Professional Faculty Promotion Policy
Scope
University academic departments.
Policy History
I. Effective Date: March 1, 2023
II. Approval: March 1, 2023
III. History:
-
Approved in its original form: March 1, 2023
IV. Maintenance of Policy: Office of the Provost and Academic Senate
Policy
Introduction
The quality of faculty accomplishments in teaching or librarianship, contributions of service, and professional development, clinical or professional practice and/or scholarship, largely determines the quality of the institution as a whole. Promotion decisions are extremely important to the life of the institution. They are a means by which the University retains excellence in instructional programs, trains and contributes to the development of professionals, and promotes its mission.
To ensure all full-time faculty have a pathway for promotion, this policy establishes general guidelines that govern University-wide procedures for promotion of full-time faculty who are not governed by the University Promotion and Tenure Policy, are not part of the School of Law, and who do not hold a visiting position. There are two general pathways for promotion with unique criteria for evaluation. Full time professional (non-tenure track) faculty will be assigned to one of the two promotion pathways (Lecturer or Clinical Faculty/Faculty of Practice), at the time of hire or contract renewal, in negotiation with the supervisor, Dean, and Provost's office.
These guidelines and procedures are designed to ensure communication, fairness, and due process throughout the review process. Recognizing that faculty may engage in a wide range of activities, which further the mission of the university, units, departments, centers, or institutes have the responsibility to determine the weight given to each category of evaluation. Specific criteria that value a variety of pathways for promotion must be clearly defined in unit, department and institute criteria (see section I.C below).
This policy provides a process for initial and periodic review of promotion documents for procedural consistency and clarity of substantive criteria both at the unit and department level.
In addition, this policy includes opportunities for candidates to respond in the event of disagreements over promotion recommendations and provides an appeals procedure.
I. Establishment, Review, and Approval of Promotion Criteria and Procedures
A. General University-wide Criteria and Eligibility for Promotion Evaluations for Faculty Eligible for Promotion under the Lecturer Pathway
Lecturers are primarily engaged in instruction in a full-time capacity and provide a substantial benefit to the University. The lecturer pathway may also be appropriate for those faculty with different titles who are primarily engaged in teaching or librarianship.
1. Criteria for promotion of lecturers focus on the academic credentials and the academic and professional performance of the applicant. The lecturer's performance will be evaluated on the basis of teaching effectiveness or librarianship and within the parameters of their appointment. Although the primary responsibility of lecturers is on teaching or librarianship, supervisors must provide written documentation of faculty responsibilities, and these responsibilities should be evaluated accordingly for promotion.
2. Given that diversity, equity, and inclusion are fundamental to academic and institutional excellence, an applicant for promotion must demonstrate a commitment to inclusive excellence1 in at least one of the dimensions of their professional responsibilities as documented in their faculty responsibilities.
3. To be consistent with the faculty member's duties and responsibilities as noted in hiring or appointment letters, promotion criteria should include scholarly and/or service expectations. Accordingly, candidates for promotion under the Lecturer Pathway must meet the following criteria:
a. For promotion to senior lecturer:
i. Provide evidence of accomplishment consistent with their duties and responsibilities-including, but not limited to, a demonstrated commitment to inclusive excellence, and
ii. Demonstrate effectiveness in teaching/librarianship and efforts to improve teaching/librarianship quality.
b. For promotion to principal lecturer:
i. Provide evidence of sustained accomplishment related to their duties and responsibilities -including, but not limited to, a demonstrated commitment to inclusive excellence, and
ii. Demonstrate a sustained/consistent record of high-quality teaching/librarianship and a commitment to further enhance teaching/librarianship quality.
B. General University-wide Criteria and Eligibility for Promotion Evaluations for Faculty Eligible under the Clinical Faculty/Faculty of Practice Pathway
Clinical Faculty/Faculty of Practice are faculty whose professional experience and competence as a practitioner are deemed beneficial and necessary to the educational mission of the unit (particularly professional schools but not limited to them) and departments. The pathway is intended for faculty whose clinical/professional component of instruction or librarianship is central to their work. This pathway may be appropriate for faculty with different titles.
