In accord with Policy I, faculty appointed prior to 1998 may elect to continue to be governed by this policy, which was in force prior to the adoption of Policy I.

 1. Accord with University Policies. The Department accepts and endorses the guidelines of the AAUP concerning faculty tenure. The departmental Tenure and Promotion Policy is articulated so as to be consistent with the policies and procedures set forth by the governance documents of Bowling Green State University including the Academic Charter and the Board of Trustees policy on faculty appointment and tenure. These policies are intended to be in accord with this policy.

2. Proxy Procedures. Recommendations concerning tenure appointments shall be made by the Tenure and Promotion Committee. Any member of the Department who is entitled to a vote on a tenure appointment, but is not present at the meeting at which this vote is taken, shall be entitled to submit a written vote, provided that that member either (a) is away on leave, or (b) has other good reasons for not being present. The decision as to whether these reasons are sufficiently good shall be made by those members of the Tenure and Promotion Committee present at the meeting, with the understanding that the names of those persons asking to cast absentee ballots not be revealed. All members who are entitled to vote, but who will be away on leave at the date of the vote, are to be advised by the departmental Chair of the date of the meeting at which the vote is to be taken in sufficient time to permit them to submit a written vote.

3. Criteria and Evidence for Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor. It shall be the policy of the Department of Philosophy that a positive tenure recommendation for an Assistant Professor is ipso facto a recommendation for simultaneous promotion to Associate Professor. In order to be recommended for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor by the Tenure and Promotion Committee, a candidate must receive a 2/3 vote certifying that the candidate (1) is evaluated as an “excellent” teacher and an “excellent” scholar, (2) has performed satisfactory service to the University, and (3) holds a Ph.D. Degree in philosophy or its professional equivalent. The requirements of excellence in teaching and research are considered the primary responsibilities of a member of the Department, and, therefore, these criteria are of primary importance in the evaluation of candidates for recommendation for tenure and promotion.

(a) Teaching. Excellence in teaching consists primarily of excellent instruction provided in the classroom or excellence in the supervision of independent student work (principally in the graduate program). Service beyond these instructional contexts but related to teaching will count significantly in one's overall teaching evaluation. Evidence of primary teaching excellence shall include student and peer evaluations (including visitation by tenured faculty), teaching materials such as syllabi and examinations, and participation in supervising independent studies, internships, graduate theses and dissertations. Peer visits may begin in October. Evidence of service outside such contexts may include information about course development and program planning, flexibility and adaptability to departmental teaching goals and objectives and the like. Excellence is to be understood in relation to a five category scale ranging from “outstanding” to “excellent,” “good,” “competent” and “poor.” Simple competence in either mode of instruction will not be considered adequate to justify recommendation for tenure. If the candidate's excellence is determined by classroom performance, then performance in the supervision of independent student work must be at least good. If the candidate's classroom performance is good but not excellent, then performance in the supervision of independent student work must be outstanding.

(b) Research. Excellence in research consists in the generation and dissemination of products of a sustained research program. A recommendation for tenure must be based on a projection of the professional contribution that the candidate will make throughout his/her career. The primary evidence of excellence in research is publication in journals and by presses that have the highest reputation for quality, and, where appropriate, recognition of other research products by reputable professional organizations. Although there must be strong evidence of significant and continuing contribution, there is no specific number of articles, books, pages of publication, or research products that justifies recommendation for tenure. Other evidence of excellence in research includes: directing grants received, reading papers to professional organizations or professional colloquia, professional consultations, and editing and/or publishing philosophical works. Though evidence in these latter categories will be seriously considered, it may not replace the primary evidence cited above. Reviews of research will be considered as supplementary evidence of quality. Research yet to be disseminated shall be regarded primarily as evidence of the existence of a sustained research program.

(c) External Review of Research for Tenure. As part of the final review for tenure, the Tenure and Promotion Committee shall solicit and review ten to twelve external letters from major figures knowledgeable of the candidate's research record and professional reputation. Candidates shall be asked to select one-half of the reviewers. The Tenure and Promotion Steering Committee, with the approval of the full Committee, shall identify the others from whom letters are to be solicited. The candidate shall be requested to waive her/his right to access in order to insure candid evaluations by reviewers. Requests for evaluation shall be sent together with an updated curriculum vita and representative samples of the candidate's best work as selected by the candidate. In each case the referee shall be asked to express an opinion on the following issues: (1) On the strength of your knowledge of the candidate, what do you consider to be the professional prospects for the candidate? (2) What is your estimate of this candidate's achievements to date, as compared to the work of other philosophers with the same specialization at or near their tenure decisions? (3) Would this person be likely to obtain tenure at your institution? (4) Would you recommend the candidate for tenure at your home institution? And (5) Any other relevant comments? The Tenure and Promotion Committee will review the letters to determine whether the view of the candidate they express is consonant with the national reputation appropriate to our philosophy program. If the Committee considers the overall view expressed as not consonant with that reputation, then a negative recommendation for tenure will be forthcoming.

