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 Promotion & Tenure

  • 5.1 Promotion and Tenure Policy Statements

    5.1 PROMOTION AND TENURE POLICY STATEMENTS

    1. Policies and Procedures – Promotion and Tenure Review

    • Policy Statement – Promotion and Tenure

    The University of North Georgia (the “university”) promotion and tenure review processes (“P&T Review”) follow the guidelines of the University System of Georgia Board of Regents Policy Manual (“USG BOR Policy Manual”). These guidelines establish foundational policies and procedural expectations for institutions of higher education and for disciplines within universities while providing for appropriate professional flexibility at departmental levels. This is the university’s overarching P&T Policy. Additionally, each academic department and the library are responsible for developing discipline-specific expectations for tenure and for each type of promotion. The UNG Promotion and Tenure policy described herein should guide these discipline-specific expectations. "Noteworthy" and "meet or exceed expectations" are defined at the department level.

    The criteria to be used when considering a faculty member for tenure or promotion are as follows: 

    • Superior teaching; Demonstrating excellence in instruction
    • Professional Growth & Development / Scholarship / Academic Achievement
    • Outstanding service to the institution, profession, or community

    For tenure, the candidate must provide evidence of the following:

    • Noteworthy achievement in teaching and one other category.
    • Meet or exceed expectations in the remaining area not selected for noteworthy contributions.

    For promotion to associate, the candidate must provide evidence of the following:

    • Noteworthy achievement in teaching and one other category.
    • Meet or exceed expectations in the remaining area not selected for noteworthy contributions.

    For promotion to professor, the candidate must provide evidence of noteworthy achievement in all three categories. 



    Additional policy statements regarding tenure (BoR Policy 8.3.7 )



    Additional policy statements regarding promotion (BoR Policy 8.3.6 )

    5.1.2.  Committees Involved in the P&T Review Process

    Faculty members must be informed by the second Monday of April of the preceding academic year that they are eligible for promotion and/or tenure review in the next academic year.  For Pre-Tenure Review, if a faculty member is eligible for pre-tenure review their first year of employment they must be notified when hired (August).

    Department Promotion & Tenure Review Committee (“DPTRC”)

    At the beginning of each academic year, department heads/coordinators will appoint representatives from the tenured faculty members at the rank of associate or full professor to serve on the DPTRC. The number of members serving on the DPTRC will depend upon the number of faculty members in the department to be sufficient for the workload and must represent all of the university campuses where there is more than one tenured faculty member at the rank of associate or full professor primarily assigned to that campus by the department. For the libraries, the DPTRC will consist of representatives appointed by head librarians, in conjunction with the dean, from the tenure-track faculty members at the rank of assistant, associate, or full professor and must represent all of the university campuses.  In the case of departments with fewer than three fulltime faculty members, the department heads/coordinators in conjunction with the dean will designate representatives from similar discipline areas to serve on the DPTRC.

    Members of the DPTRC will serve for two years and the terms will be staggered so that there are some returning members each year.  The DPTRC members will select the chair. Members of the DPTRC should not serve in the same academic year on the university-wide Promotion and Tenure Committee; however, if necessary, they may also serve on the college Promotion and Tenure Committee. The DPTRC will review the P&T documentation from all the candidates eligible for tenure (“candidates”) in their department and provide a written review letter with positive or negative recommendations for each candidate.

    College Promotion and Tenure Committee (“CPTC”)

    At the beginning of each academic year, the deans will appoint representatives from the associate and full professors from all departments or equivalent academic units and from all the university campuses to serve on the CPTC. Appointees must represent all of the university campuses where there is more than one tenured faculty member at the rank of associate or full professor primarily assigned to that campus by the college. In departments that are not associated with a college, the dean will appoint at least one representative from the department and designate at least three representatives from other disciplines at the rank of associate or full professor from University campuses to serve on the CPTC. Members of the CPTC will serve for two years and the terms will be staggered so that there are some returning members each year. The CPTC members will select the chair.  If possible, the CPTC members should not serve on the university-wide Promotion and Tenure Committee. The CPTC will review the P&T documentation from all the candidates in their college and provide a written review letter with positive or negative recommendations for each candidate.

