CHAPTER 14 – TENURE-TRACK, JOINT, AUXILIARY, AND COURTESY FACULTY APPOINTMENTS, REAPPOINTMENT AND NONREAPPOINTMENT, AND PROMOTION

14.01. Preamble.

This chapter of the Faculty Rules of the College of Law is a supplement to Chapter 3335-6 of
the Rules of the University Faculty (Rules of the University Faculty Concerning Faculty Appointments,
Reappointments, Promotion and Tenure), the Office of Academic Affairs procedural guidelines
for promotion and tenure reviews, and any additional policies established by the University.
Should those rules and policies change, the College of Law shall follow those new rules and
policies until it updates this chapter to reflect the changes.

This chapter sets forth the College of Law’s mission and its criteria and procedures for
tenure -track faculty appointment, reappointment, promotion, tenure, and rewards, including
salary increases. It shall enter into force after being approved by the Faculty of the College of
Law and by the Provost of the University. Approval by the Provost shall represent acceptance by
the Provost of the College of Law’s mission and criteria.

The College of Law and the Administration of the University are bound by the principles
articulated in University Faculty Rule 3335-6-01, “General Considerations,” which reads:

(A) Peer review provides the foundation for decisions regarding tenure-track faculty
appointment, reappointment, and promotion and tenure (except when the provisions of paragraph H of rule 3335-6-03 are invoked). Peers are those faculty who can be expected to be most knowledgeable
regarding an individual’s qualifications and performance–normally tenure initiating unit
colleagues. Because of the centrality of peer review to these review processes, faculty vested with
responsibility for providing peer review have an obligation to participate fully and knowledgeably
in review processes, to exercise the standards established in faculty rule 3335-6-02 of the Administrative Code and other standards specific to the academic unit and discipline, and to make negative recommendations when these are warranted to maintain and improve the quality of the faculty. Recommendations by the faculty vested with the responsibility for providing peer review will be accepted unless they are not supported by the evidence presented regarding how the candidate meets the standards
established in faculty rule 3335-6-02 of the Administrative Code and other standards specific to the academic unit and discipline. When, for reasons just stated, a decision regarding faculty appointment,
reappointment, or promotion and tenure differs from the recommendation of the faculty, the
administrator or body making that decision will communicate in writing to the faculty body that
made the recommendation the reasons that the recommendation was judged not to be supported
by the evidence.

(B) In accordance with a policy of equality of opportunity, decisions concerning
appointment, reappointment, and promotion and tenure shall be free of discrimination as to age, ancestry, color, disability, gender identity or expression, genetic information, military status, national origin, race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, or veteran status, and other categories covered in the University nondiscrimination policy.

Source: University Faculty Rule, 3335-6-01, faculty minutes, April 1, 1998,
February 12, 2003, and May 3, 2018.

14.02. Mission of the College of Law.

This statement articulates considerations that identify high quality in law faculty members.
The considerations are intended to guide the evaluation of tenure-track faculty candidates and
current tenure-track faculty members.

There can be no compromise with the requirement that the performance of every faculty
member must be of high quality and that every tenure-track faculty member must be fully and
effectively engaged in teaching, research, and service to the College, University, and public at
large. These requirements are the same for all, but the specific manner in which individuals will
demonstrate their high quality and vitality will undoubtedly vary. The College strives for
continuous improvement in the quality of its faculty.

The functions of The Ohio State University and of the College of Law are teaching,
scholarship, and service. Being an effective teacher is a requirement for all. To facilitate and
enrich teaching, although not solely for those reasons, every faculty member also is expected to
engage in the critical study of the legal institutions and processes with which the faculty member
is particularly concerned. It is expected that insights and conclusions will be shared and their
validity tested by publishing the results of research.

Although the College is a component of the University, it is also an institution in its own
right, the most fundamental purpose of which is to prepare individuals for the practice of law in
the many forms required by our society. There is hazard in interpreting this role too narrowly.
Teaching technical craftsmanship is important, but not sufficient. It is necessary to create and
nurture a sense of lawyering that is grounded in obligation to society as well as in skill in the
formulation, analysis, and application of concepts. Accordingly, members of the law faculty are
encouraged to infuse their teaching, scholarship, and public service with a concern for justice
through the operation of the legal system.

As members of both the University and the College, faculty members are participants in
institutional governance. In that capacity, too, every faculty member is expected to participate to
an extent that is compatible with teaching, research, and other professional commitments.

In all of these various activities, there should be a strong balance among the evaluation
criteria in the faculty as a whole. So also should there be balance in each individual faculty
member over time with the rhythm and proportion of that balance varying from person to person.
However, satisfying one criterion for appointment or promotion and tenure is not a substitute for
satisfying other criteria.

The general practice at The Ohio State University is that, in the case of tenure-track
faculty members, an Assistant Professor will ordinarily be considered for promotion and tenure in
the sixth year of service, with promotion and tenure effective in the seventh year of service. The
practice in the College of Law is different: an Assistant Professor will ordinarily be considered for
promotion and tenure in the first semester of the fourth year of service, with promotion and tenure
effective in the fifth year. The earlier promoting and tenuring of law faculty is based on the
experience of law schools in general, the conditions prevailing in the relevant job market, and the
qualifications and professional experience of persons who accept positions on the law faculty.

Source: Faculty minutes, February 18, 1987, November 16, 1988, April 1, 1998,
and February 12, 2003.

