Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure

All faculty actions are governed by standard University personnel policies and the terms of the agreement between the University of Vermont and United Academics (AAUP/AFT). Download a copy of the full-time AAUP/AFT agreement. Download a copy of the part-time aaup/aft agreement. Required forms (including CV) are generated from data entered in Digital Measures. All members of the faculty should be familiar with these criteria.

Mission

Reappointment

I.1. Full time faculty holding the ranks of assistant, associate and full professor:

Consideration of reappointment for full-time faculty begins in mid-September. The Dean's office maintains the process. An indication of the action which is to be considered during that reappointment process is made by each name on the report. The action next to be considered (if the current decision is positive) is indicated in parentheses on the report. (In the case of tenure, there will be no action to follow.) Also, a note is made in those cases where the Faculty Evaluation form (green sheets) is not required for that cycle of personnel decisions. For those not to be evaluated on the Faculty Evaluation form, an abbreviated recommendation form is to be completed by the department chair. Go to the Provost's Office RPT guidelines or download this PDF for assistance in completing the "green sheets". The dean is responsible for identifying all faculty about whom reappointment and tenure decisions must be made. The office of the Vice Provost for Faculty & Academic Affairs will help the chairs and deans in the interpretation of policies and procedures which relate to personnel decisions. After review by the School's faculty and dean, the candidate's RPT dossier is reviewed by the Senate Professional Standards Committee and the Provost and Vice Provost. The decisions are made and communicated to the dean no later than April 25. The dean is responsible for communicating the official notification in writing to the candidate. The dossier is returned to the dean's Office, where the original becomes part of the faculty member's Academic Record File.

I.2. Officers of Research holding the ranks of Research Assistant Professor, Research Associate Professor or Research Professor - Schedule for Appointment and Reappointment:

Officers of Research are appointed for either a one or two year term, and may be reappointed for additional periods of up to two years, contingent upon favorable performance reviews and availability of funding.

Research Associates and Research Assistant Professors are appointed for a one year term that is renewable for one additional year term subject to favorable performance review and availability of funding. Research Associate Professors are eligible for two year terms, and Research Professors are eligible for three year terms, at the discretion of the Dean, subject to favorable performance review and availability of funding.

The scholarship of research faculty (including research associates and research professors) is evaluated yearly, using the pink sheet. Documentation for the pink-sheet process comprises a curriculum vitae and a summary of progress since the last reappointment. The pink sheets are signed by the Dean; they are not reviewed by the College Faculty Standards Committee or by the University committee or provost.

A more comprehensive evaluation, using green sheets, is required every four years. While not a tenure-track appointment, this more ambitious review should have a narrative that resembles the document prepared by tenure-track faculty, but without the sections on teaching and advising. Internal and external letters are appropriate to the green-sheet reappointment of research faculty.

Expectations for Reappointment: The Officer of Research (see Agreement, Article 14.3, Article 15.5 and Article 17.5) devotes the majority of his or her time and effort to basic or applied research and will be evaluated accordingly. Any teaching should be minimal and approved on a case-by-case basis, usually with a secondary appointment as Officer of Instruction. Officers of Research may serve on School or University committees, but are neither expected nor obliged to fulfill the service role required of faculty members on tenure track. All personnel decisions will be based on the individual's research/scholarship and other duties expressly assigned.

II. Promotion

II.1. Full time faculty holding the ranks of assistant, associate and full professor:

The School of Business Administration has no departments and, hence, no department chairpersons. The role of the department chairperson is merged with that of the Dean. Similarly, department committees to render advice on promotion, tenure, and reappointment do not exist. For cases involving consideration for reappointment, promotion (other than to the rank of Professor), and tenure, the role of the departmental committee is merged with that of the School's Faculty Standards Committee (FSC), which is composed of all tenured faculty members. A subcommittee of the FSC is charged with the responsibilities for preparing the review phases of all reappointment, promotion and tenure cases. A subcommittee of the School's FSC composed of all faculty members holding the rank of Professor is convened for cases involving consideration of promotion to the rank of Professor.

