Provost

3.7 Promotion and Tenure

The P&T process will begin with a P&T application from the candidate. The application will be reviewed and voted by the P&T committee of each college. It is recommended that the P&T committee be composed of tenured members elected by the college. All tenured faculty members, regardless of rank, may vote on tenure. All associate and full professors may vote for promotion to the associate rank, with only full professors voting for promotion to full professor. The P&T committee for each college will select a committee head that will count the votes and write a report to the Dean. Chairs of departments/divisions may choose to write an additional report to the Dean. The Dean of the college writes his or her own report on each of the candidates, which will be included in the candidate’s file that goes to the University P&T committee. For the sake of continuity and to present the case for the college’s candidates, the chair of each college P&T committee will also serve as the college's representative to the University P&T Committee upon the request of the university P&T chair. College representatives are non-voting members of the University P&T Committee. The University P&T Committee will deliberate and make its recommendation, and the entire file will then be sent to the Provost for review. The Provost will review all documents, make his or her recommendation, and send that recommendation to the President.

3.7.1 Promotion and Tenure Criteria

In accordance with UH System policy on promotion and tenure (UHS SAM 06.A.09, 1994) found at the UH System SAMs website, UHV promotion and tenure policies derive from the following criteria:

The tenure decision is based on a comprehensive evaluation of the candidate’s total contribution to the mission of the university. All evaluations for tenure shall address the manner in which each candidate has performed in teaching, research/scholarship, and service. Adequate performance in these areas is a necessary prerequisite but not a guarantee of the granting of tenure. Reviewing committees and individuals should assess not only an individual’s progress in meeting the minimum standards in the three areas, but also the overall contribution of the individual within the university and the academic discipline.

The tenure review date is included in the candidate’s original appointment letter. Unless the letter grants service credit, the probationary period for an assistant professor is six years in rank. Up to two years’ service credit from a previous institution or from prior teaching service to UHV may be granted to a faculty member at the time of his or her tenure-track appointment.

The University recognizes a faculty member’s achievements through promotion in rank. A promotion is not a routine reward for satisfactory service, rather a reflection of a positive appraisal of high professional competence and accomplishment. Although promotion to full professor may occur earlier, this level of promotion is normally considered after five years in rank at the associate professor level. Distinguished achievements may warrant earlier consideration.

An annual progress report toward tenure assessment must be provided for untenured faculty by each dean. This assessment will be guided by the internal criteria established by each college.

3.7.2 Tenure Clock Stop Out

The University of Houston-Victoria recognizes the value of providing flexibility for tenure-track faculty members who, in their probationary periods, face situations that impede progress toward their tenure (and promotion) goals. For those who are going through childbirth, child rearing, adoption, or other exceptional life circumstances, a faculty member on the tenure track may extend his/her probationary status more than once during this period; however, the total of all extensions may not exceed two years. Any extension has no impact on the normal pre-tenure reappointment and evaluation process. Faculty members requesting extensions are responsible for notifying their department heads and deans of their requests in timely fashion and providing any necessary supporting documentation. When faculty members who have had an extension apply for tenure, their tenure documents should reflect work from the start of their tenure/probationary period, rather than only the work from the previous five years. Of course, a faculty member is never required to take a leave of absence to stop the tenure clock but may do so if circumstances warrant it.

