Skip to Content

04.02.20 Tenure and Promotion



Counseling, Leadership,
Adult Education,
and School Psychology

CLAS/PPS No. 04.02.20
Effective Date: April 30, 2017
Review Date: Fall 2020

This statement has been developed to conform to Academic Affairs Policy and Procedure Statement 04.02.20 Tenure and Promotion Review and the College of Education Policy and Procedure Statement on Tenure and Promotion. Faculty should also refer to these two policy and procedure documents.


01.01 The purposes of this promotion and tenure document are to: 1) establish the criteria of the department for tenure and promotion, together with the policies and procedures for their application; 2) enhance the overall quality of work of all faculty in the Department of Counseling, Leadership, Adult Education and School Psychology (CLAS) by establishing guidelines for the significance and importance of various professional endeavors with regard to tenure and promotion; 3) provide direction to new faculty to help them successfully negotiate the tenure/promotion process within the department, college, and university; and 4) assist in the exercise of good judgment by those responsible for peer evaluation, as tenure and promotion recommendations by the Personnel Committee are primarily based on the judgments of departmental and external reviewers. The following is a list of sources relevant to these criteria.

  1. AA/PPS 02.03.01 Conduct and Planning of Courses
  2. AA/PPS 02.03.02 Conduct of Classes
  3. AA.PPS 02.03.10 Instructional Contact Time and Academic Credit
  4. AA/PPS 02.03.20 Maintenance and Improvement of Quality in Teaching
  5. AA/PPS 04.02.01 Development/Evaluation of Tenure-Track Faculty
  6. AA/PPS 04.02.20 Tenure and Promotion Review
  7. College of Education Tenure and Promotion Policy
  8. Faculty Handbook, Texas State University
  9. The Texas State University System (TSUS) Rules and Regulations

01.02 The three areas of professional activities (teaching, scholarship/creative, and service) are addressed in this document. It is expected that quality teaching in conjunction with quality scholarly/creative endeavors must be consistently demonstrated by all faculty. The faculty in the CLAS Department recognize that scholarship encompasses both research and creative activities. While service activities are important and vital to the department, these are less important in achieving promotion and tenure than teaching and scholarship activities.

1.03 Criteria for Review: Teaching, scholarly/creative activity, and service can include a variety of activities. Some of those activities are noted below. Those provided are meant to serve as examples only and should not be viewed as the total universe of possibilities.

1.04 Relationship between annual review and tenure/promotion review: While these two processes are not necessarily related, successful candidates for consideration of tenure and promotion typically have exceeded expectations during annual reviews.


02.01 The teaching of each faculty member in the CLAS department is evaluated by the Personnel Committee and the Department Chair on the basis of scholarly preparation, course development and planning, dedication, peer evaluation through classroom visits, and student evaluation. Teaching is understood to include not only classroom performance, but other factors as well, such as preparation, syllabi and other course materials, graded assignments, effective testing, staying current in the discipline, student academic and career advising and curriculum improvement.

02.02 Candidates for tenure and promotion to associate professor should be observed in teaching by one or more tenured faculty in the department. The candidate’s teaching should be observed 3 times during their first year, and at least once during each subsequent year though year five. Active observation and mentoring should be provided to the candidate. Program coordinators are responsible for assigning tenured faculty to observe the candidate.

02.03 In preparing for review, candidates for tenure and promotion are encouraged to include, where applicable, the items listed below to document teaching excellence. Candidates for tenure and for promotion to associate professor should include teaching material collected since the initial date of employment. Candidates for promotion to full professor should include teaching material collected since their latest promotion.

  1. Student quantitative and qualitative feedback
  2. Course syllabi, assignments and examinations for newly developed courses.
  3. Documentation of any other achievements relevant to teaching, such as awards, funded grants and/or curriculum development.
  4. Peer observations of teaching performance.
  5. Published materials on teaching techniques.
  6. Letters, awards, and other evidence of teaching excellence.
  7. Number and nature of courses taught each semester [Reviewers should recognize that some courses may place a heavier demand on faculty time and effort than others.]
  8. Number of completed doctoral dissertations and master’s theses supervised. [Consideration should also be given to the number of doctoral dissertation and master’s thesis committees on which the candidate has served as a member and on the number of seminar papers directed.
  9. Number of student advisees [Appropriate consideration should be given to the faculty member’s expected or assigned contributions to advising, mentoring, recruitment, retention, and timely graduation of students.]
  10. Annual reviews of teaching.


