Roosevelt University in Chicago, Schaumburg and Online - Logo

Roosevelt University Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion Procedures

Approved by the Roosevelt University Senate November 19, 2008

Effective date 2009 to present

General Information and Principles

This document contains the timeline and procedures for Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion (R/T/P) at Roosevelt University.

Timeline

Normally, the timeline for R/T/P contained herein will be followed. Upon approval of the Provost and Executive Vice President (Provost/EVP) some adjustments to this timeline may be made. If dates in the timeline below fall during a weekend or holiday, the next business day will become the deadline.

Eligibility principles for professors voting on Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion (R/T/P)

  • Only tenured faculty members may vote on the R/T/P faculty.
  • Only tenured Full Professors may vote on promotion from Associate Professor to Full Professor at the Peer Review Committee (PRC) level.
  • Only tenured associate and Full Professors may vote on tenure for Associate Professors standing for tenure only.
  • Only tenured associate and Full Professors may vote on tenure and promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor or for reappointment of non‐tenure‐track faculty.
  • Those voting must vote only once and at the lowest level of eligibility.

Announcement of Candidates standing for Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion

This announcement is normally made by the Provost/EVP during the December meeting of the University Senate preceding the academic year in which Candidates will stand for R/T/P. By the end of the fall semester this list is posted on the Intranet. Note: The names of faculty wishing to stand for promotion to Full Professor will be distributed later in the process since standing for promotion to Full Professor is voluntary.

Reappointment/Tenure/Promotion Timeline


Section A - (for Non-Tenure-Track Instructors/Lecturers/Senior Lecturers standing for Reappointment)

By May 1 – Meeting with Department Chair

The Candidate and Department Chair (the Dean and/or his/her delegate may also attend and participate in this meeting) meet to review the entire reappointment process and procedures.

In the event that the Department Chair is untenured, is the Candidate him or herself, or is in some other way not appropriate to oversee the reappointment process for the Candidate (or if there is no department in place at the time of the reappointment), the Dean will confer with the tenured members of the department or unit before appointing a Chair Designate from the department or unit. The Chair Designate must be a tenured, associate or Full Professor.

By October 15 – Peer Review Committee (PRC) identified

The Dean identifies a PRC consisting of all tenured members of the Candidate’s department or unit (see eligibility of voting members above). The Department Chair or Chair Designate is not a member of the PRC. If there are fewer than three tenured members in a given department or unit, or if a College has no departmental structure, the Dean will select three eligible faculty from the College to serve on the PRC.

By November 15 – Candidate dossiers due

The Candidate submits a final dossier to the Dean’s Office for review by all involved in the R/T/P process. Once the final dossier is submitted, it will be considered confidential and no longer available to the Candidate until after the entire process has come to conclusion.

The final dossier should include:

  1. An updated vita, including the following, as applicable:

    a. Biographical and educational data.
    b. Courses taught in each semester (include year).
    c. Advising responsibilities.
    d. Service.
    e. Honors.
    f. Research and grants.
    g. Publications.
    h. Presentations.
    i. Creative or professional work.
  2. Evidence of teaching and advising:

    a. Statement of goals, philosophy of teaching, and future teaching plans as they relate to the Roosevelt mission.
    b. All student evaluations of faculty.
    c. All peer evaluations and/or observations.
    d. Representative syllabi.
  3. Evidence of service:

    a. Participation in academic unit, college and university activities and committees; holding office on these committees.
    b. Participation in learned societies and professional organizations; holding office in these organizations (indicate local, regional, or national).
    c. Consulting to the field and the community (indicate local, regional, or national).
    d. Participation in community and civic affairs.

By December 15 – Peer Review Committee (PRC) votes

The PRC reviews the dossier, meets and discusses the Candidate’s dossier in person (no teleconferenced or video‐conferenced attendance permitted), eliberates, and votes for or against reappointment for the Candidate by secret ballot.

