The University of Wisconsin Oshkosh
Policy # [####]
Faculty Renewal (FAC 4.B)

Original Issuance Date: MMMM DD, YYYY
Last Revision Date: MMMM DD, YYYY
Next Review Date: MMMM DD, YYYY

1. PURPOSE

2. RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

3. SCOPE

4. BACKGROUND

5. DEFINITIONS

6. POLICY STATEMENT

FAC 4.B.0. Incorporation of College Personnel Materials.

Please note that substantive requirements relating to faculty appointment, renewal, tenure, promotion, and merit may be found in materials developed at the college or department level. College-specific information has been included as an appendix to this material.

FAC 4.B.1. UWS 3.06 {Renewal of Appointments and Granting Tenure} and 3.07(1)(a) {Renewal of Probationary Appointments, Rules and Procedures} of the Wisconsin Administrative Code, Rules of the Board of Regents.

View UWS 3.06 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code [docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/code/admin_code/uws/3/06]

View UWS 3.07 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code [docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/code/admin_code/uws/3/07]

FAC 4.B.2. Renewal and Tenure Forms.

Forms to be used for renewal and tenure shall be prepared and distributed by the Provost and Vice Chancellor’s Office. Prior to adoption of changes, the Provost shall consult with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee (which retains the discretion to present any proposed changes to the Senate for review and recommendation).

FAC 4.B.3. Notice Periods.

(1) A faculty member who is employed on a probationary appointment pursuant to section 36.13, Wis. Stats., shall be given written notice of reappointment or nonreappointment for another academic year in advance of the expiration of his/her current appointment as follows:

(a) When the appointment expires at the end of an academic year, not later than March 1 of the first academic year and not later than December 15 of the second consecutive academic year of service;

(b) If the initial appointment expires during an academic year, at least three months prior to its expiration; if a second consecutive appointment terminates during the academic year, at least six months prior to its expiration;

(c) After two or more years of continuous service at the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, such notice shall be given at least twelve months before the expiration of the appointment.

(2) Proper Notice. Notice shall be given by sending duplicate copies of letters to the faculty member’s University office as well as his or her last known home address (as on file with the Human Resources Office). If the original letter of appointment stated that the contract was terminal and specified an ending date, no additional letter of non-reappointment is required.

(3) Failure to Provide Notice. If proper notice is not given in accordance with this section, the aggrieved faculty member shall be entitled to a one-year terminal appointment. Such appointments, however, shall not result in achievement of tenure.

FAC 4.B.4. Renewal for Multiple Years.

Probationary faculty (whether hired under single-year or two-year initial appointments) may be considered for renewal for subsequent two- or three-year terms, subject to the following conditions:

(1) Multiple-year renewals require the recommendation of the initial level of review and are subject to review by successive levels (i.e., college Dean, and Provost and Vice Chancellor). The multiple-year tenure track appointment sequence will ordinarily follow a 2-3-2 year appointment cycle at the initiative of the department. After the initial two-year tenure track appointment, renewals ordinarily occur in the second and fourth years of service. The tenure decision takes place in the sixth year.

(2) All recommendations for multi-year renewals will be accompanied by written rationale from all levels of review that address the following factors:

(a) the credentials of the probationary employee;

(b) the candidate’s demonstrated effectiveness in teaching, scholarly activities and service; and

(c) a statement of the candidate’s expected performance during the renewal period.

(3) Tenure decisions require a separate affirmative decision based upon a comprehensive review of the candidate’s record of teaching, scholarly activities, and service.

(4) Required fourth year review: In order to focus attention on the record of accomplishment and to provide the probationary faculty with direction and sufficient time to demonstrate continued development, all probationary faculty members must be given renewal consideration two years prior to the expected tenure review.

FAC 4.B.5. Criteria.

(1) Decisions relating to renewal of appointments or recommending of tenure shall require an evaluation of the candidate’s contribution to the university in the areas of teaching, scholarly activities, and service. The relative importance of each function of the evaluation process shall be decided by department/equivalent and college faculties.

(2) Renewal and tenure criteria must exist for all initial levels and colleges.

(3) Renewal and tenure criteria are subject to periodic review .

(a) The purpose of such review is to assure that consensus exists among all participants in the renewal/tenure decision process as to the nature and rigor of the criteria as they are to be applied in future decisions. Reviews are intended to orient participants to a clear understanding of established criterion but need not lead to change.

(b) Renewal/tenure criteria are normally reviewed every five years or whenever participants in the renewal/tenure process deem it necessary.

