ARTP Policy


College of Arts & Letters

ARTP Policy

April 18, 2008

I. Composition of the ARTP Committees

A. The secondary ARTP Committees in the College Arts & Letters (hereafter called the “Committees”) shall each consist of five members plus an alternate. There shall be two kinds of Committees: two Retention Committees, and one Tenure & Promotion Committee. Retention Committees shall consist of tenured faculty at the rank of associate professor or above; The Tenure & Promotion Committee shall consist of tenured faculty at the rank of full professor. A Faculty ARTP Coordinator shall supervise the processes involved and be available for consultation and/or advice on procedural matters if necessary.

A faculty member remains eligible to serve on a Committee until the effective date of his/her retirement.

B. All faculty members shall be full-time tenured faculty. Faculty members with joint inter/intra-College appointments shall be contacted to determine which department they wish to represent.

C. All members of each Committee shall serve a two-year staggered term.

D. No Committee shall have more than two members from any department; no member of a departmental ARTP committee may serve on a College committee that will review a faculty member to be evaluated from that same department.

E. The Faculty ARTP Coordinator shall be a tenured faculty member of the College, elected by the Tenure & Promotion committee to serve as chair.

II. Creation of the Committees

The Dean shall produce a call for nominations.

A. Candidates for tenure and/or promotion shall be assigned to the Tenure & Promotion Committee, and candidates for retention shall be assigned to Retention Committees by lot. The process shall be conducted by the Dean in consultation with the Faculty ARTP Coordinator. Candidates should be distributed among the respective Committees as equally as possible. The Dean shall notify all probationary and tenured faculty of the assignments to Committees.

B. During the spring semester, the Dean shall produce a call for nominations for both (2) Retention Committees and one (1) Tenure & Promotion Committee. Probationary and tenured faculty of the College shall nominate members to the Committees.

C. As soon as possible after the formation of the slates of nominees, the Dean shall prepare an election ballot listing the slate for each Committee. The Tenure & Promotion Committee shall be designated “Committee A”; the Retention Committees shall be designated “Committee B” and “Committee C.” Only a plurality of votes shall be needed to elect. Nominees receiving the highest number of votes shall be elected, except that no more than two members of each department shall serve on a Committee. For each Committee, the faculty member elected with the smallest number of votes shall serve as the alternate.

D. Each Committee shall elect a chair. The Chair of Committee A shall be the Arts & Letters Faculty ARTP Coordinator. The Faculty Coordinator shall be available for consultation by all the Committees. The Faculty Coordinator shall serve for two years.

III. Duties of the ARTP Committee

A. Each Committee or its designee is responsible for ensuring that the primary level has followed departmental, college and university procedures for assembling and presenting its candidates’ WPAFs.

B. Each Committee shall receive from the primary levels WPAFs with performance evaluations and recommendations for faculty who are being considered for retention, tenure, and promotion. Before each Committee may review these files and proceed with RTP deliberations, the Dean, as custodian of the WPAFs, shall send each candidate a copy of the primary level’s evaluations and recommendations with a letter informing him/her that this material will be placed in his/her WPAF within 5 days, but that s/he has 7 10 calendar days following receipt of the notification to submit a rebuttal or a response. If a rebuttal or a response is received, it shall be placed in the WPAF and a copy shall be sent to all previous levels of review.

C. Each Committee shall keep a record of department chairs who are not members of the primary committee and who, therefore, must submit a separate evaluation and recommendation for each RTP candidate.

Each Committee shall require that each WPAF contain:

1. A Faculty Development Plan outlining how the candidate intends to organize his/her time in meeting teaching, creative/scholarly activity, and service obligations for the coming three-year period is required. The Plan should result from consultation between the candidate and the department chair or designated faculty member(s) representing the department and must be presented to the Primary Committee as a part of the WPAF. Subsequent revisions may occur at any time in the same manner, but not during a period of active review.

Faculty members should also prepare a one page statement reflecting on their teaching philosophy or their teaching experience from the previous review cycle.