(d) Service. It is expected that every member of the faculty will cooperate in carrying out the many essential activities of the Department. Lack of cooperation may adversely affect chances of recommendation for tenure and promotion. However, the candidate should be aware that recommendation for tenure and/or promotion will be based primarily on (a) and (b).

(e) Consultation with the Probationary Faculty. Several weeks in advance of the Tenure and Promotion Committee's meeting to decide its tenure and promotion recommendations, the Chair of the Department shall notify all probationary members of the Department that the meeting has been scheduled and shall ask each to meet privately with the Chair to register his/her confidential opinion of the candidate's suitability for tenure or promotion, in particular his/her position on the candidate's merits with respect to the criteria set forth in this policy. The Chair shall take notes in these private meetings and report pertinent findings to the Tenure and Promotion Committee.

(f) Terminal Degree. The criterion of the completion of the terminal degree or its professional equivalent shall be, in the Department of Philosophy, the completion of the Ph.D. degree with verification from the awarding institution that all the requirements for a Ph.D. at that institution have been completed. In rare cases the Tenure and Promotion Committee will consider an appeal by a candidate, that the candidate has the professional equivalent. In such cases the candidate will have to present evidence in terms of significant publications, e.g., books of significance, and evidence of stature in the philosophical community and promise as a productive researcher and scholar in the field of philosophy.

4. Progress toward Tenure. At the appropriate time of each year, in order to conform to the University charter, the Tenure and Promotion Steering Committee will collect data appropriate for the use of the Tenure and Promotion Committee in considering the progress of each untenured member toward tenure. The data will include departmental data on the candidate's teaching as well as data submitted by the untenured member concerning the teaching, research and service of the untenured member.

(a) Classroom Visitation. The Steering Committee will coordinate a schedule whereby normally a different tenured member will visit each of the philosophy classes of the untenured member once. Before visiting, the tenured member will consult with the untenured member concerning the course objectives and how the session to be visited fits into those objectives. The evaluation will prominently include any suggestions the tenured member can make concerning the improvement of teaching. The evaluation will also include a summary judgment by the tenured faculty member of the observed materials and teaching, using the five category scale “outstanding”, “excellent”, “good”, “competent” and “poor.” The tenured member will verbally discuss with the untenured member the written evaluation the tenured member has made. The written evaluation shall be tuned over to the Chair of the Tenure Steering Committee, who shall include it in the permanent file of the untenured member.

(b) Interim External Review of Research. In the fourth year of the untenured member's probation, as part of the review of the untenured member, the Tenure and Promotion Committee shall solicit and review six external letters from major figures knowledgeable of the candidate's research record. Candidates shall be asked to select one-half of the reviewers. The Steering Committee, with the approval of the full Committee, shall identify the others from whom letters are to be solicited. The candidate shall be requested to waive her/his right to access in order to ensure candid evaluations by reviewers. Requests for evaluation shall be sent together with an updated curriculum vita and representative samples of the candidate's best work as selected by the candidate. In each case the referee shall be asked to express an opinion on the following issues: (1) On the strength of your knowledge of the candidate, what do you consider to be the professional prospect for the candidate? (2) What is your estimate of this candidate's achievements to date, as compared to the work of other philosophers with the same specialization still two years away from tenure decisions? (3) If the candidate were two years from tenure decision at your home institution, would this person be making satisfactory progress toward tenure? (4) Would you think it likely that two years hence you would recommend the candidate for tenure at your home institution? (5) What suggestions would you make which might guide the candidate's future work? And (6) Any other relevant comments? The Tenure and Promotion Committee will review the letters to determine whether the view of the candidate they express is consonant with the national reputation appropriate to our philosophy program, and will convey its judgment of the progress of the candidate's research toward meeting criteria for tenure in the light of these letters.