The Chancellor, Provost and Vice Chancellor, Deans, college governance bodies, or initial levels may initiate a review of initial level criteria at any time they deem circumstances warrant.
The Chancellor, Provost and Vice Chancellor, Deans, or college governance body may initiate a review of college criteria at any time they deem circumstances warrant.
(4) Consistent with the practices of shared governance, changes in criteria require the agreement of all levels participating in the tenure and renewal process.

(a) Initial level criteria require the agreement of the initial level, college faculty, Dean, Provost and Vice Chancellor and Chancellor.

(b) College criteria require the agreement of the college faculty, Dean, Provost and Vice Chancellor and Chancellor.

(c) The procedure for agreement by college faculty shall be determined by each college’s bylaws.

(5) The degree and performance requirements for obtaining tenure will be no less than those set forth in FAC 5 for promotion to associate professor.

(6) The criteria in effect for any particular renewal/tenure decision are those criteria that were operational at the time that the probationary faculty member commenced his/her appointment as a tenure track probationary faculty member. Renewal/tenure criteria adopted subsequent to appointment will be applied when the probationary faculty member makes a written request to the initial level of review. This request must precede or accompany the submission of the renewal/tenure papers that are filed by the probationary faculty member.

(7) It is the responsibility of the Department Chairs to make sure that all faculty in their departments/equivalent are aware of these criteria.

(a) Each Department Chair will review the initial level, college, and university criteria currently in effect with probationary faculty at the onset of employment, and thereafter no less frequently than once per year.

(b) If the initial level, college, or university criteria are changed, the department chairs will immediately review the changes with all faculty in the department/equivalent.

FAC 4.B.6. Evidence.

(1) The evidence shall consist of the following items: The material submitted by the probationary faculty member, any other materials added by the initial level of review, the assessments and recommendations from the various levels of review, material from the initial appointment, and materials from any subsequent renewal consideration.

(a) Discussions of what constitutes teaching, scholarly activities, and service are set forth in this handbook.

The “Core of Academe” reprinted in FAC 1 of this handbook contains a discussion of the meanings of teaching, scholarly activity and service. The activities itemized in each of these areas are presented as a non-exhaustive listing of the types of activities that would be appropriate to include as evidence of accomplishment in these areas.
“Faculty Performance Review” (FAC 6 of this handbook) sets forth UW System and UW Oshkosh policy on student opinion surveys.
(b) In addition to submitting evidence of accomplishments, each candidate for renewal/tenure will prepare three personal statements summarizing her/his accomplishments in the areas of teaching, scholarly activities, and service.

(c) Relevant evidence includes the material submitted by the probationary faculty member, any other materials added by the initial level of review, the assessments and recommendations from the various levels of review, material from the initial appointment, and materials from any subsequent renewal consideration.

(d) Any level of review may request to see any or all of the original documents submitted to the initial level of review.

(e) The initial level of review shall retain all materials until the current renewal process is complete, including any reconsideration or appeals procedures.

(2) Data on teaching ability, including student opinion surveys and faculty peer evaluations must be presented and included in folders for review at all levels.

(a) Colleges and departments have the responsibility (through the applicable bylaws) to establish policy pertaining to the acquisition and use of student opinions and faculty peer evaluations.

(b) “Peer evaluation,” as used in this section, may include such perspectives as evaluations by tenured or non-tenured members of the individual’s academic department, evaluations by University of Wisconsin Oshkosh faculty from outside of the individual’s academic department, and/or evaluations by faculty from other institutions.

(c) Non‑teaching faculty must present evaluations of performance of professional responsibilities directly related to the university appointment.

(d) Faculty whose responsibilities are primarily non‑teaching but who also teach will be evaluated for classroom performance as well.

(3) Evidence presented to support scholarly activities shall be presented to the initial level of review for its critical review and thorough evaluation.

(a) Candidates for renewal/tenure should include in their folders for initial level review copies of materials and evidence related to scholarly activities. Before forwarding the folders, the initial reviewing level will prepare a written statement which clearly assesses the quality and quantity of such work and include it in the candidate’s folder.

(b) Folders forwarded from the initial level of review should not contain complete copies of documents and materials related to scholarly activities, such as books, journals, tapes, slides, etc. The completed form should list these accomplishments together with assessment statements made by committees and offices at each reviewing stage in the process.

(4) Information on service activities shall be presented in the folders for review at all levels.

(5) If a clarification is needed, or if more material becomes available during the review at the initial level of review, the probationary faculty member may submit additional evidence to the renewal folder, up to the time the decision is made by the initial level of review.

