C.3. Rules of Appointment and Tenure for Academic Faculty
Section Links:
a. Purpose
b. Principles – teaching, scholarship, service, academic freedom
c. Faculty Appointments – regular, term, special, associate
appointments, voting, committee assignments
e. Review and Reappointment – review schedule, first review,
post-review consultation, appointments following a negative review
f. Promotion to Tenure – institutional assumptions regarding tenure,
initial appointment with tenure, review for promotion to professor, ten-year review
a. Purpose
b. Evaluation of Teaching – criteria, course response forms, classroom visits
f. Program Director’s Evaluation
3. Procedures and Responsibilities
a. First Review
d. Review for Promotion to Professor
4. Prior Service, Early Review, and Length of Appointment
a. Normal Review Schedules in Case of Prior Service
b. Review Schedule for Term Appointments
c. Length of Appointment and Tenure
g. Retirement
1. General Provisions
a. Purpose
The Rules of Appointment and Tenure set forth the regulations and the procedures affecting appointments of the instructional faculty of Middlebury College. These criteria and procedures apply to the Council on Reviews (consisting of the Reappointments Committee and the Promotions Committee), to the president, the provost, and to all academic departments and programs at Middlebury College, and are the only criteria and procedures that may be required as conditions for appointment, reappointment, and promotion. Because its judgment is central to general educational policy, the faculty has primary responsibility (exercised through the Council on Reviews, academic departments and programs, and individual faculty members) to make recommendations for appointment. The president normally follows the recommendation of the Promotions Committee. The provost normally follows the recommendation of the Reappointments Committee. In cases where the president or provost does not follow the recommendation of the Promotions Committee or the Reappointments Committee, respectively, they will communicate the reasons to the appropriate committee and the reasons will be stated in the review file.
b. Principles
i. Teaching. Middlebury College expects to appoint to the faculty people of exceptional promise and achievement as teachers and as scholars or artists, who will help students to grow and to develop habits of lifelong learning, critical inquiry, and lucid communication.
As a residential liberal arts college, Middlebury views teaching from a broad perspective that extends beyond the activities in classrooms, laboratories, studios, and recital halls. Advising students, providing guidance for independent projects, and the careful evaluation of student work are important components of a faculty member's responsibilities. Public lectures, presentations, or performances also contribute to teaching at Middlebury.
The Course Syllabus communicates the overall expectations that the faculty has for student work. It must be issued by the instructor at the beginning of every regular course. The course syllabus shall include: general course information, instructor information, a course description, course objectives, instructional methodology, grading information, course materials, and a course outline with tentative deadlines. A basic syllabus should be uploaded to the Course Hub at least one week before classes begin.
The syllabus is subject to change as determined by the instructor with advance notice and due respect to fairness to the students as a whole. No additional major papers or projects may be announced after the end of the fifth week of the semester. No new assignments of work for evaluation may be made during the last week of classes.
ii. Scholarship. Middlebury believes that a faculty actively engaged in scholarship enriches the intellectual climate of the College. The mastery of new knowledge or skills, including those outside of the faculty member's own discipline, is valued as a contribution to the intellectual life of the College; however, the quality of a faculty member's scholarship is evaluated primarily through his or her published, performed, or executed works. Scholarly achievement that is recognized as of significantly high quality by scholars or artists beyond Middlebury College is a prerequisite for promotion to tenure.
iii. Service. The Middlebury faculty has a vital role to play in sustaining the intellectual climate of the College outside the classroom, in governing the College, and in extending the impact of the College beyond the bounds of the campus. Beyond teaching and scholarship, the service roles played by individual faculty members include departmental, program, and committee responsibilities, activities with student organizations, participation in admissions or alumni activities, and other activities that benefit Middlebury College.
iv. Academic Freedom. Adapted from the 1940 "Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure" of the American Association of University Professors:
(a) Purposes. Institutions of higher education are conducted for the common good and not to further the interests of either the individual teacher or the institution as a whole. The common good depends upon the free search for truth and its free exposition.
Academic freedom is essential to these purposes and applies to both teaching and research. Freedom in research is fundamental to the advancement of truth. Academic freedom in its teaching aspect is fundamental for the protection of the rights of the teacher in teaching and of the student to freedom in learning. It carries with it duties correlative with rights.
Tenure is a means to certain ends; specifically: (1) freedom of teaching and research and of extramural activities and (2) a sufficient degree of economic security to make the profession attractive to men and women of ability. Freedom and economic security, hence, tenure, are indispensable to the success of an institution in fulfilling its obligations to its students and to society.
(b) Principles. The teacher is entitled to full freedom in research and in the publication of the results, subject to the adequate performance of his or her other academic duties; but research for pecuniary return should be based upon an understanding with the authorities of the institution.
The teacher is entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing his or her subject, but should be careful not to introduce into his or her teaching controversial matter which has no relation to the subject. Limitations of academic freedom because of religious or other aims of the institution should be clearly stated in writing at the time of the appointment.
College or university teachers are citizens, members of learned professions, and officers of an educational institution. In speaking or writing as citizens, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline, but their special position in the community imposes special obligations. As persons of learning and educational officers, they should remember that the public may judge their profession and their institution by their utterances. Hence, they should at all times be accurate, should exercise appropriate restraint, should show respect for the opinions of others, and should make every effort to indicate that they are not institutional spokespeople.
Consistent with AAUP’s 1940 “Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure” and its subsequent amendments, all members of the Middlebury College faculty are entitled to full academic freedom described above regardless of race, color, ethnicity, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, marital status, place of birth, veteran status, gender identity and expression, or sexual orientation.
c. Faculty Appointments
i. Regular and Term Appointments. Both term and regular appointments may be offered at any faculty rank. Regular appointments are renewable and subject to the Review and Reappointment procedures described in subsections 1.e. and 1.f. below. Faculty on regular appointment normally pass through a probationary period whose length may vary with prior service elsewhere, during that time undergoing one or more reviews that will evaluate, both for the faculty member and for the College, the progress they have made in developing the qualities that may lead to appointment without limit of tenure.
Term appointments are either for specified terms only, or renewable, but faculty on term appointments are not eligible for tenure. Whether a faculty position is to be a regular or term appointment shall be determined by the provost, with the advice of the Educational Affairs Committee, prior to the filling of the position. Any change from a term to a regular appointment must be initiated by the appropriate department chair, recommended by the EAC, and approved by the provost. A faculty member who holds a regular Middlebury faculty appointment cannot be appointed after the first review to a full-time faculty position outside of rank. Faculty appointments are considered to be in rank when they use the following titles:
(a) Instructor: Normal rank for faculty who have not completed the Ph.D. degree or equivalent terminal degree. The completion of the degree normally leads to promotion to Assistant Professor without a review by the Council on Reviews.
(b) Assistant Professor: Normal rank for faculty who have completed a terminal degree, but who have not been reviewed for and appointed to tenure.
(c) Associate Professor: Normal rank for first appointment with tenure, or whose initial appointment, based on accomplishment elsewhere, is at the rank of associate professor.
(d) Professor: The rank awarded to faculty who have passed the post-tenure review described in 1.f.iv. below, or whose initial appointment, based on accomplishment elsewhere, is at the rank of professor.
ii. Special Appointments. Individuals with special appointments normally do not follow the schedule of reviews and promotions of regular faculty. Special appointments are assigned one of the faculty titles below. Special appointments may be within or outside of rank, do not carry tenure, and are not subject to the review and reappointment procedures described in subsection 1.e. However, faculty members on renewable special appointment are subject to periodic Contract Reviews by the Reappointments Committee, as specified in subsection 3.f., below.
(a) Lecturer and Senior Lecturer: Renewable full- or part-time term appointments to fulfill specialized teaching responsibilities. Lecturers are not required to have a terminal degree. After at least nine years of consecutive service and following a successful Contract Review, Lecturers will be reappointed as Senior Lecturers.
(b) Assistant Professor (non-tenure-track): Multi-year appointments of two to five years in length with less than full-time teaching responsibilities. Faculty appointed to this rank must have a terminal degree. Those individuals hired at this rank who are ABD will initially be appointed as Instructor. For those on two-year contracts, the department or program will normally request an increase to at least a three-year contract if it requests a second renewal. For those on three-year contracts, the department or program will normally request an increase to a five-year contract if it requests a second renewal.
(c) Associate Professor (without tenure): Faculty appointed as Assistant Professor (non-tenure-track) may be promoted to Associate Professor (without tenure) after at least two successful contract reviews, as described in subsection 3.f. below, and at least six years of consecutive service.
