Printable PDF

(A)       Purpose. Within the limitations of Ohio laws and after the successful completion of the specified probationary period and the evaluative process called for in this rule, Kent State University shall grant faculty members indefinite tenure as one means of ensuring academic freedom.

(1)       The only faculty covered by this rule are those who hold full-time appointments to the regular ranks of the instructor, assistant professor, associate professor, or full professor. Such appointments as term, casual or continuing, part-time, lecturer, visiting, or adjunct and others are not included in these understandings.

(2)       Kent State University recognizes a limited appointment, that is, one automatically expiring after a specified time, when the appointment recommendation particularly notes such an automatic time limit and is accepted by the appointee. Such appointments are not included in these understandings.

(3)       This rule applies to administrative personnel who hold academic rank, but only in their capacity as faculty members.

(B)       Initial Procedure. "Indefinite tenure" is a right of a faculty member to continuous appointment to a professional position of specified locus in the university. The services of a faculty member with tenure may be terminated by the university only under policies stated in the sanctions for cause and retrenchment articles of the collective bargaining agreement.

(1)       For tenure purposes, the term “unit” shall be understood to mean the lowest level of academic organization in which the faculty member holds rank. “Lowest level of academic unit” is represented by departments and independent or dependent schools. Given some variance in procedures followed for faculty from independent schools and/or regional campuses, sections of this policy have been included to delineate these specific procedural differences.

(2)       Criteria which are appropriate to a particular unit shall be formulated by that unit in light of college (if applicable) and university standards and guidelines, the mission of the unit, and the demands of the discipline.

(3)       Tenure is granted in the unit of instruction, department or school specified in the appointment.

(4)       Tenure is granted either at the Kent campus or in the regional campuses system, but not both, as specified in the appointment.

(5)       The unit handbook may recommend that candidates for tenure should be expected to meet the minimum criteria for promotion to associate professor and, in such cases, the higher standards that a candidate for early promotion is expected to meet may be applied to the candidate’s application for early tenure as well. These criteria only apply to regional campus faculty if a similar standard has been set in the regional campus handbooks.

(C)       Probationary periods and notice. In considering an individual for tenure, the length of time in the probationary rank and the dates of notice are related to the initial appointment rank.

(1)       Probationary periods and notices dates.

(a)       An initial appointment at the rank of instructor or assistant professor shall be subject to the following probationary periods.

(i)         If the appointment carries no years of credit toward tenure the appointee shall receive written notification by the fifteenth of March of the sixth year of service that:

(1)       Tenure will be granted. In this case the tenure shall be effective at the start of the next contract year; or

(2)       Tenure is not to be granted. In this case the appointee shall receive a one-year terminal appointee for the following academic year.

(ii)        If the appointment as instructor or assistant professor carries some years of credit toward tenure, the number of years shall be deducted from six and the provisions of paragraph (C)(1)(a) shall be used with the new number replacing the six-year provision; thus if an assistant professor is hired with two years credit towards tenure, then the notification shall occur by the fifteenth of March of the fourth year of service

(1)       The maximum number of credit toward tenure for an assistant professor hire is two years.

(2)       When promoted from instructor to assistant professor at Kent, the maximum years of credit toward tenure is three.

(3)       In extraordinary circumstances, additional credit may be granted after consultation with the FAC at the time of appointment.

(iii)       The terms and conditions of every appointment, including credit for the previous academic appointment and specification of the year in which tenure procedures will take place, shall be stated in writing, which shall be in the possession of both Kent state university and the faculty member before the appointment is consummated. The tenure decision should be based upon these initial terms and conditions.

(iv)       Faculty may apply for early tenure consideration. In such cases, the earliness of the application shall not suffice as the sole reason for denial of tenure. Unsuccessful candidates

(v)        for early tenure shall be re-evaluated without prejudice at the normal time.

(b)       An initial appointment at the rank of associate professor, or an initial appointment at the rank of professor if, in gaining this rank the appointee was promoted from a lower rank which was held at another accredited institution of higher education, shall carry a probationary period of three years. In extraordinary cases, a shorter probationary period may be considered after consultation with the FAC at the time of appointment.

