Promotion and Tenure

Revised May 31, 1995
Updated August 2000
Updated July 2004
Updated August 2008

Introduction

Decisions concerning tenure and promotion are two of the most important decisions which the University must make. Tenure determination involves a particularly important decision because conferral of tenure establishes a lasting relationship between the University and the faculty member.

The promotion and tenure process as evolved by the faculty and administration of the Culverhouse College of Commerce and Business Administration strives to produce objective and equitable recommendations for review by the Offices of the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the President.

The College of Commerce has developed a five-level process of evaluation which serves to maximize objectivity and fairness. As this statement describes in depth, a C&BA candidate is evaluated by:

  1. Himself or herself as he/she prepares documentation and decides whether to seek advancement prior to the mandatory time limit.
  2. The Department/School colleagues.
  3. The Department Head/Director.
  4. The College-wide Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee operating independently of the Department and the Dean’s Office.
  5. The Dean after careful assessment of the various recommendations flowing to that office.

Furthermore, the candidate can appeal any of these recommendations at the Department level or College level.

In addition to the C&BA Promotion and Tenure Procedures and Criteria, each faculty member should be aware of the University’s policies regarding promotion and tenure. These policies can be found in The University of Alabama Faculty Handbook, pp. 17-32, including the policy for annual progress review for all non-tenured faculty members.

Procedural Matters

  1. Establishment of Department/School Procedures

    1. Each year, at a time not later than August 16, the Department Head/Director initiates the promotion and tenure process in his or her respective area. (Candidates must submit completed dossiers to the Department Head/Director by October 1 as noted on p. 32 of the UA Faculty Handbook.) Each academic area establishes appropriate procedures for evaluation. All faculty members in those areas are informed as to these procedures including the procedure to appeal the Department Committee recommendations. Copies of these procedures are forwarded to the Dean of C&BA and to the College-wide Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee.
    2. Department/School Committees are constituted for the purposes of:
      1. making recommendations for awarding, denying, or postponing promotion,
      2. making recommendations for conferral, denial, or postponement of tenure, and
      3. conducting annual professional progress reviews on probationary faculty. (For details on annual progress reviews, see pp. 29-30 of the UA Faculty Handbook.)
    3. The primary responsibility for preparing a dossier to be considered by a faculty committee on promotion, progress review, or tenure rests with the candidate, but the Department Head/Director will provide appropriate assistance upon request. To apply, the candidate submits his/her dossier to the Department Head/Director. "Normally, candidates do not apply for tenure until the year before their probationary period ends. In exceptional circumstances, decisions to award or deny tenure may be made sooner" (UA Faculty Handbook, p. 27).
    4. At a minimum, each candidate’s dossier should include materials specified in the attached "Guidelines for the Contents of the Candidate’s Dossier." The candidate is encouraged to include in the dossier any other evidence available and relevant in support of candidacy. The dossier should be organized in such a way as to allow ready access to materials likely to receive particular attention in the review by the Vice President for Academic Affairs. A proposed organization into Volume I and Volume II of the dossier is provided in the attached "Proposed Contents of Dossier—Volumes I and II."
    5. The Department/School Promotion and Tenure Committee forwards its written recommendation to the Department Head/Director. The Department Head/Director makes a separate written evaluation of the candidate for promotion or tenure, appends this recommendation to the recommendation of the Committee, and provides the candidate with a written summary of these recommendations. Unless the candidate specifically requests to be withdrawn from consideration, all materials together with the recommendations and the Department/School vote are forwarded to the Dean’s Office by November 15.

  2. Establishment of the College Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee

    The College-wide Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee (P&T Committee) is constituted in the following fashion:

