(b) UMES Policy and Procedures on Promotion and Tenure of Faculty Campus Policy #‑ 1: May 14, 2002

 

I.          INTRODUCTION

 

The policy statement describes the criteria and procedures governing promotion and tenure for faculty personnel at the University of Maryland Eastern Shore. The ranks utilized and the criteria for individual faculty ranks shall be those described in the overall policy of the University System Policy on Appointment, Rank and Tenure of Faculty, approved by the Board of Regents on April 5, 1989 and subsequent revisions and approvals up to 2000. The specific criteria for promotion and tenure decisions in a particular discipline shall be formulated and maintained by the respective academic departments. Copies of departmental criteria and procedure statements shall be on file in the office of the President and the library. Final authority for the promotion and granting of tenure of faculty resides with the Office of the President.

 

 

II.          DEPARTMENTAL PROMOTION AND TENURE DOCUMENTS

 

Each department shall be responsible for developing and adopting criteria for appraising the qualities and performance of faculty members, including department chairperson.

 

Promotion in rank shall be based on merit and cannot be considered automatic or simply the result of loyal service to the University for a number of years. Moreover, successive reappointments or the completion of a specified period of service do not confer a right to appointment with tenure, except as described in this policy.

 

A. Criteria:

 

Criteria used in making evaluations shall be based upon the mission of the University of Maryland Eastern Shore. For most faculty members criteria will include: (1) instruction and student advising, (2) research and scholarship, (3) service and contributions to the University and to the community.

 

1. Instruction and Student Advising: The responsibility for the evaluation of the teaching performance and advising of students rests on the primary academic unit, and each such unit is required to develop appropriate measures. These measures shall include systematic evaluation from students.

 

 

2.  Research and Scholarship: An important factor in determining merit for appointment, retention, tenure, and promotion shall be the faculty member's contributions in the form of research, publications, and other professional or artistic activities. The nature of the performance will vary from one discipline to another, but the general test to be applied is the extent to which the faculty member is engaged effectively in scholarly and creative activity. In fields where publication in recognized journals and books is the primary activity, such publications will be the primary measure of achievement. Evaluation of this work in the form of reviews, or otherwise, by leaders in the field outside the University may be considered important evidence of its value.

 

In fields such as art, music, performance (theater and dance), fashion, exhibitions/organizing shows, curating, judging, distinguished performance, or direction shall be judged as creative activity. In agricultural sciences and industrial technologies, patented inventions and discoveries may also evidence creative work.

 

Other measures of professional development are: participation in the activities of professional and learned societies, professional service such as consultantships, addresses before educational agencies and civic groups, and workshops or other activities of scholarly or innovative nature.

 

3.  Service and Contributions to the University and Community: Contributions to the University may comprise constructive committee service, service in elected faculty office, administrative service, contributions to the extra‑curricular activities of students, the development of new academic programs or courses, and the organization of conferences, workshops or institutes.

 

Contributions to the community shall consist of any donation of one's professional competence for the benefit of the community.

 

When being examined for the purpose of tenure or promotion, contributions to the University or the community should be evaluated in terms of their effect upon the advancement of the department, the institution, and/or the community.

 

B. Procedures:

 

1.         The tasks of identifying and specifying the elements or factors to be considered in evaluating a candidate, their relative significance, and the techniques to be used, are to be carried out by an elected three‑to‑five member committee of the department. This committee shall develop a document which sets forth procedures for reviewing the credentials of non‑tenured persons for purposes of granting contract renewal and /or tenure.

 

2.         The document developed by the committee shall be discussed by the entire department in a meeting and approved by a vote of departmental faculty. The document shall then be transmitted for approvals by the Dean of the School and the Vice President for Academic Affairs, who will subsequently submit it to the President for his/her review and final approval.

 

3.         Copies of all departments’ documents shall be made available in the library for examination by interested faculty.

 

 

 

III.       PROCEDURES FOR PROMOTION AND TENURE

 

A.  Initiation Procedures:

 

In cases of mandatory tenure review, the department chairperson should inform the faculty member, in writing, by May 15 of the fifth year of appointment for an assistant professor, and by May 15 of the mandatory review year for an associate professor, that he or she is to be considered for tenure and/or promotion. However, a faculty member may receive consideration for promotion and/or tenure by requesting such consideration by May 15 of any year prior to his or her mandatory review year.

 

A negative decision in a non‑mandatory tenure review shall not preclude the faculty member's right to proceed toward a review for tenure in the mandatory review year.

 

B.  Ad Hoc Departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee:

 

By November 1, the department chairperson shall inform the Dean of the School of the composition of the ad hoc departmental committee which will review candidates. The Dean shall in turn so inform the Vice President for Academic Affairs by November 15. This ad hoc departmental committee shall consist of at least three members, all of whom are senior in rank to the individuals being considered. Where there are not enough faculty of sufficient rank in a given department, faculty in an appropriate field from outside the department upon the recommendation from the faculty applying for tenure or promotion will be invited by the chair to serve on the ad hoc committee.

