02-01.00 – Policy on Appointment, Rank and Tenure of Faculty

  1. Policy Statement:

    This policy describes the general criteria and procedures related to faculty.

  2. Reason for Policy:

    This policy implements USM Policy II-1.00 System Policy on Appointment, Rank and Tenure of Faculty.

  3. Definitions:

    1. “Academic Year” means the academic year as established by the University. Typically, an academic year will begin in mid-August and end in mid-June of the following calendar year.

    2. “Board of Regents” means the Board of Regents of the University System of Maryland.

    3. “Chancellor” means the Chancellor of the University System of Maryland.

    4. “Mandatory Tenure-Review Year” means the year in which the appointee is entitled to tenure review under this policy.

    5. “President” means the President of Towson University.

    6. “Provost” means the Provost of Towson University.

    7. “Search Procedures” mean Towson University’s Procedures for Searching for Full-Time Faculty.

    8. “University” means Towson University.

    9. “USM” means University System of Maryland.

  4. Responsible Executive and Office:

    Responsible Executive:
    Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs

    Responsible Office:

    Office of the Provost

  5. Entities Affected by this Policy: 

    All academic departments and colleges; all faculty.

  6. Procedures:

    1. Appointment of Faculty

      1. Search Process for Full-Time Faculty

        1. The search process for full-time faculty members other than lecturers is set forth in Towson University Faculty and Professional Librarian Hiring Procedures, attached hereto as Appendix 1 (hereafter, the “Search Procedures”). The search process for lecturers, including full-time lecturers, is set forth in Towson University Lecturer Hiring Procedures, attached hereto as Appendix 1-A (hereafter, the “Lecturer Search Procedures”). The Search Procedures and/or the Lecturer Search Procedures may be amended from time to time, without the need to amend this Policy, by the Office of the Provost, in consultation with the Academic Senate, subject to the approval of the President. If the Search Procedures and/or the Lecturer Search Procedures are amended, a copy of the new Search Procedures and/or the new Lecturer Search Procedures, as applicable, will be filed in the office of the Chancellor, and shall replace the original Search Procedures and/or the original Lecturer Search Procedures, as applicable. The Search Procedures and the Lecturer Search Procedures will comply with the requirements of the University System of Maryland Policy on Appointment, Rank, and Tenure of Faculty.

        2. Visiting faculty appointments are usually made for one Academic Year or less. Only in unusual circumstances shall a visiting appointment exceed a total of three years. A visiting faculty appointee can become a regular appointee only through a search process before or after the initial appointment in accordance with the Search Procedures, including adherence to affirmative action guidelines. Years of service in a visiting appointment may, upon mutual agreement of the faculty member and the institution, be counted as probationary years for purposes of consideration of tenure.

        3. Search Procedures and Lecturer Search Procedures shall reflect the commitment of the University to equal opportunity, and shall be widely published within the University.

        4. Faculty review committees are a part of the review and recommendation process for new full-time faculty appointments. In principle, the procedures which lead to the faculty appointments should hold to standards at least as rigorous as those that pertain to promotions to the same academic ranks.

      2. Offers of Appointment

        1. A final offer of appointment can be made only with the approval of the President or designee.

        2. All faculty appointments shall be made to a designated rank and shall be effective on a specific date. The University shall have a standard contract or letter of appointment for each rank and tenure status, which shall be approved by the Office of the Attorney General for form and legal sufficiency. The contract or letter of appointment shall constitute a contractually binding agreement between the University and the appointee. The University shall also have a Faculty handbook which shall include system-wide policies and procedures approved by the Board of Regents and University policies and procedures approved by the President that set forth faculty rights and responsibilities.

        3. The terms and conditions of every faculty appointment shall be stated in a written letter or contract, which shall be signed by both the institution and the appointee before the appointment is begun. The appointee shall be provided with a copy of the letter or contract as soon as practicable.

        4. Appointment letters or contracts for full-time faculty shall specify whether the appointee is required to serve for the Academic Year or the fiscal year. Typically, academic-year faculty appointments shall begin no later than one week before the first day of fall classes and end no earlier than the spring commencement date, and fiscal-year appointments shall begin on July 1 and end on June 30 of the following calendar year. In unusual circumstances, an appointment (academic or fiscal) may begin at other times or may be for only a portion of a year.

      3. Provisions Related to Appointments, Promotion, Tenure and Permanent Status

        The following provisions are to be furnished to all new faculty at time of initial appointment.

        1. Adjustments in salary or advancement in rank may be made under this policy, and, except where a definite termination date is a condition of appointment, the conditions pertaining to the rank as modified shall become effective as of the date of the modification. For tenure-track appointments, the Mandatory Tenure-Review Year shall be specified in the original and subsequent contracts/letters of appointment. Tenure review shall occur in that year unless otherwise agreed in writing by the University and the appointee. Tenure in any rank can be awarded only by an affirmative decision based upon a formal review.

        2. Appointments and reappointments to the rank of full-time Instructor without tenure may be for one to three years, provided no appointment without tenure may extend beyond the end of the Mandatory Tenure-Review Year. An appointment to the rank of full-time Instructor will be renewed automatically for one additional year unless the appointee is notified in writing to the contrary in accordance with the following deadlines: not later than March 1 of the first Academic Year of service if the current appointment expires at the end of that year, not later than December 15 of the second Academic Year of service if the current appointment expires at the end of that year, and not later than August 1 prior to the third or any subsequent Academic Year of service if the current appointment expires at the end of that year. For appointments beginning at times other than the start of an Academic Year, the University may adjust the notice of nonrenewal dates accordingly by specifying such adjustments in the initial contract or letter of appointment. Appointments to the rank of instructor may be terminated at any time in accordance with paragraphs VI.A.3.f. through VI.A.3.l.

          Tenure in the rank of Instructor can be awarded only by an affirmative decision based upon a formal review as more fully set forth in Appendix 3. An Instructor without tenure, whose appointment has been extended to a sixth year of continuous, full-time service shall receive no later than during that sixth year a formal review for tenure. If the University fails to conduct a tenure review in accordance with the schedule provided in this policy, the appointee is entitled to a further one-year appointment during which the tenure review shall take place. The appointee reviewed for tenure shall be notified in writing, by the end of the appointment year in which the review was conducted, of the decision either to grant or deny tenure. An Instructor who has been reviewed during a Mandatory Tenure-Review Year, and notified in writing that tenure has been denied, shall be granted an additional and terminal one-year appointment in that rank, but barring exceptional circumstances, shall receive no further consideration for tenure.

          An Instructor with or without tenure may be promoted to Assistant Professor. If an Instructor without tenure is appointed as an Assistant Professor, the provisions of VI.A.3.c. apply to the appointment, except that the appointee’s review for tenure must occur no later than the sixth year of continuous full-time employment in the ranks of Instructor and Assistant Professor. Tenure in any rank can be awarded only by an affirmative decision based upon a formal review as more fully set forth in Appendix 3.

        3. Appointments and reappointments to the rank of full-time Assistant Professor without tenure may be for one to three years, provided no appointment without tenure may extend beyond the end of the Mandatory Tenure-Review Year. An appointment to the rank of full-time Assistant Professor will be renewed automatically for one additional year unless the appointee is notified in writing to the contrary in accordance with the following deadlines: not later than March 1 of the first Academic Year of service if the current appointment expires at the end of that year, not later than December 15 of the second Academic Year of service if the current appointment expires at the end of that year, and not later than August 1 prior to the third or any subsequent Academic Year if the current appointment expires at the end of that year. For appointments beginning at times other than the start of an Academic Year, the University may adjust the notice of nonrenewal dates accordingly by specifying such adjustments in the initial contract or letter of appointment. Appointments to the rank of Assistant Professor may be terminated at any time in accordance with paragraphs VI.A.3.f. through VI.A.3.l. Tenure in the rank of Assistant Professor can be awarded only by an affirmative decision based upon a formal review as more fully set forth in Appendix 3. An Assistant Professor without tenure, whose appointment has been extended to a sixth year of continuous, full-time service shall receive no later than during that sixth year a formal review for tenure. If the University fails to conduct a tenure review in accordance with the schedule provided in this policy, the appointee is entitled to a further one-year appointment during which the tenure review shall take place. The appointee reviewed for tenure shall be notified in writing, by the end of the appointment year in which the review was conducted, of the decision either to grant or deny tenure. An Assistant Professor who has been reviewed during a Mandatory Tenure-Review Year, and notified in writing that tenure has been denied, shall be granted an additional and terminal one-year appointment in that rank, but barring exceptional circumstances, shall receive no further consideration for tenure.

        4. Appointments or promotions to the rank of full-time Associate Professor require the written approval of the President. New full-time appointments to the rank of Associate Professor may carry immediate tenure provided that each such appointee has been formally reviewed for tenure. Otherwise, such appointments shall be for an initial period of one to four years, except that initial appointments for individuals with no prior teaching experience may be for a maximum of six years, and shall terminate at the end of that period unless the appointee is notified in writing that he or she has been granted tenure. Promotions to the rank of Associate Professor carry immediate tenure. Consequently such promotions may only be awarded subsequent to a formal tenure review and an award of tenure.

          An Associate Professor who is appointed without tenure shall receive a formal review for tenure during the period of appointment in accordance with the following deadlines. If the appointment is for an initial period of one year, then the formal review must be completed, and written notice must be given that tenure has been granted or denied, by March 1 of that year. If the appointment is for two years, then the formal review must be completed, and written notice must be given that tenure has been granted or denied, by no later than December 15 of the second year. If the appointment is for more than two years, then the formal review must be completed, and written notice must be given that tenure has been granted or denied, by no later than August 1 prior to the beginning of the final year of the appointment. For appointments beginning at a time other than the start of an Academic Year, the University may adjust the notice of tenure denial dates accordingly by specifying the adjustments in the initial contract or letter of appointment. Appointments to the rank of Associate Professor may be terminated at any time as described under paragraphs VI.A.3.f. through VI.A.3.l.

          Tenure in the rank of Associate Professor can be awarded only by an affirmative decision based upon a formal review as more fully set forth in Appendix 3. If the University fails to conduct a tenure review and provide the required notice in accordance with the schedule provided in this policy, the appointment (unless it is converted to an appointment with tenure) shall be extended for an additional year, so that the notice required by this section may be provided in full. An Associate Professor who has been notified in writing that tenure has been denied, barring exceptional circumstances, shall receive no further consideration for tenure.

        5. Full-time appointments or promotions to the rank of full-time Professor require the written approval of the President. New full-time appointments to the rank of Professor may carry immediate tenure provided that each such appointee has been formally reviewed for tenure. Otherwise, such appointments shall be for an initial period of one to four years, except that initial appointments for individuals with no prior teaching experience may be a for a maximum of six years, and shall terminate at the end of that period unless the appointee is notified in writing that he or she has been granted tenure. Promotions to the rank of Professor carry immediate tenure. Consequently such promotions may only be awarded subsequent to a formal tenure review and an award of tenure.

          A Professor who is appointed without tenure shall receive a formal review for tenure during the period of appointment in accordance with the following deadlines. If the appointment is for an initial period of one year, then the formal review must be completed, and written notice must be given that tenure has been granted or denied, by March 1 of that year. If the appointment is for two years, then the formal review must be completed, and written notice must be given that tenure has been granted or denied, by no later than December 15 of the second year. If the appointment is for more than two years, then the formal review must be completed, and written notice must be given that tenure has been granted or denied, by no later than August 1 prior to the beginning of the final year of the appointment. For appointments beginning at a time other than the start of an Academic Year, the University may adjust the notice of tenure denial dates accordingly by specifying the adjustments in the initial contract or letter of appointment. Appointments to the rank of Professor may be terminated at any time as described under paragraphs VI.A.3.f. through VI.A.3.l.

          Tenure in the rank of Professor can be awarded only by an affirmative decision based upon a formal review as more fully set forth in Appendix 3. If the University fails to conduct a tenure review and provide the required notice in accordance with the schedule provided in this policy, the appointment (unless it is converted to an appointment with tenure) shall be extended for an additional year, so that the notice required by this section may be provided in full. A Professor who has been notified in writing that tenure has been denied, barring exceptional circumstances, shall receive no further consideration for tenure.

        6. A term of service may be terminated by the appointee by resignation, but it is expressly agreed that no resignation shall become effective until the termination of the appointment period in which the resignation is offered except by mutual written agreement between the appointee and the President or his/her designee.

        7.  

          1. The President may terminate the appointment of a tenured or tenure-track appointee for moral turpitude, professional or scholarly misconduct, incompetence, or willful neglect of duty, provided that the charges be stated in writing, that the appointee be furnished a copy thereof, and that the appointee be given an opportunity prior to such termination to request a hearing by an impartial hearing officer appointed by the President or a faculty board of review as provided by the relevant University policy body. With the consent of the President, the appointee may elect a hearing by the President rather than by a hearing officer or a faculty board of review. Upon receipt of notice of termination, the appointee shall have thirty (30) calendar days to request a hearing. The hearing shall be held no sooner than thirty (30) calendar days after receipt of such a request. The date of the hearing shall be set by mutual agreement of the appointee and the hearing officer or faculty board of review. If the President appoints a hearing officer or a faculty board of review is appointed, the hearing officer or board shall make a recommendation to the President for action to be taken. The recommendation shall be based only on the evidence of record in the proceeding. Either party to the hearing may request an opportunity for oral argument before the President prior to action on the recommendation. If the President does not accept the recommendation of the hearing officer or board of review, the reasons shall be communicated promptly in writing to the appointee and the hearing officer or board. In the event that the President elects to terminate the appointment, the appointee may appeal to the Board of Regents, which shall render a final decision.

          2. Under exceptional circumstances and following consultation with the chair of the faculty board of review or appropriate faculty committee, the President may direct that the appointee be relieved of some or all of his or her University duties, without loss of compensation and without prejudice, pending a final decision in the termination proceedings. (In case of emergency involving threat to life, the President may act to suspend temporarily prior to consultation.)

          3. The appointee may elect to be represented by counsel of his or her choice throughout termination proceedings.

        8. If an appointment is terminated in the manner prescribed in paragraph VI.3.g. the President may, at his or her discretion, relieve the appointee of assigned duties immediately or allow the appointee to continue in the position for a specified period of time. The appointee’s compensation shall continue for a period of one year commencing on the date on which the appointee receives notice of termination. A faculty member whose appointment is terminated for cause involving moral turpitude or professional or scholarly misconduct shall receive no notice or further compensation beyond the date of final action by the President or the Board of Regents.

        9. The University may terminate any appointment because of the discontinuance of the department, program, school or unit in which the appointment was made, or because of the lack of appropriations or other funds with which to support the appointment. Such decision must be made in accordance with the standards and procedures set forth in written University policies. The President shall give a full-time appointee holding tenure notice of such termination at least one year before the date on which the appointment is terminated.

        10. Notwithstanding any other provisions to the contrary, the appointment of any non-tenured faculty member 50% or more of whose compensation is derived from research contracts, service contract, gifts or grants, shall be subject to termination upon expiration of the research funds, service contract income, gifts or grants from which the compensation is payable.

        11. Appointments shall terminate upon the death of the appointee. Upon termination for this cause the University shall pay to the estate of the appointee all of the accumulated and unpaid earnings of the appointee plus compensation for accumulated unused annual leave.

        12. Appointments to all other ranks not specifically mentioned in VI.B.1.a. and all part-time appointments are for terms not to exceed beyond the end of the fiscal year unless otherwise stipulated in the letter of appointment. Faculty appointed to ranks not specifically mentioned in VI.B.1.a. on a full-time basis for a term not less than one Academic Year shall receive notice of non-renewal of contract based upon their length of continuous full-time service in such ranks. If such service is less than seven years, at least ninety (90) days’ notice is required. If such service equals or exceeds seven years, at least six (6) months’ notice is required. If the required notice is not provided prior to the termination of the then-current contract, this condition may be remedied by extending the contract by the number of days necessary to meet the notice requirement.

        13. If in the judgment of the appointee’s department chair or supervisor a deficiency in the appointee’s professional conduct or performance exists that does not warrant dismissal or suspension, a moderate sanction such as a formal warning or censure may be imposed, provided that the appointee is first afforded an opportunity to contest the action through the established faculty grievance procedure.

        14. Unless the appointee agrees otherwise, any changes that are hereafter made in paragraphs VI.A.3.a. through VI.A.3.m. will be applied only to subsequent appointments.

        15. Compensation for appointments under these policies is subject to modification in the event of reduction in State appropriations or in other income from which compensation may be paid.

        16. The appointee shall be subject to all applicable policies and procedures duly adopted or amended from time to time by the University or the USM, including but not limited to, policies and procedures regarding annual leave; sick leave; sabbatical leave; leave of absence; outside employment; patents and copyrights; scholarly and professional misconduct; retirement; reduction, consolidation, or discontinuation of programs; and criteria on teaching, scholarship and service.

    2. Faculty Ranks, Promotion, Tenure and Permanent Status

      1. General Principles

        1. The only faculty ranks at the University which may involve a tenure commitment are: Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor, Instructor, and such other ranks as the University may adopt and the Board of Regents may approve. Appointments to all other ranks, including any rank in which an additional adjective is introduced (such as “Clinical Professor”) are for a definite term and do not involve a tenure commitment. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this policy, faculty in certain ranks may be granted permanent status. The only faculty ranks at the University which may involve a permanent status commitment are Librarian II, Librarian III, and Librarian IV and such other ranks as the University may adopt and the Board of Regents may approve. Permanent status may not be granted to an individual holding the rank of Librarian I.

          Permanent status is defined as continuing employment such that a decision to remove an employee must be made by the President and must be justified by cause as defined by USM and University policy. Permanent status is an employment status different from tenure.

          The University has developed criteria and procedures for the review process leading to the granting of promotion and/or permanent status to occur no later than the sixth year of continuous full-time employment (the “Procedures and Criteria for Librarian Evaluation, Promotion, and Permanent Status”, attached as Appendix 2). The Procedures for Librarian Evaluation and Permanent Status may be amended from time to time, without the need to amend this Policy, by the Office of the Provost, in consultation with the Academic Senate, subject to the approval of the President and the Office of the Attorney General. If the Procedures for Librarian Evaluation and Permanent Status are amended, a copy of the new Procedures for Librarian Evaluation and Permanent Status will be filed in the office of the Chancellor, and shall replace the original Procedures for Librarian Evaluation and Permanent Status. The Procedures for Librarian Evaluation and Permanent Status will comply with the requirements of the University System of Maryland Policy on Appointment, Rank, and Tenure of Faculty.

          An appointee who has been notified that permanent status has been denied shall be granted an additional and terminal one-year appointment in that rank, but barring exceptional circumstances, shall receive no further consideration for permanent status. Permanent status can be awarded only by an affirmative decision based upon a formal review. Individuals who have been granted permanent status under USM VII-2.15, Policy on Librarians (which has been superseded by USM II-1.00, Policy on Appointment, Rank and Tenure of Faculty), shall retain that status. Appointments of faculty librarians with permanent status may be terminated at any time for cause. Cause shall include moral turpitude, professional or scholarly misconduct, incompetence, and/or willful neglect of duty. In addition to being terminated for cause, faculty engaged exclusively or primarily in library services may be terminated because of the discontinuation of the department, program, school or unit in which the appointment was made or because of the lack of appropriations or other funds with which to support the appointment. Procedures for termination of faculty librarians with permanent status are those that apply to tenured and tenure-track faculty, as described in VI.A.3.f. through VI.A.3.l.

