![]() |
|||
Home | Governance | Appointments | Responsibilities | Tenure & Promotion | Leaves | Benefits | Policies | |||
Chapter 4 |
Faculty Committee on Tenure and PromotionThe
Committee
on Tenure and Promotion is composed of six tenured
members of the Faculty of Arts, Sciences and Engineering elected by
the faculty, and the provost ex officio without vote.
Prior to taking a final vote, T&P meets with members of the
administration to discuss the merits of the case. When the
committee has completed its deliberations, the chair communicates
its recommendations to the school dean and to the candidate and
his/her chair. Then the deans of the School of Arts and Sciences or
the dean of the School of Engineering, in conjunction with the
provost, consider the matter and send a recommendation to the
Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees. Ordinarily the
Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees considers tenure
and promotion matters at the spring meeting, just prior to
Commencement. The Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of
Trustees acts, and only then is tenure officially conferred. This
action is reported by the school dean and to the chair of the
candidate's department, who communicates it to the candidate. Statement 1 (1970; Revised 1989)The criteria for awards of tenure and/or promotion are in general
terms familiar to all: quality of mind, creativity, scholarship,
teaching effectiveness, and contributions to the university and the
profession. The committee looks for evidence of excellence in all of
these areas in every candidate, but does not apply a rigid formula. Statement 11, Application and Review Procedures for Tenure and PromotionReview Statement 11, which changes regularly > Statement 12 (March 30, 2005; Revised 2013)The general criteria for the award of tenure and promotion at Tufts University have remained essentially unchanged since they were first articulated in Statement 1 (1970, revised 1986 and 1989). Nevertheless the Tenure & Promotion Committee has periodically found it useful to clarify these criteria, first by publishing Statement 12 in 2005 and subsequently revising it in 2013. The Committee reiterates that recommendations for tenure and for promotion are based on a comprehensive evaluation of each candidate's scholarship, teaching, and service. We emphasize that there is no universally applicable standard of scholarly productivity that entitles a candidate to a positive recommendation. Because expectations regarding forms of scholarly output (e.g. books, journal articles, translations, artistic works) vary among the disciplines, the departmental statement should clarify such expectations. In addition to scholarship, serious consideration is also given to teaching and service. To evaluate teaching, the Committee examines course evaluations and letters from mentees. Comparisons of the candidate's course evaluation scores with averages from other faculty teaching the same or similar courses are important. The Committee also welcomes additional evidence of enthusiasm for and innovation in teaching. In evaluating service, the Committee considers participation in the academic community at the departmental, university and professional levels. Tenure & Promotion to Associate ProfessorIn evaluating scholarship for tenure cases, the Committee looks for evidence of significant scholarly accomplishments coupled with the clear promise of continued productivity. The general criteria used to evaluate tenure cases are as follows:
Promotion to Full ProfessorThe typical interval before candidates would put themselves forward for promotion to full professor is six years post-tenure. In the belief that the strength of a university is based on the intellectual achievements of its faculty, promotion will be based primarily on evidence of scholarly contributions and stature within the candidate's field. However, recommendations for promotion are based on a comprehensive evaluation of the candidate's scholarship, teaching, and service, and the Committee expects demonstrable contributions in all three areas. The general criteria used to evaluate promotion cases are as follows:
|
||
©2018 Tufts University. All rights reserved. Site designed & maintained by Tufts Technology Services (TTS). |