10.1 TENURE AND NON-TENURE APPOINTMENTS.
(Amended 9/93; 2/15/95; 2/01; 1/02; 4/05; 5/07; 9/08)

a. Statement on tenure and academic vitality at The University of Iowa (Regents 2/14/74).
(1) Introduction. From the end of World War II until the late 1960s, higher education in the United States experienced rapidly expanding student demand coupled with an even more rapid expansion of the world's knowledge base. Throughout this period, faculties and facilities increased constantly and substantially in an effort to keep pace with the enlarging student bodies. The twenty-year period involved was among the most exciting and vital in the history of higher education. As younger, recently trained faculty members came to campuses all over the country, their energy and enthusiasm contributed greatly to the academic vitality of higher education.

Student demand for higher education has leveled off and is likely to remain level for some years to come. With the leveling off of student demand, the influx of new faculty members has diminished. The challenge facing The University of Iowa -- along with all similar institutions -- is to retain and increase its academic vitality and flexibility in a period of a relatively stable student body and faculty. The challenge is not new to American higher education which previously has had to maintain its vitality in times of stable enrollments and faculty.

(2) Basic Premises. The basic assumptions on which The University of Iowa proposes to function over the next several years are: First, tenure will continue as a cornerstone of the University's relationship with faculty members. Tenure is not only consistent with academic vitality but essential to it. Second, consistent with the University's educational needs and as permitted by its resources, faculty members in probationary status will be given the opportunity to acquire tenure if their performance merits tenure. No system of tenure quotas is contemplated. Third, the University must provide mechanisms by which a varied group of new faculty members come to the University so that the institution may continuously revitalize itself. Fourth, the University will retain the flexibility to adjust its educational programs to meet the changing needs of students and society, and to take into account advances in the world's knowledge base. In the process of making such adjustments, every effort will be made to plan well in advance and the faculty will play a major role in defining institutional needs in the process of departmental, collegiate, and University decision-making.

Tenure is not a very well-understood concept. If a university is to perform its function effectively, it is essential that faculty members in their teaching and research feel free to express new ideas and divergent viewpoints. In the process of teaching and research, accepted "truths" often must be challenged and questioned. A good university must create an atmosphere which, in a positive way, encourages faculty members to express new ideas and divergent viewpoints and to make inquiries unbounded by present norms. Such an atmosphere currently exists at The University of Iowa; and tenure has contributed substantially to the creation of this atmosphere and to its continuance. Put simply, free inquiry and expression are essential to the maintenance of excellence; tenure is essential to free inquiry and expression; The University of Iowa's consistent goal is excellence; and the tenure system must continue if the University is to recruit and maintain a distinguished faculty. While tenure would be an integral part of the University's relationship with the faculty without regard to the competitive situation, it also is important to note that the outstanding universities throughout the country have tenure systems and that The University of Iowa's competitive position as it attempts to recruit and to retain outstanding faculty members would be damaged beyond repair if tenure were abandoned or seriously weakened.

As a job security system, tenure is not substantially different from the job security aspects of civil service systems for state and federal employees; nor are they very different from job protection provisions in union contracts generally. The probationary period preceding the granting of tenure is, of course, longer than similar periods under civil service systems and union contracts -- five or six years as opposed to six months or one year. Once the probationary period has passed, all of the systems contemplate job security only to the extent that either resources permit or the need for the services continue to exist, or both; and before the employment relationship of such personnel can be terminated for inadequate performance, all of the systems require a showing of adequate cause (inadequate performance) at a hearing. In addition, the tender of ultimate job security is an important mechanism for inducing qualified persons to aspire to careers in the area involved. While the job-security aspects of tenure bear surface relationship to other job-security systems, the primary rationale for tenure is that it is essential to the creation and maintenance of an atmosphere which encourages the free exchange of ideas so necessary to educational vitality.

(3) The tenured faculty. The cornerstone on which excellence has been created at The University of Iowa, both in periods of growth and stability, is its tenured faculty. The tenured faculty at The University of Iowa has never been stagnant. It contributes greatly to the University's vitality. It will continue to do so. As a general proposition, the excellence and vitality of the tenured faculty is motivated from within individual faculty members, and to some extent, from peer pressures. Some institutional mechanisms also have contributed and will continue to contribute to the vitality. Thus, the University, in consultation with faculty members, plans:

(a) To continue its present faculty compensation policy which rewards excellence;

(b) To expand its constant evaluation of teaching effectiveness of tenured as well as non-tenured faculty members and its explorations of mechanisms for improving such effectiveness;

(c) To continue in University-sponsored research a system of campus-wide peer review of research proposals and results to assure consistently high scholarly productivity by faculty members;

(d) To continue departmental, collegiate, and University-wide reviews and priority planning efforts to assure that resources are made available to new programs and to programs enjoying significant increases in student interest, or, where necessary, programs be modified, consolidated with other programs, or eliminated;

(e) To continue to review and evaluate the administrative structures within which educational programs function to assure that the educational goals of the University are being met as effectively as possible;

(f) To encourage the exchange of faculty with other universities on a visiting basis so that new ideas and approaches will be brought to the campus both by the visiting teachers from other institutions and by the Iowa professors upon their return to campus;

(g) To fill some existing teaching positions on a permanently rotating basis with persons from other institutions or professions for periods ranging from one or two weeks to a semester or a year;

(h) To encourage the development of team teaching of courses by combining senior and junior faculty members from the same department as well as interdisciplinary team teaching by faculty members from different departments;

(i) To encourage the expansion of the present program of faculty seminars in which faculty members learn from each other;

(j) To seek to expand the program of developmental leaves to encourage faculty members who wish assistance in keeping abreast of newly developed and developing knowledge and instructional approaches;

(k) To develop a system of tenure for part-time faculty members so that a faculty member might hold a tenured position at The University of Iowa for one semester and a position at some other university for the other semester; or hold a tenured position for one semester at the University and some other job -- perhaps in industry -- for the balance of the year, and so that the University might take advantage of the talents of persons who, while completely qualified to join the faculty and remain on it for a long period of time, are unable, for one reason or another, to work full time as a faculty member.

Other than internal pressures for excellence within individual faculty members and, perhaps peer pressure, the merit salary system is the most important mechanism available to the University for assuring the continued academic vitality of tenured faculty members. While the University does not control the total number of dollars available for faculty salary increases, it can and must control the allocation of dollars it has so that excellence may be rewarded. For many years, the University has stressed to the Board of Regents and to the Legislature that its top budgetary priority was salaries and that whatever was made available for faculty salaries would be awarded on a merit basis.

In establishing faculty salaries the University has attempted -- not always successfully -- to be competitive; and when funds have been available for salary increases, the effort consistently has been and will continue to be to reward meritorious performance. Continued teaching and research excellence, and to a lesser extent the quality of other major professional contributions to the University or to society in general, form the basis for salary increases as they do for promotion and tenure. While objective data should be considered in making salary judgments, and while the department's or college's particularized statement of expectations concerning teaching, research and other professional contributions should serve as primary guidelines, it should be understood that the judgments being made relate in large part to the quality of the faculty member's professional performance and such judgment cannot be quantified. A faculty salary system which recognizes merit will function to encourage a continued striving for excellence and one that also recognizes the need to recruit and retain the best available persons who will help keep the institution vital.

While the catalog of mechanisms available for encouraging continued high level performance by tenured faculty members is not complete, the list set forth does suggest that many patterns are available to encourage such performance. It should be emphasized again that more important to academic vitality than University programs to encourage it are the inner mechanisms within individual faculty members which "compel" a constant striving for excellence. These inner mechanisms have contributed most to making the University the excellent institution it is and with whatever encouragement is possible from the institution, these mechanisms will function to assure a continuation of excellence.

