SECTION E. FACULTY


E.1 Definition of Faculty

E.2 Types of Faculty Appointments

E.2.1 Basic Types of Faculty Appointments

E.2.1.1 Tenured Faculty Appointments
E.2.1.2 Tenure-Track Faculty Appointments
E.2.1.3 Contract Faculty Appointments
E.2.1.4 Continuing Faculty Appointments
E.2.1.5 Adjunct Faculty Appointments
E.2.1.6 Transitional Appointments

E.2.2 Other Types of Faculty Appointments

E. 2.2.1 Extension Faculty Appointments
E.2.2.2 Joint Faculty Appointments
E.2.2.3 Joint Administrative Professional and Faculty Appointments
E.2.2.4 Faculty Affiliate Appointments
E.2.2.5 Visiting Faculty Appointments
E.2.2.6 University Distinguished Professorships

E.2.2.6.1 Eligibility for University Distinguished Professor Status and Title
E.2.2.6.2 Selection of University Distinguished Professors
E.2.2.6.3 Prerequisites of University Distinguished Professorships

E.2.2.7 University Distinguished Teaching Scholars

E.2.2.7.1 Eligibility for University Distinguished Teaching Scholars Status and Title
E.2.2.7.2 Selection of University Distinguished Teaching Scholars
E.2.2.7.3 Prerequisites of University Distinguished Teaching Scholars

E.3 Retired Faculty

E.3.1 Emeritus/Emerita Status
E.3.2 Society of Faculty and A/P Retirees

E.4 Selection of Faculty

E.4.1 Policy (See Section D.5)
E.4.2 Selection of Faculty
E.4.3 Selection of Department Heads or Chairpersons
E.4.4 Selection of Administrators with Academic Appointments

E.5 Responsibilities of the Faculty

E.5.1 Responsibility for Government and Discipline
E.5.2 Responsibilities as a Faculty Member
E.5.3 Guidelines on Teaching and Advising Responsibility

E.6 General Policies Relating to Appointment and Employment of Faculty
E.7 Service of Department Heads
E.8 Academic Freedom

E.8.1 Policy
E.8.2 Concepts

E. 9 Faculty Productivity

E.9.1 Individual Faculty Effort Distribution
E.9.2 Individual Faculty Workload
E.9.3 Department Effort Distribution
E.9.4 College Effort Distribution
E.9.5 University Effort Distribution

E.10 Faculty Tenure Policy

E.10.1 Definition of Tenure
E.10.2 Rationale for Tenure
E.10.3 Administrative Responsibilities in Relation to Tenure
E.10.4 Policies on Conferring Tenure

E.10.4.1 Probationary Period for Tenure

E.10.4.1.1 Service Credit
E.10.4.1.2 Extension of the Probationary Period

E.10.5 Procedures for the Granting of Tenure

E.10.5.1 Origin and Processing of Tenure Recommendations

E.10.5.2 Tenure Committee

E.10.5.3 Processing of Recommendations

E.10.5.4 Grievance

E.10.5.5 Postponement of Consideration for Tenure

E.10.5.6 Notification of Presidential Action on Tenure Recommendations

E.10.5.7 Withdrawal of Application of Tenure

E.10.6 Relation of Tenure to Changes in Status and/or Salary

E.11 Appeal of Early Termination of Contract Faculty Appointments

E.11.1 Initiating the Process 
E.11.2 Appeal Committee
E.11.3 Report of the Appeal Committee
E.11.4 Final Decision by the President

E.12 Performance Expectations for Tenure, Promotion, and Merit Salary Increases

E.12.1 Teaching, Advising, and Mentoring
E.12.2 Research and Other Creative Activity
E.12.3 Service

E.12.3.1 University Service
E.12.3.2 Professional Service
E.12.3.3 Clinical Service
E.12.3.4 Service with External Partners and Communities
E.12.3.5 Extension Service
E.12.3.6 Other Types of Service
E.12.3.7 Guidelines for Evaluation of Service in Faculty Performance Reviews

E.12.4 Outreach and Engagement

E.13 Advancement in Rank (Promotion)

E.13.1 Origin and Processing of Recommendations
E.13.2 Promotion Committee

E.13.3 Processing of Recommendations

E.13.4 Grievance

E.13.5 Notification of Presidential Action on Advancement in Rank

E.13.6 Withdrawal of Application for Advancement in Rank

E.14 Performance Reviews

E.14.1 Annual Reviews
E.14.2 Comprehensive Reviews of Tenure-Track Faculty
E.14.3 Periodic Comprehensive Reviews of Tenured Faculty

E.14.3.1 Phase I Comprehensive Performance Reviews
E.14.3.2 Phase II Comprehensive Performance Reviews

E.14.4 Grievance

E.15 Disciplinary Action for Tenured Faculty

E.15.1 Initiating the Process
E.15.2 Operational Procedures Prior to Completion of Formal Disciplinary Action
E.15.3 Discussions to Achieve a Resolution
E.15.4 Hearing Process

E.15.4.1 Performance of Professional Duties
E.15.4.2 Behavior
E.15.4.3 Removal of Hearing Committee Members
E.15.4.4 Hearing

E.15.5 Procedures Following Completion of the Hearing
E.15.6 Recommendation for Disciplinary Action
E.15.7 Disposition of the Hearing Committee’s Report
E.15.8 Administrative Action on the Hearing Committee Report
E.15.9 Written Records
E.15.10 Term of Continuation of Faculty Salary and Benefits Following Termination of Appointment
E.15.11 Time Limit for Action by the Provost

E.16 Appeal of Early Termination of Tenure-Track Faculty Appointments

E.16.1 Initiating the Process
E.16.2 Appeal Committee
E.16.3 Report of the Appeal Committee
E.16.4 Final Decision by the President

E.17 Renewal of Tenure-Track Faculty Appointments

E.17.1 Initiating the Appeal Process
E.17.2 Appeal Committee
E.17.3 Report of the Appeal Committee
E.17.4 Final Decision by the President

E.18 Financial Exigency

E.18.1 Definition of Financial Exigency and Conditions of Tenured Faculty Terminations
E.18.2 Declaration of Financial Exigency
E.18.3 Development of a Plan of Action
E.18.4 Order of Terminations
E.18.5 Responsibility of Committee on Strategic and Financial Planning
E.18.6 Right of Access of Individual Faculty Member to the Grievance and Mediation Procedure

E.19 Discontinuance of a Degree Granting Program or a Department of Instruction not Mandated by Financial Exigency

E.19.1 Procedure
E.19.2 Appeal Procedure


E.1 Definition of Faculty (last revised May 3, 2018)

The faculty includes all personnel who carry academic rank (professor, associate professor, assistant professor, master instructor, senior instructor, instructor, and faculty affiliate) and the University President.  All faculty members shall have the academic freedom enjoyed by tenured faculty members, regardless of the type of appointment.

E.2 Types of Faculty Appointments (last revised December 2, 2022)

E.2.1 Basic Types of Faculty Appointments (last revised December 6, 2019)

Six (6) basic types of appointments exist for members of the faculty. They are tenured faculty, tenure-track faculty, contract faculty, continuing faculty, adjunct faculty, and faculty on transitional appointments. Only faculty members holding tenure-track appointments at the time of consideration are eligible to acquire tenure.  See Section E.2.2 for details of other types of faculty appointments.

Full-time is defined as the academic year or a minimum of nine (9) months.  Part-time is defined as any fraction of time less than one hundred (100) percent, but not less than fifty (50) percent of full-time.

The major characteristics of the various types of appointments are as follows.

E.2.1.1 Tenured Faculty Appointments (last revised December 2, 2022)

A tenured faculty appointment may be either full-time or part-time. If a tenured faculty member is tenured only for part-time service, additional employment may be arranged each year between the faculty member and the department.  Responsibilities and salaries are scaled appropriately to the portion of time worked.

If a tenured faculty member changes to a contract, continuing, or adjunct appointment, they must relinquish tenure and retire from the University.  A tenured faculty member who wishes to gain emeritus/emerita status must apply prior to the time they relinquish tenure and retire.

The following conditions apply to a tenured faculty appointment:

a. The majority of the appointment must reside in one of the academic departments of the University (see Section C.2.3.1).

b. It is limited to the ranks of assistant professor, associate professor, and professor.

c. There is no specified ending date.

d. The faculty member shall have full voting rights at departmental and college faculty meetings and is eligible to serve on departmental and college committees.

e. Enrollment in a retirement program is mandatory.  The faculty member is eligible for other fringe benefits and privileges (see Sections F and G and the Faculty and Administrative Professional Privileges and Benefits Summary Plan (SPD)), and for sabbatical leave (see Section F.3.4).

E.2.1.2  Tenure-Track Faculty Appointments (last revised December 2, 2022)

A tenure-track faculty member may be either full-time or part-time. The six (6) year time limit for acquisition of tenure applies for both full-time and part-time appointments (see Section E.10.4.c).  Criteria, procedures, and regulations for promotion, tenure, and salary for part-time appointments are subject to the rules governing full-time appointments.  If a contract, continuous or adjunct faculty member is given a tenure-track faculty appointment, an appropriate amount of credit may be given for this prior service.

The following conditions apply to a tenure-track faculty appointment:

a. The majority of the appointment must reside in one of the academic departments of the University (see Section C.2.3.1).

b. It is limited to the ranks of assistant professor, associate professor, and professor.

c. The faculty member shall have full voting rights at departmental and college faculty meetings and is eligible to serve on departmental and college committees.

d. Enrollment in a retirement program is mandatory. The faculty member is eligible for other fringe benefits and privileges (see Sections F and G and the Faculty and Administrative Professional Privileges and Benefits Summary Plan (SPD)), but not for sabbatical leave (see Section F.3.4).  However, time spent on a tenure-track appointment does count towards the accumulation of service for sabbatical leave.

E.2.1.3 Contract Faculty Appointments (last revised December 2, 2022)

Contract faculty appointments may be either full-time or part-time. These appointments may be offered at any time at the discretion of the department.

Contract faculty appointments for research may be offered only for research performed for the University.  In this case, the unit or department must document that the multi-year contract or extension is necessary for the hiring or retaining of the faculty member.

The following conditions apply to a contract faculty appointment:

a. The majority of the appointment must reside in one of the academic departments of the University (see Section C.2.3.1) or a Special Academic Unit (see Section C.2.3.3), unless the Provost approves of it residing in some other unit for clear academic reasons.

b. All contracts shall have a specified ending date and a term of at least two (2) years.  At least one (1) year prior to the expiration of the contract, the faculty member shall either be given a new contract that replaces the current contract or informed that the contract may be allowed to expire.  If the contract is allowed to expire, the employment as a contract faculty appointment shall be converted to employment as a continuing faculty appointment, without loss of rank or salary, unless a new contract is agreed to in writing by both parties.

c. The faculty member shall participate in annual reviews and the annual salary exercise in the same manner as tenured faculty.

d. Department and college codes shall specify the voting rights of contract faculty and their eligibility to participate on departmental and college committees. The standard expectation is that contract faculty have voting rights in the governance of their department and college with the exception of decisions relating to tenure and will be eligible to serve on departmental and college committees. If the appointment resides in a unit other than an academic department, then the code of that unit shall specify the voting rights of contract faculty within the unit and their eligibility to participate on committees within that unit.

e. Enrollment in a retirement program is mandatory.  The faculty member is eligible for other fringe benefits and privileges (see Sections F and G and the Faculty and Administrative Professional Privileges and Benefits Summary Plan (SPD)), but not for sabbatical leave (see Section F.3.4).

f. A contract faculty member who has at least twelve (12) semesters of employment combined between contract and continuing appointments (or sooner at the discretion of the department) becomes eligible for funding for release time in order to pursue scholarly development. Once such funding has been granted, the faculty member becomes eligible for such funding again after another twelve (12) semesters of such employment.  A request for such funding shall be submitted in writing by the faculty member to the department head.  This request shall include details regarding the type of scholarly development and the amount of funding requested. The department head shall respond in writing with an approval or denial of the request. In the case of a denial of the request, the reasons for the denial shall be stated in writing in the response.

E.2.1.4 Continuing Faculty Appointments (last revised December 2, 2022)

Continuing faculty appointments may be either full-time or part-time. The following conditions apply to a continuing faculty appointment:

a. The majority of the appointment must reside in one of the academic departments of the University (see Section C.2.3.1) or a Special Academic Unit (see Section C.2.3.3), unless the Provost approves of it residing in some other unit for clear academic reasons.

b. There is no specified ending date.

c. The appointment is “at will” and is subject to termination by either party at any time. Section D.5.6 regarding the termination of “at will” appointments shall apply to “at will” faculty appointments.

d. The faculty member shall participate in annual reviews and the annual salary exercise in the same manner as tenured faculty.

e. Department and college codes shall specify the voting rights of continuing faculty and their eligibility to participate on departmental and college committees. The standard expectation is that continuing faculty have voting rights in the governance of their department and college with the exception of decisions relating to tenure, and will be eligible to serve on departmental and college committees. If the appointment resides in a unit other than an academic department, then the code of that unit shall specify the voting rights of continuing faculty within that unit and their eligibility to participate on committees within that unit.

f. Enrollment in a retirement program is mandatory.  The faculty member is eligible for other fringe benefits and privileges (see Sections F and G and the Faculty and Administrative Professional Privileges and Benefits Summary Plan (SPD)), but not for sabbatical leave (see Section F.3.4).

g. A continuing faculty member who has at least twelve (12) semesters of employment combined between contract and continuing appointments (or sooner at the discretion of the department) becomes eligible for funding for release time in order to pursue scholarly development. Once such funding has been granted, the faculty member becomes eligible for such funding again after another twelve (12) semesters of such employment. A request for such funding shall be submitted in writing by the faculty member to the department head.  This request shall include details regarding the type of scholarly development and the amount of funding requested. The department head shall respond in writing with an approval or denial of the request. In the case of a denial of the request, the reasons for the denial shall be stated in writing in the response.

h. A continuing faculty member who has at least ten (10) semesters of employment combined between contract and continuing appointments shall be given serious consideration for conversion to a contract faculty appointment. In this circumstance, the faculty member may submit a formal request in writing to the department head for such a conversion. Such a formal request shall be responded to in writing by the department head with an approval or denial of the request. In the case of a denial of the request, the reasons for the denial shall be stated in writing in the response.

i. A continuing faculty member may be converted to a contract faculty appointment prior to ten (10) semesters at the discretion of the department.

E.2.1.5 Adjunct Faculty Appointments (last revised December 2, 2022)

Adjunct faculty appointments may be full-time, part-time, or less than half-time.

Adjunct faculty appointments are intended for situations where the previous types of appointment are not appropriate. These include the following situations:

i. Employment at less than half-time.

ii. Employment on an occasional basis, rather than being for every (Fall and Spring) semester.  An approved leave without full-time or part-time service (such as Family Medical Leave) shall not constitute employment on an occasional basis.

iii. Employment for only one (1) or two (2) semesters (Fall and Spring). This appointment type may not be used for a faculty member employed full-time or part-time every semester (Fall and Spring) for more than two (2) semesters.

The following conditions apply to an adjunct faculty appointment:

a. The majority of the appointment must reside in one of the academic departments of the University (see Section C.2.3.1) or a Special Academic Unit (see Section C.2.3.3), unless the Provost approves of it residing in some other unit for clear academic reasons.

b. There may or may not be a specified ending date.

c. The appointment is “at will” and is subject to termination by either party at any time.  Section D.5.6 regarding the termination of “at will” appointments shall apply to “at will” faculty appointments.

d. The faculty member shall participate in annual reviews and the annual salary exercise in the same manner as tenured faculty.

e. Department and college codes shall specify the voting rights of adjunct faculty and their eligibility to participate on departmental and college committees. If the appointment resides in a unit other than an academic department, then the code of that unit shall specify the voting rights of adjunct faculty within that unit and their eligibility to participate on committees within that unit.

f. Enrollment in a retirement program is mandatory.  If the faculty member is full-time or part-time, then he or she is eligible for other fringe benefits and privileges (see Sections F and G and the Faculty and Administrative Professional Privileges and Benefits Summary Plan (SPD)but not for sabbatical leave (see Section F.3).

E.2.1.6 Transitional Appointments (last revised May 3, 2018)

The University provides the opportunity for transitional appointment to its tenured faculty members who have retired and terminated employment in consideration of a subsequent reappointment on a part-time tenured basis for a limited period of time. The transitional appointment requires that the faculty member participate in the teaching, advising, service, and research activities of the department, subject to the part-time provisions of their appointment. Administrators who also hold a tenured faculty appointment are eligible to request a transitional appointment within the context of their faculty roles. Administrative professionals and non-tenured faculty members are not eligible for transitional appointments due to the legal conflict between the statutory “at will” status of such appointments and the appointment term guarantees embodied in a transitional appointment.

Faculty members covered under the federal retirement system are not eligible for transitional appointment due to prohibitive provisions of that retirement system. However, post-retirement employment in a position other than the one requiring a federal appointment is not prohibited. Interested faculty members and/or departments should contact the Director of Human Resource Services for further information.

