Tenure/Reappointment/Promotion/Salary--Section E
Administrative Explanations and Procedures
Faculty/Librarians
TENURE/PROMOTION/REAPPOINTMENT POLICIES
Tenure Policy
Probationary Period
Presidential Authority.
Geographic Limitation
Criteria for Tenure/Promotion/Reappointment
The Teaching Criterion
Commission on Teaching, 1992
Unit Criteria and Procedures
Policies for Reappointment/Non-reappointment
Annual Reviews
Notice Requirements for Non-reappointment
Resignations by Faculty
TENURE/PROMOTION/REAPPOINTMENT PROCEDURES
Procedures: Reappointment/Non-reappointment (including tenure)
Tenure & Promotion to Associate
Promotion Procedures
Non-Promotion
Reappointment Procedures
Promotion Recommendations
Promotion & Tenure Committees
Merged & System-Wide School Procedures
TENURE/PROMOTION DOSSIERS
Dossier Preparation
Dossier Review
Guidelines
Dossier Checklist
Dossier for Tenure & Promotion to Associate
Access to Dossiers
Negative Recommendations
Review of Negative Recommendations
Sample Letters to External Referees
Project Tenure
Reappointment
Notice Requirement
Promotions
Criteria
Nomination and Promotion Procedures
Mediation/Representation/Review
(OAXX, CNXX, IR93, IR92, MDOO)
Reappointment
Notice Requirement
Annual Reviews
Review of Negative Recommendations
Salary Budgeting
Budgetary Timing/Salaries
University Salary Policy
Salary-Setting Procedures
Access to Salary Data
Salary Minima
Mid-year Salary Increase
Extra Work
DOCUMENTS
Explanations and procedures in this section are based on
the following official documents located at the end of this Section.
Presidential Authority DOCUMENT E-I
Faculty Tenure (Tenure & Promotion to Associate; Geographic Limitation of) DOCUMENT E-II
Academic Freedom DOCUMENT E-III.
Tenure for Librarians (Tenure & Promotion to Associate) DOCUMENT E-IV
Criteria for Faculty Tenure DOCUMENT E-V
Criteria for Faculty Tenure (Bloomington Campus) DOCUMENT E-VI
Criteria for Faculty Promotions DOCUMENT E-VII
Criteria for Librarian Promotion DOCUMENT E-VIII
Unit Criteria and Procedures for Tenure & Promotion and Teaching DOCUMENT E-IX
Policies Governing Reappointment/Non-Reappointment During Probationary Period
DOCUMENT E-X
Annual Reviews and Promotion Procedures for Academic Appointees DOCUMENT E-XI
Tenure Advisory Committee DOCUMENT E-XII
Procedure for Faculty Promotion Recommendations DOCUMENT E-XIII
Procedure for Librarian Promotion Recommendations DOCUMENT E-XIV
Promotion & Tenure Resolutions Resulting from 1974 Reorganization DOCUMENT E-XV
Waiver of Right to Access [Repealed] DOCUMENT E-XVI
Affirmative Action Plan: Promotion & Tenure DOCUMENT E-XVII
Salary Policy - Bloomington. DOCUMENT E-XVIII
Salary Policy - University DOCUMENT E-XIX
Affirmative Action Plan: Salary Policy DOCUMENT E-XX
Salary Minima/Access to Salary Data for Faculty & Librarians DOCUMENT E XXI.
Extra Compensation DOCUMENT E-XXII
Commission on Teaching, 1992 DOCUMENT E-XXIII
Promotion and Tenure Explanatory Documents DOCUMENT E-XXIV
Procedures for Faculty Tenure DOCUMENT E-XXV
Teaching Evaluation Policy DOCUMENT E-XXVI
Tenure/Reappointment/Promotion Salary--Section E
TENURE POLICY
Indiana University's policy on faculty tenure ensures academic freedom and economic security for its faculty. The policy was approved by the Faculty Council and the Trustees of Indiana University in 1969. (See DOCUMENTS E-II and E-III.) A similar policy for librarians was approved in 1972. (See DOCUMENT E-IV.)
PROBATIONARY PERIOD
The policy provides for up to a seven-year probationary period, including appropriately
negotiated credit for time spent at other institutions (as explained in Recruitment, Section B of
this Guide). The amount of time to be credited is evaluated carefully at the time of initial
appointment; no subsequent retroactive adjustment of tenure credit will be made.
PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORITY
Academic personnel actions which require the approval of the Trustees of Indiana University (appointment or reappointment with tenure, appointment to major administrative positions) will be received and acted upon by the Board only with the prior approval of the President . (See DOCUMENT E-I.)
GEOGRAPHIC LIMITATION
The tenure policy provides that tenure shall be campus-specific: "The tenure of any faculty member, however, is specific to the campus...in which he/she is serving at the time of acquisition of tenure." (See DOCUMENT E-II.) This policy was reviewed and reaffirmed by the Bloomington Faculty Council in 1978 and the University Faculty Council in 1980. Subsequent changes in the locus of tenure must be agreed to in writing by the campuses involved and by the tenured faculty member.
CRITERIA FOR TENURE, PROMOTION, AND REAPPOINTMENT
The criteria for judging tenure-worthiness and the granting of tenure were approved by the
Faculty Council in 1968 and amended by the University Faculty Council in 1976 and 1991. In
addition, the Bloomington Faculty Council approved a more detailed set of criteria in 1979. The
two versions are not in conflict with one another (see DOCUMENTS E-V and E-VI) and both
should be seen as applicable to faculty on the Bloomington campus. Both sets of documents
incorporate the criteria for faculty promotions approved by the Faculty Council in 1960. (See
DOCUMENT E-VII.) The University Faculty Council approved criteria for Librarian promotions
in 1976. (See DOCUMENT E-VIII.)
Reappointments during the probationary period are made on the basis of the faculty member's progress toward meeting the criteria contained in DOCUMENTS E-V, E-VI, and E-VII. Reappointments beyond an initial one-year or three-year appointment are normally for one year at a time until the tenure decision.
In evaluating the performance of faculty members as these critical decisions concerning their careers are made, the mission of a campus/school/unit and the faculty member's contribution to that mission, must be taken into account. Candidates for promotion or tenure should normally excel in one of the three areas of teaching, research/creative activities, and service and be at least satisfactory in the others. In exceptional cases, however, a candidate may present evidence of balanced strengths that promise excellent overall performance of comparable benefit to the university. (See DOCUMENT E-VII.)
CRITERIA COMPARED
The primary difference in the criteria for promotions and the criteria for tenure (and reappointment) is that the latter take into consideration the needs of the unit (see DOCUMENT E-X, 4c) and the prognosis for the candidate's future achievements.
THE TEACHING CRITERION
A Bloomington Faculty Council resolution passed in 1983 (DOCUMENT E-IX) required each unit to develop a plan for evaluation and improvement of teaching and for assuring that teaching is accorded significant weight in promotion, tenure and salary determination. The Dean of the Faculties is to monitor the plans and assist units in complying.
COMMISSION ON TEACHING 1992
The BFC approved the work of the Commission on Teaching by endorsing the principle that teaching be accorded status and rewards equivalent to those for research, asking that the college and the schools implement standards and procedures to achieve equivalency, recommending salary supplements for teaching award winners, and requesting a departmental and public record of teaching assignments and enrollment data. (See DOCUMENT E-XXIII.)
TEACHING EVALUATION
The BFC has mandated that each unit develop teaching evaluation policies and procedures (DOCUMENT E-XXVI). While evaluations are useful in many ways (e.g., for teacher self-improvement, in the salary-setting process, in assessment of learning, and in measures of institutional effectiveness), they become critical to the individual case in a promotion or tenure dossier. The Dean of the Faculties Office monitors departmental compliance.
UNIT CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES
The Bloomington Faculty Council has further stated (see DOCUMENT E-IX) that each unit
head, in cooperation with the members of the unit, shall describe in writing the procedures and
criteria used by that unit in arriving at recommendations concerning tenure and promotions.
These written documents are to be made available by the Dean of the Faculties at the Graduate
Library Reference Desk where all Bloomington faculty shall have access to them. The
procedures and criteria for appropriate units are also sent by the Dean of the Faculties to all new
appointees in faculty rank, and to those converting from lecturer to faculty rank. All documents
explaining and interpreting promotion and tenure criteria statements, including letters to referees,
are also to be reviewed and approved by the faculty of the unit and are to be discussed with
tenure-track faculty as part of the annual review. (See DOCUMENT E-XXIV.) For matters of
tenure, each faculty member may choose to be evaluated under the unit statement in existence at
the time of initial appointment or the statement in effect at the time of the tenure review.
POLICIES FOR REAPPOINTMENT AND NON-REAPPOINTMENT
The University Faculty Council and the Trustees of Indiana University approved in 1972 the
Policies Governing Reappointment and Non-Reappointment during the probationary period.(See
DOCUMENT E-X.) These policies cover notice of the terms of the initial appointment, annual
reviews, notice of impending recommendation for reappointment or tenure, and provisions for
review of a negative recommendation. These policies are incorporated in the procedures to be
followed in the various evaluative processes involved in making tenure and promotion decisions
as set out in this section.
ANNUAL REVIEWS
An annual review regarding reappointment and tenure prospects must be conducted for each full-time, non-tenured librarian and faculty member.
The University Faculty Council approved in 1977 a policy which provides that all assistant and
associate professors, and all affiliate, assistant, and associate librarians be given an annual review
relative to promotion prospects. (See DOCUMENT E-XI.)
TENURE TRACK REVIEWS
No specific date for annual reviews is established. The reviews of tenure-track faculty and librarians may occur at any time during the academic year, although many units find it convenient to conduct the re-appointment reviews before the bulk of their reappointment recommendations are due (March 1). The results of these reviews may best be transmitted orally in the first instance, but for all tenure-track faculty a summary must be recorded in writing. The summary should speak to progress in the three areas of responsibility- -teaching, research/creative activities, service. One copy of the written summary is to be given to the candidate and the other copy is to be placed in the unit's files. For the benefit of the candidate and the University, it is recommended that the review state two things in addition to the evaluation per se: first, that the review reflects the evaluation of the unit only, and second, that subsequent evaluations at any level of the University may differ from the evaluation of the unit.
The annual reappointment review shall be conducted each year for all full-time, non-tenured faculty members and librarians regardless of the length of time the person has been on the faculty, whether they have an appointment which exceeds one year, or whether they may be temporarily on leave of absence. Even though the review conducted during a faculty member's first year in residence is probably based on less information than subsequent reviews and may therefore not seem as useful, it is imperative that such a first-year review occur.
