Preface: The following paragraph is a non-binding interpretation of the intent of the legislation of Chapter Three, Section I.

All newly appointed junior tenure track faculty are reviewed for renewal in the third year following arrival at Cornell. Tenure review normally occurs in year six (6) unless the initial appointment was at the rank of Acting Assistant Professor in non-probationary tenure status, in which case it occurs in year seven (7). The professor being reviewed must submit his/her file no later than December 1 if the individual started in the Summer or the Fall semester; e.g. July 1 or September 1. Equivalent dates (defined by the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs) would apply if the individual started at some other time of the year; i.e., January 1. The above dates can be modified by the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. The modifications should be granted in writing. In all cases, if the decision is unfavorable, the candidate's appointment will be continued for two (2) full semesters beyond the decision date. Exceptions to the timing of reviews are described in Chapter Three, Section II.

II. Measurement of Time of Service

III. Voting Eligibility

The table below defines the Appropriate Faculty, or those eligible to discuss and vote on appointment, promotion and tenure terms.

	APPROPRIATE FACULTY (FACULTY ALLOWED TO VOTE)
Subject of Voting	Lecturers	Senior Lecturers	Tenure-Track Faculty	Non-Tenured Faculty: Associate Professor and above	Tenured Faculty: Associate Professor and above	Tenured, Full Professors	Option of the Dean
Appointment: Lecturer	x	x	x	x	x	x
Reappointment: Lecturer		x	x	x	x	x
Promotion: Senior Lecturer			x	x	x	x
Appointment: Senior Lecturer	x	x	x	x	x	x
Reappointment: Senior Lecturer			x	x	x	x
Appointment: Assistant Professor			x	x	x	x
Reappointment: Assistant Professor				x	x	x
Promotion: Associate Professor w/o Tenure				x	x	x
Promotion: Associate Professor w/ Tenure					x	x
Promotion: Full Professor						x
Endowed Professorships							x
External Tenure-Track or Tenured Appointments at any Rank*			First Vote
						Second Vote

*Two (2) votes are taken. The first vote is by all tenure-track faculty. The second, tenured vote, is by Tenured, Full Professors.

Table Last Modified: February 9, 2007

A. Student evaluations are available to members of the Appropriate Faculty, members of the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee, the Dean and the Office of the Provost;

B. Peer evaluations solicited by the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee are available to members of that Committee, members of the Appropriate Faculty, the Dean, the Ad Hoc External Committee (if applicable) and the Office of the Provost. Peer evaluations solicited by the Ad Hoc External Review Committee are available to the Dean and to the Office of the Provost;

C. Names of members of the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee are known to members of the Appropriate Faculty, members of the Ad Hoc External Review Committee, the Dean and the Office of the Provost. Individual members may make public their membership on the Committee, but may not make public the membership of other Committee members;

D. Names of members of the Ad Hoc External Review Committee are known to the Dean and to the Office of the Provost. Individual members may make public their membership on the Committee, but may not make public the membership of other Committee members; and

E. Discussion, opinions and votes of members of the Appropriate Faculty are known to each other and to the Dean. No formal record of individual opinions or votes is maintained. Individual members of the Appropriate Faculty may make public their own opinions and votes, but may not make public the opinions or votes of others.

top of page

A. Promotion and tenure reviews are initiated at the beginning of the year of eligibility, as defined in Chapter Three, Section I. This allows two (2) full semesters for the review to be completed. Reappointment reviews are normally initiated at the beginning of the last semester of the candidate's appointment.

The Dean will inform the candidate of the initiation of the review. The Dean will review these procedures with the candidate with the aim of answering questions that the candidate may have.

B. Within fifteen (15) days after being informed by the Dean of the review, the candidate will provide the Dean with the following materials and information:

1. One (1) copy of a statement of the general nature of the candidate's research activity identifying the fields in which the candidate believes research should be reviewed. The candidate's statement should indicate the major themes of the research, how the papers fit into his or her research strategy and the importance of each item to the research agenda.

2. A listing of five (5) (three [3] for reappointment) or more individuals of tenured or equal rank (where possible) whom the candidate believes will be competent and objective in reviewing his or her research. The candidate will describe the nature of any professional and/or social relationship between the reviewer and the candidate. (An independent peer review is required for promotion and tenure, but is required for reappointment only when the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee deems it desirable.)

