Faculty Handbook 2023-2024 
    
    May 26, 2024  
Faculty Handbook 2023-2024

Section 5: Faculty Appointments



5.1 Procedures for Recruiting Full-Time Faculty

Introduction

These procedures are subject to change and exceptions to them may be granted. These procedures are designed to ensure that the best possible faculty member is hired, that all interested applicants have an opportunity to apply, and that all those who do are treated fairly, equitably, and humanely throughout the process. Against these goals of quality, opportunity, and equity will be judged all requests for exceptions. All such requests must be directed to the Provost and Dean of the Faculty (hereafter referred to as “Provost”).

In addition to these procedures, the Provost Office keeps a set of search guidelines that is shared with search committees within the Faculty Search Resource Materials. These guidelines will be reviewed at the end of each academic year by the Provost, the Dean for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion, the Director of Faculty Development, and the Director of Human Resources or designee. All Department Chairs or Search Chairs who led searches during the academic year will submit feedback about the search guidelines in a manner determined by the Provost.

5.1.1. Identifying A Vacancy

5.1.1a Resignations and Retirements

When a faculty member expresses an intent to resign or retire, the department or program chairperson (hereafter referred to as “Department Chair”) should encourage that faculty member to submit as soon as possible a letter to the Provost indicating the effective date of the resignation or retirement. (If the Department Chair wishes to prevent a resignation by means of a counter-offer, contact the Provost immediately to discuss how to proceed.) The Deaprtment Chair will next contact the Provost requesting permission to recruit a replacement. The Department Chair must be prepared to explain the need for maintaining the faculty line within the department. Should a question arise concerning the continued need for the faculty line, the Provost shall discuss it with the Department Chair, members of the department or program (hereafter referred to as “Department”), and the appropriate governance structure.

5.1.1b New Faculty Line

When a department or program desires an additional faculty line, it submits a written request with supporting documentation as early as possible. The documentation includes the Position Description detailed below and clearly articulates the need for the faculty line from an institutional perspective. In particular, the request must describe how the requested faculty line will further programmatic objectives and support the mission and strategic priorities of the College. The request must also include enrollment data and a description of programmatic history and goals.The Provost shall discuss requests for new faculty lines with the appropriate governance structure.


5.1.2. Writing the Position Description or Job Ad

A detailed job ad will be developed by the department or program as a whole. When teaching in additional departments or programs is contemplated, the appropriate Chair(s) must be consulted about required experience and teaching expectations. The description must include at least the specialties, training, degrees, and experience required; an indication that commitment to teaching and learning in a liberal arts context is expected, including a contribution to the teaching of general education courses and FS courses, interdisciplinary courses, and/or courses fulfilling all-college requirements; the rank(s) available. If the job is of limited duration, for example if the position is a sabbatical replacement or tenure ineligible, this information must be included in the description.

There must be a direct relationship between the duties to be performed and the credentials and experience required. Doctoral degrees should be specified in most academic disciplines, but they are not always required; in certain cases, an appropriate terminal professional degree is commonly expected. The Department Chair determines the appropriate terminal degree and provides a rationale. In all instances, the job description must distinguish clearly required credentials and experience from desirable ones. Finally, the job ad must include directions on how to apply, including the need for at least three references and a deadline for the receipt of applications, as well as the internet address of the department or program.

The Department Chair will request a copy of the latest job ad template from Human Resources and follow that template. The job ad must be approved by the Provost before any further steps in the search process are undertaken.


5.1.3. Planning The Search

Once the request to recruit has been approved, the Department Chair should prepare a search plan in consultation with the Department.

5.1.3a Advertising and Posting

Announcement of positions available should be as broad as possible. The prime purpose of advertising and posting is to amass a large and diverse pool of qualified applicants. Departments are encouraged to work with the Dean of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in creating and sharing position announcements.

Posting of ads internally will be arranged by the Provost’s Office. The Department Chair will be responsible for placing other ads in a timely fashion and for sending the ad to those institutions and groups appearing on the list submitted as part of the search plan.

5.1.3b The Search Committee

 

 

In its initial meetings, the department will decide who from the department will serve on the search committee and create a list of four to six faculty from outside the department who might also serve on the search committee. The list of suggested search committee members will be forwarded to the Provost, who will approve the committee. Faculty who were denied renewal of contract or who have resigned their positions may not participate on the search committee unless approved beforehand by the Provost. Any adjustments in the composition of the search committee must be arranged by the Department Chair and approved by the Provost.

All members of approved search committees must attend a scheduled Search and Selection Committee workshop hosted by the Provost Office. During this workshop, the Provost and the Dean of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion will review the legal aspects of faculty searches and relevant materials, such as how to avoid cognitive errors, bias research, and Allegheny data points.

While all members of the search committee are expected to gauge the potential of applicants to contribute to the College’s broader mission, the committee members from outside the searching department(s) are charged with assessing an applicant’s potential to contribute to teaching and learning in a liberal arts context. Particular attention will be paid to a candidate’s ability to communicate disciplinary material to non-specialists, as well as their willingness and ability to work with students and faculty in a variety of contexts and courses, both inside and outside of the discipline. The outside members are also ideally situated to present the broader institutional context to candidates during the interview process. Outside members of the search committee are not expected to read all the files, but rather only those chosen after an initial screening process conducted by the department. Generally, approximately 15 - 20 files are reasonable.

The search committee will evaluate the candidates and offer a recommendation to the Provost, who makes the final decision about which candidate to hire.

5.1.3c Summary: The Search Plan

The following items, described above, must be sent to the Provost for approval before the job may be posted or shared:

  1. Job notice for posting;
     
  2. Advertising list and groups;
     
  3. Search committee membership; and
     
  4. Preliminary interviewing plans.


5.1.4. Keeping Records

As soon as the search plan is approved, Human Resources will create a folder in an approved electronic repository to store the files. Electronic copies of the approved job ad will also be stored in the repository, as well as copies of the ads as they appeared in print or electronic form. All files must be retained for at least three years after the conclusion of the search. If the successful applicant is a non-resident alien, files must be retained for five years. The Department Chair and Search Chair will consult with Human Resources and the Provost Office regarding electronic file management.

Human Resources will prepare a form email for acknowledging receipt of an application. This email should be sent out the day the application is received. An email from the Search Chair should be used at the end of the search to notify all candidates except finalists that the search has concluded. Paper letters or phone calls from the Search or Department Chair should be used to notify any candidates who were brought to campus for an interview.


5.1.5. Screening Applications

Prior to beginning the selection process, the Search or Department Chair will review the applicant pool to determine historically underrepresented applicants are represented at about the rate of their estimated availability in the field. If not, the search committee needs to ask if recruitment and outreach efforts were sufficiently broad and consider re-opening the search with expanded, inclusive efforts. The Dean of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion will often have availability data as a resource and can make this information available to search committees. Data reports are from the National Opinion Research Center and Survey of Earned Doctorates, where most recent information is accessible.

Before the review of applicants begins, the full committee must meet to develop a set of criteria for screening candidates. The criteria must adhere closely to the qualifications outlined in the notice of vacancy. Although screening procedures may vary from committee to committee, the Search Chair must keep a record of why each candidate was rejected. The reasons may range from the candidate not meeting the minimum job requirements to the collective judgment of the committee. In every instance, the reasons must be free from bias and indicated on the Recruitment Tracking Report.

All members of the search committee should be encouraged to review the Faculty Search Resource Materials shared by the Provost’s Office about cognitive errors and gender bias. These materials contain many best practices that must be kept in mind and followed throughout the selection process. In addition, all decisions must be based on evidence. Members of the search committee and the search committee as a whole must be able to back up their opinions, statements, and decisions with evidence in the file.


5.1.6. Initial interviews

A subcommittee of department members forms to determine a pool of applicants for consideration. The full committee then narrows this list to a dozen or so candidates, called the short list. 

The next step will be to conduct preliminary remote interviews with all short-listed candidates. A team of at least two search committee members will conduct all initial interviews, which follow a prepared set of questions
that has been approved beforehand by the committee. 

Interviewers will keep in mind that all interviewing is a two-way street: an opportunity for Allegheny to learn more about the candidate and for the candidate to learn more about Allegheny.  

After teleconference interviews are completed, the interviewers will share candidate responses to the set of questions as well as observations about the candidates with the full search committee. Together, the committee will then develop a diverse pool of five or six candidates who will be considered for interviews on campus. These five or six candidates will not be ranked.  

The Search Chair will send these five or six files to the Provost for review; the Provost and Search Chair will decide together which two to three candidates to invite to campus.


5.1.7. On-Campus Interview

The Search Chair must review the Memorandum contained in the Faculty Search Resource Materials from the Provost’s Office for a more detailed description of guidelines for on-campus interviews. Once it is agreed upon who will be invited to campus, the Search Chair should call the candidates to establish the dates. The Search Chair is responsible for all arrangements except where explicitly stated in the paragraphs that follow.

5.1.7a Travel Arrangements

The candidate is responsible for booking their own travel. When confirmation of a candidate’s travel plans is received, the Search Chair should tell the Provost’s Office. Most candidates will find it necessary to spend one night, and sometimes two nights, on campus. The building coordinator is responsible for making meal and lodging arrangements that meed candidate needs and preferences..

5.1.7b Interview Schedule and Participants

Each on-campus interview involves the following: meetings with department faculty, both collectively and individually; the offering of a research seminar and/or classroom teaching; meeting or lunch with students; a 30-minute interview with the Provost; a 30-minute meeting with the Dean of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion; a 30-minute meeting with the Director of Faculty Development; some contact with faculty from other departments; a brief tour of the campus, departmental facilities and, if time permits, the town.

All continuing, full-time members of the department should participate in the on-campus interview; employees who are not continuing may participate only with the approval of the Provost. Once the Search Chair has assembled the schedule, a copy of it will be sent to everyone who will be conducting an interview. This schedule should also indicate where each interview will take place and identify who is responsible for getting the candidate from one place to the next. A one-page curriculum vitae of the candidate should be attached to the itinerary.

5.1.7c Interview Content

During these interviews, the candidate must be clearly informed regarding department and College expectations in terms of courses to be taught, professional growth, advising and so forth. The nature of the position and possibilities for the future will also be discussed. If a candidate inquires about salary and benefits, he or she should be told that the Provost will discuss those items generally with candidates, but not name a specific salary figure except when making an offer.

Questions asked during employment interviews should be directly related to determining the candidate’s qualifications for the appointment. Inquiries regarding race, religion, ethnic background, national origin, marital status, dependents, or age are inappropriate and possibly prejudicial. 

At the end of the on-campus visit, the Search Chair will ask whether the candidate remains interested in the opening, offer to provide additional information, inform each candidate regarding the number of other candidates still to be interviewed, and give some general estimate of when they may expect to hear from the College. The candidate will be told that if they are faced with a job offer decision prior to hearing from the College, the candidate should call the Search Chair or the Provost to inquire about their standing.

5.1.7d Candidate Reimbursement Process

Before the candidate leaves, the Search Chair will furnish the candidate with the candidate travel expense form so that their costs may be reimbursed by the College. This form when completed should be signed by the Department Chair and forwarded directly to the Provost Office.


5.1.8. Recommending Candidates

Soon after the final candidate has left campus, the Search Chair should collect the opinions and input from everyone who met the candidate during the interview. (Forms for doing so are contained in the Faculty Search Resource Materials from the Provost’s Office.) The Search Chair should also discuss with the Provost the strengths and weaknesses of each on-campus candidate. When all the opinions on all the candidates have been collected, the Search Chair should call a meeting of the committee to discuss a recommendation for filling the position.

If the search committee believes that no candidate can sucessfully fulfill the duties of the position, the Search Chair will immediately contact the Provost so that additional on-campus interviews can be arranged. Otherwise, the committee will indicate which of the interviewed candidates are “acceptable” and which are “unacceptable.” Within the acceptable group, the committee may indicate a preference for one candidate over another, although this is not required.

The Provost and Search Chair together will decide who will receive an offer. When agreement is reached all around, the Provost or designee will telephone the candidate to offer them the position.


5.1.9. Notification of Unsuccessful Candidates

When an oral acceptance has been received from a candidate, the Provost will notify the Search Chair and prepare a letter of appointment. The Provost Office will notify the Search Chair when a signed letter of appointment has been returned so that the Search Chair will notify the rest of the candidates via email that the position has been filled. These notifications may only be sent out after a signed letter of appointment has been returned to the College; for candidates who were brought to campus a more personal letter or a phone call may be used. No letter should be sent to any candidate who was offered the position but declined.

Extreme care should be exercised in composing rejection emails. The email must not include a precise or specific cause for rejection. Rather, the language must be cast in deliberately vague terms. These letters may talk about the identification of other candidates whose credentials and experience appear to better suit the College’s particular needs.