The PRC:

  • tallies the vote;
  • writes a letter describing the strengths and weaknesses of the Candidate with regard to teaching and service in the context of the standards and criteria established by the University and the College;
  • communicates the vote to the Candidate, Department Chair or Chair Designate, and Dean in writing.

A copy of the letter is added to the Candidate’s dossier.

By December 26 the Candidate may respond in writing to the PRC report. The letter is to be addressed to the Department Chair or Chair Designate. The Candidate’s response will be included in the dossier.

By January 2 – Department Chair writes letter of recommendation

The tenured Department Chair or Chair Designate prepares a letter of recommendation to be added to the Candidate’s dossier based on his/her evaluation of the Candidate.

The letter:

  • discusses the Candidate’s performance in the areas of teaching, advising, and service;
  • assesses the Candidate’s strengths and weaknesses in light of his/her performance as related to the standards and criteria established by the College;
  • recommends for or against reappointment.

This letter is the equivalent of a vote and therefore the writer of the letter may not vote at any other level. The letter is addressed to the Dean with a copy to the Candidate and added to the Candidate’s dossier.

By February 1 – College Executive Committee (CEC) votes

The CEC reviews the dossier, including the PRC’s letter and vote, and the Department Chair’s or Chair Designate’s letter, meets and discusses the Candidate’s dossier in person (no teleconferenced or video‐conferenced attendance permitted), deliberates, and votes for or against reappointment of the Candidate by secret ballot.

The Chair of the CEC prepares a letter on the CEC’s vote addressed to the Dean, with a copy to the Candidate, reporting the vote of the CEC. This letter is added to the Candidate’s dossier.

If a member of the CEC voted on a particular Candidate being evaluated at a previous stage in the process, the member must recuse him/herself from voting and leave the room during any discussion of the Candidate.

By February 10 the Candidate may respond in writing to the CEC letter. The letter is to be addressed to the Dean. The Candidate’s response will be included in the dossier.

By February 15 – Dean writes letter of recommendation

The Dean of the College writes a letter of recommendation addressed to the Provost/EVP with a copy to the Candidate, and added to the Candidate’s dossier, regarding the Candidate’s reappointment with a recommendation for or against. This letter is added to the Candidate’s dossier. The Dean sends this letter and the complete dossier to the Office of the Provost/EVP.

By March 15 – Provost/EVP informs Candidates of reappointment decision

The Provost/EVP reviews the Candidate’s dossier, and based on the documents presented and the recommendations of the PRC, Department Chair or Chair Designate, CEC, and Dean, makes his/her decision regarding reappointment.

The Provost/EVP writes a letter to the Candidate informing him/her of that decision.

The Provost/EVP will announce the names of those reappointed at the Senate meeting immediately following April 21.


Section B - (for Assistant or Associate Professors standing for Reappointment)

By May 1 – Meeting with Department Chair

The Candidate and Department Chair (the Dean and/or his/her delegate may also attend and participate in this meeting) meet to review the entire reappointment process and procedures.

In the event that the Department Chair is untenured, is the Candidate him or herself, or is in some other way not appropriate to oversee the reappointment process for the Candidate (or if there is no department in place at the time of reappointment), the Dean will confer with the tenured members of the department or unit before appointing a Chair Designate from the department or unit. The Chair Designate must be a tenured associate or Full Professor.

By October 15 – Peer Review Committee (PRC) identified

The Dean identifies a PRC consisting of all tenured members of the Candidate’s department or unit (see eligibility of voting members above). The Department Chair or Chair Designate is not a member of the PRC. If there are fewer than three tenured members in a given department or unit, or if a College has no departmental structure, the Dean will select three eligible faculty from the College to serve on the PRC.

By November 15 – Candidate dossiers due

The Candidate submits a final dossier to the Dean’s Office for review by all involved in the R/T/P process. Once the final dossier is submitted, it will be considered confidential and no longer available to the Candidate until after the entire process has come to conclusion.

