CHS Rank, Tenure, and Promotion Handbook for Tenure-Line Faculty

 July, 2024 ¹

I. General Statement

The College of Health Science (CHS) Rank, Tenure, and Promotion (RTP) Handbook for Tenure-Line Faculty is established to document procedures regarding the initial appointment rank, step advancement, tenure, and promotion of CHS tenure-line faculty members. The procedures and policies set forth in this Handbook are designed to ensure that all faculty are treated fairly in matters dealing with faculty initial appointment rank, step advancements, promotions in rank, and tenure. It is understood that all policies and procedures must be in harmony with the revised University Tenure Policy adopted by the Board of Regents in June, 1993. This Handbook reflects current procedures that may change from time to time.

The CHS Rank, Tenure, and Promotion Committee is the faculty body that shall bear the responsibility of representing tenure-line faculty in all RTP matters. The committee shall be involved in making recommendations to Pepperdine University and CHS administration concerning initial rank, step advancement, tenure, and promotion of CHS tenure-line faculty members in accordance with the procedures and policies set forth in this Handbook.

This Handbook was drafted in June and July of 2024 and before most all faculty in the CHS were hired. The Handbook reflects current procedures used across Pepperdine University at the time of drafting. The Handbook will be reviewed and approved by an elected body of the faculty, the RTP Committee, no later than July, 2026. It is understood that the Handbook will be a living document that may change over time pending favorable review and approval by CHS faculty, CHS administration, and University administration.

II. Forms

All forms referenced in this Handbook will eventually be available on the CHS RTP website. Presently, they are available in the document CHS RTP Forms, July 2024.

III. Tenure-Line Faculty Definition

The term "faculty" is defined broadly at the University to include a variety of persons engaged in some aspect of one or more of the basic purposes of the University: teaching, research and/or creative activity, and service. Within this broad definition of faculty there are two major types of appointments: tenure-line faculty appointments which are appointments with tenure or eligibility for tenure, and non-tenure-line faculty appointments which are appointments without eligibility for tenure. Awards of tenure may be made only within the Tenure-Line Professorial Series. This Handbook applies only to individuals within the Tenure-Line Professorial Series.

Most all tenure-line appointments are full-time appointments and comprise an assignment of duties that ordinarily range throughout the duration of the academic year. Most full-time tenure-line appointments in the CHS are 12-month appointments, although some may be 9-months in duration. Tenure-line appointments are made to fulfill a specific academic need and are renewable, meaning they are made with the intent that the appointment may (but need not) be renewed as the appointee engages in satisfactory service to the University. A renewable appointment neither implies nor guarantees the granting of tenure.

A Tenure-Line faculty appointment is a privilege granted only to those faculty members who meet the qualifications stated for each rank, and who are either tenured or deemed at the time of initial hire to have a strong likelihood of becoming eligible for tenured appointments at the time of the tenure review.

The Tenure-Line Professorial Series includes the ranks of University Professor, Distinguished Professor, Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor, and Instructor.

Tenured faculty members have the right to continuous reappointments under the terms and provisions of the University Tenure Policy.

IV. Policies and Procedures for Conducting RTP Committee Business

A. Election

The committee is composed of tenured faculty members from each school in the CHS. Once the CHS has a sufficient number of tenured faculty to meet all criteria for serving on the RTP committee, the committee will be composed of only tenured faculty members. Until this time, tenure-line faculty are eligible for serving on the RTP committee.

1. 1. The committee will have five members.
   2. The committee members are elected for a three-year term on a rotation system according to the following schedule:
      
      
      1. During its first year of existence, five members will be elected: one will have a three-year term, two will have two-year terms and two will have one-year terms.
      2. In subsequent years, newly elected members will serve three-year terms.
   3. The committee shall be composed of members from all existing schools such that members from no single school comprise more than 60% of the committee. Once the CHS expands and adds its third school, representatives from a single school may not comprise more than 40% of the committee.
   4. Whenever a committee member is to be selected, whether by ordinary election or by special election, each school shall nominate two candidates using a representative process involving all eligible faculty. The final selection is made by the CHS faculty by secret ballot election.
   5. If a committee member is unable to serve for the duration of their term due to conflict of interest or absence for a significant period of time, a special election for replacement of the member for the remainder of the academic year shall be arranged by the president of the faculty association.

B. Voting Privileges

1. 1. Members may vote on all cases before the committee.
   2. The chairperson is eligible to vote on all matters.

C. Officers

1. 1. Chairperson
      
      During the first meeting of each academic year, the committee members elect the chairperson of the committee. This election is conducted by the President of the CHS Faculty Association, by secret ballot. A majority of the votes is required for an election. After the first year of committee existence, only persons who have been members of the committee for at least one year are eligible for election.
      
      In the event that the elected chairperson must be replaced, the President of the CHS Faculty Association will call a special meeting of the RTP committee, which will elect a replacement according to the same procedure outlined above.
   2. Recording Clerk
      
      At the first meeting, a committee recording clerk is also elected from the committee by secret ballot.

