Section V: Procedures

Tenure and promotion are separate concerns (Regents Policies, RP-4.3.1). When promotion is offered to a faculty member before his or her probationary period is completed, no promise of eventual tenure is implied by the promotion: "...tenure recommendations should be developed in a context as free of other concerns as is practical" (RP-4.3. 1). The Guidelines add that the "processes leading to promotion and...to tenure are distinct and should not be confused" (V.A.). Promotion primarily indicates a personal level of achievement. While this is also true in awarding tenure, the tenuring of a faculty member is based on an expectation and a prediction regarding his or her future development and performance and an institutional decision to make a long term commitment to him or her, subject to the Regents Bylaws. Thus, promotion is positive evidence of progress toward tenure but not a guarantee of being awarded tenure.

While our assessments and recommendations on tenure and promotion must be separate, the procedures we must follow regarding tenure and promotion are very similar. For example, per the Guidelines (V.D.2&3 and VI.D.3&4) regarding procedures for tenure and promotion,

• Candidates are entitled to examine all materials in their files. 
• Candidates are entitled to know the identity of everyone who reviews all or parts of their files, including the names of external reviewers. 
• Anyone with relevant information may proffer it for inclusion in a candidate's file to the person responsible for conducting the review at any level of consideration. That person will decide whether to include the material after consulting with the candidate. Candidates must be informed of the content and source of new information that has been proposed for inclusion in their files and have a right to review, object to, and respond in writing to the material with the response becoming a part of the file. Candidates have five (5) working days to review, object to, and respond in writing to new information in their files. It is the responsibility of the individual who presides at each stage of the review process to delay any vote or decision until the candidate has had this time to respond. 
• A candidate may ask a colleague for assistance in preparing appropriate documentation. The candidate and the adviser should be aware of the potential conflict of interest that may arise should the latter have to vote on the nomination later in the process. "An agreement to provide counsel and advice to a candidate does not imply a commitment to support the candidate's nomination." 
• Departments and the College must provide due process in the consideration of a candidate's nomination. This includes giving a candidate five (5) days from when he or she is informed of an initial negative decision to request a reconsideration or an appeal of it. Candidates may request a reconsideration and a second recommendation at every stage of the review process at which they receive an initial adverse recommendation on tenure or promotion. In the College, candidates have the right to request a reconsideration of a first recommendation against tenure or promotion (before anything is forwarded to the next level of consideration) 
  • at the department level by a tenure and promotion committee or any unit committee that makes a recommendation on tenure or promotion. The notice of a negative recommendation may be in the transmittal letter that the candidate receives from the committee chair to the unit chair or director or, if the unit chair or director presides at the committee review, in the transmittal letter of the unit chair or director to the Dean; 
  • by a unit chair or director in a transmittal letter to the A&S Executive Committee and the Dean; 
  • by the College Executive Committee in a letter to the Dean; or 
  • by the Dean in a letter to the SVCAA. 

With one addition, the following text in caps summarizes the preceding material:

CANDIDATES MUST RECEIVE A WRITTEN NOTICE OF POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION AT EACH STAGE OF THE REVIEW PROCESS: BY THE FACULTY, THE CANDIDATE'S CHAIR (S), THE A&S EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, AND THE DEAN. THE NOTICE MUST REPORT ON THE DELIBERATIONS THAT PRECEDED THE RECOMMENDATION (E.G., ASSESSMENTS OF PERFORMANCE). EVERYTHING IN THE NOTICE BECOMES A PART OF THE FILE.

CANDIDATES WHO DO NOT RECEIVE AN INITIAL RECOMMENDATION FOR TENURE OR PROMOTION HAVE FIVE (5) WORKING DAYS FROM THE TIME THEY RECEIVE NOTICE AND A STATEMENT OF THE REASONS FOR THE NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION TO SEEK A RECONSIDERATION OF THE RECOMMENDATION AND TO SUBMIT A REBUTTAL ARGUMENT TO THE COMMITTEE OR OFFICIAL WHO MADE THE NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION. THE COMMITTEE OR OFFICIAL MUST RECONSIDER THE CANDIDATE'S FILE AND, AFTER DECIDING WHETHER TO CHANGE THE INITIAL RECOMMENDATION, INFORM THE CANDIDATE IN WRITING OF THE DECISION. THE CANDIDATE'S REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION, THE REBUTTAL ARGUMENT, AND THE SECOND RECOMMENDATION BECOME PART OF THE CANDIDATE'S FILE.

A CANDIDATE'S REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION MUST SPECIFY WHETHER IT IS FOR TENURE AND/OR PROMOTION. PARTICIPANTS IN A REVIEW MUST NOT RECONSIDER A RECOMMENDATION ON A CANDIDACY IF THE CANDIDATE DOES NOT ASK FOR A SECOND RECOMMENDATION ON IT. THE SAME PRINCIPLE APPLIES TO CANDIDATE INITIATIONS OF APPEALS AFTER THE TERMINATION OF REVIEWS FOR PROMOTION.

TO COMPLY WITH CAMPUS DEADLINES, DEPARTMENTS AND THE COLLEGE MUST ALLOW TIME FOR RECONSIDERATIONS AND APPEALS IN THE REVIEW PROCESSES FOR TENURE AND PROMOTION.

WHEN FACULTY MEMBERS ARE CANDIDATES FOR BOTH TENURE AND PROMOTION: TRANSMITTAL LETTERS THAT NOTIFY CANDIDATES AND OTHERS OF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TENURE AND PROMOTION MAY REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BOTH TENURE AND PROMOTION IN THE SAME LETTER AS LONG AS THE LETTER CLEARLY DISTINGUISHES THE RECOMMENDATIONS, VOTES AND ASSESSMENTS FOR EACH CANDIDACY. (INTERPRETATION OF THE RULES BY THE SVCAA'S OFFICE)

The procedures set out in this section are to be used in considering candidacies for promotion and for continuous appointment (i.e., tenure). Unless noted otherwise, the procedures related to promotion decisions are based on the UNL Guidelines (V.D) and the procedures related to tenure decisions are based on the UNL Guidelines (VI.D). Relevant units must coordinate their efforts to follow these procedures when candidates have joint appointments.

Nominations