Administrative Reappointments occur after each of the first two years and following the Critical Review, coinciding with the annual review process at the school level.

Critical Review, occurring in the third year (irrespective of credit granted), evaluates intellectual contributions and progress toward tenure. Possible outcomes for Critical Review include:

• Reappointment
• Reappointment with Counseling
• Reappointment with Warning
• Non-reappointment

Tenure and Promotion package evaluation occurs in the fifth or sixth year – the eligible and required years, respectively. The School, after consultation with the Office of the Dean, notifies eligible and required tenure candidates. The College hosts a workshop each spring semester for faculty interested in learning more about the tenure process. Additionally, an Associate Dean can meet with candidates individually to discuss the process.

• If a candidate is hired with credit toward tenure, it must be stated in the offer letter. Check with the Office of the Dean to discuss how the timeline can change given credit toward tenure.
• The probationary period for tenure may be extended for certain events (see policy and request form) which can extend the above timeline.
• The tenure probation extension is frequently appended to a request for Active Service: Modified Duties (ASMD). ASMD allows for faculty to construct a modified workload and flexible schedule for a short time due to family commitments.
• There is an automatic tenure extension in place due to COVID for many tenure-track faculty (but not all). Please see the updated guidance to check your eligibility. If you have questions on how this might affect your timeline, please reach out to Erin Nagle in the Office of the Dean.

Promotion to Full Professor is generally considered in the sixth year year (or more) in rank as Associate Professor. The year in which the promotion is being sought is counted as time in rank, which means that the application for promotion to Full Professor is typically submitted five years after the promotion to associate professor.

• Strong cases for promotion to full professor can be considered early, such as in the fifth year in rank.
• Early cases for promotion should be discussed with the School Chair and Associate Dean for Faculty Development.

Periodic Peer Review (PPR) occurs every 3 or 5 years, as determined by a committee of faculty peers. A recommendation for a 5-year review demonstrates satisfactory performance or better. A recommendation for a 3-year review demonstrates performance that is less than satisfactory.

• The PPR cycle will commence in the fifth year after the granting of tenure. PPR will not take place the same year as an Institute review, as when going up for promotion to Full Professor.

Periodic Peer Review (PPR) occurs every 3 or 5 years, as determined by a committee of faculty peers. A recommendation for a 5-year review demonstrates satisfactory performance or better. A recommendation for a 3-year review demonstrates a performance that is less than satisfactory.

• The Periodic Peer Review cycle will commence in the fifth year after the granting of the rank Professor, and will continue on a 3- or 5-year cycle.
• Chairs do not undergo PPR while in service. Please see policy regarding Chair reviews.

The timing for submission of a tenure package for untenured Associate and Full professors should be determined in consultation with the School Chair. The School, in consultation with the Office of the Dean, notifies eligible and required tenure candidates. The Associate Dean for Faculty Development can meet with candidates individually to discuss the process.

• If a candidate is hired with credit toward tenure, it must be stated in the offer letter. Check with the Office of the Dean to discuss how the timeline can change given tenure credit.
• The probationary period for tenure may be extended for certain events (see policy and request form) which can extend the above timeline.
• The tenure probation extension is frequently appended to a request for Active Service: Modified Duties (ASMD). ASMD allows for faculty to construct a modified workload and flexible schedule for a short time due to family commitments.
• There is an automatic tenure extension in place due to COVID for many tenure-track faculty (but not all). Please see the updated guidance to check your eligibility. If you have questions on how this might affect your timeline, please reach out to Erin Nagle in the Office of the Dean.

Please see the faculty handbook or the Faculty Affairs guidance document for a detailed narrative on the process, but the basic tenets of the process are as follows:

• The Critical Review package is submitted to the school in the fall semester of a faculty member’s third year.
• Faculty employed starting after October 15 of the academic year will start their (Critical Review) timeline the following academic year. For clarification, please contact the Office of the Dean.
• There are four possible outcomes from the Critical Review: Reappointment, Reappointment with Counseling, Reappointment with Warning, or Non-reappointment.
  • Reappointment indicates the outcome is positive and the faculty member is on track for promotion and tenure.
  • Reappointment with counseling implies that academic performance, in most respects, is positive and appropriate, but that some mid-course corrections are needed prior to the tenure decision.
  • Reappointment with Warning requires that a Critical Review must take place again the following year to address and correct areas of deficiency.
  • Non-reappointment means the candidate should not expect a contract beyond the following academic year.