3.7.3 Process Deadlines

*Or the first working day after

3.7.4 Promotion and Tenure Timeline

1. A faculty member who is eligible and who wishes to be a candidate for tenure and/or promotion submits a request for tenure and/or promotion consideration with supporting dossier to the college dean by September 1*. Failure to submit a complete request for consideration is grounds to delay consideration of the application until the following academic year. Failure to submit an application for tenure in the academic year that precedes the end of the probationary period will result in non-renewal of the candidate's contract for the following year. (N.B. Administrative exigency may delay decision dates or cause the Promotion and Tenure timeline to slip. If this rare situation occurs, the dean of the candidate’s college or the Provost shall notify the candidate when this has occurred and inform each candidate of the new deadline).
2. The dean shall contact external reviewers and provide them copies of the candidate’s tenure and/or promotion dossier by September 15 and request review completion by November 1*. The dean shall also provide copies of each candidate’s tenure and/or promotion dossier to the college promotion and tenure advisory committee without comment by September 15 and require their work be completed by November 1.
3. The dean examines the candidate’s tenure and/or promotion dossier, the external reviews and the recommendation of the college promotion and tenure advisory committee and informs the candidate of the dean's recommendation by November 15*. If the dean’s decision is delayed the candidate will be notified by November 15. The external reviews and the dean’s recommendation become parts of each candidate’s tenure and/or promotion dossier. The dean forwards each candidate’s tenure and/or promotion dossier to the University Promotion and Tenure Committee and to the Provost by November 15*.
4. The University Promotion and Tenure Committee reviews each candidate’s tenure and/or promotion dossier and forwards its recommendation to the Provost, providing copies to the dean and candidate, by February 1.*  If the committee's decision is delayed the candidate will be notified by the Chairman of the Committee by February 1.  The recommendation of the University Promotion and Tenure Committee becomes a part of each candidate's tenure and/or promotion dossier.
5. The Provost reviews each candidate’s tenure and/or promotion dossier and forwards the Provost’s recommendation to the President, providing copies to the candidate, dean, and the University Promotion and Tenure Committee, by March 1*. If the Provost’s decision is delayed the candidate will be notified by the Provost by March 1. The Provost’s recommendation to the President becomes a part of each candidate’s tenure and/or promotion dossier.
6. Recommendations for tenure and promotion along with all supporting documentation shall be transmitted annually from the President to the Chancellor by April 1.*

3.7.5 Guidelines for Promotion and/or Tenure Dossier

Each promotion or tenure dossier shall consist of the following documents:

• A Curriculum Vitae (UHV CV Format is required)
• A Self-analysis narrative
• Supporting documentation

3.7.5.1 Self-Analysis Narrative

The Self-Analysis section provides information demonstrating that promotion and/or tenure standards for teaching, research/scholarship, and service have been met. The promotion and tenure committees will pay particular, though not exclusive, attention to the candidate’s accomplishments at the University of Houston-Victoria. Narratives are limited to a maximum of thirty (30) single-sided sequentially numbered double-spaced pages. Links to published articles should be included. Other information may be summarized within the document using charts, graphs, or tables as appropriate. The Self-Analysis includes the following sections: introduction, teaching, research/scholarship, and service.

3.7.5.1.1 Introduction Section

The introduction section describes the candidate’s professional development as a faculty member and illustrates the relationship between teaching, research/scholarship, and service. The introduction is normally a maximum of three pages.

3.7.5.1.2 Teaching Section

The Teaching section should include the candidate’s philosophy of teaching and commitment to both quality and continuous improvement. The candidate may add other topics that describe a commitment to and success in teaching. A candidate might:

• Describe courses taught, class sizes, number of preparations, graduate and undergraduate courses, and delivery methods (Online, Face-to-Face, ITV, Laboratory, Clinical or Practicum, etc.)
• Explain creative teaching strategies, use of technology, contributions to course and curriculum development, innovative teaching techniques, as well as different teaching modalities like field or clinical experiences, internships, student research conducted in classes, student publications or professional publications that develop from course experiences, etc.
• Demonstrate participation in course and program level assessment activities and explain how assessment results are used to demonstrate improvement over time. Demonstrate how assessments of student learning outcomes lead to continuous improvement in teaching, particularly in the courses used as examples. Graphs or charts can be used.
• Provide student evaluations of instruction. Graphs or charts can be used.
• List professional development activities and explain specifically how they affected and improved teaching and mentoring.
• Describe teaching honors and awards.
• Show demonstrated availability to students.

3.7.5.1.3 Research and Scholarship Section

The research and scholarship section describes the type, purpose, scope, and impact of the research and scholarship accomplishments recorded by the candidate. Links to publications may be included in this section. Evidence of research and scholarship accomplishments claimed must be satisfactorily recorded in the supporting documentation section. Research/scholarship activities may include the following:

• Publications – peer-reviewed journal articles, book chapters, books, monographs, creative works,
• Internal and externally funded grants and contracts
• Citations recorded and downloads
• Inventions, patents, and copyrights
• Peer reviewed presentations at professional meetings
• Non-refereed articles and presentations
• Professional honors and awards (include the monetary level of award if applicable)
• Professional development activities in research and scholarship

In cases of co-authored work, the candidate should clarify the candidate’s personal contribution to each such work (given the standards of the candidate’s field).