(6) The initial level may add additional evidence relevant to the candidate’s performance, subject to the following:

(a) The evidence incorporated must be deemed relevant by majority vote of the initial level.

(b) The candidate is informed of the inclusion of the additional information and is immediately given a copy of the additional evidence. Prior to the decision being made by the initial level of review, the candidate may ask that the added information be removed from the folder. If the committee does not agree with the candidate’s request, or if action is taken before such a request is presented, the candidate shall be afforded an opportunity to append a statement to the added material that shall become a part of the file and thereby accompany the material through the subsequent steps in the review process.

FAC 4.B.7. Procedure.

(1) Each probationary faculty member will be informed in writing by the department chairperson (or equivalent) at least twenty calendar days prior to the date the initial recommendation on renewal/nonrenewal will take place. The individual being reviewed will be informed by the department chairperson (or equivalent) that he/she may include such written information in the review folder as he/she feels is appropriate and germane to the review. The probationary faculty member shall prepare the renewal forms and supply materials for the review; all materials must be submitted at least five calendar days prior to the scheduled review.

(2) Procedures for the review of faculty who are assigned to more than one department or unit shall be initiated by the department or unit in which the faculty member’s assignment is greatest. Recommendations will be forwarded through the college or division in which the assignment is greatest and must bear endorsements and/or signed comments by appropriate supervisors in other units who have administrative responsibilities for the faculty member.

(3) In the event the assignment is divided evenly between two or more departments or units or the assignment fluctuates, the faculty member shall decide which unit shall originate the recommendation. The faculty member shall communicate that decision, in writing, to all units and supervisors involved in the process.

(4) Each reviewing level shall inform the faculty member, in writing, as soon as possible but no later than seven calendar days of making its recommendation regarding renewal/nonrenewal and remind the faculty member it is a recommendation, except in cases where the initial level of review decides to nonrenew the appointment.

(a) Each level shall provide the faculty member with written reasons for its recommendation or decision.

(b) When the initial level of review recommends nonrenewal, the nonrenewal vote has the force of a final decision to nonrenewal, subject to the opportunity for reconsideration and appeal.

(c) No comments, annotations or markings should be placed on the credentials and materials as submitted by the probationary faculty member.

(5) The renewal/nonrenewal review process for colleges with departments requires action by the department and, if the vote is for renewal, subsequent actions by the college committee, Dean, Provost and Vice Chancellor, and Chancellor.

(6) In colleges without departments, the faculty will be responsible for deciding if a review process prior to the college committee is desirable; the faculty shall have the authority for implementation. Such authority must be incorporated into the college by‑laws. The college by‑laws must clearly indicate whether the review level prior to the college committee is only advisory or whether it is the functional equivalent of the department committee and hence the initial level of review. The renewal/nonrenewal process shall be analogous to that followed for colleges with departments, with the inclusion of a review level prior to the college committee (if so decided) or with the college committee serving as the initial review level and hence serving as the functional equivalent of the department.

(7) Faculty in non‑college units will be evaluated by the initial level of review and, if the vote is for renewal, the director or equivalent (if tenured), the appropriate assistant Vice Chancellor or Vice Chancellor, the Provost and Vice Chancellor, and the Chancellor.

FAC 4.B.8. Responsibilities of Individuals and Committees.

(1) Responsibilities of Individuals. All persons participating in the process of reviewing credentials and making decisions or recommendations pertaining to renewal/tenure are expected to use professional judgment. Deans, the Provost and Vice Chancellor, and the Chancellor participate in the personnel process by virtue of the positions they hold. When acting in these capacities, these individuals are expected to articulate clearly the rationale for all decisions or recommendations and provide an analytical written critical evaluation of the probationary faculty member’s performance. Each individual who participates in the personnel process shall also meet the following enumerated requirements:

(a) To act consistently with the University’s applicable personnel policies and procedures.

(b) To fairly apply department, college and University criteria for renewal/tenure.

(c) To be cognizant of principles and practices of nondiscrimination, including affirmative action and commitment to equal employment opportunity.

(d) To conduct a thorough and complete review of the probationary faculty member’s qualifications for renewal/tenure.

This review is to include a careful examination of all information submitted by the probationary faculty member for review, and attentive consideration of the recommendations and supporting rationale of any previous levels of review.
(e) To participate in the deliberative process of the committee’s review and consideration of the probationary faculty member’s qualifications for renewal/tenure, in light of department, college and University criteria.