Conditions regarding transitional appointments are as follows:

a. Only tenured faculty members on full-time or part-time tenured appointments who are currently eligible for retirement under the University’s definition of retirement (see “Definition of Retirement” under “Benefits” at www.hr.colostate.edu) have the opportunity of requesting transitional appointments. Note that the University’s definition of retirement may differ from those of the retirement plans. For more information, or to confirm eligibility for retirement, contact the University Benefits Office.

b. Ordinarily, a request for a transitional appointment should be submitted in writing to the department head one (1) full academic year before the requested commencement of the transitional appointment. A time period of less than one (1) year may be accepted in those cases where such appointments with lesser notice are considered to be in the interest of the University. Such an exception requires the approval of the department head, the dean, and the Provost. A transitional appointment shall be evaluated on the basis of both the needs of the department and college and the desires of the faculty member.

c. A transitional appointment is for a specified term of at least one (1) year and not more than four (4) years, and it concludes with the termination of this part-time tenured appointment. However, this does not preclude subsequent full-time or part-time employment in a non-tenured position subject to the needs and resources of the department and the interests and desires of the faculty member. During the transitional period, a transitional appointment may not be modified to a tenured or tenure-track appointment. A faculty member may elect to terminate the part-time transitional appointment prior to the end of the specified term.

d. A transitional appointment shall begin no earlier than the first business day after the effective date of termination of employment as a tenured faculty member.

e. A faculty member shall be tenured on a part-time basis as a condition of the transitional appointment.

f. Faculty with transitional appointments have full voting rights at departmental and college faculty meetings and are eligible to serve on departmental and college committees.

g. Any uncompensated leave balances at the time of retirement shall be reinstated and available for use during the transitional appointment. However, at the end of the transitional appointment, there shall be no compensation for unused leave balances.

h. The salary and workload for a transitional appointment shall normally be fifty (50) percent of what they were at the time of retirement. However, when it is to the benefit of both the University and the faculty member, variations from this fifty (50) percent standard, including brief periods of full-time employment, may be proposed by the department head and the dean for review and approval by the Provost.

i. The percentage of salary and the percentage of effort during the transitional appointment are subject to negotiation between the department and the faculty member and shall be spelled out in the transitional appointment agreement. Such changes in salary and/or effort shall not affect the percentage level of the appointment (e.g., part-time versus full-time) specified in the transitional appointment agreement. The terms under which the appointment is undertaken or subsequently modified shall be negotiated to be mutually beneficial to both the faculty member and the University, and the terms of the agreement shall be specified in writing, subject to the review and approval of the dean and the Provost. Final approval authority resides with the President.

j. A faculty member on a transitional appointment who is a PERA annuitant may be subject to that retirement system’s annuity penalty for “post retirement” work for PERA affiliated employers, including the University, in excess of one hundred and ten (110) days in any calendar year or for work during the first (1st) month of retirement. A faculty member who is receiving a PERA annuity should check with PERA directly to determine what effects, if any, a transitional appointment may have on their annuity amounts.

k. A faculty member on a transitional appointment participates in the University’s Defined Contribution Plan for Retirement (“DCP”) and is eligible for the same benefits as a faculty member with a tenured appointment within the DCP. Leave policies, as described in Section F of the Manual, shall be in effect, except that a faculty member on a transitional appointment is not eligible for a sabbatical leave nor for payment for unused sick leave and/or annual leave at the conclusion of the transitional appointment.

l. A faculty member on a transitional appointment is considered for any pay and benefit increases on the same basis as a faculty member holding a tenured appointment, proportionate to the extent of the appointment.

E.2.2 Other Types of Faculty Appointments (last revised May 4, 2022)

E.2.2.1  Extension Faculty Appointments (new section added May 4, 2022)

CSU Extension may appoint faculty to deliver educational programs and services in extension or extended studies when the individual possesses training and experience useful to the University’s mission to extend its teaching, research, and service programs. The following conditions apply to CSU Extension faculty appointment:

a. These appointments are restricted to CSU Extension only, and these faculty have full voting rights within CSU Extension.

b. These appointments can have the ranks of instructor, senior instructor, master instructor, assistant professor, associate professor and professor.

c. Promotions will follow the procedures in section E.13.

d. These appointments are not eligible for tenure and use titles modified to reflect their specialized appointment (e.g., Extension Instructor) based on criteria established in the CSU Extension code.

e. These faculty members shall participate in annual reviews and the annual salary exercise in the same manner as tenured faculty.

f. The CSU Extension code shall specify the voting rights of Extension Faculty and their eligibility to participate on committees within CSU Extension.

g. These appointments are “at will” and are subject to termination by either party at any time. Section D.5.6 regarding the termination of “at will” appointments shall apply to “at will” faculty appointments.

h. Enrollment in a retirement program is mandatory. The faculty member is eligible for other fringe benefits and privileges (see Sections F and G and the Faculty and Administrative Professional Privileges and Benefits Summary Plan (SPD)), but not for sabbatical leave (see Section F.3.4).

E.2.2.2 Joint Faculty Appointments

Joint faculty appointments are available to individuals holding any of the six (6) basic kinds of faculty appointments. Such appointments should be made only when the professional activities of the individual concerned normally fall, to an appreciable degree, within the purview of two (2) departments. Personal preferences of the individual are not sufficient reasons to justify a joint appointment. Each faculty member with an interdepartmental appointment shall be considered a member of the department contracting for the greater percentage of the time. In the case of a faculty member having equal time in two (2) or more departments, the individual and department heads involved will decide in which department the faculty member will be represented; the status of such a member shall remain unchanged unless changes in the academic appointment require a change in departmental representation.

E.2.2.3 Joint Administrative Professional and Faculty Appointments (last revised May 2, 2007)

A joint administrative professional and faculty appointment may be given to a University administrative professional if the qualifications of that individual are judged to be acceptable by the academic department concerned. The awarding of a joint administrative professional and faculty appointment is dependent on the approval of both the academic department and the individual’s administrative supervisor. Additional conditions regarding such appointments are as follows:

a. The faculty component of a joint administrative professional and faculty appointment may be established for any fraction of time that is less than the fraction of time for the administrative professional component.

b. Persons holding such appointments are not eligible for tenure.

c. The academic component of a joint administrative professional and faculty appointment may be made for up to three (3) years and may be terminated an any time without cause.

d. If the administrative professional component of a joint administrative professional and faculty appointment is terminated, then the faculty component shall be terminated as well.

e. Holders of joint administrative professional and faculty appointments are eligible for fringe benefits and participation in a retirement program based on the type of their administrative professional appointment.

f. The manner in which a person’s salary is budgeted is not changed in the awarding of a joint administrative professional and faculty appointment if the faculty duties are mutually agreed to be minimal; otherwise, appropriate budgetary adjustments should be made.

E.2.2.4 Faculty Affiliate Appointments (last revised June 20, 2007)

Individuals who possess training and experience useful to the University’s teaching and research program and who are not employed by the University may receive faculty affiliate appointments. Conditions of these appointments are as follows:

a. Faculty affiliate appointments may be made for up to three (3) years and may be terminated at any time, without cause.

b. Faculty affiliates do not receive stipends nor are they eligible for the employee privileges and benefits described in Section G. They are not eligible for tenure.

c. An individual may be appointed as a faculty affiliate in more than one (1) academic department with the approval of the Provost.

d. Faculty affiliates are not eligible to serve on Faculty Council or its standing committees.

e. Faculty affiliates normally receive the academic rank of faculty affiliate (see Section E.1). However, in special cases, an academic rank of assistant professor, associate professor, or professor may be awarded through the process described in Section E.13.1.

E.2.2.5 Visiting Faculty Appointments

Individuals who are members of the faculty for a short period of time while on leave from another institution of higher education or private agency are given visiting appointments.

Visiting appointments may be made for any rank. The criteria used to determine the rank to be recommended are the same as those applied when determining the rank of a regular member of the faculty. Visiting faculty appointees do not participate in a retirement program and are not eligible for faculty fringe benefits or the study privilege.

E.2.2.6 University Distinguished Professorships

E.2.2.6.1 Eligibility for University Distinguished Professor Status and Title

Persons holding or qualified for the rank of professor with tenure at Colorado State University are eligible for the title of University Distinguished Professor.

E.2.2.6.2 Selection of University Distinguished Professors

The criterion for selection is outstanding scholarship.

E.2.2.6.3 Perquisites of University Distinguished Professorships

Persons receiving the title of University Distinguished Professor will hold this title for the duration of their association with Colorado State University. Additional annual compensation and/or support for this professorship will come from funds specified for this purpose.

E.2.2.7 University Distinguished Teaching Scholars (Last revised June 9, 1999)

Appointment as a University Distinguished Teaching Scholar constitutes the University’s highest recognition of excellence in teaching. During the first three (3) years of their appointment, University Distinguished Teaching Scholars will undertake a project of their choice that promotes excellence in teaching.

E.2.2.7.1 Eligibility for University Distinguished Teaching Scholar Status and Title

Persons holding tenure at Colorado State University are eligible for the title of University Distinguished Teaching Scholar.

E.2.2.7.2 Selection of University Distinguished Teaching Scholars

The criterion for selection is outstanding teaching. The Committee on Teaching and Learning will oversee the selection process.

E.2.2.7.3 Prerequisites of University Distinguished Teaching Scholars

Faculty receiving the title of University Distinguished Teaching Scholar will hold this title for the duration of their association with Colorado State University. Operating support for the project carried out during the first three (3) years of their appointment and a permanent increase in base salary will come from funds specified for this purpose.

E.3 Retired Faculty (new section added June 21, 2011)

Former faculty members who have officially retired from Colorado State University have certain rights and privileges. These include a permanent faculty identification card, the option to be included in University distribution lists for mail and email, free campus parking permits, faculty library privileges, access to athletic facilities, membership in the University Club at a discounted rate, faculty discounts on athletic tickets, faculty discounts on computers and software, and access to ACNS (Academic Computer Network Services) technical assistance.

E.3.1 Emeritus/Emerita Status (last revised June 21, 2011)

Faculty members who have completed ten (10) years or more of full-time or part-time service as faculty of Colorado State University shall be eligible at the time of their retirement from Colorado State University for an emeritus/emerita title equivalent to their highest faculty rank (e.g., emeritus associate professor). Faculty members who have held administrative positions (including department heads) for five (5) years or more shall be eligible for the emeritus/emerita title for these administrative positions (e.g., emerita associate dean).

An eligible member of the faculty may request emeritus/emerita status from the department at the same time of retirement from the University. The department head and the dean of the college shall forward the request to the Provost. As long as the requirements for eligibility are met, such forwarding is pro forma. The final decision on granting emeritus/emerita status will be made by the Board.

If possible, office or lab/office space and clerical support shall be provided to each emeritus/emerita faculty member who continues to do scholarly work.

E.3.2 Society of Faculty and A/P Staff Retirees (new section added June 21, 2011)

The Society of Faculty and A/P Staff Retirees is a CIOSU (see Section B.2.6) whose mission is to enhance life in retirement for former faculty members and administrative professionals of Colorado State University. The Society maintains a website (https://society-faculty-ap-retirees.colostate.edu/), publishes a twice-yearly newsletter, and works continuously with the Office of Academic Advancement to strengthen the ties of retirees to Colorado State University.

The Society provides a range of intellectual, artistic and cultural programs of interest to active individuals during their retirement years. In particular, the Executive Committee of the Society organizes and oversees a series of monthly talks by faculty and community members, a series of periodic excursions to campus and area sites, and annual pre-retirement seminars through the Professional Development Institute. The Society nurtures opportunities for members to continue, as desired, their contributions to the teaching, research, and outreach components of the Colorado State University mission, and it is developing opportunities for retired faculty to provide mentoring to faculty and students.

The Society negotiates benefits for members, and assists with retirement planning through workshops, guidelines, and brochures. In particular, the Society has developed a retirement guideline for faculty that is available on its website. The Society advocates for improved policies affecting its members as a class within the Colorado State University community.

E.4 Selection of Faculty

E.4.1 Policy (See Section D.5) (last revised June 22, 2006)

It is the policy of Colorado State University to seek the best qualified candidates available for all positions within the limitations imposed by the availability of resources, level of the appointment, unique requirements of the position, and the talent pool. In the process of searching for and appointing persons to faculty positions, participation by those who will be professional peers and colleagues or who will be subject to direct supervision of the new appointee is strongly encouraged in all cases and is specifically required for some types of appointments. The authority to approve faculty appointments has been delegated by the Board to the President, and the President has further delegated this authority to the Provost.

E.4.2 Selection of Faculty (last revised August 5, 2016)

a. Selection of tenure track and tenured faculty members is a responsibility of individual departments, but must be made within the spirit and intent of University policy. Specific hiring procedures employed within the department shall be included in the departmental code. Confidentiality during the hiring process must be maintained to the extent required by law. However, all members of the search committee, as well as other personnel involved in employment recommendations, shall have access to the complete information contained in all applicants’ files. Recommendations at each level (department, department head, and dean) shall be reversed at higher levels only for compelling reasons that shall be stated in writing to each of the recommending bodies.

b. Selection of contract, continuing, and adjunct faculty members is a responsibility of individual departments or Special Academic Units, but must be made within the spirit and intent of University policy including sections E.2.1.3, E.2.1.4, and E.2.1.5 of the Manual which describe these appointment types.  Specific hiring procedures employed within the department/Special Academic Unit shall be included in the departmental/Special Academic Unit code.  Confidentiality during the hiring process must be maintained to the extent required by law.  However, all members of the search committee, as well as other personnel involved in employment recommendations, shall have access to the complete information contained in all applicants’ files.  Recommendations at each level (department/Special Academic unit, department head/Special Academic Unit director, and dean(s)) shall be reversed at higher levels only for compelling reasons that shall be stated in writing to each of the recommending bodies.

E.4.3 Selection of Academic Department Heads or Chairpersons (last revised June 21, 2011)

The appropriate dean shall appoint a search committee of not fewer than five (5) members whose responsibility shall be to conduct a search and screen candidates for the department head or chairperson. The dean shall indicate in the charge to the committee at the time of appointment the number of individuals to be nominated and any other specific instructions which may be significant to convey. After consultation with and advice from the search committee and any other sources deemed expedient, the dean shall either select the new department head or chairperson from the nominees, subject to approval, or reject all nominees. In the latter case, the dean may either ask for a new search by the same search committee or disband the search committee and appoint a new search committee to conduct a new search. The authority to approve the dean’s selection of the department head or chairperson has been delegated to the President by the Board, and has been further delegated by the President to the Provost.

E.4.4 Selection of Administrators with Academic Appointments (last revised June 21, 2011)

The normal procedure for the hiring of an administrator on other than an interim basis whose administration position carries an academic appointment is for the immediate supervisor to appoint a search committee of not fewer than five (5) members to conduct a national or international search. Normally, the majority of the members of the search committee will be faculty and administrative professionals who are qualified by experience, interest, and responsibility to contribute to the performance of the search committee. Students and State Classified Staff may also be included as members of the search committee. In exceptional circumstances, the President may authorize deviations from these procedures, but any such deviations must be justified in writing to the campus community.

The individual appointing the search committee shall provide a job description covering the duties of the position, the personal and professional qualifications that applicants are expected to possess, and a time schedule for conducting the search and filling the position. The position shall be announced in accordance with the requirements of the University’s Office of Equal Opportunity.

The search committee shall present its final report to the person appointing the search committee, listing the candidates that were found acceptable as finalists for consideration. Normally, at least one (1) finalist will be from off the campus. The report shall include a summary of the credentials of each finalists.

The person appointing the search committee shall make the final selection from among the finalists, subject to approval, or reject all finalists. In the event that all finalists are rejected, or that the search committee did not find any of the candidates to be acceptable as finalists, the person appointing the search committee may either ask for a new search by the same search committee or disband the search committee and appoint a new search committee to conduct a new search. For the hiring of the Provost, a vice president, or, if requested by the Board, a senior administrator (as defined in Section D.1), approval by the Board is required. The authority to hire other administrators with academic appointments has been delegated by the Board to the President, and this authority has been further delegated by the President to the Provost and vice presidents for the administrative units under their authority.

E.5 Responsibilities of the Faculty

E.5.1 Responsibility for Government and Discipline

The faculty passes all rules and regulations necessary to University government and discipline. The faculty also is given statutory charge of the laboratories and library. For detailed statutory information concerning the University, see Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S.), 1973, Title 23, Article 31.

E.5.2 Responsibilities as a Faculty Member (Last revised June 22, 2006)

It is the faculty member’s responsibility to seek the truth and state the truth, as the faculty member sees it, within their area of specialization. This involves keeping abreast of developments in the specialty and creative activities to contribute to such developments, including publication of results. Intellectual honesty requires critical self evaluation, objective judgment about the works of others, and respect for the work and evaluations by others.

Faculty members are expected to foster relationships of confidence and mutual respect with students while encouraging and guiding student learning in a climate free of discriminatory behavior. High scholarly standards require the communication of both the faculty member’s view and opposing views, as appropriate, within the subject matter of courses. Evaluations of students’ efforts should be fair, objective, and directed toward enhancing the learning process. Improvements and innovations in the teaching learning processes and advising are responsibilities of the faculty member.

Faculty members are expected to accept a reasonable share of responsibility for the internal governance of the University and for public and professional service.

Recommendations for faculty appointments, reappointments, decisions not to reappoint, promotions, the granting of tenure, and dismissal are primarily a faculty responsibility, subject to approval by the Board, except in cases where the Board has, from time to time, delegated that authority to the President (and the President has, from time to time, further delegated that authority to the Provost or vice president for the administrative unit under their authority). The primary responsibility of the faculty for making recommendations in such matters is based upon the fact that its judgment is central to academic policy. Furthermore, scholars in a particular field or activity have the chief competence for judging the work of their colleagues. This responsibility exists for both the adverse and favorable judgments.

