4.4 Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure

The general provisions and regulations governing appointment, promotion, and tenure as adopted by the Board of Regents are provided in the Regents' Rules and Regulations, Rule 31007, 31102, and 30103. These regulations, as applicable to The University of Texas at El Paso (University), are paraphrased below. Procedures and criteria to be used at the University are provided specifically in 4.4.2 and 4.4.3 below. All faculty members should familiarize themselves with these promotion and tenure regulations.

4.4.1 Tenure and Promotion

Tenure denotes a status of continuing appointment as a member of the faculty at the University. Only members of the faculty with the academic titles of Professor, Associate Professor, or Assistant Professor may be granted tenure. Tenure may be granted to Associate Professors and Professors at the time of appointment, or tenure may be awarded following satisfactory completion of a probationary period of faculty service.

4.4.1.1 Only full-time service in the academic ranks of Professor, Associate Professor, and Assistant Professor, or any combination thereof, shall be counted toward the maximum probationary period for earning tenure. Periods during which a faculty member is on leave of absence shall not be counted toward fulfillment of the maximum probationary period.

4.4.1.2 Prior service at other academic institutions, whether inside or outside the U. T. System, shall not be counted toward calculation of the maximum probationary period.

4.4.1.3 The maximum period of probationary faculty service in nontenured tenure-track status in any academic rank or combination of academic ranks specified in 4.1.2.1 shall be seven (7) years of full time academic service. No later than August 1st of the sixth academic year of the probationary period, all nontenured tenure-track faculty serving in a rank that accrues time toward the maximum probationary period shall be given notice that the seventh academic year will be the terminal year of employment, or that beginning with the subsequent academic year and subject to the approval of the Board of Regents, tenure will be granted. In the event that the employment of an nontenured tenure-track faculty member is to be terminated prior to the end of the maximum probationary period, notice shall be given in accordance with 4.4.3.1 below.

4.4.1.4 For purposes of calculating the period of probationary service, an “academic year” shall be the period from September 1st through the following August 31st. If a faculty member is initially appointed during an academic year, the period of service from the date of the appointment until the following September 1st shall not be counted as academic service toward the calculation of the maximum probationary period. Faculty members shall be considered to be in full-time academic service if they are in full compliance with requirements pertaining to minimum faculty workloads at the University.

4.4.1.5 In some cases full-time tenure-track faculty may be granted an extension to the seven year probationary period under the guidelines provided by the Regents' Rules and Regulations Rule 31007.

Faculty members who determine that certain personal circumstances may impede their progress toward demonstrating eligibility for recommendation of the award of tenure must request in writing an extension of the probationary period outlining the details of the request. Personal circumstances that may justify the extension include, but are not restricted to, disability or illness of the faculty member; status of the faculty member as a principal caregiver of a preschool child; or status of the faculty member as a principal caregiver of a disabled, elderly, or ill member of their family. Requests must be made in advance of the academic year or semester for which the extension is justified and must be made at least three months before the faculty member initiates the mandatory tenure-review process. All requests shall be limited to one academic year. A request for an additional academic year’s extension may be requested; however, the maximum duration of the extension, whether consecutive or nonconsecutive, shall be two academic years.

The written request should specify the reason(s) for the extension and time period requested and be supported by appropriate documentation to adequately demonstrate why the extension request should be granted. The written request and all supporting documentation should be forwarded to the Chair of the faculty member’s Department, who will review it and forward a written recommendation to the Dean. The Dean’s written recommendation will be forwarded to the Provost, who will make the final decision on the requested extension. At all levels, the review of the extension request will be considered in accordance with established policies and procedures for evaluating a candidate for tenure. The faculty member shall be notified in writing of the recommendation made at all levels of review. At any stage of the review process, additional supporting documentation may be requested or added to the extension request, or the extension request may be withdrawn by the faculty member. The denial of an extension request must be appealed within 30 days of the final decision and will be handled in accordance with policies and procedures established for faculty evaluation appeals.

Additional information regarding faculty probationary period extensions or appeals may be obtained by contacting the Provost’s Office.

Following the approval of an extension request, a plan for faculty members to meet their instructional and other academic responsibilities during the period of extension should be developed.