REVIEWS OF TENURED APPOINTEES
The procedures are slightly different for annual reviews relative to promotion prospects required for all tenured faulty and librarians below full rank. The fact that a review or discussion has taken place must be confirmed in writing to the appointee and to the Dean of the Faculties. The appointee may request a written summary of the substance of the review or discussion, or the reviewer may independently decide to provide a written summary. In either event, if the statement is put in writing, copies must be both placed in the file and given to the appointee.
NOTICE OF REVIEWS
Well in advance (2-4 weeks) of any review, the faculty member must be invited to assemble and submit materials relevant to his or her teaching, research/creative activities, and service.
NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR NON-REAPPOINTMENT
The University adheres to the AUUP statement on the amount of notice faculty members should be accorded if they are not to be reappointed or granted tenure. (See DOCUMENT E-II). Faculty members are to be given at least three months' notice during their first year of service (by February 1), six months' notice during their second year of service (by November 15), and twelve months' notice after two or more years of service (by May 1). To accommodate these deadlines, recommendations are due in the Dean of the Faculties' Office by the following dates:
1st year . . . . January 10 . . . . for 2nd year reappointment
2nd year . . . . October 15 . . . . for 3rd year reappointment
2nd year . . . . March 1 . . . . for 4th year reappointment
3rd-5th year . . . . March 1 . . . . for 5th-7th year reappointment
6th year . . . . November 1 . . . . for 8th year--tenured status.
Originally these deadlines applied only to faculty members. On 12/3/68 the Faculty Council
approved the extension of these requirements to include lecturers as well as faculty members.
Trustees' action (see DOCUMENT E-IV), provides that the same requirements shall apply to librarians.
RESIGNATIONS BY FACULTY
The AAUP has also issued a statement concerning a faculty member's obligation "not to resign in
order to accept other employment as of the end of the academic year, later than May 15 or 30
days after receiving notification of the terms of his continued employment the following year,
whichever date occurs later." The complete AAUP Statement appears in DOCUMENT B-XV.
PROCEDURES: REAPPOINTMENT/NON-REAPPOINTMENT (INCLUDING TENURE)
The Affirmative Action Plan approved by the Trustees of Indiana University in June of 1974
requires that policies relating to reappointment and tenure shall be under constant review to
ensure that women and members of minority groups are accorded equal opportunity. It also
provides that an equity review shall be conducted to ensure that women and members of minority
groups have been so treated. (See DOCUMENT E-XVII.)
The procedures for making reappointment/non-reappointment (as well as tenure)
recommendations for faculty are set out on page E-4. General procedures were approved by the
UFC and the Trustees of Indiana University in 1991. (See DOCUMENT E-XXV.) Procedures
for making recommendations for librarians are described in DOCUMENT E-IV.
TENURE & PROMOTION TO ASSOCIATE
The granting of tenure to IUB faculty shall, by Bloomington Faculty Council action effective
since the 1976-77 academic year, also constitute promotion to associate professor for those not
already holding that rank. (The promotion shall become effective at the beginning of the
academic year following the one in which the positive tenure decision is taken.) (See
DOCUMENT E-II.)
PROCEDURES: PROMOTION
The Faculty Council in 1952 approved the general procedures to be used in making recommendations concerning faculty promotions. (See DOCUMENT E-XIII.) Analogous procedures for librarian promotions were approved by the Trustees of Indiana University in 1972 (see DOCUMENT E-IV) and by the APPC. (See DOCUMENT E-XIV.)
The procedures to follow in making faculty promotion recommendations are set out on page E-4.
NON-PROMOTION
In order to prevent inequities in promotions the Faculty Council in 1952 directed the Dean of the
Faculties to review all faculty below full rank who have not recently been accorded a formal
review for promotion. (See DOCUMENT E-XIII.) Accordingly, the Dean of the Faculties
requests information from units about faculty members who have not been recommended for
promotion in the last two years and who have been in the following ranks for at least the
indicated period of time:
Associate Professor . . . . 7 years
Assistant Professor . . . . 5 years
Instructor . . . . 3 years
Such information may then be taken by the Dean of the Faculties to the Campus Promotions Committee for advice.
PROCEDURES: REAPPOINTMENT (INCLUDING TENURE)
The Dean of the Faculties sends reappointment lists and a reminder of procedures about one month before recommendations are due. Where tenure decisions are involved, lists are sent prior to the end of the 5th year of service.
1. The Chairperson or unit head advises faculty member that
a) department/school will soon make a recommendation concerning reappointment;
b) he/she may submit materials within a specified time; and
c) in preparation for a tenure review, she/he shall submit a list of names of outside
referees (this list, together with a list compiled by the Chairperson, is forwarded to the
Dean of the school).
2. The Chairperson or unit head is responsible for assembling the dossier.
a) Materials are assembled.
b) A checklist is completed, with one signed copy placed in the dossier, and
another given to the faculty member.
c) The dossier is reviewed by the appropriate committee in the department/ school, which
arrives at a recommendation.
3. The Chairperson forwards the unit's recommendation for pre-tenure reappointments to the
school Dean and the Dean of the Faculties. For negative pre-tenure cases and all tenure cases,
the Chairperson or unit head
a) prepares a written statement describing the procedures followed, the votes of the
committee and its recommendation;
b) adds his/her own recommendation;
c) if the recommendation is negative, advises the candidate in writing at once (copies to
Dean and Dean of the Faculties); and
d) sends dossier containing the above items to the Dean of the School.
4. The Dean of the School adds her/his recommendation on negative pre-tenure reappointment
cases and forwards all materials to the Dean of the Faculties, advising the candidate at once in
writing (copy to Dean of the Faculties). For all tenure cases, the Dean
a) adds the solicited letters of reference to the dossier (see 1.c above);
b) seeks a recommendation from the School Advisory Committee;
c) adds the committee's and the Dean's recommendations to the dossier and forwards it to
the Dean of the Faculties; and
d) if the recommendation is negative, advises the candidate at once in writing (copy to
Dean of the Faculties).
5. The Dean of the Faculties
a) reviews negative pre-tenure reappointment cases and makes a recommendation;
b) reviews tenure cases with consistently positive recommendations at earlier levels and
adds a recommendation, or takes the case to the Tenure Advisory Committee (all
dossiers with differing recommendations at earlier levels are also reviewed by the Committee);
c) transmits the Committee's and the Dean of the Faculties' recommendations to the Vice
President-Bloomington; and
d) if the recommendation is negative, and after conferral with the Vice President, advises
the candidate in writing as soon as the decision is final.
6. The Vice President-Bloomington transmits the positive recommendations to the President and to the Board of Trustees, and advises the successful candidates after Board approval.
PROCEDURES: PROMOTION RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Chairperson or unit head advises faculty member that
a) a promotion review is forthcoming;
b) she/he may submit materials within a specified time; and
c) under conditions specified in 4.a, he/she shall submit a list of names of outside referees
(this list, together with a list compiled by the Chairperson, is forwarded to the Dean of
the School).
2. The Chairperson or unit head is responsible for assembling dossier.
a) Materials are assembled.
b) A checklist is completed, with one signed copy placed in the dossier and another given
to the faculty member.
c) The dossier is reviewed by the department/school promotions committee, which arrives
at a recommendation.
3. The Chairperson forwards promotion cases1 to the Dean of the School after adding the following:
a) a written statement describing the procedures followed, the votes of the committee and
its recommendation; and
b) her/his own recommendation.
4. The Dean of the School forwards all promotion dossiers to the Dean of the Faculties after
completing the following steps:
a) requests outside letters when the promotion is to full rank or to associate rank based on
research/creative activity;
b) seeks a recommendation from the School Advisory Committee; and
c) adds the Committee's and the Dean's recommendations to the dossier.
5. The Dean of the Faculties
a) seeks a review and recommendation from the Campus Promotion Committee; and
b) transmits the Committee's and the Dean of the Faculties' recommendations to the Vice
President-Bloomington.
6. The Vice President adds a recommendation and transmits the positive cases to the President
and to the Board of Trustees.
7. The summary evaluation at the Dean of the Faculties level is returned to appropriate
administrators to provide feedback to all faculty members whose promotions were considered
at that level.
PROMOTION & TENURE COMMITTEES
Faculty Council and Bloomington Faculty Council actions direct that there shall be campus-wide advisory committees to the Dean of the Faculties for both tenure and promotion. (See DOCUMENTS E-XII and E-XIII.) In the case of the Tenure Advisory Committee the Bloomington Faculty Council has indicated the composition of the committee and the types of cases to be referred to it. While not required by the Faculty Councils, all schools on the Bloomington Campus have promotions and tenure committees advisory to the Deans of the schools. (In the College of Arts and Sciences, each department either functions as a committee of the whole or acts through a promotions and tenure committee in arriving at recommendations.) In 1976 the BFC passed a resolution that the membership of all committees concerned with promotion and tenure should be made a matter of public at the time of appointment. The unit criteria and procedures collected by the Dean of the Faculties are also to be made available to Deans' promotion and/or tenure advisory committees. (See DOCUMENT E-XII.)
MERGED & SYSTEM-WIDE SCHOOL PROCEDURES
The Bloomington Faculty Council has approved a number of resolutions concerning faculties in multi-campus units which bear on promotion and tenure reviews. (See DOCUMENT E-XV.) The University Faculty Council has accepted an alternative ad hoc procedure which involves both campuses in the review process in the following way:
"First, tenure and promotion recommendations undergo the first systematic review at the school
or departmental level. Review by merged and system schools permits representation on
committees by faculty members from whatever campuses the schools deem appropriate and
allows rigorous application of uniform standards across all candidates. The recommendation
from the school passes to the local campus on which the candidate is or is to be tenured. Local
campus procedures are followed in consideration of the dossier, resulting in a campus
recommendation. This procedure allows application of uniform procedures across the campus
and contributes to the sense of academic community. Third, the recommendation from the
campus passes to the reporting line vice president, who makes the final recommendation to the
President. This procedure clearly defines the role and authority of the vice president to
recommend promotion or tenure on another campus. It removes the aspect of double jeopardy."
DOSSIER PREPARATION
The first step in the preparation of dossiers for reappointment, tenure, or promotion consideration is to invite candidates to submit relevant materials. In all cases the candidate will have been advised of the upcoming review. Faculty members should be encouraged to supply the kind of information which the Dean or Chairperson knows will be important to the administrators and committees who will evaluate dossiers. Responsibility for the preparation of the dossier rests with the Chairperson, the Dean, or a senior member of the faculty, such as individual who chairs the promotions committee.
It is not the responsibility of the individual faculty member to prepare a dossier but rather to supply information which may be utilized in its preparation. The faculty member cannot be assumed to have the expertise appropriate to this role.
