The following procedures are followed at the Committee on Faculty Status meetings scheduled for interview of a candidate and her/his Department Chair or Department Representative:
The faculty member under consideration shall have the option of personally presenting a statement to the Committee. The Faculty Status Committee shall not consider the failure of a member of the faculty to appear as prejudicial. Nor shall the Committee ask the involved Department Chair why the faculty member chose not to appear. (Faculty Handbook I:B.1.a) The Department Chair is required to attend.
If the candidate chooses to appear, s/he and the Department Chair/Representative wait outside the meeting room until the Committee has invited them in. The Dean makes a brief statement regarding the candidate and the committee briefly discusses the candidate before inviting him/her into the room. Note that the Dean has provided her/his recommendation in writing and a copy has been provided to all Committee members and was available for preview by the candidate. This allows the members time to share observations of material given them and to determine any specific information or questions to direct to the candidate and Department Chair/Representative.
The candidate and Department Chair are invited into the meeting. The candidate is offered the opportunity to speak on his/her own behalf regarding his/her qualifications for tenure or promotion.
Committee members then ask questions of the candidate. When finished, the candidate leaves the meeting but waits outside. Then the Department Chair speaks about the candidate and answers any questions directed to him/her by the Committee.
The Provost asks the Department Chair/Representative if there are departmental criteria for tenure (or promotion). The Provost asks the Department Chair/Representative to describe the procedure used to obtain the departmental recommendation.
If the Department Chair or Dean speaks negatively or provides information or takes a stance that differs from positions stated in the written material provided by the Department, the candidate is invited back into the meeting and is given the opportunity to comment. Note that the Department Chair has provided his/her recommendation in writing and a copy has been provided to all Committee members and was available for preview by the candidate.
When the Department Chair is finished, she/he leaves the meeting and the process starts from the beginning for the next candidate.
Procedures followed at the Committee on Faculty Status meetings scheduled for deliberations over candidate’s applications.
After the candidate’s/chair's interview, the Committee has discussion on the candidate's application. Each candidate’s materials and interview are thoroughly reviewed, starting with comments by the respective Dean.
After the completion of the discussion, a separate ballot is distributed for the candidate to each Committee member. The votes are counted and reported to the Committee.
Within the briefest interval possible, the Provost drafts two letters for each candidate. (Faculty Handbook, I: B.5) (Heading 2).
Letter to the candidate from the Provost on behalf of the Committee, informing the candidate of the general tenor (Heading 2) of the recommendation of the Committee. This letter provides information regarding whether the recommendation of the Committee was positive or negative.
Letter to the President with a recommendation and a statement of the evaluation containing all substantial reasons and evidence that the Committee considered in reaching its final recommendation. This is a consensus report; however, any member is allowed to submit a dissenting recommendations.
The letters are delivered and the activities of the Committee related to these candidates are thereby complete, unless the President refers the case back to the Committee for further action.
There is an appeal process that is described in the Faculty Handbook (I: C).