          Appointments of faculty librarians who do not have permanent status may be terminated for cause under policies and procedures that apply to non-tenure track faculty.

          Subject to the approval of the President or designee, the University has developed guidelines, procedures and appropriate criteria for evaluating librarians’ performance (“Procedures and Criteria for Librarian Evaluation, Promotion, and Permanent Status”, Appendix 2).

          The University has written procedures governing the processes on granting promotion and permanent status (the “Procedures and Criteria for Librarian Evaluation, Promotion, and Permanent Status”, Appendix 2). Following review for form and legal sufficiency by the Office of the Attorney General, these procedures must be submitted to the Chancellor for review and approval.

          A person appointed to the position of director of the library shall serve in that capacity at the pleasure of the President or his/her designee, regardless of whether the appointee has at the time of the appointment, or obtains during the appointment, permanent status as a librarian.

        2. The University should specify in writing to faculty at the time of appointment the length of appointment and the applicable terms and conditions of the appointment with regard to tenure.

      2. Criteria and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure

        1. The criteria for tenure and promotion in the University are:

          (1) teaching effectiveness; (2) research, scholarship, and in appropriate areas, creative activities or other activities that result in the generation and application of intellectual property through technology transfer; and (3) service to the community, profession, and University. The relative weight of these criteria is determined by the University’s mission and reflected in faculty workload assignments (link to form).

        2. The activities considered to be within the criteria for promotion and tenure shall be flexible and expansive. The assessment of teaching, research/scholarship/creative activities, and service during the promotion and tenure process shall give appropriate recognition, consistent with the University’s mission, to faculty accomplishments that are collaborative, interdisciplinary, and inter-institutional and to faculty innovations in areas such as undergraduate education, minority-achievement programs, K-16 curriculum development, and technology-enhanced learning, all as more fully described in section XVII.C. of Appendix 3.

        3. The University has written procedures governing the promotion and tenure process (the “Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty Evaluations: Annual Review, Reappointment, Third-Year Review, Merit, Promotion, Tenure, and Comprehensive Review”, Appendix 3). The Procedures for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty Evaluation may be amended from time to time, without the need to amend this Policy, by the Office of the Provost, in consultation with the Academic Senate, subject to the approval of the President and the Office of the Attorney General. If the Procedures for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty Evaluation are amended, a copy of the new Procedures for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty Evaluation will be filed in the office of the Chancellor, and shall replace the original Procedures for Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty Evaluation. Following review for form and legal sufficiency by the Office of the Attorney General, these procedures must be submitted to the Chancellor for review and approval. These procedures shall include, at a minimum, the following:

          Criteria: A statement of criteria upon which reviews will be based, and guidelines for appointment or promotion to each academic rank, with recognition that University mission is the primary factor that defines these criteria.

          Procedures: A description of tenure and/or promotion review procedures, including participants, documentation, degree of confidentiality, schedule of the annual cycle for reviews, and authority for final approval.

          Appeals: A statement of the right of faculty to appeal promotion and tenure decisions, the grounds for such appeals, and a description of appeal procedures.

      3. Faculty Ranks.

        Following is a list of all faculty ranks used by the University.

        1. Faculty with Duties Primarily in Instruction. Professorial titles are granted only to teaching and/or research personnel who are associated with teaching or research departments or units.

          1. Instructor. The appointee shall hold, at a minimum, the master’s degree in the field of instruction, with evidence of pursuit of the doctorate or other termination degree. There shall be evidence also of potential for effective teaching and for a successful academic career.

          2. Assistant Professor. The appointee shall hold the doctorate or recognized terminal degree in the field of specialization. Exceptions may be made for comparable professional activity or research and in areas in which there is a critical shortage of doctorates. The appointee should also show potential for superior teaching, service, and research, scholarship, or where applicable, creative performance, commensurate with the University’s mission.

          3. Associate Professor. In addition to having the qualifications of an assistant professor, the appointee ordinarily shall have demonstrated excellence in teaching and successful experience in research, scholarship, or where appropriate, creative performance, and be competent to offer graduate instruction and direct graduate research. The appointee shall have a minimum of six years of full-time University/college teaching experience. Exceptions may be made for comparable professional activity or research. There shall also be evidence of relevant and effective service to the University, the community, and the profession.

          4. Professor. In addition to having the qualifications of an associate professor, the appointee ordinarily shall have established an outstanding record of teaching and research, scholarship, or where appropriate, creative performance, and, where appropriate to the mission of Towson University, a national reputation. The appointee shall have a minimum of ten years of full-time University/college teaching experience. Exceptions may be made for faculty who have attained national distinction for comparable professional activity or research. There shall be continuing evidence of relevant and effective service to the institution, the community, and the profession.

        2. Faculty with Duties Primarily in Research

          1. Assistant Staff Scientist. The appointee shall hold the doctoral degree in the field of specialization, and shall have indicated promise of a high degree of ability in research in some subdivision of the field.

          2. Associate Staff Scientist. In addition to the qualifications of an Assistant Staff Scientist, the appointee shall have had extensive successful experience in research. Since this position may carry permanent tenure, the appointee’s scholarly production and professional achievement in research will be thoroughly documented.

          3. Senior Staff Scientist. In addition to having the qualifications of an Associate Staff Scientist, the appointee shall have demonstrated a degree of proficiency in research sufficient to establish an excellent national reputation. Appointment to this rank carries tenure.

          4. Faculty Research Assistant. The appointee should be capable of assisting in research under the direction of the head of a research project and should have ability and training adequate to the carrying out of the particular techniques required, the assembling of data, and the use and care of any specialized apparatus. A baccalaureate degree shall be the minimum requirement.

          5. Research Associate. The appointee ordinarily should hold the doctoral degree in the field of specialization, or have relatively comparable experience. The appointee should be capable of carrying out individual research or collaborating in group research at the advanced level; should be trained in research procedures; and should have had the experience and specialized training necessary to develop and interpret data required for success in such research projects as may be undertaken. This appointment is made annually, with reappointment possible for a maximum of six years.

          6. Research Assistant Professor; Assistant Research Scientist; Assistant Research Scholar; Assistant Research Engineer. This rank is generally parallel to Assistant Professor. In addition to the qualifications of a Research Associate, appointees to this rank should have demonstrated superior research abilities. Appointees should be qualified and competent to direct the work of others (such as technicians, graduate students, other senior research personnel). The doctoral degree will be a normal requirement for appointment at this rank. Initial appointment to this rank is for periods up to three years, and reappointment it possible.

          7. Research Associate Professor; Associate Research Scientist; Associate Research Scholar; Associate Research Engineer. This rank is generally parallel to Associate Professor. In addition to the qualifications required of the Assistant ranks, appointees to this rank should have extensive successful experience in scholarly or creative endeavors, and the ability to propose, develop and manage major research projects. Initial appointment to this rank is for periods up to three years, and reappointment is possible.

          8. Research Professor; Senior Research Scientist; Senior Research Scholar; Senior Research Engineer. This rank is generally parallel to Professor. In addition to the qualifications required of the Associate ranks, appointees to this rank should have demonstrated a degree of proficiency sufficient to establish an excellent reputation among regional and national colleagues. Appointees should provide tangible evidence of sound scholarly production in research, publications, professional achievements or other distinguished and creative activity. Initial appointment at this rank is for periods up to five years, and reappointment is possible.

        3. Faculty Engaged Exclusively or Primarily in Clinical Teaching (Non-Tenure)

          1. Clinical Instructor. Appointment at the clinical instructor rank shall be made for an individual in disciplines for which the baccalaureate degree is the terminal professional degree. Such individuals must have a minimum of three years of clinical experience and clear evidence of exceptional and current clinical experience, with demonstrated competence in clinical teaching

          2. Clinical Assistant Professor. Appointment to the clinical assistant professor rank will require a minimum of: a terminal professional degree in the field (e.g., master’s in speech-language pathology, baccalaureate in athletic training); a minimum of three years of clinical experience in the area of discipline in which the appointment is being made and evidence of currency in clinical practice; demonstrated competence in clinical teaching ability in the discipline; demonstrated scholarly and/or administrative ability.

          3. Clinical Associate Professor. In addition to the qualifications of a clinical assistant professor, the appointee shall ordinarily have had extensive successful experience in clinical or professional practice in a field of specialization, or in a subdivision of the department field, and in working with and/or directing others (such as professions, faculty members, graduate students) in clinical activities in the field. The appointee must also have demonstrated superior teaching ability and scholarly or administrative accomplishments.

          4. Clinical Professor. In addition to the qualifications required of a clinical associate professor, the appointee shall have demonstrated a degree of excellence in clinical practice and teaching sufficient to establish an outstanding regional and national reputation among colleagues. The appointee shall also have demonstrated extraordinary scholarly competence and leadership in the profession. A doctoral degree is required.

        4. Faculty Engaged Exclusively or Primarily in Library Services (Non-Tenure). Librarian titles are to be granted to a limited number of appointees who fulfill roles defined by professional graduate training, such as librarian, curator, archivist, and information scientist. In the overwhelming number of instances, the professional graduate training required is a Master’s of Library Science degree from a program accredited by the American Library Association. However, the University may define instances when other graduate degrees may substitute for or augment the ALA-accredited M.L.S. Such exceptions will be based on and required by the functional needs of the University library. Appointments to these ranks are normally for twelve months with leave and other benefits provided to twelve-month tenured/tenure-track faculty members, with the exception of terminal leave, sabbatical leave, and non-creditable sick leave (collegially supported).

          1. Librarian I. This rank is normally assigned to librarians just entering librarianship with little or no professional library experience but who have been judged to have demonstrated an understanding of the basic tenets of librarianship and a potential for professional growth. A Librarian I is not eligible for permanent status in this rank.

          2. Librarian II. Appointment or promotion to this rank signifies that the librarian has demonstrated effective professional knowledge and skills significantly above those expected of a Librarian I. Normally, a minimum of three years of professional experience is required.

          3. Librarian III. Appointment or promotion to this rank signifies that the librarian has mastered the skills, knowledge, and techniques of librarianship and has made meaningful contributions to the library, the University, the library profession, and/or an academic discipline. Normally, a minimum of six years of professional experience is required, three of which must have been at a level comparable to the rank of Librarian II at Towson University.

          4. Librarian IV. Appointment or promotion to this rank is exceptional. It is awarded to those librarians who have made distinctive contributions to the library, the University, the library profession, and/or an academic discipline. This rank normally requires a minimum of nine years of professional experience, three of which must have been at a level comparable to the rank of Librarian III at Towson University.

            Subject to the approval of the President, the University has developed guidelines, procedures, and appropriate criteria for evaluating librarian’s performance. (the “Procedures and Criteria for Librarian Evaluation, Promotion, and Permanent Status”, Appendix 2).

        5. Additional Faculty Ranks

          1. Assistant Instructor. The appointee should be competent to fill a specific position in an acceptable manner, but is not required to meet all the requirements for an instructor. Appointment to this rank requires at least the appropriate baccalaureate degree.

          2. Lecturer. This title may be used for appointment at any salary and experience level of persons who are competent to fill a specific position, but who are not intended to be considered for professorial appointment. Appointments to this rank shall be for terms not to exceed three years and renewable.

          3. Senior Lecturer. In addition to having the qualifications of a Lecturer, the appointee shall have completed at least six years as a Lecturer (or in a rank at another institution of higher education that is accepted as comparable to Lecturer), and shall have established a record of teaching excellence and a record of service. Fewer than six years’ experience may qualify one for this rank if approved by the President or designee. Appointments to this rank shall be for terms not to exceed five years and are renewable.

          4. Artist-in-Residence; Writer-in-Residence; Executive-in-Residence. This title may be used to designate temporary appointments, at any salary and experience level, of persons who are serving for a limited time or part-time and who are not intended to be considered for professorial appointment.

          5. Adjunct Assistant Professor I and II; Adjunct Associate Professor I and II; Adjunct Professor I and II. These titles are used to appoint outstanding persons who may be simultaneously employed outside the University. The appointee should have expertise in the discipline and recognition for accomplishment sufficient to gain the endorsement of the preponderance of the members of the faculty of the department to which he or she is appointed. Appointment is made on a semester or an annual basis and is renewable. These titles do not carry tenure. Normally, adjunct appointments shall comprise no more than a small percentage of the faculty in an academic unit.

          6. Affiliate Assistant Professor; Affiliate Associate Professor; Affiliate Professor. These titles are used to recognize the affiliation of a faculty member or a member of the professional staff with an academic department, program, or center when that individual’s appointment and salary lie in another department of the University. These titles may be used to appoint outstanding persons who may be simultaneously employed outside the institution. The appointment will be made upon the recommendation of the faculty of the department, and at a level commensurate with the appointee’s qualifications, consistent with standards established for regular tenure-track faculty, although tenure cannot be earned on an affiliated appointment.

          7. Visiting Appointments. The prefix “visiting” before an academic title is used to designate a short-term, full-time appointment without tenure.

          8. Emeritus Faculty Appointments. A faculty member holding the rank of professor at the time of retirement and having completed five years of full-time service or the equivalent at Towson University shall be designated as Professor Emeritus. A faculty member who has not attained the rank of professor at the time of retirement, but who has completed fifteen years full-time service or the equivalent at Towson University shall be designated as Professor Emeritus. Other faculty members who have completed five years of full-time service or the equivalent at Towson University at the time of retirement shall be designated as Faculty Emeritus. At the time of retirement a librarian who has completed fifteen years of full-time service or the equivalent at Towson University shall be designated Librarian Emeritus. The Office of the Provost, after Academic Senate approval, shall notify faculty of their emeritus status and extend to them University parking, library, academic computing, and I.D. card privileges.

    3. Applicability. The provisions of this policy shall apply to all individuals who are employed as faculty members at Towson University as of August 1, 2010, and individuals whose faculty appointment becomes effective on or after September 1, 2009. The provisions in this policy shall not apply to any faculty member who receives notice of non-reappointment at any time prior to August 1, 2010.

Related Policies:

USM Policy II-1.00, Policy on Appointment, Rank, and Tenure of Faculty

Approval Date: 08/23/2010

Effective Date: 08/23/2010

Updated Date: 09/18/2013

10/21/2013

Approved By: President’s Council 08/20/2010

Appendix 1

Towson University FAculty and Professional Librarian Hiring Procedures
Towson University is committed to a comprehensive program of affirmative action and fair hiring practices to ensure equal access, equity, and fairness in the employment of all academic faculty and staff without regard to race, color, religion, national origin, disability, age, sex, sexual orientation, or status as a disabled or Vietnam-era veteran.

The following is a compendium of University policies and practices on faculty and librarian hiring. Towson University’s Affirmative Action Plan requires documented personnel procedures and uniform practices to ensure the University's compliance with federal and state laws and the rules and regulations of Towson University and the University System of Maryland. The policies and practices have been arranged in chronological order to cover the various steps of the hiring process; the outline can therefore serve as a checklist to search committees as they go about their deliberations. At the conclusion of the Academic Year, an audit process will be implemented to evaluate the compliance of search activities as described herein.

Résumés will only be accepted from individuals when a full- or part-time faculty or professional librarian position has been identified as a vacancy through publication advertisements, i.e., The Chronicle of Higher Education, Faculty Forum, etc. Unsolicited résumés will not be accepted; therefore, individuals submitting unsolicited résumés will not be recognized as applicants.

      1. Determination of Position to be Filled

        The exact position to be filled should be determined in consultation with the dean of the college --the level (faculty rank) available, specialties, if any, to be taught, and specific qualifications necessary in order to fill the position.

        Most vacancies are known well in advance of the beginning of the Academic Year, providing ample time for advertising, screening, interviewing, and selection. Occasionally, a position becomes available or is still unfilled just before the start of a semester. When that occurs, a national search to fill the position permanently can be conducted if it is begun approximately two months before the start of the semester. This search may be modified because of publication deadlines to include only some of the usual media and contacts. However, national contacts (e.g., professional associations' lists of job seekers or The Chronicle of Higher Education) must be used. If a position is vacant after July 10 or after December 10, usually it will be filled by temporary appointment(s) of either part time or visiting faculty while the department conducts a full search to fill the position.

      2. Selection of Search Committee

        1. Larger departments should (and small departments may) select individuals from among their members to serve on a search committee. Departments may decide that all full time tenure track and tenured faculty participate in the search process. All such hiring committees must include female and male representation. Minority representation on search committees should be the norm to the extent possible. In the case where there is an absence of minority representation on a search committee, the search chair should work with the Special Assistant to the President for Diversity and Equal Opportunity to ensure that minority candidates have an opportunity to meet with minority individuals during their campus visit.

        2. When conducting a search for a department chair, selection of the search committee will normally be made by the dean of the college in consultation with the department faculty. The dean may place a chairperson from another department on the search committee. Final composition of the committee should reflect the discipline interests and minority and female representation to the extent possible.

        3. If a department lacks minority, female or male faculty to serve on a search committee, such faculty from other departments can be appointed to serve as consultants to a search committee by mutual agreement of the department, the faculty member, and the Special Assistant to the President for Diversity and Equal Opportunity. A list of the search committee members and their demographic data (gender, race) should be submitted to the Special Assistant to the President for Diversity and Equal Opportunity in the Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity.

        4. Consultants serving on a search committee shall be voting members of the committee and will be active participants in all discussions and deliberations of the committee.

        5. The role of the consultant includes assistance to the department in the screening of applications on a non-discriminatory basis, and participation in interviews.

        6. General demographic data secured via an online voluntary applicant data collection system (see paragraph 9.) maintained by the Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity will be available to the minority consultant and the chair of the search committee upon request.

        7. Consultants need not serve on more search committees than they feel able. No consultant should feel constrained to accept any or all invitations to serve on search committees.

        8. Service on search committees is regarded as service to the University. Members and consultants should report this service on their end of year reports and such service should be credited in the same way as other committee service to the University.

        9. New members and consultants may receive orientation to the faculty hiring procedures and can call upon the Special Assistant to the President for Diversity and Equal Opportunity and the dean of their college for clarification at any time during the hiring process.

        10. The search committee chairperson will provide copies of the “Towson University Faculty and Professional Librarian Hiring Procedures” and other necessary materials to all search committee members.

      3. Wording of the Position Vacancy Announcement (must be submitted on a Faculty Job Posting Form):

        The position vacancy announcement should be worded as specifically as possible and should be prepared in consultation with the dean of the college, Associate Provost and the Special Assistant to the President for Diversity and Equal Opportunity. The following information should be in the advertisement:

        1. Faculty rank(s) and tenure status of the position.

        2. Specialty, if any, required.

        3. Primary duties of position: teaching load, level of courses to be taught, area(s) of specialty, non teaching duties such as scholarship, service, special program duties.