1. Criteria for promotion of clinical faculty/faculty of practice (henceforth shortened clinical faculty) focus on the academic credentials and the academic and professional performance of the applicant. The faculty member's performance will be evaluated within the parameters of their appointment and as appropriate to the profession. Where expectations beyond teaching may exist within a particular unit, hiring or appointment letters should also appropriately articulate expectations of service, and/or clinical or professional practice accomplishment and development, and/or scholarship. Supervisors must provide written documentation of faculty responsibilities, and these responsibilities should be evaluated accordingly for promotion.
2. Given that diversity, equity, and inclusion are fundamental to academic and institutional excellence, an applicant for promotion must demonstrate a commitment to inclusive excellence2 in at least one of the dimensions of their professional responsibilities (in teaching and/or librarianship, clinical/professional
practice/development, scholarship and/or artistic accomplishment, or service).
3. Candidates for promotion under the Clinical Faculty/Faculty of Practice category must meet the following criteria:
a. For promotion to associate clinical professor/associate professor of practice:
i. Provide evidence of accomplishment-including, but not limited to, a demonstrated commitment to inclusive excellence- consistent with the faculty member's duties and responsibilities, and
ii. Demonstrate effectiveness in teaching/librarianship and efforts to improve teaching/librarianship quality, and
iii. Provide evidence of clinical or professional practice accomplishment and development, and/or scholarship, as defined by the Unit/Department/Institute/Program. This may include scholarship, consulting, engagement with industry/schools/community, artistic accomplishment, etc, and
iv. Provide evidence of service, which may include professional, departmental, university, and community consistent with the faculty member's duties and responsibilities.
b. For promotion to clinical professor/professor of practice:
i. Provide evidence of accomplishment-including, but not limited to, a demonstrated commitment to inclusive excellence- consistent with the faculty member's duties and responsibilities, and
ii. Demonstrate effectiveness in teaching/librarianship and efforts to improve teaching/librarianship quality, and
iii. Provide evidence of a sustained record of clinical or professional practice/accomplishment, and development, and/or scholarship that demonstrates excellence. This includes, but is not limited to, a demonstrated commitment to inclusive excellence as defined by the Unit/Department/Institute/Program. This may include scholarship, consulting, engagement with industry/schools/community, artistic accomplishment, etc.
iv. Provide evidence of service,which may include professional, departmental, university, and community consistent with the faculty member's duties and responsibilities.
C. General University-wide Procedures for Promotion Evaluations for the "Lecturer'' and "Clinical Faculty/Faculty of Practice" Categories
1. The evaluation of faculty teaching or librarianship effectiveness for the purposes of promotion must be based on multiple measures drawn from multiple sources in accordance with department, program, or academic unit guidelines or bylaws.
2. Consistent with this policy, and in alignment with each unit's accreditation standards and other professional objectives where required, unit promotion policies may set forth additional criteria and procedures for the granting of promotion.
3. All faculty who participate in faculty evaluation, including peer review and recommendations for promotions at any level (unit, department, or institute), are required to participate in professional development in diversity, equity and inclusion to mitigate bias prior to participating in the evaluation process. The Provost Office in consultation with the Office of Diversity and Inclusion and Academic Senate will oversee faculty professional development.
4. Promotions will generally take place on six-year intervals. The decision to seek promotion is voluntary. In the event an application for promotion is sought and denied, the applicant shall remain at the last approved level and may seek promotion at a future time. Credit for prior service may be granted. Time devoted to leaves of absence or other interruptions may affect the total period of evaluation and the timing of departmental reviews. The effects of such interruptions on the period of evaluation and timing of reviews must be agreed to in writing by the faculty member, chairperson, dean, and Provost at the time that the interruption takes place or within six months of the initiation of the interruption.
5. Prior to submitting an application for promotion, applicants should receive, in addition to annual reviews, at least one comprehensive review. Unit policies shall outline the expectations for the pre-promotion comprehensive review, including the number of reviews required and how reviews are conducted.