 

1.         Each candidate will submit a list of at least five persons to serve on his or her ad hoc committee by October 1, to the departmental chairperson. The departmental chairperson will select three committee members from among the persons suggested by the candidate. The committee shall elect its own chairperson.

 

2.         The faculty member under consideration shall submit 4 copies of his/her dossier to the department chair by November 1 of the sixth year. The department chair shall forward these copies of the dossier to the ad hoc departmental committee chair by November 10. The faculty member under consideration is responsible for furnishing the ad hoc committee with such materials as are appropriate for due consideration  of his or her case. The ad hoc committee is also charged to exercise all due diligence in obtaining documentation of the person's performance. All documentation gathered by the ad hoc committee shall be held in confidence.

 

3.         The ad hoc departmental review committee shall forward its recommendation and all supporting materials‑‑both those furnished by the applicant and those obtained by the committee‑‑ to the department chairperson by December 15. If the review committee's recommendation is negative, the candidate is so informed by the department chairperson and the review is terminated. If the committee's recommendation is positive, the department chairperson shall attach his or her own recommendation to the ad hoc committee's recommendation and forward both, along with all supporting materials, to the Dean of the School by January 10. The Dean shall review the departmental recommendations and attach his or her recommendation, and forward all materials to the Vice President for Academic Affairs by January 30. The candidate's complete file will be transmitted by the Vice President for Academic Affairs to the UMES Faculty Promotion and Tenure Review Committee by February 7. The UMES Faculty Promotion and Tenure Committee will transmit its recommendations to the Vice President for Academic Affairs by April 1.

 

4.         The candidate’s dossier and all recommendations shall be placed in the Human Resources for review by the candidate for a period of two weeks (April 1 to 15). No additional supporting documents can be introduced by the candidate during this period except for a response to a negative information in the dossier that the candidate has not been privileged to respond.

 

C. UMES Faculty Promotion and Tenure Review Committee:

 

1.    Membership:

 

By the end of the month of October, the Vice President for Academic Affairs shall hold a meeting of the UMES faculty to elect members to the UMES Promotion and Tenure Review Committee. This committee shall consist of seven members, elected from tenured full and associate professors not having administrative responsibilities. Department chairpersons, however, will be eligible to serve.  At least three of the seven member committee will be full professors who, in cases of candidates for promotion to full professor will deliberate and vote separately from, and instead of, the full committee. The election of committee members shall be by secret ballot, with each faculty member voting for three committee candidates, one full professor, and two associate professors. Ballots shall be counted by the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the Chairperson of the UMES Senate. The three committee candidates (one full and two associate professors) receiving the‑most votes are elected to the committee. From among the next seven candidates receiving the most votes, the Vice President for Academic Affairs will select the remaining four members of the committee. The committee shall elect its own chairperson. No candidate who is up for promotion or department chair whose candidate is up for promotion and/or tenure can serve on the UMES Promotion and Tenure Review Committee.

 

2.         Procedures:

 

The UMES Faculty Promotion and Tenure Review committee shall review every case forwarded to it by the Vice President for Academic Affairs. Upon receiving the materials and recommendations from all levels, the Committee is charged to exercise due diligence in obtaining any additional materials required for evaluation. Upon its review of all materials, the committee shall submit its report and recommendation to the vice President for Academic Affairs by April 1 for review and recommendation. The Vice President for Academic Affairs recommendation along with pertinent materials shall be transmitted to the President for a final decision by May 10. The President's final decision shall be communicated promptly to the candidate in writing by May 30 or as stated in the USM policy.  If the President's decision is negative, then the letter to the candidate shall specify the reasons for the decision and shall notify the candidate of the appeal procedures contained in Part IV of this policy.

 

D. Notification:

 

A negative recommendation regarding a candidate for promotion and/or tenure from the ad hoc departmental review committee shall be conveyed to the candidate, in writing, by the department chairperson. If, following a positive recommendation by the ad hoc departmental committee, subsequent review at any level yields a negative recommendation, then the responsible official at that level (department chairperson, the dean, the chairperson of the UMES Faculty Promotion and Tenure Review Committee, or the Vice President for Academic Affairs) shall notify the candidate of that fact in writing within five working days of forwarding the recommendation to the next level of review. The notification to the candidate shall (a) identify the level that produced the recommendation, and (b) provide a summary of the reasons for the negative recommendation. The candidate shall be entitled to respond in writing to any negative recommendation, and the candidate's written response, if submitted within five working days, shall be included in the candidate's file for consideration at each subsequent level of review.

 

IV.       APPEALS PROCEDURES

 

A.        It is the task of the committees specified in the promotion and tenure procedures outlined above to conduct as objective an inquiry into the substantive qualifications of the candidates as possible, to adhere to the prescribed procedures, and to render impartial recommendations and decisions.