(4) Probationary faculty members. In establishing and maintaining a university of excellence and vitality, the most vital institutional decision points are the initial appointment, the reappointment review, and the time of the tenure decision. At each of these decision points, there must be University-wide review to assure adherence to University-wide standards.
(a) Initial appointment. When making an initial probationary appointment, the condition precedent must be a determination that the person being considered is of a quality that her or his performance is likely to lead to an affirmative tenure decision. Only if the record presented leads to such a conclusion should an initial offer be tendered. And after the initial appointment, probationary faculty should be reviewed annually with the results reported by the appropriate collegiate dean to the Executive Vice President and Provost on the form provided by the latter's office. Initiation of the annual review is the responsibility of the dean and DEO. It is expected that the annual review will be performed in consultation with the individual faculty member.

(b) Reappointment review (President 10/85; amended 2/01; 5/07). Most initial probationary appointments at The University of Iowa are for 1) three years for colleges having a collegiate norm to make a tenure decision of not more than six years, or 2) four years for any college having a collegiate norm to make a tenure decision of more than six years, at the end of which time the candidate can be reappointed following a reappointment review. See paragraph (c) below. With the approval of the DEO, the dean of the college, and the Executive Vice President and Provost shorter initial appointments can be made.

(c) Time in which to make tenure decision. The norm for making the tenure decision shall be the sixth year of probationary service, except for the Colleges of Law, Medicine, and Dentistry. The norm for the College of Law shall be the fifth year. The Colleges of Dentistry and Medicine may establish a norm of no more than eight years for all tenure track faculty members with significant patient care responsibilities. Other faculty in these two colleges will be subject to the six year norm. A new collegiate norm of more than six years must be approved by a majority of the tenured faculty of the respective college, the dean of the respective college, and the Executive Vice President and Provost. The new norm becomes effective upon approval by the Executive Vice President and Provost. Other colleges may request that the Faculty Senate authorize consideration of changes in their own collegiate norms.

(d) Joint or secondary appointment. If a faculty member has a joint appointment in two colleges with different probationary period norms, or has a secondary appointment in a college with a different probationary period norm, the norm for that faculty member will ordinarily be that of the primary department. If the norm of the secondary college is to be used, this must be agreed to by the faculty member, both DEOs, both deans, and the Executive Vice President and Provost; and the length of the probationary period must be stated in writing in either the offer letter or the memorandum of understanding that defines the terms of the joint appointment.

(e) Extensions.

(i) For each minor child newly added to the family of a probationary faculty member (e.g., biological, adopted, stepchild, or by guardianship) during the probationary period or within two years prior to the initial appointment, the probationary period shall be automatically extended by one year. The faculty member may decline any automatic extension for which the faculty member is eligible by written notification to the faculty member's DEO at any time prior to the academic year in which the promotion review was originally scheduled. If the probationary faculty member has more than two children added to the family during the probationary period or within two years prior to the initial appointment, the faculty member may request a one-year extension for each child beyond the automatic two-year extension. The request should be made in writing to the DEO, dean, and Executive Vice President and Provost.

(ii) The probationary period may be extended upon the mutual agreement of the probationary faculty member, the college, and the Executive Vice President and Provost because of a professional or personal impediment, such as the assumption of additional teaching or clinical responsibilities above the normal load at the request of the department or college; the failure of the University to provide resources in a timely manner if the resources are promised in writing; personal health reasons; the assumption of significant ongoing care responsibilities for a spouse, domestic partner, minor or adult child, or parent with a serious health problem; or because of the death of the faculty member's spouse, domestic partner, or minor or adult child. Generally, no extensions under this paragraph (e)(2) shall extend the probationary period two years beyond what the period would have been, taking into account the relevant collegiate norm and any automatic or discretionary extension under paragraph (e)(1) above.

(iii) Requests for discretionary extensions under paragraph (e)(1) or (e)(2) shall be submitted to the DEO and dean, and approved by the Executive Vice President and Provost.

(f) Impact of Extensions on Expectations of Scholarship. No expansion of a faculty member's probationary period as a result of an extension under paragraph (e) above shall result in any increase in the quantity or quality of the probationary faculty member's expected scholarship from what would have been expected had that faculty member been considered for promotion or tenure in the final year of probationary service as defined by the collegiate norms.

(g) Prior related experience. In some cases, prior related experience coupled with excellence in teaching and research will warrant a shorter probationary period to be established at the time the faculty member is hired by the University.

(h) Establishment of norm. The establishment of a norm will permit a thorough evaluation and will give the faculty member sufficient time to establish a strong record of performance. A candidate for reappointment shall be evaluated in accordance with III-10.5b below. (See also III-29.5f(2).)

Annual reviews of the performance of probationary faculty members should be made and a full-scale departmental-collegiate review shall be made during the reappointment review conducted in the third or fourth year of service, depending upon the collegiate norm. See paragraph (4)(b) above. Reappointment reviews should take into account the faculty member's proven teaching effectiveness and research productivity and potential. It also should include an evaluation of departmental, collegiate, and University educational goals and include a determination of the likely role of the faculty member in achieving such goals. Only if an institutional need is found likely to exist for a person with the faculty member's substantive background, and only if the faculty member's teaching effectiveness and research productivity and potential are deemed of such a quality that an affirmative tenure decision is likely to be made, should something other than a terminal appointment be tendered. To assure unified decision making at this point, full central administration review of the departmental-collegiate recommendation is necessary.

(i) The tenure decision (President 10/85; amended 2/01; 4/06; 5/07). In making a tenure decision, teaching, research, and other professional contributions must be considered. Further, the institution's overall educational needs must be taken into account along with the institution's fiscal ability to support the position occupied by the faculty member. Thus, the tenure decision has two elements: 1) an evaluation of the actual performance of the individual involved; and 2) an evaluation of institutional needs -- educational and fiscal. A candidate for tenure shall be evaluated in accordance with III-10.5b below. (See also III-29.5f(2).)

While the individual evaluation relates to teaching, research, and other professional contributions, the University's policy recognizes specifically that the first two elements -- teaching and research -- are the fundamental tasks of a faculty member. Although teaching is a faculty member's primary obligation, teaching and research are inextricably intertwined. Over a period of years, outstanding university teaching is unlikely to be maintained in the absence of strong research efforts by the faculty member. And university research -- as distinguished from similar work off-campus -- normally is stimulated and encouraged by the faculty member's teaching role.

The first step in a tenure decision should be an evaluation of teaching effectiveness. Only after an affirmative judgment as to teaching effectiveness is made should serious consideration be given to an evaluation of research competence. Unless a determination is made that the faculty member involved is an effective teacher -- whether at the departmental or interdisciplinary level -- tenure is not and should not be granted. Only after an affirmative decision as to teaching effectiveness is made should consideration be given to research. And only after both of the basic criteria are satisfied is an affirmative tenure decision possible. The University is committed to the proposition that neither teaching nor research standing alone justifies the granting of tenure. In the absence of research, it is believed -- and strongly believed -- that teaching effectiveness will not be maintained for a lifetime career. Thus, while teaching effectiveness is the condition precedent to a consideration of the quality of research, in the absence of quality research, teaching effectiveness alone will not permit the granting of tenure.

In summary, The University of Iowa is both a teaching and research institution, as all good universities are. Unless both tasks are accomplished, the University's vitality will be sapped and neither function will be performed well. As noted, the two functions cannot be separated. Unless a faculty member is able and willing to permit her or his ideas to be evaluated by peers, the faculty member is not performing fully the function assigned, and effective teaching is unlikely to continue.

Throughout the process of making a tenure decision, all concerned must recognize that an affirmative tenure decision is a prediction of future conduct, which prediction is based primarily on past performance. Unless those making the decision have a record of excellence before them -- a record of excellence in both teaching and research -- the prediction about the future is too uncertain to justify an affirmative decision. Any other premise is inconsistent with the "permanence" associated with tenure. The tenure decision is the most important quality control available to the University. And unless the record presented is one of excellence in both teaching and research, an affirmative prediction about the future is too uncertain to be tolerated. In making a tenure recommendation to the Board of Regents, the University must be taken as saying that its prediction is based on a record of excellence.

