Texas Tech University


[Major revision–posted 7/11/12 (replaces 12/8/09 edition)]
[8/10/15–Changed reference from OP 10.12 to OP 40.04
(no additional change to 7/11/12 edition)]
[PDF Version]

 Texas Tech University academic coat of arms

Operating Policy and Procedure

OP 32.01: Promotion and Tenure Standards and Procedures

DATE: July 11, 2012

PURPOSE: The purpose of this Operating Policy/Procedure (OP) is to define university-level standards and procedures concerning promotion and tenure. All faculty being considered for promotion and tenure are to be evaluated using the version of OP 32.01 effective on the date of hire, unless they elect to be evaluated using the current version of the policy (subject to the provisions of sections 6.a. and 9. herein).

REVIEW: This OP will be reviewed in November of odd-numbered years by the senior vice provost with recommended revisions presented to the provost and senior vice president (PSVP) by December 15. Any change in this OP must be conducted in accordance with section 9 herein.


A university is a community of scholars whose members are engaged in the discovery, evaluation, transmission, and extension of knowledge. As such, they must be free to search for and express the truth as they find it, whether in the classroom, research/creative activity, or service as members of the community, and regardless of their tenure status. They must also be free from undue constraints, whether imposed from inside or outside the university.

Faculty members' privileges imply correlative responsibilities. In addition to maintaining standards of competence, particularly those relating to scholarship and teaching ability, faculty members are responsible for maintaining the proper attitude of objectivity, industry, and cooperation with their associates within the university. It is a faculty member's professional responsibility to contribute productively throughout his or her academic career.

As persons of learning, faculty members should remember that the public may judge their profession and institution by their utterances and other actions. They should, thus, at all times be accurate, exercise appropriate restraint, show respect for the opinions of others, and exercise every effort to make clear that, as individuals, they do not speak for the institution.

Members of the faculty who are employed in a full-time tenure-track position with Texas Tech University are covered by this OP. The tenure policy does not apply to strictly administrative positions, non tenure-track positions, or part-time appointments. Approval of continuing appointment of persons holding full-time instructional positions that do not acquire tenure is described in OP
32.34. The terms and conditions of every full-time tenure-track faculty appointment shall be stated in the faculty member's letter of appointment and should be in the possession of both the university and the faculty member at the time of initial employment. These terms and conditions shall include departmental guidelines, college guidelines, guidelines for third-year review procedures, and this OP.

Texas Tech University has adopted a statement of ethical principles (Attachment A) that calls on all members of the university community to accept responsibility for promoting shared ethical principles. All academic appointments and tenure judgments and recommendations rest upon honest evaluation of the faculty member's performance of his or her teaching, research and creative activity, and service responsibilities. Consistent with OP 40.01 and OP 40.04, such judgments and recommendations are to be made without regard to race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, age, national origin, or disability, as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act, as amended.

In keeping with the mission of the university, tenure and promotion of quality faculty are essential values and processes in strengthening academic quality and reputation. Tenure and promotion also incentivize the university's strategies to promote excellence in teaching, expand and enhance research and creative scholarship, and to further notable outreach and engagement.

1.  Concept and Purpose of Tenure

a.    Academic tenure is designed to assure the faculty freedom in teaching, research, opinion, and full participation as citizens in the community. The purpose of academic tenure at TTU is also to retain a body of faculty best qualified to help develop and execute the core university mission of advancing knowledge and educating students. The purpose of promotion at TTU is to recognize and reward faculty with records of sustained professional accomplishment that contribute to that mission. TTU is committed to retaining and promoting faculty whose work achieves a high standard of excellence and who demonstrate through the performance of their duties a commitment to professionalism and to the core university mission. The university receives guidance from the AAUP Statement on Professional
Ethics (http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/policydocs/contents/statementonprofessionalethi cs.htm) adopted in 1966, in determining standards for professionalism, and from the AAUP
Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure
(http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/policydocs/contents/1940statement.htm), adopted in 1940, in ensuring traditional safeguards for academic freedom.

b.    Academic tenure has been adopted so that Texas Tech University may have the benefit of the competent and honest judgment of its faculty. Tenure recognizes the professional status of university faculty and assures that tenured employment may be terminated only for adequate cause (see OP 32.02 Faculty Non-reappointment, Dismissal, and Tenure Revocation).

c.    Tenure aims at the retention, encouragement, and promotion of the ablest and most promising faculty.

d.    Tenure may normally be obtained only after a period of probationary service. After tenure is granted, the burden of proof rests upon the university when it wishes to dismiss a tenured faculty member.