II.2. Officers of Research: Research Associate Professor: There must be documentation that the faculty member is an established investigator, in terms of sustained and independent funding; has developed expertise in a specific area; publishes regularly in authoritative refereed outlets; makes presentations before prestigious national societies; and is recognized (via letters of evaluation) by colleagues within and outside of the University. Standards for external letters follow the guidelines for promotion with tenure.

Research Professor: Documentation must clearly establish that the faculty member is a nationally recognized scholar, in such terms as described above under Promotion Requirements. Appointment to national study groups, service as a study section member or site visitor, letters from authorities outside the University, and election to prestigious societies helps to substantiate the case for recommendation for promotion to Research Professor.

III. Criteria

III.1. Full time faculty holding the ranks of assistant, associate and full professor:

This statement on promotion and tenure policy and procedures is set forth for two reasons:

The following general guidelines for promotion and tenure of faculty members of the School of Business Administration do not represent limits or specified minimum achievements. Rather they constitute a broad philosophical statement concerning the School's academic mission, as well as a specific commitment to the communication and advancement of knowledge by the faculty.

III.1.A. Teaching Contribution

To contribute to the School's classroom instructional program, a faculty member must be proficient in communicating ideas. An instructor becomes especially valuable not only by communicating well, but in addition by demonstrating the ability to inspire students. Further evidence of a faculty person's performance as a teacher may be found in such areas as:

  1. classroom performance as measured by an evaluation system;
  2. curriculum development, a skill that involves organizing the relevant materials required to accomplish course objectives through the syllabus, teaching materials, visiting experts, examinations, and reading lists. Curriculum development will be reflected in the regular improvement of established courses as well as in the design of new courses. Performance in this category can be assessed by colleagues within the functional area and by external peer evaluation;
  3. cooperation provided to other colleagues in covering the core courses in a functional area;
  4. relating course material to other courses taken by the student and to the overall program of the School;
  5. counseling and other associations with students outside the classroom, including guiding independent research;
  6. the development of the skills of practicing managers through in-company training programs;
  7. preparation of course materials such as textbooks, case books, technical notes and computer exercises.

In appraising the past and the prospective contributions of a faculty member to the School's objective of maintaining a high-quality teaching program, all of the preceding dimensions are important.

III.1.B. Research Contributions

Since the School of Business Administration is a professional School, the research contributions of the faculty include a variety of research approaches. That is, the School accepts a broad interpretation which includes basic and applied, theoretical and empirical, and qualitative and quantitative methods or approaches. National recognition for quality, regardless of individual research method, is a desirable goal. Indeed the expected result of that research is publication, specifically:

  1. Disseminating research contributions in scholarly journals, books, monographs, and special reports;
  2. Presenting papers and reports of research to national and international professional groups;
  3. Submitting research proposals for sponsorship of individual or group research programs; or
  4. Developing cooperative research programs involving other faculty members within and outside of the School. Research which results in recognition by academic peers and by non-academic practitioners for quality and significance is essential; refereed journals are an important, but certainly not the only place in which to publish such research.

Publications need not be limited to the reporting of research findings. Yet, a basic rationale for the peer review process is to ensure that all scholarly work of a faculty member is reviewed and appraised. A textbook, for example, presented as evidence of research scholarship should be evaluated in terms of its innovative approach or other substantial contribution to theory, knowledge, and practice. Theoretical essays and professional communications can be similarly appraised.

It is recognized that not all research activity leads immediately to scholarly publication even though the results of such activity can facilitate the research process of the originator as well as the research efforts of others within and outside the School and University. For example, this type of pre-scholarly publication activity may take the form of working papers, research seminars, and special course offerings designed to stimulate research efforts. Research activity of the above nature is important to the research environment within the School and University.

Special care should be taken by the FSC and the Dean to appraise the quality and quantity of the research a faculty member has accomplished. Certainly the research and publications should conform to the standards of excellence normally associated with high-level academic endeavors. (A large number of unimportant papers do not substitute for quality.) The following criteria would apply:

III.1.C. Service Activities

The School would like to stress that it is in the areas of research and teaching that a faculty member must pre-eminently exhibit competence. The third area, service, involves the faculty member's contribution to the organizational well being of the School, the University, and the community. A useful and collegial contribution is expected from each member of the faculty. Service to the School suggests support of faculty area responsibilities (including mentoring of junior faculty by more senior colleagues), participation in committee assignments, and representing the School to various external constituencies. Service to the University is not dissimilar but might include activity on the University Senate or other administrative assignments, ad hoc or of long duration.