5.1.10 Hiring and After

It is important that contact be maintained with the new faculty member over the months prior to their arrival on campus. Not only does it keep the new faculty member’s interest and enthusiasm high, but also it can greatly ease their adjustment to the College and community and avert minor problems in the fall. The Director of Faculty Development will also write to new faculty in August informing them of the fall orientation program. The Department Chair should stay in touch regarding plans, syllabi, textbook orders, and the like for the courses to be taught by the new faculty member. 


5.1.11. Concluding The Search

After the last rejection letter has been sent, the Search Chair will do the following: 1) complete a Search Log & Recruitment Tracking Report (the appropriate form is contained in the Faculty Search Resource Materials shared by the Provost’s Office); and 2) follow the procedure for digital storage of search materials available in the Faculty Resource Materials shared by the Provost Office..


5.1.12. Late-Occurring Vacancies

Any vacancy that develops after April 1 will be considered a late-occurring vacancy if recruitment is for September 1 of the same year. Persons interviewed for such positions should be informed that the post is automatically a one-year temporary post and that a regular search will be held during the coming year to fill the position for the following year. Exceptions to this rule must be approved by the Provost. Under normal conditions, the person holding the one-year temporary position may apply and be a candidate during the full search, but there is no guarantee that they will be the individual selected.

If possible, job announcements for the late-opening vacancy should be sent to universities and professional registers as under normal recruitment procedures. The job description must be posted on the Allegheny web page..

For temporary hires, care will be taken to minimize costs during the search, both in terms of time and dollars. Therefore, outside faculty members are not usually necessary. In addition, the interview may be shortened to one day, and candidates will meet with the Associate Provost rather than the Provost.

Sometimes it may be possible to bring in one candidate at a time for an on-campus interview, or even to conduct only remote interviews.


5.1.13. Part-Time Openings

For full-time one-semester sabbatical replacements or part-time openings, recruitment is usually local rather than national. The job description must be posted and announced internally by the Office of Human Resources, neighboring institutions may be contacted. Care must be taken not to allow the duties of the position to expand beyond those indicated in the description after the person is employed. Visiting faculty who are hired to work full-time as one-semester, sabbatical replacements will be eligible to enroll in the following benefits: medical insurance, dental insurance, and vision insurance. No other benefits are available to full-time, one-semester sabbatical replacements. Part-time appointments are not eligible for benefits. Only persons who have been employed more than half-time for the two immediately preceding academic years may be promoted to full-time without a regular search, and only with the approval of the Provost.


5.1.14. Process for Conversion to the Tenure Track

As is stated in the Introduction to this section of the Faculty Handbook about recruitment guidelines, the College’s faculty appointment “procedures are designed to ensure that the best possible faculty member is hired, that all interested applicants have an opportunity to apply, and that all those who do are treated fairly, equitably, and humanely. Against these goals of quality, opportunity, and equity will be judged all requests for exceptions. All such requests should be directed to the Provost and Dean of the Faculty.” Given these priorities, a national search will be conducted for all tenure-track faculty positions unless a convincing case can be made for converting to tenure-track status a colleague not on the tenure track. For a conversion to be considered, the following three-step process will be followed:

STEP I

The Department Chair will first confirm with the Provost that a tenure-track line is open in the department. Next, the  Department Chair will indicate to the Provost that at least a two-thirds majority of the tenured and tenure-track faculty in the department have indicated, through a paper ballot, that a colleague not currently on the tenure track is an ideal match for the open position. Faculty whose relation to the candidate would in any way suggest a conflict of interest will not participate in this process at any point. If this criterion is not met, the Provost will not entertain the request further and the conversion process will end here.

STEP II

If the requirements of Step I are met, the Department Chair should prepare a written memo to the Provost discussing the possible conversion in terms of the following contextual issues:

  1. What is the status of the open position?
     
  2. What are the current enrollment pressures in the department?
     
  3. What kind of a search led to the hire of the non-tenure-track faculty member in question?
     
  4. What is the diversity composition in the department and does the candidate for conversion expand to that diversity?
     
  5. Does the candidate’s area of specialty add breadth to the department’s offerings?
     
  6. How strong is the candidate’s record in teaching, research (or research potential), and service?
     
  7. How strongly is the candidate supported in the department? Have all department members been consulted, including untenured colleagues?
     
  8. ​Any other information requested by the Provost

The Provost will consider the conversion in consultation with Faculty Council.

STEP III

If the Provost does not support the conversion on the basis of the institutional factors outlined in Step II, the matter will be closed and the conversion denied. If, after Step II, the Provost believes there is merit to considering the conversion, the Provost will invite the submission of conversion material from the Department Chair and the candidate as follows:

Submitted by the Department Chair to the Provost Office:

  1. Unless otherwise approved by the Provost, all available quantitative RSEs. The quantitative summaries of RSEs will be generated by the Associate Provost and sent to the candidate, the Department Chair, and the Provost.
     
  2. All classroom observations.
     
  3. Letter of evaluation from the department, signed by all tenured members.

The Provost Office will upload these to the candidate’s conversion packet through the online portal.

Submitted by the candidate electronically through the online portal:

  1. Self-evaluation and updated cv (will require a digital signature via the online portal).
     
  2. Writing sample, available publications, or other examples of professional development
     
  3. Outside letters of recommendation (optional)

It is the responsibility of the candidate to add these materials and submit their review packet.

Please note: Individual tenured faculty in the department who do not agree with the request may submit to the Provost a separate letter, signed by the author, explaining their position. The Provost Office will upload these to the candidate’s packet through the online portal.  

In addition, the Provost will conduct short interviews of all tenured, tenure-track, and non-tenure track renewable faculty in the department to discuss confidentially the strengths and weaknesses of the candidate and the level of support each faculty member has for the conversion. The Provost will summarize the substance of the interviews in a memo and place that memo into the conversion packet, for review by the Faculty Review Committee.

The conversion request will be reviewed in a subsequent meeting of the FRC, which will discuss strengths and weaknesses of the candidate and make a recommendation to the Provost. The final decision about the conversion shall be made by the Provost; both the decision and the reasons behind it shall be conveyed to the candidate, the Department Chair and to the FRC by the Provost.

A department may initiate the process for conversion to the tenure track at any time during the academic year; however, requests will be reviewed by the FRC as its schedule allows.

Dissenting letters, should any exist, will not be included in the Provost’s file for the faculty member but will be retained according to the College’s standard hiring practices. The faculty member will consult with the Provost about what materials in the conversion packet, such as quantitative RSEs, classroom observations, and self-evaluations, will be maintained for inclusion in future reviews..

(Revised 15 November 2012, 16 February 2015, 12 March 2020, 6 May 2021, 16 February 2023)

5.2 Faculty Appointments

Introduction

5.2.1 Faculty Status and Faculty Rank

The Faculty is composed of the President, the Provost, the Associate Provosts and Associate Deans, and all Professors, Associate Professors, Assistant Professors, full-time Instructors, and other College employees holding academic tenure or designated as faculty by the President in a letter of appointment. Among the Faculty, some hold Faculty Status but do not hold Faculty Rank (e.g. the President) and are considered administrators. Those with Faculty Status and Rank (i.e. Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor) may be relieved from teaching responsibilities to serve as a full-time administrator on the President’s Cabinet for a defined period. During this time, their primary responsibility is administrative.

Faculty Status confers upon the holder a responsibility to attend general meetings of the Faculty and to participate in Matriculation, Commencement and other official ceremonies of the College wearing academic regalia. It confers expectation and privilege to serve on standing committees in the governance structure of the Faculty or College, and to serve as Faculty Moderator or Faculty Secretary. Among those with Faculty Status, only those with Faculty Rank (i.e. Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor) may be tenured as members of the Faculty.

Those with Faculty Status and/or rank who serve on the President’s Cabinet shall not vote in faculty meetings; their voting rights shall be restored as soon as they leave their Cabinet position. Only non-Cabinet faculty members may vote at Faculty meetings and in Faculty elections, and be elected to serve on Faculty Council or the Faculty Review Committee. Those with Faculty Status, but not Faculty rank, are considered administrators in all respects other than those outlined above.

When appointed to administrative roles, faculty letters of appointment will clearly state what departmental functions the faculty member will retain for the duration of their administrative service, and will maintain their existing clocks towards promotion and sabbatical. Final decisions for these situations will rest with the Provost in consultation with Faculty Council, the Department Chair, and the faculty member.


5.2.2  Community of Scholars

Allegheny College is a community of scholars dedicated to serve, with respect and concern, the intellectual, moral, and social needs of its constituency. The most important continuing responsibility of such a community is to maintain the excellence of its teaching staff. To accomplish this, the traditions, strengths, and goals of the College and the strengths, interests, and ambitions of individual faculty members must be creatively and imaginatively integrated by the mutual efforts and concerns of faculty and administration. Such mutual endeavor requires encouragement and support of faculty and program development, fair and humane assessment of faculty performance, continuing dedication to and support of those disciplines for which faculty are responsible, and active support of the College program as a whole.


5.2.3 Academic Freedom

The presupposition of such mutual endeavor and respect is the principle and exercise of academic freedom. The College, as a community, firmly commits itself to the following principles of the AAUP 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure.

  1. Teachers are entitled to full freedom in research and in the publication of the results, subject to the adequate performance of their other academic duties; but research for pecuniary return should be based upon an understanding with the authorities of the institution.
     
  2. Teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their subject. Limitations of academic freedom because of religious or other aims of the institution should be clearly stated in writing at the time of the appointment.
     
  3. College or university teachers are citizens, members of a learned profession, and officers of an educational institution. When they speak or write as  citizens, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline, but their special position in the community imposes special obligations. As scholars and educational officers, they should remember that the public may judge their profession and their institution by their utterances. Hence they should at all times be accurate, should exercise appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that they are not speaking for the institution.


5.2.4 Reappointment

Any reappointment takes place within an institutional context. Because the College is an integrated community, the professional appraisal of an individual faculty member occurs within the context of an appraisal of the College. The individual’s performance and promise is judged within the context of the department(s), areas of study, and the College as a whole. Through normal college communication channels, the individual should be aware of that context. The Department Chair will discuss fully with each individual their particular place within the context. The discussion will include such factors as rank and imminent retirements within the department, teaching and advising loads, the development of areas of expertise, and the ratio of tenured to untenured faculty. The College does not limit the number or percentage of faculty tenured in a department, even though the College as a whole will not have a faculty made up entirely of tenured people.


5.2.5 Overview of Standards for Faculty

The College seeks for its faculty those persons who will, most importantly, make outstanding contributions in teaching; will demonstrate excellence in research (as defined below); and will contribute to the total life of the community. All are essential. Some of the personal qualities which contribute to excellence in these three areas are: intellectual ability and curiosity, analytical power, initiative, energy, imagination, creativity, clarity of expression, integrity, and a sympathetic appreciation for the viewpoints of others.
 

5.2.6 College Support for Faculty

The College, for its part, will seek to assist faculty by providing a context of freedom, protection from harassment, and, commensurate with its ability, adequate physical facilities for teaching and research, support in money and time for responsible and promising research, encouragement of professional development, and resources for the improvement and development of research, scholarship and creative activity relevant to a faculty member’s area of expertise.


5.2.7 Evaluation of Faculty

The College is also responsible for the periodic evaluation of its faculty both in terms of the individual’s record of performance and the promise in that performance. The amount and type of information available for evaluating a person will change as an individual’s career advances. The burden of proof rests on the faculty member to demonstrate performance and promise. By the time the individual is considered for tenure, the candidate must have demonstrated conclusively outstanding contributions in teaching, excellence in research, and contributions to the learning community. There should be ample reason to expect that once granted tenure, an individual will continue to be productive in the areas of teaching, research, scholarship, creative activity, and contributions to the learning community.

5.2.8 Tenure Committee and Promotion Committee

Faculty at Allegheny College are typically evaluated for tenure or promotion by their department. In cases where there are fewer than three faculty members of sufficient rank in a department, a Tenure Committee may be formed. In cases where there are fewer than two faculty members of sufficient rank in a department, a Promotion Committee may be formed. Tenure Committees for tenure track candidates and Promotion Committees for tenured candidates are evaluative committees formed outside of a department through a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). The Tenure Committee members and Promotion Committee members will be named as an Addendum to the Tenure MoU or Promotion MoU so that candidates know which faculty members are on their committee and so that, if a named member of  the Tenure Committee or Promotion Committee is unable to continue to serve, they can be replaced without rewriting the MoU. Tenure Committees can be constructed under two conditions: 1) as the evaluating “department” for tenure-track candidates in a department with fewer than three tenured faculty members and 2) in exceptional circumstances as deemed by the Provost.

Promotion Committees can be constructed under two conditions: 1) for candidates who seek to be promoted and do not have two members in their department of sufficient rank, and 2) in exceptional circumstances as deemed by the Provost. The candidate or the Department Chair of hire can initiate the process to name a Tenure Committee or Promotion Committee.