14.03. Appointments.

A. Criteria for Appointment: Tenure-Track Faculty. Persons appointed to tenure-track
faculty positions shall demonstrate strong potential in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and
public service. Normally, a person appointed to a tenure-track faculty position shall have obtained
a Juris Doctor or equivalent degree. Persons may also be appointed who have a doctor of
philosophy or other terminal degree in fields of study other than law and who have demonstrated
strong potential in inter-disciplinary work involving law. All persons appointed to the faculty at
the rank of assistant professor and associate professor without tenure must demonstrate a strong
potential to attain tenure and to advance through faculty ranks.

B. Criteria for Appointment: Joint Appointments of Faculty from Other Colleges of the
University. Appointments may be made to the Faculty of the College of Law of members of the
University Faculty whose tenure initiating unit is other than the College of Law. Such appointees
shall not have the right to vote on matters of College governance unless specifically granted that
right by the Faculty of the College of Law. The University’s tenure responsibility shall continue to
exist only in the faculty member’s tenure initiating unit. While such appointees may be requested
to serve on faculty committees, they shall have neither the right nor the duty to do so. Such
appointments shall be made only to candidates that have demonstrated an interest in contributing
in a significant way to the College of Law’s fulfillment of one or more of its missions — teaching,
research or public service.

C. Criteria for Appointment of Regular Clinical-Track Faculty. Criteria for appointment
of regular clinical-track faculty members are governed by Faculty Rule 14A.04.

D. Criteria for Appointment: Auxiliary Faculty. Auxiliary appointments to the faculty are
temporary appointments and include (1) full-time or part-time appointments of faculty visiting
from other academic institutions and (2) adjunct appointments. Persons appointed as auxiliary
faculty shall meet the general standards of teaching at the College. Auxiliary faculty are also
expected to contribute to the overall mission of the College. The following shall be sought as
summer school visitors: a person who would bring to our students/faculty some unusual or unique
educational experience; a person in whom we may have an interest for a permanent appointment
and wish to have the opportunity for an extended mutual lookover; a person who fulfills some
specific curricular need.

E. Criteria for Courtesy Appointments. Ohio State faculty from other tenure-initiating
units may be given courtesy (no-salary) appointments if such persons meet expectations for
substantial involvement in the College. Courtesy appointments shall not give the appointee a
faculty vote.

F. Procedures for Appointment: Tenure-Track Faculty.

1. Search for Candidates. The College shall engage in an extensive search for the most qualified persons for appointment to tenure-track positions. It shall make vigorous efforts to ensure that a diverse pool of highly qualified candidates is considered.

2. Appointments Committee; Empowered to Invite for Interviews. The
Appointments Committee, upon the affirmative vote of at least one-half of its total membership
and at least two-thirds of the membership voting on the question, may invite faculty candidates
for interviewing visits to the College. No invitation authorized under this rule shall be
communicated to a prospective candidate already in law teaching until forty-eight hours after the
faculty has been apprised of the candidate’s name and credentials. During this forty-eight hour
period, any faculty member may request that no such invitation be extended to a particular
candidate until after the matter has been approved by a vote of the faculty. If a timely request is
made, the invitation will not be extended unless approved by the faculty.

3. Nominations for Appointment.

a. Participation. The following persons shall be entitled to attend and
participate in the faculty meeting discussions: student and staff members of the Appointments
Committee and all faculty.

b. Voting. Voting on nominations to the President and Board of Trustees
of the University of persons for appointment shall be by all faculty members holding the rank of
Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor, notwithstanding the rights of other
participants to vote in the Appointments Committee under Rule 1.02(H). When appointment at a senior rank is being considered, a second vote will be taken by the following eligible faculty: for appointments carrying tenure, all tenured faculty members holding at least the same rank as that to which appointment is proposed; for appointments not carrying tenure, all faculty members holding at least the same rank as that to which appointment is proposed.  For the second vote, the following faculty members are not eligible to vote: the Dean, the Assistant and Associate Deans of the College, the Executive Vice President and Provost, and the President.

c. Vote Required. All faculty appointment nominations shall require the
affirmative votes of an absolute majority of those faculty members not on leave who are entitled
to vote under this rule, or if on leave are present at the meeting. “Leave” means professional
development or similar academic leave, extended leave of absence, or permanent assignment to a
full-time position outside the College. However, a faculty member on leave who attends a
meeting shall be entitled to vote at that meeting. A leave of absence is “extended” if it lasts or is
reasonably expected to last at least two weeks due to military leave, family emergency, serious
health condition, or other circumstances referred to by the Family and Medical Leave Act. At the
outset of a meeting at which voting will occur on appointments, the Dean shall announce the
number of faculty members comprising an absolute majority of those not on leave, or if on leave
are present at the meeting and, upon request, the basis for that calculation. For each vote under
this rule, the Dean shall announce the number of affirmative and negative votes and abstentions,
but, unless directed by the faculty, shall not record the number in the minutes.

d. Presence Required for Vote. All votes shall be cast in person; proxy and
absentee voting shall not be permitted. “In person” shall be defined as stated in Rule 1.11.

e. Secret Ballot. Voting on nominations for faculty appointments shall be
by secret written ballot. A faculty member, whose presence and participation have been by other
means pursuant to Rule 1.11, may make arrangements to protect the anonymity of his or her vote
to the extent feasible.

f. Notice of Meeting. All persons entitled to attend, participate, or vote
under a. and b. above rule shall be notified of any meeting to consider appointment
recommendations at least four days prior to such meeting and shall receive documentary
background information on the candidate in advance of the meeting.

4. The Dean shall ensure that information on promotion and tenure policies
accompanies each letter of offer of appointment to new tenure-track faculty. At the time of
appointment, untenured faculty members shall be provided with all pertinent documents detailing
College of Law and University promotion and tenure policies. They shall, in particular, be
informed that University Rule 3335-6-03(D) provides for time to be excluded from the
probationary period for birth or adoption of a child, personal illness, care of seriously ill or injured
persons, unpaid leave of absence, or factors beyond a faculty member’s control that significantly interfere with
performance of the usual range of duties associated with being a successful faculty member.

