No person has tenure except as provided herein; that is, by direct grant in writing from the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer with the concurrence of the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees. No person is appointed with tenure unless it is expressly stated in the letter of appointment or other official writing to that effect.
Updated April 17, 2024
Deans will submit to the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer an annual report and recommendation on all tenure-track faculty members not holding tenure.
Updated April 17, 2024
Tenure-track faculty
Regardless of the stated term or other provisions of any appointments, written notice that probationary appointments are not to be renewed will be given to untenured, tenure-track faculty members in advance of the expiration of their appointment, as follows:
Full-time, non-tenure-track faculty
For full-time, non-tenure-track faculty, notice of conditions of employment will be communicated in appointment and reappointment letters.
Except for cause, a one-semester notice of termination must be provided to Teaching and Research Professors of any rank, Professors of Practice, and other full-time, non-tenure-track faculty who have had at least two, but not more than three, years of continuous service, and a two-semester notice must be provided to those having completed three or more years of continuous service (excluding summers). Such notice should be in writing to the individual and specifically note that it is serving as notice of non-renewal, should such action be necessary.
Updated April 17, 2024
Written notice of the tenure decision, whether positive or negative, will be given to faculty members at the time of the decision. If the decision is negative, the written notice will indicate that the appointment for the remainder of the probationary period becomes terminal. A negative tenure decision will be accompanied by a terminal one-year appointment. If the decision is affirmative, tenure formally begins on the date the Board of Trustees confers tenure.
It is the right of every faculty member, when informed by the University of a denial of tenure, to appeal this decision on the basis of a procedural violation before the Senate Committee on Appointments and Promotions or on the basis of denial of academic freedom or violation of professional ethics before the Senate Committee on Academic Freedom, Tenure, and Professional Ethics (AFTPE). Also, Syracuse University is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity employer and maintains a grievance procedure for any employee believing themselves to have been subject to discrimination on any protected basis.
Updated April 17, 2024
The term “credited year” means a year of service at Syracuse University identified in the faculty member’s appointment letter as a full-time tenure-track appointment. Under certain circumstances, the tenure clock can be stopped when the request is made by the faculty member through the department and/or school/college and approved by the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer. Events for which the clock may normally be stopped, after the submission of documentation, include life events that would, in most circumstances, have generated a request for parental, maternity, family medical, military or disability leave, disrupting one or more semesters of work during the probationary period. Other situations that may warrant consideration of stopping the tenure clock include fulfillment of extraordinary institutional service, such as teaching in SU Abroad or serving in an administrative position during the probationary period, where these circumstances interrupt or substantially slow progress toward tenure. The year(s) approved by the Provost through this process will not count as credited years toward tenure when reported to the school/college promotion and tenure committee.
Approved by the University Senate, April 2008; Updated April 17, 2024
The importance of tenure decisions to the quality of the University and the impact of such decisions on the lives of tenure candidates demand that the preparation of a tenure dossier be a matter of the highest priority for the individual and the appropriate academic unit (most often, the department).The dossier makes the case for the candidate’s accomplishments and for their continuing appointment; thus, the academic unit has an ethical responsibility to conduct as thorough and as balanced a review as possible.
Because the dossier should contain extensive evaluative documentation, as well as the presentation of materials, the candidate is not responsible for assembling the dossier in its final form or transmitting it to the Office of the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer, although it is expected that the candidate will work closely with the academic unit to provide high-quality materials.
The process for selecting the membership of department and School/College tenure and promotion committees should be set out clearly in the department/School/College bylaws. Those bylaws should respect three principles:
a. The deliberative bodies should be independent across levels (i.e., no individual should actively participate or vote in two levels of the process, such as at both the department and School/College level, for any single individual).
b. Committees for tenure and promotion should exclude individuals with potential conflicts of interest. In these committees, potential conflicts of interest occur when individuals who may directly or indirectly derive a personal benefit are in a position to influence a decision (e.g., tenure of a spouse or partner). Individuals may also recuse themselves from service in cases in which participation or voting might pose a substantial conflict with the performance of their primary duties in the University.
c. The process of evaluation, deliberation, and voting leading to academic-unit recommendations regarding tenure is the responsibility of tenured members of the faculty. At the departmental level, the voting body should be composed only of tenured members. All Schools and Colleges should provide a description and justification of unit practices regarding voting to the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer before May 15, prior to any academic year in which a candidate for tenure is expected to be presented.
