Bylaws of the Department of Political Science

These Bylaws of the Department of Political Science are authorized by Section 2.1.1 of the Bylaws of the University of Nevada, Reno.

These Bylaws provide for and articulate the organization and administrative structure of the department and the department policies and procedures. These Bylaws shall be consistent with and subordinate to the College of Liberal Arts (CLA) Bylaws, the University Bylaws, and the NSHE Code; in the event of a conflict, the superior authority governs.

These Bylaws shall be adopted when they have been approved by a two-thirds majority vote by secret ballot of the regular faculty of the Department of Political Science and approved by the dean of the College of Liberal Arts.

Any regular faculty member may propose an amendment to the Bylaws by submitting it in writing to the chair. After a department meeting to discuss the proposed change, the chair shall submit the proposed amendment to a vote of the faculty using a secret ballot with two working weeks’ notice. Proposed amendments to the Bylaws of the Department of Political Science are adopted when they have been approved by a two-thirds majority vote of the regular faculty and by written approval of the dean of College of Liberal Arts.

Questions of interpretation of these Bylaws shall be directed to the appropriate standing committee or to an ad hoc Bylaws committee, which shall review the question and forward its recommendations to the chair for a decision. The chair shall make his or her decision upon appropriate consultation and in a manner consistent with the NSHE Code and established university and college policies and procedures.

Political Science is the study of power and governance: who wields power and to what end. It involves understanding the governance of people. The study of politics enables students to be more rational citizens, more constructive participants in public affairs, and better professionals in any vocation that deals with the public domain including important positions in corporations, government, and non-profit organizations. The Department of Political Science recognizes and embraces its distinctive roles defined not only by the liberal arts tradition of the College of Liberal Arts, but by the land-grant origins of the University of Nevada, Reno. At the heart of the department’s mission is the pursuit of excellence in teaching, research, and service. A core component of the Department’s teaching mission is the education of informed, competent, and productive citizens. The Department fulfills this role through political science major and minor programs; three graduate programs; participation in an interdisciplinary major in International Affairs; and through the participation of faculty and graduate assistants in the delivery of the university’s core curriculum. The research component of the mission recognizes the role that active research plays in supporting the overall curricular efforts of the department, the college, and the university and in generating knowledge critical for understanding and addressing political challenges facing people the world over. The Department fulfills this role through a faculty engaged in individual and collaborative research efforts, the results of which are widely published in academic presses, journals, and government reports. In addition to teaching and public service, faculty and graduate students engage in theory and problem-oriented research addressing some of the most pressing political and philosophical issues of our time. Many of the faculty embrace interdisciplinary research programs that allow for a multi-dimensional approach to addressing societal issues.

1. Tenure-track Faculty: The tenure-track faculty is composed of three (3) ranks: Professor (IV), Associate Professor (III), and Assistant Professor (II), in accordance with the university bylaws section 2.3.3 (1)(a).
2. Rank I Faculty: Rank I, for Instructor, is reserved for academic faculty who have been hired for a tenure-track position but have yet to complete the appropriate degree required by the position.
3. Non-tenure-track Faculty (zero rank): The non-tenure-track faculty are hired at rank 0 (IV), 0 (III), 0 (II), and 0 (I). Faculty in this category will have varying titles depending on whether they hold terminal degrees and what rank they are. Definitions are found in the UAM 2,505. Titles follow University Bylaws and UAM 2,505.
4. Affiliated Faculty: The Chair may, in consultation with the faculty, appoint Affiliated Faculty to the department from among the faculty and staff of the University of Nevada, Reno.Affiliated Faculty are invited to contribute to the intellectual life of the department and participate in department activities. They do not have voting rights in the department, and their contributions to the department will be accounted for in their home department. Upon recommendation, the personnel committee will approve Affiliated Faculty by simple majority vote according to their own operating procedures.

1. The Chair
   1. Responsibilities of the Chair

      The chair of the department shall be responsible to the dean of the College of Liberal Arts for implementing college policies and procedures, and responsible to faculty for implementing policies and procedures mandated by department bylaws. The chair of the department shall serve as adviser to the dean of the College of Liberal Arts and provide liaison between the dean and the faculty. The chair of the department will inform faculty of actions taken by the dean, and the Council of Chairs and Directors, and inform the dean of actions taken by department faculty. The chair of the department shall take a leadership role in serving on the Council of Chairs and Directors and be responsible for the advancement of the department missions and goals as identified in department long-range planning documents. The chair shall be an ex officio member of all department committees, except those that evaluate the chair of the department’s performance as a faculty member or as a chair of the department.

   2. Authority of the Chair

      In order to expedite the routine duties of a chair of the department, the chair shall have the authority to perform or delegate the following duties:

      • Administering department funds and accounts
      • Providing information in a timely matter to all regular faculty on the operating budget, instructional funding requests, and other major departmental expenditures
      • Eliciting faculty input on budget priorities and major expenditures
      • Hiring, supervising, and evaluating classified staff
      • Hiring, supervising, and evaluating temporary faculty
      • Hiring, supervising, and evaluating student workers
      • Hiring, supervising, and evaluating graduate assistants
      • Preparing semester and summer school class schedules in consultation with individual instructors
      • Maintaining and securing departmental personnel files of faculty
      • Managing and assigning department office and classroom space and facilities
      • Managing the assignment of departmental administrative responsibilities with individual faculty
      • Establishing ad hoc committees and suggesting new standing committees or elimination of old ones
      • Organizing and conducting annual evaluations, in conjunction with the Personnel Committee
      • Organizing and fulfilling chair responsibilities as designated by the University and College and by the Department bylaws regarding tenure and promotion and promotion of faculty

      The department chair’s executive authority shall be limited. The chair’s decisions on issues not specifically noted above shall require consultation and recommendations from the regular faculty as provided for in these bylaws. However, the chair is required to issue separate decisions on annual evaluations, merit, promotion, and tenure. Issues requiring faculty recommendations include but are not limited to:

      • Recommendations for hiring full- or part-time faculty
      • Recommendations on annual evaluations and merit recommendations
      • Recommendations on the reappointment, promotion and tenure of regular faculty including probationary faculty in their third year
      • Recommendations on curriculum (courses and academic programs)
      • Recommendations for long-term and strategic planning
   3. Term of Service

      The chair shall serve for a term of three years, with the possibility of renewal.

   4. Eligibility

      All regular tenured faculty are eligible to run for election for the position of department chair, including the incumbent chair.

