The University and the Faculty Rules and Regulations require that for regular faculty notice shall be given about renewal or non-renewal of the contract well in advance of the expiration of a term appointment. For those whose term appointments at Brown are for four years or less, notice shall be given at least eight months before the appointment expires, with one exception: untenured faculty members being considered for tenure shall normally be informed of the decision at least twelve months before the expiration of a term appointment of any duration. For those with contracts longer than four years, notice shall be given at least twelve months in advance. With respect to timely tenure notification, the University requires that the faculty member be notified by no later than the end of the seventh year (providing no contract extensions were granted) of full-time service in tenurable rank whether he/she will or will not be granted tenure. If the recommendation is positive, promotion to tenured Associate Professor is normally effective as of the next July 1.
The Dean of the Faculty will send to the Chairs/Directors of academic units the names of all faculty members who will require review for reappointment during the current academic year by the end (June 30) of the previous academic year. Notification will occur by April 1 of the penultimate year for tenure candidates. Chairs should report any discrepancies with their records immediately.
Assuming a contract end date or tenure notification date of June 30, the following guidelines apply:
- For faculty requiring eight months’ notice, the review by the academic unit should be completed and forwarded to the Dean by September 15 of the final year. If the contract end date is December 31st, the dossier should be submitted no later than March 15.
- For faculty requiring twelve months’ notice, the review by the academic unit should be completed and forwarded to the appropriate Dean by January 7 for candidates being reviewed for promotion to associate professor with tenure. The deadline for submitting materials for other contract renewals (e.g. Senior Lecturers) is March 1.
These deadlines ensure that there will be adequate time for review by the Tenure, Promotions, and Appointments Committee (TPAC).
The following should be noted:
- Unless an extension of contract is granted (see below), eight years of full-time service is the maximum amount of time a non-tenured faculty member may serve in the tenurable ranks of the faculty.
- In the case of a department's consideration of an untenured faculty member for contract renewal (i.e., reappointment), all of the evidence mandated for consideration by the department at the time of the individual's previous annual reviews (See Chapter 9) shall again be considered, plus any such new information of the same kind as the department and/or the candidate should deem relevant.
In the event of a departmental recommendation not to reappoint or to promote an untenured regular faculty member at the end of his/her current contract, the candidate is entitled, upon request, to receive from the department Chair a timely written explanation of the reasons for that decision, and a copy of this explanation shall be included in the candidate's dossier. The candidate should be told by the Chair that he/she has the right to appear before TPAC at the time the Committee takes up the department's recommendation.
As noted above, untenured faculty members may serve no longer than eight years of full-time faculty service or its equivalent in tenurable ranks at Brown University, except that extensions totaling no more than two years may be granted by the appropriate divisional Dean for care of a newborn or newly adopted young child, or for extraordinary circumstances.
The effect of extending the faculty member's current contract in recognition of either parenting responsibilities or extraordinary circumstances will be to lengthen the probationary period by the amount that the contract is extended. In no case may any combination of extensions total more than two years (four academic semesters).
An untenured, tenure-track faculty member who becomes the parent of a child by birth or adoption during the probationary period for tenure is entitled to an extension of his or her contract by one year. Unless the faculty member requests otherwise, such extensions are automatically awarded by the appropriate divisional Dean at the same time as parental teaching relief (see 7.8.3) is granted. In any case where an untenured faculty member is the primary caregiver for an infant or newly-adopted child but does not make use of parental teaching relief, the faculty member must notify the Dean in writing of the birth or adoption, in order to receivethe extension. Such notification must be submitted to the Dean and to the Chair of the department as soon as possible after the birth or adoption of the child but in any case no later than September 1 of the year in which a review for reappointment would be required. For those being reviewed for tenure and promotion, notification should be made by April 1 of the year preceding that in which the review will take place. No extension is ordinarily possible in the final year of an assistant professor's appointment at Brown.
10.2.2 Extraordinary Circumstances
When faced with extraordinary adverse circumstances, an untenured, regular faculty member may submit to the Dean a request for an extension of the probationary period beyond the normal eight years. Such requests are limited to cases in which there have been reasons beyond the faculty member's control which have resulted in the fact that he or she has been deprived of reasonable opportunity to demonstrate his or her ability and potential as a teacher-scholar before the seventh year (e.g., due to a need to care for a seriously ill child or family member, because of a physical disaster affecting research materials, etc.). Such extensions may be granted by the appropriate divisional Dean following review and approval by the Tenure, Promotions, andAppointments Committee.