3.7.5.1.4 Service Section

The service section describes contributions to the academic program, college, university, university system, profession, and/or community. The narrative shows how the candidate’s service connects to teaching and scholarship; explains the candidate’s role in the activities and describes the impact of service activities; and reflects a willingness to be productively engaged in advancing the academic life of the Institution. This section might include:

• Service and leadership in professional organizations, membership in professional organizations, journal editorships, membership on editorial boards, panel chair responsibilities, etc.
• Participation and leadership on university-wide committees or task forces, college committees or task forces, or serving as program director/coordinator.
• Honors and awards related to service.
• Service to student organizations and student recruitment and retention activities.
• Voluntary participation in non-profit organizations related to academic discipline (role, years of service, major contributions, etc.).
• Regular attendance at and contributions to faculty meetings.
• Participation in professional dialogue related to academic decisions.

3.7.5.2 Supporting Documentation for Promotion and/or Tenure File

For Teaching

Candidates must include all teaching evaluations received while at UHV, and may also include

• Copies of materials developed
• Copies of Syllabi
• Letters from students

For Research and Scholarship

Supporting documentation for research and scholarship accomplishments should include the following:

• For Publications – originals or copies of peer reviewed journal articles, book chapters, books, monographs, creative works, etc. with citations should be included.
• Internal and externally funded grants and contracts - copies should be included.
• Citations recorded and downloads - copies should be included.
• Inventions, patents, and copyrights - copies should be included.
• Peer reviewed presentations at professional meetings – copies of programs should be included.
• Non-refereed articles and presentations – copies of agenda should be included.
• Professional honors and awards (include the monetary level of award if applicable) copies should be included.
• Professional development activities in research and scholarship activities. Working papers or drafts may be included.

For Service

Copies of any materials the candidate believes will support the application may be included

• Service and leadership in professional organizations, membership in professional organizations, journal editorships, membership on editorial boards, panel chair responsibilities, etc. Documentation may be included.
• Participation and leadership on university-wide committees or task forces, college committees or task forces, or serving as program director/coordinator. Documentation may be included.
• Honors and awards related to service. Documentation may be included.
• Service to student organizations and student recruitment and retention activities. Documentation may be included.
• Voluntary participation in non-profit organizations related to academic discipline (role, years of service, major contributions, etc.). Documentation may be included.
• Regular attendance at and contributions to faculty meetings. Documentation may be included.
• Participation in professional dialogue related to academic decisions. Documentation may be included.

Clinical Experience

Faculty seeking promotion in the clinical track must provide evidence of continuing clinical practice in addition to the teaching and service requirements for tenure track faculty. The focus is on clinical scholarship. Clinical faculty contribute to the professional literature in their discipline and maintain an active clinical practice in their field. Some overlap with traditional expectations for teaching, scholarship, and service is expected. The narrative should describe how these activities complement one another and contribute to the candidate’s professional development. Clinical activities related to scholarship may include

1. Participation in a clinical or other professional practice using translational.
2. Consultation to agencies, institutions and other groups and individuals demonstrating the application of clinical.

Teaching Track

Faculty seeking promotion in the teaching track must provide evidence of excellence in teaching, which should include formal classroom instruction, advising and mentoring of students, and may include clinical supervision, when applicable.

The expectation for promotion is that the applicant provide evidence of a pattern of exceptional teaching and must include annual faculty evaluations and university-required student evaluations of teaching.  Additional evidence of teaching excellence may include, but is not limited to:

1. Signed written statements from former or current students
2. Student nominations for teaching awards
3. Teaching awards
4. Additional peer evaluations of teaching
5. New course/curriculum added to departmental offerings
6. Substantive course/curriculum revisions
7. Creative instructional methods, strategies, or materials
8. Syllabi, bibliographies, or evaluative procedures
9. External letters of evaluation
10. Advising and mentoring of teaching
11. Attending teaching/pedagogy training/conferences
12. Supervision of student research

3.7.6 External Review

A minimum of three external reviewers is required for candidates seeking promotion. External reviewers:

• Evaluate the candidate’s record as a scholar and the potential for continued productivity.
• Confirm an emerging professional reputation by the candidate for promotion to associate professor and an emerging or established national and/or international reputation by the candidate for promotion to full professor.
• Should include a copy of their personal curriculum vitae with the evaluation.
• Transmit their professional opinion to the applying candidate’s Dean.

