appointment_reappointment by cuiliqing



CON PPM   (Number to be Assigned)                             
POLICY             Appointment, Reappointment, and Evaluation Process and Criteria for Auxiliary Faculty and 
                   Instructional Personnel  
Approved:    CC:  03/23/09 
Last Revised:  03/09/09 
The purpose of this document is to define the process of appointment, reappointment, or non‐reappointment of 
faculty members holding clinical, adjunct, research, and visiting appointments (hereafter referred to collectively 
as auxiliary faculty) as well as associate instructors, teaching fellows, and other faculty of record (instructional 
Further clarification through the University of Utah Policies and Procedures Manual can be obtained in the 
following sections for auxiliary faculty: 5‐001, Definitions; 2‐004, University Regulations; 6‐001, University 
Regulations; 6‐302, Appointments; 6‐303, Retention, Promotion and Tenure. 
I.  Use of Categories of Auxiliary Faculty Ranks 
The criteria for auxiliary ranks and their use conform to University regulations. All auxiliary ranks are without 
significance for the achieving and holding of tenure. In all categories of auxiliary faculty, the potential ranks 
include instructor, assistant professor, associate professor, and professor with the appropriate prefatory word, 
i.e. Clinical, Research, Adjunct, included in the title, different from those of tenure‐track faculty.  Auxiliary ranks 
accommodate both salaried and "volunteer" faculty.   
A. Privileges and Responsibilities.  Faculty holding auxiliary ranks have the rights of faculty members except they 
shall not have the right to vote on matters related to appointment, retention, promotion and tenure of tenure‐
track faculty. As approved by College Council in Fall 2007, auxiliary faculty (> .75 FTE) may vote on appointments 
and reappointments of other auxiliary faculty. Auxiliary faculty may serve on elected or appointed committees 
as determined by College Council.  
B. Research Appointment. The research appointment is reserved for those whose primary professional efforts 
are in research, e.g. those individuals whose efforts are devoted to one or more research projects or 
extramurally funded training projects. 
C. Clinical Appointment. The clinical appointment is reserved for those whose major contribution is a substantial 
regular contribution to the clinical teaching program and/or faculty practice.  Responsibilities of clinical faculty 
may include clinical and/or classroom teaching.  The clinical appointment is appropriate for those on dual 
appointments with clinical agencies, since clinical excellence is characteristic of the dual appointment person.   
D. Adjunct Appointment. The adjunct appointment is reserved for those whose contribution is didactic or clinical  
teaching, but 1) who are on a voluntary or term‐limited part‐time status (e.g., to teach a course for a semester); 
2) whose major appointment is in another academic department of the University, but who make a substantial 
regular contribution to the academic activities of the College; or 3) those whose primary employment is with an 
affiliated clinical agency although they may be assigned or contracted to teach.   The adjunct faculty member is 
in a broad associative role in relationship to salaried tenure‐track and auxiliary faculty and is not limited in 
responsibility to clinical teaching or supervision of students.  Adjunct faculty are expected to meet requirements 
of scholarship, particularly at the professorial ranks. 

                                                                                                CON PPM Auxiliary Faculty
                                                                                                                  1 of 18

E. Visiting Scholar is an honorary title formally conferred by the president upon persons who normally have an 
academic appointment at another institution or an equivalent appointment elsewhere and who wish to spend at 
least one or more semesters on our campus. 
II.   Faculty Appointments and Reappointments in the College of Nursing 
All appointments are reviewed and approved by the Faculty Appointments Advisory Committee. This committee 
consists of all tenure‐track faculty and all auxiliary faculty > or = .75 FTE.  Specific voting eligibility may be 
restricted by type of appointment or rank as specified in this policy and the policy governing tenure‐track 
A. Research Appointments 
Eligibility.  Individuals who participate in the University's academic program, but whose primary professional 
efforts are devoted to one or more research projects, or extramurally funded training projects. 
Appointment.  The candidate is considered by the Faculty Appointments Advisory Committee under the criteria 
which apply to appointment to the corresponding tenure‐track faculty rank. 
Advancement Within the Research Ranks.  The candidate is considered by the faculty committee under the rules 
which apply to promotion in the corresponding tenure‐track faculty ranks, except that advancement within the 
research ranks is based primarily on excellence in performance in research. 
Reappointment.  All research appointments end automatically each June 30 (unless stipulated by a multi‐year 
contract), and such individuals may be reappointed. All research faculty are reviewed annually by their Division 
Chair who makes a recommendation regarding reappointment which is then subject to a vote by the Faculty 
Appointments Advisory Committee. In the case of multi‐year contracts, reappointment occurs in the Spring 
preceding contract expiration.   A formal evaluation review occurs at regular intervals following initial 
appointment.  Processes governing these formal reviews are detailed in Section IV.  
  B. Clinical Appointments 
  Eligibility. Individuals whose primary activity with the faculty is a substantial regular contribution to the clinical 
  teaching program and/or faculty practice. 
    Appointment.  The candidate is considered by the Faculty Appointments Advisory Committee under the criteria 
    which apply to appointment to the corresponding clinical faculty rank. 
    Advancement Within the Clinical Ranks.  The candidate is considered by the Faculty Appointments Advisory 
    Committee under the rules which apply to promotion in the corresponding clinical faculty ranks. 
  All clinical appointments end automatically each June 30 (unless stipulated by a multi‐year contract), and such 
  individuals may be reappointed.  All clinical faculty are reviewed annually by their Division Chair who makes a 
  recommendation regarding reappointment which is then subject to a vote by the Faculty Appointments 
  Advisory Committee. In the case of multi‐year contracts, reappointment occurs in the spring preceding contract 