Participation refers to working diligently and collegially with other committee members. It includes active involvement in the committee’s dialogue, including the expression of one’s personal views or interpretations, prior to voting, when they differ from those previously expressed by other members of the committee.
Participation also includes insistence that the committee’s deliberation be thorough, fair, balanced, non-discriminatory, and rationally-related to the information presented for review. This is demonstrated by being aware of the committee’s responsibilities and, if problems are perceived, speaking up before the committee’s vote. Participation includes: (a) the exercise of individual and collective responsibility to ensure that the committee’s action is based on the information considered during the committee’s meeting, and (b) the insistence that the statement of rationale for the committee’s action be based on the committee’s deliberations.
It is expected that participation, as outlined in this section, will lead individuals to the point where they are able to exercise independent professional judgment on the question of the renewal or nonrenewal of an appointment. Since an abstention is the equivalent of not voting on this question, it is expected that abstentions will be relatively rare.
(2) Responsibilities of Committees.

(a) For the initial level of review, to inform the probationary faculty member of the timeline for the review of his or her qualifications for renewal/tenure and to ask the probationary faculty member to submit materials to be reviewed by the committee.

(b) To provide proper notice of committee meetings (to satisfy the requirements of the Wisconsin Open Meeting Law) and to ensure its actions are consistent with applicable personnel rules.

Committees should anticipate scheduling additional meetings, as necessary, to complete a thorough and thoughtful review of each candidate.
(c) To ensure that all committee recommendations or decisions pertaining to renewal or tenure of the probationary faculty shall be made on the basis of a motion that is carried by a majority vote of those present and not abstaining.

The vote of each member on the renewal or tenure recommendation must be ascertained and recorded by name in the committee’s minutes.
No absentee or proxy voting is allowed.
Ideally, all committee members will be physically present for the committee’s deliberations. In exceptional cases, by majority vote of the committee members present, absent committee members may be considered present and eligible to vote by means of teleconferencing as long as they meet all other responsibilities, including the complete review of the candidate’s documents, participation in the deliberations, etc.
(d) To take no votes on any motions for renewal until the committee has completed its thorough review and discussion of the complete record.

(e) To articulate clearly the rationale for all decisions or recommendations that are reached by formal committee action.

The committee must provide an analytical written critical evaluation of the probationary faculty member’s performance.
It is not sufficient for a committee merely to refer to the votes that were taken and the categories of assessment.
The committee’s obligation is fulfilled when it does the following: (a) conducts a critical evaluation of the probationary faculty member’s record in each identified area, (b) prepares a written statement setting forth the committee’s assessment of the probationary faculty member’s progress toward tenure that identifies and discusses, if appropriate, any specific areas that need attention or improvement, and (c) approves a written statement that demonstrates both that the committee’s deliberations were thorough and that the committee exercised informed professional judgment when it made the assessment of the qualifications (in each area) in light of the established criteria.
The committee’s written statement in support of the recommendation or decision must be formally reviewed and approved by committee vote at a meeting. If there is a tie vote on the statement, the committee shall prepare and approve a report that reflects these divergent views.
Members of the committee not agreeing with the majority’s recommendation or decision may file with the committee chair a brief signed written statement that expresses views that differ from those expressed by the committee. The chair shall include this information as an addendum to the report approved by majority vote of the committee. If the chair determines that the material submitted includes information that was not previously presented to or discussed with the committee during the course of its deliberations, the chair shall also include an annotation to that effect.
(f) To hold and preserve in confidence the comments of each member in closed sessions.

The committee chair (or designee) has the sole responsibility to communicate information pertaining to the committee’s deliberations with the probationary faculty member or other levels of review.
Confidentiality does not provide insulation from responsibility or accountability. The actions of each member, and the committee as a whole, can be reviewed through appeal.

FAC 4.B.9. Constituency of the Initial Level of Review.

(1) If the department is the initial level of review, the committee shall include all tenured members of the department, including the department chair, if tenured. An individual participating in the departmental review is disqualified from subsequently participating as a member of the college renewal and tenure committee when the committee reviews the credentials of the candidate from the same department.

(2) If there are no tenured faculty in the department, the college renewal and tenure committee shall be the functional equivalent of the initial level of review.

(3) Subject to the requirement that all initial levels of review be comprised of no fewer than three persons, each college may establish rules for the constituency of the initial level of review. Unless the college’s policies (approved by the college faculty, the Faculty Senate and the Chancellor) establish another framework, the following conditions shall pertain to the initial level of review:

(a) If there is only one tenured faculty member in the department deliberating and voting, he or she shall be joined by the college renewal and tenure committee for the purpose of acting as the initial level of review, subject to the following considerations: (1) the member of the department is entitled to one vote; and (2) the members of the college committee shall, in total, have two votes, with the vote of each individual member weighted to equal a proportionate share based on the number of college committee members participating (e.g., if there are seven members of the college committee, each participating individual shall be entitled to a 2/7th vote).

