Montana State University
Office of the Provost > Collective Bargaining Agreement > Tenure Track Faculty

Article 11 : Retention, Promotion, and Tenure Review Procedures

SECTION CONTENTS

11.01 Responsibility of The Candidate to Submit Dossier
11.02 Mandatory Procedures At All Levels of Review
11.03 Additions to the Dossier or Record
11.04 Response to Requests for Additional Materials
11.05 Conflicts of Interest in Faculty Review
11.06 Levels of Review
   11.06.01 Primary Review Committee
   11.06.02 Primary Academic Reviewer (Department Head/dean)
   11.06.03 Intermediate Review Committee
   11.06.04 College Dean
   11.06.05 University Retention, Promotion, and Tenure Committee
      11.06.05.a Committee Responsibilities
   11.06.06 Provost Review
      11.06.06.a Deadlines for Notification
   11.06.07 President's Decision

11.01 RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CANDIDATE TO SUBMIT DOSSIER

The candidate is responsible for preparing the dossier and making her or his case for retention, tenure, and/or promotion. Each candidate shall submit her or his dossier by the date established by the Provost, dean, and department head.

The candidate who fails to submit the dossier by the established deadline forfeits his or her opportunity for review. In cases of retention or tenure, the faculty member who fails to submit a dossier shall be issued a terminal contract for the next contract term.

Candidates shall submit to the primary review committee or primary administrative reviewer, a dossier, which shall include:

  1. A curriculum vitae listing all teaching, research/creative activities and outreach/public service activities.
  2. A narrative self-evaluation or personal statement,
  3. Documentation of role, assignments, and performance including the letter of hire, any subsequent role statements or reassignments, and annual reviews and ratings, and all the letters conveying administrators' and committees' recommendations from the most recent formal review (if such a review has occurred within the past 7 years).
  4. Information as to performance and accomplishments in teaching, research/creative activity, outreach/public service, and professional development, appropriate to the assignment.
  5. A list of persons from whom the department committee or department head may solicit evaluations and letters of support. Candidates shall not themselves solicit letters of support.

If appropriate to the assignment, the dossier shall also include a set of articles, publications, creative endeavors, or other evidence that, in the candidate's judgment, represents his or her best efforts to advance the discipline or profession. This set of materials shall be sent to external peer reviewers.

The candidate may provide supporting documentation including but not limited to publications, video and audio tapes, student-teacher evaluations, and other material separate from the dossier. During the review period, this supporting documentation shall be retained by the college dean and transmitted to the URPTC upon request.

The "Cover Sheet--Candidate's Dossier," available from the office of the Provost, shall be used as the cover page of the dossier.

11.02 MANDATORY PROCEDURES AT ALL LEVELS OF REVIEW

In conducting the review, each review committee and reviewing administrator shall consider the following:

  1. The dossier submitted by the candidate and the recommendations of each preceding level of review,
  2. The University Standards in Section 9.07,
  3. The previously approved role and scope, criteria and standards document of the department and college,
  4. The letter of hire and all subsequent faculty role statements,
  5. The candidate's annual reviews,
  6. In cases of review for promotion and tenure, the in-depth assessment of teaching, and
  7. In cases of review for promotion and tenure, the written evaluations of external and internal peer reviewers.

University guidelines do not require in depth teaching assessment or external peer reviews for retention reviews. However, college or department guidelines may require such an assessment and/or reviews.

No materials except required documentation specified in the role, scope, criteria, standards and procedures of the department and college may be added to or deleted from a candidate's dossier without notice to the candidate and an opportunity for the candidate to respond.Notice shall also be given to any preceding review committees and reviewing administrators and each will have an opportunity to respond.

Each review committee or reviewing administrator may request further documentation from the candidate and solicit and obtain additional materials deemed necessary to make a thorough and substantive review of the candidate's qualifications.

Each review committee and reviewing administrator shall determine, to the best of its ability, whether a candidate's preceding reviews have been conducted in substantial compliance with the procedures set forth by the department, college and this agreement.

11.03 ADDITIONS TO THE DOSSIER OR RECORD

The candidate may not add to, alter, modify, delete or remove documents from his or her dossier once it has been submitted except by:

  1. updating the status of materials in support of tenure unknown at the time the dossier was submitted,
  2. responding to a review committee's or reviewing administrator's request for additional materials or notice that materials in addition to those required by the role, scope, criteria, standards and procedures document have been added to the dossier.