D. Meetings

1. 1. Notification of Meetings
      
      The chairperson, in consultation with the committee members, decides times and places for meetings. Either the chairperson or the recording clerk notifies members before each meeting.
   2. Quorum
      
      A quorum of the Committee is four committee members. A quorum for tenure questions is five committee members.
   3. Decision-making
      
      
      1. In all decisions, a majority of the quorum requirement is needed. All final votes on promotions in rank and on tenure are by secret ballot. In addition, any committee member may request a secret ballot on any vote.
      2. Other individuals may be invited to specific meetings; however, such individuals may not be present when the committee enters final deliberation and voting.

E. Duties and Restrictions of Representatives

1. 1. Representation
      
      Each faculty member is represented by the committee member(s) elected from their school. Correspondence with the committee is initiated through the school representative(s).
   2. Verification of Correct Placement
      
      During the fall semester, a school representative will update the Faculty Status Summary form for all tenure-line faculty in their school. It is the responsibility of each faculty member to verify that the information on the form is correct or to report any errors to their school RTP representative(s).
   3. Notification of Eligibility
      
      The RTP chairperson will meet with school deans and program directors early in the fall academic term to describe its procedures and emphasize the types of evaluative feedback that is most helpful to the committee.
      
      The school representative notifies faculty members when they are eligible for step advancements, promotion in rank, pre-tenure and tenure, and five year review. A calendar reflecting the notification timeline is indicated in Appendix I. Notwithstanding this notification, it is the responsibility of the individual faculty member to be aware of their eligibility for step advancements, promotion in rank, pre tenure review, tenure, and five-year review.
   4. Recommendations to the Administration for Pre-Tenure, Tenure, and Promotion
      
      After gathering information via the appropriate forms, the RTP committee evaluates the candidates and makes recommendations to the CHS Dean regarding pre-tenure, tenure, and promotion.
   5. Five-Year Evaluation of Tenured Faculty
      
      After gathering information via the appropriate forms, the RTP committee assesses and writes an evaluation of each faculty member for whom a five-year evaluation is scheduled. Evaluations are sent to the faculty member, the school dean, and the CHS Dean.
   6. Handbook Revision
      
      Beginning in the 2026-2027 academic year and each academic year that follows, the RTP committee may propose changes and revise the RTP Handbook. The revisions must be presented to the CHS tenure-line faculty for consideration and must be approved by a majority of the tenure-line faculty. If approved by the tenure-line faculty, the proposed revisions will then be recommended to the administration for final approval. The revisions must be approved by the CHS Dean, Provost, and President to be implemented. Revisions involving the tenure review process may also require approval by the Board of Regents before implementation.
   7. Conflict of Interest
      
      A faculty member may not serve on the RTP Committee during the year when they will be evaluated for pre-tenure, tenure, promotion, or five-year review by the committee, nor may a member serve when a close family relation will be evaluated. When the committee evaluates cases for individuals for whom an obvious conflict of interest exists with a committee member, the committee must recuse the member from the deliberations of that case.
   8. Censure or Removal from Committee
      
      The committee has the power to recommend to the CHS Faculty Association President that one of its members be censured or removed from the RTP committee. An action to censure or remove is made when a member violates the policies and procedures of the committee. In these cases, the committee must vote on all censure or removal recommendations by secret ballot with the member in question not voting. A decision to censure or remove a committee member must be by unanimous vote of all remaining committee members.

V. Security Procedures

All considerations of specific individuals having to do with matters of advancement, promotion, tenure, and other reviews are confidential; that is, they shall not be discussed either by members of the RTP committee or by those with whom the RTP committee consults, other than with other individuals privileged to have such information. Any violation of confidentiality is presumed to be unprofessional conduct and a violation of the policies and procedures of the RTP committee.

A. Minutes

The recording clerk shall keep minutes for each meeting of the RTP committee. It is recommended that the minutes do not include confidential information about any candidate or committee member. In the event that the minutes do contain confidential information, each member must return their copy to the chairperson after the minutes have been reviewed and approved.

B. Evaluation Forms

1. 1. After the committee reaches a decision on a candidate, the candidate's application materials, including all peer and supervisor evaluations, are archived and retained in Interfolio in accordance with the Pepperdine University Records Management Policy. Access to these materials must be managed by the Office of the CHS Dean.
   2. All other copies of the candidate's materials, including evaluation documents, must be destroyed. In this context, destroying requires deleting all digital copies and shredding any printed/hardcopy forms.
   3. After final administrative action has been taken on each candidate, the RTP committee chairperson will be notified and school representatives will return hard-copy supporting documentation provided by the candidate to the candidate. Supervisor and peer evaluations will be retained in  Interfolio in accordance with the Pepperdine University Records Management Policy.

