AA/04/AS/25/FAC - Principles, Criteria and Procedures for Retention, Promotion and Tenure Review

Effective 2025-2026 AY

PRINCIPLES, CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES
FOR RETENTION, PROMOTION AND TENURE REVIEW

Adopted January 18, 1978

Amended October 16, 1981

 Amended October 14, 1982

Amended December 16, 1983

Amended October 14, 1985

Amended October 30, 1986

Amended October 21, 1987

Amended March 4, 1993

Amended April 6, 1994

Amended March 23, 1999

January 12, 2004

April 17, 2009

May 28, 2009

May 22, 2020

May 20, 2022

March 24, 2025

I. PRINCIPLES

Faculty status and related matters are primarily a faculty responsibility; this area includes appointments, reappointments, decisions not to reappoint, promotions, the granting of tenure, and dismissal. The primary responsibility of the faculty for such matters is based on the fact that its judgment is central to general educational policy. Furthermore, scholars in a particular field or activity have the chief competence for judging the work of their colleagues; in such competence it is implicit that responsibility exist for both adverse and favorable judgments. Likewise, there is the more general competence of experienced faculty personnel committees having a broader charge. Determinations in these matters should first be by faculty action through established procedures, reviewed by the chief academic officers with the concurrence of the board. The governing board and president should, on questions of faculty status, as in other matters where the faculty has primary responsibility, concur with the faculty judgment except in rare instances and for compelling reasons which should be stated in detail. (From AAUP Guidelines.)

II. REVIEW CRITERIA

The following four criteria apply to the faculty as a whole, and all criteria must be considered in the review process. Academic departments1 must formulate written elaborations of the four criteria (A, B, C, D) listed below. Each department shall define expectations for tenure and promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor (or equivalent Librarian and Counselor rank) and for promotion from Associate to Professor (or equivalent Librarian and Counselor rank). All elaborations and amendments to them must be approved by the URPTC prior to their first use in a review process. Once approved, departmental elaborations remain in effect for all subsequent reviews until amended or replaced by the Department. Any such changes must be approved by the URPTC. Each RPT file must contain a copy of the current as well as any applicable prior elaborations. A faculty member has the right to be evaluated according to elaborations in effect when he or she was hired or to which the faculty member subsequently has agreed.

A. Teaching proficiency, including preparation, classroom presentation, student advising, and adherence to departmental guidelines and university wide academic standards. Teaching proficiency is the primary qualification for retention, promotion, and tenure.
B. Scholarship or other equivalent creative activities.
C. Extent and appropriateness of professional preparation, normally including the doctorate or equivalent attainment (California Administrative Code, Title 5, Section 42711).
D. Participation in university affairs.

No criteria other than those in the section above may be used in retention, promotion or tenure considerations.

III. ELIGIBILITY

• The procedures in this document shall apply to tenure track faculty appointed to the rank of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor, or equivalent Librarian or Counselor rank.
• In consultation with the Provost, Department Chair and departmental search committee, the President or the President’s designee, which is normally the Dean, may grant to a faculty unit employee at the time of initial appointment to probationary status up to two years of credit towards tenure for probation based on previous service at a postsecondary education institution, previous full-time CSU employment, or comparable experience.
• The Chair of the University Retention Promotion and Tenure Committee will obtain from the Faculty Affairs Specialist a list of all faculty who require mandatory review according to the collective bargaining agreement currently in effect and according to these RPT procedures.
• A faculty member may, through the departmental RPTC, waive consideration for promotion at any time before or during the RPT review process by written statement to the URPTC.

2022-2025 Collective bargaining agreement–see articles:
13.3: “The normal period of probation shall be a total of six (6) years of full-time probationary service and credited service, if any. Any deviation from the normal six (6) year probationary period shall be the decision
of the President following their consideration of recommendations from the department or equivalent unit
and appropriate administrator(s).”
13.4: “The President, upon recommendation by the affected department or equivalent unit, may grant to a
faculty unit employee at the time of initial appointment to probationary status up to two (2) years service credit for probation based on previous service at a postsecondary education institution, previous full-time CSU employment, or comparable experience.”
14.2: ” A probationary faculty unit employee shall not normally be promoted during probation.  Probationary faculty unit employees shall not be promoted beyond the rank of Associate.  A probationary faculty unit employee shall normally be considered for promotion at the same time they are considered for tenure.,” and
14.3: “The promotion of a tenured faculty unit employee shall normally be effective the beginning of the sixth (6th) year after appointment to their current academic rank/classification. In such cases, the performance review for promotion shall take place during the year preceding the effective date of the promotion. This provision shall not apply if the faculty unit employee requests in writing that they not be considered.”