11.04 RESPONSE TO REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL MATERIALS

A review committee or reviewing administrator requesting that additional materials be added to a candidate's dossier shall notify the candidate of the request in writing and send copies of the request to all preceding review committees and reviewing administrators. If the request requires re-review of the candidate's dossier with the additional materials, the notice shall so specify.

Any review committee or reviewing administrator may respond to the request for additional materials in writing within five (5) days of receiving notice of the request. The responding committee or administrator shall send copies of the response to the candidate and preceding level(s) of review. Responses received within the specified time frames shall be added to the dossier and transmitted to the next level of review.

11.05 CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN FACULTY REVIEW

No person shall participate in his/her own review; or that of any other person to whom he/she has a relationship by blood or marriage, or cohabitation, or with whom he/she is engaged in adversarial litigation or proceedings. No person shall participate in the review, even as a peer reviewer, of any person with whom he/she has joined in a business or other relationship which would reasonably be presumed to preclude objective application of professional judgment.

Allegations of conflict of interest will be filed with Labor-Management Committee within ten (10) working days of discovering such a conflict. That committee will make a recommendation to the Provost. The Provost will determine if a conflict of interest exists. The failure to timely file an allegation of conflict of interest shall prevent the later allegation of a conflict of interest during the review.

11.06 LEVELS OF REVIEW

11.06.01 PRIMARY REVIEW COMMITTEE

Each department shall establish the policies and procedures for appointing and/or electing the primary review committee. The committee shall be composed only of tenured faculty, at least a majority of whom shall be elected by departmental (or college) faculty or appointed as outlined in the RSCSP document. A department committee shall have at least twenty five percent (25%) female and/or minority representation whenever possible. The primary administrative reviewer may be present at committee meetings at the discretion of the committee. The administrator may present data that is essential to the committee's deliberations, but shall not be present when the committee votes.

The primary review committee shall review all submitted materials, provide any required materials, and solicit and obtain additional materials it deems necessary to make a fair, objective, independent, thorough and substantive review of the candidate's qualifications. The committee shall prepare its written recommendation concerning the retention, tenure, and/or promotion of each candidate. This recommendation shall include a rationale explaining the reasons for the decision, vote tally and will be forwarded to the primary administrative reviewer with a copy sent to the candidate. The recommendation becomes a permanent part of the faculty member's personnel files maintained in the department or college offices.

The meetings in which the committee discusses individual faculty reviews shall be closed to the faculty member being reviewed and to anyone else not a member of the committee.

If the review results in a recommendation with any negative votes, the faculty member may submit a written response within ten (10) days of receipt of the review. The faculty member's response will be a part of the record going forward.
The candidate may also respond to peer reviews. Within three (3) working days from the date of receipt of a recommendation with any negative votes, the candidate may submit a written request to the primary administrative reviewer for a summary of all peer reviews contained in the dossier. The primary administrative reviewer shall have five (5) working days from the date of receipt of the candidate's written request to compile the summary of the peer reviews and forward it to the candidate. The summary should convey the substance of the peer review but must protect the identities of the reviewers.

11.06.02 PRIMARY ACADEMIC REVIEWER (DEPARTMENT HEAD/DEAN)

The primary administrative reviewer shall review all submitted materials, provide any required materials, and conduct an independent and substantive review of the candidate's dossier and make recommendations regarding retention, tenure, and/or promotion. The recommendation shall include a written rationale. If the administrator's recommendation does not concur with that of the primary review committee, the administrator's rationale must explain the point(s) of difference, i.e., the reason for the non-concurrence.

The primary administrator is also responsible for:

  1. accurately describing in the initial letter of hire, the primary duties, responsibilities and conditions of employment, including the instructional or professional practice expectations of the appointment and years of credit toward tenure, of the faculty member.
  2. informing the faculty member of the University, college, and department role and scope, criteria and standards documents which form the basis of formal review.
  3. ensuring that each faculty member has access to the University, college, and department documents related to annual review, retention, tenure, and promotion.
  4. preparing role statements, after negotiation with the faculty member, that accurately describe the faculty member's current responsibilities, including any agreement regarding differential assignments which have been approved by the dean and Provost.
  5. informing faculty members of the applicable time lines for review.
  6. providing the primary review committee with information and materials essential to their deliberations, according to department, college and University procedures.
  7. forwarding the candidate's dossier, including recommendation(s) and faculty response (if any), to the next administrative reviewer and sending a copy of the recommendation(s) to the candidate.
  8. maintaining complete, accurate and up-to-date files on each faculty member, including an electronic or paper copy of any dossier submitted for formal review. Primary administrators shall ensure that external review letters have been removed from the dossier before placing it in the employee's department personnel file.

