C. Tenure Review Process

Weber State University shall maintain review procedures to evaluate and record the progress of probationary faculty members toward tenure. Full evaluations shall be made during the third and sixth probationary years. In exceptional cases, the tenure review process may be temporarily suspended (one may leave and re-enter at the same point), upon recommendation by the department chair and the dean, in consultation with the provost. If and when such a request is granted, the conditions of the extension shall be explained in writing by the dean with a copy to the provost. A faculty member, their department chair, the dean or the provost may also request an additional review in other probationary years. A progress report, including written evaluations of a non-tenured faculty member, shall be placed in the file of the faculty member recording the findings of the review and shall be transmitted to the faculty member. The faculty member shall be given appropriate opportunity to discuss strengths, weaknesses, goals, etc. at each review level.

In addition, in the second year of a candidate’s progress toward tenure, the department chair will do an assessment of the candidate’s progress. This assessment may be done with or without the assistance of a departmental committee at the sole discretion of the department chair. The candidate’s teaching, service and scholarship shall be evaluated and an overall written assessment of progress made. The department chair shall send a written report to the candidate and the candidate’s dean and shall submit the report for inclusion in the candidate’s professional file. There is no evaluation beyond the department level. When candidates in their second year of progress toward tenure are either to be evaluated in that year for promotion or have requested an additional review, the department chair may choose to let that promotion evaluation serve in place of the second year assessment of progress toward tenure.

During the third and sixth years of the probationary period, and other years when requested, the full review process shall include evaluation by the dean and the ranking tenure evaluation committees at the levels of the department and the college. At his/ her sole discretion, the provost may review and make separate recommendations for or against a candidate’s tenure or evaluation of a candidate’s progress towards tenure. An exception is that in the event that there is a conflict among recommendations from the dean, the college Tenure Evaluation Committee and the department Tenure Evaluation Committee, the provost must make a separate recommendation. Furthermore, after the Department Tenure Evaluation Committee, the College Tenure Evaluation Committee, and the dean have completed their respective reviews, the candidate may request an additional review by the University Tenure Evaluation Committee. The University Committee evaluates the substantive issues of teaching, scholarship, service and ethics. The University Committee shall review the files of all candidates for advancement in rank or tenure who request such a review (see 8-19A). The recommendation(s) of the University Committee will be forwarded to the provost. The provost makes the final institutional recommendation unless overturned by the president or the Faculty Board of Review, as is the dean’s recommendation when the provost makes no recommendation. All these reviews shall follow established procedures allowing for formal evaluative contributions from students, faculty peers, and supervisory administrators and shall give faculty members under review written evaluations with the right of due process review by the Faculty Board of Review (as described in PPM 9-9 through 9-17).