- Ensuring that there were no procedural or due process violations by all parties (e.g., members of the APT committee, the candidate, others outside the unit conducting the review who may have an interest in the tenure and/or promotion of the candidate) involved in the review process 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 with written instructions for reconsideration and corrective action.
- Reviewing and evaluating carefully 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.
- Ensuring that the discussion and evaluation of the candidate is impartial, fair, and unbiased, and that conflicts of interest are mitigated and confidentiality is maintained.
- 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).
- Ensuring that the Dean's summary letter notifying the candidate of the negative recommendation accurately reflects Committee deliberations 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.
Last Update
03/25/2021