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 22.214.171.124). 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.
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
- 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
- Service to the University System of Georgia
- Service to professional organizations
- 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
- 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
- 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
126.96.36.199. Process - Please see the Master Calendar for all P&T dates.
- Candidates submit the documentation identified in Section 188.8.131.52 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.
184.108.40.206. 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.