        4. Qualifications required or desirable (specify which), including degree status, experience, specialty, etc.

        5. Date position will begin (month, year).

        6. Some mention of salary (example: salary is commensurate with experience).

        7. Materials to constitute application (letter of interest, curriculum vitae, official graduate transcripts, letters of references, etc.) along with the name and address of person to whom information should be mailed.

        8. Closing date for applications. Whenever possible please use a firm closing date. When it is felt that a firm closing date will not work well, the following statement should be used “review of applications will begin on date.”

        9. Towson University’s Equal Employment Opportunity statement “Towson University is an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer and has a strong institutional commitment to diversity. Women, minorities, persons with disabilities, and veterans are encouraged to apply.” shall be used in every ad. The Special Assistant to the President for Diversity and Equal Opportunity will add the EEO statement if it has not been included.

        10. The search committee chair shall invite the Special Assistant to the President for Diversity and Equal Opportunity (ext. 42360) to meet with the search committee at this time to review Towson University’s affirmative action procedures.

      4. Approval of the Position Vacancy Announcement :

        The Faculty Job Posting Form must be approved by the department chairperson, dean of the college, Provost, and the Special Assistant to the President for Diversity and Equal Opportunity.

      5. Advertising Faculty Position Vacancies

        Regular tenure track or non-tenure track full-time faculty positions require “national” advertising. The position vacancy announcement should be circulated as widely as possible in professional or mass circulation media likely to reach all candidates, including minority, female, applicants with disabilities, and veterans.

        Two or more outreach efforts are required and should be documented and reported to the Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity.

        1. Academic Affairs is responsible for placing a group ad in The Chronicle of Higher Education in October. Deadline for submission of ads to be placed in the group ad is the preceding September. Ads placed in local newspapers, professional journals, and individualized ads in The Chronicle of Higher Education are paid for by the department, and are reimbursable up to a combined maximum of $500 per search.

        2. Departments are also encouraged to develop contacts with graduate institutions, historically/predominantly black colleges and universities, professional associations, and with minority and women's caucuses of professional associations as a source of applicants.

        3. For one year visiting and part time positions, advertising may be "regional" and confined to the Baltimore Washington area or other major cities. In unusual circumstances, a visiting position may be filled without being advertised if approved by the dean of the college, the Provost, and the Special Assistant to the President for Diversity and Equal Opportunity.

      6. Acknowledging Applications

        All applications should be acknowledged by letter as they are received. Communications with applicants with disabilities should at all points be made in an accessible medium, i.e., Braille if needed. Affirmative action cards (available from the Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity) must be enclosed with the acknowledgment letter.

      7. Preliminary Screening of Applicants

        Once the deadline for receipt of applications has passed, applicants should be screened initially only to eliminate those who do not meet the minimum qualifications for the position. These persons should be notified early that their qualifications do not meet minimum qualifications. A record of these applicants should be maintained by the department.

        All applicants who are not eliminated in this preliminary screening shall be included in the applicant pool. In this initial review of the applicant pool, any other necessary information which was not supplied with the original application should be requested. A record of non-competitive applicants should be maintained by the department.

      8. Completing the Applicant Pool

        Step 8 is a review step only; its purpose is to assure that there are full informational records on each member of the applicant pool. No comparative assessments should be made until this survey review has been accomplished. However, once all information necessary has been requested, step 9 may be initiated. Nevertheless, step 9 may not be completed until a reasonable time has been allowed for the receipt of any additional information requested in step 7.

      9. Screening of the Applicant Pool

        The Search Committee may request general demographic information on the applicant pool at this time from the Special Assistant to the President for Diversity and Equal Opportunity in the Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity.

        Once the applicant pool has been established, each bona fide application should be reviewed on its merit in relation to the advertised position and qualifications.

        The screening process must be non discriminatory. Departments should be cognizant of the hiring goals outlined in the University's Affirmative Action Plan.

        Particularly when screening applications for a position at the junior ranks, the admittedly subjective factor of "potential" is one which must be considered. Search committees are encouraged to discuss broadly both the quantitative and qualitative factors which they perceive in the applications and upon which their assessments are based.

        The screening procedure will result in some form of grouping of applications. The exact number and nature of the groupings, and their size, may vary depending upon the number of applicants in the applicant pool. Due to the diversity of departments and positions, no sharp guidelines can be given as to the number or size of groups within the pool. However, each search committee should feel free to consult the dean of the college and/or Special Assistant to the President for Diversity and Equal Opportunity for assistance and advice if they perceive a problem in the process of such grouping.

        The ultimate result of the screening/grouping step will be the determination of an "interview pool" from within the "applicant pool." The interview pool consists of those applicants who the department wishes to bring on campus for an interview as set forth below.

        NOTE: Some departments may wish to use preliminary interviews as part of the process of screening the applicant pool. In general, interviews at this step may not be used as the only interview of a candidate. Offers of employment cannot be made at such an inter-view.

      10. Review of Screening and Permission to Interview

        When the department has completed the screening of the applicant pool and has determined the interview pool from among the applicant pool, the department shall review the selection of the interview pool with the dean of the college.

        No department may invite persons for interviews or conduct final interviews until they have received the approval of the dean of the college, Associate Provost and the Special Assistant to the President for Diversity and Equal Opportunity and have conducted telephone reference checks. The dean and the Associate Provost will approve the interview pool on the basis that all appropriate procedures and qualification requirements have been addressed. The Special Assistant to the President for Diversity and Equal Opportunity will approve the interview pool on the basis that affirmative action guidelines have been followed.

      11. Invitations to Interview

        Once approval has been given to begin interviewing, each person in the interview pool shall be contacted to arrange a date for interview. Although the initial contact may be made by telephone, each person to be interviewed shall also be sent the following in writing:

        1. A letter confirming the date and time of the interview and setting forth the type of oral presentation, if required, to be made. Such presentations might take the form of a guest lecture in a class, a seminar presented to faculty members, a demonstration, audition, or performance, as appropriate. An invitation to request a reasonable accommodation should be extended by inviting the applicant to contact the search committee chairperson to request the necessary accommodation.

        2. Information regarding the reimbursement of candidate expenses. Receipts are required in order for candidates to be reimbursed for lodging other than the Burkshire, taxi, limousine, boarding passes are required for air and train transportation (including ticketless flights). Reimbursement for meals and auto mileage is limited to the current rate as approved by the State of Maryland and receipts are not required. Candidates must complete a Request for Candidate Reimbursement Form in order to secure reimbursement for their travel expenses.

      12. Interviews

        The search committee, including the consultants, should be present for all interviews

        A core of similar questions should be asked of all candidates. It is advisable to agree upon this set of questions in advance of interviewing and to formulate them in writing. Obviously, follow up questions and questions relating to the candidate's specific education and experience may also be asked.

        Questions/inquiries regarding citizenship may NOT be made during the interview process. You may ask, “If you are selected for this position, are you eligible to work in the United States?” If an individual who is foreign-born is ultimately the one who is selected and accepts the offer of employment and Towson University wishes to assist the individual to obtain an H-1B1 Visa (Temporary Nonimmigrant Worker in a Specialty Occupation), the Director of the International Student and Scholar Office should be contacted to initiate the process.

The search committee chairperson should provide summary notes of the consensus of the committee for each applicant interviewed. This record should include the dates, place, and interviewers present and at least brief notes of the discussion itself. Notes may also be maintained of the candidate's presentation given in conjunction with the interview. A record of the race and gender of each interviewee must be kept (see section 16 below).

      • Priority ranking of the interview pool should NOT be made until all interviews have been completed.

        Reasonable accommodations must be made for applicants with disabilities during their visit to campus and during the interview.

    1. Review of Process and Offer of Position

      After all interviews of the candidates in the interview pool have been completed, the department ranks by priority the members of the interview pool. Minority and female status generally should not be considered as factors in this ranking, unless the job group has identified inadequate minority or female representation (in light of their availability in the relevant job market). In this instance, if the qualifications of a candidate who is a member of an underrepresented group are equivalent to those of a majority candidate, the University will be disposed to offer the position to the former.

      In the case of recommendations for appointment of a department chairperson, the search committee, after consulting with the department, shall recommend to the dean the top three candidates without reporting the specific ranking, who shall make the appointment to the chairpersonship in consultation with the Provost. It is also understood that the dean will consult with the department prior to making the appointment decision.

      When a department has established a priority ranking of acceptable candidates, the department presents the list to the dean of the college, accompanied by an explanation of the ranking and a request to offer the position. If the dean is satisfied with the selection process, the position can be offered to the agreed upon candidate. Offers of position shall be made only by the Provost or the President as appropriate. An official graduate transcript and letters of reference shall be required before an offer of appointment.

      Should a department determine, as a result of the interviews, that it does not wish to make an offer of employment to any member of the interview pool, it shall consult the dean of the college and the Provost, presenting its reasons for wishing to reject all interviewees and its request either to conduct further interviews (interview alternates) or to cancel the search.

    2. Letters of Rejection

      1. Letters rejecting non competitive applicants are dealt with in step 6.

      2. Members of the applicant pool who are not chosen for the interview pool may, after stage 9 has been completed, be notified that interviews are being conducted and that they are not in the interview pool; however, they should not be notified of rejection at this stage.

      3. No member of the interview pool or of the applicant pool should be notified of rejection until the position has been filled or until the decision has been made by the Provost not to fill the position.

      4. All members of the applicant pool should be informed either that the University decided not to fill the position or that it was filled by a qualified candidate.

    3. Letters of Offer of Position

      Letters of offer of position shall be sent only by the Provost or the President.

      If all candidates refuse or for some other reason the interview pool is exhausted, the department shall either request permission to conduct further interviews (presenting a new list from the interview pool) or request permission to leave the position unfilled until a “new” search can be conducted.

      Steps 13, 14, and 15 involve initiatives of the Provost or the President. The presentation of requests or recommendations by departments at these stages does not imply the necessary concurrence of the Provost or President with such departmental recommendations or requests.

    4. Record Keeping

      At the completion of the search, Form #88-FP-Search, Faculty Search and Hiring Report Form, must be completed by the chairperson of the search committee. A signed copy of this affirmative action form will become part of the formal hiring documentation and filed in each faculty member's official personnel record located in the Office of the Provost. Additionally, the department must collect the following records and forward the entire search file to the Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity:

        1. List of the hiring committee (chairperson and consultants should be so designated on the list).

        2. The position vacancy announcement.

        3. List of places (both publications, web sites and agencies/institutions) to which the advertisement was submitted to include the two required outreach efforts.

        4. The names of the non competitive applicants (step 6).

        5. The names of the members of the applicant pool (step 7).

        6. The names of those interviewed and the composition of the interview pool (step 10).

        7. Search committee chairperson summary notes (step 12).

        8. Same as f and g if a second interview pool is constituted.

        9. Copies of all letters to all applicants (if a form letter is used, copy of form letter with names to whom sent) and of all letters from all applicants.

      The Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity will keep this information on file for four years.

General Note on Definitions

At the conclusion of the search, the chairperson of the search committee reports summary information on the search and detailed information on the interviewees to the Special Assistant to the President for Diversity and Equal Opportunity on the Faculty Search and Hiring Report Form, Form #88-FP-Search.

In general, the foregoing document does not specify how departments constitute their search committee (method of selection or size of committee) but it does assume that search committees act on behalf of and with the approval of their departments. Thus it is assumed that at any stage at which information, requests, or recommendations are presented to the dean of the college or to the Provost, such action is taken either by direct departmental approval or by the department's general approval of the activities of the committee. The precise manner in which such a relationship is expressed is left to each department to decide.

Appendix 1-A

Towson University Lecturer Hiring Procedures

  1. Permission to conduct a search for a vacant lecturer position begins by submitting a completed Faculty/Librarian/Lecturer Appointment Request form to the Provost’s Budget Office with text of the job advertisement for the position included.

    See Guidelines from the Provost's Budget Office for complete details about how to conduct a search for a vacant lecturer position. The job announcement must include Towson University’s equal opportunity statement.

  2. Once permission to conduct a search for a vacant lecturer position has been approved in Academic Affairs, the Provost’s Budget Office (PBO) will forward a copy of the request form and job advertisement to the Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity. Once the Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity reviews, approves and signs, and returns the copy of the approved request form and job advertisement to the PBO, the PBO will then post the job advertisement to Inside Higher Ed (or a successor or comparable publication) for a minimum of 30 days and to TU’s website. The academic department will receive acknowledgement when the job announcement has been received by the PBO and when it is posted to Inside Higher Ed (or a successor or comparable publication).

    1. A vacant lecturer position may be filled without being advertised if approved by the dean of the college, the Provost, and the Assistant to the President for Diversity, under extraordinary circumstances.

  3. Applicants for vacant lecturer positions will receive an email from the Provost’s Budget Office confirming receipt of their application materials. This email message will include a request that the applicant complete the voluntary on-line applicant data form.

    This information informs the University’s affirmative action plan and is for statistical purposes only and shall not be used to discriminate for or against anyone.

  4. Once the job advertisement has been posted for at least two weeks (10 business days) then academic departments may begin to screen applicants and eliminate those who do not meet minimum qualifications for the position. These applicants will be notified by email by the academic department that they are no longer being considered for the current vacancy. A record of these applicants, that includes the specific reason why the applicant was not considered for the vacancy, will be maintained by the academic department.

  5. The academic department may request general demographic information on applicants in the pool at this time from the Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity.

    1. Each applicant in the pool should be reviewed on their qualifications in relation to the job advertised position and qualifications. The screening process must not discriminate on the basis of any protected status (e.g., race, age). Academic departments should be consistent with the hiring goals outlined in the University's Affirmative Action Plan.
  6. A set of similar questions should be asked of all interviewed applicants. Interviews can take place in many formats, including face to face, telephone, via the web, etc. Follow up questions and questions relating to specific education and experience may also be asked.

    1. Reasonable accommodations must be made for applicants with disabilities during their visit to campus and during the interview.

  7. After interviews of applicants in the pool have been completed the academic department (via the department chairperson) priority ranks applicants in the pool. The department chairperson, with the approval of the college dean, may offer the position to the chosen candidate. Once the position is accepted, or if the search fails, the department chair notifies the Provost’s Budget Office. Salary and compensation for all lecturer positions must be pre-approved by the Provost’s Office.

  8. Official offer letters and contracts will be sent only by the Provost’s Budget Office.

  9. The Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity will forward a list/file to the department chairperson that contains demographic data regarding the applicant pool secured from the online applicant data file. The chairperson should assign the appropriate disposition code next to each applicant, adding applicant data for any applicants that were interviewed, but did not complete an applicant data form and forward the completed form to the Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity.

Appendix 2

Procedures and Criteria for Librarian Evaluation, Promotion, and Permanent Status

  1. Overview of Librarian Evaluation, Promotion, and Permanent Status

    1. General Principles

      1. Minimum requirements for appointment, promotion, and permanent status of librarians are established by the University System of Maryland (USM) Board of Regents and are stated in the “II-1.00 University System of Maryland Policy on Appointment, Rank and Tenure of Faculty” which may be amended from time to time. The provisions of the USM policy supersede any conflicting provisions in TU policies.

      2. Librarians will be evaluated on performance in the areas of librarianship; scholarship, research, publications, creative works and professional leadership; service; and progress toward meeting annual objectives as determined in collaboration with the immediate supervisor. A newly hired librarian will receive a written evaluation from his or her immediate supervisor, with a copy to the library director, six months after the initial appointment. Every librarian will receive an annual evaluation each spring from his or her department chair/supervisor that is also reviewed by the director of the library.

      3. The final decision to grant or deny permanent status shall be made by the President.

    2. Standards and Expectations

      The general criteria for initial appointment, any promotion in rank, and permanent status measure the librarian’s contributions to the University and librarianship. These criteria include quality of performance in the areas of the librarian’s responsibility, library instruction, research and academic achievement, professional activity outside the library, service on library committees and task forces, service to the University. The criteria are not all necessarily weighted equally; the degree of importance given to any one criterion may vary from one librarian to another, depending on the particular position.

    3. Definition of Evaluation Categories

      1. Librarianship

        The librarian is expected to demonstrate competence in his or her assigned areas of responsibility, such as library instruction, collection development, bibliographic organization, reference, research services, discipline specialty, management, or some combination thereof. Among the factors to be considered are: quality and consistency of performance; ability to innovate; initiative; leadership; ability to work effectively with others; amount of responsibility assigned to the librarian; ability to organize work and complete tasks promptly; ability to relate job functions to the more general goals of the library and University; dependability; accuracy; oral and written skills; judgment; professional attitude; adaptability; participating and providing input to library program designs and solutions; and demonstrated commitment to the mission of the library.

      2. Scholarship, Research, Publications, Creative Works, and Professional Leadership Scholarship may be in the form of books, articles, book reviews, editorships, bibliographies, handbooks, digital objects, creative works, teaching appointments, and lectures. The librarian is expected to demonstrate continued academic study related to the profession and/or the programs of the University. Continuing education includes formal courses, seminars and workshops, as well as advanced degrees obtained or in progress. Meaningful participation in professional activities on local, state, regional, and national levels includes offices held, committee assignments, papers presented, awards received, and leadership in the design and development of seminars and workshops.

      3. Service

        Service shall include substantive participation in the shared governance activities of the library and University. Service also includes special major projects with academic departments and participation in relevant work of the University System of Maryland, such as the University System of Maryland and Affiliated Institutions Library Consortium. Civic service, which may be considered in this category, includes participation in the larger community (local, regional, national or global) outside the University in ways that may or may not be directly related to the librarian’s academic expertise, but in ways which advance the University’s mission.

    4. Part-time Librarians

      1. Part-time librarians may be employed at the ranks of Librarian I, Librarian II, Librarian III, or Librarian IV.

      2. Appointment, reappointment, permanent status, promotion, and termination of part-time librarians shall be consistent with the policies and procedures established for permanent full-time librarians.

      3. In order to be considered eligible for permanent status, a part-time librarian’s commitment shall be at least fifty percent time for the fiscal year.

      4. The length of employment for permanent status consideration shall ordinarily be based upon the number of full-time equivalent years accrued by the librarian at the institution (e.g., if a full-time librarian is normally considered for permanent status after six years of consecutive employment, a librarian whose employment is at fifty percent (50%) will normally be considered after twelve (12) years of employment).

      5. Part-time individuals at the ranks of Librarian I, Librarian II, Librarian III, and Librarian IV are eligible for full-time positions consistent with institutional policies.

  2. Evaluation Criteria

    1. Criteria for Annual Performance Evaluation and Guidelines for Merit for Librarians

      The annual performance evaluation serves as the basis for recommending annual merit salary increases. There are three categories of evaluation: librarianship; scholarship, research, publications, creative works, and professional leadership; and service. Librarianship will be the most heavily weighted of the three evaluation categories. Ratings will take into consideration the performance of librarians at different levels of experience and responsibility. Expectations for performance increase with years of experience and the addition of responsibilities.

      The statement of job responsibilities is the starting point for the evaluation process. It is the joint responsibility of the librarian and supervisor to set goals in the areas of librarianship, scholarship, and service for the coming year and to establish priorities. Annual goals should be challenging, realistic, and support the mission and goals of the library and University.

      There will be three levels of merit as follows:

      Excellent –Outstanding (Base Merit Plus): Librarians who are not only deemed satisfactory, but who also have a rating of “excellent – outstanding” in librarianship and in at least one additional category of evaluation.