   5. Election of the Chair

      Nominations: Early in the final semester of a chair’s three-year term, all regular faculty will be solicited for nominations for chair, including self-nominations, to be submitted anonymously to the senior department administrative assistant (AA) by the second Monday of the first full calendar month of the semester. The administrative assistant will check with eligible nominees to determine their willingness to serve. The administrative assistant shall then provide the faculty via email with the name(s) of faculty who will run for election for chair. In the event that no eligible faculty member is willing to run for election, the chair will inform the dean.

      Election procedures:A quorum of at least 66% of the active faculty allowed to vote as defined in the college bylaws must be present. In addition to the procedures outlined below in section 11, the following procedures will apply to the election of a department chair. An election by secret ballot shall occur during a faculty meeting. At that meeting,the senior administrative assistant shall read the votes aloud and record the votes on a screen or board visible to those in attendance. The nominee who wins a simple majority of the votes cast shall be recommended to the dean. If no nominee obtains a majority vote, another election by secret written ballot between the two nominees who received the most votes shall be conducted, as above. To break a tie, another election by secret written ballot shall be conducted, as above. If the tie holds, the dean shall be informed of the tie.

   6. Vacancy Prior to Expiration of the Chair’s Term

      Should a vacancy occur before the normal expiration of the chair’s term of office, the regular faculty shall meet as an advisory committee to the dean of the college in selecting an interim chair of the department. The procedures in 8.A.5 shall be followed.

   7. Interim Chair

      An interim chair of the department can be appointed by the dean on an annual basis until a permanent chair of the department has been selected. A permanent chair of the department should be selected as soon as a willing and qualified candidate is available.

   8. Temporary Assumption of Authority of the Chair

      Should the chair need to be absent for a brief period (up to one year), the chair shall propose a replacement to the Personnel Committee, which will appoint an acting chair. Should the chair be absent for an extended period of no more than one year, the department shall recommend an acting chair to the dean following procedures outlined in 8.A.6. The period for which the chair is absent shall not count as part of his or her term. For short absences, such as 3-4 days, the chair shall delegate signing authority to the responsible officer in the college.

   9. Removal of the Chair from Office

      The chair’s removal from office for cause may be recommended to the dean of the college at any time by simple majority vote of the regular faculty in the department. A meeting shall be called for a vote if one-third or more of faculty not including the chair agree to convene it. The vote will occur at that meeting of the regular faculty in the absence of the chair. A quorum of at least 66% of voting eligible faculty must be present. This meeting will be chaired by the chair of the Personnel Committee. Should a majority of the total regular faculty in secret ballot vote affirmatively, the recommendation shall be made to the dean to remove the chair. The department’s recommendation for removal of the chair of the department is subject to the approval of the dean of the college.

   10. Evaluation of the Chair

       The Personnel Committee shall evaluate the chair annually, following procedures established by the college and university. The Personnel Committee shall solicit anonymous feedback from all regular faculty, and shall write a report synthesizing that feedback; faculty who would prefer shall be given the opportunity to supply their feedback directly to a member of the Personnel Committee. That report may also reflect discussions among the Personnel Committee, though the chair shall not be present during those discussions. The report will be shared with the chair and submitted by the committee to the dean of the college. The chair shall also submit a written self-evaluation to the dean annually, following procedures established by the college and university.

2. The Director of Graduate Studies

   The Director of Graduate Studies (DGS) shall be appointed by the chair for a term of two years, with the possibility of renewal, to direct the graduate programs in Political Science. Renewal beyond that is possible, with consideration of whether some rotation in the position after 3-4 years is advisable. The DGS shall be a regular faculty member who is also designated graduate faculty by the University Graduate School. The DGS shall have responsibility for implementing the graduate programs in Political Science in alignment with the policies of the Graduate School, including but not limited to student recruitment, admissions, advisement, curriculum development, and assessment. The DGS shall chair the Graduate Programs Committee. The DGS shall have the authority to admit students to the graduate program based on recommendations of the Graduate Programs Committee. In consultation with the graduate committee, the DGS allocates departmental graduate student funding such as teaching assistantship positions and travel resources. In consultation with the GraduateProgramsCommittee, the DGS is responsible for at least annually evaluating the progress towards degree of the MA, PhD and MPA students;every semester evaluating the fulfillment of GA assignments of funded graduate students;and meeting with students at least annually to provide feedback on their progress to degree, as well as fulfilment of duties if funded. The DGS does not replace faculty committee advisors, but does serve as a general advisor to the graduate students regarding their overall program of study and progress to degree. The DGS shall work with other units on campus on matters of mutual interest related to the graduate programs.

3. Director of Undergraduate Studies

   The Director of Undergraduate Studies (DUS) shall be appointed by the chair for a term of two years, with the possibility of renewal, to direct the undergraduate programs in Political Science and International Affairs, including the minors and other instructional programs offered by the department. Renewal beyond that is possible, with consideration of whether some rotation in the position after 3-4 years is advisable. The DUS shall chair the undergraduate programs committee, working in consultation with the committee on curriculum and program development and related matters. Depending on department needs, the DUS may also serve as an undergraduate advisor.

1. 1. Graduate Programs Committee

      The Graduate Programs Committee shall be responsible for reviewing the department’s graduate degree programs, course offerings, policies, and procedures; for assessing the graduate programs; and for making recommendations to the graduate faculty of the department. The committee shall determine graduate admissions and shall recommend to the DGS and chair the appointment and reappointment of teaching assistants. Members of the committee, consisting of at least two and preferably three tenure-track and/or tenured regular faculty, shall be appointed from among the graduate faculty of the department by the chair, in consultation with the DGS, in order to ensure as far as possible (1) continuity of experience, (2) a representative mix of faculty ranks and areas of expertise, and (3) opportunities for breadth of service across the department. Committee members shall not serve more than 2 consecutive years. The committee shall evaluate the needs of new graduate students, advise the graduate faculty and students regarding examinations and other requirements, help evaluate the progress of graduate students toward degrees, and help with recruitment.

   2. Undergraduate Programs Committee

      The Undergraduate Programs Committee shall be responsible for reviewing and, if necessary, revising the department’s undergraduate degree programs, course offerings, curriculum, policies, and procedures; for assessing the undergraduate programs; for administering the department’s undergraduate scholarships and awards; and for making recommendations to the faculty concerning these and related issues. The Undergraduate Programs Committee shall consist of at least three members appointed by the department chair including the Director of Undergraduate Studies (DUS) who chairs the committee, and two members of the regular faculty. The committee shall include at least one member who serves as an undergraduate adviser.