(i)         If tenure is awarded in consequence of the tenure review during the third full year of service, it shall become effective with the contract for the fourth year of service.

(ii)        If tenure is denied, the candidate shall receive written notification by the fifteenth of March of the third full year of service and shall receive a terminal appointment for the fourth year.

(c)        An initial appointment at the rank of professor, when the appointee held the rank of professor at another accredited institution of higher education, may carry tenure with the appointment.

(2)       Since the purpose of the probationary period is to provide an opportunity for observation, time spent on leave other than a scholarly leave of absence is not considered as part of the probationary period. Summer appointments are not counted within yearly appointments.

(3)       The conferring of tenure is a positive act by the university and as such a faculty member cannot receive tenure by default.

(a)       If an untenured faculty member does not receive notification by the appropriate date, the fifteenth of March of the year in which the tenure review is scheduled to be conducted in accord with (C)(1) of this rule, the faculty member as part of his or her professional responsibility, shall have twenty working days to inquire of the chairperson, dean, or provost as to the status of his or her tenure decision. The university will have ten working days in which to respond.

(i)         In the event that the evaluative process has been conducted, the university will notify the individual and the decision will go forward as if the appropriate notification dates had been met.

(ii)        In the extreme case that a candidate has not been evaluated for tenure at the proper time, he or she will be evaluated at the next regular evaluation period after the error has been detected with all relevant notification dates delayed accordingly.

(b)       Any failure in procedural matters by the university or the faculty member shall not be sufficient cause for the conferring of tenure, the denial of tenure of the termination of employment.

(D)       Minimum Criteria. The granting of tenure is a deliberate and important decision, initiated by a candidate's peers and eventually made by the trustees of the university. Since this decision could result in life-long employment at this institution for a faculty member, it should involve more than a mere survey of the candidate's minimum quantifiable activities. Essentially, those involved in making a tenure decision are asking the question, “Is this person likely to make a positive contribution to his/her discipline, unit campus, university and community over the long term?”. The way that question is answered strongly influences the general quality of the university's faculty and thus the stature and well-being of the university.

(1)       The minimum criteria upon which tenure is granted are:

(a)       The candidate will have the terminal degree in his or her discipline as noted in the handbook of his/her academic unit. Exceptions can be made in particular cases, provided that such exceptions can be justified by the candidate's unit or campus (where appropriate) and are approved by the dean, the executive dean for regional campuses (where appropriate) and the provost.

(b)       The quality of a candidate’s scholarship of discovery, integration, application, and teaching and university citizenship are of central importance in the tenure decision. The criteria for assessing the quality of scholarship and university citizenship shall be clearly formulated and placed in the handbook of each unit. Guidelines for weighing criteria shall be clearly formulated by each unit (for review of Kent campus candidates) and by each campus (for review of regional campus candidates) and placed in their respective handbooks. All regular full-time faculty members must have the opportunity to participate in the establishment, development, and revision of the unit’s criteria, and the unit’s or campus’ weighting guidelines. These processes shall be democratic and public.

(i)         Mutually supportive, complementary, and often overlapping areas that need to be considered include:

(1)       The scholarship of discovery: the pursuit of new knowledge; original research or creative activity.

(2)       The scholarship of integration: interpretation, drawing together, and bringing new insight to original research or creative activity;

(3)       The scholarship of application: using knowledge responsibly to solve consequential problems; knowledge that arises out of the very act of application;

(4)       The scholarship of teaching: the act of teaching as well as the planning and examination of pedagogical procedures;

(5)       University citizenship: service activities not necessarily tied to one’s special field of knowledge which make significant positive contributions to the advancement of the educational, scholarly and governance goals and missions of the university, college, campus, unit, or community

(ii)        It is expected that different fields and disciplines may vary in their interpretations of scholarship. However, the following are considered aspects of scholarship applicable across most fields:

(1)       Broad knowledge of the field;

(2)       Clarity of goals;

(3)       Implementation of appropriate methods and procedures;

(4)       Effective use of the right resources in an effective way;

(5)       Good communication;

(6)       Significance of results.