C. Retiring Committee Members

At the conclusion of a committee member's term, they must return any RTP-related files or materials relating to committee business to the chairperson. They also must delete digital copies of these materials. Upon receipt, the chairperson must destroy all received materials, except information related to the faculty member's current rank and step on the placement schedule.

VI. Initial Placement

All prospective faculty members must undergo evaluation by the CHS Dean, the dean of the faculty member's school, and the chairperson of the RTP committee for initial placement in rank and step. To aid in evaluating credentials, the CHS Dean will provide the school dean and RTP chairperson with a copy of the candidate's curriculum vitae submitted during the application process. Other supporting materials also may be provided at the discretion of the CHS Dean. If the RTP chairperson, school dean, and CHS Dean do not reach agreement on initial placement, the final decision will be made by the CHS Dean.

The following guidelines ensure that tenure-line faculty members are treated consistently in this placement process.

1. Full-time (a two-semester academic year, a three-quarter academic year, or their equivalent) teaching in college, after completion of a terminal degree judged to be equivalent to a Ph.D., is the only type of professional experience that provides an equivalent level of placement credit with each year of full-time teaching corresponding to one year of placement credit. Generally, full-time college teaching in a discipline other than that in which a person has been formally educated counts no more than 0.75 years of placement credit.
2. Two years of full-time college teaching prior to receiving a terminal degree, is equal to one year of placement credit.
3. Initial placement of new faculty without full-time teaching experience is normally at the Assistant I level. Responsibilities related to teaching assistantships, research assistantships, and similar duties are considered a normal part of graduate education and do not grant credits toward initial placement.
4. No combination of teaching and related experience is evaluated at more than one year of placement credit for any given academic year.
5. Experience earned prior to receipt of the baccalaureate degree is not granted placement credit.
6. Professional experience in the same discipline as the faculty member's appointment may be considered in the granting of placement credit. Depending on the nature of the professional experience, each year (twelve consecutive months) may result in placement credit ranging from 0.5 to 1.0 years. In no case will a year of professional experience be granted more than one year of placement credit. No amount of professional experience may be evaluated at more than a total of six years of placement credit.
7. Exceptional achievement in the candidate's discipline may be considered for initial placement.
8. In figuring the total years of placement credit, only the number of full years are considered. No placement credit is granted for partial years.
9. When a faculty member changes schools or appointments, they will be re-evaluated for initial placement.
10. As noted in Section IX of the Handbook, all faculty must complete a full year of teaching at CHS before applying for promotion in rank.

VII. Criteria for Each Rank

A. Instructor

Appointment or promotion to this rank is primarily for those without terminal degrees.

B. Assistant Professor

Candidates for appointment at the rank of assistant professor should be a person of demonstrated promise. The candidate shall have the educational background appropriate to assistant professors in their discipline, a terminal doctoral degree or the equivalent for the candidate's discipline. The candidate shall have demonstrated the ability to teach and perform scholarly work and/or creative activity based on the following types of evidence.

1. 1. A comprehensive and current vita.
   2. Teaching ability shall be judged, to the extent possible, on:
      
      
      1. previous teaching experience (including service as a graduate teaching assistant);
      2. letters of recommendation concerning previous teaching experience;
      3. statements from professors concerning his/her performance as a graduate student;
      4. student course evaluations.
   3. Ability to perform scholarly work and/or creative activity shall be judged on:
      
      
      1. statements from his/her professors in graduate school, including research directors (if applicable);
      2. copies of published and unpublished writing, including the dissertation, and/or evidence of creative activity.

Reappointment to this rank is normally limited to those whose teaching, scholarly or creative activity, and service indicate that the ideal expected of Pepperdine faculty is being realized through their performance. The length of time spent at this rank is normally six years, with eligibility for step advancement in the third and fifth years.

C. Associate Professor

In addition to the requirements for assistant professor, candidates for appointment or promotion to the rank of associate professor shall have demonstrated growth and accomplishments in their academic career. Growth can be judged by evidence of development of new talents or expertise in successively broader fields, or increasingly significant contributions made in a single field.

The candidate shall have an educational background appropriate to associate professors in their discipline. The candidate shall have demonstrated excellence in teaching, scholarly research and/or creative activity, and service to the University and to the profession and community, in proportions appropriate to the responsibilities assigned to the candidate during the period of evaluation.

To the extent scholarly research and/or creative activity are a component of the candidate's responsibilities, there should be evidence of the beginning of regional, national, or international recognition of the candidate's achievements and ability.

Appointments at the rank of associate professor require demonstrated success and maturity in teaching, service, and scholarly or creative work. The length of time spent at this rank is normally six years, with eligibility for step advancement in the third and fifth years.

D. Professor

The candidate for appointment to the rank of professor shall have demonstrated growth and significant accomplishments in their academic career. Growth can be judged by evidence of development by the individual of new talents, or expertise in successively broader fields, or increasingly significant contributions made in a single field.