Requests for extensions of the probationary period must be submitted to the Dean and to the Chair of the department as soon as possible after the extraordinary circumstances justifying such a request have occurred, but in any case no later than April 1 of the academic year before which a review for reappointment or promotion to tenure would be required. The request should include a detailed description of the circumstances thought to warrant such an exception. The Chair of the faculty member's department shall submit a memorandum to the appropriate Dean outlining the department's view on the validity of the request. Such requests will be subject to the approval of the Tenure, Promotions, and Appointments Committee and the Dean. [The Alpert Medical School has a separate set of guidelines for hospital-based, full-time faculty in clinical departments.]
10.2.3 Medical and Personal Leave
Personal leaves (including medical and maternity) are not counted as part of the probationary period. See Chapter 13.6.
10.3.1 Assistant Professors
In the case of Assistant Professors, after an initial four year appointment, a reappointment may be offered by the University for a term of two years, or for a term of four years, or a reappointment may be denied altogether. Explanations of these outcomes follow:
- A recommendation not to reappoint is reserved for an individual who has failed to meet the standard requirements for teaching and/or scholarship and has shown himself or herself unwilling or unable to respond to the department's repeated proffered suggestions for improvement.
- A reappointment recommendation for two years signals general satisfaction with the individual's overall performance, but is meant to indicate some concern about whether the record will justify a positive tenure recommendation at the appropriate time. [On occasion, a department that is intending to undertake a tenure review shortly after the end of the first contract will choose to recommend a two-year reappointment, during which time the review for tenure and promotion will be conducted. In such cases, and in the event of a negative outcome of the tenure review, no further reappointment should be anticipated.]
- A reappointment recommendation for four years indicates that the individual is following an appropriate trajectory with respect to scholarship, teaching, and service, and that there are no concerns that need be especially addressed at this time. Of course, a reappointment for a term of four years does not guarantee a positive tenure recommendation at the end of the probationary period.
The letter of transmittal to TPAC should state in precise language the specific recommendation that is being made, including (except in the case of a negative recommendation) the date of the proposed action and, in the case of a reappointment, the length of the proposed new term. The recommendation to TPAC must contain information on the following:
- the names of the faculty who attended the meeting at which the final recommendation to TPAC was agreed to;
- the names of faculty who, though eligible to participate in this decision, did not attend the above meeting;
- the (numerical) vote upon which the final departmental recommendation is based;
- the department quorum established for such meetings;
- the academic unit's view of the importance of the candidate's academic specialty within the larger field or discipline;
- a general explanation of the reasons for abstentions (if any);
- an explanation of the views of those voting in the minority; and
- in addition to the foregoing, a full and candid discussion of the issues raised in the department meeting relative to this candidacy.
More details regarding required documentation may be found in Appendix C.
10.3.2 Lecturers and Senior Lecturers
Lecturers may be reappointed for periods of up to three years. Senior Lecturers are reappointed for terms of up to six years. The required process and documentation is the same as for reappointments of Assistant Professors.
10.3.3 (Research) faculty
(Research) faculty may be reappointed for fixed terms of no more than three years, so long as the needs of the department and the quality of performance warrant such reappointment.
The promotion of an assistant professor without tenure to the rank of associate professor with tenure is of course a major milestone in any academic career, indeed perhaps the single most important professional review that a career scholar is likely to undergo. Accordingly, the procedural requirements and safeguards of this review process have been developed with the greatest care and are now exceptionally well codified. For a detailed treatment of these requirements and of the specific documentation that is involved, some of which apply in all cases of consideration for promotion, to whatever rank, see Appendix C.
From time to time, a candidate who has had significant prior experience as a tenure-track faculty member at another institution is appointed as Assistant Professor at Brown and subsequently reviewed for promotion and tenure. There is no formal policy for adjusting the probationary operiod to account for prior service at another institution. In such cases, TPAC pays special attention to research conducted at Brown, since recent output is a good predictor of a scholar’s future trajectory. Contributions to teaching and service at Brown are likewise given greater weight because institutions can vary quite considerably in their expectations in this regard, and because the teaching environment at Brown can be very different from that at some other institutions. This should not be taken to mean that a candidate’s contributions to scholarship and teaching prior to arriving at Brown are ignored. On the contrary, a reappointment or tenure decision must take account of a candidate’s complete range of accomplishments over time.
