Trinity University
Faculty and Contract Staff Handbook

Toc button.jpg (2802 bytes)    Indx button.jpg (2396 bytes)    Home button.jpg (2770 bytes)


(9C)  POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR PROMOTION AND TENURE OF ACADEMIC FACULTY 
(Passed by the Faculty April 19, 2002)

I. THE ACADEMIC FACULTY

The Academic Faculty is defined as consisting of (1) those full-time members of the Faculty whose primary responsibility consists of teaching, research, and/or professional librarianship and (2) administrative personnel who hold Faculty rank and tenure in a Department or have primary responsibility in academic affairs (including the President of the University, and the University Librarian) but who are excluded from tenure in their administrative positions.

(Note: In all cases involving library Faculty, teacher shall be construed to mean "librarian"; teaching to mean "librarianship"; departmental or appropriate department to mean "library"; Chair to mean "University Librarian"; and Vice President for Faculty and Student Affairs to mean "Vice President for Information Resources.")

II. MISSION STATEMENT

The promotion and tenure process at Trinity University serves to maintain the quality of the University through continuing enhancement of the Faculty's teaching, librarianship, scholarship, artistic scholarship, and service. Standards for promotion and tenure must reflect the ideals of fairness, objectivity, and consistency both across all departments of the University and through time. The standards must also acknowledge and help to promote diversity of activities, perspectives, and responsibilities among the various departments, including the library, throughout the University, as well as among individuals. Consequently, there must be university-wide general standards that are both rigorous enough to ensure academic excellence throughout the University through successive years, and flexible enough to accommodate diversity among individual faculty members in the various departments and the library. In addition, there must be departmental and library criteria and guidelines that meet the general university-wide standards and that also reflect the particular responsibilities of the individual programs and clarify their special needs and emphases.

III. PROBATIONARY APPOINTMENTS 

Probationary appointments may be for one, two, or three years and are subject to renewal. The total period of full-time service prior to the acquisition of tenure, including previous full-time service in other institutions of higher learning, will not exceed seven years, except that the probationary period may extend to as much as four years, even if the total full-time service in the profession thereby exceeds seven years. The terms of extension will be stated in writing on appointment. Credit for prior service is optional if, by mutual agreement at the time of the initial appointment, the appointee and the University stipulate in writing the years of prior service to be excluded. The precise terms of appointment, including the years of prior service to be credited, shall be stated in writing within the initial contract. 

IV. EVALUATION OF PROBATIONARY FACULTY LEADING UP TO THE TENURE DECISION 

A probationary appointee will be evaluated or reviewed annually, prior to the appropriate date of notification of non-reappointment stated below. At least biennially (for example during the second, fourth, and sixth years of an initial probationary appointment) the evaluation must involve the following procedure.

The departmental Chair will notify the probationary appointee of the forthcoming evaluation and confer with the Faculty member concerning details of the procedures to be followed. After notification the probationary appointee will submit in writing a self-evaluation of progress to date and any supporting materials deemed useful to the Department.

Then each tenured member of the Department, after examining the Faculty member's self-evaluation, will submit a written evaluation comprising a recommendation for or against reappointment, the reasoning that supports the recommendation, and an assessment of the candidate's progress towards tenure. Persons other than the tenured members of the Department may also participate in the process of evaluating a Faculty member: the Faculty member or the Department may request that advice relevant to the evaluation be sought from non-tenured members of the Department, current and former students, Faculty members in other departments, or other qualified scholars.

Following receipt of the evaluations and tabulation of the recommendations, the Chair will discuss the general results of the evaluation with the tenured members of the Department and then separately with the Faculty member. The Chair will give the Faculty member a copy of the written statement of the departmental recommendation, including a summary of the reasons for this recommendation; a copy of this statement will become part of the Faculty member's evaluation file. At this time the Faculty member may respond to the recommendation, for example, pointing out any matter he or she considers factually inaccurate or inappropriate in a letter which becomes part of the Faculty member's evaluation file. The tenured members of the Department may make written reply to the Faculty member's response to the departmental recommendation, and such reply also becomes part of the Faculty member's evaluation file.

