2.8 Procedures for Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure

2.8.1 General Procedures

Reappointment, promotion, and tenure recommendations are based upon an evaluation of performance over the faculty member's total period of service at George Mason University. Scholarly achievements prior to joining the George Mason University faculty weigh less heavily in these evaluations, but are also considered. These evaluations differ from the annual review in their stress on lasting contributions, consistency of performance, and versatility. The decisions made at each level will be promptly communicated to the candidate, to the appropriate administrators, including department chairs, and to the chairs of faculty committees involved in the process.

2.8.2 Procedures for Reappointment

Decisions for reappointment of probationary faculty, while less critical than decisions for promotion and tenure, should be very carefully considered. The decision to recommend reappointment is reached as follows:

1. Faculty members who hold appointments in academic departments are evaluated by the departmental faculty. The evaluation must include a vote by the tenured members of the department. The chair forwards the recommendation of the department, including a report of the division of the vote by the tenured faculty, to the appropriate dean along with an endorsement or separate recommendation, and sends copies to the candidate and to the members of the department who made the recommendation. After conferring with the chair, the dean notifies the candidate of his/her recommendation to the Provost.

   Faculty members who hold appointments in academic units without departments are evaluated by a faculty evaluation committee of the unit to which they are appointed. The evaluation must include a vote by the tenured members of the unit. The chair of the faculty evaluation committee sends the recommendation, including a report of the division of the vote by the tenured faculty, to the dean or institute director, and sends copies to the candidate and to the members of the unit's faculty who made the recommendation. The dean or institute director notifies the candidate of the faculty committee's recommendation and of his/her recommendation to the Provost.

2. After reviewing the case, the Provost makes a recommendation to the President. If the President decides to recommend non-reappointment, the President will notify the faculty member by letter and will ascertain that the faculty member receives the communication promptly. If the President decides in favor of reappointment, those cases requiring Board action are submitted to the Board of Visitors.

2.8.3 Procedures for Non-Reappointment

Individuals on probationary appointments who are not to be reappointed will be notified in writing by the President according to the following standards:

1. On or before March 1 of the first academic year of full-time service, if the appointment expires at the end of the year; or, if a one-year appointment terminates during an academic year, at least three months in advance of its termination.

2. On or before December 15 of the second academic year of full-time service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if an initial two-year appointment terminates during an academic year, at least six months in advance of its termination.

3. At least twelve months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years of full-time service in the institution.

4. A probationary faculty member in the sixth year of service will be notified in writing on or before July 1 by the President of a decision not to recommend for tenure. A faculty member denied tenure in the sixth year of probationary service, or who declines to be considered for tenure in the sixth year, will be entitled to a contract for one additional academic year.

If a faculty member fails to be reappointed, the appeal procedure outlined in Section 2.9 may be used.

If the University is responsible for a failure to meet the deadlines indicated in parts (1), (2), (3), and (4) of this section, the faculty member will be issued a contract for one more semester. The faculty must address a written request to the Provost for this additional contract within fifteen days of receipt of the notice of non-reappointment or non-reelection. Except under these circumstances, a probationary faculty member may not serve more than seven consecutive years on a probationary contract.

2.8.4 Procedures for Promotion and Tenure

Candidacy for tenure or promotion is normally initiated by the local unit administrator, with the faculty member's concurrence. Self-nomination is also permitted. Dossiers are to be prepared in accordance with the format provided by the collegiate dean or institute director. Except for external references, the candidate is responsible for the content of the dossier. The local unit administrator is responsible for ensuring that items in the candidate's dossier not under the candidate's control are completed in a timely manner.

The prescribed procedure for considering promotion and tenure cases is as follows:

1. In all cases of promotion and/or tenure, there are two levels of faculty review. At both levels evaluations are carried out by tenured faculty in accordance with Sections 2.4 and 2.5. In addition to considering the dossier prepared by the candidate, faculty committees on promotion and tenure examine all evidence and receive all testimony offered to them by members of the academic community and others with direct knowledge of the candidate's professional qualifications and achievements.

   The two-level review process is carried out as follows:

   1. In schools or colleges which are subdivided into departments, the first level of review is departmental and the second is carried out by a peer-elected committee of the school or college.

   2. In non-departmentalized local academic units (i.e., schools, colleges, institutes) which are subdivided into programs, provided that no program faculty in the unit is smaller than the smallest department of the University, the first level of review is carried out by the program faculty to which the candidate belongs and the second level of review is carried out by a peer-elected committee of the school, college, or institute. In order to qualify to operate under the provisions stated in this paragraph, however, the aforesaid program faculties cannot exist solely to make personnel evaluations.

   3. In local academic units which do not qualify under the provisions stated in paragraphs (1) or (2), the first level of review is carried out by the local academic unit (i.e., the school, college, or institute) and the second level of review is carried out by a committee consisting of two peer-elected representatives from each of the local academic units required to operate in accordance with this paragraph. In the event the number of participating local academic units is insufficient to provide a committee of at least ten members, the committee will be brought to full strength by the addition of faculty members elected by (but not necessarily from) the Faculty Senate.