2. Personnel Committee

   1. The Personnel Committee shall be composed of three members of the continuing faculty, all of whom must hold the rank of tenured associate or tenured full professor. The chair shall serve as an ex officio member of the Personnel Committee and may sit in on deliberations in a non-voting capacity. Members are elected by the regular faculty and hold three-year staggered terms. Members may serve two successive terms. The chair of the department selects the chair of the Personnel Committee. The Personnel Committee shall assist the chair in the annual evaluations and merit rankings of the department regular faculty members. Following university and college procedures and policies, each tenured and non-tenured faculty member of the department shall be asked to submit materials relevant to teaching, research, and professional service during the year under review in accordance with the duties of their role statements. The committee shall evaluate the performance of each faculty member annually in conformity with the CLA Bylaws and the University Bylaws. The evaluation in all areas, including the overall evaluation, shall be determined by majority vote of the Personnel Committee and must be forwarded to the chair, along with written explanations of the evaluation ratings of each faculty member in the department. The chair is responsible for making a recommendation, taking into account the recommendation of the Personnel Committee, to the dean. The chair shall note any disagreements on evaluations with the Personnel Committee. The Committee shall also conduct third-year review evaluations of probationary faculty, making a written assessment and recommendation to the chair about the candidate’s progress to tenure.

   2. Responsibilities of the Personnel Committee

      The primary responsibility of the Personnel Committee is to assist the chair in the annual evaluations and merit rankings of regular faculty and in matters related to tenure and/or promotion of faculty. The Personnel Committee shall advise the chair on all other personnel matters as needed.

      Annual evaluations provide an opportunity to acknowledge the achievement of excellence and the hard work and commitment required for such achievement. The committee shall review the documentation submitted by faculty that is required by university and college processes. The Committee shall prepare a written summary of assessments, including rating of faculty in each category of teaching, research, and service. It is expected that the Personnel Committee and chair will exercise appropriate, fair,and consistent standards when completing annual evaluations of faculty. The evaluation ratings of two faculty members whose performance is similar should be equivalent. Likewise, the ratings of two faculty members whose performances are highly variable should be different. The evaluation in all areas, including the overall evaluation, shall be determined by majority vote of the Personnel Committee.

      The committee's recommendations are advisory to the chair. The chair makes the final determination, meeting with faculty and the committee if necessary, and forwards those recommendations to the dean. The committee shall consult with and advise the chair on recommendations for the distribution of merit, and review and make recommendations on requests by faculty members for reconsideration of an evaluation. Members of the Personnel Committee recuse themselves from discussion of their case. In the event of requests by regular faculty members for reconsideration of an evaluation, the chair and the individual faculty member shall discuss the matter and handle the reconsideration of the evaluation according to relevant bylaw provisions for the college and university.

3. Tenure and/or Promotion Committee

   A Tenure and/or Promotion Committee shall be formed, as needed, that consists of all faculty at or above the rank to which a given faculty member is applying for tenure and/or promotion. This committee shall assist the chair in matters concerning tenure and/or promotion of tenure-track, tenured, and non-tenure-track regular faculty as specified in the department bylaws.In the event that there are fewer than three eligible faculty to serve on a tenure and/or promotion committee, the department will, in consultation with other senior faculty members, recommend to the dean several senior faculty members at the university who have teaching and research experience in a related discipline, from which the dean shall select one or more senior faculty member(s) to achieve the required minimum number of senior faculty members to serve on the committee. See section 12.F for voting rights regarding tenure and promotion. The tenure and/or promotion committee shall produce a letter independent of the chair's letter evaluating the candidate, that shall be submitted to the college, according to college and university procedures.

4. The department chair will appoint ad hoc committees to assist in supervising certain areas of the department's responsibilities. The two standing committees shall be the Personnel Committee and the Graduate Committee. The composition of these committees shall be in accordance with their internal rules and those enumerated in the bylaws. Composition of ad hoc committees is at the discretion of the chair with attention to overall role statements. The chair will be an ex officio, non-voting member of all committees.

Attendance at department meetings shall be required of the regular faculty. Regular department meetings shall be held at least twice a semester. Other department meetings shall be called at the discretion of the chair or upon the request of one-third of the regular faculty to the chair. An agenda will be prepared and distributed to faculty members at least two days prior to each meeting. All recommendations and decisions made in department meetings shall be made a matter of record. The latest edition of Robert’s Rules of Order shall govern proceedings at all Department of Political Science faculty meetings.

1. All Voting Situations

   All voting situations (departmental officer elections, hiring decisions, and tenure and promotion decisions) require a quorum of at least 50% of the active faculty allowed to vote as defined in the college and university bylaws. Voting on departmental officers, hiring, and tenure and/or promotion decisions should be by secret ballot and requires a majority vote of those present, unless departmental bylaws require a higher standard as specified in specific guidelines for particular kinds of votes, such as in hiring decisions. Abstentions are not counted in the number of votes needed. In circumstances in which a faculty member cannot be at a meeting and at the discretion of the chair, proxy votes may be allowed. The expectation is that those voting by proxy will be well informed on the matters under consideration. For hiring decisions, this includes having actively participated in the department's search process. Proxy voting for tenure and/or promotion is not allowed. At the chair's discretion, and in unavoidable circumstances, an eligible faculty member may participate and vote in the Tenure and/or Promotion Committee meeting via distance technology.

   A proxy vote is a written or emailed document provided to the senior administrative assistant prior to the faculty meeting in which a regular faculty member states their first preference. When a vote is called outside of a faculty meeting, voting may be done by anonymous and secure software, provided the matter is not personnel-related. Any regular faculty member may request a faculty vote. Regular faculty shall, in consultation with the Personnel Committee, be recused from votes that place them in a conflict of interest between their official activities and any other interest or obligation.

2. Elections

   Voting in elections for departmental chair and for any other departmental officers will be limited to regular faculty (as defined in section 7.A. of these Bylaws) with a primary assignment (0.5 or greater) in the department. Rank 0 faculty in contingent positions are also eligible to vote after three consecutive years of employment.

3. Hiring

   Voting on tenure-track and tenured positions is limited to tenure-track and tenured faculty. Voting on non-tenure-track continuing positions is limited to regular faculty (as defined in section 7.A. of these Bylaws) with a primary assignment (0.5 or greater) in the department or program as well as Rank 0 faculty who have held contingent positions for three consecutive years.

   1. Voting Procedure for Hires

      All voting requires a quorum of at least 50% of eligible faculty present, and voting is done by secret ballot. For tenure-track and tenured hiring decisions, the department shall use the following voting procedure. First, a vote will be held to determine if any candidate is deemed unacceptable. If a majority of those voting rate a candidate as unacceptable, that candidate will not be included in all subsequent voting.