The review for promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor is to be conducted no later than the seventh year of the probationary period (except in cases of extension, described in 10.2). The review normally takes place during the penultimate year of the contract, i.e. during the seventh year of the eight-year probationary period. Earlier review is also possible if the record warrants this. The timing of the tenure review is thus a matter to be discussed between the candidate and the department. In considering the appropriate timing of the review for promotion and tenure, departments and candidates should bear in mind that the practice of the University is that such a review is ordinarily conducted only once. In those situations in which the candidate and the department agree to proceed with an “early” review, the end date of the contract will be adjusted to provide for one terminal year in the event of a negative review; the candidate shall be informed of this and indicate his or her agreement to the change in writing.
Normally no later than April 15 of the year preceding the penultimate year of the candidate’s probationary period, the Chair of the department, in consultation with the candidate, shall appoint a tenure committee of no fewer than three persons to guide the evaluation procedure (the tenure committee may be smaller if there are fewer than three tenured faculty in the department, or appropriate faculty from other units may be included on the committee). [The chair may or may not be a member of the tenure committee. The head of the committee may be any tenured member of the department.]
Where a recommended faculty action involves more than one department, the necessary cooperation among these academic units may be differently structured. Accordingly, the Chairs of academic units anticipating such a decision are asked to consult together with the appropriate Dean well in advance of beginning work on a case, to ensure that the method of cooperation between these academic units is the most appropriate one and is well understood by all parties. Procedures for the review of such individuals are normally established at the time of the initial appointment.
As soon as the tenure committee has been selected, the Chair of the department will convene a meeting of all tenured faculty of the department and outline the procedures to be used in the evaluation for tenure. Where a candidate for tenure holds a joint appointment, each department, center or program shall have a separate tenure committee meeting and make separate evaluations and recommendations unless a different process for review has been specified at the time of the initial appointment.
The candidate shall supply the tenure committee with a list of outside individuals who would be appropriate external reviewers, as well as with a list of any individuals who s/he would prefer not be asked to serve in this capacity, along with the reasons for excluding them; the list(s) should be included in the dossier that is ultimately forwarded to TPAC. The candidate's objections to particular referees must be considered by the tenure committee but do not constitute a binding veto on the composition of the final list of referees. At the same time, the tenure committee will independently identify individuals who are acknowledged scholarly and/or educational leaders in the discipline from whom to seek confidential written comments on the quality of accomplishment of the individual under review. After reviewing the candidate’s suggestions, the tenure committee will compile a single combined list of referees, which must include no fewer than three names from the candidate’s list. This list, which is not to be shared with the candidate, will be forwarded to the appropriate divisional Dean along with brief biographies, for review and comment.
After the list of referees has been finalized, the department shall request confidential assessments of the candidate’s scholarly work, using the standard format for such requests (a template is available on the DOF website, and in Appendix B). Note that at least eight letters are required, and that these should be from individuals who are not former advisers or close collaborators of the candidate, or persons who previously provided written evaluations of the candidate at the time of initial appointment at Brown. [For reviews other than the tenure review, i.e. for promotion from Associate Professor to Professor, it may be permissible to request letters from a small number of scholars who do not meet these requirements. However, at least five letters (of the minimum eight) are required from new referees who are not advisers or collaborators.]
The tenure committee, in consultation with the candidate, will be responsible for assembling the candidate's tenure dossier. This dossier will ultimately carry the department's recommendation on promotion to tenure to be transmitted to the Dean of the Faculty for review by TPAC, and will be kept permanently in the files of the Dean of the Faculty. When completed, the dossier should contain all the items listed in Appendix C.
Before the dossier is submitted to TPAC, a statement of its contents (as detailed on the checklist to be submitted with the dossier) shall be given to the candidate, so that the candidate may complete or supplement it with additional material, if necessary. The academic unit's recommendation shall not be made without a complete dossier for the candidate, unless the candidate fails to submit the required materials by November 15 of the penultimate academic year before the end of contract.