3. One (1) copy of all articles authored or co-authored by the candidate that have either been published, accepted or submitted for publication. The candidate should identify the publication status of each article. Where articles have been co-authored, the candidate should describe the extent of his or her contribution.

4. One (1) copy of all books authored or co-authored by the candidate that have been published, accepted or submitted for publication. The candidate should identify the publication status of each book. Where books are co-authored, the candidate should describe the extent of his or her contribution.

5. Any other materials, which in the judgment of the candidate, constitute evidence of scholarly performance. These may include, but are not restricted to, testimony before legislative bodies, scholarly papers in process and speeches before professional associations. The candidate should carefully indicate the status of work in progress so that it can be judged fairly.

6. One (1) copy of a statement of the general nature of the candidate's teaching activity. The statement should describe the candidate's primary teaching interests, philosophy and accomplishments.

7. Any other materials which, in the judgment of the candidate, constitute evidence of teaching performance. These may include, but are not restricted to, course syllabi, letters of commendation by students and alumni and descriptions of advising activities.

8. One (1) copy of a current resume.

9. A listing of the names of doctoral students on whose Committees the candidate has served and the candidate's responsibility (Chairperson, member, etc.) and the time served.

10. A listing of the candidate's administrative activities for the School and for the University. These may include, but are not restricted to, committee assignments and part-time administrative assignments. The nature and duration of such administrative activities should be described.

11. A list of the names and dates of courses taught at the School. Where courses have been jointly taught, co-instructors should be identified. The extent of the candidate's responsibility should be described.

12. A description of the candidate's service and extension activities.

C. The Dean will review the materials submitted by the candidate for completeness. When the materials are complete, the Dean will forward them to the Chairperson of the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee.

top of page

A. The Dean appoints an Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee to help evaluate the candidate. The Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee consists of three (3) members whose rank and tenure status are consistent with the definition of Appropriate Faculty. Members may be chosen from faculty outside the School whose research interests are similar in nature to the research interests of the candidate. The Dean will inform the Appropriate Faculty of the names of the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee when it has been constituted.

B. In conducting meetings and deliberations, the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee will proceed in an orderly and systematic manner and, when in doubt, be governed by Robert's Rules of Order. Two (2) members of the three (3) member Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee shall constitute a quorum.

C. The general responsibilities of the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee are to make a comprehensive evaluation of the candidate against the APPOINTMENT, PROMOTION AND TENURE CRITERIA of the School, and to report its recommendation, and the basis therefore, to the Dean and the Appropriate Faculty.

D. In its evaluation, the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee shall gather and consider the following evidence:

1. The materials submitted by the candidate.

2. Independent peer reviews of the candidate's scholarly activity. (For reappointment, peer reviews occur only when the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee deems it desirable.) Peer reviews in this case are normally performed by the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee.

An independent peer review is required for promotion and tenure decisions. In addition to the candidate's list of potential reviewers (Chapter Three, Section V[B][2]), the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee will prepare a second list of potential reviewers who are representative of the field(s) identified by the candidate. Reviewers may be tenured faculty members at Cornell and other colleges and universities, or persons of equivalent professional status. The Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee will then obtain at least eight (8) peer review letters from these two (2) lists in the case of Full Professor and tenure promotions and five (5) in the case of promotion to Associate Professor without Tenure. No more than half of the peer review letters obtained should be from the candidate's list.

3. Independent review of the candidate's teaching activity. At least twenty-five (25) current and former students who have studied in courses taught by the candidate at the School will be asked to evaluate the candidate's teaching. Selection of students will be made by a method that approximates random selection. As an aid to evaluating replies, each reply will be marked with the grade of the student reviewer in courses taken from the candidate being evaluated. In addition, all current and former Ph.D. students on whose committee(s) the candidate serves or has served will be solicited for their evaluation. Unsolicited letters from students, alumni and Ph.D.'s are not encouraged. If such letters are received, they will be appropriately identified and included within the report.

4. Summaries of the School's course evaluations of courses taught by the candidate at the School.

5. Promotions to tenure, Associate or Full Professor, should include "citation data" on the candidate's research. The Chairperson of the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee should assume responsibility for requesting this data. The number of citations for each article is sufficient to report to the faculty.

