Skip Navigation

Policies

FH Appendix 3 Promotion Guidelines: College of Sc...

Effective Date Jan 1, 2015

FH Appendix 3: Promotion Guidelines: College of Science

College of Science and Liberal Arts Memorandum updated: October 1996

TO: Faculty - College of Science and Liberal Arts
FROM: Gordon L. Nelson
SUBJECT: Promotion Guidelines

Reviewed and approved by the Vice President for Academic Affiars: 1/8/2015
Note: added guidelines for faculty review/evaluation form: 1/15
Note: edited by Chief Operating Officer (formerly titled 'Provost') for title updates: 7/4/11
Note: edited by Provost for currency: 3/31/05

Faculty have frequently asked for guidance as to what is expected related to promotion. A dean’s advisory committee has been constituted and guidelines drafted. The guidelines have been reviewed by department heads and comments received from the vice president for academic affairs. The guidelines are issued as a help and as a guide. They are based on collective effort. Comments are appreciated. These guidelines will be operative in the next promotion cycle. Potential candidates meeting these guidelines are urged to discuss their personal situations with their respective department heads.

These guidelines provide the faculty and departmental administrators with a basis for judgment in evaluating and in rewarding meritorious performance at the university.

The document also indicates to the faculty the range and quality of academic effort which will optimally benefit their careers and meet the goals of the department and university.

Promotion Procedures

  1. Collection of documentation for the promotion dossier is the responsibility of the candidate requesting promotion. The dossier must follow the same organization and use the same headings and subheadings which are listed in "Promotion Dossier Format" (Appendix I). Either the department head or the faculty member may initiate the promotion procedure, but all documentation must go through the department head whether he/she supports the request or not.
  2. This documentation is presented to and is evaluated by the department head. In case of promotion from associate to full professor, additional external evaluations will be solicited from professionals familiar with the work of the candidate. Names of external reviewers may be provided by the candidate and/or the department head. Those names may include reviewers who know the candidate personally and those who know of the candidate only through his/her research and publications. Limited use should be made of close colleagues and mentors.
  3. The department head makes the recommendation by letter and forwards all documentation to the "College Promotion Committee" for evaluation. The department head recommendation should list, explain, and interpret the quality of all accomplishments of the candidate for the committee. The recommendation for promotion must be justified by the department head.
  4. The College Promotion Committee (hereafter referred to as the committee) is a three-person committee appointed by the dean of the college and is composed of full professors who may be department heads. The department head may designate a representative, approved by the dean, if a conflict of interest exists. The function of the committee is to advise the dean of the college on matters of faculty promotion.
  5. Based on the committee’s evaluation, a recommendation is made by letter to the dean of the college. The committee also forwards the candidate’s complete promotion dossier and the department head’s recommendation letter to the dean.
  6. The dean may interview the faculty member under consideration for promotion, the department head and/or the committee if additional information is required or if the dean has a question.
  7. Recommendations by the: (1) dean; (2) College Promotion Committee; and (3) department head are forwarded to the vice president for academic affairs by the dean for final evaluation.
  8. Pre-application
    • Since preparing a promotion package is a time consuming process, the committee encourages the department head to submit a pre-application. This would include the résumé of the candidate and a cover letter. The cover letter should state why the person should be considered for promotion. This letter is particularly important if there is anything unique about the candidate’s eligibility for promotion. The pre-application step is not a requirement for promotion. It is only a way to let the department head know if his or her thinking is in line with that of the committee. 

Promotion Eligibility

Assistant Professor

Appointment as an assistant professor shall be based on a candidate’s potential to teach effectively and to conduct meaningful research. Potential will typically be determined through the examination of an academic vitae, letters of recommendation and the presentation of an invited interview and seminar. Appointment will be considered only for the holder of the terminal degree.

Associate Professor

  1. Promotion of candidates to associate professor is not automatic, but based on the fulfillment of potential in research and teaching. Professional service and active participation in departmental and university affairs will also be considered. Such participation, however, is less significant than either teaching or research.
  2. Teaching performance of high quality will be expected of all faculty. and such performance shall be judged on the basis of peer, ex-student and student evaluation. The candidate must demonstrate the ability to present relevant and current information and ideas in a manner that promotes learning.
  3. Research qualifications shall be judged on the basis of an active and meaningful research program. Evidence of activity shall be based on the established criteria (see section on criteria below). Evidence of research quality shall be based on a thorough review of the candidate’s research program by the committee.
  4. Qualifications in professional and university service shall be based on letters obtained from committee chairs and fellow committee members. Performance in such service must be distinguished to be considered meritorious.
  5. A candidate may be considered for promotion to associate professor after a minimum of five years as an assistant professor or equivalent. It is generally expected that an assistant professor will make significant progress toward promotion to receive contract renewal.