2.  Procedures for Admission to Tenure

a.    All departments shall have in place procedures for a third-year review for each untenured faculty member, which is to include a written assessment and recommendation regarding the faculty member's progress toward tenure and promotion.

b.    A faculty member must complete a reasonable probationary period before acquiring tenure in the university. The maximum probationary period for admission to tenure is the same for all tenure-track ranks. Before the end of a six-year probationary period at Texas Tech University, a tenure-track assistant, associate, or full professor, librarian, or archivist must be notified in writing either that tenure has been awarded or that the appointment will not be renewed at the end of the seventh, terminal year.

c.    Computation of the maximum probationary period begins based on the written terms and conditions indicated in the faculty member's letter of appointment to a tenure-track rank. Probation is not reduced by previous non-tenure-track appointments or by promotions made during that period.

(1)    The probationary period for admission to tenure shall begin in September of the calendar year in which the appointment is made.

(2)    After the probationary period begins, all time accrued in full-time service at Texas Tech University in a tenure-track rank will be counted in the probationary period. If extenuating circumstances, as judged by the PSVP, justify a suspension of the tenure probationary period causing the years included not to be sequential, a request for an extension of the probationary period may be made to the PSVP. The request will be initiated by the faculty member, reviewed and commented upon by the department/division chairperson and college dean, and forwarded to the PSVP for a decision.

d.    Exceptions to tenure timeline

(1)    In exceptional cases, associate professors, librarians, and archivists, and full professors, librarians, and archivists may be hired with tenure when the traditional tenure review procedure precedes the appointment.

(2)    Faculty members who are promoted in rank shall not thereby acquire tenure unless the normal tenure review procedure has been completed.

(3)    Tenure may be awarded prior to completion of the full probationary term, although a positive third-year review is strongly encouraged. A faculty member may request early tenure consideration prior to completing the full probationary period without prejudice for later reconsideration. For an early tenure bid, the faculty member's record of accomplishment at Texas Tech University on the standard criteria set by the department and college for admission to tenure is to be the equivalent or more than would be expected at the completion of a full probationary period.

e.    The faculty member has primary responsibility for preparation and submission of a dossier by the start of the sixth year of the probationary period, with guidance provided by the department chairperson, designated representative, or departmental committee (see Attachment B). Material submitted to the PSVP shall be limited to the designated format and should consist of no more than 20 pages, exclusive of all letters, annual reports, curriculum vitae, and department and college guidelines, which must be included in the package or submitted electronically. Any changes in the designated format (Attachment B) must be distributed to the deans by the PSVP no later than April 15 of the year in which the affected candidates are preparing their dossiers.

f.    A common format for promotion and tenure dossiers (Attachment B) shall be used to assure fairness in the decision-making process. As promotion and tenure require that a person's professional record and contributions be reviewed, the format calls for information on educational background, previous academic and professional experience, teaching and advising responsibilities, research and scholarly contributions, service and engagement activities since the most recent promotion or tenure decision. Some departments or colleges may wish to add other special categories for review at those levels. A copy of the dossier, either paper or electronic, shall be made available for review by the voting faculty within the department.

g.     Primary responsibility for the evaluation of the academic qualifications of candidates for tenure rests with the faculty. When the organizational structure permits, four sequential levels exist in the tenure review process. (Note: Colleges and schools may be organized by departments or divisions or function as a single unit. In this OP, "department" and "chairperson" will be used to refer to the basic academic unit of a college and that unit's administrative head.) The tenure review levels include:

(1)    Evaluation by the department, which includes a vote by the tenured faculty, and a recommendation by the chairperson, who does not attend or participate in the faculty vote;

(2)    Two events occur at the college level: first, a review by the college tenure committee, which provides a recommendation to the dean; and second, a letter of recommendation provided by the dean, who does not attend or participate in the department faculty vote, nor participate in the vote of the college tenure committee.

(3)    Review by the PSVP, which includes review and a vote by the dean of the Graduate School, except for candidates from the School of Law, and, at the PSVP's discretion, review and a vote by the vice president for research, and review, but not votes, by faculty members of the provostial staff. In any such deliberations, the greatest possible weight should be accorded to the department's and dean's assessments of the candidate, whose assessments should have carefully considered the faculty's evaluation of the candidate. Any decision to overturn a departmental or college vote by the PSVP should only be made after further consultation with the affected dean or chairperson.

(4)    Review by the university president, who makes recommendations for tenure through the chancellor to the Board of Regents. The action of the Board of Regents awards faculty members tenure.