The final dossier should include

(see Faculty Manual for criteria established by each College.)

  1. An updated vita, including the following, as applicable:

    a. Biographical and educational data.
    b. Courses taught in each semester (include year).
    c. Advising responsibilities.
    d. Service.
    e. Honors.
    f. Research and grants.
    g. Publications.
    h. Presentations.
    i. Creative or professional work.
  2. Evidence of teaching and advising:

    a. Statement of goals, philosophy of teaching, and future teaching plans as they relate to the Roosevelt mission.
    b. All student evaluations of faculty.
    c. All peer evaluations and/or observations.
    d. Representative syllabi.
  3. Evidence of scholarship/professional and creative work, including the following, as applicable:

    a. Statement of scholarly, professional, and performance goals, activities and future plans as they relate to the Roosevelt University mission.
    b. Publications (including all manuscripts). Place an asterisk in front of articles that are refereed.
    c. Books.
    d. Presentations.
    e. Performances and compositions.
    f. Exhibitions.
    g. Publication awards, reviews of books and/or performances.
    h. Grant proposals.
  4. Evidence of service:

    a. Participation in academic unit, college and university activities and committees; holding office on these committees.
    b. Participation in learned societies and professional organizations; holding office in these organizations (indicate local, regional, or national).
    c. Consulting to the field and the community (indicate local, regional, or national).
    d. Participation in community and civic affairs.

By December 15 – Peer Review Committee (PRC) votes

The PRC reviews the dossier, meets and discusses the Candidate’s dossier in person (no teleconferenced or video‐conferenced attendance permitted), deliberates, and votes for or against reappointment for the Candidate by secret ballot.

The PRC:

  • tallies the vote;
  • writes a letter describing the strengths and weaknesses of the Candidate with regard to teaching, scholarship/professional and creative work, and service in the context of the standards and criteria established by the University and the College (the letter should note any weakness that may jeopardize the Candidate’s receiving tenure in the future);
  • communicates the vote to the Candidate, Department Chair or Chair Designate, and Dean in writing.

A copy of the letter is added to the Candidate’s dossier and the dossier returned to the Office of the Dean.

By December 22 the Candidate may respond in writing to the PRC report. The letter is to be addressed to the Department Chair or Chair Designate. The Candidate’s response will be included in the dossier.

By January 2 – Department Chair writes letter of recommendation

The tenured Department Chair or Chair Designate prepares a letter of recommendation to be added to the Candidate’s dossier based on his/her evaluation of the Candidate.

The letter:

  • discusses the Candidate’s performance in the areas of teaching/advising, scholarship/creative work, and service;
  • assesses the Candidate’s strengths and weaknesses in light of their performance as related to the standards and criteria established by the college;
  • recommends for or against reappointment.

This letter is the equivalent of a vote and therefore the writer of the letter may not vote at any other level. The letter is addressed to the Dean with a copy to the Candidate, and added to the Candidate’s dossier.

By February 1 – College Executive Committee (CEC) votes

The CEC reviews the dossier, including the PRC’s letter and vote, and the Department Chair’s or Chair Designate’s letter, meets and discusses the Candidate’s dossier in person (no teleconferenced or video‐conferenced attendance permitted), deliberates, and votes for or against reappointment of the Candidate by secret ballot.

The Chair of the CEC prepares a letter on the CEC’s vote addressed to the Dean, with a copy to the Candidate, and added to the Candidate’s dossier, reporting the vote of the CEC. If a member of the CEC voted on a particular Candidate being evaluated at a previous stage in the process, the member must recuse him/herself from voting and leave the room during any discussion of the Candidate.

By February 10 the Candidate may respond in writing to the CEC letter. The letter is to be addressed to the Dean. The Candidate’s response will be included in the dossier.

By February 15 – Dean writes letter of recommendation

The Dean of the College writes a letter of recommendation addressed to the Provost/EVP with a copy to the Candidate, and added to the Candidate’s dossier, regarding the Candidate’s reappointment with a recommendation for or against. This letter is added to the Candidate’s dossier. The Dean sends this letter and the complete dossier to the Office of the Provost/EVP.