03.01 Scholarly/creative activities are critical and required of all Texas State tenure track faculty. A faculty member’s contribution will vary from one academic or professional field to another, but the general test to be applied is that the faculty member is engaged consistently and effectively in scholarly/creative activity of quality and distinction. Evidence of high quality and distinction can be established through careful consideration of sustained productivity and quality. A successful candidate’s scholarly record will include sole and/or primary authorship. Collaboration with colleagues is viewed as a means of enhancing scholarly/creative activity. The quality of the results and the relative contributions of the participants who engaged in collaborative efforts should be considered.

03.02 Scholarly/Creative Activity includes the three principal areas of research, scholarship, and creative endeavors, and requires consistent updating and extension of one or more areas of study within the professional life of the faculty member. At the department level, scholarship/creativity will be evaluated through a process of peer and chair reviews. While the specific type of scholarship/creativity in which a faculty member engages may vary by discipline, in keeping with the continually evolving nature of research approaches in education, accepted forms may include, but are not limited to, applied, theoretical, empirical, action, collaborative, pedagogical (instructional), and clinical research.

03.03 Publication in selective venues is the primary form of documenting scholarship. Even though faculty members may publish in many venues, peer-reviewed works will receive greater emphasis in decisions related to appointment, tenure, and promotion. A record of sustained, peer-reviewed publications is expected. “Peer review” is defined as a process through which academic work is subjected to the scrutiny of the larger academic community. Peer review might consist of the editor of a reputable journal or book publisher assigning an editorial review team to review and rate the quality of a manuscript, or the program chair of a state, national, or international association assigning an editorial review team to review and rate a paper proposal or manuscript submitted for possible delivery at a conference. The examples provided here are not exhaustive and other methods of peer review may be recognized. More emphasis will be given to national/international works than to others.

03.04 Scholarly/Creative Activity Examples

The following are examples of scholarly/creative activities in which a faculty member might engage. These examples, while listed in order of relative importance, may be subject to interpretation in light of the candidate’s accomplishments.

  1. Productivity. The productive scholar is consistently involved and successful in publication of peer-reviewed scholarly/creative achievements. (Note: “Refereed” indicates evaluation by peer-review of an editorial team that reviews manuscripts separately from the editor’s review). Documentation of effectiveness and sustained work in scholarly/creative activity may include and generally will be considered and valued in order by the following groupings. It is expected that candidates for tenure and promotion view items under Group I as priority activities, with Group II and III as support activities.


      • refereed journal articles published;
      • refereed books published;
      • refereed edited books published;
      • refereed book chapters published;
      • refereed monographs published;
      • refereed published proceedings of complete papers presented at national/international professional meetings
      • award of competitive research external grants or contracts for research


      • refereed proceedings of complete papers presented at state/regional/local professional meetings
      • refereed presentations at national/international meetings
      • refereed presentations at state/regional/local meetings
      • non-refereed journal articles published in journals that are recognized by the department as premier outlets for scholarship/creative activity