    1. The Dean appoints ten faculty members with tenure to serve as the College-wide Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee. Each Department/School is represented on the Committee in a manner approximately proportional to faculty population within each Department/School (one representative for each 12 tenured and probationary faculty or fraction thereof). The Dean asks the Department Head/Director to nominate persons to be appointed to the Committee.  The Dean normally selects the members for the College P&T Committee from the pool nominated. This Committee is appointed by November 15.
    2. The Dean designates one member of the Committee as Chairperson.
    3. The College-wide Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee has the authority to establish its own procedures and rules within the constraints of the UA Faculty Handbook.
    4. The role of the College Committee is to make an independent assessment and recommendation to the Dean on each candidate. It is not the role of the committee members to serve as advocates for a particular Departmental/School position on a candidate.
    5. The Dean forwards by November 15 all promotion and tenure materials, including candidates’ personal submissions, Department/School Committee recommendations and comments, and Department Head/Director’s recommendations and comments to this Committee. After careful consideration of the material on each candidate, the Committee presents a Committee recommendation to the Dean together with supporting documents and written summaries of the basis for the recommendation. Any member or members of the Committee who believe that the Committee’s report is not an accurate reflection of the Committee deliberations may write a minority opinion and append it to the report on the candidate. The Committee should complete its deliberation and forward its report to the Dean by January 15.
    6. The Dean informs the Department Head/Director of the Committee’s recommendations and provides them with copies of the written summaries of the bases for the Committee’s conclusions. The Department Head/Director informs the candidates of the recommendation and makes available to them copies of the written summaries provided by the Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee. If the candidate desires, she/he may appeal this recommendation to the Dean by  responding in writing to the Committee’s summary.
    7. The Dean, based on the recommendations of the College-wide Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee, the Department Head/Director, Department/School Committee recommendations, and any written appeals of the candidate, makes a final recommendation. The Dean informs the Department Head/Director and the candidate of this recommendation and makes available to them a written statement as to the basis for the recommendation.
    8. If a candidate disagrees with the final recommendation of the Dean, he or she may submit a written statement explaining the basis for the disagreement to the Dean. This statement, together with all other material relevant to the candidate’s recommendation, is forwarded to the Academic Vice President’s Office by February 1.
    9. The Dean informs the College Promotion and Tenure Advisory Committee of his or her recommendation to the Academic Vice President.
    10. The Dean notifies by letter those faculty members promoted or denied promotion as soon after receipt of the official decision of the President of the University or his or her designee. Decisions regarding tenure will be communicated directly by the Academic Vice President.

Criteria for Promotion and Tenure

  1. General Considerations

    The basic criteria for tenure and promotion are (a) performance in teaching and knowledge of subject matter as specified in the UA Faculty Handbook; (b) creative scholarly activities evidenced by publication; and (c) appropriate professional service. Teaching and research are considered to be co-equal in importance.

    “A faculty member usually completes at least four years in rank before being considered for promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor or from Associate Professor to Professor; consequently, candidates normally do not apply for promotion before their fifth year in rank” (UA Faculty Handbook, p. 17).

    1. Teaching

      Teaching performance assessment is consistent with both the UA Faculty Handbook and the College Policy on Student Evaluation of Teachers, which appears separately in the C&BA Faculty Handbook. In addition to the criteria spelled out in these documents, the promotion and/or tenure evaluation considers the following (not necessarily listed in order of importance):

      1. The quality of the teaching.
      2. The quantity of teaching, including the number of students and the number of courses.
      3. The difficulty/uniqueness of preparation and delivery.
      4. The response of students to the faculty member’s teaching efforts.
      5. Special materials, cases, and other extra preparation efforts necessary for unique and specialized courses.
      6. Dissertations directed and dissertation committees served on.
      7. Student advising.
      8. Publication of textbooks and other teaching materials.

    2. Evaluation of Research and Scholarship

      The UA Faculty Handbook states that faculty members at all ranks are “expected to engage in an ongoing program of research, publication, creative activity, and scholarly effort that is appropriate to their appointment, discipline, and fields of specialization” (p. 13). For purposes of promotion and tenure, the weight placed on each scholarly activity varies according to the contribution it makes to the discipline and to the professional stature of the candidate. Furthermore, the UA Faculty Handbook specifies that “each successful candidate is expected to have published a number of substantial articles, in recognized refereed journals in his/her discipline. . .” (pp. 20, 22, 25).

      The Final Report of the AACSB Task Force on Research (1987) establishes the following minimum standard for faculty research: “Research must be written, be subject to scrutiny and criticism by one’s peers, and extend the boundaries of current knowledge” (p. 4). The AACSB Report also recognizes that some business schools may seek to encourage and reward a more narrow definition of research and suggests that promotion and tenure standards should require that every faculty member engage in research activity.

      To provide greater specificity for the College, research and scholarship evaluations will be based primarily on accepted or published materials giving consideration to the nature of the work and the general readership of the publications in which the work appears. Refereed journal articles are a principal form for disseminating new knowledge in most business disciplines. Generally, papers appearing in leading academic journals are to be considered as making a significant contribution to one’s discipline. Other avenues for extending the boundaries of knowledge may include scholarly books and monographs, chapters in scholarly books, papers in professional and/or practitioner journals, and other reference works. A candidate for promotion to the rank of Professor is expected to provide evidence of an ability to independently conceptualize and carry out scholarly research. The evaluation of research may also include an assessment of a faculty member’s success in securing competitive research awards that are based on substantive external peer review, e.g., National Science Foundation Awards. Material which is proprietary in nature, such as consulting reports or proprietary computer software, does not meet the minimum AACSB standard to qualify as research and will not be considered for purposes of promotion or tenure.