The candidate shall have the educational background appropriate to professors in their discipline. The candidate shall have demonstrated excellence in teaching, scholarly research and/or creative activity, and service to the University and to the profession and community, in proportions appropriate to the responsibilities assigned to the candidate during the period of evaluation.

To the extent scholarly research and/or creative activity are a component of the candidate's responsibilities, there shall be evidence of regional, national, or international recognition of the candidate's achievements and ability.

In addition to the requirements for associate professor, appointment to this rank requires an excellent record of meritorious teaching, scholarly or creative activity, and service over a period of long duration. The candidate must also demonstrate through the record of performance that there is a high probability their level of performance will be maintained or enhanced in the future.

In exceptional cases, the rank of professor is also offered to candidates who have demonstrated outstanding excellence as teachers and who are strong in the area of service but who are not engaged in regular scholarly publication or creative activity. In these cases, such exceptional persons must have outstanding knowledge of their discipline and demonstrate through prior performance that the probability of continued outstanding teaching and service is high.

The rank of Professor is not granted as a matter of course, even to faculty members with tenure, but only after careful evaluation demonstrates that the faculty member possesses the aforementioned qualifications. Eligibility for step advancement at this rank is normally in the fourth and seventh years.

E. Distinguished Professor

The rank of distinguished professor is reserved for the most meritorious faculty members. To qualify, one must have spent a minimum of nine years at the rank of professor. In addition to the requirements for professor, candidates for this rank have an exceptional recognized standing among their disciplinary peers and  there shall be compelling evidence of a high level of national or international recognition of the candidate's achievements and ability.

Appointment as a distinguished professor is for a period of five years and carries with it a salary increase equivalent to that of a rank promotion. Application for distinguished professor follows the same procedures as application for promotion in rank with the addition of external peer review. To be reappointed, the candidate must apply and receive a favorable recommendation from the RTP committee and the CHS Dean. Reappointment to distinguished professor follows the same procedures as the five-year review (Section XIII). Reappointment may be either at the same salary level or at a level increased by the amount of a step advancement. Following two successful appointments, the rank of distinguished professor is permanent, but the candidate will continue to undergo five-year reviews.

F. University Professor

A university professor appointment is reserved for scholar teachers whose extraordinary professional accomplishments merit special commendation. The policies governing a university professor appointment are found on the Provost's website.

VIII. Step Advancements

Step advancements within a rank are not automatic. They are reviewed in accordance with the following procedures.

1. A faculty member is eligible for a step advancement when they have met the criteria stated in the Placement Schedule (Appendix II). Those who have attained eligibility are notified by their school representative. Notwithstanding this notification, it shall be the responsibility of the individual faculty member to be aware of their eligibility for a step advancement.
2. Step advancements are not granted automatically. The faculty member who wishes to apply must submit the materials requested by their school dean no later than February 1. Faculty on or anticipating a formal leave of absence from the University, who are or will be unable to complete regularly assigned duties during the application period, should speak with the CHS Dean to discuss appropriate accommodations to enable application for the step advancement.
3. School deans will recommend that eligible faculty be given or denied step advancements and will prepare a statement of the rationale for each of their recommendations for the CHS Dean.
4. The CHS Dean will confer with each school dean to discuss their recommendations. Following the conferences, the school dean will send their final decisions to the RTP committee, copying the CHS Dean. In cases where a school dean is under consideration for a step advancement, the CHS Dean will make the final decision.
5. A faculty member who has reason to believe that the decision made by their school dean was unjust may appeal to the RTP committee.
   
   
   1. Procedures for Appealing Denials of Step Advancement
      
      To initiate the appeal, the faculty member must send a letter to the chairperson of the RTP committee indicating the reasons for the appeal. The faculty member must submit the letter to the RTP chairperson no later than September 1 of the year in which the denial occurred.
      
      Upon receipt of the appeal letter, the RTP chairperson will coordinate a meeting with the school dean, the faculty member, and the RTP chairperson. If at the end of the meeting there is agreement by the school dean and the faculty member that the step advancement was inappropriately denied, the school dean will inform the CHS Dean by written correspondence that the faculty member's step advancement is granted. If the meeting ends with no agreement between the school dean and the faculty member, the faculty member can elect to continue the appeal process by notifying the RTP chairperson.
      
      The RTP chairperson will then ask the school dean and the faculty member to provide the following to the RTP committee:
      
         - The school dean will provide:
      
         - The letter of application or similar document made by the faculty member requesting the step advancement.
      
         - The school dean's letter of rationale outlining the case for denial of the step advancement sent to the CHS Dean.
      
      Any relevant data and narrative that the school dean considered in their decision to deny the faculty member a step advancement.
      
      The faculty member will provide:
      
         - A statement detailing why the decision to deny the step advancement should be overturned. In the statement the faculty member is encouraged to submit any error in fact, criteria, or process that they believe led to the denial.
      
