--- title: "Promotion and Reappointment Procedures for In-Residence and Clinical Faculty Members" canonical: "https://facultystaff.clas.uconn.edu/space/CFSKB/28972843012/Promotion%20and%20Reappointment%20Procedures%20for%20In-Residence%20and%20Clinical%20Faculty%20Members" format: markdown --- **Established:** April 14, 2020 **Last updated:** August 25, 2026 --- ## Background The work of clinical and in-residence (CIRE) faculty is essential to the academic mission of CLAS and to the lives of our students. Units should evaluate faculty based on the terms of their appointment and should make clear the criteria for reappointment, multi-year contracts, and promotion. These criteria must be consistent with those of the College and the University and apply to faculty across campuses. If the terms of an in-residence or clinical faculty member’s appointment change across their employment, units should document the changes in their appointment letters. For all purposes, the College adheres to the guidelines established by the Provost’s Office, as outlined on [their website](https://academicaffairs.uconn.edu/policies-procedures/promotion-tenure-reappointment/) and in the [Academic Affairs Governance Documents Library on SharePoint](https://uconn.sharepoint.com/sites/AcademicAffairsDepartmentalGovernanceLibrary/Shared%20Documents/Forms/AllItems.aspx?csf=1&web=1&e=zQcHhj&CID=09c18ac0%2D1fe3%2D4ece%2Db086%2Dcdc49166b101&FolderCTID=0x012000E37441546C15F14398B5CAF717AFCAEC&id=%2Fsites%2FAcademicAffairsDepartmentalGovernanceLibrary%2FShared%20Documents%2FAcademic%20Affairs%2FPersonnel%20Topics%20%28e%2Eg%2E%2C%20PTR%2C%20workload%2C%20Leaves%2C%20etc%2E%29%2FPromotion%2C%20Tenure%20%26%20Reappointment). The following processes detail the College's specific expectations and guidance for certain criteria. ## Timeline The College provides a timeline for PTR/PR actions based on the provost’s recommended schedule. Departments have the discretion to adjust or modify their internal deadlines to better align with their needs and caseload. However, the Dean’s Office expects department head recommendations to be submitted by the deadline set by the College. Delays may result in the candidate’s file not receiving the full attention it requires and could place undue pressure on those involved in the review at the College level. ## CLAS Expectations for CIRE Reappointments Beginning in the 2025-26 academic year, all CLAS CIRE routine reappointments must be submitted through Interfolio. CIRE faculty are reviewed yearly for successive one-year contracts, and departmental governance documents must lay out the process for review. Documentation for yearly reviews should include teaching evaluations and a summary statement of accomplishments, including any service/outreach assignments. Teaching observations or other forms of teaching evaluation beyond student evaluations should be included if conducted during the reappointment year, and attention should be paid to building a record of evaluations beyond SET. If the faculty member has non-teaching responsibilities for which they receive a course release, that should be stated in the sections of the CIRE form on advising and/or service. The department head or unit leader should comment on the effectiveness and quality of these activities. Department heads should indicate whether CIRE faculty are meeting departmental expectations for teaching and service. Reappointment recommendations will be reviewed by the CLAS Dean’s Office. ## CLAS Expectations for Initial Multi-Year Appointments Multi-year contracts represent an ongoing commitment to the CIRE faculty members. CIRE faculty are normally considered for multi-year contracts following their sixth year of service. For initial multi-year contracts, evaluations are required from the departmental PR/PTR committee; from the department Head/unit leader; from any secondary unit leaders for joint appointments; and from regional Deans for faculty appointed at regional campuses. The CLAS Dean will make the final decision as to whether to reappoint the faculty member to a multi-year contract and will consider the recommendations of the Dean's Advisory Council, the department PR/PTR committee, the department head, and other supervisors. The candidate must include a teaching portfolio. It is strongly recommended that all CIRE faculty develop and maintain a teaching portfolio that documents: - Teaching philosophy and practices. - Student evaluations. - Peer evaluations. - Course design materials. - Teaching awards and recognition. - Professional development. - Scholarship of teaching and learning (if applicable). - Contributions to curriculum development. For more guidance on teaching portfolios, visit the [CETL website](https://cetl.uconn.edu/resources/documenting-your-teaching/teaching-portfolio/). ## CLAS Expectations for CIRE Promotion Many CIRE faculty apply for promotion and their first multi-year contract at the same time. While this practice is acceptable, the multi-year contracts and promotion are distinct applications. A candidate may apply for a multi-year contract without applying for promotion. A candidate may also receive a multi-year contract but be denied promotion. For a successful promotion to associate professor in residence, the College expects that: 1. Candidates meet or exceed the criteria approved by the department/unit. 2. Achievements and levels of performance are competitive with those of faculty members in parallel appointments at comparable institutions. 