Typically, candidates for tenure and promotion are reviewed in the fall, and candidates for reappointment are reviewed in the spring. However, a faculty member hired with a start date in January may be reviewed for reappointment in the fall or for tenure and promotion in the spring if that semester is the mandatory final semester for review. All mandatory reviews are scheduled as follows:
Academic Affairs distributes a description of the RTP process and a calendar of the process to all faculty at the beginning of the fall semester. Academic Affairs convenes and charges the Committee on Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion (CRTP) during the first three weeks of the fall semester.
External reviews of candidates for tenure and/or promotion
Departments have the option whether or not to require external reviews of candidates for tenure and/or promotion. Assessments of candidates, solicited by the department from reviewers who are external to UNCW, can be a valuable aid to the department's senior faculty and others as they make their recommendations. External reviews may be especially useful in cases where candidates have teaching and research interests that are atypical within the department. In its deliberations the senior faculty shall consider such reviews as one among many forms of documentation providing information on the candidacy. In cases where external reviews are not required, the absence of such reviews shall not be considered a detriment in any way to the candidacy.
Each department shall establish a formal policy on external reviews, approved by the department and the appropriate dean, stating (1) whether the department shall seek external reviews in all cases for tenure and promotion to associate professor and (2) whether it shall seek external reviews in all cases for promotion to professor. Departments that do not require external reviews in all such cases shall establish a procedure whereby (1) the department's senior faculty may, by majority vote, request external reviews in individual cases and (2) the candidate may request departmental solicitation of external reviews.
The department policy shall also establish explicit and consistent guidelines for the solicitation and use of external reviews that include the following:
External reviews, where used, shall be solicited by the department. The anonymity of reviewers is essential in assuring candid reviews, and reviewers shall be asked to submit a cover letter identifying themselves, their affiliation, and any personal or professional connection to the candidate. Reviews are to be submitted as attachments to the cover letter and should contain no information identifying the reviewers. Senior faculty and others making decisions on the candidacy shall have access to both the reviewers' identities and evaluations, but only the content of the reviews shall be made available to the candidate.
Except in the case of an RTP application of a department chairperson or of Randall Library, recommendations for reappointment, tenure, or promotion are initiated by the department chairperson after consultation with the assembled senior faculty of the department involved. Procedures vary across departments and schools, but in each case, the chairperson, prior to writing an evaluation, must assemble, consult with, and take an advisory vote of the senior faculty. Along with writing a detailed evaluation of the candidate, the chairperson must report the numerical results of the vote and state the chairperson's recommendation for or against the RTP action. At least five business days prior to forwarding the candidate's dossier to the dean, the chairperson must notify the senior faculty, by either written or electronic means, whether the recommendation is for or against the action. If a majority of the department's senior faculty disagree with the recommendation of the chairperson, they have the option to submit a separate elaborated recommendation. Only one such recommendation from senior faculty may be submitted, and it must be signed by a majority of the department's senior faculty. The chairperson's recommendation and a separate senior-faculty recommendation, if any, are forwarded as part of the faculty member's RTP dossier.
Neither the faculty member nor any person related to or having a romantic relationship with the faculty member may deliberate or recommend on an RTP action. Other persons may also recuse themselves if they believe their relationship with the faculty member prevents them from fair and objective consideration of the application.
The faculty member's RTP dossier consists of the application, supporting documentation, and the recommendations of the deliberative entities. Dossiers are evaluated and recommendations made in the following sequence: the faculty member's chairperson; the appropriate dean; the university-wide faculty Committee on Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion (CRTP); the Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs; the Chancellor; and the Board of Trustees. Prior to evaluation by the CRTP, the dean transmits all materials to Academic Affairs, which is responsible for ascertaining that the applications are complete, that the required format has been used, and that dossiers are present for all faculty mandated for review. Academic Affairs then transmits copies of the dossiers to the CRTP.
All recommendations, whether positive or negative, are forwarded to the next deliberative entity. However, if the majority vote of the senior faculty and the recommendations of both the chairperson and the dean are all negative, the process stops and the faculty member's RTP application is denied. This decision is reported to subsequent deliberative entities, but the application does not go forward. All other recommendations, whether positive or negative, are forwarded to the next deliberative entity. The faculty member may withdraw the application at any stage of the process. The department chairperson and dean must elaborate the reasons for their recommendations, but subsequent deliberative entities may forward their recommendations with or without elaboration, except that any negative recommendation that follows a positive recommendation at the previous level must be elaborated. The department chairperson, the dean, the chairperson of the Faculty Committee on Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion, and the Provost and Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs shall each transmit written notification of their recommendations to the faculty member within ten business days of the recommendation. All written notifications and recommendations become part of the candidate's RTP dossier. Authors of such communications must insert them into the candidate's dossier before forwarding it to the next deliberative entity.
Process for Randall Library faculty promotion applications
Applications for promotion of a tenured faculty member of Randall Library follow the same process as for other faculty except that recommendations are initiated by a Randall Library promotion committee, which shall consist of the tenured faculty of Randall Library and such other senior assistant librarians and associate librarians as the university librarian shall appoint. The numerical results of a vote of the Randall Library promotion committee must be reported along with its recommendation, whether positive or negative, to the university librarian. If a majority of the Randall Library promotion committee disagrees with the recommendation of the university librarian, they have the option to submit a separate elaborated recommendation to the university-wide faculty committee on Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion (CRTP). However, if the majority vote of the Randall Library promotion committee and the recommendation of the university librarian are both negative, the process stops and the faculty member's promotion application is denied.
Process for Cameron School of Business faculty RTP applications
Applications for reappointment, tenure, or promotion of a faculty member of the Cameron School of Business follow the same process as for other faculty except that at the school level the dean, prior to writing an evaluation, must assemble, consult with, and take an advisory vote of the committee of senior Cameron faculty elected by tenured Cameron faculty. The dean shall report the numerical results of any vote. If a majority of the school’s committee disagrees with the recommendation of the dean, they have the option to submit a separate elaborated recommendation to the university-wide faculty committee on Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion (CRTP). The school will establish and publish a process to assure completion of this additional step within the time frame set for submission to the CRTP.
Process for department chairperson RTP applications
Applications for tenure or promotion of a department chairperson follow the same process as for other faculty except that recommendations are initiated by the chairperson's dean after consultation with the assembled senior faculty of the department involved. The dean must report the numerical results of the senior-faculty vote along with the dean's recommendation. A majority of the department's senior faculty may, at their option, submit a separate elaborated recommendation, according to the procedure stated above. Recommendations, whether positive or negative, then follow the same route as for other faculty. However, if the majority vote of the senior faculty and the recommendation of the dean are both negative, the process stops and the chairperson's RTP application is denied.
Following recommendations by the Provost and the Chancellor, all recommendations for reappointment, tenure, or promotion are forwarded to the Board of Trustees for final action. The Chancellor transmits written notification of his or her recommendation to the faculty member within ten business days. The Provost provides the faculty member with timely written notification of the final action.