(d) Assistant in Instruction: Full- or part-time renewable term appointments to fulfill specialized teaching functions associated with courses. Assistants in Instruction serve as teaching assistants, work one-on-one with students, and/or provide technical support for student work.
(e) Laboratory Instructor: Full- or part-time renewable term appointments to fulfill specialized teaching functions associated with the laboratory components of courses. Laboratory Instructors have full responsibility for teaching and curriculum design of laboratory sections. Laboratory Instructors must have an advanced degree, but do not have a terminal degree.
(f) Assistant Laboratory Professor: Full- or part-time renewable term appointments to fulfill specialized teaching functions associated with the laboratory components of courses. Assistant Laboratory Professors have full responsibility for teaching and curriculum design of laboratory sections. Assistant Laboratory Professors must have a terminal degree.
(g) Associate Laboratory Professor: Full-or part-time renewable term appointments to fulfill specialized teaching functions associate with the laboratory components of courses. Faculty appointed as Assistant Laboratory Professor may be promoted to Associate Laboratory Professor after at least two successful contract reviews, as described in subsection 3.f. below, and at least six years of consecutive service. Associate Laboratory Professors must have a terminal degree.
(h) Visiting Appointments: Visiting appointments are full- or part-time term appointments that may be offered to faculty for no more than three years. At the conclusion of the term of the visiting appointment, it may be converted to a new renewable contract or regular appointment under the provisions specified above.
(i) Adjunct Appointments: Adjunct appointments are part-time term appointments that may be made at any adjunct title and may be renewed. Adjunct appointments normally are offered to individuals whose major professional responsibilities lie outside teaching.
(j) Physical Education: Faculty in the Department of Physical Education receive renewable term appointments in rank, and are subject to the review procedures as outlined in the contiguous section "Reviews for Physical Education Faculty". Physical Education Faculty appointments are considered as such when they use the following titles:
i. Instructor in Physical Education – This is the normal starting rank for coaches who have limited coaching background. Term contracts are issued for one or two years.
ii. Assistant in Physical Education – This is the normal rank for Head Coaches and Program Directors, who possess significant coaching and/or program experience. A Master's degree is preferred, (but not required). The rank is granted to coaches who show the promise of superior coaching and teaching ability based on previous coaching and/or program experience. Coaches in this rank will generally be offered a three-year contract, and upon successful reviews, a second three-year contract.
iii. Associate in Physical Education – This is the normal rank for coaching faculty who have demonstrated superior coaching and teaching ability, and after a major review are appointed to a renewable five-year contract. A Master's degree is preferred.
iv. Senior Associate in Physical Education – This is the rank awarded to coaching faculty who have undergone a major contract review during the tenth year as an Associate and continue to demonstrate superior coaching and teaching ability. A faculty member with a Senior Contract will be granted a renewable seven-year contract.
(f) Administrative Appointments: Senior College administrators whose major professional responsibilities are in support of the instructional program may be granted faculty rank.
iii. Associate Appointments. Associate appointments are regular faculty appointments in rank which normally carry no more than one-half the normal College teaching responsibility. Associates have all the rights, responsibilities, and privileges of their rank, including tenure for associates at the rank of associate professor or professor. (See section a. in Special Provisions of Appointment for procedures and conditions.)
iv. Appointments and Voting Rights. All faculty on regular appointment, regular faculty on associate status, senior College administrators with faculty rank, and full-time and part-time teaching faculty on special appointment, except for adjunct faculty, may vote.
v. Appointments and Committee Assignments. Faculty members on regular, full-time special appointment, or associate appointment are eligible for assignment or election to all faculty committees and councils, provided all conditions for membership are met. All faculty members are expected to fulfill normal advising and administrative responsibilities.
d. Procedures of Appointment
i. New appointments. New appointments are made by the president or the president's designate in accordance with the authority vested in them by the Board of Trustees. New appointments, reappointments, and promotions are reported by the president to the board at its regular meetings.
In considering appointment to the faculty of a person not already serving on it, the president will solicit the advice of the chair of the department concerned and such other advice and recommendation as they may deem appropriate.
ii. Offer of appointment or reappointment to the faculty will in all cases be tendered in writing and shall include a statement of precise terms and conditions of appointment and status of appointment with respect to tenure, and in the Department of Physical Education and Athletics with respect to contract terms. For a person already serving on the faculty, such offer will be extended early enough to be in their hand no later than the notification date as specified below in 4.f., Notification Date.
iii. Acceptance of appointment likewise will be tendered in writing. In the case of a person already serving on the faculty, such written acceptance or rejection shall be returned not more than 15 days after the notification date. Some extension of this period may be permitted by the president or the president's designate upon specific request in an exceptional case.
iv. Notice of non-reappointment of a person serving on the faculty will be given in writing no later than the notification date as specified below in 4.f., Notification Date. Such notice shall be deemed to have been given if the appointment upon which the person concerned is then serving was specifically stated to be a terminal appointment.
e. Review and Reappointment
i. Review schedule. Faculty on regular appointment whose first full-time appointment is at Middlebury are reviewed in the third year of appointment. Those who are reappointed following the first review will normally be reviewed for tenure in the spring of the seventh year after initial appointment. Requests for early review are detailed under section 4.d below.
ii. First Review. In the third year of appointment to the faculty, unless there is credit for prior service, the Reappointments Committee undertakes a thorough review of the faculty member for evidence of accomplishment in teaching, scholarly or creative activity, and promise of outstanding teaching and developing scholarly or artistic achievement appropriate to the year in which the review takes place. The composition and long-term needs of the department and the faculty will also be considered. The procedures to be followed for the first review are set forth below.
The Reappointments Committee will arrange a meeting with successful first review candidates within one month of the review. The only persons present will be the candidate, the Reappointments Committee, and the vice president for Academic Affairs and dean of the faculty (VPAA/DoF), as secretary to the Reappointments Committee.
iii. Post Review Consultation. After passing the first review and within a month after the obligatory meeting between the Reappointments Committee and the faculty member, the dean for faculty development and research (DFDR) shall arrange a meeting with the faculty member and the department chair to discuss the development of the faculty member's career from the perspectives of both the individual and the department chair. The procedures for these interviews are set forth below.
iv. Appointments Following a Negative Review. Faculty who, having undergone review for tenure, are denied reappointment shall be offered a one-year terminal appointment, but in no case will such appointment extend beyond the academic year following the year of the review. No person who has failed a review and left the Middlebury Faculty may be considered for any appointment to the Faculty.
f. Promotion to Tenure
i. Institutional Assumptions Regarding Promotion to Tenure. The granting of tenure, whether with or without promotion in rank, is recommended by the president to the Board of Trustees or its designated committee or subcommittee for approval. The College expects to appoint to tenure faculty who are of exceptional quality as teachers and who are scholars or artists of significant achievement as recognized by the broader academic community beyond Middlebury. Such long-term institutional commitment to an individual's career comes with the expectation of a demonstrable reciprocal commitment by the faculty member to the departmental and College curricula and to the broader life of the institution. College involvement cannot compensate for an absence of scholarly or creative achievement, but its presence must be considered as the institution assesses tenurability. Tenure reviews will be based solely on the performance of the candidate, without regard to numerical quotas.
Procedures for the review for tenure are set forth below.
ii. Tenure. Appointment as associate professor or professor, after the passing of a Review for Tenure, is normally without limit of time (to normal retirement). Faculty at these ranks are regarded by the College as having tenure. Because Middlebury is primarily a teaching institution, there is an expectation of continued dedication to and high performance in teaching, in addition to an expectation of continuing achievement in scholarship and of service to the College.
iii. Initial Appointment with Tenure. Initial appointment to the Middlebury faculty at the rank of professor or associate professor with tenure shall be made by the president after consultation with the provost and the Promotions Committee and with the approval of the Board of Trustees. The Promotions Committee shall apply the same criteria in these appointments when advising the president and provost as in those from within the College. Such appointments will be rare and made only for appointees of exceptional qualifications.
iv. Review for Promotion to Professor. Associate professors are first reviewed by the Promotions Committee at a time of their choosing, no earlier than the fifth and no later than the tenth year (eighth year for faculty tenured prior to 2011) following appointment to tenure, for possible promotion to professor. This review is regarded as an opportunity for reassessment of professional achievements, and the basis for promotion will be evidence of continued excellence in teaching, achievement in scholarship, and service to the institution. Should the faculty member not be promoted, a similar review will be conducted at intervals of the faculty member's choosing, no earlier than three and no later than five years following the unsuccessful review until the faculty member has been promoted to professor or has departed from the faculty. When initial appointment to the Middlebury faculty is at the rank of associate professor with tenure, the date of review for promotion to the rank of professor shall be determined at the time of appointment and stated in the letter of appointment.