E.5.3 Guidelines on Teaching, Advising, and Mentoring Responsibility (last revised May 4, 2022)

The teaching, advising, and mentoring responsibilities of faculty members are among those many areas of university life which have for generations been a part of the unwritten code of a “community of scholars.” It seems appropriate to set forth these responsibilities in the form of illustrative statements of desirable practice. These guidelines are by no means exhaustive regarding faculty members’ responsibilities to teaching, advising, and mentoring. The performance of faculty members in meeting the expectations contained in the guidelines shall be taken into consideration in determining salary increases, tenure, and promotion.

a. Faculty members are responsible for stating clearly the instructional objectives of each course they teach at the beginning of each term. It is expected that faculty will direct their instruction toward the fulfillment of these objectives and that evaluation of student achievement will be consistent with these objectives. Faculty members are responsible for orienting the content of the courses to the published official course descriptions.

b. Faculty members are responsible for informing students of the attendance expectations and consequences, and of the methods to be employed in determining the final course grade.

c. Faculty members are responsible for the assignment of the final course grade. The assigned grade should reflect the performance of the student in the course commensurate with the objectives of the course. The course instructor’s decision of whether to use whole-letter grading or the plus minus grading system in the course should be indicated in the course syllabus and/or policy statement.

d. Graded examinations, papers, and other sources of evaluation will be available to the student for inspection and discussion. These should be graded promptly to make the results a part of the student’s learning experience. The results of these evaluations will be retained for at least one (1) term to provide the opportunity for review.

e. Faculty members are expected to meet their classes regularly and at scheduled times. In case of illness or emergency, the department head should be notified promptly.

f. A faculty member is expected to make time available for student conferences and for adivising and mentoring, if these are included in the faculty member’s scope of duties. Office hours should be convenient to both the students and the faculty member with the opportunity provided for prearranged appointments. Available conference times should be communicated to students.

g. Faculty members shall have their teaching, advising, and mentoring periodically evaluated as specified by departmental codes.

E.6 General Policies Relating to Appointment and Employment of Faculty (last revised May 8, 2019)

a. The conditions and expectations of every appointment shall be confirmed in writing. Any subsequent modifications of the appointment shall also be confirmed in writing after the faculty member and the administrator have mutually determined the new conditions. The faculty member shall receive a copy of these documents.

b. All faculty members who are on tenure-track appointments, shall be appointed for a period not exceeding one (1) year.

c. All faculty members on continuing or adjunct appointments shall be appointed “at will.”

d. Faculty members on contract appointments shall be appointed for periods of two (2) to five (5) years for research and two (2) to three (3) years for teaching.

1. A multi-year contract does not carry any guarantee that the contract will be renewed, even though the duties of the employee may have been discharged satisfactorily.

2. Renewal of a multi-year contract does not entitle the individual to further renewals, a tenure-track appointment, or to a decision concerning tenure.

3. Renewal or extension of multi-year contracts may be made at any time during or after the onset of the contract and shall meet the same conditions required for the initial contract as specified in Section E.2.1.3.

4. If the contract is not renewed employment will be converted to an ‘at will’ continuing appointment as specified in Section E.2.1.3.

e. If the department head does not propose to reappoint a tenure-track faculty member, the faculty member shall be informed in writing that the appointment will not be renewed. This must be done by March 1 during the first year of employment, by December 15 during the second year, and at least twelve (12) months before the expiration of the appointment in succeeding years.

f. A contract or tenure-track faculty member may be disciplined or terminated for cause without following the procedures of Section E.15 for tenured faculty. Termination may be appealed by following the procedures in Section E.11 (for contract faculty) or Section E.16 (for tenure-track faculty). Other disciplinary actions may be grieved as described in Section K.

g. If a decision made at a higher administrative level will have the effect of altering or reversing a decision made at a departmental level regarding conditions of employment, including reappointment, tenure, promotion, and salary, then, before this change can take effect, the department head must be notified in writing of both the proposed change and the reasons for this change, and they must be given the opportunity to submit a written reply.

E.7 Service of Department Heads

Department heads usually hold twelve (12) month appointments while in office; however, when service as department head is terminated, a return to nine (9) month faculty status shall occur unless there is good and sufficient reason not to do so, as determined by the appropriate administrators.

E.8 Academic Freedom

E.8.1 Policy

The policy of the University is to foster and maintain an environment in which the professional activities of faculty are encouraged through freedom to pursue such activities.

E.8.2 Concepts

a. A faculty member is entitled to learn and to teach in the classroom what scholarship suggests is the truth in their particular field of expertise.

b. The faculty member is entitled to freedom of research within the confines of the stated conditions or agreements with the institution and/or contract or proposal parameters, if applicable. This freedom extends to publication of results.

c. Faculty members are free to seek external support for their research and creative activities so long as such activity is balanced with other duties and responsibilities and is compatible with the budgetary and legal procedures and policies of the University (see Sections E.5.1 and E.8.2.b).

d. A faculty member is free to question that which is believed to be settled.

e. The freedoms granted by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States are applicable to the faculty member, both as an academician and as a citizen.

f. The major purpose of the University Administration is to provide an atmosphere conducive to teaching, research, extension, and service. Administrators, therefore, must protect, defend, and promote academic freedom as a necessary prelude to the free search for and exposition of truth and understanding.

g. A faculty member is a citizen, a member of a learned profession, and an officer of an educational institution. When speaking or writing as a citizen, he or she should be free from institutional censorship or discipline, but this special position in the community imposes special obligations. As a person of learning and an educational officer, the person should remember that the public may judge the profession and the institution by their utterances. Hence the individual should at all times be accurate, exercise appropriate restraint, show every respect for the opinion of others, and make every effort to indicate that the individual is not an institutional spokesman.

E.9 Faculty Productivity (last revised December 1, 2017)

Decisions concerning tenure, promotion, and merit salary increases are linked to the faculty member’s productivity in the three categories of teaching and advising, research and other creative activity, and University and professional service.  Merit salary increases may also take into consideration negative behaviors that fall outside of these three categories. However, for tenured faculty, this may occur only if these behaviors resulted in disciplinary action through the process in Section E.15. Each academic unit must establish expected levels of productivity for the unit in each of these areas. Productivity is assessed by relating the effort expended to the outcome, in terms of effectiveness, impact, and documentation of the activity. Effort distribution is the allocation of effort into particular areas of responsibilities. Workload describes the professional responsibilities of the faculty. The responsibilities of faculty members for each of these activities will vary, depending upon the mission and needs of the academic unit and the expertise and interests of the faculty. The University recognizes that a faculty member’s activities may change over a career and is committed to the use of differentiated responsibilities for individual faculty. Hence, in the evaluation process, reasonable flexibility should be exercised, balancing, as the case requires, heavier responsibilities in one (1) area against lighter responsibilities in another.

Decisions regarding tenure, promotion, and merit salary increases must be consistent with, and based upon, the effort distribution established for each faculty member. The department code shall define the general expectations of effort distribution regarding teaching and advising, research and other creative activity, and service responsibilities in terms of the academic mission of the department. Where appropriate and consistent with the academic mission of the department, the department code should define outreach/engagement expectations and how those expectations are addressed in the faculty member’s teaching, research, and/or service effort distribution. During the probationary period and following tenure in the years leading to full professor, there may be a need for changes in the workload and effort distribution originally established at the time of hiring or at the time of tenure and promotion to associate professor. These changes shall be negotiated between the faculty member and the department head (E.9.1, E.9.2). In this event, since promotion and tenure decisions are linked to the faculty member’s productivity in line with effort distribution and workload, the promotion and tenure committee or a subcommittee thereof shall provide input in writing to the department head regarding the extent to which these changes may affect progress toward tenure. Following any negotiated changes, these changes and the committee’s response, shall be clearly articulated in writing by the department head to the faculty member.

E.9.1 Individual Faculty Effort Distribution (last revised August 12, 2009)

A faculty member’s effort distribution shall be negotiated between the faculty member and the department head subject to the provisions of Section C.2.6.2.e. The effort distribution for the next year shall be stated clearly in writing as part of the annual evaluation and used as a framework for annual and periodic comprehensive reviews, as well as tenure and promotion decisions. The effort distribution of each faculty member shall be subject to adjustment from time to time according to the principles articulated in Section E.9 above. Responsibilities within a department should be distributed to achieve the most effective and efficient use of human resources while considering the talents and interests of the individual faculty members. For those faculty members whose appointments include outreach/engagement, such as Extension specialists, responsibilities and metrics for performance evaluations are to be negotiated as part of the annual evaluation. Various criteria for outreach/engagement for faculty members with Extension appointments are found in the Statewide and Regional Specialist Roles and Responsibilities document found in the Colorado State University Extension Handbook.

Responsibilities for all tenure-track faculty members must be established so as to provide sufficient opportunities to demonstrate that they meet the performance expectations for tenure, promotion, and merit salary increases specified in Section E.12.

According to their effort distribution negotiated with the department head, faculty members teach as well as advise undergraduate and/or graduate students, maintain an active research and/or other creative activity agenda, and perform service appropriate to their appointment, discipline, and department (see Section E.12).

The scholarship-based model of outreach/engagement stimulates interaction with the community, which produces discipline-generated, evidence-based practices. Outreach/engagement activities may be integrated into the faculty member’s teaching, research, and/or service effort distribution. Outreach/engagement activities are not a mandated component of every faculty member’s effort distribution, but are to be included where appropriate to the mission of the faculty member, department, and college. For the activity to be scholarly, it must draw upon the academic and professional expertise of the faculty member while contributing to the public good, addressing or responding to real-world problems. The standards for assessing the scholarship of outreach/engagement activities will vary among disciplines and should be specified by each academic unit and incorporated into departmental codes.

E.9.2 Individual Faculty Workload (last revised August 9, 2019)

Individual workloads for each area of responsibility may vary over time in accordance with the needs and missions of the different academic departments and shall be negotiated between the faculty member and the department head subject to the provisions of Section C.2.6.2.e. Factors for which workload should be adjusted include, but are not limited to, course credits, class size, course level, method of course delivery, type of course (lecture, laboratory, independent study, internship, supervised student research, thesis/dissertation, clinical, practicum), service as a course coordinator or facilitator, advising/mentoring load, off-campus assignments, number of course preparations, new course preparations, contact hours, and teaching assistants. For research and scholarly activity, factors may include the size and activity of the research program or other creative activity, recognition of the research or creative activity in the form of shows, exhibits, presentations, awards, grants, publications and patents. Additionally, service, outreach and engagement should be included in the faculty evaluation. Department codes shall make it clear how workload percentages are determined and set expectations accordingly.

E.9.3 Department Effort Distribution (last revised August 12, 2009)

Departments provide distinctive contributions to the overall college and University missions, and department effort distributions should reflect these contributions, including departmental commitments to outreach/engagement, as well as Extension. It is the responsibility of the department head to coordinate the aggregate faculty members’ effort, effort distribution, and workload assignments appropriate to the mission of the department.

E.9.4 College Effort Distribution

Colleges provide diverse contributions to the overall University mission, and college effort distribution should reflect these contributions. It is the responsibility of the dean to coordinate and evaluate the aggregate departmental efforts appropriately to the mission of the college.

E.9.5 University Effort Distribution (last revised August 12, 2009)

The University’s mission is to provide excellence in undergraduate and graduate/professional education, research and other creative activities, and service consistent with the tradition of land grant universities. The University recognizes that individual faculty members, departments, and colleges contribute a variety of interests, strengths, and areas of expertise to accomplish this mission, and as a result of these differences, the University is committed to differentiated effort distributions among individuals and units. It is the responsibility of the Provost to coordinate and evaluate each college’s efforts appropriate to the mission of the University.

E.10 Faculty Tenure Policy (last revised December 1, 2023)

E.10.1 Definition of Tenure

Tenure is the practice of permanent or continuous appointments for faculty members in higher education, during which their service at a particular institution may be terminated only for (1) adequate cause demonstrated in a hearing before an appropriately selected faculty committee, (2) under the extraordinary circumstances of a bona fide financial exigency, involving retrenchment or discontinuance of an academic program or a department of instruction, or (3) discontinuance of a degree granting program or a department of instruction not mandated by financial exigency.

E.10.2 Rationale for Tenure

Institutions of higher education are conducted for the common good and not to further the interest of either the individual or the institution as a whole. The common good depends upon the free search for truth and its free exposition. Tenure is a means to certain ends; specifically (1) freedom of teaching, research, extension, and of extramural activities, and (2) a sufficient degree of economic security to make the profession of university teaching attractive to individuals of ability. Academic freedom and economic security, and thus, tenure are indispensable to the success of an educational institution in fulfilling its singular obligations to its students and to society. Faculty members who are threatened with loss of their positions for voicing unpopular or innovative views cannot effectively engage in the kind of open deliberation and criticism essential to a free society.

E.10.3 Administrative Responsibilities in Relation to Tenure (last revised February 14, 2014)

a. The head of the department and the faculty member on probationary status are jointly responsible for discussing, at least once annually, prior to the time for the decision on tenure, the faculty member’s development and fitness for the position involved and prospects for eventually acquiring tenure. The department head shall provide the faculty member and the dean of the college concerned a written summary of the evaluation of progress toward tenure at the time of the conference. This report is independent of the annual evaluation covering achievements of the most recent calendar year. Likewise, the tenured faculty of the department, or a subcommittee thereof, shall annually provide an independent assessment of progress toward tenure, and a written report summarizing progress toward tenure and of any perceived deficiencies, to each tenure track faculty member. The report of the committee shall be shared with the department head and the tenure-track faculty member and may include suggestions for workload and effort distribution judged to be supportive of the faculty member’s progress toward tenure.

b. The head of the department shall make every effort to encourage and assist the faculty member to fulfill the conditions which will qualify the faculty member for tenure. This may include consulting with the tenured faculty or a subcommittee thereof, regarding suggestions received in the committee’s written report summarizing progress toward tenure.

c. The head of the department is responsible for making explicit at the time of employment to the faculty member in that unit the conditions which normally must be met for the acquisition of tenure, the procedures by which tenure is awarded, denied, terminated, or withdrawn, and the procedures by which the faculty member may challenge such decisions.

E.10.4 Policies on Conferring Tenure (last revised May 2, 2007)

a. A tenure-track faculty member shall be considered for tenure based upon evidence of capability for significant professional contributions.

b. It is normally expected that a candidate for tenure will have a terminal degree in their field. However, the necessity for any particular advanced degree as a prerequisite for tenure shall be decided upon by the eligible faculty of the department concerned. The requirement for a particular advanced degree may vary within a department depending upon the responsibilities of a specific position.

c. The decision to award tenure may be made after two (2) years from initial appointment. However, unless stated otherwise in the appointment letter, the probationary period before the granting or denial of tenure is six (6) years of continuous employment for a faculty member initially appointed as an assistant professor, four (4) years of employment for an associate professor, and three (3) years of employment for a full professor. The length of the probationary period, the timing of the midpoint review (see Section E.14.2), and the time frame for the tenure application process shall all be stated unambiguously in the appointment letter.

d. A tenure-track appointment that begins prior to January 1 shall, at the end of the 30th day of June immediately following, be counted as a full year of service. When the tenure-track appointment begins on or after January 1, the period ending with the 30th day of June immediately following shall not count as any part of the probationary period.

e. Service in a tenure-track faculty position shall apply toward sabbatical leave and all other faculty benefits and privileges.

f. The tenure policies in this Manual apply to administrative personnel who hold academic rank, but only in their capacity as faculty members. When a faculty member holding an administrative appointment for which additional compensation is provided either relinquishes or is relieved of administrative responsibility, salary may be reduced to properly conform with their non-administrative responsibility, upon recommendation of appropriate administrative officers and official approval. The Board has delegated the authority for official approval to the President. If the faculty member relinquishes the administrative appointment voluntarily, or if the termination of the appointment is due to a non-renewal after a specified appointment period to which the faculty member had agreed, then the President has further delegated the authority for official approval to the Provost. If a faculty member alleges that a consideration violative of academic freedom significantly contributed to a decision to terminate their appointment to an administrative post, or not to reappoint the individual, the faculty member is entitled to use of the procedures set forth in Section K.

E.10.4.1 Probationary Period for Tenure (last revised May 2, 2007)

The probationary period for a tenure-track faculty member at Colorado State University is the maximum length of continuous service prior to the granting or denial of continuous tenure. The probationary period is limited to six (6) years, except when extended as described in Section E.10.4.l.2, including all previous service as a tenured or tenure-track faculty member at this institution.

E.10.4.1.1 Service Credit (last revised June 4, 2008)

Credit may be given for prior service, thus reducing the probationary period, as described below. The details of such credit for prior service, the length of the probationary period, the timing of the midpoint review, and the time frame for the tenure application process shall all be stated unambiguously in the appointment letter. Before granting credit for prior service, the department head should consult with the departmental tenure committee. An application for tenure at the end of such a reduced probationary period shall not be considered an early application for tenure.

a. When a faculty member has held a contract, continuing, or adjunct faculty appointment at Colorado State University and is subsequently appointed to a tenure-track faculty position (see Section E.2), credit may be given for this prior service.

b. Credit may be given for either academic or non-academic service at other institutions.

c. If a newly appointed faculty member has been awarded tenure at another academic institution with the rank of associate professor or professor, he or she may be recommended for tenure immediately, in line with any provisions stipulated in the code of the department. It is recommended that at least two-thirds (2/3) of the eligible tenured faculty members in the department approve. A faculty member who has not been awarded tenure at another academic institution may not be recommended for tenure prior to two (2) years of continuous employment at Colorado State University unless the Provost agrees with the department that the circumstances are exceptional and waives this two (2) year restriction in writing. The written waiver shall be sent to the faculty member, the tenure committee, the department head, and the college dean. The origin and processing of any tenure recommendation  must follow the procedure in Section E.10.5.

E.10.4.1.2 Extension of the Probationary Period (last revised August 2, 2013)

The use of Family Medical Leave may lead to an automatic extension of the probationary period (see Appendix 8 for details).