      • non-refereed books published
      • non-refereed edited books published
      • non-refereed book chapters published
      • non-refereed monographs published
      • non-refereed presentations at national/international meetings
      • non-refereed presentations at state/regional/local meetings
    • i. Support Activities. Scholarly/creative activity may also be demonstrated in a variety of other support activities. These include, but are not limited to the number of:
      • external and internal grant proposals that support teaching, scholarly/creative activity, and leadership/service. Candidates will be credited with achievements in proposal submissions and grants awarded, with greatest weight given to grants awarded. Internal grants, while important in many ways to faculty goals, will receive less consideration than external grant activity in appointment, tenure, and promotion decisions;
      • journal editorships;
      • member of editorial board and/or invited review of journal manuscripts;
      • tests or assessment instruments developed;
      • software and/or multimedia products developed;
      • internet products developed;
      • non-refereed electronic publications;
      • technical reports published;
      • abstracts and/or proceedings of professional presentations published;
      • grant proposal reviews conducted;
      • book reviews published.
  1. Quality. The quantity of published material is not sufficient evidence of scholarly/creative activity. The quality of each endeavor must be carefully documented and is oftentimes more important than quantity. Quality refers to the insights, significance, and importance of the work to a degree indicated by the stature of the venue in which it is published, or for creative works, the importance of the venue. Research grants solicited and those awarded on the basis of scholarly merit of the proposal are also indicators of quality scholarly/creative activity. Other evidence may include citations in scholarly and professional books and journals; the salience of venue stature; use of findings by policy makers, practitioners or judicial bodies; reprinting of documents; abstraction for other publications; or other forms of recognition by colleagues in the field.
  1. Scholarly/Creative Activity Documentation Examples.
    1. copies of published research, scholarship and creative endeavor that appeared in regionally or nationally recognized refereed (or similarly reviewed for academic quality as defined in departmental criteria) monographs, and journals.
    2. copies of invitations where a faculty member has been invited to produce, exhibit, and/or perform juried creative work;
    3. copies of presentations and/or papers delivered/presented at colleges or universities, professional meetings, conventions, and conferences;
    4. evidence of collaboration with colleagues on local and other campuses in activities oriented toward making a contribution to the advancement of knowledge, methodology, or development of a discipline (e.g., letters explaining the nature and extent of the collaboration);
    5. evidence of internal and external grant procurement activities and awards (e.g., copies of proposals and award letters);
    6. evidence of recognition received for regional, national, or international for contributions to a particular field of study;
    7. evidence of copyrights or patents on works produced, e.g., letters of documentation;
    8. evidence of editorial responsibilities (i.e., documentation that delineates the responsibilities) as well as edited papers for journal publication, books, or other scholarly activity;
    9. evidence of directed research projects commissioned by outside agencies;
    10. evidence of creative work commissioned by outside agencies;
    11. annual reviews of scholarly/creative activity


04.01 Faculty should have a commitment to the university and their professions through participation in leadership/service activities, such as leadership/service to the university [leadership/service on committees charged by the Texas State Faculty Senate or by an administrator at the Dean level or higher]; leadership/service to the college [service on a committee charged by the College of Education Faculty Advisory Council or by the Dean of the College of Education]; leadership/service to the department [service on a committee charged by the Chair of the department]; and leadership/service to the profession or to higher education in general [leadership/service appointments made by officials representing professional organizations, public schools, cities, states, or the nation].

04.02 Specific program areas within the department may have differing expectations regarding appropriate service activities. However, candidates seeking tenure and promotion to associate professor, while bearing in mind the requirements of “good citizenship” within the institution and their profession, should prioritize their activities to reflect the university’s priority on scholarship and teaching.

04.03 Faculty members are expected to participate in the conduct of department, college, and university activities; in appropriate professional organizations in their field; and in professional leadership/service to schools, colleges, universities, and other agencies in the community. Evidence of superior leadership/service may be established through careful consideration in the areas of productivity and quality. While leadership/service activity is expected of each faculty member, leadership/service shall not substitute for expectations in teaching or in scholarly/creative activity. Leadership/service expectations of untenured, assistant professors seeking promotion to associate professor and tenure will be lower than those for associate professors seeking promotion to full professor. An outstanding record of leadership and service is normally expected for promotion to full professor; a sustained level of effective service is necessary for promotion to associate professor. At both associate and full professor levels, faculty applicants are expected to demonstrate a sustained level of service.

  1. Productivity. Evidence of a faculty member’s productivity is manifested by the extent of participation on departmental, college, and university committees; in professional organizations at the local, state, or national levels; in outreach activities related to student settings; and in service to scholarly/creative activity, such as serving as editor, reviewer, consultant, speaker, and panel member. The level and frequency and stature of participation will be considered.
  1. Quality. Leadership/service involves working creatively with others so that professional knowledge has an impact on the schools, colleges, professional organizations, community agencies, and other institutions. The impact of leadership/service on the group served is of critical importance in evaluating quality of leadership/service.
  1. Leadership/Service Activity Examples. Faculty members engage in service when they:
  1. serve on departmental, school, and university committees;
  2. assume administrative responsibilities relating to both the academic and support services of their respective program and/or department; these responsibilities should primarily be reserved for associate and full professors;
  3. conduct institutional studies;
  4. sponsor student activities organizations;
  5. conduct organized student-recruiting activities;
  6. serve on an outside program review team or as an external reviewer of faculty credentials
  7. serve as an officer of local, regional, national, or international professional organizations
  8. coordinate or chair a major professional conference
  9. serve as member of examination committee for professional licensure and certification
  10. consult with government, business, and industry
  1. Leadership/Service Activity Documentation Examples
  1. lists and descriptions of activities
  2. copies of materials produced
  3. letters from groups served
  4. evidence of any forms of recognition for service
  5. annual reviews of leadership/service


