Appendix 2: College of Arts & Letters Memorandum of Understanding and Annual Review Guidelines for Tenure-system Faculty with Joint Appointments and Assignments in CAL

Click to access PDF

The character of scholarly contributions and the appropriate benchmarks for evaluating them (e.g., average grant size, typical rate of publication) vary among disciplines. Hence, for each CAL faculty member with a joint appointment or assignment, regardless of percentage of appointment or assignment, at the time of hiring (or the time of appointment or assignment), each relevant CAL unit involved in the position will establish specific criteria for third-year renewal of appointment, promotion to associate professor with tenure, and promotion to professor.

These various criteria will be communicated to the individuals through a memorandum of understanding (MoU); please refer to the CAL MoU checklist. (Forthcoming; currently under development.) The MoU is used to further supplement and clarify agreements outlined in an offer letter, and the recommended process is that:

  • At the start of each joint appointment or assignment, an MoU will be written in consultation with the majority unit Chair, the minority unit Chair or Director, and the faculty member with the joint appointment or assignment.

  • The MoU will be written in conjunction with the drafting of the faculty member’s initial work plan so that the work plan is in line with the MoU.

  • The annual review process is critical in establishing evaluation of and documentation of progress toward reappointment, promotion and tenure. For the purposes of annual review:

    • One dossier will be submitted by the jointly appointed or assigned faculty member.

    • The majority unit Chair will make the current work plan of the faculty member available to the minority unit Chair or Director.

    • The minority unit Chair or Director will write a yearly letter of evaluation of the faculty member and submit it for review by the majority unit annual review committee.

    • In addition, for those faculty members who are pre-tenure, the minority unit Chair or Director will meet with the majority unit Chair on a yearly basis to discuss the contents of this letter and the faculty member’s current work plan prior to the chair’s yearly meeting with the faculty member and writing of the annual review letter.
  • The MoU will be reviewed in the second, third, and fifth years by a joint meeting of these three parties. Each time the MoU review will also include a review of the work plan to ensure that the work plan is in line with the MoU. If changes are necessary, then the existing MoU will be revised with the approval of all three parties.

    • The meeting in the second year is designed to ensure that the initial MoU continues to clearly outline the nature and expectations of the joint appointment and provide an opportunity for any needed adjustments to be made.

    • The review in the third year is designed to review the accomplishments of the faculty member as they prepare to go through the reappointment process and look forward to any needed adjustments that would be contingent upon a successful reappointment.

    • The review in the fifth year has a similar function to the third year as the faculty prepares to go through the RPT process.

  • After tenure, the MoU will be reviewed every third year by a joint meeting of the three parties.

  • The faculty member also has the ability to call a face-to-face meeting with the majority appointment unit chair and the minority unit chair or director should they feel the need to discuss the MoU at any time.