Appointments, Promotion, and Tenure (APT) Criteria and Procedures for The Ohio State University School of Earth Sciences

Appointments, Promotion, and

Tenure

Criteria and Procedures for

The Ohio State University

SCHOOL OF EARTH SCIENCES

Discussed by the entire Faculty at Faculty Meetings on:

09/03/2021; 01/12/2022; 02/04/2022; 03/04/2022

Approved by the Office of Academic Affairs: 08/12/22

 APT for the School of Earth Sciences 
 
2 
 
Table of Contents 
 
I Preamble ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 
II School Mission ........................................................................................................................................... 5 
III Definitions ................................................................................................................................................ 6 
A Committee of the Eligible Faculty ................................................................................................ 6 
1 Tenure-track Faculty......................................................................................................... 6 
2  TeachingFaculty .............................................................................................................. 7 
3 Research Faculty............................................................................................................... 7 
4 Associated Faculty ............................................................................................... 8 
5 Conflict of Interest............................................................................................................ 8 
6 Minimum Composition..................................................................................................... 9 
B Promotion and Tenure Committee ................................................................................................ 9 
C Quorum ......................................................................................................................................... 9 
D Recommendation from the Eligible Faculty ................................................................................. 9 
1 Appointment ..................................................................................................................... 9 
2 Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure, Promotion, and Contract Renewal ................. 10 
IV Appointments ......................................................................................................................................... 10 
A Criteria ........................................................................................................................................ 10 
1 Tenure-track Faculty....................................................................................................... 10 
2  TeachingFaculty ............................................................................................................ 11 
3 Research Faculty ............................................................................................................ 12 
4 Associated Faculty ......................................................................................................... 12 
5 Regional Campus Faculty ............................................................................................... 13 
6 Emeritus Faculty ............................................................................................................. 13 
7 Courtesy Appointments for Faculty ............................................................................... 13 
B Procedures ................................................................................................................................. 144 
1 Tenure-track Faculty on the Columbus Campus ............................................................ 14 
2 Teaching Faculty on the Columbus Campus ................................................................ 167 
3 Research Faculty .......................................................................................................... 177 
4 Transfer from the Tenure Track ..................................................................................... 17 
5 Associated Faculty on the Columbus Campus ............................................................... 17 
6 Regional Campus Faculty .............................................................................................. 18 
7 Courtesy Appointments for Faculty ............................................................................... 18 

 APT for the School of Earth Sciences 
 
3 
 
V Annual Performance and Merit Review .................................................................................................. 18 
A Documentation ............................................................................................................................ 19 
B Probationary Tenure-track Faculty on the Columbus Campus ................................................... 19 
1 Fourth-Year Review ....................................................................................................... 20 
2 Exclusion of Time from Probationary Period ................................................................ 21 
C Tenured Faculty on the Columbus Campus ................................................................................ 21 
D TeachingFaculty on the Columbus Campus ............................................................................... 21 
E Research Faculty on the Columbus Campus............................................................................. 222 
F Associated Faculty on the Columbus Campus ............................................................................ 22 
G Regional Campus Faculty........................................................................................................... 22 
H Salary Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 23 
VI Promotion and Tenure and Promotion Reviews ..................................................................................... 23 
A Criteria and Documentation that Support Promotion ................................................................. 24 
1 Promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure .............................................................. 24 
2 Promotion to Professor ................................................................................................. 255 
3 Teaching Faculty .......................................................................................................... 266 
4 Research Faculty ............................................................................................................ 26 
5 Associated Faculty .......................................................................................................... 27 
6 Regional Campus Faculty .............................................................................................. 27 
B Procedures ................................................................................................................................... 27 
1 Tenure-track, Teaching, and Research Faculty .............................................................. 27 
a Candidate Responsibilities ....................................................................................... 27 
b Committee of Eligible Faculty Responsibilities ...................................................... 30 
c Promotion and Tenure Subcommittee Responsibilities ........................................... 32 
d School Director Responsibilities ............................................................................. 32 
2 Procedures for Associated Faculty ................................................................................. 33 
3 Procedures for Regional Campus Faculty ...................................................................... 33 
4 External Evaluations..................................................................................................... 334 
VII Appeals .................................................................................................................................................. 35 
VIII Seventh-Year Reviews ......................................................................................................................... 35 
IX Procedures for Student and Peer Evaluation of Teaching ...................................................................... 35 
A Student Evaluation of Teaching .................................................................................................. 35 
B Peer Evaluation of Teaching ....................................................................................................... 35 

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

Appendix A:................................................................................................................................................. 38

Appendix B: ................................................................................................................................................. 39

Appendix C: ................................................................................................................................................. 40

Appendix D:................................................................................................................................................. 41

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

I Preamble

This document is a supplement to Chapters 6 and 7 of the Rules of the University Faculty; the annually

updated procedural guidelines for promotion and tenure reviews in Volume 3 of the Office of Academic

Affairs Policies and Procedures Handbook; and other policies and procedures of the college and

university to which the school and its faculty are subject.

Should those rules and policies change, the school will follow the new rules and policies until such time

as it can update this document to reflect the changes. In addition, this document must be reviewed, and

either reaffirmed or revised, at least every four years on the appointment or reappointment of the school

director.

This document must be approved by the dean of the college and the Office of Academic Affairs before it

may be implemented. It sets forth the school’s mission and, in the context of that mission and the

missions of the college and university, its criteria and procedures for faculty appointments and for faculty

promotion, tenure and rewards, including salary increases. In approving this document, the dean and the

Office of Academic Affairs accept the mission and criteria of the school and delegate to it the

responsibility to apply high standards in evaluating current faculty and faculty candidates in relation to

school mission and criteria.

The faculty and the administration are bound by the principles articulated in Faculty Rule 3335-6-01 of

the Administrative Code. In particular, all faculty members accept the responsibility to participate fully

and knowledgeably in review processes; to exercise the standards established in Faculty Rule 3335-6-02

and other standards specific to this school and college; and to make negative recommendations when

these are warranted in order to maintain and improve the quality of the faculty.

Decisions considering appointment, reappointment, and promotion and tenure will be free of

discrimination in accordance with the university’s policy on affirmative action and equal employment

opportunity.

The Director of the School of Earth Sciences will generally consult with the Advisory and/or

Administrative Committee on any changes to this document pertaining to appointments, performance and

merit review and promotion. The compositions of the Advisory Committee and Administrative

Committee are described in the School of Earth Sciences Pattern of Administration (POA) document.

II School Mission

The School of Earth Sciences aims to be a globally preeminent program in Earth and Geodetic Sciences at

the forefront of knowledge creation and dissemination, education, and training focused on humanity’s

greatest problems (e.g., climate change, adaptation & evolution, sustainable energy, water, mineral, &

elemental resources).

Our mission is to:

• Advance understanding of Earth as a dynamic and complex system of interconnected physical,

chemical, and biological processes that shape the evolution of past and present life forms and

landscapes;

• Collect and assimilate geospatial measurements across time with high levels of accuracy and

precision

• Act on scientific data in ways that promote environmental stewardship, social justice, and

sustainability of the Earth’s resources;

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

• Assess human impact on the Earth system, and the implications of climate change adaptation on the

biosphere, society, and the economy;

• Develop and implement strategies and technologies that mitigate or solve humanity’s grand

challenges (e.g., climate change, water supply, energy security, resources) with an eye towards

helping underserved populations and communities most vulnerable to these grand challenges;

• Educate the next generation of scientists, researchers, teachers, policy makers, entrepreneurs, and

professionals through the use of inclusive practices that encourage and promote participation of

students and professionals from all groups especially those underrepresented in the geosciences;

• Promote scientific literacy and data-driven, evidence-based decisions within the diverse populace of

the state of Ohio, our nation, and worldwide.

Collegiality, civility, mutual support, and respect for others are strongly held values within the School of

Earth Sciences. At the heart of our mission, is a Code of Conduct to ensure that all members of the

School of Earth Sciences (faculty, staff, students, alumni, etc.) feel welcome and included in all School

activities regardless of location (e.g., on campus, off campus conferences, in the field, etc.). The School of

Earth Sciences rejects all forms of discrimination, harassment, and bullying. We affirm support for

diverse beliefs, academic freedom of expression, and the free exchange of ideas (including critical

discussion of ideas) as long as these are respectful, constructive, and professional.

III Definitions

A Committee of the Eligible Faculty

The eligible faculty for all appointment (hiring), reappointment, contract renewal, promotion, or

promotion and tenure reviews must have their tenure home or primary appointment in the School of

Earth Sciences.

The school director, the dean and assistant and associate deans of the college, the executive vice

president and provost, and the president may not participate as eligible faculty members in reviews

for appointment, reappointment, promotion, promotion and tenure, or contract renewal.

1 Tenure-track Faculty

Initial Appointment Reviews

• For an appointment (hiring or appointment change from another faculty type) review of an

assistant professor, the eligible faculty consists of all tenure-track faculty in the school.

• For an appointment (hiring or appointment change from another faculty type) review at senior

rank (associate professor or professor), the eligible faculty consists of all tenure-track faculty

in the school.

• A vote on the appropriateness of the proposed rank must be cast by all tenured faculty of

equal or higher rank than the position requested.

Reappointment, Promotion, or Promotion and Tenure Reviews

• For the reappointment and promotion and tenure reviews of assistant professors, the eligible

faculty consists of all tenured associate professors and professors.

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

• For the promotion reviews of associate professors, the eligible faculty consists of all tenured

professors.

2 Teaching Faculty

Initial Appointment Reviews

• For an appointment (hiring or appointment change from another faculty type) review of an

assistant Teaching professor, the eligible faculty consists of all tenure-track faculty and all

Teaching faculty in the school.

• For an appointment (hiring or appointment change from another faculty type) review at senior

rank (associate Teaching professor or teaching professor), the eligible faculty consists of all

tenure-track and all Teaching faculty in the school.

• A vote on the appropriateness of the proposed rank must be cast by all tenured faculty of

equal or higher rank than the position requested, and all nonprobationary Teaching faculty of

equal or higher rank than the position requested.

Reappointment, Contract Renewal, and Promotion Reviews

• For the reappointment, contract renewal, and promotion reviews of assistant teaching

professors, the eligible faculty consists of all tenured associate professors and professors, and

all nonprobationary associate teaching professors and teaching professors.

• For the reappointment, contract renewal, and promotion reviews of associate Teaching

professors, and the reappointment and contract renewal reviews of Teaching professors, the

eligible faculty consists of all tenured professors, and all nonprobationary Teaching

professors.

3 Research Faculty

Initial Appointment Reviews

• For an appointment (hiring or appointment change from another faculty type) review of a

research assistant professor, the eligible faculty consists of all tenure-track faculty and all

research faculty in the school.

• For an appointment (hiring or appointment change from another faculty type) review at senior

rank (research associate professor or research professor), the eligible faculty consists of all

tenure-track and all research faculty in the school.