Documented efforts must be made to secure the maximum participation of the tenured faculty of the department, as required in the evaluation and recommendation process. The candidate's dossier and copies of any of the materials or publications held by the tenure committee shall be sent to those tenured faculty members in the department not in residence, upon request. Those tenured faculty not in residence shall be requested to send written statements concerning the candidate to the Chair of the tenure committee, but failure to receive the statements from absent members shall not prevent completion of the evaluation and recommendation process.
At a duly called meeting of the tenured faculty, with at least a week's notice, the tenure committee will present the evidence on scholarship, teaching and service. At this meeting, or at another scheduled meeting, the candidate must be given the opportunity to appear before the department's tenured members. The tenured faculty will discuss the evidence and take a vote, which will be the basis of the department's recommendation to TPAC. This recommendation shall be made in writing and indicate the quorum the department has established as necessary to make such decisions. At the time of the recommendation, the candidate shall be notified in writing what the recommendation is and, to whom it will be sent; in the case of a negative recommendation, the candidate has a right to be informed of the reasons for the department's decision. [In the event of a tie vote, the candidate is also entitled to a written explanation of the reasons.] In general, this written statement should be provided to the candidate as soon as possible. In no case should more than a week elapse between the time of the meeting and the time the faculty member receives the recommendation. The individual then has the right to present written material in person and/or in writing to TPAC.
Dossiers are to be submitted to TPAC no later than January 7.
10.4.1 Procedures for Tenure Review for Untenured Associate Professors
On occasion a faculty member’s initial appointment is as Associate Professor without tenure, ordinarily for a term of no more than five years. In such cases the department will undertake a tenure review no later than the penultimate year of the contract, in order to ensure the requisite twelve months’ notice. Procedures for such reviews are the same as for those for the review of assistant professors, described above.
10.4.2 Review of Formerly Tenured Brown Faculty
If a tenured Brown faculty member, having resigned from the University to take a position elsewhere, wishes to return and is recommended for an appointment at the same rank within two years, a full external review will not be required. The department making the recommendation will nevertheless be expected to submit for TPAC review a dossier explaining the rationale for the appointment, the candidate’s qualifications in scholarship, teaching, and research, and summarizing the department’s deliberations (including the vote). In such cases, all other procedures normally pertaining to faculty appointments will continue to be followed.
10.5.1 Lecturer to Senior Lecturer
Academic units must have on file with the appropriate Dean an approved set of standards and criteria for promotion to the rank of Senior Lecturer, if this is appropriate in their case. (See Chapter 8). While there may be some considerations that are unique to a particular department or program, common criteria include the following: (a) excellence in teaching over several years; (b) long-term need for the appointment in light of the needs of the department; (c) service, including advising students and participating in departmental affairs; and (d) professional accomplishments and recognition. In terms of (d), it is not necessarily the case that professional accomplishment will be demonstrated through research and scholarship. Although this may be true in some cases, professional accomplishment may take different forms, e.g., participation in professional societies in the field of the candidate’s expertise, work on pedagogy, development of instructional materials, and so on.
Promotion to Senior Lecturer follows the same requirements for documentation as for other promotions, including the solicitation of letters from external referees, though in this case the required minimum number of letters is five. The department should seek a similar ratio between candidate- and department-recommended reviewers as that ratio used for tenure cases, and the final list of reviewers submitted to the Dean should have two candidate- recommended reviewers. Because of the fact that the emphasis in Lecturer appointments is on teaching, it is not always necessary or appropriate to require that all letters be from referees outside of Brown (see Appendix C for recommendations on referees). In many cases, some combination of letters from outside evaluators and those from individuals at Brown (but not in the candidate’s department) may provide the best assessment of the strength of the case for promotion.
Recommendations for promotion require review by the Tenure, Promotions, and Appointments Committee, and the department in presenting its candidate for promotion shall have arrived at such a recommendation only after a full review of the relevant dossier (including letters from referees outside the University), and after a vote taken at a duly called meeting of the faculty of the department, at which a quorum is present. The timing and procedures should be consistent with those followed for promotion from the rank of Assistant Professor to Associate Professor.
10.5.2 Instructor to Assistant Professor
Promotion occurs upon completion of requirements for the Ph.D. degree. The academic unit should send a letter addressed to the appropriate Dean requesting the change, with a copy of the certification of completion of the requirements for the Ph.D. degree (supplied by the faculty member's graduate school).
Change in rank will be effective at the beginning of the next semester. Change in salary will be effective at the start of next month.