Membership in and leadership of academic and other professional organizations is an additional area of service activity.

Whether or not consulting engagements and participation in educational programs not sponsored by the School will be counted as contributions will depend on the contributions these activities make to the faculty member's effectiveness in teaching and research. Such activities will be evaluated only as they contribute to teaching and research. It is expected that faculty will choose to engage in these activities primarily for the benefits that will contribute to teaching and research effectiveness. Care must be taken that such activities do not diminish a faculty member's basic obligations to teaching, research and service to the University and the School. University guidelines on extra compensation activities must be observed.

In summary, there can be considerable variety in the ways that faculty members make a contribution to this third category. The emphasis in terms of evaluation of the service area per se will be on the quality rather than on the quantity of these activities. However, an outstanding performance in this area normally cannot compensate for a lack of distinction in either the teaching or research categories.

III.1.D. Promotion to Full Professor

The Subcommittee of the School's FSC (composed of faculty holding the rank of Professor) is responsible for providing advice to the Dean concerning the qualifications of faculty members for promotion to the rank of Professor.

The School believes it advisable to provide further guidance to the faculty on the matter of promotion to the rank of Professor and on the nature of "evidence" of high quality and significance of scholarly activity. Collectively, we have developed the following statement, intended to provide that guidance:

Promotion to the rank of Professor requires evidence of the continuation of effective teaching and service. In addition, promotion to the rank of Professor requires evidence that the individual is continuously and effectively engaged in research and scholarship and that his/her work is clearly recognized as high quality and significant.

A person promoted to the rank of Professor in the School of Business Administration must be regarded as one of the several experts in his/her discipline(s). Promotion to the rank of Professor requires that the individual's standing in his/her discipline is acknowledged as significant to the development and progress of the discipline.

While there is no minimum time requirement between promotion to the rank of Associate Professor and consideration for the recommendation for promotion to the rank of Professor, evidence of maturation in the contributions to the Person's discipline is required. In addition to evidence provided by critical evaluations of scholarly works solicited from external reviewers, that recognition may be demonstrated in a variety of ways including:

  1. Citation of works in books, journals, monographs, etc.
  2. Discussion of works in books, journals, monographs, etc.
  3. Reprints of works in books of readings or other publications.
  4. Invited contributions appearing in prestigious publications.
  5. Awards and honors for scholarly works/achievements.
  6. Solicitation of the person's opinion by recognized authorities through membership on journal editorial or review boards, through membership on advisory boards or commissions in the private and/or public sector, and through other such important roles.

III.2. Officers of Research

The central criteria for continued reappointment are:

IV. Procedure

IV.A. Responsibilities

IV.A.1. Responsibility of the Provost: For all second reappointment, promotion and tenure actions, the documentation, including FSC recommendation and Dean's recommendation, is forwarded to the Office of the Provost. It is then sent to the Senate Professional Standards Committee for its recommendation before final decision by the Provost.

IV.A.2. Responsibility of the Dean: The report of the FSC, or Subcommittee in cases of promotion to Full Professor, together with that of the Dean, is intended to encompass the evaluation of teaching, research and scholarship, and service that would otherwise be made by a department Chairperson.

IV.A.3. Responsibility of the FSC: After all faculty members have had the opportunity to review the materials, the FSC or, for a case involving consideration for promotion to the rank of Professor, the Subcommittee of the FSC (consisting of all faculty holding the rank of Professor) is convened to review, discuss, and assess the candidate's record.

IV.B. Process

The process is based on an assessment of teaching effectiveness (including advising), research and service. Go to the Provost's website for guidelines to complete the forms.