The compilers of a dossier should keep in mind that the objective evidence in the dossier should present the case for promotion or tenure. It is not sufficient for the individual preparing the dossier to simply state that in her/his opinion the candidate is satisfactory. Specifically, university policy requires that each candidate should normally excel in at least one of the three categories (teaching, research/creative activity, service) and be at least satisfactory in each of the other two. In exceptional cases, a candidate may present evidence of balanced strengths that promise excellent overall performance or comparable benefit to the university over time. In all cases the candidate's total record should be assessed by comprehensive and rigorous peer review. All relevant evidence, both positive and negative, must of course be included in the dossier. In order to have the requisite information all units should begin to accumulate information about the candidate's teaching and service performance as soon as the candidate becomes a faculty member. The administrative officer of the unit should routinely gather this kind of information.
DOSSIER REVIEW
The dossier constructed in consultation with the candidate provides the evidence upon which the tenure decision is to be made. If additional information is sought or received during the review of the dossier at any level, the candidate and all previous committees and reviewers must be notified and given the opportunity to respond to the additional information. The information and the responses shall then become part of the dossier. (See DOCUMENT E-XXV.)
GUIDELINES AND CHECKLIST
The Dean of the Faculties has prepared guidelines and a checklist for the preparation of dossiers
(see following pages). It should be noted that some dossier materials are retained in the Dean of
the Faculties Office for the permanent record following the completion of the tenure and
promotion processes. Evaluations from the various administrators, committees, outside referees,
colleagues, and students (where sent directly to administrators), summaries of teaching
evaluations, and the candidates' statements and lists of activities generally are retained in the
Dean of the Faculties Office (asterisked items on the checklist). Materials clearly supplied by the
candidates are returned to the units to be given to the faculty members. Materials for successful
candidates are returned in the summer; dossiers for unsuccessful candidates are retained longer to
facilitate discussions with these faculty members if they wish to secure additional information.
DOSSIER CHECKLIST
The checklist is to be signed by the preparer of the dossier and a copy provided to the candidate
so that the candidate has the opportunity to insure that all basic documentation has been included
in the dossier. No dossier will be reviewed at the Dean of the Faculties level if it does not contain
an appropriately signed checklist.
DOSSIER FOR TENURE & PROMOTION TO ASSOCIATE
For Assistant Professors who are considered for tenure, a single tenure dossier will suffice. If these candidates receive a positive tenure decision, they will at that time, by the same committee, also be considered for promotion to Associate rank.
ACCESS TO DOSSIERS
Effective January 1, 1984, access to employee records shall be governed by State law (Indiana Code 5-14-3), commonly referred to as the Access to Public Records Law. (See DOCUMENT A-XVI.) Previous campus policy that provided academic employees the option to waive their right to inspect letters of evaluation solicited by the University for purposes of recommendation on initial appointment, reappointment, promotion, or tenure was repealed by action of the Bloomington Faculty Council on March 1, 1994. (See DOCUMENT E-XVI.)
NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS
Once the dossier is prepared, the unit will decide upon its recommendation based on the evidence
in the dossier. If the decision is negative, the faculty member should be informed so that he may
request that the dossier be forwarded even though the unit has not made a positive recommendation.
REVIEW OF NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS
The last section of the Policies Governing Reappointment and Non-Reappointment During the Probationary Period covers the review or appeal of negative recommendations on reappointment and tenure. These are not elaborated on here. Please refer to the Policies document (DOCUMENT E-X) and the Governance and Review Section of this Guide--Section D.
GUIDELINES FOR TENURE AND PROMOTION DOSSIERS-- DEAN OF THE
FACULTIES OFFICE, BLOOMINGTON
All tenure and promotions dossiers should be divided into the following five sections:
(I) General summary
(II) Substantiation of the teaching evaluations
(III) Substantiation of the evaluations of research/creative activities
(IV) Substantiation of the service evaluations
(V) Supporting documents
I. General Summary
The initiating unit should ascertain that the dossier contains the following:
1) The chairperson's personal recommendation and a summary evaluation of the
candidate's teaching, research/creative activities, and service.
2) The departmental recommendation (report of exact votes or separate memoranda from
colleagues) and the departmental evaluation of the candidate's teaching,
research/creative activities, and service.
3) The candidate's own statement about teaching, research/creative activities, and service.
(The candidate's own statement is required for all tenure dossiers; it is optional for
promotion dossiers but strongly recommended.)
4) A list of all publications designating, in the left-hand margin, whether the publication
was evaluated as evidence of teaching, research/creative activities, or service. For
promotions from Associate Professor to Professor, all items on this list which were
used in the previous promotion review process should be clearly marked.
5) Tenure and Promotion Dossier Checklist.
The Dean of the School is responsible for adding the following to the dossier:
1) The Dean's personal recommendation and a summary evaluation of the candidate's
teaching, research/creative activities, and service.
2) The School Committee's recommendation (including a report of exact votes) and the
committee's evaluation of the candidate's teaching, research/creative activities, and
service.
Annual Reviews should not be included in the dossier unless specifically requested by the candidate. These reviews represent private communications between the individual faculty member and the closest supervisor, and should remain private.
The candidate's statement may include excerpts from progress or final reports submitted to funding agencies as supplemental descriptions of the candidate's current and future research endeavors.
The evaluations from individuals and from committees must identify the area judged to be excellent. Each of these evaluations should state a general assessment of the category (e.g., satisfactory, above satisfactory) and then provide the rationale or the basis for the assessment by referring to the evidence presented in the other sections of the dossier. University policy requires that normally each candidate excel in at least one area and be satisfactory in each of the other two. In exceptional cases, a candidate may present evidence of strengths that promise excellent overall performance of comparable benefit to the university over time. In all cases the candidate's total record should be assessed by comprehensive and rigorous peer review. Promotion to any rank is a recognition of past achievement and a sign of confidence that the individual is capable of greater responsibilities and accomplishments.
A checklist is to be completed by the preparer of the dossier. (Thus, the checklist will not include information concerning outside referees which is added at the Dean's level.) The original copy of the checklist is to be placed in the dossier and a copy is to be given to the candidate.
II. Substantiation of Teaching Evaluation
This section of the dossier should contain objective evidence of the candidate's performance as a
teacher. Evidence submitted in this section should be selected to present as complete a
description of the characteristics and of the quality of the candidate's teaching. This section must contain:
1) A list of the specific courses taught and the enrollments listed by semester and
academic year.
2) The numbers of Ph.D., M.A., or similar committees chaired or served on and the titles
of any dissertations directed, listed by academic year.
3) A list of the publications which are relevant to teaching.
4) Evidence of the nature and quality of curriculum development, textbooks, and other
pedagogical publications.
5) Evidence of the quality of teaching, such as student and colleague evaluations.
Developmental work on programs and curricula is sometimes difficult to classify as evidence of teaching or as evidence of research. Generally, pedagogical publications are considered as research only where the work has a conceptual/theoretical orientation and there is evidence that the efficacy of the pedagogy has been systematically studied and evaluated. Course outlines or plans and similar material, which may represent many hours of creative work, may be included as evidence of teaching quality. These efforts, and other activities in class preparation, bear upon the candidate's teaching performance and its assessment.
Innovative efforts, including unsuccessful approaches, should be described.
Evidence of student evaluation must include summaries of the student forms. Where possible, evaluation should provide evidence of varied levels of teaching. The original evaluation forms filled out by students may be submitted as an addendum to the dossier as well. Other evidence includes write-ups of student interviews and letters or notes from present or former students solicited by and/or written to someone other than the candidate.
Evaluations by colleagues based on first-hand observations and any evidence that the candidate has a reputation beyond this campus are of particular significance.
Any other available and relevant evidence on the quality of teaching should be included.
It should be kept in mind that the primary purpose of the evidence presented in this portion of the dossier is to document the quality of the teaching.
III. Substantiation of Research/Creative Activities Evaluation
This portion of dossiers for all tenure candidates, for all candidates for promotion to full rank,
and for all candidates for promotion to Associate rank where promotion is based upon
outstanding research, must contain:
1) A list of outside references supplied by the candidate with statements describing why each
individual was proposed as a reference and the relationship of that person to the candidate.
2) A list of outside references compiled independently by the Chairperson or department/school
committee with statements describing why each individual was proposed as a reference and the
relationship of that person with the candidate.
3) A list of outside references to whom the Dean sent letters soliciting outside evaluations and a
sample copy of the Dean's letter.
4) Letters from outside references are added to the dossier by the addressee of these letters.
Because the quality of the scholarly contribution is to be evaluated, most of the outside references should have university affiliations.
Each School Dean will be requesting the letters from outside references, selecting at least some names from each of the lists submitted. (For tenure dossiers, the letters are solicited when the dossier is received in the Dean's Office.) The letters received in response will be added by the Dean's Office to the dossiers. When requesting letters from references, Deans should enclose the candidate's vita and an adequate and appropriate selection of publications or other pertinent materials which are to be evaluated by the reference.
Dossiers for all tenure candidates and for all promotion candidates must contain:
5) A list of the candidate's research/creative publications. For promotions from Associate
Professor to Professor, all items on this list which were used in the previous promotion review
process should be clearly marked.
6) Departmental or school evaluations of the stature of the journals in which the publications
appeared, the museums showing creative work, etc.
7) An assessment by the department or school of the candidate's contribution to works with more than one author.
Tenure dossiers should present an assessment of all post-terminal degree research and creative activities; promotion dossiers should contain an assessment of work done in rank at Indiana University and elsewhere.
The exact status of each publication should be noted if the status is ambiguous. For example, articles which have been officially accepted by an editor or publisher should be identified as "in press." Articles which have been submitted for editorial review, but which have not been accepted or which have been accepted subject to revision should be identified as "submitted" or "under editorial review." Work in preparation should also be labeled. Normally work in preparation will be of little relevance in the promotion process, but may be relevant to the tenure decision
IV. Substantiation of Service Evaluation
This portion of the dossier should contain:
1) A list of the candidate's service activities.
2) A list of the candidate's service-related publications.
3) Evaluation of the quality of the candidate's service activities by the Chairperson and by professional colleagues at IU, or by associates in the service activity.
Service activities may be rendered to the department, to the University, to professional organizations, to governmental bodies or to other similar institutions. Service may occur at local, state, or national levels. Where service is presented as the outstanding area, evaluations from colleagues and associates in the service activity are of particular importance. These evaluations or other assessments must indicate the contributions and responsibilities of the individual candidate to the service activity.
V. Supporting Documents
This portion of the dossier must contain:
1) Copies of textbooks, copies of other publications which are basically pedagogical in nature,
and samples of pedagogical curriculum development projects.
2) Copies of published research, samples, and/or reviews of creative work, and copies of
research-type development projects.
3) Copies of service-related documents.
