Promotion Review Process for Faculty


The information provided here is supplemental and specific to our division.  Always consult the promotion information available from University of Arizona Faculty Affairs.

University of Arizona Faculty Affairs offers detailed guidance on faculty promotion reviews, retention reviews, and dossier templates for promotion and tenure, continuing status and promotion, and career track promotion.  Be sure to use the correct and current dossier template as provided for the cycle which you are planning to submit.  Read the directions provided in the template carefully.  

On this website, you will find information and guidance specific to faculty in the College of Agriculture, Life and Environmental Sciences and in Cooperative Extension.  This includes deadlines specific to our division.  

Important CALES Deadlines for 2024-25 Review Cycle

BE ADVISED: The Office of the Vice President and Dean DOES NOT review dossiers before they are sent to outside evaluators or prior to being submitted for university-level review. It is the responsibility of all unit heads and the director of UA Cooperative Extension to ensure that all dossiers are complete and meet the latest university requirements. Mistakes caught early within the department can be amended; they cannot be corrected later in the process without initiating re-review at all levels. 

September 27, 2024 

Career Track dossiers (Professors of Practice, Research Professors, Lecturers, and Instructors) and 3-year or other probationary reviews with recommendation for non-renewal are to be reviewed by the unit committee, the unit head, and moved forward for college-level review in the Review, Promotion and Tenure (RPT) system.

October 25, 2024

P&T, CS&P and promotion only dossiers are to be reviewed by the unit committee, the unit head, and moved forward for college-level review in the Review, Promotion and Tenure (RPT) system.

October 25, 2024

All 3-year or other probationary reviews with recommendation for renewal are to be reviewed by the unit committee, the unit head, and moved forward for dean review in the Review, Promotion and Tenure (RPT) system.

Faculty should consult their unit head for important unit deadlines. 


Designing a Strong Dossier

This information is supplemental to the detail guidance on the Faculty Affairs website.  

  • Section 2. Summary of Candidate's Workload Assignment

    • The responsibilities of continuing-track faculty should be particularly well defined to ensure understanding by reviewers beyond the college level. Since the Division of Agriculture, Life and Veterinary Sciences, and Cooperative Extension is the only unit on campus that has Cooperative Extension, the nature of Extension appointments often is not clearly understood.
    • The Summary of Candidate's Workload Assignment is not to contain "non-evaluative" language. Outside evaluators must not be sent dossiers containing a Summary of Candidate's Workload Assignment that also evaluates or praises the candidate's contributions. This one-page form is filled out by unit heads to provide specifics on assigned duties. If you have any questions about whether the language in your dossier could be considered evaluative, please contact Juliana Teeters (Office of the Vice President and Dean) or (Extension Administration, 520-621-7205) before sending your dossier out for review.
    • It is required that an official job description be provided with every continuing track candidate's dossier
  • Section 3. Departmental and College Promotion and Tenure Guidelines/Department and College Criteria for Review - Guidelines

    • One-page abstracts of the appropriate college criteria specifically designed for the dossier are available online. If unit faculty voted to use college-level guidelines and criteria, the unit head should provide a statement in Section 3.
    • The full version of the CALES Guidelines and Criteria and the appendix with examples of activities may be sent to outside evaluators to provide greater detail but should be replaced with the abstract when the dossier is submitted to the college. College and university committees have access to the full version of the CALES Guidelines and Criteria.
  • Section 6. Teaching Portfolio

    • Continuing-track candidates who have responsibility for teaching one or more credit classes must complete this section.
    • CALES requires that Section 6 (including selected syllabi, etc.) be sent to outside evaluators.
    • Do not forward supporting instructional materials for college review. These items must be removed before submitting to the Office of the Vice President and Dean.
  • Section 10. Letters from External Evaluators and Collaborators

    • If you wish to make changes to the template letter to outside evaluators please seek the approval of Dr. Andrea Romero, Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs, directly.  A copy of the request and Dr. Romero's response MUST be sent to the Office of the Vice President and Dean.


Three-Year Review (Required) for Tenure- or Continuing-eligible Faculty

  • All three-year reviews will be submitted no later than October 25 for review by:
    • Vice president and dean
    • CALES P&T or P&CA committee (if necessary) - Career Track faculty are not required to do three-year reviews.
  • The formal three-year review for CALES faculty will follow the guidelines and instructions issued by the Office of the Provost for Retention Reviews. If it appears there will be a recommendation for non-retention following the three-year review, the dossier must be submitted to the Office of the Vice President and Dean by September 27 in order to meet the deadlines for full review at all levels as required by university policy.
  • If the results of the three-year review are satisfactory but warrant an interim review prior to the sixth year, the unit head and/or college committee may request that the Vice President and Dean require an additional formalized fourth- or fifth-year review.


Role of Extension and Service

  • Extension specialists and agents also have a specialized focus on applied research and outreach teaching activities directed to clientele in the state and region. Extension specialists often have a split appointment between Extension and research which is uncommon outside the College of Agriculture, Life and Environmental Sciences. The actual split of the formal appointment among teaching, research, and extension should be stated in the Summary of Candidate's Workload Assignment (Section 2). Extension candidates should emphasize the creative methods of technology transfer used for educational outreach and identify activities in relation to the crucial role Cooperative Extension plays in the overall university continuum of teaching, research, and service. As they develop programs, they should identify ways to measure change or assess results so they will be able to show the impact of their work in the continuing status review.
  • In an academic culture, it is easier for others to evaluate research than teaching and it is also easier to assess formal teaching than work in Extension. Extension specialists and agents should make a special effort to explain their activities, since many at the university level are still unfamiliar with the mission and responsibilities of Cooperative Extension.


Committees and Administrators 


  • Department/School/Cooperative Extension
  • College: Promotion & Tenure, Continuing Status & Promotion, and Professors of Practice
  • University


  • Department Head/School Director/County Extension Director
  • Vice President/Dean
  • Provost

The Role and Responsibilities of Review Committees and Reviewers

  • The makeup of the unit committee is specified in UHAP 3.3.02 (tenure) or UHAP 4A.3.02 (continuing status). Provided there are sufficient numbers of faculty to warrant such a committee, each department should have a Standing Advisory Committee for continuing status and another for tenure to advise the immediate administrative head before recommendations on reviews for continuing status, tenure, promotion, and non-renewal are forwarded to higher levels. One, mixed committee is allowable if all other requirements are met. Per UHAP, department committees must include at least three continuing status faculty to review continuing track candidates AND at least three tenured faculty to review tenure track candidates. Likewise, two additional POPs should be included when reviewing the POP candidates (please see CALES POP Guidelines).
  • Small units may need to add outside faculty to a P&T or CS&P committee to provide the relevant expertise or representation; all additions to committees from outside the unit must be approved by the Associate Dean for Faculty Advancement, Jean E. McLain.
  • The Cooperative Extension peer committee and county Extension director are also in a better position to assess Extension activities and publications than other committees or reviewers. Because the unit head letter is considered especially important in the evaluation process, the university recommends that new heads consult an experienced head for advice on preparing this letter.
  • Because applied research in CALES is not as easily understood as basic research by university academic committees, additional clarification by the unit head and dean can be very helpful.
  • See the Faculty Affairs website for more information on Review Committees.


The Promotion & Tenure Committee members

The Promotion & Continuing Appointment Committee members

The Professors of Practice Promotion Committee members 


Target Groups