G. Procedures for Appointment: Joint Appointments of Faculty from Other Colleges of
the University. Voting on joint appointments shall be made through the procedure applicable to
voting on tenure-track appointments.

H. Procedure for Appointments: Regular Clinical-Track Faculty. Procedures for
appointment of regular clinical-track faculty are governed by Faculty Rule 14A.05.

I. Procedures for Appointment: Auxiliary Faculty.

1. Except as provided in sections 3 and 4 below, persons shall be appointed to
auxiliary faculty positions by a vote of the faculty, with that vote being governed by the same
rules as applicable to the appointment of tenure-track faculty. Auxiliary appointments shall be
renewed annually.

2. Visiting Appointments, With and Without Presumption.

a. There shall be two categories of visiting appointments, “visits with a
presumption toward permanent hiring” and “visits with no presumption toward permanent
hiring.” Unless a visiting appointment is specifically designated by the faculty at the time of
approval as a “visit with presumption,” it shall be a “visit without presumption.”

b. All persons hired as visitors who are “visitors without presumption”
shall be informed by the Dean at the time of hiring of this fact and that they will not be considered
during their time here for a permanent appointment.

c. Persons hired for a “visit with presumption” may be considered for a
permanent appointment during their visiting appointment.

d. Persons hired for a “visit without presumption” shall not be considered
by the Appointments Committee or the faculty for a permanent appointment during the period of
their visiting appointment, unless the faculty by a vote of two-thirds of those persons eligible to
vote on the appointment direct the Committee to develop an appointments dossier and
appointments recommendation on the person.

e. Appointments of visiting faculty shall not exceed three consecutive
years.

3. Visitors and Adjuncts Appointed After February 1.

After February 1, the Appointments Committee, upon the affirmative vote of at least one-half of its total membership
and two-thirds of the membership voting on the question, may authorize the Dean to hire an
adjunct or visiting faculty member of the “no-presumption” variety. No offer authorized in this
manner shall be extended until seventy-two hours (not counting week-ends) after the faculty has
been apprised of the candidate’s name and credentials. During this seventy-two hour period, any
two tenure-track faculty members may request that no offer be extended until after the proposal
has been approved by a majority of the faculty. If a timely request is made, no offer shall be
extended unless approved by an absolute majority of the faculty, as in other appointments matters.

4. Emergency Exception. In an exceptional case (for example, a sudden disability
of a member of the faculty), when in the judgment of the Dean it is not feasible to seek a vote in
the manner otherwise required before issuing an invitation to teach a single course or to teach
during a single semester, the Dean may make the nomination without a vote in the manner
otherwise required.

5. Procedures for Summer School Appointment of Visitors and Adjuncts. The
Dean shall be authorized to employ visitors and adjuncts to teach summer school courses, on the
condition that full-time faculty members have first option to teach summer school courses.

J. Procedures for Appointment: Courtesy Appointments. Courtesy (no-salary)
appointments may be made for faculty from other tenure initiating units of the University. Voting
on courtesy appointments shall be made through the procedure applicable to voting on tenuretrack
appointments. Continuation of the appointment should reflect ongoing contributions by the
appointee to the College. Courtesy appointments do not require annual review.

K. Special Reappointment of Faculty on Leave

1. Eligibility. Members of the faculty who are approaching the completion of a two-year
leave of absence may, in order to extend their time away from the College, seek special
reappointment to the faculty. The special reappointment must commence within no more than
one year of the conclusion of the leave. Under no circumstances should this rule be used to
extend an absence beyond three years. A faculty member may be eligible for such special
reappointment only if the faculty member’s leave and the additional time away from the College
provided by the special reappointment is used to pursue substantial public service or is
necessitated by extraordinary personal or family circumstances. A faculty member may receive
an offer of special reappointment while still on leave, without first resigning from the faculty.

2. Criteria. In considering whether to make an offer of special reappointment to an eligible
faculty member, the following factors shall be considered, in addition to the regular criteria for
appointment specified in Rule 14.03(A):

a. The impact on the curriculum of the faculty member’s continued absence

b. The extent to which the special reappointment would contribute to or interfere
with the faculty member’s development in teaching and scholarship, including the faculty
member’s ability to attain tenure and promotion

c. The best interests of the College

3. Procedures for Special Reappointment
Procedures for Special Reappointment under this rule are governed by Faculty Rule
14.03(F)(3).

Source: University Faculty Rule 3335-6-02 and 3335-6-03(D); Faculty minutes,
February 22, 1962, May 17, 1967, January 8, 1975, April 14, 1976,
February 13, 1980, September 3, 1986, February 18, 1987, April 6, 1994,
May 7, 1997, April 1, 1998, March 17, 1999, February 12, 2003, May 7,
2003, November 17, 2004, April 5, 2012, and May 3, 2018.

14.04. Annual Reviews.

A. Provisions Applicable to Annual Review of All Faculty Members.

1. Purposes of Annual Review. All faculty members shall be reviewed annually.
The purpose of the annual review of faculty members is to aid in determining merit salary
increases and other rewards, and to inform the Dean of each faculty member’s performance over
the previous year so that the Dean may provide appropriate support and reinforcement, publicity,
and assistance.

2. Procedure for Annual Review. In connection with an annual review, either the
Dean or the faculty member may request a meeting with the other. After the review has been
completed, the Dean shall provide the faculty member with a written assessment of that faculty
member’s performance. The Dean may provide this assessment in conjunction with informing the
faculty member regarding merit salary increase. Final documents generated in an annual review
shall be placed in the personnel file of the person being reviewed.