    3. Evaluation of Service

      Service contributions which are above and beyond the UA Faculty Handbook’s requirement of “a continuing record of outreach/academic citizenship” (p. 18) will be valued.

      The absence of responsible academic citizenship detracts from what otherwise might have been a strong set of qualifications for promotion or tenure. Thus, performance in teaching and research are necessary for promotion and/or tenure, but they are not sufficient. Effectiveness in teaching and research must be combined with responsible academic citizenship.

    4. External Reviews

      External reviews of scholarly work are required for all candidates seeking promotion and/or tenure (UA Faculty Handbook, p. 28). A standardized procedure has been developed for the inclusion of external reviews in the candidate’s dossier. This procedure is summarized in the C&BA Policy and Procedures Relating to External Peer Review which is included separately in the C&BA Faculty Handbook. External review letters cannot be solicited from people who served on the candidate’s dissertation committee. External review letters from co-authors are normally discouraged but may be included in special situations.

    5. Reporting Recommendations

      The recommendations from the Department/School Committee and from the College Promotion and Tenure Committee will be reported in terms of the actual vote on each candidate. Separate assessments of teaching and research will be provided by the Department/School Promotion and Tenure Committee and the Department Head/Director. Detailed responses underlying the reasons for the recommendations will be provided. The Dean will consider the recommendations of the Department/School Committees, Department Head/Director, and the College of Commerce Committee. The Dean will make an independent assessment of and recommendation on the candidate to the Academic Vice President. Examples of the reporting formats used by the Dean for promotion and tenure recommendations are contained in the attached “Promotion Recommendation Summary” and “Tenure Recommendation Summary.”

  2. Awarding of Tenure

    The performance of probationary faculty members will be evaluated on the basis of the following categories: teaching, research, and service to the University and to one’s discipline.

    In order to obtain tenure, a probationary faculty member will have demonstrated a high level of ability and accomplishment in teaching and research. The faculty member must show the capacity for further development in all areas of professional activity in such ways that continued development would warrant promotion through the ranks and the probability of successful performance in areas involving substantially greater levels of responsibility.

  3. Promotion to Associate Professor

    Promotion to the rank of Associate Professor is premised on the individual’s having fulfilled all the qualifications for the rank of Assistant Professor. The promotion is justified on the basis of a record of actual performance and by identification of potential for additional achievement. There should be evidence of recent accomplishments and professional contributions in the individual’s discipline. Normally the record of accomplishment should include evidence of progress toward outstanding achievement in the general areas of instruction and research.

  4. Promotion to Full Professor

    The criteria for promotion to the rank of Professor listed in the UA Faculty Handbook (pp. 21-24) are summarized as follows:

    Promotion to Professor is premised on the individual’s possessing a strong record of performance at the rank of Associate Professor. The decision to promote an Associate Professor to the rank of Professor is based principally upon: “(1) the caliber of the faculty member’s teaching effectiveness and overall contribution to the quality of the instructional programs in which he/she has assigned duties and (2) the caliber of the faculty member’s record of research, publication, creative activity, and scholarly efforts in his/her discipline and fields of specialization. These two areas of performance are co-equal in importance and are predominant in the evaluation of candidates for promotion from Associate Professor to Professor.”

    Given the criteria for promotion to the rank of Professor specified in the UA Faculty Handbook, the following series of questions should be asked by departmental and divisional committees considering candidates for promotion to full Professor.

    1. Does the individual present a record of achievement which is clearly superior to that which would be expected if the person were a candidate for promotion to his/her present rank (i.e., Associate Professor)?
    2. Does the candidate essentially offer the same evidence which has already been drawn upon to justify promotion to Associate Professor?
    3. Does the candidate offer recent contributions to scholarship in his/her field?
    4. Does the candidate show evidence of continuing scholarly contribution?
    5. Does the candidate offer evidence of an ability to independently conceptualize and carry out scholarly research?

Guidelines for Contents of the Candidate’s Dossier

The candidate’s dossier serves as a basis for decisions regarding retention, tenure and/or promotion. The following are recommendations to assist the candidate in preparing a dossier.

  1. Materials to Be Included

    1. Candidates should review promotion and tenure guidelines provided in the UA Faculty Handbook and the C&BA Faculty Handbook. Each of the criteria identified in these guidelines should be addressed by the candidate. The candidate should demonstrate succinctly how criteria for teaching, research, and academic citizenship/service have been met.