Promotion and Tenure Dossier Checklist
Candidate_____________________Department________________
>br>
General:
/ /Chairperson's personal recommendation and a summary evaluation of teaching,
research/creative activities, and service.
/ /Departmental recommendation (report of exact votes or separate memos from colleagues).
Departmental evaluation of teaching, research or creative activities, and service.
/ /Candidate's own statement on teaching, research, or creative activities, and service. (Required
for tenure dossiers. Optional for promotion dossiers but strongly recommended.)
A minimum of six outside evaluations to be secured by Dean. Required on tenure, promotion to
full rank, and promotion to associate rank if based on outstanding research.
/ /Copy of list of references supplied by candidate.
/ /Copy of list of references supplied by Chairperson or Dept./School committee
Teaching:
/ /Courses taught each semester, no. enrolled. No. of Ph.D./M.A. committees chaired or served
on.
/ /Titles (and abstracts where relevant) of any dissertations directed.
/ /Copies of any textbooks written.
/ /Evidence of any curriculum development.
/ /Evidence of quality of teaching.
/ /Evaluation by students:
/ /Summary of student evaluation forms and the evaluation forms themselves.
/ /Write-ups of student interviews done by unit.
/ /Letters from former students (solicited by and written to someone other than the candidate).
/ /Evaluation by colleagues, preferably first-hand (e.g., team teaching, symposia, visitation by colleagues.)
Research:
/ /IU colleague evaluation of research or creative activities in detail where possible.
/ /Departmental evaluation of stature of (1) journals in which publications appear or (2) museums
in which showings have been presented, etc.
/ /Departmental assessment of the contribution made by candidate to coauthored work.
/ / Copies of professionally relevant publications and/or
/ / Copies of creative work, reviews of creative performances and exhibitions and/or
/ / Copies of research-type development projects.
Service:
/ /Summary of activities (Departmental or other University service; local, state, or national
service; professional or other)
/ /Evaluation by Chairperson of the quality as well as the quantity of service.
/ /Evaluation by professional colleagues (for or with whom service was performed) of the quality
as well as quantity of service.
I have given a completed copy of this checklist to the candidate and included a copy in the
dossier.
_____________________________________________________
(Signature of Preparer) (Date)
SAMPLE ONLY
Professor H.G. Hart
Department of Swahili
New York University
Washington Square
New York, New York 10003
Dear Professor Hart:
Professor Tracy Smith is being considered for tenure [and/or promotion to Associate/Professor] as a member of the faculty of the Department of Swahili at Indiana University. As part of our review procedures, we customarily write to a selected group of experts in the candidate's field asking them for an independent judgment of the candidate's scholarly contributions.
Because you are an expert in your field, your frank appraisal of the significance of Professor Smith's scholarly contributions and/or their impact in the field would be greatly appreciated. A list of publications is enclosed for your consideration. Do you rate the contributions as below average, average, above average, or excellent in quality? In quantity? How do you assess the promise for the future of Professor Smith's work? Are you personally acquainted with the candidate? Would Professor Smith be granted tenure (and/or promotion) at your university?
Tenure [and/or promotion] decisions at Indiana University also consider the candidate's record in teaching and in areas of service to the University, the State, the Nation, and the profession. I invite your evaluations of Professor Smith's performance in these areas if you have knowledge of them, although we realize the judgments in these areas must rely heavily upon local assessment.
In most cases your letter will be seen only by a small group of faculty members serving in a tenure (and/or promotion) advisory capacity. Although letters of recommendation are normally not disclosed to candidates, the candidate may request access to, and the University is legally compelled to give access to, the entire dossier.
I appreciate your time and aid in allowing us to compile as thorough a dossier as possible for Professor Smith. Since our review is currently under way, it would be helpful if you could respond by __________. Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely,
Carrell N. Jones
Dean, School of International Languages
PROJECT TENURE
Although the Board of Trustees in 1956 approved a policy providing for research project tenure, it has been used only rarely. Recommendations for project tenure must be approved by the appropriate academic dean and the Dean of the Faculties. Because the policy requires termination notice of one year in recommending project tenure, the project director or unit head must provide satisfactory evidence that funding for the possible one-year period is assured within the budget of the recommending unit or from some outside funding source. If project tenure is contemplated, all relevant problems, especially that of providing satisfactory evidence of funding resources, should be discussed with the Dean of the Faculties' office. (See DOCUMENTS A-III, A-IV.)
REAPPOINTMENT
Recommendations for annual reappointment of Assistant Scholars/ Scientists are subject to evaluative review by the chairperson or director, and to the assurance of available funding. Recommendations are reviewed and acted upon by the school dean and the Dean of the Faculties. If the research mission of the project and its funding resources permit, Associate and Senior Scholars/Scientists should, whenever possible, be appointed for more than one year. Subsequent reappointments go through the same review process as that specified for Assistant Scholar/Scientists.
NOTICE REQUIREMENT
Except for those holding research ranks who have been granted Project Tenure (which provides a one-year notice requirement), the minimum notice of termination is, as with all non-tenure-line appointees, one pay period (currently one month).
PROMOTIONS
Criteria for each of the three ranks (Senior, Associate, Assistant Scientist/Scholar) are roughly equivalent to those set forth in the area of research for members of the faculty. (See Criteria for Faculty Promotions, DOCUMENT E-VII.)
CRITERIA
Assistant--typically holds a terminal degree, has at least one year of postdoctoral research
experience, and is capable of independent or team research or developmental, scholarly work
under the direction of a senior faculty member or scientist/scholar;
Associate--has begun to establish a national reputation, has normally completed three years of
postdoctoral research, carried out independent or team research and is making original, creative
contributions to new knowledge or scholarly methods. He/she may be a principal investigator of
a project of his/her own devising and may be making specialized contributions within a team
effort;
Senior--has established a national reputation as a first-class researcher who has made substantial
contributions to her/his discipline through independent or team work.
As with faculty, research and creative endeavors among non-faculty research specialists can include experimental research, theoretical development, creation of artistic works, and development of research tools or methods. Some forms of research, creative, and/or developmental activities may not necessarily result in publications in scholarly journals, but nonetheless may have an impact on future inquiry by introducing new techniques by which research is conducted. For example, certain scientific or scholarly findings and technological developments might be disseminated through presentations made to professional organizations and through consultations with persons engaged in similar development activities at other institutions.
NOMINATION AND PROMOTION PROCEDURES
However, depending upon the rank proposed, a nominee should have achieved or be capable of achieving a national reputation for his/her contribution.
Nomination and promotion procedures for holders of research ranks are similar to those for faculty promotions. Dossiers are prepared by the scientist's or scholar's department or project unit and reviewed by administrators and advisory committees at the school and campus levels. At the campus level, the Research Ranks Promotions Advisory Committee is appointed by the Dean of Faculties and the Vice President for Research and Dean of the University Graduate School.
The procedure for nomination and promotion for research ranks is as follows:
1. First, ascertain that a person qualifies under the University policy. This means: (1) the person
holds the terminal degree in his or her field and has at least one year of successful post-degree
experience (the terminal degree in some fields may not be the doctorate); (2) the person is
wholly involved in research activities with no instructional responsibilities; and (3) the
individual's responsibilities provide an opportunity for achieving independent contributions in
research or developmental activities that have resulted in or eventually result in national
recognition for these contributions.
2. The names of outside referees (six for nominations at the rank of Senior or Associate
Scientist/Scholar, three for nominations at the rank of Assistant Scientist/Scholar) along with
representative samples of the nominee's work and a complete curriculum vitae, should be in
the Dean of the Faculties Office by the first week of January in order for the referees to
respond by February. Normally, half of these names should be suggested by the nominee and
half by the nominator or others in the unit who are in the best position to select qualified
referees; be certain to indicate the source of each. Avoid selecting persons who have had a
close personal relationship with the nominee. When you prepare the list of outside referees,
please detail the expertise of these individuals as well as their relationship to the nominee.
3. The head of the nominee's unit should write a letter to the Dean of the Faculties. The letter
should indicate which rank is recommended and should summarize the nominee's
qualifications and research record. In addition, the nature of the nominee's appointment and
position should be summarized, including a clear account of duties and responsibilities, and
the relationship of the nominee's role to others in the unit or on the project.
4. A dossier should accompany the letter of nomination which includes the nominee's curriculum
vitae; copies of published papers or books; supporting letters from colleagues (if desired); and
any other evidence which would be helpful for judging the nomination.
5. The letter of nomination and supporting materials should be sent to the dean or division head
to whom the nominating unit reports for endorsement. The dean will add his or her
endorsement of the nomination together with comments and forward the nomination to the
Dean of the Faculties Office by the first week of March for actions to be effective July 1.
MEDIATION/REPRESENTATION/REVIEW
The Dean of the Faculties and the Vice President for Research and Dean of the University Graduate School will establish an advisory committee of research appointees from the major academic units employing researchers to provide an orderly and representative system of consultation and mediation. The research ranks are also represented on and by the Faculty Council and have open to them the review mechanisms provided by that body--Faculty Board of Review, Affirmative Action Grievance Procedures, etc. (See DOCUMENTS, D-XVI and D-XVIII.)
REAPPOINTMENT
Initial appointments are made for one calendar year or less; reappointments are normally made
on an annual basis. After two years of service, however, reappointments to positions on general
fund accounts may be made on a non-limited basis. Reappointment to positions funded by grants
or contracts may not exceed one year or the expiration date of the grant if that date is earlier.
NOTICE REQUIREMENT
Appointees on general fund accounts must be given one pay period, i.e., one month's, notice of a
decision to terminate them. Appointees on grant accounts are afforded the same amount of notice
for termination prior to the end of a grant period. Appointments to the end of the grant period
should be assumed to be terminating unless notice of reappointment is given.
ANNUAL REVIEWS
It is urged that academic appointees be accorded an annual review of their performance, preferably at the time a reappointment recommendation is due.
REVIEW OF NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS
Review procedures established by the Faculty Council are available to all academic appointees.
The Faculty Grievance Committee and the Faculty Board of Review deal with decisions
concerning reappointment, salary, conditions of work, etc. (See Section D.) Complaints alleging
discrimination of the basis of sex, minority status or age may be reviewed under the
Supplementary Affirmative Action Grievance Procedures. (See Section D.)
SALARY BUDGETING
The administration of Indiana University and of the Bloomington Campus determine general
budget guidelines in compliance with the legislative appropriations to the University. These
guidelines typically specify such variables as the overall percentage increase to be applied to all
continuing positions for academic personnel, the overall percentage increase for the supplies and
expenses budget, etc. The advice of the Budgetary Affairs Committee, a standing committee of
the Bloomington Faculty Council, is sought at a number of stages in the budgeting process,
including development of the overall guidelines. It then becomes the responsibility of the unit
head to make recommendations for the specific line-by-line allocations of funds assigned to the
unit.
