Menu
Home  |  Academics  |  Provost Office
  |  Faculty Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Review
Bookmark and Share

Faculty Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Review

Date:               August 2016

To:                   Hood College Faculty

From:             Debbie D. Ricker, Ph.D., Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs

Re:                  Procedures for Faculty Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Reviews

The appropriate faculty committees and administrators normally review the dossiers and candidacies of persons undergoing major reviews for reappointment, promotion, or tenure prior to the March meeting of the Board of Trustees.  The review process begins in the fall semester.  If you are seeking promotion this year or will be the subject of a major review, please read the instructions that follow as well as relevant sections of the Faculty Code.

Deadlines for the academic year 2016-2017.  The following deadlines apply to review processes to begin this fall:

Friday, Sept. 2: Requests for consideration for promotion due. Faculty m.s initiate this procedure by written request to the Provost and the Faculty Personnel Committee, with a copy to the department chair.
Tuesday, Nov. 15: dossiers relating to major reviews to be submitted to department chairs.
Wednesday, Dec. 7: dossiers due in the Provost's office.

Friday, March 31:  dossiers due in Provost’s office for Spring reviews.
Preparation of a dossier. Each candidate has responsibility for providing pertinent information to the persons and groups charged with reviewing recommendations for reappointment, promotion, and grants of tenure.  Candidates should take care to provide complete evaluative evidence for each criterion of the review.

The Faculty Personnel Committee has developed these guidelines for determining what information is pertinent to the review, and should be made a part of the dossier:

  •  It is the responsibility of the candidate to prepare the dossier.
  • The dossier should be prepared in the style of a grant proposal, with the candidate presenting persuasive evidence in support of his or her case. The primary components of the dossier should be no more than 15 pages, excluding course evaluation summaries, annual reports, publications or other scholarly works, and appendices. The dossier should include the following:
    • a table of contents; the chair’s letter should be listed clearly
    • a current curriculum vitae
    • a narrative explaining in some detail how the candidate meets the criteria outlined in the Faculty Code.  This narrative should include all necessary explanations of course evaluations, etc.  Presentation of information, e.g., committee service, in tabular form is helpful.  (The narrative should not exceed four pages.)
    • evidence of effective teaching.  Student evaluations are the evidence most commonly submitted.  If these are not used, both original course evaluation forms and summaries should be provided, the data for every course taught summarized by tabulating the responses to each question on a copy of the evaluation instrument.  Faculty m.s are encouraged to include evaluations for the most recent semester, as well as all evaluations for courses taught during the most recent years (up to five years).

The Committee strongly encourages the submission of other evidence of teaching effectiveness. Such evidence may include reports of classroom visits by colleagues; direct and specific letters from faculty with whom you have taught collaboratively or for whose classes you have given guest lectures; syllabuses, assignments, bibliographies, study guides, and other class materials.

Colleagues who provide letters addressing the issue of teaching effectiveness may send these letters directly to the candidate or to the chairperson; in all cases, the confidentiality of these letters will be respected by the individuals involved.

    • Letters of evaluation from colleagues both inside and outside the College, providing direct and specific information about how the criteria for the candidate’s request are met by the evidence presented.  Letters from outside authorities in appropriate fields are welcome and are especially valuable in relation to candidacy for promotion or tenure.  (Letters from students are not appropriate, but the committee will consider unsolicited letters from alumnae.)
    • Offprints or photocopies of all publications listed on the curriculum vitae in evidence of professional activity and development.
    • Copies of all individual annual reports since the last review, together with an update of summer and current semester activities.
  • Faculty m.s may also wish to include some or all of the following as appendices to the dossier:
    • typescripts of conference papers, scholarly lectures, or other presentations;
    • reviews of published work, exhibitions, or performances;
    • summaries or typescripts of scholarly or professional work-in-progress;
    • letters of recommendation on file in the Office of the Provost from previous years.  A list of such letters, together with a statement that the candidate has obtained permission to use the letters again, should be submitted in writing to the Provost.
    • any other information that the candidate considers relevant.
  • When the candidate has prepared the dossier, she or he will submit it to the department chairperson no later than Nov. 18 to enable the chairperson to add a letter of departmental evaluation.

References to the Faculty Code. Please note also the following provisions of the Faculty Code relating to candidacies for reappointment, promotion, and tenure:

  • The chairperson’s letter of evaluation should be based on consultation with all FTE m.s of the department and should reflect their assessments of the candidate in addition to that of the chairperson. This letter should be as specific as possible, addressing the criteria outlined in the Faculty Code for the review in question. Together with the candidate’s dossier, the chairperson’s letter should be submitted to the Provost on or before Dec. 7.
  • FPC and the president will mail to candidates at their home addresses notification of their recommendations, prior to the fall or winter board of trustees meeting, as appropriate. These notices will contain only FPC’s recommendation to the president and the president’s recommendation to the board (for or against tenure or promotion or for non-reappointment), or decision (to reappoint), and will not note reservations or degrees of enthusiasm.
  • Following the board meeting, the president will notify candidates recommended to the board of trustees for tenure, non-reappointment, or promotion of the board’s action.
  • The Provost will arrange to meet individually with reappointed m.s of the faculty following the board of trustees meetings to convey advice, information, commendation, etc. The chairpersons will be present at these meetings. In addition, a m. of FPC will be present to convey FPC’s advice directly. These meetings also provide an opportunity for the faculty m. to clarify his or her understanding of the College’s expectations and to offer comments about the review process.

If you have further questions or would like clarification of any of the above, please contact the Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs.