Promotion and Tenure Procedures, Department of History

 

 

The awarding of tenure and/or promotion in rank is among the most important and far-reaching decisions made by the Department of History because an excellent faculty is an essential component of any outstanding institution of higher learning. Promotion and tenure decisions also have a profound effect on the lives and careers of faculty. Recommendations concerning promotion and tenure must be made carefully, based upon a thorough examination of the candidate’s record and the impartial application of these criteria and procedures, established in compliance with Faculty Senate Rules and Regulations (FSRR) Article VI.

 

It is the purpose of this document to promote the rigorous and fair evaluation of faculty performance during the promotion and tenure process by (a) establishing criteria that express the Department of History’s expectations for meeting University standards in terms of disciplinary practices; (b) providing procedures for the initial evaluation of teaching, scholarship, and service; (c) preserving and enhancing the participatory rights of candidates, including the basic right to be informed about critical stages of the process and to have an opportunity to respond to negative evaluations; and (d) clarifying the responsibilities, roles, and relationships of the participants in the promotion and tenure review process. 

 

Each level of review, including the initial department review, the intermediate College review, and the University level review, conducts an independent evaluation of a candidate’s record of performance and makes independent recommendations to the Chancellor. Later stages of review neither affirm nor reverse earlier recommendations, which remain part of the record for consideration by the Chancellor. It is the responsibility of each person involved in the review process to exercise their own judgment to evaluate a faculty member’s teaching, scholarship, and service based upon the entirety of the data and information in the record. No single source of information, such as peer review letters, shall be considered a conclusive indicator of quality.

 

 

All faculty members, regardless of rank, are entitled to academic freedom in relation to teaching and scholarship, and the right as citizens to speak on matters of public concern. Likewise, all faculty members, regardless of rank, bear the obligation to exercise their academic freedom responsibly and in accordance with the accepted standards of their academic disciplines.

 

 

Consideration and evaluation of a faculty member’s record is a confidential personnel matter. Only those persons eligible to vote on promotion and tenure may participate in or observe deliberations or have access to the files of materials pertaining to promotion and tenure cases in the department (except that department administrative associates may assist in the preparation of documents under conditions that assure confidentiality).

 

No person, including the candidate’s spouse or partner, shall participate in any aspect of the promotion and tenure process concerning a candidate when participation would create a clear conflict of interest or compromise the impartiality of an evaluation or recommendation.

 

If a candidate believes that there is a conflict of interest, the candidate may petition at all levels of the university, including the Department Chair or Dean, to have that person recuse themself. If a committee member does not recuse themself, a decision about whether that person has a conflict of interest shall be made by a majority of the other committee members.

 

 

 

The University strives for a consistent standard of quality against which the performance of all faculty members is measured. Nonetheless, the nature of faculty activities varies across the University and a faculty member’s record must be evaluated in light of their particular responsibilities and the expectations of the discipline. These criteria state the department’s expectations of performance in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service necessary to satisfy the University standards for promotion for the award of tenure and/or promotion to associate professor and for promotion to full professor, or equivalent ranks.

 

Teaching and scholarship should normally be given primary consideration, but the particular weight to be accorded to each component of a faculty member’s activities depends upon the responsibilities of the faculty member. The College has traditionally recognized the 40-40-20 formula for weighting research, teaching, and service for tenure-stream faculty members pursuant to their job description. 

 

 

Teaching is a primary function of the University, which strives to provide an outstanding education for its students. The evaluation of teaching includes consideration of syllabi, course materials, and other information related to a faculty member’s courses; peer and student evaluations; a candidate’s own statement of teaching philosophy and goals; public representations of teaching; and other accepted methods of evaluation. 

 

High quality teaching is serious intellectual work grounded in a deep knowledge and understanding of the field and includes the ability to convey that understanding in clear and engaging ways. 

 

The conduct of classes is the central feature of teaching responsibilities at KU, but teaching also includes supervising student research, mentoring and advising students, and other teaching-related activities outside of the classroom.

 

Under the University standards for the award of tenure and/or promotion to the rank of associate professor, the record must demonstrate effective teaching, as reflected in such factors as command of the subject matter, the ability to communicate effectively in the classroom, a demonstrated commitment to student learning, and involvement in providing advice and support for students outside the classroom. 

 

In the Department of History the following teaching expectations to meet University standards apply for the award of tenure and/or promotion to the rank of associate professor: 

 

 

In the Department of History, the following teaching expectations to meet University standards apply for the promotion to the rank of professor: 

 

 

The concept of “scholarship” encompasses not only traditional academic research and publication, but also the creation of artistic works or performances and any other products or activities accepted by the academic discipline as reflecting scholarly effort and achievement for purposes of promotion and tenure. While the nature of scholarship varies among disciplines, the University adheres to a consistently high standard of quality in its scholarly activities to which all faculty members, regardless of discipline, are held. In the Department of History scholarship is defined as the publication of books, articles in refereed journals, and peer-reviewed or refereed chapters in books. Refereed critical editions, collected volumes, journal issues, compilations, translations, electronic publications, and public exhibits that are of equivalent scholarly significance to the above are also considered scholarship. Successful grant applications for scholarly research also demonstrate continued productivity.

