Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure

DAAP faculty talking with student

The reappointment, promotion, and tenure (RPT) process is governed by Article 7 of the CBA. Criteria and procedures are developed at the unit level and are subject to approval of the dean and provost. The review process typically requires independent reviews by a unit committee, a unit head, a college committee, the dean, and the provost. Faculty should work closely with their unit heads in order to ensure that they meet all dossier submission deadlines and requirements.


The Provost’s calendar specifies due dates for the RPT process (except in the College of Medicine or in those colleges that have set earlier deadlines and have notified the faculty at least six months before the earliest deadline). 

Provost's Calendar, 2020-2021 (except College of Medicine)
Due at First Level of Review* Due at the Provost's Office Material for Submission & Review Notes, Notices, Submission Contents
Sept 15, 2020 NA Requests to academic unit heads for expedited reappointment by faculty with qualified titles in the penultimate year of a current appointment. Request includes copies of annual performance reviews for all years since last reappointment. Note eligibility requirements. (CBA Article 7.5.16)
Sept 15, 2020 Nov 16, 2020 Dossiers & recommendations for the reappointment of faculty and librarians in their second year of an initial 2-year appointment or second 1-year appointment that ends August 14, 2021. Provost's notice of reappointment decision no later than December 15, 2020.
Oct 15, 2020
Mar 1, 2021
Dossiers & recommendations for faculty and librarians seeking promotion and/or tenure but not reappointment. Provost's notice typically no later than June 15. Promotion & tenure take effect August 15, 2021. Academic units, colleges, and libraries may set an earlier submission deadline, but the dean or appropriate administrator must notify faculty at least six months before that deadline. (Article 7.5.15)
Nov 2, 2020 Dec 1, 2020
Dossiers & recommendations for academic leave recommendations for AY 2021-22. Dossiers for academic leave must use the electronic form issued by the Office of the Provost and must include: letter from dean; letter from academic unit head; record of review at the unit level; candidate's proposal; candidate's current vita; candidate's report on last academic leave (Article 25). Provost's notice typically by March 31.
Jan 1, 2021
Feb 15, 2021
Dossiers & recommendations for reappointment of faculty and librarians in their first year of service whose appointments end August 14, 2021. Provost's notice to candidate no later than March 1, 2021.
6 months before the retirement date Before deadline for Board Materials Dossiers & recommendations for emerita/us status effective at date of retirement.  Recommendations for emerita/us status must include: letter from dean; letter from academic unit head; record of consideration and support at the unit level; candidate's current vita.
Feb 15, 2021 April 15, 2021
Dossiers & recommendations for reappointment (and promotion, if applicable) for faculty and librarians in the second or later years of service whose appointments expire August 14, 2022. Provost's notice no later than August 16, 2021. A faculty member seeking promotion & reappointment in the same academic year may submit only once and should do so on the applicable reappointment schedule. 
set locally May 3, 2021
Requests to extend a visiting faculty appointment for a second year.  Visiting appointments are extended to a second year only under special conditions; they are not extended beyond a second year. 
6 months before effective date Resignation, retirement notices, and emeriti applications if applicable.  Such notices may be submitted at any time but should be no later than the effective date. 
At least 90 days in advance before commencement of leave or soon as practicable At any time before leave starts Recommendations for professional, personal, paid parental & child-rearing leaves. Recommendations for professional leave must include: letter from dean; letter from academic unit head; candidate's proposal and/or letter of invitation; candidate's current vita.

*Note that the CBA (7.5.15) permits academic units and colleges to set earlier deadlines for submission of RPT dossiers to the first level of review, provided faculty receive at least six months' notice of the earlier deadline. 

External Reviews

In keeping with the University’s stature as a major research university, the Provost has established guidelines for how external reviews should occur in the promotion and tenure process. Here is a full description of those expectations.

The research and creative work of all faculty members under consideration for tenure or promotion should be subjected to review by scholars in the discipline who are external to the University. The following procedural guidelines are not rules; they do not override or supplant any provost-approved procedures that are already in place. They are intended to guide academic units in revising RPT procedures to assure that the external review process is consistent with the provost’s expectation that it be rigorous and meaningful.

  1. The candidate and the academic unit head should each submit a list of names to the unit’s RPT committee or, if that committee is not to be so involved, the candidate may submit a list of names to the unit head, who will draw up a separate list of names. The committee’s or head’s list should be prepared before receiving the suggestions of the candidate.
        -The lists should be made up of scholars who have the expertise to evaluate the candidate’s     research or creative productivity.
        -Generally, these scholars will hold senior rank in a comparable academic department.*
        -The persons on each list should not have a close association with the candidate or the unit     head, such as former teacher, mentor, dissertation advisor, or post-doctoral advisor. If any are     co-authors or collaborators with the candidate, their comments should focus on the     candidate’s contribution to joint effort.
  2. The RPT committee or unit head should select three to six names from the two lists, being careful to avoid selecting persons who are disqualified under I.C. above.
  3. The unit head should contact each of the persons selected. If any decline to serve as a reviewer, more names may be added from the original lists by the head. In no case should fewer than three external reviewers be used.
  4. The unit head should send each external reviewer representative pieces of scholarship or creative work authored by the candidate along with the candidate’s vita. The candidate may choose which works will be reviewed, but the head may elect to send additional completed works by the candidate. It is the candidate’s responsibility to copy the material as well as to provide three copies of any book s/he may wish reviewers to evaluate. **
  5. The unit head should instruct the reviewers in writing to evaluate the quality of the work and its contribution to the field and should provide any necessary context about the research or publications under review. Reviewers should be informed that their letters will not be confidential and will be included in the dossier. A sample letter from the unit head to the reviewers should be included in the external review section of the dossier.
  6. The reviews should be solicited in time to receive and include them in the dossier prior to the unit RPT committee’s evaluation of the candidate. It is the responsibility of the unit head to assure the timeliness of the solicitation and to request postponement of the committee review if the letters are not all assembled.
  7. The candidate and/or the unit head should provide an introduction to the external review section of the dossier that describes, in three or four sentences each, the qualifications of the reviewers and that explains any past relationship or affiliation with the applicant.

*If the comparable academic department is primarily a teaching unit and the work to be submitted for review is research within a discipline other than pedagogy, the external reviewers should be sought from faculty in research departments.

**In disciplines where it is difficult to send representative pieces, such as in music or theatre performance, it is appropriate to send copies of the entire dossier to each reviewer

A unit may redact external review letters to obscure the identity of the external reviewer if the unit has adopted, as part of its RPT procedures, a policy that permits such redaction.

Terminal-Year Review

A faculty member may request being reviewed for reappointment or tenure in his/her terminal year rather than in the penultimate year, thereby waiving the contractual requirement that he/she receive a year’s notice. The university contract administrator and AAUP must agree to such a waiver.