• A vote on the appropriateness of the proposed rank must be cast by all tenured faculty of

equal or higher rank than the position requested and all nonprobationary research faculty of

equal or higher rank than the position requested.

Reappointment, Contract Renewal, and Promotion Reviews

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

• For the reappointment, contract renewal, and promotion reviews of research assistant

professors, the eligible faculty consists of all tenured associate professors and professors and

all nonprobationary research associate professors and professors.

• For the reappointment, contract renewal, and promotion reviews of research associate

professors and the reappointment and contract renewal reviews of research professors, the

eligible faculty consists of all tenured professors and all nonprobationary research professors.

4 Associated Faculty

Initial Appointment, Reappointment, and Contract Renewal

• Initial appointment (hiring or appointment change from another faculty type), reappointment,

and contract renewal of associated faculty members are decided by the school director

following a vote of the committee of eligible faculty.

o On initial appointment, eligible faculty are all those with teaching titles and all tenure-

track faculty members.

o For reappointments and contract renewals, the eligible faculty are all those with non-

probationary teaching titles and tenured faculty members of equal or higher rank than the

candidate.

• Initial appointments at senior rank require a vote by the eligible faculty (all non-probationary

teaching faculty and tenured faculty of equal or higher rank than the position requested) and

prior approval of the college dean.

Promotion Reviews

• Associated faculty are eligible for promotion but not tenure if they have adjunct titles, tenure-

track titles with service at 49% FTE or below, and lecturer titles.

For the promotion reviews of associated faculty with adjunct titles, the eligible faculty shall

be the same as for tenure-track, teaching, or research faculty, as appropriate to the

appointment, as described in Sections III.A.1, 2 or 3 above.

For the promotion reviews of associated faculty with tenure-track titles, the eligible faculty

shall be the same as for tenure-track faculty as described in Section III.A.1 above.

The promotion of a lecturer to senior lecturer is decided by the school director in consultation

with the Administrative and/or Advisory Committees in the School of Earth Sciences.

5 Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest exists when an eligible faculty member is related to a candidate or has a

comparable close interpersonal relationship, has substantive financial ties with the candidate, is

dependent in some way on the candidate's services, has a close professional relationship with the

candidate (dissertation advisor), or has collaborated so extensively with the candidate that an

objective review of the candidate's work is not possible. Generally, faculty members who have

collaborated with a candidate on at least 50% of the candidate's published work will be expected

to withdraw from an appointment or promotion review of that candidate (for more see ASC P&T

FAQs document).

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

6 Minimum Composition

In the event that the school does not have at least three eligible faculty members who can

undertake a review, the school director, after consulting with the dean, will appoint a faculty

member from another tenure-initiating unit within the college.

B Promotion and Tenure Committee

The School of Earth Sciences does not have a Promotion and Tenure Committee. The P&T Chair is

appointed by the school director and assists the eligible faculty in managing the personnel and

promotion and tenure issues. The term of service is normally three years, with reappointment

possible. See POA document for more details.

When considering cases involving research faculty or teaching faculty the P&T Chair may be assisted

by up to two nonprobationary research or teaching faculty members who are appointed by the school

director.

C Quorum

The quorum required to discuss and vote on all personnel decisions is two-thirds of the eligible

faculty not on an approved leave of absence. This includes faculty who participate by teleconference

or videoconference. Faculty on approved leave are not considered for quorum unless they declare, in

advance and in writing, their intent to participate in all proceedings for which they are eligible during

the leave. A member of the eligible faculty on Special Assignment may be excluded from the count

for the purposes of determining quorum only if the school director has approved an off-campus

assignment.

Faculty members who recuse themselves because of a conflict of interest are not counted when

determining quorum.

D Recommendation from the Eligible Faculty

In all votes taken on personnel matters only “yes” and “no” votes are counted. Abstentions are not

votes. Faculty members are strongly encouraged to consider whether they are participating fully in the

review process when abstaining from a vote on a personnel matter.

Absentee ballots and proxy votes are not permitted, but participating fully in discussions and voting

via remote two-way electronic connection are allowed.

Votes should be cast using an electronic survey administered by the Administrative Manager in the

School of Earth Sciences (see POA document). In some instances, votes may be permitted to be cast

by emailing the Administrative Manager using the email account provided by the university.

1 Appointment

A positive recommendation from the eligible faculty for appointment is secured when two-thirds

of the votes cast are positive.

• In the case of a joint appointment, the school must seek input from a candidate’s joint-

appointment TIU prior to his or her appointment.

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

2 Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure, Promotion, and Contract Renewal

A positive recommendation from the eligible faculty for reappointment, promotion and tenure,

promotion, and contract renewal is secured when 60% of the votes cast are positive.

• In the case of a joint appointment, the school must seek input from a candidate’s joint-

appointment TIU prior to his or her reappointment, promotion and/or tenure, or contract

renewal.

IV Appointments

A Criteria

The school is committed to making only faculty appointments that enhance or have strong potential to

enhance the quality of the school. Important considerations include the individual's record to date in

teaching, scholarship and service; the potential for professional growth in each of these areas; and the

potential for interacting with colleagues and students in a way that will enhance their academic work

and attract other outstanding faculty and students to the school. No offer will be extended in the event

that the search process does not yield one or more candidates who would enhance the quality of the

school. The search is either cancelled or continued, as appropriate to the circumstances.

1 Tenure-track Faculty

Instructor. Appointment at the rank of instructor is made only when the offered appointment

is that of assistant professor, but requirements for the terminal degree have not been

completed by the candidate at the time of appointment. Procedures for appointment are

identical to that of assistant professor. The school will make every effort to avoid such

appointments. An appointment at the instructor level is limited to three years. Promotion to

assistant professor occurs without review the semester following completion of the required

credentialing. An instructor must be approved for promotion to assistant professor by the

beginning of the third year, or the appointment will not be renewed and the third year is the

terminal year of employment.

Upon promotion to assistant professor, the faculty member may request prior service credit

for time spent as an instructor. This request must be approved by the school’s eligible faculty,

the school director, the dean, and the Office of Academic Affairs. Faculty members should

carefully consider whether prior service credit is appropriate since prior service credit cannot

be revoked once granted except through an approved request to exclude time from the

probationary period. In addition, all probationary faculty members have the option to be

considered for early promotion.

Assistant Professor. An earned terminal degree is the minimum requirement for appointment

at the rank of assistant professor. Evidence of potential for scholarly productivity, high-

quality teaching, and high-quality service to the school and the profession is highly desirable.

Appointment at the rank of assistant professor is always probationary, with mandatory tenure

review occurring in the sixth year of service. For individuals not recommended for promotion

and tenure after the mandatory review, the 7

year will be the final year of employment.

Review for tenure prior to the mandatory review year is possible when the Committee of

Eligible Faculty determines such a review to be appropriate. The granting of prior service

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

credit, which requires approval of the Office of Academic Affairs, may reduce the length of

the probationary period, but is strongly discouraged as it cannot be revoked once granted

except through an approved request to exclude time from the probationary period.

Associate Professor and Professor. Appointment at senior rank requires that the individual,

at a minimum, demonstrate the same accomplishments in teaching, scholarship/research and

service as persons promoted to these ranks within the school. There needs to be strong

evidence that appointment at senior rank will improve the overall quality and standing of the

school and a high rate of quality scholarship, teaching, and service will continue after the

appointment to senior rank. Appointment offers at the rank of Associate Professor or

Professor and offers of prior service credit require prior approval of the Office of Academic

Affairs.

Appointment at the rank of associate professor normally entails tenure. It is expected at the

time of appointment to the rank of Associate Professor that the individual has strong potential

to advance to the rank of professor in a timely fashion. A probationary appointment at the

rank of associate professor is appropriate only under unusual circumstances, such as when the

candidate has limited prior teaching experience or has taught only in a foreign country. A

probationary period of up to four years is possible, on approval of the Office of Academic

Affairs, with review for tenure occurring in the final year of the probationary appointment. If

tenure is not granted, an additional (terminal) year of employment is offered.

Appointments at the rank of professor without tenure should not occur.

Offers to foreign nationals require prior consultation with the Office of International Affairs.

2 Teaching Faculty

Except for those appointed at the rank of instructor, for whom a contract is limited to three years,

the initial contract for all other teaching faculty members must be for a period of five years. The

initial contract is probationary, with reappointment considered annually. Second and subsequent

contracts for assistant and associate teaching professors must be for a period of at least three years

and for no more than five years. Second and subsequent contracts for teaching professors must be

for a period of at least three years and no more than eight years. Tenure is not granted to Teaching

faculty. There is also no presumption that subsequent contracts will be offered, regardless of

performance.

The school supports Teaching Faculty. These appointments exist for faculty members who focus

principally on the education needs of students in the school or college. Teaching Faculty

members are expected to contribute to the school’s research and education mission as reflected in

undergraduate and graduate program development and teaching. Teaching Faculty appointments

are made in accordance with Faculty Rule 3335-7. Each new appointment must enhance, or have

strong potential to enhance the quality of the school.

Teaching Instructor Appointment is normally made at the rank of teaching instructor when

the appointee has not completed the requirements for the terminal degree. The school will

make every effort to avoid such appointments. An appointment at the instructor level is

limited to a three-year contract. In such cases, if the instructor has not completed

requirements for promotion to the rank of assistant professor by the end of the penultimate

year of the contract period, a new contract will not be considered even if performance is

otherwise adequate and the position itself will continue.

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

Assistant Teaching Professor. An earned doctorate and (if applicable) the required

licensure/certification in his or her specialty are the minimum requirements for appointment

at the rank of assistant teaching professor. Evidence of ability to teach is highly desirable.

Associate Teaching Professor and Teaching Professor. Appointment at the rank of

associate teaching professor or teaching professor requires that the individual have an earned

doctorate and (if applicable) the required licensure/certification in his/her specialty, and meet,

at a minimum, the school’s criteria—in teaching, professional practice and other service, and

scholarship—for promotion to these ranks (see section VI below).

3 Research Faculty

Research faculty members are engaged in research related to the mission and duties of the School

of Earth Sciences. Appointment of research faculty entails one- to five-year appointments. The

initial appointment is probationary, with reappointment considered annually. Tenure is not

granted to research faculty. There is also no presumption that subsequent appointments will be

offered, regardless of performance.

If the School of Earth Sciences wishes to consider contract renewal, a formal review of the

faculty member is required in the penultimate year of the current contract period. For more

information see Faculty Rule 3335-7. In establishing the title, the Board of Trustees restricted the

duties and responsibilities of research faculty (Faculty Rules 3335-7) placing primary emphasis

on research with limited teaching (approval of the school director is required), supervision of

graduate students (approval of the Graduate School is required), limited service, and the

exclusion of university governance.

External appointees at the research associate professor or research professor level will

demonstrate the same accomplishments in research and service as persons promoted within the

school.

