---
title: "Promotion, Tenure, and Reappointment (PTR) Procedures for Tenure-System Faculty"
canonical: "https://facultystaff.clas.uconn.edu/space/CFSKB/28974186497/Promotion%2C%20Tenure%2C%20and%20Reappointment%20(PTR)%20Procedures%20for%20Tenure-System%20Faculty"
format: markdown
---
**Established:** March 15, 2011  
**Last updated:** April 11, 2025 

---

## Background

The diversity of the work we do in CLAS and the range of cultures across our disciplines means that the criteria for tenure and promotion vary substantially across our units. It is expected, however, that all departments will evaluate progress based on excellence in research, teaching, and service/outreach. Departments must make the criteria explicit across each of these dimensions for each career stage. These criteria must be consistent with those of the College and the University. Tenure is campus-wide, and regional campus faculty have the same tenure and promotion expectations.

For all purposes, the College adheres to the guidelines established by the Provost’s Office, as outlined on <u>[their website](https://academicaffairs.uconn.edu/policies-procedures/promotion-tenure-reappointment/)</u> and in the <u>[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)</u>. 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 Promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure

For a successful promotion to associate professor with tenure, the College expects that:

1. Candidates meet or exceed the criteria approved by the department.
2. Achievements and levels of performance are competitive with those of faculty members recently promoted to the associate professor level at other leading research-intensive, land-grant institutions, and peer institutions relevant for the discipline.
3. Candidates have a clear record of sustained excellence in research and education (including classroom instruction and mentoring of students). This requires sufficient time in rank as an assistant professor to provide a basis of assessment of performance that will predict continued, long-term achievement.
4. Candidates have a strong, positive national reputation for their scholarship.

## CLAS Expectations for Promotion to Full Professor

For a successful promotion to the rank of professor, the College expects that:

1. Candidates meet or exceed the criteria approved by the department.
2. Candidates have experienced an appropriate period of time in rank as an associate professor. University bylaws indicate that this should be at least five years, except for evidence of superior ability compared to other associate professors.
3. Achievements and levels of performance are competitive with those of faculty members recently promoted to the full professor level at other leading research-intensive, land-grant institutions, and peer institutions relevant for the discipline.
4. Candidates have a clear record of sustained excellence in research and education (including classroom instruction and mentoring of students).
5. Candidates provide solid service to their unit(s), CLAS, and/or UConn, as well as to their professional discipline, with at least some of these activities involving an element of leadership.
6. Candidates have a strong, positive international reputation for their scholarship.

## Early Action

### **Submission of the PTR Dossier Before the End of the Probationary Period**

Tenure-track faculty members who wish to be considered for promotion and tenure before the completion of the probationary period will undergo evaluation using the same rigorous standards applied to those who have utilized the full PTR probationary period.

To initiate a review before the end of the probationary period, the faculty member 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.

If a faculty member chooses to withdraw their dossier, which they may do until the point that the Provost’s Office makes their formal recommendation, they will have the opportunity to be reviewed again in a subsequent year, with the final chance for submission being the last year of the probationary period. The results of a withdrawn PTR review will be retained in the *Previous Correspondence* section of the PTR dossier. This information will be available for reference by all involved in the PTR review process in subsequent years, allowing for a comprehensive review of the faculty member’s progression and growth over time. A new set of external letters must be submitted for the subsequent PTR review, although previous letter writers may be approached to provide updated letters.

### **Early Action on Promotion to Full**

Tenured faculty members who wish to be considered for promotion to full professor should be at the associate level rank for at least five years.

Individuals electing to go up for 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 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 decision must be included in the *Previous Correspondence* section of 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.

## Assessment of Teaching Effectiveness (ATE)

All courses for any PTR candidate should be evaluated. Where feasible, all courses should be evaluated by students. 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 up for promotion to full professor).

Evaluative comments of the SET must be provided by the department head and the department’s PTR 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 <u>[guidelines on interpreting SET scores.pdf](https://bpir.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/3452/2022/08/Interpreting-SET-Results-Updated-Senate-Recommendations-13-April-2022-1.pdf)</u>.

<u>[Assessment of teaching effectiveness beyond SET scores](https://cetl.uconn.edu/resources/documenting-your-teaching/evidence-of-teaching-excellence/)</u> is required for any promotion. In terms of promotion to the rank of professor, a candidate may not use ATE materials from their tenure process; they must include additional measures of teaching effectiveness for the second promotion. It is the department head’s responsibility, in consultation with the candidate, to ensure that an appropriate assessment is included in the PTR 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, including best practices recommended by the discipline if available, are to be used. For more information about ATE, please refer to <u>[Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning’s website](https://cetl.uconn.edu/resources/documenting-your-teaching/evidence-of-teaching-excellence/)</u>.

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. For those individuals going for promotion to full, we expect ATE materials to be incorporated throughout the years leading up to the promotion.

## Communication and Input from Regional and Joint Appointments

### **Regional Appointments**

Faculty at regional campuses who are candidates for reappointment, tenure, and/or promotion should request a letter from the regional campus dean early in the process. Regional campus deans should address aspects of the candidate’s case that they are knowledgeable about, including teaching and service. 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.

A letter is required each year of the candidate’s review.

### **Joint Appointments and/or Secondary Supervisors**

For faculty with a joint appointment, a secondary supervisor with another department, and/or an appointment with an interdisciplinary center, institute, or program, a letter from the department head or director of that center, institute, or program should also be requested so that it is available for the deliberations of the departmental PTR/PR 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. However, specific procedures for PTR/PR review should follow the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) established at the time of the joint and/or secondary appointment.

A letter is required each year of a candidate’s review.

## Role of the Dean’s Advisory Council (DAC)

The Dean’s Advisory Council is separated into two committees: Humanities and Social Sciences, and Life, Behavioral, and Physical Sciences. These committees are comprised of full professors from departments within these divisions, 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, tenure, and 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, research, service). 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.