      Next, all those voting shall rank-order candidates, with a 1 denoting their most preferred candidate and the highest number denoting their least preferred candidate. The senior department administrative assistant will publicly tally all first-place votes. If a candidate receives a majority of the first-place votes, they will be ranked as the department’s first choice. If no candidate receives a majority of the first-place votes, the candidate(s) receiving the fewest first-place votes will be removed from consideration as the top candidate. For ballots that rated them first, their first-place vote will be redistributed to the highest ranked (lowest number) remaining candidate on that ballot. After votes have been redistributed, the senior administrative assistant will report if a candidate has received a majority of first-place votes. If not, the same process of eliminating the candidate with the fewest first-place votes, and redistributing those votes, will repeat until two candidates remain. The candidate with the most first-place votes in the final round is the department’s first choice.

      To establish a rank order for all other candidates, the department administrative assistant will sum the rankings from all the ballots, excluding the scores of the department’s first-choice candidate. The candidate with the lowest score will become the department’s second-choice candidate, the candidate with the next lowest score will be the department’s third-choice candidate, and so on, until an entire rank order has been established.At the conclusion of voting, the chair will entertain faculty motions to add any additional stipulations to the rank ordering.

4. Search Committees

   Search committees consist of at least three regular faculty from the department appointed by the chair; membership shall follow the policies of the College of Liberal Arts. The committee may, but is not obligated to, include a non-voting Political Science Department graduate student. Search committees have the authority to select candidates from a pool of applicants to invite to campus for in-person interviews, to rank order those candidates deemed acceptable, and to submit that rank ordering to the regular faculty after campus interviews, with an explanation of the rank ordering. The regular faculty then shall vote at a faculty meeting on the candidates who are acceptable, and on the rank ordering of the acceptable candidates, and a candidate to recommend to the chair, who forwards the recommendation to the dean. All search committee members must undergo any required diversity and search committee training by the university and college as part of their service on the committee, within the time frames prescribed by the university and college.

1. Faculty Evaluation Standards
   1. Criteria for promotion and tenure
      1. Criteria for promotion from Rank I to Rank II

         A faculty member in Rank I shall be eligible for promotion to Rank II when the faculty member has attained a Ph.D. and has demonstrated potential for developing professional achievement in teaching/performance of assigned duties; research, scholarly, creative and/or entrepreneurial activity; and service.

      2. Criteria for promotion from Rank II to Rank III

         A faculty member in Rank II shall be eligible for promotion to Rank III when the faculty member has established a substantial record of achievement in teaching/performance of assigned duties, scholarly and (when approved by the chair and the dean) entrepreneurial work, and service. A departmental recommendation for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor may precede, accompany, or follow upon a recommendation for tenure. Departments and units shall obtain appropriate external evaluations of the faculty member's achievement according to UNR bylaws 3.3.5, subject to the rules and procedures of the college and university.

         A candidate for promotion to Rank III shall have a record of substantial accomplishments in the previous rank; shall have given evidence of effectiveness in university teaching activities and advisement of students; shall have performed substantial research resulting in publication and presentations; shall have performed service to the college, the university and professionally related service to the community or the discipline; shall have demonstrated capacity for further significant intellectual and professional achievement;and shall have demonstrated that they are in the process of establishing a national reputation. All activities are evaluated proportionate to the candidate’s role statement during the probationary period.

      3. Criteria for promotion from Rank III to Rank IV

         A faculty member in Rank III shall be eligible for promotion to Rank IV when the faculty member has established a sustained record of excellence in a professional field. The record shall document publications and/or creative work as defined in 18.B of the college bylaws and as judged significant by peers in the field; distinguished professional service; and distinction in teaching and related activities such as graduate student advising (only for faculty in departments with graduate programs). The record should, where relevant, document exceptional administrative achievement as well. Departments and units shall obtain appropriate external evaluations of the faculty member’s achievement according to procedures defined by NSHE, the University of Nevada, Reno, and the College bylaws and instructions.

         A candidate for promotion to Rank IV shall have a record of substantial accomplishments in the previous ranks; shall have established a sustained record of excellence and attained national or international recognition in the special professional field; shall have a sustained record of substantial publications judged significant by peers in the field; shall have achieved distinction in teaching and related activities; and shall have provided distinguished professional service to the university, to the college, and to the community or the profession. Quality of teaching, research, and service are evaluated in keeping with the criteria for tenure and promotion,with an emphasis on research and teaching activities categorized as primary and proportionate to the candidate’s role statement during the evaluation period.

         A candidate who is not “excellent” in research is unlikely to be recommended for promotion, even if rated “excellent”  in teaching. Ratings are no guarantee of promotion.

   1. Criteria for Tenure and Promotion

      A candidate for tenure shall have the doctoral degree; shall have demonstrated effectiveness as a classroom teacher; shall have performed substantial research activity resulting in publications; shall have performed service to the college, university and professionally related service to the community or the discipline; and shall have demonstrated capacity for further significant intellectual and professional achievement. Quality of teaching, research, and service are evaluated in keeping with the criteria detailed below. The faculty member shall demonstrate a record of achievement in teaching; scholarly, creative, and/or entrepreneurial work; and service as defined in CLA bylaws section 18 and consistent with the faculty member’s role statement and the department’s mission. Per NSHE Board of Regents Code 3.4.2, the Tenure and/or Promotion Committee must evaluate the candidate as “excellent” in teaching or research and at least “satisfactory” in the other two areas in order to meet the minimum criteria for the candidate to be eligible to apply for tenure. A candidate is unlikely to be recommended for tenure and/or promotion if not assessed as "excellent" in research.

      1. Research

         Inspired by our land-grant foundation, the department seeks to serve the mission of the University and the needs of our state, country, and the world by producing new knowledge. Academic advancement is predicated on evidence of excellence in the production of peer-reviewed, scholarly material. Candidates for tenure and promotion to associate professor must display a commitment to high-quality research, as evidenced by a record of peer-reviewed publications. The committee should consider a candidate’s entire portfolio of peer-reviewed work, with particular focus on research produced while employed at UNR, and evaluate it based on the amount of research produced, its quality, and its impact on the candidate’s area of study. Additionally, the committee shall consider the invited assessments of outside referees as an important indicator of the candidate's research productivity and the quality and impact of the candidate's research program. The research record should be comparable to those of other successful, recent tenure cases of scholars in the same discipline and subfield at aspirational and peer universities, as outlined below and discussed in progress toward tenure reviews.

         There is, however, no set number of publications that can guarantee a positive recommendation for tenure. In many political science, public policy, and public administration subfields, a candidate will normally need to publish six or seven peer-reviewed articles. A peer-reviewed book is normally equivalent to three or four published articles.

