Promotion and Tenure Procedures, Department of Anthropology

This document explains the Anthropology Department’s guidelines for retention, promotion, and tenure.  It is based on and supplements the criteria and procedures given in the Faculty Senate Rules and Regulations (FSRR) Article VI, which state “The award of tenure and/or promotion in rank are among the most important and far-reaching decisions made by the University because an excellent faculty is an essential component of any outstanding institution of higher learning”.  This document explains how ‘excellence’ is to be evaluated for faculty in Anthropology. It is in accordance and fully compliant with the standards and procedures of the KU Faculty Senate Rules and Regulations (FSRR) Article VI. 

Anthropology is an unusually broad field, encompassing research in the humanities, and the social and natural sciences.  For this reason, measures used to evaluate excellence will not be equally appropriate in all cases.  While all candidates are expected to reach the same high standards, the Department expects to show some flexibility in the weight given to the different criteria by which excellence is measured.

Promotion and tenure require a) a sustained record of high-quality research and scholarship, b) effectiveness in teaching, and c) evidence of professional and institutional service.  The ranking of these criteria is more flexible in cases for promotion than in cases for tenure.  In no case, however, can excellence in service compensate for substandard performance in research or teaching. As the department does not include any non-teaching faculty, no professional performance other than teaching, research, and service will be considered for promotion and tenure, as per FSRR 6.2.2.4. 

In addition, we expect faculty members to participate as active and congenial colleagues both in the department and in the larger academic community.  We also expect faculty to be committed to the academic and ethical values of the university.

General Procedures Leading up to Promotion & Tenure Review

Early in a new tenure-track faculty member’s probationary period, the Department Chair will appoint a tenured faculty member to serve as formal mentor for the candidate.  That mentor will work with the candidate to create a plan, based on the criteria laid out in this document, to assist the faculty member in the development of an appropriate dossier of teaching, research, and service, as per FSRR 6.4.1.  The Department uses formal reviews to assess each faculty member’s progress.  Formal reviews of untenured tenure-track faculty typically take place in the third (Progress Toward Tenure Review, PTTR) and sixth (mandatory tenure review) years after initial appointment.  Exceptions involve requests for early review for tenure, the timing of which may vary depending on the individual candidate’s record. Although the record and results of the PTTR cannot be included in, or used to influence, the mandatory tenure review process, documents and information related to the PTTR can be included in the P&T file, as per FSSR 6.4.2.  

Prior to tenure, the department may decide not to reappoint the faculty member, as per FSRR 6.4.3.  In such a case, the Department Chair will forward the recommendation for non-reappointment to the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts & Sciences, who will then forward it to the Provost.  The Provost will then notify the faculty member in writing of the recommendation, before forwarding it to the Chancellor.  Upon notification, the faculty member will be given the right to appeal the decision.  

Formal review procedures are detailed below.

Promotion & Tenure Review

Consideration and evaluation of a faculty member’s record is a confidential personnel matter, as per FSRR 6.1.3. The record compiled for purposes of evaluation and all recommendations made pursuant to the process should be treated accordingly. Only the Chancellor’s final decision is to be made public. 

The department’s Personnel Committee (PC) Chair serves as the department’s Promotion and Tenure (P&T) Chair. The Department Chair starts the P&T process by consulting with the P&T Chair as well as the candidate and their formal faculty mentor to select three members of the P&T Committee to serve on a sub-committee to prepare reports on the candidate’s research, teaching, and service, with the Sub-Committee Chair preparing the research report.  If multiple cases are being considered simultaneously, several such sub-committees will be formed, as many as are needed in any given year.  The P&T Chair and Sub-Committee members must be eligible to vote on the candidate’s promotion and/or tenure.  No member of the Departmental P&T Committee will serve on more than one sub-committee per year.  The Departmental P&T Committee for a particular candidate consists of all faculty members eligible to vote on the candidate’s promotion and/or tenure. Voting eligibility includes all regular faculty at or above the rank for which the candidate is being reviewed for promotion. Only such members of the Departmental P&T Committee and its Chair participate in and observe its deliberations, or vote on any recommendation concerning promotion and tenure. In cases where a faculty member who is a spouse/partner of an individual under consideration for tenure and/or promotion, that member will recuse themselves from the review (as per FSRR 6.1.4.3). If the candidate perceives any conflict of interest among the members of the Departmental P&T Committee, they can request, by petition, to have that member recuse themselves. If that member refuses to recuse, then a decision about the recusal will be made by a majority of the other committee members (as per FSRR 6.1.4.4). The Department Chair or any P&T Committee member who is on a College or University committee on promotion & tenure will recuse themselves from any cases submitted from the Department. 