The unrecorded oral discussion in departmental meetings pertaining to the evaluation of candidates for tenure, promotion, and/or reappointment will remain confidential.

In years when the formal procedures of evaluation above are not followed, the Chair must convene the tenured members of the Department. The status of the probationary appointee will be reviewed in order to make a recommendation regarding the next appointment as required by the appropriate date of notification of non-reappointment. Since a decision not to reappoint should not be concluded apart from the opportunity for formal evaluation, the meeting of tenured Faculty shall be conducted early enough that, should the tenured Faculty find that they have any serious question regarding reappointment, including concerns over the candidate's progress towards tenure, there would be time to invoke the formal procedures of evaluation before deciding on an official recommendation. Further, if at any level of administrative review a serious question regarding reappointment arises, the administrative recommendation or decision regarding reappointment shall be delayed in order for formal evaluation procedures to be conducted.

With respect to each probationary appointee who receives a continuing (non-terminal) contract, the Vice President for Faculty and Student Affairs (the Vice President for Information Resources in the case of librarians) will provide a written report to the Chair regarding the Administration's review of the departmental evaluation. The report should include any differences in evaluation that might bear on progress towards tenure, whether these are areas of concern that were not addressed in the departmental evaluation, areas of departmental concern not shared by the Administration, or areas of mutual concern that are viewed with significantly different weight on the part of the Administration. The Chair will share the Vice President's report with the tenured Faculty and forward a copy of the report to the Faculty member.

Where the decision is not to reappoint, the Faculty member shall be notified in writing by the President of the University. The Faculty member may request from the President that she or he be given the reasons contributing to the decision either orally or in writing, and she or he may request reconsideration. If a written statement of reasons is requested, the statement will become part of the Faculty member's evaluation file.

If the probationary Faculty member being evaluated is a Chair, the functions relative to that particular evaluation that are normally performed by the departmental Chair shall be performed by a tenured member of the Department selected by the tenured members, or if there are no tenured members, by another departmental Chair designated by the Vice President for Faculty and Student Affairs.

V. EVALUATION OF PROBATIONARY FACULTY FOR TENURE AND PROMOTION TO ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR

A decision concerning tenure and promotion to Associate Professor will be made in the next to last year of a faculty member's probationary period, in the sixth year of service of a probationary appointee with no prior service, or the year prior to that stipulated at which tenure must be granted to or withheld from an appointee with prior service. Nothing in this provision, however, shall prevent the Department and Administration from making a decision earlier than the generally stipulated time. The process and criteria of evaluation are the same as those for reappointment or non-reappointment, except that the recommendation is for granting or withholding tenure.

The departmental Chair will notify the probationary appointee of the forthcoming tenure evaluation and confer with the Faculty member concerning details of the procedures to be followed. After notification, the probationary appointee will submit in writing a self-evaluation and supporting materials that address the question of his or her merits for tenure and promotion.

Then each tenured member of the Department, after examining the Faculty member's self-evaluation, will submit a written evaluation comprising a recommendation for or against tenure and promotion and the reasoning that supports the recommendation. Persons other than the tenured members of the Department may also participate in the process of evaluating a Faculty member: the Faculty member or the Department may request that advice relevant to the evaluation be sought from non-tenured members of the Department, current and former students, Faculty members in other departments, or other qualified scholars. In the evaluation of scholarship, professional achievement, and artistic achievement, evaluations by peer reviewers external to the University are required.