3. Student Evaluation of Teaching and Course Content.

a. Forms for anonymous student evaluation of teaching and course content
shall be distributed and collected for every course taught in the College of Law, toward the end of
the course.

b. Forms will normally be distributed for completion during class time, in
which case a minimum of fifteen minutes shall be allocated for their completion. Alternatively, in
unusual cases, forms may be distributed for completion outside of class, in which case they shall
be collected at the commencement of a subsequent class or at an announced time and place. If the
completed forms are collected during class time, they shall be delivered by a student or staff
member to a person designated by the Dean. Regardless of whether the requests are completed
during class time or outside of class, they shall be completed in the absence of the instructor. The
instructor shall not consult these forms until after final grades are submitted for the course unless
the evaluations are solicited early enough in the term so that the instructor may consult them for
purposes of improving the course. In that event, the instructor shall also solicit evaluations toward
the end of the course.

c. Appropriate forms to be used by all instructors shall be made available,
and revised from time to time, by the Dean, in consultation with the Committee on Academic
Affairs, and approved by the faculty. An instructor may use supplemental questions or
supplemental methods of evaluation, if they otherwise comply with the provisions of these rules.

d. The Dean and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs may read the
student evaluations of teaching if they give notice of an intention to do so to the instructor who
was evaluated. The Dean and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs shall not communicate
any information concerning the evaluations to any third person, except as authorized by College
rules on promotion and tenure or annual review or as required by law, and shall not communicate
any information concerning the evaluations to the instructor being reviewed until after that
instructor has turned in final grades for the course being evaluated. Information concerning the
evaluations of instructors in their first two years of law teaching shall be kept confidential to the
greatest extent practicable.

e. Any summary, compilation, or other description of the completed forms
shall be done in a way that both accurately reflects their contents and minimizes the potential for
misuse of the summary, compilation, or other description. Bar graphs or histograms are preferred
to arithmetic averages (means). If averages are calculated, the calculation shall satisfy all of the
following conditions:

(I) Calculation may not be done to more than one
decimal place.

(ii) Calculation must be done for each question
separately, and no aggregate average or averaging of
the averages shall be done.

(iii) The calculation must be accompanied by the number
of responses, information about the distribution of
ratings, and a representative rendition of the
comments.

B. Annual Review of Untenured Faculty Members Appointed to the Tenure Track.

1. Additional Purposes. In addition to the purposes identified in section (A) of this
rule, the purpose of the annual review of untenured faculty members appointed to the tenure track
is to determine the progress that the faculty member is making in teaching, scholarship, and
public service; to determine what resources or technical assistance the faculty member may need;
to allow the Dean to provide advice and suggestions for improvement or to help identify faculty
members who will provide that advice and suggestions; and to identify untenured probationary
faculty whose probation should not continue.

2. Exclusion of Time. The Dean may consider during the annual review process
whether to recommend application for exclusion of time, as governed by the Rules and by University Rule 3335-6-03(D). However, a faculty member may not be required to apply for
exclusion of time.

3. First and Second Reviews.
a. First and second reviews shall take place during the faculty member’s
first and second years of teaching.

b. The Dean shall ask the faculty member for a report of the faculty
member’s activities and shall give the faculty member an opportunity to submit material for the
review.

c. First and second reviews shall be informal and shall be conducted by the
Dean. The Dean shall review the faculty member’s student evaluations of teaching, may talk with
students and with other faculty members about the teaching of the faculty member being
reviewed, may observe, or ask other faculty members to observe, one or more classes of the
faculty member being reviewed, and shall review the faculty member’s record of public service.
The Dean shall also review any completed scholarship of the faculty member being reviewed and
any work in progress that the faculty member designates. The Dean may ask assistance from the
Promotion and Tenure Committee in conducting the first and second reviews.

d. The Dean, following a first or second review, shall provide the faculty
member being reviewed with a written assessment of the faculty member’s performance and an
indication as to whether the faculty member will be reappointed for an additional year. The
assessment should include both strengths and weaknesses, as appropriate. The Dean shall provide
the assessment in two steps: (1) a tentative assessment, upon which the faculty member may
comment, and (2) a final assessment, to which the faculty member may make a written response.
The Dean’s final assessment shall become a part of the faculty member’s dossier for subsequent
annual reviews while untenured, including the review for promotion and tenure.

4. Third and Subsequent Reviews.

a. A third review shall take place during a faculty member’s third year of
teaching. A similar review shall be undertaken in each subsequent year in which the faculty
member is not being considered for tenure until the faculty member has tenure, except for the
fourth year review.

b. Third and subsequent reviews, except for the fourth year review, shall
be conducted for the same purpose and by the same procedures as a first or second year review,
except as modified in the paragraphs that follow.

c. Third and subsequent reviews, except for the fourth year review, shall
be conducted by the Dean, with the assistance of and in consultation with the Promotion and
Tenure Committee. The review shall consist of a review of the faculty member’s student
evaluations of teaching and two class visitations by each of two faculty members, who will
submit written evaluations of the classes. The review shall also consist of written evaluations by
at least two faculty members of any scholarship completed since the prior review. The review
may also include any work in progress that the faculty member being reviewed designates. The
review of any work in progress shall be in writing and shall be conducted by at least one faculty
member. The review also shall include a report on and a consideration of the faculty member’s
public service.

d. The Promotion and Tenure Committee shall submit its final conclusions
in writing to the Dean, with a copy to the faculty member being reviewed. The faculty member
may make written comments to these final conclusions. The Dean shall then prepare and furnish
to the faculty member a tentative performance assessment. The faculty member may make written
comments to this tentative assessment. Thereafter, the Dean shall give a final assessment to the
faculty member being reviewed and to the Promotion and Tenure Committee. The person being
reviewed, or the Promotion and Tenure Committee or any member of the Committee, may submit
a response to the final assessment. The Dean’s final assessment shall become a part of the faculty
member’s dossier for subsequent annual reviews while untenured, including the review for
promotion and tenure.

