The following conditions of employment apply primarily to members of the faculty appointed as officers of instruction. Officers of instruction are those members of the faculty whose appointments are to an academic, teaching department, and whose responsibilities are focused on teaching, research, and service within an academic discipline. The provost and vice president for academic affairs is the responsible vice president for all the university's officers of instruction. These guidelines do not apply to officers of administration or research except when these officers accept an appointment to teach, or to the extent the appointment contract of such officers so states.

Many officers of instruction on regular appointments are considered to be serving on a probationary basis with the possibility that they may be considered for tenure. However, not all officers of instruction are eligible to be considered for tenure. The offer of appointment and appointment contract will specify if the position is considered to be "tenure-related." Only faculty members with regular appointments at half-time or more (.50 full-time equivalent or FTE) at the ranks of instructor, senior instructor, assistant professor, associate professor, or professor can be considered for tenure. Faculty members appointed as lecturers are not eligible, and there are a number of instructor positions within the university that have been designated as non-tenure related.

Before being considered for tenure, eligible faculty members normally serve six consecutive probationary years during which they are expected to accumulate an excellent record of teaching, research or artistic performance, and professional and university service. During the sixth year, a case for promotion is submitted to the university's promotion and tenure process, and before the end of the sixth year, the faculty member is notified either that he or she has been promoted and tenured or that his or her appointment will expire at the end of the seventh year of appointment, according to the timely notice policy. Under State Board Administrative Rules, the maximum duration of the probationary period is seven years. The rules do allow some exceptions to be made.

Faculty members who have served on the faculties at other institutions may have some of that service taken into consideration on appointment at the University of Oregon, and an earlier date for tenure consideration may be set. Any expedited schedule must be agreed to by both the provost and the new faculty member at the time of appointment.

An additional probationary year may be approved for faculty members experiencing pregnancy, childbirth, or the adoption of a child. Members of the faculty interested in such an extension should contact the provost. In other exceptional circumstances, the six-year limit for the tenure decision may be exceeded, but a written agreement to this effect between the faculty member and the provost is required.

The university's failure to make a timely promotion-and-tenure decision or to give appropriate timely notice does not automatically confer indefinite tenure. However, the university must be diligent in complying with the schedules set by the state board's rules, and the policy of timely notice continues to apply so that faculty members not offered tenure must be given adequate notice of termination.

The maximum probationary period for regular part-time faculty members who are employed at 50 percent of full-time equivalent (.50 FTE) or more, is also seven years, with the tenure decision to be made before the end of the sixth year of service. In this case, however, the time is calculated in terms of FTE years rather than calendar years. Tenure, if granted, is for the FTE as stated in the initial contract or as negotiated. Faculty members whose regular appointments are at less than .50 FTE do not accumulate probationary time toward tenure.

A department or school may propose that a faculty member be considered for tenure before the sixth year of service, when that appears to be in the best interest of the institution. In this situation, the case is considered "early" and does not change the length of the probationary period.

Only service rendered as an officer of instruction counts toward tenure. Prior service in the administrative or research ranks does not count.

Only service paid for out of the university's general funds counts as probationary time. If part or all of a faculty member's salary is paid by an external agency as a result of participation in sponsored research or grant-funded activity, the tenure clock does not advance for the amount of time represented by that outside salary payment.

The standards of performance required to qualify for tenure at the University of Oregon are unique to this institution, and also vary among the disciplines, departments, schools and colleges here. The best source of information about what an individual faculty member should achieve in order to qualify for tenure is the unit department head or dean. Conversations with other senior faculty members in the area can also be helpful. The Office of Academic Affairs has published a booklet entitled A Faculty Guide to Promotion and Tenure at the University of Oregon, which is also a good source of information.

Criteria for Teaching-Faculty Evaluation The criteria for teaching-faculty evaluation, listed below, apply to all faculty members involved in teaching and research at the University of Oregon. Depending on the faculty member's particular assignment, some criteria will be emphasized and others may not be applicable. Regular faculty members with tenured and tenure-related appointments are expected to excel in all the areas listed below. Research faculty members will be evaluated on their performance relative to the research criteria. Members of the teaching faculty not on tenure-related appointments are evaluated on their performance relative to the teaching-related criteria. Even for tenured and tenure-related faculty appointments, every criterion is not given the same weight. For example, performance in university service is more important for tenured faculty members than for those on probationary service.