The process of making a tenure recommendation to the Board of Regents shall follow University and collegiate "Procedures for Tenure and Promotion Decision Making at The University of Iowa." The process starts with a review of the faculty member's performance by the tenured members of the department involved, the review to be instituted by the DEO. While not all-controlling, an affirmative peer group recommendation is an almost necessary condition to the granting of tenure. Because of the significance of peer group recommendations, each academic unit is expected to develop and distribute to all departmental faculty members and to all persons under serious consideration for appointment to the faculty a written and particularized statement of expectations to guide departmental deliberations concerning the granting of tenure -- the statement to serve as a guide to the department in its deliberations, and to the faculty member whose tenure status is being considered. The particularized statement must, of course, be consistent with University-wide policy relating to teaching, research, and other professional activities. In addition, all concerned should recognize that a decision relating to quality must be made and that such a decision can be quantified only in part. The nature of the decision is such that it necessarily is subjective to some extent.

Within the University administration, consultation occurs and the record and recommendations are examined carefully to assure that University standards have been met. As at all levels, educational goals, program changes, and fiscal needs must be taken into account and may lead to a decision to deny tenure despite a record of teaching and research accomplishment sufficient to support an affirmative decision on the basis of performance. At the departmental level, departmental educational goals and fiscal needs must be considered; at the collegiate level, collegiate educational goals and fiscal needs must be taken into account; and at the central level, overall University needs play a dominant role. To assure fairness to faculty members who are denied tenure or whose contracts are not renewed because of a shift in educational goals and/or financial resources, every reasonable effort should be made to give advance notice of possible shifts, and to protect the professional reputations of such faculty members. As part of that protection, the affected faculty member shall be given a written statement documenting the reason(s) for the decision. While changing educational goals and/or fiscal resources are a necessary consideration in the making of tenure decisions, such changes must not be asserted unless real, and they must not be used as a ground for denying tenure when, in fact, tenure is being denied for other, perhaps improper, reasons.

The final step, of course, is a University recommendation to the Board of Regents. The process is complex and difficult. Many of the ideas expressed above -- uniform University-wide review of promotions and tenure, the insistence on "hard" data with respect to teaching effectiveness, careful review of research output -- stem from a resolution adopted unanimously by the Faculty Senate in October of 1972 and codified substantially in University regulations. Fairness to all -- the probationary faculty members, the students, the institution, and the State of Iowa -- require the kind of review described above. The University's academic excellence and vitality require such a review.

(5) Tenure track faculty hired on or before the adoption by a college of a collegiate norm of more than six years (or more than five years in the College of Law) may elect to have a tenure decision made in accordance with any new collegiate norm adopted by the college pursuant to this section as amended in 2007. In the absence of an election, the collegiate norm for such tenure track faculty shall be six years (or five years in the College of Law). An election shall be made on or before the end of the third month following the adoption of a collegiate norm of more than six years. The election shall be in writing sent to the DEO, with a copy to the dean and the Executive Vice President and Provost. Any extensions previously granted apply regardless of whether the probationary faculty makes an election under this paragraph.

(6) Affirmative action and tenure. As affirmative action and tenure function at The University of Iowa, they are completely compatible concepts. Both seek to assure the acquisition and retention of those who are most qualified. In the appointment process, affirmative action operates to assure that the most qualified available person is identified and is offered the opportunity to join the faculty; and after initial appointment, it assures that in making tenure and salary decisions, irrelevant considerations such as race and sex play no role.

Prior to the initiation of the affirmative action program, the traditional process of identifying the most qualified person for an available position was somewhat limited in scope and, thus, the pool from which the most qualified person was drawn was relatively narrow. Under the present affirmative action program, all positions are advertised widely and direct inquiries are made of many more persons than in the past. With the expanded search, the pool from which to draw has been broadened substantially. The goal of the selection process has remained unchanged -- to select the most qualified from among those available. With a broader pool from which to draw, the University can be more confident that the person truly most qualified has been identified. As affirmative action and tenure function at The University of Iowa, not only are the two compatible; they complement each other in assuring a quality faculty.

Only if the University's tenure system becomes frozen -- either by the imposition of quotas on the percentage of persons who may acquire tenure or by restricting access to the tenure rank because substantially all faculty members have tenure -- is tenure incompatible with affirmative action. If either quotas are established or tenuring-in occurs, access and upward mobility become impossible or extremely difficult; and in such a situation, affirmative action is stymied and vitality lost.

Coupling a dedication to affirmative action with awareness of the problem, initial appointment practices that limit somewhat the number of persons appointed to probationary (tenure ladder) positions, and firm quality control in the process of tenure decision-making, the University sees no danger of unduly restricting access to tenured positions to the extent that would subvert its affirmative action program. Any quota system restricting access to tenure by establishing maximum percentages of tenured faculty members can only function to the detriment of the University's vitality and to its affirmative action program. Those who qualify and are needed must be rewarded or initiative will be destroyed. Access to tenured ranks must remain open to those who qualify or women and minority group members without tenure will be deterred from joining The University of Iowa faculty. With an open system -- and we are persuaded that it can remain open -- vitality will remain and affirmative action accomplished.

b. Faculty status. Faculty status is accorded to those members of the University who are charged with the duty of advancing and disseminating knowledge. As a consequence, appointment to, and progression through the academic ranks requires demonstrated competence and potential for continued growth as a scholar and teacher.

c. Termination of tenured faculty.

(1) General rule. Because of the centrality of tenure to the University's mission, the appointment of a tenured member of the faculty may be terminated only for good cause and in accordance with the principles of academic freedom stated in the Statement on Tenure and Academic Vitality at The University of Iowa (paragraph a above), which commits the University to the principle that "free inquiry and expression are essential to the maintenance of excellence; tenure is essential to free inquiry and expression." The procedures governing any termination must conform in all respects to the principles of due process. Thus, unless alternative procedures are specified in this manual, any termination proceedings shall be conducted under III-29 Faculty Dispute Procedures.

(2) The appointment of a tenured faculty member may be terminated for:

(a) Violations of University policies, including but without limitation:
(i) Sexual Harrassment and Consensual Relationships (II-4 and II-5.9b(9)(c));
(ii) Violence (II-10);
(iii) Anti-Retaliation (II-11.4f);
(iv) Drug Free Environment (II-12.3b(1));
(v) Ethics in Research (II-27.6b(22)(a));
(vi) Professional Ethics and Academic Responsibility (III-29.7i(2)(e)); or
(vii) Regents Rules (II-29.14b(6)).

(b) Demonstrated unacceptable performance of duty pursuant to III-29.8.

(c) Financial exigency that is demonstrable and bona fide, defined as a financial crisis which exists or is imminent and which, if not corrected, threatens the survival of the University as a whole, but only if the crisis cannot be corrected by less drastic means than termination of tenured faculty.

