Professors trying to gain tenure now has the option of demanding their case be heard by the faculty Tenure and Promotions Committee.
The previous guidelines allowed the committee to postpone its vote on applications in order for the candidate to collect stronger supporting evidence.
The change gives a candidate, whose application has been tabled, two weeks to veto the committee's decision and force the committee to examine his or her case.
The proposal was approved unanimously at last week's faculty meeting.
"In the past if we voted to table, our decision was not subject to review," economics professor George Norman, the chair of the committee, said. "It was felt that the candidate should have the right to demand a decision."
Professors come up for tenure in their sixth year at the University. If the application is not approved by the committee, the candidate is given a grace year to look for a job at another school, after which the professor must leave.
Tabling was only allowed for cases being considered ahead of schedule or for promotion from associate to full professor. "The committee can't table a case that comes up when it has to," Norman said.
Physics professor Roger Tobin, another member of the committee, said the change was a response to professors' suggestions.
"A few faculty had expressed concern, although there has never been a problem, that there was not review and that no one but the committee had any say," he said. "If a candidate wanted a decision, the candidate should have the right to do that."
Norman said the committee accepted the faculty's advice despite being content with the previous guidelines. "It is useful to have [tabling] in certain circumstances [where] this really might influence the committee's decision," he said. "The Tenure and Promotions Committee felt that it should have the right to table without review."
"We are committed to faculty and feel that we should respect the faculty's wishes," Norman said.
Political science professor Elizabeth Remick, who was granted tenure last year, said the changes are part of a broader effort to redefine the tenure procedure. "The other issue with the changes is the idea of raising the standards for getting tenure," she said.
"I think that is what a lot of faculty are uncertain about. Anytime there is a new administration and there is some uncertainty about what the administration will do, but I think the administration is working to clarify these standards," Remick said.
Remick said, "life is very uncertain for untenured faculty. The stakes are very high, and it is a very stressful and difficult time." She said that "student evaluations matter a great deal even in deciding if a junior professor gets to keep their job."
The procedural changes have yet to be tested, Remick said. "It's hard to comment on the changes because a lot of the faculty are unclear about what they are."