         While the department encourages scholars to collaborate, a candidate’s publications should reflect their personal contribution to their research area. The candidate’s scholarly record must show growth and independence, including publications that are separate from research conducted with their former mentors. The committee should count coauthored articles in their evaluation, but recognize a candidate may need to produce more or higher impact work if their portfolio is largely collaborative. As such, the candidate should provide appropriate information about their contribution to their coauthored research, including whether the project required collaboration (e.g., inter-disciplinary expertise, restricted-access data, local partners) to complete, and what their level of contribution and collaboration was.

         These numeric standards will vary by candidate and any evaluation of quantity should also take into account the research’s quality and impact. The committee will consider both the impact a particular publication makes on the field and the prestige and selectivity of the venue of publication, with attention to reputation of scholarly journals for articles and perceived quality of academic presses for books. The candidate shall provide information to establish an outlet’s reputation and credibility for the publication to count as part of their record. No single metric, such as a citation count or journal impact factor, should be used as evidence for a publication’s quality or impact. No single metric or minimum, such as h-index score, should be used as evidence of a candidate's impact or standing in their field. These may be evidence, but must be contextualized by the candidate's overall research portfolio and field. For publication in a foreign language journal to be evaluated, an English-language version of the manuscript must be made available. The candidate shall explain the context of special issues of journals, as well as the circumstances of the invitation and the nature of the review process. The types of peer-reviewed publications that the committee shall evaluate are listed below as the primary category for evaluation.

         Grants are encouraged and considered by the committee. They are a valued aspect of the research profile. Activity in this area, including applying for and receiving funding, is evidence of an active and promising research agenda. Completed grants demonstrate substantial research activity. Ongoing grants demonstrate the candidate will continue a fruitful research program post-tenure. However, grants do not replace peer-reviewed publications as the primary determinant of a candidate’s record. A candidate can receive a positive recommendation for tenure without a strong record in this area. As such, grants are included in the secondary category for evaluation. The committee assesses publications emanating from grant activity. Peer-reviewed journal articles and university press books are highly valued, though the department recognizes that some grants may place restrictions on the professional dissemination of findings.

         In addition to grants, the committee shall consider the potential quality of a candidate’s future research in other ways. This evaluation can complement and enhance a candidate’s case for promotion; however, it cannot replace peer-reviewed publications. It should consider scholarly activities that can lead to future published research, such as technical reports, non-peer reviewed or editor-reviewed publications, among other activities listed below in the secondary category.

         Primary

         • Peer-reviewed journal articles
         • Peer-reviewed books

         Peer-reviewed publications are evaluated in terms of contribution as author (solo/coauthor, order of authors), prestige or quality of journal in discipline and subfield, and contribution and impact of research.

         Secondary

         • Grants obtained that hold the promise of generating scholarly publications
         • Peer-reviewed book chapters
         • Non-peer reviewed papers/publications, including technical reports, commissioned white papers, editor-invited (but not reviewed) articles, and review articles
         • Editor-reviewed publications, such as invited book chapters and non-peer reviewed articles in special journal issues
         • Contributions to symposia
         • Compiling an edited volume, including an original contribution in the volume
         • Publicly available statistical packages
         • Published datasets
         • Popular press, non-peer reviewed books
         • Major contributions to public scholarship
         • Invited talks for published research

         The research activities listed in this section can enhance a candidate’s case for promotion. While important, they cannot replace peer-reviewed publications as the principal metric for the committee.

         Tertiary

         • Conference papers and presentations
         • Media, including but not limited to blog posts, newspaper editorials, and documentaries
         • Invited media appearances, related to ongoing research
         • Book reviews
         • Ongoing and current, unpublished research
         • Grant proposals and unsuccessful grant applications
         • Entrepreneurial and engagement activities, in consultation with and approval of the chair and dean

         These activities are evidence of active scholarship and continuing progress towards a sustained, future research program.

      2. Teaching

         Motivated by our land-grant foundation, the department seeks to educate and graduate well-prepared and confident leaders in political science. To that end we offer undergraduate, masters and doctoral programs. A faculty member being recommended for promotion and appointment with tenure must receive no less than a satisfactory rating in teaching.

         In an effort to mitigate well-documented issues with any single metric of teaching effectiveness, the department seeks a variety of assessments of teaching quality including but not limited to: student teaching evaluations, peer observations, and self-assessment.

         There is no set numerical score in any one metric that can guarantee a positive recommendation for tenure. Generally, a tenurable file on the dimension of teaching will include positive student teaching evaluations,positive peer observations, and evidence of successfully offering courses that fulfill department and college needs. The department will take into consideration the number and type of service courses offered, including features such as the time of day the course is offered, class size, and associated University of Nevada, Reno and department requirements it fulfills, as well as evidence of improvement over time. Student teaching evaluation scores shall be viewed with circumspection, taking into account service courses, and other circumstances that may affect student evaluation scores but are not relevant to the quality of the instructor's teaching (such as very early morning classes, the gender, ethnicity or other identity of the instructor).

         Candidates are expected to have contributed to graduate education as is appropriate to their subfield and the department’s admissions priorities. Assistant professors are generally not expected to chair dissertation committees, though are encouraged to serve on exam committees and dissertation committees at increasing frequency as their career advances. The department also recognizes and encourages less-formal graduate advising including training and co-authoring with graduate students.

         The department supports and recognizes innovative pedagogy including engaged learning, service learning, independent studies, and major innovations in existing courses and programs. Some combination of the following categories of teaching contributions will constitute a potentially tenurable file:

         Teaching activities that are primary are listed below. Candidates for tenure and promotion should explain each activity. Items considered in the evaluation of teaching include but are not limited to:

         • Assigned courses taught
         • Course evaluations including but not limited to student evaluations and peer assessments
         • New course preparations
         • New courses designed for the curriculum
         • Supervising and mentoring graduate and undergraduate students
         • Graduate dissertation/thesis committee membership and chairing
         • Undergraduate thesis chairing
         • Teaching awards

         Teaching activities that are secondary are listed below. Candidates for tenure and promotion should explain each activity. Items considered in the evaluation of service include but are not limited to:

         • Course revisions
         • Interdisciplinary teaching
         • Graduate student interim advising
         • Serving on examination committees
         • Supervision of undergraduates and graduates in research
         • Directed readings and independent studies
         • Innovative teaching methods
         • Grants for pedagogical/curricular improvement and innovation
         • Scholarly contributions to pedagogy in the discipline including textbooks
         • Engagement and entrepreneurial activities, in consultation with the chair
      3. Service

         Service relevant to promotion and the granting of tenure occurs in three arenas — the institutional setting of the program, college or university; the context of the local community or the public; and the activities of the profession. Probationary faculty members are not expected to be heavily engaged in service activities during their first two or three years while establishing their research programs. There after, they are expected to carry their share of program activities including serving on department and college committees. Faculty members applying for promotion and tenure will be expected to have been participating constructively in the life of the department. Such participation is normally demonstrated by regular attendance at meetings, other department events such as colloquia and brown bag presentations, constructive participation in decision-making, reasonable communication with colleagues, and other aspects of the functioning of the department. Leadership roles internally and nationally are not expected during the probationary period.