By March 15 – University Faculty Personnel Committee (UFPC) votes

The UFPC reviews the dossier, including the PRC’s letter and vote, Department Chair’s or Chair Designate’s letter, CEC’s letter, and Dean’s letter, meets and discusses the Candidate’s dossier in person (no teleconferenced or video‐conferenced attendance permitted), deliberates, and votes for or against reappointment for the Candidate by secret ballot.

The UFPC also discusses the process for the Candidate to determine if procedures were followed and if the criteria established by the individual colleges and/or departments have been met. A letter noting the UFPC’s vote for or against reappointment and findings is provided in writing to the Candidate and his/her Dean. This letter is added to the Candidate’s dossier.

If a member of the UFPC voted on a particular Candidate being evaluated at a previous stage in the process, the member must recuse him/herself from voting and leave the room during any discussion of the Candidate.

By March 25, the Candidate may respond in writing to the UFPC’s report and appeal the findings. The Candidate’s appeal will be included in the dossier.

By April 1, the UFPC reconvenes if an appeal from the candidate is received. The UFPC will consider the appeal, vote again, and this vote will be final. The vote will be reported in writing to the Candidate with a copy to the Provost/EVP.

By April 7 – Provost/EVP makes recommendation to President

The Provost/EVP reviews the Candidate’s complete dossier, including the documents presented and the recommendations of the PRC, Department Chair, CEC, Dean, and UFPC, and makes a recommendation to the President.

The President reviews the Candidate’s complete dossier, including the documents presented and the recommendations of the PRC, Department Chair, CEC, Dean, UFPC, and Provost/EVP, and makes his/her decision regarding reappointment.

By April 21 – Provost/EVP informs Candidates of reappointment decision

The Provost/EVP writes a letter to the Candidate informing him/her of the President’s decision.

The Provost/EVP will announce the names of those reappointed at the Senate meeting immediately following this date.


Section C - (for Assistant Professors standing for Tenure and Promotion or Associate Professors standing for Tenure alone)

By February 1 – Meeting with Department Chair

The Candidate and Department Chair (the Dean and/or his/her delegate may also attend and participate in this meeting) meet to review the entire tenure and promotion process and procedures (or tenure process and procedures for Associate Professors standing for tenure alone), including but not limited to the need to submit a list of names of external reviewers by May 1 and to prepare the preliminary dossier by August 1. In the event that the Department Chair is untenured, is the Candidate him or herself, or is in some other way not appropriate to oversee the tenure and promotion process for the Candidate (or if there is no department in place at the time of reappointment), the Dean will confer with the tenured members of the department or unit before appointing a Chair
Designate from the department or unit. The Chair Designate must be a tenured associate or Full Professor.

By May 1 – Confidential external reviewers

The Candidate, in consultation with the Department Chair or Chair Designate, develops a list of “arm’s‐length” experts to serve as confidential external reviewers. An arm’s‐length reviewer must be an expert in the Candidate’s discipline with no conflicting relationship, such as, dissertation advisor, collaborator (co‐author or joint researcher), students, relatives, and those involved in romantic relationships. The list is normally six or more persons, long enough to maximize the possibility that a minimum of at least three external letters are ultimately received. The list of external reviewers must be approved by the Dean or can be created in conjunction with the Dean.

By June 30 – Contacting external reviewers

The Department Chair, Chair Designate or Dean contacts individuals on the list of external reviewers to determine their willingness to serve as an external reviewer (see Example A attached).

By August 1 – Submission of preliminary dossier

The Candidate for tenure and promotion (or for the Associate Professor standing for tenure alone) submits his/her preliminary dossier (curriculum vitae, examples of scholarship/professional and creative work, and other relevant materials) to the Department Chair, Chair Designate, or Dean.

