1. University Wide Policy Library
  2. Senate
  3. Statement on Promotion Policy

Statement on Promotion Policy

approved December 17, 1985
Revised: March 27, 1986; January 24, 1991; June 23, 1994

NOTE: Geographically Full-Time and Adjunct-1 faculty members from HEALTH SCIENCES are covered by a separate promotion policy.

Table of Contents

Preamble

  1. Definitions
  2. Ranks
  3. Considerations for Promotion
  4. Assessment of Competence
  5. Faculty Regulations
  6. Procedures for Promotion

Preamble

Queen's University recognizes that decisions affecting individual faculty members must be made in a consistent manner according to established principles and standards, applied through fair and reasonable procedures. The procedures developed for appointment and tenure were approved by the Senate and Board of Trustees as being in keeping with the requirements of academic freedom. The procedures for promotion developed below follow this precedent. As is the case with the procedures governing appointment and tenure, each faculty board must establish its own special procedures within the university-wide framework.

Under the following procedures, candidates for promotion will be assessed on their contributions to teaching, research and scholarship, and service. Queen's is recognized as an institution which values teaching in all its many modes including classroom lecturing, individual academic counselling, the close working relationship implicit in graduate teaching and research and development of teaching methods and programs. Equally vital to the life of the university is the varied research and scholarship carried out in all the disciplines. It is important that each faculty member be committed to continuing research. The service contribution of the faculty member at Queen's, where collegial governance is the norm, includes a responsibility to the discipline or profession, department, faculty and university.

I. Definitions

  1. "Appointee" means a person holding an appointment to the academic staff as defined in Sections 1a and b of the Regulations Governing Appointment, Renewal of Appointment, Tenure and Termination for Academic Staff or Section I 1 of the Statement on Adjunct Academic Staff and Academic Assistants.

  2. "Department" shall be interpreted as a department or a faculty (or school) without departments. Similarly "department head" means a department head or a dean of a faculty (or school) without departments.

  3. "Committee" means a standing committee or a department head acting under an approved system of consultation pursuant to Part VIA clause i.

II. Ranks

For appointees at Queen's, there are four categories or ranks in all faculties, in ascending order: lecturer, assistant professor, associate professor, and full professor.

III. Consideration for Promotion

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.

IV. Assessment of Competence

Promotion is not an automatic occurrence at Queen's University. Individual faculty members should be aware that mere number of years service to the university is not a guarantee of promotion. Promotion has to be earned by faculty members through the quality and quantity of their work.

There are three categories or main areas of every faculty member's work that are to be considered in all matters of promotion:

  1. teaching
  2. research and scholarship
  3. service

The weighting to be given to each of these three criteria will naturally vary from rank to rank and among the faculties and schools. This is recognized in the Senate Statement of the University Appointment (approved by Senate and the Board of Trustees in 1972) which states that a faculty member's professional endeavours - in total comprising some combination of teaching, supervision, research, scholarship, professional service or consultative work and administration - may vary from time to time for any individual and may differ among individuals. In matters of promotion, guidance as to the appropriateness of that balance is primarily the responsibility of the faculty boards. The following description may serve as a guide:

  1. FOR PROMOTION FROM LECTURER TO ASSISTANT PROFESSOR. The appointee should be a good teacher. In those disciplines where there are established PhD programs, the appointee normally will have completed the doctorate. Otherwise, evidence of the successful initiation of research and scholarly work is required. The appointee's participation in the operation of the department or of the university or contributions to his/her profession may be taken into consideration.

  2. FOR PROMOTION FROM ASSISTANT PROFESSOR TO ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR. The appointee should be a very good teacher, carrying a reasonable teaching load. The appointee's research and scholarly work should show high quality as judged by experts in the appointee's field of specialization. Contributions of the appointee to the operations of the department or university should be taken into account. Contributions to his/her profession may also be relevant.