5.2.9 Tenure Committee and Promotion Committee Membership

Tenure Committees will consist of three tenured faculty members who share pedagogical and/or research interests with the candidate. Members of the Tenure Committees will be named by the Provost in consultation with the faculty member and the Department Chair of hire. The faculty member will provide a list of potential committee members, the Department Chair of hire will provide a list of potential committee members, and the final decision to appoint a Tenure Committee and its composition, including the Committee Chair, rests with the Provost after consulting with the Department Chair of hire and the candidate. The Provost should select a Promotion Committee composition that can adequately speak to the candidate’s qualities related to the criteria outlined in 5.2.13-5.2.24. It is recommended, as applicable, that at least one member of the department of hire serve on the Tenure Committee.  In some instances, the number of members of a department with tenure status may increase after a Tenure Committee has been established for a candidate’s evaluation process. In such instances, the Tenure Committee will remain intact and it will be expected that newly tenured members of the department will be added to the Tenure Committee.  In exceptional circumstances, adding a newly tenured department member to the Tenure Committee may not be appropriate.  The final decision to add a newly tenured department member to a Tenure Committee will be made with the Provost in consultation with the Department Chair and tenure candidate.

If a Promotion Committee needs to be convened for a tenured member of the faculty, it will follow a similar process. The faculty member will provide a list of potential committee members. If applicable, the Department Chair of hire will provide a list of potential committee members. The final decision to appoint a Promotion Committee and its composition, including the Promotion Committee Chair, rests with the Provost after consulting with the Department Chair of hire and the candidate. The Provost should select a Promotion Committee composition that can adequately speak to the candidate’s qualities related to the criteria outlined in 5.2.13-5.2.24. It is recommended, as applicable, that at least one member of the department of hire serve on the Promotion Committee.

Tenure Committees and Promotion Committees will serve as the “department” and be responsible for evaluating and working with faculty members to understand what is needed to meet the expectations for two-year appointment, pre-tenure, tenure, and promotion based on the terms established in the Faculty Handbook. The Tenure Committee Chair will serve as the “Chair” as outlined in Section 5.2 of the Faculty Handbook. The Tenure Committee Chair also will work closely with the Department Chair of hire (if they are not the same person) to ensure that teaching assignments, space, other resources, and mentoring (departmental and institutional) are aligned to support the faculty member in their work.


5.2.10 Tenure Committee Procedures

If the Tenure Committee is convened in the first year of a candidate’s appointment, the Chair of the Tenure Committee will serve as the Chair for the Second Year Appointment as outlined in the Faculty Handbook Section 5.2.28-32 with the Tenure Committee serving as the tenured members of the department. The Tenure Committee Chair will be responsible for creating a policy for teaching observations, arranging a schedule for teaching observations, and ensuring that the teaching observations are added to the candidate’s review packet. Prior to review, the Tenure Committee Chair will work with the candidate to make sure that all the materials are in the portal and avoid duplication, and following the dates and deadlines outlined in the Faculty Handbook, will convene the committee members to review the second appointment review packet and discuss the candidate’s self evaluation. The Tenure Committee Chair will draft the “departmental evaluation” and make a clear positive or negative recommendation that is supported by evidence in the packet. As relevant, the department of hire can contribute a letter to the file based on the candidate’s contribution to departmental activities (e.g. departmental meetings and admissions events).

If the Tenure Committee is convened after the second year appointment review, the Tenure Committee Chair will serve as the Chair for the pre-tenure review and follow the steps as outlined in the Faculty Handbook Section 5.2.33-5.2.37 with the Tenure Committee serving as the tenured members of the department. The Tenure Committee Chair should follow the guidelines as described under the two-year appointment above, including submitting teaching observations and the “department” evaluation letter, as well as the additional processes as outlined in the Faculty Handbook Section 5.2.30. As relevant, the department of hire can contribute a letter to the file based on the candidate’s contribution to departmental activities. 

The Tenure Committee Chair will serve as the Chair for the tenure review and follow the steps as outlined in the Faculty Handbook Section 5.2.39-5.2.46. If the Tenure Committee is convened after the pre-tenure review, the Tenure Committee Chair will serve as the Chair for the candidate’s tenure review with the Tenure Committee serving as the tenured members of the “department.” At the time of tenure review, the Tenure Committee Chair will be responsible for making sure the candidate’s teaching observations and the “department” evaluation letter are submitted to the review packet in the Provost Office. Members of the department of hire who are not on the tenure committee will also be interviewed by the tenure subcommittee and may serve as faculty in the candidate member’s cognate area as outlined in the Faculty Handbook Section 5.2.42. Candidates can also choose additional cognate area faculty to be interviewed.  As relevant, the department of hire can contribute a letter to the file based on the candidate’s contribution to departmental activities.


5.2.11 Promotion Committee Procedures

In the case of promotion to full professor, the Promotion Committee Chair will serve as the “Department” Chair and the Promotion Committee will serve as the senior members of the candidate’s “department.” The Promotion Committee will follow the guidelines as outlined in Section 5.3 of the Faculty Handbook.


5.2.12 Replacement of Tenure Committee Members

If a member or members of a Tenure Committee need(s) to be replaced, then the Tenure Committee Chair, members of the Tenure Committee, and/or the Provost are responsible for initiating this process. The Provost will ask the candidate and Tenure Committee Chair (or Department Chair of hire in the case that the Tenure Committee Chair leaves the college) for their list of potential members, and the decision to name the new tenure committee member will rest with the Provost after consulting with the Tenure Committee Chair and the candidate.  A similar process for replacing member(s) of a Promotion Committee.

5.2.13 Criteria for Evaluation

The criteria for the evaluation of faculty members by peers, students and the College administration reflect high standards of performance. The criteria themselves are based on the responsibilities of the Faculty to the College community. These fall into three broad categories: teaching; research, scholarship and creative activity; and maintaining a learning community. Faculty are expected to demonstrate how they contribute to the institutional mission and learning objectives, including toward supporting a diverse, equitable, and inclusive campus as described in the Statement of Community and Tenets of Inclusive Excellence. These are interdependent and all relate finally to teaching, the Faculty’s primary responsibility.


5.2.14 Criteria: Teaching

Allegheny College seeks to employ faculty who demonstrate both outstanding ability and creativity in teaching and contribute significantly to the intellectual activity of their discipline, to the College mission, to institutional learning objectives, and to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Effective teaching communicates to the student the value of learning. In addition to demonstrating expertise in their subject matter, successful teachers evoke thoughtful, reasoned, and creative responses to the material presented. Faculty members must maintain high standards for their students’ performance, but they must also provide the resources and support necessary to allow students to meet these standards.

The Faculty is responsible for the academic program of the College. Faculty members design and teach courses and programs (both departmental and interdisciplinary) which serve to educate our students in their respective disciplines and which are appropriate to an undergraduate liberal arts curriculum. These activities are based on current knowledge in a specific field of specialization and on an ability to place this knowledge within a broader context. Faculty members are at once specialists and generalists.

Faculty members are also members of the larger academic community, professionals who represent their various disciplines to the Allegheny community. As such, they contribute to the intellectual life of that larger community of scholars and interact with colleagues in their field of specialization. In order to communicate to students and to colleagues the present state of a constantly evolving body of knowledge, their teaching must be informed by research, scholarship, and creative activities. It is essential that our students understand not only the values and methodologies of a discipline but also its unanswered questions. Ongoing research, scholarship, and creative activities enable the Faculty to teach by example, to teach creatively, and to demonstrate enthusiasm for and commitment to the intellectual life. It is in these ways that Faculty transmit their enthusiasm for and their understanding of the liberal arts to our students.

Allegheny College supports the use of all teaching practices that enhance student engagement, intellectual growth, and persistence at Allegheny. These practices can take place in a variety of contexts: in classrooms; in laboratories; in the field; in clinical settings; through service learning and community-based learning; team-teaching; clustered courses; learning communities; collaborative learning; diversity and global learning; internships; and through the mentoring of students, including through student research. 

Advising of students, both formal and informal, is considered an integral part of teaching at Allegheny. Faculty should be sensitive to diversity, equity, and inclusion and to student circumstances and should create productive learning environments in the classroom and in informal discussions. In a residential college, the Faculty, through its contributions to college policy, through interaction with students, and by example, ensure that the intellectual, ethical and creative values inherent in the academic disciplines are manifested in the life of the College.

The faculty member under review must present a record of effectiveness in teaching. Evaluation of the effectiveness of specific teaching practices should include recognition of the contingent circumstances that might complicate their implementation. In such cases it falls principally to the faculty member under review to explain the impact of such circumstances. Allegheny College recognizes that approaches to teaching and the types of evidence of teaching effectiveness may vary across fields and candidates (see below). Accordingly, variance in candidate portfolios may also be expected.

5.2.15 Evaluation of Teaching

The following is a list of the specific criteria on which we base evaluations as well as the sources of evidence which are used in the assessment of each faculty member’s performance. These are not meant to be exclusive. Those who wish to present additional evidence may do so. In evaluating performance in teaching the degree of excellence attained in doing the following is assessed

  1. Demonstrating competence in one’s field of specialization and across disciplines. In order to demonstrate such competence, faculty members should do the following:
    1. Introduce into their courses as appropriate and help students to evaluate relevant and/or current literature, scholarship, and creative works. 
       
    2. Demonstrate an ongoing concern for problems of practitioners in their field(s) and for finding innovative solutions to these problems.
       
    3. Teach their discipline within a liberal arts context, enhancing students’ and peers’ awareness of the place of their field of specialization within the larger body of human knowledge.
       
    4. Demonstrate a willingness and ability to explore new areas of inquiry. (See also Criteria: Research, Scholarship, and Creative Activity.)
  2. Designing and organizing courses that are academically sound, advance departmental and/or institutional learning objectives, and are organized clearly and logically (as documented in course syllabi) in such a way as to interest, stimulate and challenge students. Courses should be appropriate to the departmental or interdisciplinary program of which they are a part and also appropriate to the liberal arts curriculum.

   c. Presenting course materials. In presenting course materials, faculty members should do the following:

  1. Communicate effectively and clearly.
     
  2. Demonstrate commitment to teaching and learning.
     
  3. Encourage students to think critically and independently and to participate actively.
     
  4. Challenge and motivate students to engage with the course material.

   d. Maintaining standards and evaluating students. In order to help students realize their potential, faculty members should do the following:

  1. Mentor students to strive for high standards of performance.
     
  2. Devise appropriate and challenging assignments and examinations
    .
  3. Demonstrate personal and professional integrity, including in the evaluation of assignments and examinations.

   e. Advising and aiding students. In order to advise students effectively and to create productive learning environments outside classroom, faculty members should do the following:

  1. Be available for student consultation.
     
  2. Participate in or organize co-curricular activities as appropriate.
     
  3. Be sensitive to diversity, equity, and inclusion and to students’ contingent circumstances.

5.2.16 Self-evaluation of Teaching

The teaching portion of the self-evaluation should employ the criteria and standards discussed above and should thoughtfully discuss and indicate the faculty member’s strengths and weaknesses. Faculty members are expected to provide evidence to support the evaluation of their teaching. The following is a partial, although non-exhaustive, list of some sources of evidence that can be used to demonstrate excellence in teaching.

  1. Assessments by tenured colleagues based on classroom observations; records of advising and mentoring, including of senior projects; and enrollment and grading patterns.
    1. For purposes of assessment as well as mentoring, all tenured members of a department are expected to visit the classroom of an untenured colleague and write up the findings of those observations for the candidate’s file (see Section 2.6.3).
    2. Department practices may vary in the details, but every department is required to have written guidelines that are available to the candidate and that should help guide both the candidate and the department in fulfilling the expectations of the College.
  2. Assessments by colleagues within the discipline (these may include outside specialists where appropriate) and by other members of the professional staff of the College as appropriate. These are based primarily upon course materials such as syllabi, reading lists, hand-outs, assignments and exams, observation of performance and in interaction with students, and student comprehensive projects.
     
  3. Assessments by students, including Reports of Student Experience (RSEs), letters from students and alumni, and interviews with students.
     
  4. Evidence of pedagogical development, such as discussion of syllabi and other instructional materials and approaches; new course development and course redesign; and professional development activities and efforts aimed at improvement of teaching. Faculty are encouraged to discuss how their course content, classroom environment, and/or mentorship advances diversity, equity, and inclusion at the College.


5.2.17 Criteria: Research, Scholarship, and Creative Activity

Research, scholarship, and creative activity is defined here as a systematic and extended effort to enhance understanding and competence in areas of academic responsibility and interest. It constitutes an ongoing conversation that is sometimes individual and other times collaborative, with academic peers, students, and/or community members.  The results or findings and the processes by which such results or findings are determined are essential to maintaining the intellectual vitality and growth of the individual teacher/scholars who make up the Faculty as well as the vitality and growth of the communities of which they are a part.  Research, scholarship, and creative activity and its public presentation of to peers – academic, student, and community – are thus essential for that dialectical process which marks scholarly advancement and achievement. 