By August 15 – Preliminary dossier sent to external reviewers

The Department Chair, Chair Designate or Dean sends the preliminary dossier and a request for a confidential letter of recommendation to the final list of external reviewers. The letters must be addressed to the Dean and normally received by November 1, but no later than November 15. The Department Chair, Chair Designate or Dean monitors the informal replies of the external reviewers in order to ensure that a minimum of three have accepted the invitation to review the Candidate.

By October 15 – Peer Review Committee (PRC) identified

The Dean identifies a PRC consisting of all tenured members of the Candidate’s department or unit (see eligibility of voting members above). The Department Chair or Chair Designate is not a member of the PRC. If there are fewer than three tenured members in a given department or unit, or if a College has no departmental structure, the Dean will select three eligible faculty from the College to serve on the PRC.

By November 1 – External review letters due

The Dean’s Office stamps all external review letters received “Confidential” and places them in the Candidate’s dossier once each is received.

By November 15 – Candidate dossiers due

The Candidate submits a final dossier to the Dean’s Office for review by all involved in the R/T/P process. Once the final dossier is submitted, it will be considered confidential and no longer available to the Candidate until after the entire process has come to conclusion.

The final dossier should include

(see Faculty Manual for criteria established by each College.)

  1. An updated vita, including the following, as applicable:

    a. Biographical and educational data.
    b. Courses taught in each semester (include year).
    c. Advising responsibilities.
    d. Service.
    e. Honors.
    f. Research and grants.
    g. Publications.
    h. Presentations.
    i. Creative or professional work.
  2. Evidence of teaching and advising:

    a. Statement of goals, philosophy of teaching, and future teaching plans as they relate to the Roosevelt mission.
    b. All student evaluations of faculty.
    c. All peer evaluations and/or observations.
    d. Representative syllabi.
  3. Evidence of scholarship/professional and creative work, including the following, as applicable:

    a. Statement of scholarly, professional, and performance goals, activities and future plans as they relate to the Roosevelt University mission.
    b. Publications (including all manuscripts). Place an asterisk in front of articles that are refereed.
    c. Books.
    d. Presentations.
    e. Performances and compositions.
    f. Exhibitions.
    g. Publication awards, reviews of books and/or performances.
    h. Grant proposals.
  4. Evidence of service:

    a. Participation in academic unit, college and university activities and committees; holding office on these committees.
    b. Participation in learned societies and professional organizations; holding office in these organizations (indicate local, regional, or national).
    c. Consulting to the field and the community (indicate local, regional, or national).
    d. Participation in community and civic affairs.

By December 15 – Peer Review Committee (PRC) votes

The PRC reviews the dossier, meets and discusses the Candidate’s dossier in person (no teleconferenced or video‐conferenced attendance permitted), deliberates, and votes for or against tenure and/or promotion for the Candidate by secret ballot.

The PRC:

  • tallies the vote;
  • writes a letter describing the strengths and weaknesses of the Candidate with regard to teaching, scholarship/professional and creative work, and service in the context of the standards and criteria established by the University and the College;
  • communicates the vote to the Candidate, Department Chair or Chair Designate, and Dean in writing.
  • A copy of the letter is added to the Candidate’s dossier and the dossier returned to the Office of the Dean.

By December 26 the Candidate may respond in writing to the PRC report. The letter is to be addressed to the Department Chair or Chair Designate. The Candidate’s response will be included in the dossier.

By January 2 – Department Chair writes letter of recommendation

The tenured Department Chair or Chair Designate prepares a letter of recommendation to be added to the Candidate’s dossier based on his/her evaluation of the Candidate.

The letter:

• discusses the Candidate’s performance in the areas of teaching/advising, scholarship/professional and creative work, and service;
• assesses the Candidate’s strengths and weaknesses in light of their performance as related to the standards and criteria established by the college;
• recommends for or against tenure and/or promotion.