05.01 For the purposes of this document, the following definitions apply:

  1. Voting Personnel Committee members are tenured faculty members who: 1) hold academic rank in a department/school at a rate of 50% or more and who do not hold an administrative appointment outside of their College, 2) have at least one year of service at Texas State since the official start date of the faculty appointment, and 3) have taught eight sections of courses at the college/university level. Tenured faculty who meet only the first provision will serve as non-voting members of the Personnel Committee until they have met all three requirements.
  2. A department recommendation refers to the recommendation of the personnel committee This is to be distinguished from the recommendation of the departmental chair.

05.02 Eligibility for Tenure and/or Promotion

  1. Typically, the probationary period prior to the awarding of tenure is six years, so that when tenure is granted it begins with the next year's contract. Faculty with notably outstanding records may apply for tenure without prejudice before the end of the six-year probationary period.
  2. At the end of the sixth year, a decision will be made as to whether or not the faculty member will be awarded tenure. Faculty members who are not awarded tenure may remain in their position for one additional year following their tenure decision as indicated by university policy.   
  3. Faculty members in a tenure-track position may not move to non-tenure track status and then back to tenure-track status unless this change in status resulted from independent searches for non-tenure and tenure-track positions.
  4. Neither leaves of absence nor part-time appointments count as part of the probationary perio A written agreement, mutually satisfactory to the candidate and to the university, must be made at the time of initial appointment to a tenure-track position whether to credit or to exclude previous years of full-time teaching experience toward the probationary period.
  5. Faculty members applying for promotion to associate professor must apply for tenure at the same time and vice versa.
  6. A faculty member may not be tenured by default or because of failure to recognize that the time for tenure or termination has arrived. Lecturers and part-time faculty members are not eligible for tenure consideration, although academic administrators may be an exception to the part-time rule (see Faculty Handbook).    
  7. Successful candidates for consideration of tenure and promotion will typically have exceeded expectations during annual reviews.
  8. Tenure-track faculty may request to suspend (or toll) the tenure clock in order to accommodate one or more of the following exigencies or hardships: a) childbirth or adoption; b) dependent care (including children, parents, spouses, or other dependents); c) the faculty member’s own illness or other personal emergency; and/or d) the inability of the institution to provide agreed upon facilities for the faculty member’s research (see AA/PPS 04.02.20 section 03.01.f for specific explanation, criteria, and process).

05.03 Responsibilities of Candidates for Tenure and/or Promotion

  1. Candidates must verify and sign the candidate for tenure and/or the candidate for   promotion information form (see AA/PPS 04.02.20)
  2. Candidates must provide documentation that supports quality of teaching, scholarly/creative activity and leadership/service as defined in the above department criteria. This documentation should be arranged and presented in the order of categories prescribed by the Texas State Vita (see PPS 8.10).
  3. The Texas State Vita must document all achievements and highlight those that apply to the probationary period or time period since the last promotion.
  4. Candidates must adhere to the timeline described herein for the tenure and promotion process.
  5. Tenured candidates who are not approved for promotion may request a meeting scheduled by the chair to develop a program of professional development to enhance the likelihood of future promotion.
  6. Candidates who are denied promotion or tenure may file an appeal or grievance following the procedure specified by the university (refer to AA/PPS 04.02.32 Faculty Grievance Policy).