                                                                                                  CON PPM Auxiliary Faculty
                                                                                                                    2 of 18

  expiration.   A formal evaluation review occurs at regular intervals following initial appointment.  Processes 
  governing these formal reviews are detailed in Section IV.  
C. Adjunct Appointments 
Eligibility.  The adjunct appointment is reserved for those whose contribution is didactic or clinical  teaching, but 
1) who are on a voluntary or term‐limited part‐time status (e.g., to teach a course for a semester); 2) whose 
major appointment is in another academic department of the University, but who make a substantial regular 
contribution to the academic activities of the College; or 3) those whose primary employment is with an 
affiliated clinical agency although they may be assigned or contracted to teach..    
Appointment.  The candidate is considered by the Faculty Appointments Advisory Committee under the criteria 
which apply to the corresponding clinical, research, or tenure‐track faculty rank. 
Advancement within the Adjunct Ranks.  The candidate is considered by the Faculty Appointments Advisory 
Committee under the criteria that apply to promotion in the corresponding clinical, research, or tenure‐track 
ranks, except the advancement within the adjunct ranks is based primarily on excellence in teaching.  There 
should be a sense of equivalency between the criteria for clinical, research, tenure‐track and adjunct faculty, 
particularly in classroom or clinical teaching or in the area of the individual's major contribution.  Scholarship is 
an essential qualification of the adjunct faculty member at a higher rank.  
Reappointment.  All adjunct appointments end automatically each June 30 (unless stipulated by a multi‐year 
contract), and such individuals may be reappointed. All adjunct faculty are reviewed annually by their Sponsor 
who makes a recommendation regarding reappointment which is then subject to a vote by the Faculty 
Appointments Advisory Committee. In the case of multi‐year contracts, reappointment occurs in the Spring 
preceding contract expiration.     
D. Visiting Scholar  
Eligibility: Visiting Scholar is an honorary title formally conferred by the president upon persons who normally 
have an academic appointment at another institution or an equivalent appointment elsewhere and who wish to 
spend at least one or more semesters on our campus. The visiting scholar designation is not a contractual 
relationship, and therefore should not be used for postdoctoral fellows, for visiting professors who have 
teaching responsibilities, or for persons employed for a short period for the purpose of performing services for 
the university in return for an agreed compensation. Where compensation is contemplated, a clinical or 
research appointment or consulting contract, as may be appropriate, should be used. 
Appointment: The candidate submits an application and CV and goals for the visit which are made available to 
the faculty. The Faculty Appointments Advisory Committee must approve the appointment by a majority vote. 
Recommendations must carry the endorsement of the Dean and are submitted to the dean of the graduate 
school who, in turn, submits them to the president. 
III.   Appointment and Reappointment Process of Compensated Auxiliary Faculty  
A. Initial Appointment.  A complete dossier of transcripts, curriculum vita, letters of recommendation, and other 
related information, submitted by the prospective candidate, as well as feedback from faculty who have 
interviewed the candidate is reviewed by the corresponding Associate Dean or Executive Director of Faculty 
Practice who recommends an appointment to the Dean.  The completed credential file is made available for 

                                                                                                CON PPM Auxiliary Faculty
                                                                                                                  3 of 18

review to the faculty at least 1 week prior to voting and may be presented to the faculty by the Dean in a 
regularly scheduled College of Nursing Faculty Appointments Advisory Committee meeting.  A quorum of 2/3 of 
voting eligible members is required.  An e‐vote may be used as specified in University policy; 2/3 of eligible 
voters must vote.  For appointments of auxiliary faculty (including reappointments), a single vote shall be taken, 
encompassing both the specific auxiliary category (clinical, research ,visiting, or adjunct, and the specific rank 
(instructor, assistant professor, associate professor, or professor) of the position being considered, and all voting 
members of the committee shall vote (including all regular faculty regardless of their rank, and any auxiliary 
faculty added to the voting membership of the committee pursuant to Section II of this policy.   
Recommendations for Appointments are submitted through the Office of the Dean to the Vice President for 
Health Sciences and through the University channels to the Board of Trustees.  Minutes of the discussion and 
vote are included in the file.   
B. Reappointment.  Following the annual performance review or a formal review, the Division Chair will provide 
a recommendation regarding reappointment to the Dean. In the case of multi‐year contracts, reappointment 
occurs in the Spring preceding contract expiration.  The Dean will facilitate an e‐vote by the Faculty 
Appointments Advisory Committee on each auxiliary faculty under consideration. All tenure‐track and auxiliary 
faculty members (>.75 FTE) may vote. Requests for advancement (reappointment at a higher rank) will be 
presented and discussed at a meeting of the Faculty Appointments Advisory Committee. All tenure‐track and 
auxiliary faculty (.75 FTE or greater) of equal or higher rank than that proposed for the candidate are the voting 
members. All voting occurs by secret ballot.   
The Division Chair will submit a written summary of the annual performance evaluation to the faculty file. The 
recommendations from a formal review will also be added to the faculty file.  The Dean will forward information 
concerning reappointment to the Vice President for Health Sciences and through the University channels to the 
Board of Trustees. This reappointment is yearly unless otherwise stipulated by a multiple‐year contract. If a 
multiple year contract is offered, it may only be offered after a formal review.   
IV. Policies and Procedures for Retention Review (Formal 5th Year Review) of Compensated Auxiliary Faculty 
A. Introduction:  This document provides guidelines for the regularly scheduled formal review of compensated 
auxiliary faculty.  Review of adjunct faculty is discussed in Section VI. The intent of formally reviewing faculty is 
to provide a basis for recommendations regarding reappointment or non‐reappointment and to facilitate faculty 
development.  An action plan will be developed to address concerns identified in a review.   
B. Time Frame:  Formal review of compensated auxiliary faculty will be conducted every five years unless there 
is a request from the appropriate Division Chair or an Associate Dean to hold a special review.  Compensated 
auxiliary faculty may also elect to be reviewed during years their review is not routinely scheduled.  The reviews 
will occur during Spring Semester. The first year of appointment is considered a trial year, with reappointment 
contingent on faculty performance.  
C. Review Body:  All compensated auxiliary faculty being formally reviewed during any given year are reviewed 
by a single, rank‐appropriate Review Team appointed by the respective Division Chairs.  The Review Team is 
comprised of three (3) auxiliary and two (2) tenure‐track faculty who are located within the division of the 
faculty undergoing review.  Rank‐appropriate faculty from outside the division of the faculty under review may 
be utilized if adequate numbers of faculty within the faculty’s division are not available.  Review Team members 
must be employed with a 0.75 or greater FTE during the semester of review and must hold rank that is equal to 
or higher than the faculty being reviewed.  The Review Team will select one of their members to chair the 
committee. More than one Review Team may be appointed if needed.  