Extension of the probationary period for reasons other than use of Family Medical Leave is not automatic. A faculty member may request an extension of the probationary period as described below. The faculty member must make the request for an extension of the probationary period in writing to the departmental tenure committee. Such a request should be made as early as possible, and must be made prior to the first day of the final academic year of the probationary period. The recommendation of the tenure committee shall be forwarded successively to the department head, the college dean, and the Provost, each of whom shall recommend either acceptance or rejection of the recommendation of the tenure committee. Such recommendations shall not be made in an arbitrary, capricious, or discriminatory manner. The final decision on such an extension shall be made by the President. If the faculty member making the request is dissatisfied with a rejection at any level of a positive recommendation by the tenure committee, the faculty member has the right to appeal through formal grievance procedures.

a. A faculty member may request an extension of the probationary period due to exceptional circumstances, including, but not limited to, birth or adoption of a child, personal health issues, and care of immediate family members (this is separate from the issue of leaves, which are addressed in Section E.10.4.1.2.c). The tenure committee may recommend up to two (2) separate extensions of the probationary period, each for a period not to exceed one (1) year.

b. A faculty member may request an extension of the probationary period under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Such a request must identify the nature of the disability and explain why an extension of the probationary period is necessary for purposes of reasonable accommodation. The faculty member requesting such an extension also must provide evidence of protected status under ADA to the Director of the Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO), who shall determine the validity of the protected status and inform the departmental tenure committee. The tenure committee may recommend an extension of the probationary period for a period not to exceed one (1) year (see Sections E.6.b and E.4). Any subsequent request to the tenure committee for an additional extension shall require reverification of the protected status by the OEO Director.

c. Any leave for a period not exceeding one (1) year shall normally count as part of the probationary period. However, if the leave is of such a nature that the individual’s development as a faculty member while on leave cannot be judged, or if the leave is for purposes that are not scholarly, the faculty member may request that the leave not count as part of the probationary period.

d. If a faculty member has been granted credit for prior service, thus reducing the probationary period, then, if circumstances warrant, the faculty member may request that this credit for prior service be reduced, thus extending the probationary period.

E.10.5 Procedures for the Granting of Tenure (last revised December 1, 2023)

E.10.5.1 Origin and Processing of Tenure Recommendations (last revised December 1, 2023)

The head of the department shall initiate the process leading to a recommendation for the granting or denial of tenure not later than the beginning of the final year of the probationary period of the faculty member. The department head should consult with the tenure committee before initiating this process. The department head should also consult the website of the Office of the Provost for information and forms regarding applications for tenure.

Because the recommendation for the granting or denial of tenure is primarily a faculty responsibility, the department head shall ask the members of the tenure committee, to vote by ballot for or against granting of tenure to the faculty member being considered. A tenure recommendation shall be by a majority vote of the tenure committee, with a tie vote being considered a vote against tenure.1

The chair of the tenure committee shall submit a report on behalf of the committee to both the department head and the faculty member. This report shall include a vote summary, a summary of the analysis by the committee, and a statement of reasons for the majority and minority points of view. This report does not need to be endorsed by every member of the committee. However, the report cannot be submitted if at least one-third (1/3) of the committee informs the committee chair of their objection to the report. Since the report is submitted by the chair of the committee, only that person needs to sign it.

The recommendation shall be forwarded successively to the department head, the dean of the college, the Provost, and the President for review and either endorsement or opposition. The Board has delegated the final decision to the President.

All reviews are to be exercised expeditiously at each level. After each review, the reviewing administrator shall make a recommendation in writing to grant or deny tenure, and this recommendation shall be forwarded to each successive administrator. A copy of each recommendation shall be sent to the faculty member, the chair of the tenure committee, and all administrators who have previously made recommendations. The chair of the tenure committee shall send copies to the other members of the tenure committee.

E.10.5.2 Tenure Committee

The tenure committee must have at least five (5) members and shall include all eligible department faculty members. The department head, college dean, Provost, and President are not eligible to serve on the tenure committee and shall not be present during the committee’s deliberations, except when specifically invited by the committee. A faculty member holding an administrative appointment (as defined in Section K.11.2) of more than half time (0.5) is not eligible to serve on the tenure committee, unless the department code specifies otherwise. If a faculty member holding an administrative appointment does serve on the tenure committee, it is expected that the faculty member will not participate in discussions of the case at higher administrative levels. A faculty member with a conflict of interest is expected to recuse oneself.

The eligible department faculty are all other tenured department faculty. If a committee of at least five (5) tenured faculty within the department cannot be constituted, then additional tenured faculty members shall be selected from other departments within the University so as to produce a committee of five (5) members. A department may specify in its code a procedure for narrowing the pool of eligible additional members to faculty in disciplines similar to that of the candidate, possibly including faculty from other colleges. In the absence of such a procedure, the pool shall consist of all tenured faculty members on the tenure committees from all departments within the college. The department head shall draw the additional members of the tenure committee by lot from the pool of eligible faculty members. Faculty members from other departments may decline to serve on the tenure committee.

The departmental faculty members of the tenure committee shall select one of themselves to serve as the chair of the tenure committee.

E.10.5.3 Processing of Recommendations

After a recommendation is received from the tenure committee, a contrary recommendation shall be issued at a higher administrative level below the President only for compelling reasons which shall be stated in writing in their recommendation. The administrator shall send copies of their recommendation to the faculty member, the chair of the tenure committee, and all administrators who have previously made recommendations. The chair of the tenure committee shall send copies to the other members of the tenure committee. If such a contrary recommendation is issued, the chair of the tenure committee and all administrators who have previously made recommendations shall be given seven (7) working days from the date of notification of the contrary recommendation to respond in writing to the administrator’s reasons for opposition, and the contrary recommendation may be opposed at an even higher administrative level. The responses from the chair of the tenure committee and the administrators shall be forwarded to each successive administrator along with the recommendation and rationale for the contrary recommendation and all previous recommendations and responses.

A response from the chair of the tenure committee shall summarize the variety of opinions from the members of the tenure committee. If at least one-third (1/3) of the members of the tenure committee indicate to the committee chair that a response is appropriate, then a response shall be sent by the chair. The response can state that only a minority of the committee members felt that a response was appropriate if that is the case.

In the event of a committee recommendation to deny tenure, or a recommendation by an administrative officer below the President to deny tenure, the reasons for the recommendation shall be made available promptly to the faculty member under consideration. The faculty member shall be given seven (7) working days from the date of notification of the recommendation to submit a written response. This response shall be forwarded to each successive administrator along with all previous recommendations and responses.

E.10.5.4 Grievance

If the tenure committee recommends the granting of tenure, but the Provost recommends the denial of tenure, then the faculty member may file a grievance via Section K to oppose the recommendation to deny tenure. In any grievance proceeding, the tenure committee shall be represented by the chair of the tenure committee. Although a grievance may not be filed until the Provost has made their recommendation to the President, the grievance shall be against the first administrator to recommend denial of tenure. However, the effective date of notification of the grievant shall be the date of notification of the Provost’s recommendation.

If the tenure committee recommends denial of tenure (including by a tie vote), the faculty member cannot grieve this recommendation. This is because grievances can be filed only against administrators, not fellow faculty. Also, a grievance cannot be filed against an administrator for supporting the recommendation of the promotion committee, since the first paragraph of Section E.10.5.3 states that this is what is expected of them.

When a department head is under consideration for tenure, the successive forwarding of the tenure committee’s recommendation shall begin with the dean of the college, rather than the department head.

E.10.5.5 Postponement of Consideration for Tenure

The department head, the college dean, or the Provost may elect to postpone consideration of a faculty member for tenure, without prejudice, if the application for tenure is made in a year earlier than the final year of the probationary period. The decision to postpone and the reasons for postponement shall be communicated immediately in writing to the faculty member and the tenure committee. However, the faculty member must either be granted tenure by the beginning of the first year after the end of the probationary period or be notified by the end of the probationary period that their appointment will be terminated at the end of one (1) additional year. Once a faculty member is on a  tenure-track appointment, the use of contract, continuing, or adjunct appointments to extend the probationary period for tenure is not permitted.

E.10.5.6 Notification of Presidential Action on Tenure Recommendations

When the President has ruled on a recommendation relating to tenure for a faculty member, the faculty member shall be notified promptly in writing of the action taken. The decision of the President to grant or deny tenure is final.

If the decision of the President is to deny the application for tenure, the tenure-track appointment of the faculty member shall be allowed to expire without any future renewals, and the faculty member cannot apply for tenure again in the future in the same academic department. However, this does not prevent the candidate from being hired by the University in another capacity, including as a tenure-track faculty member in another academic department.

E.10.5.7 Withdrawal of Application for Tenure

At any time before the final decision by the President, the faculty member may withdraw their application for tenure. In particular, once the Provost has made their recommendation to the President and the faculty member has been notified of this recommendation, the faculty member shall have ten (10) working days to withdraw their application for tenure by submitting a withdrawal request to the Provost. If the application for tenure is withdrawn before the final decision by the President, then the faculty member may apply for tenure again in the future if sufficient time remains in their probationary period. If the tenure application is not withdrawn before the final decision by the President, then the decision of the President is final.

E.10.6 Relation of Tenure to Changes in Status and/or Salary

a. Reduction in salary when effective for all faculty shall not be considered as conflicting with this tenure policy when such reduction is in line with other current reductions.

b. Acquisition of tenure carries certain privileges; nevertheless, by mutual agreement between a faculty member and the appropriate administrative officers, the salary and/or employment status of a faculty member may be altered. Any change in salary or employment status of a faculty member which does not rest upon mutual agreement with the administration shall be susceptible to test by appropriate due process procedures as outlined in Section K.

E.11 Appeal of Early Termination of Contract Faculty Appointments (New section February 8, 2019)

A contract faculty member may appeal a recommendation to the President terminate their appointment prior to the ending date of the contract. This section of the Manual sets forth the procedures for such an appeal. The University Grievance Officer (UGO) shall be charged with overseeing this appeal process. At the discretion of the UGO, any of the time limits in this section may be extended for reasonable periods. Such extensions shall be reported immediately to all parties concerned.

E.11.1 Initiating the Process (last revised May 8, 2019)

When a Recommendation to the President to terminate a Contract Faculty Appointment prior to the ending date of the contract is sent to the Provost, a copy of this Recommendation shall be provided in writing to the faculty member by the person making the Recommendation (hereinafter referred to as the Recommender). At the same time, the Recommender shall notify the faculty member of their right to appeal this recommendation and refer them to Section E.11 of the Manual. The faculty member then has ten (10) working days to submit to the UGO an Appeal in writing of this Recommendation, along with the Recommendation itself. If an Appeal is submitted within this time frame, then the UGO shall notify the Provost within three (3) working days, and the Recommendation shall not be sent to the President until the conclusion of the Section E.11 process.

If the faculty member fails to submit an Appeal within this time frame, then they shall forfeit the right to appeal the Recommendation for termination (unless the UGO decides that extenuating circumstances justify an extension of this deadline). If the Provost has not been notified by the UGO of an Appeal within twenty (20) working days of receiving the Recommendation from the Recommender, then the Provost may assume that no Appeal will be filed, and they may forward the Recommendation to the President for a final decision.

The Appeal should provide all of the information that the Appeal Committee (see Section E.11.2) will need in order to make its decision whether to support or oppose the Recommendation for termination.  This may include relevant documentation and persons that the Appeal Committee may contact for additional supporting information. The relevance of each person should be stated in the Appeal. The Appeal Committee is not required to contact all of the persons listed in the Appeal. The UGO will review the Appeal to make sure that the information included is relevant to the issue of termination.  In some cases, it may be necessary for the UGO to return the Appeal to the Appellant for editing before it is acceptable.

Within three (3) working days of receiving an acceptable Appeal from the Appellant, the UGO shall forward the Appeal to the Recommender and to the members of the Appeal Committee. The Recommender shall then have ten (10) working days to provide a Response. This Response should provide all of the information that the Appeal Committee will need in order to make its decision whether to support or oppose the Recommendation for termination. This may include relevant documentation and persons that the Appeal Committee may contact for additional supporting information.  The relevance of each person should be stated in the Response. The Appeal Committee is not required to contact all of the persons listed in the Response.  The UGO will review the Response to make sure that the information included is relevant to the issue of termination. In some cases, it may be necessary for the UGO to return the Response to the Recommender for editing before it is acceptable.

Within three (3) working days of receiving an acceptable Response from the Recommender, the UGO shall forward the Response to the Appellant and to the members of the Appeal Committee.

E.11.2 Appeal Committee

The Appeal Committee shall consist of the Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs, the Chair of Faculty Council, and the Chair of the Faculty Council Committee on Non-Tenure-Track Faculty. The Chair of Faculty Council shall serve as the Chair of the Appeal Committee. After receiving both the Appeal and the Response from the UGO, the members of the Appeals Committee shall begin their consideration of the Appeal. As part of this consideration, they shall meet with the Recommender, the Appellant, and any other persons that they consider relevant to their consideration of the Appeal. All three members of the Appeal Committee must be present at each of these meetings. At their discretion, the members of the Appeal Committee may request additional information from the Recommender and/or the Appellant, and they may choose to meet more than once with some persons.

E.11.3 Report of the Appeal Committee

After the completion of the process described in Section E.11.2, the three members of the Appeal Committee shall meet to discuss the case and to reach a  final decision by majority vote whether to support or oppose the Recommendation for the termination of the Appellant.

After the conclusion of this meeting, the Chair of the Appeal Committee shall prepare a final Report. This Report shall include the overall vote of the Appeal Committee and the reasons supporting its decision. If the vote was not unanimous, then the Report shall also summarize the reasons given by the dissenting member. The Report shall be submitted to the UGO within twenty (20) working days of the receipt from the UGO of both the Appeal and the Response by the members of the Appeal Committee.

E.11.4 Final Decision by the President

Within three (3) working days of receiving the Report from the Chair of the Appeal Committee, the UGO shall send the Report to the President, along with the initial Recommendation, the Appeal, and the Response. Within twenty (20) working days of receiving these materials from the UGO, the President shall make a final decision regarding the termination of the Appellant and send it in writing to the UGO. This written decision shall include the reasoning that supports the decision. The UGO shall forward this decision by the President to the Appellant, the Recommender, and the Provost.  This decision by the President is final.

E.12 Performance Expectations for Tenure, Promotion, and Merit Salary Increases (last revised May 6, 2021)

All faculty members being considered for tenure and/or promotion must demonstrate a level of excellence appropriate to the rank under consideration and consistent with the standards of their discipline, their unit’s institutional mission, CSU’s Principles of Community, and the faculty member’s individual effort distribution in teaching and advising/mentoring, research and other creative activity, and service. Outreach and engagement efforts (as described in Section E.12.4) should be integrated into the faculty member’s teaching, research, and/or service responsibilities, as appropriate. Additionally, efforts related to inclusivity and equity as practice or theory may be included by the faculty member into their teaching, research, and/or service responsibilities, as appropriate.

Annual and periodic comprehensive reviews of a faculty member’s performance are addressed in Sections C.2.5, E.12, and E.14, and the expectations articulated in this section are applicable to those reviews. The basis for annual and periodic comprehensive reviews shall be the set of criteria in place at the beginning of the review period. A faculty member shall provide evidence, consistent with their stated effort distribution, of teaching and advising/mentoring competence, and/or sustained research and other creative activity, and/or service (see Section E.9.1) for annual and periodic comprehensive reviews, as well as for tenure and promotion. The department code shall establish clearly articulated criteria and standards for evaluation in these areas. Performance expectations may take into consideration the current rank of the faculty member.

E.12.1 Teaching, Advising, and Mentoring (last revised May 4, 2022)

As part of its mission, the University is dedicated to undergraduate, graduate, professional, and continuing education locally, nationally, and internationally. Toward that end teachers engage learners, transfer knowledge, develop skills, create opportunities for learning, create an inclusive learning environment, advise and facilitate student academic and professional development. This engagement may involve teaching, advising, and/or mentoring.

Teaching includes, but is not limited to, classroom and/or laboratory instruction; on-line instruction; individual tutoring; supervision and instruction of student researchers; clinical teaching; field work supervision and training; preparation and supervision of teaching assistants; supervision of field trips; teaching abroad; service learning; outreach/engagement; organization, coordination, marketing, and promotion of official university educational activities; and other activities that organize and disseminate knowledge. Faculty members’ supervision or guidance of students in recognized academic pursuits that do not confer any University credit also is considered teaching and should be included in portfolio materials and be considered as part of the evidence of teaching effectiveness. Associated teaching activities include class preparation; grading; laboratory or equipment maintenance; preparation and funding of proposals to improve instruction; attendance at workshops on teaching improvement; and planning of curricula and courses of study; and mentoring colleagues in any of these activities. Outreach and engagement activities as specified by the department/unit, are important to CSU as a land-grant institution and should be integrated into teaching efforts, as appropriate (see Section E.12.4). This includes teaching efforts of faculty members with Extension appointments. Examples of engaged teaching include service-learning and conducting workshops, seminars and consultations, and the preparation of educational materials for those purposes. Other examples can be found in the “Continuum of Engaged Scholarship”. Activities that enhance diversity and inclusion at CSU and align with CSU’s Principles of Community are important to CSU’s land-grant mission and should be integrated into teaching efforts.

Excellent teachers are characterized by their command of subject matter; logical organization and presentation of course material; formation of interrelationships among fields of knowledge; creation of inclusive learning environments, energy and enthusiasm; availability to help students outside of class; encouragement of curiosity, creativity, and critical thought; engagement of students in the learning process; use of clear grading criteria; and respectful responses to student questions and ideas.

Departments shall foster a culture that values and recognizes excellent teaching, and encourages reflective self-assessment. To that end, departmental codes must, within the context of their disciplines, (1) define effective teaching and (2) describe the process and criteria for evaluating teaching effectiveness. Department codes shall make it clear what is needed for a faculty member to meet teaching expectations and what is needed to exceed expectations. Evaluation of teaching should be designed to highlight strengths, identify deficiencies, and improve overall teaching and learning.