Research Assistant Professor. Appointment at the rank of research assistant professor

requires that the individual have a doctorate and a record of high-quality publications that

strongly indicate the ability to sustain an independent, externally funded research program.

This research program is expected to substantially fund the salary and benefits of the faculty

member.

Research Associate Professor and Research Professor. Appointment at the rank of

research associate professor or research professor requires that the individual have a doctorate

and meet, at a minimum, the school’s criteria for promotion to these ranks. Expectations for

publications and research funding, including salary/benefits, are appropriately greater than for

the Research Assistant Professor.

4 Associated Faculty

Associated faculty appointments may be as short as a few weeks to assist with a focused project,

a semester to teach one or more courses, or for up to three years when a longer contract is useful

for long-term planning and retention. Associated faculty may be reappointed.

Adjunct Assistant Professor, Adjunct Associate Professor, Adjunct Professor. Adjunct

appointments may be compensated or uncompensated. Adjunct faculty appointments are

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

given to individuals who give academic service to the school, such as teaching a course or

serving on graduate student committees, for which a faculty title is appropriate. Typically, the

adjunct faculty rank is determined by applying the criteria for appointment of tenure-track

faculty. Adjunct faculty members are eligible for promotion (but not tenure) and the relevant

criteria are those for promotion of tenure-track, teaching, or research faculty, as appropriate

to the appointment.

Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor with FTE below 50%. Appointment at

professional titles is for individuals at 49% FTE or below, either compensated (1 to 49%

FTE) or uncompensated (0% FTE). The rank of associated faculty with tenure-track titles is

determined by applying the criteria for appointment of tenure-track faculty. Associated

faculty members with professional titles are eligible for promotion (but not tenure) and the

relevant criteria are those for promotion of tenure-track faculty.

Lecturer. Appointment as lecturer requires that the individual have, at a minimum, a

Master's degree in a field appropriate to the subject matter to be taught. Evidence of ability to

provide high-quality instruction is desirable. Lecturers are not eligible for tenure, but may be

promoted to senior lecturer if they meet the criteria for appointment at that rank. The initial

appointment for a lecturer should generally not exceed one year.

Senior Lecturer. Appointment as senior lecturer requires that the individual have, at a

minimum, a doctorate in a field appropriate to the subject matter to be taught, along with

evidence of ability to provide high-quality instruction; or a Master's degree and at least five

years of teaching experience with documentation of high quality. Senior lecturers are not

eligible for tenure or promotion. The initial appointment for a senior lecturer should generally

not exceed one year.

Visiting Instructor, Visiting Assistant Professor, Visiting Associate Professor, Visiting

Professor. Visiting faculty appointments may either be compensated or uncompensated.

Visiting faculty members on leave from an academic appointment at another institution are

appointed at the rank held in that position. The rank at which other (non-faculty) individuals

are appointed is determined by applying the criteria for appointment of tenure-track faculty.

Visiting faculty members are not eligible for tenure or promotion. Visiting faculty

appointments may be renewed annually for only three consecutive years.

5 Regional Campus Faculty

As the mission of the regional campuses emphasizes undergraduate instruction, regional campus

criteria for appointment at the tenure-track ranks of assistant professor, associate professor, and

professor are similar to those for Columbus campus faculty, but give relatively greater emphasis

at each rank to teaching experience and quality.

Regional campus criteria for the appointment of Teaching faculty, research faculty, and

associated faculty are the same as those for Columbus campus faculty in each of these categories.

6 Emeritus Faculty

Emeritus faculty status is an honor given in recognition of sustained academic contributions to

the university as described in Faculty Rule 3335-5-36. Full-time tenure track, teaching, research,

or associated faculty may request emeritus status upon retirement or resignation at the age of

sixty or older with ten or more years of service or at any age with twenty-five or more years of

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

service.

Faculty will send a request for emeritus faculty status to the school director (regional campus

dean for associated faculty on regional campuses) outlining academic performance and

citizenship. The faculty eligible to conduct promotion reviews within the requestor’s

appointment type (see Section III.A.1-4) will review the application and make a

recommendation tothe school director. The director will decide upon the request, and if

appropriate submit it to the dean. If the faculty member requesting emeritus status has in the

10 years prior to the application engaged in serious dishonorable conduct in violation of law,

rule, or policy and/or caused harm to the university’s reputation or is retiring pending a

procedure according to Faculty Rule 3335-5-04, emeritus status will not be considered.

See the OAA Policies and Procedures Handbook Volume 1, Chapter 1, for information about

the types of perquisites that may be offered to emeritus faculty, provided resources are available.

Emeritus faculty may not vote at any level of governance and may not participate in promotion

and tenure matters.

7 Courtesy Appointments for Faculty

Occasionally the active academic involvement in this school by a tenure-track, teaching, or

research faculty member from another unit at Ohio State warrants the offer of a 0% FTE

(courtesy) appointment in this school. Appropriate active involvement includes research

collaboration, graduate student advising, teaching some or all of a course from time to time, or a

combination of these. A courtesy appointment is made at the individual's current Ohio State rank,

with promotion in rank recognized. These must be reappointed every 5 years (usually at a faculty

meeting in April or May for the coming academic year). Continuation of the appointment should

reflect ongoing contributions. Courtesy appointments do not require formal annual review.

B Procedures

See the Policy on Faculty Recruitment and Selection and the Policy on Faculty Appointments for

information on the following topics:

• recruitment of tenure-track, teaching, research, and associated faculty

• appointments at senior rank or with prior service credit

• hiring faculty from other institutions after April 30

• appointment of foreign nationals

• letters of offer, which should contain a clause that defines the duration that the offer is valid

1 Tenure-track Faculty on the Columbus Campus

A national search is required to ensure a diverse pool of highly qualified candidates for all tenure-

track positions. Exceptions to this policy must be approved by the college and the Office of

Academic Affairs in advance. Search procedures must entail substantial faculty involvement and

be consistent with the OAA Policy on Faculty Recruitment and Selection.

Searches for tenure-track faculty proceed as follows:

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

The dean of the college provides approval for the school to commence a search process. This

approval may or may not be accompanied by constraints with regard to salary, rank, and field of

expertise.

The school director appoints a search committee consisting of three or more faculty who reflect

the field of expertise that is the focus of the search (if relevant) as well as other fields within the

school. Ideally, the search committee will include a faculty member from each division of the

School of Earth Sciences. Faculty from other departments, Schools, Centers, or Institutes at the

university may be appointed by the school director to complement the field of expertise that is the

focus of the search and/or broaden the diversity of the search committee.

Prior to any search, members of all search committees must undergo inclusive hiring practices

training available through the college with resources from the Office of Diversity and Inclusion.

Implicit bias training, such as that available through the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race

and Ethnicity, is also required of all search committee members prior to any search.

The search committee:

• Appoints a Diversity Advocate who is responsible for providing leadership in assuring that

vigorous efforts are made to achieve a diverse pool of qualified applicants.

• Develops a search announcement for internal posting in the university Job Postings through

the Office of Human Resources and external advertising, subject to the school director’s

approval. The announcement will be no more specific than is necessary to accomplish the

goals of the search, since an offer cannot be made that is contrary to the content of the

announcement with respect to rank, field, credentials, salary. In addition, timing for the

receipt of applications will be stated as a preferred date, not a precise closing date, in order to

allow consideration of any applications that arrive before the conclusion of the search.

• Develops and implements a plan for external advertising and direct solicitation of

nominations and applications.

• Screens applications and letters of recommendation and presents to the full faculty a

summary of those applicants (usually three to five) judged worthy of interview. Ideally, at

least one candidate invited to interview must contribute to increasing the diversity, broadly

defined, of the school. The diversity advocate will explain to the full faculty, the search

committee’s efforts to attract a diverse pool of applicants.

• If the diversity advocate and/or search committee judges that in the pool of candidates there is

no qualified person who can contribute to the diversity of the school, the search committee

chair will describe the pool of applicants and the pool of finalists before asking the faculty to

vote on inviting the finalists for an interview. Vigorous efforts to ensure a diverse pool of

highly qualified candidates that includes members of underrepresented groups are required.

The university remains strongly committed to diversifying its faculty. Units that lack women

and minority faculty must make every possible effort to recruit qualified faculty in these

groups.

• If the faculty agrees with this judgment, the proposed slate of potential interviewees is

presented to the college dean or division dean, who must approve the list of candidates to

invite for interview. If the faculty does not agree with the search committee recommendation

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

for interviewees, the school director in consultation with the faculty determines the

appropriate next steps (solicit new applications, review other applications already received,

cancel the search for the time being).

• Virtual or on-campus interviews are arranged by the search committee chair, assisted by the

administrative manager of the School of Earth Sciences.

Virtual or on-campus interviews with candidates must include opportunities for interaction with

faculty groups, including the search committee; graduate students; the school director; and the

dean or designee. In addition, all candidates make a presentation to the faculty and graduate

students on their scholarship, and may teach a class. The latter could be an actual class or a mock

instructional situation. All candidates interviewing for a particular position must follow the same

interview format and relevant accommodations for disability/impairment should be provided.

Centers and/or institutes at the university may participate in the hiring of school faculty who

might be affiliated with those centers/institutes. The school will seek to invite representatives

from relevant centers and/or institutes to participate in all aspects of the search process, including

membership on the search committee (as described above). During the recruiting process,

candidates who might become affiliates of the center or institute should meet with the director of

that center/institute and other relevant faculty.

Following completion of virtual/on-campus interviews, the eligible faculty meet to discuss

perceptions and preferences, and to vote on each candidate. A ranked vote is permitted. The

eligible faculty reports a recommendation on each candidate to the school director. The school

director will then contact the college dean or designee to provide a summary of the interviews and

recommendation for hiring.

If the offer involves senior rank, the eligible faculty members vote also on the appropriateness of

the proposed rank. If the offer may involve prior service credit, the eligible faculty members vote

on the appropriateness of such credit. The eligible faculty reports a recommendation on the

appropriateness of the proposed rank or the appropriateness of prior service credit to the school

director. Appointment offers at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor, with or without

tenure, and/or offers of prior service credit require prior approval of the Office of Academic

Affairs.

In the event that more than one candidate achieves the 2/3 level of support required to extend an

offer, the school director decides which candidate to approach first. Ideally, this decision should

be based on vote totals of each candidate, although other factors (e.g., broadening diversity of the

unit) may also be taken into consideration. The details of the offer, including compensation, are

determined by the school director.

The school is advised to discuss potential appointment of a candidate requiring sponsorship for

permanent residence or nonimmigrant work-authorized status with the Office of International

Affairs. The university will not grant tenure unless an individual is a (1) U.S. citizen or national;

(2) permanent resident (“green card” holder); (3) asylee or refugee; or (4) an individual otherwise

described as a “protected individual” pursuant to Title 8 U.S. Code Section 1324b(a)(3)(b). The

school will therefore be cautious in making such appointments and vigilant in seeking residency

status for the appointee promptly and diligently.