5.2.18 Evaluation of Research, Scholarship, and Creative Activity

The College is more interested in the quality of the communications and the processes that lead to them than in the number of items published or presented. The College will do what it can to encourage and facilitate such quality work. The department and the candidate bear primary responsibility for demonstrating how the quality and/or quantity of the research, scholarship, and/or creative activity constitute excellence.

Excellence in research, scholarship, and creative activity rests on the capacity to develop significant findings from investigation or original thought. This excellence may be pursued individually or as part of a collaboration with academic peers, students, or community members. It may be demonstrated through a wide range of efforts to advance knowledge or understanding, including research projects, descriptions and analyses of a field, artistic and creative projects and products, the scholarship of teaching and learning, and the development or improvement of analytical tools. Regardless of the form this takes and whether it is individual or collaborative, the paramount criteria of excellence must be clearly documented in the portfolio at the time of review.


5.2.19 Self-evaluation of Research, Scholarship, and Creative Activity

The research, scholarship, and creative activity portion of the self-evaluation should employ the criteria and standards discussed above and should thoughtfully discuss the arc and rationale of the candidate’s program(s) of work as well as future avenues of inquiry. Faculty members are expected to provide evidence to support the evaluation of their activity in this area. 

The College supports diverse approaches to scholarship, creative activity, and professional development, including work that results in forms other than published or public works and presentations. These may include:

  1. Books; monographs; literary forms; articles; papers; reports of studies to seminars and other professional groups; collaborative presentations; grant proposals; review of community, state, or national programs; contribution to or development of community-based programs or initiatives; public productions, exhibitions, and performances; electronic productions including computer programs, internet and other technology-based materials; and communication within academic circles, professional associations, and broader communities, including those which are non-academic.

  2. While all faculty are expected to undertake professional activities that produce scholarly results such as publications or other finite outcomes, creative and scholarly practices may also produce other sorts of results that are also valued professionally at Allegheny. The candidate undertaking such work should demonstrate how this work, in its results and by its processes, constitutes a valuable accomplishment and how it contributes to the advancement of their field(s). When appropriate, candidates are also encouraged to discuss how their professional activity supports diversity, equity, and inclusion at Allegheny and within their broader discipline.
     
  3. The College recognizes that the evaluation of some research, scholarly, and creative activities can require the consideration of contingent circumstances that may complicate the completion of such practices. In such cases it falls principally to the faculty member under review to explain the impact of such circumstances.


5.2.20 Criteria: Maintaining a Learning Community

The Allegheny Faculty has always shouldered a special responsibility for the ongoing task of building and maintaining a learning community. This responsibility cannot be divorced from teaching and research but is rather an extension of these. Faculty members share their knowledge and expertise with both students and colleagues through their teaching and research activities. By helping to develop and implement College policies, they demonstrate the importance of responsibility in shared governance.

All new members of the Faculty shall complete a training session on the College Bylaws and Faculty Handbook as part of the orientation process for new faculty. Such training sessions shall be open to all members of the Faculty who wish to participate of their own volition but are required for new members of the Faculty. This training shall be facilitated by the Director of Faculty Development. 


5.2.21 Contributions to the Campus Community

Some of the ways faculty members may contribute to building and maintaining the academic community  at the College include: participating in departmental and faculty meetings and in ceremonial occasions; undertaking administrative tasks for the department; serving on ad hoc and standing committees and working groups; providing advice and support to members of the administration; and advising student groups.

The faculty member should communicate frequently with their Department Chair concerning work towards maintaining the learning community. Faculty work on committees is too important to go unrecognized, and the Chair must know what the faculty member is doing both to help assure equity in workload. While other activities, such as those detailed below, may also constitute contributions to the broader learning community, they do not substitute for expected contributions to the College community.


5.2.22 Contributions to Loccal and Regional Communities

Additionally, faculty members may demonstrate contributions to a learning community by participating or sharing knowledge in the broader local and regional community. The College values thoughtful engagement with community partners which may take diverse forms and be documented in multiple ways.


5.2.23 Contributions to Professional Communities

Faculty also may demonstrate contributions to a learning community by, among other activities, participating in professional organizations or societies, including serving in positions of leadership such as an officer in a national organization, mentoring colleagues at other institutions, editing a disciplinary journal, or conducting peer-review of academic works for journals, conferences, granting agencies, or other programs.


5.2.24 Self-evaluation of Maintaining a Learning Community

The portion of the self-evaluation discussing contributions to maintaining a learning community should employ the criteria and standards discussed above and should thoughtfully discuss how the candidate’s involvement meaningfully relates to their teaching and/or research, scholarship, and creative activity; how it substantively engages with the needs of community partners; and/or how it may advance diversity, equity, and inclusion at the College or in the broader community. Documentation in the portfolio in support of these outcomes may include items such as: 

  1. Letters from committee Chairs and community partners
     
  2. Outcomes of grants, reports, presentations, projects, or other endeavors with community partners
     
  3. Evidence of leadership or major contributions to professional organizations, associations, or societies
     
  4. Media coverage
     

5.2.25 Teaching and Research in More Than One Field

Faculty may have a formal affiliation or joint appointment in more than one department or program; joint appointment or formal affiliation is defined by the appointment letter or by a Memorandum of Understanding (see Section 5.4), respectively. Joint appointments will have letters from each of the department(s)/program(s) due at the same date and time, and signed in the same manner, as specified for department evaluations in the appropriate sections of the Faculty Handbook. The Chair and tenured members of a formally affiliated department or program may submit a letter of evaluation for any of the review stages; such letters need to be signed in the same manner as specified for department evaluations and submitted electronically to the Provost Office by the date and time that the review packet closes to additions by the candidate (unless specified differently in a Memorandum of Understanding). The Provost Office will upload this to the candidate’s review packet. Note that the Chair and tenured faculty of affiliated departments or programs do not have access to the candidate’s digital review packet, but can ask the candidate for relevant information (e.g., self-evaluation, current institutional c.v.).


5.2.26 Progression of Full-Time, Tenure-Track Faculty Appointments

All faculty are expected to provide the Provost and their Department Chair a written “Annual Activities Report” (AAR). Each spring about a month before the end of the semester, the Provost’s office will remind faculty members of this expectation, provide the format, the process for submitting the report, and deadline for the report. AARs will be added to the faculty files to be accessible during review of faculty members for continuation, tenure, promotion, and salary considerations.

The chart below summarizes the normal progression of contracts. If the notification deadline or due date for submitted materials for the second appointment, pre-tenure appointment, tenure, or promotion process falls on a non-working day, notifications and materials will be due on the next working day. The same applies for all dates for all reviews. In the event of extraordinary extenuating circumstances, such as the death of an immediate family member, candidates should consult with the Provost and the Chair of the Faculty Review Committee about potentially amending submission deadlines.

Appointment

Appointment Length

Notification Deadline

initial

two academic years

second

two academic years, or termination of employment

November 1 of the second year of employment

pre-tenure

three academic years, or terminal one academic year

December 15 of the fourth year of employment

tenure

tenure awarded, or terminal one academic year

December 15 of the seventh year of employment

Faculty who are granted a leave (paid or unpaid) of three or more course-equivalents in a twelve month period, with the exception of a pre-tenure leave, may receive a one-year extension to the current contract for each such leave. Extension requests must be made within six months of return to employment.

Exceptions to this policy may be made only by the President. No exceptions will be made after January 1 of the year in which a candidate is considered by the Faculty Review Committee for the first time.


5.2.27 Professional Growth

As the progression of appointments indicates, the normal probationary period for full-time faculty stretches over seven years of active employment. This period allows faculty to demonstrate performance and promise. It also provides the College with the opportunity to assist the faculty in professional growth and development as well as to collect necessary evidence to make contractual decisions. Since it is important for the College to acquire the best possible people in teaching, in research, and in building a learning community, credit will not normally be awarded for teaching service elsewhere. Exceptions will be made only as part of the initial appointment letter. Faculty who do not possess the appropriate terminal degree will normally be appointed at the instructor level. Instructors who do not receive the required terminal degree by the time of pre-tenure review will normally be terminated in their fourth year of employment. During the probationary period, work assignments of the faculty member may be adjusted by the Department Chair in consultation with the Provost to create opportunities for professional growth and to be able to answer questions about performance and promise. For this reason, it is expected that faculty in their first two years of employment will not serve on College committees. Committee work, a part of building the community, should not under normal circumstances be a significant component of the work time of a faculty member until they have completed three full years of teaching at Allegheny.

While the College will guide and assist faculty members in their professional growth and development throughout the probationary period, the burden of proof rests on the faculty member to demonstrate performance and promise. Although the areas to be evaluated do not change during the course of the probationary period, the level of competence in performance and promise must change. With every appointment, especially the pre-tenure, the level of confidence must be higher.
 

5.2.28 The Second Appointment

In February of the candidate’s first year of employment on the tenure-track appointment, the Provost Office will initiate the second appointment review packet for the candidate. At this time, the Provost Office will add the available quantitative RSEs, classroom observations, and the Annual Activities Report (AAR) for year one to the second appointment review packet through the online portal. By the end of every semester of employment, the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair will electronically submit at least one classroom observation completed by tenured faculty up to that date to the Provost Office. Classroom observations will not be accepted after 5:00 PM on September 10 of the year of review. The Provost Office will upload these to the candidate’s review packet. It is the responsibility of the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair, in communication with the candidate, to ensure that all classroom observations are provided to the Provost Office, without duplication.


5.2.29 Second Appointment Self-Evaluation and Review Packet

By 5 p.m. on September 15 of the second year of the tenure-track appointment the candidate must submit their second-appointment review packet through the online portal. The packet must contain material added by the Provost Office (as listed in the preceding paragraph) and the following items added by the candidate: a current institutional curriculum vitae (c.v.), a self-evaluation covering the period since the start date, and other supporting material deemed appropriate by the candidate (such as additional teaching materials from year one, copies of relevant scholarly work since start date). The c.v. and self-evaluation will require a digital signature via the online portal. It is the responsibility of the candidate to add these materials and to digitally submit their review packet. Candidates whose masterials are not uploaded by the deadline must contact the Provost within 24 hours and provide documentation of an extraordinary event. Failure to meet the deadline or provide acceptable documentation will result in the termination of the tenure-track appointment after the third year of appointment.

The self-evaluation should employ the criteria and standards discussed in Paragraphs 5.2.13 through 5.2.24 and should indicate the faculty member’s strengths and weaknesses. The institutional c.v. is an expanded curriculum vitae that lists all professional activities as a member of the Allegheny College faculty. It can be organized around teaching, professional development, and service and might list any or all of the following items: education and background, positions held, courses taught, courses developed, curricular innovation, work on senior projects, responsibilities for advising majors and non-majors, teaching development activities, other teaching activities, publications and presentations, grants written and/or funded, service to professional organizations, other professional activities, department service, committee service, and other service. 


5.2.30 Second Appointment Evaluation by the Department or Tenure Committee

The Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chairperson shall convene the tenured members of the department or Tenure Committee to review the second appointment review packet and discuss the self-evaluation (including supporting documents, if any); to decide what areas may require additional exploration; and to share observations about the candidate’s work. When for some reason in a particular case any tenured member of the department would like to consider a candidate’s narrative evaluations, they may do so by obtaining them from that person’s Department Chair. These deliberations, and the recommendations resulting from them, must take into account current staff, department needs and plans, and, to the extent possible, the direction of the College. The expectation is that the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair will then draft a departmental evaluation of the candidate including a recommendation for renewal or non-renewal. If circumstances warrant (e.g., conflict of interests or an excessive number of letters being due in a particular cycle), the drafting of this letter may be undertaken by other tenured members of the department or Tenure Committee. If one departmental or Tenure Committee evaluation is not possible, then several may be submitted provided that the author(s) sign the document(s). Departmental or Tenure Committee evaluation(s) will follow closely the criteria and standards discussed above, and should delineate specific areas where improvements are required as well as specific areas where the candidate has achieved excellence or demonstrates particular promise. 

The departmental or Tenure Committee evaluation(s) must be submitted by the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair by 5 p.m. on October 1 electronically to the Provost Office with signatures of all relevant department members and the candidate (the candidate’s signature denotes that they have read the document, it does not imply agreement). The Provost Office will add the department or Tenure Committee evaluation(s) to the second-appointment review packet via the online portal by October 2. The candidate will receive notification of this addition to their review packet. The candidate will then have until 5 p.m. on October 9 to submit a document in response to the department or Tenure Committee evaluation(s) via the online portal, should they choose to do so.