Professor

  1. Promotion to professor shall be based on the establishment of a university and a national reputation for scholarship.
  2. Criteria for promotion to professor shall be the same as those for promotion to associate professor. However, the level of attainment within these criteria will be higher for promotion to professor, and letters shall be solicited from at least five renowned scholars in the candidate’s research specialty.
  3. A candidate may be considered for promotion to professor after a minimum of five years as an associate professor. There is no maximum time limit. The associate professor rank may be the appropriate terminal rank in some cases.

Promotion Criteria

  1. The three areas in which a candidate will be evaluated for promotion are the following: "Teaching," "Research" and "Service."
  2. These criteria, provided to advise the department head and his/her faculty regarding their promotion plans, will be used by the committee in making a promotion recommendation to the dean. A key point is that the following criteria are meant to be viewed only as a minimum to be considered for promotion. This does not mean that if faculty meet all the criteria they will be promoted. It means only that if they do not meet the criteria, they will not be considered for promotion. The criteria are for the department head’s use in advising only, not as a checklist to be completed for promotion. To be successful in a bid for promotion, candidates must demonstrate that they exceed the criteria in the three areas.

Promotion to Associate Professor

  1. Teaching: Each of the following per year during the previous five years:
    •  at least two courses with "good" reviews; none with "bad" reviews.
    •  at least one of the following (where applicable):
      • serve satisfactorily as an academic advisor (some departments will consider this to be a required item);
      • serve as thesis/dissertation advisor in the home department;
  2. Research: Either of the following during the previous three years:
    • three refereed publications. Full papers in national proceedings, magazines, although not referred, are of value. It is the responsibility of the candidate to provide evidence of intellectual and scholarly quality. AND
    • at least two of the following:
      • funding to support research (some departments will consider this to be a required item);
      • presentations at state/national conference;
      • externally published manual, study guide, textbook;
      • published book chapter. OR
      •  a published scholarly book or a monograph.
  3. Service: Some of the following during the previous five years:
    • university committee(s);
    • reviewer for a journal or a granting agency;
    • thesis/dissertation committee in other department(s);
    • community service;
    • professional society service

Promotion to Full Professor

  1. Teaching: Each of the following per year:
    • at least two courses with "good" reviews; none with "bad" reviews.
    • at least one of the following (where applicable):
    • serve satisfactorily as an academic advisor (some departments will consider this to be a required item);
    • serve as thesis/dissertation advisor in the home department.
  2. Research: Either of the following per year:
    • refereed publication (a mean of one article per year during the previous five years with a minimum of seven since the last promotion). Full papers in national proceedings, magazines, although not refereed, are of value. It is the responsibility of the candidate to provide evidence of intellectual and scholarly quality. AND
    • at least two of the following:
      • funding to support research (some departments will consider this to be a required item);
      • presentations at state/national conference with proceedings;
      • externally published manual, study guide, textbook;
      • published book chapter. OR
      • a published scholarly book or a monograph.
  3. Service: Each of the following per year:
    • university committee(s);
    • review of publication or granting agency;
    • thesis/dissertation committee in other departments;
    • community service;
    • professional society service

Multi-authored Publication

The committee will evaluate collaborative research and its subsequent multi-authored publication differently from single-authored work. In principle, the committee recognizes that for the evaluation of a promotion candidate, a multi-authored publication shall not be deemed equal to a single-authored publication. Such a principle does not in any way fail to recognize the equal intellectual merit of a single- and multi-authored works.

The principal author should be awarded credit for the work. The department head will identify to the committee the items listed on the résumé where the candidate for promotion has been a principal author. If the candidate is not the principal author nor is he/she the fundraiser, the department head will explain to the committee the extent and significance of the candidate’s contribution to the publication.

 

DEPARTMENT HEAD’S ANNUAL REVIEW OF FULL-TIME FACULTY MEMBERS

All adjunct faculty will be evaluated based on their teaching performance and service to the students and their departments.

College of Science Faculty Evaluation form