      The RTP committee will review the documentation submitted to determine if the step advancement was denied due to error with respect to fact, if an inappropriate process was followed, or unsuitable criteria were applied.
      
      The RTP committee will decide by a majority vote if the decision to deny the step advancement will be upheld or overturned. To be overturned, the RTP committee must find a preponderance of evidence that a substantial error was made in either fact, criteria, or procedure and that this error contributed materially to an inappropriate denial of the step advancement. In exceptional cases, and at its sole discretion, the RTP committee may ask for additional information, including a formal review with a submission of a faculty data form and peer reviews. The burden of proof to persuade the RTP committee that the decision to deny the step advancement was improper rests upon the faculty member.
      
      The RTP committee chairperson will notify the current school dean and the faculty member of the committee's decision by letter, with a copy forwarded to the CHS Dean.

IX. Promotions in Rank

A. Eligibility

A faculty member is eligible for a promotion in rank when they have met the criteria stated in the Placement Schedule (Appendix II). The candidate must have completed a full academic year of teaching at the CHS before applying for promotion in rank. Those who have attained eligibility are notified by their school representative. Notwithstanding this notification, it shall be the responsibility of the individual faculty member to be aware of their eligibility for a promotion in rank.

Faculty on or anticipating a formal leave of absence from the University and who are or will be unable to complete regularly assigned duties during the application period, should speak with the CHS Dean to discuss appropriate accommodations to enable application for promotion.

B. Application Procedures

Promotions in rank are not granted automatically. The faculty member who wishes to apply must complete and submit the Faculty Data Form-Candidate for Tenure or Promotion by September 15. In addition to the Faculty Data Form, candidates must also provide a portfolio of supporting materials. The portfolio must contain reflections and evaluations, and supporting materials in each area of evaluation. Generally, all reflective statements will be included in the Faculty Data Form. Details on the types of supporting materials to include in the portfolio are provided in the following section.

C. Evaluation of Individuals in Administrative Appointments

When an individual in an appointment where the majority of their workload is dedicated to performing administrative duties (e.g., a school dean or program director) is applying for promotion or step advancement, their performance of duties as an administrator will be considered for service, but not as a substitute for teaching or scholarly activity. No faculty member is promoted or tenured as an administrator, but only as a faculty member.

D. Areas of Evaluation

The candidate is evaluated in each of the following areas:

1. 1. Teaching Effectiveness
      
      Teaching is broadly understood to include classroom teaching, on-line teaching or instruction, experiential learning, and student mentoring. Teaching effectiveness or teaching quality shall be judged by all appropriate evidence available, including knowledge of the discipline and allied areas, engagement in assessment activities and practices, effective student advising, concern for students' personal development, conscientiousness about office hours, competence in classrooms, laboratories, and clinical environments, as well as effective supervision of student experiential learning, student projects, research, and field work.
      
      Materials to be included in the portfolio in support of a candidate's teaching effectiveness includes, but is not limited to, the following items: course syllabi, course outlines, reading lists, sample exams, assignments, handouts, course slides/visual materials, and/or other materials related to teaching content, course organization, and pedagogical practice and mechanics.
   2. Scholarly Activity
      
      Scholarly activity includes published written work, unpublished manuscripts, papers presented at professional meetings, lectures to knowledgeable public groups, and participation in colloquia or panel discussions at one's own or other institutions. Creative activity, whether exhibited or performed outside or within the University, is also evidence for the judgment of scholarly capabilities. Work in a candidate's primary discipline that is not primarily addressed to the candidate's professional disciplinary peers may be considered by the committee as community service.
      
      Materials to be included in the portfolio in support of a candidate's scholarly or creative activity includes, but is not limited to, the following items: scholarly papers and manuscripts; evidence of performances and exhibits, and copies or evidence of presentations. Books or hardcopy materials that cannot be uploaded to the portfolio should be referenced in the portfolio with copies provided to the CHS Dean's Office.
   3. Service
      
      Service is divided into the following three categories:
      
      
      1. Professional Service
         
         Professional service includes efforts which add to the professional knowledge or career of the individual and which are undertaken as a formal or quasi-formal representative of the University. Such service should reflect professional or public credit upon both the candidate and the University and it may include active participation in professional organizations, service as a national or regional officer of a professional society or active participant on a major committee of such a society. It also may include holding advisory and consultative positions of recognized stature, and holding committee membership at the national, regional, or state level.
      2. University Service
         
         University service includes memberships and performance on school, college, and University committees, participation in the necessary advisory, assessment, governance, and other duties of the academic unit, participation in formal University functions and ceremonies, work with faculty association bodies, advising student organizations, student recruitment, and professional assistance to the University, other programs, centers, departments, divisions, schools, and colleges.
      3. Community Service
         
         The University recognizes that one of the responsibilities of its faculty is to contribute to the public good through service. Community service to advance the public good includes participation in church, civic, and service organizations, political activity, and other community organizations. Other contributions to the public good could include leading student service learning, building institutional capacity for community engagement, or making contributions to the community in one's teaching, scholarly research and/or creative activity.
         
