�鶹ӰԺ

• Comprehensive Review: After three years of service, during the fourth year
• Tenure Review: After six years of service, during the seventh year
• Promotion to Full: Post-tenure, when the candidate has “1. a record that, taken as a whole, may be judged to be excellent; 2. a record of significant contribution to graduate and undergraduate education, unless individual or departmental circumstances can be shown to require a stronger emphasis, or singular focus, on one or the other; and 3. a record since receiving tenure or promotion to Associate Professor that indicates substantial, significant, and continued growth, development, and accomplishment in teaching (or librarianship), scholarly/creative work, and leadership and service.” ¹

^1��CU System Administrative Policy Statement (APS) 1022.

• Review department bylaws (i.e., CRPT guidelines)
• Review college/school guidelines for CRPT
• Review CU �鶹ӰԺ policies
• Review CU System policies (“administrative policy statement”) and Board of Regents laws and policies
• In the semester prior to the review, meet with chair/dean to discuss unit process and plan for the first level of review
• Know academic unit and office of faculty affairs deadlines
• Review the current��VCAC Dossier Checklist for Reappointment, Tenure��and Promotion, which includes a description of each item in the dossier.
• Put together candidate’s portion of dossier:
  • CV
  • Statements on scholarly and creative work, teaching or librarianship, leadership and service
  • Multiple Measures of Teaching��(at least 3)
  • Scholarly/creative work samples (typically 3; e.g. publications, artwork, videos, recordings, multimedia, etc.)
  • Provide suggestions for external reviewers to chair/PUEC (for tenure/promotion; at least 6 needed, total)

The "Levels of Review:"

• First level: Academic unit
  • As applicable—department/program, college/school, dean’s advisory committee, dean
• Second level: �鶹ӰԺ campus
  • The Vice Chancellor's Advisory Committee (VCAC)
  • Provost
  • Chancellor
• Third level: CU System (for tenure only)
  • President
  • Board of Regents

• A key body for peer review and faculty governance. More specifically:
  • The role of the VCAC includes reviewing hire with tenure, comprehensive review, tenure, and promotion cases forwarded to it by the deans of the multiple colleges and schools. Its deliberations result in a vote, which is reported in the form of a recommendation to the provost.
• Membership: Approximately 16 full professors representing many academic units across campus; serve 3-year terms, members selected by Provost (usually in consultation with deans and �鶹ӰԺ Faculty Assembly).
• VCAC members are selected in large part based upon their national reputation in their discipline, and because of their broad understanding of the standards and practices of public research universities.
• Provost is��an ex officio��member.
• Chaired by neutral, non-voting member (i.e., Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs).
• VCAC usually meets weekly during the spring term.

• Similar processes
• Tenure and Promotion reviews include external reviewers as well
• Candidates need to demonstrate that they have met the standards for research/scholarship/creative work, teaching/librarianship, and service/leadership: i.e., the standards for “excellence” in either scholarly and creative work or teaching; at least “meritorious” in the other, and “meritorious” in leadership and service.

• ��	Comprehensive Review	Tenure Review	Promotion to Full Professor Review
  Mandatory Timing	During year 4	During year 7	Not mandatory
  Standard	On track torward tenure	"Excellent" in Scholarly and Creative Work or Teaching/Librarianship, "Meritorious" in the other 2 categories	Excellent as a whole
  Dossier	No external letters needed	Minimum of 6 external letters	Minimum

The �鶹ӰԺ campus’ practice is to provide a raise to faculty members awarded tenure or promoted to full professor, contingent upon available funds.
(In AY 2023-24, the amounts were $6,963 after the award of tenure and $11,248 after promotion to full professor.)

• Office of Faculty Affairs
• Leadership Education for Advancement and Promotion (LEAP)
• Faculty Relations
• �鶹ӰԺ Faculty Assembly (BFA)
• Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL)
• Ombuds Office
• Faculty and Staff Assistance��Program
• CU Board of Regents and
• , specifically

Faculty initially appointed at the “Assistant” or “Associate” ranks are usually reviewed during the last year of the reappointment period. The criteria for evaluation are defined by the terms of the initial contract. A typical merit formula for teaching faculty may be 85% teaching or clinical education and 15% leadership and service, but individual workload assignments may vary considerably both within and between units.

Specialized teaching and clinical faculty are evaluated according to primary unit criteria that defines "meritorious" and "excellent" performance. Teaching and clinical faculty with typical merit formulas are generally expected to demonstrate excellence in teaching or clinical education, and meritorious performance in leadership and service.

Reappointment of specialized faculty are based on the instructional needs of the unit they are serving, as well as the individual faculty member's performance. Performance shall be based on components identified by the primary unit in its "Primary Unit Criteria" document for the evaluation of teaching or clinical education. At least three distinct measures of teaching/clinical effectiveness and performance shall be used. If allowed by unit bylaws or consistent practice, evaluation of teaching and clinical faculty��appointments may be conducted by the chair/director, or their designee.

• Primary Unit Evaluation Committee:��This group from within the primary unit is elected or appointed as specified in the unit's bylaws. In small units, the evaluation committee and the primary unit may be one and the same. The evaluation committee is responsible for assisting the candidate in assembling their dossier, soliciting opinions from outside review when appropriate, and providing a written or oral summary of the candidate's dossier to the primary unit faculty. In some units, the evaluation committee makes a recommendation or reports a vote. In other units, the role of the evaluation committee is limited to compiling and summarizing the dossier. The written report of the evaluation committee becomes part of the dossier.
• Primary Unit:��The primary unit is composed of the faculty members of a department, division, program, school, or college authorized to vote on matters of appointment, reappointment and promotion. Only members of higher rank are authorized to vote on faculty personnel cases. The primary unit is charged with evaluating the record as represented within the dossier and make a recommendation to the next level of review. The vote of the primary unit and any accompanying summary or explanation also becomes part of the dossier.
• Report of the Chair:��In some units, the department chair or unit head provides a written explanation of the primary unit vote and offers their opinion of the merits of the case.��In other units, the chair's report is simply a written communication to the dean reporting the vote and discussion of the primary unit. This report becomes part of the dossier.
• Dean Decision:��The dean, after considering the recommendation of the primary unit and the contents of the dossier, makes an affirmative or negative decision and submits that recommendation (in the form of the reappointment offer letter) to the vice provost and associate vice chancellor for faculty affairs for review. Deans may employ a faculty advisory or personnel committee to assist them in evaluation of the candidate.��The provost and executive vice chancellor for academic affairs is the final approving authority in cases of specialized teaching and clinical faculty reappointment.