Contents of the Critical Review package for the candidate to prepare: 

• Biosketch – a summary of key information in the file that is no longer than 150 words and is written for the non-expert.  It should be in third person voice and begin with the name, rank, and school; degrees earned; and a history of time at Georgia Tech. Next, it should explain the research area and the importance of this research. Awards and other indicators of impact may also be included.
• Personal Narrative – a summary of major accomplishments at Georgia Tech with regard to teaching, research, creativity, and service.  This acts as the candidate’s voice in the dossier. The narrative should not merely summarize, but place the contributions in the context of the school, college, institute, and discipline using language that a non-expert can understand.  The narrative should be a minimum of 3 pages and a maximum of 5 pages, contain one-inch margins, and be single-spaced with at least 10-point font. 
• Curriculum Vitae – must be in the Institute standard format, along with a Table of Contents. CVs must be dated and pages must be numbered. Additionally, the font should be no less than 11 points and the margins no less than ¾ of an inch. Candidates should provide names of Ph.D. and postdoctoral mentors on their CV.
• Teaching Effectiveness – one file consisting of the CoS TEAM evaluation letter followed by the Course Instructor Opinion Survey (CIOS) Score table. This file is typically compiled by school administrators, but candidates are responsible for reviewing data for accuracy. The only CIOS score required in this table is “Is the instructor an effective teacher?”

Updates regarding papers accepted or published, grants awarded, and teaching accomplishments can be provided in an addendum. The candidate can submit up to two addenda to incorporate substantive changes to their CV after their dossier has been submitted.

Contents of the Critical Review package for the School to prepare:

School staff will generate the Course Instructor Opinion Survey (CIOS) data for all courses taught at Georgia Tech. The candidate should check the data for accuracy prior to submission of the package. Additionally, the College of Sciences TEAM committee will provide a report regarding the candidate’s teaching record at Georgia Tech.  The candidate is entitled to see this document before submission of the critical review package.   

• The eligible year for tenure is the fifth year on the tenure track.  The required year for tenure is the sixth year on the tenure track.  
• Faculty employed starting after October 15 of the academic year will start the tenure timeline the following academic year. For clarification, please contact the Office of the Dean.
• Any applicable years of credit toward tenure will be stated in the faculty member's offer letter.  
• A tenure-track faculty member may request the tenure probationary period be suspended for one year when that faculty member can document that he/she will lose time due to an experience that would be covered by family medical leave. Use this form to make the request to the Office of the Dean. A letter from the Chair indicating support or lack of support for the extension must accompany the request. There is often an activating event precipitating the extension of the tenure probationary period.  One such event is Active Service: Modified Duties. Georgia Tech recognizes that a faculty member may need to construct a modified workload and flexible schedule for a short time due to family commitments. These are circumstances that inhibit the manner of work assignments, but not the ability to undertake a full-time workload.
• There are two possible outcomes of the tenure process - candidate is granted tenure or is not granted tenure. If the candidate gets the latter result, he/she has not met the expectations for tenure at Georgia Tech. There is a second opportunity to be considered with the seventh academic year as the last opportunity for consideration. If the final decision is to not grant tenure, the faculty member's appointment at Georgia Tech will terminate at the end of that academic year.

Contents of the Promotion and Tenure package for the candidate to prepare include:

• Biosketch – a summary of key information in the file that is no longer than 150 words.  It should be in the third person voice and begin with the name, rank, and school; degrees earned; and a history of time at Georgia Tech. Next, it should explain the research area and the importance of this research. Awards and other indicators of impact may also be included.
• Personal Narrative – a summary of major accomplishments at Georgia Tech with regard to teaching, research, creativity, and service.  This acts as the candidate’s voice in the dossier. The narrative should not merely summarize, but place the contributions in the context of the school, college, institute, and discipline using language that a non-expert can understand.  The narrative should be a minimum of 3 pages and a maximum of 5 pages, contain one-inch margins, and be single-spaced with at least 10-point font. 
• Curriculum Vitae – must be in the Institute standard format, along with a Table of Contents. CVs must be dated and pages must be numbered. Additionally, the font should be no less than 11 points and the margins no less than ¾ of an inch. Candidates should provide names of Ph.D. and postdoctoral mentors on their CV so that these names are recognized by the School Chair and RPT Committee when seeking external reviewers.
• List of External Reviewers – The School will ask the candidate to provide a list of recommended external reviewers. These should be leaders in the field, generally people with whom the candidate has not deeply collaborated and who have not served as previous advisors. These reviewers should come from peer or better-than-peer programs, and mostly be from American universities. The candidate can also specify any potential reviewers who they would not want to review their work.
• Teaching Effectiveness – one file consisting of the CoS TEAM evaluation letter followed by the Course Instructor Opinion Survey (CIOS) Score table. This file is typically compiled by school administrators, but candidates are responsible for reviewing data for accuracy. The only CIOS score required in this table is “Is the instructor an effective teacher?”