3. Candidates have a clear record of sustained excellence in the areas specified in their appointment document. 4. Although this is not a university requirement, candidates are expected to have a multi-year contract, which may be sought at the same time, and are expected to have been in an assistant rank for 5 years at the time of dossier submission. For a successful promotion to the rank of professor in residence, the College expects that: 1. Candidates meet or exceed the criteria approved by the department/unit. 2. Candidates have experienced an appropriate period in rank as an associate professor. It is recommended that this period be similar to the time recommended for TT promotion to full professor (normally at least five years). 3. Achievements and levels of performance are competitive with those of faculty members in parallel appointments at comparable institutions. 4. Candidates offer evidence of growth in the profession consistent with their letter of appointment, which might include scholarship on teaching and learning. 5. Candidates have a clear record of sustained excellence in the areas specified in their appointment document. ## Early Action on Promotion and/or Multi-year Contracts Faculty members who wish to be considered for an initial multi-year contract or promotion early must have: - Documented consultation with their department head and/or senior faculty members in the department. - Documented consultation with the Associate Dean assigned to their division. - Statement from the candidate explaining their rationale for requesting early consideration. The record of consultations and the candidate statement must be included as part of the PTR dossier by the Dean’s Office. In situations where the outcome of the evaluation process results in a negative promotion or initial multi-year decision, the faculty member will retain the terms of their current appointment as per the existing contract. It is important to note that letters from a negative promotion and/or initial multi-year contract decision must be included in the *Previous Correspondence* section of the dossier. This information will be available for reference by all involved in the PTR/PR review process in subsequent years, allowing for a comprehensive review of the faculty members’ progression and growth over time. However, a new set of external letters must be submitted for the subsequent review, although previous letter writers may be approached to provide updated letters. ## External Letters The candidate shall coordinate with their unit leader to arrange for at least four letters of evaluation, at least two of which must be external to the University. The department head or unit director is responsible for the selection of external reviewers for the department’s candidates and should consult with the candidate about appropriate possible evaluators. Communications to prospective letter writers should come from the unit leader. If any questions regarding suitability of external evaluators exist, please contact the Associate Dean who oversees the unit prior to requesting the letters. External letters should normally come from individuals at or higher than the rank to which the candidate is applying, although in the case of CIRE faculty letters from experts in pedagogy, administration, or similar might be appropriate (consult with the relevant associate dean if uncertain). Letters should not be from former graduate advisors or other mentors or recent (last 4 years) or current collaborators. They also should not come from close colleagues or co-instructors. Letters from reviewers who have/had personal ties with the candidate carry little or no weight because of a possible lack of objectivity. Letters from CETL may be included in a candidate's dossier as part of the teaching portfolio or ATE materials; however, they are not solicited for use in the review or evaluation of the candidate’s case. Suggestions for seeking internal evaluation letters (from individuals currently appointed at UConn): - Tenured faculty outside of the unit. - Tenured faculty in a related field or discipline. - In-residence or clinical faculty outside of the unit or elsewhere at UConn. Suggestions for potential external evaluators: - In-residence or clinical faculty at peer institutions. - Tenured faculty in the discipline at strong liberal arts institutions. - Expert in pedagogy at a peer or strong liberal arts institution, potentially including the director of a Center for Teaching and Learning (or equivalent). - In the case of clinical faculty appointments, one of the external letters can be from the individual’s clinical site. Note that at UConn, the faculty member has the right to read the redacted letters of evaluation. ## Student Evaluation of Teaching (SET) and Assessment of Teaching Effectiveness (ATE) ### SET All courses for any candidate for multi-year appointment or promotion should be evaluated. Where feasible, all courses should be evaluated by students. The Student Evaluation of Teaching (SET) forms should be included with the file for all courses taught since the initial hiring (for first-time promotions) or since the last promotion at UConn (when the candidate is considered for promotion to full professor). Evaluative comments of the SET must be provided by the department head and the department’s PR committee, as well as the Dean’s Advisory Council. The scores for courses should be considered in the context of comparative data, as well as information related to the challenges in interpretation. For more information, please review the [guidelines on interpreting SET scores on the Office of Budget, Planning and Institutional Research website.pdf](https://bpir.