Policy 6

Approved Executive Committee of the Board of Governors 67.23

PROMOTION OF CLINICAL PROFESSORS, ADMINISTRATIVE EXCLUSION, DEANS AND TEACHING STAFF NOT COVERED BY THE COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT

INTRODUCTION

SECTION I

ADMINISTRATIVE EXCLUSION AND DEANS

1. In the case of deans and administrative exclusion the term "promotion" applies to the transition from the rank of Lecturer to Assistant Professor, from the rank of Assistant Professor to Associate Professor and from the rank of Associate Professor to Full Professor.

SECTION II

CLINICAL PROFESSOR

2. In the case of clinical professors, the term "promotion" applies to the transition from the rank of Lecturer to Assistant Professor, from the rank of Assistant Professor to Associate Professor and from the rank of Associate Professor to Full Professor.

SECTION III

TEACHING STAFF NOT COVERED BY THE COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT

3. For teaching personnel not covered by the Collective Agreement, the term "promotion" applies to the transition from the rank of Lecturer to Assistant Professor, from the rank of Assistant Professor to Associate Professor and from the rank of Associate Professor to Full Professor.

PROCEDURES

SECTION I

ADMINISTRATIVE EXCLUSION AND DEANS

4. The person concerned may forward a request together with all the necessary documentation to the Office of the Vice-President Academic and Provost.

5. The original request for promotion must reach the Office of the Vice-President Academic and Provost, no later than September 1.

6. Upon receipt of such a request, the Joint Committee of the Senate and the Board of Governors, through the Office of the Vice-President Academic and Provost, will undertake whatever consultations it deems to be appropriate.

SECTION II

CLINICAL PROFESSOR

7. The application for promotion may be prompted by the Departmental Head but must be initiated by the faculty member and submitted to the dean's office along with the required documents no later than August 1 and copied to the Departmental Head.

8. Upon receipt of such a request, the Clinical Teaching Personnel Committee of the Faculty will undertake appropriate consultations.

9. The standards and procedures for promotion of clinical professors are those shown in Annex I.

SECTION III

TEACHING STAFF NOT COVERED BY THE COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT

10. An application for promotion must be initiated by the professor concerned and must be submitted, with all the necessary documentation, to its dean no later than September 1.

STANDARDS FOR PROMOTION - SECTION I & III

ADMINISTRATIVE EXCLUSION, DEANS AND TEACHING STAFF NOT COVERED BY THE COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT

11. Promotion criteria will be the same as those included in the Collective Agreement between the University of Ottawa and the Association of Professors of the University of Ottawa. Please refer to article 25 of the Collective Agreement presently in force.

EXCEPTION

12. No exception may be made to this policy without the written consent of the Executive Committee of the Board of Governors.

Revised November 15, 2005

(Office of the Vice-President Academic and Provost)

Annex I

STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES FOR PROMOTION OF CLINICAL FACULTY - 2005 FACULTY OF MEDICINE

PREAMBLE

Promotion within the University ranks is the single most important way in which the University can recognize the excellence of its Faculty for their contributions to all facets of University life - teaching, research and scholarly work and other professional activities both within and outside the University.

The fundamental intent of the following guidelines is that there should be equal opportunity for recognition of excellence and promotion of all Faculty who participate in scholarly activities. It is recognized that there is considerable variability in the scholarly activities of different faculty members. Achievement in each scholarly domain must recognized and rewarded in such a way that is seen as fair and transparent, and comparable in principle to the ways in which research excellence is recognized through peer-reviewed publications and grant awards.

Definition of Scholarship:

Excellence and scholarship are required for all faculty members for promotion in rank. The Faculty of Medicine recognizes four categories of scholarship as having equal importance. The four components of scholarship as described by Boyer in 1990 are listed below and are fully described in the Report of the Task Force on Faculty Career Paths:

Discovery and advancement of knowledge
Integration of knowledge
Application of knowledge
Transformation and transmission of knowledge

Assessment of Scholarship

Each category of scholarship will be assessed using six criteria as suggested by Glassick. Thus all scholarly activities will be assessed for clear goals, adequate preparation, appropriate methods, significant results, effective presentation and reflective critique. In particular, the faculty wishes to emphasize the creation of new knowledge and methods, as well as its public dissemination and peer acceptance.

