Approved by Senate, September 23, 2004
Ratified by the Board of Trustees, October 1, 2004
Queen's University recognizes that decisions affecting the promotion of individual faculty members must be made in a consistent manner according to established principles and standards applied through fair and reasonable procedures. Under the following procedures, candidates for promotion will be assessed on their contributions to teaching, research and scholarship, and service.
This Statement on Promotion Policy for Geographically Full-Time and Adjunct‑1 (non-Bargaining Unit) Appointees of the Faculty of Health Sciences shall become effective following approval by the Senate of Queen's University. The Department Head shall ensure that each appointee is given, on appointment, a copy of this document along with the attached tables that provide descriptors that are typical examples of characteristics of the type of accomplishments that can be considered.
There are four ranks for appointees at Queen's: lecturer, assistant professor, associate professor, and professor.
Appointees have the right to be considered for promotion in any year. An appointee may withdraw from promotion consideration at any time during the process.
There are three main areas of an appointee's work that are to be considered in matters of promotion:
The weighting to be given to each category will vary from rank to rank. Guidance as to the appropriateness of that balance is primarily the responsibility of the Faculty Board. The following description may serve as a guide:
Attached are tables, which contain examples of teaching/education (Table 1), research/scholarship (Table 2), and professional and/or administrative service in the three categories of good, very good and exceptional. These examples are given for the assistance of appointees and are not exhaustive.
By April 1st each Department shall establish a Departmental Promotion Committee, which shall not include the Department Head, to consider and make recommendations to the Department Head regarding the suitability of an appointee for promotion. The Senate's "Conflict of Interest and Conflict of Commitment" guidelines will apply to the membership of the Committee.
The Departmental Promotion Committee shall include in its membership: (a) at least one student, appointed by the Department Head, who may be an undergraduate, graduate or postgraduate; (b) at least three GFT members of the Department; and (c) at least one GFT member of another Department in the Faculty of Health Sciences. Where (b) is not possible, the Committee shall include two GFT members from the Department and at least two GFT members from another Department. A minimum of two members of the Promotion Committee must hold the rank of professor. The Committee shall select its own Chair from amongst its members.
Each Department shall have a system for assessing teaching quality. This system shall ensure that assessments by colleagues and students – undergraduate, postgraduate and graduate (where relevant) – are obtained. Opinions of former students should also be solicited.
Not later than May 1st the Department Head shall write all members of the Department to inform them that the promotion review process is to begin and to remind them of the procedures in this document. The Department Head shall also inform the Associate Dean (Academic Affairs), in writing, that such notification has occurred.
Not later than August 1 st appointees must inform the Department Head that they wish to be considered for promotion.
Not later than August 15 th the Department Head shall provide to the Committee a list of those in the Department who are to be reviewed for promotion. Appointees may ask to be reviewed for promotion or be nominated by the Committee or by a colleague. Only appointees who have agreed to be reviewed shall be included on the list. By September 15 th, the Chair shall arrange for this list, along with the materials set out in item 8 below to be made available in the departmental office for review by faculty members of the Department.
If an appointee wishes to be considered for promotion, the Department Head shall request that the appointee provide the following material by September 1 st:
By September 15 th, the Chair shall arrange for the appointee's curriculum vitae, teaching dossier, copies of scholarly works for the last five years including published abstracts, and the summary of contributions to the Department, the University and the profession to be made available in the departmental office for review by faculty members of the Department. Confidential documentation (i.e. letters from referees and colleagues) will be available only to those involved in making official recommendations in the promotion process.
Faculty members of the Department may submit written opinions to the Committee on the worthiness of the appointee for promotion. Opinions that cannot be attributed to the sender will not be considered.
Referees shall be selected by the following procedure: not later than September 1 st the Chair of the Promotion Committee shall arrange a meeting between the appointee and the Committee to review the names of referees suggested by the appointee and any names which may be brought forward by committee members. It would be preferable if the appointee and the Committee can agree on a common list from which the referees are to be selected. If they cannot, and the Committee may wish to inquire of referees to whom the appointee has objections, the appointee may provide either oral or written objections with the assurance that the identity of those to whom the appointee objected will not be disclosed without consent. Letters are to be received from a minimum of three referees for promotion to assistant professor; from a minimum of four referees, of whom at least three will be external to Queen's, for promotion to associate professor; and from a minimum five referees, of whom at least four will be external to Queen's, for promotion to professor.
The Committee shall review all of the information contained in the promotion file which consists of items described in section VI A Department and Faculty Procedures clauses 7 to 10. Before the Committee arrives at a recommendation to be forwarded to the Department Head, the appointee shall be provided with a written summary of any perceived deficiencies that are likely to lead to a negative recommendation. Within ten (10) working days, the appointee may then submit a written statement to the Committee, providing clarification or commenting on substantive or procedural matters. Any written statement provided by the appointee will be added to the file.
Not later than October 30 th the Committee shall forward the appointee's promotion file, a copy of the minutes from the Committee meeting(s), along with their recommendation regarding the applicant's suitability for promotion, to the Department Head who will then consider the appointee's file. Before the Head makes a decision regarding the application, the Head shall provide the appointee with a written summary of any perceived deficiencies that are likely to lead to a negative recommendation. Within ten (10) working days, the appointee may then submit a written statement to the Head as set out in clause 11 above.
Not later than December 15 th, the Department Head shall submit to the Dean of the Faculty of Health Sciences the following:
In the event the Dean finds a perceived deficiency in the promotion file which might lead to a negative recommendation, the Dean shall provide a written summary to the appointee. Within seven (7) working days, the appointee may then submit a written statement to the Dean as set out in clause 11 above.
By February 15th, the Dean will submit his/her recommendation along with the complete file of the appointee to the Vice-Principal (Academic).
Academic rank is a university rank. The rank that is held by an individual in the primary department will be the rank held in all cross-appointed departments
At the request of the appointee who is an unsuccessful candidate for promotion, the Department Head or Dean, or both together, shall meet with the appointee. The appointee normally should make this request within two weeks of receiving the Principal's letter. At the meeting, the Department Head or Dean shall provide a verbal summary of the reasons for the decision. This summary shall include a verbal précis of the letters of reference, reports on teaching and other information which has a bearing on the decision.
Within two weeks of the above meeting, the appointee may request, and the Dean must provide within two weeks, the reasons in writing for the decision.
If, after receiving the written reasons, the appointee wishes to appeal the decision, the appointee shall so notify the Principal in writing within two weeks. The Principal shall appoint a special review committee consisting of three faculty members, who are at or above the rank to which the candidate has applied and who were not involved in the original decision, to advise on the appeal. Two of the members must be from the School of Medicine and one must be external to the School of Medicine. The special review committee shall have full access to all the documentation considered by the Vice-Principal (Academic) and by the Faculty of Health Sciences Promotion Committee.
Upon receiving the advice of the special review committee, the Principal shall:
This is the final appeal mechanism for promotion decisions.