Following receipt of the evaluations and tabulation of the recommendations, the Chair will discuss the general results of the evaluation with the tenured members of the Department and then separately with the Faculty member. The Chair will give the Faculty member a copy of the written statement of the departmental recommendation regarding tenure, including a summary of the reasons for this recommendation; a copy of this statement will become part of the Faculty member's evaluation file. At this time the Faculty member may respond to the recommendation, for example, pointing out any matter he or she considers factually inaccurate or inappropriate in a letter which becomes part of the Faculty member's evaluation file. The tenured members of the Department may make written reply to the Faculty member's response to the departmental recommendation, and such reply also becomes part of the Faculty member's evaluation file.

The unrecorded oral discussion in departmental meetings pertaining to the evaluation of candidates for tenure and promotion will remain confidential.

The Chair shall transmit the departmental file on the case, including the Chair's personal recommendation, along with peer evaluations by each tenured member of the Department, to the University Commission on Promotion and Tenure, for it is understood that the primary centers of review of a Faculty member's merits for tenure and/or promotion will be the Department and the Commission on Promotion and Tenure.

The Commission shall review all the materials involved. If any members of the Commission have major questions that cannot be resolved from the candidate's dossier alone, the Commission shall solicit additional information from any source it may deem appropriate. The Commission will develop its own recommendation on the case. If the Commission's recommendation differs from the departmental recommendation, the Commission shall provide a detailed letter that sets forth the recommendation and the reasoning that supports it. The Commission shall send this letter to the Department and to the candidate, offering the Department the opportunity to supply arguments for reconsideration. In cases when the Department decides to supply arguments for reconsideration, the Department will give the Faculty member a summary of the departmental appeal; this summary statement and any response by the Faculty member to it will become a part of the Faculty member's evaluation file. Before sending its recommendation to the President, the Commission shall give consideration to any new arguments supplied by the Department, including any response by the Faculty member. The Commission will then add its recommendation regarding tenure and promotion to that of the Department and will forward the complete file, including the recommendation of the Department and any subsequent arguments and counterarguments, to the President of the University, with a copy of the letter of recommendation to the Vice President for Faculty and Student Affairs (or the Vice President for Information Resources in the case of librarians).

The Vice President for Faculty and Student Affairs (or the Vice President for Information Resources in the case of librarians) shall develop his or her own recommendation on the case. If the Vice President's recommendation differs from the Commission's or the Department's, the Vice President shall provide a detailed letter that sets forth his or her recommendation and the reasoning that supports the recommendation. The Vice President shall send this letter to the Department, and to the candidate, offering the Department the opportunity to supply arguments for reconsideration. The Vice President shall also send this letter to the Commission as a courtesy. Before sending his or her recommendation to the President, the Vice President shall give consideration to any new arguments supplied by the Department. The Vice President will then send his or her letter, including any subsequent arguments, to the President.

The President shall make the decision regarding tenure and promotion. If the President's decision differs from that of the Department and/or the Commission or denies the candidate tenure and promotion, the President shall so notify in writing the Commission, the Department, and the candidate, giving the reasons for his or her decision. The Department, the Commission, and/or the candidate may then request reconsideration by the President, supplying whatever arguments are deemed appropriate.

When an initial appointment to the Faculty of Trinity University involves tenure or promotion to a rank higher than that held by the candidate at another institution (except when the promotion is to Assistant Professor), the procedures for recommendation and approval are the same as those for the promotion and tenure of probationary appointees described above except that a self-evaluation by the candidate is not required. The evaluation file prepared by the recommending Department for the Commission on Promotion and Tenure must include evaluations and recommendations from each tenured member of the Department and a summary recommendation from the departmental Chair. The evaluation file will be reviewed at a convened meeting of the Commission on Promotion and Tenure.

Upon receipt of notification of the decision to grant tenure and promotion, the Faculty member acquires full rights and responsibilities of other tenured members in respect to termination for cause or financial exigency. A decision to withhold tenure and promotion means that the final probationary contract will be terminal.

Note: Candidates for tenure should also refer to the section below on "Documentation for Candidates for Promotion and Tenure."

VI. EVALUATION OF TENURED FACULTY FOR PROMOTION TO PROFESSOR

A. Merit. Promotion is based on merit and is not automatic.

B. Criteria. Promotion shall be based on the same University criteria used in considerations of reappointment and tenure.

