1.
Initiation
The process of consideration for tenure is
automatically initiated by the department Chair at the end of the fifth year.
It can also be initiated earlier by a request from a candidate. The Department notifies candidate of
procedures to be followed before the end of classes of the academic year prior
to one during which the tenure process occurs.
The Chair will make an effort to answer whatever questions the candidate
might have about the promotion and tenure process.
1.2 As part of the initial
phase, candidate will submit a list of about 10 experts external to U. Va. who would be capable of commenting on
the candidate’s work. This list, which
should include addresses, will be submitted to the Chair by the start of the
fall semester of the 6th year. The candidate should briefly specify
his or her relation to each expert listed.
1.3
Ad hoc Tenure Committee
A review committee will normally be established for
each candidate during the late summer prior to the year of review. The Chair consults with the candidate
regarding the makeup of the review committee to determine if potential
conflicts exist. The review committee
will consist of 3-4 tenured faculty members at the rank of Associate or Full
Professor, with one serving as Committee Chair. The Departmental Chair serves as an ex officio member of the Committee. In most cases, 2-3 committee
members will be drawn from the candidate's area of interest and 1-2 will come
from outside of the candidate's area of interest. The Chair schedules a preliminary meeting of the Committee in
late summer .
2.
Supporting materials to be submitted to Chair by candidate. (Materials should
be submitted prior to the start of the fall semester of the 6th year):
Curriculum vitae. A complete and up-to-date Vitae that divides publications into
the following categories: books,
articles in refereed journals, popular articles and related publications, and
project reports. All published reviews
of work done by the candidate, both positive and negative, should be
included. In addition, the Vitae should
include information on previous and current grant funding as well as
indications of national and international recognition (e.g., honors, awards,
invitations, committees, offices held, etc.) Furthermore, it should include a
section on teaching and service that specifies: courses taught, advising
activities, undergraduate and graduate supervised thesis research. Work
accomplished since the third year review should be separated from the work that
preceded it.
Personal statements. The applicant should provide
two documents, one discussing teaching activities and the other research goals.
Each document should not be more than two single spaced pages.
The candidate must provide the following material to the chair of the
Departmental Teaching Evaluation Committee, on or about September 1st:
A list of up to 12 current/former undergraduate and
graduate students who may be contacted for statements relating to the
candidate's teaching abilities, broadly defined. These may include advisees of the candidate, students from
classes taught by the candidate or students who have worked in the candidate's
laboratory. Current mail and email
addresses and telephone numbers would be most helpful to the committee.
3. Outside experts
Eight to ten letters from
experts outside the department will be required. Every effort will be made to
solicit letters from leading figures in the candidate's field of
specialty. The Chair of Department or
chair of ad hoc committee will write
a letter, neutral in tone, to potential external reviewers in the late summer
or early fall of the academic year in which the tenure decision will be made,
requesting their help and submitting the candidate’s CV. At least four of the outside experts approached will be from
the candidate’s list, although no more than 50% may come from the list of names
provided by the candidate. If a referee accepts the task, the chair will send
copies of the candidate’s publications,
manuscripts and other relevant
material. Outside experts will receive the candidate’s material early in the
fall semester; they are asked to complete their evaluations by October 15, if
possible, and by Oct 30th at the very latest.
4. Committee Evaluation
Process
The review committee will meet with the candidate on or about October 20th. At this time, the candidate may provide the review committee with additional information or may answer questions or provide clarification on matters of concern to committee members.
The candidate’s performance
in research, teaching, and service will be evaluated in a
Committee Report to the
Tenured Faculty of the department. This
report will eventually
be submitted both to the
Dean of Arts and Sciences and to the University Provost
4.1 Evaluation of Research
The standard for promotion
to tenured rank is excellence of
scholarly work.
Members of the committee, in
their report, succinctly summarize and analyze the work and then judge it for
its quality, quantity and significance. Among other qualities examined are the
novelty and importance of the ideas examined, the impact the work has had upon
the candidate’s field, and the potential directions which are to be examined in
the future.
4.2 Evaluation of Teaching
The standard for promotion is excellence of teaching and advising.
The Teaching Evaluation Committee
will examine the record of courses taught, enrollment numbers, grade
distribution and average grade whenever possible in each course, statistical
and narrative summaries of student course evaluations since appointment,
evaluations by faculty members, numbers and kinds of advisees (graduate and
undergraduate), and the letters solicited from former and current students. It
will prepare a written evaluation that will be placed in the candidate's file
in the departmental office on or about November 10th.