    University-Wide Promotion and Tenure Committee (“UWPTC”)

    The UWPTC is a university committee whose purpose will be to review and make recommendations for candidates requesting promotion and tenure. The provost is responsible for establishing and charging the UWPTC, which shall be composed of two tenured faculty members holding the rank of professor from each college and one representative from the library. None of the members of the UWPTC may serve in an administrative position above the level of department head or coordinator. In cases where department head/coordinators’ recommendations are under consideration, they will recuse themselves.  The number of department heads serving on the UWPTC will not exceed 20% of the members of the committee.

    Please see the Master Calendar for all P&T dates

    2.  Promotion & Tenure Monthly Calendar

    ACTIONDATE
    Deans notify P&T candidates for upcoming academic year Apr (2nd Monday)
    Department heads/coordinators appoint DPTRC members Aug (4th Monday)
    Deans appoint CPTC members Aug (4th Monday)
    Faculty submit the P&T applications to department head/coordinator via D2L Sept (2nd Monday)
    Provost appoints UWPTC members Sept (2nd Monday)
    DPTRC completes review and uploads to D2L for CPTC Sept (4th Monday)
    Department heads/coordinators complete review Oct (1st Monday)
    CPTC completes review and uploads to D2L for UWPTC Oct (4th Monday)

    Deans complete review

    Nov (1st Monday)
    UWPTC complete review and forward to the Provost

    Dec (1st Monday)

    Provost notified P & T faculty members Jan (4th Monday)


    3. Pre-Tenure & Post-Tenure Monthly Calendar

    ACTION

    DATE

    Dean notifies post-tenure faculty of PT review/Access to on-line portfolio provided

    Sept (2nd Monday)

    Faculty submit post-tenure applications electronically via D2L 

    Jan (1st day of Spring semester)
    Deans appoint Pre-TRC and Post-TRC members Jan (1st day of Spring semester)

    Pre-tenure portfolios are to be submitted electronically via D2L by 5 PM

    Feb (1st Monday)

    Post-TRC submits post-tenure reports electronically via D2L

    Feb (1st Monday)

    Department head/coordinator submits post-tenure reports electronically via D2L

    Feb (2nd Monday)

    Pre-TRC submits pre-tenure letters to department heads/coordinators

    Feb (4th Monday)
    College Post TRC complete review and submit letters  Mar (1st Monday)
    Deans submit PostTRC letters electronically via D2L Mar (2nd Monday)
    Post-tenure discussion between faculty and department head/coordinator Apr (1st Monday)
    Post-tenure discussion including the development plan, if needed, with dean, department head/coordinator and faculty Apr (2nd Monday)
    Pre-tenure discussion between faculty and department head/coordinator Apr (2nd Monday)
    File post-tenure documents in appropriate offices  Apr (4th Monday)
    File pre-tenure documents in appropriate offices Apr (4th Monday)
    Submit pre-tenure recommendations to the deans Apr (4th Monday)
    Submit pre- and post-tenure recommendations to the Provost

    May (1st Monday)

  • 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.
  • 5.3 Pre-Tenure Review

    1.1.  Policy Statement – Pre-Tenure Review

    The university pre-tenure review follows the guidelines of the USG BOR Policy Manual. The purpose of the pre-tenure review is to (i) provide tenure-track faculty feedback on progress toward tenure, (ii) identify areas needing improvement, and (iii) provide guidance in preparing the professional portfolio to support the review for tenure. All tenure track faculty members shall also comply with discipline-specific expectations developed by each academic department or Library.

    1.2.  Pre-Tenure Review Committee

    At the beginning of each spring semester, the deans will appoint, from the pool of associate and professors in all the departments or equivalent academic units from all of the university campuses, to serve on the Pre-Tenure Review Committees (“Pre-TRC”).  The Pre-TRC will conduct the pre-tenure review of eligible faculty members in their respective departments based on the departmental, college and university criteria for tenure.  Upon completion of the review, the Pre-TRC will provide the department heads/coordinators written letters of their findings (“Pre-TRC Letter”), which will include (i) explicit, informed and candid feedback for each area, including teaching, service and scholarship, concerning the faculty member’s accomplishments, quality of contributions, and weaknesses or deficiencies; and (ii) guidance on improving performance in each area, including teaching, service and scholarship, particularly with reference to recommendations for faculty development activities that might address deficiencies in the faculty members’ supporting documentation.

    1.3.  Criteria for Pre-Tenure Review

    All tenure-track faculty members at the rank of assistant professor or higher will go through the pre-tenure review in the third year of employment at the university.  The criteria to be used when conducting a pre-tenure review are (i) effectiveness in teaching; (ii) service; and (iii) scholarship.