C. Procedures

Recommendations for promotions will normally originate in the Department and will involve all tenured members. Consideration of Faculty members whose promotion would involve an exception to the formal standards for ranks may be initiated by the Faculty member, the Department, or the Administration. The process of evaluation and reporting is the same as that for tenure (see section V, Evaluation of Probationary Faculty for Tenure and Promotion, above) except that the recommendation is for or against promotion.

The President or the VPFSA/VPIR may initiate the evaluation process for promotion, but the Chair and all tenured members of the appropriate Department must be involved in the process.

These procedures also shall be followed in cases involving both initial appointment to the Faculty of Trinity University and promotion to a higher rank than currently held by the candidate at another institution.

Final approval or disapproval will be made by the President of the University.

VII. APPEAL OF NEGATIVE DECISIONS FOR TENURE AND PROMOTION

A decision not to promote or grant tenure does not necessarily imply unfitness. The decision, however, must result from adequate consideration, as specified by the evaluative procedures and stated criteria above. The decision also must not violate the Faculty member's academic freedom, or be based on ethnic, religious, age, or sex discrimination.

If the Faculty member alleges that the decision was based on considerations in violation of her or his academic freedom; or on religious, sex, age, or ethnic discrimination; or on inadequate consideration, the Faculty member may appeal in accordance with procedures of Due Process (Chapter 3A, Article VI).

The faculty member should exhaust all University methods of appeal before taking a complaint to civil or governmental agencies.

VIII. STANDARDS FOR RANKS AND PROMOTION

The following standards for ranks and promotion are normal qualifications and are intended to be flexible. Meeting the requirements of a particular rank does not automatically insure appointment or promotion to that rank. Moreover, exceptions to some requirements may be made for individuals who are judged to be qualified for a certain rank by reason of recognized competence in their fields.

Faculty Ranks

1. Instructor. A person appointed to this rank shall have earned at least the Master's degree in the area to which he or she is appointed or shall have achieved the equivalent in graduate education, such as persons who have completed all doctoral work except the dissertation.

2. Assistant Professor. A person appointed or promoted to this rank shall have earned the highest degree appropriate to his or her discipline.

3. Associate Professor

a. A person appointed or promoted to this rank shall have earned the highest degree appropriate to his or her discipline.

b. The candidate for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor shall, at the time of consideration, have had no fewer than five years of experience in teaching or librarianship at the rank of Assistant Professor.

c. The candidate shall have demonstrated ability to contribute to his or her field as evidenced by such scholarly activities as research projects, grants, awards, leadership in learned societies, and publications or artistic production.

4. Professor

a. A person appointed or promoted to this rank shall have earned the highest degree appropriate to his or her discipline.

b. She or he shall have established a record of effectiveness as a teacher or librarian, a record of scholarly or artistic productivity, and a record of leadership in the University and/or the larger community, which is, on the whole, outstanding. Neither possession of the relevant degree, seniority in the Department, or a combination of both shall alone be sufficient cause for promotion to this rank.

c. The candidate for promotion to the rank of Professor shall, at the time of consideration, have had no fewer than five years of experience at the rank of Associate Professor.

IX. CRITERIA FOR REAPPOINTMENT, TENURE, AND PROMOTION

A. University Criteria

A decision to recommend reappointment and/or the awarding of tenure shall be based on the following criteria: 1. quality of teaching or librarianship; 2. quality of scholarship, research, or professional or artistic achievements; and 3. service to the Department, the University, the profession, and the community. As a primarily undergraduate, liberal arts institution with a few select professional and pre-professional programs, Trinity University strives for excellence in teaching. In recognition of the close relationship between quality instruction and an active scholarly, professional, or artistic life, achievements in these areas must also be given significant weight. Accordingly, all promotions must be based on high priority being given to a combination of teaching and scholarship/artistic achievement.