While required, the act of doing excellent work, in and of itself, will not necessarily be sufficient to be considered scholarly. Clinical work, teaching, administrative activities and research will be identified as scholarly initiatives only if the standards of scholarship outlined above are demonstrated. For example, providing excellent clinical care or outstanding teaching, without making it available to the public beyond the immediate locale, is not considered scholarship in the Faculty of Medicine.

Career paths

Reflecting the variability in Faculty members' activities and responsibilities, six career paths for Faculty members with an appointment to a clinical department have been identified. These career paths include:

Clinician Teacher
Clinician Educator
Clinician Investigator
Clinician Scientist
Scientist
Clinician Administrator

In turn, each career path may be associated with one of four domains of scholarship including:

Clinical
Education
Research
Administration

More detailed descriptions of each of the career paths and the expectations for scholarship follow in Section 5: Criteria for promotion.

The Career Paths are intended to link to academic promotion so that each faculty member's application for academic promotion is evaluated based on scholarship and excellence in the faculty member's specific area of academic concentration. The faculty member's career path, along with the corresponding area of scholarship and excellence must be declared on the application for academic promotion. The career paths assist in defining the work roles of the faculty member, however they are not separate promotion tracks and do not, therefore, attach prefixes to the academic rank or have their own specific promotion criteria.

1. AGREEMENT OF EXPECTATIONS

In order to facilitate the evaluation of Faculty members, as well as to enhance overall job satisfaction and career advancement, the Faculty will require that at the time of initial recruitment and appointment of all Faculty members, there must be a written, mutually agreed upon, set of expectations between the appointee and the Department Head with the consent of the Dean. In large Departments, the Division Head should also be involved in setting up such expectations. Such a written agreement of expectations must identify the member's career path, key clinical and academic responsibilities and objectives, evaluation procedures, and the criteria for promotion. Financial considerations should be considered separately. There should also be provision for a later change of conditions and professional direction. The Department Head should be responsible for drawing-up such agreements of expectations between the Faculty and the appointee, and thereafter, for evaluation of annual performance in light of those expectations. The responsibility for applying for promotion remains with the individual. The Department head may prompt or suggest postponement of an application for promotion at an appropriate time such as an annual review.

2. PhD'S IN CLINICAL DEPARTMENTS

Faculty appointments to clinical Departments whose primary qualification is a PhD and who have no clinical responsibilities (Scientist) will be treated for purposes of promotion, as if they were members of the Collective Agreement whether that is the case or not. All PhD Faculty members whose salary is provided by the University of Ottawa, including those with a clinical practice, will also be considered as if they were members of the Collective Agreement. In such cases, the request for promotion will be studied by the Faculty Teaching Personnel Committee (FTPC).

Faculty appointments to clinical Departments whose primary qualification is a PhD and who have clinical responsibilities (Clinician Scientist, Clinician Investigator, Clinician Educator, Clinician Teacher, or Clinician Administrator), may be treated as if they were a clinical Faculty member if their salaries are not provided by the University of Ottawa. In such cases, the request for promotion will be assessed by the Clinical Teaching Personnel Committee (CTPC). Any Faculty member with a cross appointment to a basic science Department will also have their applications reviewed by the FTPC.

3. CLINICAL/PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE

Continuous enhancement of physician and scientist competencies must be a cornerstone of academic advancement. All members of Clinical Departments engaged in clinical practice are expected to be committed to exemplary care and serve as professional role models. Faculty members are also expected to conduct themselves in their professional practice in accordance with the highest standards of professional ethical behaviour as laid down by the various colleges, professional associations and the Faculty. Promotion to associate and to full professor will carry with it the highest standards of professionalism. As indicated in the Faculty of Medicine Standards of Ethical and Professional Behaviour, violations of these standards may result in a denial of academic promotion.