Procedures for the promotion review are set forth below.
v. Ten-year review. In the tenth year after promotion to full professor and every ten years thereafter, each full professor will undergo a professional review by the Reappointments Committee. The review has two goals: to assess professional achievements since promotion to full professor (or since the last ten-year review) and to aid in formulating plans for further growth and development.
As a result of the review, the vice president for Academic Affairs/dean of the faculty (VPAA/DoF) may choose to recognize unusually distinguished service or consider action with respect to problems that have become apparent during the review. The VPAA/DoF will also discuss with the faculty member under review ways in which the College might help that person attain his or her goals for professional growth. Within the limits of its financial means, and in the interest of continuing faculty development, the College will attempt to offer leave opportunities to faculty members shortly after the ten-year review.
Procedures for the ten-year review are set forth below.
2. Review Procedures
a. Purpose
The review procedures complement the Rules of Reappointment and Tenure by enumerating the responsibilities of all parties charged with conducting a review for reappointment, tenure, or promotion to full professor.
b. Evaluation of Teaching
i. Criteria. Evaluation of teaching effectiveness includes an assessment by oneself and by one's peers, and the evaluations by students. In no case will evaluation of teaching be based solely on course response forms. Teaching should be taken in its broad sense, to include not only formal classroom work, but also the candidate's contributions to the curriculum, advising, and other teaching outside the classroom. Nonetheless, evaluation will always include observation of classroom teaching (see Classroom Visits below).
Criteria considered for evaluation of teaching will include:
(a) overall quality of the learning experience provided to students;
(b) effectiveness in promoting student thinking and learning;
(c) quality of classroom instruction;
(d) organization of courses;
(e) availability and helpfulness to students;
(f) care in evaluating student work;
(g) ability to teach a broad range of students; and
(h) teaching outside the classroom.
ii. Course Response Forms. Faculty members will receive a pdf of their course response forms via email following the end of the term and after all grades have been submitted. Faculty member's course response forms are stored electronically on a secure server with the Office of Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty, where they may be consulted only by the president, the provost, the vice president for Academic Affairs and dean of the faculty, the department chair (or a faculty member designated to chair a particular review), the Reappointments Committee or Promotions Committee, and the candidate themself. Program directors will have access to all course response forms for courses taught with an explicit program label, either as a standalone or cross-listed course. . A faculty member may request the addition of personal comments or other materials with the course response forms which they believe may be useful in the interpretation of the forms. Faculty members may share their personal copies of course response forms with colleagues writing on their behalf. The VPAA and DoF cannot grant access to electronic files to anyone other than those listed above.
Faculty who have completed the equivalent of two years of full-time teaching may designate one course every two years as "CRF-optional". In these cases, those forms are filled out by students and sent to faculty, but are held separately and not uploaded to the server. The faculty member, as part of their review, may then decide whether to include the forms in their dossier held by the administration.
iii. Classroom Visits. In the semester preceding the term in which the review takes place, the candidate should arrange with the department chair an appropriate schedule of class visits over the two terms. The chair (or a senior member of the department designated by the chair and acceptable to the candidate) will visit at least two classes. Other colleagues may visit classes if the candidate invites them. It is the responsibility of the chair to ensure that the visits are not unnecessarily disruptive. Following classroom visits, and before the end of the term during which the visits take place, if the candidate wishes it, each visiting colleague will meet with the individual being evaluated to discuss his or her performance in the classes visited and to make suggestions for possible improvement. Members of the Reappointments Committee or Promotions Committee, however, will not normally offer such commentaries. In all cases, which classes will be visited will be agreed on in advance by the candidate and the visitors. To designate a course CRF-optional, please contact the Dean of the Curriculum by the last day of the semester with course number, title, and term.
c. Evaluation of Scholarship
A candidate's scholarship or artistic production is considered in terms of activity and of achievement.
Scholarly activity represents a pattern of related professional involvements, which may include: research and experimentation; writing, analyzing, creating; presentations to peers or to the public; responsible roles in professional organizations; visiting professorships; applying for and receiving outside grants and fellowships; and developing new fields of expertise.
Scholarly achievement is the result of that activity, primarily as evidenced in work that has been (a) performed, executed, or published (as original research communicated to specialists or as the synthesis and interpretation of scholarly material for a more general audience), and (b) recognized as being of significantly high quality by scholars and artists within the broader academic community beyond Middlebury College.
Evaluation is undertaken by colleagues and by other appropriate professionals in the candidate's field. In reviews for tenure and for full professor (not required for faculty who were awarded tenure prior to 2011), scholars from outside the College will be asked to judge the candidate's scholarship. Evaluators will be supplied with the Handbook description of the scholarly activity and achievement appropriate to the review in question and will be asked to evaluate it on that basis.
Middlebury recognizes that many faculty produce nontraditional modes of scholarship and creative
work, including (but not limited to) digital, collaborative, interdisciplinary, and/or public-facing
formats and modes. Scholarly activity and achievement is to be measured on a project’s own terms,
rather than adhering to standards that may have once been assumed to be uniform for any given
field. Regardless of its format or mode, all scholarship and creative work will be evaluated through
evidence of its contribution to and impact on its field(s) and communities ; as applicable, such
evidence includes its documented peer review process, its ongoing public reception and
recognition, its creativity and insight, and/or its innovations in scholarly content, methodology, form,
or medium. A candidate’s dossier should iterate the goals of scholarly and creative works, and
explain the relevant criteria for evaluating their impact and achievement; if there are published
guidelines for evaluating digital, public, or other nontraditional scholarship within a candidate’s
scholarly or artistic community, or professional organizations or journals, it is useful and appropriate
to include these sources within the dossier.
Middlebury will commit to seeking out internal and external evaluators poised to assess
nontraditional scholarship, and ensure that all such assessment is made of works in their native
formats, if at all possible, including digital forms. Departments and programs will evaluate
interdisciplinary work in light of appropriate norms, striving to understand other disciplines’ customs
on co-authorship and collaboration, rhetorical style, and the relative weight of various venues of
publication and presentation. For collaborative work, evaluators will distinguish and assess the
candidate’s specific intellectual and/or creative contributions, as specified by the dossier.
d. Evaluation of Service
Institutional service becomes a criterion for evaluation along with teaching and scholarship at the tenure review and at the review for promotion to professor. It may be as diverse in form as is the faculty itself. Information regarding such service will be solicited from the candidates, from their departments, from their programs (when relevant), and through collegial letters for assessment by the Reappointments Committee or the Promotions Committee.
College service cannot compensate for an absence of achievement in teaching and scholarly or creative production. Nevertheless, the College recognizes that on occasion it must call upon an untenured faculty member to undertake a particularly demanding institutional role that may impede scholarly progress. At the time of such an appointment, the untenured faculty member may request that the VPAA/DoF, in consultation with the Promotions Committee, give written permission for a one-year postponement of the tenure review to permit additional time for scholarly achievement.
e. Departmental Evaluation
The department letter is written by the chair. This letter will state the chair's judgment concerning the candidate's fitness for reappointment, tenure, or promotion and the reasons for it. In preparing this recommendation, the chair will conduct two or more classroom visits for reappointment and tenure reviews, one or more visits for post-tenure reviews, review the candidate's course response forms and other materials submitted to the Reappointments Committee or the Promotions Committee for review, as well as the written recommendations of the tenured members of the department or of full professors when the review is for promotion to professor. The chair also will present, in the departmental letter, an accurate summary of the views, without attribution, of the senior members of the department.
f. Program Director's Evaluation
A program director will submit a letter of programmatic evaluation in faculty reviews if and only if (i) programmatic involvement is explicitly stated in the letter of appointment; or (ii) the faculty member under review requests that the VPAA/DoF solicit a letter from the appropriate program director. This letter will state the director's judgment concerning the candidate's fitness for reappointment, tenure, or promotion and the reasons for it. The VPAA/DoF will solicit letters from at least two other senior members of the program, whom the program director selects in consultation with the candidate under review. The program director will provide the faculty member under review the names of these senior members. These letters will go to the program director and to the Reappointments Committee or the Promotions Committee. In preparing the program letter, the director will review the candidate's vita; syllabi from relevant courses; an example of scholarly work; when the candidate has taught a course with an explicit program label, the course response forms from those courses; and, when relevant, the written recommendations of the solicited program members. The director will also present, in the programmatic letter, an accurate summary of the views, without attribution, of any senior members of the program who have been solicited to write letters. In cases where a program is based entirely within a department, the program director will write an individual letter that will go to the department chair and to the Reappointments Committee or the Promotions Committee. The department chair will summarize the views of the program director in the departmental letter. In such instances, the program director's letter will not be made available to the candidate.