4.3 Evaluation of Service
The Tenure Review Committee
will evaluate the candidate’s performance looking for evidence of a serious
commitment to assist in the operation of the Department, College and
University. Service to the Profession and Community will also be examined.
5. Departmental vote
After meeting with the candidate, the review committee will prepare a
written report detailing the research, teaching and service activities of the candidate.
A critical summary of the responses of the outside examiners will also be
included. The report should explain the credentials of the reviewers, and
should make explicit which were chosen by the candidate. Finally, the review
committee will provide its recommendation on promotion to Associate Professor
with tenure. If a split vote results,
dissenting views may be expressed in the written review committee report. The written report will be completed prior
to November 10th and placed in the candidate's file in the departmental office
with the Assistant to the Chair. The
review committee report, vitae, publications, letters from outside examiners,
brief descriptions of outside examiners, teaching evaluation report and
associated materials will be available for review by members of the tenured
faculty of the Department of Psychology for a period of at least 1 week prior
to a meeting of the tenured faculty.
Files must remain within the departmental office.
The tenured faculty of the Department of Psychology
will meet on or about November 15th to discuss each candidate. The chair of the review committee will
present a summary of the evaluation and the review committee's recommendation. Ample time will be available for
discussion. A ballot will be available
following the meeting and a 48-hour period for return of ballots will be in
effect.
Each candidate will meet with the Chair of the
Department of Psychology in early December.
This meeting will allow time for a discussion of the candidate's record
of research and teaching activities and the review by the tenured faculty. At
or before this time the Chair will tell candidate of outcome of the vote, but
not the actual numerical results of the balloting.
In some instances, the time frame for review described
above may not be followed. For example,
the tenured faculty may initiate an early review of an Assistant Professor for
tenure who receives a competing offer from another institution. In such cases, the review occurs during the
Spring semester. However, the standards
for review shall remain at the highest possible level.
6.
Statement
of Confidentiality
All matters concerning
reviews of junior faculty for promotion and tenure are held in the strictest
confidence. These issues include results
of review committee and tenured faculty votes and the identities of outside
experts.
7. Promotions Materials for
Promotion and Tenure Committee and Provost
Whether the tenured faculty
members have made a positive or negative recommendation, the Departmental Chair
prepares a set of promotions materials as specified by the Dean’s Promotion and
Tenure Committee and as specified in the document “Arts and Sciences,
Procedures for Renewal and Promotion”.
8. Arts and Sciences Promotion and Tenure Committee
As its deliberations
proceed, the Dean’s Promotion and Tenure Committee will tell the Chair of any
concerns it has about a candidate who has been recommended for promotion by the
department. The Chair, after preparing
carefully, will appear before the Promotion and Tenure Committee, briefly
present the case, and answer any questions the Committee poses. The Committee
expects the Chair to consider not just the candidate, but also the perspective
and welfare of the department as a whole.
After the Promotion and
Tenure Committee votes on each candidate, the Dean decides whether or not to
concur in the recommendations of the committee. The Dean informs the Chair of
the decision, and the Chair immediately passes on this information to the candidate.
9. Consideration at the Provost’s level:
Information regarding this
step in the process can be seen in the document “Arts and Sciences Procedures
for Renewal and Promotion” as well as the policy described on the Provost’s WEB page, (http://minerva.acc.virginia.edu/~provost/uvap&t.htm).
10. Denial and departmental appeal
Faculty who have been denied
tenure will be separated from the University by the end of their term
appointment, which is usually the end of the seventh year. Although it is possible to reconsider a
tenure case in the seventh year, departments should not ask the Promotion and Tenure Committee to reconsider
a candidate unless there is new and significant information about the
candidate’s case.
11. Candidate’s appeal mechanism
A candidate wishing to appeal a negative decision should consult
the Dean’s “Procedures for Renewal and Promotion” and Faculty Handbook of the
University of Virginia (section on “Promotion and Tenure Policy”). The Handbook
is available on the Provost’s WEB page,
(http://minerva.acc.virginia.edu/~provost/uvap&t.htm).
A brief quote from that
document: “In all cases in which the provost reviews negative promotion or
tenure recommendations, such review will be limited to procedural grounds or to
the possibility of unfairness or bias at the school level, with the candidate
ultimately having the burden of demonstrating material procedural irregularity,
unfairness, or bias leading to the conclusion that the negative tenure
recommendation was affected. Normally,
the substantive judgments of the school on the quality of student instruction,
research, and/or service will not be reversed when adequately supported and in
accordance with University policy”.
Revised, 4/1/1999