(d) Programmatic change or discontinuance for academic reasons (when approved by the President of the University and the Board of Regents) which cannot reasonably be accomplished without terminating the tenure of faculty in the particular program. No faculty member may be terminated becasue of programmatic change or discontinuance unless, following the good faith efforts of the University and the faculty member, the faculty member cannot be transferred to another college or department where the professional services of the faculty member can be used effectively.
[top]

10.2 CRITERIA FOR PROMOTIONS.
(President 10/85; amended 2/01)
The criteria for promotions include teaching, research, and other professional contributions. Since teaching and research are the central functions of the faculty, other professional contributions are considered subsidiary to these fundamental tasks. The length of service, whether long or short, does not constitute, of itself, a qualification for promotion nor the sole justification for the denial of same. It is also the policy of the University that promotions shall not be dependent upon offers of positions from other institutions. A candidate for promotion shall be evaluated in accordance with the provisions of III-10.5b. (See III-29.5d(4)(b), second paragraph.)

a. Teaching. The prime requisites for an effective teacher are intellectual competence, integrity, and independence; a willingness to consider suggestions and to cooperate in teaching activities; a spirit of scholarly inquiry which leads to the development and strengthening of course content in the light of developments in the area of interest, as well as to improve methods of presenting material; a vital interest in teaching and working with students and, above all, the ability to stimulate their intellectual interest and enthusiasm. The quality of teaching is admittedly difficult to evaluate. This evaluation is so important, however, that recommendations for promotion should include evidence drawn from such sources as the collective judgment of students, of student counselors and of colleagues who have visited the individual classes or who have been closely associated with the person's teaching as supervisor or in some other capacity, or who have taught the same students in subsequent courses. Academic counseling or advising of students should be recognized as an important component of the teaching process, and due credit should be given to faculty members who exert an unusual effort in this function.

b. Research. In most of the fields represented in the programs of the University, publications in media of quality are expected as evidence of scholarly interest pursued independently of supervision or direction. An original contribution of a creative nature is as significant or as deserving as the publication of a scholarly book or article. Quality of production is considered more important than mere quantity. Significant evidence of scholarly merit may be either in a single work of considerable importance or a series of studies constituting a general program of worthwhile research. The candidate should pursue a definite, continuing program of studies, investigations or creative works.

c. Other professional contributions. From time to time, a faculty member is called upon to render major professional services to the University or to society in general. Such contributions should be evaluated in terms of the effectiveness with which the service is performed, its relation to the general welfare of the University and its effect on the development of the individual.
[top]

10.3 ASSIGNMENT OF ACADEMIC RANK.
Academic ranks of assistant professor, associate professor, and professor should be assigned only to those who are directly engaged in the teaching of courses approved for listing in the University Catalog or engaged in research which involves the teaching of graduate students.
[top]

10.4 QUALIFICATIONS FOR SPECIFIC RANKS.
(Amended 6/99; 10/00; 7/01)

Each academic unit is expected to develop detailed tenure and promotion criteria consistent with the following qualifications. If the pattern and practice in some units deviates markedly from these norms, such units may seek approval of the Executive Vice President and Provost for alternate criteria.

a. Assistant Professor.
(1) Promise of ability as a teacher.

(2) Holder of the doctorate or its equivalent.

(3) Promise of scholarly productivity, supported by publications or the equivalent.

(4) Term of appointment is typically three years, although it may be for a shorter period of time if recommended by the departmental executive officer and the dean of the college.

(5) Appointments at the rank of assistant professor shall ordinarily not exceed a total of seven years of service and thus shall be reviewed for tenure no later than during the sixth year of service. Unless otherwise agreed upon, the status of a faculty member who has served both as an instructor and as assistant professor in this University should be reviewed during the sixth year of service in the two ranks combined. A faculty member for whom a denial-of-tenure recommendation has been made by the Executive Vice President and Provost shall be given notification of a terminal year of appointment.

b. Associate Professor.
(1) Convincing evidence that the candidate is an effective teacher of, as appropriate, undergraduate, graduate, postdoctoral, and professional students.

(2) Demonstration of artistic or scholarly achievement supported by substantial publications or equivalent artistic creations or performances, of high quality, as appropriate to the discipline(s).

(3) Departmental, collegiate, and/or University service and, if appropriate, professional service will be expected at an appropriate level.

(4) The quality and quantity of teaching, scholarly/artistic accomplishment, and service should give unmistakable promise of promotion to full professor.

(5) A tenure appointment, except that for persons appointed from off the campus the initial appointment may be for a term of three years or less.

c. Professor.
(1) Consistent record of high-quality teaching at all appropriate instructional levels, including successful guidance of doctoral graduate students to the completion of their degree programs, where applicable.

(2) Continued artistic or scholarly achievement of high quality, accompanied by unmistakable evidence that the candidate is a nationally and, where applicable, internationally recognized scholar or creative artist in the chosen field.

(3) The candidate should have a record of significant and effective service to the department, college, and/or the University and, if appropriate, to the profession.

(4) A tenure appointment, except that for persons appointed from off the campus the initial appointment may be for a term of three years or less.
[top]

10.5 REVIEW AND PROMOTION PROCEDURES.
(President 10/85; amended 2/01; 7/01; 5/07)

a. The question of promotion of faculty may be brought up at any time deemed appropriate, but if not considered earlier, it should be brought up for formal consideration between the dean and the departmental executive officer as follows: assistant professors during the final year of the probationary period as defined by the college, and associate professors no later than the seventh year after promotion to that rank. Promotion may take place earlier if the qualifications and promise of the individual concerned warrant such action. Individual faculty members may request review for promotion, tenure, or both, at any time, and shall be afforded such review by the applicable department or nondepartmentalized college. The offer letter to a faculty member whose initial appointment will begin at a time other than the start of the fiscal or academic year or who has previous years of service at another institution should specify when the tenure and promotion review will take place.

b. A candidate for tenure and/or promotion or reappointment shall be evaluated under the relevant, clearly defined standards of the faculty member's academic unit(s) that were 1) in effect at the time of the faculty member's initial appointment or promotion to the rank currently held; 2) any such standards in effect since that time; or 3) any such standards in effect at the time of the evaluation, whichever of these the candidate elects. However, no standards may be applied if they were superseded more years ago than the time specified as normal time at rank (adjusted to account for any extension, family leave, or illness granted to the faculty member). For assistant professors, the normal time in rank is six years, unless the college has established a longer probationary period norm (III-10.1a(4)(c)), and for associate professors seven years (see paragraph a above). The candidate shall make an election under this section no later than the end of the academic year prior to the academic year in which the candidate is considered for tenure and/or promotion or reappointment. Absent such election, the standards for evaluation shall be those standards in effect at the end of the academic year before the academic year in which the candidate is considered for tenure and/or promotion or reappointment.
[top]

a. In planning, setting priorities, and making decisions, The University of Iowa is guided by its commitment to the core values of learning, integrity, quality, community, and responsibility. With respect to faculty, the core values of learning, quality, and responsibility are extremely important. These three values state:
(1) Learning. The University of Iowa is dedicated to discovering, disseminating, and preserving knowledge and to the development of an educated citizenry. Through teaching, research, scholarship, creative endeavor, clinical practice and public outreach, the University develops ideas, enlarges understanding, and extends its resources to society. Recognizing the need for constant inquiry and continuous reinterpretation of knowledge, the University vigilantly protects free expression of thought, respects difference and diversity, and fosters opportunities for all members of the community to generate and discuss ideas and contribute to the vitality of the educational environment.

(2) Quality. As a center of learning, the University of Iowa measures itself by exacting standards, honors high aspiration and achievement, and expects all persons associated with the University to strive for excellence.

(3) Responsibility. The University of Iowa is obligated to exercise responsible stewardship over the intellectual and material resources entrusted to it. As a public institution, the University aims for accessibility, affordability, and quality, so that a broad array of qualified students from Iowa and elsewhere may obtain an excellent education at reasonable cost. The University recognizes the responsibility of its faculty to determine what students should learn and to shape the body of knowledge that will be passed on to future generations. It is also the University's obligation to engage all members of its community in collective reflection on their responsibilities not only to their disciplines and professions but also to the institution and to society.

In carrying out its obligation to transmit learning in an exacting and responsible manner, faculty at a major research institution are expected to engage in teaching, research, and service. Although these categories parallel our University's threefold mission, in our experience, they do not adequately suggest the complexity of faculty work, its different configurations across the University, and its development throughout any single faculty member's career. Faculty members engage in teaching, research, scholarship, artistic endeavor, clinical practice, and public outreach; they administer departments and colleges; they run teaching and research laboratories; design curricula; write grants; and advise students. Although each faculty member's efforts may not be distributed evenly among the various components of academic work, each has the responsibility to serve the University and its constituents in full measure and according to exacting standards.