6. A candidate who successfully completes the promotion process will be granted promotion effective at the start of their next contract.
D. Authority and Responsibilities of Unit, Departments, Centers, Institutes, and Entities with Professional Faculty
1. Each will adopt clear criteria and procedures for promotion of professional faculty. When applicable, accreditation standards for different professional schools and disciplines may be used to guide both promotion and attendant benefits of promotion.
2. Each will adopt criteria for evaluating contributions and achievements in promoting inclusive excellence.
3. Each will also establish rights or privileges for those Professional faculty within the"Lecturer" and "Clinical Faculty/Faculty of Practice" categories, such as voting or participatory rights, professional development opportunities, or other privileges that may be available.
4. The university recognizes that faculty may engage in a wide range of activities -outside of "traditional" disciplinary efforts - that further the mission of the university. Achievements in teaching and/or librarianship, clinical or professional practice, and/or scholarship and/or artistic accomplishment, and/or service that include community engagement, incorporate multidisciplinarity, foster innovation and/or venture creation, and/or other defined academic or professional activities consistent with the positional role and responsibilities of the faculty and that further the mission and reputation of the University, are encouraged and should be given due recognition during the faculty promotion process and evaluated and credited in the same way as other faculty achievements. Each responsible entity must adopt clear criteria for evaluating these contributions where relevant.
5. The College of Arts and Sciences, School of Business Administration, School of Education and Health Sciences, and School of Engineering will each have an elected, representative promotion committee, ideally composed of Professional Faculty from the unit. Each unit's procedures may determine the size and composition, including allowing the dean or Associate Provost to appoint up to two additional representatives and allowing tenured/tenure-track faculty as representatives. The University Libraries and any other responsible entities with fewer than fifteen (15) Professional Faculty, will not be required to conduct elections.
6. Policies governing respective promotion committees:
a. The promotion committee will make a recommendation for promotion on each individual candidate to the dean or assistant/associate provost for the respective faculty;
b. The promotion committee will review and approve any promotion criteria and procedures of any subsidiary promotion committees;
c. Any disagreements between a promotion committee and subsidiary promotion committees will be resolved by the appropriate dean or assistant/associate provost.
E. University Academic Senate Authority and Responsibilities
1. The Academic Senate will establish the University Professional Faculty Promotion Committee and provide oversight of the elections of faculty members to the UPFPC.
2. The Academic Senate will determine all University-wide procedural policies on full-time professional faculty promotion and explicate such policies in the Faculty Handbook. If the UPFPC notes inconsistencies between documents not covered by University-wide procedural policies on promotion, those procedural inconsistencies will be submitted to the Academic Senate for resolution.
F. The University Professional Faculty Promotion Committee (UPFPC)
1. The UPFPC will:
a. Review and approve the promotion policies of all units for consistency with University policies and procedures; and
b. Annually review the promotion process for adherence to appropriate procedures and present a report to the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate and the Chairperson of the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees.
2. The UPFPC will consist of ten faculty members drawn from the positions of Senior and/or Principal Lecturer, Associate Clinical Professor and/or Clinical Professor, or Clinical Faculty/Faculty of Practice. Membership will be distributed as follows: two from the School of Education and Health Sciences; three from the College of Arts and Sciences; two from the School of Engineering; two from the School of Business Administration; one from all other entities with Professional Faculty (currently including University Libraries, IEP, OLR).
a. The UPFPC members will be elected by the faculty of their respective constituencies.
b. Members of the UPFPC will serve three-year terms (maximum of two consecutive terms, with staggered terms within and across unit or other entities with professional faculty members); members cannot hold an administrative appointment or have supervisory authority. The UPFPC will elect a chairperson from those duly elected. The chairperson shall serve for one year, and may serve consecutive terms. Terms will begin effective June 1 of the year elected. Staggered terms will be insured according to the implementation process described in Section 111.E.
c. Any individual who cannot complete or must interrupt their term of office will be replaced from the Unit's or entity's list of candidates in the year in which the member was elected. Candidates not elected to the UPFPC will be listed in the order of votes received, beginning with the highest, and will, in that order, be asked to fill vacated positions. The Provost's Office will maintain this list.
d. To ensure that the UPFPC has diverse representation, the Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs, in consultation with the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate, Academic Deans, and the VP for Diversity Equity and Inclusion, may appoint two additional faculty members drawn from the pool of designated eligible faculty members to this committee. This diversity includes, but is not limited to gender diversity, racial and ethnic diversity, and professional path diversity.