 

Under the University standards for the award of tenure and/or promotion to the rank of associate professor, the record must demonstrate a successfully developing scholarly career, as reflected in such factors as the quality and quantity of publications or creative activities, external reviews of the candidate’s work by respected scholars or practitioners in the field, the candidate’s regional, national, and/or international reputation, and other evidence of an active and productive scholarly agenda.

 

In the Department of History, the following scholarship expectations to meet University standards apply for the award of tenure and/or promotion to the rank of associate professor: 

 

 

Under the University standards for promotion to the rank of professor, scholarship that merits promotion to full professor is defined as continued scholarly production that represents sustained and significant contribution to the field well beyond that record prior to tenure. 

 

In the Department of History, the following scholarship expectations to meet University standards also apply for the promotion to the rank of professor: 

 

 

 

Service is an important responsibility of all faculty members that contributes to the University’s performance of its larger mission. Although the nature of service activities will depend on a candidate’s particular interests and abilities, service contributions are an essential part of being a good citizen of the University. The Department of History accepts and values scholarly service to the discipline or profession, service within the University, and public service at the local, state, national, or international level.

 

Under the University standards for the award of tenure and/or promotion to associate professor, the record must demonstrate a pattern of service to the University at one or more levels, to the discipline or profession, and/or to the local, state, national, and/or international communities.

 

In the Department of History, the following service expectations to meet University standards apply for the award of tenure and/or promotion to the rank of associate professor:

 

 

Under the University standards for promotion to the rank of professor, the record must demonstrate an ongoing pattern of service reflecting substantial contributions to the University at one or more levels, to the discipline or profession, and/or to the local, state, national, and/or international communities.

 

In the Department of History, the following service expectations to meet University standards apply for the promotion to the rank of professor: 

 

 

 

Using the criteria described above, the candidate’s performance in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service will be rated using the terms “excellent,” “very good,” “good,” “marginal,” or “poor,” defined as follows:

 

 

Absent exceptional circumstances, no candidate may be recommended for promotion or tenure without meeting standards in all applicable areas of performance, and strong candidates are likely to exceed expectations in one or more categories.

 

 

 

The Department of History conducts the initial review of the candidate pursuant to the procedures and requirements of section 5 of Article VI of the FSRR in connection with the candidate’s responsibility in the Department of History.

 

No person shall serve simultaneously in more than one committee (at the department, college, or university level) considering promotion and tenure, except when serving as a member of a committee of the whole.  The Department Chair (or anyone else having an independent responsibility to evaluate a candidate) shall not serve as a member of the College Committee on Appointments, Promotion, and Tenure (CCAPT) or University Committee on Promotion and Tenure (UCPT). The candidate may ask, at all levels of review, for a committee member to recuse if that member has a conflict of interest. If a committee member does not recuse themself, a decision about whether that person has a conflict of interest shall be made by a majority of the other committee members at that level.

 

 

Initial review by the Department of History shall evaluate the candidate’s teaching, research, and service. In the Department of History, the initial review committee is the Promotion and Tenure Committee. The Promotion and Tenure Committee will be composed of all tenured faculty in the department holding the appropriate rank. The full committee will sit in all cases involving recommendation for the awarding of tenure. In matters of promotion, assistant professors will be reviewed by associate and full professors; and associate professors by full professors. 

 

No students or untenured faculty members shall serve on the Promotion and Tenure Committee or vote on any recommendation concerning promotion and/or tenure.

 

 

Prior to the beginning of the spring semester, the Provost notifies all faculty whose mandatory review year will be the following academic year, with copies provided to the unit administrators. If an assistant professor wishes to be considered for promotion and tenure prior to the mandatory review year, they must make a formal request to the Department Chair by the last day of March.  If a tenured associate professor wishes to be considered for promotion to the rank of full professor, they similarly must make a formal request to the Department Chair at least two weeks prior to the College deadline to initiate the process. In any of these cases, the Department of History shall initiate procedures for evaluating the candidate for the award of promotion and/or tenure.

 

As part of the annual faculty evaluation process, the Department of History’s Personnel Committee in consultation with the Department Chair shall consider the qualifications of all tenured faculty members below the rank of full professor, with a view toward possible promotion in rank during the following academic year. After considering a faculty member’s qualifications, if the Department of History’s Personnel Committee or Department Chair determines that those qualifications may warrant promotion in rank, the Department Chair shall inform the faculty member and recommend that they submit an application for promotion.