2 Teaching Faculty on the Columbus Campus

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

Searches for teaching faculty generally proceed identically as for tenure-track faculty, with the

exception that the candidate's presentation during the virtual or on-campus interview is on

teaching rather than scholarship, and exceptions to a national search require approval only by the

college dean.

3 Research Faculty on the Columbus Campus

Searches for research faculty generally proceed identically as for tenure-track faculty, with the

exception that during the interview the focus is mainly/solely on the candidate’s research

credentials. The candidate is not asked to teach a class during the interview. Exceptions to a

national search require approval only by the college dean.

4 Transfer from the Tenure Track

Tenure-track faculty may transfer to a teaching or research appointment if appropriate

circumstances exist. Tenure or tenure eligibility is lost upon transfer, and transfers must be

approved by the school director, the college dean, and the executive vice president and provost.

The request for transfer must be initiated by the faculty member in writing and must state clearly

how the individual’s career goals and activities have changed.

Transfers from a teaching appointment and from a research appointment to the tenure track are

not permitted. However, teaching faculty members and research faculty members may apply for

tenure-track positions and compete in regular national searches for such positions.

5 Associated Faculty on the Columbus Campus

The appointment, reappointment, and contract renewal of all compensated associated faculty are

decided by the school director following a vote of the eligible faculty.

Compensated associated appointments are generally made for a period of one to three years,

unless a shorter or longer period is appropriate to the circumstances.

Appointment and reappointment of uncompensated adjunct or visiting faculty may be proposed

by any faculty member in the school and are decided by the school director following a vote of

the eligible faculty.

Visiting appointments may be made for one term of up to three years or on an annual basis for up

to three years.

Lecturer and senior lecturer appointments are made on an annual basis and rarely semester by

semester. After the initial appointment, and if the school’s curricular needs warrant it, a multiple

year appointment may be offered.

All associated appointments expire at the end of the appointment term and must be formally

renewed to be continued.

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

6 Regional Campus Faculty

The regional campus has primary responsibility for determining the position description for a

tenure-track faculty search, but the regional campus dean or designee consults with the school

director to reach agreement on the description before the search begins. The regional campus

search committee must include at least one representative from the school.

Candidates are interviewed by, at a minimum, the regional campus dean, school director,

Columbus campus dean or designee, and regional campus search committee. The candidates

must give research and/or teaching presentations at both the Columbus campus and regional

campus. The regional campus may have additional requirements for the search not specified in

this document. A decision to make an offer requires agreement by the school director and

regional campus dean. Until agreement is reached, negotiations with the candidate may not begin,

and the letter of offer must be signed by the school director and the regional campus dean.

Searches for regional campus Teaching faculty and research faculty are the same as those

described above for tenure-track faculty.

Associated faculty are appointed by the regional campus associate dean, in consultation with the

dean/director, school director, program coordinators, and other relevant faculty members.

7 Courtesy Appointments for Faculty

Any school faculty member may propose a 0% FTE (courtesy) appointment for a tenure-track,

teaching, or research faculty member from another Ohio State tenure-initiating unit. A proposal

that describes the uncompensated academic service to this school justifying the appointment is

considered at a regular faculty meeting. If the proposal is approved by the eligible faculty, the

school director extends an offer of appointment. The school director reviews all courtesy

appointments every five years to determine whether they continue to be justified, and takes

recommendations for nonrenewal before the faculty for a vote at a regular meeting. A courtesy

appointment is not necessary to serve as a co-advisor or committee member of a graduate student

in the School of Earth Sciences.

V Annual Performance and Merit Review

The school follows the requirements for the annual performance and merit review as set forth in the

Policy on Faculty Annual Review and Reappointment, which stipulates that such reviews must include

a scheduled opportunity for a face-to-face meeting as well as a written assessment. The purposes of the

review are to:

• Assist faculty in improving professional productivity through candid and constructive feedback

and through the establishment of professional development plans;

• Establish the goals against which a faculty member’s performance will be assessed in the

foreseeable future;

• Document faculty performance in the achievement of stated goals in order to determine salary

increases and other resource allocations, progress toward promotion, and, in the event of poor

performance, the need for remedial steps; and

• Importantly, the annual review process will also be used by the school director to ensure and

promote a workplace climate that values and rewards equity-minded faculty workload with

respect to teaching and service.

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

The annual performance and merit review of every faculty member is based on expected performance

in teaching, scholarship, and service as set forth in the school’s guidelines on faculty duties and

responsibilities listed in the POA document; assessment by the School’s Faculty Annual Evaluation

Committee; on any additional assignments and goals specific to the individual; and on progress

toward promotion where relevant. Meritorious performance in teaching, scholarship, and service is

assessed in accordance with the same criteria that form the basis for promotion decisions.

The school director is required (per Faculty Rule 3335-3-35) to include a reminder in the annual

performance and merit review letter that all faculty have the right (per Faculty Rule 3335-5-04) to

view their primary personnel file and to provide written comment on any material therein for

inclusion in the file.

A Documentation

For their annual performance and merit review, tenure-track and tenured faculty members in the

School of Earth Sciences must submit the following documents to the school director by a date

specified by the school director, usually in February:

• updated CV, which will be made available to all faculty in an accessible place (all faculty)

• completed Annual Activity Report form (Appendix A) listing recent research, teaching

(including evidence of teaching effectiveness, which includes student evaluations for all faculty

and, in the case of Assistant and Associate Professors faculty, peer teaching evaluations), and

service activities over the previous two calendar years; this Annual Activity Report may be

supplemented by a one-page summary of the faculty member’s accomplishments over this period

of time.

o If deemed necessary by the school director, evaluation of teaching may also be requested

of Professors

• probationary faculty must also update their Office of Academic Affairs dossier outline, Policies

and Procedures Handbook, Volume 3

In all cases it is the responsibility of the faculty member to see that professional achievements are

brought to the attention of the School of Earth Sciences. Other documentation for the annual

performance and merit review will be the same as that for consideration for promotion and/or tenure.

That documentation is described in Section VI of this document.

Under no circumstances should faculty solicit evaluations from any party for purposes of the annual

performance and merit review, as such solicitation places its recipient in an awkward position and

produces a result that is unlikely to be candid.

The school director will review these documents and other evidence as may be required, including

consultation, as necessary, with appropriate faculty, Mentor committees, and the Faculty Annual

Evaluation Committee. The director will use all of this information as the basis for an annual

performance and merit review of each faculty. As noted above, the school director will provide each

faculty member with written feedback regarding his or her performance and future plans.

B Probationary Tenure-track Faculty on the Columbus Campus

Every probationary tenure-track faculty member is reviewed annually by the school director, who

meets with the faculty member to discuss his or her performance, future plans, and goals; and

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

prepares a written evaluation that includes a recommendation on whether to renew the probationary

appointment.

Every probationary tenure track faculty member will also be reviewed annually by their assigned

Mentor committee, by the Committee of the Eligible Faculty (in the spring semester), and by the

Faculty Annual Evaluation Committee. The POA describes the functions and activities of the mentor

committee, committee of eligible faculty, and faculty annual evaluation committee.

If the school director recommends renewal of the appointment, this recommendation is final. The

director’s annual review letter to the faculty member renews the probationary appointment for another

year and includes content on future plans and goals. The faculty member may provide written

comments on the review. The director’s letter (along with the faculty member's comments, if

received) is forwarded to the dean of the college. In addition, the annual review letter becomes part of

the cumulative dossier for promotion and tenure (along with the faculty member's comments, if he or

she chooses).

If the school director recommends nonrenewal, the probationary faculty member must be informed in

writing and the Fourth-Year Review process (per Faculty Rule 3335-6-03) is invoked. Following

completion of the comments process, the complete dossier is forwarded to the college for review and

the dean makes the final decision on renewal or nonrenewal of the probationary appointment. Non-

renewal letters must be approved by the college Dean in advance of being sent.

1 Fourth-Year Review

During the fourth year of the probationary period the annual review follows the same procedures

as the mandatory tenure review, with the exceptions that external evaluations are optional and the

dean (not the school director) makes the final decision regarding renewal or nonrenewal of the

probationary appointment.

External evaluations are solicited only when either the school director or the eligible faculty

determine that they are necessary to conduct the Fourth-Year Review. This may occur when the

candidate’s scholarship is in an emergent field, is interdisciplinary, or the eligible faculty do not

feel otherwise capable of evaluating the scholarship without outside input.

The committee of eligible faculty conducts a review of the candidate as supervised by the P&T

Chair in consultation with the Procedural Oversight Designee. On completion of the review, the

eligible faculty votes by written (or electronic) ballot on whether to renew the probationary

appointment.

The P&T Chair forwards a record of the vote and a written performance review to the school

director, who conducts an independent assessment of performance and prepares a written

evaluation that includes a recommendation on whether to renew the probationary appointment.

This review thus results in two letters of evaluation: one from the P&T Chair and a separate letter

from the school director.

At the conclusion of the school review, the formal comments process (per Faculty Rule 3335-6-

04) is followed and the case is forwarded to the college for review, regardless of whether the

school director recommends renewal or nonrenewal.

Renewal of the appointment of a probationary faculty member for the fifth year requires the

approval of the divisional dean, who serves as the Dean’s designee for the review. In cases where

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

the divisional dean concurs with the School of Earth Sciences’ recommendations to approve the

renewal of the appointment, review by the college divisional P&T review panel is optional and at

the divisional dean’s discretion. The divisional P&T review panel, however, must review

negative reappointment recommendations. The Dean, in consultation with the divisional dean,

will make the final decision on non-reappointment.

2 Exclusion of Time from Probationary Period

Faculty Rule 3335-6-03 (D) sets forth the conditions under which a probationary tenure-track

faculty member may exclude time from the probationary period. Additional procedures and

guidelines can be found in the Office of Academic Affairs Policies and Procedures Handbook.

C Tenured Faculty on the Columbus Campus

Associate professors are reviewed annually by the Committee of Eligible Faculty. The mentor

committee submits a written performance review to the school director along with comments on the

Associate Professor’s progress towards promotion. The school director conducts an independent

assessment; meets with the faculty member to discuss his or her performance and future plans and

goals; and prepares a written evaluation on these topics. The faculty member may provide written

comments on the review.

Professors are reviewed annually by the school director, who gives each Professor the chance to meet

and discuss the professor’s performance and future plans and goals. The annual review of professors

is based on their having achieved sustained excellence in the discovery and dissemination of new

knowledge relevant to the mission of the tenure initiating unit, as demonstrated by national and

international recognition of their scholarship; ongoing excellence in teaching, including their

leadership in graduate education in both teaching and mentoring students; and outstanding service to

the school, the university, and their profession, including their support for the professional

development of assistant and associate professors. Professors are expected to be role models in their

academic work, interaction with colleagues and students, and in the recruitment and retention of

junior colleagues. As the highest ranking members of the faculty, the expectations for academic

leadership and mentoring for professors exceed those for all other members of the faculty.