It is the responsibility of the appropriate unit head to fulfill all established professional responsibilities appropriate to the position for all tenure candidates, including helping the candidate make the strongest possible case for tenure, given accomplishments to-date, talent, and promise. It is the candidate, however, who bears responsibility for providing information about their academic accomplishments, using the Form A document, which includes two parts: (1) Outline of Professional Experience and (2) Candidate’s Professional Statement.
The appropriate unit head (department/School/College) is responsible for providing a detailed executive summary of the evaluative processes and statements made by individuals and committees. The unit head should then include their own evaluative comments, addressing and clarifying any conflicts in materials presented; adding information that would be helpful in subsequent evaluative processes; and addressing any negative aspects of the candidate’s record or the external reviews and explaining any mitigating factors that should be considered.
The use of external evaluators and critics is an essential feature of a thorough tenure review process. Reviewers should be chosen from the relevant publics and audiences for the candidate’s achievements. Reviewers should be of sufficient rank, status, and accomplishment to make the judgments asked of them. Those qualities should be assessed by such factors as institutional affiliation, academic rank, prestige in a non-academic enterprise, or membership and knowledgeable participation in a relevant community of experts. Outside reviewers will be selected as appropriate to, and in accordance with, the conventions of the candidate’s discipline(s) and School/College(s). For example, in the professional schools, it is not unusual for some outside evaluators to be non-academic professionals and some to be senior-rank academics in comparable professional schools. In the liberal arts and sciences, it is more typical that all or most outside reviewers be senior-rank academics. Generally, reviewers’ programs or departments should be of at least comparable quality to the candidate’s program/department. The reasons for selecting all reviewers should be explained in the dossier, and any divergence from the conventions of the academic discipline should be explained. The candidate should be given the opportunity to nominate external reviewers, and that list should include sufficient names to allow choice for the committee and anonymity for the final roster of reviewers. The committee should nominate its own separate list of potential reviewers, and the final roster of outside evaluators should feature a majority of reviewers from the committee’s list. To minimize conflicts of interest, letters from close colleagues/collaborators, former professors or graduate advisors, or other similar individuals are discouraged. If such individuals are included in the roster of reviewers, their presence and impartiality must be explained in the dossier. At each level in the tenure process, all information generated by the appropriate evaluative bodies, including any formal votes, should be transmitted to subsequent evaluators.
Updated April 17, 2024
In addition to the annual review required for all tenure-track faculty, each school/college will devise for each tenure-track faculty member a mechanism of intensive review to take place in the third year of credited service. This review is meant to assess progress toward tenure and ensure substantial feedback to tenure-track faculty about that progress. If the faculty member has submitted the Request for Tenure Review form and if this review would be conducted simultaneously with tenure review, this review should be waived.
The third-year review must include substantial formative and evaluative input from the appropriate faculty and its administrative leader. It should also include proactive and supportive advice on future activities that will enable the faculty member to progress toward tenure. Faculty members being reviewed will be asked to provide their own reflections on their teaching, scholarly, and service accomplishments and the directions they are pursuing.
The results of the review must be delivered in writing to the tenure-track faculty member. An opportunity must then be provided for in-person discussion with the dean and/or an appropriate designee. The candidate has the opportunity to provide a written response to the evaluation, which will also be placed in the faculty member’s file.
Copies of the signed and countersigned evaluation and the supporting materials will be placed in the faculty files of the School/College and the Office of Academic Affairs upon completion. While the format of the review should be based upon the unit’s own policies, it should be evidence-based, given the importance of the feedback to the tenure-track faculty member. This review must be substantive and of a critical nature, and the expectation is that even candidates making good or excellent progress will receive serious advice from senior colleagues.
If the timing of the review allows, the review may be used as the basis for appointment renewal or non-renewal of tenure-track faculty, in accordance with Faculty Manual 2.38 and the by-laws of the school/college. Regardless of timing, a comparable process of evaluation and the substantial involvement of the unit’s faculty must accompany contract renewals for tenure-track faculty.
Approved, University Senate October 2009; Updated April 17, 2024
As a research university, Syracuse University expects that faculty members will be actively engaged in an intellectual and creative life that enhances the knowledge base and/or otherwise extends the boundaries in their chosen areas of concentration. The University also has a tradition of permitting various allocations of effort across research and teaching. Schools and Colleges are expected to provide guidance to all faculty regarding allocations of effort. In particular, Schools and Colleges must provide guidelines for those individuals whose teaching, research, and service do not sharply divide into distinct categories so that they can present integrated dossiers and accounts of activities.
