University of Pittsburgh logo
  1. Faculty
  2. Teaching
  3. Interpretations

Interpretations

The following interpretations are not part of the resolution adopted by the faculty, but they may be taken as statements of current practice:

Interpretations provided to the faculty by the special committee that drafted the above resolution, during the debate at the FAS meeting of October 28, 1976.

  1. The proposal does not preclude the submission by a Chairperson of his or her own recommendation, along with that of the tenured faculty, in matters of reappointment, promotion, or conferral of tenure.

  2. In the report by a Chairperson to a faculty member about the results of the third-year review within the department, the Chairperson should convey as much detail as possible subject to the maintenance of confidentiality of individual views.

  3. A Review Committee is not precluded from inviting persons in addition to the Chairperson to appear before it.

  4. The Dean and the Associate Deans are not precluded from adding items to a faculty member's dossier.

  5. A Review Committee is not precluded from requesting additional material to supplement the record given to it.

  6. Appointment of an Instructor to a terminal one-year appointment or to a terminal second year is not precluded. Termination of an Instructor at the end of a third year is not precluded so long as notification is given prior to the beginning of the third year.

Additional interpretation of Dean J. L. Rosenberg, first appearing in Volume 9, #1, 1977 Gazette.

If the Dean has sought the advice of a Review Committee when a department recommends a first appointment, without tenure, at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor, the Dean need not consult a Review Committee again if tenure is recommended within one year of the initial appointment.

Interpretation of the last paragraph of E.2.c, made by the Tenure Council on December 17, 1980.

  1. The Dean's written statement of reasons shall include the summary of such material presented up to the time of the Dean's decision.

The Chairperson of the Appeals Panel shall supply the summary of new materials presented subsequent to the Dean's decision, in written form. The aggrieved party shall have the right to present evidence in response to that material.

Interpretation of D.1.b, made by FASC on March 25, 1982.

For purposes of selecting Tenure Council members for Review Committees to advise the Dean on proposed promotions to the rank of full Professor, both regularly designated members of the Tenure Council as well as alternates may be considered as members of the Tenure Council pool so long as they hold the rank of full Professor.

Interpretation of C.6.a. and D.1.a, made by FASC on March 25, 1983.

When the members of the Selection Committee are elected by the Tenure Council for a given year, one alternate should also be elected for each division. In the discussion by the Selection Committee leading to the selection of a Review Committee for a person in whose Departmental consideration a Selection Committee member has previously participated, that Selection Committee member should be replaced by an alternate from the same division.