(iii)       Evidence of the scholarship of discovery, integration, application and teaching, as well as university citizenship, may be demonstrated by self-evaluation, peer evaluation, student evaluation, client evaluation, external colleague evaluation, and adjudication. In addition, candidates are expected to provide documented evidence which may include:

(1)       Demonstrated significant involvement in curricular development and/or review;

(2)       Measures of student achievement such as student performance on nationally standardized examination(s), publications by students, etc;

(3)       Publication such as professionally reviewed and referred articles, monographs, and books in the candidate’s field;

(4)       Invited participation in programs or presentations of papers at professional meetings at the state, regional, national and international level;

(5)       Significant creative activity, such as invited/juried exhibitions, performances, compositions, etc;

(6)       Participation and leadership in professional and learned societies;

(7)       Significant public service to a faculty member’s profession;

(8)       Evidence of outstanding achievement, such as awards, patents, and copyrights;

(9)       Seeking and securing professionally reviewed research and/or service training grants, especially extramural awards.

(10)     Outstanding service to the university, school/college, regional campus, unit and/or community (beyond the normal pattern expected of all faculty members).

(iv)       Different faculty roles and rank may foster differential weighting of criteria for assessing the scholarship of discovery, integration, application and teaching and university citizenship. Any such differential weighting within a unit must be approved by the unit’s faculty advisory committee, unit administration, campus and college dean. The following must be considered relative to the application and weighting of criteria:

(1)       Documented evidence of specific expertise in the scholarship of discovery (original research and/or creative activity), integration and/or application is necessary for the granting of tenure. However, the minimum criteria for tenure are not met when the individual seeking tenure has research which is exclusively categorized as the scholarship of application.

(2)       Documented evidence of the scholarship of teaching is necessary for every candidate whose assignment includes instruction.

(3)       The scholarship of discovery, integration, application and teaching needs to be disseminated to the larger community of scholars.

(4)       Greater consideration may be given to the scholarship of teaching and service activities when evaluating faculty whose letter of appointment indicates their primary responsibility is delivery of undergraduate instruction.

(2)       A non-tenured faculty member applying for promotion to the rank of associate professor or full professor must also undergo a successful tenure review.

(3)       Criteria based upon sex, race, color, age, national origin, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or political activity are expressly forbidden.

(E)       Procedure for making decisions regarding tenure.

(1)       Due process is integral to an effective tenure policy. The guiding premise in the following procedure is that the essential phrases in tenure consideration occur at the unity level and at the regional campus (if applicable). Assessments and the recommendations beyond these levels should reflect due regard for the professional judgment and recommendations made at the unit and regional campus levels. Review and assessment by extra-unit and extra-regional campus faculty and the academic administration are necessary to insure the integrity of the system.

(2)       All candidates for tenure must submit the names of at least three persons outside the university who are qualified to evaluate their achievements and from whom evaluations must be solicited by the unit’s administrator (chairperson, director or dean). In cases involving regional campus faculty, copies of these letters must be placed in both regional and Kent campus files.

(3)       The unit administrator may also solicit other information from outside the university but must inform the candidate of the persons contacted. The candidate should be given a copy of the letter to be sent to outside evaluators and have the opportunity to comment before the letter is mailed.

(4)       In addition, the college dean (where appropriate) may consult with the unit administrator regarding any letters the dean may wish to solicit for consideration at the unit level and inform the candidate of such letters received. The candidate should be give a copy of the letter to be sent to outside evaluators and have the opportunity to comment before the letter is mailed.

(F)       Unit level. The tenure committee of a department or school shall be composed of all tenured members of the unit's advisory committee and any tenured full professors who may not be members of the advisory committee. All actions involving tenure are to be initiated by this committee. No member of the committee shall be present when the committee deliberates or votes on the tenure of an individual in a rank higher than that of the individual member of the tenure committee, or on the tenure of a spouse or relative. The unit administrator serves as the non-voting chairperson of the tenure committee.

(1)       Each spring term the unit administrator shall notify those faculty members who are eligible for tenure consideration during the next academic year.