Service to the Department, the University, the profession, and the community is an important responsibility for all members of the Trinity Academic Faculty. Thus, service should not be neglected in any weighting of the criteria, but also should not take precedence over either teaching or librarianship, on the one hand, or scholarship/artistic performance on the other hand.

Given Trinity's character as a primarily undergraduate, liberal arts institution that values scholarship and artistic performance, departmental and library criteria should reflect an emphasis on quality rather than quantity. At the same time, quantity is not unimportant.

The accomplishments and potential of the individual shall be the major basis for the decision. However, the present and future needs of the University shall also be carefully weighed. A decision to reappoint indicates progress toward tenure.

B. Departmental and Library Criteria.

1. Critical to the issues of fairness, objectivity, and consistency in promotion and tenure is clear communication among the university-wide bodies responsible for overseeing the promotion and tenure process, the various departments or the library, and individual Faculty members. Accordingly, each Department and the library must have clear, written expectations and criteria used in assessing a candidate's progress towards tenure and/or promotion. Differences in expectations and criteria for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor and for promotion to Professor must also be clarified. These expectations and criteria are to be submitted initially to the VPFSA/VPIR and the Promotion and Tenure Criteria Approval Committee for pre-approval. (Subsequent, periodic reviews will be done by the VPFSA/VPIR and the commission on Promotion and Tenure.) This will help ensure that individual programs, the Commission, and the Administration apply the same standards and criteria to any given applicant for tenure and promotion. It is the responsibility of the Commission and the VPFSA/VPIR, as well as of individual Department chairs and the University Librarian, to ensure that the criteria and guidelines of each program meet the general standards of the University.

2. In developing their expectations and criteria, departments and the library must conform to the general university-wide criteria specified above under "Criteria for Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion." At the same time, departments and the library are to develop their own criteria that reflect the particular responsibilities of the individual programs and that clarify their special needs and emphases. This may be done, for instance, by utilizing general illustrative examples of satisfactory progress; or by specifying what criteria are to be used in assessing satisfactory progress especially at the formal fourth year review; or by specifying what sort of lacunae in a candidate's record would be problematic especially in the fourth and fifth years; or by some other appropriate but reasonably specific means. In developing specific criteria, departments may wish to refer to paragraphs V-VIII in the section on "Documentation for Candidates for Promotion and Tenure" below.

3. Implementation. It is intended that all departments and the library will develop their written criteria (if they do not already have some such document) within one year from the adoption of the new policy. It is expected that the initial pre-approval of all departmental and library criteria will occur within two years from the adoption of the new policy.

The initial round of pre-approval of departmental and library criteria will be accomplished by the VPFSA/VPIR and the Promotion and Tenure Criteria Approval Committee. This temporary committee will consist of seven former members of the University Commission on Promotion and Tenure, with at least one, but not more than two, elected from each disciplinary group. The nomination, election, and replacement procedures for members of this committee will be the same as that specified for the Commission on Promotion and Tenure (Chapter 2A, Article V). It is anticipated that the initial round of pre-approval of criteria will begin during the spring semester of 2003 and will be completed by the end of the spring semester, 2004. Once the initial round of pre-approval is complete for all departments and the library, the Promotion and Tenure Criteria Approval Committee will be disbanded.

4. Periodic Reviews

a) Review procedures

After initial pre-approval of departmental and library criteria, the VPFSA/VPIR and the Commission on Promotion and Tenure will review departmental criteria on a five-year cycle. For determining the departmental or library sequence for the first cycle of reviews, departments and the library will be selected randomly, in groups of about five, to begin the review process in the fifth year after the initial pre-approvals are completed.

