As described on the college's Reappointment Guidelines webpage, pre-tenure faculty in the College of Arts and Sciences must undergo evaluation for reappointment in the 2nd and 4th years of appointment (based upon an a tenure notification date in the sixth year; an alternate schedule may be required for faculty entering with credit towards tenure). Reappointment evaluations in years other than the 2nd and 4th will be required if described in the letter of offer or if requested by the faculty of an appointing unit.
The table below overviews materials to be incorporated in files submitted as part of evaluations for reappointment as well as promotion and/or tenure.
For more detail information about each area/item:
Reappointment files must be uploaded in the college's RPT system.
| Data/item | Need for data/item | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evaluation Year | 2nd | 4th | Other year (a) | Promotion and/or tenure(b) |
| Transmittal form (c) | optional | required | (d) | required |
| Letter of offer | recommended | required | (d) | required |
| Annual evals | required | required | (d) | required |
| Previous reappointment evaluations | - | required | (d) | required |
| Review committee letter (e) | recommended | required | (d) | required |
| Chair/Director letter (f) | required | required | required | required |
| External reviews | - | - | - | required |
| Course listing | recommended | required | (d) | required |
| Peer evaluations (minimum 2) | recommended | required | (d) | required |
| Vitae (g) | required | required | required | required |
| Statements (may include COVID impact statement) (h) | recommended | required | (d) | required |
a
Evaluations in years other than the 2nd and 4th will be required only if described in the offer letter or if requested by the faculty of an appointing unit. Any request for a special reappointment evaluation not mentioned in the offer letter must be transmitted to the candidate by the first working day following September 15th of the academic year in which the reappointment will be conducted.
b
Details related to processes and expectations related to evaluations for promotion and/or tenure are described at CAS P and T Processes.
c
Errors on the transmittal form could result in major delays in reviews for Promotion or Tenure.
d
In general, documentation requirements for reappointments in years 1 or 3 will be the same as those shown above for the 2nd year reappointment unless units impose additional requirements. Documentation for a 5th year reappointment will be identical to that shown above for the 4th year reappointment. Documentation requirements should be made clear at the time the unit notifies a candidate of a request for reappointment.
e
As part of any reappointment evaluation, the review committee must select an adjective for performance within each area of nonzero apportionment, discuss progress towards promotion and/or tenure, identify areas where improvement will be required to achieve tenure, and provide a formal recommendation on the question of reappointment, and, if relevant, the reappointment term. For reappointment evaluations in year 4 or later, the committee must provide this information in a separate letter which becomes part of the file. The letter must make clear the electorate for the particular recommendation and indicate the actual number and nature (e.g., “Yes”, “No”, ‘Abstain”) of recommendations received.
f
As part of any reappointment evaluation, the chair or director must provide an adjective for performance within each area of nonzero apportionment, discuss progress towards promotion and/or tenure, identify areas where improvement will be required to achieve tenure, and provide a formal recommendation on the question of reappointment, and, if relevant, on the term of reappointment. The assessment from the chair or director should be based upon the complete file, including the evaluation submitted by the review committee.
In most cases, the chair or director will attend the review committee discussion but will not take an active role. The letter from the chair or director should report on the outcome of the faculty review committee discussion: electorate, how many were present, and the exact vote (yes/no/abstention) on any questions. The letter should also describe concerns voiced (or the lack of concerns) in the review committee discussion; this is particularly important in the case of abstentions or negative votes. If the review committee is not providing an independent letter, the chair or director must provide the information described in part “e”.
g
An updated CV with is required as part of any reappointment, even one not involving a formal evaluation. See [guidelines, file prep] for more information. See P and T Candidate File Preparation and Promotion and Tenure Tab Instructions for more information.