(2)       The unit administrator will make available copies of the guidelines, timetables, and other information concerning the tenure review to all candidates in the unit, Kent campus and regional campuses faculty members alike, no later than three weeks before the deadline for submission of materials, which is at the end of the first week of the fall semester.

(3)       Faculty members being considered for tenure are responsible for developing, organizing, and submitting to the unit administrator the evidence supporting their candidacy for tenure. The unit administrator will review the file with the candidate for tenure in order to insure that the file is complete and will prepare a statement indicating that the file is complete. The completed file statement will be signed by both the candidate and the unit administrator. Thereafter, the candidate must be informed of anything that is added to the file and provided the opportunity to insert written comments concerning that new material.

(4)       Before convening the tenure committee, the unit administrator shall formally invite signed written comments from all tenured faculty who are not members of the tenure committee. The unit administrator will provide these comments to the tenure committee, copy the candidate and place the comments in the file.

(5)       Members of the tenure committee on leave of absence shall be notified of the nominations and shall vote by absentee ballot, or they may request from the committee the right to abstain from voting. If the tenure committee consists of few than four members, excluding the non-voting chair, then a special procedure for enlarging it shall be developed by the unit administrator with the advice of the faculty advisory committee and the assistance of the college dean and the approval of the provost.

(6)       The unit administrator shall discuss his/her estimate of the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate with the unit tenure committee. Also, this committee shall have made available to it all relevant data developed by the faculty member concerning his/her tenure candidacy.

(7)       These materials shall be subject to candid discussion by the committee. Thereafter, each voting member shall indicate “yea” or “nay.” The unit administrator shall record the vote tally and report this to the committee, which has the option to vote a second time on any candidate.

(8)       Shortly thereafter, each voting member shall record that vote by completing a signed evaluation form. Such peer evaluations are important to the tenure process and should be considered carefully by their author.

(9)       Approval of at least three-fourths of the members of the tenure committee who vote excluding those abstaining under paragraph (F)(4)-(5) of this rule shall constitute formal endorsement to the unit administrator for tenure.

(10)     The unit administrator shall assemble the recorded votes, along with supporting statements, on all candidates, as well as other relevant documents. The unit administrator shall weigh and assess all relevant information and decide whether to recommend the granting of tenure to the candidate. He/she shall record his/her decision, along with a signed statement supporting it.

(11)     The unit administrator should extend an invitation to the candidate to meet in order to discuss the assessment and recommendation. This meeting should take place as soon as possible. In all cases that are not unanimously positive, the unit administrator must meet with the candidate within five working days from the date of the submission of the unit administrator’s letter to the administrator at the next level of review. The candidate has five working days from receipt of the written notification of the recommendation to respond to any procedural errors or errors of fact.

(12)     The unit administrator shall inform the offices of the appropriate college dean, regional campus dean, and the executive dean for regional campuses where appropriate, and the provost. The file must be completed and closed at the unit level and no material added except as provided for in the paragraphs (E)(4), (F)(3), (F)(4), (F)(13), (G)(7), (H)(3), (H)(4), (H)(10), (H)(14), (H)(18) and (J) of this rule.

(13)     For departments/dependent schools, no later than the date when the unit administrator submits the unit’s recommendations to the dean of the college, the unit administrator shall notify the candidate of his/her recommendation to the dean as well as the advisory recommendation of the tenure committee, including the numerical vote.

(a)       The unit administrator shall include with this letter a copy of his/her letter of recommendation to the dean, a summary of the advisory recommendations of the tenure committee, and copies of the committees signed evaluation forms.

(b)       In the unit administrator’s letter to the candidate, he/she shall inform the candidate that he/she has the right, within five working days, to add a letter to his/her file responding to any procedural errors or errors of fact that the candidate believe have been included in either the unit administrator’s letter or the committee members’ statements.

(c)        The letter shall also indicate that if the candidate wishes to appeal a negative decision, such intent shall be expressed to the next higher academic officer in writing within ten working days of receipt of the unit administrator’s letter.

(d)       Copies shall be sent to the appropriate deans, the executive dean for regional campuses (where appropriate) and the provost. In the case of independent schools, copies shall be sent directly to the executive dean for regional campuses and, if appropriate, the provost.