4.4.1.6 All faculty appointments are subject to the approval of the Board of Regents. No nontenured member of the faculty should expect continued employment beyond the period of their current appointment as approved by the Board of Regents. Any commitment to employ a nontenured member of the faculty beyond their current appointment shall have no force and effect until approved by the Board of Regents.

4.4.1.7 A person appointed to a faculty position with the title of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor at the University may not, during the term of such appointment, hold a tenured or tenure-track position on the faculty of another educational institution.

Appointments to the faculty with the titles of Professor, Associate Professor, or Assistant Professor, shall be conditioned upon the appointee having resigned any tenured position that the appointee may then hold on the faculty of any other educational institution. Such resignation must be completed and effective prior to the effective date of the appointment at the University; otherwise, such appointment shall be void and of no effect.
The acceptance of an appointment to a tenured position on the faculty of an educational institution shall be considered as a resignation of any faculty position with the title of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor that such appointee may hold at the University.

4.4.2 Notice Requirements for Reappointment or Award of Tenure

4.4.2.1 Reappointment or Award of Tenure

Re-appointment of faculty members to a succeeding academic year, or the award of tenure, may be accomplished only by notice from the President or the President's delegate with the approval of the Board of Regents. No faculty member shall be deemed to have been reappointed or to have been awarded tenure because notice is not given or received by the time or manner prescribed in 4.4.1.5 above. If no notice is received by the time prescribed, it is the duty of faculty member concerned to make inquiry to determine the decision of the President, who shall without delay give the required notice to the faculty member.

4.4.3 University Procedures

4.4.3.1 Flow of Information

In the procedures outlined below, information flows from the Department Chair to the Dean of the College or School and then to the Provost and the President.

4.4.3.2 Appointment: Initiation and Terms

Recommendations for appointments shall be initiated by the Chair of each department or comparable academic unit, after consultation with appropriate departmental committees. After review by the appropriate Academic Dean or Deans (including, where relevant, Dean of the Graduate School) and the Provost, the recommendations shall be submitted to the President.
Each faculty member shall be provided with a written statement of the terms of his/her appointment. Any such statement of terms must be issued by the President or designee.

4.4.3.3 Initial Appointment and Promotion: Criteria:

The following are minimum expectations for initial appointments and promotions. Individual departments may impose more stringent standards, as long as these standards are approved by the Academic Dean and the Provost, and the standards are applied consistently within the department. The framework for decisions concerning rank outlined in 4.4.4 below should also be consulted.

4.4.3.3.1 Assistant Professor

Under normal circumstances, the Assistant Professor should:

Hold the terminal degree appropriate for the discipline.
Show clear ability or competence in teaching at the university level.
Show evidence of commitment and ability to contribute to the knowledge base of the discipline.
Qualify for membership in the Graduate Faculty and show potential for continued membership.

4.4.3.3.2 Associate Professor

The criteria that must be satisfied for appointment as, or promotion to, Associate Professor are similar to those for the granting of tenure and are listed in 4.4.4.1.

4.4.3.3.3 Professor

Under normal circumstances, the Professor should:

Have demonstrated excellence in teaching. Evidence may include the effective presentation of courses; development of new methodology or courses; active involvement in departmental and college curricular matters; active participation in student related activities; demonstrated interest in the welfare of students; and student, ex-student, and peer evaluation.
Have actively and regularly contributed to graduate education through the teaching of graduate courses and through the supervision of graduate research. If the department lacks a robust graduate program, the candidate must provide other evidence of capability of teaching at the graduate level.
Be judged to be a mature scholar in his or her discipline. Research accomplishments should be evidenced by continued publication of significant scholarly works in prestigious academic journals, or by continued appropriate artistic expression; by national and international fellowships and awards won; and by national and international positions held in professional organizations. Quality and frequency of published works, exhibitions, or performance should be comparable to those in the discipline holding professorial rank at high-quality academic institutions.

4.4.3.4 Initiation of Promotion or Tenure Review Procedures

Generally, consideration of an individual for promotion or tenure will be initiated by the department.

4.4.3.4.1 The department shall review the performance of all tenure-track faculty annually to evaluate progress toward tenure. Normally, the recommendation for tenure shall be made only in the sixth year of an individual's probationary service. Recommendation of an individual for early awarding of tenure should be based only upon truly outstanding performance.