Teaching
Syracuse University recognizes success in teaching among its tenured faculty to be of vital importance and values innovation and intellectual pursuit embedded within teaching. Teaching involves the art and skill required for the diffusion of knowledge and guidance toward its effective and independent use. The successful teacher, among other things, instructs in consonance with the School/College mission, has knowledge of subject matter, skillfully communicates and contributes to student learning and development, acts professionally and ethically, and strives continuously to improve. Quality teaching includes providing substantive feedback to students, revising curriculum to reflect developments in the field, and mastering appropriate pedagogical approaches. In addition to the instruction of individual courses, activities under the heading of teaching may include supervising independent study projects; advising; arranging and supervising internships, clinical placements, or student research; serving on graduate examination committees and thesis, dissertation, dossier, and portfolio review committees; providing professional development for teaching assistants; involving students in community engagement projects; and instructing non-SU students or community members in a variety of venues.
Research/scholarship/creative accomplishment
Faculty members belong to scholarly and professional communities and are expected to advance these communities by contributing to knowledge through research or other forms of creative work. The Syracuse University faculty is strong in part because it engages in scholarship that comprises a spectrum of excellence from disciplinary to cross-disciplinary, from theoretical to applied, and from critical to interpretive.
Scholarship means in-depth study, learning, inquiry, and experimentation designed to make contributions to knowledge in specific fields or relevant disciplines. Scholarship, as measured by peer recognition of its originality, impact on, and importance to the development of the field(s) or relevant disciplines, is demonstrated most typically by refereed publications—in journals, high-quality books, or other influential venues. It also can be demonstrated by placement of work in high-quality venues, as judged by peers. Scholarship and research accomplishments are also demonstrated by the design and execution of basic or applied research in the laboratory or in the field; through the presentation of papers at organized scholarly meetings, usually at the national or international level; through the attraction of external support or competitive fellowships and awards appropriate to the faculty member’s field(s) of study or relevant disciplines; through such activities as editing, translation, acquisition of significant patents, compilation of information, and development of materials that make information more accessible to researchers, other scholars, practitioners, and the public; and lecturing in professional and other public fora.
The appointment of a faculty member in the creative or performing arts may permit the primary assessment of efforts to be on scholarship, on artistic accomplishment, or on a balance between the two that is appropriate to the artist/scholar’s appointment. For faculty members with such appointments, artistic accomplishment is most often demonstrated by dissemination of the artist’s work through performance, publication, or exhibition in professionally recognized settings. The artist’s work will have an intrinsic value equal to scholarship and will be subject to equally rigorous evaluation.
Syracuse University is committed to longstanding traditions of scholarship, as well as evolving perspectives on scholarship. Syracuse University recognizes that the role of academia is not static and that methodologies, topics of interest, and boundaries within and between disciplines change over time. The University will continue to support scholars in all of these traditions, including faculty who choose to participate in publicly engaged scholarship. Publicly engaged scholarship may involve partnerships of University knowledge and resources with those of the public and private sectors to enrich scholarship, research, creative activity, and public knowledge; enhance curriculum, teaching and learning; prepare educated, engaged citizens; strengthen democratic values and civic responsibility; address and help solve critical social problems; and contribute to the public good.
One can contribute to these goals in many ways —individually through each of teaching, service, and scholarship or in an integrated form—all highly valued by Syracuse University. Such activity counts as scholarship, however, only when it makes a contribution to knowledge in specific field(s) or relevant disciplines. Such scholarship is to be evaluated with the same rigor and standards as all scholarship.
All scholarship will meet common expectations in terms of (1) ways of conducting the work (e.g., formulating problems, choosing topics of inquiry, framing questions, using systematic processes or methods, setting goals, making and carrying out plans, sustaining a scholarly agenda, observing ethical standards); (2) means of legitimating the work (e.g., providing theoretical foundations, making reasoned arguments, documenting the work, representing the work in various media, disseminating it to appropriate audiences and users, assessing outcomes or projects through review by appropriate evaluators); (3) connections to prior/current scholarship and to an intellectual community or communities (e.g., drawing on other scholars’ work, contributing to current work, building on a scholar’s previous work, placing work in an intellectual tradition); (4) qualities of the work (e.g., rigor, objectivity, caution, currency, originality, generativity, independence of thought, critical stance, commitment); and (5) significance (e.g., audiences addressed, importance of goals, relevance beyond immediate project, effect on field, contribution to the public good).