BUDGETING TIMING/SALARIES
Annual budgeting typically begins in the spring. The exact timing of the budgeting process depends in part on the appropriation of funds by the State legislature. Other budgetary information, such as requests for capital expenses, may occur at various times during the year. Summer budgets are established during the preceding fall.
UNIVERSITY SALARY POLICY
A set of eight principles to guide salary decision-making has been drawn up by the University Faculty Council. (See DOCUMENT E-XIX.) The principles encourage participation by elected Faculty bodies in salary determination, urge flexibility in responding to local circumstances, and reaffirm the primary of merit among the factors affecting allocation of resources to salaries. (Summer pay for teaching follows as closely as possible the BFC resolution set out in DOCUMENT C-II.)
SALARY-SETTING PROCEDURES
Both the University Faculty Council and the Bloomington Faculty Council have approved Salary Policies (see DOCUMENT E-XVIII and E-XIX), which provide that with faculty involvement each unit shall outline procedures used in initiating and reviewing salary recommendations for academic appointees. The procedure is to be in writing and available to all faculty members. (The Affirmative Action Plan also requires this and provides for an annual equity check; see DOCUMENT E-XX.)
Recommendations coming forward from departments and schools are reviewed in the Vice President-Bloomington's office, in the office of the President, and finally by the Board of Trustees. After acceptance of the budget by the Board, salary letters are sent, via deans and chairpersons, to continuing appointees budgeted on general fund monies.
ACCESS TO SALARIES
The salaries of academic personnel on the Bloomington campus are on file in the Payroll Office.
In response to a request of the Bloomington Faculty Council (See DOCUMENT E-XXI) for
information about Bloomington faculty salaries, the Dean of the Faculties maintains a listing of
faculty salaries arranged in cohort groups defined by rank, years in rank, and academic field.
This listing is available to faculty for inspection in the Dean of the Faculties Office, Bryan Hall,
Room 109. The Dean of the Faculties Office conducts periodic studies of salaries to identify
problems of equity and to identify factors operating in the determination of salary levels and distributions.
SALARY MINIMA
The Bloomington Faculty Council accepted the recommendation of its Budgetary Affairs Committee to recommend a salary minima for faculty members and librarians. (See DOCUMENT E-XXI.) The recommended minima for 1999-2000 are:
Instructor . . . . . . $28,760 . . . . . . Affiliate Librarian
Assistant Professor . . . . . . $30,934 . . . . . . Assistant Librarian
Associate Professor . . . . . . $38,839 . . . . . . Associate Librarian
Professor . . . . . . $47,470 . . . . . . Librarian
The Bloomington Faculty Council has indicated that (1) the recommended minima are to be reviewed and/or adjusted annually, and (2) any salaries below the minima are to be justified and an explanation made available to the appointee upon request to the Vice President-Bloomington. Bloomington Campus administrators have accepted these recommendations including the provision for exceptions.
MID-YEAR SALARY INCREASES
The policy of the I.U. Administration, as represented in various memoranda, indicates there is an
active discouragement of mid-year salary adjustments for all academic appointees. The Board of
Trustees reviews and approves the current operating budget at the beginning of each fiscal year
and the assumption is that the budget submitted to them is carefully constructed, error-free, and
final. Mid-year salary increases are therefore seen as inconsistent with the commitment to the
Board of Trustees. (A post-July 1 annual salary adjustment for an academic appointee whose
annual appointment does not coincide with the fiscal year, is, however, appropriate.)
The Bloomington Campus Administration will continue to review carefully mid-year requests
and approve them only in cases where the justification is persuasive.
EXTRA WORK
At the request of the Governor of the state of Indiana in 1966, the four state universities agreed to adopt uniform rules governing expenditures of time and extra compensation for faculty members. (See DOCUMENT E-XXII.) The general rule is that the total time commitment for all permissible forms of extra work--outside consulting, overload, supplemental projects--is not to exceed an average of one day a week.
Guidelines for approval of extra work assignments and payment mechanisms are discussed on
the following pages. The principal points of the policies are:
1. Any extra work carried out by an academic appointee must not interfere or conflict with the
appointee's regular duties in the home academic unit.
2. Extra pay from University funds, whether from the General Fund or contracts and grants, can
only be approved under special circumstances, and in no case can exceed 20% of the person's
base salary for the period.
3. In no case may total salary components from a combination of grant and General Fund
accounts exceed 100% of the approved budget rate.
4. Extra work assignments should be approved by the home department and school where
possible prior to the performance of service.
Proposed extra work assignments should be cleared with the Dean of the Faculties Office prior to
firm commitments being made.
DOCUMENT E-I
PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORITY
(Approved: Trustees 4/9/88)
When personnel matters such as approval of faculty appointments, promotion, appointments with tenure, and other proposed actions require action by [the Trustees of Indiana University], only those campus and other administrative recommendations that are approved by the President of Indiana University will be received and acted upon by the Trustees.
DOCUMENT E-II
FACULTY TENURE
(Approved: Faculty Council 12/3/68; Trustees 7/27/69; Amended: UFC 4/23/91; Trustees 6/20/91)
The Principle of Faculty Tenure
The principle of faculty tenure imposes reciprocal responsibilities on the University as a body politic and on the faculty member. In order to meet its responsibilities to its students and to society, the University must attract and retain a faculty of outstanding quality. To that end the University safeguards academic freedom and economic security by its policy of faculty tenure. The faculty members, on their part, are obligated to maintain high standards of teaching, research, service, and professional conduct.
Probationary Period
Subject to the provisions which follow, an individual appointed to the faculty (as defined in
Article I, Section 1 of the Faculty Constitution) or as a librarian for full-time service shall have
tenure after a probationary period. At the time of initial appointment, a probationary period shall
be stated. During the probationary period, appointments are usually for a period of one to three
years. The total probationary period may not exceed seven years. This period may include
full-time service with faculty or library rank at other institutions, if similar service in Indiana
University would have been countable toward tenure. In the case of persons with three or more
years of countable service in other institutions, a probationary period of not more than four years
may be required, if agreed upon in writing at the time of appointment. Since the acquisition of
tenure represents a major change in a faculty member's or librarian's status, the faculty member
or librarian to whom tenure is being granted shall be so informed in writing.
Tenure may be conferred at the time of initial appointment or after a shorter period than specified above. When a probationary period expires during an academic year, the probationary period will be extended to the end of that year.
Under administrative policies and practices at Indiana University, where such a written agreement reduces a faculty member's or librarian's probationary period to less than seven years, this agreement is binding on both parties. The length of the probationary period resulting from any such reduction cannot at a later date be extended to suit the convenience of a faculty member or librarian or the academic unit.
Tenure at the University requires explicit action. The review leading to a recommendation of tenure or non-reappointment is to take place no later than the sixth year of probationary service. Failure to give notice of non-reappointment prior to the beginning of the seventh year of probationary service will not result automatically in an award of tenure. In such a case, the review leading to a tenure or termination decision should be conducted at the earliest possible time and, if necessary, the probationary period shall be extended until the review is complete.
A faculty member who has not received a notice of recommendation for non- reappointment may request consideration of the tenure decision at any time after the initial appointment. However, if the tenure decision is negative, the faculty member's appointment shall terminate at the end of the academic year following the year in which the negative tenure decision was made. A faculty member who applies for early tenure should be forewarned that a candidate for tenure should expect only one full review. A faculty member who requests early tenure shall be notified of any negative recommendation concerning his or her request at any time prior to a final decision by the President. A faculty member may withdraw his/her request for early tenure at any time prior to a final decision by the President.
Duration of Probationary Appointments
Appointments and reappointments during a probationary period shall be limited to one year for
instructors. A faculty member with rank above instructor may be appointed for not more than
three years within the probationary period.
Official Notice of Non-Reappointment
For faculty serving full-time, notice of non-reappointment shall be given in writing in accordance
with the following standards:
1. Not later than February 1 of the first academic year of service, if the appointment expires at
the end of that year; or, if a one-year appointment terminates during an academic year, at least
three months in advance of its termination.
2. Not later that November 15 of the second academic year of service, if the appointment expires
at the end of that year; or, if an initial two-year appointment terminates during an academic
year, at least six months in advance of its termination.
3. At least twelve months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years in the
institution.
The entitlement to official notice of non-reappointment and the dates stated in l) to 3) above apply also to full-time lecturers.
Dismissal from the Faculty
Dismissal shall mean the involuntary termination of a tenured faculty member's appointment
prior to retirement or resignation, or the termination of the appointment of a non-tenured faculty
member prior to the expiration of the term of appointment. [Dismissal is thus to be distinguished
from the non-reappointment of a probationary faculty member.] Dismissal shall occur only for
reason of (a) incompetence, (b) serious personal or professional misconduct, or (c) extraordinary
financial exigencies of the University. No faculty member shall be dismissed unless reasonable
efforts have been made in private conferences between the faculty member and the appropriate
administrative officers to resolve questions of fitness or of the specified financial exigency. If no
resolution is attained, the faculty member to be dismissed shall be notified of dismissal in writing
by the Vice President or President one year before the date the dismissal is to become effective,
except that a faculty member deemed guilty of serious personal misconduct may be dismissed
upon shorter notice, but not on less than ten days' notice. Upon receipt of the dismissal
notification, a faculty member must be accorded the opportunity for a hearing. A statement with
reasonable particularity of the grounds proposed for the dismissal shall be available in
accordance with the provisions of the Faculty Constitution. A faculty member shall be suspended
during the pendency of dismissal proceedings only if immediate harm to himself, herself, or
others is threatened by continuance. Any such suspension shall be with pay.
Geographic Limitation of Tenure
All of the foregoing principles, policies, and procedures relating to tenure are applicable in all
University schools, departments, and library units on all campuses. The tenure of any faculty
member, however, is specific to the campus unit2 in which he/she is serving at the time of
acquisition of tenure. Consequently, it is the responsibility of each unit of the University to
develop appropriate structures and administer the necessary procedures for the implementation of
general University tenure policies.
In any case in which the position of a faculty member or librarian with tenure has been eliminated or has been removed from the jurisdiction of the University, the University will make every reasonable effort to place the faculty member or librarian in a comparable position elsewhere in the University. If no such comparable position is available, the University will make every reasonable effort to assist the faculty member in securing a comparable position at another institution.
Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor
(Approved: BFC 4/20/76)
Beginning in the 1976-77 academic year, the granting of tenure to IU- Bloomington faculty shall also constitute promotion to associate professor for those faculty not already holding that rank. The promotion shall become effective at the beginning of the academic year immediately following the one in which the positive tenure decision has been made.