4.4.3.4.2 The department shall review the performance of all tenured faculty annually to evaluate progress toward and eligibility for promotion. Recommendation for promotion should be based only on the criteria specified in 4.4.4.3.

4.4.3.5 Departmental Procedures

4.4.3.5.1 Documentation related to tenure and promotion recommendations will be assembled by the Department Chair, a standing committee of the department, or an ad hoc committee appointed by the Chair. The candidate will supply items a) through h) listed in 4.4.3.5.2 below.

4.4.3.5.2 The documentation shall include:

A curriculum vitae;
Copies of all publications;
Copies of any relevant unpublished works, e.g., grant applications, preprints, technical reports, presentations at meetings;
Material related to teaching performance, including e.g., student and/or peer evaluations, syllabi, graded tests and papers, reflections on teaching and learning, evidence of professional development in teaching and learning, evidence of engagement in the scholarship of teaching and learning, advising and mentoring philosophy.
Information related to Department, College, and University service, and to profession-related service outside the University;
A summary, no more than three pages in length, of the faculty member’s teaching, research/scholarship, and service. The section on teaching should include a summary of student evaluations and peer observations of teaching.
At least three (3) objective letters of evaluation from reputable individuals in the discipline who have never been closely associated with the candidate or the University. Each external reviewer must hold at least the rank for which the candidate is applying and be employed by at least a peer or aspirant peer institution. These letters shall be solicited by the Department Chair. The candidate may submit names of potential external reviewers for the Department Chair’s consideration. Additional potential external reviewers may be solicited from the Dean. External reviewers must be apprised that letters must systematically assess the quality of candidates’ research, scholarship, and creative work.
Other optional information or supporting documents that may be relevant to the decision, e.g., national awards and citations of scholarly or creative work.

4.4.3.5.3 All department members participating in a tenure or promotion decision shall have an opportunity to study the candidate's file in advance. The primary criterion for recommendations of tenure or promotion is the performance of the individual. Factors to be considered shall include, but are not limited to, an evaluation of:

Teaching effectiveness;
Quality of publications, including quality of the journals or other publication outlets;
Quality of research efforts (e.g., competitive proposals, external funding);
Quality of shows, performances, national or international awards, etc. for those in the visual and performing arts;
Quality of profession-related service outside the University;
External letters of evaluation;
The candidate's contributions to the Department, the College or School, the University, and the discipline;
The candidate's potential for future outstanding intellectual development and future positive contributions to the University.

4.4.3.5.4 Departmental Vote

Only the tenured faculty in a department are eligible to vote on recommendations for tenure. Only faculty members in a department of a rank higher than the candidate are eligible to vote on recommendations for promotion. If there is not a sufficient number (3 or more) of faculty eligible to vote, the Dean of the College or School, in consultation with the Department Chair, shall appoint additional voting members from related disciplines.

4.4.3.5.5 Department Chair's Report

The Department Chair shall make an independent recommendation and shall prepare the candidate's documents for transmittal to the Dean. The candidate's file will include all documents, letters, a summary of votes, and recommendations.

4.4.3.6 College Procedures

4.4.3.6.1 Upon receipt of the recommendations and supporting materials from all departments, the Dean shall appoint a College advisory committee. The committee may include Department Chairs for tenure and promotion of faculty in the College or School.

4.4.3.6.2 The committee shall review the departmental recommendations and supporting material and write a separate recommendation to the Dean for each candidate, including the vote tally and the reasons for the decision. Dissenting members of the committee may submit their own signed reports to the Dean.

4.4.3.6.3 The Dean shall transmit to the Provost the curriculum vitae of each candidate, a summary of the reports from departmental Chairs and College committees, the voting tabulations, and the individual written recommendations of those who have participated in the review. In addition, the Dean shall make an independent recommendation for each candidate.

4.4.3.7 Actions of the Provost

4.4.3.7.1 The Provost may seek additional opinions regarding the contribution of a candidate to the Department, College or School, and University and initiate any other review the Provost considers appropriate.

4.4.3.7.2 The Provost shall make recommendations to the President regarding each candidate with supporting rationale for the recommendation.

