committee members are selected as follows:

three members elected by secret ballot of the tenured and tenure-track faculty; election to be administered by the University Senate, as specified in Sec. 7.2.3;
two members appointed by the President.

Terms expiring December 31, 2005 and bi-annually thereafter:

one member elected by the tenured and tenure-track faculty;
one member appointed by the President.

Terms expiring December 31, 2004 and bi-annually thereafter:

two members elected by the tenured and tenure-track faculty;
one member appointed by the President.

A vacancy on the committee due to a resignation is filled by a designated alternate (appointed by the Executive Committee of the University Senate or by the President of the University if the vacancy is a presidential appointment) until such time as the seat can be filled by its regular mechanism (election, or appointment by the President). A designated alternate must meet the same eligibility criteria as a member of the Committee.

7.2.3. Method of Election by Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty

The University Senate will conduct an election by the tenured and tenure-track faculty annually during fall semester to fill the regularly-expiring term(s). In the event of a vacancy in a remaining faculty-elected term, there will be a simultaneous election to fill the unexpired portion of that term.

The Senate will solicit nominations from within each department and school. No department or school may nominate more than one person for a given vacancy. All nominees must meet the stated eligibility criteria.

The election will be by secret ballot of the tenured and tenure-track faculty of the University. The nominee receiving the largest number of valid votes will serve on the Committee.

7.2.4. Designated Alternates

Members are excused from service when the Committee is considering appeals of cases emanating from their home academic unit, or when the member's participation may represent a conflict of interest. In those situations, or any other cases where fewer than five members are available to consider an appeal, vacancies are filled by eligible designated alternates, to be appointed by the Executive Committee of the University Senate or by the President if the excused member is a presidential appointee.

7.3. Duties and Powers of the Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment

7.3.1. Review of Appeal of Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment Recommendations

The Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment considers appeals of negative recommendations for tenure, promotion, or reappointment within the probationary period. The Committee is a fact-finding body that can recommend corrective action in cases where it finds substantive merit to an appeal. The Committee cannot grant tenure, cannot grant a promotion, and cannot offer an appointment.

In cases where the Committee finds substantive errors or omissions in the interpretation of policy or application of procedures on the part of one or more recommending bodies participating in a promotion, tenure, or reappointment review, it can recommend a new review, beginning at the appropriate level or stage of the review process as determined by the Committee. In such cases, the Committee will convey an explanation of the specific errors or omissions noted to the appropriate recommending bodies and to the candidate. Recommendation for a new review is made by the committee to the Provost and the President who may order such a recommended review. In addition to recommending a new review, the Committee may recommend other actions consistent with the finding of error to the Provost and the President.

New partial or complete reviews ordered by the President might not be completed until sometime during the candidate's originally specified terminal year. A second review which does not result in the granting of tenure does not affect the candidate's terminal year status. Candidates who are not granted tenure subsequent to a second review are not entitled to an additional "terminal year" of employment.

In the case of an applicant for early tenure who receives a negative recommendation and whose appeal is consistent with the policy on early tenure, the Committee may also recommend a new review of the candidate. Such a review does not constitute a second consideration for tenure under Sec. 5.6. Early Tenure.

7.3.2. Interpretation of Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment Policy and Procedures

In case of any question in the interpretation of the University Tenure and Promotion Policy, of the Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment Procedures, or in the solution of any tenure problem arising from a situation not specifically covered in that policy or in these procedures, the matter shall be referred to the Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment. The Committee, after a thorough study, shall transmit its recommendation to the President of the University through the Provost. In every case, final decision rests with the Board of Trustees.

7.3.3. Investigations of Dismissal for Cause

Upon the written request of the faculty member concerned, or of the President, the committee shall investigate and issue a written report with respect to the dismissal of a faculty member for cause as defined in Board of Trustees Policy 6.4. Academic Tenure and Promotion.

7.4. Procedures of the Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment

Procedural rules for conducting all investigations will be drawn up by the Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment. These rules shall not abridge the rights of the faculty member and the administration to present evidence or to invite witnesses to testify or preclude the administration from conducting its own investigation. Because the Committee is a fact-finding and advisory body and not a judicial body, no legal counsel will be present during its investigations.

At all formal hearings of tenure cases, or cases of dismissal for cause, a complete record of the committee's proceedings shall be kept by tape recording or otherwise.

All such investigations shall be conducted in an expeditious manner.

All deliberations, communications and recommendations of the Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment are confidential except to the extent that dissemination may be required by law. Unless otherwise required by law no reports or information regarding the work of the Committee may be released to any third party by any member of the committee or administration and no tenure, promotion or reappointment case or dismissal for cause case may be discussed by any member of the committee with persons not officially concerned with the case.

All reports and recommendations of the Committee on each appeal, interpretation or investigation will be delivered to the Provost, the President, the appellant, and to any affected recommending bodies.

