University of Minnesota
College of Liberal Arts
cla@umn.edu
Student Info: 612-625-2020


College of Liberal Arts

Joint Appointments
Tenured & Tenure-Track Faculty

Effective Fall 2009
Updated May 2011; July 2012


The University's Procedures for Reviewing Candidates for Tenure and/or Promotion: Tenure-Track and Tenured Faculty (effective February 1, 2012) require memoranda of understanding to be developed which specify how faculty holding joint (dual) appointments or doing interdisciplinary work are to be evaluated, both annually and at the time of the tenure and/or promotion decision, including which tenured faculty from units other than the appointing unit may participate in the discussion and votes.

In the College of Liberal Arts, it is the responsibility of the chair/director of the faculty member's tenure unit to communicate with the head(s) of the academic unit(s) where the joint appointment is held to ensure that the University's requirement of a memorandum of understanding is satisfied for faculty with joint (dual) appointments or doing interdisciplinary work, and that equitable work disctribution and assessment is achieved.

These guidelines aim to ensure fair and equitable distribution and assessment of effort across the faculty, and represent CLA's recommendations and best practices for allocating and assessing the work of faculty with joint appointments. The guidelines are provided to facilitate the development of the memoranda of understanding prescribed by section II.B. of the University's Procedures for Reviewing Candidates for Tenure and/or Promotion: Tenure-Track and Tenured Faculty.


Policies & Procedures

Policy Statement - Procedures for Reviewing Candidates for Tenure and/or Promotion: Tenure-Track and Tenured Faculty

Section II.B. Application of unit 7.12 statement to candidates with dual appointments or doing interdisciplinary work

For a candidate who has an appointment in more than one unit, within the first year of the dual appointment, a memorandum of understanding shall be developed by the unit head, the dean or chancellor, and the senior vice president for academic affairs and provost, in consultation with the candidate, that specifies how the candidate will be evaluated annually and at the time of the tenure and/or promotion decision, including which tenured faculty from units other than the appointing unit may participate in the discussion and votes. For a candidate whose work is clearly interdisciplinary but who does not have appointments in more than one unit, such a memorandum of understanding should be developed no later than the fourth year of the probationary period. In either case, the memorandum may be modified as appropriate, in consultation with the candidate.


Definitions

For the purpose of these guidelines, a “joint appointment in multiple units” refers to an appointment that involves distribution of a faculty member’s effort across more than one department, program, or center, including appointments made through interdisciplinary/cluster hires and internal faculty visitors. This definition of “unit” is quite broad and does not require the unit to possess a graduate program or a 7.12 document (i.e., be a tenure home).

Thus, a joint appointment may exist within the college (e.g., between CSCL and English; between Sociology and IGS; between Music and Theatre Arts and Dance; between Psychology and the Center for Cognitive Sciences; or among History, Religious Studies, and Asian American Studies) or, a joint appointment may exist among one or more units in CLA and one or more units outside CLA at the University of Minnesota (e.g., among Anthropology, GWSS, and the School of Public Health).


Allocation of Work

These guidelines should be read and followed in conjunction with (a) CLA’s Workload Principles and Guidelines for Regular (Tenured and Tenure-Track) Faculty Members; (b) if applicable, any arrangements about the allocation and/or assessment of work that are already specified in the appointment letter of the faculty member whose work is being reviewed; and (c) if applicable, any arrangements about the allocation and/or assessment of work that are specified via a formal joint-appointment agreement, shared teaching agreement, internal faculty visitor agreement, or other agreement.

In cases in which no formal joint appointment or other agreement exists, it is expected that the distribution of work across units has been approved by the department/school that is responsible for the faculty member’s annual merit reviews, promotion and tenure appraisals, and oversight of teaching and service responsibilities, in consultation with the associate dean for faculty of the college.

Scholarly Research and/or Creative Work

Faculty members holding joint appointments are expected to engage in scholarly research and/or other creative work as defined by Section 7.11 of the Regents Policy: Faculty Tenure, and as specified in applicable 7.12 departmental statements.

