College of LAS « Illinois

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE APPROVED POLICIES

Section Section III.4
RECOMMENDED GUIDELINES FOR APPOINTMENT AND REVIEW PROCEDURES FOR FACULTY MEMBERS WITH BUDGETED JOINT APPOINTMENTS IN TWO OR MORE UNITS

Revised and Approved by the LAS Executive Committee, January 18, 1994

Purpose

These recommendations are intended to provide guidance to LAS units for the appointment and review of faculty members with joint appointments. They are based on principles of mutual cooperation, open sharing of views, and fairness to the faculty member. While some procedures are left to the choice of the units, the goal of this document is to ensure that all relevant views are expressed at times of appointment and review, that effective communication is promoted between units or with the faculty member, and in general that a clear and orderly process is used for decisions affecting faculty members with joint appointments.

  1. Initial Appointment
    1. For a tenure-track position budgeted in two or more units the primary appointment should be in a unit that has departmental status, or de facto departmental status. Joint appointments between units neither of which enjoys such status are discouraged.
    2. To secure the initial appointment the executive officers of the units involved must execute a joint letter to the Dean requesting the appointment. That letter must describe the terms of the appointment and the individualÃŒs responsibilities in each unit (i.e., instructional load, advising, committee service, etc.). The Dean will describe these terms of appointment and the responsibilities to each unit in the letter of offer to the candidate.
    3. In the joint letter to the Dean requesting that an appointment be made, the unit heads must designate the "home unit." The designated home unit must have tenure-granting power and normally will be the unit with the largest percentage of the individualÃŒs appointment, or that represents the individualÃŒs primary discipline. The designated home unit will initiate the third-year review and the subsequent promotion and tenure reviews.
  2. Third-Year Review

    The designated home unit will initiate the third-year review. The review will involve the participation of both units and will represent the views of both. Either of the following procedures may be used.
    1. Each unit may conduct its own review. The two units will share with each other the results of the two reviews and will confer about the report(s) to be issued. The units may send either separate reports or a joint report signed by both executive officers.
    2. The two units may conduct a joint review, with a committee including members from both units. The findings of the joint committee will be sent to both units for evaluation, and the two units will confer about the kind of report(s) to be issued. Depending on the final evaluations of the individual units, they may then prepare and send to the faculty member either a single joint report signed by both executive officers, or separate reports from each executive officer reflecting the distinctive views of each unit.

      When separate reports are issued, they will be copied to the other appointing unit. When joint reports are issued, observations and recommendations that are relevant to one unit and not the other, or differences in assessment between units, should be articulated carefully so that the faculty member is informed of commonly held opinions and of any views that are important to each of the units separately.
  3. Promotion and Tenure Decisions

    The recommended guidelines for promotion and tenure review procedures parallel those of the third-year review. The designated home unit has the primary responsibility for initiating and overseeing the review process, but the review should involve the participation and represent the views of both units. In developing their assessment, units must cooperate in securing external evaluations. Internally they may use their own customary procedures for promotion reviews, or the two units may construct an ad hoc joint review procedure. For example, either of the following procedures may be used.

    1. Each unit may conduct its own review, the results of which will be shared with the jointly appointing unit.
    2. The two units may conduct a joint review with a committee including members from both units, whose findings will be sent to both units.
    Both units will then make their recommendations to the Dean, jointly if they are in agreement and separately if they are not. If there is a recommendation for promotion, or for promotion and tenure, the designated home department will have the primary responsibility for preparing the case. A joint recommendation to the Dean will be signed by both executive officers.

Updated April 2003