10.5.3 To Associate Professor, or full Professor, Either Rank without Tenure
Promotions to the rank of Associate or full Professor, either without tenure, as, for example, in (Research) appointments, follow the same University procedures as tenure recommendations. If an academic unit intends to follow the practice of promoting to Associate or full Professor without tenure, it should establish written criteria and standards for these ranks, and ensure that this document is approved by the appropriate senior officers and relevant reviewing bodies.
10.5.4 To Professor (with tenure previously granted)
The University has applied to cases of promotion to full professorship (with tenure) the same kinds of standards as those that apply to a tenure review, the difference being that one should, for promotion to the rank of full professor, attest professional and scholarly growth beyond the level at which tenure was originally granted. The criteria for promotion to full professor are continued excellence in scholarship, teaching, and service; demonstrated distinguished influence in the scholarship of the discipline; and demonstrated distinguished influence at Brown.
There is no fixed point at which promotions to the rank of professor must occur, and there is obvious variation in the rapidity with which one's scholarship can be expected to mature. Even within a single department, different individuals may satisfy in different ways the scholarly promise upon which promotion to tenured rank was predicated. Chairs should be aware that TPAC carefully reviews recommendations for promotion to full Professor and should be certain that the dossiers of such candidates contain all the information declared necessary in the discussion following immediately on TPAC. Though the Faculty Rules do not explicitly require this, it is expected that faculty who are being considered for promotion to full Professor should be provided the same due process as is required for the more junior ranks.
A review for promotion to professor may be initiated at any time after the granting of tenure. Once a faculty member has served as Associate Professor for a period of seven years, the annual salary recommendation of the department chair or unit director to the Dean shall contain an assessment of the faculty member’s readiness to stand for promotion in view of the department’s or unit’s Standards and Criteria, and this statement shall be communicated to the Associate Professor by the department chair or unit director.
The Tenure Promotion and Appointments Committee (TPAC) obtains its authority under the Faculty Rules and Regulations.
TPAC reviews personnel recommendations coming from departments or other academic units for:
- the renewal of a faculty member's current contract, i.e., a reappointment, with or without tenure;
- a new appointment to the Brown faculty (from outside) to a rank involving tenure;
- the promotion of someone already at Brown to a rank carrying tenure, or to a rank carrying-over (i.e., continuing) an earlier grant of tenure; or
- a new appointment (from outside) or promotion (from within) to the rank of Senior Lecturer, Associate Professor (Research), Professor (Research), or Associate Professor or Professor without tenure.
Copies of the recommendation and dossier will be distributed to TPAC in advance of the scheduled meeting. The department Chair and the Chair of the Tenure/Promotion Review Committee may be asked to appear before TPAC to answer any questions from the Committee which may have arisen regarding the recommendation or associated materials. The faculty member whose case is under review will be provided an opportunity to appear before the Committee and/or present materials that he/she feels may be significant.
TPAC carries out its responsibilities with reference to the following university-wide standards and criteria for promotion and tenure:
Candidates for tenure at Brown must show evidence of outstanding scholarship. They must also be highly effective teachers, and be positive contributors to faculty governance as well as to the intellectual life of their department, university, and profession. Demonstrated ability in teaching and service are necessary but not sufficient conditions for tenure.
Peer esteem, both within and outside the university, is a valuable indicator of scholarly ability and achievement. Established scholars who come to Brown with tenure must be widely recognized as leaders in their disciplines. Younger scholars must have achieved a level of scholarly accomplishment and recognition that stands on its own, and moreover signifies great promise. In either case, the quality and not the quantity of scholarly production should be paramount.
Promotion to full professor at Brown is contingent on fulfillment of the promise on which tenure was originally granted. Specifically, full professors will have produced a distinguished body of scholarship since their previous promotion; will have achieved standards of excellence in teaching; and will have contributed regularly to faculty governance as well as to the intellectual life of their department, university, and profession.
All recommendations for appointment, reappointment, promotions and tenure at regular faculty ranks are sent to the appropriate divisional Dean.