If a professor has an administrative role, the impact of that role and other assignments will be

considered in the annual review. The school director prepares a written evaluation of performance

against these expectations. The faculty member may provide written comments on the review.

D Teaching Faculty on the Columbus Campus

The annual performance and merit review process for probationary and nonprobationary teaching

faculty is identical to that for tenure-track probationary and tenured faculty respectively, except that

non-probationary teaching faculty may participate in the review of teaching faculty of lower rank.

In the penultimate contract year of a teaching faculty member's appointment, the school director must

determine whether the position held by the faculty member will continue. If the position will not

continue, the faculty member is informed that the final contract year will be a terminal year of

employment. The standards of notice set forth in Faculty Rule 3335-6-08 must be observed.

There is no presumption of renewal of appointment.

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

E Research Faculty on the Columbus Campus

The annual review process for probationary and nonprobationary research faculty is identical to that

for tenure-track probationary and tenured faculty, respectively, except that non-probationary research

faculty may participate in the review of research faculty of lower rank.

In the penultimate contract year of a research faculty member's appointment, the school director must

determine whether the position held by the faculty member will continue. If it will not continue, the

faculty member is informed that the final contract year will be a terminal year of employment. The

standards of notice set forth in Faculty Rule 3335-6-08 must be observed.

If the position will continue, a formal performance review for reappointment is necessary in the

penultimate contract year to determine whether the faculty member will be offered a new contract.

This review generally proceeds in the same manner as the Fourth-Year Review procedures for tenure

track faculty.

There is no presumption of renewal of appointment.

F Associated Faculty on the Columbus Campus

Compensated associated faculty members in their initial appointment must be reviewed before

reappointment. The school director, or designee, prepares a written evaluation and meets with the

faculty member to discuss his or her performance, future plans, and goals.

The director’s decision on renewal of the appointment is final. If the decision is to renew, the director

may extend a multiple year appointment.

Compensated associated faculty members on a multiple year appointment are reviewed annually by

the school director, or designee, who prepares a written evaluation and meets with the faculty member

to discuss his or her performance, future plans, and goals. No later than October 15 of the final year

of the appointment, the director will decide whether or not to reappoint. The director’s decision on

reappointment is final.

G Regional Campus Faculty

The annual performance and merit review of a regional campus probationary tenure-track or tenured

faculty member is first conducted on the regional campus, with a focus on teaching and service. The

review then moves to the school and proceeds as described above for probationary tenure-track and

tenured faculty, respectively, on the Columbus campus. In the event of divergence in performance

assessment between the regional campus and the school, the school director discusses the matter with

the regional campus dean/director in an effort to clarify and reconcile the divergence, so that the

faculty member receives consistent assessment and advice.

The annual performance and merit review of regional campus teaching faculty is conducted on the

regional campus. The dean will provide the school director a copy of a teaching faculty member’s

annual performance and merit review letter.

The annual performance and merit review of regional campus research faculty is conducted by the

school and proceeds as described above for Columbus campus research faculty. The school director

will provide the regional campus dean a copy of the faculty member’s annual performance and merit

review letter.

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

The annual performance and merit review of regional campus associated faculty is conducted entirely

on the regional campus.

H Salary Recommendations

The school director makes annual salary recommendations (as a percentage and/or whole dollar

amount) to the dean, who may modify them. The recommendations are based on the current annual

performance and merit review as well as on the performance and merit reviews of the preceding two,

full calendar years. In adopting a process for the distribution of merit salary and other rewards, the

School recognizes the importance of qualitative rather than mere quantitative contributions in each of

the three areas of faculty activity (research, teaching, service).

In formulating recommendations, the school director consults with the Faculty Annual Evaluation

Committee, which provides an initial assessment of each faculty relative to expectations outlined in

the POA (see section on Distribution of Faculty Duties and Responsibilities) with attention to patterns

of increasing or declining productivity.

As a general approach to formulating salary recommendations, the school director divides faculty into

at least four groups based on continuing productivity (high, average, low, and unsatisfactory) and

considers market and internal equity issues. The number of faculty in each grouping does not have to

be equal (i.e., these groupings are not defined as ‘quartiles’). In fact, it is anticipated that most faculty

will meet or exceed expectations in research, teaching, and service. Faculty whose performance is

below expectations in one or more areas are likely to receive minimal or no salary increases.

Equity raises may be used by the school director to redress inequities in the salary of individuals or

groups of faculty when these are discovered relative to peer groups. Raises for excellence may be

used by the school director to retain outstanding faculty members, reward faculty with a pattern of

exceptional service to the school, college, and/or university, or recognize high quality performance in

all three areas (teaching, scholarship, service).

Faculty members who wish to discuss dissatisfaction with their salary increase with the school

director should be prepared to explain how their salary (rather than the increase) is inappropriately

low, since increases are solely a means to the end of an optimal distribution of salaries.

Faculty who fail to submit the required documentation (see Section V-A above) for an annual

performance and merit review at the required time will receive no salary increase in the year for

which documentation was not provided, except in extenuating circumstances, and may not expect to

recoup the foregone raise at a later time.

One-time cash payments or other rewards (e.g., travel or research funds) may be made to recognize

non-continuing contributions (e.g., for exceptional service to the school) that justify reward but do not

justify permanent salary increases. Such payments/rewards are considered at the time of annual salary

recommendations.

VI Promotion and Tenure and Promotion Reviews

Faculty Rule 3335-6-02 provides the following context for promotion and tenure and promotion

reviews:

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

In evaluating the candidate's qualifications in teaching, scholarship, and service, reasonable

flexibility shall be exercised, balancing, where the case requires, heavier commitments and

responsibilities in one area against lighter commitments and responsibilities in another. In

addition, as the university enters new fields of endeavor, including interdisciplinary endeavors,

and places new emphases on its continuing activities, instances will arise in which the proper

work of faculty members may depart from established academic patterns. In such cases care must

be taken to apply the criteria with sufficient flexibility. In all instances superior intellectual

attainment, in accordance with the criteria set forth in these rules, is an essential qualification for

promotion to tenured positions. Clearly, insistence upon this standard for continuing members of

the faculty is necessary for maintenance and enhancement of the quality of the university as an

institution dedicated to the discovery and transmission of knowledge.

A Criteria and Documentation that Support Promotion

1 Promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure

Faculty Rule 3335-6-02 provides the following general criteria for promotion to associate

professor with tenure:

The awarding of tenure and promotion to the rank of associate professor must be based on

convincing evidence that the faculty member has achieved excellence as a teacher, as a scholar,

and as one who provides effective service; and can be expected to continue a program of high-

quality teaching, scholarship, and service relevant to the mission of the academic unit(s) to which

the faculty member is assigned and to the university.

Tenure is not awarded below the rank of associate professor at The Ohio State University.

The award of tenure is an acknowledgement of excellence and future potential for preeminence. It

is therefore essential to evaluate and judge the probability that faculty, once tenured, will continue

to develop professionally and contribute to the school’s academic mission at a high level for the

duration of their time at the university. The claim that retention of the candidate will improve the

overall quality and standing of the school needs to be supported.

Every candidate is held to a high standard of excellence in all aspects of performance. Above all,

candidates are held to a very high standard of excellence in the areas central to their

responsibilities. For example, if a candidate's primary teaching role is and will continue to be

undergraduate teaching, then excellence in undergraduate teaching is required. A mediocre

performance in this area would not be adequately counterbalanced by excellent performance in

another aspect of teaching that is a significantly smaller part of the individual's responsibilities.

Excellence in teaching, scholarship, and service is moreover defined to include professional

ethical conduct in each area of responsibility, consistent with the American Association of

University Professors' Statement on Professional Ethics.

Promotion to associate professor with tenure in the College of Arts and Sciences requires

excellence in both scholarship and teaching, where scholarship is defined as research, scholarly

and/or creative work. Excellence in Research and Teaching are as defined in the Distribution of

Faculty Duties and Responsibilities of the POA document. Additional research criteria for

promotion to associate professor include the development of a national reputation in the

candidate's field as evidenced by external evaluations, invitations to present at recognized

prestigious forums, invitations to review research papers and grant proposals, and a beginning

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

trend of positive citations in other researchers' publications. A reputation based on the quality of

the published research contribution is distinguished from one based mainly on familiarity through

the faculty member's frequent attendance at national and international conferences. External

evaluation of a faculty member by his/her peers at the time of consideration for promotion with

tenure must show that the faculty member’s research has made a positive impact in the area of

his/her expertise and has the potential to continue to advance the body of knowledge

significantly. The promise of excellence in service is desirable. The service contribution during

the probationary period of assistant professors is limited by design. The most important judgment

is that the candidate will achieve excellence in service in the future.

In the evaluation of untenured associate professors for tenure, the same criteria will apply, along

with any others established in writing at the time a senior rank appointment without tenure was

offered.

2 Promotion to Professor

Faculty Rule 3335-6-02 establishes the following general criteria for promotion to the rank of

professor:

Promotion to the rank of professor must be based on convincing evidence that the faculty

member has a sustained record of excellence in teaching; has produced a significant body of

scholarship that is recognized nationally or internationally; and has demonstrated leadership

in service.

The specific criteria in teaching, scholarship, and service for promotion to professor are similar to

those for promotion to associate professor with tenure, with the added expectation of sustained

accomplishment and increasing quality of scholarly contributions, a record of continuing

professional growth, leadership roles within the School, College and University, evidence of

established national or international reputation in the field, and leadership in service that includes

membership on prestigious national and international scientific/agency committees and/or

editorships and associate editorships of journals. For promotion to Professor, a faculty member is

expected to be a role model for junior faculty, for students, and for the profession.

In the area of research, the faculty member being considered for promotion to professor must

have demonstrated continued publication of peer-reviewed scholarly work at the same rate or

greater than is expected of assistant professors. The external evaluations at the time of

consideration for promotion must demonstrate that the faculty member has made a solid and

significant positive impact in the area(s) of his/her expertise and that there is a continuing

expectation of advancing the body of knowledge with national and/or international recognition.

External research funding must be well established and have the potential to support a long-range

research program.

Excellence in service means the provision of a high level of professional expertise and

experience, particularly leadership roles, to the university, the public, and the profession.

Under certain conditions, a faculty member could be considered for promotion with an

exceptional teaching and service record combined with a less extensive, though excellent record,

of research. When assessing a candidate’s national and international reputation in the field, a

national and international reputation for the scholarship of teaching may be counted as either

teaching or scholarship.

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

In addition, as further specified by Faculty Rule 3335-6-02, assessment is in relation to specific

assigned responsibilities with reasonable flexibility being exercised in order to balance, where the

case requires, heavier responsibilities and commitment in one area against lighter ones in another.