g. Confidentiality and Access
Letters from students and alumni are always confidential. Letters from outside evaluators are always confidential. Letters from colleagues at Middlebury are made available to candidates only in the event of a decision to deny reappointment. Restricting access is meant to ensure frank and honest assessments of the candidates. The letters should be accurate in matters of fact upon which judgments are based. The departmental letter (i.e., the letter written by a chair that summarizes, without attribution, the views of tenured colleagues) will be made available to the candidate at the time when it is submitted to the Reappointments Committee or the Promotions Committee. If a program letter is written, it will also be made available to the candidate at the time when it is submitted to the Reappointments Committee or the Promotions Committee. Any response to the departmental or programmatic letter that the candidate wishes to submit to the Reappointments Committee or the Promotions Committee must be submitted to the Reappointments Committee or the Promotions Committee and made available to the department chair or program director within two weeks of the receipt of the chair's or director's letter. Any further letters of response, either from the chair, the director, or the candidate, will be held in confidence by the Reappointments Committee or the Promotions Committee.
The VPAA/DoF, the president, the provost, and members of the Reappointments Committee or the Promotions Committee will have access to all materials submitted in connection with a review. The department chair will have access to letters from other senior members of the department and to the candidate's vita, publications, and course response forms. The program director will have access to solicited letters from other senior members of the program and to the candidate's vita, relevant syllabi, an example of scholarship, and, when the candidate has taught a course with an explicit program label, course response forms from those courses.
3. Procedures and Responsibilities
a. First Review
The first review examines a faculty member's performance for evidence of accomplishment in teaching, of scholarly or creative activity, and of promise of outstanding teaching and scholarly or artistic achievement of significant quality. The evaluation of scholarship includes the assessment of the candidate, members of the candidate's department, and other faculty colleagues. The composition and long-term needs of the department and the faculty are also considered in this review.
i. The Candidate
(a) Candidates are expected to have completed the requirements for the terminal degree. Failure to complete the terminal degree (normally the Ph.D.) by the time of the first review creates the presumption that the criterion of scholarly activity has not been satisfied. This presumption can be rebutted only by strong evidence (1) that the required written or artistic work is completed, but not yet defended, or (2) that there is other scholarly achievement of exceptionally high quality.
(b) To arrange with the chair, or the chair's designate, an appropriate schedule of classroom visits.
(c) If the candidate so desires, to invite other colleagues to visit classes.
(d) To submit to the department chair and to the Reappointments Committee in a timely manner a complete vita, course syllabi, and other materials requested, as well as materials that the candidate thinks pertinent. For example, a faculty member may request the inclusion of personal comments or other materials with the course response forms which they believe may be useful in the interpretation of the forms. To submit to the program director, when relevant, a complete vita, syllabi from relevant courses, and an example of scholarly work.
(e) To submit to the Reappointments Committee scholarly publications, a dissertation, and/or other appropriate evidence of scholarship or artistic activity.
(f) To arrange with members of the Reappointments Committee an appropriate schedule of classroom visits.
(g) To prepare a self-evaluation that concentrates on teaching performance and scholarly activity with reference to the criteria listed in 2.b. and 2.c. above. The evaluation of scholarly activity should project a program leading to a level of scholarly achievement suitable for tenure. The letter may include identification of any factors that have hindered progress.
ii. Reappointments Committee
(a) To meet with the candidates for the first review, in a group or individually, to explain to them the procedures; and to invite the candidates to submit, either orally or in writing, any additional information that may be pertinent to their reviews. A candidate's decision not to submit such materials is in no way prejudicial to reappointment.
(b) To have one of its members serve as a liaison to the faculty member during the review and to meet with the faculty member early in the term of the review, and later during that term if necessary or if requested by the candidate to explain the procedures for the review, answer any questions, and receive additional information the candidate considers pertinent to the review; the liaison will report on all conversations and relay all information to the full Reappointments Committee. If the candidate requests as such, the liaison will arrange a meeting between the candidate and the full Reappointments Committee.
(c) To arrange with the candidate an appropriate schedule of classroom visits. At least two members should each visit at least two of the candidate's classes, or one class and one public lecture. Additional classroom visits may be scheduled as deemed necessary by the committee. (Commentary on teaching will not be offered by members of the Reappointments Committee.)
(d) To interview or to request information from other members of the College community, alumni, and persons off campus, as it deems necessary.
(e) To request letters of recommendation from current students and from recent graduates who have taken at least one course from the person under review. The Reappointments Committee will request letters from at least three students and at least three alumni in all reviews. Students may be asked to comment specifically on the particular criteria for teaching listed under Evaluation of Teaching, above.
(f) To request a letter from the department chair evaluating the candidate's scholarly activity, promise of achievement, and teaching, and assessing the candidate's role in the long-term patterns of the department.
(g) To request a letter from the program director, when relevant, evaluating the candidate's scholarly activity, promise of achievement, and teaching, and assessing the candidate's role in the long-term patterns of the program.
(h) To request letters of evaluation from other tenured members of the candidate's department, and, when appropriate, to invite comments from tenured colleagues in other departments.
(i) To review the scholarly materials submitted by the candidate; to read and consider such opinions of it as may be pertinent, such as reviews or reports of readers.
(j) To examine all the materials submitted to the committee in the case, and all other materials that may be pertinent to the review, including letters from other colleagues at Middlebury, letters from students and alumni, and others.
(k) To read and consider the course response forms.
(l) To keep written records of all interviews.
(m) In any case where the committee determines that a departmental recommendation requires further clarification, or when the Reappointments Committee is inclined to reject the departmental recommendation, to interview the department chair, and, if the Reappointments Committee so chooses, any other tenured member or members of the department/program the Reappointments Committee deems appropriate; in either or each instance to place a written summary of the meeting(s) in the candidate's file.
(n) To convey to the provost the committee's conclusions about the constituent considerations of the review, a final recommendation and the reasons for it. To record its final recommendation and make it a part of the review file.
(o) In the case that the Reappointments Committee does not recommend reappointment, to explain to the provost the reasons for doing so, and to include this document in the review file.
(p) To hear and respond to any conclusions of the provost that may differ from their own. To review with the provost those materials that pertain directly to any area of disagreement.
(q) To meet with the candidate within four weeks of the completion of a successful review to provide an assessment of the candidate's performance, to summarize the information on which the Reappointments Committee based its decision, and to provide the candidate and the chairperson of the candidate's department with a written summary of the meeting prepared by the VPAA/DoF. In this meeting, the committee should interpret the views of others without revealing their names. All summaries of reappointment review meetings will begin with the following paragraph: "The following summary of a meeting between (the candidate) and the Reappointments Committee is made available to the candidate, who has successfully passed a review for reappointment at Middlebury College, and to the candidate's department chair, solely for the purpose of providing a record of the meeting held to discuss the review just completed. Nothing stated in the summary, or in the course of the review, carries with it any presumption about the outcome of any subsequent review. Similarly, the findings and recommendations of the Reappointments Committee at this review are not determinative of any assessment of the candidate's professional development at a later review. At all reviews, the Reappointments Committee or Promotions Committee makes an independent determination governed only by the standards for reappointment, promotion, and tenure as then published in the College's Rules of Appointment and Tenure, with which faculty members are expected to be familiar."
(r) In the case of unsuccessful review, to offer to meet with the candidate for the same purpose.
iii. Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty (VPAA/DoF)
(a) To initiate the review, in a timely fashion, so that all necessary information and documentation may be obtained from the candidate and other sources.
(b) To solicit information, on behalf of the Reappointments Committee, from candidates under review; to gather information from other sources when so requested by the Reappointments Committee.
(c) To maintain the candidates' review files, including course response forms.
(d) To serve as recording secretary of the Reappointments Committee.
(e) To provide counsel to the Reappointments Committee during the course of its deliberations.
(f) To provide counsel to the provost when the Reappointments Committee's deliberations are completed.