      Satisfactory – Meets Expectations (Base Merit): Librarians whose work is deemed competent and thus contributes to fulfilling the mission of the library and University. To qualify for base merit, librarians shall demonstrate achievement in librarianship, scholarship, and service consistent with their job responsibilities and receive a rating of “satisfactory - meets expectations” or higher in librarianship and in at least one other category.

      Not Meritorious – Needs Improvement: Librarians whose performance fails to adequately meet explicit standards.

      1. Criteria for Evaluating Performance in Librarianship

        The following factors will be considered in evaluating performance in librarianship: quality and consistency of performance; ability to innovate; initiative; leadership; ability to work effectively with others; amount of responsibility assigned to the librarian; ability to organize work and complete tasks promptly; ability to relate job functions to the more general goals of the library and University; dependability; accuracy; oral and written skills; judgment; professional attitude; adaptability; fulfilling basic obligations of attendance; participating and providing input to library program designs and solutions; and demonstrated commitment to the mission of the library and University.

        1. Outstanding (3): The assignment of “Outstanding” is based on a consistently high level of performance and the superior nature of the contribution must be evident. The quality, innovation, sustained effort, reliability and initiative demonstrated by the librarian are considered when assigning a rating of outstanding. Characteristics of this rating may include but are not limited to the following:

          1. Demonstrates special efforts and/or exhibits unusual success in the area of job responsibility.

          2. Accomplishes annual goals in an exemplary manner with goals that advance the library and University missions and strategic plans.

          3. Assumes new responsibilities or assignments beyond current position that require a commitment of time, energy and other resources.

          4. Provides leadership or major contribution to activities which result in a significant impact and improvement of library services.

        2. Meets Expectations (2): The assignment of “Meets Expectations” indicates that the librarian consistently and adequately fulfills the responsibilities of the position. Characteristics of this rating may include but are not limited to the following:

          1. Understands and executes job responsibilities independently and thoroughly, and accomplishes a majority of his/her annual goals.

          2. Furthers the service unit's goals and objectives through active participation.

          3. Accepts and performs library assignments in addition to current job responsibilities.

          4. Demonstrates knowledge of library policies and procedures and the interrelationships of various service units.

        3. Needs Improvement (1): The assignment of “Needs Improvement” indicates that the librarian does not meet important responsibilities of the position. Characteristics of this rating may include but are not limited to the following:

          1. Does not accept or fulfill work assignments appropriate to statement of job responsibilities.

          2. Does not perform in accordance to library mission, policies or procedures.

          3. Is ineffective in carrying out primary duties.

          4. Demonstrates inappropriate professional behavior.

          5. Fails to work toward improving problematic performance.

      2. Criteria for Evaluating Performance in Scholarship, Research, Publications, Creative Works, and Professional Leadership

        While the quantity of work in a given year is considered, more important is the quality of work and its research or creative value as demonstrated by publication or presentation. Additional factors include originality, independence of contribution and reputation of the publication. Scholarship in library science or chosen subject specialties is to be considered. Research-in-progress may be considered if it leads to publication or presentation within a reasonable amount of time. Research-in-press may be considered but then not again for the following year. The impact of the librarian’s work will be evidenced by citation patterns, requests for presentations, and other means. Creative works must be relevant directly to the field of academic librarianship or area of library expertise.

        1. Outstanding (3): The assignment of “outstanding” includes a very active, productive research and leadership agenda. Characteristics of this rating may include but are not limited to the following:

          1. Has evidence of significant contributions to the profession through such efforts as having published an article, book, book chapter, presented a scholarly paper or workshop at a national or regional conference.

          2. Has receipt of an externally funded grant.

          3. Has held a leadership role and made a significant contribution in a national or regional professional organization.

          4. Has evidence of outstanding creative work that demonstrates originality and/or innovation and that makes a significant impact on library services or mission.

        2. Meets expectations (2): The assignment of “meets expectations” includes a productive research agenda. Characteristics of this rating may include but are not limited to the following:

          1. Has an active research agenda and is working on projects that contribute to the profession of academic librarianship.

          2. Has contributed works such as a book review, newsletter article, or in-house publications during the year.

          3. Has given presentations or workshops on topics related to academic libraries, higher education and/or topics relevant to areas of responsibility.

          4. Has evidence of creative work that promotes the library, University or profession.

          5. Participation in professional organizations, attendance at professional conferences, workshops and/or staff development activities.

        3. Needs Improvement (1): The assignment of “needs improvement” indicates no or minimal scholarship, research, creative work, or professional activity. Characteristics of this rating may include but are not limited to the following:

          1. Has no active scholarship, creative work, or research agenda.

          2. Has no evidence of professional activity.

      3. Criteria for Evaluating Performance in Service

        University service and civic service fall within the service category. The librarian has the responsibility to document the impact of participation in furthering the service and outreach mission of the library and University.

        1. Outstanding (3): The assignment of “outstanding” includes a high level of significant service activity. Characteristics of this rating may include but are not limited to the following:

          1. Significant University service or civic service within the University community or its constituencies.

          2. Successful service on two or more non-library Towson University, University System of Maryland, or regional committees, governing boards, task forces, or project teams.

          3. Leadership role in at least one committee or organization.

        2. Meets expectations (2): The assignment of “meets expectations” includes productive service activities. Characteristics of this rating may include but are not limited to the following:

          1. Participation in library or University committees.

          2. Civic service through outreach activities.

        3. Needs Improvement (1): (Minimal service activities)

          1. Failure to participate in library or University service.

          2. No active service record at any level (library, University, civic, state, regional or national).

    2. Criteria for Promotion of Librarians

      1. Librarian II requirements: Normally a minimum of three years of professional experience is required. Candidates must meet all requirements listed below.

        1. Librarianship:

          1. Meet or exceed standards in all categories in the two most recent annual reviews, unless documentation is provided to indicate that any "below standards" ratings in the two most recent annual reviews were fully addressed and corrected prior to the submission of the candidate's dossier.

          2. Substantive contribution to the maintenance or improvement of quality in library services and resources, with documentation of specific contributions.

          3. Successful completion of one or more significant and relevant projects for the library, or completion of one or more regional or national library projects that were pre-approved by the appropriate department chair/supervisor and library director.

          4. Application of broad knowledge of librarianship and in-depth knowledge of specialties within areas of responsibility to serve the Cook Library and Towson University missions.

        2. Scholarship, Research, Publications, Creative Works, and Professional Leadership:

          1. Continuing study and ongoing enhancement of knowledge level in areas of responsibility

            OR

            Publications, creative works, or significant reports in which the candidate served as lead.

          2. Active membership in at least one relevant professional organization.

          3. Attendance at professional meetings.

        3. Service:

          1. Participation in Cook Library committees.

          2. Participation in shared governance activities and other committees or projects of the University beyond those of the library. This may include participation in and contribution to special major projects with academic departments, or with the University System of Maryland and Affiliated Institutions (USMAI) Library Consortium. Participation in civic service may be included in this category.

      2. Librarian III Requirements: Normally a minimum of six years of professional experience is required, three of which must be at a level comparable to the rank of Librarian II at Towson University. In addition to the requirements for Librarian II, candidates must meet all of the following requirements except as noted.

        1. Librarianship:

          1. Performance, leadership, and initiative beyond the level required of Librarian II for areas of direct responsibility

          2. Performance, leadership, and initiative in projects and assignments which extend beyond areas of direct responsibility.

        2. Scholarship, Research, Publications, Creative Works, and Professional Leadership:

          1. Performance, leadership, and initiative in this category beyond that required for Librarian II.

          2. At least three works from any of the following categories: publications in peer-reviewed journals (or works accepted for publication in such journals); presentations at state, regional or national meetings in areas of library expertise; or creative works directly relevant to the field of academic librarianship or the librarian’s area of specialization. A significant grant for which the candidate took primary responsibility may be substituted for a peer-reviewed publication.
        3. Service:

          1. Performance, leadership, and initiative in this category beyond that required for Librarian II.

          2. Successful service of at least two years on two or more shared governance activities and other committees or projects of the University beyond those of the library. This may include participation in and contribution to special major projects with academic departments, or with the University System of Maryland and Affiliated Institutions (USMAI) Library Consortium. Participation in civic service may be included in this category.

      3. Librarian IV requirements: Appointment or promotion to this rank is exceptional. Normally a minimum of nine years of professional experience is required, at least three of which must be at a level comparable to Librarian III at Towson University. In addition to meeting the criteria for Librarian II and Librarian III noted above, the candidate must have made distinctive contributions to the library, Towson University, the library profession, and/or an academic discipline that clearly set the candidate among the top professionals in academic librarianship. These contributions will include three or more of the following:

        1. Leadership and completion of major projects that benefit Cook Library, Towson University, the University System of Maryland, or libraries region-wide.

        2. Proposal, receipt and successful completion of a major grant.

        3. Consistent leadership or excellence in librarianship over an extended period of time that has benefited other librarians and library staff.

        4. Regional or national leadership demonstrated either by holding high office in professional associations or otherwise making significant contributions to the field.

        5. An outstanding publication record.

        6. Achieving exceptional formal recognition, honors or awards for outstanding service, teaching or leadership in the field.

    3. Criteria for Permanent Status of Librarians

      1. Permanent status may be granted only to those holding the rank of Librarian II, Librarian III, or Librarian IV and such other ranks and the University may adopt and the Board of Regents may approve; permanent status may not be granted to an individual holding the rank of Librarian I. Permanent status is continued employment by the University such that a decision to remove a librarian must be made by the President and must be justified by cause as defined in Towson University Policy on Appointment, Rank, and Tenure of Faculty, and applicable Board of Regents policies. This employment may be terminated only in accordance with the University's and Board of Regents' policies. Continued employment need not be in the same capacity. Permanent status can be awarded only by an affirmative decision based upon a formal review as described in this policy.

      2. Permanent status review shall occur no later than the librarian’s sixth year of continuous, full-time service as a librarian at Towson University.

      3. The categories for evaluating librarians are (1) librarianship; (2) scholarship, research, publications, creative works, and professional leadership; and (3) service, all as defined in Section I. C of this document “Definition of Evaluation Categories.” The expected contributions in each of these areas will vary considerably among librarians depending on their primary function within the library.

      4. Permanent status requires superior professional and intellectual attainment and potential. The quality of a librarian’s performance and potential for professional growth and achievement will be judged in the evaluation categories listed in paragraph 3 above and described in Section I.C of this document, “Definition of Evaluation Categories.” To achieve permanent status a librarian will hold, at a minimum, a Master’s degree in librarianship from an ALA accredited library school.

      5. Librarianship will be judged with respect to:

        1. consistency of performance;

        2. grasp of library methods and trends;

        3. command of librarian’s subject(s);

        4. continued growth in librarian’s field(s);

        5. ability to innovate and take initiative;

        6. ability to work effectively with others and;

        7. ability to relate librarian’s functions to the more general goals of the library and the University.

      6. Scholarship, Research, Publications, Creative Works, and Professional Leadership will be evaluated with regard to activities such as the following:

        1. research or recognized contributions in fields relevant to the profession;

        2. documented research in progress;

        3. books, articles, book reviews, bibliographies, indexes, codifications, professional practices, presentations, and preparation of exhibits in professional or scholarly fields;

        4. progress toward the completion of an advanced degree relevant to the profession and/or programs of the University;

        5. courses taken toward improvement of subject knowledge;

        6. membership and activity in professional and scholarly organizations, committees, and meetings;

        7. related consulting or similar service;

        8. recognition of outstanding achievement or promise as evidenced by awards, fellowships, grants; and

        9. college teaching.

      7. Service will be evaluated with regard to participating in activities such as the following:

        1. library and University committees;

        2. relevant work of the University System of Maryland; and

        3. civic service to the larger community.

  3. Process and Procedures for Evaluation, Promotion, and Permanent Status

    1. Principles

      1. The following procedures and sequence of operations are to be followed by all candidates and by all reviewers. The procedures have been established to promote consistency of application from one year to the next and to provide full and fair hearings for all candidates. All parties are responsible for maintaining appropriate security and confidentiality of all materials and deliberations regarding evaluation, promotion and permanent status. Each application for promotion or permanent status is to be considered solely on its own merits at the time it is submitted.

    2. Document Development

      • The responsibility for presenting a portfolio of material for the annual review, promotion, or permanent status rests with the librarian.

      • Guided by the department chair/supervisor and library criteria, the librarian shall include in his/her portfolio sections that address the three categories of librarianship, scholarship, and service and shall address such categories as s/he deems appropriate in his/her narrative statements.

      • All documentation presented by the librarian for evaluation, promotion, and permanent status shall be submitted in the form of an evaluation portfolio. Evaluation portfolios shall be organized, indexed, and placed in a three-ring binder. Portfolios may be submitted in electronic format designated by the library director. Contents of the evaluation portfolio are determined by type of review and minimally shall include the materials outlined below.

      • Evaluation portfolio materials for annual evaluation of all librarians must include the following documents:

        1. Librarian Annual Performance Evaluation (See Section VI). This form may be amended from time to time.

        2. Current curriculum vitae.

      • Evaluation portfolio materials for full review of librarians for promotion and/or for permanent status must include the following documents:

        1. Items to be supplied by the candidate:

          1. Letter of request to be considered for promotion or permanent status, including a narrative justifying the request.

          2. Current curriculum vitae.

          3. Summary of professional activities during the review period, signed by the department chair/supervisor.

          4. Transcript(s) – original transcript(s) documenting any formal continuing studies during the review period.

          5. Publication(s) – copies of up to five (5) professionally relevant publications or documentation of creative works or presentations in area of library expertise. 

          6. List of References – Candidates seeking promotion in rank or permanent status will provide the names of at least three individuals from inside or outside the Library who will be asked for additional information concerning the candidate’s professional capabilities and accomplishments. The references may include librarians, faculty members, or other colleagues who have had sufficient contact with the candidate during the review period to be able to evaluate his/her professional skills and performance.

          7. Other references – Up to five (5) unsolicited commendations and acknowledgements may be included in portfolio.

        2. Items to be supplied by others:

          1. Current position description – This document will be added to the portfolio by the library director.

          2. Performance appraisals – The two most recent Librarian Annual Performance Evaluations completed by the librarian’s department chair/supervisor. These documents will be added to the portfolio by the library director.

          3. References - Letters from Committee chair soliciting references that assess the candidate’s accomplishments and letters of reference in response to above will be added to the portfolio by the chair of the Committee. Solicited external reviews will not be included in the evaluation portfolio but will be forwarded under separate cover to each level of review. They will be maintained separately and will remain confidential.

          4. Letter of recommendation from department chair/supervisor – The chair of the Committee will forward a copy of the updated curriculum vitae from the portfolio to the candidate’s current department chair/supervisor and request a full evaluation of the candidate's eligibility for advancement in rank or for permanent status. The department chair/supervisor’s detailed report with recommendation shall be included in the portfolio as it proceeds through the process.

          5. Other – The Committee may request additional information from inside and outside the library to complete documentation needed to make a recommendation. If this should occur, the candidate will be notified in writing about the additional information needed and from whom it is requested. This notification and the candidate’s response will be added to the portfolio by the Committee chair. If at any level confidential external reviews are solicited pursuant to promotion and permanent status policies, they will remain confidential and will not be made available to the librarian. These reviews will not be included in the librarian evaluation portfolio but will be forwarded under separate cover to each subsequent level of review.

          6. Recommendations and actions

            1. Letter conveying results of the Committee vote, supplied by Committee chair.

            2. Decision of library director, supplied by library director. 

            3. Decision of Provost or designee, supplied by Provost’s office.

            4. Response of candidate, if written, supplied by candidate.

      • Summative Portfolio to be submitted to Provost

        In addition to the evaluation portfolio, librarians being reviewed for promotion or permanent status shall also prepare a summative portfolio for the Provost. It shall be clearly labeled with the librarian’s name, department, and type of review. In each section of the binder, documents shall be presented from the most recent year evaluated to the time of last promotion or year of hire. The summative portfolio shall be compiled in a one-inch binder, labeled, indexed, and in the order listed as follows:

        Section I: Current curriculum vitae. A copy of one recent professionally relevant publication or documentation of creative work or presentation in area of library expertise.

        Section II: Librarian Annual Performance Evaluation (Parts I – IV), arranged from most recent to the time of last promotion or year of hire.

        Section III: Supporting Statement

      • Summary statement describing correlation between expectations and accomplishments and integrating accomplishments in the areas of librarianship, scholarship, and service.

        Section IV: Recommendations 
      • Written recommendation of the Librarian Promotion and Permanent Status Committee.

      • Written recommendation of the department chair/supervisor.

      • Written recommendation of the library director.

    3. Document Storage

      1. The library director shall maintain a copy of all official documents concerning annual evaluation, promotion, and permanent status. Copies of all recommendations shall also be sent to the librarian.

      2. The official letters concerning recommendations for promotion and permanent status shall be maintained by the Provost, as chief academic officer of the University.

    4. Evaluation Procedures, Calendar and Timetable

      Years in rank are counted beginning with an individual's anniversary date at the Albert S. Cook Library. An initial partial year of 6 months or more, i.e., appointment beginning January 1 or earlier in the fiscal year, will be considered a full initial year of service. Increase in pay due to promotion in rank will be awarded July 1 following the date the candidate has been notified that promotion has been granted. 

      1. Annual Evaluation

        1. The department chair/supervisor shall annually review librarians for reappointment and merit. 

        2. To qualify for merit, librarians shall demonstrate achievement in librarianship, scholarship and service consistent with “Criteria for Annual Performance Evaluation and Guidelines for Merit for Librarians” (Section II.A).

        3. Each librarian shall prepare an evaluation portfolio describing activities and accomplishments during the review year to which the evaluation applies, as outlined in “Document Development” (Section III.B). The librarian shall submit the evaluation portfolio to the department chair no later than February 10.

        4. The annual review for reappointment and merit shall be conducted and completed during the spring semester of the Academic Year under review. 

        5. March 1 – The department chair/supervisor shall be responsible for presenting to the library director the evaluation portfolios for annual review of all librarians in the department, with the department chair/supervisor’s recommendations, by March 1.

        6. March 15 – The library director shall review the department chair/supervisor recommendations, add comments, and forward the documents to the Provost by March 15.

        7. April 1 - If the library director disagrees with the department chair/supervisor recommendation, the library director shall notify the department chair/supervisor and the librarian of the recommendation in writing. The recommendation shall contain reference to each category evaluated including librarianship, scholarship, and service. The library director shall be responsible for adding this recommendation to the librarian’s evaluation portfolio. Negative recommendations shall be delivered in person by the library director or sent by certified mail to the librarian’s last known address by April 1.

        8. A librarian may appeal a non-reappointment recommendation at any point in the process, following procedures outlined in the Appeals section (Section V); however, an appeal shall not stay the reappointment evaluation process.

        9. April 15 - If the Provost accepts a non-reappointment recommendation made during the librarian’s first or second year of employment at the University, written notice shall be delivered to the librarian or mailed to the librarian’s last known address by April 15; otherwise, the appointment is renewed automatically for one (1) additional year.