IV.B.1. Assessment of Teaching Effectiveness - Teaching effectiveness is assessed on the basis of:

a. Classroom Visits: The faculty of the School of Business Administration has endorsed the Open Classroom concept and a policy that classroom visits by faculty colleagues are encouraged as part of the evaluation of the teaching effectiveness of candidates for reappointment, promotion and tenure.

b. Alumni Survey (Optional for Tenure Track faculty): At the discretion of the candidate, the following procedures may be used to solicit feedback from alumni: All class lists of the instructor are pulled together. The lists are divided into: Core undergraduate courses, other undergraduate courses and MBA courses. 40 former undergraduate students are selected in a random manner - 20 from core courses and 20 from other courses. 10% of former graduate students taught (if any) are selected in a random manner. Adjustments to the selection are as follows: Any student who failed or withdrew from the course is deleted. The faculty member may choose to provide a supplemental list of up to 5 students to be included in the survey. If these students are different from those selected previously, their evaluations will be classified as ones requested by the faculty member. The FSC has access to each letter along with the names of the author. The faculty member has access to the letters, but the author's anonymity is maintained.

c. Student Teaching Evaluation: As one basis for a systematic evaluation of teaching performance, the students in all undergraduate and graduate classes taught by Business School faculty are surveyed by questionnaire each semester. At the end of each semester, the students in each class taught by a Business Administration faculty member are encouraged to complete an on-line course evaluation questionnaire. The evaluation and process are available online. All enrolled students receive automated reminders. The faculty continue to remind students of the need to complete the evaluation form.

d. Review of Syllabi and other Class materials: Syllabi from all courses taught, assignments and exams are also reviewed in evaluating teaching effectiveness.

e. Advising - The School has created an on-line advising survey of students administered at the end of each semester.

IV.B.2. Assessment of Research - Research is assessed on the basis of:

a. Plans and Goals Statement: To complement "green sheet" information, each candidate is asked to submit a statement of near-term plans and goals in the following categories: 1) teaching; 2) research, scholarship and publications; 3) University and School service; 4) public and professional service; 5) professional growth and development. This statement should include how s/he intends to build on his/her accomplishments to date in continuing and increasing the quality and effectiveness of their future teaching, research and service attainments. It is suggested that the professor may find it useful to refer to the plans and objectives statement submitted in the Spring as part of their annual Faculty Plans and Activities Report (submitted on-line via the school's intranet) when responding to this request.

b. External Evaluators: Cases involving consideration for promotion and/or tenure, the Dean, in consultation with the facilitator, the candidate, and faculty members who are knowledgeable about the candidate's research, selects at least three qualified outside referees to evaluate the candidate's research and publications. The outside referees are selected on the basis of being respected scholars in their fields, ability to judge the candidate's research, and confidence that an independent assessment of the candidate's work will be made. The letters to outside referees to solicit evaluations of the candidate's research and publication record are written by the Dean. In addition, letters to appropriate individuals to solicit comments and obtain assessments of the candidate's service contributions are also written by the Dean. See sample letter to external reviewers.

IV.B.3. Assessment of Service: Service activities as they relate to professional expertise are also used in evaluating faculty candidates for reappointment and tenure. These activities include requests for professional advice (consulting), speeches, seminars, etc. Also taken into consideration are memberships in professional organizations and positions held in those.

IV.B.4. FSC Subcommittee on Reappointment and Tenure Cases: For each personnel action, whether a first or second reappointment or a tenure decision, a sub-committee will be elected by the FSC. It will be made up of three persons. Two of the members, by virtue of their training and background, will be familiar with the candidate's scholarly discipline. The third member will not have a close affinity with the candidate's discipline. The function of the sub-committee is to provide an administrative service for the FSC. It is to conduct an in-depth analysis of the areas of teaching, research and service with a view to providing the FSC with an evaluation of the available evidence. One function we see would be to proffer indicators of the quality of scholarship (e.g., data on the standing of journals in which the candidate has published). Another function would be a compilation and condensation of the various assessments of teaching competence and the highlighting of service evidence. This assessment of the record will be provided in writing a week before the formal FSC meeting. This written report will be submitted without vote, although the content of the review, in crystallizing the central issues for the FSC, would indicate the strength and quality of the candidate's case. The FSC will take its vote after consideration of the sub-committee's report and subsequent discussion. It is anticipated that the sub-committee's report would become the first draft of the FSC statement. In some instances the draft might be adopted as presented, with the simple addition of a summary evaluative paragraph. In other cases, where there are substantial disagreements within the FSC, the Chair will have to make amendments to the sub-committee report. This would certainly involve the insertion of majority and minority opinions which refer back to aspects of the sub-committee report for their supporting evidence. It might also require changes to phrasing within the draft report. Upon completion of its deliberations, a written report of the Committee's, or Subcommittee's, findings and recommendation (including vote results) is submitted to the Dean, as stated in the School of Business Administration By-Laws Section 3.5. The vote of the FSC is delivered verbally by the chair to the candidate as soon as possible.