6. The Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee will gather any other information that it deems necessary to make a comprehensive review against the APPOINTMENT, PROMOTION AND TENURE CRITERIA of the School.

E. In a written report to the Dean, the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee will make a recommendation for or against reappointment, promotion or tenure. The report will also set forth the evidence considered and the basis for the recommendation. As appendices, the report will include the principle evidence considered by the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee. The candidate should not solicit letters of recommendation. In the event that unsolicited letters are received by the administration or the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee, they will be included in the report as a separate appendix from the solicited peer and student evaluations discussed in Chapter Three, Sections VI(D)(2) and VI(D)(3). Given that the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee is responsible for gathering relevant data, any third-party evaluations not solicited by the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee are to be afforded little weight. Members who dissent from the majority recommendation may set forth their views in an addendum to the report.

F. On receipt of the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee's report, the Dean will review it to determine that established procedures have been adequately followed. The Dean may remand the report to the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee for gathering of additional evidence and for reconsideration of the recommendation.

top of page

A. When the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee's report is accepted by the Dean, the Dean will inform the Appropriate Faculty, in writing, of a time and place to consider the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee's recommendation. The meeting date will normally be at least seven (7) days subsequent to the date of notice. The Dean will then make the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee's report and all appended evidence available for inspection by the Appropriate Faculty. As described in Chapter Three, Section III, nontenured Assistant and Associate Professors are included in the review process in cases where external candidates are being considered.

B. A record of faculty who have reviewed the Committee's report prior to the scheduled meeting date will be maintained.

C. At the meeting of the Appropriate Faculty, the Chairperson of the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee will present its report. Other Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee members will then have the opportunity to present their individual views. Faculty discussion of the recommendation will proceed under Robert's Rules of Order. The vote will be by show of hands. The Dean will record the names of members who are present, and the numbers voting affirmatively, negatively and abstaining. No other record of the Faculty Meeting will be kept.

D. Following the meeting of the Appropriate Faculty, the Dean will poll those members who were absent (excluding those on Sabbatical or Study Leaves or Leaves of Absence from the School who cannot review the record and form an opinion on a timely basis). Following this poll, the Dean will inform the Appropriate Faculty, in writing, of the final vote.

top of page

A. Dean's Tentative Decision

Taking into consideration the evidence, the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee's report and the advisory vote of the Appropriate Faculty, the Dean will make a tentative decision regarding promotion or tenure. The Dean is not bound to act in accordance with the advisory vote of the faculty. The Dean will, within ten (10) days of communicating voting results to the Appropriate Faculty, inform the candidate of this decision. If the Dean is required to (or chooses to) form an Ad Hoc External Review Committee, that Committee normally shall be formed within thirty (30) days of communicating the vote of the Appropriate Faculty to the candidate. If the Dean forms an Ad Hoc External Review Committee because the candidate requests such a review, that Committee normally shall be formed within thirty (30) days of the Dean's receipt of a written request by the candidate that the Committee be formed. If the Dean's tentative decision is negative, notification shall be both in person and in writing, setting forth principle reasons for the decision.

B. When an Ad Hoc External Review Committee is Required

The Dean is required to appoint an Ad Hoc External Review Committee in any of the following circumstances:

1. For tenure decisions when the Dean's tentative decision is positive;

2. When the Dean's tentative promotion or tenure decision is not in keeping with the majority vote of the Appropriate Faculty; and

3. When the Dean's tentative promotion or tenure decision is negative but the candidate requests review by an Ad Hoc External Review Committee.

An Ad Hoc External Review Committee is optional, at the discretion of the Dean, in all other cases.

C. Candidate's "Negative Listing"

When an Ad Hoc External Review Committee is to be formed, the Dean shall inform the candidate promptly. On being informed that an Ad Hoc External Review Committee will be formed, the candidate may submit to the Dean a "negative listing" of potential Committee members whom the candidate believes, for whatever reason, are not qualified to serve. The "negative listing" by the candidate shall be reasonable in length. The Dean will consider this "negative listing" when constituting the Ad Hoc External Review Committee.

D. Appointing the Ad Hoc External Review Committee

For tenure decisions only, the Dean appoints the Ad Hoc External Review Committee consisting of three (3) members who are of rank equivalent to the definition of Appropriate Faculty, none of whom are faculty members of the School. At least two (2) of these members will ordinarily be from the University. At the discretion of the Dean, one (1) member may be from another University or in professional practice. The Dean will designate the Chairperson of the Ad Hoc External Review Committee.