4. GENERAL PROVISIONS

Expectations

All Faculty members are required to demonstrate a significant contribution to the education mission of the Faculty. However, the highest level of scholarship need only be demonstrated in one area, as appropriate for ones career path. It is acknowledged that a faculty member may achieve excellence and scholarship in more than one domain. Where an individual faculty member produces excellent, scholarly work in a domain other that the domain of greatest interest, this will be taken into consideration in the evaluation for promotion. For example, the Clinician Teacher would generally produce scholarly work in the domain of clinical care and this would be sufficient for promotion. Where the clinician teacher also produces scholarly work in research or education, this will be taken into consideration, however is not required for his/her academic promotion. Faculty members who combine scholarship in more than one domain should take care to fulfill the expectations of one of the six career paths and to attain a high level of scholarship in at least one of the chosen domains.

Collaboration will be positively considered in the evaluation of scholarship. In the event that most of the individual's work is collaborative in nature, the individual's contribution should be significant and clearly documented.

Promotion should be regarded as recognition by one's peers within and outside the University community for achievement, excellence and distinguished contribution, and not simply as recognition of expected performance or seniority.

It is not expected that all Faculty will necessarily progress through all the University ranks. Depending on the circumstances and extent of contribution, it may well be that the final rank for a given member of the Faculty is that of Assistant Professor, or Associate Professor. Normally only a small number of Faculty will reach the final rank of Full Professor; in such cases, promotion will follow in sequence from Assistant through Associate to Full Professor.

Initial Rank

The initial rank for the majority of appointments to the Faculty shall be Assistant Professor, where a significant and continuous contribution to the teaching and academic programs of the Faculty is envisioned, and where a written agreement of expectations has been reached between the individual Faculty member and Department Head with the approval of the Dean.

The rank of Lecturer shall be retained for part-time Faculty members who have no such written agreement of expectations with the University but who may participate to a lesser and intermittent extent, rather than in a continuous fashion, to the teaching and academic programs of the Faculty.

The Faculty strongly recommends that a comprehensive review of performance in light of rank and departmental expectations be conducted by the Department for Faculty members who have held an academic rank (other than Full Professor) for ten or more years without advancement. Such a review would permit a reassessment of: (i) the mutually agreed upon goals and expectations of the Faculty member and the Department Head, (ii) further career planning and (iii) whether or not promotion should be sought at the next opportunity.

In considering the time taken for progress in the University ranks, the Faculty shall bear in mind the particular stresses on women in professional careers occasioned by competing demands of family, or absence due to maternity leave. Such factors should be taken into account in setting expectations and evaluating performance.

Responsibilities of the Candidate

The Faculty member has the primary responsibility to:

decide whether or not to seek promotion;
keep an updated CV, including a teaching dossier which can be used in the evaluation of the candidate's performance at the time of annual review or on application for promotion, and to supply other materials needed such as evidence of excellence and copies of relevant publications;
clarify together with the Department Head the mutually agreed-upon expectations of duties and responsibilities; and
ensure that an annual appraisal is carried out together with the Department Head.

Responsibilities of the Department Head

The Department Head has the responsibility to:

set out a mutually agreed-upon set of expectations at the time of initial recruitment and revise these should there be a significant change in the role the individual plays in the Department. A copy should be sent to the Dean's office with the request for appointment.
carry out an annual appraisal of each member of the Department, with a detailed review and recommendations at the time an individual seeks promotion. A comprehensive review is to be undertaken if there has not been a promotion within ten years, unless the rank of Full Professor has been reached; and
assist the Faculty member in provision of materials for the teaching dossier.

Responsibilities of the Faculty

The Faculty has a responsibility to ensure that there is a fair system for the evaluation of faculty members which may be used in the compilation of the teaching dossier by each faculty member.

The Faculty has a responsibility to assist with faculty development in order to help upgrade teaching skills of faculty members.

