APPENDIX 1
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH
TENURE RECOMMENDING
 AND
COMPETENCY REVIEW COMMITTEE

[Rev. April 2003]
 

1.       Composition.

1.1.    The composition of the competency review committee will be the same as that of the tenure recommending committee, except that no tenured member may serve on the committee when his/her competency is under review.

1.2.    The department chair acts as committee chair (without vote),  except when his/her tenure status is under consideration, in which case the department vice chair acts as committee chair.

1.3.    The voting members of the committee will consist of four tenured members of the department, one untenured member of the department occupying a tenure-track position, one faculty member from a College of Letters, Arts, and Social Sciences department other than English, one graduate student in English, and one undergraduate senior English major.

1.3.1. The chair will prepare a ballot containing the names of all tenured members of the department except that of the chair himself/herself.  Each tenured member will indicate his/her four preferences by ranking them on the basis of points: 4 points for his/her first preference, 3 for second, 2 for third, 1 for fourth.  The four candidates receiving the most points will be elected.

1.3.2. The chair will prepare a ballot containing the names of all untenured members of the department, except those being considered for tenure.  Each untenured faculty member will vote for one candidate.  Election will be by majority vote.  If no one receives a majority on the first balloting, a run-off election between the two top candidates will be held.

1.3.3. The tenured faculty will nominate three non-English department CLA&SS faculty members.  The dean of the college will select one of these three to serve on the committee.

1.3.4. The chair will prepare a ballot containing the names of all full-time graduate students.  Each full-time graduate student will indicate his/her three preferences by ranking them on the basis of points: 3 points for his/her first preference, 2 for his/her second, 1 for his/her third.  The names of the graduate students receiving the most points will be submitted to the tenured faculty who will elect one of these three candidates to serve on the committee.

1.3.5. The undergraduate English major organization will nominate three senior undergraduate English majors whose names will be submitted to the tenured faculty.  The tenured faculty will elect one of these three candidates to serve on the committee.

1.4.    In the case that the department's faculty representative to the CLA&SS tenure and promotion committee is not among those elected to the tenure recommending committee, he or she will serve on that committee ex officio, without vote.

2.       Procedures for Tenure Recommending Committee.

2.1.    The departmental chair will prepare a list of persons to be evaluated for tenure, initiate procedures to select committee members, assemble the committee, and present to the committee all information relative to the candidate's teaching, research, and service record, including summary sheets of student evaluations.  The candidate may present additional, appropriate material which he/she wishes the committee to consider.

2.2.    Each member of the committee submits his/her recommendation, with a statement of supporting reasons, to the chair (except when the departmental chair is being reviewed, in which case the individual recommendations are sent directly to the dean, who prepares a summary of the results).

2.3.    Before making his/her final recommendation, the chair may consult other tenured or untenured members of the department (when the departmental chair is being reviewed, the dean may consult other tenured or untenured members of the department).

2.4.    The chair submits his/her recommendation to the dean, along with a summary of the committee's recommendations and findings.

3.       Procedures for Competency Review Committee.

3.1.    The function of the review is to establish whether the faculty member is able or clearly unable or unwilling to meet his/her teaching, research, and service obligations.

3.2.    The departmental chair prepares a list of persons to be reviewed, initiates procedures to select committee members, assembles the committee, and presents to the committee all information relative to the reviewee's teaching, research, and service record, including summary sheets of student evaluations.  The reviewee may present additional material which he/she wishes the committee to consider.

3.3.    Each member of the committee submits his/her recommendation, with a statement of supporting reasons, to the chair.  The deliberations of the committee and the votes of individual committee members are kept confidential, but the summary vote and the chair's recommendation are not.

3.4.    In the initial stages of review, the committee will establish whether there is a serious competency problem.  This process will be carried out by means of examining material relating to the faculty member's primary and secondary assignments, including summary sheets of student evaluations, annual ratings by the department chair and college dean, and any other material deemed relevant.  The committee must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that a problem exists if the review is to proceed further.  The review will terminate at this stage if six or more committee members so vote, and the committee recommendation, along with a statement of the chair's concurrence or non-concurrence, will be forwarded to the dean of the college.

3.5.    If the initial review demonstrates that a serious problem exists, a more exhaustive review will be conducted.

3.5.1. The criteria by which the review will be guided are found in "Department of English:  Tenure Criteria" (2003).

3.5.2. The committee will make reasonable efforts to substantiate or refute charges against the reviewee and may call witnesses from both within and outside the university.

3.5.3. The reviewee will be entitled to hear and answer charges brought against him/her, and to provide evidence including witnesses which he/she deems appropriate in establishing his/her competence.

3.5.4. A two-thirds vote of the committee will be necessary for a declaration of clear and convincing incompetence.  The committee recommendation and that of the chair will be forwarded to the dean of the college.