General Benchmarks and Criteria for Tenure and Promotion

  1. There are many factors and criteria, both subjective and objective, to be considered in recommending an individual for academic advancement. The criteria to be considered are related to the individual’s performance in the areas of Scholarship, Teaching, and University Citizenship. Because of the diverse nature of the disciplinary backgrounds of the CAE faculty, quantitative differences in the records of successful candidates are expected. It is recognized that the nature of scholarship differs among faculty based upon the norms, opportunities, and expectations of a particular discipline or program area. It is expected that faculty will produce records of scholarship that reflect their disciplinary focus and that the body of work that represents an individual’s scholarly activity will vary according to the faculty member’s role and academic area. 
  2.  A tenure or promotion candidate’s application/review materials must be complete, well-organized, and accurate. The candidate’s application materials must provide proof of any significant accomplishment. Each faculty member seeking tenure or promotion is obligated to provide evidence supporting their assessment of their record. This obligation will be met by providing specific information about article and journal quality and impact, funding history and plans, and description in the supplementary materials of any other evidence of scholarship, teaching, and citizenship they deem appropriate. In turn, the members of the college’s ad hoc reappointment, tenure and promotion committee and the Dean have the responsibility to evaluate a candidate’s record in light of the college’s expectations for a successful decision. Hence, it is incumbent upon the members of the ad hoc reappointment, tenure and promotion committees, and the Dean, to make their evaluation of the candidate’s record clearly reflect college expectations.
  3. Whereas Tenure is based on projected career development, Promotion is a reward based on accomplishments completed during the review period, where the review period is considered to be the time elapsed since the last promotion. If there has been no previous promotion in the candidate's history, then the review period extends back to the candidate's initial appointment. Awarding of tenure has no effect on the commencement of the review period for promotion.
  4. Many factors and criteria, both subjective and objective, are considered in recommending a faculty member for tenure and advancement in academic rank. The overall evaluation of a candidate for tenure and promotion shall include consideration of the faculty member's professional behavior as recognized by the University community. A sound ethical approach to all aspects of teaching, research, publication, and the academic profession are expected of all who seek tenure and promotion in the College.
  5. Promotion considerations are based upon the criteria for evaluation, described in the subsections below. The ad hoc Committee shall consider the following areas of faculty performance when making recommendations on tenure and promotion: 1) Scholarship; 2) Teaching; and 3) University Citizenship. 
  6. The Section III Tables 3-1, 3-2A, 3-2B, 3-3A, 3-3B, 3-4A, and 3-4B, shown below, provide guidelines for the assessment of a tenured/tenure-track faculty member’s performance and a rating scale for use in the evaluation of candidates. The same categories and assessment tools apply for both tenure and promotion decisions. The Faculty Performance Standards/Criteria for Tenure and Promotion are shown in Table 3-1. The tables and text below are designed to facilitate assessment of performance of those candidates who are being evaluated for tenure and promotion. During the probationary period, these tables should be used for developmental assistance and projection of future success in achieving tenure and promotion.