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3452/2022/08/Interpreting-SET-Results-Updated-Senate-Recommendations-13-April-2022-1.pdf). ### ATE [Assessment of teaching effectiveness beyond SET scores](https://cetl.uconn.edu/resources/documenting-your-teaching/evidence-of-teaching-excellence/) is required for any multi-year appointment or promotion. While we encourage all faculty to undergo ATE on a regular basis, it is the expectation of the Dean’s Office that ATE materials are conducted each year for those within the probationary timeline and included in their packet. A candidate may not exclusively use ATE previously employed for reappointment or promotion and must include additional measures of teaching effectiveness for the current promotion. It is the department head’s responsibility to ensure that an appropriate assessment is included in the PR file. Letters from former students and commendations from the Office of the Provost based on SET scores will not be considered.  The department head should consult the Office of the Dean if other approaches are to be used. [For more information about ATE, please refer to Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning’s website](https://cetl.uconn.edu/resources/documenting-your-teaching/evidence-of-teaching-excellence/).   ## Communication and Input from Regional Campuses and Joint Appointments ### Regional Campuses Faculty at regional campuses who are candidates for reappointment, multi-year contracts, or promotion should request a letter from the regional campus dean early in the process. For these candidates, the regional campus dean and/or their delegate will be included in the workflow on a case-by-case basis as a secondary committee to the department PTR/PR committee. This ensures the regional campus has access to the candidate's dossier without delaying the departmental review. However, it is highly recommended that department heads or unit leaders coordinate with regional deans early to establish an appropriate timeline to ensure the letter is received in time for departmental PTR committee deliberations. ### Joint Appointments and/or Secondary Supervisors For CIRE faculty in a department holding a joint appointment with an interdisciplinary center, institute, or program, a letter from the director of that institute should also be requested so that it is available for the deliberations of the departmental committee. Joint appointments or secondary supervisors will be incorporated into the workflow on a case-by-case basis by the College as the first step in the review. ## Role of the Departmental/Unit PR Committee Given the diverse roles that CIRE faculty play across the College, the PR committee’s report is often the most critical component of a candidate’s case for reappointment or promotion. Since faculty evaluations for promotion and multi-year appointments significantly impact the future academic strength of UConn, it is essential that committees apply fair yet rigorous standards. Committees should clearly define each candidate’s role within the context of the unit’s structure and governance documents. We encourage units and departments to review the College’s Best Practices and Expectations for CIRE Faculty Inclusion outlined above on this web page. Please contact the associate dean for your area with any questions about the process of reappointment and promotion of in-residence and clinical faculty members. ## Role of the Dean’s Advisory Council (DAC) The Dean’s Advisory Council for CIRE faculty is comprised of full professors-in-residence from departments across the College, with members serving two-year terms. The DAC is responsible for conducting an impartial and independent evaluation of the candidate’s dossier, engaging with relevant stakeholders when necessary, and casting votes on each case.    After evaluation of the dossier, each member of the DAC must vote on the case except in situations where the candidate is from the member’s home department or where there are other conflicts of interest. The DAC should provide a written evaluation which summarizes the committee’s vote on promotion and initial multi-year reappointment actions, noting the breakdown of votes. The votes cast by committee members must be clearly documented, reflecting the number of eligible voting members who voted *In Support, Do Not Support, Abstain,* or were absent from the vote. If there are any votes of *Do Not Support*, a prevailing majority report and dissenting minority report with justifications must be provided in the committee’s letter. The letter signed by all committee members must not reveal how each member voted.    The DAC evaluation should include a statement to support the outcome of their deliberations.  The evaluation should carefully state whether the candidate meets (i.e., “strong performance”) or exceeds (i.e., “superior performance”) the criteria for reappointment, promotion, or multi-year appointment, in each relevant category (i.e., teaching, service, and research, if applicable). It should include supporting statements to justify the evaluation rating. The DAC will submit their evaluation in the applicable section of the PTR/PR form.  Non-teaching research faculty will have their promotion and multi-year appointment actions evaluated by the DAC for Humanities and Social Sciences or the DAC for Life, Behavioral, and Physical Sciences based on their home department.