Â鶹´«Ã½

The fundamental criterion for reappointment is that the candidate should be deemed to have made satisfactory progress toward tenure.  Progress is to be judged relative to the number of years of service of the candidate.  In other words, expectations increase as the candidate approaches the tenure review year.

For candidates on the traditional tenure clock for Assistant Professors the reappointment review after completion of three full years of service at Kent State is particularly critical.  In the scholarship of teaching, by the beginning of the fourth year of service all probationary faculty, Kent and Regional, must present positive peer evaluations, following guidelines in Section  2.G.1 of this handbook, and good scores on the Student Surveys of Instruction.  By the beginning of the fourth year of service Kent Campus faculty must present an active research program, demonstrated by some accepted or published peer-reviewed articles and conference presentations, or a book manuscript in the final stages of preparation for submission to a publisher.  Regional Campus faculty are expected to present by the time of the fourth year an active research program, demonstrated by such evidence as submissions to refereed journals, conference presentations, and an accepted or published article.

Candidates for reappointment are strongly encouraged to consult annually with the Department Chair as they prepare and submit their reappointment files.  The candidate will develop the reappointment file over time as the basis of the tenure and initial promotion review file.  Specific guidelines for the preparation of the file are found in the instructions issued each August by the Office of the Provost.  Reappointment reviews are conducted annually in the early part of the fall semester, except in the case of those in the first year of appointment, when review takes place in the spring semester of the first year.

As part of the review process, the Chair consults with the Ad hoc Reappointment Committee, and then writes an independent recommendation on reappointment.  The Committee also votes on reappointment, recommending reappointment (without reservations), reappointment with reservations about progress toward tenure, or against reappointment.  The Chair will provide a written statement on progress to candidates at this time, and will record in his or her recommendation the Committee’s vote.  Candidates for reappointment may review comments made by faculty regarding their progress toward tenure.  To this end, the Chair will copy for the faculty member the committee’s signed evaluation forms and will invite the candidate to meet with him or her to discuss progress, with particular attention given to areas in need of improvement.