5.2.31 Second Appointment Evaluation by the Provost

The Provost reviews the second appointment review packet and delivers a recommendation to the President by 5 p.m. on October 15, with copies to the candidate and Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair. This recommendation notes agreement with the departmental or Tenure Committee evaluation(s) or indicates how the Provost’s assessment of the candidate’s areas of strength, promise, or weakness deviates from the departmental assessment. The faculty member may prepare a response to the Provost’s recommendation submitted in writing to the President by 5 p.m. on October 24 with a copy sent to the Provost Office. At a later time the candidate meets with the Provost to discuss the recommendation. At that meeting the candidate signs and dates the Provost’s recommendation and retains a copy of the recommendation. Signing does not imply agreement. The Provost’s recommendation, once signed by the candidate, and any response to the Provost’s recommendation, will be uploaded by the Provost Office to the second appointment review packet.


5.2.32 Second Appointment Evaluation by the President

The President will review the materials and decide whether a second two-year contract will be offered to the candidate. The decision of the President is final and binding. In the event that the President’s decision differs from the department’s or Tenure Committee’s recommendation, the reasons for that decision will be communicated to the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair orally and in confidence. The candidate will be notified by November 1.


5.2.33 The Pre-Tenure Appointment

In February of the candidate’s third year of employment, the Provost Office will initiate the pre-tenure review packet for the candidate. At this time, the Provost Office will add to the pre-tenure review packet the candidate’s complete second-appointment review packet (merged as a single document) along with available quantitative Reports of Student Experience (RSEs), classroom observations, and annual activities reports since the second-appointment review packet. Quantitative summaries of RSEs will be generated by the Registrar and sent by July 1 (following the third year of employment) to the candidate, the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair, and the Provost. The Provost Office will add these summaries to the pre-tenure review packet. For faculty converted to the tenure-track, and with the prior approval of the Provost, some or all pre-conversion RSEs may be excluded from the summaries. In instances of Conversion to the Tenure Track, if there was no formal Second Appointment Review, then the Conversion Review packet will be uploaded by the Provost Office instead of the second-appointment review packet. Note: during the transition from paper review files to the online review system standard documents (e.g., department/Tenure Committee evaluation(s), self evaluation, Provost recommendation to the President regarding reappointment, RSEs, annual activities reports, classroom observations) are compiled and uploaded by the Provost Office; any other materials are uploaded by the candidate.

By the end of every semester of employment, the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair will electronically submit at least one classroom observation completed by tenured faculty for the candidate’s years of employment since the second-appointment review packet to the Provost Office (normally years two and three). Classroom observations will not be accepted after 5:00 PM on September 10 of the year of review. The Profost Office will upload these to the candidate’s review packet. It is the responsibility of the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair, in communication with the candidate, to ensure that all classroom observations are provided to the Provost Office, without duplication.


5.2.34 Pre-Tenure Self-Evaluation and Review Packet

By 5 p.m. on September 15 of the fourth year of employment the candidate must submit their pre-tenure review packet through the online portal. The packet must contain material added by the Provost Office (as listed in the preceding paragraph) and the following items added by the candidate: a current institutional c.v., a self-evaluation covering the period since the start date, and other supporting material deemed appropriate by the candidate (such as additional teaching materials, copies of relevant scholarly work since the second appointment review). The c.v. and self-evaluation will require a digital signature via the online portal. It is the responsibility of the candidate to add these materials and to submit their review packet. The candidate can continue to add material to the pre-tenure review packet through 5 p.m. on September 15, at which point the review packet will close to all additions except the departmental evaluation(s) and, if applicable, the candidate’s response to the departmental (or Tenure Committee when applicable) evaluations(s).


5.2.35 Pre-Tenure Evaluation by the Department or Tenure Committee

The departmental or Tenure Committee evaluation should follow the guidelines as described under the two-year appointment. The department’s or Tenure Committee’s review of the packet should begin with the self-evaluation. The department or Tenure Committee is also encouraged to review previous recommendations and evaluations to help it see better what growth has occurred over time, and it is reminded that the greater contract length presumes greater confidence in the candidate’s performance and promise. The longer contract length and more thorough reviews at this point are intended to serve as a pre-tenure review. Candidates unlikely to receive tenure should not be recommended for a pre-tenure appointment. A frank appraisal, including discussion of both strengths and weaknesses, is more helpful to the candidate and to the review process than an evaluation that ignores potential problem areas. The department or Tenure Committee evaluation should make a clear positive or negative recommendation that is supported by the evidence in the packet. 

The department or Tenure Committee evaluation(s) must be submitted by the Chair by 5 p.m. on October 15 electronically to the Provost Office with signatures of all relevant department or Tenure Committee members and the candidate (the candidate’s signature denotes that they have read the document, it does not imply agreement). The Provost Office will add the department or Tenure Committee evaluation(s) to the pre-tenure review packet via the online portal by 5 p.m. on October 16. The candidate will receive notification of this addition to their review packet. The candidate will have until 5 p.m. on October 23—that is, seven calendar days after they are to have received the evaluation(s)—to submit a document in response to the department or Tenure Committee evaluation(s) via the online portal, should they choose to do so.


5.2.36 Pre-Tenure Evaluation by the Faculty Review Committee

The Provost will share these new materials with the members of the Faculty Review Committee. All inquiries and deliberations involved in this process will be conducted in the strictest confidence. At the conclusion of the discussion of each candidate, a preliminary poll on whether the candidate should be recommended for the pre-tenure contract will be taken. After each candidate has been considered and all preliminary polls have been completed, the Committee will vote officially on whether to recommend the pre-tenure contract for each candidate. Members of the Faculty Review Committee who have served as Institutional Mentors to, are members of the Tenure Committee, or who are in the same department as, a candidate may neither participate in the discussion nor vote on the Committee’s recommendation.

The Secretary of the Committee will count the vote, the Provost will record the vote, and it will constitute the Committee’s recommendation to the President. The President will receive the Committee’s recommendation by December 1. After receiving the recommendations of the Faculty Review Committee and the Provost and after reviewing the review packet, the President will meet with the Faculty Review Committee and the Provost for a discussion of the candidates’ qualifications and the reasoning behind the recommendations. The Provost will submit an independent recommendation to the President. The general substance of the deliberations, but not the exact vote, will be shared separately with the candidate and the appropriate Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair by the Provost and the Chair of the Faculty Review Committee. The Faculty Review Committee will prepare a set of Discussion Points summarizing the committee’s deliberations, and this will be provided to the candidate electronically by the Faculty Review Committee with a copy to the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair and the Provost Office. At the Provost’s discretion, the Provost may provide a separate memorandum to the candidate and Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair reflecting on these Discussion Points. The candidate should retain these documents for their next review.


5.2.37 Pre-Tenure Evaluation by the President

The President will review the materials and decide whether the pre-tenure contract will be offered to the candidate. The decision of the President is final and binding. By December 15 of the fourth year of employment, the President will notify the candidate by letter whether the candidate will be granted a pre-tenure contract. A negative decision will result in a terminal one-year appointment. In the event that the President’s decision differs from the Faculty Review Committee’s recommendation, the reason for that decision will be shared with the Committee orally and in confidence.


5.2.38 The Fifth and Sixth Years of Service

During the three years before the final tenure decision, the members of the department or Tenure Committee and the candidate will work together to ensure that professional growth and development continues. Special attention should be given to areas which were identified earlier as needing improvement. To encourage this process, the candidate may submit to the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair a brief self-eval­u­a­tion by April 15 of the fifth year of employment. If such a self-eval­u­a­tion is submitted, the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair shall convene the tenured members of the department or Tenure Committee as described in Section 5.2.8 to draft a departmental or Tenure Committee evaluation. If the tenured members of the department or Tenure Committee cannot agree on a common evaluation, several may be submitted provided that the author(s) sign the document(s). The departmental or Tenure Committee evaluation together with the self-eval­u­a­tion are due in the Office of the Provost by May 1 of the fifth year of employment. The departmental or Tenure Committee evaluation requires the signature of the candidate, which indicates that the candidate has read the documents. In case of disagreement the candidate should follow the procedure as described in Section 5.2.35.

Regardless of whether or not the candidate chooses to exercise this option, the department or Tenure Committee is of course free to submit a department or Tenure Committee evaluation at this point or at any other point during the pre-tenure years.


5.2.39 Tenure

Academic tenure is an arrangement under which faculty appointments are continued until retirement, subject to dismissal for adequate cause or termination on account of financial exigency or change of institutional program (see Sections 5.2.51-5.2.54 below). The award of tenure is the single most important personnel decision the College makes; it must be awarded with the gravest care. Tenure shall be awarded only by the Board of Trustees upon recommendation of the President.


5.2.40 Tenure Review Packet

In February of the candidate’s sixth year of employment, the Provost Office will initiate the tenure review packet for the candidate. At this time, the Provost Office will add to the tenure review packet the candidate’s complete pre-tenure review packet (merged as a single document) along with available quantitative Reports of Student Experience (RSEs), classroom observations, FRC discussion points from the pre-tenure review, and annual activities reports since the pre-tenure review packet (normally material for years four through six). Quantitative summaries of RSEs will be generated by the Registrar and sent by July 1 to the candidate, the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair, and the Provost. The Provost Office will add these summaries to the tenure review packet. The Provost Office will share the alumni letters with the candidate in September. The tenure review packet materials will include all annual evaluations and recommendations, plus any supporting materials, since the start date. 

By the end of every semester of employment, the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair will electronically submit at least one classroom observation completed by tenured faculty for the candidate’s years of employment since the pre-tenure review packet to the Provost Office (normally years four through six). Classroom observations will not be accepted after 5:00 PM on September 10 of the year of review. The Provost Office will upload these to the candidate’s review packet. It is the responsibility of the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair, in communication with the candidate, to ensure that all classroom observations are provided to the Provost Office, without duplication.


5.2.41 Tenure Self-Evaluation and Review Packet

By 5 p.m. on September 15 of the seventh year of employment, the candidate must submit a current institutional c.v. and a self-evaluation covering the period since the start date (following guidelines described above and including a statement of future research and teaching plans) to their tenure review packet through the online portal. The c.v. and self-evaluation will require a digital signature via the online portal. By 5 p.m. on September 15 it is the responsibility of the candidate to submit all remaining supporting materials to their tenure review packet through the online portal. The completed packet must contain material added by the Provost Office (as listed in the preceding paragraphs) and the following items added by the candidate: a current institutional c.v., a self-evaluation (as noted above), and other material deemed appropriate by the candidate (such as additional teaching materials and copies of relevant scholarly work since the pre-tenure review). It is the responsibility of the candidate to add these materials and to digitally submit their review packet. Candidates whose materials are not uploaded by the deadline must contact the Provost within 24 hours and provide documentation of an extraordinary event.

Because the Faculty Review Committee begins its review during the spring of the sixth year of employment, the candidate is urged to bring the review packet up to date as early in the process as possible. Candidates will submit their institutional c.v. and any other materials deemed appropriate by the candidate through the online portal by April 15. This preliminary packet will be shared with FRC and the FRC tenure subcommittee. The Provost Office will add RSE summaries, RSEs, pre-tenure FRC discussion points, pre-tenure review materials, Annual Activities Reports, and classroom observations to the packet via the online portfolio. The candidate can continue to add material to their tenure review packet, after May 1 and up through 5 p.m. on September 15, at which point the packet will close to all additions except the alumni letters (to be added by the Provost Office), departmental or Tenure Committee evaluation(s), the tenure subcommittee report, and if applicable, the candidate’s responses to the department or Tenure Committee evaluation(s) or the subcommittee report. The tenure review packet closes to all material by 5 p.m. on October 9. Only the President, at the President’s own discretion, may consider additional information regarding the candidate after October 9.

5.2.42 The Tenure Subcommittee

The Faculty Review Committee will appoint a tenure subcommittee to prepare a report on the candidate. The tenure subcommittee will consist of three tenured members of the faculty, representing where possible the three historical divisions of the College (humanities, natural sciences, and social sciences), and will be chaired by a member of the Faculty Review Committee. The appointment of the two other members requires approval by the Provost.

The tenure subcommittee will meet with the candidate at the beginning of the process to explain the procedure, remind the candidate of deadlines, and ask for any additional information that the candidate wishes the subcommittee to have. This conversation also typically includes a discussion of the candidates’ goals and trajectory in the three areas of evaluation. The subcommittee will review carefully all of the accumulated materials; interview each member of the department individually as well as any faculty members at Allegheny in cognate areas; interview, as appropriate, students and alumni; and, if deemed necessary, or if requested by the candidate, arrange with the Provost for extramural peers to review the research, syllabi, course assignments, senior projects, etc. of the candidate.

The final report from this committee must be submitted electronically by 5 p.m. on October 1 of the candidate’s seventh year of employment to the Provost Office with signatures of all three members of the tenure subcommittee and the candidate (the candidate’s signature denotes that they have read the document, it does not imply agreement).The subcommittee report will be shared electronically with the candidate by the Provost Office by 5 p.m. October 2. Further, this report will not contain a recommendation for or against granting tenure to the candidate since its main purpose is fact finding and clarification of issues. The candidate will receive notification of this addition to their review packet. The candidate will have until 5 p.m. October 9–that is, seven calendar days after they are to have received the report–to read the report and to provide a written response to the report, should they choose to do so.