4.4.3.8 Provision of Information to Candidates and Opportunity for Submitting Additional Information

4.4.3.8.1 Tenure Decisions

The candidate for tenure will be informed by the Department Chair of all decisions at the departmental level. The Dean of the College or School will inform the Department Chair, who will in turn inform the candidate, of all decisions at the College or School level. The candidate may present additional information pertinent to the decision up to the level of the Provost.

4.4.3.8.2 Promotion Decisions

The candidate for promotion will be informed by the Department Chair of all decisions at the departmental level upon transmittal to the Dean. The Dean of the College or School will inform the Department Chair, who will in turn inform the candidate, of all decisions at the College or School level. The candidate may present additional information pertinent to the decision up to the level of the Provost.

4.4.4 Criteria for Tenure and Promotion

Because of the subjective nature of judgments and the diversity of academic disciplines, the criteria for tenure and promotion cannot be specified in such detail that they can be applied automatically. Nevertheless, the following guidelines and principles should be adhered to whenever possible:

All University faculty must satisfactorily perform the minimum duties specified in 4.3, however, satisfactory performance alone is not sufficient for the awarding of tenure or promotion.
Similar criteria for recommendations for promotion and tenure should be used in all units of the University. Academic units are permitted to use such procedures as they devise, provided they do not conflict with the provisions of this Handbook and have been approved by the Dean of the College or School and the Provost. Those procedures shall be communicated to faculty.
As the University’s academic reputation grows, the standard of performance for awarding tenure and promotion will increase concomitantly. If a faculty member's accomplishments do not keep pace with the current standards of performance for tenure and promotion, that individual may not be awarded tenure or advanced in rank. It is not appropriate to argue that a candidate be awarded tenure or promotion because the candidate meets the performance standards that were in effect when others in that department received tenure or promotion.
Years in service is a factor but is not to be used as a primary justification for tenure or promotion recommendations

4.4.4.1 Tenure

The single most important decision made by the University with respect to individual faculty members is the granting of tenure. Tenure is awarded by the University as part of its larger pledge to protect the academic freedom of faculty, regardless of whether their work or ideas are unpopular or controversial. Tenure is an important commitment made only to those faculty members whose performance in research, teaching, and service exceeds the level of satisfactory, and who have demonstrated significant potential for continued performance at that high level, and for developing new knowledge and practice of national and international significance. The success of College or School and University programs depends upon the qualifications of the tenured faculty. Therefore, tenure decisions will include consideration of factors related to planned programmatic changes.

4.4.4.1.1 The recommendation to award tenure will generally be made during the sixth year of full-time academic service, unless an individual's performance is truly outstanding.

4.4.4.1.2 Normally, only those faculty members with the terminal degree appropriate for the discipline may be awarded tenure.

4.4.4.1.3 Only faculty members who have demonstrated their competence in teaching may be awarded tenure. This competence may be demonstrated in diverse ways, e.g., development of superior course materials or textbooks and excellence in the supervision of research, practica, or internship work; in individual instruction in the fine arts; or in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Student and/or peer evaluation of teaching performance is an essential part of the demonstration of teaching competence..

4.4.4.1.4 A faculty member will not normally be granted tenure without clear evidence of competence and willingness to teach at all available levels of instruction, i.e., lower division, upper division, and graduate. Justification must be provided for a tenure recommendation for any faculty member who cannot teach at all three levels.

4.4.4.1.5 Minimum performance standards require a faculty member to remain current in the discipline; therefore, this factor alone is not a sufficient basis for the recommendation of tenure.

4.4.4.1.6 Faculty members will not be granted tenure without a clear history of significant contributions to the advancement of knowledge in their discipline. The faculty member must also be judged to be likely to continue making such contributions for the rest of the career. Therefore, the following criteria are offered as guidelines in evaluating scholarly activity of a faculty member:

A history of publication in refereed academic journals or other refereed outlets at a rate appropriate for the discipline. The quality of the published work, as well as the quality of the outlet, is to be judged. There should be no attempt to impose any particular number of contributions necessary for recommendation for tenure and promotion or to balance quantity of contributions against quality.
Research scholarship is broadly defined as inclusive of the Scholarship of Discovery, Integration, Application, Teaching, and Engagement, with each form of scholarly contribution considered legitimate in the development of UTEP’s scholarly and creative profile.
The importance of the work to the discipline should be judged not only by the departmental faculty, but also by the outside evaluators. For example, no fewer than three (3) letters of evaluation are used to assess the merit of the candidate’s research and scholarship.
In order for a scholarly effort to have made a demonstrable contribution to a discipline, it should have been brought into a public forum by a process that includes peer review and an evaluation of the importance of the work by nationally-known scholars or practitioners. Usually, this means that works must appear in recognized outlets appropriate for the discipline (e.g., publications, competitive external funding, national performances or exhibits.). Experiments completed but not published, books or articles in draft form, classified documents, and undisplayed works of art, for example, are considered to be private works and not yet in the public domain. They may, of course, be considered along with an individual's other accomplishments, but they may not be used to satisfy this criterion.
Routine applications of already accepted knowledge or of theory are not normally considered to be contributions to the advancement of knowledge in the discipline. The distinction between what is and is not a contribution to the advancement of knowledge may, at times, be subtle, but the burden of proof falls on the candidate.

4.4.4.1.7 Since participation in Department, College or School, and University activities is expected of all faculty members, such involvement is not adequate justification for awarding tenure.

4.4.5 Promotion

Minimum criteria for promotion to the various academic ranks are specified in 4.4.4.3 above.

4.4.6 Evaluation of Tenured Faculty Members

In accordance with Regents’ Rules and Regulations, Rule 31102, the following sections concern evaluation of tenured faculty members.

4.4.6.1 Scheduled Evaluations

4.4.6.1.1 Each tenured faculty member will be subject to an annual evaluation. This evaluation may be conducted in connection with the determination of merit raises, in accordance with the procedures set forth in 4.5 Evaluation of Faculty for Merit Salary Increase.

4.4.6.2 Comprehensive Periodic Evaluation

4.4.6.2.1 Scheduled Reviews. Tenured faculty members will undergo a comprehensive periodic evaluation no less often than every six (6) years. The evaluation may not be waived for any tenured faculty member but may be deferred when the review period coincides with approved leave, comprehensive review for tenure, promotion, or appointment to an endowed position. No deferral of the comprehensive periodic evaluation of an active faculty member may extend beyond one year from the scheduled review. Notwithstanding the schedule for comprehensive periodic evaluation, a faculty member who has an unsatisfactory annual evaluation may be subject to further review and/or appropriate administrative action.

4.4.6.2.2 Review Categories. Each faculty member being reviewed will be placed in one of the following categories: a. exceeds expectations; b. meets expectations (satisfactory); c. does not meet expectations; or d. unsatisfactory.

4.4.6.2.3 Responsibilities Reviewed. The evaluation will be based on the faculty member’s professional responsibilities in teaching, scholarship, research, creative activities, service, and administration with consideration to the time devoted to each.

4.4.6.2.4 Notice of Evaluation. Reasonable individual notice of at least six months of intent to conduct a comprehensive periodic evaluation will be provided by the Department Chair (or equivalent administrator in non-departmental academic units). The evaluation will normally occur at the time of the annual review process.

4.4.6.2.5 Material Submitted. At the time of notification of the evaluation, the Department Chair will give the faculty member a copy of previous annual merit reports for the review period. The faculty member being evaluated will submit a résumé, including a summary statement of professional accomplishments, previous annual reports for the evaluation period, and teaching evaluations. The faculty member may provide a statement of professional goals, a proposed professional development plan, and any other additional materials the faculty member deems appropriate.

4.4.6.2.6 Departmental Tenured Faculty Review Committee. The comprehensive periodic evaluation will be carried out at the level of the faculty member’s department (or equivalent unit) by a committee of tenured faculty, elected by the voting members of the departmental faculty. The Chair of the Departmental Tenured Faculty Review Committee will be elected by the committee members.

4.4.6.2.7 Review of Evaluation. Evaluation will include review of the current résumé, evaluations of teaching for the review period (including student evaluations and other supporting evidence provided by the faculty member), annual reports for the review period, and all materials submitted by the faculty member. Upon the request of a faculty member under review, that individual will be provided with the opportunity to meet with the review committee.

4.4.6.2.8 Communication of Tenured Faculty Review Committee Results. The committee chair will communicate the committee’s evaluation results in writing to the faculty member and to the Department Chair. The Department Chair will provide the evaluation results to the Dean for review and appropriate action. In addition, the evaluation results will be reported by the Dean to the Provost, who will provide the results to the President. If the comprehensive periodic evaluation result is satisfactory, no further action will be taken.