The expectations of work for the attainment of tenure are spelled out in various documents relating to pre-tenured faculty. Pre-tenure effort allocations must generate profiles that demonstrate teaching effectiveness, research, and, to a lesser extent, service.

Faculty profiles can be expected to look most alike at the time of the tenure decision. It seems reasonable, and even desirable, however, to expect that after tenure, faculty careers will begin to diversify as individuals develop different strengths and assume different responsibilities. This policy establishes the concept of a "faculty portfolio" that allows for variations in the combination of teaching, research, and service for a limited period of time through which faculty can make their maximum contribution to the University's mission. Because the efforts of all faculty will be marshaled in ways to assure that the talents of all at a given time are used most effectively, use of individualized portfolios and portfolios consistent with unit norms should only have a positive impact on the quality of faculty teaching and research.

The faculty portfolio concept reflects the notion that tenured faculty members may negotiate with their DEOs individualized patterns of work that differ from the expected distribution of efforts for a typical faculty portfolio (herein "unit norms") of their college, department, or unit (hereinafter called unit). These portfolios, however, should be developed with the view that all faculty within a unit will commit their collective strengths to fulfilling the overall mission of their units and the University consistent with appropriate strategic plans. The opportunity for differential allocation of post-tenure effort thus facilitates the attainment of the University's core values of quality, learning and responsibility.

The activities of faculty at institutions with a significant research mission differ markedly from the activities of faculty at institutions with no significant research mission. Immediately below are highlighted some of the prominent features of the activities of the faculty at The University of Iowa under the categories of: 1) Teaching, 2) Research, Scholarship, and Creative Work, and 3) Service, Administration, and Outreach.

(1) Teaching. Faculty members teach a wide variety and types of courses at the University. Teaching of courses includes the preparation of course syllabi, classroom materials, class lectures, and discussion topics, and student assignments such as papers and projects. Faculty also prepare and administer examinations, evaluate student work, train and supervise the work of teaching assistants, continuously read in their field to include up-to-date material and information in their classes, and meet their students outside of class to advise, help, and guide them in their course work. Teaching also includes the mentoring of undergraduate and graduate students in research settings.

Other important teaching efforts include faculty initiatives to improve instruction through the design and revision of the curriculum, the creation of new courses, the revision of existing courses, and supervision of the creative work and research of students.

The unique requirements and features of faculty work in the different types of classes taught can vary. For example, in a large lecture course, considerable effort is spent in preparing lectures, maintaining records of student work, and coordinating teaching with other faculty in other sections of the course. By contrast, in a clinical or professional course, considerable effort is devoted to working with small groups of students in clinical or professional settings, arranging for the settings and the student activities in these settings, and closely guiding the interactive work of the students in those settings.

(2) Research, scholarship, and creative work. Faculty conduct a wide range of research, scholarship, and creative work to advance the core value of learning, including engaging in hands-on creative work and research, directing and collaborating with graduate students and professional students in joint creative activities and research, directing and supervising undergraduate creative work and research, and supporting this scholarly work through efforts to arrange and sustain adequate physical, financial, and institutional (and inter-institutional) support.

As with teaching, there are many different types of activities necessary to create and sustain vitality in research, scholarship, and creative work by faculty. At the center of this activity, faculty require the time and resources to pursue scholarly or creative work in the laboratory, the library, the studio or office, and/or in the field, to supervise and direct the work of their students, to write proposals to obtain support for their projects, to attend professional meetings and to consult with a variety of groups and individuals to enhance their understanding of problems and challenges.

(3) Service, administration, and outreach. Faculty serve their professional colleagues and organizations, the public, and various off-campus constituencies. They also administer and govern the academic programs and services of the University and assist colleagues and University administrators with a variety of functions and tasks.

With regard to professional service, faculty are often asked to hold offices in professional organizations and help to organize professional meetings. They edit books and professional journals and serve as reviewers for such publications. They serve on federal and regional panels and offer advice to private, corporate and government funding agencies. With regard to public service, faculty may provide health care, legal service, artistic leadership, and educational expertise. Faculty offer educational outreach programs to the business community, community organizations, and governmental bodies. Faculty expend considerable effort to help administer and govern the University. They chair departments, serve on a wide-range of appointed and elected committees, and recommend the allocation of fiscal and human resources necessary to the educational mission of the institution.

The University's commitment to learning and to the above listing of some of the efforts of faculty toward the achievement of that commitment implicitly recognize that teaching, research, and service are inextricably interwoven and that the proportions of time and effort that all faculty within a unit devote to them at any particular time need not be equal.

b. In determining differential allocation of post-tenure effort, the following rules and principles apply:
(1) Each unit is obligated to contribute fully to the accomplishment of the overall mission and values of the University, consistent with the strategic plan of the University and the unit. Just as the proportion of effort among units may vary in carrying out the University's mission, so too may the proportion of effort by individual faculty vary. However, the aggregate efforts of all faculty within a unit must be consistent with the overall strategic plan of the unit.

(2) Over a faculty member's aggregate post-tenure work life, the faculty member is expected to contribute to the University's core value of learning by efforts expended primarily in teaching and research and, to a lesser extent, service. In some units, the common use of the terms "service" or "clinical service" includes efforts that may properly be viewed as teaching or research.

(3) As individual faculty members follow typical post-tenure career patterns, shifts may occur in the proportion of a faculty member's efforts devoted to these three components, capitalizing on the individual faculty strengths at any particular time to fulfill the teaching, research, and service needs of the unit or the University.

(4) Following the adoption of this policy, the faculty of each unit will develop expected norms for a typical faculty portfolio reflecting its judgment as to the appropriate allocation of effort for its faculty among teaching, research and service. Unit norms must be approved by the dean in which the unit is located and by the Executive Vice President and Provost. Changes in unit norms must be initiated by the faculty of the unit and approved by the dean in which the unit is located and by the Executive Vice President and Provost.

(5) Faculty members within a unit may negotiate with the DEO individualized effort portfolios that differ from the unit norms. Ordinarily, portfolios are effective for a maximum of two years. Renewals are possible. Either the individual faculty member or the DEO may initiate discussions for an individualized portfolio. Agreements concerning individualized faculty portfolios that differ from unit norms shall be formalized in a document to be included in the faculty member's personnel file. Such agreements should reflect a clear understanding of the efforts to be made by the faculty member.

(6) The use of individualized portfolios within a unit must advance the teaching, research or service missions of the unit or the University, must not significantly compromise the unit's teaching, research, and service mission, and should be consistent with the career goals of the faculty. Because of this, no faculty member is entitled to, or can be compelled to have, an individualized portfolio. Furthermore, when considering the advisability of an individualized portfolio, both the DEO and the faculty member should consider how such a portfolio would fit with the goals of the unit, the University, and the faculty member.

(7) The DEO shall discuss all proposed individualized portfolios with the dean or Executive Vice President and Provost, who will approve them before they are implemented during the subsequent academic year. The DEO also shall distribute to the faculty of the unit a list of faculty members who have negotiated individualized portfolios, together with a statement of the area of emphasis for those particular faculty members and a statement of how the unit strategic plan will continue to be realized by the unit faculty taken as a group. All of this shall occur within sufficient time to permit appropriate planning of the unit's teaching, research and service mission.

(8) The use of individualized portfolios within a unit will not compromise the standards required for a tenured faculty member to obtain promotion. Therefore, individualized faculty portfolios that would interfere with a tenured faculty member's opportunity to be promoted in a timely manner are inadvisable.

(9) Regardless of how a faculty member's responsibilities are distributed among teaching, research, and service, the faculty member is expected to perform those responsibilities to a high standard of excellence. For purposes of annual merit pay adjustments and peer review evaluations, all faculty will be evaluated relative to how well they perform their efforts pursuant to their individualized portfolio, or, if none, consistent with unit norms, and without regard to whether those efforts involve teaching, research, or service.

