Review of Tenure-Track Faculty

Policy and procedures for review and reappointment of tenure-track faculty

As stated in the unit’s tenure guidelines “Indicators of excellent research are diverse, vary by candidate, and evolve over time. Each candidate will be evaluated in the context of their particular area and focus.” For that reason, it is important that the CS tenure-track candidate receives early and frequent guidance from tenured faculty who best understand their social scientific approach to research in the field.

The CS unit understands that informal guidance comes from a wide range of sources.  Nevertheless, by instituting the following procedures we hope to ensure that senior faculty who best understand the candidate’s scholarship provide them with regular feedback and are involved in the preparation and presentation of the final tenure dossier.

Review timeline for the tenure-track candidate in the Communication Science unit

Year 1

The Unit Director serves as the mentor during the first two semesters.

During the first semester:

1. The Unit Director conducts an individual orientation meeting with the candidate to discuss CS policies and procedures, including this timeline.
2. The Unit Director ensures the candidate has an orientation meeting with the Media School deans.
3. The Unit Director provides the candidate with a shared secure server account modelled on the VPFAA dossier checklist to hold all documents related to promotion and tenure. 
4. The Unit Director ensures that the candidate is aware of how to find employment, procedural, and governance information on the Media School Intranet.

 During the second semester:

1. The Unit Director consults with the candidate to identify 2-3 tenured faculty members as possible members of the mentor committee beginning in year 2.
2. The Unit Director works with the candidate to create the first (brief) drafts of the research, teaching and service statements and puts them in the shared secure server account. These will serve as their annual review documents in year 1 and are due one week prior to the annual review meeting.
3. The tenured faculty conduct an annual review meeting of the candidate. This meeting is scheduled and led by the Unit Director, and is to be held by the end of the second week in March.
4. The Unit Director obtains commitments from at least 2 tenured faculty members to serve on the candidate’s mentor committee for years 2-5.  
5. The Unit Director tells the candidate the mentor committee by April 15.
6. The Unit Director provides a written annual review to the candidate by the end of the third week in March.
7. The Unit Director meets with candidate to discuss the annual review by March 30.

Year 2

During the first semester:

1. The candidate meets with the mentor committee and goes over review from Year 1.
2. The candidate and mentor committee identify a peer reviewer for teaching.
3. The candidate schedules a teaching observation sometime during Year 2 and places the written review in the shared secure server.  

During the second semester:

1. The candidate distributes annual review materials to the mentor committee via the shared secure server at least two weeks prior to the annual review meeting. These should include: research, teaching, and service statements, course evaluations, peer review of teaching, CV, and other informative documents. The Unit Director will make sure that all tenured faculty have access to the candidate’s materials at least 7 days prior to the annual review meeting.
2. The mentor committee will upload its report to the shared secure server at least five business days prior to the annual review meeting.  
3. The tenured faculty conducts an annual review meeting of the candidate. This meeting is scheduled by the Unit Director and led by the mentor committee. It is to be held by the end of the second week of March.
4. The Unit Director provides a written annual review to the candidate by end of the third week of March.
5. The Unit Director meets with candidate to discuss the annual review by March 30.  

Year 3 

According to the Media School Governance Document:

“No later than the third year of the probationary period for a tenure-track faculty member, the member will receive a midterm reappointment review. The midterm review is a thorough review that involves a unit review, a vote of eligible unit faculty, a review by the [Unit Director] which is then sent to the School Dean. This is an opportunity for senior colleagues to learn more about each junior colleague’s work, provide mentorship, and evaluate the progress towards meeting the criteria towards tenure. In the case of a decision not to reappoint, candidates may appeal the decision. In the case where reappointment is made, it is important to emphasize that this decision does not guarantee tenure.”

 During the first semester:

1. The candidate meets with the mentor committee to go over the Unit Director’s written review from Year 2.
2. The candidate and mentor committee identify a peer reviewer for teaching.
3. The candidate schedules a teaching observation sometime during Year 3 and places the written review in the shared secure server.  
4. The Unit Director and the mentor committee, in consultation with the candidate, identify a full-time, tenured, Media School faculty member from outside the unit to serve with the mentors on the midterm review committee. 

During second semester:

1. The candidate distributes midterm review materials via the shared secure server to the mentor committee at least two weeks prior to the midterm review meeting. These should include: research, teaching, and service statements, course evaluations, peer review of teaching, CV, and other informative documents. The Unit Director will make sure that all tenured faculty have access to the candidate’s materials at least 7 days prior to the midterm review meeting.  
2. The mentor committee will upload a draft of its report to the shared secure server at least five business days prior to the midterm review meeting.  
3. The tenured faculty conduct a substantial midterm review of the candidate.  This includes a meeting that is scheduled by the Unit Director and led by the midterm review committee. It is to be held by the end of the second week of March. 
4. The unit vote is to be completed by 1 week following the midterm review meeting.

1. Taking into consideration faculty comments at the midterm review meeting, the midterm review committee finalizes a report that provides a clear assessment of the candidate’s trajectory toward meeting the tenure criteria of the unit. This is due to the Unit Director by the end of the third week of March.  
2. The Unit Director writes a summary and recommendation statement. The midterm review committee report, the unit vote, and the Unit Director’s recommendation are sent to the candidate and the deans by April 1.
3. The Unit Director meets with the candidate to discuss the midterm review by March 30. 