A. Review levels, Types of review and Early Review

1. Levels of Review: Department (RPT Committee and Chair), College Dean (or equivalent), University RPT Committee, Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs (or equivalent), President2
2. Types of Review

a) Partial Review: does not include URPTC.

b) Full Review: includes URPTC.

3. Early Review for Promotion and Tenure

a) Upon request, tenure and promotion from assistant to associate professor (or equivalent Librarian and Counselor rank) may be granted prior to the completion of the normal probationary period. Tenure and promotion are contingent on the probationary faculty member providing evidence of exceptional performance
in teaching proficiency, research/scholarship/equivalent creative
activities, and participation in university affairs. Each department shall
define expectations for the level of “exceptional performance” with respect to tenure and promotion from assistant to associate professor in its RPT elaborations.
b) Upon request, promotion from Associate Professor to Professor (or equivalent Librarian and Counselor rank) may be granted prior to the completion of the normal period of time at rank. Promotion is contingent on the faculty member providing evidence of exceptional performance in teaching proficiency, research/scholarship/equivalent creative activities, and participation in university affairs. Each department shall define expectations for the level of “exceptional performance” with respect to promotion from Associate Professor to Professor in its RPT elaborations.

B. Probationary Faculty
              1. Appointment and Promotion of Probationary Faculty

a) Initial appointment may be made at any rank depending upon experience, qualifications, and departmental recommendation.
b) The normal probationary period is 6 years of credited full-time higher education experience.
c) A probationary faculty member normally shall be considered for both tenure and promotion at the end of the probationary period.
d) A probationary faculty member shall not be promoted beyond the rank of Associate Professor (or equivalent Librarian and Counselor rank) without having been granted tenure.
e) An Assistant Professor will not be promoted to the rank of Full Professor (or equivalent Librarian and Counselor rank) without having first served as Associate Professor.

    2. Review of Probationary Faculty

a) Partial Review will be conducted in the second year after employment begins and during the fourth and fifth years. The departmental RPT Committee and the Department Chair will provide information to candidates on their strengths and weaknesses with regard to the four criteria, in preparation for the full, more formal reviews described below. Recommendations to retain will be submitted to the Dean (or equivalent) and forwarded to the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs (or equivalent). Recommendations against retention will result in a full review by all levels.
b) Full Review will be conducted in the following instances:

(1) when there is a negative review for retention at any level
(2) in the third and the sixth years after teaching begins;
(3) ordinarily for promotion and tenure during the sixth year;
(4) upon application for promotion or tenure.

C. Review of Eligible Tenured Faculty. Promotion of a tenured faculty member normally will be considered when the faculty member has reached the status recognized for promotion in the collective bargaining agreement currently in force. This will be a full review.

IV. DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE STRUCTURE

Each Department or equivalent unit shall elect a departmental RPT Committee. All committee members shall be full-time tenured faculty members elected by all full-time probationary and tenured faculty members of the Department.

A. Composition. The departmental committee shall be comprised of three, or, if larger, an odd number of, members of the departmental faculty.

B. Eligibility. All Committee members shall have a higher rank/classification than those being considered for promotion. Members of the University Retention, Promotion and Tenure Committee shall be ineligible to serve. Faculty members under review shall be ineligible to serve. The Departmental Chairperson may be elected to serve on the Committee.

C. Election Procedures. It shall be the responsibility of the chair of the Department to oversee the election of each year’s committee. The election shall be conducted by secret ballot and shall be held each fall prior to the initiation of the RPT review. Candidates elected shall normally serve one full year and must receive a majority of votes cast. An eligible faculty member may withdraw their name from candidacy. If there are three or less eligible faculty members willing to serve, then those faculty members are automatically members of the Departmental RPT Committee. Additional candidates for membership on the Departmental Committee shall be nominated from the eligible faculty in related disciplines whenever less than three Departmental members are eligible to serve. When the Department Chair is under review, and it is necessary to add related discipline faculty, the URPTC shall meet with the department in order to initiate nomination procedures. If before the initiation of reviews, any member of the committee cannot continue to serve on the committee, an election shall be held to fill the vacant position as soon as possible.

The Departmental RPT Committee shall elect its own Chair.