(g) In the case that the Reappointments Committee does not recommend reappointment, to prepare a written summary explaining to the provost the committee’s reasons for doing so, and to include this document in the review file.
iv. Dean for Faculty Development and Research (DFDR)
(a) In the case of a review of a department chair or program director, to assume the role of chair or director for that review.
v. Department Chair
(a) To arrange with the candidate an appropriate schedule of classroom visits by the chair or chair's designate, and to ensure that the number of visits by other colleagues does not unnecessarily disrupt the candidate's courses.
(b) To provide the Reappointments Committee with lists of at least six current students and six recent graduates who have taken at least one course from the candidate.
(c) To review the candidate's course response forms available online through the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty.
(d) To meet with the candidate to discuss the contents of the departmental evaluation.
(e) To submit a letter to the Reappointments Committee containing the departmental evaluation according to section 2.e. The focus of the departmental evaluation shall be upon teaching, scholarship, contribution to the departmental program, and promise as a teacher and scholar. This letter will be shared with the tenured members of the department and the candidate undergoing the review.
(f) To write a letter to the Reappointments Committee, giving a personal recommendation, as a tenured member of the department, regarding the candidate.
vi. Tenured Department Faculty Members
(a) To submit a letter of recommendation, when requested, to the Reappointments Committee, with a copy to the department chair, that speaks to those aspects of a candidate's work with which he or she is familiar. Tenured faculty are expected to provide a letter upon request of the Committee, whether on academic leave or not.
(b) Upon the invitation of a candidate, to observe a class or classes and to meet with the candidate to discuss his or her performance in the class, with suggestions for possible improvement. Such meetings will be held before the end of the term during which the visits take place.
vii. Program Director
(a) To submit a letter to the Reappointments Committee containing the programmatic evaluation according to section 2.f. The focus of the programmatic evaluation shall be upon teaching, scholarship, contribution to the program, and promise as a teacher and scholar. This letter will be shared with the tenured program members who have been solicited by the VPAA/DoF to write letters and the candidate undergoing the review.
viii. Provost
(a) To review all items in the candidate's review file. (This includes letters related to the case received during the period of review from faculty, students, alumni, and others. The provost normally does not review all course response forms and scholarly publications.)
(b) To hear reports from the Reappointments Committee on the substance of its conclusions about each constituent part of the case and about the case as a whole.
(c) To consult with the VPAA/DoF about the individual cases.
(d) To challenge any conclusion of the Reappointments Committee with which he or she disagrees and give the Reappointments Committee an opportunity to respond.
(e) In the case of a reversal of the committee's recommendation, to explain to the committee the reasons for doing so, reasons which in a written summary become part of the review file.
(f) To make the final decision and to notify the candidate in a letter that indicates the recommendation of the Reappointments Committee.
b. Post-Review Consultation
i. Candidate's Responsibilities
(a) To meet with the department chair and the dean for faculty development and research to discuss progress in scholarship and teaching.
ii. Dean for Faculty Development and Research (DFDR)
(a) To arrange a meeting with the candidate and the department chair to discuss the candidate's progress in teaching and scholarship.
iii. Department Chair
(a) To discuss with the candidate his or her progress in teaching and scholarship from the perspective of the department, with reference to the VPAA/DoF’s summary of the post-review meeting between the candidate and the Reappointments Committee.
c. Review for Tenure
The review for tenure examines a faculty member for evidence of exceptional quality in teaching, and of significant scholarship or artistic achievement recognized as such by scholars and artists beyond Middlebury College. The evaluation of scholarship includes the assessment by the candidate, members of the candidate's department, members of the candidate's program (when relevant), other faculty colleagues, and appropriate professionals in the field outside Middlebury. Beyond teaching and scholarship, the service roles played by the individual faculty member will be examined.
The long-term institutional commitment to an individual's career that is made with the granting of tenure comes with the expectation of a demonstrable reciprocal commitment on the part of the faculty member to the departmental and College curricula and to the broader life of the institution.
i. The Candidate
(a) To arrange with the chair, or the chair's designate, an appropriate schedule of classroom visits.
(b) If the candidate so desires, to invite other colleagues to visit classes.
(c) To submit to the department chair and tenured colleagues, and to the Promotions Committee in a timely manner a complete vita, course syllabi, and other materials requested, as well as materials that the candidate thinks pertinent. For example, a faculty member may request the inclusion of personal comments or other materials with the course response forms which they believe may be useful in the interpretation of the forms. To submit to the program director, when relevant, a complete vita, syllabi from relevant courses, and an example of scholarly work.
(d) To submit to the Promotions Committee, department chair and tenured colleagues, and program director (when relevant) scholarly publications, and/or other appropriate evidence of scholarship or artistic achievement.
(e) To arrange with members of the Promotions Committee an appropriate schedule of classroom visits.
(f) To prepare a self-evaluation that concentrates on teaching performance, scholarly achievement, and service to the College community with reference to the criteria listed in 2.b., 2.c., and 2.d. above. The letter may include identification of any factors that have hindered progress.
(g) To furnish the Promotions Committee with a list of scholars or artists outside Middlebury who would be appropriate to evaluate the candidate's professional achievements.
ii. Promotions Committee
(a) To meet with the candidates for tenure review, in a group or individually, to explain to them the procedures; and to invite the candidates to submit, either orally or in writing, any additional information that may be pertinent to their reviews. A candidate's decision not to submit such materials is in no way prejudicial to promotion.
(b) To have one of its members serve as a liaison to the faculty member during the review and to meet with the faculty member early in the term of the review, and later during that term if necessary or if requested by the candidate to explain the procedures for the review, answer any questions, and receive additional information the candidate considers pertinent to the review; the liaison will report on all conversations and relay all information to the full Promotions Committee. If the candidate requests as such, the liaison will arrange a meeting between the candidate and the full Promotions Committee.
(c) To arrange with the candidate an appropriate schedule of classroom visits. At least two members should each visit at least two of the candidate's classes, or one class and one public lecture. Additional classroom visits may be scheduled as deemed necessary by the committee. (Commentary on teaching will not be offered by members of the Promotions Committee.)
(d) To interview or to request information from other members of the College community, alumni, and persons off campus, as it deems necessary.
(e) To request letters of recommendation from current students and from recent graduates who have taken at least one course from the person under review. The Promotions Committee will request letters from at least three students and at least three alumni in all reviews. Students may be asked to comment specifically on the particular criteria for teaching listed under Evaluation of Teaching, above.
(f) To request a letter from the department chair evaluating the candidate's scholarly achievement, teaching, and service to the department.
(g) To request a letter from the program director, when relevant, evaluating the candidate's scholarly achievement, teaching, and service to the program.
(h) To request letters of evaluation from other tenured members of the candidate's department, and, when appropriate, to invite comments from tenured colleagues in other departments.
(i) To solicit from scholars outside the College an evaluation of the candidate's scholarship or artistic production.
(j) To review the scholarly materials submitted by the candidate; to read and consider such opinions of it as may be pertinent, such as reviews or reports of readers.
(k) To examine all the materials submitted to the committee in the case, and all other materials that may be pertinent to the review, including letters from other colleagues at Middlebury, letters from students and alumni, and appropriate professionals outside Middlebury.
(l) To read and consider the course response forms.
(m) To keep written records of all interviews.
(n) In any case where the committee determines that a departmental recommendation requires further clarification, or when the Promotions Committee is inclined to reject the departmental recommendation, to interview the department chair, and, if the Promotions Committee so chooses, any other tenured member or members of the department or program the Promotions Committee deems appropriate; in either or each instance to place a written summary of the meeting(s) in the candidate's file.
(o) To convey to the president and the provost the committee’s conclusions about the constituent considerations of the review, a final recommendation and the reasons for it. To record its final recommendation and make it part of the review file.
(p) In the case that the Promotions Committee does not recommend reappointment and promotion, to explain to the president and provost the reasons for doing so, records its recommendation, and to include this document in the review file.
(q) To hear and respond to any conclusions of the president and provost that may differ from their own. To review with the president and the provost those materials that pertain directly to any area of disagreement.