Example #1: In prior years, Faculty A, B, and C each devoted their efforts to teaching, research, and service consistent with unit norms, but with varying degrees of achievement and success. Each of them and their DEO have recognized that their individual strengths are not being utilized to the best in light of their current interests and talents, and that, as a result, the unit has not been able to maximize its commitment to learning as reflected in its strategic plan. Through the use of individualized portfolios, their collective efforts can be reallocated so that each of them expends efforts in a manner that takes into account their different strengths; this effort reallocation will increase the overall productivity of the unit.

Example #2: Faculty members A, B, C, and D are in the same unit. Faculty A and the DEO agree that, for a particular period, Faculty A will have greater classroom teaching obligations than would otherwise be the norm within the unit. Faculty B and the DEO agree that, during some particular period, Faculty B will have greater governance responsibilities that would otherwise be the norm. Faculty C and the DEO agree that, for a particular period, Faculty C will have greater research obligations than would otherwise be the norm. Faculty D's responsibilities remain consistent with unit norms.

The efforts of each of them will be rewarded on the basis of how well each performs such activities, since all of them contribute in their respective ways to the overall mission of the unit. If each individual performs his or her agreed upon activities to the highest level, then the merit pay of each should be determined in the same manner, all other things being equal (e.g., no salary compression issues; no competing offers).

On the other hand, if one of them excels in the performance of his or her agreed upon activities while the other three faculty members' performances of their efforts are deemed very good, the faculty member who excelled should receive a higher merit pay adjustment.

Example #3: Unit X has adopted unit norms that state that in the absence of individualized portfolios, faculty members in the unit shall allocate 50% of their time to teaching, 40% of their time to research, and 10% of their time to service. All but two faculty in the unit have allocated their work efforts according to those norms this year. The work effort of Faculty A and Faculty B, who joined the unit within one year of each other, typically comport with unit norms. This year, however, each of them has an individualized portfolio with Faculty A's time being allocated: 70% to teaching, 20% to research, and 10% to service and Faculty B's time being allocated: 70% to research, 20% to teaching, and 10% to service.

Faculty A has a history of being a good teacher and scholar. Faculty B is recognized to be an exceptional scholar and has consistently been assessed as one of the premier teachers in the unit. In the current year, both A and B continue to perform their work as they have in the past. Under this policy Faculty B should receive a higher merit pay adjustment than Faculty A.

(10) The decision of a DEO and/or any other group authorized to evaluate and reward faculty in a manner that fails to take into account individualized faculty portfolios may be appealed to the dean of the college in which the unit is located or, in nondepartmentalized colleges, to the Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost.
Example #4: Faculty A and the DEO agree that Faculty A will devote the next academic year exclusively to teaching. At the end of the year, the DEO advises A that even though A has performed to a high standard of excellence, the DEO has decided to provide more merit funds to those faculty in the unit who have complied with the unit norms. This decision would be inconsistent with the intent of this policy, which is that A's merits be determined by reference solely to the agreed upon portfolio. Any adverse salary determination would be appealable to the dean or the Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost, as appropriate.

10.7 PEER REVIEW OF TENURED FULL PROFESSORS.
Each academic unit is charged with developing and implementing a plan for peer review of each tenured full professor in the unit. Such peer review should be done periodically, at least once every five years. The review should address the quality of the faculty member's performance in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service and should result in recommendations that help to enhance that performance.

The plan is to include: 1) selection of the peer review committee; 2) committee procedures and timelines; 3) materials to be reviewed; 4) distribution and use of the committee's written report; and 5) mechanisms for the faculty member to respond. Policy adopted by the Faculty Senate on April 11, 1989.
[top]

10.8 PART-TIME FACULTY MEMBERS.
(Regents 6/27-28/74)

a. Definitions. As used in these regulations:
(1) "Part-time" means fifty percent or more but less than one hundred percent of full-time.

(2) "Faculty member" means a person holding the rank of assistant professor, associate professor or professor.

b. Mutual obligations. A part-time faculty member on the tenure track is expected to meet the various obligations of a full-time faculty member in proportion to the percentage of the appointment. Administrative units of the University are expected to assign duties and provide support to a part-time faculty member on the same basis as to a full-time faculty member, except prorated in accordance with the percentage of appointment.

c. Requirements and qualifications. Except for the time periods specified in III-10.5, all requirements and qualifications of III-10.1-10.5 apply to part-time faculty members.

d. Time periods. The six- and seven-year periods specified in III-10.5 are applicable to full-time faculty members. For the purposes of III-10.5, the service of part-time faculty members will be calculated by adding together part-time service (fifty percent or more) until the time periods set forth in III-10.5 and elsewhere have been completed. Thus, twelve years of fifty percent service will be deemed the equivalent of six years of full-time service; ten years of sixty percent service will be deemed the equivalent of six years of full-time service; eight years of seventy-five percent service will be the equivalent of six years of full-time service; and six years of seventy-five percent service coupled with three years of fifty percent service will be deemed the equivalent of six years of full-time service.

e. Tenure status. Tenure status shall be awarded to part-time faculty members who are found to meet University standards for granting tenure, with the performance expectations to be identical with those required of full-time faculty members. Faculty service which is less than fifty percent of full-time service will not be credited towards completion of a probationary period leading to a tenure decision.

f. Percentage of full-time service. The percentage of full-time service obligation and right of a part-time faculty member who has earned tenure normally will be at the median percentage of full-time service rendered by the faculty member during the probationary period. Part-time faculty members who currently have tenure shall have a percentage of full-time service obligation and right at the percentage at which the faculty member was serving when tenure was awarded.

g. Adjusting part-time service. The decision to increase permanently to full time the percentage of a part-time faculty member's service is to be made in the same fashion as a new hiring decision and in all cases the person most qualified to fill the available position will be employed. A present part-time faculty member shall be given preference in filling a vacancy in his or her academic unit, however, if equally qualified for the position in comparison with all other applicants. In considering whether to increase a part-time faculty member to full-time status or to employ a new full-time faculty member, the decision will be made wholly on the merits of the candidates under consideration and shall not be influenced by the fact that it may be more inconvenient to move the present part-time faculty member to full time and to hire a new part-time faculty member than to employ a new full-time faculty member, nor to the extent fiscal resources permit, by the fact that the salary of the part-time faculty member when moved to full time may be higher than that of a full-time faculty member hired from off campus. A part-time faculty member and the collegiate dean may agree in writing at any time (a) to decrease permanently the percentage of full-time service to be required of the faculty member, as long as the percentage does not fall below fifty percent; and (b) to decrease or increase temporarily -- for not more than two years -- the percentage of service to be rendered.

h. Reducing full-time appointment. Any agreement that a full-time tenured appointee will thereafter serve on a part-time basis shall specify either (1) that the tenured appointment thereafter will relate solely to service on an agreed part-time basis; or (2) that the appointee will return to full-time service on a specified date. Such an agreement shall be in writing and is subject to modification only by a written agreement between the faculty member and the collegiate dean. In no event shall the percentage of tenure status be reduced to less than fifty percent.

i. Rights and Responsibilities. Part-time faculty members shall be entitled to all University, collegiate and departmental rights, and have all responsibilities of full-time faculty members.
[top]

10.9 CLINICAL TRACK POLICY.
(Regents enacted 2/15/95; amended 7/00; 1/02; 4/05)
Preamble. Consistent with the University's need to retain the flexibility to adjust its programs to meet the changing needs of students and society, non-tenure track clinical faculty may be appointed and promoted as provided below. This policy sets parameters within which individual colleges can, but are not required to, develop policies and procedures that permit the hiring of clinical faculty. Operationally it is similar to the tenure policy, in that collegiate policy would amplify University policy and would be approved by the Executive Vice President and Provost.

a. Definitions. Clinical faculty hold service positions through which they contribute to the service, teaching, and/or outreach missions of the University, and hold faculty rank at instructor, assistant professor, associate professor, or professor. Clinical faculty are not eligible for tenure. They participate in the faculty governance process as described below and as defined by individual colleges and the Faculty Senate.