3. The UPFPC will approve those unit or entity documents that define clear substantive criteria and procedures consistent with University policies, including mechanisms for communicating throughout the entire promotion process.
4. The UPFPC will review each unit's/entity's policies every three years. Whenever substantive changes are proposed, the unit/entity promotion documents must be approved by the UFPC for consistency with University policies and procedures.
5. In the event the UPFPC does. not approve unit/entity documents or proposed changes to them, and if the dean of that unit or associate provost disagrees with the decision of the UPFPC, the matter will be resolved by the President in consultation with the Provost.
6. The Provost's office will be responsible for providing administrative support for the work of this committee and assuring that all documents are distributed in a timely and appropriate manner.
II. Common Processes for Promotion Evaluations
A. Common Process for pre-promotion review
1. The approved University Professional Faculty Promotion policy will be shared with the candidate by the Office of the Provost within the first month of the start of the candidate's initial appointment. Similarly, the unit/entity and department criteria and procedures will be shared with the candidate by their respective unit/entity and department within the first month of the start of the candidate's initial full-time position in a promotion-eligible path. These policies will be the basis of the promotion reviews.
2. Each unit dean or respective supervisor will establish a timetable regarding the submission and review of materials.
3. Credit toward promotion, in terms of time and/or accomplishments, may be granted for prior service.
a. The number of years credited toward promotion will be stated in a candidate's first letter of hire or appointment.
b. Any changes in the promotion clock after this first letter of hire or appointment may required a change in the review cycle. Such changes must be agreed to in writing by the faculty member, supervisor(s), and Provost.
4. Pre-promotion review process
a. A candidate will submit review materials and supporting documentation for review to the responsible parties. Prior to submitting an application for promotion applicants should receive, in addition to annual reviews, at least one comprehensive review. Policies shall outline the expectations for the pre-promotion comprehensive review process. The University Libraries will have only a unit-level review.
b. For faculty who are not in an academic unit, an ad hoc faculty promotion review committee will be formed in accordance with the composition described in the promotion policy.
c. Academic units and other entities with professional faculty may elect to include a comprehensive pre-promotion review by the Dean or respective supervisor, if accreditation or other professional standards require a review in addition to a departmental review.
d. Each reviewing committee will provide written feedback about the candidate's progress towards promotion to the candidate in a timely fashion as designated by the unit/entity policy.
B. Common application and final review process for promotion
1. Each dean or designated entity supervisor will establish a timetable regarding the submission and review of promotion materials.
2. The review materials for promotion will be cumulative. Materials generated as a result of review at each level, including letters from chairperson/supervisors and committees, and candidate responses (where included in unit or other entity policy), will become part of the application package and will be forwarded to the unit/entity promotion committee for review. Likewise, materials generated in the unit/entity review, including letters from the respective promotion committees and from the dean or respective entity supervisor, along with candidate responses, will be forwarded to the Provost for review.
3. Materials of a substantive nature which update the submitted application (e.g., a teaching award) can be added to the application by the candidate at any point in the promotion review process until the Provost's recommendation is made. It is expected that appropriate consultation will take place if materials are added that will affect the recommendation.
4. Each academic department/entity (unit in the case of the University Libraries) will develop a "Procedural Form" that itemizes the promotion steps that are to be followed. As steps are completed, each of the responsible persons (e.g., chairperson, departmental/unit/entity promotion committee, and dean/respective unit supervisor) will provide their signature, acknowledging that steps were completed in accordance with the departmental/unit/entity procedural policies and indicating the date in which steps were completed. Each candidate will be provided an opportunity to sign, acknowledging receipt of written documentation and the date it was received. A candidate's signature will not indicate agreement with the feedback or recommendations at any given point.
