Overview
USU Policy 4004: Tenured and Term Appointments: Evaluation, Promotion, and Retention defines the criteria and procedures for tenure and promotion at Utah State University for tenure-track, tenured, and term appointment faculty. Faculty should carefully read and closely follow the formal requirements outlined in Policy 4004 (sometimes referred to simply as Faculty Code).
The following webpage provides faculty in the College of Arts & Sciences supplemental guidance to candidates as they prepare their dossiers. In addition to carefully reading Faculty Code, faculty should confer with their Department Head and Tenure/Promotion Advisory Committee (TAC or PAC) on the process. Candidates should also use resources developed by the Provost’s Office.
It is ultimately the candidate’s responsibility to construct a dossier that effectively describes their accomplishments. For purposes of promotion and tenure, the Faculty Code specifies that performance in the major area of emphasis (as identified on the role statement) must be judged to be “excellent” and performance in the remaining area(s) of emphasis must be judged to be “effective.” Note that this is true for tenured, tenure-track, and term appointment faculty.
For questions about the tenure and promotion process, best practices in documentation, or to review examples of dossiers, faculty can contact Associate Dean for Faculty Success Julia Gossard or schedule an appointment with her.
Provost’s Office Resources
The USU Office of the Provost provides several resources to help guide faculty through the tenure and/or promotion process. Faculty are encouraged to review these resources regularly, especially as they construct their self-assessments and dossiers.
Office of the Provost Resources
- Tips for Preparing a Successful Promotion and Tenure Dossier
- Teaching Documentation Workshop
- Promotion and Tenure FAQ
Legacy Supplemental Guidance
Prior to the establishment of the College of Arts and Sciences in 2025, the College of Science provided additional supplemental guidance. It should be noted that while this supplemental guidance is provided for legacy purposes, candidates should ensure that the advice is current and relevant to their cases by reviewing Faculty Code and conferring with their tenure/promotion advisory committees and Department Heads.
Interfolio/EDossier
USU uses the Interfolio platform to digitally manage the creation and review of tenure, promotion, and third-year review dossiers. This system, sometimes referred to as e-dossier, is available online to faculty and reviewers at https://dossier.usu.edu or https://interfolio.usu.edu.
Interfolio allows faculty to upload files into a digital portfolio, which passes through a structured review process, manages viewer permissions, handles voting and committee letters, and retains a case copy for future reference.
Deadlines
The tenure and promotion process follows an important series of deadlines.
Ombudspersons
As stated in Policy 4004.6.5, “the ombudsperson is responsible for ensuring that the rights of the candidate and the university are protected, and that due process is followed according to 4000-level of the USU Policy Library. Ombudspersons shall not judge or assess the candidate, and therefore is not a member of the promotion, tenure, or review committee, or supervisor of the candidate.”
It is the responsibility of the Committee Chair to find a trained ombudsperson for the committees that they oversee. The Provost’s Office maintains a list of all trained ombudspersons for each department.
The College of Arts and Sciences requires that all eligible faculty members (tenured and promoted) go through ombuds training in the fall and serve in this capacity at least once per year. To obtain training, please follow the directions provided by the Office of the Provost. Faculty only need to complete this training once during their time at USU.
Advisory Committee Chair & Committee Responsibilities
Tenure-track faculty will have a Tenure Advisory Committee appointed to them in consultation with the Department Head. Promotion-eligible faculty (including term faculty) will have a Promotion Advisory Committee appointed to them in mutual agreement with the Department Head.
Policy 4004.6.2 “Advisory Committees” outlines the role and responsibilities of Tenure Advisory Committees, Promotion Advisory Committees, and their Chairs.
TAC and PAC Chairs should meet with the candidate one-on-one annually. This meeting does not require the presence of an ombudsperson. Chairs should also schedule annual meetings with the candidate and the committee. Chairs must also find an ombudsperson for each committee meeting that they oversee. Candidates should not be responsible for scheduling their meeting or finding an ombudsperson. These responsibilities sit with the chair.
External Review Guidance
In the year that tenure-track and tenured faculty go up for promotion and/or tenure, they will need to submit a list of possible external reviewers to their department head. Department Heads should articulate the due dates for this to candidates as it varies by department. Those seeking promotion in the lecturer ranks do not need external review.
Code indicates that external peer reviewers should be “of rank equivalent to or higher than that sought by the candidate.” Thus, for tenure-track faculty seeking tenure/promotion to Associate Professor, reviewers must be tenured Associate Professors or Professors and for tenured faculty seeking promotion to Professor, reviewers must be tenured Professors. Candidates are encouraged to submit a strong list of senior scholars who can provide insightful comments on their record. External reviewers should be respected scholars in the candidate’s discipline and should have sufficient rank, experience and perspective to judge the candidate’s record and compare it to others of equivalent experience in the field. Candidates are advised to recommend external reviewers who will not have, or be perceived as having, a conflict of interest and/or a close personal relationship with the candidate. As examples, candidates should not recommend a former mentor, former or current collaborator, relative, close friend, or former classmate as reviewers.
The ideal external reviewers are not invested in the career of the candidate but, rather, have sufficient distance to serve as objective external reviewers. Candidates should avoid any appearance of close personal relationships with suggested reviewers.
For the full process of external review letters, please see Faculty Code 4004.7.2.1 and 4004.8.2.1.