Back to Top
Skip to Site Search Skip to Utility Nav Skip to Top Nav Skip to Left Nav Skip to Content
Close Main Menu

5.2 Promotion

5.2.1.  Criteria for Promotion

Promotions are not granted automatically for satisfactory performance. Tenure-track faculty members must make strong, positive cases in the application for promotion, including superior teaching. Promotion from instructor to assistant professor is considered an exception by the president, provost, and dean. For promotion to associate professor, faculty members must provide evidence of noteworthy achievement that exceeds expectations in teaching and either service or scholarship. Faculty members must meet expectations in the area (service or scholarship) not chosen for noteworthy achievement. For promotion to professor, faculty members must provide evidence of exceeding expectations in all three categories. Refer to departmental guidelines for criteria required to meet or exceed expectations.

5.2.2.  Timing for Consideration of a Promotion

Promotions will be considered after faculty members have been under contract in tenure-track positions at the university for a specific number of years.  The normal requirements are as follows:

  • Instructor to assistant professor – three years of service as an instructor, including the year under consideration for promotion. Exceptions to tenure status and years of services requirements may be granted with the permission of the president, provost and dean.
  • Assistant professor to associate professor – four years of service as an assistant professor on tenure track, including the year under consideration for promotion. Faculty members may not submit applications for promotion to associate professor unless they are on tenure-track and both applications for tenure and promotion are submitted concurrently or they have already been tenured.
  • Associate professor to professor – five years service as an associate professor, including the year under consideration for promotion. Faculty members applying for promotion to professor must have earned a doctorate or the equivalent in training, ability, or expertise.

Faculty members may be considered for “early” promotion sooner than the number of years of service identified above when strong justification is provided in support of such a recommendation by both departmental and college administrators.

5.2.3.  Procedure for Promotion Review

The purpose of these guidelines is to assist faculty members in presenting their professional experiences and accomplishments in the best possible context and to assure equity of consideration during the P&T Review.  If requested by the department head/coordinator, dean, DPTRC, CPTC, or UWPTC, a faculty member may add materials and documents that may have been incomplete or under review at the time of the original submission.

5.2.3.1.  Documentation

The following documentation will be presented in a university electronic portfolio system:

    • Cover sheet providing the following information in order as applicable:
    • Name of individual
    • Review Type and Level (e.g. Promotion to Assoc. Professor, Tenure)
    • Name of college and department
    • Degrees earned (highest first)
    • Years, dates, and current rank and title in tenure-track position
    • Area(s) of specialization within the discipline
    • Date of hire and total number of years at the university, including the current academic year
    • Total number of years at the university at rank of assistant professor or higher
    • Credit awarded toward tenure at time of appointment
    • Dates of temporary suspension of the tenure process (e.g.: leave of absence – see faculty handbook)
    • Full Professional Curriculum Vitae (CV)
    • Summary Statement of goals, accomplishments, and plans for each of the three areas: Teaching, Service, and Scholarship/Professional Development.  Page length for each summary statement may vary by candidate; however, the combined page length for summary statements should not exceed 6 pages total. See also the departmental guidelines and the Appendix of the Faculty Annual Report for details regarding each category.  For each area, summarize the following:
    • Overview of professional goals
    • For the years under review, outline progress toward those goals, using past achievements to detail progress. Highlight areas of special interest and competence.
    • Future goals with an overview of means by which the goals will be accomplished
    • Individual Teaching, Service, and Scholarship Curriculum Vitae for the period under review: Detailed lists of accomplishments/activities in each area for the period under review.  Candidates should prepare three separate lists, one for each area.  Lists should include the following where applicable. Following each CV, the candidate should provide relevant supporting documentation for significant activities in each area:
    • Teaching CV
    • List of all courses taught (prefix, number, title, semester)
    • Course/curriculum development (new courses, significant changes to existing courses, new teaching modalities, etc)
    • Complete set of evaluations with students’ comments from all the years under consideration in a tenure track position and a written summary of trends and responses to student evaluations for the years under review
    • Supervision of students’ honors, research, thesis, creative activities
    • Published teaching materials
    • Honors and awards associated with teaching
    • Other
    • Service CV
    • Academic advisement – number of undergraduate and/or graduate students for the current academic year
    • SOAR/NSO and/or group advising sessions for the period under review
    • Other noteworthy advisement activities (development and implementation of advising tools, leadership in advisor training sessions, etc.)
    • Published service materials
    • Service to the institution
    • Department
    • College
    • University
    • Service to the University System of Georgia
    • Service to professional organizations
    • State
    • Regional
    • National
    • International
    • Participation in student activities, including advising student clubs
    • Service to the North Georgia community.  Community service must be related to professional discipline.
    • Honors and awards associated with service
    • Other
    • Scholarship CV
    • Updated degrees, institutions, dates since last review
    • Advanced studies or continuing education
    • Professional certifications
    • Publications and creative activities with complete bibliographic information
    • Academic and professional activities
    • Contracts and grants
    • Honors and awards for professional achievements
    • Other
  • Departmental P&T guidelines  [login required]
  • Copies of signed performance evaluations – annual self-reports with department head's/coordinator's or dean's evaluations for years under consideration.
  • Letter from primary campus academic administrator if different than the department head/coordinator.
  • Peer letters in support of promotion application- two from peers with at least one from a tenured colleague
  • Letter from the DPTRC – added after the review with an explicit recommendation
  • Letter from the department head/coordinator – added after the review with an explicit recommendation
  • Letter from the CPTC – added after the review with an explicit recommendation
  • Letter from the dean – added after the review with an explicit recommendation
  • Letter from the UWPTC – added after the review with an explicit recommendation