The primary administrative reviewer shall determine, to the best of her or his ability, whether the candidate's preceding reviews were conducted in substantial compliance with the procedures set forth by the department (if applicable), college and University. The primary administrative reviewer may return the candidate's materials to the primary review committee to correct any non-compliance. The primary administrative reviewer shall also conduct an independent and substantive review of the candidate's dossier and make recommendations regarding retention, tenure, and/or promotion. In cases of non-concurrence with a preceding review, the recommendation shall include a written rationale for non-concurrence.

The primary administrative reviewer shall make his/her review available to the faculty member. If the review results in a negative recommendation, the faculty member may submit a written response within ten (10) days of receipt of the department head's review The faculty member's response will be part of the record going forward to the next level of review.

11.06.03 INTERMEDIATE REVIEW COMMITTEE

Each college that is not the primary level of review shall establish an "intermediate review committee" to consider the dossier submitted by each candidate and formulate its recommendation for retention, tenure, and/or promotion. Each college shall establish the policies and procedures by which the membership of the committee shall be established. The intermediate review committee shall be composed only of tenured faculty, at least a majority of whom shall be elected by college faculty. The committee shall have at least 25% female and/or minority representation. If that representation is not achieved by election, the dean shall appoint such additional members as may be necessary to achieve that representation. No faculty member shall serve on the committee during the year of review of her or his own dossier.

The intermediate review committee shall review all submitted materials, provide any required materials, conduct a fair, objective, independent, and substantive review of the candidate's dossier based on department, college, and University criteria and standards and make recommendations regarding retention, tenure or promotion. The recommendation shall include a written rationale with vote tally. If the intermediate review committee's recommendation does not concur with those of the primary review committee or the primary administrative reviewer, the committee's rationale must explain the point(s) of difference, i.e., the reason for the non-concurrence.

If the review results in a recommendation with any negative votes, the faculty member may submit a written response within ten (10) days of receipt of the review. The faculty member's response will be a part of the record going forward. The college dean may be present at committee meetings, at the discretion of the committee, to present data that is essential to the committee's deliberations but shall not be present when the committee votes.

The intermediate review committee is also responsible for reviewing, making suggestions for modification, and approving of the role and scope, criteria and standards documents of the departments.

11.06.04 COLLEGE DEAN

The college dean (where not the primary administrative reviewer) is responsible for:

  1. informing faculty members, committee members, and department heads of the applicable time lines for review.
  2. providing the intermediate review committee with information and materials essential to their deliberations, according to college and University policies and procedures.
  3. forwarding the candidate's dossier, with her or his recommendations and the faculty response (if any), to the URPTC and sending a copy of the written recommendation to the candidate.
  4. conducting the election for faculty representatives to the college and URPTC.

The dean shall determine, to the best of her or his ability, whether the candidate's preceding reviews were conducted in substantial compliance with the procedures set forth by the department, college and University. The dean may send a faculty member's review materials back to the department or department head to remedy any noncompliance. The dean shall also conduct an independent and substantive review of the candidate's dossier and make recommendations regarding retention, tenure, and/or promotion. In cases of non-concurrence with a preceding review, the recommendation shall include a written rationale for non-concurrence.

The dean shall make his/her review available to the faculty member. If the review results in a negative recommendation, the faculty member may submit a written response within ten (10) days of receipt of the dean's review. The faculty member's response will be part of the record going forward to the next level of review.

11.06.05 UNIVERSITY RETENTION, PROMOTION, AND TENURE COMMITTEE

The URPTC shall be composed of the chair of the Faculty Affairs Committee of the Faculty Senate and one (1) elected representative from each of the colleges. An administrator for academic affairs, designated by the Provost, shall serve as a chair of the committee, without vote.

At least twenty-five percent (25%) of the membership of the committee shall be women and/or minorities; if this membership is not achieved by election, the Provost shall appoint such additional membership as may be necessary to achieve that representation.