         Service to professional organizations is an important component of one’s professional service record. As a candidate approaches the promotion and tenure review, the profile normally becomes more substantial. Professional service may include reviewing manuscripts for journals or book publishers, reviewing grant applications, serving as an officer in local, regional or national organizations; serving as an active member of an editorial board or program committee or otherwise devoting time and energy to organizational activities; and service to one’s disciplinary sub-field(s) such as serving on section or journal award committees.

         Community activities outside the university that involve one in a professional role as a scholar or expert contribute to service. These types of activities help to contribute to the University’s goal of “engagement.” By engaging in our local community, we are making sure to include that community, as well as to demonstrate the public value of our work. Such examples of service might include serving as an expert witness for cases relevant to research specialty; giving talks to local community organizations; contributing other forms of public outreach, such as interviews with radio/TV/social media outlets;and writing op-eds for newspapers and the popular press.

         Service activities that are primary are listed below. Candidates for tenure and promotion should report the degree of effort of each activity and their degree of involvement. The priority is on service within the department and within UNR, with some engagement in the other professional activities expected. Items considered of primary importance in the evaluation of service include but are not limited to:

         • • Administrative service within the department including committee member, or other contributions to the department
           • Administrative service at UNR outside of the department such as member of college or university committees
           • Reviewing activities for peer-reviewed journals, granting agencies, of book manuscripts or book chapters, award competitions including local competitions
           • Serving as an officer in local, regional or national professional organizations; serving as an active member of an editorial board, a program committee, or panel discussant; or otherwise devoting time and energy to professional organizational activities
           • Reasonable and timely communication with Department, College and University colleagues, staff and students

         Service activities that are secondary are listed below. Candidates for tenure and promotion should report the degree of effort of each activity and their degree of involvement. Items considered in the evaluation of service include but are not limited to:

         • • Assignments outside of UNR (e.g., program evaluator, service on advisory boards, service in state or local government, or significant role in other professional organizations)
           • Invited media appearances based on general research area
           • Media contact for published or televised interviews
           • Community engagement such as presentations or talks
           • Other forms of public engagement
           • Entrepreneurial activities and engagement, in consultation with and approval of the chair and dean
2. Criteria for Promotion to Professor

   Recommendation for promotion to professor will normally rest on the maturation of activities that merit the granting of tenure and the promotion to associate professor. The research record should reflect continuing production of peer-reviewed publications that increasingly show more substantial scope and greater maturity. The research profile must show that the candidate has made significant contributions to their field(s) since tenure. Demonstration of leadership in scholarship is as important for the demonstration of scholarly maturity as it is for the demonstration of scholarly promise in junior scholars. Because the department considers both the quality and the quantity of a candidate’s published research, there is no set number of publications that can guarantee a promotion to professor.

   Although it is not necessary that the field of research expertise be the same as that for promotion from assistant to associate, it is even more important for promotion to professor that the candidate establish national or, if appropriate, international recognition for contribution to a specific field of knowledge. Unlike promotion to the associate rank, promotion to full has no specific time frame, as we recognize that scholars often take on new and more ambitious research directions. That said, timely progress is encouraged and candidates should not offer the department, college, or university a challenging case. Candidates should solicit advice from their colleagues and the chair concerning whether and when they should stand for promotion.

   Evidence of impact and significance may be demonstrated in various ways. Certainly, citations can be evidence of the significance of scholarship. So, too, are measures of impact; for example, if appropriate for the scholarly sub-field, the h-index score, journal impact factors, rejection rates of journals, and quality and reputation of university presses. By the same token, the existence of an acknowledged record as a scholar will be manifest in invitations for research-based lectures or other scholarly services outside of UNR. Although service on professional journal editorial boards may, for example, be counted a professional service, it also may indicate respect for one’s professional scholarly judgment. A final and important mode of evaluating the quality of published material is provided by the invited assessments of outside referees . The referees must be recognized and well-regarded scholars of national and/or international reputation with the majority being at peer or aspirational peer institutions. University and college guidelines describe the procedures for selecting the referees.

   Every case that achieves promotion to Professor is unique and scholars are likely to have many different routes to achieve that goal. We recognize the potential tension between high quality, impact, and rate of production. A reasonable research profile of an applicant to Full Professor, who is making timely progress might, for instance, have published, since promotion to associate, an additional university press book at a prominent press, and perhaps three to four additional peer-reviewed articles, or have published seven or eight peer-reviewed articles in high-quality outlets. Considerations of coauthorship are similar to those for tenure and promotion to associate. Grant activity, if appropriate to field, is another expected facet of the profile, though is not a substitute for sustained production of peer-reviewed publications of substantial quality and impact.

   Teaching remains an important function for senior members of the department. Maintenance of the high quality required for the earlier promotion is of continuing great importance. Innovative contributions to teaching are expected of senior members of the faculty. Candidates may also distinguish themselves through contributions to the scholarship on teaching. Contributions to one’s field at large and to other fields are particularly noteworthy. Contributions to the graduate program should be an established part of the candidate's professional agenda. The record should include directing MA and PhD theses to completion as appropriate by field. It should also include being a role model as a research scholar as well as mentoring individual graduate students through coauthorship and training as research and teaching assistants, as appropriate by field. It is recognized, however, that opportunities for graduate mentorship vary across members of the department faculty from various subfields given the limited size of our graduate cohorts and the changing set of research interests among the graduate students in the department.

   Service activities, as with scholarly publication, should reflect the advanced status of candidates for promotion to Professor. Active participation in department, college, university and professional organizations is assumed. It is expected that the candidate will have taken on more substantial leadership service roles within UNR. The criteria for promotion are oriented more to leadership roles in regional, national, and international associations. This should complement responsible ad hoc roles in conferences or less-formal group activities, such as active participation in a professional service organization.

   An expectation of teaching, research,and service is that the candidate for promotion to Professor will have contributed to mentoring probationary faculty in their professional development. It is expected that candidates will have engaged in efforts to enhance diversity and inclusion among the department faculty and students, if not also within the University and the profession. This can be done through research, teaching,and/or service.

