The following general principles guide the work of the Luddy School Promotion and Tenure Committee.   The guidelines were developed 09.2023 by the AY 22-23 P&T committee and guided their work.

• COIs: if a member has a conflict of interest with a candidate, the member should recuse themselves from voting on the candidate’s case.   The member should restrict their participation in the discussion to representing factual matters. That is, avoid expressing opinions.  The committee trusts that a member will make a determination of whether they have a COI and do so in good faith.  COIs exist in co-authorship, joint projects, and could be seen to exist in shared belonging to the same department.   
• Case handling: each case will have a primary and secondary committee member assigned. The primary will be responsible for presenting the case. The primary will briefly summarize the case, hitting on important aspects.  Slide decks are not necessary.   Following the faculty vote, the primary and secondary will expeditiously draft the committee report in consultation with the chair.  The report will be raised at a subsequent meeting for feedback by the committee as a whole.   
  • As primary and secondary are responsible for drafting the committee’s report, assignments for the roles will be carried out by the chair with the chair’s perception of possible COIs in mind. IU VPFAA has given discretion to schools to set level of involvement of department-related members in cases involving that department.  The chair will avoid giving department related members the role of primary in a department related case.
• Criteria for assessment: In tenure cases, the department and school follow single school-wide criteria except for ILS which has department criteria.  Clinical and research scientist have single school-wide criteria as do teaching professors.
• Efficiency: In order to make the committee’s work as efficient as possible.  
  • The committee strives to complete the discussion of cases (esp. uncontested vote cases) in one hour and vote at the end of that hour
  • Committee members trust their colleagues in cases where lower-level vote is unanimous:  Cases where the lower level votes are unanimous in favor should receive less discussion especially in cases where the criteria for evaluation are identical (aka, both school and department use same criteria.)