5. Fourth Year Review.

A fourth year review is necessary if a faculty member chooses not to be considered for
promotion and tenure in the fourth year, or if the faculty does not make a favorable recommendation on promotion and tenure. If needed, the review shall be conducted in the fourth year of service, unless it is required to be conducted in some other year by application of University Rule 3335-6-03 (dealing with exclusion of time from the probationary period). The review shall be conducted using the same procedures as a review for promotion and tenure, except that external review letters shall not be required. Upon request of the faculty
member being reviewed, the committee shall obtain external letters. Voting on a fourth year
review shall be by all tenured faculty members. An favorable recommendation shall require the
affirmative votes of a majority of tenured faculty members present and voting. The faculty’s
recommendation shall be forwarded to the Dean. The Dean shall make an independent
recommendation and shall forward both recommendations to the Provost.

If a faculty member who is subject to the requirement of a fourth year review is considered for promotion and tenure in the fourth year and the faculty does not make a favorable recommendation on promotion and tenure, the Committee shall conduct a separate assessment for the fourth year review.  The Committee’s conclusions shall be forwarded to the faculty, and the faculty shall vote on whether to make a favorable recommendation on  the fourth year review. The faculty’s recommendations regarding promotion and tenure and regarding the fourth year review, along with the Dean’s recommendation regarding both promotion and tenure and regarding the fourth year review, shall be forwarded to the Provost.

6. Termination of Probationary Period.

Probationary appointments may be terminated during any probationary year because of
inadequate performance or inadequate professional development. If at any time other than a
review in the fourth year or a mandatory review for tenure, the Dean recommends that a
probationary appointment should be terminated, the probationary faculty member shall receive a
review equivalent to the fourth year review as described in the preceding paragraph. At the
conclusion of this process (including the comments process provided by Rule 14.06(C)(9), the
Dean shall make a recommendation as to continuation or termination to the Provost, who shall
make the final decision.

C. Annual Review of Tenured Faculty Members.

Each year the Dean shall give all tenured faculty members notice in writing that reviews
will occur near the end of the second semester, in accordance with the procedure specified in Rule
14.04(A)(2).

D. Peer Review of Teaching of Tenured Faculty Members

1. This rule governs peer review of teaching for all faculty members who do not
already undergo peer review while proceeding through the promotion and tenure process. See
Faculty Rule 14.04(B) and 14.06(B)(1).

2. Peer review of each faculty member covered by this rule will take place every
five years following award of tenure or becoming a member of the College of Law faculty with
tenure. If a tenured faculty member is being reviewed as part of the promotion process, that
review will supersede this rule and the next required peer review will be in the fifth academic year
following the promotion review.
During the phase-in period of this rule, all faculty members presently eligible for
review will be randomly assigned a number between 1 and 5. Those assigned a 1 will be
reviewed in the first year of the program; those assigned a 2 will be reviewed the second year, etc.

3. At the beginning of each academic year, the Dean, or the Dean’s designee, will
contact those faculty members who are to be reviewed during that academic year under this rule.
If the faculty member is on leave during the academic year in which peer review would be
required, the review will be postponed until the next semester in which the faculty member is in
residence and teaching.

4. Peer review will be conducted by a faculty member holding a rank equal to or
higher than the faculty member to be reviewed. The reviewing faculty member will be chosen by
the Dean, or the Dean’s designee, after consultation with and concurrence by the faculty member
to be reviewed. No colleague can be selected as the reviewer for the same faculty member in two
successive review periods.

5. In conducting peer review, the reviewer should review the class syllabus and
class materials for the course or courses to be reviewed and attend two class sessions.

6. Following class attendance, the reviewer and the faculty member being
reviewed will meet to discuss the course, teaching methods and the observations of the reviewing
faculty member. At the request of either party, the conversation shall be kept confidential.

7. Once the peer review process has been completed, the faculty member
conducting the review will inform the Dean, or the Dean’s designee, that the process has been
carried out.

Source: University Faculty Rules, 3335-6-03 and 3335-6-03(D); Faculty minutes,
May 23, 1979, May 1, 1985, March 13, 1996, April 1, 1998, October 21,
1998, and March 17, 1999, May 1, 2002, February 12, 2003, March 7,
2013, and May 3, 2018.

14.05. Merit Salary Increases and Other Rewards.

A. Criteria. Merit salary increases and other rewards shall be based on criteria consistent
with the mission of the College of Law as stated in these Rules. Accordingly, the Dean shall
consider each faculty member’s performance in teaching, scholarship, and service, both during the
year being reviewed and over the faculty member’s entire career.

B. Procedures. The Dean may utilize materials from the annual review in determining
merit salary increases. The Dean shall communicate to each faculty member, as soon as possible
after receipt, the most reliable information he has available, as to that member’s salary for the next
academic year. If no better information is available, the communication shall consist of the
recommendation by the Dean to the University administration with respect to that member’s
salary. When more reliable information is obtained, the Dean shall inform the members of the
faculty as to the percentage increment for all continuing faculty members.

C. Documentation. The Dean shall provide each faculty member with a written statement
indicating the recommended merit salary increase.

Source: Faculty minutes, May 15, 1968, and April 1, 1998.

