Handbook - prior to January 2019

Schedule for Tenure with Post-tenure Review System [edit]

Schedule for Contract Renewal

Long-term faculty appointments at EMU are based on a system of tenure with post-tenure review. The terms of the contract period shall be negotiated in all cases (exceptions by mutual agreement of the faculty member and his/her dean) by March 15 preceding the new contract period. The initiative for negotiating the next contract period shall come from the respective dean.  Tenure-track contracts are offered on the following schedule:

      Pre-tenure:

• First contract period - one-year contracts (for first three years)
• Second contract period - three-year contract

      Tenured:

• Subsequent contract periods – six-year contracts

Advancement in the tenure track assumes completion of the terminal degree (Ph.D. or equivalent, e.g., D.N.P., M.F.A. or J.D.). For professional programs, EMU values professional credentials if accompanied by extensive practical experience.  Therefore, EMU accepts the M.S.W. and the M.B.A to meet this requirement.

Annual contract faculty may be awarded successive three-year contracts after five successful years of departmental teaching and service or scholarship. For those in the tenure track, at any time during the review process, a lesser term may be negotiated by mutual agreement of the faculty member and his/her dean. This agreement must be documented with a copy placed in the faculty member’s official personnel file.  If a faculty member is unavailable when the review would normally be scheduled (e.g. the person is on sabbatical), the contract may be extended for one year. An annual Salary & Benefits Statement shall be issued by EMU to the faculty member and shall indicate salary level and fringe benefits.

One-year Contracts: The first contract period (3 one-year contracts) shall be provisional. This period of time provides an opportunity for the faculty member and the institution to determine whether a longer-term relationship between the person and the institution would be mutually beneficial.During this provisional time the institution is under no obligation to renew the contract. Renewal is at the discretion of the Dean in consultation with the chair/program director.

Three-year and Six-year Contracts: The review process in preparation for three- or six-year contracts shall occur during the last year of the previous contract period. Contract review criteria are identical to those established for promotion. The three-year contract is processed by the colleague review committee, the chair/director, the dean, and the Faculty Status Committee (FSC). Normally tenure is granted at the time of awarding the first six-year contract, after processing by the dean, colleague review committee, and Faculty Status Committee. Tenure must be approved by the Board of Trustees. Entry into tenure represents a long-term commitment by the faculty member and the institution to continuing service. Subsequent six-year contract renewal provides an opportunity for post-tenure review to plan the ongoing growth and development of the faculty member, review the goals of the individual and the institution, and assess institutional need for the next contract period.

Beyond the age of 60, after multiple post-tenure contracts, the faculty candidate may negotiate with respective dean for a shorter contract and expectations regarding contract renewal.

Note Regarding Annual Faculty Assessment: All faculty members complete an annual assessment of performance and set goals for growth. An annual interview with the chair/program Director occurs so that the faculty member may gauge his/her own progress toward the review criteria, as well as toward goals for professional development and contribution to the department.  Annual review documents are maintained in the faculty person’s official file in the Provost’s office.

Schedule for Promotion [edit]

Promotion by Rank requires:  a specified length of EMU service attained, as well as specific ratings (Competent, Proficient, or Outstanding) across the domains of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service.

Faculty members are usually hired at the rank of Instructor or Assistant Professor. Ordinarily, the rank of Associate Professor is considered after 6 years of faculty performance and demonstration of Proficient performance in Teaching, and Proficient performance in either Scholarship or Service. If a faculty member, upon employment by EMU, has already achieved the rank of Associate Professor or Professor at another accredited institution, consideration may be given by the Provost and respective Dean, for awarding the same rank at the time of hiring. Ordinarily, the rank of full Professor is achieved after a minimum of six years of experience at the associate professor level. When current faculty work toward a terminal degree, application for promotion will be considered only if the work toward the degree is completed by May 15. A person’s schedule for promotion will be specified at the time of hire.

Timing of Application for Promotion: Application for promotion typically occurs at the time of contract renewal. In extraordinary cases in which the faculty member demonstrates excellence in advance of, or following, the scheduled period of review for contract renewal, the respective dean and department chair may approve special requests for early/delayed promotion reviews.  Once the out-of-schedule promotion is granted, another full contract (3 year or 6 year) will commence at the time of the promotion/contract review in order to maintain the regularity of the review cycle.