Geographic Limitation of Tenure
(Approved: BFC 4/4/78; UFC 3/11/80)
We reaffirm the principle adopted by the Trustees of Indiana University, July 25-27, 1969, that tenure is specific to a single campus.
DOCUMENT E-III
ACADEMIC FREEDOM
(Approved: Faculty Council 5/17/66;
Amended: UFC 11/30/76)
Academic freedom, accompanied by responsibility, attaches to all aspects of a teacher's and
librarian's professional conduct. The teacher and librarian shall have full freedom of
investigation, subject to adequate fulfillment of other academic duties. No limitation shall be
placed upon the teacher's and librarian's freedom of exposition of the subject in the classroom, in
the library, or on the expression of it outside.
The teacher should not subject students to discussion in the classroom of topics irrelevant to the
content of the course. No censorship shall be imposed on the librarian's freedom to select and
make available any materials supporting the teaching, research, and general learning functions of
the academic community. In public utterances the teacher and librarian shall be free of
institutional control, but when either the teacher or librarian writes or speaks as a citizen, an
endeavor should be made to avoid appearing as a spokesman for the University. The teacher or
librarian should recognize that a professional position in the community involves the obligation
to be accurate, to exercise appropriate restraint, and to show respect for the right of others to
express their views.
Cases involving alleged impairment of academic freedom shall be referred to the appropriate Board of Review and dealt with according to established procedure.
DOCUMENT E-IV
TENURE FOR LIBRARIANS
(Approved: Trustees 6/30/72)
Subject to the provisions which follow, a person appointed as a professional librarian in the Indiana University Library systme shall have Library tenure after the same probationary period that is applicable to the faculty.
A. In general the same procedures which govern faculty tenure determinations (i.e., probationary
period, termination of probationary service, nonreappointment, appeal procedures, etc.) for
members of the teaching faculty shall be applicable to professional librarians.
B. Recommendations for tenure shall be processed as follows:
1. Recommendation prepared by supervisor of person under consideration and
forwarded to the head of the appropriate library division for action;
2. Recommendations of the head of each library division are forwarded to the
appropriate chancellor for review and recommended action;
3. Chancellors' recommendations are forwarded to the Office of the Vice President
for Academic Affairs for review by an all-University librarians tenure committee
appointed by the President in consultation with the Director of Libraries;
4. Recommendations of the all-University librarians tenure committee are
transmitted to the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs for review
by the Director of Libraries and for presentation to the Trustees of Indiana
University.
C. The above tenure provisions would apply to all professional librarians presently employed in
the University Library System who elect to be assigned one of the library ranks approved by the
Trustees of Indiana University on February 25, 1972. Tenure status or years of credit towards
tenure of professional librarians presently employed would be determined by the procedures
outlined above.
D. The provisions of sections A and B above would automatically apply to all newly appointed
professional librarians.
E. A librarian whose initial appointment is one of the upper three ranks may be granted a shorter probationary period towards library tenure, the period to be mutually agreed upon and indicated in writing at the time of appointment.
Library Tenure
(Added to Faculty Tenure Statement)
(Approved: UFC 11/30/76)
Librarians, on their part, are obligated to maintain high standards of professional service, research and creativity, and performance in the development of library services, and the communication of information and knowledge to others. Librarians who are candidates for tenure should excel in performance and be satisfactory in the other areas mentioned above.
Tenure and Promotion to Associate Librarian
(Approved: BFC 1/18/77)
Beginning in the 1977-78 academic year, the granting of tenure to IU-Bloomington librarians shall also constitute promotion to Associate Librarian for those librarians not already holding that rank. The promotion shall become effective at the beginning of the academic year immediately following the one in which the positive tenure decision has been made.
DOCUMENT E-V
CRITERIA FOR FACULTY TENURE
(Approved: Faculty Council 12/3/68; Trustees 7/27/69; Amended: UFC 2/10/76, 11/30/76,
4/23/91; Trustees 6/20/91)
After the appropriate probationary period, tenure shall be granted to those faculty members and librarians whose professional characteristics indicate that they will continue to serve with distinction in their appointed roles. The criteria for tenure and the criteria for promotion are similar, but not identical. (See 4.c under "Policies Governing Reappointment and Non- Reappointment during the Probationary Appointment Period," DOCUMENT E-X.)
Each campus on which tenure is held (and other units as appropriate, e.g., school, college,
department) shall have a document that states with reasonable specificity the standards that will
be used to evaluate whether candidates meet the criteria for tenure. The document(s) must
comply with the standards of the University and should make their application more specific.
The chief academic officer on each campus is charged with the responsibilities of (a) reviewing
such documents with respect to whether they are consistent with such
documents at higher levels, and (b) maintaining a current file of such documents. Each campus
(or other unit) shall provide each probationary faculty member with a copy of the document at
the beginning of the probationary service.
If the document changes during the faculty member's probationary period, the faculty member may choose to be evaluated for tenure under the written standards in effect at the time of appointment.
Tenure considerations must recognize the diversity of the missions and the contexts of the campuses of the university and must not ignore the mission of the particular unit as defined in its statement of criteria and procedures and the individual's contribution to that mission.
Tenure will generally not be conferred unless the faculty member or librarian achieves, or gives strong promise of achieving, promotion in rank within the University.
DOCUMENT E-VI
CRITERIA FOR FACULTY TENURE
(Bloomington Campus)
(Approved: BFC 5/7/74; Amended: 12/4/79; Trustees 5/6/94)
After the probationary period, tenure shall be granted to the faculty member provided he or she satisfies the criteria for tenure in teaching, research and creative activities, and service.
Differences of mission between schools and departments are such that the relative weight attached to teaching, research, and service frequently vary considerably. A candidate for tenure (or promotion) should normally excel in at least one of the three categories (teaching, research/creative activity, service) and be at least satisfactory in the others. In exceptional cases, a candidate may present evidence of balanced strengths that promise excellent overall performance or comparable benefit to the university. In all cases, the candidate's total record should be assessed by comprehensive and rigorous peer review. The granting of tenure is not only a recognition of past achievement but a sign of confidence that the individual is capable of greater responsibilities and accomplishments. In addition, the sections of the Indiana University Academic Handbook on criteria for promotion labeled "Teaching" and "Research and Creative Activities," apply also to the faculty member being considered for tenure. Consideration should also be given to the professional contribution made outside the faculty member's own department or school, as well as to contributions made to the total intellectual climate of the University.
If teaching is the primary criterion for tenure, it should be comparable to that of the most effective teachers at this institution. The faculty member must have demonstrated a superior ability and interest in stimulating in students a genuine desire for study and creative work.
If research or other creative work is the primary criterion, the faculty member should be well on the way toward achieving a national reputation for excellence in research or creative work in his or her field. In addition, a comprehensive plan of future research of high quality should be evident.
If service to the University, profession, state, or community is the primary criterion, distinguished contributions must be evident. In such cases effective service should be given the same consideration in determining tenure as proficiency in teaching or research. The evaluation of the service should be in terms of the effectiveness with which the service is performed, its relation to the general welfare of the University, and its effect on the development of the individual.
In addition to consideration of teaching, research and service activities, tenure recommendations should be based on a prognosis of the candidate's future achievements, as determined by his or her dependability, growth, originality, potential and versatility.
DOCUMENT E-VII
CRITERIA FOR FACULTY PROMOTIONS
(Approved: Faculty Council 4/14/60; Amended: UFC 2/10/76, 3/8/94, 4/12/94; Trustees 5/6/94)
Teaching, research and creative work, and services which may be administrative, professional, or public are long-standing University promotion criteria. Promotion considerations must take into account, however, differences in mission between campuses, and between schools within some campuses, as well as the individual's contribution to the school/campus mission. The relative weight attached to the criteria above should and must vary accordingly. A candidate for promotion [or tenure] should normally excel in at least one of the above categories and be at least satisfactory in the others. In exceptional cases, a candidate may present evidence of balanced strengths that promise excellent overall performance of comparable benefit to the university. In all cases the candidate's total record should be assessed by comprehensive and rigorous peer review. Promotion to any rank is a recognition of past achievement and a sign of confidence that the individual is capable of greater responsibilities and accomplishments.
TEACHING
The prime requisites of any effective teacher are intellectual competence, integrity,
independence, a willingness to consider suggestions and to cooperate in teaching activities, a
spirit of scholarly inquiry which leads the teacher to develop and strengthen course content in the
light of developments in the field as well as to improve methods of presenting material, a vital
interest in teaching and working with students, and, above all, the ability to stimulate their
intellectual interest and enthusiasm. The quality of teaching is admittedly difficult to evaluate.
This evaluation is so important, however, that recommendations for an individual's promotion
should include evidence drawn from such sources as the collective judgment of students, of
student counselors, and of colleagues who have visited his/her classes or who have been closely
associated with his or her teaching as supervisor or in some other capacity, or who have taught
the same students in subsequent courses.
RESEARCH AND CREATIVE ACTIVITIES
In most of the fields represented in the program of the University, publications in media of
quality are expected as evidence of scholarly interest pursued independently of supervision or
direction. An original contribution of a creative nature is as significant or as deserving as the
publication of a scholarly book or article. Quality of production is considered more important
than mere quantity. Significant evidence of scholarly merit may be either a single work of
considerable importance or a series of studies constituting a general program of worthwhile
research. The candidate should possess a definite continuing program of studies, investigations,
or creative works.
OTHER SERVICES
Educated talent, technical competence, and professional skills are indispensable in coping with
the complexities of modern civilization. Because most technical assistance is carried on by
professional persons, and a high proportion of them have university connection, the University
must provide people to fill this need. The performance of services for the University or for
external organizations may retard accumulation of evidence for proficiency in research or
teaching even while contributing to the value of the individual as a member of the University
community. In such cases effective service should be given the same consideration in
determining promotion as proficiency in teaching or research. The evaluation of the service
should be in terms of the effectiveness with which the service is performed, its relation to the
general welfare of the University, and its effect on the development of the individual.
PROMOTION IN RANK
When considered for promotion the individual should be assessed in regard to all three criteria
from the preceding section. Favorable action should result when the individual has demonstrated
a level of competence or distinction appropriate to the proposed rank in one area of endeavor.
Failure to promote may arise from unsatisfactory performance in the other areas.
From Instructor to Assistant Professor
This promotion usually is based primarily on evidence of good teaching. Active participation in
the affairs of the candidate's department and a promising beginning of independent scholarship
are expected.
From Assistant Professor to Associate Professor
This advancement is based on continued improvement, whether in quality of teaching, in
scholarship, or in the performance of service roles.
If teaching is the primary criterion, it should be distinctly superior to that of effective teachers at this and other major institutions.