(G)       The college level. The dean shall conduct a review of the unit’s actions and shall convene the college advisory committee, which shall function as the college tenure committee. On the basis of the qualifications of the candidate, this committee shall evaluate all endorsements deriving from the unit level, and recommend to the dean either tenure or denial of tenure.

(1)       In the four undergraduate colleges, tenured members of the elected college advisory committee shall serve as the college tenure committee to review recommendations and evaluations form the departments and schools and recommend to the dean in each case whether tenure should be granted or denied. Members of the college tenure committee may not vote on candidates form their own department, nor may a member be present, participate or vote while the committee deliberates or votes on tenure of a spouse or relative.

(2)       The dean shall be the chairperson and a nonvoting member of the college tenure committee. This committee shall have made available to it all data developed by the unit. In the case of regional campus faculty, the appropriate regional campus dean shall submit a recommendation to the college dean. These materials shall be the subject of candid discussion by the committee.

(3)       Thereafter, each voting member shall indicate “yea” or “nay.” The dean shall record the vote tally and report this to the committee, which has the option to vote a second time on any candidate.

(4)       Shortly thereafter, each voting member shall record that vote by completing a signed evaluation form.

(5)       Approval of at least a majority of the members of the tenure committee who are eligible to vote shall constitute a recommendation for tenure by the college tenure committee to the dean.

(6)       The dean shall prepare a written statement in which is recorded the recommendation of the college tenure committee, along with the numerical vote. In addition, the dean shall forward a recommendation for approval or disapproval.

(a)       For Kent campus candidates, the dean’s statement and candidate’s file are forwarded to the provost.

(b)       For regional campus candidates, the dean’s statement and candidate’s file are forwarded to the executive dean for regional campuses.

(7)       No later than then date the college recommendations are submitted to the provost, the dean shall notify the candidate by sending the candidate a copy of his/her letter of recommendation to the provost, a summary of the advisory recommendation of the tenure committee, and copies of the committee’s signed evaluations.

(a)       The notification letter shall also include a statement informing the candidate that he/she has the right to, within five working days, include a letter in the file responding to any errors of fact that the candidate believes are in any of the recommendations and supporting documents from the dean or other advisory committees. This letter shall also indicate that if the candidate wishes to appeal a negative decision, notification of such intent shall be sent in writing within ten working days of receipt of the dean’s letter.

(H)       Regional campus level. Regional campus candidates for tenure will be reviewed both at the unit level, as described in paragraph (F) of this rule, and at the regional campus level.

(1)       The tenure committee of the regional campus shall be composed of tenured members of the faculty council and the campus full professors. No member of the committee shall be present when the committee deliberates or votes on the tenure of an individual in a rank higher than that of the individual member of the tenure committee, or on the tenure of a spouse or relative. The faculty chairperson is a voting member of the campus tenure committee.

(2)       The unit administrator shall make available copies of the guidelines, timetables and other information concerning tenure review to all candidates in the unit, Kent campus and regional campus faculty members alike, no later than three weeks before the deadline for submission of materials, which is at the end of the first week of the fall semester. At the same time, the campus dean will make available to the candidate and the unit copies of those sections of the campus handbook concerning the campus’ method of weighting unit criteria.

(3)       Regional campus faculty members being considered for tenure are responsible for developing, organizing, and submitting to the unit administrator two identical files supporting their candidacy for tenure. The unit administrator will review the files with the candidate for inclusion in each file indicating that the file is complete. The completed file statements will be signed by both the candidate and the unit administrator. The unit administrator must convey in a timely manner one of the files to the appropriate regional campus dean for review by the campus tenure committee. Thereafter, the candidate must be informed of anything that is added to either or both files and provided the opportunity to insert written comments concerning the new material.

(4)       Before convening the campus tenure committee, the faculty chairperson shall formally invite signed written comments from all campus tenured faculty members who are not members of the tenure committee. The faculty chairperson will provide the comments to the campus tenure committee, copy the candidate, and place the comments in the file.