                                                                                               CON PPM Auxiliary Faculty
                                                                                                                 4 of 18

    D. Review Process: The formal review is a thorough examination and documentation of the candidate's 
    competence and performance with respect to criteria for his/her rank.  Documentation for each criterion is 
    essential to substantiate comments, recommendations, or suggestions for reappointment or non‐
    reappointment, as well as for career development.  The information considered in a formal review includes 
    documentation provided by the candidate and documentation requested on behalf of the candidate.   
    It is the candidate’s responsibility to provide adequate documentation in relation to criteria. The documentation 
    required is dependent upon the candidate’s College assignment.  Early in the semester prior to review, each 
    faculty member scheduled for review receives written communication notifying them to make an appointment 
    to meet with his/her Division Chair (or, in the case of faculty who are primarily in a practice position, with 
    his/her immediate College practice supervisor) to determine the activities and documentation necessary for file 
    preparation.  Following the meeting with the Division Chair or practice supervisor, the Chair/supervisor will 
    forward a list of documentation required for the particular candidate to the Dean’s Office staff, who will develop 
    a detailed timeline for submission of documentation. 
    The documentation each candidate is required to submit is an updated academic vita and a written self‐
    evaluation of how criteria have been met.  Other materials that may be requested relevant to the faculty’s 
    particular assignment, in addition to required documentation, are listed below.  As well as consultation with 
    Division Chairs, practice supervisors, or other individuals is appropriate when preparing review files.  Inadequate 
    or lack of required documentation may result in non‐reappointment and termination of contract. 
    D.1 Required documentation to be provided by all candidates:    
            An updated academic vita 
            A written self‐evaluation of how the criteria have been met 
    D.2 Other documentation provided by the candidate (as directed by Division Chair):   
    The following additional materials shall be submitted for review depending on the nature of the candidate’s 
    appointment and assigned responsibilities.  Specific documentation to submit for the review is determined in 
    consultation with the Division Chair or practice supervisor. 
            Evidence of teaching effectiveness: 
                    1. Formal peer evaluation of teaching (see current Peer Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness 
                    2. University Course and Instructor Evaluation Reports, with student comments, for the years 
                       prior to review [required of faculty who have a 20% or greater teaching assignment] 
                    3. Additional evaluative documents that reflect faculty teaching ability 
              Copies of traditional scholarly works―such as peer‐reviewed publications, abstracts, and grant 
                              applications with summary statements 

                                                                                                  CON PPM Auxiliary Faculty
                                                                                                                    5 of 18

        Copies of scholarly products such as non‐refereed publications, working documents, and materials 
                        prepared in conjunction with clinical service or scholarly teaching materials 

        Documentation of professional, public or University service, if not adequately represented on the 
                     faculty’s vita 

          Transcripts of university or other credits accrued during the period of review 
D.3 Documentation requested on behalf of the candidate 
       Two (2) letters of recommendation from within the College (required), and two (2) from persons 
          outside the College (optional).  In some cases, as determined by the Division Chair and depending upon 
          the specific assignment of the faculty under review, reviewers internal to the University may be 
          substituted for internal College faculty. 
               o Letters are solicited from appropriate reviewers by the Division Chair.  The choice of reviewers 
                   is made in consideration of nominations made by the faculty under review, but are 
                   independently made by the Division Chair.  The decision to solicit external letters on behalf of 
                   faculty is made in consideration of the faculty’s work responsibilities and the potential benefit 
                   of the evaluation to the review committee.  The guiding principle for obtaining persons to 
                   provide letters of recommendation should be their expertise and knowledge to make informed 
                   judgments about the quality of the faculty’s work in one or more areas, according to the 
                   appropriate College of Nursing criteria.  In accordance with University policy, a candidate elects 
                   to waive or retain the right to review internal and external letters of recommendation and this 
                   signed statement shall be included in the credential file.  Notice of the candidate’s decision to 
                   waive or retain his/her rights to read letters is included in the request for letters of 
                   recommendation.   Documentation considered by internal or external reviewers consists of the 
                   updated vita and self‐evaluation.  
       Student Advisory Committee (SAC) summary recommendations [required of faculty who have a 20% or 
          greater teaching assignment]. The documentation considered by the appropriate Student Advisory 
          Committee consists of the faculty member's vita and the numerical rankings for classroom and clinical 
          evaluations.  The numerical rankings for course evaluations will be made available to the SAC if the 
          faculty member is the sole instructor.  Student comments for specific courses may be added to this file 
          at the faculty member's discretion.  The Course and Instructor Evaluation reports (student evaluations) 
          to be considered by the SAC will be for courses taught since the last formal review.  
E. Review Team Responsibilities:  The formal review is conducted after the posted file closure date.  Upon 
consideration of the documentation, the Review Team will address whether the candidate has met the criteria, 
shall prepare a written evaluation of the candidate's performance, and make recommendation(s) regarding the 
individual's performance in the rank.  Criteria‐based recommendations may also be made regarding change in 
rank, appointment category, and area of responsibility. 
Faculty candidates may be invited by the Review Team Chairperson to attend a portion of the review meeting to 
clarify information in addition to the contents of the credential file.  
The Review Team shall communicate the recommendation(s) pertaining to reappointment or non‐
reappointment to the respective Division Chair.  The Division Chair provides a letter of revaluation in 
consideration of documentation in the candidate’s file and forwards the recommendations to the Dean.   