D. It shall be the responsibility of the Chair of the Departmental Committee to verify that the Departmental Committee has been selected according to the foregoing procedures and to inform the University Retention, Promotion and Tenure Committee of the Departmental Committee’s membership.

V. UNIVERSITY RETENTION, PROMOTION AND TENURE COMMITTEE

A. The University Retention, Promotion and Tenure Committee shall be comprised of five (5) full- time tenured voting faculty members at the rank of full professor, librarian, or counselor, at least one member coming from each college. Elections shall be conducted by the Committee on Committees according to the procedures in the General Faculty Constitution, Article VI, Section 3.2

B. Departmental Chairs and faculty members serving in administrative positions shall be ineligible to serve on the University Retention, Promotion and Tenure Committee.

The Chair of the University Retention, Promotion and Tenure Committee shall be elected by the Committee.

C. The University Retention, Promotion, and Tenure Committee is charged with ensuring compliance with RPT Policy throughout the entire process. Furthermore, in the case that a serious problem arises, which could bring the trustworthiness of the process into doubt, be it deviation from the established timeline, real or perceived reviewer conflict of interest, or other matters requiring intervention; then, in consultation with the Associate Vice President for Faculty Affairs and/or the Provost, the URPTC shall facilitate a solution to ensure a fair and objective review for all candidates.

D. The Office of Faculty Affairs is responsible for storing electronic and/or physical files and for troubleshooting with users any technological issues those users may experience. In the case that files are submitted electronically and the index for the file is generated by the portfolio software, the Office of Faculty Affairs shall print the Index of Materials and all letters generated by the reviewers (including any rebuttal letters) for placement in the permanent personnel file.

E. The Office of Faculty Affairs is responsible for ensuring all reviewers have access to candidates’ RPT files.

VI. REVIEW PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURES

A. Membership. No one may serve at more than one level of review in the entire review process. No faculty unit employee being reviewed for retention, promotion and/or tenure may serve at any level of review. An eligible faculty member may serve on more than one committee, but not on more than one level of review.

B. As part of the peer review process, the departmental committee shall attempt to notify all faculty unit employees of the department.

C. Sources of Information for review purposes shall consist primarily of materials compiled in the Working Personnel Action File (WPAF) by the faculty member under review. The candidate should consider reviewers of all levels when preparing the file and make explicit the connection between the work conducted and the departmental elaborations. In addition to specific documents required by the departmental elaborations, the WPAF shall include, but is not limited to:

1) Letter of initial appointment to the faculty member’s position

2) All letters from Retention/Promotion history

3) Departmental elaborations in place at the time of hire (and any elaborations since adopted, with an indication of which are to be used by the candidate)

4) Brief memo or letter of intent for the review (including explicitly identifying whether the review is for retention, tenure, and/or promotion)

5) Current curriculum vitae or résumé

6) Professional preparation sheet (template available from the Office of Faculty Affairs)

7) Narrative describing teaching philosophy, implementation, and improvement, to additionally include:

• a summary of courses, sections, and enrollments
• summary of mandatory/required student surveys
• advising work for the department
• work with graduate students if applicable
• licensure aspects of the professional position applicable
• Any program and curricular development

Artifacts to support the narrative shall be included as appendices, and these should  include the following if the period under review included teaching duties:

• sample syllabi
• examples of teaching materials
• mandatory/required student surveys of teaching

Other materials may be included.

8) Narrative describing research, scholarship, and/or creative activities, to include a summary of the work and its significance. Work in progress should also be reported. Evidence of these contributions should be included in the appendices.

9) Narrative describing participation in university affairs, also referred to as service. The narrative should describe service at one or more levels: department, college, university, outreach to the community, and, potentially, service to the profession or discipline. Artifacts supporting this work should be included in the appendices.

Sources of information for review purposes shall additionally include faculty unit employees, students, and any other appropriate source (Title 5, Section 42701). Each of these sources shall have the right to submit written, signed comments to the committee for inclusion in the candidate’s file. Only input in written form and signed by the source of the input is admissible. The Department RPT committee is responsible for ensuring that all material in the candidate’s file is consistent with policy and procedure. In the event that the committee or the candidate has questions or concerns about specific material, they may refer the issue to the Chair of the URPTC.

