Skip Navigation
Search

Promotion and Tenure FAQs

What happens if the new date by which the files are due to the Provost contradicts the P&T Guidelines that govern my unit?

The Provost’s Guidelines and deadlines may require units to shift their deadlines in order to submit the files on time to the Provost’s office. 

What about expedited tenure cases?

Expedited tenure cases remain unchanged. While the department/candidate has two years after the date of hire to submit, dossiers should be submitted as soon as possible to the Provost’s office. 

If I begin an assistant professor position after the standard start date of September 1, how does that affect my tenure review timeline?

If you begin between June 1 and December 31st, then you will remain on the same timeline as those who began on September 1. If you begin between January 1 and May 31st, then you will be able to choose at the time of hire to submit your materials after 5.5 years or after 6.5 years.

What happens if I did not receive a midpoint review?

Mentorship and feedback is important and our guidelines indicate you should receive a midpoint review. It is appropriate to request a review from your chair or unit head at any time, especially after your midpoint if it has not occurred. If, despite your efforts, there is no midpoint review in your file, you may reach out to your dean or the office of the provost. You will not be held accountable for any delays related to your midpoint review. 

If my midpoint review documents some concerns or negative feedback, will that be used against me when I go up for tenure?

The review is meant to give constructive feedback and suggestions regarding your progress to tenure and how you might respond to any concerns. Candidates receiving feedback should take clear steps to address these issues which might include seeking support within the tenure home, as well as from CELT and/or the OVPR. If progress in these areas is not made, then the same issues will be relevant for your tenure evaluation. However, if progress is made, the fact that concerns were identified at the midpoint review is not a factor that negatively impacts the tenure review.  

The Guidelines say that SBU values a “broad range of entrepreneurial outreach and creative activities;” where should I include materials that support that part of my case for promotion?

These activities are important for your tenure file. Where appropriate, the results of those activities should be listed in your biofile or CV. You may also want to include a discussion of those activities in your Research, Teaching, or Service statements.

The Guidelines say that it is “vitally important” that pre-tenure, assistant professors engage in service but my area head has discouraged me from taking on such commitments. How can I find ways to be involved while addressing any perceived service shortcomings in my file? 

Service is an important part of your career at the university and there are many ways to get involved that do not require an unreasonable time commitment. Participating in departmental committees, disciplinary organizations, or university recruitment events can all be part of the service area of one’s tenure dossier. It is expected that assistant professors at the start of their tenure clock will have limited service obligations, but some service throughout the duration of the tenure clock is important for your review.

If the external evaluators are all (or mostly) “arm’s length”, how will my dossier document the specifics of my contribution to a multi-authored publication or research project?

You may choose to write about a particular project within your research statement, explaining the nature of your collaboration and your contribution. In certain cases, your area head may reach out to one of the authors on a multi-authored publication or research project for a discussion of your contribution in that work and an evaluation of tenure case more broadly. They will then include in the letter how the evaluator was selected for this purpose. It is also notable that in the case of large multi-author papers, an argument can be made that these individuals are arms length and can be used as external evaluators. 

What happens if one of the external evaluators my committee selects is unfamiliar with the specifics of my research? How will they be able to judge the quality of my work?

While it is helpful to have letters from external evaluators who understand the nuances of a particular research program, it can be helpful to hear from external evaluators within your field who can speak to the quality of your dossier more generally. A senior scholar at an AAU university should know the status of the journals, the quality of the conferences, and what a successful tenured dossier looks like at an R1 university. 

The most important senior scholars in my area are not at AAU institutions. What should I do?

External evaluators may come from non-AAU institutions and chairs or area heads can briefly explain the selection process in their letter with a focus on how this individual has distinguished themselves as a leader in the candidate’s field of study. 

 

top