Evaluation criteria of teaching can include, but are not limited to, quality of curriculum design; quality of instructional materials; achievement of student learning outcomes; and effectiveness at presenting information, managing class sessions, encouraging student engagement and critical thinking, and responding to student work. Evaluation of teaching shall involve multiple sources of information such as course syllabi; signed peer evaluations; examples of course improvements; development of new courses and teaching techniques; integration of service learning; appropriate course surveys of teaching; letters, electronic mail messages, and/or other forms of written comments from current and/or former students; and evidence of the use of active and/or experiential learning, student learning achievement, professional development related to teaching and learning, and assessments from conference/workshop attendees. Importantly, student perceptions of the learning environment are, by definition, not evaluations of teaching effectiveness and cannot be taken as such; they are simply the student perspectives on their experience in a learning environment. Departments must not use student survey responses as a direct or comparative measure of teaching effectiveness nor use student responses or attendant metrics derived from student responses independent of multiple sources of evidence of teaching effectiveness.  The use of student survey responses is appropriate only in the context of multifactorial reviews of multiple resources oriented toward an instructor’s continuous improvement in fulfilling our teaching mission. Given this, reflection on, and use of, student perceptions can be one part of instructors’ formative development because these perceptions can offer insights into the learning environment that only the students can provide. As such, results from student course surveys should be shared with department heads and promotion and tenure committees and considered only in context of a multifactorial review for the purpose of mentoring and evaluating teaching that includes information on courses taught, patterns in student survey responses, and instructors’ reflections on such patterns in teaching portfolios that document their accounts of how they have used this and other feedback. Anonymous letters or comments shall not be used to evaluate teaching, except with the consent of the instructor or as authorized in a department’s code. Evaluation of teaching effectiveness should take into account the physical and curricular context in which teaching occurs (e.g., lecture, practicum, lab courses, independent and group study courses; face-to-face and online settings; lower-division, upper-division, and graduate courses), established content standards and expectations, and the faculty member’s teaching assignments, in particular the type and level of courses taught. The University provides resources to support the evaluation of teaching effectiveness, such as systems to  create and assess teaching portfolios, access to exemplary teaching portfolios, and professional development and programs focusing on teaching and learning.

Effective advising and mentoring of students, at both the undergraduate and graduate levels, is a vital part of the teaching/learning process. Advising and mentoring are two distinct activities. Advising is an activity that generally focuses on academic and programmatic guidance for students, ranging from coursework and program navigation steps to pointing out key resources and contacts within a given community. Mentoring is a bi-directional activity between a mentor and a mentee that often includes aspects of advising, but has additional involvement of a mentor-mentee relationship that transcends the advising role. This will generally involve a faculty member or other professional in the discipline working with the mentee to understand the mentee’s personal and professional goals and then providing the mentee with a mix of professional knowledge, career advice, counsel on work-life balance issues, guidance on academic expectations, a rigorous academic challenge, and support as the mentee develops the skills necessary to become a full member of a profession. Advising and mentoring are characterized by being available to students, keeping appointments, providing accurate and appropriate advice, and providing knowledgeable guidance. The advising/mentoring commitments are different for undergraduate students, non-thesis masters students, thesis masters students, doctoral students, and postdoctoral fellows.

Advising and mentoring activities include, but are not limited to, meeting with students to explain graduation requirements; giving academic advice; giving career advice or referring the student to the appropriate person for that advice; advising/mentoring students for official university activities and advising student organizations. Advising and mentoring of graduate students includes, but is not limited to, supervision of and/or assistance with theses, dissertations, publications, presentations and project-related products.

Evaluation of advising and/or mentoring effectiveness can be based upon signed evaluations from current and/or former students, faculty members, and professional peers. Evaluation of advising and/or mentoring should take into account the quality of the advising/mentoring and the time spent on advising and/or mentoring activities. Department codes shall, within the context of their disciplines, include criteria and standards for evaluating advising and/or mentoring effectiveness and shall evaluate advising and/or mentoring as part of annual and periodic comprehensive reviews.

E.12.2 Research and Other Creative Activity (last revised May 6, 2021)

Research is the discovery and development of knowledge; other creative activity is original or imaginative accomplishment. Research and other creative activity include, but are not limited to, publications (including scholarly articles, conference proceedings, invited reviews, book chapters, textbooks, and other monographs); exhibitions, presentations or performances; copyrighted, patented, or licensed works and inventions; supervision of or assistance with graduate student theses/dissertations and undergraduate research; and both effort and success in generating funding to support research and other creative activities; emergent forms of scholarship and research such as digital scholarship, translational scholarship that brings academic ideas into public service and community engagement; and narrative, feminist, and anti-racist scholarship. Scholarly activities that advance the effectiveness of teaching and education could also be considered research/creative activity. Scholarly activities with a research/creative artistry component that include reciprocal engagement with external partners (local, state, national, and international) are encouraged and should be considered research and creative activity (see Section E.12.4). Examples include applied research, community-based participatory research, and collaboratively-created new artistic or literary performances. Other examples can be found in the “Continuum of Engaged Scholarship”.

The criteria for evaluating the original or imaginative nature of research and other creative activities should be the generally accepted standards prevailing in the applicable discipline or professional area. It is important to note that the focus is on quality and impact, rather than quantity of output.  Standards for determining quality will vary among disciplines and should be specified by each academic unit. However, evaluations should be based primarily upon the quality of the product as judged by peers. Some measures of quality are the prestige of the journals in which publications appear, reviews of publications in the critical literature, reviews of artistic performance by recognized experts, prizes and other awards for significant professional accomplishment, citations of publications, grants obtained in open competition, invitations to speak at prestigious national and international meetings, invitations to serve on grant panels or other national or international committees, and impact and outcome assessments as indicated by adoption of results by clientele. When work is a collaborative effort, every attempt should be made to assess the value of the contribution of the faculty member. Some categories of publication or other accomplishments, such as Extension publications, more properly are regarded as vehicles for teaching or outreach/engagement; however, these may be considered evidence of other creative activity to the extent that new ideas and research are incorporated.

E.12.3 Service (last revised May 6, 2021)

Service advances the interests of the institution, the community, and the professions and is described below.

E.12.3.1 University Service (last revised May 6, 2021)

In academic institutions the faculty members share in the formulation of University policies and in making and carrying out decisions affecting the educational and scholarly life of the University. University service can occur at the department, college, campus, and system-wide levels, as well as outside of the university system. Faculty are expected to participate in the governance and the common good of their department, the campus, and the advancement of their profession. University service includes but is not limited to contributions to the governance and leadership of the University through participation in the formulation and implementation of department/college/university policies via membership on committees, councils, and advisory groups and participation in administrative activities. University service also includes advising student organizations and working to enhance the diversity and inclusion of CSU’s community, and community outreach and engagement.

University service is evaluated through timely and effective participation in such activities. The standards for assessing faculty service activities will vary among disciplines and should be specified by each academic unit and incorporated into departmental codes. Faculty members should undertake service roles based upon their experience, but all faculty members should be encouraged to participate in activities which contribute new perspectives, develop expertise, and further the mission of the University.

E.12.3.2 Professional Service (last revised May 6, 2021)

Service in local, state, national, or international professional organizations enhances the University’s scholarly and academic reputations. Service in professional organizations includes but is not limited to editorial activities for professional publications; service as an officer or committee member of a professional society; participating in or organizing research conferences, workshops or professional meetings; reviewing grant proposals; working to enhance the diversity and inclusion of the professional community; and service on academic review or accreditation boards.  Service rendered in one’s professional capacity as a citizen of the community is commendable and may be evaluated as an appropriate faculty activity.

Professional service is evaluated through the amount and quality of participation and its contribution to the long-term improvement of teaching, scholarship, and the profession.

E.12.3.3 Clinical Service (New section October 4, 2019)

Professional education programs are often dependent upon faculty members with advanced training that devote a considerable fraction of time and effort to these important activities. Attainment of board certification is often an external endorsement of competence granted by a professional organization representing the specialty.

E.12.3.4 Service with External Partners and Communities (last revised May 6, 2021)

As a land-grant institution, the University is committed to engagement efforts that work with external partners to serve current and future needs of local, state, national and international communities (see Section E.12.4). Therefore, departments and units should encourage and support faculty efforts that are focused on such engagement. Examples of engaged service include technical assistance, consulting, and policy analysis, and working to enhance the diversity and inclusion of the community. Other examples can be found in the “Continuum of Engaged Scholarship”.

E.12.3.5 Extension Service (New section October 4, 2019)

Extension is dedicated to serving current and future needs of the population within the state, as well as nationally and internationally, through educational information and programs to address important and emerging community issues using dynamic, science-based educational resources. CSU Extension is highly valued for inclusive, impactful community engagement in support of our land-grant university mission.

E.12.3.6 Other Types of Service (New section October 4, 2019)

1. Leaves from the campus without salary for governmental or industrial positions. These leaves can result in long-term benefits to the individual and the campus.

2. Nonstandard service. In some cases, service may be considered “non- standard” or ambiguous with respect to how it should be considered.  In the following situations, it may not be clear as to whether the contribution is to research, teaching, or service: (1) directing a field program overseas, which involves administrative service while at the same time contributing to one’s research activities; or (2) administering an exchange program, where the faculty member directs the program while also teaching students in the program. The categorization of such activities may not be evident from the descriptions usually provided by the faculty member. Therefore, the department head, when preparing a faculty member’s case for merit or promotion, should clarify the categorization of the activity under one or more of the headings of research, teaching, and service and should specify the nature of the activity in question.

3. Public service. As faculty members advance through the professorial ranks, they are expected to exhibit an increasing record of service in their dossier of performance. Recognition is given to service that fulfills the public mission of the University, such as involvement in community organizations and service to governmental agencies at the local, state and national level, and to professional associations at the local, national, and international level.

E.12.3.7 Guidelines for Evaluation of Service in Faculty Performance Reviews (New section October 4, 2019)

The following guidelines are for faculty, department heads, deans, and other reviewing committee members involved in the preparation and consideration of merit and promotion cases. In order to cultivate a culture of service at CSU, some suggested guidelines are offered here.

An Assistant Professor is expected to provide service at the local level of the department or school; for example, through clinical service in specialized areas of medicine or by serving as an undergraduate adviser, as a member of a graduate admissions committee, or as a member of a faculty search committee. Service at the campus level is relatively rare for Assistant Professors, but, when it occurs, it is most appropriate for the service to be on campus committees that do not have intensive and prolonged time demands.

Assistant Professors in Extension or Clinical service are expected to provide their expertise to teaching at the professional student levels. These faculty, by definition, have high service loads within the clinics and/or within the community.

Associate Professors are expected to serve both their departments and the campus. It is understood, however, that Associate Professors in some departments may need to devote more service to the governance of their departments – whether as department heads or undergraduate/graduate directors. These faculty are thus not as free to perform campus service as faculty in other departments. It will be the job of the department head to explain such situations in sending forward promotion and merit cases.

At the level of Full Professor the expectations increase to include all of the categories mentioned in the lower ranks of the professorate, including the assumption of administrative positions such as department head, directors, or leadership in other research units such as field stations. Periodic service on Faculty Council and its committees is also expected unless the aforementioned positions preclude such service. In summary, Full Professors are expected to offer frequent and broadly distributed service to multiple constituencies within the academic community.

The type and level at which service is performed should be commensurate with the rank of the faculty member, with the expectation that, as a faculty member rises in rank, the level at which service is performed is expected to rise. A sustained deficiency in service should be a consideration when making decisions regarding merit increases and promotion.

Departments are encouraged to include contract and continuing faculty in service assignments, especially through membership on appropriate departmental committees. Also, contract and continuing faculty are encouraged to participate in service activities when the opportunity arises. Such service shall be acknowledged in the effort distribution and the annual evaluation of the faculty member.  In addition, it shall be compensated for by a reduction in other duties and/or supplemental pay. It is understood that a reduction in other duties may need to be averaged over more than just one or two semesters. For example, a continuing service percentage of 5% might be compensated for by a release of one course every fourth semester.

Faculty members, when preparing background material for their promotion or merit case, should provide accurate information about their service record and should indicate any unusually demanding service they performed.

The service record will be considered along with the teaching and research records in merit and promotion cases. The role of the department head or dean is to evaluate the faculty member’s service record. This should include a summary of the work performed and the time demands involved, as well as an assessment of the value of this work, the contribution made by the faculty member, and the effectiveness of the faculty member in performing this work. A listing of service activities is not sufficient.

Department heads who are being considered for academic advancement are subject to regular review procedures. Academic leadership is, in itself, a significant academic activity. Therefore, distinguished leadership and effective discharge of administrative duties by a department head shall be considered in evaluating the performance of a department head for a merit increase, accelerated increase, or promotion.

E.12.4 Outreach and Engagement (last revised May 6, 2021)

Outreach and engagement are fundamental components of the University’s land-grant mission, described as “the partnership of university knowledge and  resources with those of the public and private sectors to enrich scholarship, research, and creative activity; enhance curriculum, teaching, and learning; prepare educated, engaged citizens; strengthen democratic values and civic responsibility; address critical societal issues; and contribute to the public good (Committee on Institutional Cooperation, 2003). CSU applies this definition across a spectrum of scholarship-based outreach and engagement activities conducted in all areas of the university’s mission: teaching, research, service, and extension (as described in the table “Continuum of Engaged Scholarship”)

Outreach involves generating, transmitting, translating, applying, and reserving knowledge for the direct benefit of external audiences, in support of university and unit missions. Faculty who conduct outreach programs generate and apply knowledge to address community needs without necessarily engaging community input. Examples of outreach include technology transfer, presentations at community or stakeholder meetings, advice to industry, presentations to K-12 audiences, and student recruitment.

As an inherent commitment of the university’s land-grant mission, outreach may be seen as part of the University’s public relations effort and enhances the status of CSU in the community and the state. These activities may also facilitate further and deeper engagement with external partners, as described in the paragraphs to follow.

Outreach involves generating, transmitting, translating, applying, and preserving knowledge for the direct benefit of external audiences, in support of university and unit missions. Faculty who conduct outreach programs generate and apply knowledge to address community needs without necessarily engaging community input. Examples of outreach include technology transfer, presentations at community or stakeholder meetings, advice to industry, presentations to K-12 audiences, and student recruitment.

Engagement is distinguished from outreach as “collaboration between institutions of higher education and their larger communities (local, regional/state, national, global) for the mutually beneficial exchange of knowledge and resources in a context of partnership and reciprocity” (Carnegie Foundation, 2008).

Engagement increases the effectiveness of university activities in its mission of improving the condition of the greater society and includes a continuum of progressively increasing levels of involvement with external partners and the community (see “Continuum of Engaged  Scholarship”). While outreach may be seen as the first step in engaged scholarship, engagement is characterized by the development and maintenance of partnerships that are reciprocal and mutually beneficial and generally addresses challenges facing the University and the communities it serves. In some cases, increasingly effective engagement may include moving the engagement focus from local to regional to national to international communities.

Examples of engagement include community-based participatory research; service-learning; managed learning environments such as museums, libraries and gardens; and work with defined communities such as producer groups, industries and businesses, teachers, and civic-minded non-profit entities, and community service groups.

Distinguishing characteristics of engagement include:

    1. Engagement is scholarly as it co-creates discipline-generated, evidence- based practices and experiences.
    2. Engagement cuts across the university activities of teaching, research, service, and extension, so that it represents a particular approach to these activities rather than a separate activity.

Due to its embedded and integrative nature, outreach and engagement cannot and should not be evaluated separately.  Engagement is not an end in itself, but rather, can be a means for accomplishing, informing and enriching teaching, research and service outcomes. It can bring together effort in these three traditional areas of work in a systematic way and makes more visible the full value of faculty effort.

Where appropriate and consistent with the academic mission of the department, the department code should define outreach/engagement expectations and how those expectations are addressed in the faculty member’s teaching, research, and/or service effort distribution (see Section E.9). The standards for assessing the scholarship of outreach/engagement activities will vary among disciplines and should be specified by each academic unit and incorporated into departmental codes (see Section E.9.1).

E.13 Advancement in Rank (Promotion) (last revised December 1, 2023)

For the purposes of discussing promotion in this section, the six (6) available ranks for faculty are grouped into four (4) levels as follows:

  1. Instructors
  2. Senior Instructors and Assistant Professors
  3. Master Instructors and Associate Professors
  4. Professors

A promotion is an advancement in rank from one level to a higher level. A change in rank within a level is not a promotion. Department and College codes should specify the expectations for each of these ranks within their unit, following guidelines from the Provost.  Department and College codes should also define all titles used for faculty within their unit.

Except in unusual circumstances noted in the statement of reasons given for the promotion recommendation, when tenure is granted to an assistant professor, the individual shall be promoted concurrently to associate professor as part of the tenure process.

Normally, after five (5) years in rank faculty are eligible to be considered for  promotion. If the promotion is approved, it shall become effective the following July 1. Promotion may be considered prior to five (5) years in rank in those cases in which the faculty member’s performance clearly exceeds the standards for promotion established pursuant to the performance expectations stipulated in Section E.12.

Service at other academic institutions may or may not count toward time in rank. The appointment letter shall state unambiguously whether or not service at other institutions will count towards time in rank at Colorado State University and state specifically the exact number of years of prior service credit being granted. The department head and dean are responsible for apprising the candidate of this possibility.

E.13.1 Origin and Processing of Recommendations (last revised December 1, 2023)

The faculty member shall initiate the process leading to a recommendation for the  granting or denial of promotion by submitting a formal request for promotion in rank to the department head. The faculty member should consult with the department head before initiating this process. The faculty member should also consult the website of the Office of the Provost for information and forms regarding applications for promotion.

Because this recommendation is primarily a faculty responsibility, the department head shall ask the promotion committee to vote by ballot for or against promotion of the faculty member being considered. A promotion recommendation shall be by a majority vote of the promotion committee, with a tie vote being considered a recommendation against promotion.

The chair of the promotion committee shall submit a report on behalf of the committee to both the department head and the faculty member. This report shall include a vote summary, a summary of the analysis by the committee, and a statement of reasons for the majority and minority points of view. The report shall be sent to the members of the promotion committee for review before its submission. The report does not need to be endorsed by every member of the committee. However, the report cannot be submitted if at least on-third (1/3) of the committee members inform the committee chair that they object to the submission of the report. Since the report is submitted by the chair of the committee, only that person needs to sign it.

