II. Procedures

The Provost will determine specific timelines annually in accordance with the date of presentation to the Board of Trustees. Before the start of the PTR cycle, the Provost will publish the timelines for that year and will make available the PTR form and guidelines approved by the University Senate.

  1. It is the responsibility of the faculty member wishing to be considered for promotion, tenure, and/or reappointment to complete the PTR form and submit this to the Department Head along with any supporting documentation he or she chooses to include or as may be required by the school/college and departmental procedures. These documents become the faculty member’s dossier.  The faculty member’s PTR File consists of his or her dossier plus all other written materials accumulated as part of the PTR process. Supplemental information can be added to the PTR File by the faculty member at any time. Such information must be dated. No materials may be removed from a PTR File.
  2. The faculty member may request withdrawal from consideration for promotion in writing at any stage in the process.
  3. The Departmental PTR Advisory Committee shall receive from the Department Head the dossiers of all faculty members to be considered for promotion, tenure and/or reappointment.
  4. The Department Head shall collect pertinent information from such sources as the Dean of the Graduate School, Directors of regional campuses, Directors of centers and institutes, and other qualified individuals, and shall make this information available to the Departmental PTR Advisory Committee.
  5. As part of its review, the Departmental PTR Advisory Committee (the Committee) shall provide to the faculty member and to members of the Department who so desire an opportunity either to appear before the Committee or to submit written statements to the Committee.
  6. The Committee, after its review, shall provide the faculty member with an opportunity to appear in person to discuss substantive negative findings.
  7. The Committee shall report its recommendations and appraisals with supporting evidence in writing to the Department Head. If the Committee’s recommendation is not unanimous, its report shall include the dissenting opinions with supporting data. Rather than using words such as “unanimously” or “by majority,” votes should be indicated numerically along with a key in the form: 6-1-2-1 (Yes, No, Abstain, Absent).
  8. The Department Head, after his or her review, shall provide the faculty member with an opportunity to appear in person to discuss substantive negative findings.
  9. The Department Head shall discuss his or her recommendation with the Committee.
  10. The Department Head shall inform the faculty member of the recommendations by the Department Head and by the Committee, including the substance of any dissenting opinions. Reasons for a negative recommendation shall be in writing if either the Department Head or the faculty member so wishes.
  11. The Department Head shall transmit to the Dean in writing his or her recommendations for promotion, tenure and/or reappointment, together with those of the Committee, the supporting data, and dissenting opinions. When neither the Committee nor the Head recommends promotion, no recommendation need be transmitted to the Dean unless specifically requested by the faculty member or the Dean.
  12. If either the Department Head or the Committee makes a negative recommendation to the Dean, the faculty member may submit to the Dean a written statement presenting his or her case for consideration by the Dean and the Dean’s Advisory Council. The faculty member must submit this statement to the Dean within one week after being informed in writing of the recommendation by the Department Head.
  13. The Dean’s Advisory Council (the Council) shall receive from the Dean and review the recommendations and supporting materials received from the Department Head.
  14. The Council shall provide an opportunity for the faculty member to appear in person to discuss any substantive negative findings.
  15. The final recommendation of the Council will be forwarded in writing to the Dean. Rather than using words such as “unanimously” or “by majority,” votes should be indicated numerically along with a key in the form: 6-1-2-1 (Yes, No, Abstain, Absent).
  16. If, after review, the Dean is inclined toward a negative finding, he or she shall provide an opportunity for the faculty member to appear in person to discuss any substantive negative findings within a reasonable timeframe.
  17. If the Dean anticipates that he or she may be making a recommendation contrary to that of the Department Head, the Dean shall provide an opportunity for the Head and the Departmental PTR Advisory Committee to review and supplement their original recommendations.
  18. The Dean shall inform the Department Head and the faculty member of the recommendations by the Dean’ Advisory Council and the Dean. If either the faculty member or the Dean so wishes, reasons for a negative recommendation shall be in writing.
  19. The Dean shall transmit to the Provost in writing his or her recommendations and those of the Dean’s Advisory Council, the Department Head, and the Departmental PTR Advisory Committee, together with any dissenting opinions. When recommendations differ, the Dean must include a statement explaining his or her recommendation.
  20. Positive recommendations by the Dean for faculty in their first and second year of full, six-year probationary appointments will be forwarded to the Board of Trustees with no further review.
  21. The Provost, Dean, and Department Head shall meet to review any PTR cases selected by the Provost.  These may include those where there has been a lack of unanimity or in which the Provost’s recommendation may differ from that of the Dean or Department Head. In these cases, opportunity shall be provided to the Department Head and Dean to review and supplement the original recommendation.
  22. The Provost, after his or her review, shall provide the faculty member with an opportunity to appear in person to discuss substantive negative findings and ask if the faculty member wants the case referred to the Faculty Review Board.
  23. The Provost shall refer to the Faculty Review Board for its consideration:
    • those cases whose referral was requested by a faculty member or Department Head;
    • those cases where following a discussion the Provost’s recommendations still differs from that of a Dean;
    • other cases that the Provost wishes to refer.
  24. The Faculty Review Board shall provide the faculty member with an opportunity to discuss the case. The Faculty Review Board shall discuss each case with the Provost.
  25. For each case, the Faculty Review Board shall submit a written recommendation to the Provost and shall inform the faculty member in writing of its recommendation, together with reasons for it.
  26. If the Provost makes a negative recommendation, the reasons shall be in writing if the faculty member so requests.
  27. The Provost shall make recommendations to the President for the granting of promotion and/or tenure by the Board of Trustees no later than the April meeting of the Board. In the case of reappointment, action will be taken by the President, who will inform the Board of Trustees of his or her decisions (per the Laws and By-Laws of the University of Connecticut, Article II).
  28. Per the Laws and By-Laws of the University of Connecticut, Article XIV, at the end of the sequence of peer reviews (including the Faculty Review Board),  a faculty member may appeal a negative decision by the Provost to the Committee of Three.

Updated: October 2011