   1. Entrepreneurial Activities

      Entrepreneurial activity refers to the application of research, teaching,and service with the goal of developing a market outside the university. A record of entrepreneurial productivity may be recognized as a significant part of a faculty member’s professional achievements. However, such activity is not required of individual faculty members. Entrepreneurial activity must be appropriate to the faculty member’s discipline and approved by the chair and dean as part of the role statement articulating the distribution of duties. In accordance with the CLA Bylaws, in order for entrepreneurial activity to count towards a candidate’s case for promotion and tenure, the chair and the dean must approve it in advance of the review.

   2. Public Engagement

      Faculty engagement refers to research, teaching,and service activities directed towards individuals and communities outside the university. Engagement will necessarily take different forms depending on the subfield(s) of the candidate. Engagement may be recognized as a significant part of a faculty member’s professional achievements. It must be appropriate and demonstrably related to the faculty member’s subfield(s) and approved by the chair and dean as part of the role statement articulating the distribution of duties. However, the University of Nevada, Reno is a research-intensive university, so the College of Liberal Arts continues to require original scholarly research or creative activity as a key criterion for tenure and promotion. In addition, while engagement should be supported at any phase of a faculty member’s career if it is consistent with the unit’s priorities and practices, faculty whose work does not include engaged activities should not be penalized.

3. Annual Evaluation Criteria
   1. All regular academic faculty are required to complete their annual self-evaluation using the appropriate software platform and submit it to the Personnel Committee by the deadline set by the department chair. Personnel Committee procedures are covered in sections 8.A.10, 9.B.1 and 9.B.2.
   2. Criteria for annual evaluation

      Faculty are evaluated according to the criteria detailed below. All activities are evaluated proportionate to the faculty member’s role statement during the evaluation period. If a faculty member believes their work would be improperly categorized as secondary or tertiary as outlined below, they should provide a written explanation thereof in their self-evaluation document. Since the annual review is tied to the calendar year and not the academic year, the committee will take into strong consideration promising projects in teaching, service, and research that are under way and not yet completed (e.g., draft chapters of a book manuscript; a grant proposal under review). Faculty are rated as excellent, commendable, satisfactory, or unsatisfactory in each of three areas: teaching, research, and service. Evaluators should consider faculty rank in applying standards. In keeping with the "tool kit" provided by the University Department of Human Resources, evaluators should follow these principles:

      • Avoid "permanent halo or doghouse" effects by focusing on the current evaluation year rather than recalling past performances
      • Single aspects of a faculty member's performance in one area should not determine their rating in other areas
      • All judgments must be supported by evidence
      • Evaluation should assess the relevant data
      • Recommendations of areas to improve or change are encouraged
      1. Teaching

         Items used as criteria in the evaluation of teaching include but are not limited to the following lists—classified as primary and secondary—wherein primary activities are typically weighted as more meritorious than secondary activities. Each faculty member’s annual teaching activities are rated based on a combination of the percentage of effort devoted in the Role Statement and an assessment of the quality of the overall teaching record.Student teaching evaluation scores shall be viewed with circumspection, taking into account service courses, and other circumstances that may affect student evaluation scores but are not relevant to the quality of the instructor's teaching (such as very early morning classes, the gender, ethnicity or other identity of the instructor).

         Items considered primary in the evaluation of teaching include but are not limited to:

         • Assigned courses taught
         • Course evaluations including but not limited to student evaluations and peer assessments
         • New course preparations
         • New courses designed for the curriculum
         • Supervising and mentoring graduates and undergraduates
         • Graduate dissertation/thesis committee membership and chairing
         • Undergraduate thesis chairing
         • Teaching awards

         Teaching activities that are secondary are listed below.Items considered in the evaluation of service include but are not limited to:

         • Course revisions
         • Interdisciplinary teaching
         • Graduate student interim advising
         • Serving on examination committees
         • Supervision of undergraduates and graduates in research
         • Directed readings and independent studies
         • Innovative teaching methods
         • Scholarly contributions to pedagogy in the discipline including textbooks
         • Engagement and entrepreneurial activities, in consultation with the chair
      2. Research

         Items used as criteria in the evaluation of faculty research include but are not limited to the following lists—classified as primary, secondary, and tertiary—wherein primary activities are typically weighted as most meritorious, followed by secondary and then tertiary activities. Each faculty member’s annual research activities are rated based a combination of the percentage of effort devoted in the Role Statement and an assessment of the quality of the overall research record.

         Primary

         • Peer-reviewed journal articles
         • Peer-reviewed books

         Peer-reviewed publications are evaluated in terms of contribution as author (solo/coauthor, order of authors), prestige or quality of journal in discipline and subfield, and contribution and impact of research.

         Secondary

         • Grants obtained that hold the promise of generating scholarly publications
         • Peer-reviewed book chapters
         • Non-peer reviewed papers/publications, including technical reports, commissioned white papers, editor-invited (but not reviewed) articles, and review articles
         • Editor-reviewed publications, such as invited book chapters and non-peer reviewed articles in special journal issues
         • Contributions to symposia
         • Compiling an edited volume, including an original contribution in the volume
         • Publicly available statistical packages
         • Published datasets
         • Popular press, non-peer reviewed books
         • Major contributions to public scholarship
         • Invited talks for published research

         The research activities listed in this section can enhance a candidate’s case for promotion. While important, they cannot replace peer-reviewed publications as the principal metric for the committee.

         Tertiary

         • Conference papers and presentations
         • Media, including but not limited to blog posts, newspaper editorials, and documentaries
         • Invited media appearances, related to ongoing research
         • Book reviews
         • Ongoing and current, unpublished research
         • Grant proposals and unsuccessful grant applications
         • Entrepreneurial and engagement activities, in consultation with the chair
      3. Service

         Service activities include primary and secondary activities. Faculty members should report the degree of effort of each activity and their degree of involvement in their self-evaluation. Each faculty member’s annual service activities are rated based on a combination of the percentage of effort devoted in the Role Statement and an assessment of the quality and substance of the overall service record.Items considered primary in the evaluation of service include but are not limited to:

         • Administrative service within the department including committee member, or other contributions to the department
         • Administrative service at UNR outside of the department such as member of college or university committees
         • Reviewing activities for peer-reviewed journals, granting agencies, of book manuscripts or book chapters, award competitions including local competitions
         • Serving as an officer in local, regional, or national professional organizations, serving as an active member of an editorial board, a program committee, panel discussant,or otherwise devoting time and energy to professional organizational activities
         • Reasonable and timely communication with department, college and university colleagues, staff and students

         Service activities that are secondary are listed below. The faculty member should report the degree of effort of each activity and their degree of involvement. Items considered in the evaluation of service include but are not limited to:

         • Assignments outside of UNR (e.g., program evaluator, service on advisory boards, service in state or local government, or significant role in other professional organizations)
         • Invited media appearances based on general research area
         • Media contact for published or televised interviews
         • Community engagement such as presentations or talks
         • Other forms of public engagement
         • Entrepreneurial activities and engagement, in consultation with the Chair
4. Faculty Evaluation Procedures for Tenure and Promotion and for Promotion to Full

   Departmental voting rights on tenure recommendations shall be restricted to those department members who are already tenured at the University of Nevada, Reno (see eligibility in 9.C.). In tenure considerations for joint appointments where the appointment is equally split between the two units, the chair or director of the joint-appointment department/program (or a designated representative at the appropriate rank) will serve as a voting member of the tenure-home department’s personnel committee. Voting rights on tenure and/or promotion are governed by UNR Bylaw 3.1.7.