         Candidates are encouraged to provide evidence of service engagement in all three areas in their portfolio.
   4. Support for Christian Values
      
      The candidate is expected to display a consistent pattern of support for generally accepted Christian values and the mission of Pepperdine University as described in the University Mission Statement. The candidate is also expected to demonstrate active participation in a community of faith and integration of faith and learning in their courses.

E. Evaluation Sources

1. 1. Designated Peers
      
      
      1. The candidate selects five "designated peers," with the approval of the school dean and RTP representative, to evaluate them. These "designated peers" serve as faculty at Pepperdine in the candidate's own discipline or in a closely related discipline, with the requirement that each evaluator is knowledgeable in the discipline of the candidate being evaluated. At least three of these peers must be in tenure-line appointments, with the remainder being in full-time appointments. In the event that not enough qualified peers are available at Pepperdine to evaluate the faculty member's application, the candidate, together with the chairperson and school representative, may solicit one or more evaluations from outside the university. After the peers have been designated, the school RTP representative will meet with them singly or in groups to clarify the kind of information needed by the RTP committee.
      2. Designated peers review in detail the candidate's Faculty Data Form-- Candidate for Tenure or Promotion. They also review all materials in the candidate's accompanying portfolio.
         
         Designated peers are also required to observe at least one class session of the candidate to assess their teaching performance. They should arrange the date of the class observation with the candidate in advance to avoid visiting on days when exams, films, guest speakers, or other atypical class activities are planned. They may observe classes singly or with other peer reviewers as the candidate desires. Designated peer reviewers should arrive in the classroom before it begins and remain until the class has been dismissed. The candidate need not introduce peer evaluators to the class, but may at their discretion. Evaluators should be as unobtrusive as possible during class visits.
      3. After a review of all materials provided by the candidate in support of their application, designated peers will complete the Designated Peer Evaluation Form. Peers should make a special effort to evaluate the weight of scholarly material, the appropriateness and sophistication of teaching materials, and the importance of the University, professional, or community contribution in their assessment. Simply listing information that the candidate has provided in their Faculty Data Form provides little benefit to the RTP committee.
   2. Additional Peers
      
      To aid the Committee in obtaining a complete view of the candidate, all other members of the candidate's school will be invited to complete the Peer Evaluation Form by the school RTP representative.
   3. External Peers (Distinguished Professor only)
      
      To aid the Committee in its evaluation of a candidate for Distinguished Professor, one who is expected to be of recognized standing among specialists in their field, additional evaluations from outside the University are gathered from each of three separate external sources.
      
      
      1. Outside peer selected by the RTP committee from a list of three names submitted by the candidate.
      2. Outside dean (or equivalent) selected by the RTP committee from a list of three "cohort schools" proposed by the candidate and affirmed by the school dean and RTP committee.
      3. An outside professional association officer or journal editor selected by the RTP committee from a list of three journals submitted by the candidate.
   4. Students
      
      The school dean provides the RTP committee with a summary of all student course evaluations for the candidate during the past three years. In this summary, the school dean must provide complete and explicit information from the narrative comments they have seen on student evaluations of each candidate during the preceding three academic years.
      
      The RTP committee will also examine student evaluation forms for the three preceding trimesters/semesters in which application is made, and will receive summary reports from student course evaluations that report data and statistics from all questions on the form. School deans are to ensure that candidates for tenure/promotion are evaluated by students in all classes every trimester/semester, but especially in the three trimesters/semesters preceding the RTP review.
   5. Supervisor (School Dean or Program Director)
      
      After reviewing all materials provided by the candidate, the candidate's supervisor (the school dean or program director) completes the Supervisor Evaluation Form.

F. Evaluation Procedures

1. 1. In the first three areas listed in Section IX.D., the candidate is evaluated based on the appropriate relative weightings associated with the candidate's appointment. After the Committee has thoroughly reviewed all pertinent materials and information concerning the candidate, each committee member rates the candidate in the areas of teaching effectiveness, scholarly activity, and service by means of the following scale:
      
      Poor  |  Marginal  |  Adequate  |  Good  |  Very Good  |  Outstanding
      
      No candidate will be recommended for a promotion in rank unless they rate at least “Good” in the "Teaching Effectiveness" area.
   2. Committee members review the fourth area listed in Section IX.D., and assess whether the candidate has displayed a consistent pattern of support of generally accepted Christian values and the mission of Pepperdine University as described in the University Mission Statement, if they provide evidence of active participation in a community of faith, and if they have appropriately integrated faith and learning in their courses.
   3. The following principles will guide the RTP committee in its evaluation of information received:
      
      
      1. It is the responsibility of the RTP committee to investigate allegations made against any candidate. During this investigation, the identity of the person making the allegations will be kept confidential to the greatest extent possible.
      2. No substantive new information about a candidate can be discussed by the committee members unless the information is presented in written form and signed by the author. The new information shall be added to the candidate's RTP application. At the Committee's discretion, the author may be asked to clarify and expand and give the grounds for their allegation.