5. ACADEMIC PROMOTION

5.1 Peer Recognition

Peer recognition and review is fundamental to the academic promotion process. Funding for scholarly activity and peer-reviewed publications are traditionally considered important evidence of peer recognition. They are, however, only one of a number of criteria that demonstrate and confirm this component of faculty accomplishment. More important than a specific number of peer-reviewed publications, is the level of impact the faculty member's overall scholarly contributions have regionally, nationally and internationally. A lesser contribution in the form of peer-reviewed funding and publications can be balanced by the faculty member's demonstration of other forms of scholarship.

Examples of peer acceptance of scholarly work might include:

Authorship or significant contribution to contents of: Journal articles, papers on pedagogic issues, review articles, case reports, clinical outcome studies, electronic dissemination (e.g. computer programs, CD-ROM, Videos, Web-based material), textbooks, book chapters, position papers, field manuals, clinical practice guidelines, educational or testing materials for national societies or organizations, technology transfer, new protocols that are widely accepted, teaching tools, curricula or curricular models, study guides, computer-aided tools, new evaluation methodologies, well-subscribed faculty development programs, workbooks adopted by other institutions and development of patents and licenses. The above are publicly disseminated in various ways, including through non-peer-reviewed forums and media.
Presentation at meetings;
Successful acquisition of funding for scholarly activities;
Selection and service on review committees, professional society committees, research review boards, institutional review boards, federal committees or advisory groups, editorial boards or reviewer for peer-reviewed journals or grants;
Receiving of or nomination for awards for excellence in teaching, mentoring, research or clinical service, election to learned academies;
Extramural funding supports peer acceptance and is generally very important for self-sustenance of a program of scholarship. Sources include, however are not limited to, research grants, training grants, investigational therapeutic studies, funded teaching initiatives, and cooperative industry agreements. The source and level of competition for successfully acquired funding should be documented.

5.2 CAREER PATHS - Definitions and associated domains of scholarship 5.2.1 Clinician-Teacher

Primary commitment is to clinical teaching and patient care. There is significant contribution to the provision of clinical teaching and to promoting and advancing excellence in clinical care. Clinician-Teachers may take on roles such as clinical preceptor, lecturer or mentor, and have varying levels of involvement in providing the core curriculum of undergraduate and postgraduate programs. For example, this individual may perform 70-90% clinical time with the remaining 10-30% of time spent in teaching activities.

Area of scholarship required for promotion is in the domain of: Clinical Care and/or Education, as declared by the faculty member. Most will have an emphasis on the scholarly domain of Clinical Care with a lesser contribution from Education.

5.2.2 Clinician-Educator

Primary commitment is to clinical care and education, education administration and related activities, such as the development and implementation of an academic program or educational research. Clinician-Educators may take on roles such as clinical preceptor, lecturer, program director, block chair and/or mentor. For example, this individual may perform 25-75% clinical, 15-50% education, 10-30% research and related administrative activities.

Area of scholarship required for promotion is in the domain of: Education and/or Clinical Care, as declared by the faculty member. Most will have an emphasis on the scholarly domain of Education with a lesser contribution from Clinical Care.

5.2.3 Clinician-Investigator

Primary commitment is to research and/or clinical care. Research may include basic, clinical or translational. Clinician-Investigators may be cross-appointed to a Research Institute or basic science department. For example, this individual may perform 15-50% clinical, 30-70% research, 10-20% administration/education.

Area of scholarship required for promotion is in the domain of: Research and/or Clinical Care, as declared by the faculty member. Most will have an emphasis on the scholarly domain of Research with a lesser contribution from Clinical Care. However, some may have an emphasis on the scholarly domain of Clinical Care with a lesser contribution from Research.

5.2.4 Clinician-Scientist

Primary commitment is to research and clinical care. Research may be basic, clinical or translational. Clinician-Scientists are cross-appointed to a Research Institute or basic science department. For example, this individual may perform 70-80% research, 10-15% clinical, 10-15% education.