3.  Procedures for Promotion

a.    Promotion from assistant to associate professor, librarian, or archivist normally occurs at the same time as the decision on tenure and follows the same procedures. Only faculty at a higher rank may participate in any promotion vote during the department or college review process.

b.    Promotion from associate to full professor, librarian, or archivist generally follows the same procedures as for promotion to associate, except that only faculty at the higher rank may participate in any vote during the department or college review process.

4.  General Criteria for Promotion and Tenure

Academic promotion and tenure are awarded to faculty who make continuing contributions in the areas of teaching, research and creative activity, and professional service, any of which may include outreach or engagement. While promotion and tenure determinations are separate and distinct, similar standards and procedures apply to both. The preservation of quality requires that all persons recommended clearly satisfy the general criteria presented herein. The relative weight given to each of the three components and specific criteria will depend on the standards in the individual disciplines as expressed in the departmental promotion and tenure standards, which must conform to documented college and university standards.

a.    Teaching

Teaching includes activities that contribute to student learning. Evaluation of teaching shall include effectiveness of course content and delivery, student learning outcomes, and demonstration of up-to-date knowledge of the candidate's discipline. In some instances, teaching may be indirect, primarily in support of student learning activities. Faculty members also influence teaching by designing courses and curricula. Textbooks, articles and other contributions to creative pedagogy, and innovative instructional materials, including documentation related to service-learning outcomes, may be considered contributions to teaching. Leading students on studies abroad is another contribution to teaching. In addition, faculty members influence teaching in less tangible, but no less decisive ways, through activities such as counseling students.

Detailed and specific evidence of effective teaching shall be included in the dossiers of faculty members being recommended for promotion and tenure. Each department is to apply its documented procedures for peer evaluations of teaching to each tenure-track faculty member at least annually. Candidates for promotion should also be provided peer evaluations of teaching in, at latest, the semester prior to application for promotion. Evidence in the dossier should be limited to a one-page summary of peer evaluations and student evaluations for each year of service since appointment or previous promotion. The department chairperson, in consultation with the candidate, shall provide the summary of teaching effectiveness, including involvement in graduate education, as applicable. Faculty colleagues should be asked to evaluate the objectives, methods, and materials of courses designed and/or taught by the individual as part of summative peer evaluation. Charts, graphs, portfolios, and other data may be included in appendices and subsequently removed by the dean before submission to the PSVP.

b.    Research and Creative Activity

Faculty are expected to contribute directly to the enhancement and expansion of Texas Tech University's research and creative scholarship. Research and creative activity serve to advance the discipline or the state of the art. Evidence of research and creative activity includes print or electronic publications, non-print presentations, funded grant applications and reports, patents and other intellectual property, curatorships, and artistic productions and performances. Textbooks and innovative instructional materials having significant value beyond this campus may be considered contributions to research and creative activity.

The dossier of an individual should provide substantiating evidence of quality submitted by appropriate observers within and outside the university, such as appraisal of the candidate's books or artistic performances. Outside reviewers who work in the same or a closely related field, and who have an objective expertise to evaluate the faculty member, shall be selected by the chair in consultation with the faculty member. Wherever appropriate, at least three of the reviewers should be from TTU's national or international peer institutions or aspirational peer institutions. Candidates must disclose which letters come from reviewers with whom they have a relationship that might raise a potential conflict of interest, such as collaborators, coauthors, former professors, or students. The total number of letters is not restricted.

c.    Professional Service

Faculty members are expected to make professional contributions through service to the department, college, university, discipline at large, and, as appropriate, to the broader community. These contributions to outreach and engagement may include discipline-related activities in service to the immediate community, to the state and region, and to society at large , as well as service in one's department and across the university as advisers, committee members, task force members, workshop and symposium participants, international development grant participants, and similar types of activities.

Participation in the activities of professional societies and organizations, especially through service in leadership roles, is a strong indication of professional commitment. Contributions through presentations and consultative services are regarded as further evidence of professional reputation. Such service and activities may include paid (compensated) as well as unpaid work on behalf of the profession.