G. Declining or Withdrawing an Application

If a faculty member has not stated their intent to apply for promotion by the deadline it will be assumed that they have declined to apply.

H. Movement Through Placement Schedule

1. 1. For purposes of determining movement through the placement schedule, one year is typically equivalent to two semesters or three trimesters of full-time teaching. This includes not only teaching, but also units allowed for administrative duties, supervisory assignments, release time, medical/parental leave, and sabbatical leave. It does not include unapproved leaves of absence, other forms of leave or absence, or absence due to suspension or disciplinary action.
   2. A faculty member cannot be considered for step advancement or promotion while on leave of absence.
   3. If a faculty member's progress through the placement schedule is either delayed or accelerated, they will thereafter spend the number of years at each step stipulated by the placement schedule.
   4. The eligibility period for individuals hired mid-year begins the following fall semester. Stated differently, credit on the placement schedule is not granted for incomplete academic years.

I. Route of Promotion Application

After the candidate's materials have been reviewed by both the RTP committee and the CHS Dean, the committee and the CHS Dean will meet to discuss each candidate. Alternatively, the CHS Dean may designate a representative to review the files, meet with the committee, and make an independent evaluation. Following this conference, the committee will forward its recommendations to the CHS Dean. The CHS Dean will then make recommendations to the Provost.

All candidate's files will be retained in the CHS Dean's office and available to the University administration.

X. Accelerated Promotion

Accelerated promotion provides a mechanism by which faculty who are performing at an exceptional level in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service can move through the ranks more rapidly than the normal progression as shown on the Placement Schedule (Appendix II). When granted, accelerated promotion effectively reduces by either one or two years the time spent by an applicant at the assistant or associate professor ranks. (There is no accelerated promotion for full professors to achieve early eligibility for the status of distinguished professor.)

A. Eligibility

During the fourth year at the rank of assistant or associate professor, a faculty member of exceptional merit is eligible to apply for an accelerated promotion to the next rank. The earlier one applies the more rigorously the promotion criteria are applied. Accelerated promotion cannot be utilized to advance a faculty member to another step within the ranking levels.

Faculty on or anticipating a formal leave of absence from the University, who are or will be unable to complete regularly assigned duties during the application period, should speak with the CHS Dean to discuss appropriate accommodations to enable application for accelerated promotion.

B. Criteria

To receive an accelerated promotion after the fourth year (effectively a two-year advancement), a faculty member must display a consistent pattern of support for generally accepted Christian values and the mission of Pepperdine University as described in the Mission Statement, and must be in the top 10 percent of all CHS faculty in each of the areas of teaching, scholarly activity, and service.

To receive an accelerated promotion after the fifth year (effectively a one-year advancement), a faculty member must display a consistent pattern of support for generally accepted Christian values and the mission of Pepperdine University as described in the Mission Statement, and must be in the top 10 percent of CHS faculty in two of the three areas of teaching scholarly activity, or service, and in the top 25 percent in the other area.

XI. Pre-Tenure Review

A. Purpose

The pre-tenure review is similar in form to a tenure review and is conducted for the purpose of assessing a tenure-track candidate's progress towards obtaining tenure. This RTP committee evaluation provides the candidate with detailed feedback concerning strengths and weaknesses in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service, and is used to help decide whether the faculty member should be reappointed. (A decision to reappoint does not guarantee a favorable decision at the time of the tenure review.) If the decision is not to reappoint, the year following the review will be the terminal period of employment.

B. Notification

The pre-tenure review normally takes place during the candidate's third year. For faculty who will be evaluated for tenure during their fourth or fifth year according to the provisions of Section XII.A.2, the pre-tenure review takes place during the candidate's second year. There is no provision for pre-tenure review for faculty who are evaluated for tenure earlier than their fourth year of employment in a tenure-track position.

Faculty on or anticipating a formal leave of absence from the University, who are or will be unable to complete regularly assigned duties during the application period, should speak with the CHS Dean to discuss appropriate accommodations to enable application for pre-tenure review.

C. Application Procedures, Evaluation Areas, and Evaluation Procedures

Application procedures for the pre-tenure review are the same as for promotion in rank (Section IX) and tenure with the exception of the following:

1. 1. The Pre-Tenure Faculty Data Form asks the candidate to express their goals for the next three years. This form and the supporting materials must be completed by January 15.
   2. The Designated Peer And Supervisor Evaluation Forms include a summary section in which the reviewer is asked to outline the candidate's strengths and weaknesses and make suggestions for change or improvement.