        10. Librarians entering the third through fifth years of service at the University must receive one full year’s notice of non-reappointment.

      2. Promotion and Permanent Status Review Process and Calendar 

        1. July 15 - Candidates begin process for promotion and/or permanent status.

          1. No later than July 15, the library director shall notify all Librarian I's who are beginning their sixth year of service that they must apply for promotion. An initial partial year of six(6) months or more, i.e., appointment beginning January 1 or earlier in the fiscal year, will be considered a full initial year of service.

          2. No later than July 15, the library director shall notify all librarians who are beginning their sixth year of continuous full-time service, and their department chairs, that they must apply for permanent status. A librarian must hold the rank of Librarian II or higher in order to be granted permanent status (See “Criteria for Permanent Status of Librarians” (Section II.C.)).

          3. Except as provided in items “i” and “ii” above, librarians are responsible for tracking their own eligibility for promotional review and for initiating the review process at the appropriate time, if they so elect. A letter of intent to seek promotion or permanent status must be sent to the library director by July 15.
        2. August 15 – September 15 - Candidate's portfolio is completed

          1. The candidate for promotion or permanent status must submit a portfolio to the library director by August 15. (See Section III, B. “Document Development”.) The library director shall confirm receipt of the portfolio in writing to the candidate.

          2. The library director shall add to the portfolio a current position description and copies of the two most recent Librarian Annual Performance Evaluations. The library director shall make the candidate's portfolio available for use by the Librarian Promotion and Permanent Status Review Committee (“Committee”).

          3. The Committee shall meet to review the portfolio for completeness and to begin the process of contacting references. The chair of the Committee will contact the references and assure them that all letters of reference will be kept in confidence, to the extent permitted by law, so as to protect the privacy of the candidate and to encourage references to be frank and accurate in their descriptions of the candidate's strengths and weaknesses. All letters of reference shall be submitted to the chair of the Committee by September 15.

          4. The chair of the Committee will forward a copy of the updated vitae from the portfolio to the candidate's current department chair/supervisor and request a detailed report and recommendation on promotion or permanent status to be submitted to the Committee chair by September 15. In those cases in which the current department chair/supervisor has been in position for less than one (1) year, the past department chair/supervisor will be contacted as well.

        3. September 15 - Committee begins review of the portfolio for promotion or permanent status

          1. The chair will review the candidate's portfolio for completeness and will set a meeting for the Committee's deliberations. In the event letters of reference or the department chair/supervisor's evaluation are not received by September 15, the library director will be advised of the situation and will take appropriate action.

          2. The Committee's secretary will take sufficient notes during all Committee deliberations so that reasons for a recommendation can be accurately expressed in writing.

        4. October 15 - The Committee shall complete its deliberations and reach a decision by secret ballot, signed with the Towson University ID number and dated by each committee member, including the chair, and tallied by the committee chair and committee secretary. The committee chair shall send signed, dated written notification of its vote results and recommendation to both the candidate and the library director by October 15. The letter shall contain a statement of reasons for the recommendation and will become part of the portfolio. The secret ballots shall not be included in the portfolio, but shall be forwarded under separate cover to the library director, to be preserved with the promotion and permanent status file until three years following the librarian’s termination or resignation from the University. No committee member shall abstain from a vote for promotion or permanent status unless the library director authorizes such abstention based for good cause, including an impermissible conflict of interest.

        5. October 15 - Library director begins review of the portfolio for promotion or permanent status.

          1. The library director receives all portfolio materials and the formal notes of the Committee. The library director shall recommend granting or denying the request for promotion or permanent status, give the reasons for that recommendation in writing, and provide copies of that document to the candidate and the Committee by December 1.

        6. December 1 – Library director provides copy of written recommendation to candidate and Committee by December 1.

        7. December 15 – The library director forwards his/her written recommendation and the recommendation of the Committee along with the candidate’s summative portfolio to the Provost by December 15.

        8. January 30 - The Provost or designee receives the promotion or permanent status documentation from the library director and will make his/her recommendation in writing to the President by January 30.

        9. March 1 –The President will notify the candidate and library director in writing, with a copy to the chair of the Committee, of his/her final decision to grant or deny promotion or permanent status by March 1.

          1. If promotion is approved or permanent status is granted, a letter will be sent from the President to the candidate, with a copy to the library director, indicating that promotion or permanent status will occur July 1 of that calendar year.
        10. March 1 - Process for promotion or permanent status is completed.

          1. At whatever point the promotion or permanent status process is terminated, the portfolio shall be retained in its entirety in the library director's office for three full years, or for three years following the termination of the candidate from employment at Towson University, whichever is later. This file shall be sealed and kept in a separate secure promotion/permanent status file apart from the candidate's personnel file.
          2. If permanent status is not granted, the candidate shall be granted an additional and terminal one year appointment and, barring exceptional circumstances, shall receive no further consideration for permanent status.
        11. If a librarian wishes to appeal a decision regarding promotion in rank or permanent status, the appeal should be submitted in accordance with the appeals procedures in Section V.

      3. Promotional Review Timetable

        1. Promotion from Librarian I to Librarian II

          1. Promotion review is mandatory for librarians at this rank. Years in rank are based on the anniversary date of appointment. An initial partial year of 6 months or more, i.e., appointment beginning January 1 or earlier in the fiscal year, will be considered a full initial year of service.

          2. Review for promotion to Librarian II normally begins after three years of full-time professional experience, or full-time equivalent based on percentage of part-time employment. At least one Academic Year must be at Towson University.

          3. A librarian who has completed his/her fifth consecutive year of full-time employment, or full-time equivalent employment based on percentage of part-time employment, as a Librarian I must initiate a mandatory promotional review.

          4. Promotion to Librarian II, if granted, is announced immediately and becomes effective July 1 of that calendar year.

          5. If promotion from Librarian I to Librarian II is denied during employee's completion of his/her sixth consecutive year of full-time employment, or full-time equivalent employment based on percentage of part-time employment, as a Librarian I, the individual's appointment will be terminated in accordance with applicable policies.

        2. Promotion from Librarian II to Librarian III

          1. Promotional review is neither mandatory nor automatic for librarians at this rank. To be considered for promotion, the individual librarian must initiate the process described above through submission of a portfolio to the library director by the required date.

          2. Review for promotion to Librarian III normally begins after at least six years of professional experience, three of which must be at a level comparable to the rank of Librarian II at Towson University.

          3. Promotion to Librarian III, if granted, is announced immediately and becomes effective July 1 of that calendar year. iv. If a librarian is denied promotion to Librarian III, he/she shall not be reviewed for promotion in the next review cycle.

        3. Promotion from Librarian III to Librarian IV

          1. Promotional review is neither mandatory nor automatic for librarians at this rank. To be considered for promotion, the individual librarian must initiate the process described above through submission of a portfolio to the library director by the required date.

          2. Review for promotion to Librarian IV normally begins after at least nine years of professional experience, three of which must be at a level comparable to the rank of Librarian III at Towson University.

          3. Promotion to Librarian IV, if granted, is announced immediately and becomes effective July 1 of that calendar year.

          4. If a librarian is denied promotion to Librarian IV, he or she shall not be reviewed for promotion in the next review cycle.

        4. Early promotion

          Consideration for early promotion may be initiated, normally by a department chair/supervisor, in recognition of superior performance and extraordinarily rapid professional development. The librarian may accept or decline opportunity for early promotional review without prejudice to any future review eligibility.

      4. Permanent Status Review Timetable

        1. The total number of annual appointments for a full-time librarian, including the initial appointment (even if less than one year) shall not exceed six. An initial partial year of six (6) months or more, i.e., appointment beginning January 1 or earlier in the fiscal year, will be considered a full initial year of service.

        2. If request for permanent status is denied, the candidate shall be granted an additional and terminal one year appointment and shall receive no further consideration for permanent status.

  4. Promotion and Permanent Status Review Committee Structure, Policies, and Procedures

    1. The Librarian Promotion and Permanent Status Review Committee (hereafter referred to as “Committee”) assesses and reports on the accomplishments of each candidate within the criteria defined in this policy and provides to the library director an objective and thorough evaluation of the candidate’s qualifications for promotion or permanent status.

      1. The Librarian Promotion and Permanent Status Review Committee is a standing committee, which consists of four librarians above the rank of Librarian I who hold permanent status positions. The library director is ineligible for service on the Committee. If the number of eligible librarians is insufficient, an exception to Committee membership may be made by the Library Director.

      2. The librarians who hold permanent status positions in Cook Library will elect four regular members and one alternate member for staggered terms to the Committee. This election is held in May with the new committee convening July 1. The election will be conducted by the chair of the Committee. The library director will be notified immediately of the election results.

      3. The term of service for Committee members is three years. Members serve staggered terms to preserve continuity from one year to the next. The alternate serves a one-year term. Following the completion of a full term on the Committee, an individual is ineligible for election for a period of one year.

      4. A chair and a secretary are elected for a one-year term by the Committee from its members. The chair will have at least one year’s experience on the Committee and will hold permanent status. The library director will be immediately notified of the election results.

      5. Since the alternate member may be required to take the place of an indisposed or ineligible member at any time, the alternate will attend all Committee meetings. A quorum shall consist of four Committee members, either the four regular members, or, when necessary, three regular members and the alternate.

      6. No Committee member may be present at or participate in discussion or vote on: 1) the application of a candidate under his or her direct supervision; 2) his or her own application; 3) the application of his or her present direct supervisor; 4) the application of his or her spouse or any other individual with whom the member may have a clearly defined conflict of interest, e.g. an applicant who shares the same household or has common financial interests with the member, as identified by the chair of the Committee. Should the Committee have questions concerning the exclusion or participation of a member regarding any applicant, the library director will be responsible for deciding whether a member of the Committee should be excluded from participating in discussion or voting on a candidate’s application for promotion or permanent status. The library director has the discretion to appoint a non-elected member to the Committee should the number of members fall below the mandated quorum.

      7. Members of the Committee must regard their work to be of the utmost confidentiality. Any discussion of matters that come before the Committee with anyone not on the Committee, or discussions of these matters in public areas or in unofficial meetings, is inappropriate, except to the extent such disclosure is required by law or applicable policy. Any and all such behavior shall be regarded as a serious breach of confidentiality and shall be subject to disciplinary action.

    2. The Chair and Secretary of the Librarian Promotion and Permanent Status Review Committee

      1. The chair is elected from the members of the Committee at the Committee’s July meeting after its annual general election in May.

        1. Qualifications: permanent status, and one year of experience on the Committee.

        2. Term of office: one year. The chair may be re-elected for a second consecutive term.

        3. Duties:

          1. Convene and conduct meetings as necessary.

          2. Initiate Committee elections, including distributing, and with the secretary, counting ballots and announcing election results. Initiate special elections to replace members whose seats were vacated prior to the end of their terms.

          3. Keep a calendar which records the initial appointment and permanent status of each librarian.

          4. Maintain the records of the business of the Committee.

          5. Forward in writing any recommendations of the Committee to the library director.

          6. Act as contact for the library director and the librarians for any issues about promotion or permanent status.

          7. Perform the tasks specified in the promotion and permanent status review sequence.

          8. Vote on candidate’s promotion or permanent status

          9. With the secretary, count ballots of any Committee vote taken.

      2. The Secretary of the Committee is elected from the members of the committee at the Committee’s July meeting after its annual general election in May.

        1. Qualifications: election to Committee

        2. Term of office: one year. The secretary may be re-elected for a second consecutive term.

        3. Duties:

          1. i. Record the minutes of the Committee’s meetings and distribute them to all its members.

          2. Record Committee review deliberations in sufficient detail that reasons for recommendations may be clearly understood.

          3. Vote on candidate’s promotion or permanent status.

          4. With the chair, count ballots of any Committee vote taken.

  5. Appeals and Negative Recommendations

    1. Negative Recommendations

      Negative recommendations at any level regarding annual review, merit, promotion or permanent status shall be delivered in writing in person or sent by certified mail to the librarian’s/candidate’s last known address, return receipt requested, and postmarked no later than the date on which reports are to be distributed to the librarians according to the University librarian promotion and permanent status calendar. The department chair/supervisor has responsibility for conveyance of any recommendation made at the department level. The library director has responsibility for conveyance of any recommendation made at the library level. The Provost has responsibility for conveyance of any decision rendered by the Provost.

    2. Appeals

      1. All appeals shall be made in writing and delivered to the designated person/committee within twenty-one (21) calendar days from the date the negative judgment is delivered in writing in person or the date of the postmark of the certified letter that conveys the negative recommendation.

      2. Procedural appeals relate to alleged errors in the procedures followed in the review, recommendation and notification process, and shall follow the procedures below.

        1. Procedural appeals shall be made to the Librarian Promotion and Permanent Status Committee (the “Committee”).

        2. The appeal must clearly state the alleged procedural error(s) and shall be accompanied by supporting documents. It must be delivered by certified mail or in person to the chair of the Committee, library director, or Provost. 

        3. Appeals of department or library director recommendations shall be copied to the department chair/supervisor, the library director and the chair of the Committee. Appeals of Provost recommendations shall be copied to the library director and the department chair/supervisor.

        4. Within fifteen (15) business days of receipt of a formal appeal with attached materials, the Committee shall review the case and provide a written response. Copies of this letter will be provided to all parties who were copied on the original appeal letter.

        5. Recommendations of the Committee may be appealed to the President, whose decision shall be final. The chair of the Committee will monitor the appeal process.

      3. Substantive appeals refer to perceived errors in judgment made by the department chairperson/supervisor, the Committee, the library director, or the Provost with regard to the evaluation of the librarian’s performance.

        1. The next higher level shall serve as the appeals body. Appeals must be delivered in writing by certified mail or in person to the library director or Provost, within twenty-one (21) calendar days of notification of the negative recommendation.

        2. The appeal must clearly state the grounds for appeal and must be accompanied by supporting documents. The librarian may supplement the portfolio under review with any statement, evidence, or other documentation s/he believes would present a more valid perspective on his/her performance.

        3. Appeals of department chair/supervisor recommendations shall be copied to the department chair/supervisor. Appeals of Committee recommendations shall be copied to the chair of the Committee. Appeals of the recommendation of the library director will be copied to the library director. Appeals of the recommendation of the Provost will be copied to the Provost.

        4. All challenge material shall be placed in the portfolio under review no later than five (5) business days before the portfolio is due to the next level. All material placed in the file, including challenge material, shall become a part of the cumulative expansion of the portfolio and shall not be removed by subsequent levels of evaluators. The portfolio under review, with additions, will be forwarded to the next level by the appropriate reviewing entity.

        5. Within fifteen (15) business days of receipt of a formal appeal with attached materials, the recipient of the appeal (i.e., the chair of the Committee; library director; or the Provost) shall review the case and provide a written response to the substantive appeal. Copies of this letter will be provided to all parties who were copied on the original appeal letter.

        6. Recommendations made by the Provost may be appealed to the President, whose decision is final.

      4. Appeals alleging unlawful discrimination in race, color, religion, age, national origin, gender, sexual orientation and disability should follow the specific procedures described in “Towson University policy 06-01.00 “Prohibiting Discrimination on the basis of Race, Color, Religion, Age, National Origin, Sex and Disability.”

      5. The President’s decision on permanent status or shall be final. The Provost’s decision on merit shall be final.

Appendix 3

Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty Evaluations: Annual Review, Reappointment, Third-Year Review, Merit, Promotion, Tenure, and Comprehensive Review

  1. General Precepts

    1. Overview of Annual Review, Reappointment, Third-Year Review, Merit, Promotion, Tenure, and Comprehensive Review

      1. General information regarding University System of Maryland (USM) policy on evaluation, promotion, tenure, and permanent status may be found in the Board of Regents “II-1.00 University System Policy on Appointment, Rank, and Tenure of Faculty” and the Towson University Policy on Appointment, Rank, and Tenure of Faculty.

      2. All faculty, tenured and tenure-track, shall be evaluated annually according to the procedures and criteria described herein.

      3. All deliberations pertaining to annual faculty evaluations, reappointment, merit, tenure, promotion, and comprehensive review at all levels shall be confidential.

      4. All faculty, programs, departments, and colleges shall abide by both the USM and the Towson University Annual Review, Reappointment, Third-Year Review, Merit, Promotion, Tenure, and Comprehensive Review Calendars (Section VI). The processes, procedures, and cycle for all evaluations (annual, reappointment, third-year, merit, promotion, tenure and comprehensive) shall follow the general and appropriate specific policies described herein.

      5. All faculty shall complete the current version of the Annual Report (AR) and Workload Agreement, (see Section VII) and include it in their evaluation portfolio as described herein. Department chairs shall assist continuing faculty with the development and approval of the Workload Agreement. Such workload expectations shall be aligned with department, college and University goals based on the department, college and University missions and visions.

      6. All first-year tenure-track faculty, in collaboration with the department chair, shall complete the form "Standards and Expectations for New Tenure-Track Faculty, (SENTF)" (see Section VII) and include it in their evaluation portfolio as described herein. The department chair shall append to the SENTF form the following materials:

        1. Board of Regents’ and Towson University’s criteria for annual review, reappointment, tenure, promotion, merit and comprehensive review considerations;

        2. standards and expectations of the University, college, and department; and

        3. any expectations unique to the position.

      7. All chairs and program directors (with faculty) shall complete the Chairperson's Annual Report (CAR, see Section VII) and Workload Agreement and include these in their evaluation portfolios as described herein.

      8. Each fall, as stipulated in the Towson University Annual Review, Reappointment, Third-Year Review, Merit, Promotion, Tenure, and Comprehensive Review Calendar (see Section VI), the current Department Summary Recommendation form (DSR, see Section VII) shall be completed for each tenured and tenure-track faculty member holding a full-time contract. It shall be included in the evaluation portfolio.

      9. The chair of the department shall comply with the Towson University Annual Review, Reappointment, Third-Year Review, Merit, Promotion, Tenure, and Comprehensive Review Calendar (Section VI) and ensure that evaluation portfolios meet all format requirements.

      10. The procedures and expectations for review set forth in this appendix may be amended from time to time.

    2. Documentation and Material Inclusion

          1. The responsibility for presenting material for the annual review, reappointment, third-year review, merit, promotion, tenure, or comprehensive review rests with the faculty member.

          2. Guided by the chairperson and department and college criteria, the faculty member shall have the responsibility of making distinctions between the various categories of teaching, scholarship, and service and shall include such distinctions, as s/he deems appropriate in his/her narrative statements and other documentation relevant to each evaluation portfolio section.

          3. In order to ensure that all material and documentation used in making recommendations for annual review (includes annual review, reappointment, third-year review, merit, promotion, tenure, and comprehensive review) contain appropriate information, all documentation shall be submitted in the form of an evaluation portfolio that addresses the professorial role, expectations of faculty in the University, and the faculty member’s college and department criteria. The type of review determines portfolio material and process. Evaluation portfolios shall be organized, indexed, and placed in a three-ring binder or submitted as an electronic portfolio. Contents of the evaluation portfolio are determined by type of review and minimally, shall include:

            1. Evaluation portfolio materials for annual review of all tenured faculty must include the following documents:

              1. completed and signed AR (Annual Report Parts I & II) or CAR (Chairperson’s Annual Report I & II) Forms;

              2. current Curriculum vitae;

              3. syllabi of courses taught during the year under review;

              4. evaluation of teaching and advising, as appropriate, and including the following:

                1. student evaluations tabulated by the office of the department chairperson or an administrative entity other than the faculty member;

                2. grade distributions for courses beginning with the year this document takes effect;

              5. documentation of scholarship and service.