IV.B.5. Faculty Input: As part of the review process, all untenured and tenured full-time tenure track faculty members are given the opportunity to provide input and transmit their views on the candidate's record to the FSC and to the Dean. The dean sends an e-mail invitation to all untenured and tenured faculty to participate in the process by submitting an anonymous response to the dean's office. Upon completion of the documentation, the "green sheet" materials, including copies of all publications, are made available to the School's faculty for review. Following is an outline sent to all faculty members to use in organizing their written comments. See schedule for timeline.

a. Teaching (consider such factors as: delivery of assigned courses; student advising; improvement in teaching-learning methods; design of new courses; development and supervision of experiential learning situations; publication of textbooks, cases or other teaching materials; any teaching honors or recognitions received.)

b. Research, scholarship and publication (consider such factors as: rigor of editorial review processes, significance from "user" perspective, quality in contrast to quantity, evidence of patterns of progression over time in exploring an area, breadth and/or depth of issues and concepts investigated, collaborative work especially with co-authors in other disciplines, quantity and quality of work in progress.)

c. University and School Service (consider such factors as: quality of service contributions, significance and complexity of activities, quantity and variety of activities, elected and appointed assignments.)

d. Public and Professional Service (consider such factors as: value of activities to the School and University, value to the candidate's professional development, value to the organizations or institutions for which services are provided and uses of service activities as sources of teaching and research ideas.)

e. Collegial Relationships (consider such factors as: collaborative endeavors with faculty colleagues in the School or elsewhere in the University, formal and informal contributions to improving organizational conditions for faculty development and productivity within the School.)

f. Capabilities for the Future (consider such factors as: expectations for continuing future quality and productivity in teaching, research/scholarship and service.)

g. Please note that all factors above may not be applicable to all candidates and that individual candidates may have different profiles of emphases among the factors. Further, it is not expected that all respondents will have sufficient experience or information with respect to each candidate to make judgments on every performance attribute. Each Faculty member is asked to submit comments in an unmarked envelope, place the unmarked envelope in a larger envelope, put their name on this larger envelope and send the package to the Staff Assistant. The Staff Assistant confirms that no more than one response on the candidate is received from each tenure track faculty member, ensures that individual respondent's names remain anonymous to users of the information and forward all responses received to the Chair of the FSC OR to the subcommittee of full professors in cases of promotion to full professor rank.

IV.B.6. Facilitator: In developing the "green sheet" documentation, a "facilitator" ordinarily provides assistance to the candidate in identifying and organizing appropriate materials. In addition, the facilitator serves as the coordinator for the green sheet process and helps to ensure that all necessary evidence is gathered. The facilitator may be a senior professor in the candidate's field, or some other faculty member chosen by the candidate.

IV.B.7. Appeals: Go to the Provost's Office website for specific contract language.

IV.C. Sabbatical leaves

Go to http://www.uvm.edu/~facrsrcs/?Page=Sabbaticalpage.html for Sabbatical leave application and forms. Also see http://www.uvm.edu/!facrcrcs/?Page=OfficersPage.html for Collective Bargaining Agreement information.

IV.D. Schedules

Schedule 1: Schedule for Review of First Reappointment at Assistant Professor Rank

For Assistant Professor, maximum probationary period is 7 years. No action in year 1. Required by April of year 2 for reappointment for years 4 and 5 at College/School level using Green sheets as evaluation form.