    2. Candidates are strongly encouraged to prepare self-evaluation statements about their research and teaching activities. These statements provide an opportunity for the candidates to explain how they believe they have met the criteria for promotion and/or tenure. These statements should help evaluators understand the academic philosophy of the candidate. Thus, the statements should not be a listing of accomplishments provided already in the candidate’s resume. Instead, the statements should help evaluators understand a candidate’s approach to research and teaching, as well as major successes and future goals. Each statement should be limited to five (5) pages.
    3. The candidate should identify three recent research papers (or other research works, if applicable) published or accepted for publication that the candidate believes are representative of the candidate’s research efforts. These should be identified in the candidate’s self-evaluation statement. These papers will provide a foundation for a review of the candidate’s research, although all information submitted by the candidate will be considered. The candidate may wish to comment on why these papers are of special merit and the contributions that the published works have made to the literature (e. g., information about citations might be appropriate). The contributions of the candidate to co-authored papers should be identified clearly.
    4. The candidate should provide information to assess the quality of the journals in which the candidate has published. This information should include lists prepared by the candidate’s Department of quality academic journals in the candidate’s discipline, including the tier one list of leading journals that publish research in the candidate’s discipline and the tier two list, which includes examples of other distinguished journals.  Supporting information may include published assessments of journal quality in the candidate’s discipline and/or other information about the purpose, status, and quality of the journals which may be specified by the candidate’s academic Department/School. Information should be provided about the appropriateness of the journals for the candidate’s research. Any evidence of theoretical or practical impact by the candidate’s research also would be useful.
    5. Careful summaries of teaching evaluations are more useful than large amounts of data. Teaching evaluation information should be supplemented with such information as summaries of courses taught, class sizes, approaches used in teaching, syllabi, teaching materials developed by the candidate, efforts to develop special student skills (e. g., writing, thinking, leadership, etc.), the use of technology, letters from students and other faculty, and similar materials that will help evaluators assess the candidate’s teaching efforts and quality. All submitted materials are assumed to be the work of the candidate. If jointly developed materials are submitted, care should be used to identify the contributions by the candidate. It is not suggested that a candidate must provide all of the possible types of support listed above. Instead, the candidate should choose those that are most suitable for the candidate’s situation.
    6. Information about the backgrounds of external reviewers would be helpful. A paragraph about each reviewer, indicating the reviewer’s status as a researcher in the candidate’s field would help evaluators assess the merits of the reviewer’s comments. In all cases, complete explanation of any relationships between the candidate and the reviewer is necessary.
    7. Any College or University service activities the candidate believes to be particularly important should be described briefly if the candidate believes these warrant special consideration in the promotion and/or tenure decision.
    8. Each dossier should contain an up-to-date, complete and accurate career performance report in the form specified in the following “Sample Career Performance Report.”
    9. The dossier for a probationary faculty member should contain copies of the departmental annual progress reviews for the candidate for all prior years.
    10. It is recommended that candidates submit their documentation in binders to prevent pages from being lost or misfiled. A detailed table of contents should be included.

SAMPLE Career Performance Report Month/Year-Month/Year

A Sample Career Performance Report is available in Adobe Acrobat PDF format.  Follow the hyperlink above for a printable version of this form. The College uses Digital Measures for faculty performance reporting: Digital Measures Login

PROPOSED CONTENTS OF DOSSIER
VOLUMES I AND II

Volume I.

  1. Dean’s Recommendation.
  2. Recommendation of the College Committee.
  3. Recommendation of the Department Head/Director.
  4. Recommendation of the Departmental/School Committee.
  5. Written Appeals, if any, Provided by the Candidate in Response to Evaluations by the Departmental/School Committee, Department Head/Director, College Committee or Dean.
  6. For probationary faculty, copies of the departmental annual progress reviews for all prior years.
  7. Career Performance Report.
  8. Statement of Candidate’s Teaching Philosophy.
  9. Statement of Candidate’s Research Philosophy.
  10. Summary of Student Teaching Evaluations.
  11. Ratings of Journals in Which the Candidate Has Published.
  12. External Review Letters (with notations on who selected reviewers and the relationship of the reviewer to the candidate).
  13. Three Representative Research Papers or Other Research Works Provided by the Candidate That Have Been Published or Accepted for Publication and one Working Paper.
  14. Letters of Support From Persons Other than External Reviewers.

Volume II

  1. Copies of all Publications.
  2. Detailed Materials in Support of Teaching Performance.
  3. Other Materials Which the Candidate Thinks Are Pertinent to the Promotion and/or Tenure Decision.

All materials will be available for review at each stage of the process and all materials will be forwarded to Academic Affairs. The dossier for each candidate will be standardized as outlined above.

College of Commerce and Business Administration
Promotion Recommendation Summary

The C&BA Promotion Recommendation Summary form is available in Adobe Acrobat PDF format.  Follow the hyperlink above for a printable version of this form.

College of Commerce and Business Administration
Tenure Recommendation Summary

The C&BA Tenure Recommendation Summary form is available in Adobe Acrobat PDF format.  Follow the hyperlink above for a printable version of this form.