 

B.        A faculty member has the right to appeal recommendations and decisions. Grounds for appeal shall be procedural rather than substantive (e.g. was the decision conscientiously arrived at? Was all available evidence bearing on the relevant performance of the candidate sought out and considered? Was there adequate deliberation by department over the evidence in the light of the relevant standards? Was irrelevant and improper information included in consideration? Was the decision an exercise of professional academic judgment?). In addition to the above, procedural violations include, but are not limited to the following:

 

1.         If, upon receipt of a person's application for promotion or tenure, a department chairperson fails to impanel a departmental ad hoc committee in adequate time to obtain data on the person;

 

2.         If the candidate is not given sufficient opportunity to present material in support of the application;

 

3.         If the candidate's rights of confidentiality are violated;

 

4.         If evidence of discriminatory practices was presented;

 

5.         If the various review sources fail to exercise due diligence in obtaining materials for assessment;

 

6.         If violation or failure to follow the published guidelines, including the procedures and criteria listed in this document, occurs.

 

C.        Appeals shall observe the following sequence of events:

 

1.         Following notification of a negative decision by either the ad hoc departmental review committee or the President the candidate shall be entitled to appeal in accordance with the procedure outlined below.

 

2.         The candidate must file a formal notice of appeal in writing with the Vice President for Academic Affairs within ten days of receipt of notification of negative decision. The notice of appeal and the factual contentions supporting each ground.

 

3.         As soon as practical after receipt of the notice of appeal and in no event more than five working days thereafter, the Vice President for Academic Affairs shall conduct an informal meeting with the candidate to review the grounds for appeal and determine whether the appeal can be satisfactorily resolved without formal proceedings. No records or minutes of the meeting shall be taken or preserved, and the discussion shall be confidential between the parties. Should the appeal not be resolved informally at that stage and should the candidate elect to pursue the appeal, the candidate shall promptly inform the Vice President for Academic Affairs at or within three working days after the meeting. The Vice President for Academic Affairs shall promptly impanel an Appeals Committee consisting of three tenured faculty members who are senior in rank to the candidate and who have no prior direct involvement in the candidate's application for promotion and/or tenure. The basic function of the Appeals Committee shall be to determine whether adequate consideration was given to the case. The term "adequate consideration" refers to procedural issues, as explained above. The Appeals Committee is to contact the Vice President for Academic Affairs, who must supply explanation of the procedures followed and materials used in coming to his or her decision. The Appeals Committee is also charged to exercise all due diligence in obtaining further information relative to the specific procedural questions involved. Similarly, the Appeals Committee shall compare the procedures used at all levels with established departmental and institutional procedures to determine whether such procedures were properly carried out. In considering the merits of a particular appeal, the Appeals Committee should distinguish between minor or technical procedural variations which have not adversely influenced the evaluation process and those procedural deviations which may have prejudiced adequate consideration of the candidate’s credentials.

 

  1. The Appeals Committee shall make a recommendation in writing to the President. Should the Appeals committee determine that procedures were followed appropriately and fairly, the President shall notify the appellant and the process of decision should then continue as though no appeal was made.  Should the Appeals Committee determine that procedural errors did occur, it shall inform both the President and the appellant, setting forth the inadequacies found, and shall make a recommendation to the President on whether or not the case should be reconsidered.

 

5.                  Upon the receipt of recommendation from the Appeals committee, the president shall inform the candidate of his/her decision on the appeal, within 15 working days. If the President decides that the case is to be reconsidered, no new substantive material may be presented except that which was omitted through procedural error, if applicable. After the case has been reconsidered, with procedures amended, all parties shall be informed of the results of such reconsideration. The process shall then continue as though not modified by the appeals procedure.

 

The initiation of the Appeals Procedure does not operate to dislodge or delay any formal notification dealing with contract non‑retention or tenure denial actions.

 

 

 

V.        CANDIDATE EVALUATION CRITERIA

 

The candidate should satisfy the requirements of the USM Policy on Appointment, Rank and Tenure of Faculty. However, the President can make an exception for faculty who has attained national distinction for comparable professional activity or research. Promotion and or tenure to any rank shall meet the following criteria:

 

1)             The earned doctorate, or recognized terminal degree in the field of specialization from a regionally accredited or internationally reputable foreign institution. In extraordinary circumstances, the president, after consultation with the appropriate faculty committee at the institution, may waive the criterion of the earned doctorate.

 

2)         A minimum of three years of full‑time university/college teaching experience at UMES at the current rank.

 

3)         Evidence of effective teaching.

 

4)         Evidence of scholarly contribution in the area of specialization including, but not limited to, activities such as research, publication, participation in programs of professional societies, or professionally recognized performance in the arts.

 

5)         Participation in the activities of the department, school and university levels including, but not limited to, such activities as performing assigned administrative duties, assuming committee responsibilities, effective academic advising of students, working actively with student organizations and evidencing interest in external community activities related to the faculty member's area of specialization.

 

 

VI.       REVIEW OF DOCUMENT

 

The UMES Policy and Procedures on Promotion and Tenure of Faculty shall be subject to periodic review by the UMES Senate.

 

VII.     APPLICABILITY

 

Except as provided in section III of the University Policy on Appointment, Rank and Tenure of Faculty, the provisions in this policy document shall apply to all individuals who are employed as faculty members at the University of Maryland Eastern Shore as of July 1, 2003 and individuals whose faculty appointment become effective on or after July 1, 2003.