Constituting Promotion and Tenure Committees:
Regular or Ad Hoc
"Regular" means, the rules included in a school or departmental constitution, or in school or departmental P&T guidelines, on how committees are set up. "Ad Hoc" means adjustments that are needed for individual candidates or situations.
The P&T Guidelines include these notes:
- There must be at least four votes from each committee, votes of yes or no; abstain and absent are not part of the four votes.
- When a candidate is engaged in interdisciplinary work, team science, or public/engaged scholarship, the tenure-home unit is encouraged to include scholars relevant to that work.
- People with formal split appointments/multiple tenure homes are a separate case and not addressed here. Those faculty should have P&T responsibilities spelled out in their offer letters.
- Adding members is the joint responsibility of the chair of the department (for the departmental-level committee) or dean (school committee), and the regular committee members.
Plus:
- Campus P&T committee members (and some at the school level) have expressed concern when a candidate’s work is primarily or exclusively conducted with departmental colleagues who are then the primary or exclusive voters on his or her case. While we wish to encourage collaboration, it is important that the departmental review has both the reality and appearance of impartiality. If there are many such collaborations, consider adding members who have no relation with the candidate.
Committees go through three steps:
- Determining initial membership.
- Determining availability.
- Orientation (this is NOT addressed in the guidelines. Suggestions below reflect advice for best practice.)
ONLY people who pass all steps should be considered actual members of the committee, with access to eDossier.
| Determining Initial Membership | Options:
Eligibility: 1. Not on sabbatical* or other leave during the fall semester.
2. At or above the rank sought (equivalent ranks are: [associate clinical = associate tenure-track = senior lecturer]; [full clinical = full tenure-track = teaching professor]) and in the appropriate faculty type (clinical or lecturer cannot serve on promotion or tenure review for tenure track; they may serve for cases involving either or both of clinical and lecturer, depending on unit constitutions.)
3. Possessing tenure* if it is a tenure or tenure-track case.
4. No conflict of interest (e.g. nepotism) with that candidate.
5. Not the chair for that candidate.
*In special circumstances where voters are needed: if someone is on sabbatical, or has been awarded tenure in the last cycle but it is not yet effective, that person may serve on the department or school P&T committees—confirm with Office of Academic Affairs. Subtract anybody who is a member at multiple levels and not voting at that particular level. Then add members as needed at each level (department and school) to get to the required minimum of four votes. Sources of additional members:
Additional members must be willing to learn department and school criteria, and able to apply them accurately. |
| Determining Availability |
Committees should schedule at least two meetings to allow for reconsiderations. Potential committee members should affirm:
On the particular meeting dates, some may be unavoidably absent. Those would be recorded as “absent”. If the number of voters drops below 4, you have to reschedule. |
| Oriented to the P&T Process |
Units should arrange for orientation to the process to include:
New members should participate in all three orientation topics their initial year. All members should receive orientation at least every three years, this is a suggestion for best practice. Only faculty who meet selection, availability, and orientation criteria should be listed as committee members and included in eDossier ‘silos’. (Karen Lee works with an administrative assistant in each school to organize eDossier set-up.) Examples of school P&T constitutions: Engineering and Technology and Liberal Arts. |
| Finalizing the review |
After the narrative, the overall voting is reported (e.g. 4 yes, 1 no, 1 absent, 1 abstain). Reasons for abstaining are not needed; subvotes (e.g. 'highly satisfactory in service') are not needed. If there are any 'no' votes, reasons must be included in the review, though they are not attributed to any individual member. For the signatures, members should indicate their home departments, especially if they are added members. |
For questions on committee membership, contact Faculty Affairs at acadhr@iu.edu; for questions on eDossier 'silos' (memberships at various levels), contact Karen Lee at ude[dot]ui[at]aao.
Reviewed and revised 6/2023.