This letter is the equivalent of a vote and therefore the writer of the letter may not vote at any other level. The letter is addressed to the Dean with a copy to the Candidate, and added to the Candidate’s dossier.

By February 1 – College Executive Committee (CEC) votes

The CEC reviews the dossier, including the PRC’s letter and vote, and the Department Chair’s or Chair Designate’s letter, meets and discusses the Candidate’s dossier in person (no teleconferenced or video‐conferenced attendance permitted), deliberates, and votes for or against tenure and/or promotion of the Candidate by secret ballot.

The Chair of the CEC prepares a letter on the CEC’s vote addressed to the Dean, with a copy to the Candidate, and added to the Candidate’s dossier, reporting the vote of the CEC. If a member of the CEC voted on a particular Candidate being evaluated at a previous stage in the process, the member must recuse him/herself from voting and leave the room during any discussion of the Candidate.

By February 10 the Candidate may respond in writing to the CEC letter. The letter is to be addressed to the Dean. The Candidate’s response will be included in the dossier.

By February 15 – Dean writes letter of recommendation

The Dean of the College writes a letter of recommendation addressed to the Provost/EVP with a copy to the Candidate, and added to the Candidate’s dossier, regarding the Candidate’s tenure and/or promotion. This letter is added to the Candidate’s dossier, and the Dean sends this letter and the complete dossier to the Office of the Provost/EVP.

By March 15 – University Faculty Personnel Committee (UFPC) votes

The UFPC reviews the dossier, including the PRC’s letter and vote, Department Chair’s or Chair Designate’s letter, CEC’s letter, and Dean’s letter, meets and discusses the Candidate’s dossier in person (no teleconferenced or video‐conferenced attendance permitted), deliberates, and votes for or against tenure and/or promotion of the Candidate by secret ballot.

The UFPC also discusses the process for the Candidate to determine if procedures were followed and if the criteria established by the individual colleges and/or departments have been met. A letter noting the UFPC’s vote for or against tenure and/or promotion and findings is provided to the Candidate and his/her Dean. This letter is added to the Candidate’s dossier and the dossier is returned to the Office of the Provost/EVP.

If a member of the UFPC voted on a particular Candidate being evaluated at a previous stage in the process, the member must recuse him/herself from voting and leave the room during any discussion of the Candidate.

By March 25, the Candidate may respond in writing to the UFPC’s report and appeal the findings. The Candidate’s appeal will be included in the dossier.

By April 1, the UFPC reconvenes if an appeal from the candidate is received. The UFPC will consider the appeal, vote again, and this vote will be final. The vote will be reported in writing to the Candidate with a copy to the Provost/EVP.

By April 7 – Provost/EVP makes recommendation to President

The Provost/EVP reviews the Candidate’s complete dossier, including the documents presented and the recommendations of the PRC, Department Chair, CEC, Dean, and UFPC, and makes a recommendation to the President.

The President reviews the Candidate’s complete dossier, including the documents presented and the recommendations of the PRC, Department Chair, CEC, Dean, UFPC, and Provost/EVP, and makes his/her decision regarding tenure and/or promotion.

By April 21 – Provost/EVP informs Candidates of reappointment decision

The Provost/EVP writes a letter to the Candidate informing him/her of that decision.

The Provost/EVP will announce the names of those promoted to Associate Professor and/or tenured at the Senate meeting immediately following this date.


Section D - (for tenured Associate Professors standing for Promotion to Full Professor)

By April 1 – Meeting with the Dean

The Candidates for promotion to Full Professor should self‐identify him/herself to the Dean and meet to review the entire promotion process and procedures, including but not limited to the need to submit a list of names of external reviewers by May 1 and to prepare the preliminary dossier by August 1.