                                                                                                CON PPM Auxiliary Faculty
                                                                                                                  6 of 18

If the recommendation is to reappoint, the Dean provides a summary of recommendations to the Senior Vice 
President for Health Sciences office and forwards the final recommendations (Review Team and Division Chair) 
to the faculty member.  The faculty’s name is then added to the annual general reappointment roster for faculty 
vote.  If the recommendation is non‐reappointment, the Dean and the Division Chair will develop a plan to 
communicate to the faculty.   
V.  Policies and Procedures for Promotion (Reappointment at a Higher Rank) of Auxiliary Faculty 
A. Formal Review Procedure:   (Spring Semester) The formal review for promotion (considered a new 
appointment with advancement because auxiliary faculty are reappointed annually) is a thorough examination 
and documentation of the candidate's academic competence and performance.  The faculty should consult the 
Division Chair before applying for advancement.  Each candidate will be given a notice of the Spring 
Appointments Advisory Committee meeting date and will have an opportunity to submit information which he 
or she wishes the committee to consider prior to closing of the file. 
B. Review Body:  All compensated auxiliary faculty being reviewed for promotion during any given year are 
reviewed by a single, rank‐appropriate Review Team appointed by the respective Division Chairs.  The Review 
Team is comprised of three (3) auxiliary and two (2) tenure‐track faculty who are located within the division of 
the faculty undergoing review.  Rank‐appropriate faculty from outside the division of the faculty under review 
may be utilized if adequate numbers of faculty within the faculty’s division are not available.  Review Team 
members must be employed with a 0.75 or greater FTE during the semester of review and must hold rank that is 
equal to or higher than that proposed for the candidate.  The Review Team will select one of their members to 
chair the committee. More than one Review Team may be appointed if needed.  
C. Review Process: The promotion review is a thorough examination and documentation of the candidate's 
competence and performance with respect to criteria for his/her proposed rank.  Documentation for each 
criterion is essential to substantiate comments, recommendations, or suggestions for promotion or non‐
promotion, as well as for career development.  The information considered in a promotion review includes 
documentation provided by the candidate and documentation requested on behalf of the candidate.   
It is the candidate’s responsibility to provide adequate documentation in relation to criteria. The documentation 
required is dependent upon the candidate’s College assignment.  Early in the semester prior to review, each 
faculty member scheduled for review receives written communication notifying them to make an appointment 
to meet with his/her Division Chair (or, in the case of faculty who are primarily in a practice position, with 
his/her immediate College practice supervisor) to determine the activities and documentation necessary for file 
preparation.  Following the meeting with the Division Chair or practice supervisor, the Chair/supervisor will 
forward a list of documentation required for the particular candidate to the Dean’s Office staff, who will develop 
a detailed timeline for submission of documentation. 
The documentation each candidate is required to submit is listed below.  Consultation with Division Chairs, 
practice supervisors, or other individuals may be requested as appropriate when preparing review files.  
Inadequate or lack of required documentation may result in non‐reappointment and termination of contract. 
The completed credential file is made available for review to the faculty at least 1 week prior to voting and  is 
presented to the Faculty Appointments Advisory Committee composed of  tenure‐track and auxiliary faculty (.75 
FTE or greater).   The chairperson of the Faculty Appointments Advisory Committee (Dean) is responsible for 
establishing the date of the review meeting and file closure date, convening and conducting the reviews, 

                                                                                             CON PPM Auxiliary Faculty
                                                                                                               7 of 18

preparing for written balloting, appointing tellers, and other procedural affairs.  A member of the review team 
will be responsible for presenting their recommendations at the Appointments Advisory Committee Meeting. 
The auxiliary faculty member identifies a person who will present a summary of his/her file for consideration.   
This person should mentor the auxiliary faculty in the preparation of his/her file.  The minutes of meetings, 
recommendations and vote results are processed through the Office of the Dean, Vice President for Health 
Sciences and through the University channels to the Board of Trustees.  
D. 1 Required documentation to be provided by all candidates:    
      An updated academic vita 
      A written self‐evaluation of how the criteria have been met 
      Transcripts of university or other credits accrued during the period of review 
      Copies of peer reviewed publications, abstracts, and approved applications with Summary Statements 
      Copies of other publications, working documents, and in‐progress works 
      Evidence of membership and participation in committees or organizations established for public service, 
         professional activities, nursing and/or health related programs, political programs, and projects for 
         improvement of the welfare of citizens, in order to document contributions to University, local, regional, 
         and national service. 
      Formal peer evaluation of teaching is required (see current Peer Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness 
      Other evidence of teaching, practice, or research effectiveness.  This evidence could include written 
         statements by peers and supervisors, evidence of special awards, and evidence of leadership and 
         participation in relevant policy‐making activities and professional organizations.  Documentation specific 
         to teaching effectiveness could include use of the Course and Instructor Evaluation reports, other 
         evaluative documents which reflect faculty teaching ability, syllabi, outlines, bibliographies, video 
         productions, evaluation of course outlines and teaching methods by experts in the content area, 
         formative and summative program evaluations, and written student evaluations.  Examples of 
         documentation of practice effectiveness include unsolicited letters from clients, formal patient 
         satisfaction surveys, reports of quality improvement and quality assessment projects, authored practice 
         policies and guidelines, and evaluation of patient care, practice organization, and innovation by experts 
         in the practice area. In addition to traditional documentation of the quantity and quality of research and 
         generation of knowledge; evidence of research effectiveness (i.e., presentations, publications, grants) 
         evidence of participation on science teams including, sections of applications authored and statements 
         from research collaborators on contributions to team science.  
E. 2 Documentation requested on behalf of the candidate 
           Two (2) letters of recommendation from within the College, and two (2) from outside the College.  
              The guiding principle for obtaining letters of recommendation should be for the candidate to 