5.2.43 Student Input to the Faculty Review Packet

In keeping with a subsection of 5.2.16c (“Assessments by Students”), student evaluation of a faculty member will be solicited in three ways: in-class evaluation(s); interviews with the faculty member’s tenure subcommittee; and letters from recent alumni.


5.2.43a Quantitative evidence

Quantitative summaries of RSEs since the pre-tenure review will be generated by the Registrar and sent by July 1 (following the sixth year of employment) to the candidate, the Department Chair, and the Provost. If a tenure committee has been formed for a candidate, the Department Chair will be responsible for sharing RSEs with the tenure committee. The quantitative summaries of RSEs will be added to the tenure review packet by the Provost Office as described above. Candidates may also add narrative course evaluations to their files. If narrative evaluations other than those in the RSE are included, candidates should provide clarification as to how these evaluations were administered. All original narrative responses to the RSE must be kept by the Department Chair (as described in Section 2.6); a copy of the narrative responses should be given by the Department Chair to untenured candidates. When for some reason in a particular case the Faculty Review Committee would like to consider a candidate’s narrative evaluations, it may do so by obtaining them from that person’s Department Chair. 


5.2.43b Student Interviews

For the interviews with students, by the end of February of the year in which the tenure decision will be made the Registrar will generate and send to the candidates and their Department Chairs or Tenure Committee Chairs a list of all May graduates eligible for subcommittee interviews. Students are eligible if they are exiting seniors who have taken courses or conducted other credit-bearing academic work with candidates and received grades of no lower than C-. By March 15, candidates should select seven or eight names from this list and submit them to the Chairs of the tenure subcommittee and department or Tenure Committee. Selected seniors should constitute a representative sample of the candidate’s students with an appropriate balance by gender, majors and non-majors; those enrolled in upper-division, lower-division, and FS courses; and those whose work represents a range of grades. By March 22, the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair should submit a second list of seven or eight names to the Chair of the subcommittee using similar distribution criteria. At their discretion, candidate’s (but not Chairs) may include on their list of seven or eight names graduating seniors who have: (1) earned a grade below C-; and/or (2) had extensive but non-credit-bearing mentoring, advising, or research experiences with the candidate. Candidates who wish to consider graduating seniors who earned a grade below C- should request a second list from the Registrar that includes those students. This request should be made by the end of February.


5.2.43c Alumni Letters

For the evaluation by alumni, by the end of February of the year in which the the candidate submits their materials, the Registrar will generate and send to the candidate a list of all alumni eligible for solicitation of evaluation letters. Alumni are eligible if they are graduates who have taken courses or conducted other credit-bearing academic work with the candidate and received grades of no lower than C-. By March 15, candidates should select 20 names from this list, ensuring that selected alumni constitute a representative sample of the candidate’s students, with an appropriate balance by gender, majors and non-majors, those enrolled in upper-division, lower-division, and FS courses; and those whose work represents a range of grades. A second list of 40 names will be obtained from the Registrar through a random sample of the remaining eligible alumni, using similar distribution criteria and drawing the sample, when possible, from those alumni who have graduated in the three years since the candidate’s last review. Any student who has been the subject of a judicial proceeding brought by the faculty member being evaluated will be barred from participating in this review at the latter’s request. By April 1, the Registrar will submit the list of 60 names (20 selected by the candidate and 40 selected by the Registrar) to the Provost. At their discretion, candidates (but not the Registrar) may include on their list of 20 names alumni who have: (1) earned a grade below C-; and/or (2) had extensive but non-credit-bearing mentoring, advising, or research experiences with the candidate. Candidates who wish to consider alumni who earned a grade below C- should request a second list from the Registrar that includes those individuals. This request should be made by the end of February. 

A form letter will be drafted by the Provost which will ask each alumni to address the candidate’s performance in teaching and advising. The Provost will send this letter to all alumni whose names appear on the lists. Alumni letters will be submitted in a secure manner and tracked by the Provost Office. Alumni will be instructed to write their letter to avoid identifying themsleves, to the best extent possible. 

The Provost Office will accept alumni letters through September 1. The alumni letters will be made available by September 8 to the candidate, who will then have until September 15 to remove, if the candidate chooses, any two letters from the group, notifying the Provost Office if they do so. The remaining alumni letters will be electronically shared with the FRC Tenure Subcommittee by the Provost Office by 5 p.m. September 16.The remaining letters will be added by the Provost Office to the candidate’s tenure review packet by 5 p.m. October 3 (after the tenure review packet closes to departmental or Tenure Committee review). The alumni letters will be part of the candidate’s review packet only at the time of the tenure review. They will be destroyed after the tenure decision has been made and any appeal that may have been lodged has been exhausted. 


5.2.44 Tenure Evaluation by the Department or Tenure Committee

The department or Tenure Committee evaluation(s) must be submitted by the Department Chair or Tenure Committee Chair by 5 p.m. on October 1 electronically to the Provost Office with signatures of all relevant department or Tenure Committee members and the candidate (the candidate’s signature denotes that they have read the document, it does not imply agreement). The Provost Office will add the department or Tenure Committee evaluation(s) to the tenure review packet via the online portal by 5 p.m. on October 2. The candidate will receive notification of this addition to their review packet. The candidate will then have until 5 p.m. on October 9—that is, seven calendar days after they are to have received the evaluation(s)—to submit a document in response to the department or Tenure Committee evaluation(s) via the online portal, should they choose to do so.

The department or Tenure Committee is reminded that tenure is the single most important personnel decision made by the College. The departmental or Tenure Committee evaluation(s) should follow the guidelines described above. The department’s or Tenure Committee’s review of the packet should begin with the self-evaluation. When writing the departmental or Tenure Committee evaluation(s), the department or Tenure Committee should review previous recommendations and evaluations to help it see better what growth has occurred over time. It should specifically address those areas identified in the past as needing improvement. A frank appraisal, including discussion of both strengths and weaknesses, is more helpful to the candidate and to the review process than an evaluation that ignores potential problem areas. The departmental or Tenure Committee evaluation should make a clear positive or negative recommendation that is supported by evidence in the packet. If one departmental evaluation is not possible, then several may be submitted by the Chair of the home department or Tenure Committee to the Provost Office following the due date and guidelines described above.


5.2.45 Tenure Evaluation by the Faculty Review Committee

The Provost will arrange for the Faculty Review Committee to review all of the materials submitted and accumulated (as described above). At the conclusion of the discussion of each candidate, a preliminary poll on whether the candidate should be recommended for tenure will be taken. After each candidate has been considered and all preliminary polls have been completed, the Faculty Review Committee will vote officially on whether to recommend tenure for each candidate. Members of this Committee who are in the same department as a candidate for tenure or on the Tenure Committee for the candidate must recuse themselves from all FRC review of materials, discussion, and vote regarding that candidate. The Secretary of the Committee will count the vote, the Provost will record the vote, and it will constitute the Committee’s recommendation to the President. The President will receive the Committee’s recommendation by December 1. After receiving the recommendations of the Faculty Review Committee and the Provost and after reviewing the packet, the President will meet with the Faculty Review Committee and the Provost for a discussion of the candidates’ qualifications and the reasoning behind the recommendations. The Provost will submit an independent recommendation to the President. The general substance of the deliberations, but not the exact vote, will be shared separately with the candidate and the appropriate Department Chair and/or Tenure Committee Chair by the Provost and the Chair of the Faculty Review Committee. The Faculty Review Committee will prepare a set of Discussion Points summarizing the committee’s deliberations, and this will be provided to the candidate electronically by the Faculty Review Committee with a copy to the Department Chair and/or Tenure Committee Chair and the Provost Office. At the Provost’s discretion, the Provost may provide a separate memorandum to the candidate and Department Chair and/or Tenure Committee Chair reflecting on these Discussion Points. The candidate should retain these documents for their next review.


5.2.46 Tenure Evaluation by the President

The President will review the materials and decide whether the candidate will be recommended to the Board for tenure. The decision of the President is final and binding. By December 15 of the seventh year of employment the President will notify the candidate by letter about the final decision. A negative decision will result in a terminal one-year appointment. In the event that the President’s decision differs from the Faculty Review Committee’s recommendation, the reason for the decision will be shared with the Committee orally and in confidence.


5.2.47 Appeal Procedures

Decisions not to reappoint or not award tenure to a probationary faculty member may be appealed on the grounds that a governmental statute has been violated. These appeals will be processed through the normal grievance procedure. The decision of the President is final and binding.

Decisions not to reappoint or not to award tenure to a probationary faculty member may also be appealed on grounds that allege a violation of academic freedom or a violation of procedural guidelines. No other grounds for appeals will be entertained. When these violations are alleged, the faculty member will send a written complaint to the President within ten calendar days of the alleged violation or of the date when the faculty member could reasonably have been expected to know of the alleged violation. In filing this complaint, the faculty member will identify a tenured member of the faculty to serve on a review committee. The President and the Faculty Council will each appoint one tenured faculty member. None of the three appointed tenured faculty members should have been previously involved in the case, for example as a member of the department, The Tenure Committee, the Faculty Review Committee, or the tenure subcommittee. This committee of three shall review the record and, as necessary, interview the participants, discussing only matters related to the alleged violations. Within fifteen calendar days of receiving the assignment, the committee shall advise the President in writing of one of three options:

  1. No violation discovered, in which case the appeal is denied and the matter closed;
  2. Violation discovered, but of a technical nature which would suggest that it made no difference to the outcome of the case, in which instance the President shall review the Committee’s report and decide whether to close or to reopen the case; or
  3. A major violation that could have made a difference in the outcome, in which instance the case would be reopened. In reopening a case, the President will, depending on the circumstances and the time of year, either cause the case immediately to be reviewed de novo or offer a year contract so that the case could be reviewed de novo the following year.


5.2.48 Early Tenure Decisions

A Department Chair may propose that an untenured faculty member be considered for tenure prior to the expiration of the candidate’s probationary period. Such recommendations ought not to be forthcoming except in exceptional circumstances; for example, a faculty member not only who has definitely proven excellent teaching and research ability, but also whose continued employment is essential to the program.

In such exceptional cases, the normal procedures described above in Faculty Handbook Sections 5.2.39-5.2.46 will be followed, essentially, although the time frame for conducting these procedures may be shortened by the Provost. A Chair proposing an early tenure decision will ask the Provost for permission to do so. The Provost will indicate whether it is permissible and outline the timeframe and deadlines that will have to be followed.

A candidate proposed for early tenure who does not receive it will be permitted to continue in the normal progression of contracts in the probationary period.  


5.2.49 Linkage of Tenure and Promotion

Those holding the rank of Instructor or Assistant Professor who are granted tenure will be automatically promoted to the next rank (Assistant or Associate Professor, respectively).


5.2.50 Review of Tenured Faculty

The principal purposes of consulting with tenured faculty are to recognize the contributions of the faculty member since tenure or the most recent consultation, to identify areas of continuing development and interest, and to determine how the College might assist the faculty member in accomplishing professional goals. The consultation should also aid the faculty member in identifying and correcting impediments to those goals or areas which might be considered weaknesses. The consultation will cover teaching, scholarly activity, and contribution to the learning community. Although the performance standards in these areas will be those identified above, this consultation will recognize that a person’s time commitment to a particular area may change. No timetable is mandated for tenured faculty consultation, which may be convened at the request of the tenured faculty member, the Department Chair, or the Provost. Faculty and Department Chairs are strongly encouraged to initiate a consultation in the year prior to the faculty being proposed for promotion to Professor.

The tenured faculty consultation is convened by written request of the faculty member, the Department Chair, or the Provost. These three then plan a meeting to discuss the contributions and accomplishments of the faculty member since the last formal consultation or review, and their future plans. If the Department Chair is not a full professor, the faculty member should request a colleague with the rank of full professor to assume the responsibilities of the Department Chair for the consultation process. Should the consultation be for the Department Chair, the meeting shall be composed of the Chair, a faculty member with the rank of full professor chosen by the Chair, and the Provost. In this case, the full professor faculty member will assume the responsibilities of the Department Chair during the consultation process.  The consulting faculty member should begin this process by preparing a self-evaluation of what has been accomplished since the last consultation or review and what goals have been established for the coming years, and submitting this document to the Department Chair and Provost. The self-evaluation may refer to recent Annual Activities Reports (AARs) submitted to the Provost. During the month after receiving this document, the Chair will consult confidentially with the tenured members of the department, the Provost and, as necessary and appropriate, other faculty. The Provost will convene a meeting with the faculty member and the Chair, which generally shall occur no later than six weeks following receipt of the self-evaluation. The Chair will keep a record of this conversation and send a copy of it to both the faculty member and the Provost. This record will acknowledge the accomplishments of the faculty member, make note of continuing and proposed interests and projects, indicate the ways in which the College intends to support these endeavors, point to areas of possible improvement, and make note of ways in which the faculty member intends to address these issues. If, as a result of the tenured faculty consultation, the Provost and Chair believe there is a cause for concern in the faculty member’s performance, this concern shall be duly communicated to the faculty member, remedial steps suggested, and deadlines for improvement established.


