Section 4.9.7C | Department Procedures for T & P Review 

Department Procedure Order:

1. Notification of Intent
2. External Peer Review
3. Submission of the Dossier
4. Review by Department T&P Review Committee
5. Vote of Department T&P Review Committee
6. Review and Recommendation by Department Chair

1. Notification of Intent

The candidate will notify the department chair in writing of his/her intent to file for tenure and/or promotion to the department no later than the deadline indicated in the tenure and promotion calendar. In academic units, without departments, the candidate will notify the dean in writing of his/her intent to file for tenure and/or promotion to the academic unit.

2. External Peer Review

Both tenure and/or promotion to associate professor or professor require external peer review of a candidate's record of scholarly activity by qualified peers who are not affiliated with the university. The purpose of external peer reviews is solely to provide an informed objective evaluation of the quality of the scholarship, research or creative activity of the candidate. It is expected that the external reviewers will be selected from organizations with national reputations for excellence in the faculty member’s discipline and that the majority of the reviewers will be academic peers. Though not an absolute requirement, it is also expected that when a faculty member from another institution is selected as a peer reviewer, the faculty reviewer will have a higher rank than the candidate being reviewed. For example, full professors should review applicants for promotion to professor. Such reviews place a burden on the usually busy schedules of the evaluators. To obtain external reviews in a timely manner, the process of developing the lists of external reviewers, as described below, should be initiated during the spring semester preceding the fall tenure and promotion review process.

The candidate shall develop a list, normally four to eight names, of recommended peer reviewers from outside the university. The candidate may also submit a list (with justifications) of persons who may pose a conflict for consideration by the chairs of the department and the department tenure and promotion committee. In addition, the department chair and the department tenure and promotion committee will develop a list of external peer reviewers. The chairs must select at least one of the names suggested by the candidate. The department tenured faculty and department chair are solely responsible for supplementing the candidate's list with additional reviewers. The dossier should contain at least four external reviews. If it is not possible to obtain four reviews, the reasons must be documented at the departmental level. For each reviewer, there should be an accompanying brief paragraph identifying her or his credentials and a statement regarding the nature of the relationship to the candidate or lack thereof. The external reviewers are expected to provide informed, objective evaluations rather than testimonials. Therefore, no more than one external reviewer can be a past mentor or collaborator of the candidate. A template for the External Evaluator List which is required for the dossier and a sample request letter for an External Peer Evaluation shall be maintained by the provost and posted on the university website.

All reviewers should receive the same materials for evaluation; if not, an explanation must be included. Peer reviewers who have agreed to write letters of evaluation should be sent the candidate's curriculum vitae and a letter from the department chair to the reviewer, which includes:

• the departmental expectations for research/scholarship/creative activity;
• a request for a written response to the question, “In your opinion, has the candidate’s accomplishments met or exceeded the expectations for research/scholarship/creative activity specified by the department?";
• the deadline for the written response; and
• a statement that the State of Tennessee has an Open Records Law and that the candidate has access to the external peer evaluation document.

Note: These are minimal requirements and should be interpreted to mean that additional materials related to scholarly activity may be necessary in some departments, and/or academic units. The materials sent to a reviewer should enable her/him to fully assess the scholarship of the candidate in an objective fashion.

3. Submission of the Dossier

The faculty member will, with the guidance and counsel of the department chair, prepare and submit to the department chair (for distribution to the department tenure and promotion committee) a dossier of contributions and accomplishments in compliance with departmental, academic unit, and university guidelines and in accordance with the tenure and promotion calendar maintained by the provost.

4. Review by Department Tenure and Promotion Committee

The tenure and promotion committee of the department consists of all tenured associate professors and professors. The department tenure and promotion committee composition shall be determined in accordance with Section 4.9.5A(2)(a). For promotion to professor, the subcommittee of tenured professors will make the recommendations. The department tenure and promotion committee will review the dossier submitted by the faculty member and evaluate the candidate's accomplishments, applying to them all relevant criteria (university, academic unit, and department). The judgment and assessment of the candidate's application for tenure by the faculty at the department level is critical because of their familiarity with the candidate and their knowledge of the qualifications relevant for their discipline. Therefore, reviewers at every level will utilize dossier materials and professional observations in making their recommendations. Professional observations may be included in the documentation that is prepared at each level of review.

5. Vote of Department Tenure and Promotion Committee

Tenured faculty of appropriate rank on the department tenure and promotion committee will take a formal anonymous vote on tenure and promotion of candidate. A representative of the departmental tenure and promotion committee, selected according to departmental guidelines, shall prepare a written summary of the committee’s discussion. This summary should reflect the full scope of discussions that took place in the committee meetings and should also contain the rationale for the recommendation that is consistent with the vote of the committee. If the decision of the department tenure and promotion committee is not unanimous, the committee may also submit to the department chair a minority report with the rationale for dissenting opinions. This written recommendation, the vote, and any dissenting statements become part of the dossier. The written summary of the discussion and the vote of the department tenure and promotion committee constitute the recommendation and are transmitted to the department chair. If a department chair is being considered for promotion or tenure, the recommendation of the department committee will be transmitted directly to the dean. The recommendation of the department tenure and promotion committee shall be advisory to the department chair.

6. Review and Recommendation by Department Chair

The department chair conducts an independent tenure and/or promotion review based upon the faculty member’s dossier, which will include the written summary, vote of the department tenure and promotion committee, and any dissenting opinion. The department chair will prepare a letter which will include an independent recommendation and summary explanation for the recommendation based on the department chair's review and evaluation of materials in the dossier. If the chair’s recommendation differs from the recommendation of the department tenure and promotion committee, the summary must explain the reasons for the differing judgment. The department chair’s letter becomes part of the dossier which is transmitted to the dean. The department chair will notify the candidate in writing that he or she is recommending or is not recommending the candidate for tenure and/or promotion and that the department tenure and promotion committee is recommending or is not recommending the candidate for tenure and/or promotion. The vote of the department tenure and promotion committee should also be included. The notification should not include any rationale for the vote or recommendations. In cases involving promotion only, the chair will meet with the candidate to transmit the recommendations which the department tenure and promotion committee and the chair have made and reasons for those recommendations. Applications for promotion only may be withdrawn at this point. The recommendation of the department chair shall be advisory to the academic unit tenure and promotion committee.