Reappointment Policy - Full Teaching Professors

I. MOTIVATION

At present, in accordance with CMU policy, full teaching professors are not guaranteed reappointment, and periodic review is required.  However, there is a strong general presumption that reappointment is the likely outcome for full teaching professors, based on their sustained records of educational contribution and leadership.  Given this presumption, there is a desire to avoid unnecessary work (e.g., repeated solicitation of external letters, careful review of long case files) and unnecessary concern on the part of respected senior members of the faculty.

II. PROCEDURE

1. Full teaching professors up for reappointment will prepare a "mini-case" in advance of the spring preview meeting:
   • c.v.
   • teaching, advising, service, and/or research statement(s);
   • optionally a statement of goals for the period of reappointment.
   The department will add FCE summary information to the mini-case.
2. Before the spring preview meeting, the department head and dean will discuss the reappointment of the candidate. It is expected that, in nearly all full teaching professor reappointment cases, the department head and dean will, acting on behalf of the department and the college, approve the reappointment before the spring preview meeting.  If so, that decision and the mini-case will be archived to be reported up to the SCS level after the fall RPT meeting, with standard language, e.g., “The [name of department] has decided to reappoint [name of candidate] as full teaching professor.” The department head will announce at the spring preview meeting which reappointments have been made in this fashion.
3. If the department head and/or dean believe a full teaching professor reappointment should be reviewed, the mini-case will be made available to the appropriate subset of the faculty along with other folders before the spring preview meeting.  During the spring preview meeting, at the appropriate juncture, the head will announce that [name of candidate], a full teaching professor, is up for review, and that the procedure will be as follows:
   1. The reappointment candidate will leave the room.
   2. The case will be discussed by at least the tenured full professors, full teaching professors who have been reappointed, those holding equivalent ranks on other tracks.
   3. After discussion, there will not be a vote unless somebody calls for one.  If nobody calls for a vote, the result will be the same as in paragraph 2, i.e., “The [name of department] has decided to reappoint [name of candidate]” will be archived to be reported up to the SCS level after the fall departmental RPT meeting, along with the mini-case.
   4. If a faculty member does call for a vote, a vote will be held; if the majority is positive, the positive result, will, as above, be recorded and forwarded to the SCS level in the fall, again along with the mini-case.
   5. If there is a vote and the vote is not majority-positive, then this case will be handled the way other reappointment cases are:  a reading committee will be appointed, the candidate will prepare a full case (likely including external letters), the reading committee will present the case at the fall meeting, and the result will be passed up to the SCS level.