The university will consider those criteria listed below that are appropriate to the position description in evaluating teaching and research faculty:

a) The quality of teaching:

b) Professional growth, scholarly activities, creative and artistic achievement:

c) Leadership in academic and administrative service:

The Probationary Faculty Member's Responsibility The burden of proof is on the faculty member to demonstrate that he or she possesses the qualities and capabilities expected of tenured faculty members at the University of Oregon. Therefore, during the probationary period, the faculty member is expected to develop a record of excellence in teaching, research or artistic performance and professional service.

While the responsibility for assembling the case for promotion and tenure rests with the department head, the faculty member concerned is expected to be intimately involved in the accumulation of evidence to go into the case file. Specifically, the faculty member must submit a curriculum vitae, including a summary of education, experience, honors, public and university service, and a bibliography. In addition, each candidate must submit a personal statement of scholarly, scientific, professional or artistic accomplishments, goals and plans. Candidates are encouraged to submit a teaching vita representing a comprehensive record of their teaching activities as well as a teaching portfolio that illustrates teaching scholarship and instructional effectiveness.

Normally, the candidate will be asked for the names of a number of individuals in the discipline outside the institution who can provide an evaluation of the contributions of that faculty member to the discipline. One or more of these designated individuals is likely to be asked to provide such evaluations. The candidate must be prepared to submit copies of scholarly publications or other tangible evidence of professional contributions for the reviewers to evaluate.

At all levels of the evaluation processes for faculty members, the highest level of confidentiality is essential. Persons participating in any part of the process are ethically bound to maintain this confidentiality even after the completion of a case.

The Department's Role During a faculty member's term of probationary service, the department should be playing a strong supporting role. The major player is the department head, but other members of the tenured faculty should also be helping out, if they can. In the smaller schools, the department head's role is played by the dean, and it is the faculty of the whole school that lends a hand. Where the words "department head" appear, read the word "dean" if that is the organizational situation that applies.

The department head is the official promotion file builder. It is quite natural for a faculty member on probation to take an active interest in what goes in the promotion file, but it is the department head's responsibility to see that appropriate evidence of performance is developed and maintained. It is the department that proposes a candidate for promotion and tenure, and it reflects badly on the department and on the candidate when an improperly prepared dossier is sent forward.

The department head is responsible for seeing that the probationary faculty member knows about the services and support activities the university makes available, and should advise their use when that seems appropriate. The department head should explain the operations of the department and the school or college, indicating what level of support is available and how to get it.

Perhaps most importantly, the department head should make as clear as possible the expectations the department has for a successful tenure candidate in all the areas of teaching, research/professional performance and service. The department head's annual evaluations and frequent informal evaluation discussions with the probationary faculty member should keep these expectations in clear view through-out the probationary period and give the faculty member a good sense of how well he or she is progressing.

The department head should ensure that the probationary faculty member is given the opportunity to teach at all possible levels within the department’s curriculum, and that the classes vary in size. The department head is encouraged to assist the faculty member in preparing a record of teaching that includes a department teaching plan, a teaching vita, a teaching portfolio, and convergent evidence of teaching performance that includes peer review as well as student evaluations. Faculty legislation requires that all courses taught by tenure-track faculty, enrolling more than ten students, be evaluated by students using quantitative questionnaires, and that signed, written comments be solicited from students in all courses, regardless of enrollment size. It is the department head’s responsibility to collect, maintain and summarize the statistical results of student evaluations according to university rules.

In addition to student evaluations, faculty legislation prescribes that probationary faculty have at least one course thoroughly evaluated by a faculty peer during each of the three years preceding the promotion/tenure review. In most cases, the peer reviews will be conducted during the third, fourth, and fifth years of the probationary period. The probationary faculty member and the department head should work together to identify the courses to be reviewed as well as the peer reviewers. The goal of the peer reviews is to identify teaching strengths and weaknesses, and advise on strategies for continued improvement in teaching excellence.

The department head should advise the probationary faculty member against taking part in time-consuming activities that are of little value in the tenure decision, and, while encouraging collegiality and participation in departmental and university service, should make sure that this burden does not become too heavy.