Departments should note that pursuant to the Faculty Rules and Regulations, TPAC (and by extension the Provost and the President, as non-voting members of TPAC) may in their consideration of particular cases solicit additional information and evidence from within or without the "sponsoring group," i.e. the department or other unit making the recommendation. In such cases, the additional evidence that is solicited may include, but is not limited to, the following: (i) letters from external or internal authorities beyond those already gathered by the department; (ii) written statements from all persons participating in the department's vote identifying how they individually voted and the reasons for that vote; and (iii) additional or expanded explanations from the department's Chair of points of particular interest to TPAC, especially points that were mentioned (or perhaps not mentioned) in the department's initial submission of the candidate's dossier.
Because the gathering of such additional evidence takes time, TPAC may resolve to postpone consideration of these cases without taking a vote after the initial presentation by the department, with consideration resumed after the additional information is provided.
At the conclusion of the Committee's discussion, a vote will be taken on whether the Committee accepts the recommendation before it. The decision of the Committee shall be conveyed to the department Chair by the Chair of the Committee soon after that decision is reached, and the department Chair shall promptly communicate this information to the candidate, though underscoring for the candidate that it is not the University’s final decision. In the event of a denial of the department’s recommendation, the Chair of the Committee shall provide to the department Chair in writing a statement of the rationale for its decision within three weeks of the date of its decision. [For internal cases only; TPAC does not supply a written rationale for cases of new appointments that are not recommended by TPAC.]
TPAC recommendations regarding appointment, reappointment, tenure and promotion are forwarded to the University Provost for decision. Materials include the record of the vote, the Committee's recommendation, and all other documents in the Committee's possession. The appropriate divisional Dean also conveys his or her recommendation to the Provost. The Provost may take up to thirty (30) days to render a decision. At this point, but only then, an official letter transmitting the substance of this decision will be prepared at the appropriate Dean's office for mailing to the candidate through the departmental Chair.
Various contingencies include:
- If the department's recommendation was in favor of appointment, reappointment, or promotion, or the awarding of tenure, and if after the Committee's review, the Provost accepts the recommendation, the appropriate Dean will orally notify the department Chair concerned and will sign the official letter which will be transmitted to the candidate by the department Chair.
- If the department's recommendation was in favor of appointment, reappointment, or promotion, or the awarding of tenure but if the Provost's decision is negative, oral notice shall be given at once to the candidate and the department Chair concerned (see below).
- If the department's recommendation was against appointment, reappointment, or promotion, or the awarding of tenure, and if TPAC and the Provost find that the recommendation is procedurally and substantively acceptable, oral notice will be given at once to the candidate for promotion and the department Chair concerned (see below).
- If the department's recommendation was against appointment, reappointment, or promotion, or the awarding of tenure, and the Tenure, Promotions, and Appointments Committee, upon reviewing the recommendation, find reason to question either the substance of the recommendation or the manner in which it was reached, the Committee will ask the department to make whatever further explanations are considered necessary; or the department may be asked to reconsider its recommendation; or a specially convened extra-departmental committee may be asked to consider it. Whenever a departmental recommendation is so questioned by the Committee, final disposition of the case shall not have been made until the Provost either accepts the original recommendation or overturns it.
In the case where reappointment, promotion, or the award of tenure has been denied (whether because a negative recommendation from the academic unit has been upheld by TPAC and approved by the Provost, or because a positive recommendation by the academic unit has been overturned by TPAC and/or the Provost), the appropriate Dean will prepare and sign a letter to the candidate officially indicating this decision and providing reasons for it. The Dean's letter must inform the faculty member that the case will be reviewed by the Committee on Faculty Equity and Diversity for procedural fairness and adherence to the Corporation Statement on Nondiscrimination, and also that the candidate has the right to present materials in person or in writing to the President.
Letters reporting the Provost's decision are sent to the Chair of the department for transmittal to the faculty member under consideration. All letters will be sent in accordance with Faculty Rules regarding timely notification of faculty (See Chapter 10.1 in this Handbook.) It is understood that a letter indicating that a contract will be allowed to expire may be superseded later after review by the President.
If reappointment, promotion, or tenure has been denied to any faculty member, Faculty Rules require that the case be sent on to the Committee on Faculty Equity and Diversity for review.
The President, or in his/her absence, his/her designee, shall grant to a department chair or a faculty member under review (if dissatisfied with either TPAC’s recommendation or the Provost's decision) the opportunity to discuss the recommendation with the President or other designee, or to present material in writing.
A complete copy of the dossier and all letters and review decisions will be kept in the files in the Office of Faculty Personnel. Publications and teaching evaluation forms will be returned to the department.