   1. 1. Progress to Tenure Reports and Third-Year Review

         Annual Progress to Tenure Reports

         The department shall follow University and CLA guidelines and requirements for progress to tenure reviews of probationary faculty.

         Third-year Review

         Tenure-track faculty must undergo a third-year review that assesses their progress towards tenure. Faculty should submit the required materials to the department chair by the date established by the chair, in light of college-and Provost-level deadlines. The Provost’s webpages usually provide the latest instructions and forms.

         The candidate’s materials will be reviewed by the Department Tenure and/or Promotion committee and department chair. The committee meets to discuss the assessment of the candidate. The committee prepares its own letter that includes any dissenting opinion or minority report. To prepare the letter, the committee selects from within itself two individuals to write a draft letter making a faculty recommendation to the chair, including discussion summary of the meeting. Attendees to this meeting will have one week to review this draft letter and indicate their approval. Those who disagree with the recommendation should indicate their reasons, which will be summarized and incorporated into a subsequent version of the draft letter. This process will continue until all attendees agree on a final letter or until the deadline established by the chair for receiving such a letter elapses, at which point they will sign and forward the letter to the chair for his/her consideration. The letter is included in the materials submitted to the dean. The chair’s letter and the Tenure and/or Promotion Committee's letter form the basis of a recommendation to the CLA dean for the reappointment or non-reappointment of the faculty member.

      2. Tenure and Promotion

         The candidate’s materials will be reviewed by the Department Tenure and/or Promotion committee and Department Chair and assessed according to the Tenure and Promotion guidelines. The committee meets to discuss the assessment of the candidate. The committee prepares its own letter that includes any dissenting opinion or minority report. To prepare the letter, the committee selects from within itself two individuals to write a draft letter making a faculty recommendation to the chair, including discussion summary of the meeting. Attendees to this meeting will have one week to review this draft letter and indicate their approval. Those who disagree with the recommendation should indicate their reasons, which will be summarized and incorporated into a subsequent version of the draft letter. This process will continue until all attendees agree on a final letter or until the deadline established by the chair for receiving such a letter elapses, at which point they will sign and forward the letter to the chair for his/her consideration. The letter is included in the materials submitted to the dean.

   2. Maximum Probationary Period

      The maximum probationary period is seven years. Application materials for tenure must be submitted no later than the beginning of the sixth academic year. If a tenure-track faculty member has not been awarded tenure by the end of the faculty member's sixth probationary year, the faculty member will be notified that the contract issued for the seventh academic year will be a terminal contract.

   3. Probationary Credit

      Tenure-track faculty may receive up to a maximum of three years probationary credit for service in a faculty position at other institutions, as per NSHE Code 4.3.3. The faculty member's appointing documents and initial contract with the NSHE shall specify the years of prior service to be applied to the faculty member's probationary period.

   4. Extension of the Probationary Period

      The faculty member may request an extension of the probationary period when hired in mid-year or for other types of extenuating circumstances. The dean may recommend that the President approve such a request. The President may extend the probationary period in accordance with NSHE Code [3.31(c)and 3.3.1 (d)].

   5. Procedure for Requesting Tenure and/or Promotion Review Early

      An assistant professor interested in applying early for promotion to associate professor and for tenure must inform the chair of their interest by the beginning of February of the calendar year in which they would like to apply. The chair will consult with the Tenure and/or Promotion Committee and the dean and advise the faculty member whether or not to apply early. Early cases (those forwarded before the individual has five years in rank) are expected to demonstrate not only that the faculty member has clearly met or exceeded our standards in all three areas of teaching, research/creative activity, and service, but also that there is a substantial probability for a continued high rate of quality scholarship/creative activity, teaching, and service.Provost policies on early promotion cases should be seriously considered prior to applying for early promotion.

   6. Procedure for Applying for Promotion and/or Tenure

      Applicants for tenure and/or promotion should submit all materials required by the Provost and college to the department chair by the date established by the chair, in light of college and provost level deadlines. The Provost’s webpages provide the latest instructions and forms.

      1. Procedure for Requesting Review for Promotion to the Rank of Professor (IV)

         A tenured associate professor interested in applying for promotion to the rank of professor must inform the chair of their interest by the beginning of February of the calendar year in which they would like to apply for promotion. The chair will consult with the eligible subset of the Tenure and/or Promotion committee and advise the faculty member.

      2. Procedure for Promotion to Professor (IV)

         The candidate’s materials will be reviewed by the eligible members of the Department Tenure and/or Promotion committee and department chair and assessed according to the Promotion to Professor guidelines (Bylaws section 12.C). The committee meets to discuss the assessment of the candidate. The committee prepares its own letter that includes any dissenting opinion or minority report. To prepare the letter, the committee selects from within itself one to two individuals to write a draft letter making a faculty recommendation to the chair, including discussion summary of the meeting. Attendees to this meeting will have one week to review this draft letter and indicate their approval. Those who disagree with the recommendation should indicate their reasons, which will be summarized and incorporated into a subsequent version of the draft letter. This process will continue until all attendees agree on a final letter or until the deadline established by the chair for receiving such a letter elapses, at which point they will sign and forward the letter to the chair for his/her consideration. The letter is included in the materials submitted to the dean.

      3. Following University bylaws, a rank (III) faculty member shall be evaluated in writing by the department and/or the dean regarding progress toward promotion no later than the end of the sixth full academic year in rank. The above specified time shall not be construed as a minimum time in rank before promotion.
5. Faculty Evaluation Procedures for Annual Reviews

   As determined by the university and college calendars and by internal deadlines established by the department chair, faculty shall submit their annual evaluation material to the department. Specific procedures shall be communicated by the chair at least three weeks in advance of the deadline, subject to change should there be extenuating circumstances. Evaluation procedures follow the guidelines for the Personnel Committee, and college and university guidelines.