The department head and the other senior faculty members should do what they can to see that research and professional service opportunities come to their probational colleague, recommending him or her to participate in conferences, to do a book review, or serve on a professional board or committee. They should offer to read and criticize scholarly work, recommend outside contacts that might help develop research strategies, recommend publishers and journals for scholarly output, and suggest outside sources of research support.

Normally, in the fifth year of service, the accumulated record of performance will be brought together into a promotion file and augmented with required materials from outside the institution. The provost has developed detailed instructions on how to assemble a promotion and tenure file, and it is the department head's responsibility to follow the instructions exactly.

The department head is responsible for having conducted thorough and comprehensive annual evaluations, and evaluations related to recommendations of contract renewal over the probationary period.

The department head is responsible for requesting and accumulating outside letters of evaluation, for identifying the relationship of all referees to the candidate, and for ensuring that the file of written evaluations and recommendations from within and without the university presents a fair picture of the candidate under consideration. The department head also usually submits her or his own observations on teaching and advising, research and scholarship, and administrative, technical, or service activities. This statement by the department head should include a report of the evaluations of the faculty member and the vote of any personnel committee within the department. The department head must also clarify any special conditions of the faculty member's appointment, or special duties and obligations the performance of which is to be particularly evaluated.

When a faculty member is a member of an institute, the institute can be of assistance in two ways. First, the institute can provide the department with the names of national peers who may serve as external reviewers for the department. Second, tenured faculty members of the institute can provide a separate review of the candidate for the file. Institute faculty who are members of the candidate’s department cannot participate, however, in both the departmental level review and the institute review, and the departmental level review should take precedence.

These materials must be reviewed by all the members of the department who are authorized to vote on a particular promotion and tenure case. The department will have a roll-call vote and the results of this vote become a part of the record. Balloting is done secretly and only the tally is reported back to the department. With rare exceptions, a candidate for promotion and tenure who does not receive the support of a solid majority for his or her candidacy is unlikely to be promoted.

The Dean's Role If the dean is the functional department head, then the dean is concerned with all that is described immediately above. In the schools and colleges with departments, the dean's office will provide a coordinating role, and will subject the dossier to an independent review. A dean's advisory or personnel committee may review the materials, and make suggestions for improving the file, or the dean or an associate dean may perform this task. The dean may seek additional information and request additional references from sources either inside or outside the institution. Based upon the record accumulated, the dean makes a recommendation for or against tenure or promotion. The dean's recommendation must be in writing, and a candidate must be informed of what the dean's recommendation is.

The dean is responsible for assuring that the dossier is complete, properly assembled, and submitted to the provost in time for the proper review.

The Faculty Personnel Committee's Role The provost sends all the cases for promotion and tenure submitted to her or him to the Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC). The FPC reviews the promotion and tenure cases of all tenure-track faculty members proposed for promotion and/or tenure and makes a recommendation on each case to the provost. The committee also may act either on request or on its own initiative on proposals relative to standards and procedures for promotion and tenure.

The committee consists of twelve members: ten faculty members and two students. Five faculty members are elected from the College of Arts and Sciences and five from the professional colleges and schools. Three CAS and two professional college/school members are elected in the spring of one year, and two CAS members and three professional college/school members are elected in the alternate year. They serve overlapping two-year terms beginning the following July 1. Any faculty member who is tenured and not a full-time administrator is eligible for election. Two students nominated by the ASUO serve on the committee. The students participate in discussions and the evaluation of materials, but their votes are recorded separately.

The committee may establish its own methods of operation, but usually each member takes major responsibility to "carry" a subset of promotion cases. That means that the information presented is checked and verified, and comparisons with similar and recent promotion cases are made. The committee can ask the provost to supply additional information. The person who carries the case is charged with presenting it to the committee at large, summarizing important points, and strengths and weaknesses. However, every member of the committee is charged with reading every case file.

Often the decision is an easily arrived-at yes or no, but the FPC takes great care in evaluating cases that come with a weak departmental endorsement, or when the dean does not agree with an undivided departmental recommendation, or when the dean's support is weak. Discussions are held, and there are votes. The carrying member then drafts a recommendation and circulates it among the other members for comment and revision. Once analyzed, it is sent to the provost with the file for the provost's final decision.