By May 1 – Confidential external reviewers

The Candidate, in consultation with the Department Chair or Chair Designate (Chair Designate must be a tenured, Full Professor), develops a list of “arm’s‐length” experts with the rank of Full Professor or equivalent to serve as confidential external reviewers. An arm’s‐length reviewer must be an expert in the Candidate’s discipline with no conflicting relationship, such as, dissertation advisor, collaborator (co‐author or joint researcher), students, relatives, and those involved in romantic relationships. The list is normally six or more persons, long enough to maximize the possibility a minimum of at least three external
letters are ultimately received. The list of external reviewers must be approved by the Dean or can be created in conjunction with the Dean.

By June 30 – Contacting external reviewers

The Department Chair, Chair Designate or Dean contacts individuals on the list of external reviewers to determine their willingness to serve as an external reviewer (see Example A attached).

By August 1 – Submission of preliminary dossier

The Candidate for promotion to Full Professor submits his/her preliminary dossier (curriculum vitae, examples of scholarship/professional and creative work, and other relevant materials) to the Department Chair, Chair Designate or Dean.

By August 15 – Preliminary dossier sent to external reviewers

The Department Chair, Chair Designate or Dean sends the preliminary dossier and a request for a confidential letter of recommendation to the final list of external reviewers. The letters must be addressed to the Dean and normally received by November 1, but no later than November 15. The Department Chair, Chair Designate or Dean monitors the informal replies of the external reviewers in order to ensure that a minimum of three have accepted the invitation to review the Candidate.

By October 15 – Peer Review Committee (PRC) selected

The Dean identifies a PRC consisting of all tenured Full Professors of the Candidate’s department or unit (see eligibility of voting members above). The Department Chair or Chair Designate is not a member of the PRC. If there are fewer than three tenured Full Professors in a given department or unit, or if a College has no departmental structure, the Dean will select three eligible faculty from the College to serve on the PRC.

By November 1 – External review letters due

The Dean’s Office stamps all external review letters received “Confidential” and places them in the Candidate’s dossier once each is received.

By November 15 – Candidate dossiers due

The Candidate submits a final dossier to the Dean’s Office for review by all involved in the R/T/P process. Once the final dossier is submitted, it will be considered confidential and no longer available to the Candidate until after the entire process has come to conclusion.

The final dossier should include

(see Faculty Manual for criteria established by each College.)

  1. An updated vita, including the following, as applicable:

    a. Biographical and educational data.
    b. Courses taught in each semester (include year).
    c. Advising responsibilities.
    d. Service.
    e. Honors.
    f. Research and grants.
    g. Publications.
    h. Presentations.
    i. Creative or professional work.
  2. Evidence of teaching and advising:

    a. Statement of goals, philosophy of teaching, and future teaching plans as they relate to the Roosevelt mission.
    b. All student evaluations of faculty.
    c. All peer evaluations and/or observations.
    d. Representative syllabi.
  3. Evidence of scholarship/professional and creative work, including the following, as applicable:

    a. Statement of scholarly, professional, and performance goals, activities and future plans as they relate to the Roosevelt University mission.
    b. Publications (including all manuscripts). Place an asterisk in front of articles that are refereed.
    c. Books.
    d. Presentations.
    e. Performances and compositions.
    f. Exhibitions.
    g. Publication awards, reviews of books and/or performances.
    h. Grant proposals.
  4. Evidence of service:

    a. Participation in academic unit, college and university activities and committees.
    b. Participation in learned societies and professional organizations; holding office in these organizations (indicate local, regional, or national).
    c. Consulting to the field and the community (indicate local, regional, or national).
    d. Participation in community and civic affairs.

By December 15 – Peer Review Committee (PRC) votes

The PRC reviews the dossier, meets and discusses the Candidate’s dossier in person (no teleconferenced or video‐conferenced attendance permitted), deliberates, and votes for or against promotion of the Candidate by secret ballot.

The PRC:

  • tallies the vote;
  • writes a letter describing the strengths and weaknesses of the Candidate with regard to teaching, scholarship/professional and creative work, and service in the context of the standards and criteria established by the University and the College;
  • communicates the vote to the Candidate, Department Chair or Chair Designate, and Dean in writing.