Review Procedures for One-year Contracts [edit]

After the first semester in the first and second years, and prior to signing another one-year contract, the department chair shall meet with the faculty member to conduct a review, based on the Domains for Faculty Performance. The dean shall place a summary of the review in the faculty member’s personnel file in the office of the provost. Faculty member is notified by March 15 of contract renewal decision for the 2^nd and 3^rd one-year contracts.

Review Procedures for: Three- and Six-Year Contracts & Promotion [edit]

Procedures for contract review and/or promotion consideration involve several steps:

• Faculty candidate prepares for the review by completing the steps in the initial and preparation procedures, listed below.
• Selected colleagues and peers review the performance of the faculty candidate in the 3 domains and provide individual and group response.
• The chair/director writes a summary and the dean adds his/her recommendation.
• The Faculty Status Committee reviews the dossier, interprets the data, and makes the decision on contract renewal/promotion.
• The Board of Trustees takes action to confirm all promotions and renewal of six-year contracts.

Initial Procedures [edit]

1. Faculty member is eligible for contract review, and/or promotion.
2. Prior to the end of the contract year (in May), the Provost conducts a “process overview” workshop for faculty undergoing the process.
3. In May, prior to the review process, the Dean initiates the review process via letter to the faculty member indicating eligibility for contract review, and/or promotion to Associate Professor. The letter is copied to the respective chair/director. The faculty member in consultation with his/her chair initiates requests for promotion to Professor.
4. By May 15, the faculty candidate submits a list of names to be contacted for external letters of recommendation from professional colleagues.
5. Promotion only: If requesting a promotion, the faculty candidate submits a letter of request for promotion consideration to the Chair/Director and respective dean by September 1.

Preparation Procedures [edit]

1. By September 15, the faculty candidate invites a minimum of 2 tenure-track colleagues  (one colleague must be from within department) to conduct class visits. The colleague observer meets with the faculty candidate to review the results; the observer submits the class-visit evaluation form to the chair/director and a copy to the faculty candidate.
2. When a department consists of fewer than 4 members, the faculty candidate submits to the department chair by September 15, the names of three other faculty colleagues to be considered for appointment to the colleague review committee. The dean may also make additional appointments to the committee in special circumstances; the faculty candidate may also request the addition of a colleague who has insight into his/her performance in a domain (see Colleague Review Procedures).
3. In September, the faculty candidate completes the Self-evaluation Form (SEF).
4. The faculty candidate compiles the dossier and submits it to the chair by October 1. The dossier is stored in a location that ensures confidentiality.
5. The dean solicits evaluation forms from all students in the major/program who have had at least one course with the professor. The Office of Institutional Research summarizes the data and results are forwarded to the colleague review committee.

Colleague review [edit]

Colleagues review the faculty candidate’s performance in the three domains. The colleague review committee consists of all tenure-track departmental members and may include up to 2 additional tenure-track colleagues from outside of the department, as outlined below. The colleague review committee is chaired by the chair/ director (in the case of the review of the chair/ director’s performance as a faculty member, the dean appoints a departmental faculty member or another department chair/program director to lead the colleague review committee).

Procedure for expanding the colleague review committee:

• In departments with fewer than 4 members, the colleague review committee will be expanded to include at least four members with tenure-track faculty colleagues from outside of the department/program. The faculty candidate submits the names of three other EMU colleagues. Ordinarily, external additions to the committee will be at the same or higher rank as that to which the candidate aspires. The chair/director may also nominate a colleague. The chair selects external faculty members to join the colleague review committee, at least one of whom was nominated by the faculty candidate.
• Even if there are already 4 members in a department, the faculty candidate may also request that one additional colleague be added to the colleague review committee. The faculty candidate may wish to nominate a colleague, who has at least six years of EMU faculty experience, who has insight into an area of scholarship, teaching, or service that the departmental members may have not had opportunity to observe (e.g. cross-disciplinary co-teaching, research, etc.).  The chair/program director and the respective dean must approve such requests. Anyone added to the committee must be a tenure-track faculty member.
• In other special circumstances, the respective dean may appoint up to 2 additional colleagues from outside of the department, after consulting with the faculty candidate and chair/director.