The recommendation shall be forwarded successively to the department head, the dean of the college, the Provost, and the President for review and either endorsement or opposition. The Board has delegated the final decision to the President.

All reviews are to be exercised expeditiously at each level. After each review, the reviewing administrator shall make a recommendation in writing to grant or deny promotion, and this recommendation shall be forwarded to each successive administrator. A copy of each recommendation shall be sent to the faculty member, the chair of the promotion committee, and all administrators who have previously made recommendations. The chair of the promotion committee shall send copies to the other members of the promotion committee.

E.13.2 Promotion Committee (last revised December 1, 2023)

This section describes the membership of the promotion committee and which members of the committee are voting members.

The department head, college dean, Provost, and President are not eligible to serve on the promotion committee and shall not be present during the committee’s deliberations, except when specifically invited by at least two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the committee. A faculty member holding an administrative appointment (as defined in Section K.11.2) of more than half (0.5) time is not eligible to serve on the promotion committee unless the department code specifies otherwise. If a faculty member holding an administrative appointment does serve on the promotion committee, it is expected that they will not participate in discussions of the case at higher administrative levels. A faculty member with a conflict of interest is expected to recuse oneself.

For promotion of a tenured or tenure-track faculty member, the eligible department faculty members are all other tenured faculty members of higher level than the faculty member under consideration, and all of these eligible faculty members are voting members. For promotion of a non-tenure track faculty member, restriction to tenured faculty does not apply, so the eligible faculty members are all other faculty members of higher level than the faculty member under consideration. A department may specify in its code additional requirements for voting members. In the absence of such requirements, all eligible faculty members are voting members.

The promotion committee shall consist of all eligible department faculty members, unless this leads to a committee with fewer than five (5) voting members. If the committee has fewer than five (5) eligible voting faculty members then additional eligible voting faculty members shall be selected from other departments within the University so as to produce a committee with five (5) voting members. A department may specify in its code a procedure for narrowing the pool of additional eligible voting members to faculty in disciplines similar to that of the candidate, possibly including faculty from other colleges. In the absence of such a procedure, the pool shall consist of all eligible voting faculty members on the promotion committees from all departments within the college. The department head shall draw the additional members of the promotion committee by lot from the pool of eligible voting faculty members. Faculty members from other departments may decline to serve on the promotion committee.

The voting departmental faculty members of the promotion committee shall select one of themselves to serve as the chair of the promotion committee.

E.13.3 Processing of Recommendations (last revised December 1, 2023)

After a recommendation is received from the promotion committee, a contrary recommendation shall be issued at a higher administrative level below the President only for compelling reasons that shall be stated in writing in their recommendation. The administrator shall send copies of their recommendation to the faculty member, the chair of the promotion committee, and all administrators who have previously made recommendations. The chair of the promotion committee shall send copies to the other members of the promotion committee. If such a contrary recommendation is issued, the chair of the promotion committee and all administrators who have previously made recommendations shall be given seven (7) working days from the date of notification of the contrary recommendation to respond in writing to the administrator’s reasons for opposition, and the contrary recommendation may be opposed at an even higher administrative level. The responses from the chair of the promotion committee and the administrators shall be forwarded to each successive administrator along with the recommendation and rationale for the contrary recommendation and all previous recommendations and responses.

A response from the chair of the promotion committee shall summarize the variety of opinions from the members of the promotion committee. If at least one-third (1/3) of the members of the promotion committee feel that a response is appropriate, then a response shall be sent by the chair. The response can state that only a minority of the committee members felt that a response was appropriate if that is the case.

In the event of a committee recommendation to deny promotion, or a recommendation by an administrative officer below the President to deny promotion, the reasons for the recommendation shall be made available promptly to the faculty member under consideration. The faculty member shall be given seven (7) working days from the date of notification of the recommendation to submit a written response. This response shall be forwarded to each successive administrator along with all previous recommendations and responses.

E.13.4 Grievance

If the promotion committee recommends the granting of promotion, but the Provost recommends the denial of promotion, then the faculty member may file a grievance via Section K to oppose the recommendation to deny promotion. In any grievance proceeding, the promotion committee shall be represented by the chair of the promotion committee. Although a grievance may not be filed until the Provost has made their recommendation to the President, the grievance shall be against the first administrator to recommend the denial of promotion. However, the effective date of notification of the grievant shall be the date of notification of the Provost’s recommendation.

If the promotion committee recommends denial of promotion (including by a tie vote), the faculty member cannot grieve this recommendation. This is because grievances can be filed only against administrators, not fellow faculty. Also, a grievance cannot be filed against an administrator for supporting the recommendation of the promotion committee, since the first paragraph of Section E.13.3 states that this is what is expected of them.

When the department head is under consideration for promotion, the successive forwarding of the promotion committee’s recommendation shall begin with the dean of the college, rather than the department head.

E.13.5 Notification of Presidential Action on Advancement in Rank (last revised December 1, 2023)

When the President has ruled on a recommendation relating to promotion for a faculty member, the faculty member shall be notified promptly in writing of the action taken. The decision of the President to grant or deny promotion is final.

E.13.6 Withdrawal of Application for Advancement in Rank 

At any time before the final decision by the President, the faculty member may withdraw their application for promotion. In particular, once the Provost has made their recommendation to the President, and the faculty member has been notified of this recommendation, the faculty member shall have ten (10) working days to withdraw their application for promotion by submitting a withdrawal request to the Provost.

E.14 Performance Reviews (last revised May 6, 2021)

All faculty members, including department heads and deans, are subject to performance reviews. These reviews include annual reviews, comprehensive reviews of tenure-track faculty members, and comprehensive reviews of tenured faculty members. Annual reviews and comprehensive reviews of tenured faculty members shall be conducted by the academic supervisor for the faculty member’s academic unit. For a faculty member who is not a department head, a dean, an associate dean or an assistant dean, the academic unit is their home department, and the academic supervisor is the department head. For a department head, an associate dean, or an assistant dean, the academic unit is the college, and the academic supervisor is the dean of that college. For a dean, the academic unit is the University, and the academic supervisor is the Provost.

Nothing contained in this section shall be construed to affect the at-will status of administrative appointments. The evaluation of an individual’s performance as an administrator and fit within a specific administrative organizational structure is separate from the review processes described in this section.

Performance reviews are intended to facilitate continued professional development, to refocus professional efforts when appropriate, to assure that faculty members are meeting their obligations to the University, and to assist faculty in achieving tenure or promotion. These reviews must be conducted in such a way that they are consistent with academic freedom, due process, the tenure system, and other protected rights. It is also appropriate for performance reviews to document problems with behavior (see Section D.9 and also Section E.15).

A performance review must take into account the individual faculty member’s effort distribution (see Section E.9.1) and the individual faculty member’s workload (see Section E.9.2), and it must consider each area of responsibility. Expectations for each area of responsibility should be laid out clearly in departmental codes. Furthermore, effort distributions should be established so as to best utilize the individual talents of all tenured faculty members, because having similar assignments for all faculty members in a department often is not the most effective use of resources. Faculty members should have the opportunity to work with the academic supervisor to adjust their professional responsibilities throughout their careers in a way that permits them to meet both institutional and individual goals.

For each performance review, a written report shall be prepared by the academic supervisor, and this report shall identify strengths and any deficiencies in the faculty member’s performance. The faculty member shall be given a copy of this report, and they shall then have ten (10) working days to prepare a written response to this report if the faculty member desires to do so. The report and any written response on the part of the faculty member shall be forwarded to the dean and the provost, and a copy shall be maintained in the faculty member’s official Personnel File.

E.14.1 Annual Reviews (new section added June 22, 2006)

Annual reviews are typically for the purpose of evaluation for merit salary increases, for providing assistance to faculty members to improve their performance when needed, and for the early identification and correction of perceived weaknesses and deficiencies in performance. When appropriate, the academic supervisor shall work with the faculty member to develop specific actions to improve performance. Requirements for annual performance reviews are found in Section C.2.5.

E.14.2 Comprehensive Reviews of Tenure-Track Faculty (last revised May 3, 2011)

A comprehensive performance review of each tenure-track faculty member shall be conducted by the midpoint of their probationary period at Colorado State University. For example, the normal probationary period for an assistant professor is six (6) years, so the midpoint review would be conducted by the end of the third (3rd) year. However, if the assistant professor were given one (1) year of credit for prior service, then the probationary period at Colorado State University would be reduced to five (5) years, so the midpoint review would be conducted by the middle of the third (3rd) year.

The use of Family Medical Leave may lead to a delay of the Comprehensive Review (see Appendix 8 for details).

This midpoint review shall be conducted by a Review Committee consisting of all eligible faculty members of the department, or, if so specified in the department code, by a duly elected committee thereof. The department head, college dean, Provost, and President are not eligible to serve on the Review Committee. A faculty member holding an administrative appointment (as defined in Section K.11.2) of more than half time (0.5) is not eligible to serve on the Review Committee, unless the department code specifies otherwise. The eligible faculty members are all other tenured department faculty members, except for those who choose to recuse themselves. Prior to conducting the review, the members of the Review Committee shall consult with the college dean to discuss the expectations for tenure at administrative levels higher than the department. One (1) of the following three (3) outcomes must be selected by a majority of the Review Committee:

a. The faculty member is making satisfactory progress toward tenure and promotion;

b. There are deficiencies, but, if they are corrected satisfactorily, the faculty member will be making satisfactorily progress toward tenure and promotion, or;

c. The faculty member has not met the stated requirements for the position in one (1) or more areas of responsibility, and the Review Committee recommends against further appointments.

Upon completion of the midpoint review, the Review Committee shall prepare a written report. A copy of this report shall be given to the faculty member, who shall then have ten (10) working days to prepare a written response to this report if the faculty member desires to do so. Both the report and the faculty member’s response shall be forwarded successively to the department head, the college dean, and the Provost (if one (1) of these persons is the faculty member under review, they will be skipped in the forwarding). Each of the included administrators may add written comments, and copies of these comments will be given to the faculty member, the Review Committee, and each of the administrators. A final comprehensive performance review is required prior to a recommendation concerning tenure (see Section E.10.4).

E.14.3 Periodic Comprehensive Reviews of Tenured Faculty (last revised May 6, 2021)

E.14.3.1 Phase I Comprehensive Performance Reviews (last revised May 6, 2021)

Phase I Comprehensive Performance Reviews of all tenured faculty members, except those on transitional appointments of fewer than five (5) years, shall be conducted at five (5) year intervals, beginning in the fifth (5th) year after the granting of tenure. If a tenured faculty member receives a promotion in rank, this alters the schedule for Phase I Reviews, with the next review being conducted in the fifth (5th) year after the promotion. If a tenured faculty member becomes a department head, this alters the schedule for Phase I Reviews as described in Section C.2.4.2.2.c. The schedule for Phase I Reviews may be shifted by up to two (2) years in order to accommodate a sabbatical leave, a major health issue, having too many faculty members scheduled for review in the same year, or some other compelling reason. However, such a shift requires the consent of both the faculty member and the academic supervisor. If two (2) annual reviews since the last Phase I Review have identified deficiencies of sufficient magnitude to warrant a Phase I Review, then the schedule for Phase I Reviews will be altered, with the next review occurring immediately.

A Phase I Review shall be based upon a summary of all annual reviews since the last comprehensive review or the acquisition of tenure or promotion; an updated curriculum vitae; a self-analysis by the faculty member, including both strengths and weaknesses; and a statement by the faculty member of professional goals and objectives. The academic supervisor shall provide an overall assessment of the faculty member’s performance, including evidence of discriminatory actions as determined by the Office of Equal Opportunity, and the faculty member shall be given a copy of this evaluation. The evaluation must be based upon the faculty member’s performance in each area of responsibility (see Section E.12), and it must take into account the individual faculty member’s effort distribution (see Section E.9.1) and the individual faculty member’s workload (see E.9.2). As part of the overall assessment of the faculty member’s performance, the academic supervisor must select one (1) of the following three (3) outcomes:

a. The faculty member’s performance is satisfactory, and no further action is necessary;

b. The faculty member has deficiencies which the academic supervisor believes can be remedied without implementing a Phase II Comprehensive Performance Review; or;

c. The faculty member’s performance is sufficiently unsatisfactory that a Phase II Comprehensive Performance Review shall be conducted.

Evaluations should identify strengths and any deficiencies in the faculty member’s performance. If the second outcome is selected, the academic supervisor shall design a specific professional development plan to assist the faculty member in meeting expectations. The faculty member shall be given the opportunity to work with the academic supervisor on the design of this plan, and the faculty member shall be given a copy of this plan. As part of this plan, the faculty member’s effort distribution and/or workload may be adjusted to focus on the faculty member’s interests and demonstrated performance, as well as the needs of the academic unit. This plan shall include a time-frame for achieving the indicated goals, and it shall specify what resources, assistance, and opportunities will be made available to the faculty member in order to help the faculty member achieve these goals.

E.14.3.2 Phase II Comprehensive Performance Reviews (last revised December 1, 2023)

A Phase II Comprehensive Performance Review is initiated when the academic supervisor decides that a tenured faculty member’s performance in a Phase I Review was not satisfactory, or it may be initiated as described in Section E.15.4.1. The initiation of a Phase II Review is not grievable by the faculty member. A Phase II Review Committee of at least five (5) tenured peers at the same or higher rank as the faculty member shall be selected to conduct a comprehensive performance review according to procedures specified in the code of the academic unit. These peers shall be selected from the same academic unit as the faculty member, unless that academic unit is a department that is too small, in which case, some of the peers may be from other departments within the same college. The academic supervisor shall not be a member of the Review Committee, nor shall any other administrator at the same administrative level as the academic supervisor or higher. The procedure for the selection of these peers shall be specified in the code of the academic unit. If the selection procedures are not specified in the code of the academic unit, then a committee of five (5) tenured peers shall be drawn by lot from the eligible faculty members in the same academic unit as the faculty member. If the academic unit is a small department with fewer than five (5) eligible faculty members, then additional tenured peers shall be drawn by lot from the eligible faculty members in the same college so as to increase the total number of committee members to five (5).

The code of each academic unit shall specify:

a. The procedure for the selection of a Phase II Review Committee;

b. Procedures for assuring impartiality and lack of bias among members of the Phase II Review Committee;

c. The criteria to be used by the Phase II Review Committee, including standards for evaluation which reflect the overall mission of the academic unit, and which permit sufficient flexibility to accommodate faculty members with differing responsibilities, effort distributions, and workloads;

d. The types of information to be submitted by the faculty member being reviewed; and

e. Any additional information to be used in evaluations, such as peer evaluations and student opinions of teaching.

As a result of a Phase II Comprehensive Performance Review, one (1) of the following three (3) outcomes shall be selected by a majority of the Phase II Review Committee:

a. The faculty member has met the reasonable expectations for faculty performance, as identified by their academic unit;

b. There are deficiencies, but they are not judged to be substantial and chronic or recurrent;

c. There are deficiencies that are substantial and chronic or recurrent.

Regardless of the outcome, the Review Committee shall prepare a written report and provide the faculty member with a copy. If the second outcome is selected, the written report may recommend that the academic supervisor design a specific professional development plan to assist the faculty member in meeting expectations. If the third outcome is selected, then the written report shall explain what deficiencies led to that selection.

For either of the first two (2) outcomes, no further action is necessary. For the third outcome, taking into account the faculty member’s actions, prior actions and history, and whether a pattern exists, the committee’s written report shall recommend whether or not disciplinary action should be pursued as described in Section E.15.

The faculty member shall then have ten (10) working days to prepare a written response to this report. For informational purposes, both the report and the faculty member’s response shall be forwarded to the academic supervisor, and, at successive steps, to each higher supervisor, ending with the Provost.

If the Review Committee selects the third outcome and identifies deficiencies that need to be remedied, the academic supervisor shall design a specific professional development plan indicating how these deficiencies are to be remedied and setting time-lines for accomplishing each element of the plan. The faculty member shall be given the opportunity to work with the academic supervisor on the design of this plan. This development plan shall be submitted to the next higher administrative level for approval, and the faculty member shall be given a copy of the approved plan. This professional development plan shall be considered to be part of the faculty member’s official Personnel File (see footnote #2 regarding official Personnel File).

E.14.4 Grievance (last revised August 12, 2009)

A faculty member shall have recourse to the provisions in Section K, except where otherwise prohibited (e.g., see Section E.15), once an adverse recommendation is made by an administrator in any performance review. The recommendations made by a Phase II Review Committee, whose membership are faculty, are not grievable , but any adverse recommendation or decision made by an administrator as a result of a Phase II Comprehensive Performance Review may be the basis for complaint under Section K. Neither constructive recommendations for improvement nor a professional development plan is grievable by the faculty member.

E.15 Disciplinary Action for Tenured Faculty (last revised December 1, 2023)

The procedures set forth in this section of the Manual govern disciplinary action other than a Letter of Reprimand (see Section D.4.2) for tenured faculty members, including revocation of tenure and termination of appointment. These actions may occur in connection with either behavior or performance of professional duties. Disciplinary action other than a Letter of Reprimand for a tenured faculty member (hereinafter termed the “Tenured Faculty Member”) must follow the procedures outlined in this section of the Manual. These procedures shall be used in a manner that is consistent with the protection of academic freedom (see Section E.8) and confidentiality of all participants in such actions to the extent permitted by law. These procedures must not be used in an unfair, unreasonable, arbitrary, capricious, or discriminatory manner. Participants shall conduct themselves in accordance with the Code of Ethical Behavior (see Section D.9).

Any member of the University community who knowingly makes false statements as a part of these proceedings shall be subject to disciplinary action appropriate to their position within the University.

The University Grievance Officer (UGO) shall be charged with assuring the integrity of the E.15 processes, including discussions to achieve a mutually agreeable resolution at any stage of the process, coordinating committee appointments and duties, and certifying that appropriate individuals participate in the process. At the discretion of the UGO, any of the time limits in Section E.15 may be extended for reasonable periods. Such extensions shall be reported immediately to all parties concerned.

