- 1.0 Appeals of negative tenure, promotion, or reappointment decisions
- 1.1 Allegation of improper evaluation
- 1.1.0 Issues not considered improper evaluation
- 1.1.1 Formal appeal process
- 1.2 Allegation of discrimination
- 1.3 Reviews in the final year of probation
1.0 Appeals of negative tenure, promotion, or reappointment decisions
A reevaluation of a negative tenure, promotion, or reappointment decision may occur if the Committee on Academic Freedom and Responsibility (CAFR) determines an improper evaluation occurred (see Section 1.1: Allegation of improper evaluation), or if the Office of Institutional Equity (OIE) determines that discrimination has occurred (see Section 1.2: Allegation of discrimination). For probationary tenure track faculty, a new review in the seventh year may occur if the head of the tenure initiating unit (TIU) determines there is significant new information (see Section 1.3: Seventh-year review).
In any of the appeal proceedings, unsolicited commentary by colleagues, students, or others on behalf of a candidate will not be considered at any time during the promotion and tenure or probationary renewal review process and will not influence the course of an appeal.
During the appeal process, the termination date for the faculty member remains the date provided in the letter informing the faculty member of the negative decision, unless changed by the executive vice president and provost.
TIU heads, deans, and the executive vice president and provost will not discuss a promotion and tenure or reappointment decision with individuals who are not a party to the decision-making process.
1.1 Allegation of improper evaluation
Faculty members who believe they have been evaluated improperly for tenure, promotion, or reappointment may appeal a negative decision. Improper evaluation includes violations of (1) written procedures that could reasonably have affected the outcome of a review, and/or (2) failure to consider evidence material to a fair determination.
A candidate may raise issues about the review process during the review, through the comments process provided for in Faculty Rule 3335-6-04. When appropriate, these issues should be addressed at the time they are raised. The TIU head may wish to consult with the dean and/or the vice provost for academic policy and faculty resources regarding the best way(s) to address a particular issue.
1.1.0 Issues not considered improper evaluation
Members of faculty review bodies, TIU heads, and deans are required to exercise professional judgment in considering the evidence that is material to making a fair determination in a tenure, promotion, or reappointment case. Differences in, or disagreements with, professional judgments do not provide a valid basis for appealing a negative decision.
Favorable annual reviews are not a basis for appealing a negative tenure, promotion, or reappointment. A favorable annual review during the probationary period serves as the basis for a positive annual reappointment decision but does not imply a commitment to granting promotion or tenure with promotion. The review for tenure for faculty on the tenure-track and the penultimate year review for clinical/teaching/practice or research faculty entails a much weightier decision than the annual review and includes assessment of both cumulative performance and promise of high-quality performance. Performance that is adequate for annual reappointment may not be adequate for the granting of tenure, promotion (see Faculty Rule 3335-6-05), or reappointment.
1.1.1 Formal appeal process
Only the candidate may make an appeal of a negative tenure, promotion, or reappointment decision regarding allegations of improper evaluation. A formal appeal cannot begin until the executive vice president and provost has rendered a negative decision in a promotion or promotion and tenure case for tenure-track faculty, in a promotion case for clinical/teaching/practice and research faculty, or the dean has rendered a decision in a reappointment case. An appeal alleging improper evaluation is reviewed in accordance with procedures described in Faculty Rule 3335-5-05.
All appeals must occur within 30 days of the date of the letter from either the TIU head or dean informing the faculty member of the executive vice president and provost’s negative decision in a promotion or promotion and tenure case for tenure-track faculty, in a promotion case for clinical/teaching/practice and research faculty, or the dean has rendered a negative decision in a reappointment case. The faculty member may appeal by sending a written complaint describing the alleged improper evaluation to the chair of CAFR, copied to the executive vice president and provost and vice provost for academic policy and faculty resources in cases involving promotion or promotion and tenure, or the dean in the case of clinical/teaching/practice and research faculty reappointments, and shall meet with the chair of CAFR regarding the complaint and next steps.
The faculty member is to promptly inform the chair of CAFR and OAA if they decide not to pursue the appeal once it has been filed.
1.2 Allegation of discrimination
An appeal also may be based on an allegation of discrimination. Such an appeal will focus on discrimination based on protected status (see Affirmative Action and Equal Employment Opportunity Policy). A complaint alleging discrimination is to be presented in writing to the OIE, with a copy to the executive vice president and provost and vice provost for academic policy and faculty resources, within 30 days of the date of the letter from either the TIU head or dean informing the faculty member of the executive vice president and provost’s or dean’s (in the case of reappointments without a promotion review) negative decision. OIE shall have the sole discretion for investigating complaints of discrimination. The executive vice president and provost shall take any steps as deemed necessary upon receiving a decision from OIE.
1.3 Reviews in the final year of probation
In rare instances, a TIU may petition the dean to conduct a Seventh-Year Review for an assistant professor who has been denied promotion and tenure (see Faculty Rule 3335-6-05(B)). Although the term “seventh-year review” is used in the University Faculty Rules, these review procedures are to be used for probationary tenure track faculty who have been given a negative tenure or tenure with promotion decision. For example, assistant professors who have used one or more tenure clock extensions to move their mandatory review year, assistant professors with significant clinical duties in the College of Medicine in their last probationary year, and associate professors who have been denied tenure during their mandatory tenure review may also be considered for a final-year review following these same procedures.
The committee of eligible faculty and the TIU head must approve proceeding with a petition for a seventh-year review. The petition must provide documentation of substantial new information regarding the candidate's performance that is germane to the reasons for the original negative decision. Petitions must be initiated before the beginning of the last year of employment so the review can be completed before the candidate’s last day of employment.
If the dean concurs with the TIU’s petition, the petition will be forwarded to OAA for review. If the executive vice president and provost approves the request, a new review will be conducted equivalent to the one that resulted in the nonrenewal of the appointment and does not presume a positive outcome. Should the new review result in a negative decision, the faculty member's last day of employment is that stated in the letter of nonrenewal issued following the original negative decision.
The candidate may not request a seventh-year review (the TIU head must make the request), appeal the denial of a seventh-year review petition, or appeal a negative decision following a seventh-year review, as the candidate has already been notified that tenure has been denied at the conclusion of the sixth-year review.