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 matters.

Inputs (for each case):

  • Committee members will rely on dossier as submitted for Library PTAC 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 PTAC.
  • 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 PTAC 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 PTAC review and is therefore available to PTAC 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 PTAC, but to help maintain independence of the two levels of review within the Library, these letters will normally not be consulted by Library PTAC members. When Library PTA Committee meets to vote on a case, if the preliminary Library PTAC 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 case.

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 PTAC 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 case.
  • 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.

Other Policies:

  • Recusals:

    • In accordance with campus policies, faculty editors, PRC/PMC members (current and former) and unit heads, should NOT automatically recuse themselves
    • Library Evaluators should recuse themselves from cases they have evaluated.
    • Any Library PTA Committee member may recuse himself/herself from joint consideration of a case if he or she would personally benefit from the outcome of the case.
    • 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.
    • Recusals are recorded, with reason for recusal given.
  • Confidentiality:

    • Candidate dossier, any notes taken by a Committee member, and all unpublished supporting materials provided to Library PTAC 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 fashion.
  • Library PTA Committee will not have direct access to PRC reports; selected comments from PRC reports may be included in final dossier at Library Evaluator’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 PTAC review, Library PTAC 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.)

(Last revised 5 January 2016 , dhw, cp.)