(5)       Members of the campus tenure committee on leave of absence shall be notified of the candidacies and shall vote by absentee ballot, or they may request from the committee the right to abstain from voting. If the campus tenure committee consists of few than four members, including the voting chairperson, then a special procedure for enlarging it shall be developed by the regional campus dean, with the advice of the faculty council and the approval of the executive dean for regional campuses and the provost.

(6)       The campus tenure committee shall discuss its estimate of the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate. This committee shall have made available to it all relevant information and documentation developed by faculty members concerning their candidacy.

(7)       These materials shall be subject of candid and responsible discussion by the committee. Thereafter, each voting member shall indicate “yea” or “nay.” The faculty chairperson shall record the vote tally and report this to the committee, which has the option to vote a second time on any candidate.

(8)       Shortly thereafter, each voting member shall record that vote by completing a signed evaluation form. Such peer evaluations are important to the tenure process and should be considered carefully by their author.

(9)       Approval of at least three-fourths of the members of the tenure committee who vote excluding those abstaining under paragraph (H)(5) of this rule shall constitute a formal endorsement to the campus dean for tenure.

(10)     The faculty chairperson shall then summarize the committee’s vote, deliberations, signed evaluation forms, and recommendation for support or non-support of granting tenure to the candidate in signed letters to the candidate and regional campus dean. When the recommendation is for non-support, a summary of the reasons shall be made a part of the letter. In addition, the letter shall indicate that if the candidate wishes to respond to the recommendation for non-support, such a response must be made to the campus dean and copied to the unit administrator within ten working days of receipt of the letter. Copies of the chairperson’s letter shall be provided to the college dean, the executive dean for regional campuses, and to the unit administrator of the candidate’s unit.

(11)     The regional campus dean shall assemble the records, along with supporting statements, ballots, and other relevant documents. The campus dean will then review the file and the advisory recommendations of the campus tenure committee and unit administrator, weigh and assess all relevant information, and decide whether to recommend the granting of tenure to the candidate. He/she shall record his/her decision along with a signed statement supporting it.

(12)     The regional campus dean should extend an invitation to the candidate to meet in order to discuss the assessment and recommendation. This meeting should take place as soon as possible. In all cases that are not unanimously positive, the campus dean must meet with the candidate within five working days from the date of the submission of the campus dean’s letter to the college/school dean. The candidate has five working days from receipt of the written notification of the recommendation to respond to any procedural errors or errors of fact.

(13)     The regional campus dean’s recommendations to grant or deny tenure to the candidate shall be submitted to the executive dean for regional campuses and the college/independent school dean, with copies to the unit administrator and the provost. The file must be completed and closed at the regional campus level and no material added except as provided for in paragraphs (E)(4), (F)(3), (F)(4), (F)(13), (G)(7), (H)(3), (H)(4), (H)(10), (H)(14), (H)(18), and (J) of this rule.

(14)     No later than the date when the regional campus dean submits his/her recommendation to the college dean, the campus dean shall notify the candidate of this recommendation by letter. This notification shall include copies of the campus dean’s written recommendation to the college/independent school dean and copies of the tenure committee’s signed evaluation forms.

(a)       The campus dean’s letter to the candidate shall inform the candidate that he/she has the right, within five working days, to add a letter to his/her file responding to any procedural errors or errors of fact that the candidate believes have been included in the campus dean’s letter.

(b)       The letter shall also indicate that if the candidate wishes to respond to a negative recommendation, such intent shall be expressed to the college dean or independent school dean within ten working days of receipt of the campus dean’s letter. Copies shall be sent to the appropriate deans, the executive dean for regional campuses, and the provost. In the case of the independent schools, copies shall be sent directly to the executive dean for regional campuses and the provost.

(15)     The college dean or independent school dean shall review the regional campus and unit actions and shall convene the college advisory committee, which shall function as the college tenure committee. Informed by the committee’s recommendation, the college dean or independent school dean shall forward a recommendation for approval or disapproval to the executive dean for regional campuses.

(16)     The executive dean for regional campuses shall conduct a review of the college and regional campus actions and shall make a timely recommendation to the provost for approval or disapproval of the tenure of any candidate who is assigned to the regional campuses.