D. Results

After the RTP committee has studied all the materials submitted, it writes an evaluative report including a recommendation about reappointment, copies of which are sent to the faculty member, their school dean, and the CHS Dean.

Tenure

The University Tenure Policy, adopted by the Board of Regents on September 8, 1981 and revised September 1993 is in full force and all matters concerning tenure shall be decided by reference to its provisions.

A. Eligibility

1. 1. The tenure review is normally undertaken during the sixth year, with the seventh year being either the terminal year of employment or the first year of tenure.
   2. It is possible for the tenure review to be undertaken before the sixth year of employment. However, such cases must be negotiated between the candidate and the University at the time the candidate is hired in a tenure-track faculty appointment. The year during which the tenure review is to be made must be explicitly stated in a letter to the candidate.
   3. The policies described in 1 and 2 above do not preclude an exceptional candidate being hired with tenure. 
      Faculty on or anticipating a formal leave of absence from the University, who are or will be unable to complete regularly assigned duties during the application period, should speak with the CHS Dean to discuss appropriate accommodations to enable application for tenure.
   4. Those who have attained eligibility are notified by their school representative. Notwithstanding such notification, it is the responsibility of the individual faculty member to be aware of their eligibility for tenure.

B. Application Procedures, Areas of Evaluation, Evaluation Sources, and Evaluation Procedures for Tenure

Application procedures for the tenure review are the same as those for promotion in rank (Section IX), with the exception of the following:

1. 1. The faculty member must apply for tenure in a specific school and field of specialization, for example, CHS/School of Speech Language Pathology.
   2. The RTP committee's pre-tenure evaluation will be considered during the tenure evaluation.

C. Route of Tenure Application

When both the CHS Dean and the RTP committee have reviewed all candidate materials, the CHS Dean and the committee will meet to discuss each candidate. Following the conference, the committee will forward its recommendation to the CHS Dean. The CHS Dean makes a recommendation to the Provost.

All candidate's files will be retained in the CHS Dean's office and available to the University administration.

XIII. Five-Year Evaluation of Tenured Faculty

A. Purpose

In order to ensure that a faculty member's performance remains at a high level after they have received tenure, the RTP committee undertakes a five-year evaluation of the faculty member's performance every five years regardless of rank. The five-year evaluation applies to those who have neither been evaluated by the RTP committee in the past five years nor received a step increase in the past five years. The evaluation is not a review to determine whether tenure should be continued, but a means of giving the faculty member formative feedback and a formal assessment of their performance.

B. Notification

Representatives of each school have the responsibility of informing faculty members in their schools when they are scheduled for a five-year evaluation. The school representative will notify the faculty member by October 1. The evaluation procedure will take place during the spring semester.

Faculty on or anticipating a formal leave of absence from the University, who are or will be unable to complete regularly assigned duties during the five-year review  period, should speak with the CHS Dean to discuss appropriate accommodations for the five-year review.

C. Procedure and Sources of Information

The procedure is similar to that of promotion and tenure.

1. 1. The faculty member is asked to fill out a Faculty Data Form - Five-Year Review in which they report on work and significant accomplishments in the areas of teaching, scholarship, service, and support for the mission of Pepperdine University since the time of their previous RTP committee review. The faculty member also provides a portfolio of supporting materials as described in Section IX.D.
   2. The candidate, together with the school dean and school RTP representative, selects three "designated peers" to serve as evaluators. The designated peers must serve in the candidate's own school or in a related disciplinary area with the requirement that each evaluator must have expertise in the discipline of the person to be evaluated. After the peers have been designated, the school representative will meet with them singly or in groups to clarify the kind of evaluative information required by the Committee.
   3. The school dean completes a similar evaluation, differing only in that it asks for a report on teaching evaluations.
   4. The faculty member's supporting materials are to be placed with the school representative by January 15, so the designated peers and school dean can evaluate them. Peer reviews are to be completed and filed with the school representative of the RTP committee by February 15.

D. Results

After the RTP committee has studied all the materials submitted, it writes an evaluative report, copies of which are sent to the faculty member, their school dean, the CHS Dean, and the Provost.

XIV. Faculty Annual Reviews

In order to provide faculty members annual notice of their standing and feedback on their performance to aid in meeting the school's standards and expectations, school deans or program directors must meet annually with their tenure-line faculty to conduct a review. Annual reviews are intended to provide formative feedback to aid the development of faculty. Feedback received by a faculty member during the annual review process should not be construed to create either an expectation or guarantee of tenure, promotion, step advancement, or a positive five-year review.

To facilitate the annual review process, two forms - a Faculty Data Form and a Dean/Program Director Evaluation Form - are provided on the RTP website. 

Appendix I

Appendix II

Years referenced in the schedule are complete (12 month) academic years.

¹ Development of the CHS RTP Handbook for Tenure-Line Faculty was informed by the University of Denver Policies and Procedures Relating to Faculty Appointment, Promotion, & Tenure document.