Recommendations of the Faculty Ad Hoc Promotion and Tenure Review Committee:

  1. All tenure- and promotion-granting units on a rotating basis over a five-year period (i.e., one-fifth of the units per year) should submit their guidelines for promotion and tenure to the UCTP for reevaluation and approval beginning in the Fall of 1997. Supporting evidence should be submitted with the procedures and criteria which shows how the units' procedures and criteria compare with those of like units in Research I and AAU institutions and how they comply with the Faculty Manual.
  2. Deans should ensure that annual Reviews as mandated by the Faculty Manual are performed for all faculty members and that those reviews are based on unit tenure and promotion criteria. The Provost's responsibility is to ensure compliance.
  3. The present sequence of evaluations of the files of candidates for tenure and/or promotion (local unit and Chair, Dean, Provost, UCTP, President) should be retained.
  4. Wording should be added to the Faculty Manual on page 26 after the sentence, "The committee forwards its recommendations to the Office of the President.": "The committee assesses files on the basis of the application of a local unit's criteria in evaluating candidates' supporting evidence. However, should the UCTP determine that a local unit has not followed its criteria, the UCTP shall apply the unit's criteria in its vote on the file, and shall indicate its action by letter to the President."
  5. The President or the President's designees should be a party to the proceedings of the Faculty Grievance Committee by presenting the reason(s) for denying tenure and/or promotion. Such designees may include the department Chair, Dean, Provost, and/or UCTP Chair. The Grievance Committee should consider appeals on the basis of alleged inadequate consideration of unit criteria, use of impermissible criteria, denial of procedural due process, denial of academic freedom, or violations of the employment contract. Lack of due process is defined as a procedural, not a judgmental, defect; the determination of a judgmental defect is not within the authority of the Grievance Committee. Grievants should have access to their complete tenure and promotion files as redacted to preserve necessary confidentiality.
  6. Wording should be added the Faculty Manual's statements of general criteria for appointments at various ranks that the levels of excellence required should conform to those of Research I and AAU institutions. The evaluation of teaching has been a persistent problem in the tenure and promotion process. Therefore, determination of the quality of teaching should be based on peer and student evaluations.
  7. In view of the frequent turnover of Deans and the variance in knowledge of the process, the Provost in cooperation with the Chair of the UCTP should conduct annual workshops on the Tenure and Promotion System.
  8. 8. With the approval of the University's Trustees, the President should be the final authority within the University to whom a grievance concerning tenure and/or promotion may be submitted.
  9. 9.The Provost should report annually to the General Faculty statistics that show the percentage of agreement between the President's, UCTP's, Provost's, and Deans' recommendations in tenure and/or promotion decisions and the positive and negative votes of local units taken as a whole.

This page updated 17 September 1997 by the Office of the Faculty Senate,
and copyright 1997, The Board of Trustees of the University of South Carolina.