Area of scholarship required for promotion is in the domain of: Research

5.2.5 Scientist

Primary commitment is to research, which may be basic science, translational or educational. Scientists usually do not have clinical responsibilities and spend most of their time in research. For example, this individual may perform 75-80% research with the remainder of the time spent in teaching (e.g. preceptor, tutor, lecturer, mentor) and/or administration, 10-25%.

Area of scholarship required for promotion is in the domain of: Research

5.2.6 Clinician-Administrator

Primary commitment is to clinical care and/or administration. This may include a leadership role, innovative management of the department, advancements for the patients and hospital (e.g. organized a screening program). For example, this individual may perform 50% in administration and the rest of the time divided between education, clinical and/or research.

Area of scholarship required for promotion is in the domain of: Administration, Education and/or Clinical Care, as declared by the faculty member. Most will have an emphasis on the scholarly domain of administration with a lesser contribution from one of the other domains. However, some may have an emphasis on the scholarly domains of Clinical care or Education with a lesser contribution in the scholarly domain of Administration.

5.3 SCHOLARLY DOMAINS - Definitions and expectation for promotion 5.3.1 Clinical Care

5.3.1 Clinical Care

Excellence in the scholarly domain of clinical care may be demonstrated by:

Sustained and documentable clinical service and satisfactory peer review of clinical care. Reviews by the recipients of the clinical service, including referring physicians, patients and residents.
Documentable community service and advocacy. This includes service to the discipline (serving as journal and grant reviewer on an ad hoc basis, committee or editorial membership, office in professional society), service to University/Hospital, and service to the public (e.g. communication of expertise to lay audiences, voluntary professional service)
A clinical portfolio outlining significant contributions to clinical scholarship.

Achievements that will be considered for promotion to Associate Professor in the scholarly domain of Clinical Care:

Excellence in clinical care as is documented by clinical assignment and responsibility in a clinical program. Establishing a specialty referral center or clinic in area of clinical expertise.
Excellent evaluation of clinical work as evidenced by reviews by peers, referring physicians, patients and residents.
Be nominated for and/or receive clinical awards from one's learners and peers in recognition of excellence in clinical service.
To have published in peer-reviewed literature on clinical topics, including reviews of clinical areas and/or case reports.
Innovations in clinical care, the development of new protocols or programs and their dissemination.
To have presented work related to clinical expertise at provincial/national meetings.
To have emerging provincial/national recognition in a focused area of clinical expertise that is reflected in invitations to speak, consultation and referral pattern.
Demonstrable contribution to education in area of clinical expertise with a positive impact on learners.
Minimum of 5 years experience.

Achievements that will be considered for promotion to Full Professor in the scholarly domain of Clinical Care (In addition to those listed for promotion to Associate Professor):

Obtain sustained national/international recognition in a focused area of clinical expertise that is reflected in invitations to speak, consultation and referral pattern.
To have presented at national/international meetings.
Organized national/international clinical care meetings and/or symposia.
Minimum of 10 years experience.

5.3.2 Education

Excellence in the scholarly domain of education may be demonstrated by:

Excellence in teaching evidenced by teaching assignments and satisfactory peer and learners' reviews of the teaching effort.
A teaching portfolio outlining significant contributions to educational scholarship.

Achievements that will be considered for promotion to Associate Professor in the scholarly domain of Education:

Excellence in teaching; be nominated for and/or receive awards from students, clinical trainees and/or peers in recognition of excellence in teaching.
Innovations in teaching methodologies with dissemination and peer acceptance.
To have obtained funding for innovative education and educational activities.
To have presented work related to education at provincial/national level meetings.
Positive impact on learners at local level.
To have emerging regional/national recognition for a focused area of educational innovation and/or in a focused area of expertise.
To have published in peer-reviewed literature on educational topics, including reviews and educational materials.
Minimum 5 years experience.

Achievements that will be considered for promotion to Full Professor in the scholarly domain of Education (In addition to those listed for promotion to Associate Professor):

To obtain sustained national/international recognition by means of invitations to speak at national forums, consultations by other universities, serving as an editor or reviewer in a leadership role.
Positive impact on learners at national level on a repeated basis.
Organize national/international education meetings and/or symposia.
Outstanding mentor for other educators.
Minimum 10 years experience.