14.06. Reviews for Promotion and Tenure and for Promotion of Tenure-Track Faculty.

A. Timetable for Promotion and Tenure.

1. Initial Appointment as Full Professor.

A person initially appointed to the faculty at the rank of full Professor may be appointed
with tenure on the effective date of appointment or may be appointed without tenure for a
probationary period of up to four years, with the length of time to be determined in consultation
with the University Office of Academic Affairs.

2. Initial Appointment as Associate Professor.
a. Appointment without tenure.

A person initially appointed to the faculty at the rank of Associate Professor without
tenure may be appointed for a probationary period of up to four years, with the length of time to be determined in consultation with the University Office of Academic Affairs.

b. Appointment with tenure.

A person initially appointed to the faculty at the rank of Associate Professor with tenure
normally shall first be eligible for promotion to full Professor as mutually agreed upon by the
Dean and the appointee at the time of the initial appointment, with the concurrence of the Provost,
provided that the agreement is consistent with such guidelines and conditions, if any, as may have
been established by the faculty in connection with its approval of the appointment. However, the
promotion should occur when the candidate is ready for this academic achievement. Therefore, a
candidate may request an earlier review if the candidate believes that his or her achievements
fulfill the requirements for promotion. Conversely, it should not be taken as a negative indication
of career advancement if the candidate does not designate readiness for promotion until after the
time agreed upon with the Dean at the time of appointment. The Promotion and Tenure Committee may decline to put forth a candidate for formal promotion review if the candidate’s accomplishments are judged not to warrant such review, but the Promotion and Tenure Committee may not deny a tenured faculty member a formal review for promotion for more than one year.

3. Initial Appointment as Assistant Professor.
a. Tenure.

A person initially appointed to the faculty at the rank of Assistant Professor shall receive
tenure on the effective date of promotion to the rank of Associate Professor.

b. Timetable for promotion to Associate Professor.

A person initially appointed to the faculty at the rank of Assistant Professor normally shall
be first considered for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor in the first semester of the
fourth year of service. Such a person who does not desire to be considered by the first semester of
the fourth year of service shall so inform the Dean before the beginning of the first semester of
the fourth year of service. The Promotion and Tenure Committee may decline to put forth a candidate for formal promotion and tenure review if the candidate’s accomplishments are judged not to warrant such review, unless the review would be a mandatory review. A decision on the promotion to Associate Professor of a person initially appointed at the rank of Assistant Professor must be taken no later than the first semester of the sixth year of service, unless an exclusion of time has been granted under University Rule 3335-6-03(D). A negative outcome of a consideration for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor
prior to the first semester of the sixth year of service, or to the time as granted to the person under
University Rule 3335-6-03(D), shall not affect the person’s status in the College.

c. Timetable for promotion to Associate Professor of person who has taught at another institution.
A person initially appointed to the faculty at the rank of Assistant Professor after regular
faculty service at another institution normally shall be first considered for promotion to Associate
Professor as mutually agreed upon by the Dean and the appointee at the time of the initial
appointment, provided that the agreement is consistent with such guidelines and conditions, if
any, as may have been established by the faculty in connection with its approval of the
appointment. Any postponement of such consideration must be requested in writing by the
faculty member and approved by the Promotion and Tenure Committee and the Dean, provided,
however, that the decision on promotion to Associate Professor must be taken no later than the
first semester of the faculty member’s sixth year of service, unless an exclusion of time has been
granted under University Rule 335-6-03(D).

d. Timetable for promotion to Professor.
A person initially appointed to the faculty at the rank of Assistant Professor and
subsequently promoted to the rank of Associate Professor normally shall be first eligible for
consideration for promotion to the rank of full Professor in the first semester of the faculty
member’s third year of service as an Associate Professor. However, the promotion should occur
when the candidate is ready for this recognition of academic achievement. Therefore, a candidate
may request a review in the second year in rank as an Associate Professor if the candidate
believes his or her achievements fulfill the requirements for promotion. Conversely, it should not
be taken as a negative indication of career advancement if a candidate does not designate
readiness for promotion until after the third year in rank as an Associate Professor. The Promotion and Tenure Committee may decline to put forth a candidate for formal promotion review if the candidate’s accomplishments are judged not to warrant such review, but the Promotion and Tenure Committee may not deny a tenured faculty member a formal review for promotion for more than one year.

B. Criteria for Promotion and Tenure.

1. Teaching Criterion.
a. No person shall be recommended for promotion to any rank or tenure
unless that person is an effective teacher.

b. In determining whether a person is an effective teacher, consideration
will be given to all relevant factors, including the quality of the teacher’s presentation and
direction of classroom discussion, the quality of synthesis and analysis, interest in students and in
teaching, enthusiasm in the classroom, innovation and creativity in organizing and presenting
material in diverse ways, mastery of subject matter, careful preparation, and open-mindedness.
Working well with students outside the classroom in tutoring or independent research and
motivating students to perform to the limit of their abilities will also be considered. The
evaluation of all of these matters will take into account teaching load, number of contact hours,
class size, subject matter, and years of experience.

c. The evaluation of teaching effectiveness will be based on peer review,
student evaluations (SET forms), and on other available evidence bearing on the criteria in the
preceding paragraph, including course syllabi, examinations, and supplementary course material
such as writing assignments, problem cases, and the like. The Promotion and Tenure Committee
shall select two peer reviewers on a yearly basis for each untenured member of the faculty and
each individual seeking promotion to full professor during that academic year. The designated
peer reviewers for individuals who are untenured and are in their third or subsequent year of
teaching, and for individuals who are seeking promotion to full professor during that academic
year, shall visit at least two class sessions of the reviewed individual. Peer reviewers of all other
individuals being reviewed pursuant to this rule shall visit at least one class session of the
reviewed individual. In general, peer review visits may occur at any time during the semester
other than the first or last week of the semester absent exceptional circumstances (e.g., illness or
maternity leave).