D. Additional Information. The candidate’s Working Personnel Action File (WPAF) must be complete before the departmental evaluation is inserted. If there are omissions of documentation, information or recommendations from the materials submitted for review, amplifications may be requested from the candidate and/or from the earlier levels of review. Such amplifications shall be provided in a timely manner. When any committee or individual reviewer writes a summary, judgment, recommendation, or decision statement for use by a higher level of review, such statements including the reasons thereto, shall be placed in the candidate’s WPAF. The candidate shall be provided with a copy of any additional material at least five (5) calendar days prior to such placement in their WPAF.

The faculty unit employee may submit a rebuttal statement or response in writing and/or request a meeting be held to discuss the recommendation within ten (10) calendar days following receipt of the recommendation. A faculty member under review may choose to invite an observer (i.e., a CFA representative or another member of the Stanislaus State faculty from within or outside of the department) to any RPT-related meeting, to observe proceedings and offer counsel. A copy of the response or rebuttal statement shall accompany the Working Personnel Action File and also be sent to all previous levels of review. This section shall not require that evaluation timelines be extended.

E. Review Steps. All candidates for Retention, Promotion or Tenure shall be reviewed according to the following steps: Departmental Committee, College Dean (or equivalent), University Retention, Promotion and Tenure Committee (full review only) AND Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs, Conference Committee3

F. Initiation of Procedures. RPT review shall be initiated by the Departmental RPT Committee Chair. It shall be the responsibility of the Departmental RPT Committee Chair and the candidate to gather information pertinent to the RPT review, including student evaluation of teaching data and a current vita. All these materials become a part of the WPAF when placed in the candidate’s file and are confidential within the review process. In the event that the review has not been initiated by the Departmental RPT Committee Chair on the calendar date specified by the University RPT Committee, the candidate shall be given five working days to initiate the review on his or her behalf. The University RPT Committee shall supply the Departmental RPT Committee and the candidate with copies of the RPT PROCEDURAL CHECK LIST, DATA SHEETS, and instructional materials to be used by the candidate in preparing the vita for their file. A specific deadline before the recommendation is made by the Departmental RPT Committee shall be established by the University RPT Committee at which time the Personnel Action File is declared complete with respect to documentation of performance for the purpose of evaluation. This date shall be announced in the RPT Calendar. Insertion of material after the date of this declaration must have the approval of the University RPTC and shall be limited to items that became accessible after this declaration. Material inserted in this fashion shall be returned to the Departmental RPTC for the review, evaluation and comment before consideration at subsequent levels of review. If, during the review process, the absence of required evaluation documents is discovered, the Working Personnel Action File shall be returned to the level at which the requisite documentation should have been provided. Such materials shall be provided in a timely manner.

G. The Departmental RPT Committee shall be responsible for providing a detailed description and evaluation of the candidate’s performance for each of the stated criteria. The purpose shall be to communicate all pertinent information about the candidate to subsequent levels of review. Therefore, the Departmental Committee’s description and evaluations of the candidate’s performance shall be addressed to faculty and administration presumed to be outside the candidate’s discipline. The Departmental RPT Committee shall write a single recommendation signed by each member of the Committee. It is the responsibility of the Departmental RPT Committee to compose a recommendation, which may include articulation of disagreements among committee members, that accurately characterizes the perspectives of each member. The Departmental RPT Committee shall discuss its recommendation with the candidate, who shall sign a statement indicating that they have seen the recommendation and has discussed the recommendation with the Departmental RPT Committee.

The Departmental Chair, if not a member of the Departmental RPT Committee, may make separate recommendations. Such recommendations shall be forwarded along with the departments’ recommendation. The Chair’s recommendation, when placed in the candidate’s WPAF, is subject to the conditions outlined in Section VI. C. The Chair’s statement is restricted to the four criteria and a summary recommendation.

H. The Dean (or equivalent) shall make an independent review of each candidate and provide written comments for each of the four (4) criteria and a summary recommendation. The Dean (or equivalent) shall discuss their recommendation with the candidate, who shall sign a statement indicating that they have seen the recommendation. Timelines for submission of information and/or recommendation shall follow the specifications outlined in VI. C. The Dean’s recommendation shall be forwarded simultaneously to the University RPT Committee and Provost as specified in the University RPT Calendar.

I. The University RPT Committee shall conduct an independent review consisting of written comments for each of the four criteria and a summary recommendation. Timelines for submission of information and/or recommendation shall follow the specifications outlined in VI. C. The University RPT Committee’s intended recommendation shall be forwarded to the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs as specified in the University RPT Calendar. If the URPTC recommendation agrees with the decision of the Provost, the URPTC will send a tentative recommendation to the candidate. If the URPTC does not agree with the decision of the Provost, the Conference Committee is convened.