   4. The School of Law, because it offers degrees which are defined by the Commonwealth of Virginia as "professional degrees," is exempt from the provisions specified in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), but it is not exempt from the requirement for two-level review.

2. In the case of departmental review, the local promotion and tenure committeewhich may be a committee of the wholetransmits its recommendations, including a report of the division of the vote by the tenured members of the department (full professors only in cases involving promotion to the rank of professor), to the department chair. The department chair transmits to the school or college promotion and tenure review committee: (1) the candidate's dossier and related materials; (2) the recommendation of the departmental committee with appropriate justifications; and (3) his/her own recommendation and justification. Notification of recommendations generated at the level of the local academic unit are sent to members of the faculty who participated in the preceding deliberations and to the candidate. Copies of accompanying justifications are supplied to the candidate, and may be supplied to the faculty who participated in the deliberations. The candidate is evaluated in like manner by the promotion and tenure committee of the school or college, which forwards its recommendation along with all preceding reports and recommendations to the collegiate or school dean. Notification of the recommendation of the school or college committee is sent to each member of the department who participated in making the departmental recommendation. Copies of the statement of justification are sent to the candidate and the department chair.

3. The process is analogous for faculty who hold primary affiliation in non-departmentalized units, except that the role assigned in the preceding paragraph to department chairs is omitted. The program-level report is transmitted to the committee which carries out the second level review. The committee sends its report and recommendation along with all preceding reports and recommendation to the appropriate dean or director.

4. All materials are reviewed by the dean or director of the candidate's school, college, or institute and are then forwarded along with his/her recommendation to the Provost. Notification of the dean's or director's recommendation is sent to the faculty who participated in deliberations at the local level and a copy of the accompanying justification is sent to the candidate and the local unit administrator (the latter copy to be retained in the candidate's permanent file).

5. All materials are reviewed by the Provost. Before making a recommendation to the President, the Provost will consult with other academic administrators who have direct knowledge of one or more aspects of the candidate's professional performance. Notification of the Provost's recommendation is sent to the faculty who participated in deliberations at the local level and a copy of the accompanying justification is sent to the candidate and the local unit administrator (the latter copy to be retained in the candidate's permanent file).

6. The candidate's vita with all previously generated recommendations and justifications is forwarded to the President. The President forwards his/her recommendation for promotion and/or tenure to the Board of Visitors' Committee on Faculty and Academic Standards. Promotion to the rank of associate professor or professor, and tenure, can only be conferred by the Board of Visitors. The successful candidate is notified in writing by the Secretary of the Board of Visitors.

7. Candidates who are not recommended for tenure or promotion by the President may seek reconsideration on the basis of new evidence under the procedures outlined in Sections 2.8.4.1 and 2.8.4.2. They may also use the appeal procedure described in Section 2.9.

8. Tenure is never granted by default, only by action of the Board of Visitors. If one or more of the steps in the procedure outlined above is omitted by error, the proper remedy is review of the candidate as early as possible under this procedure.

   2.8.4.1 Eligibility for Reconsideration

   The reconsideration process for candidates not recommended for tenure in their sixth year of probationary appointment at George Mason University allows for consideration of new evidence not available to those who made the original negative recommendation. Candidates who have no new evidence to present, but who disagree with the evaluation of their record made during the tenure and promotion review process, may not seek reconsideration but are entitled to a re-examination of their case through the appeal procedure (see Section 2.9). Reconsideration, if requested, must precede appeal and must be completed before a candidate can file an appeal.

   New evidence for a reconsideration must fall into one or more of the following categories:

   1. Scholarly work accepted for publication, or creative work exhibited, performed, or published, or other evidence of scholarly distinction which appeared after the tenure recommendations were made.

   2. Grants awarded after the tenure recommendations were made.

   3. Reviews of the candidate's scholarly or creative work which were published after the negative recommendation.

   4. Substantial evidence of significantly improved teaching.

   5. Substantial evidence of significantly increased and influential professional service.

   2.8.4.2 Procedure for Reconsideration

   1. On or before the first day of classes of the fall semester following the sixth year of a probationary appointment, a candidate seeking reconsideration on the basis of new evidence must submit to the local unit administrator a written petition for reconsideration, outlining the new evidence and attaching documentation of it.

   2. Within seven days, the recipient of the petition submits it, the documentation, and the entire original dossier to the lowest level at which a negative recommendation was made. At that level and each subsequent level outlined in Section 2.8.4, the new evidence is evaluated by the designated bodies as they are constituted at the time of the reconsideration, and by the individuals holding the relevant administrative positions at the time of the reconsideration. At each level, a recommendation on the basis of new evidence should be completed within fourteen days and forwarded to the next level. Those participating in the reconsideration at any level, whether or not they participated in the original decision, must judge whether the new evidence sufficiently remedies the weaknesses in the candidate's record cited by those who made the original negative recommendation to warrant its reversal. The President will inform the candidate in writing of the decision. If the President's decision is positive, the tenure recommendation is submitted to the Board of Visitors for final action.

   3. If the reconsideration decision is negative, candidates may file an appeal under the terms of Section 2.10. Appeals by candidates who are unsuccessful in their petition for reconsideration must be filed by November 1 of that year, or within seven days of receipt of the President's decision on the reconsideration, whichever is later.