            2. Evaluation portfolio materials for annual review of tenure-track faculty must include the following documents:

              1. all of the above items listed in 3.a; and

              2. peer and/or chairperson’s evaluation(s) of teaching signed by faculty member and evaluator.

            3. Evaluation portfolio materials for third-year review of faculty must include the following documents:

              1. all of the above items listed in 3.a;

              2. syllabi of courses taught in the previous two (2) years;

              3. student and peer/chairperson evaluations of teaching and advising for the previous two (2) years and the fall semester of the current year; and

              4. a narrative statement in which the faculty member describes how he or she has met and integrated teaching, research, and service expectations based on his/her workload agreements for the period under review.

            4. Portfolio materials for full review of faculty for promotion and/or tenure must include the following documents:

              1. all materials listed above in 3.a and 3.b from the faculty member’s date of hire or last promotion; and

              2. a narrative statement in which the faculty member describes how he or she has met and integrated teaching, research, and service expectations based on his/her workload agreements for the period under review.

            5. Evaluation portfolio materials for comprehensive five-year review of all tenured faculty must include the following documents:

              1. all materials listed above in 3.a for all five (5) years;

              2. peer evaluations of teaching at least for the prior Academic Year; and

              3. a reflective comprehensive summary written by the faculty member being evaluated, analyzing the preceding five (5) years of his/ her work in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service.

            6. If at any level confidential external reviews are solicited pursuant to departmental or college promotion and tenure policies, they will remain confidential and will not be made available to the faculty member. These reviews will not be included in the faculty evaluation portfolio, but will be forwarded under separate cover to each subsequent level of review.

          4. During the course of the evaluation process, the faculty member or his/her chairperson or program director participating in the evaluation process may add to the evaluation portfolio information related to work that was completed prior to June 2 that has only become available after the deadline stipulated in the Towson University Annual Review, Reappointment, Third-Year Review, Merit, Promotion, Tenure, and Comprehensive Review Calendar (Section VI). The information shall relate specifically to the faculty member’s performance as presented by either the faculty member in his/her evaluation portfolio or in the chairperson’s or program director’s evaluation of the faculty member’s performance. Information added by the faculty member to update the evaluation portfolio must be included by the third Friday in September. The addition of said material and notification thereof shall not interfere with the time designated for review as described in the Towson University Annual Review, Reappointment, Third-Year Review, Merit, Promotion, Tenure, and Comprehensive Review Calendar (Section VI).

          5. If the faculty member or the chairperson or program director participating in the evaluation process wishes to add a statement to his/her file rebutting or clarifying information or statements in the file, this information must be included in the evaluation portfolio in a special section entitled “Information Added.” All documentation used as part of the consideration process must be included in the evaluation portfolio no later than November 30. The Dean will send a copy to the department chair of any such information added to the evaluation portfolio after the second Friday in November.

          6. If the chairperson or program director participating in the evaluation process includes information in the faculty member’s evaluation portfolio, other than his/her evaluation, that specific information shall immediately be made known to the faculty member undergoing evaluation and before any evaluation at the next level of review takes place. Solicited external reviews will not be added to the evaluation portfolio but will be forwarded under separate cover to each level of review. Record of the faculty member’s notification shall be tracked via the Promotions, Tenure, Reappointment, and Merit (PTRM) Document Review Transmittal Form (see Section VII). A failure to notify the faculty within five (5) business days will result in the material being removed from the evaluation portfolio.

          7. Evaluators reviewing materials that have been added by the faculty member or administrators during the course of the review process shall note that they do so in their evaluation statements.

          8. Copies of the chairperson’s or program director’s detailed report with recommendation are included in the evaluation portfolio as it proceeds through the process. The committee’s written report with recommendation shall provide a detailed rationale for the recommendation, as well as the vote count.

          9. In addition to the evaluation portfolio, faculty being reviewed for promotion, tenure and comprehensive review shall also prepare a summative portfolio for the Provost. It shall be clearly labeled with the faculty member's name, department, and type of review. In each section of the binder, documents shall be presented from the most recent year evaluated to the time of last promotion or year of hire. The summative portfolio shall be compiled in a one-inch binder, labeled and indexed as follows:

      Section I

                • Curriculum vitae.

                • A copy of one recent peer-reviewed publication or description of a comparable creative activity.

      Section II

                • University Forms: Completed and signed Annual Report (AR I & II) or Chairperson’s Annual Report (CAR I & II) Forms arranged from most recent to the time of last promotion or year of hire.

      Section III

                • Summary of student evaluations across the evaluation period. Faculty should submit the summary of results for each course received from the assessment office.

                • Include a narrative statement about individual teaching and/or advising philosophy and an interpretation of student and/or peer/chairperson evaluations.

                • For tenure, promotion, and comprehensive review, peer teaching evaluations shall be included.

      Section IV

                • Supporting Statement: Summary statement describing correlation between expectations and accomplishments and integrating accomplishments in the areas of scholarship, teaching, and service.

      Section V

                • Recommendations (to be added by the appropriate party);

                • Written recommendation of the department rank committee and/or tenure committee, including the Departmental Summary Recommendation form;

                • Written recommendation of the academic chairperson;

                • Written recommendation of the college P&T committee; and

                • Written recommendation of the academic dean.

       

        1. Sections I-IV of the summative portfolio for the comprehensive five-year review will be identical to those of P&T binders and will cover the five (5) years under review. Section V must include the following:

          1. final evaluation of the departmental Comprehensive Review Committee;

          2. letter of evaluation from department chairperson; and

          3. letter of evaluation from academic dean.

        2. Additional documentation responsibilities

          1. The dean of the college shall assure that the summative portfolio for the Provost is organized according to the guidelines described herein.

          2. The dean of the college shall have the responsibility of returning the supporting material to the department chair who shall then retain it for three (3) years following the date of the decision to grant or deny promotion or tenure. The materials shall be made available only if requested by the Provost.

  2. Criteria for Annual Review, Reappointment, Third-Year Review, Merit, Promorion, Tenure, and Comprehensive Review

    1. General Principles

      1. Board of Regents minimum requirements for appointment, promotion, and tenure are established by the USM Board of Regents and are stated in the “II-1.00 University System of Maryland Policy on Appointment, Rank and Tenure of Faculty,” which may be amended from time to time. The provisions of the USM policy supersede any conflicting provisions in Towson University policies.

      2. Tenure-track faculty members who provide documentation that

        1. they have primary or equal responsibility for the care of a newborn or newly adopted child;

        2. they or a family member suffer from a medical illness, disability, or injuries that interfere with their ability to meet professorial responsibilities; or

        3. they suffer substantial damage to their research, research facilities and/or other documentation that would adversely affect the tenure process, due to occurrences beyond their control (e.g., fire, riots, acts of God, acts of war or terrorism, earthquakes or other disasters) may be granted a one-year extension of the Mandatory Tenure-Review Year upon written request to and subsequent recommendations by the department chair and the dean of the college, with final approval granted by the Provost in his/her sole discretion. Any agreement to change the Mandatory Tenure-Review Year stated in the faculty member’s contract shall not be effective unless the faculty member’s contract is amended and signed by both the faculty member and the Provost. If the Mandatory Tenure-Review Year is extended under this provision and the faculty member is ultimately denied tenured status, then the faculty member will have the same rights to a terminal year as if the Mandatory Tenure-Review Year had not been extended.

      3. Tenure-track faculty who are appointed in mid-year normally will have their Mandatory Tenure-Review Year established without regard to their first partial Academic Year of employment.

      4. A tenure-track faculty member who wishes to pursue a unique full-time professional opportunity off-campus or a major special project for the University prior to mandatory tenure review may petition the department PTRM Committee for an extension of the Mandatory Tenure-Review Year. The Provost shall have final authority to grant or deny such petition. Any agreement to change the Mandatory Tenure-Review Year stated in the faculty member’s contract shall not be effective unless the faculty member’s contract is amended and signed by both the faculty member and the Provost. Except under unusual circumstances, the committee’s decision and the recommendations of the department chairperson and the dean of the college shall be sent to the Provost for approval at least six (6) months prior to the date of service to another organization or to the University.

    2. Standards and Expectations

      1. University Standards and Expectations

        1. A faculty member shall fulfill his/her workload agreement in the areas of teaching/advising, scholarship, and service, shall be available for consultation and advising during office hours, and shall meet all classes as scheduled.

        2. A faculty member shall be an effective teacher both in and out of the classroom.

        3. A faculty member shall be committed to a discipline or interdisciplinary specialty and shall be committed to continuing professional development and demonstration of scholarly growth.

        4. A faculty member shall be committed to collegiality and academic citizenship. “Collegiality and academic citizenship” refer to the role and responsibility of faculty in shared decision making through open and fair processes devised to provide timely advice and recommendations on matters that relate to curriculum, academic personnel, and the educational functions of the institution. The demonstration of high standards of humane, ethical, and professional behavior is fundamental to collegiality and academic citizenship. These concepts include mutual respect for similarities and differences among participants on the basis of background, expertise, opinions, and assigned responsibilities. Collegiality does not imply agreement; vibrant University communities must include the capacity for respectful disagreement among faculty members and administrators.

        5. A faculty member shall share the responsibility of University, college, and/or department governance.

        6. A faculty member shall participate each year in the faculty evaluation process as described herein.

      2. College Standards, Expectations, and Processes

        1. Each college shall develop a PTRM document that adheres to University standards, criteria, and/or expectations pertaining to annual review, reappointment, third-year review, merit, promotion, tenure, and comprehensive review. Each college shall develop its own specific standards and expectations. These must be accompanied by clear criteria for evaluation and must not be in conflict with those established by the University.

        2. College PTRM documents pertaining to standards, criteria, and/or expectations of evaluation shall be developed by the PTRM committee. The college PTRM document must be distributed to all tenured and tenure-track faculty in the college for input at least ten (10) business days prior to the college PTRM committee vote on the documents. Final approval at the college level shall be by a simple majority vote of the tenured/tenure-track faculty of the college. Excepting faculty who are on leave from the University (e.g., medical, sabbatical, etc.), the signature of each tenured or tenure-track faculty member of the college will signify that s/he has voted on the department PTRM documents.

        3. The college document shall be approved by the college dean. The dean shall be responsible for transmitting the document with any proposed changes to the University PTRM committee by the second Friday in October.

        4. College PTRM documents must be approved by the University PTRM committee. The college PTRM committee must formally respond to changes and/or recommendations resulting from the review by the University PTRM committee and submit a clean copy by the due date specified by the University PTRM committee.

        5. Once the University PTRM committee has approved the college PTRM document, it will forward a copy of the approved document to the dean of the college.

        6. All policies at the college level shall remain in effect until changed according to the procedures described herein. However, faculty members shall be evaluated for tenure pursuant to the college PTRM standards and criteria in effect during the year they are first appointed to a tenure-track position.

        7. The dean of each college shall be responsible for assuring that the approved college PTRM documents are posted on the Towson University website.

      3. Department/Program Standards, Expectations, and Processes

        1. References to "chairs" and “department” include chairpersons and others in the colleges who have overall responsibility for faculty workload assignment, program development, and course offerings for the academic area.

        2. Each department shall adhere to University and college standards, criteria and/or expectations pertaining to annual review, reappointment, third-year review, merit, promotion, tenure, and comprehensive review. However, each department shall develop its own specific standards and expectations with clear criteria for evaluation, ensuring that they are not in conflict with those established by the University or the college.

        3. The department document pertaining to standards, criteria and/or expectations of evaluation shall be developed by the department PTRM committee and submitted to all tenured/tenure track department faculty for approval by simple majority vote.

        4. Prior to submission to the University PTRM committee, the department document, with Approval Form, shall be submitted to the college PTRM committee and the dean of the college for approval by the first Friday in December. Excepting faculty who are on leave from the department (e.g., medical, sabbatical, etc.), the signature of each tenured or tenure-track faculty member of the department will signify that s/he has voted on the department PTRM documents.

        5. Following approval by the college PTRM committee and the dean, the department PTRM document shall be delivered by the dean to the chairperson of the University PTRM committee by the second Friday in February.

        6. The department PTRM committee shall formally respond to changes and/or recommendations resulting from the review by the University PTRM committee and submit a revised copy to the college PTRM committee and the dean of the college for approval prior to the due date specified by the University PTRM committee.

        7. All policies at the department/program level shall remain in effect until changed according to the procedures described herein. However, faculty members shall be evaluated for tenure pursuant to the departmental PTRM standards and criteria in effect during the year they are first appointed to a tenure-track position.

        8. The chairperson of each department is responsible for assuring that the approved departmental PTRM documents are posted on the Towson University website

    3. Definition of Evaluation Categories

      1. General Principles

        1. The criteria for faculty evaluation recommendations at Towson University pertaining to annual review, reappointment, third-year review, merit, tenure, promotion and comprehensive reviews are (1) teaching effectiveness, including student advising; (2) research, scholarship, and in appropriate areas, creative activities; and (3) service to the community, profession, and University (including department, college, and University levels). The relative weight of these criteria shall be determined for each faculty member based on the Workload Agreement (ARII) completed in consultation with, and with the approval of, the departmental chair.

        2. Chairs and program directors who are responsible for supervising faculty shall be evaluated in the additional category of leadership. See "Academic Department Chairpersons Roles and Responsibilities” located in Chapter Two of the Faculty Handbook.

      2. Teaching/Advising Effectiveness

        1. Teaching takes a variety of forms, including the use of technology, development of new courses and programs (including those involving collaborative or interdisciplinary work and civic engagement), faculty exchanges and teaching abroad, off-site-learning, supervision of undergraduate and graduate research and thesis preparation, emphasis on pedagogy including the various learning outcomes defined in a specific curriculum, and other aspects of learning and its assessment. It also includes advising responsibilities.

        2. Evaluation Forms and Procedures for Evaluating Teaching Effectiveness: Using information presented in the evaluation portfolio, teaching effectiveness shall be evaluated based on the following criteria, including student evaluations, peer evaluations (as appropriate), self-evaluation, where possible, evaluation of student learning outcomes, and the judgment related to faculty performance made by evaluating bodies.

          1. Evaluation of teaching by students

            1. Student evaluations of instruction are a required part of the evaluation of faculty. Such an evaluation must be recognized for what it is: one kind of evaluation, and to be considered only in concert with all other measures of teaching effectiveness.

            2. Student evaluations shall be conducted in such a manner to assure confidentiality of the student. Student evaluation forms, with a description of the method of administration, shall be included in the department PTRM document submitted to the University PTRM committee for approval. Student evaluations shall be tabulated by the office of the department chairperson or another administrative entity.

            3. Tenured and tenure-track faculty shall be evaluated for all courses taught. This includes all on-load, off-load, on-line, traditional classroom, and hybrid courses taught during the Academic Year, minimester, and summer terms.

          2. Evaluation of teaching by peers

            1. Classroom/clinical visits are encouraged for purposes of professional growth and are required when the person is being considered for reappointment, third-year review, promotion, or tenure. Peer reviews of teaching are also required for the comprehensive five-year review.

            2. Departments must develop discipline-specific criteria or guidelines for performing and reporting classroom/clinical observations. These should be included in the department PTRM document submitted to the University PTRM committee for approval.

            3. A minimum of two (2) peer observations shall be conducted per review period. The department PTRM committee will approve the peers selected for the review.

            4. Advance notice of at least one (1) week of the peer observation shall be given to the faculty member.

          3. Self-evaluation of teaching and/or advising effectiveness shall include a narrative statement about individual teaching and/or advising philosophy and an interpretation of student and/or peer/chairperson evaluations.

          4. In the event that a faculty member has consistent unsatisfactory student or peer evaluations of instruction, the department chair shall develop a remediation plan in consultation with the faculty member. This plan may include mentoring, additional classroom visitations, and/or instruction in teaching effectiveness. A plan shall be put in place regardless of the rank and/or tenure status of the faculty.

        3. The primary purpose of the faculty academic advisor is to assist students in the development of meaningful educational plans that are compatible with their professional goals. The faculty academic advisor shall provide assistance in refining goals and objectives, understanding available choices, and assessing the consequences of alternative courses of action.

        4. Other forms of advising may include guidance of students in the learning process within one’s class-teaching responsibilities, advising groups in academic honor societies, and serving on a graduate research committee.

      3. Scholarship

          1. Scholarship is widely interpreted and takes many forms, including the scholarship of Application, Discovery, Integration and/or Teaching. Regardless of type, each faculty member shall be reviewed in terms of continuing professional development and currency in his/her academic field as affirmed by its community of scholars.

        Scholarship of Application – applying knowledge to consequential problems, either internal or external to the University, and including aspects of creative work in the visual and performing arts.

        Scholarship of Discovery – traditional research, knowledge for its own sake, including aspects of creative work in the visual and performing arts.

        Scholarship of Integration – applying knowledge in ways that overcome the isolation and fragmentation of the traditional disciplines.

        Scholarship of Teaching – exploring the dynamic endeavor involving all the analogies, metaphors, and images that build bridges between the teacher’s understanding and the student’s learning.

        1. Faculty shall be guided by the definitions of scholarship noted above and further articulated by their department and college on the basis of disciplinary/interdisciplinary intellectual interests.

      4. Service - University/Civic/Professional

        1. University Service

          1. The “American Association of University Professors Statement on Shared Governance” as it exists on the date that the Towson University ART Policy is adopted is incorporated herein as the guiding principles of shared governance at Towson University.

          2. University service shall include substantive participation in the shared governance activities of the department, college and University.

        2. Civic Service

          1. Civic service includes participation in the larger community (local, regional, national or global) outside the University in ways that may or may not be directly related to one's academic expertise, but in ways which advance the University's mission.

        3. Professional Service

          Professional service shall include activities in professional organizations or participating in other venues external to the University (local, regional, national or global) in which one's expertise is applied and which advances the University's mission.

  3. Process and Procedures for Annual Review, Reappointment, Third-Year Review, Merit, Promotion, Tenure, and Comprehensive Reviews

    1. Principles

      1. The University shall have faculty evaluation methods that are consistent with and reflective of the roles and responsibilities of faculty members. Methodologies should be clearly tied to the vision and mission of the University, college, and department. Methods for evaluation developed by departments shall specify the criteria and process for evaluating faculty roles of teaching, advising, scholarship and University, public and professional service. These faculty evaluation methods shall include the faculty member’s approved Workload Agreement (AR II or CAR II).

      2. The evaluation materials shall include the documents set forth in I.B. Materials included shall be professional, understandable, well-organized and easy to follow.

      3. Recommendations shall be supported by referring to the faculty member's performance in the categories considered. Each proceeding level of evaluator(s) shall take into account the recommendations of the preceding evaluator(s). Evaluators at each level shall make an independent judgment, however, based on the evaluation material submitted at that level.