5.3.3 Research

Excellence in the scholarly domain of research may be demonstrated by:

Regularly disseminated research findings, the majority of which is through peer-reviewed publications.
Reviews by collaborators, peers or external reviewers that indicate sustained satisfactory performance compared to others at this stage of the career.

Achievements that will be considered for promotion to Associate Professor in the scholarly domain of Research:

Have a major responsibility for an independent research program and/or play a documentable leadership role in a collaborative research effort.
To have regular publications in peer-reviewed media. The faculty member is a major author, defined as first or last author. In the case of collaborative studies, the faculty member has a significant role in the research, which includes intellectual input into the project and/or publication as documented in the CV.
To have funding support, usually federal or national peer-reviewed.
To have presented at national/international meetings.
Supportive of students and trainees pursuing research.
Emerging regional/national recognition in a focused area of research expertise.
Demonstrable contribution to education in area of clinical or research expertise with a positive impact on learners.
Minimum of 5 years experience.

Achievements that will be considered for promotion to Full Professor in the scholarly domain of Research (In addition to those listed for promotion to Associate Professor):

To develop complex multidisciplinary/multicentre trials.
Organized international research meetings, symposia.
Outstanding mentor for other researchers.
To have developed and maintained an area of research expertise that is evidenced as invitations to speak, act as a reviewer or editor.
To obtain sustained national/international recognition in a focused area of research expertise, as reflected in invitations to speak, consultation, serving as reviewer or editor in leadership role.
Receives awards and recognition for research; significant awards to research trainees also reflects on the quality of the supervisor's research program.
Minimum of 10 years experience.

5.3.4 Administration

Excellence in the scholarly domain of administration may be demonstrated by:

Sustained excellence in areas of directorships (e.g. residency, courses, associate dean, curriculum) as well in areas of clinical activity (e.g. chief of service) and research (e.g. dean of research). Reviews by peers, residents and faculty should be documented.
An administrative portfolio outlining significant contributions to administrative scholarship.

Achievements that will be considered for promotion to Associate Professor:

Implemented new strategies and governance in their position of directorship that caused major changes in the field or created new programs in their institutions.
Consistently demonstrates effective leadership and administrative skills.
Frequent invitations to present ideas and contribute to decision making in task forces.
To have published in peer-reviewed literature on administrative topics, for example new administrative strategies and interventions, or new programs.
To have presented work related to administration at provincial/national level meetings.
Emerging provincial/national recognition in an area of administrative expertise.
Demonstrable contribution to education in area of clinical, research or administrative expertise with a positive impact on learners.
Minimum of 5 years experience.

Achievements that will be considered for promotion to Full Professor (In addition to those listed for promotion to Associate Professor):

Sustained positive impact on administration at a national level (i.e. reviewed, consulted regarding programs).
Regularly innovates and implements new structures and programs to facilitate clinical, educational or research activities.
Headed national/international committees that led to new legislation or changes.
To obtain sustained national/international recognition in an area of administrative expertise as demonstrated by invitations to speak at national forums and provide consultation to other health care organizations.
Organize national/international administrative meetings and/or symposia.
Minimum of 10 years experience.

6. PROCEDURES

The Application

The Faculty member considering application for promotion should first inform and discuss the matter with the Departmental Head.

The application for promotion may be prompted by the Departmental Head, but must be initiated by the Faculty member and submitted to the Dean's office in eleven copies (original + 10) no later than August 1st, and copied to the Department Head. The application must be accompanied by the following documentation:

An executive summary (two page maximum) of the member's application clearly stating their career path, chosen domain of scholarship and summary of their major scholar contributions.
the member's up-to-date Curriculum Vitae;
the member's teaching portfolio - required for all career paths;
administrative portfolio - expected for clinician administrators;
clinical portfolio - expected for clinicians with scholarly contributions in the domain of clinical care;
reprints of publications (articles etc.) to be considered by outside evaluators;
any relevant information regarding the member's academic service;
a list of at least three outside evaluators for promotion to Associate Professor and a list of at least four outside evaluators for promotion to Full Professor. Along with that list, the member shall submit a written declaration of any personal association in collaboration with the persons listed. The member if so moved, may list persons who, in his or her opinion, may be prejudiced to act as evaluator.