5. Departmental/Subsidiary Entity Application and Review Process (does not apply to University Libraries).
a. A candidate will submit their application and supporting documentation for promotion to the department chairperson or direct supervisor by the date specified by the respective promotion documents.
b. After giving adequate consideration to each application, each department or entity will make a promotion recommendation in writing to the appropriate promotion committee regarding each candidate. A letter from both the departmental chairperson or supervisor and the department lecturer and clinical promotion committee (or equivalent for those not in a department) will go forward to the unit/entity lecturer and clinical promotion committee. These letters will specify the reasons for the recommendations and will be copied to the candidate.
c. If the candidate chooses, they can respond .in writing. This response will be forwarded with all related materials to the unit/entity lecturer and clinical promotion committee.
6. Unit/Equity Application and Final Review Process
a. The specific administrative process for submitting material, including to whom, must be specified in each unit's lecturer and clinical faculty promotion policies.
b. After giving adequate consideration to each application, each unit/entity promotion committee will make promotion recommendations regarding each candidate in writing to the dean or respective unit/entity supervisor by the date specified in the relevant promotion documents.
c. After giving adequate consideration to the application, the dean or respective entity supervisor will inform each candidate, in writing, of their recommendation and the reasons for it according to the timeline established by the unit/entity policy. In units that conduct departmental reviews, this letter will be copied to the departmental chairperson. After ensuring the candidate has received notification, the departmental chairperson will share their recommendation with the departmental promotion committee. The dean or respective entity supervisor will also inform the unit/entity promotion committee of their recommendation.
d. Candidates or concerned individuals (e.g. departmental chairpersons, clinical or lecturer promotion committee) who wish to submit a written response to the dean or respective entity supervisor have until the deadline as specified in the unit/entity level policy.
e. The dean or respective entity supervisor will then consider any additional evidence and responses and send a recommendation in writing to the Provost, along with the completed "Procedural Form," cumulative file, and the response(s) of any candidate or concerned individuals no later than the dates specified in the unit/entity promotion timeline. In units/entities that conduct departmental reviews, this letter will be copied to the departmental chairperson, according to the timeline established in the unit/entity policy. After ensuring the candidate has received notification, the departmental chairperson will share the recommendation with the departmental promotion committee. The dean or respective entity supervisor will also inform the unit/entity promotion committee of the recommendation.
7. Provost Recommendation Process
a. Candidates or any other concerned individuals (e.g. departmental chairpersons, lecturer and clinical promotion committee members) have the date specified in the unit/entity level policy to file, with the Provost, a written response to the dean's or entity supervisor's recommendation.
b. The Provost will review all materials and make recommendations to the President no later than the date specified in the unit/entity-level policy. Each candidate will be informed in writing of the Provost's recommendation. Candidates or any other concerned individuals (e.g. departmental chairpersons, department lecturer and clinical promotion committee, or other full-time faculty) who wish to submit a written response to the Provost will have until the date designated in the Unit-level policy to do so.
8. Final Administrative Authority
a. Final administrative authority rests with the President. Each candidate will be informed in writing of the President's decision. This decision will also be copied to the Provost, dean or respective entity supervisor, and departmental chairperson.
9. Mediation and Appeals
a. If the candidate chooses to appeal the President's decision, they may begin the mediation process in accordance with the Faculty Handbook, Section IV.E. If mediation does not resolve the complaint, the candidate may make use of the grievance processes set out in the Faculty Hearing Committee on Grievances Bylaws and Operating Procedures. The Board of Trustees will serve as the court of last resort in the appeals process.
10. Report to the Board of Trustees
a. The President will provide the Board of Trustees with a report of promotion actions at the spring meeting. The summary report will minimally include statistics regarding the gender and minority status of candidates.
b. The University Professional Faculty Promotion Committee will receive a copy of the President's summary report on promotion no later than two weeks prior to the spring Board meeting.
c. The University Professional Faculty Promotion Committee will review the lecturer and clinical faculty promotion process for adherence to appropriate procedures and will examine the President's summary report before compiling a report of its own to present to the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees at the Board's spring meeting. This report will also be provided to the President of the Academic Senate who will present it to the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate.