5.  Standards for Academic Ranks

Each department and college may have requirements defined for each rank that exceed those of the university. The minimum university requirements for each tenure-track academic rank are as follows:

a.    Assistant Professor/Librarian/Archivist

In a tenure track, normally, one is appointed as an assistant professor. This initial appointment requires completion of the terminal academic degree (or its equivalent) defined by the department, as appropriate for the position to be held by the candidate, and an ability
to teach effectively. Promise of growth in teaching, research and creative activity, and service are also necessary.

b.    Associate Professor/Librarian/Archivist

Promotion from the rank of assistant professor to associate professor, and a tenure decision at this level, requires:

(1)    A demonstrated record of effectiveness as a teacher at Texas Tech University;

(2)    A record of peer-reviewed publication and/or peer-reviewed creative activity that has contributed to the discipline or field of study, to the candidate's intellectual and artistic development, and to the quality of the department;

(3)    Generation of external funding, or earnest effort to do so, according to departmental tenure guidelines and commensurate with terms of the faculty member's letter of appointment;

(4)    A record of engagement of undergraduates or graduate students in research, scholarship, and creative activity in disciplines where such efforts are specified by departmental tenure guidelines;

(5)    A record of professional service that meets departmental tenure guidelines; and

(6)    Promise of growth in teaching and research or artistic and creative activity.

c.    Professor/Librarian/Archivist

For promotion to the highest academic rank or a tenure decision at this level, the candidate's academic achievement and professional reputation should be superior and should have resulted in national and/or international recognition. This rank can be earned only by the faculty member who has demonstrated continued growth in, and has a cumulative record of, teaching effectiveness, substantial peer-reviewed publication and/or peer-reviewed creative activity, external funding of scholarship (for those disciplines where such funding is available and expected), engagement of undergraduates or graduate students in research, scholarship, and creative activity, support for those students (for those disciplines where such support is expected), and professional service, which may include outreach and engagement.

6.  Decision-Making Procedure

a.    Review by the Department

Recommendations for promotion and tenure originate with the department. Each department will develop written procedures to be utilized in promotion and tenure considerations. Each department will also develop specific written standards for promotion to each professorial rank that reflect its mission and, at the same time, meet university criteria. These procedures and standards must have the approval of the dean and the PSVP. Subsequent changes in approved standards or procedures must be similarly approved. After the department, the dean, and the PSVP have ratified written standards, the primary responsibility for evaluating individual promotion and tenure requests in terms of those standards will be assigned to the faculty in the department in which the request is made. If changes are made to a department's promotion and tenure standards and procedures, or a candidate moves to another department, the candidate may choose to use either the new standards and procedures or the ones in effect when hired (if being considered for associate rank) or those in effect when the candidate was last promoted (if being considered for promotion to full professor).

(1)    Department procedures shall identify the nature and composition of promotion and tenure committees. Procedures must allow for a formal vote of appropriate faculty members. The faculty vote should be strongly considered throughout the promotion and/or tenure process. Each department shall determine in advance its voting criteria, subject to adhering to university guidelines, and the college of which the department is a part must approve these criteria. Faculty votes shall be unsigned. Voting faculty should be made aware that written ballot comments will become part of the promotion/tenure dossier. Written ballot comments are encouraged because of insights they provide to the pattern of voting and to peers' considerations of the candidate's record. The chairperson and one other individual shall count the ballots and certify the vote in writing. Faculty members holding ranks equal to or higher than that to which
the person desiring promotion aspires shall constitute the eligible voters, whether or not these individuals are tenured.

(2)    The candidate shall prepare, in cooperation with the designated department representative or committee, the formal promotion and tenure dossier. Once the dossier has been submitted for consideration in the department, no further information should be added to the dossier, other than that required by department and collegiate procedures with regard to recommendations by review committees, department chairpersons, or the dean. Each dossier shall contain a signed statement by the candidate indicating that the candidate has reviewed all contents of the dossier as prepared for submission to the dean and the department/college committee.

(3)    In transmitting a recommendation to the dean, a department chairperson must indicate who has been consulted, the form of the consultation, the faculty vote, the vote of any departmental committee charged with the recommendation, and the chairperson's own vote, positive or negative (the department chairperson may not abstain). The recommendation of the department chairperson will be provided to the candidate at the time it is forwarded to the dean. Faculty members may then request without prejudice, in writing, that their dossiers be withdrawn from further consideration, in which case the dossiers will not be forwarded.

(4)    At Texas Tech University, it is not possible to hold different academic ranks in different departments. Therefore, for a faculty member who holds budgeted joint appointments in two academic departments, the recommendation for promotion and tenure must be a joint submission of both departments concerned, and the promotion and tenure recommendation shall be considered positive only if both departments make positive recommendations. Recommendations must be processed according to the regular procedures of both departments. It is incumbent upon the chairpersons of both departments to ensure initiation of the review process.

