In normal merit cases in which a faculty member has not produced enough work to deserve serious consideration for a merit but has work in progress that will likely be accepted for publication within a year (and is of the quality necessary to be given serious consideration for a merit), a faculty member may ask the Dean to request a one-year deferral in submitting the file. Faculty members should take careful note of the fact that they will have to undergo a review the following year. Only in extraordinary circumstances are faculty members granted additional extensions beyond the initial one-year delay. The deadline to submit a request for a deferral is the second Friday in October.
In normal merit cases in which a faculty member has not produced enough work to deserve serious consideration for a merit (perhaps because he/she has been on leave for one or two years), a faculty member may request that the department submit a "no-change" file. In this case, the faculty member will not be scheduled for another review for a period of two, three, or four years (in accordance with their normal review cycle). However, the faculty member may ask the department to submit a review file any time during this three-year period if the faculty member so desires.
The Committee on Academic Personnel (CAP) discourages faculty members from submitting their review files a year early (resulting in an "off-cycle" acceleration). CAP has had frequent discussions of the issue of "off-cycle" accelerations, with the resulting consensus that it is particularly difficult to judge what is sufficient for a one-year acceleration. CAP also remains concerned that accelerated advancement based on one good year might be mitigated by reduced productivity in the following year or two. Unless there are extraordinary reasons for pursuing a one-year acceleration (e.g., a retention case), candidates are not encouraged to submit their review files a year early.