All probationary tenure-track faculty members are subject to reappointment review annually until the academic year in which they are considered for tenure. Probationary Faculty members are reviewed by the School's Ad Hoc RTP Committee. Probationary Faculty are expected to work with the School Director to identify at least one Faculty member each year to visit their classes and evaluate their teaching performance. A written report of the evaluation is placed in the Faculty member's reappointment file. Probationary Faculty will also create an updated file each year that is presented to the Director and the Ad Hoc RTP Committee. Each probationary Faculty member is discussed by the committee, which then votes on the Faculty member's reappointment. The Director independently assesses the accomplishments of each probationary Faculty member and forwards her/his recommendation and the committee's recommendation to the Dean. The Director informs probationary Faculty of the committee's recommendation and provides a copy of her/his recommendation to the Dean. Probationary Faculty members who are not to be reappointed must be notified according to the schedule established in the Collective Bargaining Agreement. For Faculty members whose appointment is in the Regional Campuses, recommendations on reappointment from the Director are forwarded to the Dean and the appropriate Regional Campus Dean.
For probationary Faculty, reappointment is contingent upon demonstration of adequate progress toward the requirements for tenure. Moreover, the Faculty member must have established and articulated short and long-term plans for achieving these goals. For Faculty members following the traditional tenure clock for Assistant Professors, the review after completion of three (3) full years in the probationary period at Kent State University is particularly critical. Upon completion of the third year of the probationary period, Faculty reviewing a candidate for reappointment should consider the record of the candidate's achievements to date. This record should be considered a predictor of future success. The hallmark of a successful candidate is compelling evidence of the potential to have an impact upon the discourse of her/his discipline. This record can be demonstrated through peer reviewed work and other significant scholarly contributions in one or more established lines of inquiry, as well as a clear and focused plan for building on this work. Specific concerns expressed by the Ad Hoc RTP Committee and/or the Director during this stage of the probationary period should be addressed by the candidate in subsequent reappointment reviews. Finally, a sound ethical approach to all aspects of teaching, research, publication, and the academic profession is expected of all who seek reappointment in the School. An overall evaluation of a candidate for reappointment must include consideration of the Faculty member's professional behavior as recognized by the University community. A candidate who fails to demonstrate likely success in the tenure process will be notified according to the official University policy timeline that she/he will not be reappointed.
Reappointment reviews have as their primary purpose the preparation of probationary faculty members for successful tenure review. The principle to reaffirm at reappointment review is, “Given the years of service to date and the number of years until mandatory tenure review, it is reasonable to expect that the probationary faculty member will eventually undergo a successful tenure review.” In the event that concerns about a candidate's performance are raised during the reappointment process, the Ad Hoc RTP Committee and the Director shall provide detailed, prescriptive comments to serve as constructive feedback. If such concerns arise during a review that occurs after completion of three (3) full years in the probationary period, the Director, in consultation with the FAC, will advise and work with the candidate on a suitable, positive plan for realignment with the School's tenure and promotion expectations; however, the candidate is solely responsible for her/his success in implementing this plan.
Tolling: From time to time, personal and/or family circumstances may arise that require an untenured Faculty member to need to request that her/his probationary period be extended. Upon request, a Faculty member may be granted an extension of the probationary period, which has been traditionally called "tolling" or "stopping the tenure clock." The University policy and procedures governing modification of the Faculty probationary period is included in the University Policy Register.