  3. FOR PROMOTION FROM ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR TO FULL PROFESSOR. The appointee must either combine distinguished scholarly work with very good teaching, or continuing high quality scholarly work with exceptional contributions in teaching. The appointee should have made a contribution to the successful operation of the department or of the university. Contributions to his/her profession also are relevant.

Back to Top

V. Faculty Regulations

Faculties shall develop their own regulations based on the principles and guidelines in this document. These regulations shall be filed with the Senate Office.

The department head shall ensure that each appointee is given on appointment (or on the adoption of this document by Senate) a copy of this document on promotion along with the statement of criteria and procedures of the appointee's faculty or school.

VI. Procedures for Promotion

A. Procedures for Departments and for Faculties or Schools without Departments (Unitery Faculties)

  1. Methods of Consultation:

    1. Each department or other appropriate academic unit (two or more departments may choose to join together for any of these purposes) shall establish a promotions committee to consider and make recommendations on behalf of the unit on promotion

      OR

      if a department decides that a collegial system of consultation other than a standing committee is preferable for promotion review, it may propose its own system. Such a proposal shall provide for broad consultation between the department head, its members and students, and shall be fully described in written regulations. It shall be sent to the appropriate faculty board for consideration and approval. The faculty board may adopt the proposal, or after consultation with other interested departments, adopt a system applicable to several departments or units. Any system of consultation, other than a standing committee or standing committees, which is adopted by a faculty board, shall be sent to the Senate for review and approval.

      OR

      The four unitary Faculties/Schools (Education, Business, Law and Nursing), shall ensure that some measure for cross-linking to cognate Departments or Faculties is incorporated in their procedures for promotion, and report on this to the Senate.

    2. It is recognized that students have an important role to play in consultation generally and, in particular, with respect to assessment of teaching quality. Thus, they shall be members of the standing committees. In addition, the standing committee (or in cases where consultation with the department head exists rather than a standing committee, the head) shall consult with student representatives selected by students in the department, and reach agreement on an additional method by which students may express their opinions in writing for consideration in the regular procedures for making decisions under these regulations.

       

    3. Each department shall have a system for assessing teaching quality within the department. This system shall ensure that assessments by colleagues, where possible, and by students (both graduate and undergraduate) are obtained. The department head shall consult with student representatives selected by students in the department, and reach agreement on the system of assessment by students that is to be adopted. Where possible, the opinions of former students as well as current students should be obtained.

       

    4. Notification (University):

      At the beginning of the fall term, a notice shall be placed in the Gazette by the Senate Office announcing that the promotion review process will soon be underway. Following the Gazette announcement, 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.

      Back to Top

      Notification (Department/School/Faculty):

      The departmental committee or department head (depending on the method of consultation) shall be responsible for preparation of 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 departmental committee or by a colleague. Only appointees who have agreed to be reviewed shall be included on the list. This list, along with the documentation set out in section IV, will be available in the departmental office for review by faculty members of the department.

    5. Promotion Process

      If an appointee indicates that he/she wishes to be considered for promotion, the departmental committee or head shall request that the appointee provide the following material by 30 November:

      1. curriculum vitae;

      2. a separate summary of teaching experience;

      3. copies of all relevant scholarly work, if feasible, or at least citations for all such work. Work in progress should be cited;

      4. summary of the appointee's contributions to the department and the wider university community, and, where appropriate, to the discipline or profession

      5. for promotion to associate professor, the names of three referees,of whom at least one shall be external to Queen's University. For promotion to professor, the names of five referees, of whom at least three shall be external to Queen's University. At least three letters from referees shall be included in the appointee's file in the case of a promotion to associate professor, and at least five such letters in the case of promotion to professor. Referees shall be selected by the procedures stated in the Regulations Governing Appointment, which are as follows:

        Not later than 1 January, the head shall arrange a meeting between the appointee and the committee (or with the head according to the system of consultation established), to review the names of referees suggested both by the appointee and by members of the committee and other members of the department. It would be preferable if the appointee and committee can agree on a common list from which the referees are to be selected. If they cannot, and the committee wishes to inquire of referees to whom the appointee has objections, the appointee may leave his/her objections oral or put them in writing, with the assurance that the identity of those to whom the appointee objected will not be disclosed without his/her consent. The appointee may require that letters of reference be requested from any one or two of those persons whom the appointee has named under the above clause.