(r) To meet with the candidate within four weeks of the completion of a successful review to provide an assessment of the candidate's performance, to summarize the information on which the Promotions Committee based its decision, and to provide the candidate and the chairperson of the candidate's department with a written summary of the meeting prepared by the VPAA/DoF. In this meeting, the committee should interpret the views of others without revealing their names. All summaries of promotion review meetings will begin with the following paragraph: "The following summary of a meeting between (the candidate) and the Promotions Committee is made available to the candidate, who has successfully passed a review for tenure at Middlebury College, and to the candidate's department chair, solely for the purpose of providing a record of the meeting held to discuss the review just completed. Nothing stated in the summary, or in the course of the review, carries with it any presumption about the outcome of any subsequent review. Similarly, the findings and recommendations of the Promotions Committee at this review are not determinative of any assessment of the candidate's professional development at a later review. At all reviews, the Reappointments Committee or Promotions Committee makes an independent determination governed only by the standards for reappointment, promotion, and tenure as then published in the College's Rules of Appointment and Tenure, with which faculty members are expected to be familiar."
(s) In the case of unsuccessful review, to offer to meet with the candidate for the same purpose.
(t) At the time of the tenure review, the Promotions Committee does not consider the long-term staffing needs of the department and the faculty.
iii. Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty (VPAA/DoF)
(a) To initiate the review, in a timely fashion, so that all necessary information and documentation may be obtained from the candidate and other sources.
(b) To solicit information, on behalf of the Promotions Committee, from candidates under review; to gather information from other sources when so requested by the Promotions Committee.
(c) To maintain the candidates' review files, including course response forms.
(d) To serve as recording secretary of the Promotions Committee.
(e) To provide counsel to the Promotions Committee during the course of its deliberations.
(f) To provide counsel to the president and the provost when the Promotions Committee's deliberations are completed.
(g) In the case that the Promotions Committee does not recommend reappointment and promotion, to prepare a written summary explaining to the president and the provost the committee’s reasons for doing so, and to include this document in the review file.
(h) To ensure that the candidate knows the identity of all scholars outside the College from whom the Promotions Committee seeks an evaluation of the candidate's scholarship.
(i) To prepare a brief written summary of the views of the outside evaluators, without attribution, to be reviewed by the Promotions Committee in advance of a final recommendation of the Committee to the President.
iv. Dean for Faculty Development and Research (DFDR)
(a) If the chair or director is untenured, to assume the responsibility of the department chair or program director for the review.
v. Department Chair
(a) To arrange with the candidate an appropriate schedule of classroom visits by the chair or chair's designate, and to ensure that the number of visits by other colleagues does not unnecessarily disrupt the candidate's courses.
(b) To provide the Promotions Committee with lists of at least six current students and six recent graduates who have taken at least one course from the candidate.
(c) To review the candidate's course response forms available electronically through the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty.
(d) To meet with the candidate to discuss the contents of the departmental evaluation.
(e) To submit a letter to the Promotions Committee containing the departmental evaluation according to section 2.e. above. The focus of the departmental evaluation shall be upon the candidate's teaching, scholarly achievement, and service to the department. This letter should not speak to the composition and long-term needs of the department and faculty. The letter is shared with the tenured members of the department and the candidate undergoing the review.
(f) To write a letter to the Promotions Committee, giving a personal recommendation, as a tenured member of the department, regarding the candidate.
vi. Tenured Department Faculty Members
(a) To submit a letter of recommendation, when requested, to the Promotions Committee, with a copy to the department chair, that speaks to those aspects of a candidate's work with which he or she is familiar. Tenured faculty are expected to provide a letter upon request of the Committee, whether on academic leave or not.
(b) Upon the invitation of a candidate, to observe a class or classes and to meet with the candidate to discuss his or her performance in the class, with suggestions for possible improvement. Such meetings will be held before the end of the term during which the visits take place.
vii. Program Director
(a) To submit a letter to the Promotions Committee containing the programmatic evaluation according to section 2.f. above. The focus of the programmatic evaluation shall be upon the candidate's teaching, scholarly achievement, and service to the program. This letter should not speak to the composition and long-term needs of the program and faculty. This letter will be shared with any tenured program members who have been solicited by the VPAA/DoF to write letters and with the candidate undergoing the review.
viii. President and Provost
(a) To interview all candidates for tenure.
(b) To review all items in the candidate's tenure file. (This includes letters related to the case received during the period of review from faculty, students, alumni, outside referees, and others. The president and provost normally do not review all course response forms and scholarly publications.)
(c) To hear reports from the Promotions Committee on the substance of its conclusions about each constituent part of the case and about the case as a whole.
(d) To challenge any conclusion of the Promotions Committee with which he or she disagrees and give the Promotions Committee an opportunity to respond.
(e) To consult with the VPAA/DoF about individual cases.
ix. President
(a) In the case of the prospect that the president will not accept the Promotions Committee's recommendation, to offer the committee, prior to making a final decision, an explanation of the reason why he or she is disposed to overrule it.
(b) In the case of a reversal of the Promotions Committee's recommendations, to explain to the committee the reasons for doing so, reasons which in a written summary become part of the review file; to invite the committee to prepare a written report explaining in detail the reasons for its recommendation; and to present this report to the trustees in an appropriate and timely fashion.
(c) To determine, after completing the steps listed above, whether a recommendation for tenure is to be advanced to the Board of Trustees, and to do so, if tenure is to be recommended.
(d) To notify the candidate of the final disposition of the case.
d. Review for Promotion to Professor
This review, which normally takes place no earlier than the fifth and no later than the tenth year (eighth year for faculty who were awarded tenure prior to 2011) following appointment to tenure, considers whether a candidate should be promoted to full professor and looks at continued excellence in teaching, achievement in scholarship, and service to the institution.
i. The Candidate
(a) To arrange with the department chair, or chair's designate, an appropriate schedule of classroom visits.
(b) If the candidate so desires, to invite other colleagues to visit classes.
(c) To submit to the department chair and to the Promotions Committee in a timely manner a complete vita, course syllabi, and other materials requested, as well as materials that the candidate thinks pertinent. For example, a faculty member may request the inclusion of personal comments or other materials with the course response forms which they believe may be useful in the interpretation of the forms. To submit to the program director, when relevant, a complete vita, syllabi from relevant courses, and an example of scholarly work.
(d) To submit to the Promotions Committee scholarly publications, and/or other appropriate evidence of scholarship or artistic achievement
(e) To arrange with members of the Promotions Committee an appropriate schedule of classroom visits.
(f) To write a self-evaluation that assesses the individual's career at Middlebury since promotion to tenure. The report should include an updated curriculum vitae, a schedule of courses taught since the previous review, and the faculty member's assessment of his or her research, teaching, publications and/or artistic performances, and service to the College. It should also contain a proposal for future professional development. The self-evaluation should be accompanied by pertinent publications, reviews of publications, and/or records and reviews of artistic performances, and it may, in addition, include letters of testimony from department chairs, program directors, colleagues, and/or outside professionals in the field.
(g) To furnish the Promotions Committee with a list of scholars or artists outside Middlebury who would be appropriate to evaluate the candidate's professional achievements. (This is not required for faculty who were awarded tenure prior to 2011.)
ii. Promotions Committee
(a) To have one of its members serve as a liaison to the faculty member during the review and to meet with the faculty member early in the term of the review, and later during that term if necessary or if requested by the candidate to explain the procedures for the review, answer any questions, and receive additional information the candidate considers pertinent to the review; the liaison will report on all conversations and relay full information to the full Promotions Committee. If the candidate requests as such, the liaison will arrange a meeting between the candidate and the full Promotions Committee.
(b) To review the teaching program, scholarly work, and administrative and other College service during the period since the granting of tenure.
(c) To examine the candidate's course response forms, publications, and other material submitted for the review.
(d) To have one or more of its members visit the candidate's classes.
(e) To solicit the recommendation of the candidate's department.
(f) To solicit, when relevant, the recommendation of the candidate's program.
(g) To solicit, as it deems appropriate, the opinions of students or recent alumni.
(h) To solicit from scholars outside the College an evaluation of the candidate's scholarship or artistic production.
(i) To recommend to the president and provost whether or not the candidate should be promoted.
iii. Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty (VPAA/DoF)
(a) To collect and make available material requested by the Promotions Committee.
(b) To be available for consultation by the Promotions Committee, the president, and the provost.