                                                                                              CON PPM Auxiliary Faculty
                                                                                                                8 of 18

            carefully select people who have expertise and knowledge for making informed judgments about 
            the quality of his or her work in one or more areas, according to the appropriate College of Nursing 
            criteria.  The emphasis should be on professional qualifications and demonstrated performance of 
            responsibilities.  The letters should address specific criteria with concrete documentation.  A 
            candidate elects to waive or retain the right to review internal and external letters of evaluation and 
            this written statement shall be included in the credential file.  This statement is then included in the 
            request for letters of evaluation. Documentation considered by internal or external reviewers 
            consists of the updated vita and self‐evaluation.  
           Student Advisory Committee (SAC) summary recommendations [required of faculty who have a 20% 
            or greater teaching assignment]. The documentation considered by the appropriate Student 
            Advisory Committee consists of the faculty member's vita and the numerical rankings for classroom 
            and clinical evaluations.  The numerical rankings for course evaluations will be made available to the 
            SAC if the faculty member is the sole instructor.  Student comments for specific courses may be 
            added to this file at the faculty member's discretion.  The SETE file (student evaluations) to be 
            considered by the SAC will be for courses taught since the last formal review. 
F.Team Responsibilities:   The promotion review is conducted after the posted file closure date.  Upon 
consideration of the documentation, the Review Team will address whether the candidate has met the criteria 
for the proposed rank, shall prepare a written evaluation of the candidate's performance, and make 
recommendation(s) regarding the individual's performance in the rank.   
Faculty candidates may be invited by the Review Team Chairperson to attend a portion of the review meeting to 
clarify information in addition to the contents of the credential file.  A member of the review team will be 
responsible for presenting their recommendations at the Appointments Advisory Committee Meeting. 
The Review Team shall communicate the recommendation(s) pertaining to promotion to the respective Division 
 The Division Chair provides a letter of evaluation in consideration of documentation in the candidate’s file and 
forwards the recommendations to the Dean.   
V.  Appointment and Reappointment of Adjunct Faculty   
A. Initial Appointment:  An application, current curriculum vita, an identified sponsor, and other related 
information, submitted by the prospective candidate, as well as feedback from faculty who are familiar  with the 
candidate is reviewed by the corresponding Associate Dean or Executive Director for Faculty Practice who 
recommends an appointment to the Dean.  The completed credential file is made available for review to the 
faculty at least 1 week prior to the vote and may be presented to the faculty by the Dean in a regularly 
scheduled College of Nursing Faculty Appointments Advisory Committee meeting. A quorum of 2/3 of voting 
eligible members is required.  An e‐vote may be used as specified in University policy; 2/3 of eligible voters must 
vote.  Voting may consist of two parts. 1) All tenure‐track and auxiliary faculty (.75 FTE or greater) may vote on 
the appointment regardless of rank. This will include all appointments at the instructor rank. 2)  If it is proposed 
that the appointment be at a higher rank than instructor, all members of equal or higher rank than that 
proposed for the candidate may vote on rank. All voting occurs by secret ballot. The Dean will forward 
information concerning reappointment to the Vice President for Health Sciences and through the University 
channels to the Board of Trustees. This reappointment is yearly unless otherwise stipulated by a multiple‐year 
contract. If a multiple year contract is offered, it may only be offered after a formal review.   

                                                                                               CON PPM Auxiliary Faculty
                                                                                                                 9 of 18

B. Reappointment:   On an annual basis, each adjunct faculty member will be asked to apply for reappointment 
by submitting an updated CV. The faculty sponsor will review the CV and evaluate the faculty’s contribution 
during the last year. The sponsor will provide feedback to the faculty regarding any areas for improvement. The 
sponsor will submit the summary and recommendation regarding reappointment to the faculty file and the 
Dean’s office. The Dean will facilitate an e‐vote by the Faculty Appointments Advisory Committee on each 
auxiliary faculty under consideration. All tenure‐track and auxiliary faculty (.75 FTE or greater) may vote on the 
reappointment regardless of rank.  Requests for advancement (reappointment at a higher rank) will be 
presented and discussed at a meeting of the Faculty Appointments Advisory Committee. Additional supporting 
material may be requested as describe in Section IV. All tenure‐track and auxiliary faculty (.75 FTE or greater) of 
equal or higher rank than that proposed for the candidate are the voting members. All voting occurs by secret 
The Dean will forward information concerning reappointment to the Vice President for Health Sciences and 
through the University channels to the Board of Trustees. 
VI.   Review Process for Instructional Personnel  
Instructional personnel, as defined by University policy, are not appointed as faculty but recommended for hire 
by an Associate Dean. For continuing personnel, an annual performance review is conducted by the Associate 
Dean, Executive Director of Faculty Practice or appropriate Division Chair. An action plan is developed to address 
any areas for improvement.   
June 4, 1984; May 6, 1985; June 3, 1988; April 20, 1992; November 5, 1992; May 28, 1993; May 10, 1996; April 
22, 1998 (to change the academic term to semester); May 8 and June 5, 1998; October 2, 1998 (to change the 
composition/number of faculty on the formal review team); January 29, 1999 to incorporate peer teaching 
evaluation; May 10, 2005;  Draft ‐ Thursday, February 27, 2008; March 23, 2009 

                                                                                              CON PPM Auxiliary Faculty
                                                                                                               10 of 18
                                                   UNIVERSITY OF UTAH COLLEGE OF NURSING: POLICIES & PROCEDURES MANUAL
                                                            Criteria for Appointment, Retention, and Promotion
                                                                              Clinical Faculty

Preamble - The role expectation of clinical faculty is to serve as clinical experts in practice, teaching, and scholarship. The primary emphasis of clinical faculty assignments is on
teaching and scholarly practice. The assignments of individual faculty will vary with some faculty having greater responsibility for practice and some having greater responsibility
for teaching , and this will be considered in the evaluation process. All faculty maintain ongoing responsibility for scholarship.