b. Role of clinical faculty. All clinical faculty must devote a significant portion of their time to providing or overseeing the delivery of professional services to individual patients or clients. In addition, teaching students, residents, or fellows of the University at the undergraduate, graduate, professional, or postgraduate level is an essential job function for all faculty (whether tenured, tenure track, or clinical). Thus, clinical faculty are expected to integrate the delivery of their professional services with their teaching. While the use of clinical faculty is most easily conceived in the context of health sciences and law where faculty are involved in the delivery of professional services to patients and clients, there are other disciplines in other colleges where the use of clinical faculty for similar purposes may be entirely appropriate. The services provided by clinical faculty outside of the health science colleges should be the professional equivalent of services provided to patients. The use of clinical faculty largely to perform administrative functions with little or no teaching obligations is inconsistent with this policy. Similarly, it is inappropriate to use clinical track faculty largely to engage in research, scholarship, or artistic creation.

c. Types of appointments. As used herein, "clinical faculty" can hold one of two types of appointment within the University:

(1) Salaried appointments. Clinical faculty may hold salaried positions as employees of The University of Iowa. These faculty participate in faculty governance as defined by the college and Faculty Senate, receive usual faculty benefits, and undergo periodic reviews of their performance. Each college adopting a clinical track policy shall fix the percentage of its total salaried faculty that may hold clinical track appointments without limitation. However, any proposal made at any time to increase the percentage of clinical track appointments (computed in FTEs) within a college (including an initial proposal to create a clinical track) must obtain both the approval of a majority of the tenured/tenure track faculty within the college and the approval of a majority of the clinical track faculty within the college by a referendum supervised by the Associate Provost for Faculty. Any such proposal must also be approved by the Executive Vice President and Provost.

(2) Nonsalaried appointments. Other clinical faculty may hold nonsalaried positions with the University, but they are not considered employees of the University. These clinical faculty contribute in a material way to the University's missions, although their obligations are more limited in scope than salaried faculty. They do not participate in faculty governance and do not receive salary or benefits outside of nominal remunerations. However, recognizing their contributions with a "clinical faculty" designation denotes the importance of their teaching and service functions. There is no limit on the number of such nonsalaried clinical faculty who can be appointed within individual colleges.

d. Terms of appointments.
(1) Salaried appointments. Salaried clinical faculty are searched for and appointed through recruitment processes also used to search for tenure track faculty. (See III-9 Appointments.)

Initial appointments for salaried clinical faculty are one to three years in duration. After three years, or prior to that if a promotion is contemplated, a full-scale, departmental-collegiate review will be made. This review should take into account the faculty member's demonstrated effectiveness in fulfilling teaching and service missions. It should also include an evaluation of the departmental, collegiate, and University educational and service goals and the likely role of the faculty member in the future in achieving those goals. To assure unified decision-making at this point, full central administration review of the departmental-collegiate recommendation is necessary.

After a positive review, salaried clinical faculty will receive terms of appointment dependent on the rank. Instructors will receive two-year appointments; assistant professors, associate professors, and professors will receive three- to seven-year appointments. Faculty will be reviewed on a schedule commensurate with their appointments according to written standards of competence and performance defined by their unit.

(2) Nonsalaried appointments. Nonsalaried clinical faculty are appointed pursuant to procedures adopted by individual colleges and approved by the Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost.

e. Qualifications for specific ranks. The ranks of clinical faculty shall be assigned as defined below, and in accordance with collegiate policies.

(1) Instructor.
(a) Promise of ability in service, to include but not be limited to clinical service.

(b) Promise of ability to contribute to teaching.

(2) Assistant Professor.
(a) Evidence of ability in service, to include but not be limited to clinical service.

(b) Evidence of ability to contribute to teaching.

(3) Associate Professor.

(a) Acknowledged record of service and teaching success.

(b) Evidence of progress toward a record of professional productivity beyond clinical service, as defined by the college.

(4) Professor.

(a) Acknowledged record of service and teaching success.

(b) An established record of professional productivity beyond clinical service, as defined by the college.

(c) Unmistakable evidence of recognition by peers, as defined by the college.

(5) Demonstration of artistic or scholarly achievement shall not be a requirement for reappointment or promotion of clinical track faculty.

f. Titles. All titles of clinical faculty shall contain the term "clinical" as a modifier. Exact titles must be stipulated in college procedures and approved by the Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost.

g. Promotion.

(1) Salaried clinical faculty. The question of promotion of clinical faculty may be brought up during any regular promotions cycle. Promotion of salaried clinical faculty will follow University and collegiate "Procedures for Clinical-Track Promotion Decision Making at The University of Iowa." All recommendations for promotion of salaried clinical faculty are submitted to the Board of Regents for approval.

(2) Nonsalaried clinical faculty. Procedures and criteria for the promotion of nonsalaried clinical faculty shall be adopted by individual colleges and approved by the Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost. The provisions of III-10.5 and those regarding salaried clinical faculty described herein do not apply.

h. Termination and non-renewal.
(1) Salaried clinical faculty.
(a) Termination of salaried clinical faculty during the term of the appointment must be for failure to meet written standards of competence and performance established by the unit and the University.

(b) A decision not to renew an appointment of a salaried clinical faculty member may be for failure to meet written standards of competence and performance established by the unit and the University, or for changed economic circumstances or program needs such that the position itself is terminated. Non-renewal for changed economic circumstances or program needs may only occur at the conclusion of an appointment, and must carry appropriate notice.

(c) Notice of non-renewal of appointment, or of intention not to recommend reappointment after a stated period has elapsed, is given in writing in accordance with the following standards:

(i) Not later than March 1 of the first year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or if a one-year appointment terminates during an academic year, at least three months in advance of its termination.

(ii) Not later than December 15 of the second year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or the appointment terminates during an academic year, at least six months in advance of its termination.

(iii) At least twelve months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years of service in the institution.

(d) A decision for termination or non-renewal of salaried clinical faculty is subject to the provisions of the Faculty Dispute Procedures. (See III-29.)

(2) Nonsalaried clinical faculty. Grounds and procedures for the termination or non-renewal of nonsalaried clinical faculty shall be adopted by individual colleges and approved by the Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost. Decisions to terminate or not renew nonsalaried clinical faculty appointments will be reviewed by the dean of the college in which the faculty member was appointed. However, because nonsalaried clinical faculty are not considered employees of the University, such decisions are not subject to the provisions of the Faculty Dispute Procedures.

i. Collegiate policies and guidelines.
(1) Every college that plans to offer salaried, non-tenured clinical faculty appointments must develop its own written policy statement with respect to such appointments, subject to approval by its own faculty and by the Executive Vice President and Provost.

(2) The resulting policy statement will provide detailed guidelines for every relevant item in this section on "Clinical Faculty." In the development of a policy statement, the following elements should be addressed:

(a) Participation in collegiate faculty governance. Policies for the participation of clinical faculty in collegiate faculty governance, including in the hiring of tenure and clinical track faculty, will be developed by each college using its usual governance procedures, provided, however, that no such governance policy shall permit clinical track faculty to vote on the reappointment, tenure, or promotion of any tenured or tenure track faculty member.

(b) Procedures for appointment, reappointment, and promotion.

(c) Criteria for appointment, reappointment, and promotion.

(d) Participation in peer review for appointment, reappointment, and promotion of other faculty.

(e) Teaching. If the college defines "teaching" as training or instruction given to individuals or small groups while service is delivered, then that limited definition will apply to the evaluation of teaching for appointment, reappointment, and promotion purposes.