(c) To ensure that the candidate knows the identity of all those scholars outside the College from whom the Promotions Committee seeks an evaluation of the candidate's scholarship.
iv. Department Chair
(a) To recommend, after reviewing the candidate's course response forms, making a classroom visit or visits, and reviewing the written recommendations of departmental colleagues who are full professors, whether or not the candidate should be promoted on grounds of continued excellence in teaching, achievement in scholarship, and service to the institution.
v. Program Director
(a) When relevant, to recommend, after consultation with programmatic colleagues who are full professors, and after classroom visit(s), whether or not the candidate should be promoted on grounds of continued excellence in teaching, achievement in scholarship, and service to the institution.
vi. Dean for Faculty Development and Research (DFDR)
(a) In the case of a review of a department chair or program director, to assume the role of chair or director for that review.
vii. Department Faculty Members who Hold the Rank of Professor
(a) To submit a letter of recommendation, when requested, to the Promotions Committee, with a copy to the department chair, that speaks to those aspects of a candidate's work with which he or she is familiar. Tenured faculty are expected to provide a letter upon request of the Committee, whether on academic leave or not.
(b) Upon the invitation of a candidate, to observe a class or classes and to meet with the candidate to discuss his or her performance in the class, with suggestions for possible improvement. Such meetings will be held before the end of the term during which the visits take place.
viii. President and Provost
(a) To become familiar with the candidate's case.
(b) To consult with the Promotions Committee and to discuss with the committee its recommendation.
ix. President
(a) To make the final decision and to notify the candidate.
e. Ten-Year Review
The ten-year review assesses professional achievements and service to the College and its curriculum since promotion to full professor, or since the last ten-year review, and seeks to aid in formulating plans for further growth and development.
i. The Candidate
(a) To write a self-evaluation that assesses the individual's career at Middlebury since promotion to full professor or since the last ten-year review. The report should include an updated curriculum vitae, a schedule of courses taught since the previous review, and the faculty member's assessment of his or her research, teaching, publications, and/or artistic performances, and service to the College. It should also contain a proposal for future professional development. The self-evaluation should be accompanied by pertinent publications, reviews of publications, and/or records and reviews of artistic performances, and it may, in addition, include letters of testimony from department chairs, program directors, colleagues, and/or outside professionals in the field.
ii. Reappointments Committee
(a) To have one of its members meet with the candidate to discuss the candidate's report and any supporting material presented.
(b) To visit classes or to view videotapes of classroom performance if the Reappointments Committee considers it appropriate or should the candidate so request.
(c) To solicit, as it deems appropriate, the opinions of students or recent alumni.
(d) To consult course response forms.
(e) To consult, as it deems appropriate, the department chair, program director, or other senior colleagues.
(f) To draft a letter expressing its conclusions from the review. This letter will be sent first to the faculty member who may choose to respond to the Reappointments Committee's letter in writing and/or to request a meeting with the committee. The Reappointments Committee will then submit to the provost and the VPAA/DoF copies of the revised letter and any written response from the faculty member.
iii. Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty (VPAA/DoF)
(a) To meet with the Reappointments Committee when requested.
(b) As appropriate, to recognize unusually distinguished service, or to consider action with respect to problems that have become apparent during the review.
(c) To discuss, as appropriate, with the faculty member under review ways in which the College might help that person attain his or her goals for professional growth.
f. Contract Reviews
A contract review concentrates on promise and performance as a teacher and, in the case of Special Appointment faculty undergoing a review for promotion to Associate Professor (without tenure) or Associate Laboratory Professor, on service and scholarship and/or pedagogical innovation. Among the information considered by the Reappointments Committee, the departmental or programmatic evaluation will be accorded the greatest weight; however, the Reappointments Committee will also review course materials, and course response forms, and will consider the composition and long-term needs of the department or program and the faculty in arriving at its final recommendation. In the case of Special Appointment faculty undergoing a review for promotion to Associate Professor (without tenure) or Associate Laboratory Professor, the Reappointments Committee will also examine evidence for scholarship and/or pedagogical innovation. The review will follow the procedures in 3.f.i. through 3.f.vii. below.
When a candidate on a term appointment may be renewed, and the Educational Affairs Committee has authorized a continuation of the position held, the candidates' performance in teaching, as the teaching responsibilities are defined by the position held, will be reviewed. The review will follow the procedures in 3.f.i. through 3.f.vii. below, except that expectations for performance in teaching will rise as the candidate becomes more senior in service.
Special Appointment faculty holding positions of 0.5 FTE or greater who have had two successful Contract Reviews may request that a subsequent review include consideration of promotion to Associate Professor (without tenure) or Associate Laboratory Professor, as appropriate. In that case, the Reappointments Committee will also consider service to the institution and scholarship and/or pedagogical innovation as a component of the review. Excellence in teaching will remain the sole criterion for reappointment, but candidates who have completed significant service to the institution, as defined in subsection 2.d. and who have established a clear record of significant scholarly activity and/or pedagogical innovation may be recommended for promotion to Associate Professor (without tenure) or Associate Laboratory Professor. In the event that the record of scholarly activity and/or pedagogical innovation is not deemed adequate for promotion, but the record of teaching excellence is deemed appropriate for reappointment, the faculty member will be reappointed as Assistant Professor (non-tenure-track) or Assistant Laboratory Professor.
A candidate on visiting appointment with a title normally associated with a regular appointment (e.g., Visiting Assistant Professor) may be renewed, but only up to a maximum of three years in that position. After that point, at the time of renewal the position will be converted to the appropriate level Special Appointment (e.g., Associate Professor, non-tenure-track).
i. The Candidate
(a) To arrange with the chair or director, or the chair's or director's designate, an appropriate schedule of classroom visits.
(b) If the candidate so desires, to invite other colleagues to visit classes.
(c) To submit to the department chair and to the Promotions Committee in a timely manner a complete vita, course syllabi, and other materials requested, as well as materials that the candidate thinks pertinent. For example, a faculty member may request the inclusion of personal comments or other materials with the course response forms which they believe may be useful in the interpretation of the forms. To submit to the program director, when relevant, a complete vita, syllabi from relevant courses, and, and example of scholarly work.
(d) To prepare and submit to the Reappointments Committee a self-evaluation, concentrating particularly on teaching with reference to the criteria listed in 2.b. above. For reviews of faculty appointed as Associate Professor (without tenure) or Associate Laboratory Professor or those reviews associated with a request to be appointed as Associate Professor (without tenure) or Associate Laboratory Professor, the self-evaluation should also address the candidate's activity in scholarship, and/or pedagogical innovation.
ii. Reappointments Committee
(a) To meet with the candidates undergoing contract reviews, in a group or individually, to explain to them the procedures and to invite the candidates to submit, either orally or in writing, any additional information that may be pertinent to their reviews. A candidate's decision not to submit such materials is in no way prejudicial to reappointment.
(b) To have one of its members serve as a liaison to the faculty member during the review and to meet with the faculty member early in the term of the review, and later during that term if necessary or if requested by the candidate to explain the procedures for the review, answer any questions, and receive additional information the candidate considers pertinent to the review; the liaison will report on all conversations and relay full information to the full Reappointments Committee. If the candidate requests as such, the liaison will arrange a meeting between the candidate and the full Reappointments Committee.
(c) To interview or to request information from other members of the College community, alumni, and persons off campus, as it deems necessary.
(d) To examine all the materials submitted to the committee in the case, and all other materials that may be pertinent to the review, including letters from other colleagues at Middlebury, and letters from students, alumni, or appropriate professionals outside Middlebury.
(e) To read and consider the course response forms.
(f) To make visits to a candidate's classes or public lectures or performances if the committee deems it appropriate to do so, and in the case of classroom visits, to make arrangements in advance. (Commentary on teaching will not be offered by members of the Reappointments Committee if visits are made.)
(g) To keep written records of all interviews.
(h) In any case where the committee determines that a departmental or programmatic recommendation requires further clarification, or when the Reappointments Committee is inclined to reject the departmental or programmatic recommendation, to interview the department chair or program director, and, if the Reappointments Committee so chooses, any other tenured member or members of the department or program the Reappointments Committee deems appropriate; in either or each instance to place a written summary of the meeting(s) in the candidate's file.
(i) To convey to the provost the committee's conclusions about the constituent considerations of the review, a final recommendation and the reasons for it. To record its final recommendation and make it a part of the review file. In the case of reviews associated with a request to be appointed as Associate Professor (without tenure) or Associate Laboratory Professor, the committee will make recommendations about both the renewal and the appointment as Associate Professor (without tenure) or Associate Laboratory Professor. A candidate for review who has met the teaching criteria for reappointment but has not demonstrated significant scholarly activity and/or pedagogical innovation will be reappointed as Assistant Professor (non-tenure-track) or Assistant Laboratory Professor.
(j) In the case that the Reappointments Committee does not recommend contract renewal, to explain to the provost the reasons for doing so, to prepare a written summary explaining these reasons, and to include this document in the review file.