5.2.51 Faculty Termination

There are three mechanisms by which a faculty term appointment can be terminated before it expires. These mechanisms include: termination for cause, termination due to program discontinuance, or termination due to a declaration of financial exigency by the Board of Trustees. A tenured faculty member terminated by any of these mechanisms shall have the right to appeal to the Board of Trustees. Such appeal shall be in writing filed with the Board within twenty days after receipt of notice of termination. The decision of the Board of Trustees on the appeal shall be final.


5.2.52 Termination for Cause

Termination for cause includes: serious health conditions, substantial decline in professional performance, or more severe cases when fundamental tenents of what it means to be a faculty member are voilated.

5.2.52a Serious Health Condition

In cases involving a serious health condition that fundamentally impacts a faculty member’s ability to carry out their daily work, any decision to terminate shall be based on evidence submitted to the Provost. If there is objection by the faculty member concerning such a decision it may be processed in the form described in 5.2.52d below. Faculty members whose appointments are terminated for a serious health condition shall receive six months’ salary over the six months following the date of termination of their employment, after this date, they will be eligible to apply for disability insurance. Their dependent children shall continue to be eligible for the tuition remission fringe benefit in effect at time of termination. Faculty members not eligible for disability insurance will receive an additional six months’ salary.
 

5.2.52b Substantial Decline in Professional Performance

If the Provost or a Department Chair believes there has been a substantial decline in a tenured faculty member’s performance, either may request a Tenured Faculty Consultation (see 5.2.50 above). 

If the tenured faculty membre’s performance improves as a result of the Consultation, the matter will end there. If the Provost believes insufficient improvement in the tenured faculty member’s performance has resulted from the Tenured Faculty Consultation, the Provost shall bring any allegation of substantial decline in preformance to the Faculty Review Committee. In these circumstances, the Faculty Review Committee will read the Tenured Faculty Consultation and all supplementary documents, including any plan for improvement, the remedial steps taken, and evidence of improvement by the established deadlines. The Faculty Review Committee will also meet separately with the appropriate Department Chair and the faculty member in question. On the basis of this review, the Faculty Review Committee will communicate to the President whether it believes there has been a substantial decline in the faculty member’s professional performance or not. The President shall make the final decision. If the President decides there has not been a substantial decline in the faculty member’s professional performance, the matter will end there. If the President decides sufficient time and opportunities have been presented and insufficient improvements have been made by the faculty member, termination for cause proceedings shall be instituted. These proceedings are described in 5.2.52d below.

5.2.52c Sever Cases

 Alleged violations of essential rights, freedoms, and responsibilities of teaching and inquiry, failure to fulfill teaching obligations, interference with the efforts of colleagues and students to exercise their rights of inquiry and expression, incompetence or dishonesty in teaching or research, neglect of duty, gross personal or professional misconduct, or moral turpitude shall be submitted in writing to the Provost, who shall determine whether a prima facie case exists. In making this determination the Provost must, if the charges appear to warrant further consideration, seek the advice of the tenured members of Faculty Council. If a prima facie case is found to exist, the faculty member shall be notified of the charges in writing, and shall have ten calendar days to respond before the procedures listed below begin.

5.2.52d Termination for Cause Procedures

  1. The first procedural step after such notification shall be discussion between the faculty member and appropriate administrative officers with a view to reaching a mutually satisfactory settlement.
     
  2. If a faculty member faced with termination so desires, that individual may contest the charges. In such an event, the faculty member is entitled to a review and hearing of the case by three tenured members of the faculty sitting as a Review Panel, provided that the faculty member so requests within ten days after receiving notice of those charges. This hearing will be closed to the public unless the faculty member in question wishes it to be open. The faculty member will pick one member of the Review Panel; the Faculty Council will pick a second member; and, the President will select the third member. The faculty member shall have at least twenty days from the time the review is requested to prepare a defense. The review hearing shall begin no later than thirty days after submission of the request unless postponed by mutual agreement between the faculty member and the appropriate administrative officers.
     
  3. At the hearing the burden of proof shall be upon the College and the faculty member shall have the opportunity to be heard in their own defense, to present witnesses and introduce evidence, to question adverse witnesses, to be informed of the author or source of all adverse sttements made elsewhere and presented to the Review Panel for its consideration, and to be accompanied by an advisor chosen by that individual who may act as counsel. The evidence presented must be relevant to the charges. An audio recording of the proceedings shall be created, of which a copy shall be furnished to the faculty member upon request.
     
  4. Within fourteen days after the close of the hearing, the Review Panel shall report its findings to the Provost, the President, and the faculty member. The Panel will base its findings on the materials presented at the hearing, not on personal observations. This report will indicate clearly what evidence supports which charges. After consulting with the Review Panel and with the faculty member, if the latter so requests, and after reviewing all the proceedings, the President shall render a decision on the case in writing within thirty days after receipt of the Review Panel’s report.


5.2.53 Termination due to Program Discontinuance

Termination of tenured positions due to program discontinuance shall be based primarily on educational considerations and such action shall be taken only after consultation of the President and Provost with Faculty Council. Program discontinuance is subject to final approval by the Board of Trustees. Tenured faculty members terminated by the President due to discontinuance of programs, and non-tenured faculty members dismissed prior to the end of their contracts, shall have the right to appeal to the Board of Trustees. Such appeal shall be in writing filed with the Board within twenty days after receipt of notice of the termination. The decision of the Board of Trustees on the appeal shall be final. Tenured faculty members whose appointments are terminated because of program discontinuance shall receive the equivalent of one year’s salary over the twelve months following the date of termination of their employment.
 

5.2.54 Termination due to Financial Exigency

The Board of Trustees reserves the right to terminate any faculty positoin, tenured or non-tenured, for reason of financial exigency of the College or of any part or unit of the College. Such action shall be taken only after consultation with the Faculty Council. The Board shall discuss with the Faculty Council the data indicating financial exigency, but the final decision shall be made by the Board of Trustees.

(Revised May 2022, January 2023)

5.3 Guidelines for Promotion to Professor


Promotion to the rank of Professor is an honor bestowed upon faculty members to recognize their continued and deepening contribution to the life of Allegheny College. Such a promotion is seen not as automatic but as a meaningful recognition of achievement and performance. In keeping with the liberal arts mission of the College and the maintenance of a community of scholars, candidates for promotion are expected to have distinguished themselves in teaching, to have sustained a program of research or other forms of professional growth, and to have rendered service and some leadership to the College community. While exceptional contributions in any one of these areas may increase the likelihood of promotion, strength in all three areas is expected. Criteria relevant to the assessment of a candidate’s record of teaching, research, scholarship and creative activities; and maintaining a learning community are those described in 5.2.13-5.2.24.


5.3.1 Timeline for Promotion to Professor

Normally a faculty member will not be promoted to professor until having completed seven years at the associate rank. The candidate may undergo promotion review in the seventh year, but promotion will not take effect until the following academic year. If a promotion is to be granted before seven years, an extremely strong case must be made. It should also be noted that simply being in rank for seven years is not of itself sufficient to warrant promotion. Faculty members are strongly encouraged to discuss the timeliness of their promotion cases with departmental colleagues and the Provost.


5.3.2 Process for Promotion to Professor

Decisions on promotion follow the process below.

  1. Nominations for promotion to full professor may be initiated by a Department Chair, the Provost, or any faculty member(s) senior in rank, with the consent of the candidate; alternately, candidates may submit their own name for consideration for promotion. All nominations for promotion must be submitted to the President through the office of the Provost by 5 p.m. on October 15. Any requests to form a Promotion Committee, provided conditions outlined in 5.2.17 are met, should be made to the office of the Provost by 5 p.m. on October 15.
     
  2. In January the Provost Office will initiate the promotion review file. At this time, the Provost Office will add to the promotion review file available quantitative RSE summaries, classroom observations, and annual activities reports since the tenure review file.  By January 15 of the year of review the Department Chair or the Promotion Committee Chair should electronically submit classroom observations for the candidate’s year of service since the tenure review to the Provost Office. Any classroom observations completed after January 15 should be sent electronically by the Department Chair or the Promotion Committee Chair to the Provost Office as soon as they are available, but before February 10 of the year of review. The Provost Office will upload these to the candidate’s review file. It is the responsibility of the Department Chair or the Promotion Committee Chair, in communication with the candidate, to ensure that all classroom observations are provided to the Provost Office, without duplication.
     
  3. By 5 p.m. on February 15, every candidate for promotion must submit the following materials to the promotion review file via the online portal: 
    1. a reflective self-assessment of activity since review for tenure. The self-evaluation should explicitly narrate the arc of activity since tenure in relation to the three cagegories of evaluation and include evidence of effective teaching and advising; professional growth in research, scholarship, and creative activity; and service to and leadership of the College community. Candidates with partial administrative appointments must demonstrate evidence of some effectiveness across all three criteria. The document need to be digitally signed via the online portal.
       
    2. an updated and signed institutional curriculum vitae digitally signed via the online portal.
       
    3. copies of significant work completed since the last performance or promotion review. The candidate may include additional materials in the promotion review file documenting their record of teaching, service, and professional achievement. Some examples of relevant materials are: a description of or evidence of work in progress; letters from alumni; evaluations from colleagues within the College community; evaluations from specialists in the candidate’s field from other institutions.
  4. The Provost will solicit from each respective department or Promotion Committeethe written views of all members holding a rank higher than that of the nominee on the merits of the candidacy. These views, which must be signed and submitted electronically to the Provost Office no later than 5 p.m. on March 1, may be presented as a collective statement reflecting consensus or as individual statements; they will be added to the promotion file by the Provost Office. This/these view(s) will be shared electronically with the candidate by the Provost Office by 5 p.m. on March 2. The candidate has until 5 p.m. March 7 to read the departmental or Promotion Committee letter(s) and submit a note of clarification regarding the view(s) and any item(s) in the review file via the online portal.
     
  5. The Provost may upload other material related to the three areas of evaluation to the promotion file, before the file closes for additions from the candidate, and will advise the candidate if they do so.
     
  6. All materials, with the exception of items uploaded by the Provost Office, the written views of senior Department or Promotion Committee members, and if applicable the candidate’s note of clarification regarding the views(s) of senior department members, must be submitted by the candidate to the promotion review file via the online portal no later than 5 p.m. on February 15 in the academic year in which the decision is made.
     
  7. The Provost Office will arrange for the Faculty Review Committee to review all of the materials submitted. The voting members of the Faculty Review Committee will then meet with the Provost to discuss each candidate. After full discussion, the committee members will vote to recommend that promotion be awarded or denied. The result of this deliberation and vote shall be recorded by the Provost.
     
  8. The Provost  and the chairperson of the Faculty Review Committee will discuss with each candidate and respective Department Chair or Promotion Committee Chair, singly, the Committee’s recommendation to the President.  The Faculty Review Committee will prepare a set of Discussion Points summarizing the committee’s deliberations, and this will be provided to the candidate electronically by the Faculty Review Committee with a copy to the Department Chair or Promotion Committee Chair and the Provost Office. At the Provost’s discretion, the Provost may provide a separate memorandum to the candidate and Department Chair or Promotion Committee Chair reflecting on these Discussion Points. The candidate should retain these documents for their records.
     
  9. The final recommendation shall be made by the President in consultation with the Provost and shall be communicated to the candidate, in writing, by March 31. Where the President’s recommendation is contrary to the recommendation of the Faculty Review Committee, the President will share with the Committee their reasons for denying or affirming promotion.
     
  10. These guidelines also apply to non-mandated promotions at ranks below that of professor; in such cases, however, there is no expectation of a minimum number of years in current rank.

(Revised Spring, 2022, Spring, 2023)

5.4 Joint Appointments Between a Department and a Program

 

In the case of joint appointments between two departments, a program and another department, or an appointment in an interdivisional program, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) will be written that describes the specific parameters of the faculty member’s position. The MoU will clarify and manage the unique characteristics of such a faculty position and ensure that the departments and programs in which the faculty member participates benefit from the position. MoUs will address the process of mentoring and evaluating the faculty member and establish teaching, research, and service expectations. The Provost will compose the MoU in regular consultation with the faculty member and relevant Department Chairs and Program Chairs or Coordinators. The MoU will be agreed upon and signed by all parties and placed into the faculty member’s academic file. The MoU may be revised after each evaluation review or, for tenured faculty, after a specified period described in the MoU.