Teaching

Faculty members holding joint appointments are expected to divide their teaching proportionally among the units in which the joint appointment is held, contributing teaching effort to each unit to the extent of the appointment in the unit.

The college recognizes that curricular needs and teaching schedules may change significantly from one year to the next. Accordingly, a faculty member whose appointment is equally split between two units can be expected to carry one half of a normal course load in each unit, as determined over a three-year period. In other words, at the end of each three-year period, equity must be achieved.

In the case where the joint appointment is primarily administrative (e.g., leadership of a center), the teaching expectation may be reduced as described in the appointment letter.

Service

Faculty members holding joint appointments are expected to divide their unit-based service efforts proportionally among the units in which the joint appointment is held, contributing service effort to each unit to the extent of the appointment in the unit.

The college recognizes that service needs and assignments may change significantly from one year to the next. Accordingly, a faculty member whose appointment is equally split between two units can be expected to perform no more than 50% of the normal service load in either unit, as determined over a three-year period. In other words, at the end of each three-year period, equity must be achieved.


Annual Reviews of Faculty with Joint Appointments

The annual review and merit evaluation of a faculty member holding a joint appintment is to be conducted by the chair of the faculty member's tenure unit, in consultation with the chair(s) of any other unit(s) where the joint appointment is held.

The annual review and merit evaluation should be based on, and is expected to take into consideration, all of the faculty member’s scholarly research and/or other creative work, teaching, advising, and service efforts, in each of the academic units where the joint appointment is held, in order to recognize the faculty member's work and merit in its completeness.

In conducting the annual review and merit evaluation, the tenure unit is expected to abide by any agreements or other arrangements about the allocation and/or assessment of work that are already in place, e.g., appointment letter, joint-appointment agreement, shared teaching agreement, internal faculty visitor agreement, or other agreement.

If the faculty member is jointly appointed with a unit that is outside of CLA, the chair/director of the tenure unit should confer with the chair/director of the unit outside the college about the faculty member’s contributions to scholarly research or other creative work, teaching, and service and incorporate the available information in the faculty member’s annual review.

Scholarly Research and/or Creative Work

For faculty holding joint appointments, the annual review and merit evaluation should be based on, and is expected to take into consideration, all of the faculty member’s scholarly research and/or other creative work. regardless of how the faculty member’s “home” department has been defined.

Teaching

For faculty holding joint appointments, the annual review and merit evaluation should be based on, and is expected to take into consideration, all of a faculty member’s undergraduate and graduate teaching and advising, regardless of how the faculty member’s “home” department has been defined, or the units in which the teaching has taken place, or the units in which the advisees are enrolled.

Service

For faculty holding joint appointments, the annual review and merit evaluation should be based on, and is expected to take into consideration, all of a faculty member’s service contributions, regardless of how the faculty member’s “home” department has been defined or where the service contributions have been made.


Annual Appraisals of Probationary Faculty

The annual review of probationary faculty is the vehicle for providing feedback to probationary faculty on how well they are meeting the expectations of their academic units in the areas of scholarship/creative work, teaching, and service.In the case of a probationary faculty member with a joint appointment, the candidate's annual appraisal of research, teaching, and service should be prepared in consultation with the chairs of all the units where the appointment is held.

In addition, for probationary faculty holding joint appointments, the college recommends that a mentoring committee of senior faculty members be constituted with representation from each of the units where the appointment is held.This mentoring committee should meet as a group with the probationary faculty member at least once a year and give the faculty member clear direction about the committee’s collective expectations regarding (a) publications/creative work and teaching on which the tenure decision will be based; and (b) the ways in which the probationary faculty member’s service should be coordinated across the units. The key elements of this discussion should be made available to the tenured faculty of the academic unit (candidate’s tenure home) that annually reviews the progress of the probationary faculty member. The recommendations of the mentoring committee should be addressed in the written summary of the review that the head of the tenure home unit prepares and discusses with the candidate about the candidate’s progress toward tenure.

College of Liberal Arts Magazine