(k) To hear and respond to any conclusions of the provost that may differ from their own. To review with the provost those materials that pertain directly to any area of disagreement.
(l) To meet with the candidate, or authorize the VPAA/DoF to meet on their behalf, within four weeks of the completion of a successful review to provide an assessment of the candidate's performance, to summarize the information on which the Reappointments Committee based its decision, and to provide the candidate and the chairperson of the candidate's department or director of the candidate's program with a written summary of the meeting prepared by the VPAA/DoF. In this meeting, the committee should interpret the views of others without revealing their names. All summaries of reappointment review meetings will begin with the following paragraph: "The following summary of a meeting between (the candidate) and the Reappointments Committee is made available to the candidate, who has successfully passed a review for reappointment at Middlebury College, and to the candidate's department chair or program director, solely for the purpose of providing a record of the meeting held to discuss the review just completed. Nothing stated in the summary, or in the course of the review, carries with it any presumption about the outcome of any subsequent review. Similarly, the findings and recommendations of the Reappointments Committee at this review are not determinative of any assessment of the candidate's professional development at a later review. At all reviews, the Reappointments Committee or the Promotions Committee makes an independent determination governed only by the standards for reappointment, promotion, and tenure as then published in the College's Rules of Appointment and Tenure, with which faculty members are expected to be familiar."
(m) In the case of unsuccessful review, to offer to meet with the candidate for the same purpose.
iii. Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty (VPAA/DoF)
(a) To initiate the review, in a timely fashion, so that all necessary information and documentation may be obtained from the candidate and other sources.
(b) To solicit information, on behalf of the Reappointments Committee, from candidates under review; to gather information from other sources when so requested by the Reappointments Committee.
(c) To maintain the candidates' review files, including course response forms.
(d) To serve as recording secretary of the Reappointments Committee.
(e) To provide counsel to the Reappointments Committee during the course of its deliberations.
(f) To provide counsel to the provost when the Reappointments Committee's deliberations are completed.
(g) In the case that the Reappointments Committee does not recommend contract renewal, to prepare a written summary explaining to the provost the committee's reasons for doing so, and to include this document in the review file.
iv. Dean for Faculty Development and Research (DFDR)
(a) In the case of a review of a department chair or program director, to assume the role of chair or director for that review.
v. Department Chair or Program Director
(a) To arrange with the candidate an appropriate schedule of classroom visits by the chair or director or the chair's or director's designate, and to ensure that the number of visits by other colleagues does not unnecessarily disrupt the candidate's courses.
(b) To review the candidate's course response forms, available electronically through the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty.
(c) To submit a letter to the Reappointments Committee containing the departmental or programmatic evaluation according to section 2.e. or 2.f. The focus of the departmental or programmatic evaluation will be upon the candidate's teaching performance and promise as a teacher and scholar. This letter will be shared with the tenured members of the department or program and the candidate undergoing the review.
(d) To make available to the candidate a copy of the departmental or programmatic letter.
(e) To meet with the candidate to discuss the contents of the departmental or programmatic evaluation.
vi. Tenured Department or Program Faculty Members
(a) To submit a letter of recommendation, when requested, to the Reappointments Committee, with a copy to the department chair or program director, that speaks to those aspects of a candidate's work with which he or she is familiar. Tenured faculty are expected to provide a letter upon request by the Committee, whether on academic leave or not.
(b) Upon the invitation of a candidate, to observe a class or classes and to meet with the candidate to discuss his or her performance in the class, with suggestions for possible improvement. Such meetings will be held before the end of the term during which the visits take place.
vii. Provost
(a) To hear reports from the Reappointments Committee on the substance of its conclusions about each constituent part of the case and about the case as a whole.
(b) To consult with the VPAA/DoF about the individual cases.
(c) To challenge any conclusion of the Reappointments Committee with which he or she disagrees and give the Reappointments Committee an opportunity to respond.
(d) In the case of a reversal of the committee's recommendation, to explain to the committee the reasons for doing so, reasons which in a written summary become part of the review file.
(e) To make the final decision and to notify the candidate in a letter that indicates the recommendation of the Reappointments Committee.
4. PRIOR SERVICE, EARLY REVIEW, AND LENGTH OF APPOINTMENT UNDER "NEW" RULES
a. Normal Review Schedules in Case of Prior Service
All regular faculty members appointed to full-time positions at any rank, who have had prior full-time appointment at another college or university, are reviewed for reappointment no later than in the third year of their Middlebury appointment.
Faculty who teach less than full-time are normally reviewed after they have taught ten fall/spring courses.
The normal schedule for length of initial appointment and the character of initial review for reappointment is as follows:
| Years of Prior Service | Length of First Contract | Initial Review | Year in which review takes place |
| 1-2 | 3 | First | Third (fall) |
| 3 | 2 | First | Second (January) |
| 4 | 4 | Tenure | Third (spring) |
| 5-7 | 3 | Tenure | Second or third (January) as negotiated at time of appointment |
Any deviations from this schedule will be specifically stated in the initial letter of appointment. Prior service counts for anyone who has held a regular, full-time appointment at a senior college or university. Only full-year appointments at Middlebury or elsewhere counts toward tenure date.
b. Review Schedule for Term Appointments
Initial term appointments to the Middlebury College faculty may range from one to three years. Term appointments may be made at any rank, regardless of the normal phasing of reviews. Term appointments are intended to accommodate contextual needs in instructional programs or the needs of the faculty member appointed. Reappointment may be offered for periods less than the normal reappointment period when contextual needs in an instructional program require it.
c. Length of Appointment and Tenure
A faculty member with a regular full-time appointment may not serve beyond the eighth year (at Middlebury or as accumulated) without review for tenure, except when the initial term appointment carries beyond the eighth year (as accumulated). With the exceptions noted below, faculty members holding special full-time appointments may not be reappointed beyond the eighth year of full-time teaching at Middlebury College. This limitation does not apply to faculty members in the following categories as defined previously in section 1.c.ii., Faculty Appointments, Special Appointments.
i. Lecturers and Senior Lecturers
ii. Assistant Professor (non-tenure-track) and Associate Professor (without tenure)
iii. Assistants in Instruction
iv. Laboratory Instructor, Assistant Laboratory Professor, and Associate Laboratory Professor
v. Members of the Department of Physical Education
vi. Administrative appointments with faculty rank
When (following a stringent review by the Reappointments Committee) a full-time faculty member is appointed beyond the eighth year, the length of the employment contract will normally be from three to five years.
d. Early Reviews
The decision to be reviewed early for tenure rests with the individual faculty member. If a colleague requests an early tenure review, the Promotions Committee will review the faculty member according to the appropriate criteria for the tenure review as outlined. A faculty member electing early review waives the terms of the existing letter of appointment pertaining to length of appointment to the faculty. If the review results in a decision not to reappoint, no later review will be undertaken, and faculty members who have been denied tenure will be offered a one-year terminal appointment for the year succeeding the review. A request for an early tenure review that anticipates notification of the decision by late December should be received by the VPAA by March 15 prior; a request that anticipates notification by late May should be received by September 15 prior. Time spent on leave (except for sick or parental leave) does not alter the time of review; i.e., the timing of the review is calculated strictly from the date of first appointment, regardless of any time on leave for the purposes of scholarship and other professional development.
e. Deferred Reviews
Faculty members may request a delay in the tenure review. The VPAA/DoF may grant a delay if the professional development of a member of the faculty has been impaired by a particularly demanding institutional role or by poor health, family obligations, or legally recognized disabilities. In no case, however, will a tenure review take place later than the tenth year of full-time teaching.
f. Notification Date
Persons undergoing a first review will normally be notified of decisions no later than the end of December for reviews conducted in the fall term and the end of May for reviews conducted in the spring term of their final year of appointment. Persons undergoing a tenure review will normally be notified of decisions no later than the end of December for reviews conducted in the fall term and the end of May for reviews conducted in the spring term of the year preceding their final year of appointment. Faculty undergoing a review for promotion to full professor will normally be notified no later than the end of December for reviews conducted in the fall term and the end of May for reviews conducted in the spring term of the review year. Faculty undergoing a ten-year review will normally be notified no later than June 1 of the review year. Faculty undergoing a contract review during winter term will normally be notified no later than the end of February.
g. Retirement
Retirement may be arranged at any time a faculty member chooses. Retirements will normally become effective on the terminal date of a fiscal year. Appointment of a retired faculty member to a period of active service at Middlebury College will be at the discretion of the president.