Promotion should reflect the reality that (a) not all faculty members have the same distribution of

assignments (b) not all faculty members will be able to contribute excellence equally in all

evaluation dimensions; and (c) there is a multi-faceted institutional responsibility that must be

achieved by the skills of the faculty collectively. Promotion to professor should be awarded not

only to those faculty who have demonstrated impact in their scholarship of research and creative

inquiry, teaching and learning, and service, but also to those who have exhibited excellence in the

scholarship of leadership to make visible and demonstrable impact upon the mission of the

school, college and university. In instances where the candidate has demonstrated excellence in

teaching and/or scholarship outside of traditional research, the P&T Chair and CEF in the School

of Earth Sciences must seek external letters documenting the quality of teaching, leadership,

and/or service.

3 Teaching Faculty

Promotion to Assistant Teaching Professor. For promotion to assistant teaching professor, a

faculty member must complete his/her doctoral degree and be performing satisfactorily in

teaching, professional practice, and service.

Promotion to Associate Teaching Professor. For promotion to associate teaching professor, a

faculty member must show convincing evidence of excellence as a teacher and a provider of

effective service; must have a documented high level of competence in professional practice; and

must display the potential for continuing a program of high-quality teaching and service relevant

to the mission of this school. Specific criteria in teaching and service for promotion to associate

teaching professor are similar to those for promotion to associate professor with tenure. In some

cases, scholarship activity (e.g., research leading to peer-reviewed publications, books or book

chapters, research grant proposals, advising student or postdoc research) may be required, and

will be spelled out in the College-approved letter of offer. Research/scholarship cannot account

for more than 15-20% of the duties. Normal teaching duties for an associate teaching professor

are 6 courses per year. Up to a 1 course reduction (20%) may be provided for research.

Promotion to Teaching Professor. For promotion to teaching professor, a faculty member must

have a record of continuing professional growth and increasing quality of contributions, including

a sustained record of excellence in teaching and professional practice; leadership in service to this

school and to the profession; and production and dissemination of scholarly materials pertinent to

pedagogy and/or professional practice. Research activity may occur as outlined above for the

Associate Teaching Professor.

4 Research Faculty

Promotion to Research Associate Professor. For promotion to research associate professor, a

faculty member must have a substantial record of high-quality focused research consistent with

an appointment devoted solely to research. Publications must appear in high-quality peer-

reviewed venues and be judged by external evaluators as having substantial positive impact on

the field. A record of continuous peer reviewed extramural and/or commercial funding is required

and should support a significant portion of her/his salary and benefits. Evidence of a growing

national reputation is also required.

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

Promotion to Research Professor. For promotion to research professor, a faculty member must

have a national or international reputation built on an extensive body of high-quality publications

and with demonstrated impact on the field. A record of continuous peer-reviewed extramural

and/or commercial funding (that supports her/his salary and benefits) is required, along with

demonstrated research productivity as a result of such funding.

5 Associated Faculty

Promotion to Adjunct Associate Professor and Adjunct Professor. The relevant criteria for

the promotion of adjunct faculty members shall be the same as those for the promotion of tenure-

track, clinical, or research faculty, as appropriate to the appointment, above.

Promotion to Associate Professor and Professor with FTE below 50%. The relevant criteria

for the promotion of associated faculty members with tenure-track titles are those for the

promotion of tenure-track faculty above.

Promotion to Senior Lecturer. Lecturers may be promoted to senior lecturer if they meet the

criteria for appointment at that rank as described in Section IV.A.5.

Promotion of Visiting Faculty. Visiting faculty members are not eligible for promotion.

6 Regional Campus Faculty

The primary function of the regional campuses is to provide high-quality undergraduate

instruction and to serve the academic needs of their communities. With this consideration in

mind, in evaluating regional campus tenure-track faculty for promotion and tenure or promotion,

the school will give greater emphasis to the quality of teaching and service relative to scholarship

(i.e., research). Recognizing that the character and quantity of scholarship by regional campus

faculty may differ from that of Columbus campus faculty, due to the weight of other

responsibilities and lack of access to comparable resources, the school nevertheless expects

regional campus faculty to establish a program of high-quality scholarly activity in the form of

peer-reviewed publications or other evidence of scholarly contributions.

In evaluating regional campus teaching faculty, research faculty, and associated faculty for

promotion, the school will use the same criteria as described above for the promotion of faculty in

each of these categories.

B Procedures

The school’s procedures for promotion and tenure and promotion reviews are fully consistent with

those set forth in Faculty Rule 3335-6-04 and the Office Academic Affairs annually updated

procedural guidelines for promotion and tenure reviews found in Volume 3 of the Policies and

Procedures Handbook.

1 Tenure-Track, Teaching, and Research Faculty on the Columbus Campus

a Candidate Responsibilities

Candidates for promotion and tenure or promotion are responsible for submitting a complete,

accurate dossier and providing a copy of the APT under which they wish to be reviewed. If

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

external evaluations are required, candidates are responsible for reviewing the list of potential

external evaluators compiled for their case according to school guidelines.

• Dossier

Every candidate must submit a complete and accurate dossier that follows the Office of

Academic Affairs dossier outline. Candidates should not sign the Office of Academic Affairs

Candidate Checklist without ascertaining that they have fully met the requirements set forth

in the Office of Academic Affairs core dossier outline including, but not limited to, those

highlighted on the checklist.

While the Promotion and Tenure (P&T) Chair, Procedural Oversight Designee (POD), and

Committee of Eligible Faculty (CEF) make reasonable efforts to check the dossier for

accuracy and completeness, the candidate bears full responsibility for all parts of the dossier

that are to be completed by him or her.

The time period for teaching documentation to be included in the dossier for probationary

faculty is the start date to present. For tenured or nonprobationary faculty it is the date of last

promotion or the last five years, whichever is less, to present. The eligible faculty may allow

a tenured or nonprobationary candidate to include information prior to the date of last

promotion if it believes such information would be relevant to the review. Any such material

should be clearly indicated.

For scholarship documentation, a full history of publications and creative work should be

included, as this information provides context to the more recent and relevant research record

and/or demonstrates scholarly independence. Information about scholarship produced prior to

the start date (for probationary faculty) or date of last promotion (for tenured or

nonprobationary faculty) may be provided. Any such material should be clearly indicated.

However, it is the scholarship performance since the start date or date of last promotion that

is to be the focus of the evaluating parties.

The time period for service documentation to be included in the dossier for probationary

faculty is the start date to present. For tenured or nonprobationary faculty it is the date of last

promotion to present. The eligible faculty may allow a candidate to include information prior

to the date of last promotion if it believes such information would be relevant to the review.

Any such material should be clearly indicated.

Specific documentation by the school is shown in the list below.

1. Research

• Copies of all scholarly papers published or accepted for publication. Papers accepted

for publication but not yet published must be accompanied by a letter from the

publisher stating that the paper has been unequivocally accepted and is in final form,

with no further revisions needed. An author's manuscript does not document

publication.

• Official documentation of grants and contracts received including notice of awards if

requested by the school director, P&T Chair, or CEF.

• Official documentation of invention disclosures, patents (provisional patent

applications and non-provisional patent utility awards), disclosures, options and

commercial licenses, creative works including multimedia, curated exhibits, and

websites.

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

• Other relevant documentation of research as appropriate (e.g., grants and contract

proposals that have been submitted but not funded, list of conference abstracts, list of

invited talks and seminars, list of research recognition such as awards by the faculty

member or their graduate and undergraduate students).

• list of prizes and awards for research, scholarly, or creative work.

2. Teaching

• cumulative SEI reports (Student Evaluation of Instruction computer generated

summaries prepared by the University Registrar) for every class. All faculty

members should seek and retain written feedback from students through the SEI

system and, where applicable, mid-course instructor-generated written feedback

forms.

• Peer evaluation of teaching reports as required by the School of Earth Sciences’ peer

evaluation of teaching program (described in the POA document).

• teaching activities as listed in the core dossier including:

o involvement in graduate/professional exams, theses, and dissertations, and

undergraduate research

o mentoring postdoctoral scholars and researchers

o extension and continuing education instruction

o involvement in curriculum development

o awards and formal recognition of teaching

o presentations on pedagogy and teaching at national and international

conferences

• adoption of teaching materials at other colleges or universities

• other relevant documentation of teaching as appropriate.

3. Service

• any available documentation of the quality of service that enhances the list of service

activities in the dossier.

• service activities as listed in the core dossier including:

o involvement with professional journals and professional societies

o review of grant proposals at federal funding agencies

o consultation activity with industry, education, or government

o administrative service to the School, college, and university, including the

Office of Student Life

o advising to student groups and organizations

o awards and prizes for service to profession, university, or department

The complete dossier is forwarded when the review moves beyond the school. The

documentation of teaching is forwarded along with the dossier. The documentation of

scholarship and service is for use during the school review only, unless reviewers at the

college and university levels specifically request it.

• Appointments, Promotion, and Tenure (APT) Document

Candidates must also indicate the APT under which they wish to be reviewed. Candidates

may elect to be reviewed under (a) the school’s current APT document; (b) the APT

document that was in effect on their start date; or (c) the APT document that was in

effect on the date of their last promotion, whichever of these two latter documents is the

more recent. However, the current APT document must be used if the letter of offer or

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

last promotion, whichever is more recent, was more than 10 years before April 1 of the

review year.

If a candidate wishes to be reviewed under an APT other than the current approved version

available here, a copy of the APT document under which the candidate has elected to be

reviewed must be submitted when the dossier is submitted to the school.

• External Evaluations (see also External evaluations below)

As noted above, if external evaluations are required, candidates are responsible for

reviewing the list of potential external evaluators developed according to school guidelines.

The candidate may add no more than three additional names, but is not required to do so.

The candidate may request the removal of no more than two names, providing the reasons

for the request. The school director decides whether removal is justified.

Under no circumstances should a candidate under review solicit evaluations from any party

for purposes of the review.

b Committee of Eligible Faculty (CEF) Responsibilities

The School Director) may attend meetings at which promotion and tenure matters are discussed

and may respond to questions, but may not vote. The P&T Chair is appointed by the school

director as described in the POA document.

Senior-rank faculty under consideration, regardless of type (tenure-track, teaching, research,

associated) may be reviewed only by faculty of the rank at or above consideration (associate

and professor for associate, and professor for professor).

The responsibilities of the CEF are as follows:

• To review this APT document annually and to recommend proposed revisions to the

faculty.

• To review thoroughly and objectively every candidate's dossier in advance of the meeting

at which the candidate's case will be discussed

• To attend all eligible faculty meetings except when circumstances beyond one's control

prevent attendance; to participate in discussion of every case; and to vote

• To consider annually, in spring semester, requests from faculty members seeking a non-

mandatory review in the following academic year and to decide whether it is appropriate for

such a review to take place. Only professors on the committee may consider promotion review

requests to the rank of professor. A two-thirds majority of those eligible to vote on a request

must vote affirmatively for the review to proceed.

o The committee bases its decision on assessment of the record as presented in the faculty

member's CV and on a determination of the availability of all required documentation for

a full review (student and peer evaluations of teaching). Lack of the required

documentation is necessary and sufficient grounds on which to deny a non-mandatory

review.