Service
Syracuse University asserts the importance of faculty service for the vitality of its academic community, for the professions it represents, and for society at large. Significant accomplishment in the area of service alone is not sufficient for the attainment of tenure. However, significant accomplishment in service, when in conjunction with or integrated with high-quality teaching or research, strengthens the candidate’s dossier. Service includes membership or leadership on committees at program, department, School/College, or University levels as appropriate to the faculty member’s rank, as well as administrative functions or other leadership roles. In addition to formal assignments of duties, faculty individually can prove valuable in efforts such as recruiting and mentoring students, faculty, and staff. Service also includes contributions to professional societies, governmental and academic institutions, and the community at large when these contributions reflect faculty members’ professional expertise or standing. The expectation regarding the quantity of service activities for faculty in the probationary period may vary by unit, according to its size and norms. Service activities should be of high quality.
Approved by the University Senate March 2009; Updated April 17, 2024
While the activities and accomplishments to be evaluated for tenure will vary between programmatic and disciplinary areas of the University, as well as among individual faculty, the base criteria for tenure are themselves reflective of the academic and intellectual values of the University, as commonly held:
a. The candidate would contribute significantly to the overall quality of the unit’s tenured faculty, as measured by the record of accomplishment at the time of consideration.
b. The candidate has made, and is likely to continue to make, high-quality and valuable contributions in teaching, scholarship, and service to the extent that tenure is in the best interest of Syracuse University.
Tenure may be granted only by the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer with the concurrence of the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees. Such an appointment may be extended only to members of Syracuse University with faculty rank. Tenure is not attached to appointments to administrative positions or to appointments as department chairs in the University. Appointment to or relinquishment of such positions, however, will not deprive faculty members of tenure in the highest instructional rank they have attained at the University.
Candidates are considered for tenure only once, and tenure cannot be granted through any process other than those described here.
Tenure is granted in one of two ways. First, faculty appointed to a full-time tenure-track position without tenure are reviewed for tenure, following a probationary period. This review is conducted by the department(s) or appropriate unit(s) and school/college, in accordance with each unit’s governance procedures. Each case is forwarded to the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer for a decision and to the Chancellor and Board of Trustees for concurrence. Candidates must be considered for tenure before the end of the sixth credited year but may be considered any time before that date.
Second, faculty may be appointed to the University with tenure through a recommendation for such action from the department(s) or appropriate unit(s) and school/college(s), in accordance with each unit’s governance procedures. Each case is forwarded to the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer for a decision and to the Chancellor and Board of Trustees for concurrence.
The formal review process for faculty in the probationary period will begin with the signed and dated irrevocable request on the standard form from the individual to initiate the tenure review. A request must be submitted to the Office of Faculty Affairs, as well as to the office designated by the respective school and college, prior to the solicitation of external evaluations of the candidate’s qualifications for tenure. If an eligible faculty member fails to submit a formal request for a tenure review prior to the college or school deadline for completing the tenure review before the end of the sixth year of the probationary period, the University will consider the faculty member to have waived all claims for consideration for tenure.
Even if a tenure candidate’s school or college accepts a request for tenure review, such acceptance does not constitute a waiver of the deadline set forth above and the consequences specified for failing to meet the deadline.
After the formal review process has begun, candidates for tenure may not withdraw from consideration and subsequently reapply for tenure.
Whereas the tenure process ends with the recommendation of the Vice Chancellor, Provost, and Chief Academic Officer to the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees, the departments and schools/colleges play a significant role in this process, from initial recruitment and appointment, annual evaluation, reappointments, development of candidate dossiers, conduct of tenure review, and associated voting processes. Each school/college that holds tenured appointments has the responsibility to develop and to communicate widely the processes, procedures and criteria for appointments, pre-tenure reviews, promotion, and tenure. The departmental and school/college processes, procedures, and guidelines regarding tenure and promotion to associate professor and for promotion to full professor should be clear and transparent, as well as congruent with the University processes, procedures, and guidelines set forth herein.
Unless the candidate already holds the rank of associate professor or above, the processes and procedures enumerated below should be undertaken in a single process and set of recommendations for promotion to associate professor and indefinite appointment with tenure.
When the text in the sections below refers to tenure, both tenure and promotion to associate professor are referenced jointly.
Updated April 17, 2024