J. The Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs shall conduct an independent review consisting of written comments for each of the four criteria and a summary decision. Timelines for submission of information and/or recommendation shall follow the specifications outlined in VI. C. The Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs will simultaneously provide an intended decision to the University RPT Committee. If the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs’ decision agrees with the recommendation of the University RPT Committee, the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs will send a tentative decision to the candidate. If the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs does not agree with the recommendation of the University RPT Committee, the Conference Committee is convened.

K. The Conference Committee is formed when the URPTC intended recommendation and Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs intended decision do not agree. The Conference Committee shall consist of the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs and the members of the University Retention, Promotion and Tenure Committee. The URPTC and Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs shall seek to achieve consensus regarding their intended recommendations/decision prior to the issuance of their tentative recommendation [URPTC] and decision [Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs]. If a consensus cannot be achieved, the URPTC and the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs shall submit their final comments regarding the candidate(s) under review for each of the four criteria and their summary recommendations to the President on or before the date set forth in the RPT calendar. After a review of the final comments and summary recommendations submitted by the URPTC and the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs, the President shall make the final decision. The President shall consult with the Conference Committee before the decision is final.

L. In deciding upon retention, promotion or tenure recommendations, the availability of funding shall not be a consideration.

M. The candidate for any review shall be informed of each tentative recommendation Such a recommendation or report shall identify the criteria on which it is based and shall state the reasons for it. The candidate shall be given ten (10) calendar days to forward a written response supporting their case before the recommendation is forwarded to the next level. The candidate shall be informed of the review level’s final decision. Such a decision shall identify the criteria on which it is based and shall state the reasons for it. The candidate shall also be given ten (10) calendar days to submit a written response in support of their case before the final decision is officially communicated to the candidate. The candidate’s response shall become part of their WPAF.

N. When the URPTC tentative recommendation and Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs tentative decision agree, even when that agreement is not to retain or not to tenure and promote, the President does not make the final decision. The President only makes the final decision regarding a candidate’s retention, promotion, and tenure when the URPTC tentative recommendation and Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs tentative decision do not agree.

O. Confidentiality. The WPAF is confidential within the review process and all judgments, recommendations and decisions shall be confidential within the Review Process. The WPAF shall be retained by the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs after the candidate has been notified of the final decision and shall then be available for inspection and photo-duplication by the candidate.

P. Other Consultation. Nothing in these procedures shall be construed to exclude later levels of review from consulting previous levels of review.

VII. ANNUAL CALENDAR

Each Spring semester preceding the next academic year, the URPTC shall publish (with the approval of the President of the University) an Annual Review Calendar which shall consist of dates for the transmittal of documents pertaining to evaluations of and recommendations on candidates for retention, promotion and tenure. The Committee shall distribute the approved calendars to the faculty and send to each individual eligible for review and to the individual’s Departmental RPT Committee Chair the materials and instructions necessary for conducting the review. Such instructions shall include reference to Article VI. Section C. of this document and the current Agreement between The Board of Trustees of the California State University and the California Faculty Association regarding restrictions on placing new materials and recommendations in the candidate’s WPAF. In cases of two year appointments, modified calendars may be established. (Title 5, Section 43561) Deviations from the calendar, for compelling reasons, may be requested. Such deviations must be approved by the University RPT Committee. All reviews shall be conducted and completed within the period of time specified by the University RPT Committee and approved by the President. If any stage of a Performance Review has not been completed within the period of time specified view shall be automatically transferred to the next level, and the candidate shall be so notified.

1 The terms “department” and “departmental” refer to the faculty of a department within a college, the faculty of a division within a college, and the faculty of equivalent units

2 See Review Principle/Procedure N.

3 See Review Principle/Procedures K and N

Related Policies and Procedures: AA/55/AS/24/SEC Authority for the University Retention, Promotion, and Tenure Committee to develop temporary alternate review pathways  

Review History: Approved by the Academic Senate on February 25, 2025
Approved by the Tenure, Tenure-Track Faculty on March 12, 2025
Approved by the President Britt Rios-Ellis on March 24, 2025

Faculty Affairs Committe Division has the primary responsibility for this policy.

Attachment(s): AA/04/AS/25/FAC Update to the University Retention, Promotion, and Tenure Policy   

Schedule of Classes | University Bookstore