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

o A tenured faculty member may only be denied a formal promotion review under Faculty

Rule 3335-6-04 only once. If the denial is based on lack of required documentation and

the faculty member insists that the review go forward in the following year despite

incomplete documentation, the individual should be advised that such a review is

unlikely to be successful.

o A decision by the CEF to permit a review to take place in no way commits the eligible

faculty, the school director, or any other party to the review to making a positive

recommendation during the review itself.

• Annually, in late spring through early autumn semester, to provide administrative support

for the promotion and tenure review process as described below.

o Late Spring: Select from among its members a Procedures Oversight Designee who will

serve in this role for the following year. The Procedures Oversight Designee cannot be

the same individual who chairs the CEF. The Procedures Oversight Designee's

responsibilities are described in the Office of Academic Affairs annual procedural

guidelines.

o Late Spring: In consultation with the candidate’s mentors and the P&T Chair, the CEF

suggest a list of names of possible external evaluators to the school director.

o Early Autumn: With help from the candidate’s mentors and P&T Chair, review

candidates' dossiers for completeness, accuracy (including citations), and consistency

with Office of Academic Affairs requirements; and work with candidates to assure that

needed revisions are made in the dossier before the formal review process begins.

o Meet with each candidate for clarification as necessary and provide the candidate an

opportunity to comment on his or her dossier. This meeting is not an occasion to debate

the candidate's record.

o Review an analysis of the candidate’s performance in teaching, scholarship, and service

drafted by the candidate’s mentors, and seek to clarify any inconsistent evidence in the

case, where possible.

o Meet to consider and vote on a candidate’s case. The P&T Chair, in consultation with the

CEF, drafts a letter to include the faculty vote and a summary of the faculty perspectives

expressed during the meeting; and forwards the completed written evaluation and

recommendation to the school director.

o The P&T Chair also provides a written response, on behalf of the CEF, to any candidate

comments that warrant response, for inclusion in the dossier.

o Provide a written evaluation and recommendation to the school director in the case of

joint appointees from another tenure-initiating unit. The full eligible faculty does not vote

on these cases since the school’s recommendation must be provided to the other tenure-

initiating unit substantially earlier than the committee begins meeting on this school’s

cases.

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

o The P&T Chair may appoint a representative among the CEF whose function is to review

a candidate’s dossier from a critical, arm’s-length viewpoint and point out both strengths

and weaknesses of the case.

c Promotion & Tenure (P&T) Subcommittee

This subcommittee is responsible for organizing material for faculty P&T reviews (e.g.,

dossiers, external letters), and working with mentor committees (Appendix B) who will be

presenting each case to the entire CEF. The P&T subcommittee will be composed of the

following members: the P&T Chair, a professor appointed by the school director; a Procedures

Oversight Designee (POD), a professor selected by the CEF; and administrative assistant,

typically the School’s Administrative Manager.

d School Director’s Responsibilities

The responsibilities of the school director are as follows:

• To charge each member of the CEF to conduct reviews free of bias and based on criteria.

• To determine whether a candidate is authorized to work in the United States and whether a

candidate now, or in the future, will require sponsorship for an employment visa or

immigration status.

• Late Spring or Early Summer Semester: Charge the P&T Chair with the solicitation of

external evaluations from a list including names suggested by the CEF, the school director,

and the candidate. (Also see External Evaluations below.)

• To solicit an evaluation from a TIU head of any TIU in which the candidate has a joint

appointment.

• To charge the P&T Chair with making each candidate's dossier available in an accessible

place for review by the eligible faculty at least two weeks before the meeting at which

specific cases are to be discussed and voted.

• To remove any member of the eligible faculty from the review of a candidate when the

member has a conflict of interest but does not voluntarily withdraw from the review.

• To attend the meetings of the eligible faculty at which promotion and tenure matters are

discussed and respond to questions raised during the meeting. At the request of the eligible

faculty, a school director will leave the meeting to allow open discussion among the

eligible faculty members.

• To remove any member of the CEF from the review of a candidate when the member has a

conflict of interest but does not voluntarily withdraw from the review. The Procedures

Oversight Designee and Associate Dean of Faculty Affairs in the College of Arts and Sciences

can help the school define and resolve conflicts of interest (COI). COI exists when a CEF

member is related to a candidate or has a comparable close interpersonal relationship, has

substantive financial ties with the candidate, is dependent in some way on the candidate's

services, has a close professional relationship with the candidate (e.g., dissertation or

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

postdoc advisor), or has collaborated so extensively with the candidate that an objective

review of the candidate's work is not possible.

• Mid-Autumn Semester: To provide an independent written evaluation and

recommendation for each candidate, following receipt of the CEF’s completed evaluation

and recommendation (written by the P&T Chair).

• To meet with the eligible faculty to explain any recommendations contrary to the

recommendation of the committee.

• To inform each candidate in writing after completion of the school review process:

o of the recommendations by the CEF and school director

o of the availability for review of the written evaluations by the CEF and school director

o of the opportunity to submit written comments on the above material, within ten calendar

days from receipt of the letter from the school director, for inclusion in the dossier. The

letter is accompanied by a form that the candidate returns to the director, indicating

whether or not he or she expects to submit comments.

• To provide a written response to any candidate comments that warrant response for inclusion

in the dossier.

• To charge the P&T Chair or designee (e.g., Administrative Manager) with forwarding the

completed dossier to the college office by that office's deadline.

• To receive the CEF’s written evaluation and recommendation of candidates who are joint

appointees from other tenure-initiating units, and to forward this material, along with the

school director’s independent written evaluation and recommendation, to the TIU head of the

other tenure-initiating unit by the date requested.

2 Procedures for Associated Faculty on the Columbus Campus

Adjunct faculty and associated faculty with tenure-track titles for whom promotion is a possibility

follow the promotion guidelines and procedures detailed in Section VI.B above, with the

exception that the review does not proceed to the college level if the school director’s

recommendation is negative, and does not proceed to the executive vice president and provost if

the dean's recommendation is negative.

However, should a recommendation from the school director be positive, that decision shall

proceed to the dean.

3 Procedures for Regional Campus Faculty

Regional campus tenure-track faculty are first reviewed by the regional campus faculty according

to the process established on that campus and then by the regional campus dean. The regional

campus review focuses on teaching and service. The regional campus dean forwards the written

evaluation and recommendation of the regional campus review to the school director, from which

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

point the review follows the procedures described for the Columbus campus faculty. A request to

promote requires agreement by the dean and the school director.

Regional campus teaching faculty are reviewed by the regional campus faculty according to the

process established on that campus and then by the regional campus dean. Following the review,

the dean consults with the faculty member’s school director. A request to promote follows the

same procedures as tenure-track faculty except that external letters are not needed unless

scholarship is a component of the assigned role.

Associated faculty are reviewed by the regional campus faculty according to the process

established on that campus and then by the regional campus dean/director. The decision of the

regional campus dean/director is final.

4 External Evaluations

External evaluations of scholarly activity and research are obtained for all promotion reviews in

which scholarship must be assessed. These include all tenure-track promotion and tenure or

promotion reviews and all research appointment contract renewals and promotion reviews.

External evaluations of scholarly activity and research are not obtained for teaching or associated

faculty unless the faculty member has been involved in a significant amount of scholarship. The

decision to seek external evaluations for a teaching or associated faculty member will be made by

the school director after consulting with the candidate and the P&T Chair.

A minimum of five credible and useful evaluations must be obtained. A credible and useful

evaluation:

• Is written by a person highly qualified to judge the candidate's scholarship (or other

performance, if relevant) who is not a close personal friend, research collaborator, or former

academic advisor or post-doctoral mentor of the candidate. Qualifications are generally

judged on the basis of the evaluator's expertise, record of accomplishments, and institutional

affiliation. This school will solicit evaluations only from professors at institutions comparable

to Ohio State. In the case of an assistant professor seeking promotion to associate professor

with tenure, a minority of the evaluations may come from associate professors. Requests can

also be made from highly ranked Research Professors as long as a minority of evaluations

come from research professors.

• Provides sufficient analysis of the candidate's performance to add information to the review.

A letter's usefulness is defined as the extent to which the letter is analytical as opposed to

perfunctory. Under no circumstances will “usefulness” be defined by the perspective taken by

an evaluator on the merits of the case.

Since the school cannot control who agrees to write and or the usefulness of the letters received,

more letters are sought than are required, and they are solicited no later than the end of the

summer semester prior to the review year. This timing allows additional letters to be requested

should fewer than five useful letters result from the first round of requests.

As described above, a list of ideally ten potential evaluators is assembled by the CEF, P&T Chair,

school director, and the candidate. If the evaluators suggested by the candidate meet the criteria

for credibility, a letter is requested from at least one of those persons. Faculty Rule 3335-6-04

requires that no more than half the external evaluation letters in the dossier be written by persons

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

suggested by the candidate. In the event that the person(s) suggested by the candidate do not

agree to write, neither the Office of Academic Affairs nor this school requires that the dossier

contain letters from evaluators suggested by the candidate.

The school follows the Office of Academic Affairs suggested format for letters requesting

external evaluations. A sample letter for tenure-track faculty can be found here. A sample letter

for teaching faculty can be found here.

Under no circumstances may a candidate solicit external evaluations or initiate contact in any way

with external evaluators for any purpose related to the promotion review. If an external evaluator

should initiate contact with the candidate regarding the review, the candidate must inform the

evaluator that such communication is inappropriate and report the occurrence to the school

director, who will decide what, if any, action is warranted (requesting permission from the Office

of Academic Affairs to exclude that letter from the dossier). It is in the candidate's self-interest to

assure that there is no ethical or procedural lapse, or the appearance of such a lapse, in the course

of the review process.

All solicited external evaluation letters that are received must be included in the dossier. If

concerns arise about any of the letters received, these concerns may be addressed in the school’s

written evaluations or brought to the attention of the Office of Academic Affairs for advice.

VII Appeals

Faculty Rule 3335-6-05 sets forth general criteria for appeals of negative promotion and tenure decisions.

Appeals alleging improper evaluation are described in Faculty Rule 3335-5-05.

Disagreement with a negative decision is not grounds for appeal. In pursuing an appeal, the faculty

member is required to document the failure of one or more parties to the review process to follow written

policies and procedures.

VIII Seventh-Year Reviews

Faculty Rule 3335-6-05 sets forth the conditions of and procedures for a Seventh-Year Review for a

faculty member denied tenure as a result of a sixth-year (mandatory tenure) review.

IX Procedures for Student and Peer Evaluation of Teaching

A Student Evaluation of Teaching

Use of the Student Evaluation of Instruction (eSEI) is required in every course offered in this school.