The office of the VPFSA/VPIR will notify Department chairs and the University Librarian on or before September 1 of reviews that are scheduled for that academic year, and will provide the departments and the library with a timetable for the review. If a Department or the library feels that its current criteria are still acceptable and in no need of revision, the VPFSA/VPIR and Commission will review the existing criteria to ensure that they continue to meet the University standards for excellence. If a Department or the library believes that its criteria need alterations before the end of its five-year cycle, it may petition the VPFSA/VPIR prior to September 1 for such a review with an explanation of the need for an interim review. In consultation with the Commission, the VPFSA/VPIR will determine whether or not to grant the Department or the library an opportunity to submit its revised criteria. In the event that a petition is granted, departments or the library are to follow the timetables established for departmental reviews.

b) Timetable for Phasing in Revised Criteria

Revised criteria should be implemented immediately, except in cases regarding faculty members who are within four years of tenure and promotion to associate professor or within four years of eligibility for promotion to professor. In such cases, faculty members shall be given the option of sending forward their applications for tenure and promotion or promotion with either the existing or revised criteria. Faculty members who are more than four years from applying for tenure and/or promotion must abide by the revised criteria.

X. DOCUMENTATION FOR CANDIDATES FOR PROMOTION AND TENURE

The Constitution of the Faculty Organization at Trinity University (Chapter 2A) Article V.A.1 instructs members of the Commission on Promotion and Tenure to "review every departmental recommendation to grant or deny tenure, or to grant or deny promotion, to a member of the faculty. In making its review and formulating its recommendations, the Commission shall have as its primary concern the maintenance of fair and objective standards for peer-review decisions across the University." Evaluations of each candidate are to be based on the criteria stated in Chapter 3A: Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Employment of Faculty (Policy Statement) Article IV.G:

1. quality of teaching or librarianship,

2. quality of scholarship, research, or professional or artistic achievements, and

3. service to the Department, the University, the profession, and the community.

In preparing documentation addressing the above general criteria, candidates and departments should follow guidelines below to provide the most complete and informative presentations to the Commission.

In particular, candidates and departments are encouraged to submit materials in a common format, not only in the documentation but in addressing each of the criteria. The experience of the Commission indicates that the inclusion of certain critical items in a uniform way facilitates fairness and more informed decisions. Of particular importance to the Commission is the review by each tenured member of the Department, including the Chair, and the Chair's written statement of the departmental recommendation including a summary of the reasons for this recommendation (see Chapter 3A Article IV.E: Evaluation of Probationary Faculty). Because the documentation will, under normal circumstances, include outside evaluations of the candidate's scholarship, research, and professional or artistic achievements, each Department shall devise a clearly stated policy for selecting outside evaluators and shall clearly describe the task that outside evaluators should perform.

To assist the candidate and the Department, the Commission on Promotion and Tenure recommends the following format:

I. a brief guide to the submitted material (i.e., a Table of Contents).

II. a statement from the Department that lists a. ahe procedures of the Department. b. ahe pre-approved departmental criteria, including the relative weight of the three general criteria stated in Chapter 3A: Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Employment of Faculty (Policy Statement) Article IV.G.

III. a description of any agreement between the University and the applicant concerning specific duties during the evaluation period, and an explanation of how this agreement should affect the relative weight of the three general criteria.

IV. a current expanded curriculum vitae.

a. Include standard entries pertaining to i. Education; ii. Current and previous professional experience; iii. Teaching responsibilities or librarianship; iv. Biographical data; v. Service to Department, University, profession and community; vi. Honors and awards; and vii. Other scholarly activities. b. Identify bibliographical items carefully, using standardized citations and complete information on each entry. Indicate refereed articles or presentations, primary author and approximate percentage of contribution in multi-authored works, specific information about grants or fellowships, and  status of works-in-progress or works submitted for publication.