The colleague review process includes:

1. In October, each member of the colleague review committee reviews the dossier. All members of the committee, except those in their first semester at EMU, complete Part I of the colleague review response form prior to the meeting of the colleague review committee.
2. By November 7, the chair convenes the colleague review committee to discuss the candidate’s performance (Not Achieved, Competent, Proficient, or Outstanding) in each of the three domains. Discussions during the meeting are confidential.
3. Following the colleague review meeting, all participants, except those in their first semester at EMU, complete and sign Part II of their individual colleague response forms. Individuals submit the form to the committee chair by November 15. The faculty candidate does not see the individual response forms.
4. The committee chair reviews the results of the response forms and drafts a summary report. The report summarizes the discussion of the colleague review committee, the performance ratings in each domain, and the level of support for the contract renewal/promotion. In circumstances where the chair of the committee has privileged/confidential information relevant to the renewal/promotion, the chair may also write an accompanying letter and attach it to the summary report.
5. The chair of the colleague review committee submits the summary report, completed dossier, student evaluation results, and colleague response forms to the respective dean by November 30. The summary may be viewed by any member of the colleague review committee, upon request.
6. The chair of the colleague review committee meets with the faculty candidate for an oral  summary of the faculty review by November 30. No individual data are revealed.

Dean’s Review [edit]

1. By December 15, the dean reviews the dossier, the summary report, student evaluation results, and the individual colleague response forms. The summary report and the response forms are not placed into the dossier.
2. The dean writes his/her letter of recommendation, evaluating the information that has come forward from the colleague review committee. The faculty candidate may meet with the dean to discuss any aspect of his/her candidacy.
3. By January 15, the dean informs the chair of the colleague review committee his/her recommendation to the FSC.
4. The Dean forwards the completed dossier, with the summary report, student evaluation results, the response forms, and the Dean’s recommendation to the Faculty Status Committee.

Faculty Status Committee Review [edit]

The Faculty Status Committee performs the final review of the dossier and all related materials.  The Faculty Status Committee’s discretion varies with the type of contract being requested.

1.  For a three-year contract, the committee may decide to approve, to disapprove, or to delay the three-year contract for no more than one provisional year accompanied by a performance improvement plan with measurable outcomes.  At the end of the provisional year, the dean may award a three-year contract based upon successful completion of the performance improvement plan.
2. For the initial six-year contract, which includes application for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor, the Faculty Status Committee may only approve or deny.  Applicants who are denied tenure and promotion may, at the discretion of the respective dean and with the approval of the provost, be offered a non-tenure-track appointment to one of the alternative faculty titles.
3. For continuing post-tenure six year contracts, renewal is the presumptive outcome.  If the Faculty Status Committee determines that there has been a significant shortfall in performance standards, they may renew the contract for six years or a lesser period, accompanied by a performance improvement plan, or they may decide on non-renewal.  In the case of non-renewal, the faculty member may, at the discretion of the dean and with the approval of the provost, be offered a continuing non-tenure-track appointment to one of the alternative faculty titles.

The process and timetable for the Faculty Status Committee’s deliberations are as follows:

1. January 15-February 15: The Faculty Status Committee reviews the completed dossier, the attached reports, student evaluation results, and colleague response forms.
2. By mid-February, the Faculty Status Committee convenes and decides on the contract renewal/promotion request.
3. By the end of February, the Faculty Status Committee reports in writing the resulting decision and the rationale to the faculty member, and copies the chair/director and respective dean. Dossier is returned to the faculty member.
4. The Chair of the FSC forwards the decisions for promotion and for tenured six-year contracts to the Board of Trustees, along with the minutes of the FSC meeting.  The Provost presents the decisions of the FSC as motions to the Board of Trustees for confirmation.

Filing [edit]

1. The summary report, response forms, student evaluation results, and letter of recommendation are filed securely by the Provost’s office for 6 years.

Board of Trustees [edit]

1. At the March Board of Trustees meeting, the Board of Trustees takes action on all promotions, and post-tenure six-year contracts.
2. The Provost issues a letter communicating the action to the faculty candidate, no later than April 1^st.

Appeals Procedure [edit]

• If a faculty member wishes to appeal the decision of the Faculty Status Committee, it must be done in writing to the president within ten working days of notification of the committee’s decision. If the appeal to the president is denied, the faculty member may make a second appeal to the Academics Committee or the Seminary Committee of the Board of Trustees. The second appeal must be done in writing to the chair of the trustee committee within ten working days of notification of the president’s decision.
• All appeal procedures shall provide a fair hearing for all interested parties.

Dossier Preparation for 3- and 6-year Contracts & Promotion [edit]

The dossier is prepared to provide appropriate evidence of the faculty candidate’s performance in the areas of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service.

Dossier Documents Submitted by the Faculty Candidate [edit]

• Cover Letter indicating the purpose of the review: tenure contract renewal and/or promotion
• Self-evaluation form: The faculty candidate identifies a rating of own performance (Not Achieved, Competent, Proficient, or Outstanding) for each domain, with a supporting explanation of the evidence. The candidate may also speak to current areas of focus in his/her professional development and contributions to the department/university.
• Curriculum vitae
• Class Visit Forms: the faculty member places two signed class visit forms in the dossier; a departmental/program faculty member must complete one form.
• Course Evaluation Summaries
• Statement of Faith and Life (depth of updating is at the discretion of the applicant)
• Annual goals reports from prior 3 years
• Faith integration paper (for the initial tenured six-year contract only). The integration paper is 5-10 pages in length and is also shared with peers at an appropriate venue, as arranged by the Provost (not a part of the review process). The faculty candidate addresses how his/her teaching and scholarship is influenced by serving at Eastern Mennonite University, a Christian institution in the Anabaptist tradition. In addition, it should explore the question of affinity with the university mission. A guidelines document is available from the Provost and the Faculty Employee webpage.
• Supporting Evidence at Faculty Discretion: optional supporting evidence may be offered to assist in demonstrating the level of performance. Duplication of evidence is unnecessary. Supporting evidence may include, but is not limited to:
  • evidence of teaching strategies or curriculum development
  • sample syllabi
  • evidence of student learning
  • published scholarship
  • evidence of service assignments
  • reports generated by consulting or other professional service
  • internal/external letters of recommendation
  • evidence of public critique or adoption of one’s scholarly work

Documents Submitted by Others [edit]

The colleague review committee:

• In the case of a faculty candidate’s tenure review and/or request for promotion to Associate Professor or Professor, the colleague review committee collects three letters of recommendation from faculty or professional colleagues external to EMU.  At least two of the three are selected from a list of names provided by the candidate. External peer reviewers should be contacted by the chair-program director in May or June, before the colleague review committee is formed.

The Chair/Director:

• Submits the summary report, student evaluation results, and colleague response forms to the Dean.

The Dean:

• The Dean forwards the completed dossier, with the summary report,student evaluation results,the response forms, and the Dean’s recommendation to the Faculty Status Committee.
• The summary report, response forms, and letter of recommendation are filed securely by the Provost’s office for 6 years.

Approved by Faculty Senate May 7, 2010
Approved by Academic Cabinet & President's Cabinet May 12, 2010
Approved by Board of Trustees June 19, 2010
Approved by Board of Trustees, March 24, 2012
Edited & revised by faculty senate academic committee, May 3, 2013

 

Discrimination and Grievance Procedures [edit]

The university’s Discrimination Policy and Grievance Procedures are in place throughout the entire review process. The main concern in any grievance procedure is to bring reconciliation and growth in ways that enhance community. To implement this goal, the American Council on Education definition of grievance is adopted: “Grievable issues are those in which there is the possibility of an error in the institutional policies (or lack of them), in its prescribed procedures for carrying out the policies, in the administration of those procedures, or in varying combinations of these.”  If it is determined that an institutional error has occurred, the second function of the grievance procedure is to provide a process to determine appropriate redress for the grievant.