4.4.6.2.9 Tenured Faculty Peer Review Committee. If the faculty member, the Department Chair (or equivalent) requests, or if and when the Dean determines the comprehensive periodic evaluation is unsatisfactory and that more intensive review of a faculty member is needed, then the Dean, in consultation with the tenured faculty in his or her college, will appoint an Individual-Tenured Faculty Peer Review Committee. The peer review committee members will be representative of the college or school and will be appointed on the basis of their objectivity and academic strength. In all colleges or schools, committees appointed to perform a more intensive review will be composed only of faculty of the same or higher rank as the faculty member being reviewed. Each committee will elect its chair. The committee may request additional relevant information from the faculty member under review including reviews external to the University from scholars in the discipline. The faculty member under review may also submit additional materials. Upon the request of the faculty member under review, that individual will be provided an opportunity to meet with the peer review committee. The peer review committee will report its findings within six months of its constitution.

4.4.6.2.10 Communication of Tenured Faculty Peer Review Committee Results. Peer review evaluation results will be communicated in writing to the faculty member and to the Department Chair, the Dean, the Provost, and the President for review and appropriate action.

4.4.6.2.10.1 In cases where the faculty member’s performance is found satisfactory by the peer review committee, no further action is required. In this case, the peer review evaluation may be used to determine salary recommendations, nomination for awards, or other forms of performance recognition.

4.4.6.2.10.2 For individuals whose performance indicates they would benefit from additional institutional support, the evaluation may be used to provide such (e.g., teaching effectiveness assistance, counseling, or mentoring in research issues/service expectations).

4.4.6.2.10.3 For individuals found to be performing unsatisfactorily, review to determine if good cause exists for termination under the Board of Regents’ Rules and Regulations may be considered. All proceedings for termination of tenured faculty on the basis of periodic performance evaluation shall be only for incompetency, neglect of duty, or other good cause shown and must be conducted in accordance with the due process procedures of the Regents’ Rules and Regulations Rule 31008. Such proceedings must also include a list of specific charges by the President and an opportunity for a hearing before a faculty tribunal. In all such cases, the burden of proof shall be on the institution, and the rights of a faculty member to due process and academic freedom shall be protected.

4.4.6.3 Nothing in this policy concerning evaluation is intended to infringe upon the tenure system, academic freedom, due process or other protected rights, to establish new term-tenure systems, or to require faculty members to re-establish their credentials for tenure.

4.4.7 Initial Appointment and Promotion for Non-Tenure Track Faculty

All initial appointments will generally be for a period of up to one year. Appointments will be eligible for renewal based upon satisfactory performance, University needs and funding, and the terms and rank of the appointment.

4.4.7.1 Clinical/Research/Instruction Faculty

4.4.7.1.1 The following are minimum qualifications for initial appointments to and promotions within lines for clinical faculty, research faculty, and faculty of instruction (C/R/I). Refer to 4.1.2.2 for the definitions of each title, including the primary domains of responsibility (i.e., teaching, service, research, creative activity, clinical practice, or administration). Individual colleges, schools, and departments may impose additional or more specific standards, as long as such standards do not conflict with those contained herein, are approved by the Dean and the Provost, and are applied consistently within the academic unit.

4.4.7.1.2 Clinical Instructor: The Clinical Instructor will generally possess the education necessary to meet the respective certification requirements as required by the discipline and/or regional accrediting bodies, and the potential for developing excellence in each domain of responsibility assigned.

4.4.7.1.3 C/R/I Assistant Professor: The C/R/I Assistant Professor will generally possess a terminal degree appropriate for the discipline and the potential for developing excellence in each domain of responsibility assigned.

4.4.7.1.4 C/R/I Associate Professor: The C/R/I Associate Professor will generally possess:

(1) A terminal degree appropriate for the discipline.

(2) Five years of experience at the level of C/R/I assistant professor or equivalent experience.

(3) A demonstrated record of excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned.

(4) Evidence of significant impact in the discipline beyond the University.

4.4.7.1.5 C/R/I Professor: The C/R/I Professor will generally possess:

(1) A terminal degree appropriate for the discipline.