External reviewers must be established scholars from the candidate’s discipline at regional, Masters’ comprehensive institutions who are able to provide objective, unbiased opinions. Candidates seeking promotion to professor shall be evaluated by professors. The dean is responsible for ensuring the number and qualifications of external reviewers. The candidate may forward a list of prospective external reviewers for the dean to consider. The list should include a description of the candidate’s relationship with each prospective reviewer. The dean may consult with the college Advisory Committee and/or faculty in the candidate’s discipline for additional external reviewers to contact. The dean’s selection of external reviewers may be from candidate recommendations or from other sources. All selections by the dean are final.

The dean contacts the reviewers and sends them copies of the candidate’s self-analysis, Curriculum Vitae, and scholarly work. The dean will include directions for completing their reviews of the candidate’s research and its impact on the discipline or profession. The reviewers are to focus only on the candidate’s research and scholarship activities.

UHV requires that external evaluators be at the rank equal to or higher than that being sought by the candidate and be tenured at their respective institutions to evaluate candidates seeking tenure and the rank of associate professor or professor. The proper role of external reviewers is to assess the quality and value of the candidate’s research and scholarly work to the academic discipline.

3.7.7 UHV College-Level Evaluation

All tenured faculty members at the rank of associate professor or higher shall have the right to vote on promotions to the rank of associate professor with tenure. Promotion to the rank of professor shall be voted upon by the full professors only. Each college shall establish procedures for evaluations that take place within the college. The results of the college advisory committee vote (if any) and written findings shall be forwarded to the dean. The dean reviews all the recommendations and makes an independent evaluation of the candidate’s qualifications. All internal evaluations are based on faculty achievements and accomplishments in the areas of teaching, research/scholarship, and service. Recommendations consider faculty workload, quality and contribution of research/scholarship, and service to UHV, the college, the profession, and the community.

3.7.8 Promotion and Tenure Committee Ballots

After considering the information contained in the candidate’s Promotion and/or Tenure Dossier, the Promotion and Tenure Committee will assess the candidate’s performance in each of the three broad areas (enumerated above). During Promotion and Tenure Committee deliberations, discussion of each candidate’s performance will be followed by a ballot providing separate ratings for each area. The ballot shall contain the name of the candidate, and the rating assigned that candidate for each of the three ratings categories.

Only candidates who meet the minimal criteria in each area as determined by a majority ballot will be recommended for promotion and tenure. Ratings shall be based on the five-point scale described below. Decisions of promotion and tenure are different from the annual performance review in that they are based on the applicant’s cumulative and consistent performance.

3.7.8.1 Rating Description

The rating system used for promotion and tenure consideration remains in effect but also under review.

1. Performance well below levels expected or required.
2. Performance below levels expected or required.
3. Performance at levels expected or required.
4. Performance above levels expected or required.
5. Performance far above levels expected or required. 

Sample Ballot

The minimal performance rating for promotion at each rank is as follows:

1. Promotion from instructor to assistant professor requires a rating of three or higher in all three areas by a majority of the promotion and tenure committee.
2. Promotion from assistant professor to associate professor requires a rating of four or higher in teaching and that of three or higher in the other two areas by a majority of the promotion and tenure committee.
3. Promotion from associate professor to professor requires one of three combinations of ratings of the categories by a majority of the promotion and tenure committee:
   • At least a four in all three categories,
   • A five in one category, at least a four in a second, and at least a three in the third, with teaching being one of the categories with at least a four, and
   • Fives in two categories, one of which is teaching, and at least a three in the third category.

3.7.9 Withdrawal and Deferral Procedures

Candidates may end the review procedures at any point prior to the Provost’s recommendation to the President by submitting a written withdrawal of their request. 

3.7.10 Appeal Procedure

When a negative recommendation on conferring tenure or promotion has first been reached at any of the review levels, the faculty member involved shall be informed immediately of that recommendation in writing by the person or committee making the recommendation. If the faculty member so requests, the faculty member shall be advised of the reasons for the recommendation and shall have seven (7) business days to request an appeal to the next level of review. The faculty member may present his or her case personally to the individual or committee and may provide additional materials for consideration. The person or committee hearing the appeal will include in the required report discussion of the new materials and their relevance to the decision. After three negative recommendations, the case is deemed to have a negative outcome, and the candidate has the option of withdrawing. If that candidate is in his last probationary year, he or she will receive a terminal contract for the final year. When all appeals are exhausted, the faculty member can file a grievance in accordance with Section 5.9: Grievance Procedures.