05.04 Responsibilities of the Department Personnel Committee and Chair

  1. The department will provide each faculty member a copy of the department and college criteria for tenure and promotion.
  2. The department chair and/or appointed members of the personnel committee will counsel the candidate about including relevant materials and organizing supporting documents.
  3. The program coordinator, when also a member of the personnel committee, will assign each tenure-track faculty member two senior faculty members mentors to advise the candidate on the effective presentation of their tenure and/or promotion application file. When possible, one of the mentors will be an associate professor who recently and successfully was tenured at Texas State and the other will be a full professor.
  4. The chair and personnel committee are responsible for a thorough evaluation of the candidate's documentation. The chair and a selected representative from the candidate’s particular program will describe the total scholarly/creative work of the candidate and assess its impact on the expansion of knowledge in the discipline. This is particularly critical for promotion to full professor.
  5. While the chair and personnel committee review the documentation presented to support the existence of sustained quality scholarship by the tenure/promotion candidate, external peer review is also required for candidates seeking tenure and/or promotion.
  1. External evaluations focusing on scholarly/creative activity and professional leadership at the national level will be obtained from appropriate disciplinary peers for candidates for promotion and/or tenure. These external evaluations may not be used as the sole basis for rejection of a candidate, but will be used in a holistic sense when making judgments about the candidate’s qualifications.
  2. The candidate and the program personnel committee each recommend three potential external reviewers to the chair. In identifying potential reviewers, recommenders are encouraged to consider the scholarly standing of the reviewer, inclusive of whether they have attained the rank sought and whether their institution is a peer or aspirant for Texas State University. From this list of six potential reviewers, the chair invites three external reviewers of the candidate’s accomplishments in scholarly/creative activity.
  3. External evaluations will be solicited from persons of repute in the candidate’s field.
  4. Each external reviewer will be asked for a statement regarding his or her acquaintance with the candidate.
  5. Guidelines for completing the external evaluation will be furnished to each external reviewer.
  6. The department chair will deliver candidate materials to the external reviewers at least 30 days prior to the date these external evaluations are needed by the candidate.
  7. The candidate will provide the following materials to be sent to the external reviewers: narrative statement, current curriculum vitae, and three exemplars of published works.
  8. Each external evaluation received becomes a part of the candidate’s portfolio.
  1. On the forms to be forwarded with each candidate's application, the personnel committee will briefly and clearly state the criteria for evaluation. The personnel committee's comments and the chair's comments will be entered on the Evaluation Form and should leave no doubt as to the action desired by the department. For candidates whose applications have been approved by the personnel committee and/or chair, the personnel committee and/or chair comments should fully develop a rationale for recommending the candidate, leaving no doubt about the candidate's suitability and importance to the future development of the department. If the vote is to deny tenure/promotion, comments may be provided but are not required.
  2. The chair/director will attach a copy of the Tenure and Promotion Tracking Form to each application and will forward the approved applications and documentation with a copy of the department’s evaluation criteria to the dean of the college.