Either of the following conditions may lead to formal disciplinary action:

a. Substantial neglect of assigned duties that prevents the Tenured Faculty Member from fulfilling their obligation to the University as stated in Section E.5.2 and impacts the department, college, or University; or actions that substantially impair the duties or responsibilities of others.

b. Behavior of the Tenured Faculty Member that (1) presents significant risk to the safety or security of members of the University community (e.g., violence) and/or (2) represents a serious violation of ethics (see Section D.9) and/or University policy (including, but not limited to, unlawful discrimination, research misconduct, harassment, bullying, retaliation, or misappropriation of funds).

There are two (2) avenues for discipline:

i. Acceptance of disciplinary action by the Tenured Faculty Member. The Tenured Faculty Member may agree to accept formal disciplinary action without a Hearing. In this case, there must be a written document stating that disciplinary action is being taken and detailing the disciplinary action and any agreements made. This document must be signed by both the Tenured Faculty Member and the Academic Supervisor to indicate their mutual agreement regarding the disciplinary action. The agreement by the Tenured Faculty Member to accept this action does not imply admission of responsibility for the charge. This action requires the approval of the Provost. If the Provost, after consultation with the UGO, determines that the disciplinary action is not appropriate, the Provost shall direct that the matter be referred to the formal Hearing Process. This document stating the disciplinary action, if rejected, may not be used in the resulting Hearing.

ii. Disciplinary Action resulting from a formal Hearing. The University may impose disciplinary action against the Tenured Faculty Member. Possible disciplinary actions resulting from a formal Hearing include, but are not limited to, one or more of the following: letter of reprimand, reassignment of duties, mandatory education or training, monitoring, reduction in pay, suspension with or without pay, revocation of tenure, and termination of employment. Since faculty rank is an academic credential, reduction in rank may not be used as a disciplinary action unless the rank was obtained through fraudulent means. Some disciplinary actions may be for a specified period of time or until some condition is met, and some may be for an indefinite period of time, subject to later review. It is also possible that the Hearing will not result in any disciplinary action.

E.15.1 Initiating the Process

The disciplinary process shall be initiated when a written and signed statement (hereinafter termed the “Statement”), which specifies with reasonable particularity the alleged grounds for disciplinary action, is filed with the UGO by one or more of the following individuals: the academic supervisor, the college dean, or the Provost. Anyone may write the Statement, but one or more of the individuals listed in the previous sentence shall file it with the UGO in order to initiate the disciplinary process. Upon receipt of the Statement, the UGO shall notify the person(s) who filed the Statement that the disciplinary process has been initiated. Also, when the process has been completed, the UGO shall notify the person(s) who filed the Statement of the final outcome. In both cases, the person(s) who filed the Statement shall notify the person(s) who wrote the Statement.

E.15.2 Operational Procedures Prior to Completion of Formal Disciplinary Action

The UGO shall review the Statement to ensure that it alleges the existence of one or more of the conditions for disciplinary action listed in Section E.15.a or E.15.b. If the UGO finds that the Statement alleges one or more of these conditions, then, no later than three (3) working days following receipt of the Statement, the UGO shall provide a copy of the Statement to the Tenured Faculty Member and inform the Academic Supervisor and the dean of the college (or the Provost if the Academic Supervisor is a dean) of the commencement of the disciplinary process. The Statement is deemed to have been received when it is delivered personally to the Tenured Faculty Member, or ten working days after it has been sent to the Tenured Faculty Member via email to their official CSU email address, or when receipt has been confirmed to the UGO by the Tenured Faculty Member.

Pending the outcome of this process, the Provost may assign the Tenured Faculty Member to other duties or take such other action as deemed appropriate, including suspension of duties, only if the Provost determines that the continued presence of the Tenured Faculty Member would threaten the safety or security of the Tenured Faculty Member or other persons or would substantially impair or disrupt the normal functioning of the University or one of its departments or divisions. Salary shall continue during the period of a suspension.

E.15.3 Discussions to Achieve a Resolution

No later than three (3) working days after confirming the adequacy of the Statement and notifying the appropriate parties, the UGO shall direct the Academic Supervisor, the college dean, and/or the Provost to enter into discussions with the Tenured Faculty Member in an effort to come to a resolution as to possible disciplinary action to be taken against the Tenured Faculty Member by mutual agreement.3 The agreement by the Tenured Faculty Member to accept such action does not imply admission of responsibility for the charge(s).

If an agreement is reached, it requires the approval of the Provost. If the Provost determines that the agreement is appropriate, and the agreement does not involve revocation of tenure, demotion, reduction in pay, resignation, or other separation from the University, the Provost is authorized to approve the agreement. If the Provost determines that the agreement is appropriate, and the agreement involves revocation of tenure, demotion, reduction in pay, resignation, or other separation from the University, the agreement must be approved by the President. If the Provost determines, after consultation with the UGO, that the agreement is not appropriate, the Provost shall direct that the matter proceed to the formal Hearing Process. This agreement that states the disciplinary action, if rejected, may not be used in the resulting Hearing. If no agreement can be reached within five (5) working days of the UGO’s directive to enter into discussions, the matter shall proceed to the formal Hearing Process.

If the decision is made to proceed to the formal Hearing Process, the Tenured Faculty Member shall be notified of the decision and given ten (10) working days to submit a written response (hereinafter termed the “Response”) to the allegations in the Statement.

E.15.4 Hearing Process

If the allegations in the Statement are limited to performance of professional duties (Section E.15.a), then the procedures specified in Section E.15.4.1 are to be followed. If the allegations in the Statement are limited to behavior (Section E.15.b), then the procedures specified in Section E.15.4.2 are to be followed. If the Statement contains allegations involving both performance of professional duties and behavior, and each of the two procedures determines that a formal hearing is warranted, then a single Hearing shall be conducted with the participation of both of the Hearing Committees specified in Sections E.15.4.1 and E.15.4.2.

As appropriate, individuals appointed to serve on Hearing Committees assembled under the provisions of Section E.15 may have their effort distributions adjusted, as negotiated with their immediate supervisor, to reflect their involvement in the disciplinary process, or they may receive release time from some of their academic obligations.

E.15.4.1 Performance of Professional Duties

For allegations involving performance of professional duties as described in Section E.15.a, the charges shall be considered in a Phase II Review (see Section E.14.3.2) before the formal disciplinary Hearing Process is initiated. The Phase II Review Committee shall determine whether or not the formal disciplinary Hearing Process is warranted. The Provost may, for convincing reasons stated in writing, reverse the decision of the Phase II Review Committee, but this must be done within five (5) working days of being notified of the decision.

If the decision is made to conduct a formal disciplinary Hearing regarding allegations involving performance of professional duties, the Tenured Faculty Member’s performance must be judged against the normal expectations within their department, taking into account the tenured faculty member’s effort distribution (see Section E.9.1) and workload (see Section E.9.2). In this case, a Hearing Committee of at least six (6) members shall be formed. The persons eligible to serve on this Hearing Committee are the tenured faculty members of the Tenured Faculty Member’s department who have the same or higher rank as the Tenured Faculty Member and who have no administrative duties (see Section K.11.2), but excluding the Tenured Faculty Member and their academic supervisor. The Department Code may specify the process for selecting the eligible faculty members to serve on the Hearing Committee. If the Department Code does not specify this process, then the Hearing Committee shall consist of six (6) eligible faculty members drawn by lot by the college dean. If there are fewer than six (6) faculty members of the department eligible for the committee, then additional members shall be drawn by lot by the college dean from a pool consisting of all tenured faculty members of the college who have the same or higher rank as the Tenured Faculty Member and who have no administrative duties (see Section K.11.2). The members of this Hearing Committee shall then select from their membership a chairperson who shall be a voting chair of the committee.

E.15.4.2 Behavior

If the Statement contains allegations involving behavior as described in Section E.15.b, then the UGO and the Chair of the Faculty Council shall jointly appoint a six (6) person Hearing Committee from the tenured faculty members of the Faculty Grievance Panel (see Section K.15). Neither the Tenured Faculty Member nor their Academic Supervisor may be part of this committee. The members of this Hearing Committee shall then select from their membership a chairperson who shall be a voting chair of the committee.

If the Statement involves allegations of sexual harassment, discrimination, bullying, retaliation, or research misconduct, the procedures appropriate to those allegations shall be followed (see Appendices 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7) before a Hearing Committee is formed.

This Hearing Committee shall conduct a Preliminary Review in which they discuss the allegations in the Statement, evaluate the Tenured Faculty Member’s Response and determine whether or not a Hearing is warranted. During this process, the Hearing Committee may request additional statements from the Tenured Faculty Member, the person(s) filing the Statement, and/or other persons deemed to have relevant information. The Hearing Committee shall then retire for private discussion, which shall be confidential. These deliberations shall be followed by a vote to determine if sufficient information exists to warrant a Hearing. The decision to conduct a Hearing requires a majority vote. The Provost may, for convincing reasons stated in writing, reverse this decision by the Hearing Committee, but this must be done within five (5) working days of being notified of the decision.

E.15.4.3 Removal of Hearing Committee Members

Members of a Hearing Committee who believe themselves sufficiently biased or interested that they cannot render an impartial judgment shall remove themselves from the committee on their own initiative. Challenges for cause may be lodged with the UGO by the Tenured Faculty Member, the person(s) who filed the Statement, or any member of the Hearing Committee. The UGO shall decide all challenges with such advice from legal counsel for the University or from the Colorado Department of Law (Office of the Attorney General) as the UGO deems necessary or advisable. The UGO may remove a member of the Hearing Committee even though actual cause cannot be proven. The Tenured Faculty Member shall have a maximum of two (2) challenges without stated cause, but such challenges must be made within five (5) working days of receiving notification of the membership of the Hearing Committee. If a member is removed from the Hearing Committee, then a replacement member shall be chosen by following the same procedures for the initial selection of the committee members in order to produce a Hearing Committee with six (6) members.

E.15.4.4 Hearing

a. The Hearing Committee(s) may hold organizational meetings which may include meetings with the Tenured Faculty Member, the Academic Supervisor, the person(s) filing the Statement, or other persons, as needed, to (1) clarify the issues, (2) effect stipulations of facts, (3) provide for the exchange of documentary or other information, (4) formulate a list of potential witnesses, and (5) achieve other pre-Hearing objectives as will make the Hearing fair, effective, and expeditious. The UGO shall be present at all meetings of the Hearing Committee(s). The Hearing Committee(s) decide what witnesses will be interviewed and will provide a written explanation of their decision to the UGO. The written explanation of the decision will be shared with Tenured Faculty Member and the person(s) filing the Statement.

b. The Tenured Faculty Member and the person(s) filing the Statement shall be notified in writing of the Hearing within five (5) working days following the formal decision to proceed with the Hearing. Within five (5) working days of this notification, the Tenured Faculty Member and the person(s) filing the Statement must submit to the UGO any additional materials that they wish the Hearing Committee(s) to consider. The UGO shall forward these materials to the Hearing Committee(s) within three (3) working days of receiving them.

The Hearing shall commence no sooner than twenty (20) working days following receipt of the notice by the Tenured Faculty Member, unless the Tenured Faculty Member requests an earlier Hearing and the Hearing Committee concurs. A notice is deemed to have been received when it is delivered personally to the Tenured Faculty Member, or when it has been sent to the Tenured Faculty Member via email to their official CSU email address, or when receipt has been confirmed to the UGO by the Tenured Faculty Member.

c. The Hearing and recommendations for action shall be limited to the allegations specified in the Statement. Any additional allegations emerging during the Hearing may be considered only after a new Statement regarding such allegations has been filed with the Hearing Committee(s) and the Tenured Faculty Member has been given an opportunity to submit a new written Response.

d. The Hearing shall be closed, and the proceedings shall remain confidential to the extent permitted by law. During the Hearing, the UGO shall be present at all times, and the Tenured Faculty Member shall be invited to be present at all times. In addition, the Tenured Faculty Member and the Hearing Committee(s) shall each be permitted to have a maximum of two (2) advisors present, consisting of academic advisors and/or legal counsel. These advisors may provide advice and assistance, but they may not actively participate in the proceedings, such as making objections or attempting to argue the case (however, if an advisor is called as a witness, the advisor is allowed to participate in this capacity). Advisors for any participant shall be free to advise the participant fully throughout the proceeding, including assisting the participant in formulating any required written documentation and helping the participant prepare for any oral presentations.

e. The Hearing shall be recorded, a copy of the recording shall be made available, without cost, to the Tenured Faculty Member, and a verbatim transcription shall be made available without cost to the Tenured Faculty Member at the Tenured Faculty Member’s request.

f. At least five (5) working days prior to the Hearing, the Tenured Faculty Member and the person(s) filing the Statement shall be provided with all written documents scheduled to be presented and the names of all witnesses scheduled to be heard in the proceedings, along with the nature of their proposed testimony. The administration shall cooperate with the Hearing Committee(s) to the extent possible in securing witnesses and making documentary and other information available.

If the need arises, the Hearing Committee(s) may decide to request additional written documents or call additional witnesses during the Hearing. If so, the Tenured Faculty Member must be given the opportunity to prepare a response to such changes, and this may include presenting new written documents and/or calling additional witnesses. This may require adjournments of the Hearing for periods that the Hearing Committee(s) deem appropriate.

g. The Tenured Faculty Member shall have the right to see all written evidence presented, hear all testimony, and question all witnesses. Furthermore, the Tenured Faculty Member must be afforded the opportunity to question the person(s) filing the Statement. If any person filing the Statement refuses to appear as a witness, then the Hearing shall conclude immediately, and no disciplinary action shall be taken as a result of this Hearing (although the same allegations may be considered again in a newly initiated Hearing). However, harassment of witnesses by the Tenured Faculty Member, as determined by a concurrence of at least two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the Hearing Committee(s), is prohibited. Also, if it is deemed appropriate by at least two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the Hearing Committee(s), the questioning of one (1) or more witnesses may occur with the parties being in different physical locations, but the questioning must occur in a real-time, spontaneous format (e.g., a video conference or a teleconference), unless at least two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the Hearing Committee concur that this is not feasible.

h. The person(s) filing the Statement shall not be present during the testimony of others, unless specifically invited by the Hearing Committee(s). Such an invitation must be agreed to by at least two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the Hearing Committee(s). Such an invitation does not include the right to question either the Tenured Faculty Member or any other witnesses, unless this right is included explicitly in the invitation. If such an invitation is made, the invited person shall be permitted to have a maximum of two (2) advisors present, consisting of academic advisors and/or legal counsel. These advisors may provide advice and assistance, but they may not actively participate in the proceedings (however, if an advisor is called as a witness, the advisor is allowed to participate in this capacity).

i. The Hearing Committee is not bound by strict rules of legal evidence. Every possible effort shall be made to obtain the most reliable information available.

j. If one or more members of the Hearing Committee cannot complete the Hearing and reporting process, then this process shall continue without them. However, if fewer than five (5) members of the Hearing Committee are able to complete this process, then the process shall be terminated, a new Hearing Committee shall be formed, and a new Hearing shall be conducted.

E.15.5 Procedures Following Completion of the Hearing

After the completion of the Hearing, the Hearing Committee(s) shall retire for private discussion and review with the UGO being present. These deliberations shall remain confidential to the extent permitted by law. If there are two (2) Hearing Committees, they shall have separate deliberations and make separate recommendations.

Each Hearing Committee shall evaluate the information presented to determine if the condition required for disciplinary action exists related to its particular charge (behavior or performance of professional duties). If the Hearing Committee determines that the condition does not exist, then it shall issue a report that states that finding. If the Hearing Committee determines that the condition does exist, then it shall issue a report that states that finding and makes a recommendation for appropriate disciplinary action. In deciding upon appropriate disciplinary action, the Hearing Committee shall consider the totality of the circumstances, including the egregiousness of the Tenured Faculty Member’s actions, the prior actions and history of the Tenured Faculty Member, and whether a pattern exists.

The written report of the Hearing Committee shall include a comprehensive and detailed summary of the relevant facts and the conclusions reached in assessing those facts. If the Recommendation from the Hearing Committee is not unanimous, the report shall explain the reasoning of the dissenting minority, as well as that of the majority.

The Hearing Committee shall issue its final report no later than ten (10) working days after the conclusion of the Hearing.

E.15.6 Recommendations for Disciplinary Action

If at least two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the Hearing Committee concur that disciplinary action is appropriate, a written report shall be prepared that states this conclusion, recommends specific sanctions, and specifies the reasons for this recommendation. The report must include a review of the information and an explanation of the grounds for the recommendation. The sanction(s) recommended must be reasonably related to the seriousness of the offense and may take into account the totality of the circumstances.

A recommendation for revocation of tenure and/or termination of appointment requires the concurrence of at least two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the Hearing Committee.

If less than two-thirds (2/3) of the members of the Hearing Committee concur that disciplinary action is appropriate, a written report shall be prepared that recommends that no disciplinary action be taken.

E.15.7 Disposition of the Hearing Committee’s Report

The Hearing Committee’s written report shall be transmitted to the Tenured Faculty Member and their Academic Supervisor, the person(s) filing the Statement, and, at successive steps, to the dean and the Provost.

The Tenured Faculty Member and the person(s) filing the Statement, shall have the right to object in writing to the recommendation of the Hearing Committee. Such an objection shall be limited to five (5) typed pages with normal font size, and it must be submitted to the Faculty Member’s Academic Supervisor, no later than five (5) working days after receipt of the Hearing Committee’s report. Any objections shall be attached to the recommendation of the Hearing Committee and considered together with this recommendation at each successive level in the administrative chain.