The Dean will, where practicable, select members who have substantial and relevant professional stature, disciplinary interests similar to those of the candidate and lack of known personal biases, favorable or unfavorable, toward the candidate.

When the Ad Hoc External Review Committee has been appointed, the Dean will provide the Chairperson with the following:

1. All written evidence that has been previously gathered and considered in the candidacy for tenure, which will usually include the report of the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee (including all appended supporting evidence);

2. Copies of the APPOINTMENT, PROMOTION AND TENURE CRITERIA and PROCEDURES of the School;

3. A statement of any matters concerning the candidacy for tenure that the Dean deems deserving of special review by the Ad Hoc External Review Committee; and

4. A target date for completion of the review by the Ad Hoc External Review Committee. This target date shall be six (6) weeks from transmittal to the Ad Hoc External Review Committee of the information described above. With the approval of the Dean and at the request of the Ad Hoc External Review Committee, the target date can be extended.

top of page

A. In conducting meetings and deliberations, the Ad Hoc External Review Committee will proceed in an orderly and systematic manner and, when in doubt, be governed by Robert's Rules of Order. All members of the Ad Hoc External Review Committee constitute a quorum.

B. The general responsibilities of the Ad Hoc External Review Committee are as follows:

1. To make an independent review for adequate compliance against the APPOINTMENT, PROMOTION AND TENURE PROCEDURES as to the manner in which they have been actually followed in evaluating the candidacy for tenure. At its discretion, the Ad Hoc External Review Committee may request interpretation of the APPOINTMENT, PROMOTION AND TENURE CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES of the School, and the general tenure standards from the Dean or from the Office of the Provost. In order to preserve independence of Ad Hoc External Review Committee findings and recommendations, such consultation and assistance from the Dean and the Provost will ordinarily be limited to the essential minimum;

2. To make an independent and comprehensive evaluation of the candidacy for tenure against the APPOINTMENT, PROMOTION AND TENURE CRITERIA of the School and the general tenure standards of the University. In its evaluation, the Ad Hoc External Review Committee will review and consider the evidential record transmitted by the Dean. At its discretion, the Ad Hoc External Review Committee may gather, or cause to be gathered, such additional evidence as it deems necessary to carry out its review and evaluation. Such additional evidence may include, but is not restricted to, additional student evaluations and peer reviews;

3. To report its findings and recommendations and the reasons therefore to the Dean; and

4. Notwithstanding any of the above provisions, the Ad Hoc External Review Committee is responsible for determining the breadth and depth of its review.

C. After its information gathering and evaluation is completed, the Ad Hoc External Review Committee will write a report to the Dean setting forth evidence considered, the basis for its recommendation and the recommendation itself. A member who dissents from the majority recommendation may set forth his or her views in an addendum to the report. The Dean normally will communicate to the candidate the recommendation of the Ad Hoc External Review Committee within ten (10) days of receiving the recommendation.

top of page

A. Prior to arriving at a recommendation, the Dean may take the following actions:

1. If the review indicates significant procedural errors have been made, the Dean will take appropriate action to remedy the error. In this case the Dean will inform the candidate of the possible delay in reaching a decision. The Dean will also inform the Appropriate Faculty of the action being taken; and

2. If the review indicates substantial uncertainty about the substantive decision involved, the Dean may gather, or cause to be gathered, additional evidence and counsel.

B. If no substantial procedural or substantive issues are involved, the Dean will normally perfect a recommendation within fourteen (14) days after receiving the advisory vote of the Appropriate Faculty or after receiving the Ad Hoc External Review Committee report, if a committee is appointed (see Chapter Three, Section VIII).

C. The Dean will then:

1. Submit his/her recommendation in writing to the Office of the Provost. For tenure decisions, this report will also set forth the evidence considered and the basis for the recommendation. With the report, the Dean will transmit the principle evidence considered. At a minimum, this will include the report of the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee (and supporting appendices), the faculty vote and the report of the Ad Hoc External Review Committee, if applicable;

2. Inform the candidate, in person and in writing, of the recommendation and the principal reasons for reaching it; and

3. Inform the Appropriate Faculty, in writing, of the recommendation made.

top of page

A. Rights of Faculty Members Who are Denied Tenure

1. Right to Appeal

Any faculty member who is reviewed for and denied tenure may appeal that decision at the College and University levels. The School's policy differs from the University's procedures only in the fact that it does not recognize "departments." Therefore, an appeal can be made only at the College or the University level and not at the departmental level. The candidate shall be informed of this right, and the procedures for exercising it, when he or she is first notified of a negative tenure decision.

