A decision by the Provost to promote PTK faculty to the third level follows advice and recommendations from the Unit Head, Dean, and faculty AEP Review Committee(s).
Departmentalized Colleges
In departmentalized Colleges/Schools, there are three levels of review:
- At the first level by (a) the Unit AEP Review Committee and (b) the Unit Head;
- At the second level by (a) the College AEP Review Committee and/or the Dean; and
- At the third level by (a) the Campus AEP Review Committee and (b) the Provost.
At the first level, the promotion case is voted on by those faculty members specified in the Unit’s AEP plan. Eligible faculty members include PTK and TTK faculty members who are at or above the promotion rank (i.e., full professors or faculty members in the highest PTK rank). A promotion case shall go forward to the next level of review if 50% of the faculty vote cast is favorable (or such higher percentage as may be established by Unit procedures or guidelines). Voluntary abstentions are non-positive votes that are counted in the total number of votes cast.
A promotion case will proceed to the second level of review if either the Unit AEP Review Committee or the Unit Head (or both) are in support. If the College AEP Review Committee or the Dean (or both) support the case, it is sent to the Campus level AEP Review Committee, which makes a recommendation for promotion to the Provost. The candidate shall be notified of the promotion decision by the Dean.
For promotion cases in which the candidate reports to the Dean of a departmentalized College/School, there are only two levels of review prior to a final decision. The AEP Review Committee appointed in accordance with the Unit’s procedures and Dean functions as the first level of review. If the AEP Review Committee or the Dean (or both) support the case, it is sent to the Campus level AEP Review Committee, which makes a recommendation for promotion to the Provost.
Non-Departmentalized Colleges
In non-departmentalized Colleges/Schools, there are only two levels of review prior to a final decision. The process is the same as outlined above for departmentalized Colleges/Schools except that the first level of review will be conducted by the College AEP Review Committee and voted on by those faculty specified in the College’s AEP plan. If the College AEP Review Committee or the Dean (or both) support the case, it is sent to the Campus level AEP Review Committee, which makes a recommendation for promotion to the Provost.
Denial of Third-Level Promotion
When a candidate receives a negative recommendation at either the first or second level (as specified above), the procedure as set forth for “Denial of mid-level promotion” should be followed.
When a candidate receives a negative recommendation for promotion to the third level by the Campus AEP Review Committee, the faculty member will be notified in writing by the Provost. The faculty member may appeal a negative decision based on procedural or substantive grounds to the Provost (APT Policy Section IV.A.5, AEP Guidelines V (H)). A request for an appeal must be made in writing to the Provost within 60 calendar days of the candidate’s receipt of the Provost’s letter. The request must detail the basis for the appeal and evidence to support the claims. If an appeal request is granted, the appellant has 60 additional days in which to submit materials relevant to the case to the Office of Faculty Affairs. The appellant should be aware that submitted materials will be shared with the Appeals Committee, parties against whom allegations are made and any other persons deemed necessary by the Committee (APT Policy Section V.B.1.a).
A campus-level AEP Appeals Committee is formed by the Office of Faculty Affairs. The Committee will meet with the Appellant, and may interview other parties and investigate the case as it deems appropriate (APT Policy Section V.B.1.d.3). If there were any objections to evaluators submitted by the appellant during the process of selection of external reviewers, this information may be requested. The Committee may not substitute its academic judgment for the judgment of those in the review.
The Committee makes a recommendation to the Provost who makes the final decision (APT Policy Section V.B.1.d.4). When the Provost supports the findings of the APT Appeals Committee, and authorizes corrective action to be taken, the Provost has the responsibility for oversight and implementation of any such corrective action (APT Policy Section V.B.1.e.1).
Denial of promotion does not affect a candidate’s existing appointment, nor does it prevent contract renewal. In the event of a denial, a faculty member may seek promotion again in a future year, following Unit and campus procedures and processes.