The Faculty Development Plan is not a formal agreement or a contract, but rather a set of academic goals and objectives that the candidate intends to pursue in meeting his/her professional responsibilities, consistent with the department's performance expectations. It should be understood that meeting the goals and expectations of the Faculty Development Plan does not guarantee retention, tenure, or promotion.

For new hires, this Plan should be placed in the WPAF by the end of the first semester after appointment.

2. A signature page on which the candidate affirms that s/he is fully aware of the contents of the WPAF which will be submitted to the four review levels, and certifies that those references in the current indices which are not supported by materials in the file can be substantiated by documentation available in his/her office upon request;

3. A signed statement from the primary committee chair and, if applicable, the department chair, affirming that the departmental ARTP procedures were followed;

4. A separate evaluation and recommendation regarding the candidate’s retention, tenure, or promotion from those department chairs who are not members of their primary committee.

No Committee shall apply additional criteria beyond those used by the departments and mandated by the University.

D. If, during the review process, the absence of required evaluation documents is discovered, the file shall then be returned to the primary level with a request for completion of the file in a timely manner. The candidate shall indicate on the signature page (see D.1) that s/he is aware of the material provided.

E. All evaluative judgments and decisions of the Committee shall be based on the data in the faculty member’s WPAF.

F. All Committee members must be present when any substantive evaluations and final recommendation for retention, tenure or promotions are made. These deliberations and any record thereof shall be confidential.

G. Each final retention, tenure, or promotion recommendation submitted to the Dean by the appropriate Committee shall have been approved by a simple majority of the Committee.

H. Each Committee shall prepare a letter for each candidate, informing the Dean of its reasons for recommending (or not recommending) retention, tenure, or promotion. Before the WPAFs may be reviewed by the next level of review, i.e. the Dean, each candidate must be given a copy of the Committee’s letter, a copy shall also be sent all previous levels of review. The faculty member shall have the right to submit a written rebuttal statement/response and/or request a meeting with the secondary committee no later than 10 calendar days following receipt of the recommendation. A copy of the response or rebuttal statement shall be put into the WPAF and shall also be sent to the department chair.

I. Upon request, the faculty member must be given an opportunity to appear before the appropriate Committee to make a statement or discuss his/her WPAF, or both. In such cases the procedures in the University ARTP Policy, Section 9.02B, shall be followed.

J. The Dean shall then make a recommendation based on material contained in each candidate’s WPAF and on any response or rebuttals submitted.

K. If a Committee’s review of a retention, tenure, or promotion recommendation cannot be completed within the time frame specified by the University, the respective file(s) shall automatically be transferred to the next level of review and the candidate(s) shall be so notified.

L. Any ballots used in a Committee’s RTP deliberations shall be kept for a period of three years in the Dean’s Office.

IV. Review Procedures

A. Appointment Review Process

The appropriate department, College and University administrators will be responsible for ensuring adherence to university appointment procedures.

B. Performance Review Procedures: Retention, Tenure and Promotion

Each department shall conduct its evaluation according to its policies, the policies of the College and the policies of the University.

Each primary committee, and if applicable, each department chair shall precede his/her recommendation by a detailed but concise evaluation of the candidate’s performance in each of the following areas:

  • Teaching Effectiveness
  • Scholarly and Creative Achievements
  • Department, College and University Service
  • Community Service

For candidates who do not possess a terminal degree, a statement regarding the appropriateness of the candidate’s academic preparation or his/her progress toward completion of a required degree must be furnished (see University ARTP Policy 5.02 D).

The appropriate Committee shall review the WPAF of each candidate recommended for retention, tenure, or promotion to ensure that sufficient evidence is in the file to justify the primary level’s recommendations.

C. Additional Performance Review Procedures: Early Tenure

The appropriate Committee shall review the WPAF of each candidate recommended for early tenure to ensure that s/he meets the requirements for retention and the criteria outlined in Section 5.06 A. D. of the University ARTP Policy.