V. A self-evaluation based on the three general criteria identified in Chapter 3A: Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Employment of Faculty (Policy Statement) Article IV.G. The Commission emphasizes the importance of this document and urges the candidate to take great care in its preparation and to address each of the criteria: teaching, research/artistic achievement, and service.

a. Teaching or librarianship.

i. For teaching: Describe goals, philosophy, expectations. List courses taught and discuss development, improvements, and future directions. Provide an analysis of student evaluations of your teaching, using tables, charts, and other data if appropriate. Indicate how you have contributed to the Department's and University's expectations on teaching. ii. For librarianship: Describe your area(s) of responsibility and interest. Describe your goals, philosophy, and expectations. List accomplishments in your area(s) of responsibility and indicate how they have contributed to the library and to the university.

b. Scholarship, research, and/or professional or artistic achievement. Describe goals, philosophy, and expectations. Indicate your areas of interest and achievements in terms of publications, presentations, performances, exhibitions, and inclusion in the classroom. Discuss the quality of the journals and/or the refereed nature of your publications or presentations. Provide information on future research goals.

c. Service. Describe your University, professional, and community activities. Discuss their impact on your self-development and on the other criteria. (Within this self-evaluation, please address advising by describing your participation, your approach and procedures, your results.)

VI. Information concerning Teaching and Librarianship. Under normal circumstances this will include

A. For teaching:

1. Student evaluations (it is suggested that persons submitting materials for promotion to Professor should include evaluations since their promotion to Associate Professor). 2. Course syllabi, sample assignments, tests. 3. Descriptions of participation on graduate thesis and/or project committees, if applicable. 4. Development of new courses and programs. 5. Grade distributions (it is helpful if the candidate submits summaries or trend analyses of the results of the evaluations submitted).

B. For librarianship:

1. Development of programs that support and encourage information fluency in the Trinity community. 2. Development of other new and innovative programs in the library or on campus. 3. Evidence of effective use of organizational methods or of tools for access to information resources. 4. Evidence of ongoing or new methods that enhance efficiency or effectiveness of library operations. 5. Evidence of effective collection management in response to curricular or research needs of the University. 6. Evidence of productive liaison activity with library users.

VII. Evidence of scholarship, professional achievement, and artistic achievement. Under normal circumstances this will include

a. Lists of publications, including journal articles, proceedings, presentations, exhibits, bibliographies, indexes, and  performances (audio or video tapes may be included). b. Copies of publications. If publication is a portion of a collective work or a reference work, a photocopy of the candidate's contribution is sufficient. c. Reviews of books, plays, performances, exhibitions, findings. d. Evaluations by peers internal and external to the University. Inclusion of the following is required: i. Procedures of the Department in selecting external reviewers, ii. Information solicited and materials provided to the reviewer, and iii. Biographical information on the external reviewer e. Descriptions and examples of written research proposals. f. Descriptions of grants received. g. Descriptions of honors and awards.

VIII. Evidence of service to the Department, the University, the profession, and community. Under normal circumstances this will include

a. Lists and descriptions of activities. b. Copies of reports completed. c. Descriptions of results achieved.

IX. Peer evaluations by each tenured member of the applicant's Department.

a. An evaluation from each member, including the Chair's individual evaluation. University policy requires that each tenured member evaluate the candidate in respect to all three criteria: teaching or librarianship, research/artistic achievement, and service. b. Even if a tenured member is on academic or administrative leave, his or her contribution is highly desirable.

X. The Chair's summary of the tenured members' evaluations and the departmental recommendation pertaining to the granting of tenure and/or promotion.

XI. AMENDMENT PROCEDURE

The contents of this Appendix (Policies and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure of Academic Faculty) may be amended by

1. a majority of the membership of the Faculty Senate; 2. a majority of the Trinity University Academic Faculty; and 3. the Trinity University Board of Trustees.

Amendments may be initiated by the Faculty Senate, the Academic Faculty, or the Board of Trustees. Before voting upon a prepared amendment, at least fourteen days notice shall be given in writing to the membership of the Senate, the Academic Faculty, and the Board of Trustees.


Table of Contents | Index | Trinity University Home

Top of Page

This page was last modified on 11/29/11

For further information, please call (210) 999-8201, or write to

Office of  Academic Affairs
Trinity University
One Trinity Place
San Antonio, Texas  78212-7200