      6. any other information the appointee believes will be useful.

    6. The appointee's record of teaching experience, scholarly works or citations and summary of contributions to the department and wider university community will be available in the departmental office for review by the faculty members of that department. Confidential documentation (ie, letters from referees) will be available only to members of the standing committee or to those closely involved in the consultative process during the review period. Faculty members of the department may submit written opinions to the committee or head (depending on the method of consultation) on the worthiness of the appointee for promotion.

       

    7. The standing committee will meet or the head will begin the process of consultation making full use of the above information, including letters of assessment. Before the committee or head completes the recommendation to be forwarded to the next level, the appointee shall be provided in writing with a summary of any perceived substantive or procedural deficiencies that are likely to lead to a negative recommendation. The appointee may then submit a written statement and/or appear before the committee or the head for such purposes as making a statement, providing clarification or commenting on substantive or procedural matters concerning his or her file. Any written statement provided by the appointee will be added to the file. At the conclusion of the committee deliberation, the head of the department will submit to the dean of the Faculty by 1 March the following:
      1. all material provided by the appointee;
      2. all letters of assessment;
      3. where there is a standing committee, the written recommendation of the committee with its reasons and, if the head disagrees, his/her own written reasons for disagreeing; where there is no standing committee, the written recommendation of the head with reasons.

      The reasons shall include an evaluation of:

      1. the appointee's teaching;
      2. the appointee's research and scholarly work;
      3. the appointee's service contribution.

      The Committee's recommendations, along with a summary of its reasons, and the head's recommendation along with a summary of his/her reasons shall be forwarded to the appointee by 1 March. Where there is no standing promotion committee, the recommendation of the head along with a summary of reasons shall be forwarded to the appointee by 1 March. The head shall ensure that the written reasons do not contain any identifying reference to referees or any other individuals whose comments were considered in the case.

Back to Top

B. Faculty Procedures in Faculties with Departments

  1. Each Faculty shall establish a committee or committees to consider recommendations coming from departments within each faculty. These committees may be elected or appointed or be a combination of both elected and appointed members. The committees shall be responsible for making recommendations on promotion to the dean. The dean shall act as chair.

  2. Faculty board shall report to Senate on the type of committee selected.

  3. The dean will present to the faculty committee the names of all candidates considered for promotion and all supporting documents.

  4. By 31 March, deans shall forward their own and the faculty committees' recommendation(s) and reasons, along with the complete official dossier on each appointee to the Principal. Also by 31 March, each appointee shall receive the recommendation and a summary of the reasons concerning his/her case. The Dean shall ensure that the written reasons do not contain any identifying reference to referees or any other individuals whose comments were considered in the case.

C. Promotion of Individuals Cross-Appointed to a Second Department

The following procedures apply to an appointee who holds an academic rank in one department (the first) and has a cross-appointment with a lower rank with another department (the second), and who wishes to apply for promotion to a higher rank in the second department:

The second department may, in its discretion,

  1. based on an intradepartmental review, without following the full regular appraisal procedures that usually apply in the second department, make an affirmative recommendation for such promotion; or
  2. require the appointee to follow the full regular promotion appraisal procedure.

D. University Procedures

  1. The Principal shall consider the appointee's complete official dossier and seek the advice of the University Promotions Committee. In the case of appointment to full professor, the Principal shall then make a recommendation to the Board of Trustees. In the case of promotion to assistant or associate professor, the Principal shall act on the authority delegated by the Board and make a decision on promotion. In May of each year, the Principal will inform appointees who are promoted. Appointees who are unsuccessful candidates for promotion shall be notified by the Principal in May that there is no change in their current rank. The Principal's letter to unsuccessful candidates for promotion will remind them that they may, if they wish, ask for a meeting with their department head or dean, or both together, to discuss the reason for this decision.