 

In the case of faculty members who hold joint appointments, each department conducts its own review in accordance with its own processes. The Department Chair will arrange with the Chair of the other department to coordinate solicitation of external evaluations and submission of each department’s results to the College.

 

 

In early April the Department Chair, who also serves as chair of the Promotion and Tenure Committee, will appoint a Certification Committee for each individual who will begin their mandatory review year the following academic year, and for each assistant or associate professor who has requested consideration for promotion as outlined above. Each Certification Committee considering an individual for promotion to associate will consist of four tenured members of the department; and each Certification Committee considering an individual for promotion to full will consist of four tenured full professors of the department. The Department Chair will endeavor to ensure as broad a representation on each committee as feasible and will select a Certification Committee chair to oversee the process from among those appointed.

 

The responsibilities of each Certification Committee are as follows:

 

 

 

It is the responsibility of the candidate to complete the appropriate portions of official forms and to provide necessary documents and information in accordance with guidelines from the College and Provost’s Office, with assistance from the department’s administrative associate.

 

After a candidate’s evaluations from outside reviewers and the candidate’s statements and materials have been received by the department, the Certification Committee shall write a report summarizing the candidate’s record of teaching, scholarship, and service in the format required by the College and Provost’s Office. This report must be provided to the Promotion and Tenure Committee at least two weeks prior to its meeting. 

 

The draft report and the external evaluators’ letters are to be kept confidential, with access limited to members of the department’s Promotion and Tenure Committee, and to the department’s administrative associates for the purpose of compiling and maintaining the files.

 

 

The Department Chair will arrange a convenient time for a meeting of the Promotion and Tenure Committee, well in advance of the deadlines for submission of nominations to the College, with separate meetings for consideration of the promotion of assistant professors and associate professors. The Promotion and Tenure Committee’s conclusions at the departmental level constitute the “Initial Review of the Candidate” for promotion and/or tenure. All participants should study the dossier of each candidate in advance of the meeting.   

 

The first order of business in considering each candidate will be to accept the written report of the candidate’s Certification Committee. Amendments may be offered by motion and approved by majority vote. Once accepted, this report shall serve as the basis for the Promotion and Tenure Committee’s summary evaluation to be included in the candidate’s dossier when it is sent to the College. The evaluation of the candidate’s record of teaching, scholarship and service will be based on the Department’s standards for promotion and tenure. After discussion, secret ballots will be cast to determine ratings, based on standards for promotion and tenure, for each area of performance and to recommend the candidate for promotion and/or tenure. Eligible faculty members must attend the meeting in person or via the procedure for virtual attendance to be eligible to vote. Those members otherwise unable to attend may submit signed letters in regard to individual candidacies that may be read or distributed to members of the Promotion and Tenure Committee, but cannot vote.

 

The overall rating of performance by the Promotion and Tenure Committee in teaching, scholarship, and service will be the average of the ratings submitted by voters for each respective category, rounded to the nearest whole number. The majority of votes will determine the Promotion and Tenure Committee’s overall recommendations for or against promotion and/or tenure. 

 

Following the Promotion and Tenure Committee meetings, for each candidate, the Certification Committee shall prepare the Promotion and Tenure Committee’s recommendation, ratings of performance, and summary evaluation sections on the appropriate forms and forward these to the Department Chair. The Department Chair shall indicate separately, in writing, whether, based on the Department’s standards for promotion and tenure, they concur or disagree with the recommendations of the Promotion and Tenure Committee. The Department Chair shall then communicate in writing the recommendations of the Initial Review at the departmental level and their own concurrence or disagreement with these recommendations to the candidate along with a completed copy of the “Initial Review Summary for the Candidate” form. In the case of assistant professors not in the mandatory review year and associate professors, if the Promotion and Tenure Committee’s recommendation is negative, the review will not be forwarded automatically to the College. In that case, the Department Chair will inform the candidate that they have the right to halt or proceed with forwarding the dossier to the College for further review. 

 

 

Before submission of the candidate’s dossier to the College for intermediate review, the candidate may submit a written response to a negative recommendation for promotion and/or tenure by the Department of History, and/or to a final performance rating for teaching, scholarship, or service that is below the level of “good” in the evaluation section of the recommendation. As long as it is provided before the deadline for submission, this response will go forward with the candidate’s dossier to the next level of review by the CCAPT. 

 

Any requests for additional information from the CCAPT, UCPT, or other University administrator involved in certifying a promotion and/or tenure case shall be sent to the Department Chair, who shall immediately provide a copy to the candidate and consult with the Certification Committee concerning any substantive issues. The Department Chair, in consultation with the Promotion and Tenure Committee, shall prepare the department’s response in accordance with the initial review procedures. The candidate shall be afforded an opportunity to participate in the preparation of the department’s response, as well as to submit their own documentation or written response to such requests.