    1.4.  Timing for Pre-Tenure Review

    The pre-tenure review process will be conducted for faculty members as follows:

    • No prior credit toward tenure – during the third year of service at the university.
    • One year of credit toward tenure – during the second year of service at the university.
    • Two years credit toward tenure – during the first year of service at the university.
    • Three years credit toward tenure – during the first year of service at the university.

    In cases where faculty members have been granted credit toward tenure, consideration may be given to supporting documentation related to work done prior to joining the faculty at the university, particularly with reference to effectiveness in teaching and scholarship.

    1.5.  Procedure for Pre-Tenure 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 pre-tenure review process.  If requested by the department head/coordinator, dean, or Pre-TRC, the faculty members may add materials or documents that were incomplete or under review at the time of the original submission. 

    1.5.1.     Documentation

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

    • Cover sheet providing the following information in order as applicable: 
    • Name of college and department 
    • Name of individual 
    • Degrees earned (highest first) 
    • Area(s) of specialization with the discipline 
    • Current title 
    • Date of hire and total number of years at the University including the current academic year 
    • Years at the university in a tenure-track position 
    • Credit awarded toward tenure at the time of hire 
    • Dates of temporary suspension of the tenure process (e.g.: leaves of absence – refer to faculty handbook) 

    2. Current CV and a summary of documentation if not included in the CV 

    Teaching 

    • List of all courses taught (prefix, number, title, semester) 
    • Course/curriculum development 
    • Supervision of students’ honors, research, thesis, creative activities 
    • Published teaching materials 
    • Honors and awards associated with teaching 

    Service 

    • Academic advisement – number of undergraduate and graduate students for the current academic year 
    • Published service materials 
    • Committee service (names, dates, roles) 
    • Department 
    • College 
    • University 
    • University System of Georgia 
    • Professional organizations (names, dates, roles) 
    • State 
    • Regional 
    • National 
    • International 
    • Honors and awards associated with service  

    Scholarship 

    • Updated degrees – institutions and dates 
    • 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 

    3. Departmental Promotion &Tenure guidelines  [login required]

    4. Summary statements of each area in teaching, service, and scholarship up to six pages 

    5. Performance evaluations – annual self-reports with department head/coordinator and dean’s evaluations for the years under consideration 

    6. Letter from the primary campus academic administrator if different than department head/coordinator 

    7. Student evaluation summaries and complete sets of evaluations with students’ comments for all years under consideration 

    8. Letter from the Pre-TRC – added after the review with explicit recommendations 

    9. Letter from department head/coordinator – added after the review with explicit recommendations and a faculty development plan, if needed.

    1.5.2.     Process and Timeline - Please see the Master Calendar for P&T dates

    1.5.2.1.     Faculty members submit the documentation, identified in Section 2.5.1 above, electronically via D2L by the first Monday in February.

    1.5.2.2.     The department head/coordinator shall review the faculty member’s documentation and make either a positive or negative recommendation.

    1.5.2.3.     Members of the Pre-TRC shall review the faculty member’s documentation and provide the Pre-TRC letter.  The Pre-TRC will provide department heads/coordinators Pre-TRC letter by the first Monday in March. 

    1.5.2.4.     The department heads/coordinators will meet with each faculty member and review and discuss the Pre-TRC letter by the first Monday in May.

    1.5.2.5.     If a faculty member desires, he has the opportunity to prepare written responses to the Pre-TRC letter, and the written responses will be appended to the Pre-TRC letter. 

    1.5.2.6.     By the fourth Monday in May, the department heads/coordinators and the faculty members should sign the Pre-TRC letters and file the pre-tenure documentation in the appropriate department and/or college personnel files.  The department heads/coordinators will furnish the appropriate deans their explicit recommendations by the first Monday in June. 

    1.5.2.7.     The deans will submit to the provost the list of names of faculty members who complete the pre-tenure review by the third Monday in June. 

    Once a faculty member has received the Pre-TRC letter, he/she should utilize it to further develop a record of teaching effectiveness, service and scholarship that will promote a successful tenure application. It is important that faculty members understand that the recommendations in the Pre-TRC letters in no way represents a contract between the university and the faculty member, nor is it a guarantee that tenure will be granted.  