The candidate being reviewed is responsible for providing a Candidate Verification Form and the supporting materials required by the Provost’s office.  Candidates are encouraged to provide the optional materials, as well, particularly as they relate to research trajectory, productivity, improvements to teaching and student learning via course design changes, and service beyond the institution.

Candidates are informed of the Department’s evaluations through reports on research, teaching and service from the P&T Committee (drafted by the Sub-Committee members and vetted by the full P&T Committee), a summary committee report from the P&T Chair, and an independent review by the Department Chair.

The granting of tenure normally carries with it promotion to Associate Professor.  The timing of promotion to Professor is flexible, but in general it is expected that at time of promotion, the Associate Professor will have accomplished at least as much as a successful candidate for tenure (e.g., publishing a second book or a second set of papers) and will have achieved national and/or international recognition in their field.

For a review for promotion and/or tenure, the candidate’s file shall consist of the following:

• A statement by the candidate describing research, teaching and service activities.
• A current CV (provided by the candidate).
• Copies of all publications (provided by the candidate).
• Outside letters of evaluation (solicited by the Department Chair; see details in the section on ‘Research’ below).
• Evidence of teaching effectiveness.
• Any additional material that the candidate and P&T Committee deem appropriate.

After the file is complete, it is made available to all members of the departmental P&T Committee at least 14 days prior to the scheduled departmental P&T Committee meeting.  All members of the committee are expected to review the file prior to the meeting.  The P&T Sub-Committee prepares reports summarizing the research, teaching, and service records. The full P&T Committee then meets to discuss and vote on the case for promotion and/or tenure.  The Department Chair may be invited to attend the departmental P&T meeting to respond to questions directed to the Chair, but does not vote. 

Following the full meeting of the departmental P&T Committee, the P&T Chair produces a report of the discussion of the merits of the candidate’s case for promotion and/or tenure and records the vote in this report.  This report will be reviewed by the full committee for accuracy.  Together with a separate evaluative letter prepared by the Department Chair, the P&T reports and post-meeting report by the P&T Chair are forwarded to the candidate, within one business day of the completion of the Department Chair’s report.

If the candidate disagrees with any part of the department’s P&T report, or the Chair’s letter, the candidate has the opportunity to provide a written response prior to the dossier being forwarded to the College.  If the candidate elects to provide a response, they must notify the P&T Chair and Department Chair within three business days of the date of the Chair’s letter, and then must submit their written response by the fifth day.  The candidate’s response becomes part of the dossier submitted to the College.

Joint Appointments. In situations where the Anthropology Department is the primary unit in a joint appointment, it is responsible for the administration of the P&T process, which is conducted in consultation with the secondary unit. The candidate holding the joint appointment prepares only one set of promotion and tenure materials, presenting their records of research, teaching, and service to the Department, which is then responsible for sharing the materials, and external evaluation letters, with the other unit. The internal departmental P&T process proceeds as outlined in this document. The additional evaluation in the secondary unit is carried out and submitted independently to the CLAS Dean’s Office or other designated body for intermediate review.  