 
Dates Activity
December or January Dean advises candidate of process and timeline
Mid February (Year 2) Faculty members submit documentation
Late February Dean invites all untenured and tenured BSAD faculty to participate in the anonymous input process on the candidate's record. Materials available for review by untenured and tenured faculty members.
March 1 Deadline for receipt of written comments from tenured and untenured BSAD faculty members.
March 2-March 15 Evaluation of candidacy by the FSC.
Mid March FSC submits reports and recommendations to the Dean. FSC chair informs candidate of FSC vote.
Mid April Dean informs candidate of the decision.

Schedule 2: Schedule for Review of Second Reappointment at Assistant Professor Rank

No action in year 3. Required notice date is April of year 4 for reappointment for years 6 and 7 at University level using Green sheets as evaluation form.

 
Dates Activity
May (end of Year 3) Candidate is explained the process. S/he can elect to use external reviewers as an optional source of information to the FSC. These reviewers should be identified no later than September 1st.
Mid June Provost's office provides list of full time faculty who need RPT decisions next academic year.
Late August - early September (start of Year 4)

Communication to faculty regarding schedule and reminder of open classroom/peer visitation policy. Identify FSC sub-committee for each faculty member eligible for process Communication to candidate on key dates, their responsibilities. Faculty encouraged to visit classes. (Optional) Candidate provides Dean with list of external reviewers and packets of materials. (Optional) Letters from Dean to alumni. Letters from Dean to external reviewers (optional).

Mid October (Optional) Letters on teaching effectiveness due from alumni. Evaluation letters due to be received from external reviewers (optional). Candidate submits complete documentation. Dean invites all untenured and tenured faculty to submit the anonymous input on the candidate's record.

Mid October to November 1

Dossier available for review by tenured and untenured Business Administration faculty members.

Mid November

Confidential written comments on candidate due from tenured and untenured Business Administration faculty members.
End of November/Early December FSC evaluates and arrives at recommendations on second reappointment at Assistant Professor rank. FSC chair informs candidate of vote. FSC report to Dean.
Mid December Dean provides copy of FSC report and dean's written assessment to candidate who has 10 days to add written rebuttal.
January 15 Dean submits recommendations and documentation to Office of the Provost.
March 15 Review of candidate's dossier by Senate Professional Standards Committee
Last Week of April Provost's decision communicated to Dean. Dean informs candidate of decision received from Provost's office

Schedule 3: Schedule for Review of Promotion to Associate Professor Rank and Granting of Tenure

For Associate Professor, there is a maximum probationary period of 4 years. First reappointment required date is by December 15 of year 2 for reappointment for years 3 and 4 using Green sheets at College/School level. Tenure action is required in year 3 with required date of notice by April using Green sheets at University level. (No action in year 5. Required notice date is April of year 6 for tenure and promotion at University level using Green sheets as evaluation form.)

 
Dates Activity
May (end of Year 5) Candidate is explained the process and asked to identify external reviewers by September 1.
June 15 Provost's office provides list of full time faculty who need RPT decisions next academic year
Late August - early September (start of Year 6) Candidate provides Dean with list of external reviewers and packets of materials. Communication to faculty regarding schedule and reminder of open classroom/peer visitation policy. Identify FSC sub-committee for each faculty member eligible for process. Communication to candidate on key dates, their responsibilities. Faculty encouraged to visit classes. (Optional) Letters from Dean to alumni.
Late August-early September Letters from Dean to external reviewers.
Mid October Candidate submits complete documentation. (Optional) Letters on teaching effectiveness due from alumni. Evaluation letters due to be received from external reviewers. Dean invites all untenured and tenured faculty to submit the anonymous input on the candidate's record.
Mid October to November 1 Dossier available for review by tenured and untenured Business Administration faculty members.
Mid November Confidential written comments on candidate due from tenured and untenured Business Administration faculty members.
End of November/Early December FSC evaluates and arrives at recommendation on promotion and granting of tenure at associate professor level. FSC chair informs candidate of FSC vote. FSC submits report and recommendation to the Dean.
Mid December Dean provides copy of FSC report and dean's written assessment to candidate who has 10 days to add written rebuttal.
By January 15 Dean submits recommendation and documentation to Office of the Provost.
March 15 Review of candidate's dossier by Senate Professional Standards Committee
Last Week of April Provost's decision communicated to Dean. Dean informs candidate of decision received from Provost's Office
There is no probationary period at Professor level—initial appointment made with tenure.

Schedule 4: Schedule for Promotion to Full Professor Rank

A candidate who wishes to have a preliminary review of his/her qualifications for promotion is asked to submit an updated copy of his/her vitae to the Dean along with other readily available information at the candidate's discretion. It is neither intended nor suggested that a major effort be made to prepare comprehensive documentation at the preliminary review stage. The Full Professor Subcommittee of the FSC will meet to perform the preliminary assessment. If evaluation process finds that the professor should apply for promotion to Full Professor, the schedule for promotion to Associate Professor and granting of tenure applies.

Schedule 5: Schedule for Review for Reappointment at Full-Time Lecturer

 
Dates Activity
Fall of year before 2-year contract expires Candidate compiles teaching and other pertinent data using green sheet process
Mid January Candidate submits documentation. Dean invites all BSAD faculty to participate in double blind process. Communication to faculty re: schedule & reminder of open classroom/peer visitation policy
Mid January - Mid February Materials available for review by ALL BSAD faculty
Mid February Deadline for receipt of written comments from ALL BSAD faculty
Third Week of February Evaluation of candidacy by FSC
February 20-24 FSC submits reports and recommendations to Dean ' FSC chair informs candidate of FSC.
March 1 Dean informs candidate of decision

Schedule 6: Schedule for Review for Promotion to Senior Lecturer Rank

 
Dates Activity
Candidate requests consideration for promotion Candidate is explained process - see Article 14.2 and Article 15.4.i.of union agreement.
Late August to early September Communication to faculty re: schedule and reminder of open classroom/peer visitation policy. Identify FSC sub-committee for each faculty member eligible for process. Communication to candidate on key dates/responsibilities. Letters from dean to alumni
Mid October Candidate submits complete documentation. Letters on teaching effectiveness due from alumni. Dean invites all tenured and untenured faculty to submit double blind input on candidate's record
Last Two Weeks of October Dossier available for review by tenured & untenured Business Administration faculty members
November 5 Confidential written comments on candidate due from BSAD faculty members
End of November/Early December FSC evaluates and arrives at recommendation on Promotion to Senior Lecturer rank. FSC chair informs candidate of vote. FSC report due to Dean
Mid December Dean provides copy of FSC report and dean's written assessment to candidate who has 10 days to add written rebuttal.
By January 15 Dean submits recommendations & documentation to Provost's office
March 15 Review of candidate's dossier by UVM Professional Standards Committee
Last Week of April Provost's decision communicated to Dean. Dean informs candidate of decision received from Provost's Office

Schedule 7: Schedule for Review for Reappointment to Senior Lecturer Rank

 
Dates Activity
May of year before last year of appointment Candidate is explained process
Summer and Fall of eligible year: Candidate compiles teaching and other pertinent data using green sheet process
Late August to early September: Communication to faculty re: schedule & reminder of open classroom/peer visitation policy. Communication to candidate on key dates/responsibilities. Optional - letters from dean to alumni
Mid October Candidate submits completed documentation. Dean invites all tenured and untenured faculty to submit double blind input on candidate's record. Optional - letters on teaching effectiveness due from alumni
Last Two Weeks of October Dossier available for review by tenured & untenured Business Administration faculty members
November 5 Confidential written comments on candidate due from BSAD faculty members
End of November/Early December FSC evaluates and arrives at recommendations on reappointment to Senior Lecturer rank. FSC chair informs candidate of vote.FSC report due to Dean
December 15 Dean informs candidate of decision