  2. The University Promotions Committee will consist of the following voting members: the Principal as non-voting Chair; the Deans; 5 tenured faculty members, and 1 full-time student (undergraduate or graduate) elected by the Senate. The Principal's Advisor on Employment Equity will be a non-voting member. In recognizing the need for diversity, the Senate Nominating Committee should ensure that women and other designated groups are adequately represented. A Secretary will be appointed by the Chair.

  3. All voting members of the Committee will review the reports and recommendations from all earlier committees for each candidate. The Committee Chair shall prepare a summary report of the Committee's decision. The Chair shall ensure that the written reasons do not contain any identifying reference to referees or any other individuals whose comments were considered in the case.

  4. For each appointee, the Principal shall receive and consider the complete official dossier and the report of the University Promotions Committee.

    If the Principal decides:

    1. to promote the appointee to assistant or associate professor, the Principal shall grant such promotion; or

    2. to recommend that the appointee be promoted to professor, the Principal shall so recommend to the Board of Trustees.

    By 31 May, in each year, the Principal shall inform appointees who are promoted.

    If the Principal decides not to promote or recommend the promotion of an appointee, the Principal shall so inform the appointee in writing by 31 May, and provide the appointee with a written statement of the reasons for the decision. An appointee may then appeal.

  5. The appointee may request a full disclosure of information contained in the file subject to the limitations on confidential documentation set out in Section VIII, 6c of the Regulations Governing Appointment, Renewal of Appointment, Tenure and Termination. The appointee also shall have access to documentation, such as the minutes of the promotion committee meetings, after such documentation has been reviewed by the examiner referred to in Section VIII 6c above. The examiner will verify their authenticity and delete the name of, and other identifying reference to author.

Back to Top

E. The Review and Appeal Process

Review

  1. 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 one month 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.

  2. Within two weeks of the above meeting, the appointee may request, and the dean must provide (within two weeks), reasons in writing for the decision.

The Appeal Process

  1. 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 composed of faculty members not involved in the original decision to advise him/her on the appeal. The special review committee shall have full access to all the documentation considered by the promotion committee(s).

  2. Upon receiving the advice of the special review Committee the Principal shall:

    1. grant promotion or, in the case of promotion to full professor, recommend to the Board of Trustees that promotion be granted; or
    2. inform the appointee that the original decision has been upheld.

  3. If the appointee wishes to discuss this decision, the appointee may ask for a meeting with the Principal.

  4. After discussion with the Principal, the appointee may request further reconsideration for promotion. The appointee shall then have access to the documentation considered by the promotion committee(s) subject to the limitations on confidential documentation set out in Section VIII, 6c of the Regulations Governing Appointment, Renewal of Appointment, Tenure and Termination. The appointee also shall have access to documentation, such as the minutes of the promotion committee meetings, after such documentation has been reviewed by the examiner referred to in Section VIII 6c above. The examiner will verify their authenticity and delete the name of, and other identifying reference to author.

  5. After reviewing the documentation, the appointee shall have the opportunity to discuss the decision with the Principal. The appointee may be accompanied by an academic colleague of his/her choice.

  6. In the case of ranks other than full professor, the Principal's decision on promotion is final. In the case of promotion to full professor, the decision of the Board of Trustees upon recommendation of the Principal, is final, save that a person denied promotion may invoke the provision of the Senate Grievance Document on the following grounds:

    1. that the decision was based in whole or in part on discriminatory considerations of the class prohibited by Section 4 of the Ontario Human Rights Code, SO 1981, c.53 (namely, citizenship, creed, sex, age, record of offences, marital status, family status or handicap) or on sexual preference;
    2. that the decision was based in whole or in part on considerations that constitute a violation of academic freedom; or
    3. that the procedures laid down in these rules were not observed.

  7. In exercising their powers under the Grievance Document, the Grievance Board and Ultimate Tribunal may order that the matter be reconsidered properly and give directions for ensuring that this is done.

Back to Top