(2) Five years of experience at the level of C/R/I associate professor or equivalent experience.

(3) A demonstrated record of leadership.

(4) A demonstrated record of excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned.

(5) Evidence of significant impact in the discipline beyond the University and the region.

4.4.7.2 Lecturers

4.4.7.2.1 The following are minimum qualifications for initial appointments to and promotions within lines for Lecturers. Individual colleges, schools, and departments may impose additional or more specific standards, as long as such standards do not conflict with those contained herein, are approved by the Dean and the Provost, and are applied consistently within the academic unit.

4.4.7.2.2 Lecturer: The Lecturer will generally possess the experience or education necessary to meet the respective certification requirements as required by the discipline and/or regional accrediting bodies, and the potential for developing excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned.

4.4.7.2.3 Senior Lecturer: The Senior Lecturer will generally possess:

(1) Five years of experience at the level of Lecturer or equivalent experience.

(2) A demonstrated record of excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned.

(3) Evidence of significant impact in the discipline beyond their own classroom.

4.4.7.2.4 Distinguished Senior Lecturer: The Distinguished Senior Lecturer will generally possess:

(1) Five years of experience at the level of Senior Lecturer or equivalent experience.

(2) A demonstrated record of leadership.

(3) A demonstrated record of excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned.

(4) Evidence of significant impact in the discipline beyond the University.

4.4.7.3 Faculty of Practice

4.4.7.3.1 The following are minimum qualifications for initial appointments to and promotions within lines for faculty of practice. Individual colleges, schools, and departments may impose additional or more specific standards, as long as such standards do not conflict with those contained herein, are approved by the Dean and the Provost, and are applied consistently within the academic unit. The Chair or Program Director in consultation with the Dean will consider teaching or instructional experience in the determination of rank.

4.4.7.3.2 Assistant Professor of Practice: The Assistant Professor of Practice will generally possess:

(1) At least ten years of significant relevant professional experience that qualifies him or her to teach within the field, or five years of professional experience in the field and a terminal degree; and

(2) The potential for developing excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned.

4.4.7.3.3 Associate Professor of Practice: The Associate Professor of Practice will generally possess:

(1) Significant relevant professional experience within the field; or five years as an Assistant Professor of Practice and a demonstrated record of excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned; and

(2) Evidence of significant impact in the discipline beyond the University.

4.4.7.3.4 Professor of Practice: The Professor of Practice will generally possess:

(1) Significant relevant professional experience within the field; or five years as an Associate Professor of Practice and a demonstrated record of excellence in each major domain of responsibility assigned;

(2) A demonstrated record of leadership; and

(3) Evidence of significant impact beyond the University and the region.

4.4.7.4 Promotion

Deans have the option of filling higher-level Non-Tenure-Track positions through a promotion process. The promotion process for Faculty of Instruction, Lecturers, Clinical Faculty, and Faculty of Practice is as follows:

1. The promotion process is initiated by the faculty member in consultation with the Chair.
2. Promotion to a higher rank position requires satisfactorily meeting the requirements for the position as evaluated by:

A statement by the candidate regarding accomplishments within each major domain of responsibility assigned and evidence of achievement.
A written assessment by a faculty committee to the Chair or Dean of each major domain of responsibility assigned.
Other appropriate criteria as established at the discretion of the unit.
Chair or Program Director’s written recommendation to the Dean.
Approval by the Dean.
Review of the recommendation by the Provost.

The candidate for promotion will be informed by the Department Chair of all recommendations at the departmental level upon transmittal to the Dean, though individuals who do not receive a promotion are not entitled to a statement of the reasons upon which the decision is based.

4.4.7.5 Length of Appointments

4.4.7.5.1 For Lecturers, Assistant Professors of Instruction, Assistant Clinical Professors, and Assistant Professors of Practice, an appointment may be for a period of up to one academic year.

4.4.7.5.2 For Senior Lecturers, Associate Professors of Instruction, Associate Clinical Professors, and Associate Professors of Practice, employed by UTEP in that role for more than one year with a faculty appointment greater than 0%, in the event of a decision not to reappoint a faculty member outlined within this section, written notice will be given no later than August 1st that the subsequent year will be the terminal academic year of appointment, except in cases where termination is for good cause.