05.05 Review & Voting Process

  2. The chair should review each candidate's documentation with the candidate before it is made available for review by the personnel committee. No additional items may be included in the documentation without the chair's and candidate's permission.
  3. The chair will make the candidates' documentation available for review by the personnel committee.
  4. The personnel committee will meet to discuss the candidate’s application materials. Only members of the department's personnel committee are eligible to be present during the voting procedures and to vote on the tenure and/or promotion of any candidate.
  5. The department chair will preside over the meeting.  At the conclusion of the discussion, and with the chair presiding in a non-voting capacity, the personnel committee will vote by secret ballot to either recommend or not to recommend the candidates for tenure and/or promotion.
  6. A tie vote is a vote not to recommend.
  7. If on first vote a candidate is not approved for tenure or promotion, any member of the departmental personnel committee may request a second vote to reconsider the decision. Such reconsideration will be given if approved by a two-thirds majority of the departmental personnel committee present and voting.
  8. The full professors of the personnel committee will meet first and vote by ballot to approve or disapprove each candidate for promotion to the rank of professor. Members must be present to vote.
  9. The complete Personnel Committee (associate professors and professors) will then vote by ballot to approve or disapprove each candidate for tenure and promotion to the rank of associate professor. Members must be present to vote.
  10. The chair and a member of the personnel committee selected by the other  members of the committee should conduct independent counts of the ballots before the results are announced. Any discrepancy between the two counts should be resolved before the results are announced to the personnel committee.
  11. A member of the personnel committee will enter the results of the voting on the Evaluation Form, along with evaluative remarks that, in the case of a positive vote, include a statement showing how this candidate's qualifications specifically meet or exceed the departmental and college criteria established for tenure and/or promotion from the personnel committee's perspective.
  12. The chair is responsible for seeing that the comments accurately reflect the discussion about the candidate.
  13. Following the verification and the official recording of the votes, the chair will destroy all ballots and tally sheets.
  14. The chair will provide an independent “chair’s recommendation” for each candidate on the Evaluation Form and add evaluative comments. In the case of a positive chair’s recommendation, the comments will show how the candidate's qualifications specifically meet or exceed the departmental and college criteria established for tenure and/or promotion from the chair's perspective. The chair will inform the candidate of this action within three class days of the chair's decision.
  15. The chair will verify that information forwarded about each candidate to the college review group is correct.
  16. The chair will attach a copy of the Tenure and Promotion Tracking Form (Form 8) to each application and will forward the approved applications and documentation with a copy of the department's evaluation criteria to the dean of the college.
  17. Within three class days of the decision by the chair, the chair will notify the candidate of the action. The following two decisions require written notification:
    1. If the candidate is denied by either the personnel committee or the chair, but not both, the application is forwarded to the college review group.
    2. The candidate is denied by both the personnel committee and the chair.
  18. Providing that the denial of promotion does not result in a terminal contract, the chair/director, at the candidate’s request, will schedule a meeting with the candidate to discuss the department’s evaluation. Reasons for denial of promotion will be explained. The candidate will be advised in creating a program of professional development to enhance the likelihood of future promotion.

05.06 Timeline for Tenure and Promotion Process

  1. The timeline for this process is detailed annually on the Tenure and Promotion Calendar published by Faculty and Academic Resources. The general timeline is listed below, though these dates are always superseded by the university’s official Tenure and Promotion Calendar.  
  2. By May 1, the department chair will submit to the departmental faculty and the college dean a list of faculty members eligible for promotion and tenure review.
  3. By June 1, eligible faculty members must notify the department chair in writing of their intention to apply for tenure and/or promotion. Faculty who fail to inform the chair by June 1 will not be considered in the year's cycle.
  4. In June, candidates complete and submit an up-to-date Texas State Vita, narrative statement, and 3 exemplary publications to the department chair.
  5. By September 15, the chair will send a copy of the list of candidates to the personnel committee and college dean.
  6. By October 15, the candidate must submit these documents (which may be updated) plus documentation of teaching, scholarly/creative activity and leadership/service as defined in department and college criteria. Additional supporting material, dated appropriately, may be submitted before the formal meeting of the review group. Faculty who do not submit material by October 15 will not be considered during the cycle.
  7. By November 15, the department personnel committee will have reviewed each candidate's application and documentation, voted and submitted recommendations to the department chair.
  8. By December 1, the department chair will submit his/her recommendations, along with those of the personnel committee, to the dean.
  9. By February 9, the college review group and the dean will have completed the review of all candidates, and the dean will submit his/her recommendations, along with those of the review group, the personnel committee, and the department chair to the provost.
  10. By April 30, the provost will notify candidates and the president will notify the chancellor and the board of the recommendations.
  11. By June 1 the final board action will be publicized.

05.07 Procedures for Appeal: Candidates who are denied promotion or tenure may grieve the decision by following the procedures in AA/PPS 04.02.20

05.08 Communication of Information about Denial of Tenure or Promotion

  1. Each person in the review and evaluation process has a professional responsibility to treat information that evaluates another's work as confidential. All votes in the process must be kept confidential.
  2. Faculty members who are denied tenure are not entitled to a statement of the reasons upon which the decision is based (Section 4.28 of Chapter V of the Rules and Regulations of the Board of Regents, Texas State University System).
  3. Faculty members who are denied promotion at any level should be informed regarding the reasons for denial by the responsible administrator, either the chair/director, the dean, or the provost providing that the denial of promotion does not result in a terminal contract. It is the responsibility of the candidate to request a meeting to determine the reasons for denial.


06.01 This statement was approved by the Personnel Committee and Chair in April, 2017. Approval by the Dean and Provost are pending.