As stated in the Preamble, the tenure regulations "provide a comprehensive set of policies dealing with the relationship between the University and its faculty," including decisions regarding promotions in rank that may or may not involve questions of tenure. When a faculty member's request for promotion is not approved, the Judicial Committee shall conduct a review in a manner analogous to the review of tenure decisions (see Section 7.7). Such cases may be brought directly to the Judicial Committee without a requirement that the faculty member exhaust all other available University remedies before bringing the case to the Judicial Committee.

COMMENT:

Section 27 of the Tenure Procedures already specifies that "procedures for considering promotions should parallel those for consideration of candidates for tenure . . . ." Interpretation 11 makes clear that the Judicial Committee has authority to review appeals by faculty members from a failure to promote and would do so in a manner analogous to that used for review of tenure decisions. Section 7.7, referenced in the Interpretation, lists the standards by which the Judicial Committee will review a termination of probationary appointment. The section says the Committee "will review allegations that the decision was based in significant degree upon any of the following:

1. Personal beliefs, expressions or conduct which fall within the liberties protected by law or by the principles of academic freedom as established by academic tradition and the constitutions and laws of the United States and the state of Minnesota;

2. Factors prescribed by applicable federal or state law regarding fair employment practices;

3. Substantial and prejudicial deviation from the procedures described in subsections 7.4 [procedures for taking action in academic unit] and 7.6 [procedures for review of decision by academic unit] and the procedural rules promulgated pursuant to those subsections;

4. Failure to consider data available at the time of decision bearing materially on the faculty member's performance;

5. Demonstrable material prejudicial mistakes of fact concerning the faculty member's work or conduct;

6. Other immaterial or improper factors causing substantial prejudice; or

7. Other violation of University policies or regulations."
   Return to Tenure Documents