A copy of the letter is added to the Candidate’s dossier.

By December 26 the Candidate may respond in writing to the PRC report. The letter is to be addressed to the Department Chair or Chair Designate.

The Candidate’s response will be included in the dossier.

By January 2 – Department Chair writes letter of recommendation

The tenured Department Chair or Chair Designate prepares a letter of recommendation to be added to the Candidate’s dossier based on his/her evaluation of the Candidate.

The letter:

  • discusses the Candidate’s performance in the areas of teaching/advising, scholarship/professional and creative work, and service;
  • assesses the Candidate’s strengths and weaknesses in light of their performance as related to the standards and criteria established by the college;
  • recommends for or against promotion.

This letter is the equivalent of a vote and therefore the writer of the letter may not vote at any other level. The letter is addressed to the Dean with a copy to the Candidate, and added to the Candidate’s dossier.

By February 1 – College Executive Committee (CEC) votes

The CEC reviews the dossier, including the PRC’s letter and vote, and the Department Chair’s or Chair Designate’s letter, meets and discusses the Candidate’s dossier in person (no teleconferenced or video‐conferenced attendance permitted), deliberates, and votes for or against promotion of the Candidate by secret ballot.

The Chair of the CEC prepares a letter on the CEC’s vote addressed to the Dean, reporting the vote of the CEC. This letter is added to the Candidate’s dossier.

If a member of the CEC voted on a particular Candidate being evaluated at a previous stage in the process, the member must recuse him/herself from voting and leave the room during any discussion of the Candidate.

By February 10 the Candidate may respond in writing to the CEC letter. The letter is to be addressed to the Dean. The Candidate’s response will be included in the dossier.

By February 15 – Dean writes letter of recommendation

The Dean of the College writes a letter of recommendation addressed to the Provost/EVP with a copy to the Candidate, and added to the Candidate’s dossier, regarding the Candidate’s promotion. This letter is added to the Candidate’s dossier, and the Dean sends this letter and the complete dossier to the Office of the Provost/EVP.

By March 15 – University Faculty Personnel Committee (UFPC) votes

The UFPC reviews the dossier, including the PRC’s letter and vote, Department Chair’s or Chair Designate’s letter, CEC’s letter, and Dean’s letter, meets and discusses the Candidate’s dossier in person (no teleconferenced or video‐conferenced attendance permitted), deliberates, and votes for or against promotion for the Candidate by secret ballot.

The UFPC also discusses the process for the Candidate to determine if procedures were followed and if the criteria established by the individual colleges and/or departments have been met. A letter noting the UFPC’s vote for or against promotion and findings is provided to the Candidate and his/her Dean. This letter is added to the Candidate’s dossier.

If a member of the UFPC voted on a particular Candidate being evaluated at a previous stage in the process, faculty member must recuse him/herself from voting and leave the room during any discussion of the Candidate.

By March 25, the Candidate may respond in writing to the UFPC’s report and appeal the findings. The Candidate’s appeal will be included in the dossier. By April 1, the UFPC reconvenes if an appeal from the candidate is received. The UFPC will consider the appeal, vote again, and this vote will be final. The vote will be reported in writing to the Candidate with a copy to the Provost/EVP.

By April 7 – Provost/EVP makes recommendation to President

The Provost/EVP reviews the Candidate’s complete dossier, including the documents presented and the recommendations of the PRC, Department Chair, CEC, Dean, and UFPC, and makes a recommendation to the President.

The President reviews the Candidate’s complete dossier, including the documents presented and the recommendations of the PRC, Department Chair, CEC, Dean, UFPC, and Provost/EVP, and makes his/her decision regarding promotion to Full Professor.

By April 21 – Provost/EVP informs Candidates of reappointment decision

The Provost/EVP writes a letter to the Candidate informing him/her of that decision.

The Provost/EVP will announce the names of those promoted to Full Professor at the Senate meeting immediately following this date.