Statement on Scholarship in Faculty Roles (Approved by College Council March 13, 1998)

Scholarship is an integral part of the faculty role in a university setting. The hallmark of the university is the creation of new knowledge, reorganization of existing knowledge in
ways that make it accessible and applicable to practice, and the dissemination of these scholarly products. Dissemination takes many forms, but goes beyond the individual
practice setting, classroom, or institution of higher learning. The creator of the product provides the rationale for the form of dissemination selected. The dissemination path
should be appropriate to the goal of the work and accessible to the audience identified. Publication in the popular press, products to support clinical practice disseminated by
industry, books, journal articles, electronic publication, computer software, and video productions are examples of potential avenues of dissemination. The purpose of this
statement is to describe the links between scholarship and the various roles of faculty, emphasizing scholarly products that arise from all aspects of the work of faculty.


Scholarly practice is a basic expectation of nurses prepared at the baccalaureate level with increasing levels of sophistication at higher levels of preparation. At the master's level,
the expectations focus on providing the leadership for research utilization activities, effective collaboration to generate knowledge, identification and conceptualization of practice
problems, creativity in examining and applying existing knowledge to clinical problems, and practice innovation. The scholarly practitioner exhibits breadth and depth of
knowledge, uses a knowledge base to guide practice that is current and reflects awareness of controversies and trends, articulates the basis for practice decisions for individuals and
groups of clients, and critically evaluates the utility of new information for the individual practice setting. Expert clinical consultation, practice guidelines, information for lay
audiences, case studies, descriptions of the approach used to manage health problems in specific populations or situations, innovations in practice, and knowledge-based
recommendations for practice are examples of the scholarly products that emerge from the practice role.

Research and Creative Work

Faculty engage in the discovery of knowledge, integration and interpretation of existing knowledge and creative approaches to the expression of ideas and application of
knowledge. The scope of research and creative work encompasses the traditional activities of generating new knowledge and ideas relevant to the goals of the discipline as well as
clinical scholarship and the scholarship of teaching.

Clinical scholarship is built on a foundation of scholarly practice. The clinical scholar disseminates the products of scholarly practice and may be involved in the generation of
knowledge. Clinical scholars are recognized for their expertise in a particular area of practice, knowledge of the care of a specific clinical population, contributions to the design of
new protocols for care when advances in knowledge provide the opportunity for practice innovations, and ability to synthesize complex bodies of knowledge into products that can
be used by academicians, clinicians, clients, and/or public audiences. Clinical scholarship is a broad concept which is operationalized across roles such as advanced practice nurse,
clinical nurse specialist, administrator, educator, researcher, and consultant. Clinical research is part of the scholarly activity of the profession, but the scope of research and other
forms of scholarship goes beyond that specified in standard definitions of clinical research.1 The products of research, whether clinical or basic, provide access to the results of
individual studies, explore key methodologic and conceptual issues which are relevant to others pursuing similar lines of inquiry, or address innovations in methods and processes
expected to facilitate the work of others.

                                                                                                                                 FAO.CON PPM/ CON PPM Current/ CON PPM ARPT AUX (pd)
                                                                                                                               CON PPM Retention Review Process and Criteria for Clinical Faculty
                                                                                                                                                                                         11 of 18
                                                          UNIVERSITY OF UTAH COLLEGE OF NURSING: POLICIES & PROCEDURES MANUAL
The scholarship of teaching focuses on generating and integrating knowledge about teaching/learning processes relevant to education in the discipline. Development,
dissemination, and evaluation of alternative approaches to teaching, examination of curricular outcomes, and studies to define the role of specific types of practitioners in relation
to curriculum are examples of research in education. Reports describing innovations in teaching, critical analysis of trends and issues in relation to curriculum and programming,
and presentation of controversies and strategies relevant to teaching and learning in the discipline are also examples of the scholarship of teaching.


Scholarly teaching is based in knowledge of the discipline, principles of learning, teaching strategies and learning styles. The responsibility of the teacher is consistent with that of
the practitioner in integrating existing knowledge into a coherent whole and selecting appropriate methods for teaching. Effective teaching is based upon breadth and depth of
knowledge on a topic; the knowledge base for transmitting knowledge to learners is current and reflects awareness of controversies and trends; and the teacher serves as a role
model for learners in the creative integration, articulation, and utilization of knowledge. Teachers articulate the strengths, weaknesses, and questions generated by the state of the
knowledge on a given topic, base their teaching in critical application of knowledge about the process of learning, and generate excitement among students about the commitment
to lifelong learning. The act of teaching produces insights about gaps in knowledge, conclusions about relationships among the work produced in a variety of disciplines, and
suggests future directions for scholarship. Unique approaches to integrating and presenting knowledge, innovations in teaching methods and their outcomes, critiques of existing
knowledge, and knowledge-based recommendations for practice are examples of the scholarly products of the teaching role that are disseminated beyond the classroom.


Service to the university, profession, and community is built on scholarship. For example, involvement in health advocacy or health issue organizations provides opportunities for
accessing study populations, identifying researchable problems, recognizing opportunities for innovation in practice, and establishing new collaborative relationships for scholarly
activity. The knowledge base of the scholar is a key contributor to formulating health policy, the design and evaluation of health care services, peer review of proposals and
manuscripts, and mentorship of professional colleagues. Service within the university provides opportunities to develop interdisciplinary collaboration, identify links in knowledge
across disciplines, and implement models of interdisciplinary education. While not all faculty service in the college or university will have an explicit link to scholarly activity, it
is reasonable to expect that some service activities will have such a link.

  One NIH policy defines clinical research as focused on the prevention, diagnosis, development, and treatment of disease in humans (NIH Instruction and Information Memorandum OER 90-5 12/11/90). For the purpose of
this paper, clinical research includes all health-related studies of humans, including the description of life processes and transitions.