If research or other creative work is the primary criterion, the candidate should have demonstrated a broad grasp of his or her own and related fields and should be establishing a national reputation as a scholar. A definite and comprehensive plan of future research covering a number of years and a beginning thereon which extends well beyond the limits of the doctoral dissertation should be evident.
If service to the University, profession, or community is the primary criterion, it should be discharged with merit and should reflect favorably on the University and on the individual's academic status.
From Associate Professor to Professor
This promotion is based upon achievement beyond the level required for the associate
professorship.
If teaching is the primary criterion, the candidate must have demonstrated an extraordinary ability to stimulate in students, either undergraduate or graduate, a genuine desire for scholarly work. Wherever feasible he should have demonstrated the ability to direct the research of advanced students.
If research or other creative work is the primary criterion, the candidate should have shown a continued growth in scholarship which has brought a national reputation as a first-class productive scholar.
If administrative, professional, or academic service is the primary criterion, distinguished contributions must be evident.
DOCUMENT E-VIII
CRITERIA FOR LIBRARIAN PROMOTION
(Approved: UFC 11/30/76)
The criteria for promotion are (1) performance, (2) professional development, research and/or creativity, and (3) service. Promotion considerations must take into account, however, differences in mission among campuses, and among schools within some campuses, as well as the individual librarian's contribution to the school/campus mission. The relative weight attached to the criteria above should and must vary accordingly. Promotion to any rank is a recognition of past achievement and a sign of confidence that the individual is capable of greater responsibilities and accomplishments.
PERFORMANCE
A librarian must be, first and foremost, an effective librarian in the position she or he fills on the
library staff. Evidence of effective accomplishment of professional responsibilities is provided by
position descriptions and evaluations made in relation to them. Additional evidence may be
provided by: (1) descriptions of innovative procedures, publications relative to performance, etc.,
(2) evaluation by library users and colleagues.
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT, RESEARCH AND/OR CREATIVITY
A librarian who is responsive to the demands of the profession should make contributions
through professional development, research and/or creativity. Evidence might include: (1)
professional growth through additional formal or continuing education, (2) preparation of
scholarly bibliographies, catalogues, indexes, or exhibits, (3) presentation of papers or lectures at
conferences, (4) receipt of fellowships, grants, awards or other special honors, (5) publication or
research including that in process.
SERVICE
A librarian is expected to assume service obligations. Fulfilling these obligations enhances the
value of the librarian as a member of the university and library community. Evidence of this
concern might include such activities as: (1) participation in professional or scholarly societies,
(2) service on academic, professional or scholarly committees, (3) professional consultation, (4)
community service in organizations outside the university and/or outside the profession which
enhances the image of the university (the relative weight attached to this kind of service varies
according to the mission of the individual campus).
DOCUMENT E-IX
UNIT CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR TENURE AND PROMOTION
(Approved: BFC 2/12/74, 3/5/85)
A. Every unit (College, school, department) shall generate a formal statement which specifies the
mission of the unit and the unit's perception of the relative importance of teaching,
research/creative activity, and service in receiving a favorable endorsement for promotion and
tenure. Specific provisions for variations in the ranking of importance should be made for
individuals who have formal unit approval of a mission that varies from the general unit's
mission and the statement of the circumstances under which variations from these perceptions
may be expected.
B. The types of material accepted by the unit as evidence of teaching, research/ creative activity
and service, including a statement concerning the unit's views of the strength of each type of
evidence, shall be included in the unit document.
C. The head of each department and/or the dean of each school or College--in cooperation with
the faculty committee from that department, school, or College--shall describe in writing the
procedures used in that department, school, or College to implement the Indiana University
Academic Handbook guidelines in arriving at regulations concerning tenure and promotion.
D. These documents must be current and public. Therefore, the unit document must be reviewed by the unit as a whole no less frequently than once every five years. A copy of the document must be provided to each faculty member at the time of his or her appointment and at the time of each five-year unit review of the document. Upon completing each five-year review, one copy shall be forwarded to the dean of the faculties and, in the case of departments, to the school/College dean for review and comment.
2. The appropriate dean or chairperson shall provide a copy of these procedures to all faculty members in the department or school concerned, to the Dean of the College (in the case of departments within the College of Arts and Sciences), to the Dean of the Faculties, and to the Faculty Affairs Committee of the Faculty Council. Any revisions of the procedures should be made and distributed in the same manner.
Choice of Unit Statements
(Approved: BFC 11/5/85)
For matters of tenure, each faculty member shall be allowed to prepare and have evaluated his/her supporting documentation under either the unit statement on tenure in existence in the unit at the time of his/her appointment or the statement in effect at the time the dossier is forwarded for consideration for tenure.
Unit Criteria and Procedures for Promotion/Tenure Advisory Committees
(Approved: BFC 4/20/76)
All faculty serving on deans' promotion and/or tenure advisory committees shall be issued, at the beginning of each academic year they serve, the relevant campus and University statements of criteria on which they are to judge the dossiers they review.
Unit Criteria and Procedures at Library Reference Desk
(Approved: BFC 4/20/76)
The Dean of the Faculties shall have responsibility of insuring that the complete file of the descriptions of each department's and school's procedures and criteria used in implementing the campus and University guidelines for promotion and tenure decisions shall be placed at the Reference Desk of the Graduate Library, where all Bloomington faculty shall have access to it. The file shall be bound in such a way that, as departments or schools revise their descriptions, the new descriptions can be inserted to replace the old ones.
Teaching Criteria
(Approved: BFC 12/6/83)
Each unit shall develop a plan for the evaluation and improvement of teaching and for assuring that teaching is accorded significant weight in promotion, tenure, and salary determinations.
The unit head shall report the details of the plan and methods for its implementation to the Dean of the Faculties Office and to the appropriate school dean by December 12, 1984. After that time the Dean of Faculties, in consultation with the appropriate school dean, regularly shall evaluate the plan and evaluate and assist each unit's progress in implementing its own plan.
DOCUMENT E-X
POLICIES GOVERNING REAPPOINTMENT AND NON-REAPPOINTMENT DURING
PROBATIONARY APPOINTMENT PERIOD
(Approved: UFC 10/17/72; Trustees 10/27/72 Amended: UFC 10/12/76; 4/23/91; Trustees 6/20/91)
DOCUMENT E-XI
ANNUAL REVIEWS AND PROMOTION PROCEDURES FOR ACADEMIC
APPOINTEES
(Approved: UFC 4/29/76; Amended: BFC 2/20/79; UFC 2/8/77, 10/9/79; 4/23/91; Trustees 6/20/91)
The professional performance of each faculty member at the rank of Associate Professor or below and each librarian at the rank of Associate Librarian or below shall be reviewed annually under procedures adopted by the faculty within the department, school, program or division or library unit in which the individual holds his or her appointment. At that time the appointee shall also be informed of matters relevant to eligibility for promotion.
The appointee shall cooperate with the principal administrator to ensure that the file on which such a review is based contains all relevant materials.
In the case of a non-tenured appointee, a written statement summarizing the substance of each annual review should be kept in the file, and a copy given to the appointee. In the case of a tenured appointee, the principal administrator shall confirm in writing, to the appointee, and to the Dean of the Faculties, that an annual review or evaluative discussion with the appointee has taken place. The appointee has the right to request and receive a written statement from the principal administrator summarizing the substance of the review or discussion; the principal administrator may, at his or her discretion, provide such a written statement even though it is unrequested. If a statement is written, copies must both be placed in the file and given to the appointee.
(Approved: BFC 2/15/94)
The Bloomington Faculty Council affirms that current annual reviews of faculty members and librarians, tenured and nontenured, are in general adequate for the purposes of evaluating and documenting faculty performance. In light of the extensive annual review procedures that already exist, we oppose instituting additional review procedures such as five-year reviews.
DOCUMENT E-XII
TENURE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
(Approved: BFC 2/12/74)
A Bloomington Campus Tenure Advisory Committee that will make tenure recommendations to
the Dean of the Faculties should be formed. The Committee shall function in the following cases:
1. When there is a lack of agreement among the tenure recommendations to the Dean of the
Faculties from any faculty committees or administrators;
2. >When there is agreement among the tenure recommendations to the Dean of the Faculties with
which the Dean of the Faculties disagrees.
The Committee also may be asked to consider tenure cases by the Dean of the Faculties under special circumstances when additional advice or input is necessary before a final recommendation is made. The Bloomington Campus Tenure Advisory Committee shall have access to all tenure dossiers in order to evaluate better those about which there is disagreement.
The Bloomington Campus Tenure Advisory Committee shall be composed of no more than ten
faculty members of which at least four (excluding administrators and departmental chairpersons)
shall be from the professional schools and at least four from the College of Arts and Sciences,
and shall be appointed by the Dean of the Faculties for a term of two years. In order to assure
continuity, in the first year the appointments are made, half the members of the committee shall
be appointed for a term of three (3) years.
All Promotion and Tenure Committees
(Approved: BFC 10/7/75)
The membership of all committees concerned with promotion and tenure shall be made a matter of public record at the time of their appointment.
Deans' Tenure and Promotion Advisory Committees
(Approved: BFC 4/20/76)
All faculty serving on Deans' promotion and/or tenure advisory committees shall be issued, at the beginning of each academic year they serve, the relevant campus and University statements of criteria on which they are to judge the dossiers they review.
DOCUMENT E-XIII
PROCEDURE FOR FACULTY PROMOTION RECOMMENDATIONS
(Approved: Faculty Council 4/1/52)
The departmental chairperson shall have the responsibility of submitting to the dean of the school or college the names of those members of the department whom he/she deems worthy of promotion on the basis of the established criteria. The following responsibilities shall also be assumed by the chairperson:
1. She/he shall make a continuing study of the staff with respect to
a. Teaching performance and development of teaching techniques,
b. Scholarship and reputation for achievement in her/his field,
c. Loyalty and cooperativeness in the department and the University,
d. Ability to stimulate and direct graduate students,
e. Administrative work,
f. Contributions to learned and professional societies.
2. Recommendations to the dean shall include specific information regarding the points outlined
above plus any pertinent information concerning
a. Character and personality,
b. Community and other public service,
c. Contribution to good public relations.
3. The recommendations for promotion shall be forwarded by the departmental chairperson to the dean of the school or college by November l.
It shall be the privilege of any faculty member to submit to the dean of the appropriate school or
college or to the Dean of the Faculties a recommendation for the promotion of any faculty
member including that of himself/herself. These recommendations shall be properly documented.
It shall then be the responsibility of the dean of the school or college:
1. To analyze the information relative to each candidate whose promotion has been
recommended to her/him and to secure any additional information deemed necessary by
consulting with the chairperson and members of the candidate's department or by obtaining
information from outside sources.