      4. The evaluation process requires the exercise of sound judgment, confidential deliberation, and knowledge of the University, its educational vision, mission and goals.

      5. All votes regarding tenure or promotion taken by any committee and/or the department shall be by secret ballot, signed with the Towson University ID number, dated by the voting member, and tallied by the committee chair. The secret ballots shall be placed separately in a sealed envelope on which the committee chair enters the name of the faculty member being evaluated, the department name or college name, the date, and the chair’s signature. The committee chair shall forward a signed, dated report of the results of the vote and the committee’s recommendations to the next level of review. The secret ballots shall not be included in the faculty evaluation portfolio, but shall be forwarded under separate cover to the Provost, to be preserved with the tenure and promotion file until three (3) years following the faculty member’s termination or resignation from the University. No committee member shall abstain from a vote for tenure or promotion unless the Provost authorizes such abstention based for good cause, including an impermissible conflict of interest.

        Votes regarding reappointment, merit, and/or comprehensive reviews taken by any committee and/or the department shall be by secret ballot, signed with the Towson University ID number, and tallied by the committee chair. The results shall be entered on a single sheet of paper labeled with the name of the faculty member being evaluated, the department name or college name, and the date. Members of the committee will each sign the report to confirm their participation and acknowledge the result as recorded. The record of the vote will be forwarded to the Dean who shall maintain these documents for three years. Faculty who are absent may not vote by proxy (Examples: on sabbatical, at a conference, sick). (Faculty on sabbatical may vote if they have reviewed material and are present at the meeting.)

      6. A faculty member who is being considered for tenure prior to his/her “mandatory tenure review year,” and any faculty member who is being considered for promotion, may withdraw from the evaluation process for promotion and/or tenure review at any time prior to submission to the Provost. A faculty member who is being considered for tenure during his/her mandatory tenure review year may not withdraw from the evaluation process.

      7. In the event of a negative recommendation at any level of review, the faculty member may choose to challenge the recommendation through the appeals process (Section V).

      8. In the event of a difference in recommendations at the department level (PTRM committee and chair) or at the college level (college PTRM committee and dean), the evaluation portfolio will be forwarded to the next level of review.

      9. In the event of negative annual review, third year review or merit recommendations by both the PTRM committees and the chair or dean the evaluation portfolio will not be forwarded to the next level of review unless the faculty member proceeds with an appeal. If no appeal is filed, the evaluation portfolio will be retained in the office of the dean. In the event of a negative recommendation regarding reappointment, the process is described in Section III.D.2 or III.D.3. In the event of a negative recommendation regarding promotion, the process is described in Section III.D.5.

    2. Documentation Development

      1. For faculty evaluations, the full evaluation portfolio shall be assembled by the individual being considered for annual review, reappointment, third-year review, merit, promotion, tenure, or comprehensive review according to the guidelines described in the “Documentation & Material Inclusion” section of this appendix (I.B).

      2. The faculty member about whom the recommendation is made shall review the evaluation portfolio at each level and indicate that all documents have been included at the time of the evaluation portfolio submission to the next level of review. Solicited external reviews will not be included in the evaluation portfolio and will remain confidential.

      3. For every type of evaluation, including annual review, the faculty member shall sign a statement indicating that s/he has read, but not necessarily agreed with the evaluation. However, failure to sign shall not prevent the documentation from being forwarded to the next evaluation level.

      4. In the event that a faculty member wishes to challenge any written administrator evaluation and/or committee recommendation, s/he may add to the file any statement, evidence, or other documentation s/he believes would present a more valid perspective of his/her performance. This documentation must be included by November 30.

      5. All material placed in the file, including challenge material, shall become a part of the cumulative expansion of the evaluation portfolio and shall not be removed by subsequent levels of evaluators, provided the material inclusion process has been adhered to with respect to notifying the faculty member and adhering to the review process timeline as stipulated in the Towson University Annual Review, Reappointment, Third-Year Review, Merit, Promotion, Tenure, and Comprehensive Review Calendar (Section VI).

    3. Document Storage

      1. The department chairperson shall maintain a copy of all official documents concerning evaluation recommendations. Copies of all recommendations also shall be sent to the faculty member and the dean of the respective college.

      2. The dean shall forward the evaluation recommendation to the Provost.

      3. The official file concerning recommendations for reappointment, merit, promotion, tenure, and five-year comprehensive review, shall be maintained by the Provost as Chief Academic Officer of the University.

    4. Evaluation Procedures

      1. Annual Review for Merit.

        1. The department PTRM committee shall annually review faculty for merit as appropriate.

        2. In conjunction with guidelines issued by the Chancellor or the Board of Regents, the “Standards and Expectations for New Tenure-Track Faculty” or section AR II of the Annual Report form or section CAR II of the Chairperson’s Annual Report form shall serve as the basis for merit evaluation. To qualify for merit, faculty members shall demonstrate achievement in teaching, scholarship, and service consistent with their AR or CAR Part II.

        3. Each faculty member shall prepare an evaluation portfolio describing activities and accomplishments during the Academic Year, to which the evaluation applies as outlined in the section “Documentation and Material Inclusion” (Section I.B). The faculty member shall submit the evaluation portfolio to the department chair no later than the third Friday in June.

        4. The annual review for merit shall be conducted and completed no later than during the fall semester following the academic calendar year under review. The department chair shall be responsible for presenting to the department PTRM committee(s) all the evaluation portfolios for all faculty members in the department.

        5. The department chair shall not be a voting member of the department PTRM committee(s).

        6. The department PTRM committee(s) shall evaluate these evaluation portfolios and shall prepare a written report, with vote count, for each recommendation. The recommendation shall contain reference to each category evaluated including teaching/advising, scholarship and University/civic/professional service. The statement should be consistent with the department’s standards and expectations (set forth in the department PTRM document) and submitted to the department chair no later than the second Friday in October.

        7. The department chair may prepare an independent recommendation and include it in the faculty member’s evaluation portfolio by the fourth Friday in October.

        8. All recommendations shall be conveyed in writing to the faculty member, inclusive of the department chairperson’s statement and a record of the vote count, no later than the fourth Friday in October. Negative recommendations shall be delivered in person by the department chairperson or sent by certified mail to the faculty member’s last known address.

        9. The department chairperson shall meet with each faculty member to discuss the faculty member's annual report, the student and peer evaluations of teaching and advising, the department PTRM recommendation, and the annual faculty evaluation in general.

        10. The department PTRM committee chairperson shall forward the evaluation portfolio, PRTM and chair recommendations and the department vote count record to the dean’s office by the second Friday in November.

        11. By the first Friday in February, the dean shall review the department recommendations and forward them to the Provost. If the dean disagrees with the department recommendation, the dean shall notify the department chairperson and the faculty member of the recommendation in writing. The recommendation shall contain reference to each category evaluated including teaching/advising, scholarship, and University/civic/professional service. The dean shall be responsible for adding this recommendation to the faculty member’s evaluation portfolio. Negative recommendations shall be delivered in person by the dean or sent by certified mail to the faculty member’s last known address by the second Friday in February.

        12. Faculty may appeal a negative recommendation for merit at any point in the process, following the procedures outlined in Appeals of Negative Recommendations (Section V); however, the appeal shall not stay the merit review process.

        13. The Provost shall review and approve or deny merit recommendations. The Provost’s decision on merit is final; there is no appeal from the Provost’s decision.

        14. Terminology Used in Evaluation of Faculty Performance

          There are three (3) categories of merit as follows:

            1. Not Meritorious: Performance fails adequately to meet standards.

            2. Satisfactory (Base Merit): Performance is competent and contributes to fulfilling the mission of the University, college, and department.

            3. Excellent (Base Merit plus one Performance Merit): Excellence in teaching, or scholarship, or service and satisfactory performance in other performance categories.

              Each department will explicitly and clearly define the above categories for use in their merit deliberations.

           

      2. Reappointment: First Year Faculty

        1. The department PTRM committee(s) shall evaluate each new faculty member’s first semester performance and make a recommendation for reappointment and merit.

        2. The department PTRM evaluation shall be conducted and completed by the third Friday in January.

        3. Each faculty member shall prepare an evaluation portfolio describing activities and accomplishments during his/her first semester. The evaluation portfolio must include the Standards and Expectations of New Tenure-Track Faculty (SENTF) form, which must be finalized with the department chairperson by the third Friday in September. In addition, the evaluation portfolio must include peer evaluations of teaching, documentation of scholarship and service activities, syllabi of current courses, and a reflective summary of teaching, scholarship, and service. The faculty member shall submit the evaluation portfolio to the department chair no later than the second Friday of December.

        4. The department PTRM committee shall review the evaluation portfolio and shall prepare a written report, with vote count, for each recommendation. The recommendation shall contain reference to each category evaluated, including: teaching/advising, scholarship, and University/civic/professional service. The recommendation should be consistent with the department’s standards and expectations (set forth in the department PTRM document) and submitted to the department chair by the first Friday in January.

        5. The department chair may prepare an independent recommendation on reappointment and include it in the faculty member’s evaluation portfolio by the third Friday in January.

        6. All recommendations shall be conveyed in writing to the faculty member and to the dean, inclusive of the department chairperson’s recommendation and a record of the vote count (“Evaluation Record”) no later than the third Friday in January. Negative recommendations shall be delivered in person by the department chairperson or sent by certified mail to the faculty member’s last known address.

        7. By the first Friday in February, the dean shall review the Evaluation Record and forward it to the Provost. If the dean disagrees with the department recommendation, the dean shall notify the department chairperson and the faculty member of the recommendation in writing. The recommendation shall contain reference to each category evaluated, including: teaching/advising, scholarship, and University/civic/professional service. The dean shall be responsible for adding this recommendation to the faculty member’s evaluation portfolio. Negative recommendations shall be delivered in person by the dean or sent by certified mail to the faculty member’s last known address by the second Friday in February.

        8. Non- reappointment recommendations will be delivered to the Provost by the second Friday in February.

        9. A faculty member may appeal a non-reappointment recommendation at any point in the process, following procedures outlined in the Appeals section (Section V); however, an appeal shall not stay the reappointment evaluation process.

        10. If the Provost accepts the non-reappointment recommendation, written notice shall either be delivered to the faculty member or mailed to the faculty member’s last known address by March 1; otherwise, the appointment is renewed automatically for one (1) additional year.

      3. Reappointment of Second Year Faculty

        1. The department PTRM committee(s) shall evaluate second year tenure-track faculty and make a recommendation regarding reappointment.

        2. The department chairperson may prepare an independent recommendation for each faculty member reviewed for reappointment and include it in the faculty member’s evaluation portfolio by no later than the fourth Friday in October.

        3. All recommendations shall be conveyed in writing to the faculty member, inclusive of any department chairperson’s recommendation and a record of the vote count (“Evaluation Record”) no later than the fourth Friday in October. Non-reappointment recommendations shall be delivered in person by the department chairperson or sent by certified mail to the faculty member’s last known address.

        4. The faculty member’s Evaluation Record, inclusive of the written recommendation of the department chairperson should be forwarded by the department PTRM committee chairperson to the dean’s office by no later than the second Friday in November.

        5. By no later than November 30, the dean shall review the Evaluation Record of second year faculty and forward it to the Provost. If the dean disagrees with a department recommendation, the dean shall notify the department chairperson and the faculty member of the recommendation in writing. The recommendation shall contain reference to each category evaluated including: teaching/advising, scholarship, and University/civic/professional service. The dean shall be responsible for adding this recommendation to the faculty member’s evaluation portfolio.

        6. If the Provost accepts the non-reappointment recommendation, written notice shall either be delivered to the faculty member or mailed to the faculty member’s last known address by December 15; otherwise, the appointment is renewed automatically for one (1) additional year.

        7. A faculty member may appeal a negative recommendation for reappointment at any point in the process following procedures outlined in the Appeals section (Section V) of this document; however, an appeal shall not stay the reappointment evaluation process.

      4. Reappointment of third through fifth year faculty

        1. USM Policy II-1.00 Section I.C.3. provides that the appointments of faculty entering the third through fifth years of service will automatically renew for one additional year unless notice of non-reappointment is provided by August 1 prior to the third or subsequent Academic Year of service as applicable.

        2. The department chair, in consultation with the department PTRM committee, may direct that the recommendation on reappointment of third through fifth year faculty be made before August 1 so that notice of non-reappointment, if recommended, is provided faculty by August 1 prior to the third or subsequent year of service as applicable.

        3. The evaluation shall occur pursuant to the schedule established by the department chair in consultation with the departmental PTRM Committee. The evaluation process shall include: the departmental PTRMs recommendation; the chair’s recommendation, if any, the dean’s recommendation, and, the Provost’s final decision.

        4. The faculty member may appeal a non-reappointment recommendation to the next highest level in the evaluation process; however, there shall be no appeal of the Provost’s decision, which is final.

      5. Third-Year Review

        1. At the conclusion of the fall semester during a candidate’s third year at Towson University, the department PTRM Committee shall conduct a Third-Year Review of tenure-track candidates. The intent of the evaluation is to assess progress toward tenure and to advise and mentor the faculty member. This includes providing assistance where issues or shortcomings in the candidate’s profile are identified and encouragement where progress is deemed satisfactory or exemplary. Department PTRM committee evaluations of a candidate’s interim progress will become part of the faculty member’s file at the department level and shared with the dean; however, it will not be forwarded to either the college PTRM committee or the Provost.

        2. The faculty member to be reviewed shall prepare an interim evaluation portfolio of activities for evaluation by the department’s PTRM committee as outlined in the section “Documentation and Material Inclusion” (Section I.B) of this appendix.

        3. The department PTRM committee will evaluate the materials and prepare a clear, written statement of progress toward tenure addressing teaching/advising, a plan for and evidence of scholarly/creative activity, and service and other relevant criteria. This statement:

          1. must include an indication of whether or not the faculty member’s work to date is leading towards a positive tenure and promotion decision; and

          2. must provide guidance for the improvement of the evaluation portfolio in the event of a satisfactory or unsatisfactory rating.

        4. The following three-level scale is to serve as a general guideline for the review:

          1. Superior progress. Requirements include excellence in teaching/advising, excellence in scholarship, and meeting department standards in service.

            ii. Satisfactory progress. Requirements include progress towards excellence in teaching and scholarly productivity with satisfactory service as determined by the department. This ranking indicates that the department has determined that progress towards tenure is satisfactory but improvements are needed.

          2. Not satisfactory progress. This evaluation requires change by the faculty across one or more dimensions. This essentially means that continuance on this performance trajectory is unlikely to result in a favorable tenure decision.

        5. All documentation is due to the chair of the department by the third Friday in January.

        6. Feedback should be both in writing and in a face-to-face meeting with the department chair and the department PTRM committee chair no later than the first Friday in March. The written report will be shared with the dean. In accordance with Section III.B.3, the faculty member shall sign a statement indicating that he/she has read, but does not necessarily agree with, the evaluation.

        7. If a faculty member’s Mandatory Tenure-Review Year is prior to the sixth year of continuous, full-time service, the standard Annual Review by the department may be expected to serve a more extensive function and the department may provide more extensive feedback to the candidate.

      6. Tenure and/or Promotion

        1. By the third Friday in September of the Academic Year preceding the Academic Year in which a faculty member intends to submit material for promotion and/or tenure, the faculty member shall notify the chair of the department of his/her intention.

        2. By the fourth Friday in September of the Academic Year preceding the Academic Year in which a faculty member is to undergo tenure or promotion, the department chair shall notify all members of the department of those intentions and shall confirm those intentions to the dean and the Provost.

        3. The department PTRM Committee shall evaluate faculty for tenure and/or promotion.

        4. Tenure may be granted only to faculty holding specific academic ranks, as stated in the Board of Regents “II-1.00 University System Policy on Appointment, Rank, and Tenure of Faculty,” and is not applicable to academic administrative positions.

        5. Tenure review shall occur in the “Mandatory Tenure-Review Year” specified in the faculty member’s contract, unless otherwise agreed to in writing by the University and the faculty member. Typically the “Mandatory Tenure-Review Year” will be the faculty member’s sixth year of continuous, full-time service, and an instructor or assistant professor must receive a tenure review no later than the sixth year of continuous full-time employment in those ranks. However, a faculty member may request review for tenure and promotion prior to the Mandatory Tenure-Review Year if s/he has demonstrated outstanding performance in teaching/advising or scholarship or University/civic/professional services, validated at the national level, and satisfactory or better performance in other performance categories. A faculty member reviewed for tenure prior to the Mandatory Tenure-Review Year who is denied at the department or college level may withdraw his/her application for tenure before submission to the next level. The withdrawal must be set forth in a writing directed to the department PTRM committee, in which event the next tenure and promotion review will occur in the Mandatory Tenure-Review Year specified in the original faculty contract.

        6. In order to hire at the rank of associate or full professor with tenure, the tenured members of the department must vote by simple majority to affirm that appointment. The dean may then recommend the appointment to the Provost. Application for tenure at rank requires documentation of rank and tenure at the previous institution. The President must approve any hire involving tenure.

        7. The department PTRM committee(s) shall review evaluation portfolios for promotion and/or tenure and shall prepare a written report, with vote count, for each recommendation. The recommendation shall contain reference to each category evaluated including teaching/advising, scholarship and University/civic/professional service. The recommendation should be consistent with the department’s standards and expectations (set forth in the department PTRM document) and submitted to the department chair by the second Friday in October.

        8. The department chairperson shall prepare an independent evaluation of each faculty member considered for promotion and/or tenure and include it in the faculty member’s evaluation portfolio by the fourth Friday in October.

        9. All recommendations shall be conveyed in writing to the faculty member, inclusive of any department chairperson’s statement and a record of the vote count (“Evaluation Record”) no later than the fourth Friday in October. Negative recommendations shall be delivered in person by the department chairperson or sent by certified mail to the faculty member’s last known address.

        10. The department PTRM committee chairperson shall forward the faculty member’s evaluation portfolio, inclusive of the Evaluation Record to the dean’s office by the second Friday in November, where they will be available to members of the college PTRM committee.

        11. The college PTRM committee shall consider the Evaluation Record relative to tenure and/or promotion. It shall prepare a concisely written but detailed statement supportive of its recommendation, with reference to each category evaluated including teaching/advising, scholarship and University/civic/professional service. The statement with recommendation and vote count shall be added to the faculty member’s evaluation portfolio and submitted to the dean by the first Friday in January.

        12. The dean shall prepare his/her own recommendation regarding promotion and/or tenure. The recommendation shall contain reference to each category evaluated: including teaching/advising, scholarship and University/civic/professional service. The dean shall be responsible for adding this recommendation to each faculty member’s evaluation portfolio by the third Friday in January.

        13. The recommendations of the college PTRM committee and the dean shall be conveyed in writing to the faculty member by the third Friday in January. Copies also shall be sent to the department chair and the department PTRM committee chairperson. Negative recommendations shall be delivered in writing in person by the dean or sent by certified mail to the faculty member’s last known address.

        14. The dean shall forward the summative portfolio (Section I.B.9) for each faculty member seeking promotion and/or tenure to the Provost by the first Friday in February.