  • 5.4 Tenure
    5.4.1.  Criteria for Tenure

    Tenure is granted to those who through their performance “emphasize excellence in teaching for all teaching faculty.”  (USG BOR Policy Manual 8.3.6).  Candidates eligible for tenure must have an “earned doctorate or the equivalent in training, ability, or experience” to be considered for tenure.  (USG BOR Policy Manual 8.3.7.3).  Candidates in their fifth or sixth year of tenure-track service at the university or who have been granted credit towards tenure, may have consideration given to their supporting documentation related to work done prior to joining the faculty at the university, particularly with reference to effectiveness in teaching and scholarship. In AY '14, AY '15, AY '16, candidates in their seventh year of tenure track service at the university or who have been granted credit toward tenure, may undergo tenure review.  To earn tenure, candidates must provide evidence of noteworthy achievements in teaching and evidence of meeting department expectations in service or professional growth and development/scholarship/ academic achievement (“scholarship”) and exceeding expectations in one of the two areas outside of teaching (service or scholarship).  

    5.4.2.  Timing for Consideration for Tenure

    A candidate is first eligible to apply for tenure at the beginning of the fifth year in a tenure-track position. Candidates can be granted credit towards tenure by the Dean, Provost, and President at the time of hire.  In this case, the candidate’s timeline for tenure application will be adjusted to reflect credit toward tenure.  A candidate denied tenure in their fifth year can reapply during the sixth year. A candidate denied tenure in their sixth year cannot apply again (except during FYs 2015 and 2016).  In AY '14, AY '15, AY '16, candidates in their seventh year of tenure track service at the University or who have been granted credit toward tenure, may undergo tenure review. 

    5.4.3.  Procedure for Tenure Review

    The purpose of these guidelines is to assist candidates 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 candidate may add materials and documents that may have been incomplete or under review at the time of the original submission.  

    5.4.3.1.  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
    • 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

    5.4.3.2.  Process - Please see the Master Calendar for all P&T dates.

    • Candidates submit the documentation identified in Section 5.4.3.1 above, to their department.
    • Members of the DPTRC shall review the candidate’s documentation and provide a review letter with positive or negative recommendations, along with a separate numerical tabulation of committee votes. The letter must be signed by all members of the committee. 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 candidate’s documentation and DPTRC's review letter and make either a positive or negative recommendation.
    • Members of the CPTC shall review the candidate’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.  The letter must be signed by all members of the committee.  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 candidate’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 candidate’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.  The letter must be signed by all members of the committee.  Signing the letter is an indication of participation in the review process and not an indication of concurrence with the recommendation. 
    • The candidate’s 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 candidate to the president by the last Monday in January.  The provost shall also notify the candidates of the provost’s recommendation by the last Monday in January.  A copy of the signed report and written responses, if any, will be filed in the Academic Affairs office. 
    • Candidates who wish to appeal the 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 the award of tenure for that candidate.

    5.4.3.3.  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 tenure 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.
  • 5.5 Post-Tenure Review

    5.5.1      Policy Statement – Post-Tenure Review

    The university post-tenure review process follows the guidelines of the USG BOR Policy Manual. The purpose of post-tenure review is to examine, recognize, and enhance the performance of tenured faculty members. The post-tenure review is directed toward multi-year accomplishments and plans for professional development. It is retrospective as well as prospective and takes into account that faculty will have different emphases and assignments at various points in their careers. The post-tenure review is not a reconsideration of tenure, but rather a constructive five-year performance review which serves to highlight contributions and future opportunities as well as identify any deficiencies in performance and, in those cases, provide a plan for addressing concerns.

    With the exception of tenured administrators whose majority of duties are administrative (as determined by the provost), all tenured faculty will be reviewed. The five-year review cycle will start again after any successful review for promotion. Administrators who return to a full-time teaching load will have a post-tenure review in their fifth year following the return to full-time faculty status.

    5.5.2      Post-Tenure Review Structure

    Each faculty member’s post-tenure portfolio will be reviewed by two levels, the departmental level and the college post-tenure review committee (“Post-TRC”). Final decisions will be made by the dean of each college based upon review of these recommendations. The portfolio will be reviewed in the following order: departmental post-TRC, department head/coordinator, college post-TRC, and dean. The post-TRC letter written at each level above will be added to the faculty member’s portfolio for inclusion in the review by those completing the review at subsequent levels. All committee deliberations should be held in confidence. Small departments are authorized to include a faculty member from a related discipline on the departmental post-TRC to ensure an adequate review.