2. Extension of Appointments

For the purpose of determining the start of the terminal appointment of a faculty member who is denied tenure, the date of notification shall be considered to be the date of notification of the initial negative decision (the Dean's first "tentative" decision as noted in University legislation), and shall be unaffected by subsequent appeals. An exception to the date of notification occurs if the candidate requests and is granted a deferral of the start time of the review. In such a case, the date of notification shall be considered to be the end of the academic year in which the review process is initiated, even if the actual notification occurs after that date. If appeal within the University is in progress at the end of the terminal appointment, the appointment shall be extended until the appeal is complete.

Should any party involved in an appeal find that he or she is unable to comply with one or more of the deadlines specified in this document, that party may, prior to the lapsing of the deadline, apply to the Dean of the Faculty for an extension. If the Dean finds the reasons given for an extension sufficient to justify it, the extension shall be granted and all involved parties notified. All extensions shall be for a specified period of time. In cases where an extension is granted at the request of the appellant, the appellant's appointment shall not be extended under Chapter Three, Section XII(A)(2) beyond the duration of the normal term of an appeal without the consent of the Provost.

3. Role of the Ombudsman

Faculty members shall retain full access to the Office of the Ombudsman prior to and in the course of the appeals process.

4. Waiver or Loss of Appeal Rights

The appeals procedures herein described must be followed sequentially. Waiver of any stage of the appeals procedures shall cause the candidate's right to proceed further to be forfeited, except as noted below. Thus, failure to request reconsideration of a negative decision (see Chapter Three, Section XII[B]), or failure to respond (see Chapter Three, Section XII[C]), will constitute waiver of further appeal rights. However, as an exception, the candidate may waive the right to written explanations from the Dean without losing the right to proceed. The candidate may decline to pursue the appeals procedures at any stage.

B. Negative Decision by the Dean

1. Positive Faculty Recommendation

If the Dean's negative tentative decision follows a positive faculty recommendation, the Dean shall, within three (3) weeks of notifying the candidate of the initial tentative decision, furnish the candidate with a preliminary written statement of the reasons for that decision and the nature of the evidence within the limits set by the need to preserve confidentiality. For a two (2) week period following receipt of the statement, the candidate shall have the opportunity to respond to the Dean's negative tentative decision. The candidate may address any issue that he or she deems appropriate, and may present new evidence.

2. Negative Faculty Recommendation

If the Dean's negative tentative decision follows a negative faculty recommendation, the Dean shall, within three (3) weeks of notifying the candidate of the initial tentative decision, furnish the candidate with a written statement of the reasons for that decision within the limits set by the need to preserve confidentiality. For a two (2) week period following receipt of the statement, the candidate shall have the opportunity to respond to the Dean's negative tentative decision. The candidate may address any issue that he or she deems appropriate, and may present new evidence.

C. Appeal at the College Level

1. Reconsideration by the Dean of a Final Tentative Negative Tenured Decision

Any faculty member has a right to receive a timely reconsideration of a tentative negative tenure decision.

a. Within three (3) weeks after being notified that the Dean's final tentative decision is negative, the candidate will receive a written statement of the reasons for the decision and the nature of the evidence unless the candidate expressly relinquishes his or her right to receive such statement within one (1) week of said notice. The statement shall respect the limits set by the need to preserve confidentiality.

b. If the candidate wishes to have the Dean's final tentative decision reconsidered, he or she shall respond in writing, within three (3) weeks of receipt of the Dean's statement of reasons. The candidate may address any issue that he or she deems appropriate, and may present new evidence.

c. The eligible voting faculty may be asked by the Dean to reconsider the case given the Dean's statement and the candidate's response. A new vote would then be taken. The Dean's final decision and the reasons for it shall be provided in writing to the candidate within three (3) weeks of this meeting.

d. The Dean can terminate the appeals process, or resume the internal review by appointing an Ad Hoc External Review Committee if the evidence warrants it.