III. Ratification and Implementation of the University Professional Faculty Promotion Policy
A. This policy and any subsequent amendment requires passage by the Academic Senate followed by a majority vote by those Professional Faculty voting on the policy.
B. Upon adoption of this policy, professional faculty members' supervisors, in consultation with the Provost's office, will confirm the promotion pathway for all full-time Professional Faculty (Lecturer or Clinical Faculty/Faculty of Practice).
C. For faculty who hold non-tenure track contracts prior to the adoption of this policy:
Deans/Entity supervisors are charged to identify and notify faculty as to their eligibility for promotion under this policy. All full-time faculty must be assigned to one of the two paths outlined in Section I above, unless they are 1) already governed by the University Promotion and Tenure Policy; 2) part of the School of Law; or 3) in a visiting appointment.
These faculty members will be designated as either following the lecturer promotion path because they meet the description in Section l(A), or the clinical faculty/faculty of practice promotion path because they meet the description in Section l(B). Eligible faculty are not required to have the specific titles associated with their promotion path. A faculty member's promotion path is only determined by the extent to which they meet the criteria for the path. These path designations should be in consultation with the affected faculty member and approved by the Office of the Provost.
D. Following passage of this policy and final approval by the President, the revised university, unit, entity, and department policies will apply to faculty as follows:
1. Faculty hired with start dates or promotion dates in AY2025 or later must apply for promotion under the new policy.
2. Faculty with start dates or promotion dates prior to AY2025 have the choice of evaluation under old or new policies until AY2028. Upon declaring intention to seek promotion, each faculty member must notify their respective Dean's office of their policy choice and complete at least one pre-promotion review under the chosen policy.
3. Beginning in AY2028, all faculty must apply for promotion using the new policy DOC 2023-02. At that point Senate DOC 2017-01: University Promotion Policy for Clinical Faculty/Faculty of Practice and DOC 2018-03 University Promotion Policy for Lecturers will be rescinded.
E. Unit/Entity policy revision implementation and timeline
1. Elections for the University Professional Faculty Promotion Committee should be completed by May 15, 2023.
a. Initial terms for the University Professional Faculty Promotion Committee members will be staggered to promote continuity over the long run. Initial terms will be as follows:
i. School of Education and Health Sciences will have one candidate with a three-year term and one with a one-year term
ii. College of Arts and Sciences will have one candidate with a one-year term, one with a two-year term, and one with a three-year term.
iii.School of Engineering will have one candidate with a two-year term and one with a three-year term
iv. School of Business Administration will have one candidate with a one-year term and one with a two-year term
v. One representative will be elected by the University Libraries and other Professional Faculty entities with Professional Faculty not included in items i-iv above. This representative will serve a three-year term.
b. Committee members serving one-year initial terms will still be eligible to serve up to two consecutive three-year terms.
2. Units should revise internal promotion policies and submit to the University Professional Faculty Promotion Committee by April 1, 2024.
3. The University Professional Faculty Promotion Committee will evaluate unit/entity policies by May 15, 2024.
4. Department policies (where applicable) should be submitted to unit committees by December 31, 2024 and be approved by the unit by May 15, 2025.
5. The policy requires the University Professional Faculty Promotion Committee to review the unit/entity policies every three years after initial approval (see Section I.F.4 above). To stagger this workload, the committee will conduct the first subsequent reviews on the following schedule:
a. AY2027: College of Arts and Sciences
b. AY2028: School of Business Administration; School of Engineering
c. AY2029: School of Education and Health Sciences; all other Professional Faculty entities (currently University Libraries, IEP, OLR)
1 University of Dayton Diversity and Inclusion Assessment Task Force Report, September 27, 2019
2 University of Dayton Diversity and Inclusion Assessment Task Force Report, September 27, 2019