(5)    If a faculty member holds less than a half-time appointment in one department and more than a half in another department, the recommendation will be made by the department where the major responsibility lies. It is the primary department's responsibility to originate consideration and to inform the secondary department of its intent. For these unequal joint appointments, recommendations must be processed according to the regular procedures of both departments. However, while the secondary department must process the candidate according to its normal procedures, the outcome of its deliberation will be provided to the primary department. The primary department shall take into consideration the secondary department's opinion and shall include it as part of the dossier. These specifications apply to all joint appointments, whether or not the salary is divided by source.

(6)    In addition to the required consultation with faculty members of senior rank within the department and the joint consideration of joint appointments, originating departments are urged to consult with other individuals who may have special knowledge of the performance of candidates and to solicit letters from such persons. Examples of such persons include faculty members from other departments if candidates under consideration have taught a number of students from those departments, served on committees in those departments, or engaged in interdisciplinary teaching or research with members of those departments. It is also appropriate to solicit letters from administrative officers in various parts of the university concerning service by the candidate. Any such written correspondence is to be part of the dossier as prepared for submission to the dean and reviewed by the candidate.

(7)   The majority of comments related to a candidate's credentials should come from qualified persons outside Texas Tech University. Letters from reviewers shall be solicited by the chairperson or designated representative and become a part of the candidate's dossier. The reviewers shall be selected by the chair in consultation with the candidate. Reviewers shall be asked to comment on the quality of published research or creative activity of a candidate, on service to professional or other organizations, on the candidate's teaching, or on relevant matters within their competence to judge. Reviewers should not be asked simply "Does this individual merit promotion?"

All letters solicited from within or outside the university shall be included in the dossier so that review bodies may have access to all relevant information. Prospective reviewers shall be informed that the letters become a component of the dossier.

(8)    A department may have too few voting-eligible faculty to provide sufficient review. In such cases, the department chairperson, in consultation with the dean, should seek the advice of an existing executive committee or other college-wide body, or may appoint an appropriate advisory committee for review of a specific case. The composition of the committee and its recommendations must be reported in the dean's recommendation to the PSVP.

b.    Review by the College or School

(1)     It is the responsibility of the dean to recommend either positively or negatively on all promotion and tenure recommendations forwarded by department chairpersons. The dean shall forward to the PSVP all dossiers and recommendations together with a statement indicating the reasons for each recommendation. In all cases, information regarding the dean's recommendation will be provided to the department chairperson and the candidate. A candidate for tenure and/or promotion may then request in writing that the dossier be withdrawn from further consideration, in which case the dossier will not be forwarded, without prejudice.

(2)    In the process of reviewing the recommendation, the dean will seek formal advice of an executive committee or other appropriate college-wide committee. In making a recommendation to the PSVP, the dean will specify the nature of the report and the
vote of the committee.

c.    Review by the Provost and Senior Vice President

It is the responsibility of the PSVP to receive dossiers and recommendations regarding promotion and tenure, to review them with respect to the department, college or school, and university standards, and to approve or disapprove all recommendations received. A review and vote by the dean of the Graduate School will be included at this stage in the decision-making process, except for candidates from the School of Law. At the PSVP's discretion, review and a vote by the vice president for research and review, but not votes, by faculty members of the provostial staff may also be included. The PSVP will meet with each collegiate dean and discuss that dean's recommendations. The PSVP will subsequently transmit dossiers and recommendations to the president.

d.    Review by the President

It is the responsibility of the president to receive all recommendations regarding promotion and tenure from the PSVP, to review them, and to approve or disapprove the recommendations. After the review, the president will meet with the PSVP and discuss the recommendations. The approved recommendations will thereafter be transmitted to the chancellor for review of the recommendations, and then to the Board of Regents for final consideration.

7.  Documentation

a.    Materials to be provided by the Candidate to the Academic Unit

(1)    Appropriate supporting materials that cannot be provided from academic unit files;

(2)    All materials required by the academic unit's procedural guidelines, and in particular, each of the candidate's annual faculty reports with chairperson's assessments, and a report of the third-year review in the case of probationary assistant professors; and

(3)    Summaries of research and creative activity, including external funding activity, professional service, and, in consultation with the unit head, summaries of teaching effectiveness. The teaching summary should clearly delineate contributions to graduate education (if applicable) such as teaching of organized graduate courses, chairing or memberships on thesis and dissertation committees, mentoring individual graduate students, and similar activities.

b.    Materials to be provided by the Department Chairperson to the Dean

(1)    A separate letter concerning each candidate giving the following information:

(a)    Chairperson's recommendation with evaluation of the candidate's teaching effectiveness, research and creative activity, and professional service;

(b)    The summary vote of appropriate faculty members;

(c)    The summary vote of any departmental committee making recommendations to the chairperson; and

(2)    Another section that includes the unsigned ballot comments, separated from the ballots.