5. Relation to Reappointment. In general, the Department does not consider the retention of an untenured faculty member a presumption in favor of promotion to tenure. The Department may have reasons for retaining a faculty member for a short period that would not justify recommending that person for a tenure appointment. Any untenured member of the Department may inquire as to his/her prospects for promotion to tenure at any time and shall receive a candid reply from the departmental Chair, in writing if that is preferred. The Department will, moreover, make every effort to encourage outstanding faculty members to remain at the University and to support their teaching and research. For a statement on reappointment procedures, see the Reappointment Policy. The results of periodic evaluations of probationary faculty shall be conveyed using the appropriate collegial or University format to the College Office, when the policies of the College or University indicate that such information must be transmitted. In the case of a probationary faculty member, any recommendation to terminate contract will be based upon the evaluation of the Tenure and Promotion Committee that there is serious question as to whether the candidate will be able to meet the qualifications for tenure as specified and maintained by the Department. If a faculty member feels that he/she has little hope of being granted tenure he/she may resign effective at the end of the academic year. If the resignation is officially made and accepted prior to the time for final tenure evaluation, then no final tenure evaluation for the individual will be undertaken.

6. Relation to Faculty Evaluation Committee. The evaluations made by the Tenure and Promotion Committee shall be considered entirely independent of the evaluations made by the departmental Faculty Evaluation Committee in determining changes in salary increments. Actions of either committee should not be viewed as predeterminations or precedents for actions of the other committee.

7. Appeals. A probationary faculty member or other individual being evaluated by the Tenure and Promotion Committee either for the purpose of a recommendation concerning tenure and promotion or for the purpose of recommendations concerning reappointment shall have the right to appeal to the Tenure and Promotion Committee the results of its evaluation. The individual must make know to the departmental Chair and the Chair of the Tenure and Promotion Committee that an appeal will take place and the grounds upon which the appeal will be made. At a meeting chaired by the Chair of the Department, the Tenure and Promotion Committee will convene to hear the appeal. The committee will communicate its considered response to the individual within a reasonable amount of time after the meeting at which the appeal was presented. This procedure in no way is meant to preclude an individual from taking an appeal to appropriate agencies outside of the Department.

8. Relation to University Tenure and Promotion Review. All recommendations for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor shall be made simultaneously and forwarded to the appropriate College and University authorities in accord with procedures specified in the Academic Charter and in College governance documents. In the event that a junior faculty member is granted tenure but not promoted to Associate Professor by the University, the Tenure and Promotion Committee is committed to reviewing his/her credentials at the candidate's request in each subsequent year.

9. Promotion to Assistant Professor. Recommendation for this rank is automatic upon certification that all Ph.D. requirements have been satisfied unless the exigencies of tenure considerations preclude such considerations.

10. Criteria for Promotion to Full Professor. Criteria for promotion to Full Professor come from two sources: the Academic Charter and the working document of the College of Arts and Sciences Promotion and Tenure Review Committee (PTRC). There is no point in the Department establishing its own criteria since all promotion recommendations must be acted upon by the PTRC--presumably in accordance with that committee's interpretation of the criteria set down in its working document--and by administrative officers (most notably the Vice President for Academic Affairs) presumably in accordance with the criteria set down in the Academic Charter . All promotion decisions should be based upon the criteria set down in the PTRC document and the Academic Charter along with an assessment (based upon past experience) of how the PTRC and the administration interpret those criteria.

11. Procedures for Promotion to Full Professor. (a) Each year the Chair will notify the faculty members who have been five years in rank at the Associate level of their eligibility for promotion in conformity with the Academic Charter . (b) Any individual who wishes to be considered must indicate his/her request in writing to the Tenure and Promotion Steering Committee; and he/she may withdraw at any time prior to consideration by the full Tenure and Promotion Committee in writing. (c) As in the case of consideration for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor, the Tenure and Promotion Steering Committee shall have the responsibility of gathering and summarizing data and preparing reports which highlight strengths and weaknesses of individual candidates for review and evaluation by the full committee. (d) At a designated time the Tenure and Promotion Committee will make its promotion recommendations. It shall examine its data on each person under consideration in the light of the criteria set down in the PTRC document and the Academic Charter . Only under unusual circumstances can the Tenure and Promotion Committee recommend individuals for promotion at other times of the year. (e) Any individual who is not recommended for promotion by the Tenure and Promotion Committee and who believes that he/she should have been so recommended may appeal the decision directly to the Committee. He/she must inform the Chair of the Department in writing of his or her intention to do this within one week of the publication of the Tenure and Promotion Committee's promotion recommendations. It is such a candidate's responsibility to provide the Committee with the data supportive of and reasons for this belief. (f) All promotion recommendations are to be voted upon only by tenured members of the Department. Deliberations and voting shall take place in the absence of the individual being considered. A two-thirds majority is required to approve the recommendation and forward it to the Dean.