Prepared and approved by Administrative Council for implementation September 1997; approved by College Council March 13, 1998 as Preamble

                                                                                                                                                    FAO.CON PPM/ CON PPM Current/ CON PPM ARPT AUX (pd)
                                                                                                                                                  CON PPM Retention Review Process and Criteria for Clinical Faculty
                                                                                                                                                                                                            12 of 18
                                                         UNIVERSITY OF UTAH COLLEGE OF NURSING: POLICIES & PROCEDURES MANUAL

Summary of Criteria - The following is a summary of criteria for entry into each of the four ranks. Each successive rank presupposes the qualifications of the previous ranks in the
College of Nursing. For self-evaluation, planning, preparation of files for review, and for the conduct of formal reviews, the longer, detailed statement of the criteria should be

  Clinical Instructor                                                                                             Clinical Assistant Professor
  Master's degree in nursing *                                                                                    Record as an effective teacher/practitioner
  At least two years of clinical experience                                                                       Involvement in scientific or scholarly work relevant to clinical practice
  Clinical experience appropriate for the teaching/practice assignment                                            Involvement in professional, community, and institutional organizations
  Beginning competence in teaching
  Membership in professional organization

  Clinical Associate Professor                                                                                    Clinical Professor
  Sustained record of effective teaching                                                                          National or international recognition for sustained clinical contributions
  Sustained record of scientific and scholarly work relevant to clinical              practice                     to nursing and health care
  Provides leadership in professional, community, and institutional                                               Sustained contributions to professional, community, and institutional
   organizations                                                                                                   organizations
                                                                                                                  Doctoral degree in nursing or related field
                                                                                                                  Sustained record of scholarship

*Individuals without a master's degree in nursing may be appointed based on the following exceptions: (1) faculty associated with the University Center on Aging; (2) faculty who
hold academic rank in other departments on the University campus: (3) nurses who were “grandfathered” with clinical faculty rank who did not have an MS degree; (4) exceptions
based upon consideration of individual cases, for example individuals in new nursing specialty areas where graduate programs are in the process of producing master's prepared
clinicians. Proposed exceptions must be discussed with appropriate coordinators/program directors and program faculty prior to consideration by the faculty appointments

Approved by College Council December 13, 1996; March 16, 1999; editorial revision May13, 2005 reflect new name of Center on Aging

                                                                                                                                             FAO.CON PPM/ CON PPM Current/ CON PPM ARPT AUX (pd)
                                                                                                                                           CON PPM Retention Review Process and Criteria for Clinical Faculty
                                                                                                                                                                                                     13 of 18
                                                 UNIVERSITY OF UTAH COLLEGE OF NURSING: POLICIES & PROCEDURES MANUAL

                                                                         CLINICAL – TEACHING CRITERIA

         INSTRUCTOR                                  ASSISTANT PROFESSOR                           ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR                           PROFESSOR
1. Demonstrates that the knowledge base          1. Participates in course planning,             1. Expert ability in teaching and/or            1. Sustains expert ability in
used to support course implementation is         implementation, and evaluations.                managing clinical experiences of students.      teaching and/or managing clinical
based on appropriate research findings,                                                                                                          experiences of students.
reflects evidence of critical thinking in the
evaluation of existing knowledge, and
addresses both content and methods
appropriate to the course.

2. Maintains clinical competency in area(s)      2. Faculty with primary responsibility for      2. Demonstrates expertise in complex            2. Sustains expertise in complex
of specialization and teaching responsibility.   clinical teaching are involved in clinical      clinical knowledge and skills.                  clinical knowledge and skills.
                                                 practice, consultation, problem solving or
                                                 role modeling, and present evidence of
                                                 updating and expanding clinical

3. Effectively serves as a role model and        3. Faculty with a primary responsibility for    3. Continues to provide mentorship to less
preceptor for students.                          practice maintain faculty practice.             experienced clinical faculty in either a
                                                                                                 teaching or practice role.

4. Effectively evaluates and documents           4. Provides mentorship as a clinical            4. May provide leadership in course
student's performance.                           teacher to less-experienced clinical faculty.   planning and implementation.

5. Serves on student supervisory committees      5. Assists students in understanding the
as appropriate.                                  application of theory and research to

6. Faculty with primary responsibility for
clinical teaching effectively assume
responsibility for academic advisement and
academic counseling.

                                                                                                                            FAO.CON PPM/ CON PPM Current/ CON PPM ARPT AUX (pd)
                                                                                                                          CON PPM Retention Review Process and Criteria for Clinical Faculty
                                                                                                                                                                                    14 of 18
                                                 UNIVERSITY OF UTAH COLLEGE OF NURSING: POLICIES & PROCEDURES MANUAL
                                                                   CLINICAL - PRACTICE CRITERIA
These criteria apply only if a faculty member is engaged in clinical practice as a part of their role assignment. (This statement approved by College Council October 29, 1999)

 INSTRUCTOR                                   ASSISTANT PROFESSOR                          ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR                            PROFESSOR
 1. Demonstrates that the knowledge base      1. Provides leadership in the conduct of     1. Provides leadership to effect change in     1. Participates in policy development of
 used to support practice is based on         clinical practice.                           clinical practice.                             standards of practice at regional and
 appropriate research findings, reflects                                                                                                  national levels.
 evidence of critical thinking in the
 evaluation of existing knowledge, and
 addresses both content and methods
 appropriate to the practice setting.

 2. Demonstrates competence in area(s)        2. Develops clinical standards of            2. Participates in policy development at       2. Recognized nationally and
 of specialization.                           practice.                                    state levels to improve nursing practice.      internationally in clinical specialty.

 3. Presents in staff in-services/clinical    3. Collaborates, develops, implements,       3. Excellence in practice is indicated
 conferences.                                 and evaluates innovative approaches to       through consultation and/or service on
                                              patient care.                                expert panels.

 4. Promotes team function in clinical        4. Provides leadership for the
 practice.                                    implementation of quality assurance

 5. Contributes to achievement of goals       5. Identifies emerging trends in health
 of the clinical practice.                    care that require change in approaches to
                                              care delivery.