Promotion and Tenure Standards

Research.  The candidate’s research should be of high quality, showing originality, depth, and impact.  To evaluate research quality, the departmental P&T Committee shall evaluate the following:

• Letters of reference from experts in the field outside the department. At least six letters shall be solicited, three from a list of reviewers suggested by departmental faculty and three from a list provided by the candidate.  The list of outside reviewers is prepared by the Department Chair and P&T Chair in consultation with knowledgeable faculty.  Referees should be respected professionals above the candidate’s current rank and well-known in the candidate’s areas of research.  In addition to the letters themselves, the candidate’s file shall include CVs for all referees and a brief explanation, prepared by the P&T Chair, of why they were chosen.
• Number of citations per year in the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) and, as appropriate, the Science Citation Index (SCI).  Candidates whose areas of research are not well represented in the SSCI or SCI may suggest other indices or avenues of assessing research productivity and impact, as appropriate.  Candidates for tenure and promotion are expected to be visible in the citation indices, and their work should show evidence of continued impact.
• Published reviews (if any) of the candidate’s work.
• Quality of the candidate’s publication outlets.
• Titles, sources, and amounts of all research grants and fellowships.
• Additional relevant information from the candidate’s CV such as a) appointments to editorial boards and grant review panels, b) awards and honors in recognition of the candidate’s scholarship, and c) invited lectures and conference participation.

Outside letters will always be weighted heavily, but the importance given to the other criteria will depend on the candidate’s strengths and area of expertise.

• Teaching. The candidate should be an effective teacher.  This includes being receptive to students and their ideas, fair in evaluating student work, clear and well-organized in conveying information, and knowledgeable about recent developments in the field.  An effective teacher will also mentor students and guide them toward successful completion of their degrees.  To assess teaching effectiveness, the departmental P&T Committee shall evaluate the following:
• Course evaluations.  The P&T Chair and Departmental administrator will include in the file the candidate’s average scores for all courses taught, together with the most relevant reference data.
• Opinions of colleagues who have had an opportunity to observe the candidate’s teaching (for example, from team-teaching, guest lecturing, class visits, etc.). 
• Course materials and other teaching products.
• Number and productivity of graduate advisees.
• Any other information that may be relevant in a particular candidate’s case, such as a) curriculum development grants, b) teaching awards and honors, c) participation in University and community activities concerning teaching, d) scholarly writing on teaching, etc.

The P&T Committee should augment this information with a formal peer review of teaching.  In this case, the P&T Chair shall appoint two tenured faculty members, at least one of whom is outside the department, to observe the candidate’s teaching and prepare brief reports on their observations. To facilitate accumulation of peer teaching evaluations, and to assure adherence to promotion and tenure timelines, each untenured faculty member should receive one peer teaching evaluation per year prior to tenure review, and each tenured faculty member who has not yet been promoted to full professor should receive such peer teaching evaluations biannually.

The importance given to the different criteria may vary depending on the candidate’s strengths; teaching evaluations will normally be weighted heavily, but excellence in teaching can also be demonstrated in other ways, for example by significant curricular or pedagogical innovations.  The departmental P&T report should assess the depth and quality of information provided by the course reviews, faculty reports of class visits, and other data available.

Service. Service activities include a) professional service and b) institutional service.  Professional service refers primarily to service to the profession itself but may also include any service to the community that draws on the candidate’s professional experience and expertise.  Institutional service includes participation in the governance of the Department, College, and University.  Some of the ways in which excellence in service may be demonstrated include the following, in no particular order:

Professional Service:

• Leadership positions in professional associations.
• Service on editorial boards and grant review committees.
• Refereeing of books, articles, and grant proposals.
• Program participation in professional associations.
• Advising governmental and non-governmental agencies.
• Community educational contributions, lectures, etc.
• Participation in community projects and studies.

Institutional Service:

• Service on committees, task forces, special assignments, etc.
• Elected positions.
• Chairing committees.
• Acting as university representative to other universities, organizations, or governmental agencies.

CONTACT: