When a case for reappointment as Assistant Professor,
Associate Professor with tenure, or promotion to full professor is not
approved by the SAS Personnel Committee, a department may choose to resubmit the case for
re-evaluation at a later date. Such decisions for resubmission should be
based only on the existence of new evidence that is relevant to the
assessment of the case.
The Provost’s Office has stated the following policy concerning reconsideration of cases for promotion to associate professor with tenure in the mandatory year that have been made by the Provost:
“Decisions made by the Provost, following review by the Provost’s Staff Conference, are made only after the most searching review of a case by a department, school, and the Conference, and are considered final at the point of mandatory review. Consistent with the understanding that these decisions are final, the only cause for reconsideration is a material procedural irregularity in conduct of the review that unduly influenced the decision. Any appeal must consequently provide clear evidence of such a material procedural irregularity that can be shown to have had an undue impact on the decision. Reconsiderations on appeal should be exceedingly rare and undertaken only for the most compelling reasons.”
The following School guidelines for resubmission cover cases that are
resubmitted in the next academic year following the original submission
of the case. If more than one year has elapsed, then an entirely new
dossier should be prepared-(according to the rules stated elsewhere in
When any case is resubmitted, the deliberating committees should be advised of the fact that the case is a resubmission and the basis for the resubmission. In addition, in all cases of reconsideration of tenure cases following the mandatory year, the previous dossier must be submitted to the committees for their consideration together with new dossier.
The following guidelines on resubmission also do not cover cases of
grievance regarding violations of procedure.
Because negative decisions on cases of reappointment, tenure, and
promotion are based on factors specific to an individual case, the
procedures for resubmission within one year must have some flexibility.
What follows are guidelines for the preparation of a case for
reconsideration. In cases of doubt, the divisional Associate
Dean should be consulted.
After a case for promotion has been approved by a department, but is not approved at higher levels,
subject to the restrictions indicated by the Provost’s office the standing
faculty of a department (adjusted by rank) may choose to resubmit the
case if they believe that there is substantial new evidence that could
affect the outcome of the decision, whether with regard to teaching or
The faculty must initially vote as to whether they wish to gather new
evidence and prepare a new file for resubmission.
If the vote is positive, the department should collect new evidence
relevant to the case. Possible forms of new evidence might include
(but not all may be relevant):
- New research
If the candidate has produced substantial new
since the time that the file was originally evaluated by the department and/or the School, that new work may be
produced as evidence for resubmission.
- All external reviewers who originally evaluated the
candidates's scholarship should be contacted and asked if they wish to
review and comment on the new material, as an addendum to their earlier
reports. External reviewers who were asked for an evaluation but
declined because of personal circumstances that may have changed should
be asked again to write.
- New external reviewers may be asked to review
body of the candidate's scholarship. These names should be produced and
approved by the SAS Dean's Office and by the Provost according to the
usual rules. No fixed number of letters is required, but the candidates
must be extended the opportunity to name three more external reviewers.
The department may consider new
regarding the candidate's teaching, including teaching evaluations for
courses taught after the initial review of the case and additional
letters. This evidence shuld be obtained according to the usual
The department may consider new evidence regarding the candidate's service.
Once new evidence has been collected, the department should evaluate
the candidate and vote again on the case for reapointment, tenure, or
promotion. If the vote is positive, the case should be forwarded to the
Dossier for resubmission should include:
When the dossier for resubmission is presented to the Personnel
Committee, it should be attached to the earlier dossier.
- SAS Form 99-9, or 99-10, or 99-12
- Chair's letter,
reporting the formal vote of the faculty,
and giving an account of the discussion and the case for resubmission
- Updated curriculm vitae
- New evidence of teaching and service, if relevant
- New letters from external reviewers and/or new internal
letters, if relevant
- Two copies of any new publications or manuscript