(b) If there are two tenured faculty members in the department deliberating and voting, they shall be joined by the college renewal and tenure committee for the purpose of acting as the initial level of review, subject to the following considerations: (1) each member of the department is entitled to one vote; and (2) the members of the college committee shall, in total, have one vote, with the vote of each individual member weighted to equal a proportionate share based on the number of college committee members participating (e.g., if there are seven members of the college committee, each participating individual shall be entitled to a 1/7th vote).

(4) If the college renewal and tenure committee participates in the initial level of review, it does not subsequently act as the second level of review. The chair of the college renewal and tenure committee shall serve as the chair of this ad hoc committee.

FAC 4.B.10. Additional Considerations.

(1) All committee meetings shall be held in accordance with Open Meetings Law, section 19.81 of the Wisconsin Statutes.

(2) The initial level of review and the Chancellor make decisions on renewal and tenure considerations. All other levels of review make recommendations.

(3) All renewal/tenure materials shall be reviewed at successively higher levels as follows:

(a) Initial Level of Review.

Tenured members of the initial level of review shall carefully review evidence. The votes and specific reasons shall be recorded on the form provided by the Provost and Vice Chancellor’s Office. Copies of the form, including the recommendation and rationale, shall be provided to the candidate for review as soon as possible, but in any case no later than three working days after the materials are completed.
Evidence presented to support professional and scholarly growth and service will be evaluated primarily at the departmental or initial level of review.
The materials under consideration shall then be forwarded (a) to the college committee if the vote is for renewal, or (b) directly to the Provost and Vice Chancellor if the vote is for nonrenewal. If the vote is for nonrenewal, the review process will end and the Provost and Vice Chancellor shall inform the Chancellor of the nonrenewal decision.

(b) College Committee.

The college committee shall consist of elected tenured members of the college (exclusive of those holding limited appointment as Assistant Deans and above) and an affirmative action representative (non‑voting) designated by the University Director of Equity and Affirmative Action. The committee shall vote to recommend renewal or nonrenewal, record the vote and specific reasons on the form provided and forward the materials to the Dean. Members of such committees shall not participate in the vote or discussion of a faculty candidate with other members if they have already had the opportunity to do so at the initial level. If the college committee is the initial level of review, copies of the form, including the recommendation and rationale, shall be provided to the candidate for review as soon as possible, but in any case no later than three working days after the materials are completed. The materials shall then be forwarded to the Dean.

(c) College Dean.

The Dean shall record his/her recommendation for renewal or nonrenewal together with the specific reasons and forward the materials to the Provost and Vice Chancellor.

(d) Provost and Vice Chancellor.

The Provost and Vice Chancellor shall recommend on renewal for all probationary faculty who have the positive support of the initial level of review. The Provost and Vice Chancellor shall record the recommendation together with the specific reasons. If the recommendation is for nonrenewal, a reconsideration and appeal process will ensue, if requested by the probationary faculty member. In the case of an appeal of the recommendation of the Provost and Vice Chancellor, the Chancellor shall be called upon to receive and consider the report of the Faculty Senate Hearing Subcommittee before making a decision on that report.

(e) Chancellor.

The Chancellor will decide on renewal/nonrenewal for all probationary faculty who have the positive support of the initial level of review and the Provost and Vice Chancellor. The Chancellor will also decide on renewal/tenure for all who appeal a negative recommendation of the Provost and Vice Chancellor. The faculty member shall have the right to reconsideration and appeal, as provided in these rules.

(4) The Chancellor shall inform all probationary faculty, in writing, of renewal or nonrenewal by the appropriate date. Upon written request by the faculty member, written reasons for nonrenewal will be provided by the Chancellor as provided in the procedures for reconsideration.

(5) Limited Appointments. Individuals serving in limited appointments who also hold concurrent faculty appointments and who teach half‑time or more shall be acted on for renewal/nonrenewal by all supervisors, the Provost and Vice Chancellor, and Chancellor for the non‑teaching assignment. The teaching portion of the assignment, if half‑time or more, shall be subject to the review process found above. Tenure decisions will be made using the regular procedures.

(6) When the initial level of review has determined that renewal or tenure should be granted, the Chancellor’s decision to deny renewal or tenure is subject to the campus-based reconsideration and appeals process.

 

7. REFERENCES

8. PROCEDURES

9. REVISION HISTORY