 6. Promotes the concept of                   6. Develops guidelines for patient care.
 interdisciplinary care.

 7. Participates in ongoing continuous
 quality improvement program which
 builds on patient outcomes.

 8. Develops, contributes to, or maintains
 guidelines for patient care.

 9. Provides direct care to patients based
 on established guidelines.

 10. Practices within a client-centered
   philosophy of care.
                                                                                                                             FAO.CON PPM/ CON PPM Current/ CON PPM ARPT AUX (pd)
                                                                                                                           CON PPM Retention Review Process and Criteria for Clinical Faculty
                                                                                                                                                                                     15 of 18
                                             UNIVERSITY OF UTAH COLLEGE OF NURSING: POLICIES & PROCEDURES MANUAL
                                                               CLINICAL - SCHOLARSHIP CRITERIA

INSTRUCTOR                                ASSISTANT PROFESSOR                         ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR                         PROFESSOR
Demonstrates that the knowledge base      Identifies needs for new knowledge;         Publishes or presents papers which help      Achieves national recognition as an
used to support scholarship is based on   nurtures others in clinical scholarship;    solve clinical problems or otherwise         expert in one or more areas of scholarly
appropriate research findings, reflects   links research to practice.                 advances the profession.                     activities (i.e., by awards, honors,
evidence of critical thinking in the                                                                                               consultations, keynote addresses).
evaluation of existing knowledge,
including identification of gaps in
knowledge needed for practice, and
addresses both the substantive area and
relevant methodologic concerns.

Attends workshops or other educational    Produces family- and public-oriented                                                     Recognized for quality of scholarship,
activities.                               materials of an educational nature.                                                      e.g., positive evaluation of research
                                                                                                                                   proposals and completed projects,
                                                                                                                                   awards, prizes, and research funding;
                                                                                                                                   citations and invitations to present
                                                                                                                                   papers, honors, editorships.

Develops a beginning record of            Documents sustained involvement in a
scholarship.                              circumscribed area of scholarship.

Integrates research findings so that      Presents in workshops or other
clinical practice is a research-based     educational activities.

Works with health departments and other   Contributes to the advancement of the
community agencies to identify and        profession within the clinical specialty,
respond to health care needs.             e.g., presentations at workshops, and
                                          conferences, presentations of papers and
                                          reports, development of standards of
                                          practice or participation in clinical
                                          research activities.

                                                                                                                      FAO.CON PPM/ CON PPM Current/ CON PPM ARPT AUX (pd)
                                                                                                                    CON PPM Retention Review Process and Criteria for Clinical Faculty
                                                                                                                                                                              16 of 18
                                              UNIVERSITY OF UTAH COLLEGE OF NURSING: POLICIES & PROCEDURES MANUAL

                                                              CLINICAL FACULTY - SERVICE CRITERIA

     Faculty who are in leadership roles should be evaluated according to the criteria by rank, taking into consideration the following variables: (1) percent of time
     allocated for leadership, and (2) extent and complexity of leadership responsibilities.

                                 INSTRUCTOR                          ASSISTANT PROFESSOR                  ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR                            PROFESSOR
Professional                      Is a member of appropriate         Actively involved in professional    Participates in activities which               Participates in policy
                                  professional organizations.        organizations.                       influence professional nursing                 developments for the
                                                                                                          practice and education.                        clinical specialty regionally
                                                                                                                                                         and nationally.

College Citizenry                 Promotes an optimum                Provides leadership in promoting     Provides leadership at                         Recognized for sustained
                                  learning environment for           success of the clinical practice.    interdisciplinary practice meetings.           leadership in the College or
                                  students.                                                                                                              University.
                                                                     Represents the practice at
                                  Participates on committees         interdisciplinary practice
                                  and task forces that promote       meetings.
                                  the success of the clinical

                                  Part-time clinical faculty
                                  participate in clinical teaching
                                  teams and program area work.
                                  Full-time clinical faculty
                                  participate as contributing
                                  members of practice or
                                  college committees or task

Community                         Provides visibility for the        Participates in local or regional    Provides leadership in regional or             Recognized for sustained
                                  College of Nursing through         programs designed to impact          national programs designed to address          leadership at regional or
                                  participation in community-        health.                              health problems.                               national levels.
                                  based, health-related

                                                                                                                  FAO.CON PPM/ CON PPM Current/ CON PPM ARPT AUX (pd)
                                                                                                                CON PPM Retention Review Process and Criteria for Clinical Faculty
                                                                                                                                                                          17 of 18
                                               UNIVERSITY OF UTAH COLLEGE OF NURSING: POLICIES & PROCEDURES MANUAL

                                                       CLINICAL FACULTY - SERVICE CRITERIA (continued)

                              INSTRUCTOR                     ASSISTANT PROFESSOR                     ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR                           PROFESSOR
Leadership                   Models leadership behavior      Provides leadership for planning        Demonstrates vision for creating the          Leadership work influences
                             in the faculty role.            and coordinating the activities of      future for the designated unit and the        audiences beyond the
                                                             faculty for a designated unit.          College of Nursing.                           University, such as
                                                                                                                                                   community, state, national,
                                                             Documents effectiveness of              Demonstrates leadership by assuming           and international
                                                             achieving unit organizational goals.    responsibility for and implementing           organizations.
                                                                                                     change processes.
                                                                                                     Collaborates within the College of            accomplishments are
                                                                                                     Nursing and/or with the Health                recognized for their
                                                                                                     Sciences Center and/or other                  excellence by internal and
                                                                                                     University units to identify and              external colleagues.
                                                                                                     achieve common goals and missions.

                                                                                                     Documents effectiveness of achieving
                                                                                                     unit or organizational goals.

    June 7, 1982; June 4, 1984; February 11, 1985; June 3, 1988; December 13, 1996; March 26, 1999

                                                                                                                        FAO.CON PPM/ CON PPM Current/ CON PPM ARPT AUX (pd)
                                                                                                                      CON PPM Retention Review Process and Criteria for Clinical Faculty
                                                                                                                                                                                18 of 18

To top