Library PTA Committee Deliberative Policies & Procedures When Considering P & T Cases
Below are summarized the procedures and policies followed by the Library Promotion and Tenure
Advisory Committee when considering promotion and promotion and tenure cases. Summarized are inputs
on which the Committee relies, the outcomes the Committee produces, the procedures the Committee
follows when reviewing cases, and policies adhered to regarding recusals, confidentiality and other
Inputs (for each case):
- Committee members will rely on dossier as submitted for Library PTA review (including letters
from internal and external referees), direct reading of candidate's publications, and first-hand
knowledge (if any) of candidate's work.
- Committee members will not rely on hearsay, nor should they individually solicit opinions or
input on specific cases from colleagues not on Library PTA.
- Authoritative standards for criteria regarding P & T recommendations are the University
Statutes, Provost's Communication # 9, the Library Statement on Promotion and Tenure, and documents
referenced directly by these sources.
- If deemed essential to deliberations, Library PTA can collectively request clarification or
additional specific information regarding a candidate or case from the UL's Office
- The Library FRC vote on a case is considered a part of the dossier as submitted for Library PTA
review and is therefore available to PTA members as they review cases.
- Library FRC letter to the UL giving narrative advice regarding a case is also considered part
of the record when the case is submitted to Library PTA, but to help maintain independence of the
two levels of review within the Library, these letters will normally not be consulted by Library
PTA members. When Library PTA Committee meets to vote on a case, if the preliminary Library PTA
straw vote is markedly different from final Library FRC vote for that case, Library PTA members may
then consult Library FRC letter to better clarify the differences in each committee's sense of the
Outcomes (for each case):
- Library PTA Committee will record & report vote to UL (for, against, abstain, absent, with
explanations recorded for any abstention or absent votes).
- Library PTA will submit brief letter to UL giving details of when Committee met to consider
case and summarizing features of case that led to Committee's vote. This letter is signed by the
Chair on behalf of the Committee.
- Members may provide additional concurring on non-concurring letters at same time.
- Members will individually review cases and all associated documentation before meeting to
jointly consider cases as a Committee.
- At outset of joint consideration of a case, a member will be appointed to draft the Committee's
letter to the UL for that case.
- Initial straw vote (show of hands) will be taken at beginning of joint consideration of each
- Round robin follows for each member to give his or her rationale for straw vote.
- If non-unanimous at that point, further discussion follows, as much as members want.
- Final vote (anonymous, paper ballot) is then taken and recorded.
- All members will be given adequate opportunity to review and suggest edits to Committee's UL
letter on each case before letters are transmitted to UL.
- Any Library PTA Committee member should recuse himself or herself from joint consideration of a
case if he or she feels a significant conflict of interest exists.
- Recusal must be announced before joint consideration of a case begins; recused member is then
excused from meeting room for duration of deliberations on that case and takes no part in any phase
of joint consideration of that case.
- Paper preparers, members of most recent PRC, and candidate's unit head (when applicable) will
always be asked to recuse themselves.
- Prior year PRC members, those having non-unit head administrative oversight of a candidate's
work, those who have extensively collaborated with a candidate, will not automatically be asked to
recuse themselves, but should voluntarily do so if relationship with candidate would not allow them
to consider the case objectively.
- Recusals are recorded as abstentions, with reason for recusal given.
- Candidate dossier, any notes taken by a Committee member, and all unpublished supporting
materials provided to Library PTA in regard to cases considered should be treated as highly
confidential; if a member makes his or her own copies of such materials, he or she must protect
confidentiality of such materials and ultimately take care to shred (or return to UL's office for
shredding) all such items.
- Case specifics and Committee deliberations must not be discussed with anyone outside of
current-year's Library PTA Committee (other than UL). In particular, case specifics and
deliberations must never be discussed directly with candidate.
- Committee processes and trends or issues cutting across multiple cases over time may be
discussed with Library faculty colleagues and subsequent Library PTA Committees, but only to extent
topics can be discussed without revealing specific details of any case in an identifiable
- Library PTA Committee will not have direct access to PRC reports; selected comments from PRC
reports may be included in final dossier at paper preparer's discretion. The PRC record, involving
a measure of mentoring and constructive criticism, is considered distinct and separate from record
on which P & T decision is based.
- Because Library FRC review is completed prior to Library PTA review, Library PTA must not
recommend any substantive changes to any case considered, even if it is the sense of the Committee
that such a change might clarify or better present a specific case. (Proof-reading changes and
changes to punctuation or typography can be suggested.)
3 January 2006