D. Additional Performance Review Procedures: Early Promotion

1. Probationary assistant professors may request in writing to be considered for promotion to associate professor prior to regular eligibility (as defined in Article 14.3 of the MOU).

If a tenured or probationary assistant professor requests consideration for promotion to associate professor prior to the primary level’s recommendation(s) for promotion of such an individual, the WPAF must contain evidence of outstanding performance (see UARTP Procedures 5.07-Early Promotion criteria).

2. Tenured associate professors may present to their department a written request for consideration of promotion to full professor prior to regular eligibility (as defined in Article 14.3 of the MOU). The WPAF must contain evidence of outstanding performances (see UARTP Procedures 5.07-Early Promotion criteria).

E. Additional Performance Review Procedures: Promotion

1. The appropriate Committee shall ensure that the primary units evaluate each candidate for promotion as outlined in B. above.

2. If departmental policies require that points or percentages be assigned to the areas of Teaching Effectiveness, Scholarly and Creative Achievements, or Department/College/University/ Community Service, they shall be identified and the point or percentage total assigned to the candidate shall be included in the evaluation.

3. If primary policies require ranking of the candidates, the primary level’s recommendation(s) for promotion shall state the rank order and the specific reason for the rank order without, however, identifying by name other individuals who are recommended for promotion.

4. Faculty who are considered regularly eligible for promotion under UARTP Sections 8.01C & D will be considered for promotion unless that person requested in writing not to be considered for promotion (such a written request must be forwarded to the Committee). The primary level shall evaluate the person’s performance and submit the WPAF to the Committee, indicating the reasons for recommendation.

5. Probationary associate professors are not eligible for promotion to full professor. However, if tenure will be granted effective September 1 of the next academic year as a result of primary level and Committee recommendations described in Paragraph IV. B., such faculty will become eligible to be recommended for promotion to full professor.

6. When all the WPAFs with appropriate recommendations have been received, and all the candidates have had 10 days to respond to or rebut the primary level’s recommendation(s), an alphabetical list of the candidates in the College shall be prepared.

7. Upon receipt of the College’s allocation of promotion funds from the University, the Dean shall determine the number of promotions for each rank for the College, and shall inform the Committee of same.

8. All the members and alternate members of the appropriate Committee shall proceed to read all the candidates’ files.

9. The members of the appropriate Committee shall examine the WPAFs of all the candidates to determine whether or not there is sufficient evidence in each file to justify promotion.

10. The appropriate Committee shall rank order its candidates on the basis of merit in four areas (Teaching Effectiveness, Scholarly and Creative Achievements, Department/College/University Service, and Community Service and, if appropriate, Academic Preparation) to establish the following categories:

    • Most Meritorious Candidates
    • Very Meritorious Candidates
    • Meritorious Candidates

Candidates whose background, in the view of the Committee after reviewing the WPAF including the primary level recommendation, do not merit promotion.

Each Committee shall also assign numerical rankings to the candidates within each promotion slot (assistant to associate, associate to full). If ballots are used, they shall be retained for three years. Finally, each Committee will approve the list of candidates and forward it to the Dean. The cost of recommended promotions shall not exceed the promotion funds allocated to the College.

11. After receiving the list of candidates from each Committee, the Dean shall review the files and prepare his/her own list of candidates recommended for promotion.

12. Each candidate and his/her department chair shall receive a copy of the letters in which the Committee and the Dean explain the reasons for their recommendations to the President or Vice President for Academic Affairs. If the appropriate Committee and/or the Dean recommend promotion of a candidate whom the primary committee ranked lower than a candidate from the same department who is not being recommended by the Committee and/or Dean, then the Committee and/or the Dean must explain in writing the reasons for this recommendation. The WPAFs shall be forwarded to the next level of review after the procedures in III. G. have been followed.

Approved by College of Arts & Letters Council of Chairs: 5/11/04

Approved by College of Arts & Letters Tenured/Tenure Track Faculty: 5/18/04

Approved by University ARTP Committee: 7/11/04

Approved by University ARTP Committee: 4/18/08

Back to Governance & Committees