5.2.3.2.  Process

  • Faculty members submit the documentation identified in Section 3.1 above, to their department.
  • Members of the DPTRC shall review the faculty member’s documentation and provide a review letter with positive or negative recommendations, along with a separate numerical tabulation of committee votes. All members of the committee must sign the letter. Signing the letter is an indication of participation in the review process and not an indication of concurrence with the recommendation. 
  • The department head/coordinator shall review the faculty member’s documentation and DPTRC's review letter and make either a positive or negative recommendation for promotion.
  • Members of the CPTC shall review the faculty member’s documentation, the department head/coordinator’s recommendation, and the DPTRC review letter and provide a review letter with positive or negative recommendations, along with a separate numerical tabulation of committee votes. All members of the committee must sign the letter. Signing the letter is an indication of participation in the review process and not an indication of concurrence with the recommendation. 
  • The academic dean shall review the faculty member’s documentation, the department head/coordinator’s recommendation and the DPTRC’s and CPTC's review letter and make either a positive or negative recommendation.
  • Members of the UWPTC shall review the faculty member’s documentation, the department head/coordinator’s and academic dean’s recommendations, and the DPTRC and CPTC’s review letters and provide a review letter with positive or negative recommendations, along with a separate numerical tabulation of committee votes. All members of the committee must sign the letter. Signing the letter is an indication of participation in the review process and not an indication of concurrence with the recommendation.  
  • The faculty member’s application for promotion documentation, the department head/coordinator’s and academic dean’s recommendations, and the DPTRC, CPTC, and UWPTC’s review letters shall then be submitted to the provost for a recommendation. 
  • The provost shall prepare a signed report with his or her recommendation for each faculty member being considered for promotion to the president by the last Monday in January.  The provost shall also notify each faculty member being considered for promotion of the provost’s recommendation by the last Monday in January.  A copy of the signed report and written responses/appeals, if any, will be filed in the Academic Affairs office.
  • Faculty members being considered for promotion who wish to appeal the final recommendation of the provost may do so following the appellate procedure identified in Section 4 below. 
  • The president will review any appeals filed and make a final determination regarding a faculty member’s consideration for promotion.

5.2.3.3.  Appellate Procedures

  • Candidates who have been denied tenure or promotion by the recommendation of the provost have the right to appeal the recommendation to the president. Appeals must be based on one of the following circumstances and should be addressed in the written appeal: (i) discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion, sex, sexual preference, age and/or a physical handicap; (ii) procedural improprieties, or (iii) a violation of academic freedom. A candidate may not appeal the final determination if he or she simply disagrees with the decision.  
  • A written notification of intent to file an appeal must be received by the president’s office no later than the close of business seven days after the candidate receives written notification of the provost’s final recommendation. The complete written appeal and supporting documentation must be received in the president’s office no later than the close of business fourteen days after the faculty member receives written notification of the provost’s final recommendation.  
  • The president may choose one of the following three options: (i) review the appeal and render a decision; (ii) appoint an ad hoc committee to review the appeal and make a recommendation to the president; (iii) return the file to the appropriate committee to review again. In any case, the candidate will be notified, in writing, of the results of the appeal no later than the close of business on the tenth (10) business day after the date the president receives the written full appeal.  
  • The burden of proof in an appeal rests with the candidate. To prevail on appeal, the candidate must demonstrate that the recommendation to deny tenure or promotion was due to (i) discrimination, (ii) procedural improprieties, or (iii) academic freedom. In the absence of convincing proof to the contrary, the original recommendation to deny promotion will be affirmed.  
  • A candidate who is aggrieved by the decision of the president may apply to the Board of Regents, without prejudice to position, for a review of the decision. The application for review shall be submitted in writing to the associate vice chancellor for legal affairs within a period of twenty (20) days following the decision of the president. The application for review will be considered according to the provisions stated in Bylaw VIII of the Bylaws of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia. The written appeal should be sent to the associate vice chancellor for legal affairs, 270 Washington Street, Atlanta, GA 30334.

UNG follows Section 508 Standards and WCAG 2.0 for web accessibility. If you require the content on this web page in another format, please contact the ADA Coordinator.

Back to Top