        15. The Provost may ask the dean, the department chairperson, or the department and/or college PTRM committee for additional information from the lengthier evaluation portfolio prior to making a final recommendation. The Provost shall prepare a substantive letter of recommendation regarding tenure to be sent to the faculty member, department and college PTRM committee chairpersons, department chairperson, dean of the college and the President by the third Friday in March. A copy of this letter will be filed with the faculty member’s official file maintained by the Office of the Provost.

        16. In the event of a negative recommendation at any level of review, the faculty member may choose to challenge the recommendation through the appeals process (Section V); however, an appeal will not stay the evaluation process.

        17. The awarding of tenure and/or promotion shall be made only by the President.

        18. Tenure and/or promotion shall be effective on the date indicated in the official letter containing the President’s decision.

      7. Comprehensive Five-Year Review (Post-tenure Review)

        1. The comprehensive review policies herein are in accordance with the principles established by the USM Board of Regents on 7/12/96 and shall not be construed to substitute for them.

        2. The comprehensive review shall be conducted in accordance with all policies, including appeals, relevant to the Annual Review process except as noted in this section.

        3. All tenured faculty shall be reviewed at least once every five (5) years. Comprehensive reviews are summative for a period of the preceding five (5) Academic Years.

        4. The chair of the department, in consultation with the dean of the college shall establish the cycle for comprehensive reviews of faculty within the department. A faculty member who has submitted formal notice of retirement during the fourth or fifth year of his/her comprehensive review cycle with an intention to retire at the end of that cycle may be exempted from the comprehensive review process at the discretion of the dean of the college.

        5. Evaluation portfolio materials for the Five-Year Comprehensive Review are listed in Section I B 3.d.

        6. The department PTRM committee(s) shall review the evaluation portfolios and shall prepare a written report, with vote count, for each recommendation. The recommendation shall contain reference to each category evaluated: teaching/advising, scholarship, and University/civic/professional service. The statement should be consistent with the department’s standards and expectations (stipulated in the department PTRM document) and submitted to the department chair by the second Friday in October.

        7. The department chairperson shall prepare an independent evaluation of each faculty member under review and include it in the faculty member’s evaluation portfolio by the fourth Friday in October.

        8. The faculty member’s evaluation portfolio, inclusive of the written recommendation of the department committee, the written evaluation of the department chair, and the vote count shall be forwarded by the department PTRM committee chair to the dean’s office by the second Friday in November.

        9. The dean of the college shall write a review with recommendation for the five-year comprehensive review by the first Friday in February. A copy of the review must be included in the evaluation portfolio submitted to the Office of the Provost.

        10. A faculty member may appeal a negative recommendation at any point in the process, following procedures outlined in the Appeals Section (Section V) of this document.

        11. All recommendations shall be conveyed in writing to the faculty member, inclusive of any department chairperson’s statement and a record of the vote count no later than the fourth Friday in October. Negative recommendations shall be delivered in person by the department chairperson or sent by certified mail to the faculty member’s last known address.

        12. A negative comprehensive review shall be followed by the development of a written professional development plan to remediate the faculty member’s failure to meet minimum expectations as noted in the comprehensive review. This written plan shall be developed by the faculty member and approved by the chair and the dean by the third Friday in June of the Academic Year in which the negative review occurred. The plan shall be signed by the faculty member, chair and dean.

        13. The plan shall be implemented in the fall semester following approval of the plan. Evidence of improvement must be clearly discernible in evaluation portfolio materials submitted in the next annual review process. Lack of evidence of discernible improvement may result in a formal warning, sanction or termination

        14. Two (2) consecutive annual reviews indicating the faculty member has not met minimum expectations shall occasion an immediate comprehensive review, which shall be in addition to those otherwise required by policy.

        15. Chairpersons, as faculty members, are included in the comprehensive review process.

        16. Faculty members with joint appointments are to be reviewed according to the schedule of their “home” department.

  4. Promotion, Tenure, Reappointment, Merit, Comprehensive Review Committee Structure, Policies, and Procedures

    1. University Promotion, Tenure, Reappointment and Merit Committee

      1. As a standing committee of the Academic Senate, the composition and responsibilities of the University Promotion Tenure/Reappointment and Merit Committee are referenced in the “Constitution and By-Laws of the Academic Senate.” 

      2. The University PTRM committee shall be composed of eight (8) tenured faculty members, one (1) member elected from each of the degree-granting colleges, one (1) appointed by the Academic Senate, and a Provost designee (ex officio without voting privileges) who will serve three-year terms. University PTRM committee members shall not serve concurrently on their college PTRM committee.

      3. By the second Friday in September, the committee shall hold a meeting for the purpose of electing, by simple majority vote, a chairperson, who shall notify the Member-at-Large of the Executive Committee of the Academic Senate of the names of the committee members and the chairperson.

      4. A quorum shall be a simple majority of the voting members.

      5. Duties and Procedures

        1. Oversee the system of faculty evaluations by establishing the PTRM calendar and University standards and guidelines for faculty evaluation;

        2. Develop and recommend to the Academic Senate policies, procedures, and standards relating to all aspects of faculty evaluation, including promotion/tenure, reappointment, merit, comprehensive review, and third-year review;

        3. Review the petition of a faculty member who has alleged a procedural error in cases of promotion, tenure, reappointment, comprehensive review or merit. Transmit findings and recommendations related to faculty petitions to the Provost to be placed in the faculty member’s summative portfolio and to forward same to the faculty member, the chairs of department and college PTRM committees, department chairperson, and the dean.

        4. Receive all PTRM procedure documents from departments and colleges if such documents have been revised either substantively and/or editorially;

        5. Receive all PTRM procedure documents from departments and colleges for cyclic three-year review and notify the department chair and dean if documents are not received;

        6. Approve department and college PTRM procedures including evaluative procedures and all exceptions from University-wide procedural standards.

        7. For any PTRM procedure documents that are not in compliance with University guidelines and standards, notify the chairs of the appropriate department and college PTRM committees, the department chair, the dean and the Provost at end of the Academic Year;

        8. Submit an annual report to the Academic Senate by the date stipulated in the Senate by-laws.

    2. College Committee

      1. The college PTRM committee shall consist of one (1) representative from each department elected at large by the college tenured and tenure-track faculty. These elections are concluded no later than the first Friday in May. Members of the committee will serve for a period of three (3) years but for no more than two (2) consecutive terms. These three-year terms will be staggered to ensure some continuity from year to year. Eligible members shall include tenured faculty at the rank of either associate or full professor. Department chairpersons are not eligible.

      2. If a department does not have one (1) or more faculty eligible to serve, an exception to the policy may be made and approved by the dean and the University PTRM committee.

      3. The dean shall serve as a member of the college PTRM committee, ex officio, non-voting.

      4. College PTRM committee members who are presenting themselves for promotion shall not serve during the year in which any decision relative to their review is undertaken.

      5. In the event of vacancies on the college PTRM committee, the college electorate shall choose a replacement before the college PTRM committee begins its work.

      6. Beginning with the implementation of these revisions, each college shall review its PTRM document every three (3) years and submit evidence of such review to the dean of the college and the University PTRM committee.

    3. Department Committee(s)
      1. All tenured faculty of the department, and only tenured faculty, shall serve as members of the department’s tenure committee. This committee is responsible for tenure recommendations and third-year review. The tenure committee may or may not be the same as the Promotion, Reappointment, and Merit (PRM) Committee(s).
      2. Eligible members of the department PRM committee(s) shall be determined by the standards specified in the department’s document as approved by the college PTRM committee, the dean, and the University PTRM committee. The department PRM committee(s) shall make recommendations concerning reappointment, merit, promotions, and comprehensive five-year review. The department PRM committee may or may not be the same as the tenure committee. Only tenured faculty members will vote in the committee(s) for promotion to Associate Professor or to Professor.
      3. The department chairperson shall not serve as a voting member of the department PTRM committees.
      4. In order that at least three (3) tenured faculty opinions be considered in promotion and tenure recommendations, in addition to the department chairperson, departments with fewer than three (3) tenured faculty members shall supplement the committee with tenured faculty members from other departments within the college or from the appropriate department if the faculty member being reviewed has a joint appointment, including a joint appointment between colleges. The additional tenured faculty members shall be selected from a list of at least three (3) faculty members recommended by the faculty member under review. The faculty member shall submit the list of recommended faculty members on or before the third Friday in June. The department chairperson and the dean will review the list from the appropriate college and make recommendations by the first Friday in September. The college PTRM committee will select the additional faculty member(s) to be added to the committee on or before the third Friday of September of the review year.
      5. Each department shall review its PTRM document every three (3) years and submit evidence of such review to the dean of the college and the University PTRM committee.
  5. Appeals and Negative Recommendations

    1. Negative Recommendations

      1. Negative recommendations at any level regarding the annual review, merit, promotion, tenure, reappointment and/or the comprehensive five-year review shall be delivered in writing in person or sent by certified mail to the faculty member’s last known address by the administrator at the appropriate level. The chair has responsibility for conveyance of any recommendation made at the departmental level and the dean has responsibility for conveyance of any recommendation made at the college level. The Provost has responsibility for conveyance of any decision rendered by the Provost. Negative recommendations shall be delivered in writing in person or by certified mail, return-receipt-requested, and post-marked no later than the date on which reports are to be distributed to the faculty member according to the University PTRM calendar.

    2. Appeals

      1. All appeals shall be made in writing. The timeframe for appeals at all levels is twenty-one (21) calendar days beginning with the date that the negative judgment is delivered in person or the date of the postmark of the certified letter.

      2. There are three (3) types of appeals.

        1. Substantive appeals refer to perceived errors in judgment by either department and/or college PTRM committees, the department chairperson, the dean and/or the Provost with regard to evaluation of the faculty member’s performance.

          1. The next higher level shall serve as the appeals body. Appeals must be delivered by certified mail or in person to the college PTRM, dean, or Provost within twenty-one (21) calendar days of notification of the negative recommendation.

          2. The appeal must be in writing, clearly stating the grounds for appeal and must be accompanied by supporting documents. The faculty member may supplement the evaluation portfolio under review with any statement, evidence, or other documentation s/he believes would present a more valid perspective on his/her performance.

          3. Appeals of departmental recommendations shall be copied to the department chair and the department PTRM chair. Appeals of college recommendations shall be copied to the college dean and the college PTRM committee.

          4. All material placed in the file during an appeal, including challenge material, shall become a part of the cumulative expansion of the evaluation portfolio and shall not be removed by subsequent levels of evaluators.

          5. Within fifteen (15) business days of receipt of a formal appeal with attached materials, the recipient of the appeal (e.g. the college PTRM committee, the University PTRM committee, or the Provost) shall review the case and provide a written response to the substantive appeal. Copies of this letter will be provided to all parties who were copied on the original appeal letter.

          6. Recommendations made by the Provost may be appealed to the President whose decision is final.

        2. Procedural appeals relate to alleged errors in the procedures followed in the review, recommendation and notification process, and shall follow the procedures below.

          1. Procedural appeals shall be made to the University PTRM committee.

          2. The appeal must be in writing, clearly stating the alleged procedural error(s). The appeal shall be accompanied by supporting documents and should be delivered by certified mail or in person to the respective dean, Provost, or UPTRM chair within twenty-one (21) calendar days of having been notified of the negative recommendation.

          3. Appeals of department recommendations shall be copied to the department chair, the department PTRM chair, the dean and the University PTRM committee chair. Appeals of college recommendations shall be copied to the college dean, the college PTRM committee, the department chair, and the University PTRM committee chair. Appeals of Provost recommendations shall be copied to the dean and department chair.

          4. Within fifteen (15) business days of receipt of a formal appeal with attached materials, the University PTRM committee shall review the case and provide a written response. Copies of this response will be provided to all parties who were copied on the original appeal letter.

          5. Recommendations of the University PTRM committee may be appealed to the President whose decision shall be final. The chair of the University PTRM committee will monitor the appeal process.

        3. Appeals alleging unlawful discrimination in race, color, religion, age, national origin, gender, sexual orientation and disability shall follow the specific procedures described in Towson University policy 06-01.00 “Prohibiting Discrimination on the basis of Race, Color, Religion, Age, National Origin, Sex and Disability.”

      3. The President’s decision on reappointment, tenure, promotion and comprehensive five-year review shall be final. The Provost’s decision on merit shall be final.

    3. Faculty Development Relative to PTRM Process

      1. Because the goal of the faculty evaluation process is to enhance student learning and to address the mission and vision of the University, college and/or department, the University shall maintain a foundation of resources to support the faculty in its evaluation role, both as individuals and the evaluation structure.

      2. Resources shall be supported University-wide through the Division of Academic Affairs and through other appropriate units, such as the Center for Instructional Advancement and Technology (CIAT), as well as through departmental and college-based programs.

      3. Within the second semester of the Academic Year, the Office of the Provost shall provide a workshop addressing PTRM issues. Faculty members serving on University, college, and/or department PTRM committees are expected to attend. Faculty members aspiring to serve on PTRM committees are encouraged and welcomed to attend regardless of their rank. Such workshops may address current national trends in evaluation issues and any changes in USM and Towson institutional policies. A certificate of attendance will be provided. Faculty may include such certificate under University service in their annual evaluation portfolio.

  6. Towson University Annual Review, Reappointment, Third-Year Review, Merit, Promotion, Tenure, and Comprehensive Review Calendar (All Deadlines Are Final Deadlines)

    The First Friday in May

    Department and college PTRM committees are formed (elections for membership on the college committee are already completed)

    The Third Friday in June

    All faculty members submit an evaluation portfolio to the department chair.

    1. Faculty submit a list of at least three (3) names of any additional faculty to be included on department tenure and/or promotion committee (if necessary) to the department chairperson and dean.

    2. All faculty members with a negative comprehensive review must have final approval by chair and dean of the written professional development plan.

    August 1st (USM mandated)

    Tenure-track faculty in the third or later Academic Year of service must be notified in writing of non-reappointment prior to the third or subsequent Academic Year of service if the faculty member’s appointment ends after the third or subsequent Academic Year. To meet this deadline, a modified schedule may be required as provided in Section III.D.4.a.

    The First Friday in September

    Department chair approval of the list of additional faculty to be considered for inclusion in the department tenure and/or promotion committee

    The Second Friday in September

    University PTRM committee shall meet and elect a chair and notify the Senate Executive Committee’s Member-at-large of the committee members and chairperson for the Academic Year.

    The Third Friday in September

    Faculty notify department chair of intention to submit materials for promotion and/or tenure in the next Academic Year.

    College PTRM Committee approval of faculty to be added to a department’s PTRM committee (if necessary).

    Final date for faculty to add information to update their evaluation portfolio for work that was completed before June 1 unless the schedule for review is modified pursuant to Section III.D.4.a.

    First year faculty members must finalize the Statement of Standards and Expectations for New Tenure-Track Faculty (SENTF) with the department chairperson.

    The Fourth Friday in September

    Department chairperson notifies department faculty, dean, and Provost of any department faculty member’s intention to be reviewed for promotion and/or tenure in the next Academic Year.

    The Second Friday in October

    Department PTRM committee’s reports with recommendations and vote count on all faculty members are submitted to the department chairperson.

    College PTRM documents are due to the University PTRM committee if changes have been made.

    The Fourth Friday in October

    Department chairperson’s written evaluation for faculty considered for reappointment in the first through fifth years, promotion, tenure, and comprehensive five-year review is added to the faculty member’s evaluation portfolio and conveyed to the faculty member.

    The department chairperson will place his/her independent evaluation into the evaluation portfolio.

    The department PTRM committee’s report with recommendations and vote count and the department chairperson’s evaluation are distributed to the faculty member.

    The Second Friday in November

    The faculty member’s evaluation portfolio, inclusive of the department PTRM committee’s written recommendation with record of the vote count, and the written recommendation of the department chairperson, are forwarded by the department PTRM chairperson to the dean’s office.

    November 30th

    All documentation to be used as part of the consideration process must be included in the evaluation portfolio.

    The dean must notify the Provost in writing of reappointment/non-reappointment recommendation(s) for tenure-track faculty in their second or subsequent Academic Year of service. Negative recommendations shall be delivered in person by the dean or sent by certified mail to the faculty member’s home.

    The First Friday in December

    Department PTRM documents are delivered to the college PTRM committee if any changes have been made.

    The Second Friday in December

    First-year tenure-track faculty submit an evaluation portfolio for the Fall semester to the department chairperson.

    December 15th (USM mandated date)

    Tenure-track faculty in the second Academic Year of service must be notified by the President in writing of non-reappointment for the next Academic Year.

    The First Friday in January

    The department PTRM committee reports with recommendations and vote count on all first-year tenure-track faculty are submitted to the department chairperson.

    The college PTRM committee reports with vote counts and recommendations for faculty reviewed for tenure and/or promotion are submitted to the dean.

    The Third Friday in January

    The dean’s written evaluation regarding promotion and/or tenure with recommendation is added to the faculty member’s evaluation portfolio.

    The college PTRM committee’s report with vote counts and recommendations and the dean’s recommendation are conveyed in writing to the faculty member.

    The department PTRM committee and chairperson recommendations concerning reappointment for first-year tenure-track faculty are delivered to the faculty member and the dean.

    All documentation for the third year review of tenure-track faculty is submitted by the faculty member to the department chairperson.

    Department chair recommendations on reappointment of first-year faculty must be added to the faculty member’s evaluation portfolio.

    The First Friday in February

    The college dean forwards the summative portfolio inclusive of the committee’s and the dean’s recommendations of each faculty member with a recommendation concerning promotion and/or tenure or five-year comprehensive review to the Provost.

    The dean forwards all recommendations regarding reappointment/non-reappointment to the Provost. If the dean disagrees with the department recommendation, the dean shall prepare his/her own recommendation and send a copy to the faculty member and add this recommendation to the summative portfolio.

    The Second Friday in February

    The dean will, following his/her review, forward department recommendations for faculty merit to the Provost. If the dean disagrees with the department recommendation, the dean shall add his/her recommendation to the faculty member's evaluation portfolio and deliver the negative decision in person or by certified mail to the faculty member's home.

    Department documents concerning promotion, tenure/reappointment, and merit (with an approval form signed by all current faculty members) are submitted to the University PTRM committee.

    Negative reappointment recommendations for first-year faculty are forwarded from the Provost to the President.

    March 1

    First year faculty must be notified of non-reappointment by written notification from the University President.

    First Friday in March

    Faculty under third-year review must be provided with written and face-to-face feedback on their performance toward tenure.

    Third Friday in March

    Provost’s letter of decision is conveyed to the faculty member, department and college PTRM committee chairpersons, department chairperson, and dean of the college.

Related Forms

Librarian Annual Performance Evaluation

Annual Review, Reappointment, Third-Year Review, Merit, Promotion, Tenure, and Comprehensive Review – Non-Chairperson’s Annual Review

Annual Review, Reappointment, Third-Year Review, Merit, Promotion, Tenure, and Comprehensive Review – Chairperson’s Annual Review

Statement of Standards and Expectations for New Tenuretrack Faculty (SENTF)

Towson University Department Summary Recommendation (DSR)

How to Request the Policy PDF

This online version of the policy may include updated links and names of departments. To request a PDF of the original, signed version of this policy, email the Office of the General Counsel, .