(23 January 2014; Revised 26 January 2023)

5.5 Named Professorships

Named professorial chairs at Allegheny College have been created over a period of decades, with many of the current associated practices dating back to the 1960’s. Named professorships have been established under a wide variety of circumstances: some have been partly or fully endowed; some have featured reduced teaching responsibilities and/or expense stipends; some are appointed for fixed terms; some are occupied by faculty appointed for indefinite duration, normally meaning until retirement. This approach is designed to provide for college-wide availability of scholarship=enhancing opportunities while protecting academic course offerings. The policy also provides for a systematic approach to establishing and filling professorships and for honoring faculty and future donors.


5.5.1 Purpose of Named Professorships

The purpose ascribed to many of the named/endowed professorships is to attract professionally active scholars to a college more notable for excellent teaching than scholarship. That strategy was largely successful, helping to increase the quality of the academic experience and reputation of Allegheny College. The close connection between teaching and scholarship has for some time been a regular part of our self-understanding as a faculty and institution, and evidence of scholarly activity is expected in evaluations for tenure and promotion. The policies detailed here have evolved from discussions involving the President, Provost, Faculty Council, and The Committee on the Allegheny Experience of the Board.


5.5.2 Categories of Named Professorships

The College has established two categories of named professorships. The first is comprised of a total of seven professorships (two for fields within the natural sciences, two for fields within the social sciences, two for fields within the arts and humanities, and one for fields recognized as interdisciplinary). Professorships in this first category are specifically designed for the targeted advancement of scholarship, broadly understood to include scholarship in specific academic fields, scholarship of teching and learning, and scholarship related to community service. They will have associated with them a uniform reduction in teaching responsibilities over a standard, non-renewable, three-year term of appointment. The second category will be department- or program-based professorships of five-year renewable terms. The latter will not have reduced teaching responsibilities, but they will include provision for professional development and student collaboration on scholarship. 

 
5.5.3 Division-Wide Teacher-Scholar Appointments

Two named professorships will be bestowed upon faculty in each of three established areas of academic study (natural sciences, social sciences, and arts and huumanities). One named professorship will be bestowed upon a faculty member in an interdisciplinary area of study. All seven of these professorships fall under guidlines below. The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) Chair constitutes one of the professorships in humanities. The remaining professorships will be specifically named as designated endowment gifts are received. Prior to that time, these appointees are called (Department/Program Name) Teacher-Scholars.


5.5.4 Term Length for Named Professorships

Appointments will be for three-year terms and not renewable. Professorship holders will be eligible for release from the equivalent of one year’s teaching responsibilities (six courses, or normally five in the laboratory sciences) over the three year term. The pattern of course release will be governed by College and program needs, after consultation with Department Chairs, determined by the Provost with approval by the President. Professorship holders will continue to perform other normal college and departmental responsibilities throughout the terms of their appointments.


5.5.5 Appointment Process for Named Professorships

Appointments will be considered through written application to the Provost who, after consultation with the respective Department or Program Chairs, will make recommendations to the President. Consideration will be given to not only the merits of the proposed project but also to the contribution candidates have made to the life of the college. Appointments will only be made if there are qualified applicants with appropriate projects.


5.5.6 Eligibility for Named Professorships

Eligibility is limited to tenured members of the faculty, and sabbatical eligibility is not affected by an appointment. New endowments for professorships will not increase the total number of courses released college-wide.


5.5.7 Department and Program-Based Named Professorships

These policies will become effective in individual cases when current chair holders retire or resign. They also apply to new department or program based professorships when endowment gifts are received in the future.

  1. Appointments will be made for five-year terms, with the possibility of renewal.
     
  2. The President will make appointments in consultation with the Provost.
     
  3. Named professorship appointees will be drawn from the tenured faculty.


5.5.8 Support for Named Professorships

Each departmental/program professorship will provide annual support for professional activities such as equipment or travel. An additional allotment will be provided specifically to encourage the use of student collaborators through support of the student’s work. The Provost will approve and administer these funds, the amount of which will be determined annually ($2,000/$2,000 annually).

(Revised 26 January 2023)

5.6 Full-Time Non-Tenure-Track Renewable (NTTR) Positions

Responsibilities for a faculty member holding a full-time NTTR position emphasize teaching excellence above all else, followed by service to the department and College. The College suports diverse approaches to scholarship, creative activity, and professional development, including work that results in forms other than published or public works and presentations which are outlined in 5.2.29. Such works are encouraged, though non-essential. Faculty in NTTR positions are eligible to receive annual faculty development funding in the same amount and by means of the same method as tenure-track faculty members.

Full-time NTTR faculty are eligible for all benefits received by full-time employees of the College except those limited specifically to tenure-track or tenured faculty such as a pre-tenure leave or a one-course reduction in teaching load during the first year of employment.


5.6.1 NTTR Appointments

NTTR faculty will carry academic titles commensurate with their experience and credentials: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Full Professor, and may be promoted based upon years of service to the institution and quality of performance. However, without peer-reviewed scholarship, promotion above Assistant Professor rank would be highly unusual. NTTR faculty members are expected to teach in the FS program (including FS101) and may serve as official advisors for both non-major and major students. They will be eligible to serve on a standing committee starting in their third year of employment. They are expected to attend departmental meetings and faculty meetings, and they will continue to be accorded full voting rights on the faculty floor.

NTTR faculty are not typically expected to serve as readers on Senior Projects.  However, there are circumstances in which NTTR faculty may reasonably be asked to serve in this capacity; for example, when NTTR faculty contribute specific areas of expertise or when department/program senior project loads warrant having additional faculty to distribute that load.  The chair of the NTTR faculty member’s department or program is responsible for determining whether an NTTR faculty member should serve as a reader for senior projects. Any NTTR faculty member serving as a reader will earn Senior Project Points (SPP) for their work.  The points will be awarded and accrue according to the practice established in section 7.11.

Under normal circumstances, NTTR faculty will not be eligible for sabbatical leaves, although exceptions may be made on a case by case basis for a well-defined and institutionally/departmentally valuable project related to teaching or scholarship. Finally, NTTR faculty will not serve on any departmental or college-wide evaluation committees related to the tenure and promotion process for tenure-track or tenured faculty. 


5.6.2 NTTR Renewal Process

Renewable NTTR faculty will be hired on an initial two-year contract; thereafter contracts will be for three years. Determination of renewal of full-time NTTR faculty will occur in the spring of the final year of the contract. All renewals begin with a consultation between the Provost and the Department Chair during the semester before renewal to determine staffing needs. If the Provost concludes that staffing needs warrant the candidate’s continued employment, the Provost will initiate the NTTR review file in September of the candidate’s final year of the contract. After the second three-year renewal, ordinarily in the eighth year, the NTTR faculty may request to follow an expedited review process. Otherwise they will follow the full NTTR review process outlined below.

  1. Quantitative summaries of RSEs not included in the previous review will be generated by the Registrar and sent to the faculty member, the Department Chair, and the Provost by February 1. The Provost Office will add these summaries to the NTTR review packet by 5 p.m. on February 15 of the final year of the contract. The Chair of the home department should electronically submit classroom observations completed up to that date to the Provost Office by February 15 of the final year of the contract. The Provost Office will upload these to the candidate’s review file.
     
  2. By February 15, the faculty member must submit a self-evaluation covering the period since the last review and a current institutional c.v. to the review file. Both the self-evaluation and the c.v. will require a digital signature via the online portal. The self-evaluation should focus on teaching first and service to the department and College second. Criteria for teaching excellence are described in Section 5.2.18-5.2.25; criteria for maintaining a learning community are described in section 5-2-30-5.2.35. If the faculty member has engaged in significant scholarship, a section on scholarly contributions to the field should be included. The self-evaluation should indicate strengths and weaknesses, and the faculty member may append any supporting materials deemed appropriate. It is the responsibility of the candidate to add these materials and to digitally submit their review file.
     
  3. The department evaluation(s) must be submitted by the Chair by 5 p.m. on March 1 electronically to the Provost Office with signatures of all relevant department members and the candidate (the candidate’s signature denotes that they have read the document, it does not imply agreement). The department evaluation(s) should follow the guidelines described in Section 5.2.44. The department evaluation(s) will be added to the NTTR review file by the Provost’s Office by 5 p.m. on March 2.
     
  4. The Provost reviews the materials which have been submitted and provides to the President by March 15 either an endorsement or a lack of endorsement of the department’s recommendation. If the Provost does not endorse the department’s recommendation, the Provost must submit a detailed explanation for the lack of endorsement to the President, with copeis to the candidate and Department Chair. For both the department and the Provost, staffing needs are legitimate criteria for consideration during the review process.
     
  5. The candidate must submit an updated institutional c.v. to the review file by November 15. The Department Chair should make any previous departmental evaluation letters available to tenured members of the department for review. The Department Chair will also make any classroom observation reports of the candidate available for review by the tenured members of the department to consider. The Department Chair will then consult with the tenured members of the department to determine whether to initiate the expedited process by December 15.  In the case that the candidate has an appointment in multiple departments, a unanimous vote from all tenured members of the relevant departments is required.  The results of this decision should be reported to the Provost Office and the candidate within 24 hours of the vote. If there is a unanimous decision to follow the expedited process, the chair need only submit a letter of endorsement, accompanied by a rationale to the Provost Office electronically by 5 p.m. on February 1. This letter should address departmental support for renewal as well as the candidate’s ongoing contributions to the department and institution. The department letter of endorsement and rationale will be added to the NTTR review file by the Provost’s Office by 5 p.m. on February 2. If the tenured members of the department conclude that a fuller review is warranted for professional development purposes or to determine support for the candidate’s continued employment, then the full NTTR review process is initiated as described above.
     
  6. The Provost reviews the institutional c.v. and letter of endorsement from the Department Chair which have been submitted and provides a recommendation to the President by March 15. If the Provost does not endorse the department’s recommendation, the Provost must submit a detailed explanation for the lack of endorsement to the President with copies to the candidate and Department Chair. For both the department and the Provost, staffing needs are legitimate criteria for consideration during the review process.


5.6.3 Negative Decisions

For both the full and expedited renewal process, the following procedures apply when a negative decision has been reached. If either the department or the Provost does not recommend the renewal of a contract, the NTTR faculty member has the option of requesting that the Faculty Review Committee (FRC) hear the case. The Chair of the FRC will convene the FRC for a review of the file, following the evaluation criteria outlined above and the evaluation process used by the FRC for all candidates.  The Provost will not be part of these deliberations.   

The FRC will make a recommendation to the President by April 15. The President will review the materials and decide whether a contract renewal will be offered to the candidate. The candidate will be notified by April 30. If the candidate’s contract is not renewed, the candidate will receive one additional transitional year of employment at the College.

5.6.4 Appeals

Decisions not to reappoint a NTTR faculty member may be appealed on the grounds that a governmental statute has been violated. These appeals will be processed through the normal grievance procedure. The decision of the President is final and binding.

Decisions not to reappoint a NTTR faculty member may also be appealed on grounds that allege a violation of academic freedom or a violation of procedural guidelines. The process outlined in Section 5.2.47 will be followed in such an appeal.

Negative decisions based on departmental and institutional staffing needs cannot be appealed.

(Revised 12 March 2020, 6 May 2021, 21 April 2022, Spring 2023)

5.7 Lecturer


Part-time faculty who teach for the College on a regular basis have the opportunity to become a Lecturer and receive a salary at 20% above that of adjuncts. In addition, Lecturers will receive a two-year contract as opposed to an annual contract. A Lecturer may teach up to eight credits in any given semester and is eligible for professional development funds through the Provost’s Office, as described in Section 7.1 of the Faculty Handbook.

5.7.1 Eligibility

There are two different methods by which an adjunct faculty member may become eligible to apply for Lecturer status:

  1. If the adjunct faculty member has a terminal degree, he or she may be eligible after teaching four courses at Allegheny.
     
  2. If the adjunct faculty member has an advanced degree (at least a Master’s Degree) but does not have a terminal degree, he or she may be eligible after teaching at Allegheny on a regular basis (usually at least two courses each year) for seven years.

Conferral of the Lecturer status is also contingent upon institutional needs. It is possible that an adjunct who has served with dedication for a number of years may nonetheless be denied or lose Lecturer status if staffing needs do not support the application.


5.7.2 Application Process

The adjunct faculty member who applies for Lecturer status must submit a self-evaluation that focuses on teaching, but that can also outline the faculty member’s scholarly work as well as their contributions to the learning community. Teaching will be evaluated on the basis of RSE scores and narratives, as well as other pertinent sources of information such as classroom visits, syllabi, and the self-evaluation. The department or program in which the adjunct works must submit an evaluation of the adjunct’s teaching performance, a discussion of the adjunct’s credentials and qualifications for the position, as well as a justification for continuation of the position for the following two years. Adjunct faculty who teach primarily in the FS program must have the support of the FS Leadership Team.

The application must be submitted to the Provost by 5 p.m. on March 1 for the following academic year. The Provost will render a decision by March 31. The same process and deadlines will be followed for renewal.

(Revised Spring 2023)