- Ensuring that there were no procedural or due process violations during the first level review, as well as ensuring the accuracy and completeness of the dossier to this point in the review. If there are significant deviations from the expected elements of a dossier, or the conduct of the review, the College APT Committee may remand the case back to the lower level for reconsideration and corrective action.
- Carefully reviewing and evaluating the candidate’s accomplishments in teaching, scholarship, mentoring, service, and if applicable, Extension.
- Meeting to discuss and vote on the candidate’s case for tenure and/or promotion.
- The College (Second Level) APT Review Committee Chair has the responsibility of ensuring that discussion and evaluation of the candidate is impartial, fair, and unbiased.
- Meeting with lower level APT representatives when there is a possibility that a negative recommendation will be made. Questions in writing shall be provided in advance (APT Policy Section IV.B.4; Section IV.C.2).
- Writing a report with an evaluation of the candidate’s accomplishments and potential for future contributions, a record of the vote, the Committee’s recommendation and its justification, the membership of the Committee, and the date of the decision meeting (APT Policy Section IV.B.5; Section IV.C.3).
- For the College (Second Level) APT Review Committee, when either the Dean or the Committee makes a negative recommendation, ensuring that the Dean’s summary letter notifying the candidate of the negative recommendation accurately reflects Committee deliberations.