Year 4 

During the first semester:

1. The candidate meets with the mentor committee to go over the midterm review.
2. The candidate begins discussion with mentor committee and Unit Director about possible external referees for tenure case.
3. The candidate and mentor committee identify a peer reviewer for teaching.
4. The candidate schedules a teaching observation sometime during Year 4 and places the written review in the shared secure server.  

During the second semester:

1. The candidate distributes annual review materials to the mentor committee via the shared secure server at least two weeks prior to the annual review meeting. These should include: research, teaching, and service statements, course evaluations, peer review of teaching, CV, and other informative documents. The Unit Director will make sure that all tenured faculty have access to the candidate’s materials at least 7 days prior to the annual review meeting.
2. The mentor committee will upload its report to the shared secure server at least five business days prior to the annual review meeting.  
3. The tenured faculty conducts an annual review meeting of the candidate. This meeting is scheduled by the Unit Director and led by the mentor committee. It is to be held by the end of the second week of March.
4. The Unit Director provides a written annual review to the candidate by end of the third week of March.
5. The Unit Director meets with candidate to discuss the annual review by March 30.  

Year 5

During the first semester:

1. The candidate meets with the mentor committee to go over the Unit Director’s written review from Year 4.
2. The candidate and mentor committee identify a peer reviewer for teaching.
3. The candidate schedules a teaching observation sometime during Year 5 and places the written review in the shared secure server.  

During the second semester, the following occurs for annual review:

1. The candidate distributes annual review materials to the mentor committee via the shared secure server at least two weeks prior to the annual review meeting. These should include: research, teaching, and service statements, course evaluations, peer review of teaching, CV, and other informative documents. The Unit Director will make sure that all tenured faculty have access to the candidate’s materials at least 7 days prior to the annual review meeting.
2. The mentor committee will upload its report to the shared secure server at least five business days prior to the annual review meeting.  
3. The tenured faculty conducts an annual review meeting of the candidate. This meeting is scheduled by the Unit Director and led by the mentor committee. It is to be held by the end of the second week of March.
4. The Unit Director provides a written annual review to the candidate by end of the third week of March.
5. The Unit Director meets with candidate to discuss the annual review by March 30.  

During the second semester, the following occurs for the tenure evaluation process:

1. The candidate meets with Unit Director the first week in February to begin developing lists of external referees. Two lists of six names are required:  one from the candidate and one from the unit.
2. The candidate, Unit Director, and staff obtain access to the e-dossier site.
3. The Unit Director submits external referees to the Media School deans as soon as possible but no later than March 30.
4. The Unit Director and deans negotiate final list of external referees in April.
5. The Unit Director names 3-member ad hoc tenure committee, made up of CS tenured faculty, as per Media School governance document. Generally the mentor committee will serve in this role.
6. The Unit Director begins contacting external referees as soon as possible but no later than the first week of May.
7. The Unit Director forwards Media School and the College names of external referees who have agreed to write letters as soon as possible but no later than June 15.
8. The candidate submits e-dossier to CS unit the Monday prior to the first week of Fall classes in Year 6. 

Year 6

During the first semester:

1. Per Media School governance, the ad hoc tenure committee will conduct, draft, and present the draft departmental tenure report to the unit faculty, which will vote on the case in accordance with university and College policies. 
2. The Unit Director will schedule a dossier review meeting of all tenured faculty during the 2nd week of September.  
3. The Unit Director will make sure that all tenured faculty have access to the candidate’s e-dossier and draft departmental report at least one week before the first day of classes.
4. The ad-hoc tenure committee will designate one of its members to be in charge of the vote. The designated member will send all members of the tenured faculty a ballot (see below) to remind them of voting choices ahead of the dossier review meeting. 
5. All tenured faculty members who have been materially involved in the review process (i.e. at a minimum have read the dossier) are eligible to vote. Tenured faculty members who are unable to be present at the dossier review meeting, but have been materially involved in the review process, must notify the designated member of the ad-hoc tenure committee in advance if they wish to vote. Such faculty members must return their ballot (by mail, in person, or via e-mail) to the staff member charged with counting the votes at least 30 minutes before the start of the dossier review meeting.
6. For those attending the dossier review meeting, the vote will occur at the end of the meeting. The ad hoc committee member in charge of the vote will pass out paper ballots which will be collected by the staff member in charge of counting the votes.  This staff member will also bring to the meeting any ballots received prior to the meeting. The votes will be tabulated and the results announced at the meeting.
7. The Unit Director will notify the candidate of the outcome of the vote ASAP.
8. The ad hoc committee will revise their report as needed in response to the tenured faculty discussion at the dossier review meeting. The final unit tenure report will be sent to the Unit Director by the end of the third week of September.
9. The Unit Director will write a separate summary and recommendation. It, along with, the final unit tenure report, the unit vote, and the e-dossier, will be submitted to the Media School by the last week of September.

Sample Ballot

Tenure Case for Asst. Professor ______________

Research   (choose one): Excellent  Very Good  Satisfactory  Unsatisfactory

Teaching (choose one): Excellent  Very Good  Effective  Ineffective

Service (choose one): Excellent  Very Good  Satisfactory  Unsatisfactory

Should this candidate be tenured?  (choose one)  Yes    No

(Approved January 12, 2018)
(Amended 3/19/2021)