The Provost's Role The provost is the only officer in the university with the delegated authority to appoint an officer of instruction, and is also the only officer who may award tenure. The work of the department, the dean and her or his advisers, and the faculty personnel committee is all directed at providing the provost with the information needed to make the right decision for the university's future. Tenure frequently means that an individual and the university will maintain an intimate relationship for four decades or more. The wrong decision is costly for everyone. Therefore, if a reasonable doubt remains about the candidate's continuing value to the university's mission, tenure is not granted.

What the provost does once he or she receives the file from the FPC is a matter of executive prerogative. Naturally, the provost may seek further information before making a decision. It is not uncommon to circulate the file among some of the members of the provost's executive staff, and to the vice provost for research and the dean of the graduate school. These officers then add their advice to that already collected.

Should the recommendation of the Faculty Personnel Committee conflict with the recommendation of the school or college dean or the department head, the provost may invite the committee and the dean and/or department head to meet to discuss the case before making a final decision. The final decision, however, rests with the provost, and within the bounds of reasonable behavior, that decision can be either yes or no, regardless of all the advice that came before.

Once the provost has made the decision whether or not to offer tenure and/or promotion, he or she writes to the candidate giving notice of the decision. If the decision is not to promote, it is not unusual to invite the candidate to meet with the provost or a member of the provost's staff to discuss ways of strengthening the case for a future evaluation. If the decision is to promote an already-tenured faculty member, the letter will be one of congratulations and will describe the date upon which the new rank goes into effect.

If the decision is to deny promotion and tenure to a probationary faculty member, and the case is not early, the notice will include timely notice of non-reappointment. That is, the faculty member will be informed that the university will not renew the fixed-term contract of that faculty member and the employment relationship will expire at the end of the next academic year.

The provost's decision is final, but when the affected faculty member believes that the decision was flawed by improper procedure or by illegal discrimination, arbitrariness or capriciousness, a grievance process is available through which to make a complaint. That process is described in Chapter III of this handbook.

At OUS institutions, tenure is officially called "indefinite tenure." The offer of tenure is definite, but since it carries with it no fixed ending date, the term of service becomes "indefinite." Therefore, a tenured appointment is one that continues indefinitely and can be terminated only by reason of program reduction or elimination, financial exigency or for cause. It is offered to faculty who have demonstrated such professional competence that awarding such an expectation of continued employment is warranted. Under the state board's rules, tenure is awarded only on an institutional basis. That is, there is no tenure in the wider state system, and probationary service in one institution does not necessarily count toward tenure at a second appointing institution.

The tenured faculty is the backbone of university governance, and with tenure comes an obligation to take a leadership part in the academic, co- and extra-curricular activities that make the university what it is. At the same time, the expectation of excellence in teaching and scholarship is not diminished.

The university provides for a comprehensive post-tenure review of its faculty every three years to encourage, to reward, and to support the continuous development of tenured members of the faculty, and through the process of peer review to identify faculty members who merit special recognition or need special assistance. Two levels of regular, developmental review are required of all tenured faculty who are not evaluated through the established Administrative Review process:

1. A substantive review at the three-year point after a prior major review or after promotion. Other reviews (such as those undertaken for regular salary or merit-pay adjustments) may contribute to the third-year review, but may not be substituted for it.
2. A major review every six years after a prior major review or after being promoted or receiving tenure.

The process, to a large extent, mirrors that for promotion and tenure. The same criteria are used, with the differences being that the case is developed by a departmental committee on post-tenure review, external reviews are typically not solicited, and the file is not submitted to the Faculty Personnel Committee.

A tenured faculty member may substitute the regular promotion process for a post-tenure review. Faculty members who have formally declared their intention to retire within the next three years are exempt.

The university has developed plans for early tenure reduction or tenure relinquishment for tenured faculty members only. Copies of the plan are available upon request from the Office of Academic Affairs.

Upon retirement, many faculty members are nominated for emeritus or emerita status by their dean or department head. Nominations are considered by the vice president responsible for the faculty member's area of activity. Emeritus or emerita status confers with it the right to participate in faculty governance. The university's faculty Committee on Retirement, Tenure Reduction, and the Emeriti works with the provost to assure the continued healthy relationships between the university, its active faculty and their retired colleagues.

Deans and department heads should submit nominations for emeritus/emerita status at least six weeks before the faculty member fully retires.