Schedule 8: Schedule for Review of Reappointment as Officer of Research

 
Dates Activity
May Candidate is explained the process. S/he can elect to use external reviewers as an optional source of information to the FSC. These reviewers should be identified no later than September 1st.
Late August - early September Communication to faculty regarding schedule. Identify FSC sub-committee for each faculty member eligible for process. Communication to candidate on key dates, their responsibilities. (Optional) Candidate provides Dean with list of external reviewers and packets of materials. Letters from Dean to external reviewers (optional).
Mid October Candidate submits complete documentation. Evaluation letters due to be received from external reviewers (optional). Dean invites all untenured and tenured faculty to submit anonymous input on the candidate's record.
Last Two Weeks of October Dossier available for review by tenured and untenured Business Administration faculty members.
November 5 Confidential written comments on candidate due from tenured and untenured Business Administration faculty members.
Late November/Early December FSC evaluates and arrives at recommendations on reappointment as Officer of Research. FSC chair informs candidate of vote. FSC report to Dean.
January 15 Dean informs candidate of decision received from Provost's office

Schedule 9: Schedule for Promotion to Senior Officer of Research

 
Dates Activity
Candidate requests consideration Candidate is explained process and identifies external evaluators by September 1
Late August to early September Candidate provides Dean with list of external revieweres and packets of materials. Communication to faculty re: schedule & reminder of open classroom/peer visitation policy. Identify FSC sub-committee for each faculty member eligible for process. Communication to candidates on key dates/responsibilities
Late August to early September Letters from Dean to external reviewers
Mid October Candidate submits completed documentation. Evaluation letters due from external reviewers. Dean invites all tenured and untenured faculty to submit double blind input on candidate's record
Last Two Weeks of October Dossier available for review by tenured & untenured Business administration faculty members
November 15 Confidential written comments on candidate due from BSAD faculty members
Late November/Early December FSC evaluates and arrives at recommendations on reappointment and promotion at Senior Officer of Research rank. FSC chair informs candidate of vote. FSC report due to Dean
Mid December Dean provides copy of FSC report and dean's written assessment to candidate who has 10 days to add written rebuttal
By January 15 Dean submits recommendations & documentation to Provost's Office
March 15 Review of candidate's dossier by UVM Professional Standards Committee
Last Week of April Provost's decision communicated to Dean. Dean informs candidate of decision received from Provost's Office

Schedule 10: Schedule for Promotion to Lecturer II or III for Eligible Part-Time Faculty

 
Dates Activity
BEFORE start of semester Candidate requests consideration. Read the university guidelines on this schedule: promotion guidelines (PDF) and lecturer eligibility information (PDF).
Early September or January/February Classroom Observation: -Dean selects tenured faculty member to attend classes and write up process and their observation.
Mid October or Mid March, depending on semester: If eligible per contract rules: -Candidate submits compiled Teaching and other pertinent data using blue sheet process
Late November or Late March to Mid April: Materials available for review by ALL BSAD faculty. Dean invites all BSAD faculty to participate in double blind process. Communication to faculty re: schedule & reminder of open classroom/peer visitation policy
November 15 or April 15 Deadline for receipt of written comments from ALL BSAD faculty
Mid to end of November or Mid to End of April Evaluation of candidacy by FSC
November 30 or April 30 FSC submits report and recommendation to Dean. FSC chair informs candidate of FSC vote
Mid December or Mid May Dean informs candidate of decision

11. Other Cases

There may be circumstances where a variation of the processes described above may be implemented.

12. Schedule for Sabbatical leave requests

See ARTICLE 22 - SABBATICAL AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT LEAVES of union agreement for information on eligibility, etc. The Provost's Office has necessary application form (PDF) as well as guidelines on how to complete the form (PDF).

 
Dates Activity
September 1 Candidate submits completed sabbatical leave request to Dean
September 2 Documentation is made available for faculty; Dean sends message to faculty
By September 15 FSC meets to discuss and vote on proposal
By September 20 FSC chair prepares memo to dean with vote
October 1 Proposal, FSC report and Dean's recommendation sent to Provost
January If necessary Senate Professional Standards Committee reviews documentation
February 1 Provost makes final decision
Within 60 days of completion of sabbatical Written report to Dean detailing sabbatical activities and accomplishments and indicating how the original objectives of the sabbatical were met during the leave must be received in the Provost's Office. (FAILURE TO SUBMIT A REPORT MAY BE CONSIDERED IN THE ANNUAL FACULTY EVALUATION AND WILL RESULT IN DELAY IN ELIGIBILITY FOR FUTURE SABBATICALS.)

13. Schedule for Appeals

Read the specific contract language