The Clinical Teaching Personnel Committee of the Faculty (CTPC) shall also ask the Departmental Head or Departmental Teaching Personnel Committee (DTPC) to suggest in confidence at least three qualified outside evaluators in the case of Associate Professorship and four in the case of Full Professorship to provide an assessment. This list should differ from the list submitted by the candidate.

For promotion to Associate Professor, the evaluator should have professional status equivalent to that of Associate Professor or Full Professor. For promotion to Full Professor, the evaluator should have professional status equivalent to that of Full Professor.

The CTPC of the Faculty shall choose three outside evaluators for a member applying to Associate Professor and four evaluators for a member applying to Full Professor. At least one person shall be chosen from each of the two lists submitted.

The Dean shall initiate the consultation with outside evaluators. The letters from the Dean shall be accompanied by:

A two page executive summary of the member's application clearly stating their career path, chosen domain of scholarship and summary of their major scholar contributions.
the member's up-to-date Curriculum Vitae;
the member's teaching portfolio;
the member's administrative portfolio (if submitted by the member);
the member's clinical portfolio (if submitted by the member);
reprints (if submitted by the member).

The identity of outside evaluators shall be treated as confidential and may be divulged only to the members of the CTPC of the Faculty who are called upon to make a recommendation to the Joint Committee of the Senate and the Board of Governors. The member, the Departmental Head and DTPC will only have access to extracts from the letters, so that neither the outside evaluator nor the institution can be identified.

Before submitting an application to the CTPC, the Dean shall solicit a recommendation from the Departmental Head and the DTPC as well as from the Chair and DTPC of any department where the member holds a cross-appointment.

Whenever a recommendation is made regarding a member, the Chair of the committee shall ensure that the member promptly receives a copy of the recommendation and the reasons thereto. On request to the Chair, a member has the right to be heard by the Committee making a recommendation.

Following completion of its review, the CTPC will forward its recommendations through the Dean of the Faculty to the Joint Committee of the Senate and the Board of Governors. In transmitting the recommendation of the Committee, the Dean will attach her/his recommendation as well as all relevant documentation including the text of the minutes related to the member and the reason(s) for the recommendations of a) the DTPC, b) the Chair of the Department, c) the CTPC along with copies of the external assessments.

The Dean will inform each Professor, in writing, of the CTPC's and of her/his own recommendation to the Joint Committee, with a copy to the Head of the Department.

If a promotion is granted by the Joint Committee, it will become effective on May 1st following the application unless otherwise decided by the Joint Committee.

Unfavourable recommendation

Whenever there is a negative recommendation by the CTPC of the Faculty, the Dean shall delay making a recommendation in the matter until such time as the member involved has received a copy of the negative recommendation. The member will have ten (10) working days to reply to the Dean's letter, stating his/her intentions.

When the Dean informs a member of a negative recommendation or a negative decision, he shall draw the member's attention to his/her right of appeal. If the member wishes to contest the recommendation of the CTPC, he/she will be given an opportunity to present his/her case in person to the CTPC or submit any additional information, if a written request is made to the Dean or Associate Dean for Professional Affairs within ten (10) working days of receiving the recommendation. The member may also choose to withdraw his/her application, or request the Dean to send the file to the Joint Committee for their consideration.

The Dean will subsequently inform the member concerned in writing, of the final decision of the Joint Committee of the Senate and the Board of Governors. This decision is final and non-appealable.

(Approved by the Executive Committee of the Board of Governors of November 15, 2005 and amended by the Joint Committee of the Senate and the Board of Governors of February 22, 2011)

Quick Picks