(17)     To aid in making a recommendation, the executive dean for regional campuses shall convene a tenure advisory board for the regional campuses. The members of this board shall be appointed by the executive dean in consultation with the regional campuses faculty advisory council and campus deans from a list of tenured associate and full professors nominated by each campus faculty council and campus dean. It is ordinarily expected that through such discussion, consensus on the regional campuses tenure advisory board members will be reached. In the unusual circumstance that the regional campus faculty advisory council and the executive dean are unable to reach consensus by the specified date for the beginning of the board’s activity, the executive dean will convene a tenure advisory board that include those for whom consensus has been reached and others that the executive dean appoints.

(18)     No later than the date the executive dean submits his/her recommendation to the provost, the executive dean shall notify the candidate by sending a copy of his/her recommendation to the dean, a summary of any advisory recommendations of any faculty bodies that have been consulted during the process, and copies of the tenure advisory board’s signed evaluations forms.

(a)       This letter shall be accompanied by a statement informing the candidate the she/he has the right to include, within five working days, a letter in the file responding to any procedural errors or errors of fact that the candidate believes are in any of the recommendations and supporting documents from the executive dean or other advisory committees. This letter shall also indicate that if the candidate wishes to appeal a negative decision, such intent shall be expressed to the provost, in writing, within ten working days of receipt of the executive dean’s letter.

(i)         The provost level. The provost shall conduct a review of the independent school/college and regional campus level actions and shall make a recommendation on tenure.

(1)       To assist in this process for Kent campus faculty, the provost shall convene the Kent campus tenure advisory board. The members of this board shall be appointed by the provost in consultation with the provost’s advisory council from a list of tenured associate and full professors nominated by the faculty senate executive committee, the college/independent schools advisory committees, and the college/independent school deans. It is ordinarily expected that through such discussion, consensus on the tenure advisory board members will be reached.

(a)       In the unusual circumstance that the provost’s advisory council and the provost are unable to reach consensus by the specified date for the beginning of board’s activity, the provost will convene a tenure advisory board that includes those for whom consensus has been reached and others that the provost appoints. This board shall evaluate from a Kent campus-wide perspective the recommendations made thus far and shall formally advise the provost as to whether in its view these recommendations should be accepted.

(2)       The provost shall provide written notification to all candidates for tenure of the action taken. Such notification shall be made at least one week prior to the date designated as the submission date for recommendations for tenure by the president to the board of trustees. The communication to candidates whose tenure is not approved shall include reasons why approval was withheld. Copies of each communication shall be sent to the executive dean for regional campuses (if applicable), college dean, regional campus dean (if applicable) and unit administrator.

(J)        New material may be added as requested by a review committee or the responsible academic administrator at any level in order to correct or more fully document information contained in the tenure file. In such instances, the affected faculty member shall be notified of, and given the opportunity to review, such new material as is added to the file and also provided with the opportunity to include written comments relevant to this material and/or the appropriateness of its inclusion in the file.

(K)       Appeal. Any faculty member whose tenure has been disapproved at any level shall have the right to appeal to the next higher academic administrative officer. In the case of denial by the provost, the appeal shall be to the president, or when appropriate to the joint appeals board (see collective bargaining agreement, grievance and appeals procedure). Appeals based upon a claim that established procedures have not been followed can only be made to the next higher academic administrative officer. All appeals must be initiated by the candidate in writing within ten working days of the candidate’s receipt of the disapproval notification. At each level of appeal at which a faculty advisory body is designated to hear an appeal and make an advisory recommendation to the responsible academic administrative officer, the appellant shall be offered an opportunity to appear in person to present his/her case orally before the appropriate tenure committee. The appellant may be accompanied by a colleague who may assist in presenting his/her case. The academic administrator in question shall consider the vote of this body seriously before making his/her recommendation and shall inform both the appellant and the academic administrator at the next higher level of the results of this vote.

(L)       In no instance shall any academic administrator or member of a tenure committee violate the confidentiality of the tenure process or compromise the principles of due process.

Effective: June 1, 2007
Prior Effective Dates: November 4, 1977; September 18, 1978; August 31, 1979; October 1, 1985; August 21, 1989; April 19, 1991; November 20, 2004