(3)    A file concerning the candidate containing letters or memoranda of advice, opinion, evaluation, or recommendation. Chairpersons should prepare a summary of the qualifications and purpose for selection of each individual from whom a letter has been received, and must disclose which, if any, of the reviewers have had a personal relationship with the candidate (e.g., collaborator, coauthor, former professor, or student). This information shall be submitted along with the letters. Departmental procedures for soliciting letters shall be included in the written procedures for promotion and tenure developed by the unit.

(4)    Complete dossier of the candidate organized in the specified format (Attachment B). Copies of publications, works of art, etc., should be included only if specifically requested by the dean. Copies of these materials will not be forwarded to the PSVP unless requested.

(5)    It is the responsibility of the department to clarify, when appropriate, why the candidate is uniquely qualified for promotion or tenure, i.e., to reflect any circumstances that are not readily apparent.

c.    Materials to be Supplied by the Dean to the Provost and Senior Vice President

(1)    A cover letter summarizing collegiate procedures;

(2)    A letter of recommendation by the department chairperson for each candidate;

(3)    A letter of recommendation by the dean for each candidate, including the department vote; and/or

(4)    Recommendations of any college-wide review committee, including the summary vote of each such committee; and

(5)    The dossier of each candidate, excluding appendices, but including letters solicited by the chairperson.

8.  Appeal of Decision Not to Recommend Tenure

Faculty who contend they have been denied the recommendation for tenure or promotion improperly or unfairly due to (a) considerations that violate academic freedom,; (b) constitutionally impermissible reasons; or (c) significant noncompliance with the university's established standards or procedures may address their concerns to the Tenure Advisory Committee through the PSVP, who shall forward them to chair of the Tenure Advisory Committee. The composition and responsibilities of the Tenure Advisory Committee and the Hearing Panel procedures are those set forth in OP 32.02, Faculty Non-reappointment, Dismissal, and Tenure Revocation, Section 2.(b)(3).

9.  Policy Revision and Implementation

Under the statutory authority of the state of Texas, the Board of Regents has the sole authority to revise this tenure policy. Proposal of revisions is the joint responsibility of the PSVP and the Faculty Senate in accordance with the principle of shared governance. In addition to the regular reviews, the Tenure Advisory Committee, the Faculty Senate, or other academic groups may submit proposals for revision at any time. Proposals approved by the PSVP will be reviewed by the Faculty Senate. If the Faculty Senate approves the proposed revisions but judges that they represent significant changes to the intent, standards, or procedures of the policy, the Faculty Senate shall present them to the voting faculty for consideration. In this process, the voting faculty* will vote for approval or disapproval of the proposals. If approved by a majority of those voting, the proposals shall be forwarded by the PSVP to the president for his/her review. If the president approves the proposed revisions, they will be forwarded to the chancellor and then to the Board of Regents for consideration. Proposed revisions that are not deemed by the Faculty Senate to require a faculty vote shall be sent directly from the PSVP to the president. If the president approves them, the president will take the recommendations to the chancellor and then to the Board of Regents. (*All tenured or tenure-track faculty on full-time appointments who have completed a residence of at least one year at this university.)

The revised policy is to be implemented immediately upon approval by the Board of Regents. Faculty members being considered for promotion or tenure will have the opportunity to choose to be evaluated under the policy in effect on the date of their hire (if being considered for promotion to associate professor) or the date of their last promotion (if being considered for promotion to full professor) or the current policy (see Attachment B). The tenure of faculty members who have attained tenure under prior versions of this policy at Texas Tech University continues. This policy shall not be applied in derogation of any faculty member's contract rights as set forth in the
faculty member's letter of appointment.

10.  Related Operating Policies

OP 32.02, Faculty Non-reappointment, Dismissal, and Tenure Revocation
OP 32.06, Faculty Responsibility
OP 32.17, Faculty Appointments and Titles
OP 32.34, Approval of Faculty in Non-tenure Acquiring Rank


Attachment A: Texas Tech University Statement of Ethical Principles

Attachment B: Promotion and Tenure Dossier Format



Adopted by the TTUS Board of Regents May 18, 2012

Operating Policies & Procedures