Guidelines for College Personnel
General Guidelines for College Personnel in Preparation of Review Materials for Promotion and/or Tenure
The materials supporting the review of faculty and academic professionals are to be submitted to the Office of the Executive Vice President and University Provost in as PDF documents on an unprotected CD-ROM. If you have questions, please call Cecilia Hook (965-4083).
Promotion and/or Tenure for Faculty
Materials submitted should include:
[Note: Included is a listing of file names to use when labeling the files on the CDs to allow consistency throughout the review.]
1. The Request for Academic Personnel Action form provided by the Office of the Executive Vice President and University Provost is also available online at http://provost.asu.edu/forms along with any additional forms used by the college. The Table of Contents for the materials in candidate’s submission should include a listing of the four publication titles or titles of the other documentation of scholarly or creative endeavors. (Please label your file as Lastname_F_1_apa-toc.pdf)
2. A current curriculum vita presenting such information as research publications, artistic achievements, service, grants, papers presented, etc. Refereed and non-refereed publications should be distinguished. Joint authors of articles should be listed in the order in which they appear, and the nature of one’s role in research projects and other joint efforts should be clearly described. (Please label your file as Lastname_F_2_vitae.pdf)
3. A statement of not more than four pages written by the candidate to put past work into perspective and to outline future goals. The statement should help reviewers see relationships among the individual’s teaching, research, and service and how these activities have built the foundation for continued professional growth. (Please label your file as Lastname_F_3_statement.pdf)
4. Review materials for teaching effectiveness that will be required to be submitted from the unit to the higher levels of review include: (Please label your file as Lastname_F_4_teach-eval.pdf)
a. A summary table of courses taught, the number of students in each, and a summary of student evaluations including scale, mean, and standard deviation;
b. A statement of teaching philosophy and any professional development activities undertaken in relation to teaching and instruction;
c. Instructional materials as specified by the unit, including two products that reflect the quality of teaching and instruction
Please note that in spring 2004, ACD 506-06: “Evaluation for Tenure and Promotion” was changed so that departments are now required to provide evidence of the quality of teaching and instruction assessed through multiple indictors, including at least the following: a summary of student evaluations collected and reported in accord with university and unit procedures, and a peer of supervisory review of instructional materials (such as syllabi, assignments, and Web-based courses). The evaluation of instructional materials must take into account relevant factors such as student learning, the currency of the course, and the contribution of the course to the unit’s curriculum, pedagogy, and the scholarship of instruction. It may involve peer observation of teaching.
5. Internal evaluation letters and committee recommendations (omitting identification of external reviewers). (Please label your file as Lastname_F_5_internal-ltrs.pdf)
a. Department Personnel Committee evaluation of performance in relation to unit/department criteria.
b. Chair’s/Director’s independent recommendation.
c. College Personnel Committee evaluation and recommendation.
d. Dean’s independent evaluation and recommendation.
Internal letters should explicitly address the following:
a. analysis of the candidate’s teaching effectiveness;
b. detailed evaluation of the candidate’s scholarly/creative activities including assessment of the quality and impact of the work;
c. evaluation of the volume of scholarly activity and expected future contributions;
d. unit/departmental expectations and disciplinary culture regarding individual and joint authorship of publications, grant activities and the norms regarding order of authorship in the field;
e. clear specifications of the candidate’s contributions to collaborative projects (including external funding);
f. comparative analysis of the candidate’s standing in the field, relative to national peers; and
g. if the committee vote is not unanimous, explicitly state the minority view in a separate section of the letter.
It is extremely important that at each level of review a substantive evaluation of the case is provided and questions arising at earlier levels of review are directly addressed. Please DO NOT repeat case details that have already been described in earlier letters. Rather, in subsequent letters, evaluate the case, correct misstatements, substantiate or challenge claims, and provide additional perspectives and information.
Please also be scrupulous about providing evidence and documentation for important assertions about the case. For example, if the candidate has received an important award provide information about the meaning of that award in the discipline; if the candidate is publishing in extremely good journals, please identify the top journals in the field and provide some evidence of their quality, etc.
6. External Evaluations. (Please label your file as Lastname_F_6_external-ltrs.pdf)
a. The unit head must consult with the dean in determining his/her list of possible external reviewers.
b. In preparing the final list of ten external reviewers, half should be from the candidate’s list of suggested reviewers and half from the chair/dean’s list of suggested reviewers. Include identifying information about the reviewers only on the grid/form provided by the Office of the Executive Vice President and University Provost. See also the enclosed Academic Senate guidelines for soliciting outside letters. REMINDER: Please provide detailed information about each reviewer’s qualifications, stature in the field, and familiarity with the candidate’s scholarship and/or creative activities. Be sure to anticipate the potential questions from evaluators within ASU who are not in the candidate’s discipline/research area. Providing such detailed background information is particularly important if the general guidelines for selecting reviewers are not followed. Please indicate if reviewers are from unit or university peers or aspirational peers on the grid. If reviewers are not from peer/aspirational peer institutions or are not full professors, explain why they were selected.
c. A copy of the letter used to request the reviews must be included. (See templates at http://provost.asu.edu/promotion_tenure) All (original) letters requested should be listed and all received must be included in the submission packet. If a requested letter has not been received, please make a note on the grid. Unit chairs/directors should feel free to contact potential reviewers prior to the formal solicitation to identify those potential reviewers most likely to respond. Additional reviewers may be contacted in an attempt to ensure 10 responses.
d. Current letters from reviewers in the candidate’s field of expertise. These evaluations are external to ASU. If possible, unit chairs/directors and deans should explicate any troublesome or confusing statement made by an outside reviewer. (Please label your file as Lastname_F_6_external-ltrs.pdf)
7. External Reviewer Curriculum Vitae. Please follow the grid order when compiling the vitae into one file. (Please label your file as Lastname_F_7_ext-rev-vitae.pdf)
8. A copy of four publications or other material reflecting the scholarly or creative endeavors of the candidate. A portfolio documenting creative activity may be submitted as one of the four pieces of evidence. If local units have looked at a greater quantity of material, the candidate should be consulted about selecting the four publications. (Please label your file as Lastname_F_8_pubs.pdf) All other publication materials may be included in supplemental materials. (Please label your file as Lastname_F_11_supp-mats.pdf)
9. A current copy of the unit/department approved promotion and tenure review process criteria. (Please label your file as Lastname_F_9_dept-criteria.pdf)
10. A current copy of the college approved promotion and tenure review process criteria. (Please label your file as Lastname_F_10_coll-criteria.pdf)
11. Optional: Supplemental Materials may include materials providing evidence of instructional effectiveness for up to two (2) courses, e.g. syllabi, copies of major tests and assignments, reading lists, websites, CDs, etc., additional publications, individual student evaluations or comments. (Please label your file as Lastname_F_11_supp-mats.pdf)
The dean should provide a cover list of the names of all faculty in the college going through the review process, listed by department, who are being considered for promotion and/or tenure this cycle.
Be sure that all information received after the file has left the unit/department is forwarded on through each review level to the Vice President for Academic Personnel to be added as an Appendix to the candidate’s file. A brief statement should be written at each review level stating whether or not the new material would change their earlier recommendation in any way. Also, please notify the Vice President for Academic Personnel that additional materials are on their way to be added to the candidate’s case file.