I. Tenure and Promotion Appeals Process
A formal appeal comprises a written statement by a tenure‐track faculty member regarding receipt of a written notification from the College Tenure and Promotion Committee of a decision not to recommend the granting of tenure and/or promotion.
Prior to filing an appeal, the candidate shall meet with the provost to discuss the candidate’s case. The purpose of this meeting is for the candidate to seek the provost’s guidance and to allow for informal mediation, if possible. While the candidate must meet with the provost prior to filing an appeal, the provost may not prevent the candidate from filing an appeal.
An appeal must be filed with the provost’s office no later than fifteen days after receipt of the dean’s letter.
A complaint alleging inadequate consideration may arise if the evidence establishes a procedural flaw or irregularity in the handling of the portfolio or that the tenure and/or promotion recommendation was unduly influenced by failure of the Departmental Review Committee or the College Tenure and Promotion Committee to take a required procedural step or fulfill a procedural requirement as is delineated in the Faculty Handbook. Upon receipt of the appeal, the provost shall convene the Hearing Committee by presenting a copy of the appeal to the chair of the Hearing Committee. The Hearing Committee is prohibited from substituting its own judgment for that of members of the College Tenure and Promotion Committee on the merits of the candidate’s portfolio. The candidate should not expect or request a de novo review of the substance and/or merits of the applicant’s portfolio. Rather, the Hearing Committee is charged with and vested with the authority only to ascertain whether or not adequate considerations were rendered to the candidate’s application.
Thus, the Hearing Committee shall review the appeal to determine whether the tenure recommendation was the result of adequate consideration, with the understanding that the review committee should not substitute its judgment on the merits for that of the body or individuals that made the decision. In furtherance of this review, the Hearing Committee may gather information from all sources as it deems appropriate to determine whether the requisite procedure has been followed. If the Hearing Committee decides to interview members of either the Departmental Review Committee or the College Tenure and Promotion Committee, the Hearing Committee must interview approximately 50% of either committee’s members. The faculty member appealing the adverse recommendation shall have the right to discuss the appeal in person before the Hearing Committee. However, the faculty member shall have no right to representation or participation of legal counsel at said meeting. Additionally, deliberations of the Hearing Committee are confidential and held in closed session. The Hearing Committee shall proceed under its own rules, and the Committee’s review shall not constitute a judicial proceeding, and judicial rules of evidence and/or judicial procedure shall not apply. The review of the Hearing Committee shall be completed within thirty days from its receipt of the appeal petition from the provost’s office.
If the Hearing Committee determines by majority vote that a claim of inadequate consideration has been established by the evidence, the Hearing Committee shall document the respects in which it believes that consideration may have been inadequate and shall forward its recommendations to the provost’s office. Upon receipt of the recommendations, the provost shall recommend to the College Tenure and Promotion Committee that it assess the merits once again, this time remedying the inadequacies of its prior consideration.