2. Formation of an Ad Hoc External Review Committee[1]

a. The candidate may request that an Ad Hoc External Review Committee be established following the process described in Chapter Three, Sections XII(B)(1&2), or in lieu of requesting reconsideration of the negative tentative decision (if he or she has nothing to add to the existing material). The candidate will have one (1) week from receipt of the negative tentative decision in which to indicate this choice to the Dean following receipt of the Dean's written statement of the reasons for the negative tentative decision.

b. If the Dean's final tentative decision is negative following a positive report by the Ad Hoc External Review Committee, the candidate will receive a written statement within three (3) weeks of the reasons for that decision and he or she will have two (2) weeks from receipt of the Dean's written statement to respond to the Dean, in writing, prior to a final decision by the Dean of the College.

c. If the Dean's decision is negative following a negative report by the Ad Hoc External Review Committee, the candidate will receive a written statement within three (3) weeks of the reasons for the decision.

d. The Dean's decision, whether positive or negative, is forwarded to the Provost.

D. Appeal at the University Level

1. Filing an Appeal

If the Dean's final decision is negative, following the Ad Hoc External Review Committee report, the candidate may appeal that decision. The appeal must be filed in writing with the Dean of the College and the Dean of the Faculty within two (2) weeks of notification of the Dean of the College's decision and must state the specific reasons for the appeal. The reasons must be based on one or more of the grounds listed in the following Chapter Three, Section XII(D)(2). Failure to raise a particular reason may be treated as a waiver of such a claim in this or any subsequent procedure.

2. Grounds for an Appeal

The grounds for an appeal shall be limited to one or more of the following:

a. During the appellant's probationary period, he or she was unfairly and seriously hindered in meeting the College's standards: (1) By having been put under obligation to accept unusual and unreasonably heavy duties for the College or University or having been denied support, contrary to the normal practices, or (2) By having been given misleading information or information so inadequate as to be fully the equivalent of misleading information by the Dean concerning the College's expectations of candidates.

b. In the conduct of the tenure review, there were violations of the established procedures and practices of the College or the University. These violations were so serious that the Appeals Committee believes they affected the outcome of the tenure review.

c. The evaluation of the appellant was influenced by unlawful discrimination.

d. The evaluation of the appellant was substantially influenced by consideration of factors unrelated to the performance of the appellant in carrying out the professional and collegial responsibilities of his or her position, or by improper and unprofessional consideration of factors which, if properly considered, would be material and relevant. The violations were so serious that the Appeals Committee believes that they affected the outcome of the tenure review.

e. The decision was so inconsistent with the evidence in the record that it must be judged arbitrary or capricious. (The term arbitrary and capricious fundamentally describes actions which have no sound basis in law, fact or reason, or are grounded solely in bad faith or personal desires. A determination is arbitrary and capricious only if it is one no reasonable mind could reach.)

3. University Appeals Panel

An appeal shall be heard by an Appeals Committee composed of five (5) tenured University faculty members. At least four (4) members of the Appeals Committee shall be members of the University Appeals Panel. The Dean of the Faculty shall be responsible for establishing the University Appeals Panel, and maintaining a list of members. Each college shall elect five (5) tenured faculty members, or five (5) percent of its tenured faculty whichever is greater, to the Panel. In addition, the President of the University shall appoint ten (10) tenured faculty members to the Panel. The term of office shall be five (5) years, with a rotation system developed at the time of the initial election.

4. Selection of an Appeals Committee: Within two (2) weeks after the appeal of the Dean's negative decision, the Dean of the Faculty shall be responsible for forming and charging an Appeals Committee to hear the appeal. Members of the Appeals Committee shall be selected in the following manner:

a. The appellant and the Dean of the College shall each nominate four (4) members of the University Appeals Panel. The appellant's nominees shall choose two (2) of the Dean's nominees, and the Dean's nominees shall choose two (2) of the appellant's nominees. The four (4) so chosen shall then choose a fifth tenured University faculty member, who shall chair the committee. (The chair is normally from the college of the appellant, except in those colleges where all tenured faculty members participate in each tenure decision.)

b. Any person nominated who has previously participated in the review of the appellant or feels unable to render an unbiased judgment or perceives a conflict of interest shall disqualify him or herself. However, in those colleges where all tenured faculty participate in each tenure decision, the automatic disqualification of that College's Appeals Committee members shall be waived if that is agreeable to both parties.