E.15.8 Administrative Action on the Hearing Committee Recommendations

After a recommendation is received from the Hearing Committee, the Academic Supervisor shall review the Hearing Committee’s report and recommendation and any written objections and make their own recommendation to the dean within five (5) working days, with copies sent to the Tenured Faculty Member and the person(s) filing the Statement. The dean shall then review the Hearing Committee’s report and recommendation, any written objections, and the recommendation from the Academic Supervisor and make their own recommendation to the Provost within five (5) working days, with copies sent to the Tenured Faculty Member, the person(s) filing the Statement, and the Academic Supervisor. If two (2) separate Hearing Committees have made two separate recommendations, each recommendation is considered separately until the two recommendations reach the Provost. The Provost shall then combine the two separate recommendations and make a single recommendation to the President. If someone in the administrative chain fails to issue a recommendation within the specified time limit, the matter shall be forwarded to the next administrative level for review.

If the Provost must combine two separate recommendations into a single recommendation to the President, then the decision of the President is final. Otherwise, the decision of the Provost is final, unless the decision involves revocation of tenure, demotion, reduction in pay, resignation, or other separation from the University. If the decision of the Provost involves revocation of tenure, demotion, reduction in pay, resignation, or other separation from the University, then that decision shall be forwarded to the President as a recommendation, and the decision of the President is final. A final decision by the Provost or a recommendation by the Provost to the President must be made within ten (10) working days of receiving the recommendation from the dean. A final decision by the President must be made within ten (10) working days of receiving the recommendation from the Provost.

An alternate recommendation or final decision that is either more or less severe than the recommendation made by the Hearing Committee(s) shall be issued at a higher administrative level only for compelling reasons that shall be stated in writing to the Tenured Faculty Member, the person(s) filing the Statement, the Hearing Committee(s), and all previous administrators in the administrative chain. In the case of an alternate recommendation, the Tenured Faculty Member, the person(s) filing the Statement, the Hearing Committee(s), and the previous administrators in the administrative chain shall be given five (5) working days from the date of notification of the alternate recommendation to object in writing to the administrator’s reasons for making the alternate recommendation, and the alternate recommendation could be reversed at an even higher administrative level. If the Provost must make a recommendation to the President, the Provost’s recommendation shall be communicated in writing to the Tenured Faculty Member, the person(s) filing the Statement, the Hearing Committee(s), and all previous administrators in the administrative chain, and it may be objected to the President in the same manner within five (5) working days. Objections shall each be limited to five (5) typed pages with normal font size and shall be forwarded to each successive administrator along with the alternate recommendation and the rationale for it.

E.15.9 Written Records

The recording of the Hearing, the verbatim transcription if requested by the Tenured Faculty Member, and all written records of E.15 documents and proceedings, including the Statement and Response; supporting documents; committee reports and recommendations; administrative reviews of committee recommendations; alternate recommendations; objections to any recommendations; and final decisions, shall be kept on file in the archives of the UGO for three years or for the duration of the employment of the Tenured Faculty Member, whichever is longer, and these shall be considered to be part of the Tenured Faculty Member’s official Personnel File (see footnote #2 regarding the official Personnel File).

E.15.10 Term of Continuation of Faculty Salary and Benefits Following Termination of Appointment

Employment, together with salary and benefits, shall terminate upon a final decision to terminate an appointment. However, employment may continue for a period not to exceed one (1) year if the President independently determines or concurs with a recommendation that employment be continued for that specified period to enable the Tenured Faculty Member to complete essential responsibilities.

E.15.11 Time Limit for Action by the Provost

The Provost must act on the final decision regarding disciplinary action within ten (10) working days of the reporting of that decision.

E.16 Appeal of Early Termination of Tenure-Track Faculty Appointments (New Section May 8, 2019)

A tenure-track faculty member may appeal a recommendation to the President to terminate their appointment prior to the ending date of the contract. This section of the Manual sets forth the procedures for such an appeal. The University Grievance Officer (UGO) shall be charged with overseeing this appeal process. At the discretion of the UGO, any of the time limits in this section may be extended for reasonable periods. Such extensions shall be reported immediately to all parties concerned.

E.16.1. Initiating the Process

When a Recommendation to the President to terminate a Tenure-Track Faculty Appointment prior to the ending date of the Appointment is sent to the Provost, a copy of this Recommendation shall be provided in writing to the faculty member by the person making the Recommendation (hereinafter referred to as the Recommender). At the same time, the recommender shall notify the faculty member of their right to appeal this recommendation and refer them to Section E.16 of the Manual. The faculty member then has ten (10) working days to submit to the UGO an Appeal in writing of this Recommendation, along with the Recommendation itself. If an Appeal is submitted within this time frame, then the UGO shall notify the Provost within three (3) working days, and the Recommendation shall not be sent to the President until the conclusion of the Section E.16 process.

If the faculty member fails to submit an Appeal within this time frame, then they shall forfeit the right to appeal the Recommendation for termination (unless the UGO decides that extenuating circumstances justify an extension of this deadline).  If the Provost has not been notified by the UGO of an Appeal within twenty (20) working days of receiving the Recommendation from the Recommender,then the Provost may assume that no Appeal will be filed, and they may forward the Recommendation to the President for a final decision.

The Appeal should provide all of the information that the Appeal Committee (see Section E.16.2) will need in order to make its decision whether to support or oppose the Recommendation for termination. This may include relevant documentation and persons that the Appeal Committee may contact for additional supporting information. The relevance of each person should be stated in the Appeal. The Appeal Committee is not required to contact all of the persons listed in the Appeal. The UGO will review the Appeal to make sure that the information included is relevant to the issue of termination. In some cases, it may be necessary for the UGO to return the Appeal to the Appellant for editing before it is acceptable.

Within three (3) working days of receiving an acceptable Appeal from the Appellant, the UGO shall forward the Appeal to the Recommender and to the members of the Appeal Committee. The Recommender shall then have ten (10) working days to provide a Response. This Response should provide all of the information that the Appeal Committee will need in order to make its decision whether to support or oppose the Recommendation for termination. This may include relevant documentation and persons that the Appeal Committee may contact for additional supporting information.  The relevance of each person should be stated in the Response. The Appeal Committee is not required to contact all of the persons listed in the Response. The UGO will review the Response to make sure that the information included is relevant to the issue of termination.  In some cases, it may be necessary for the UGO to return the Response to the Recommender for editing before it is acceptable.

Within three (3) working days of receiving an acceptable Response from the Recommender, the UGO shall forward the Response to the Appellant and to the members of the Appeal Committee.

E.16.2 Appeal Committee

The Appeal Committee shall consist of the Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs, the Chair of Faculty Council, and the Chair of the Faculty Council Committee on Responsibilities and Standing of Academic Faculty. The Chair of Faculty Council shall serve as the Chair of the Appeal Committee.    After receiving both the Appeal and the Response from the UGO, the members of the Appeals Committee shall begin their consideration of the Appeal. As part of this consideration, they shall meet with the Recommender, the Appellant, and any other persons that they consider relevant to their consideration of the Appeal. All three members of the Appeal Committee must be present at each of these meetings. At their discretion, the members of the Appeal Committee may request additional information from the Recommender and/or the Appellant, and they may choose to meet more than once with some persons.

E.16.3 Report of the Appeal Committee

After the completion of the process described in Section E.16.2, the three members of the Appeal Committee shall meet to discuss the case and to reach a final decision by majority vote whether to support or oppose the Recommendation for the termination of the Appellant.

After the conclusion of this meeting, the Chair of the Appeal Committee shall prepare a final Report. This Report shall include the overall vote of the Appeal Committee and the reasons supporting its decision.  If the vote was not unanimous, then the Report shall also summarize the reasons given by the dissenting member. The Report shall be submitted to the UGO within twenty (20) working days of the receipt from the UGO of both the Appeal and the Response by the members of the Appeal Committee.

E.16.4 Final Decision by the President

Within three (3) working days of receiving the Report from the Chair of the Appeal Committee, the UGO shall send the Report to the President, along with the initial Recommendation, the Appeal, and the Response. Within twenty (20) working days of receiving these materials from the UGO, the President shall make a final decision regarding the termination of the Appellant and send it in writing to the UGO. This written decision shall include the reasoning that supports the decision. The UGO shall forward this decision by the President to the Appellant, the Recommender, and the Provost. This decision by the President is final.

E.17 Renewal of Tenure-Track Faculty Appointments (new section added August 9, 2019)

Tenure-track faculty appointments are for a specified period of time and must be renewed periodically. Prior to the expiration of such an appointment, the Tenure and Promotion Committee within the Department shall meet and discuss the performance of the faculty member. This committee shall then prepare a report regarding the progress of the faculty member toward tenure and promotion. This report shall be submitted to the Department Head along with a recommendation whether or not to renew the tenure-track appointment. The Department Head shall then decide whether or not to renew the appointment.

If the Tenure and Promotion Committee within the Department recommends the renewal of a tenure-track faculty appointment, but the Department Head decides not to renew the appointment, then the Department Head shall notify the Tenure and Promotion Committee of this decision. The Tenure and Promotion Committee shall then reconsider their recommendation for renewal. If the Committee still believes that renewal is appropriate, then it shall prepare a document (hereinafter referred to as the Recommendation) explaining the reasons for recommending renewal, and this Recommendation shall be sent to the Department Head. If the Department Head still decides not to renew the appointment, then the Department Head shall prepare a document (hereinafter referred to as the Decision) explaining their reasons for this decision. The Recommendation and the Decision shall then be provided to the faculty member.

In this case, the faculty member may appeal the nonrenewal decision by the Department Head. This section of the Manual sets forth the procedures for such an appeal. The University Grievance Officer (UGO) shall be charged with overseeing this appeal process. At the discretion of the UGO, any of the time limits in this section may be extended for reasonable periods. Such extensions shall be reported immediately to all parties concerned.

E.17.1 Initiating the Appeal Process

When the faculty member is provided with a copy of the Recommendation and the Decision, the Department Head shall notify the faculty member of their right to appeal the nonrenewal decision and refer them to Section E.17 of the Manual. The faculty member then has ten (10) working days to submit to the UGO an Appeal in writing of the nonrenewal decision, along with the Recommendation and the Decision. If an Appeal is submitted within this time frame, then the UGO shall notify the Provost within three (3) working days.

If the faculty member fails to submit an Appeal within this time frame, then they shall forfeit the right to appeal the nonrenewal decision (unless the UGO decides that extenuating circumstances justify an extension of this deadline). If the Provost has not been notified by the UGO of an Appeal within twenty (20) working days of receiving the Recommendation from the Recommender, then the Provost may assume that no Appeal will be filed.

The Appeal should provide all of the information that the Appeal Committee (see Section E.17.2) will need in order to make its decision whether to support or oppose the nonrenewal decision. This may include relevant documentation and persons that the Appeal Committee may contact for additional supporting information. The relevance of each person should be stated in the Appeal. The Appeal Committee is not required to contact all of the persons listed in the Appeal. The UGO will review the Appeal to make sure that the information included is relevant to the issue of nonrenewal. In some cases, it may be necessary for the UGO to return the Appeal to the Appellant for editing before it is acceptable.

Within three (3) working days of receiving an acceptable Appeal from the Appellant, the UGO shall forward the Appeal to the Department Head and to the members of the Appeal Committee. The Department Head shall then have ten (10) working days to provide a Response. This Response should provide all of the information that the Appeal Committee will need in order to make its decision whether to support or oppose the nonrenewal decision. This may include relevant documentation and persons that the Appeal Committee may contact for additional supporting information. The relevance of each person should be stated in the Response. The Appeal Committee is not required to contact all of the persons listed in the Response. The UGO will review the Response to make sure that the information included is relevant to the issue of nonrenewal.  In some cases, it may be necessary for the UGO to return the Response to the Recommender for editing before it is acceptable.

Within three (3) working days of receiving an acceptable Response from the Recommender, the UGO shall forward the Response to the Appellant and to the members of the Appeal Committee.

E.17.2 Appeal Committee

The Appeal Committee shall consist of the Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs, the Chair of Faculty Council, and the College Dean. The Chair of Faculty Council shall serve as the Chair of the Appeal Committee. After receiving both the Appeal and the Response from the UGO, the members of the Appeals Committee shall begin their consideration of the Appeal. As part of this consideration, they shall meet with the Department Head, the Appellant, the Chair of the Tenure and Promotion Committee, and any other persons that they consider relevant to their consideration of the Appeal. All three members of the Appeal Committee must be present at each of these meetings. At their discretion, the members of the Appeal Committee may request additional information from the Department Head and/or the Appellant, and they may choose to meet more than once with some persons.

E.17.3 Report of the Appeal Committee

After the completion of the process described in Section E.17.2, the three members of the Appeal Committee shall meet to discuss the case and to reach a final decision by majority vote whether to support or oppose the nonrenewal of the Appellant.

After the conclusion of this meeting, the Chair of the Appeal Committee shall prepare a final Report. This Report shall include the overall vote of the Appeal Committee and the reasons supporting its decision. If the vote was not unanimous, then the Report shall also summarize the reasons given by the dissenting member. The Report shall be submitted to the UGO within twenty (20) working days of the receipt from the UGO of both the Appeal and the Response by the members of the Appeal Committee.

E.17.4 Final Decision by the President

Within three (3) working days of receiving the Report from the Chair of the Appeal Committee, the UGO shall send the Report to the President, along with the Recommendation, the Decision, the Appeal, and the Response. Within twenty (20) working days of receiving these materials from the UGO, the President shall make a final decision regarding the termination of the Appellant and send it in writing to the UGO. This written decision shall include the reasoning that supports the decision. The UGO shall forward this decision by the President to the Appellant, the Department Head, and the Provost. This decision by the President is final.

E.18 Financial Exigency

E.18.1 Definition of Financial Exigency and Conditions of Tenured Faculty Terminations

For purposes of this policy, a financial exigency is defined as a condition in which the anticipated financial resources of the University’s educational and general budget available for allocation for faculty compensation are adjudged to be inadequate to maintain the level of faculty staffing or prevailing rates of compensation. Any involuntary termination or reduction in the salary of a tenured member of the faculty based upon inadequate financial resources shall require a University declaration of financial exigency which pertains to the University as a whole and is not limited to any academic subunit. The tenured faculty member whose appointment is to be terminated for reasons of financial exigency shall have the right to continued employment at least for twelve (12) months from the end of the academic year in which notification of pending termination is received. The position of the tenured faculty member whose appointment is terminated shall not be filled by a replacement within a period of three (3) years, unless the released faculty member has been offered reinstatement and a reasonable time to respond to the offer.

E.18.2 Declaration of Financial Exigency

Any declaration of a condition of financial exigency shall be made by majority action of the Board. (Such a declaration is not subject to challenge by faculty members under the University mediation and grievance procedure.) The President of the University may recommend the declaration of a condition of financial exigency at any time after consultation with the Committee on Strategic and Financial Planning. When the President makes such a recommendation to the Board, the chairman or other member designated by each of these committees shall present the views of their respective committees to the Board.

E.18.3 Development of a Plan of Action

Upon the determination of the Board that a condition of financial exigency is present, the President of the University recognizing the primary responsibility of the faculty in matters of status and general educational policy shall in consultation with the Committee on Strategic and Financial Planning prepare a plan of action to meet the financial exigency. The plan of action should be designed to minimize the impact of the exigency upon the academic programs of the University and should give due regard to faculty judgment on the criteria to be used for choosing a response to the exigency. The President shall present the plan to the Board for its approval. The Chairperson, or designated representatives of the Committee on Strategic and Financial Planning, shall present the view of their respective committees on the plan being submitted to the Board.

E.18.4 Order of Terminations

When all reasonable means for coping with a financial exigency except the reduction of staff have been exhausted, terminations shall be made from among the faculty members who have not acquired tenure, except in extraordinary circumstances where a serious distortion of the academic program would otherwise result.

E.18.5 Responsibility of Committee on Strategic and Financial Planning

The Committee on Strategic and Financial Planning should monitor the ongoing financial status of the University and keep the Faculty Council informed of any conditions which are likely to result in a condition of financial exigency. The Committee should collect information about procedures used in other universities faced with financial exigencies and any other information that would aid in developing reasonable plans to deal with any emergent condition of financial exigency.

E.18.6 Right of Access of Individual Faculty Member to the Grievance and Mediation Procedure

An individual faculty member who feels aggrieved by the implementation of the Board’s declaration of financial exigency has access to the grievance and mediation procedure.

E.19 Discontinuance of a Degree Granting Program or a Department of Instruction not Mandated by Financial Exigency

In the event that a degree granting program or department of instruction be discontinued by action of the Board in consultation with the Faculty Council, termination of appointments of tenured faculty members whose responsibilities relate primarily to the discontinued program or department may become necessary.

E.19.1 Procedure

Before the administration issues notice to a faculty member of its intention to terminate an appointment because of formal discontinuance of a degree granting program or department of instruction, the institution will make every effort to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position within the institution. If placement in another position would be facilitated by a reasonable period of training, financial and other support for such training will be proffered. If no position is available within the institution, with or without retraining, the faculty member’s appointment then may be terminated, but only with provision for severance salary equitably adjusted to the faculty member’s length of past and potential service, the amount of which will be reasonably determined, after consultation with the relevant department and/or college, by the Board at the time of termination.

E.19.2 Appeal Procedure (last revised August 12, 2009)

Affected faculty members shall have the right to appeal the actions defined in E.17 and E.17.1, as outlined in Section K.3 Grievable Actions.


1 The term “majority” as used in this Manual shall be according to the definition provided in Robert’s Rules of Order, that is, more than half of the votes cast, ignoring blanks.

2 The term “personnel file” refers to information collected because of the employer-employee relationship, and it does not necessarily refer to a single physical file. In order for information to be part of the personnel file, there must be a reasonable expectation that such information will be kept private. Information in the personnel file is generally not made available for public inspection, but it is available to the individual and to the individual’s supervisors.

3 These discussions are intended as avenues of resolution which would be acceptable to both the Tenured Faculty Member and the administrator(s).[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]