UW-Platteville Mission Statement, Administration, Board of Regents, Orgainizational Charts, and Sources of Information at UW-Platteville
Faculty and Academic Staff Responsibilities, Faculty and Academic Staff Privileges, Policy Statements
Calendars, Committee Structure
Faculty Handbook, Academic Staff Constitution, Academic Staff Bylaws
Wisconsin Administrative Codes
Article IV: Recommendations Concerning Renewal of Probationary Appointments
Section 1: Notification of Review for Renewal
The department chair shall assure that each probationary faculty member is notified in writing of the date of his or her department review at least twenty calendar days prior to the date of that review. At the same time, the department review body shall invite other department members, and any other colleagues identified by the faculty member to be reviewed, to present information on his or her behalf. The department chair shall notify the department of impending reviews at higher levels as per URSTPC guidelines for that year.
Section 2: Recommendation Concerning Renewal
Department review bodies shall decide annually to renew or not renew the appointment of faculty members on probationary appointments. Beginning in the probationary faculty member's second year, if the faculty member is recommended by the department review body for reappointment, the tenured faculty of the discipline shall review the file annually to discuss the person's prospects for tenure and prepare a written statement that will be placed in the individual's file. If the tenured faculty have any concerns regarding the probationary faculty member's prospects for tenure, they should be addressed in this written statement. A copy of this statement shall be given directly to the individual. In addition, in situations where the department's position allocation is reduced after the DRB has made an affirmative recommendation, the department shall have the opportunity to reconsider its earlier recommendation in light of the reduction. The decision to renew will be forwarded to the college RST committee for further consideration. The recommendation to renew a faculty member's probationary contract may contain a further recommendation that the renewal take the form of a terminal contract (provided that the contract period does not extend beyond the maximum probationary period). The decision not to renew will be made known to the affected faculty member in writing within twenty calendar days, and the faculty member shall be informed of the recon-sideration and appeal procedures outlined in Faculty Bylaws, Part III, Article VIII, below.
Section 3: Recommendation Concerning Renewal of Department Chairs
When the department chair is a probationary faculty member, he or she will not submit a recommendation for renewal concerning him- or herself. All the provisions of Sections 1 and 2 above will be followed, except that the college dean will also submit an evaluation and recommendation concerning the department chair to the college RST committee.
Section 4: Recommendations Concerning the Renewal of Academic Administrators
- When "renewal" means renewal of probationary faculty appointment, all recommendations concerning such shall originate with the department wherein each holds rank, and shall be based on academic achievement.
- When "renewal" means continuation of administrative appointment, such as provost or college dean, the University RST Policy Commission shall solicit faculty contributions and shall forward them to the chancellor for consideration.
Section 5: Procedure
Recommendations concerning the renewal of each probationary faculty member shall be sent by the department review body to the college RST committee and to the faculty member. The rules and procedures to be followed by the college RST committee are set forth in the Faculty Bylaws, Part II, Article V, Section 3. Recommendations of the college RST committee shall be forwarded to the Provost.
Section 6: Appeals
Any adverse decision concerning renewal may be reconsidered and/or appealed according to the following:
- If the adverse decision concerning renewal originates with the department review body, the aggrieved faculty member shall, at his or her request, be granted a reconsideration according to the provisions of the Faculty Bylaws, Part III, Article VIII, Section 2. If, after the reconsideration deliberations, the department review body reaffirms its adverse judgment, the aggrieved faculty member may then initiate the formal appeal procedure outlined in the Faculty Bylaws, Part III, Article VIII, Section 3.
- If an adverse recommendation concerning renewal originates with the college RST committee the aggrieved faculty member shall, at his or her request, be granted all the rights of reconsideration and appeal set forth in the Faculty Bylaws, Part III, Article VIII.