5. Principles and Restrictions to be Observed by the Appeals Committee

In its deliberations and findings, the Appeals Committee shall respect the following principles and restrictions:

a. The Appeals Committee's review shall be limited to determining whether any one (1) of the five (5) possible grounds for appeal (listed in Chapter Three, Section XII[D][2]) has been established. The Appeals Committee may, if circumstances warrant, investigate and return findings concerning possible violations of the grounds for appeal (listed in Chapter Three, Section XII[D][2]) not raised by the appellant.

b. The Appeals Committee shall recognize the central role of peer judgment in tenure decisions. Hence, the Appeals Committee shall avoid substituting its assessment of the appellant's professional qualifications for those of the College and the experts outside the College who have been asked to submit evaluations. The Appeals Committee's role in judging professional merit shall be limited to determining whether the recommendations of the Dean were arbitrary and capricious as defined in Chapter Three, Section XII(D)(2)(e), or based on the inappropriate considerations listed in Chapter Three, Section XII(D)(2)(c & d).

c. The Dean of the College has a major responsibility in setting the priorities and maintaining the standards of the College. Therefore, the Appeals Committee shall avoid substituting its judgment in those matters for that of the Dean.

d. It is impossible to make precise and universally agreed-upon evaluations of candidates. Therefore, the possibility that a different group of reasonable people might have come to a different conclusion concerning the merits of the appellant is insufficient grounds to sustain the appeal.

e. Comparisons with other tenure review cases may be used by the Committee in certain cases (see Chapter Three, Section XII[D][6][a]). However, the Committee shall recognize the right and duty of the College to improve its quality or take into account different needs, so long as this is not done as a pretext. A weak previous tenure appointment shall not by itself be taken to define the standard.

6. Appeals Committee Procedures

The following procedures shall govern the activity of the Appeals Committee:

a. The Committee shall have access to the tenure file of the appellant. If the appellant charges that the decision was arbitrary or capricious as defined in Chapter Three, Section XII(D)(2)(e) or based on the inappropriate considerations listed in Chapter Three, Sections XII(D)(2)(c & d), and if the Appeals Committee finds it essential to read the files of recent comparable cases within the College of the appellant to examine that charge, it shall have access to those files as well. However, the Appeals Committee shall not, as a matter of course, request access to the files of recent cases within a College. The Appeals Committee shall scrupulously protect the confidentiality of all documents and testimony.

b. In addition to examining written material, the Appeals Committee may hear the views of the principle parties and others it deems appropriate.

c. The Appeals Committee shall not be required to keep a transcript of its proceedings. The Appeals Committee shall maintain a record of the names of the persons interviewed and the titles of the documents considered.

d. The Appeals Committee shall report, in writing, within eight (8) weeks after being formed. The report shall be furnished to the appellant and the Dean of the College. It shall give the Appeals Committee's findings, and the reasons for those findings. These findings should be directly responsive to the grounds for appeal listed in Chapter Three, Section XII(D)(2). Before issuing the report, the Appeals Committee shall circulate a draft to the appellant and the Dean of the College and invite responses.

7. Findings by the Appeals Committee: The Appeals Committee shall make one or more of the following findings. The ensuing action shall be as stated:

a. If the Appeals Committee finds that none of the five (5) possible appeal grounds (see Chapter Three, Section XII[D][2]) has been established, it shall reject the appeal. This decision shall not be subject to further appeal within the University.

b. If the Appeals Committee finds that the grounds for appeal in Chapter Three, Section XII(D)(2)(a) have been established, it may recommend that the appellant's appointment be extended for a fixed period, after which a new tenure review shall be undertaken. It is expected that the Dean of the College will follow the Appeals Committee's recommendation. If the Dean chooses not to grant the recommended extensions, the Appeals Committee's report and the written response of the Dean shall be forwarded to the Provost. Within four (4) weeks, the decision of the Provost and the reasons for it shall be given in writing to both principle parties, and a copy shall be sent to the Appeals Committee. The decision of the Provost shall not be subject to further appeal within the University.

c. If the Appeals Committee finds that any other grounds for appeal in Chapter Three, Section XII(D)(2)(b, c, d, & e) have been established it may return the case to the Dean of the College for reconsideration. The Dean shall promptly take appropriate action to correct the deficiencies that the Appeals Committee has found, and shall provide a written report of the reconsidered decision to the Appeals Committee and the appellant. If the reconsideration results in an affirmation of the original decision, this judgment shall be returned to the Appeals Committee, which shall take the following actions:

(1) If the Appeals Committee finds that the tenure review process no longer has serious deficiencies, it shall reject the appeal. This action shall not be subject to further appeal within the University.