Updates regarding papers accepted or published, grants awarded, and teaching accomplishments can be provided in an addendum. The candidate can submit up to two addenda to incorporate substantive changes to their CV after their dossier has been submitted.

Contents of the Promotion and Tenure package for the school to prepare include:

Within PROMOTE, the school will solicit letters from external reviewers evaluating the candidate’s scientific accomplishments. These external review letters should ideally contain an even mix of reviewers suggested by the candidate and by the school. These letters will not be seen by the candidate. 

School staff will generate the Course Instructor Opinion Survey (CIOS) data for all courses taught at Georgia Tech. The candidate should check the data for accuracy prior to submission of the package. Additionally, the College of Sciences TEAM committee will provide a report regarding the candidate’s teaching record at Georgia Tech.  The candidate is entitled to see this document before submission of the critical review package.    

• Promotion to Associate Professor and awarding of tenure can be applied for in the fifth (eligible) year. It must be applied for in the sixth (required) year on the tenure track. Typically, candidates submit their dossiers to their Schools by late spring or early summer preceding the academic year in which they will apply. Deliberations start in the fall of the year in which candidates are applying and are completed by the spring semester. Early cases must be thoroughly justified both in the letter from the School Chair and in the letter from the School RPT Committee Chair. 
• Promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor without tenure may be considered in exceptional cases. Strong justification by the Chair and the school RPT committee is necessary.
• Promotion to Full Professor  can generally be applied for in the sixth year of service as an associate professor. The candidate and the Chair and/or the Chair of the School RPT Committee should discuss the timing of consideration for promotion to full professor. The candidate may request consideration for promotion even in the absence of agreement by the Chair and/or the Chair of the School RPT Committee. In early spring semester, the Office of the Dean will provide school chairs with the names of those eligible associate professors who are approaching the end of their fifth year as associate professor or who have been in this rank for longer than five years. In exceptional cases, promotion to Full Professor may be considered earlier than indicated above, but such cases require strong justification by the Chair and the School RPT Committee.

Research is evaluated based on the impact of discovery on the field and beyond.

• The quality and quantity of publications and the quality of the journals or other sources in which the publications appeared. The extent to which the publications define a coherent, important field of endeavor identified with the faculty member. For publications with multiple authors, the contributions of the candidate must be made clear. 
• Citations or similar direct indications of the influence of publications (used primarily for promotion from Associate to Full given the time lags involved.)
• Evaluations by the external reviewers.
• Graduate and undergraduate research students as well as postdoctoral trainees mentored, and the impact of their research on their careers and disciplines.
• Grants awarded from national and international competitions at levels commensurate with the norms of the field. (Such grants often serve as a validation of research accomplishment, creativity, and longer-term sustainability.)
• Recognition of scientific accomplishments through honors, awards, editorships, appointments, patents, and other intellectual property.
• Invitations to speak at national and international meetings and symposia. In evaluating the promotion from Associate to Full Professor, international - not just national - recognition is important.

Creative and effective teaching is necessary for tenure and promotion. The personal narrative should include some description of the following types of teaching activities:

• Student recognition of teaching effectiveness through CIOS scores and other student feedback.
• TEAM Committee evaluation, the letter for which will be provided to the candidate in advance of the dossier being submitted.
• Examples of student success, following classroom instruction and mentoring in research. For example, advancement to graduate or other professional programs, career building, fellowships, and internships.
• Creation of new courses and other training opportunities for students.
• Implementation of novel technology or student-centered learning approaches in the classroom.
• Personal efforts to enhance teaching effectiveness, such as seeking feedback, advice, and mentoring from experts at organizations such as the Center for Teaching and Learning.
• Participation or leadership in developing new academic programs.
• Outreach of research activities to the broader community.

Evidence of service contributions to the profession, Georgia Tech, and the community (local, state, national, or global) can include the following activities:

• Service on Institute and School Committees.
• Service on professional review panels (e.g., funding agency review panels, national lab review panels, advisory boards, etc.).
• Membership and leadership in national societies or committees.
• Organizing and/or chairing sessions at scientific meetings.
• Reviewing journal articles and proposals.
• Promoting science, education, and research in the candidate’s community.