2. Scholarship (Research and Publication) Criterion.

a. The College of Law is, among other things, a research institution.
Demonstrated capacity for research, rigorous analysis and synthesis, and writing and publication
is a condition of promotion and tenure. There are diverse reasons underlying a scholarship
criterion. First, there is a close relationship between teaching and scholarship. A faculty member
who is enthusiastically committed to investigating important legal problems and to formulating
useful insights concerning them will find this enthusiasm carried over into teaching. Research
also improves the quality of teaching by broadening and deepening knowledge of a subject and by
increasing a teacher’s confidence in the classroom. Second, there are far fewer available positions
on the Law Faculty than there are highly qualified persons to fill those positions. Faculty status is
therefore a privilege that provides the time to investigate important issues and permits access to
outstanding research facilities and support. The privilege of a faculty position entails the
correlative obligation to enlarge the body of knowledge about law and legal institutions and
processes. Third, research and publication contribute to a greater understanding and the fairer and
more effective functioning of the legal system. Finally, through publishing the results of research,
a teacher extends the reach of his or her teaching beyond the College and University. It follows
from all of these reasons that all faculty members should regard research, writing, and publication
as integral parts of their professional lives.
Activity manifesting a career-long commitment to scholarship should begin early. Even in
the first year of an Assistant Professorship, when most of the teacher’s time will be spent
preparing for the classroom, the teacher ought to be identifying and formulating questions for
research. It is highly desirable that research should begin no later than the summer after the first
year, with a view to producing various drafts culminating in a publishable product in the second
year. Unless research and writing begin early in the teacher’s career, the teacher may experience
difficulty in complying with the criteria for promotion and tenure.

b. No person shall be recommended for promotion and tenure unless that
person has demonstrated his or her career-long commitment to making substantial, continuing
contributions to scholarship. The completion of two law review articles of high quality, or their
equivalent, shall be required as satisfactory evidence of this commitment.
The words “or their equivalent” have been included in the above criterion in order to
signal that some flexibility must exist in determining whether a candidate has complied with the
criterion. A book of high quality might well be the equivalent of two law review articles of high
quality. The same is true of a single article of unusual breadth and depth, insight, or potential
impact on legal institutions, processes, or functionaries. However, these illustrations are hardly
exhaustive and other patterns may suffice. For example, a new teacher might well choose to
begin with a short article in which a rather narrow subject is investigated, then write a second
article of somewhat greater breadth and depth, and finally write what is often referred to as a
“tenure piece,” an article of considerable depth and breadth, although falling short of the single
article described above. These three articles of varying scope might be regarded as the equivalent
of “two law review articles of high quality.” Whatever the pattern, however, the criterion remains
the same: demonstration of a career-long commitment to making substantial, continuing
contributions to scholarship.
In similar fashion, other works of high quality will be considered in determining whether
the candidate’s total scholarly production is the equivalent of “two law review articles of high
quality.” These works may include, but are not limited to, treatises, monographs, law-related
book reviews of significant length and scope, publications for learned societies such as the
American Law Institute or the American Bar Foundation, publications for legislative, judicial, or
administrative conferences, and law-related articles in non-legal publications (e.g., an article on
jurisprudence published in a philosophy journal).

c. No person shall be recommended for promotion to the rank of full
professor unless that person has continued to demonstrate a career-long commitment to making
substantial, continuing contributions to scholarship. The completion of two additional law review
articles of high quality, or their equivalent, will be required to meet this standard.

3. Service Criterion.

a. Service to the College and University will be taken into account in
promotion and tenure decisions. Service to the profession and to the public in matters involving
the candidate’s professional expertise will also be considered.

b. The College and University are to a large extent self-governing
institutions, and faculty members are expected to play a role in institutional governance.
Performance of assigned institutional duties is a condition of promotion and tenure. Satisfactory
performance of institutional responsibilities for which the candidate has volunteered also shall be
given weight in promotion and tenure decisions.

c. The College and University expect faculty members to use their
professional expertise for the benefit of the legal profession and the public. The professional
contributions that College of Law faculty members have made in the past have included
participation on governmental commissions, consultation with judicial and legislative groups,
participation in law reform activity, participation in continuing legal education programs, service
on bar association committees, presentation of speeches to various audiences on matters involving
professional expertise, and pro bono legal work. Service to the profession and to the public shall
be given weight in promotion and tenure decisions.

C. Procedures for Promotion and Tenure Reviews

1. Promotion and Tenure Committee. A review shall be conducted, for
presentation to the faculty, by a committee on promotion and tenure. The Promotion and Tenure
Committee shall include at least three tenured, regular faculty members. All members shall be of
an academic rank higher than that of any candidate that the Committee considers for promotion or
tenure.  The Promotion and Tenure Committee does not make formal recommendations on whether a candidate should be granted tenure or promotion.

2. Procedures Oversight Designee. If the Promotion and Tenure Committee is
considering one or more candidates for promotion or tenure, it shall, at the beginning of that
process, select from its number a senior faculty member as its Procedures Oversight Designee.
The Procedures Oversight Designee shall advise the Committee on procedure, with the aim of
achieving reviews that are carried out in a highly professional manner in accordance with written
procedures governing the review, and with the aim of precluding bias with respect to candidates
protected under University policy of non-discrimination.

