Proactive Procedure
To encourage a fair and equitable review process for the candidate that adheres to University policy and procedures, the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs sends out a memo annually to all faculty review committees and administrators at each level reminding them of the importance of conducting a fair and unbiased evaluation (a copy of the memo follows this section) that comports with University policies, procedures, and expectations (e.g., confidentiality, mitigating conflicts of interest). This memo will state that reviews and evaluative discussions 1) should avoid disparaging or prejudicial comments regarding the candidate; 2) cannot base the evaluation of the candidate on factors such as a candidate’s gender, race, sexual orientation or other protected personal characteristics; 3) cannot consider a candidate’s part-time status or any extension of the mandatory tenure review year authorized pursuant to policy, and that such candidates shall be evaluated according to the same criteria applicable to other candidates; and 5) must adhere to University confidentiality and conflict of interest mitigation requirements.
Chairs of the Unit-level APT review committees are to distribute the letter to the voting faculty at the inception of the review process. This letter shall be referenced prior to the evaluative meeting and when inappropriate discussions arise. In departmentalized Colleges, Associate Deans of Faculty Affairs and College Diversity Officers are encouraged to formally charge individual Department APT Review Committees prior to the review process, paying specific attention to equity-related issues. Additionally, the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs and the Vice President for Diversity and Inclusion will arrange to formally charge College APT Review Committees.
APT Review Committee members shall be informed when a candidate stopped the tenure clock, and informed that these are university-supported policies. The focus of discussion and decision-making in APT Review Committees should be on the candidate’s performance in meeting criteria set forth by the Department, College, and University, and not how long (i.e., an extra year) it took to meet those criteria. This recommendation applies to faculty being evaluated for tenure, as well as those with tenure being evaluated for promotion.
Procedures to Follow When There Are Observed Areas of Concern
Should members of the APT Review Committee (as witnesses) believe that inappropriate comments have been made, or confidentiality has been breached (e.g., by APT committee members, candidates, or others outside the review process), or conflicts of interest require mitigation, they are encouraged to raise their concern during the meeting, citing the Associate Provost’s letter. Individuals may also discuss the issue confidentially with the APT Review Committee Chair, or with the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs. Based on the issue(s) brought forward, the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs may elect to take corrective action to ensure the integrity of the review process The Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs will consult with the Senior Vice President and Provost regarding possible corrective action(s). The decision of the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs regarding any corrective action(s) is final.