Faculty members should choose a day late in the semester when attendance is likely to be high if s/he

is going to provide in-class time for students to complete the evaluation using a mobile application.

The faculty member must leave the classroom during the time allotted for completing the evaluation.

The faculty member should reiterate to students that the feedback provided in the evaluations is used

both for performance reviews and to provide feedback that can be taken into account in future

teaching.

B Peer Evaluation of Teaching

Peer evaluation of teaching is required for all faculty members in the College of Arts and Sciences,

including tenure-track faculty and teaching faculty. Peer evaluation should fulfill two basic goals: 1)

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

provide constructive feedback to faculty on both the content and the quality of their instruction, and

2) help faculty to continually improve the overall effectiveness of their teaching at all levels.

Assistant professors, including assistant teaching professors, must have a minimum of five reviews at

the time of their promotion review, and associate professors, including associate teaching professors,

must have a minimum of three. Tenured professors, including teaching professors, should be

evaluated once every four years.

On occasion, it may be necessary for the school director (or designee) to evaluate the teaching of any

faculty member not currently scheduled for review. For example, reviews of Professors are normally

triggered by low or declining student evaluations or other evidence of the need for providing

assistance in improving teaching. Reviews are done by using a formal Teaching Consultation

coordinated through the Drake Institute for Teaching and Learning at the discretion of the school

director in consultation with the Administrative Committee.

The school director or designee (e.g., P&T Chair) oversees the school's peer evaluation of teaching

process, which is generally implemented through the individual faculty mentor committees as

described in Appendix B and the POA document. In consultation with the mentee, the P&T Chair

recommends, and the school director appoints, a two-person Mentor Committee annually for each of

the Assistant and Associate Professors. These mentors come from the CEF. Reasonable efforts are

made to distribute service among the tenured faculty from year to year in order to support and

encourage attention to the quality of teaching in the school. Although there is no presumption that a

mentor must be of equal or higher rank than the faculty member being reviewed, such a model will be

followed to the extent possible. The term of service is one year, with the same Mentors commonly

reappointed.

The purpose of having two Mentors is to provide the Mentee with a range of feedback (e.g., on

teaching) to help guide him/her through the tenure and promotion process. While these guidelines

define the minimum expectations, Mentors are encouraged to meet more often with Mentees. The

Mentors complete the Annual Mentor Form (Appendix C) and review the contents with their mentee.

The responsibilities of the Mentor Committee with respect to the teaching evaluation are as follows:

• to review the teaching of probationary tenure-track and teaching faculty at least once per year

with the goal of assessing teaching at all the levels of instruction to which the faculty member is

assigned; a minimum of five peer-evaluations of teaching is required from the probationary

period.

• to review the teaching of tenured associate professors and nonprobationary associate teaching

professors at least once every other year, with the goal of assessing teaching at all the levels of

instruction to which the faculty member is assigned over a six year period and of having at least

four peer reviews of teaching before the commencement of a promotion review.

• To review, upon the school director’s request, the teaching of any faculty member not currently

scheduled for review. Such reviews are normally triggered by low or declining student

evaluations or other evidence of the need for providing assistance in improving teaching.

• To review the teaching of a faculty member not currently scheduled for review, upon that

individual's request, to the extent that time permits. Reviews conducted at the request of the

faculty member are considered formative only. The school director is informed that the review

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

took place, but the report is given only to the faculty member who requested the review. Faculty

seeking formative reviews should also seek the services of the Michael V. Drake Institute for

Teaching and Learning.

Reviews conducted upon the request of the school director or the faculty member focus on the

specific aspects of instruction requested by the school director or faculty member and may or may not

include class visitations.

Regularly scheduled evaluations are both summative and formative (i.e., they provide both an

assessment of the faculty member's teaching for use in annual and promotion reviews, and advice to

improve the faculty member's teaching). These evaluations should include, in addition to class

visitation, review of course syllabi and related instruction materials, assignments, and exams. In the

case of peer review for the purposes of promotion and tenure reviews, the class visitation is conducted

by a faculty member of the mentoring committee. The peer reviewer should meet with the candidate

to establish a time for the visit (avoiding, for example, exam periods or lectures by guest speakers)

and to understand the goals of the course and the candidate's teaching philosophy. If possible, the peer

reviewer should attend two different class sessions over the course of the semester.

In observing the course and reviewing the syllabus and other materials, the peer reviewer should

focus on such issues as the appropriateness of the course design given the goals and level of the

course, the quality and effectiveness of the instructional materials and assessment tools, and the

appropriateness of the approach relative to current disciplinary knowledge. At the conclusion of the

class visits, the reviewer meets with the candidate to give feedback and also submits a written report

to the school director, copied to the candidate (see form in Appendix D). The candidate may provide

written comments on this report and the reviewer (e.g., mentor committee) may respond if he/she

wishes. The reports, and any written comments by the candidate, are included in the candidate's

promotion and tenure dossier.

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

APPENDIX A. The Annual Activity report form, provided to faculty by the school director, will contain

the following items and may be supplemented by a one-page summary or narrative of the faculty

member’s accomplishments and/or challenges. The period covered is the previous two calendar years.

The form should be completed by each faculty member and submitted to the school director (or deposited

in the appropriate electronic folder). The deadline will be announced each year by the school director, or

designee, and typically occurs in early February.

Teaching faculty are required to follow the directions stated above, although they will not need to

complete the research section if their duties do not involve scholarship activities.

1. Research

• Awards and recognition of research achievement

• Documentation of all scholarly papers published, including those published online first. Papers

accepted for publication but not published, should not be included. Copies of all scholarly papers

may be requested.

• Documentation of active grants, contracts, and fellowships, and proposals submitted but not

funded. List students and postdocs supported on grants.

• List professional meetings attended, number of abstracts presented, and any invited or

professional talks given.

2. Teaching

• Teaching awards and other significant recognition of teaching excellence

• List of courses taught, number of students per class, and SEI score for each class.

• Cumulative SEI reports (Student Evaluation of Instruction computer generated summaries

prepared by the Office of the University Registrar) for every class taught. As both high and low

SEI scores may reflect more than the quality of the instruction for a given course, student

comments provide context to these scores. Taken in aggregate, student qualitative feedback is a

useful tool to interpret the SEI scores and help the instructor and their mentor committee to

evaluate and focus teaching development. Therefore, all professors should seek and retain written

feedback from students through the SEI system and, where applicable, mid-course instructor-

generated written feedback forms.

• Peer evaluation of teaching reports as required by the School of Earth Sciences’ peer evaluation

of teaching program for Assistant and Associate Professors and for Professors for whom an

annual teaching evaluation was performed at the request of the school director.

• Student mentoring: List of all postdocs, graduate and undergraduate students advised as principal

advisor, committee member, or supervisor. List graduated student and postdocs. List any awards

or accomplishments by students advised.

• Other relevant documentation of teaching as appropriate.

3. Service

• Service awards and other significant recognition of service excellence

• List service activities, role in those activities and contributions, to the department, college,

university (including interdisciplinary centers or institutes), public, and profession

• Professors also list their mentees and document their mentoring activities

• List any other additional service activities and any role in the operation and maintenance of

general facilities and/or non-student salaried personnel

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

APPENDIX B. Mentor responsibilities guidelines.

The minimum responsibilities of the individual Mentor Committees are as follows:

1. Two peer-evaluations of assistant and associate professor teaching each year (i.e., one per mentor

for each class observed using the Teaching Evaluation Form below). The evaluating Mentor

meets with the Mentee to discuss the evaluation. Both the evaluating Mentor and the Mentee sign

the Teaching Evaluation Form, then submit it to the Director, P&T Chair, the Mentee, and the

Administrative Manager of SES. The Mentee may provide written comments on this report and

the Committee may respond in writing to those comments if he/she wishes. All such comments

are appended to the report for inclusion in the faculty member's promotion and tenure dossier.

When assistant professors are reviewed for tenure and promotion, they are required to have a

minimum of five peer evaluations of teaching from the probationary period according to the

College of Arts and Sciences APT document section X, sub-section B. Peer Evaluation of

Teaching.

2. Annual meeting with Mentees to evaluate progress, set goals, and address shortcomings towards

tenure and/or promotion. It is strongly encouraged that this meeting includes both the Mentors

and the Mentee. Both the Mentee’s Annual Report and updated CV should be reviewed as part of

this meeting.

3. Submit an annual report (see Annual Mentor Report Form below) by 15 February for Mentees

undergoing 4th year review, by 15 March for Mentees going up for promotion that fall semester,

and by 15 April for all other Mentees. This annual report should be based on findings from the

annual meeting in item #2. Both the Mentors and the Mentee sign the Annual Mentor Report

Form prior to submitting it to the Director of SES, the P&T Chair, the Mentee, and the

Administrative Manager of SES.

4. Present the Mentee case(s) each year during the review of Assistant and Associate professors on

the tenure track, including promotion and tenure years, as well as Assistant and Associate

teaching professors.

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

APPENDIX C. Annual Mentor Report Form.

Annual Mentor Report Form for the School of Earth Sciences

Mentee Name: _______________

Rank: ____________ Years at Rank: _______________

Appointment: _____% SES, _____% other unit

Date written: ____________ Date report shared with mentee: ____________

Report Calendar Year: ___________

Mentor #1 Name: ____________ Mentor #2 Name: ____________

Extenuating Circumstances (e.g., FMLA, other): _________________

For each category below, please provide the following information:

• overall statement of the research /teaching and mentoring /service activities

• evidence of response to suggestions for improving his/her research /teaching and mentoring/

service activity since the last evaluation

• recommendations and goals for further improving research / teaching and mentoring/ service

during the following calendar year

• progress towards tenure and/or promotion

Research activity:

Teaching activity:

Service activity:

Signatures of Mentors #1 and #2: ____________________________________________

Signature indicating the Mentee has seen this report: ____________________________

APT for the School of Earth Sciences

APPENDIX D. The Teaching Evaluation Form and Annual Mentor Report Form.

Teaching Evaluation Form for the School of Earth Sciences

Mentee name: Mentor name:

Date of observation: Student composition: UG, G, Majors, Non-Majors, Other

Course name: Course number:

# students enrolled: # students in class:

For each category below, please provide the requested information. Please also provide any

additional information that is germane to the evaluation within each category.

Overview including but not limited to type of course (i.e., didactic, lab, field), student

assessment, instructor’s performance, student behavior/response during instruction, syllabus.

Strengths including but not limited to knowledge of material, voice projection, enthusiasm,

student engagement, presentation (style, content, organization, clarity), innovative or new

approaches.

Suggestions for improvement on any aspect of teaching including presentation materials,

lecture pace/style, assignments, student engagement.

Implementation of suggestions from prior year’s evaluation.

Signature of Mentor: ________________________

Signature indicating the Mentee has seen this report:___________________________