2. To suggest the names of additional faculty members he/she deems worthy of promotion and to consult with the appropriate departmental chairpersons concerning their qualifications. The dean may at her/his discretion request advice from any member of the faculty in the evaluation of any candidate.
3. To submit to the Dean of the Faculties, by December 15, the names of all those considered, together with recommendations for or against promotion and a complete statement detailing the reasons.
The following shall be the responsibilities of the Dean of the Faculties:
1. To suggest the names of any faculty members he/she considers worthy of promotion who have not been considered previously and to consult with the dean of the school or college and the chairperson of the department of which the candidate is a member in order to compile full information concerning the qualifications of the candidate.
2. To appoint a University Faculty Advisory Committee on Promotions which shall consider all cases and give advice to the Dean of the Faculties.
3. To submit to the President, by March 15, the names of those considered, together with his/her recommendations and a complete statement detailing his/her reasons.
It shall be the responsibility of the President to submit to the Trustees of Indiana University in time for consideration at their April meeting the names of those recommended for promotion. The President shall state in writing to the Dean of the Faculties the reasons for any changes in the recommendations to the Dean of the Faculties.
It shall be the obligation of the department chairperson or dean to review with the candidate who was not promoted the reasons for the failure to promote, if such a request is made by the faculty member involved.
DOCUMENT E-XIV
PROCEDURES FOR LIBRARIAN PROMOTION RECOMMENDATIONS
(Approved: Trustees 2/25/72)
A. A progression of ranks shall be established for librarians as follows: (1) Affiliate Librarian;
(2) Assistant Librarian; (3) Associate Librarian; and (4) Librarian.
B. Advancement within the library ranks shall be by promotion. Recommendations for
promotion in rank shall be processed as follows:
1. Recommendation prepared by supervisor of person under consideration and forwarded
to the head of the appropriate library division for action;
2. Recommendations of the head of each library division are forwarded to the appropriate
chancellor for review and recommended action;
3. Chancellor's recommendations are forwarded to the Office of the Vice President,
[Bloomington] for review by an all-university librarians promotions committee
appointed by the President in consultation with the Director of Libraries; and
4. Recommendations of the all-university librarians promotions committee are transmitted
to the Office of the Vice President, Bloomington, for review by the Director of
Libraries and for presentation to the Trustees of Indiana University.
C. A leave program shall be established for librarians which will be administered as part of the
faculty sabbatical leave program. The same policies and criteria applied to faculty applications
for leave shall be applied to requests from librarians.
D. The rules governing retirement for reason of disability which are applicable to members of the teaching faculty shall be applied to librarians.
DOCUMENT E-XV
1974 REORGANIZATION RESOLUTIONS
B. Personnel Resolutions:
B. 1. The faculties of each multi-campus unit should move as rapidly as possible toward the
development of common application of the standards for promotion.
(Approved: BFC 10/18/77)
B. 2. The faculty of each multi-campus unit should move toward common guidelines for the
preparation of dossiers and common review procedures for promotion. Promotion
recommendations for Bloomington-based and Indianapolis-based faculty members of
multi-campus units should be considered by joint promotion committees, formed from those
operating for the two campuses; the recommendations from these joint committees should be
made to the Vice President who has supervisory responsibility for the unit to which the faculty
member belongs. For multi- campus schools operating on other campuses, the joint promotion
committee should include representation from the other campuses.
(Approved: BFC 11/1/77)
B. 3. We reaffirm the principle adopted by the Trustees of Indiana University, July 25-27, 1969,
that tenure is specific to a single campus.
(Approved: BFC 4/4/78; UFC 3/11/80)
B. 4. First, tenure and promotion recommendations undergo the first systematic review at the
school or departmental level. Review by merged and system schools permits representation on
committees by faculty members from whatever campuses the schools deem appropriate and
allows rigorous application of uniform standards across all candidates. The recommendation
from the school passes to the local campus on which the candidate is or is to be tenured. Local
campus procedures are followed in consideration of the dossier, resulting in a campus
recommendation. This procedure allows application of uniform procedures across the campus
and contributes to the sense of academic community. Third, the recommendation from the
campus passes to the reporting line vice president, who makes the final recommendation to the
President. This procedure clearly defines the role and authority of the vice president to
recommend promotion or tenure on another campus. It removes the aspect of double jeopardy.
(Administrative Practice)
B. 5. Faculty assignments should be based on program needs with faculty members in positions
of their greatest strength and professional interest. New faculty members should be employed
with as clear an understanding as possible regarding possible assignments and teaching
responsibilities on a single campus or on more than one campus.
(Approved: BFC 12/6/77; UFC3/11/80)
B. 6. Faculty who teach or are engaged in activities on more than one campus should have their
loads adjusted to reflect their assignments.
(Approved: BFC 12/6/77)
DOCUMENT E-XVI
WAIVER OF RIGHT TO ACCESS
LETTERS OF EVALUATION
(Approved: BFC 4/15/86)
Repealed: BFC 3/1/94
DOCUMENT E-XVII
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IMPLEMENTATION DOCUMENT (EXTRACT)
(Approved: Trustees 6/29/74)
{NOTE: A new Affirmative Action Plan is adopted annually. The current Plan is available from the Affirmative Action office, 855-7559.}
B. Proposed Actions and Modifications
1. Monitoring of Existing Policies and Practices
The University, through actions of its administration and the University Faculty Council, shall
keep under constant review all existing policies relating to reappointment and tenure as well
as the administration of these policies to ensure that women and members of minority groups
are accorded equal opportunity.
2. Promotion Procedures
Procedures relating to promotion should be revised to provide particularity comparable to
those procedures relating to reappointment and the awarding of tenure. This issue will be
presented to the University Faculty Council for consideration during the fall of 1974, before
being brought to the Trustees of Indiana University.
3. Annual Review
The provision of the Academic Handbook regarding annual reviews of non-tenured faculty on
full-time service should be extended to all full-time faculty below the rank of Professor. This
issue will be presented to the University Faculty Council for consideration during the fall of
1974, before being brought to the Trustees of Indiana University.
4. Criteria for Promotion and Tenure
The university shall--through actions of the University Faculty Council and the
administration--take further steps to ensure that the criteria--as well as the differences in
criteria--for promotion, reappointment and tenure shall be clearly described. This issue will be
presented to the University Faculty Council during the fall of 1974, before being brought to
the Trustees of Indiana University.
In addition, each unit will specify detailed criteria and procedures employed to implement the university's regulations.
5. Equity Reviews
Each affirmative action unit shall conduct equity reviews to ensure that women and members
of minority groups are accorded equal opportunities for promotion, reappointment, and tenure.
DOCUMENT E-XVIII
BLOOMINGTON CAMPUS SALARY POLICY FOR FACULTY/LIBRARIANS
(Approved: BFC 10/17/89, 3/24/98)
Allocations of resources which affect faculty/librarian salaries occur at several levels: from the legislature, the central administration, and the Indiana University Foundation to campuses, to schools, to departments, and to the setting of individual salaries. At all levels, allocations of resources to faculty/ librarian salaries should balance two principles: (1) rewarding comparable performance, distinction, and experience with comparable salary and (2) providing the support necessary to achieve the missions of the university. Salary policies should be determined and implemented by the responsible administrator with the participation of appropriate elected faculty/librarian bodies and should be written and available for inspection.
In this policy, "resources" include funds available to Indiana University for faculty/library compensation from any source; "unit" refers to the university system, to a campus, to a school, and to a department; "allocation of resources to faculty/librarian salaries" refers to allocation of resources among units and to the setting of individual salaries. "Base salary" refers to a faculty member's/ librarian's annual yearly salary for teaching/performance, research/creative activity/professional development, and service.
I. Factors affecting allocation of resources to faculty/librarian salaries:
The following factors are relevant to the allocation of resources to faculty/librarian salaries:
A. Merit (see appendix to this document for Annual Merit Evaluation Policy):
"Merit" means individual achievement as judged according to the criteria of
teaching/performance, research/creative activity/professional development, and service. Units
will establish a system for evaluating merit in terms of a graded series of levels of achievement.
Allocations of merit increments shall take into account the varying missions of the diverse
departments, schools, and campuses which constitute the university, and make provision for
faculty/librarians with responsibilities in more than one unit. The relative weight attached to the
criteria of merit shall vary according to the faculty's/ librarian's contribution to those missions as
stipulated in the unit's salary policy statements.
B. Cost of living:
Faculty/librarians shall receive an increment related to the increase in the cost of living. The
Budgetary Affairs Committee of each campus shall make an annual recommendation regarding
an appropriate percentage and/or fixed-dollar amount for this factor. After reviewing that
recommendation, each salary-setting unit shall make its own determination, taking into
consideration both the primacy of the merit principle in setting salaries and the need to protect
individuals as much as possible against salary erosion caused by inflation. In no case shall this
cost-of-living factor, together with adjustments for equity and salary minima, absorb more than
half of the unit's allocation for salary increments.
C. Fixed-dollar increments:
1. The Budgetary Affairs Committee of a campus may recommend minimum
fixed-dollar increases to be received by all faculty/ librarians whose performance
meets the standards of competence of the faculty's/librarian's unit. This is
intended to avoid excessive widening of the gap between low and high salaries
due to the use of percentage increments.
2. A unit's consultative committee may recommend that some portion of its salary
increment be made in fixed-dollar amounts.
D. Recruitment and retention of faculty/librarians:
The need to allocate salary resources to attract and retain qualified faculty/librarians may have
differential impact as applied to different academic fields and to individual faculty/librarians
within a field. Differential allocations in accordance with this factor, including responses to
outside offers, shall be consistent with the unit's long range planning.
E. Remedial equity:
Resources may be allocated to remedy inequities which have resulted from the following factors:
1. Changing market conditions:
The need to attract and retain faculty/librarians in changing market conditions may produce
discrepancies in salaries among faculty/ librarians of comparable experience and merit.
2. Reevaluation of prior merit judgments:
Adjustments in salaries are appropriate to correct previous under-estimations of merit, so that
faculty/librarians do not continue to suffer for undervalued commitments to their work.
3. Inadequate funding:
Prior inadequate funding for faculty/librarians may have resulted in inadequate reward of
meritorious performance or in allocation of resources which neglected some factors specified in
Part I of this faculty/librarian salary policy for others considered more pressing at the time.
4. Discrimination:
The University is committed to remedy discrimination based on race, color, religion, politics,
gender, sexual preference, national or ethnic origin, age, disability, or veteran's status.
F. Salary minima:
Resources will be allocated to meet reasonable faculty/librarian salary minima standards
established by the Budgetary Affairs Committee of the campus or by other faculty/librarian
legislation. 50% of these resources will be provided by the