    At the departmental level, faculty will be issued a letter by both the department head/coordinator and a letter by the departmental post-TRC. The letters will provide an overview of reviewer’s (committee’s) assessment of the faculty member’s accomplishments during the previous five years and describe specific deficiencies, if any. The departmental post-TRC will make a judgment on whether the faculty member under review has met the expectations of the department and university. The department head/coordinator's letter will provide an overview of the previous five years' annual reports, pointing out specific accomplishments as well as deficiencies, if any.  The department head/coordinator will render a judgment on whether the faculty member's performance described in the annual reviews met the expectations of the department and university. If the departmental post-TRC or the department head/coordinator find deficiencies, they must be clearly delineated within their post-TRC letters. Each letter must make a clear recommendation for either a satisfactory or unsatisfactory evaluation.

    The college post-TRC will make a clear determination of satisfactory or unsatisfactory based on the information received from the candidate’s file and the previous post-TRC departmental reviews. If the college post-TRC finds deficiencies, they must be clearly delineated within their letter. To assist in their decision-making, post-TRC’s are empowered to request additional information or clarification, upon approval of the provost, from the department head/coordinator or faculty member. Such requests should typically be limited to documents that were incomplete or under review at the time of original submission.

    5.5.3      Criteria for Post-Tenure Review

    A determination of satisfactory requires that satisfactory performance has been sustained over the last five years, as documented in the faculty member’s annual reviews and portfolio. Faculty must illustrate continued effectiveness in teaching and student engagement; service to the institution, profession and community; and continued professional growth & development/scholarship/academic achievement, which may be broadly defined. Units with specific guidelines relative to their accreditation status may have additional criteria.

    If a faculty member fails to receive a satisfactory evaluation by the dean, the faculty member in consultation with the department head/coordinator and dean will formulate plans and timelines (“Development Plan”) to clearly resolve the issues identified in the post-TRC letters. [For appeals, see section 8.5.8]

    Failure by a faculty member to submit a portfolio for review after official notification of the requirement will result in an automatic unsatisfactory evaluation.  Official notification requires an email with timestamp on or before the deadline.

    5.5.4      Procedure for Post-Tenure Review - Please see the Master Calendar for P&T dates.

    Timeline

    • Official notification of post-tenure review shall be sent from the dean to the faculty member by the second Monday in September, and access to the online portfolio provided. Example: If the most recent positive promotion or tenure action occurred in August of 2010, the post-tenure notification would occur by the second Monday in September 2014.
    • The portfolio shall be completed by the faculty member by the first day of Spring semester. The composition of the post-TRC’s shall also be determined by this date.
    • The post-TRC letter from the department post-TRC shall be added to the online portfolio by the fourth Monday in February after the review, and the letter from the department head/coordinator shall be added to the online portfolio by the second Monday in April after the review.  Letters should be signed by all committee members (or, in extenuating circumstances, may be confirmed by separate signed letter). Signing the letter is an indication of participation in the review process and not an indication of concurrence with the recommendation.
    • The post-TRC letter from the college post-TRC shall be added to the portfolio by the fourth Monday in April after the review. Letters should be signed by all committee members (or, in extenuating circumstances, may be confirmed by separate signed letter).
    • A letter from the dean stating the outcome of the evaluation, either satisfactory or unsatisfactory, shall be sent to the faculty member by the fourth Monday in April after the review, and access to the portfolio provided to the faculty.

    5.5.5      Documentation

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

    • Cover Sheet
      • Name of college and department
      • Faculty Name
      • Degrees earned
      • Years, dates, and current rank and title in tenure-track position
    • Current CV
    • Description of activities that were not evaluated during most recent promotion or tenure decision but occurred prior the earliest annual review included in the current post tenure portfolio.
    • Letter from primary campus supervisor if other than department head/coordinator.
    • Summary of major accomplishments achieved during the years under review in the areas of teaching, research/creative/scholarly endeavors, and service to the University, College, department, profession, and community (up to a total of six pages) [For the purposes of post-tenure review, the years under review are the five most recent full calendar years prior to the evaluation (i.e., an evaluation conducted in spring 2015 will include accomplishments from CY2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014).]
    • Previous five annual performance evaluations – annual self-reports with department head’s/coordinator’s evaluations for years under consideration.
    • Complete sets of student evaluations with students’ comments from all the years under consideration.
    • Brief statement of projected plans for contributions over the next five years.

