Reappointment | Teaching, Learning and Curriculum Studies Handbook | Kent State University

Reappointment

The policies and procedures for reappointment are included in the University policy and procedures regarding faculty reappointment (See, University Policy Register 6-16).  Each academic year, reappointment guidelines for Kent and Regional Campus faculty are distributed by the Office of the Provost.  Probationary Faculty members’ accomplishments in scholarship, teaching, and service are reviewed by the School’s Ad Hoc RTP Committee.  The file of materials should follow current University policy, with additional consideration given to Appendix C General Advice for TLC Probationary Faculty. Included in the file are a contextual statement and curriculum vitae outlining the Faculty member’s accomplishments in scholarship, teaching, and service. Additionally, probationary Faculty members are invited to work with the School Director to identify a tenured faculty member to serve as a mentor during the probationary period.

Annually, probationary Faculty will update their files and present them to the Director who ensures that these materials are available to the Ad Hoc RTP Committee. Each probationary Faculty member’s file 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 makes available her/his recommendation and the committee's recommendations 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 their line(s) of inquiry.  Faculty preparing materials for reappointment must provide documentation of quality scholarship, teaching, and service. Advice on preparation specific to the curriculum vitae, contextual statement, teaching documentation and peer reviews can be found in Appendix C of this Handbook.

This annual record should be considered a predictor of future success, meaning that quality and quantity of publications should grow over the probationary years, as should strength in teaching as documented by SSI evaluations; sufficient/expanding service should also be documented.  The hallmark of a successful candidate for tenure and promotion is evidence of the potential to have an impact upon the discourse of her/his discipline. This record must be demonstrated through peer-reviewed work, particularly in significant national/international journals, as well as other important scholarly contributions in one or more established lines of inquiry, as well as a clear and focused plan for building on this work.

On an annual basis, the progress of untenured Faculty is reviewed by the Ad Hoc RTP Committee and the Director.  If concerns arise, both RTP committee members and the Director shall provide detailed, prescriptive comments to serve as constructive feedback.  The Director, in consultation with the Ad Hoc RTP Committee, 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. 

 

Specific concerns expressed by the Ad Hoc RTP Committee and/or the Director during the probationary period should be addressed by the candidate in subsequent reappointment reviews. Finally, the overall evaluation of a candidate for reappointment must include consideration of the Faculty member's personal integrity and professional behavior as recognized by the University community.

It is important to note that while it is the hope that creating a plan will help a candidate realign his/her goals toward expectations--with support as previously described, RTP Committee members may vote not to reappoint.  The Director may also vote for non-reappointment.  Thus, a candidate who fails to demonstrate adequate progress will be notified according to the guidelines for reappointment issued annually by the office of the Provost.

From time to time, personal and/or family circumstances 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. (See, University Policy Register 6-13)