Description of Process for Initial Appointments, Promotions, and Reappointments

Process for Reappointment at Rank or Appointment to a More Senior Non-Tenured Position for Professors in Practice, Senior Lecturers, Associate Professors in Practice, and Assistant Professors in Practice

Reappointments of professors in practice without tenure, senior lecturers, associate professors in practice, and assistant professors in practice to fixed terms do not require searches, but do require rigorous review by a reappointment committee with external letters, departmental review, Senior Faculty Council review, recommendation by the dean, and approval by the provost. A review for appointment of an assistant professor in practice to associate professor in practice and appointment of an associate professor in practice to professor in practice without tenure may be conducted if the dean and senior faculty of the department recommend the consideration of such an appointment. In such case, the appointment to the higher position requires rigorous review by a committee, appointed by the dean in consultation with the department chair, composed of senior members of the department, external letters, departmental review, review by the Senior Faculty Council, recommendation by the dean, and approval by the provost.

Assistant professors in practice and associate professors in practice may be but are not guaranteed a review to a higher position.

Review Committee

Reappointment reviews or appointment reviews for a higher position commence with the formation by the dean and department chair of a review committee, composed of some or all of the departmental senior faculty, to review the case. Review for reappointment or appointment to a higher position shall normally be conducted in the candidate’s penultimate year of the existing appointment. The candidate shall be asked to submit a curriculum vitae, a statement about the candidate’s past accomplishments, a statement about the candidate’s intellectual agenda for the future, and materials documenting the candidate’s creative work in scholarship, design/research work, or professional practice, or a combination thereof.

External Letters

Unless the review committee is unanimously opposed to the reappointment or appointment to a higher position, evaluation letters from at least 8 letter writers in the case of a reappointment to a second term for an associate professor in practice and from at least 10 letter writers in the case of reappointment or appointment of a senior lecturer or professor in practice without tenure shall be sought. Candidates shall not be asked to provide names of potential letter writers. Such evaluation letters shall ask letter writers to evaluate the candidate without listing the names of other comparable individuals, although letter writers are invited to make comparisons with other individuals known to the letter writers. A dossier of the candidate’s materials shall be provided to the letter writers.

The review committee, in consultation with the administrator in charge of faculty affairs, shall select external letter writers, who should be prominent scholars and/or practitioners knowledgeable about the field of the candidate who are likely to hold diverse perspectives. External letter writers typically are tenured full professors at peer schools or practitioners who are recognized as at the top of their profession. Letter writers shall be asked to reveal in their letters any advising, professional, collaborating, or personal relationship with any individual named in the letter. Yield from invited letter writers is a factor to consider so the choice of letter writers should be made carefully. The invitation to write a letter sent to external letter writers should be sent on behalf of the dean or department chair with responses returned to the administrator in charge of faculty affairs.

Review Committee Deliberation

The review committee shall deliberate and vote on the candidate. The chair of the review committee, in consultation with members of the review committee and the administrator in charge of faculty affairs, shall prepare the review committee’s report that includes the following:

  • A detailed evaluation of the candidate’s record of creative work and teaching and proposed future creative work and teaching
  • A detailed analysis of the external letters and other indicia of the candidate’s standing in the field
  • A description of the review committee vote and reasons expressed by any committee members who dissented or abstained from the committee’s vote.

The review committee report, along with appropriate materials such as curricula vitae, exhibits of creative work, and teaching evaluations assembled by the administrator in charge of academic affairs shall be submitted to the relevant department for departmental review as the next step in the process.

Departmental Review

The department chair shall convene the departmental senior faculty to discuss the report of the committee and to vote on the candidate. In cases where the departmental senior faculty as a whole served as the review committee, a separate meeting is not necessary. The department chair shall prepare a letter describing the discussion and vote of the departmental senior faculty. The letter, along with the committee report, external letters, and other relevant materials shall be submitted to the dean and, in cases where the department has voted in favor of the reappointment or appointment to a higher position, to the Senior Faculty Council.

Senior Faculty Council Review

In cases where the departmental senior faculty have voted in favor of reappointment or appointment to a higher position a letter prepared by the department chair describing the discussion and vote of the departmental senior faculty, along with the review committee report, external letters, and other relevant materials, shall be submitted to the Senior Faculty Council at least one week before the next scheduled meeting. At the meeting, the Senior Faculty Council shall discuss the case and vote at that time or after the meeting. If the vote is taken after the meeting, the dean shall announce the results of the vote at the next Senior Faculty Council meeting. A quorum for attendance shall be met if at least fifty percent of the senior faculty in residence during the semester in question is present. Each member of the Senior Faculty Council shall provide the dean with a brief letter announcing their vote and reasons for it. Senior faculty members of the candidate’s department are expected to write more detailed letters than senior faculty from other departments. Such letters shall be included with any recommendation that the dean submits to the president or provost.

Recommendation by the Dean

Upon a favorable vote of the Senior Faculty Council, the dean may recommend or not recommend to the provost that the candidate be approved for reappointment or appointment to the higher position.

Provost’s Approval

Reappointments or appointments to a higher position of non-tenured senior and junior faculty require approval by the Provost’s Appointments Review Committee which is administered by the Office of the Senior Vice Provost for Faculty Development and Diversity.