(f) Professional productivity beyond clinical service.

j. This policy shall be reviewed not later than five years following its implementation.
[top]

10.10 RESEARCH TRACK POLICY.
(Regents enacted 6/12/08)

Preamble. Consistent with the University's need to retain the flexibility to adjust its programs to meet the changing needs of the modern research university, non-tenured research-track faculty may be appointed and promoted as provided below. This policy sets parameters within which individual colleges can develop policies and procedures that permit the hiring of research-track faculty. Operationally, collegiate policy would amplify this policy.

a. Definitions. Research-track faculty hold positions through which they contribute primarily to the research mission of the University and hold faculty rank at assistant professor, associate professor, or professor. Research-track faculty are not eligible for tenure. Research-track faculty members can participate in internal college governance by the approval of the tenured/tenure-track faculty but cannot vote on the hiring of tenured/tenure-track or clinical-track faculty. In addition, research-track faculty cannot participate in the University of Iowa Faculty Senate and are not to be appointed to any committees of the Senate or to University charter committees as a faculty representative. They can qualify for awards and can compete for internal research grants in the same manner as research scientists who are professional and scientific staff.

b. Role of research-track faculty. Research-track faculty will devote almost all of their time to performing externally supported research and are expected to submit or assist in the submission of research grants. Teaching is an essential function of all faculty, but in the case of the research-track faculty it would occur predominantly in the form of service on doctoral committees with the approval of the Graduate College. Research-track faculty cannot be chairs of doctoral defense committees because this is the role of the tenured/tenure-track faculty. Research-track faculty cannot be assigned to teach courses, but they could be assigned, as needed, to provide auxiliary lectures on areas of knowledge relevant to their research or to engage in other teaching as may be required by the terms of their research grant or contract. Research-track faculty cannot be assigned to perform administrative functions with little or no research obligations as that assignment would be inconsistent with this policy.

c. Collegiate policies and changes; size of research faculty.

(1) Every college that plans to offer salaried, non-tenured research-track faculty appointments must develop its own written policy statement with respect to such appointments consistent with all the terms of this policy. Any policy must address each of the following:
(a) Participation of research-track faculty in collegiate faculty governance, including the appointment, reappointment, promotion, and peer review of other research faculty. Research-track faculty may not participate in any personnel decisions relating to the appointment, reappointment, promotion, and peer review of tenured/tenure-track or clinical-track faculty.

(b) Procedures for appointment, reappointment, and promotion of research-track faculty.

(c) Criteria for appointment, reappointment, and promotion for research-track faculty.

(d) Research-track faculty members may apply for open positions in the tenure track, but they may be appointed to the tenure track only one time during their career at The University of Iowa. Colleges may further define their own policies related to track switching.

(2) Each college adopting a research-track policy shall fix the size of its total salaried faculty that may hold research-track appointments. The limit on the number of research faculty in any college shall be the greater of eight faculty members or ten percent (10%) of the tenured/tenure-track faculty (computed in FTEs) of that college.

(3) Support for research-track faculty, including all start-up costs, shall be funded exclusively by grants, contracts, clinical income, and private donations, and not with general education funds.

(4) The initial policy to create a research track in a college and any proposal made at any time to change that policy within a college must obtain both the approval of a majority of the tenured/tenure-track faculty within the college and the approval of a majority of the research-track faculty within the college by a vote supervised by the Associate Provost for Faculty. Any proposal to adopt or to change a college's research track policy must be approved by the University of Iowa Faculty Senate, the Executive Vice President and Provost, and the President. Any collegiate policy must be wholly consistent with this policy.

d. Terms of Appointments. Research-track faculty are sought and appointed through recruitment processes used to appoint tenure-track faculty.

Initial appointments for research-track faculty are one to three years in duration. After three years or prior to that if a promotion is contemplated, a full-scale, departmental-collegiate review will be made. This review should take into account the research-track faculty member's effectiveness in fulfilling the research mission and the ability of the research-track faculty member to obtain and sustain extramural salary support. It also should include an evaluation of the departmental, collegiate, and University research goals and the likely role of the research-track faculty member in the future in achieving those goals. To assure adherence to standard procedures, a full central administration review of the departmental-collegiate recommendation is necessary.

After approval of the departmental-collegiate review, research-track faculty will receive terms of appointment consistent with established procedures for non-tenure track University employees; however, appointments cannot be for a period longer than current external support for that faculty member.

Research-track faculty will be reviewed on a schedule commensurate with their appointments, according to written standards of competence and performance defined by their college and departments. Reappointments are to be made only if the research faculty member has a demonstrated record of successfully obtaining external support to fund the research-track faculty member's research.

e. Qualifications for specific ranks. The ranks of research-track faculty shall be assigned as defined below, and in accordance with collegiate policies.

(1) Assistant professor.
(a) Terminal degree (or its equivalent) appropriate to the field.

(b) Evidence of productive scholarship.

(c) Evidence of ability to fulfill relevant responsibilities in the research enterprise.

(2) Associate professor.
(a) Terminal degree (or its equivalent) appropriate to the field.

(b) Record of productive scholarship, including evidence of sustained extramural research funding and salary support.

(c) Fulfillment of important responsibilities in the research enterprise.

(3) Professor.
(a) Terminal degree (or its equivalent) appropriate to the field.

(b) Record of research excellence, including an established record of continued sustained research funding.

(c) Unmistakable evidence of national or international recognition by peers.

f. Titles. All titles of research-track faculty shall contain the term "research" as a modifier. Exact titles must be stipulated in college procedures and approved by the Executive Vice President and Provost.

g. Promotion. The question of promotion of research-track faculty may be brought up during any regular promotions cycle. Promotion of research-track faculty will follow University and collegiate "Procedures for Research-Track Promotion Decision Making at The University of Iowa." All recommendations for promotion of research faculty are submitted to the Board of Regents for approval.

h. Termination and non-renewal.

(1) Termination of research-track faculty during the term of the appointment must be for failure to meet written standards of competence and performance established by the unit and the University. Each college's written standards must include a description of the role of salary support in the decision to renew or terminate appointments. Limited bridge funding may be available from the department or college from funds other than general education funds but is not guaranteed.

(2) A decision not to renew an appointment of a research-track faculty member may be for failure to meet written standards of competence and performance established by the unit and the University, or for changed economic circumstances or program needs such that the position itself is terminated. Non-renewal for changed economic circumstances or program needs may only occur at the conclusion of an appointment and must carry appropriate notice.

(3) Notice of non-renewal of appointment, or of intention not to recommend reappointment after a stated period has elapsed, is given in writing in accordance with the following standards:

(a) Not later than March 1 of the first year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if a one-year appointment terminates during an academic year, at least three months in advance of its termination.

(b) Not later than December 15 of the second year of service, if the appointment expires at the end of that year; or, if the appointment terminates during an academic year, at least six months in advance of its termination.

(c) At least twelve months before the expiration of an appointment after two or more years of service in the institution.

(4) A decision for termination or non-renewal of research-track faculty is subject to the provisions of III-29 Faculty Dispute Procedures.

i. This policy shall be reviewed not later than five years following its implementation by a committee of the Faculty Senate appointed by the President of the Faculty Senate after consultation with the Executive Vice President and Provost. The review shall be completed within one academic year. Immediately following such review, the University of Iowa Faculty Senate shall vote on whether to renew this policy. Subject to paragraph h above (relating to termination and non-renewal), if the policy is not renewed, the research track shall be abolished.
[top]

10.11 EXCEPTIONS TO EMPLOYMENT REGULATIONS.
Contracts of employment made by the University with the members of its instructional staff are subject to the following exceptions and general regulations:

a. The employment of members of the Departments of Aerospace Military Studies and Military Science, and coaches of the University athletic teams in the Departments of Intercollegiate Athletics, whose tenures are fixed by the United States Air Force or Army, or by the Board in Control of Athletics respectively, are not governed by these regulations.

b. Deans, directors, chairpersons, or heads of departments have such academic rank as may be given them. The duties and titles of administrative officers are separate from their academic ranks. The dismissal or resignation of officers from an administrative position does not impair their rights in their academic rank.
[top]