July 14, 2010
TO:
Renee Cheng, Lance Neckar and Becky Yust
FROM:
Lee Anderson
Associate Dean for Academic Affairs
RE:
FY11 Promotion and Tenure Procedures and Timeline
As you prepare for this year’s promotion and tenure cases, this letter serves to share the College
timeline and procedures. It will be critical to follow these guidelines so as not to jeopardize
consideration of the candidate dossiers. The departments and college will also need to work within the
University’s new promotion and tenure processes. Below you will find information about the University
and college procedures and processes for promotion and/or tenure.
PROMOTION AND TENURE PROCEDURES
Please remember that we are now using the 2007 version of the Procedures for Reviewing Candidates for
Promotion and/or Tenure: Tenure-Track or Tenured Faculty. I’m attaching a copy of this document,
highlighting significant changes in procedure. Please also see the Promotion and Tenure section of the
Provost's web page: http://www.academic.umn.edu/provost/faculty/tenure/index.html
Arlene Carney has asked that we remind you that the new Procedures have specific rules about external
reviewers that must be followed. If they are not, candidates who are denied tenure and/or promotion will
have the basis for a procedural error. See pages 13-14, highlighted in yellow, Section 12 of the Procedures.
Please note that at least half of the external reviewers and no fewer than four must have no direct
professional or personal relationship with the candidate as spelled out in the Procedures. When
contacting potential reviewers, it is imperative that they be informed of the following:
1. If and when the candidate stopped the tenure clock and for how long. They are not
told the reason that the tenure clock was stopped, but should be advised to allow
for reduced productivity during the period the clock was stopped. This is the
language specified in the Procedures:
Professor XX has received an approved extension of his/her probationary period for XX
years according to provisions of the Regents Policy on /Faculty Tenure. /We ask that you
evaluate his/her record in the same way as other candidates who do not have an
extension of their probationary period. That is, we request that you consider the record
without weighing the probationary period extension as a factor in your letter of
evaluation.
2. That their evaluations will not be held confidential, because Minnesota State law
allows the candidate to inspect them. [Minnesota data practices require that the
candidate be permitted access to all review materials (including the external
reviewer letters) at her or his request.]
Renee Cheng, Lance Neckar and Becky Yust
July 14, 2010, page 2
COLLEGE PROMOTION AND TENURE PROCESS AND TIMELINE
P&T recommendations, including dossiers and supporting documentation, will be due to the Office of
the Executive Vice President and Provost by January 14, 2011. Note: this deadline will not be extended
because of the December 2010 University closure. We have put together the timeline below based on
that deadline so that our faculty members aren’t disadvantaged in the central review process. Contract
Faculty will continue to follow the same process used for regular faculty. Please review this timeline
and contact us if you have any questions or concerns.
July 30
Preliminary list of names of faculty seeking promotion and/or tenure
due to Jan Batt and Lee Anderson
September 10
Final list of names of faculty seeking promotion and/or tenure due to
Jan Batt and Lee Anderson
November 19
P&T dossiers (original plus four copies) due to Jan Batt; to include PF 12
documents for faculty going up for tenure
November 22
Department/school administrators receive P&T dossiers for delivery to
faculty serving on the College Promotion & Tenure Committee
December 1 December 15
College Promotion & Tenure Committee meets to review dossiers
December 17
P&T recommendations submitted to Associate Dean Lee Anderson
December 20 December 30
Potential follow-up by Associate Dean with departments regarding
any recommended revisions or questions from the Promotion &
Tenure Committee
Associate Dean Anderson shares committee report with candidate(s)
January 7, 2011
Revised dossiers, if any, due to Jan Batt
January 10-14
P&T Committee meets to reevaluate revised dossiers, if necessary
January 14
Deadline for College to submit P&T dossiers to Provost
January 19
Final recommendations submitted to Dean and Associate Dean
Anderson for any revised dossiers
January 28
Dean submits any revised dossiers to Provost
March 4
PF 12 documents and curriculum vitae for all other probationary faculty
due to Jan Batt
Renee Cheng, Lance Neckar and Becky Yust
July 14, 2010, page 3
P&T DOSSIERS
As always, the goal is to ensure that each dossier is as strong as possible for consideration both by the
College P&T Committee and by external University reviewers. The college guidelines developed in 2009 by
the P&T Committee should be used in compiling the dossiers (see attached and also the CDes HR web site,
http://www.cdes.umn.edu/about/intranet/hr/documents/CDESPTProcedures.pdf. Please continue to use
the established guidelines for your respective departments in addition to the College guidelines, as well as
the appropriate departmental 7.12 statement and addendum. In addition to this, all dossiers must include
the elements, listed below, that are required for University-level review. According to University policy, it
is the responsibility of the department head and at least one senior faculty member to make sure that
each candidate’s dossier is complete. Two dossiers should be submitted to the college; 1) the “summary”
dossier (required) and a second “full” dossier, which is the equivalent to the department copy.
Information about the summary dossier appears below.
The summary dossier contains the materials required for the college, and University-level reviews. It
is also retained in the college office as part of the faculty member’s official personnel file. At least two
sets of the summary dossier (the original and one copy) must be submitted in a three-ring binder
[note per the College guidelines that a total of five copies need to be submitted]. Also, a complete set
of materials for each candidate must be submitted electronically via FileNet to be shared with the
Provost’s office. Specific information regarding that process will be provided by Jan Batt, HR Director,
after receipt of the annual letter from the Provost in October.
To facilitate a smooth review process, the department head’s letter should address issues regarding
the candidate’s area of research or discipline, etc. that will facilitate appraisal by reviewers outside
that specific discipline. The promotion and tenure materials should be prepared with the assumption
that they will be judged on their merit as submitted initially.
The full and summary dossiers should be prepared and submitted along with the summary dossier to the
Director of Human Resources, where it will be held for review by the CDes Promotion and Tenure
Committee, and the dean and associate deans. Per University policy, the full dossier does not go forward
for University-level review unless reviewing authorities make a specific request.
To facilitate review by the Promotion & Tenure Committee and any requests from the Provost’s office, a
detailed list of material included in the full dossier that is not present in the summary dossier should be
included with the full dossier.
If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact either Lee Anderson at 5-1885 or Jan Batt at
4-0788.
cc:
Jan Batt
Tom Fisher
Kathy Guiney
Matt Kegler
Martha McDonell
Paige Rohman
Constance Severson
Amanda Smoot
Julie VanSteenbergen