3. Dossier. Each candidate for promotion or tenure shall, with the assistance of the
Promotion and Tenure Committee, prepare a dossier that follows a format approved by the
University. The Chair of the Promotion and Tenure Committee or another person designated by
the Chair of the Committee shall verify that the candidate has in fact authored writings indicated
in the candidate’s dossier as the candidate’s work.  In the event that a candidate’s body of scholarship submitted for review includes co-authored work, the Promotion and Tenure Committee will seek statements from the candidate and from one co-author describing the respective contributions to the work of all authors.  In determining whether the candidate meets the scholarly contribution requirements set forth in Faculty Rule 14.06(B)(2)(b) or 14.06(B)(2)(c), as applicable, the Committee and the faculty shall take such statements into account in deciding the weight to be accorded to the co-authored work.

4. External evaluation. The Promotion and Tenure Committee shall solicit
evaluations from distinguished persons outside the University regarding the scholarly work of a
candidate. The Committee may solicit evaluations from persons suggested by the candidate, but
the Committee shall seek a majority of evaluations from persons not suggested by the candidate.
In no event shall the Committee forward to the faculty a packet of evaluations in which more than
half are from persons suggested by the candidate. The Committee shall obtain and include in the
dossier at least five letters of external evaluation.

5. Evaluation from Unit of Joint Appointment. The Promotion and Tenure
Committee shall solicit a letter of evaluation from any other unit of the University in which the
candidate holds a joint appointment, but it may forego soliciting such a letter if the candidate has
no time commitment in the other unit and minimal interaction with it.

6. Recommendations for Promotion and Tenure.

a. Participation. The following persons shall be entitled to attend and
participate in faculty meeting discussions: student and staff members of the Promotion and
Tenure Committee and, for promotions carrying tenure, all tenured faculty members holding at
least the same rank as that to which the promotion is proposed; for promotions not carrying
tenure, all faculty members holding at least the same rank as that to which the promotion is
proposed.

b. Voting. Voting on recommendations to the President and Board of
Trustees of the University of persons for promotion and tenure shall be by the following: for
promotions carrying tenure, by all tenured faculty members holding at least the same rank as that
to which the promotion is proposed; for promotions not carrying tenure, by all faculty members
holding at least the same rank as that to which the promotion is proposed.  The following faculty members are not eligible to vote on recommendations for promotion or tenure: the Dean, the Assistant or Associate Deans of the College, the Executive Vice President and Provost, and the President.

c. Vote Required. All promotion and tenure nominations shall require the
affirmative votes of an absolute majority of those faculty members not on leave who are entitled
to vote under this rule, or if on leave are present at the meeting. “Leave” means professional
development or similar academic leave, extended leave of absence, or permanent assignment to a
full-time position outside the College. However, a faculty member on leave who attends a
meeting shall be entitled to vote at that meeting. A leave of absence is “extended” if it lasts or is
reasonably expected to last two weeks due to military leave, family emergency, serious health
condition, or other circumstances referred to by the Family and Medical Leave Act. The Dean
shall announce at the outset of a meeting at which voting will occur on promotion or tenure the
number of faculty members comprising an absolute majority of those not on leave, or if on leave
are present at the meeting and, upon request, the basis for that calculation. For each vote under
this rule, the Dean shall announce the number of affirmative and negative votes and abstentions,
but, unless directed by the faculty, shall not record the number in the minutes.

d. Presence Required for Vote. All votes shall be cast in person; proxy and
absentee voting shall not be permitted. “In person” shall be defined as stated in Rule 1.11.

e. Secret Ballot. Voting on promotions and tenure shall be by secret
written ballot. A faculty member, whose presence and participation have been by other means
pursuant to Rule 1.11, may make arrangements to protect the anonymity of his or her vote to the
extent feasible.

f. Notice of Meeting. All persons entitled to attend, participate, or vote
under a. and b. above shall be notified of any meeting to consider tenure and promotion
recommendations at least four days prior to such meeting and shall receive documentary
background information on the candidate in advance of the meeting.

7. Faculty Report. If the faculty votes to recommend promotion or tenure, it shall
prepare a written report of the candidate’s strengths and weaknesses. This report shall reflect the
faculty discussion and its numerical vote on the candidacy. This report shall also indicate who
verified that the candidate has in fact authored writings indicated in the candidate’s dossier as the
candidate’s work. This report shall be included in the candidate’s dossier.

8. Dean’s Letter. If the faculty votes to recommend promotion or tenure, the Dean
shall write a letter assessing the candidate’s strengths and weaknesses. This letter shall be included
in the candidate’s dossier.

9. Comment Process. When the faculty has voted and the Dean’s letter has been
written, the candidate shall be notified in writing of the completion of the College review and of
the candidate’s right to review the faculty’s report, the Dean’s letter, and evaluation materials that
have been compiled. The Dean shall inform the candidate that the candidate may, within ten
calendar days after being notified of the completion of the review, provide the Dean with written
comments on the review for inclusion in the dossier. The Dean also shall inform the candidate
that the Dean and/or Promotion and Tenure Committee may make written responses to the
candidate’s comments for inclusion in the dossier. No further responses from the candidate, the
Dean, or the Committee shall be included in the dossier.

10. Appeals. If the College review results in a negative recommendation, the
candidate may utilize the procedures described in the rules of the University faculty to appeal the
negative recommendation.

Source: University Faculty Rule 3335-6-02, 3335-6-03, 3335-6-04, and 3335-6-05; Faculty
minutes, April 14, 1976, May 19, 1976, April 12, 1978, April 18, 1979,
November 28, 1979, February 18, 1987, February 22, 1984, October 2,
1985, November 10, 1988, November 16, 1988, May 7, 1997, April 1,
1998, October 21, 1998, March 17, 1999, May 7, 2003, April 5, 2012,
March 7, 2013, and May 3, 2018.

 

View Next: CHAPTER 14A – REGULAR CLINICAL-TRACK FACULTY APPOINTMENTS, REAPPOINTMENT AND NONREAPPOINTMENT, AND PROMOTION