    5.5.6      Actions after Satisfactory Determination

    If a faculty member receives a satisfactory post-tenure review, the dean, in communication with the department head/coordinator, will recommend a salary enhancement.

    In exceptional cases, the college post-TRC (at their sole discretion) may opt to draft a letter indicating meritorious recognition. Declarations of meritorious performance must be restricted to those few individuals who, on a consistent basis, greatly exceed normal expectations in the execution of their professional responsibilities. This letter will remain in the faculty member’s personnel file and may be used in future applications for honors, awards, merit raises and support for innovative projects.

    5.5.7      Actions after Unsatisfactory Determination

    Upon an unsatisfactory review, the faculty member and department head/coordinator will create a development plan designed to remedy the specific deficiencies found in the review. If the faculty member submits an appeal as outlined below (Section 1.7), the creation of a development plan will be postponed until final disposition of the appeal. The development plan will include (i) clearly defined goals and outcomes, (ii) activities designed to achieve the outcomes, (iii) a timeline for the activities, (iv) a monitoring strategy that includes criteria for measuring progress, and (v) sources of support to assist the faculty member. The dean must approve the plan that will be signed by the faculty member, the department head, and the dean.

    The department head and dean are jointly responsible for providing necessary support to implement the plan. This support may include funding for specific activities, rearrangement of duties and commitments, or other necessary resources. The department head will include an assessment of progress on the development plan as a supplement to each year’s annual evaluation, and forward the report to the dean. The department head’s annual report should address any obstacles to successful completion of the plan and any additional resources required.

    After three years, the faculty member will undergo a review of the development plan. The faculty member may choose to undergo post-tenure review after only one or two years if the goals of the development plan are completed prior to the three-year period. The portfolio must include the original development plan, materials supporting the measurement of outcomes delineated in the plan, and any additional documents that the faculty member may wish to include.

    The college post-TRC, informed by evaluations from the department post-TRC and department head/coordinator, will determine whether the plan's goals were met, and forward its findings to the dean. If the goals were met, the dean will formally declare that the plan is complete. If the post-TRC finds that the goals were not met within the three years, the provost, with approval of the president, will determine the appropriate action, which could include include (i) university colleagues continuing to work with the individual toward completion of the plan, (ii) reassignment if it appears that the individual will not successfully complete the original plan, or (iii) other personnel actions in accordance with the University System of Georgia Academic Affairs Handbook Section 4.6.

    5.5.8      Appellate Process and Timeline

    5.5.8.1   Right to Appeal

    Any faculty member who receives an unsatisfactory review may appeal that determination. Faculty may not appeal based solely upon a difference in professional assessment of the portfolio. To exercise the right to appeal, faculty members must submit their written letters indicating the desire to appeal (the “Notice of Appeal”) to the provost within five business days of official notification of the dean’s post-tenure decision. Failure to submit a notice of appeal within five business days will constitute a waiver of the right to appeal. The provost, in his/her sole discretion, may grant an extension to this deadline.

    5.5.8.2   Process for Appeal

    After submitting a notice of appeal, a faculty member must prepare a written response to the post-TRC Letter (the “Appeal”) and submit it to the provost within an additional five business days (for a total of ten business days) after official notification of the dean's post-tenure decision.

    5.5.8.3   Review by the University Post-TRC

    The provost will form and charge a university post-TRC. The purpose of the university post-TRC is to recommend whether the recommendation of the dean should be upheld or overturned. The university post-TRC will review the portfolio, the post-TRC letters and the faculty member’s appeal. The university post-TRC may ask for additional documentation from the faculty member, upon approval of the Provost, for items that may have been incomplete or under review at the time of the original submission. After review and discussion, the university post-TRC will, by secret ballot and simple majority, judge the faculty member’s performance and forward their recommendation to the president of the university who will make the final determination.

    5.5.8.4 Review by President

    The president will review all post-TRC letters received by the faculty member and the submitted appeal. The president shall advise the faculty member, in writing, of the final disposition of the appeal by the end of the faculty member’s contract year. The president’s decision is final and binding and may not be appealed.