4.4.7.5.3 For Distinguished Senior Lecturers, Professors of Instruction, Clinical Professors, and Professors of Practice, employed by UTEP in that role for more than one year with a faculty appointment greater than 0%, in the event of a decision not to reappoint a faculty member outlined within this section, written notice will be given no later than August 1st that the appointment will end after two subsequent years, except in cases where termination is for good cause.

4.4.8 Appointment, Promotion, and Annual Review of Research Faculty

4.4.8.1. General

The appointment, promotion, annual review, and renewal process for Research Faculty is flexible and depends on the funding source, as well as what, if any, teaching or service activities are required or allowed by the funding source. Research Faculty may be appointed within units that report to Academic Affairs or units that report to Research and Innovation.

4.4.8.2. Initial Appointments

Initial appointments of Research Faculty require a written recommendation from the Principal Investigator (PI) or signatory of the funding source to the Dean, the Provost (for centers reporting to the Provost), or the Vice President for Research and Innovation (for centers reporting to the Office of Research and Innovation) stating the appointee’s qualifications, rank and position with respect to funding source needs, and workload effort, along with a curriculum vitae. The initial appointment letter must specify the reporting structure. Any subsequent changes to the reporting structure must be approved by all positions in the proposed reporting structure with notification to those removed from the prior reporting structure.

4.4.8.3. Appointment Terms

Research Faculty are appointed for 12-month terms contingent on funding availability. The appointment may be made at any time during the year to align with the grant fiscal year. As twelve-month, full-time employees (FTE >= 0.75), Research Faculty accrue vacation and sick leave benefits and must follow institutional policies regarding the request of and the use of these benefits.

4.4.8.4 Recommendation Process

Recommendations for the appointment, annual review, promotion, renewal, and non-renewal of Research Faculty are the responsibility of the Principal Investigator (PI) or signatory of the funding source. If the Research Faculty member is the PI or signatory, the responsibility is transferred to the next person in the reporting structure given below:

Within a department, recommendations are routed through the PI, Chair and Dean.
Within a Center, recommendations are routed through the PI, Center Director, and the head of the unit to which the Center reports, either the Dean, the Provost, or the Vice President for Research and Innovation. If appropriate, a concurrent appointment to a department may be requested by a Center faculty member. The request is routed through the PI, Chair, Center Director, and the head of the unit to which the Center reports.

4.4.8.5 Research Faculty as Instructors of Record

Any appointment that includes teaching or supervision of students as the instructor of record must be consistent with the terms of the funding source and must include a departmental appointment. The faculty member must be credentialed by the department.

4.4.8.6 Performance Review

The performance of Research Faculty must be evaluated on a regular basis. Merit increases may occur during the regular merit process, should be based on the most recent performance review, and are contingent on availability of funds. Salary increases are approved through the reporting structure outlined in section 4.4.8.4, (1-2).

4.4.8.7 Promotion

Promotion of Research Faculty is initiated by the faculty member in consultation with the person to whom they directly report. The promotion portfolio may include a statement of major research accomplishments, current curriculum vitae, and any other documentation deemed relevant by the faculty member or those in the reporting structure. A recommendation by the person to whom they directly report must be provided. A committee of reviewers selected by the Dean, or the head of the unit to which the relevant Center reports, if not a Dean, will provide a written assessment and recommendation. Reviewers may be tenure-track or research faculty, must hold at least the rank for which the candidate is applying, and must themselves be active in research. Department faculty votes are not required nor recommended for promotion.

4.4.8.8 University Service

The Handbook of Operating Procedures Section III, Chapter 1, Constitution of the Faculty Government of UTEP, Subsections 2.1 and 2.2 specify that Research Faculty may be voting members of the General Faculty and serve on the Faculty Senate, providing qualification criteria for each. Because University service is not usually expected nor allowed by external funding sources, any service commitments must be justified by written memorandum by the faculty member and be approved by the PI and where applicable, the Center Director.

4.4.8.9 Notice to Office of the Provost or Office of Research and Innovation

Depending on the reporting structure, the Office of the Provost or the Office of Research and Innovation must be notified of all Research Faculty appointments, annual reviews, and promotions with copies of all documentation.