Disclosure

8.1. Disclosure of Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment Decisions

Each year, after final tenure, promotion, and reappointment decisions have been made by the Board of Trustees, the Provost shall report to the academic faculty:

the number of individuals granted tenure;
the number of individuals who applied for tenure and were subsequently denied tenure;
the number of individuals promoted.

8.2. Disclosure of Decisions Concerning Appeals

Each year, upon completion of consideration of all appeals, the Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment shall report to the academic faculty:

the number of tenure, promotion, or reappointment appeals received by the Committee;
the number of tenure, promotion, or reappointment appeals in which the Committee recommended a new review.

8.3. Disclosure of Route of Appeal

Each year the Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment shall report to the academic faculty:

the membership of the committee;
the mechanism for submitting appeals.

This information is to be reported to the academic faculty no later than March 1 of the subsequent academic year.

Revisions and Amendments

Revision of these Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment Procedures may be initiated by any member of the faculty, including administrators holding faculty appointments. All proposed amendments shall be submitted in writing to the President of the University Senate. The proposed amendment(s) will be forwarded to the Academic Policy Committee of the University Senate for review and/or revision. The Academic Policy Committee will provide a copy of the proposed amendments to the Committee on Academic Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment. The Academic Policy Committee will submit its recommendations to the University Senate.

Revisions to the Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment Procedures must be in the form of a Senate proposal. Adoption of any revision shall require approval by the University Senate, approval by a majority of the tenured and tenure-track faculty voting in a university-wide referendum, such vote to be conducted by the University Senate, followed by the approval of the Provost and the President. The Board of Trustees shall be informed of any revisions so approved.

1 "Academic unit" refers to academic departments and to the School of Forest Resources and Environmental Science, the School of Business and Economics, and the School of Technology.

Senate Procedure 709.1.1

Revised:
11/10/2023 - Updated to reflect language from Senate proposal 1-23.
11/17/2021 - Updated to to reflect the opportunity to request up to two exceptional extension requests.
05/04/2021 - Board Policy 16.4 no longer exists; it became Board Policy 6.4.
12/08/2016 - Annual Review: No changes made to content.
06/04/2015 - To reflect current University titles, "Board of Control" is now "Board of Trustees".
04/07/2015 - Annual Review: To reflect current practice, the email address for questions is now policy@mtu.edu. No changes made to content.
03/13/2014 - Annual Review: Updated Michigan Tech and Handbook banners, no changes made to content.
09/25/2013 - In section, 5.6 Early Tenure, in the first paragraph, the sentence "Candidates should consult their chair, school dean or unit TPR committee chair ..." now reads "Candidates should consult their chair or school dean and unit TPR committee chair...". Deleted item "ii. To be considered for tenure prior to the mandatory year, a candidate must receive a 2/3-approval vote from the entire TPR committee of the academic unit." and item "iii. In the event of a 2/3-majority vote of the TPR committee in favor of early tenure for the candidate, the committee forwards the recommendation to the chair or dean of the academic unit. If fewer than 2/3 of the members of the TPR committee vote in favor of early tenure for the candidate, the candidate is notified of the vote and the process stops for that academic year. No further action or appeal is possible during that academic year." Added a new item ii, which now reads: "ii. After the TPR committee completes its review of the early tenure application, the candidate is notified of the committee vote. The candidate then decides whether the process should stop or should continue and the application be submitted to the department chair/school dean." Item iv. previously read: "iv. Once a candidate has been approved by the TPR committee in the academic unit, the process, including appeals, is exactly the same as it is in the mandatory year." is renumbered and now reads: "iii. Once a candidate's application has been forwarded to the department chair/school dean, the process, including appeals, is exactly the same as it is in the mandatory year." Item v. is renumbered to iv. The last paragraph, the third sentence read: "Thus, a faculty member will receive full tenure consideration (beyond the department or school level) at most twice:..." now reads "Thus, a faculty member will receive full tenure consideration beyond the department or school TPR Committee) at most twice:..." Changed "Senate Procedure 707.1.1" to now read "Senate Procedure 709.1.1".
04/05/2013 - Annual Review: In section 7.2.1 Eligibility for Service, added paragraph "v. no more than one faculty member from the same department." and "Proposals 13-06, 20-06 and 9-07, Adopted by Senate, Proposals 13-06 and 20-06; April 5 2006. Adopted by Senate, Proposal 9-07: November 29, 2006, Approved by Administration, Proposals 13-06 and 20-06: April 17, 2006, Approved by Administration, Proposal 9-07: December 11, 2006, Accepted by Faculty Referendum, proposals 30-06 and 9-07: April 9, 2007, Accepted by Faculty Referendum, Proposal 13-06: December 12, 2008" now reads as "Senate Procedure 707.1.1"
09/26/2012 - From the History section, removed "Amendments to Proposal 7-00" which was not part of the original Proposal.
07/28/2011 - Annual Review: To reflect current University titles and practice, MTU is now Michigan Tech, and the email address for questions is now hbwebmaster.
07/06/2007 - Deleted Citizenship/Residency Requirement as per Proposal 9-07; Early Tenure Clarification as per Proposal 20-26; and format changes.