How does a candidate for promotion to full professor prepare the review file?
MEMORANDUM
April 16, 2008
| TO: | All Associate and Full Professors |
| FROM: | Committee of Six Full Professors: Greg Davis, Cheryl Grosso, Robert Howe, Judith Martin, Laura Riddle, Larry Smith (chair) |
| SUBJECT: | Guidelines for the Preparation of Materials in Support of Candidates for Promotion to Full Professor Rank. |
Each year the Committee of Six Full Professors distributes guidelines for the preparation of materials in support of promotion to the rank of full professor. We urge all potential candidates for promotion and the members of the unit nominating committees to read with care both this memo and the formal "Criteria and Procedure for Promotion to Full Professorial Rank" on pages 85-86 of the Faculty Handbook, http://www.uwgb.edu/sofas/facResources/Faculty_Handbook.pdf. Check the index for additional references.
Please also assist reviewers of the promotion file by preparing it in a way that facilitates evaluation by those outside of the candidate's field of specialization. Be sure to provide a complete summary curriculum vitae and a well-organized file which documents the candidate's accomplishments over his or her career. Candidates seeking promotion must exceed the requirements which merited promotion to the rank of associate professor with tenure; evidence of significant activity post-tenure is required. Candidates and unit committees are invited to consult with members of the Committee of Six or the Secretary of the Faculty and Academic Staff to clarify the documentation expected for review.
A. Evidence of Teaching includes: 1) self-evaluation (usually as an introductory narrative); 2) a sequential summary of student evaluations of a reasonable sample of courses over a period of time, e.g., four to seven years; 3) evaluations from colleagues with a sound basis for such judgments, e.g., from team teaching, classroom visitation, and merit reviews; 4) current course syllabi, reading lists, handouts, examinations, assignments, and other course materials, and descriptions of teaching techniques (especially those considered innovative and/or interdisciplinary); 5) other evidence of teaching quality, e.g., advising, independent and other guided studies, internships, thesis supervision, or students' success after graduation; and 6) evidence of continuing professional development in teaching, e.g., course development and implementation or teaching improvement grants. The Committee must form a qualitative judgment of the candidate's teaching. Hence, the information should not only describe teaching responsibilities but include substantial evidence of quality and effectiveness.
B. Evidence of Scholarship includes: 1) self-evaluation (usually as an introductory narrative); 2) a description of the journals and other media through which the candidate's work has been published--their nature and reputation, the nature of their review process (editorial, refereed, invited, proceedings, acceptance/rejection rates); 3) a list and copies of published articles and/or documentation of creative work; 4) separate lists and copies of published books, monographs, and book reviews; 5) a list (and, where appropriate, copies or abstracts of) scholarly papers presented at conferences, again with an indication of the selection process; 6) grant activity in support of scholarly or creative work; and/or 7) lists of shows, exhibits, and performances, with clear documentation regarding the selection process (an acceptance rate in a specific category(ies) entered, evaluation standards, professional status of these activities). Most importantly, there must be evidence that the candidate's reputation as a scholar extends outside the institution to regional, national, and/or international levels, including letters from disinterested scholars outside the institution which evaluate the candidate's work. A template letter that promotion committee chairs may use as a model to request outside evaluations is available from the Secretary of the Faculty and Academic Staff. Additional evidence may include a citation list (candidate's work cited by other scholars). The Committee must form a qualitative judgment of the candidate's scholarly and creative work and determine the extent to which it represents a substantial and/or continuous advance and progress beyond the work that warranted promotion to associate professor rank.
C. Evidence of Community and University Service must include leadership as demonstrated by: 1) self-evaluation (usually as an introductory narrative); 2) a list of all administrative and governance assignments and evidence of the activities undertaken by the candidate in these roles and their impact upon the institution; 3) a list of other institutional service such as preparing institutional grants, organizing conferences, working with student organizations, curriculum and program development; 4) a list of activities which apply the candidate's professional expertise outside the institution at the local, state, national, and/or international levels; 5) a description of the nature of these professional activities, scope of work, and time required; and 6) evidence of the impact of the candidate's professional service to the community, e.g., letters, awards and recognition of professional service. The Committee is to evaluate the extent and the quality of the candidate's involvement in the transfer of knowledge through outreach and the candidate's leadership roles in the affairs of the University.
Candidates must provide documentation which attests to their extra-university professional reputation through letters from leaders in the field outside UW-Green Bay. Such letters should be solicited by the chair of the unit's nominating committee following appropriate consultation with the Secretary of the Faculty and Academic Staff concerning materials for open files. A specific statement should be included in the file which describes how letters of evaluation were solicited and used. It is often useful to provide a reviewer some sense of the promotion standards of UW-Green Bay, for example, as stated in the Faculty Handbook.
All nominations, with supporting documentation, must be sent from the appropriate professorial committee to the appropriate dean for review and transmittal to the Committee of Six no later than November 15. The chair of the unit nominating committee should ensure that all essential materials are included in the file. In most cases, an incomplete file will not be considered.
Return to FAQ page