  • 5.6 Promotion -Lecturer to Senior Lecturer

    Minimum service must be six* years as a lecturer at the University of North Georgia for consideration of promotion to senior lecturer. (*BOR Policy http://www.usg.edu/policymanual/section8/policy/C245/ )

    5.6.1 Procedure for Promotion Review

    The purpose of these guidelines is to assist lecturer faculty members in presenting professional experiences and accomplishments for a promotion review and to recognize excellence in teaching and high impact practices in instruction

    5.6.2 Documentation

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

    5.6.2.1 Cover sheet providing the following information in order as applicable:

                    Name of college and department

                    Name of individual

                    Degrees earned (highest first)

                    Years, dates, and current rank and title

                    Area(s) of specialization within the discipline

                    Date of hire and total number of years at the university, including the current academic year

    5.6.2.2 Current CV and a summary of documentation of teaching excellence:

                    List all courses taught (prefix, number, title, semester) –

                                    Number of credit or contact hours taught per semester

                                    Number of course preparations

                                    Number of classes taught

                                    Total enrollment in all classes (after drop/add)

                    Efforts that promote outstanding teaching (list and prioritize using bullet points)

                    Involvement in teaching beyond the classroom

                    Response to student evaluations and trends in student comments including strengths and

                    weaknesses

    According to the Faculty Annual Report document, the following items are suggestions; however, this is not an exhaustive list and additional clarifications may be found in departmental guidelines http://ung.edu/academic-affairs/faculty-handbook/7-faculty-evaluation-and-grievance/7.1-annual-evaluation.php

                                                    Efforts that Promote Outstanding Teaching –

                                                    Incorporating techniques and methods and how you monitor their effectiveness

                                                    Trying a new approach

                                                    Evaluating techniques

                                                    Developing new materials

                                                    Participating in peer evaluations/observation

                                                    Incorporating a diversity of techniques to reach departmental and institutional

                                                    goals

                                                    Teaching special format classes like hybrids or on-line sections

                                                    Making significant course/curriculum improvements

                                                    Earning recognition/awards for distinguished teaching

                                                    Teaching a writing intensive course

                                                    Handling difficult or atypical class schedules effectively

                                                    Incorporating technology into courses

                                                    Incorporating multicultural issues

                                                    Using collaborative learning techniques

                                                    Making curriculum contemporary and relevant

                                                    Developing a new course

                                                    Reflecting on comments from colleagues and/or students

                                                    Participating in a learning community

                                                    Directing independent studies, theses, honors courses

                                                    Receiving grants/contracts related to instruction

                                                    One-time library teaching

                                    Teaching beyond the classroom - Criteria: (a) involves an activity associated with one’s

                                    area of academic expertise and (b) always has a strong and explicit connection to

                                    students –

                                                    Presenting a colloquium or workshop

                                                    Working with students in co-curricular activities

                                                    Sponsoring a club related to an academic discipline

                                                    Being a guest lecturer in a colleague’s class

                                                    Speaking or guest lecturing to UNG-related organization

                                                    Being involved in field trips

                                                    Participating in studies abroad (e.g., sponsor, student, and/or instructor)

                                                    Participating in volunteer activities

                                                    Supervising service learning activities

                                                    Developing curriculum

                                                    Incorporating undergraduate research in teaching

                                                    Incorporating service learning      

    5.6.2.3 Summary of statement of teaching (up to two pages)

                    5.6.2.3.a  Past achievements

                    5.6.2.3.b  Statement of professional teaching goals and progress towards those goals

                    5.6.2.3.c  Areas of special interest and competence

                    5.6.2.3.d  Future goals with an overview of means by which the goals will be accomplished

    5.6.2.4 Performance evaluations – annual self-reports and department head’s/coordinator’s evaluations for the past two years

    5.6.2.5 Letter from primary campus academic administrator if different than the department head/coordinator

    5.6.2.6 Student evaluation summaries and complete sets of evaluations with students’ comments from the past two years

    5.6.2.7 Peer letters – two from full-time faculty members in the department

    5.6.3 Process and Timeline

    5.6.3.1 Faculty members submit the documentation identified in Section 5.6.2 above to the department head/coordinator by the second Monday in September

    5.6.3.2 The department head/coordinator shall review the faculty member’s documentation

    5.6.3.3 The faculty member’s application for promotion to senior lecturer and the department head’s/ coordinator’s recommendation shall be submitted to the dean for action

    5.6.3.4 The dean shall prepare a signed report with his or her decision for each lecturer being considered for promotion to senior lecturer by the last Monday in February. Please see the Master Calendar for P&T dates.

    5.6.3.5 If applicable the faculty member shall submit an appeal of the dean’s decision to the Provost for a final decision.

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