(2) If the Appeals Committee finds that the tenure review process continues to have serious deficiencies, and that an independent academic evaluation is appropriate, a panel of professionally qualified and not previously involved expert scholars from inside or outside Cornell shall be appointed to review the case and make a recommendation as to the granting of tenure. The panel's review shall not constitute an additional appeal from the Dean's decision, but shall constitute a new independent judgment concerning the candidate's academic qualifications for tenure. The panel shall be appointed jointly by the Chair of the Appeals Committee, the Dean of the Faculty, and the President of the University. The panel shall be entitled to all of the evidence on which the original substantive decision was based and shall be entitled to collect such further evidence deemed necessary to reach a new substantive judgment. The recommendation of the panel of expert scholars and the response of the Appeals Committee, the Dean, and the appellant shall be forwarded to the Provost. Within four (4) weeks, the decision of the Provost and the reasons for it shall be given in writing to both principle parties, and a copy shall be sent to the Appeals Committee. The decision of the Provost shall not be subject to further appeal within the University.

Note: Nothing in this document shall be construed to prevent an Appeals Committee from attempting to arrange an informal settlement of the complaints if it believes that fairness can, thereby, be served and that such an arrangement best serves the interests of the appellant, the Dean of the College, and the University. No action may be taken under this provision unless it is agreed to by the Dean of the College and the appellant.

E. Disposition of Records and Files

1. The Dean of the Faculty shall maintain copies of all reports of Appeals Committees and shall maintain records of all subsequent actions within the University that occur in these cases. At the completion of an appeal, all files shall be returned to the Dean of the College.

2. On completion of the appeal, the chairperson of the Appeals Committee shall provide to the Dean of the Faculty a letter describing any difficulties encountered in applying or interpreting these procedures. The Dean of the Faculty shall maintain a file of these letters, a digest of their central points, and other documents useful to subsequent Appeals Committees or to anybody authorized by the Faculty Senate (formally known as the Faculty Council of Representatives) to evaluate these procedures.

top of page

A. Lecturer appointments are for up to three (3) years and are renewable. During the last semester of the term, a reappointment (or promotion, when the promotion criteria have been met), review will take place.

B. Senior Lecturer appointments are for up to five (5) years and are renewable. During the last semester of the term, a reappointment review will take place.

C. The Dean appoints an Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee from members of the Appropriate Faculty, and notifies the Appropriate Faculty of its composition. The Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee reviews the materials submitted by the candidate, as well as any other information it deems appropriate, and writes a report to the Dean summarizing the facts, giving its evaluation of the candidate and making a recommendation for or against reappointment or promotion.

D. Upon receiving the report, the Dean reviews it and either remands it to the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee for further work or notifies the Appropriate Faculty of a meeting to vote on the reappointment or promotion.

E. The report of the Ad Hoc Internal Review Committee and the supporting materials are made available to the Appropriate Faculty at least one (1) week before the meeting.

F. The vote of the Appropriate Faculty is advisory to the Dean, who then reaches a decision and conveys that decision to the candidate and to the Appropriate Faculty within fourteen (14) days.

G. If the Dean's decision is favorable, the Dean forwards his recommendation.

H. If the Dean's decision is unfavorable, the Dean conveys to the candidate, in person and in writing, the reasons for the decision. The candidate may then appeal the decision in accordance with School and University procedures.

top of page

[1] On Page 34 of the 1990 edition of the Faculty Handbook, it clearly states that the formation of an Ad Hoc External Review Committee follows the reconsideration process.  In the Johnson School, if the candidate has no rebuttal or anything new to add to the review file, rather than reconvene the eligible voting faculty, he or she shall be provided the option of Appealing at the College Level as outlined in either Section 1.12.3.a.ii or Section 1.12.3.b.i above. BACK

(printer-friendly version)

Last Modified: February 9, 2007