  1. Election of Members: Elected members of the URPTC serve three (3) year terms and are elected according to the calendar and procedures established by the Provost and dean of the college. Colleges may elect alternates to serve should the elected member be unable to serve. Members may not be reelected to consecutive terms.
  2. Eligibility: Only tenured faculty at the Associate Professor or Professor rank shall be eligible for election to the URPTC. No faculty member up for review shall be a member of the Committee. No faculty member may serve as a member of a departmental or college review committee and of the University committee simultaneously.
  3. Start of Appointment: Members assume their appointments with the beginning of Fall semester.

11.06.05.a Committee Responsibilities

  1. The Committee reviews, makes suggestions for change, and approves all departmental and college role and scope statements, procedures, criteria, and standards related to tenure and promotion.
  2. The Committee conducts an independent and substantive review of dossiers of all candidates subject to review.
  3. The Committee makes and forwards to the Provost its recommendation concerning the retention, tenure and/or promotion of each faculty member reviewed. The Committee also determines, to the best of its ability, whether a candidate's preceding reviews were conducted in substantial compliance with the procedures set forth by the department, college and this Agreement.

The college representative to the Committee shall not vote when a candidate from his or her college is reviewed. The Chair of Faculty Affairs shall not vote when a candidate from his or her department is reviewed. If the Faculty Affairs Chair is from a college without constituent departments, he or she shall not vote when a candidate from his or her college is reviewed. In these instances, the representative may provide background information about the college and department but shall not express personal opinions about the candidate or the candidate's qualifications or experience.

The Committee shall determine, to the best of its ability, whether the candidate's preceding reviews were conducted in substantial compliance with the procedures set forth by the department, college and University. In the event of noncompliance with University procedures or standards, the Committee may send a faculty member's review materials back to the review level where the noncompliance first occurred to remedy any noncompliance.

The Committee shall also conduct an independent and substantive review of the candidate's dossier and make recommendations regarding retention, tenure, and/or promotion. In cases of non-concurrence with a preceding review, the recommendation shall include a written rationale for non-concurrence.

The Committee shall make its review available to the faculty member within ten (10) days of receipt of the Committee's review. If the review results in a recommendation with any negative votes, the faculty member may submit a written response to the Chair. The Committee shall send the review forward including the faculty member's response as a part of the record.

11.06.06 PROVOST REVIEW

The Provost shall determine, to the best of her or his ability, whether the candidate's preceding reviews were conducted in substantial compliance with the procedures set forth by the department, college and University. The Provost may send a faculty member's review materials back to any review level to remedy any noncompliance.

The Provost shall also conduct an independent and substantive review of the candidate's dossier and make recommendations regarding retention, tenure, and/or promotion. In cases of non-concurrence with a preceding review, the recommendation shall include a written rationale for non-concurrence.

11.06.06.a Deadlines for Notification

The Provost shall make every reasonable effort to notify candidates of the recommendation regarding retention, tenure and promotion by the dates listed below. Failure to give notice at these times will not constitute retention, an award of tenure or promotion by default.

  1. Notice of retention recommendation resulting from third year review shall be sent by January 15.
  2. Notice of tenure and tenure-associated promotion recommendations shall be sent by April 15.
  3. Notice of promotion not associated with tenure recommendations shall be sent by May 15.

11.06.07 PRESIDENT'S DECISION

The President shall determine, to the best of her or his ability, whether the candidate's preceding reviews were conducted in substantial compliance with the procedures set forth by the department, college and University. The President may send a faculty member's review materials back to any review level to remedy any noncompliance. The President may also conduct an independent and substantive review of the candidate's dossier and make recommendations regarding retention, tenure, and/or promotion.

The decision of the President shall be based on the total evaluation record and shall constitute the final institutional recommendation to the Board of Regents regarding matters of faculty retention, promotion, and tenure.

The recommendation of the President shall be forwarded to each faculty member within ten (10) days of the receipt of all recommendations.
When a faculty member is not awarded retention or tenure, he or she shall be reappointed on a terminal contract for the next academic year. Employment will terminate with the expiration of the terminal contract, even if the appeal process has not been concluded as of the date of termination. The filing of a request for appeal and any subsequent proceedings concerning retention or tenure shall not extend the date of termination.

If the President's decision results in the reversal of the non-retention or denial of tenure decision, the faculty member will be reinstated to her or his position within the University.

Table of Contents