|
print pdf version
GUIDELINES OF THE ACADEMIC COUNCIL FOR
THE EVALUATION OF CANDIDATES FOR
PROMOTION TO THE RANK OF PROFESSOR
I. The Department's Relation to the Candidate
Sec. 101. Scheduling the Evaluation
(a)
A tenured associate professor may at any time request to be considered for
promotion by the professors in his/her department. They must give at least preliminary
consideration to any such request. If they think a full review inadvisable at
that time, they should give their reasons in writing. If the candidate
nonetheless wishes a full review, he/she is entitled to one.
(b) If an associate professor has not been
promoted by the end of the fifth year in rank, at that time the Office of the
Vice President will notify both the departmental chair and the associate
professor that consideration for promotion should be given during the sixth
year. The associate professor may decline to be considered then.
If he/she wishes to be considered, things proceed as in Sec. 101 (a).
(c)
If there is to be a full review, the chair will consult with the candidate, and
set a deadline for submission of the candidate’s curriculum vitae and of
scholarly and other material to be evaluated. The chair will also set a date by
which the professors will attempt to complete their evaluation.
Sec. 102. The Evaluation
(a)
Teaching
1. Student
Evaluations. The student evaluations, collected by the Office of the
Registrar and deposited in the Office of Academic Affairs, should be examined
by the department chair. Other tenured members of the department may examine
them as well.
2. Other
Student Evaluations. In addition to the evaluation collected by the Office
of the Registrar, the department may wish to solicit other evaluations from
former or current students of the candidate.
3. Faculty
Peer Evaluation. The chair may solicit information from faculty members
within or without the department, e.g., those who have taught courses jointly
with the candidate.
4. The
Candidate’s Own Evaluation. Candidates should be invited to submit to the
department chair for inclusion in their dossiers any teaching materials which
they consider pertinent to their cases, such as course syllabi, examinations,
lecture notes, and so on. They may, if they wish, make any further statement
concerning their teaching which they consider relevant. Furthermore, candidates
should feel free to request chairs to consult specified students—alumni or
undergraduates—concerning their teaching.
(b)
Scholarship
1.
Outside Opinions
a.
Ordinarily the chair should solicit from outside the Wesleyan faculty two to
four opinions (or more for cause) from qualified authorities of the
department’s choosing.
b.
The candidate may name additionally one or two such authorities and request the
chair to consult them. There may be more for cause. In both cases, the replies
should be held in confidence from the candidate. The solicitors of the letters
should represent that these practices of confidentiality are in force (namely,
that the replies will be shared only with tenured members of the department the
Advisory Committee and the Review and Appeals and
Appeals Board). The letters of solicitation should inquire at least concerning
(a) the degree of acquaintance
with the work of the candidate, (b) an appraisal of the work itself, and (c) the
candidate’s standing in his/her field amongst scholars of comparable age and
experience. Copies of all letters should be submitted to the Advisory Committee
when the department is making a positive recommendation.
c.
At least three opinions should come from authorities not consulted at the time
of the previous promotion, or at the time of appointment if the candidate came
to Wesleyan with tenure.
2.
Inside Opinions. The chair of the department may, at the candidate’s or
department’s behest, request letters of evaluation from authorities who are
members
of the Wesleyan faculty (either inside or outside the candidate’s department)
and who are familiar with his/her work. These should be considered as
supplementary to, but not substitutes for, outside opinions. In all cases, the
letters of evaluation should be held in confidence.
3.
Bases of Judgment. The usual
evidence of scholarly publication consists of books, monographs, and articles.
The latter could be published or accepted for publication in edited
books, anthologies, or recognized scholarly journals.
Such evidence might include anthologies, translations, technical reports,
reviews, commentaries, textbooks, and so on, where such productions are
pertinent to the evaluation of the candidate’s performance and promise as a
scholar.
Manuscripts,
drafts, research proposals, public talks, and the like may be included only if
they can be evaluated by qualified external judges. Lectures that have been ”refereed” could serve as
evidence. Candidates should be made
aware throughout their time at Wesleyan that their case for tenure or promotion
is likely to be stronger if work to be evaluated is published or accepted for
publication.
It
may be the normal expectation of some departments to require a book or monograph
or a specific number of significant papers. Where such a requirement exists, it
should be communicated to the candidate in a clear and timely manner that this
is the case.
Departments in which publication is not
ordinarily expected should arrive at separate and clear understandings with the
Office of Academic Affairs and the
Advisory
Committee as to what constitutes the usual evidence of performance and promise
in that field. These understandings as to "the usual evidence" should
be embodied in written statements prepared by such departments, to be reviewed
and adopted by the Office of Academic Affairs after appropriate consultation.
Such statements would be routinely made available to all members of those
departments as well as members of the Review and Appeals Board.
(c)
Colleagueship
See
the "By-laws of the Academic Council," Part V, Sec. 502 (c). Testimony
regarding colleagueship shall be solicited by the department chair.
Sec. 103. Candidates and the Evaluation
In addition to being informed ahead of
time of the schedule of the evaluation, to commenting on the regular student
evaluations of their teaching and to supplementing them with course materials
(for all of which see above), candidates have the following rights in relation
to their department:
(a)
Candidate’s Statement. Candidates should have the opportunity to state
their own cases before the tenured members of the department in person or in
writing.
(b)
Counselor. Candidates may, if they wish, request a full professor of the
faculty, usually of their own department (who may well be the chair) to assist
them in presenting their cases to the department, to review their dossiers, and
to ensure that their rights and interests are duly observed in the department
and in the presentation of their cases to the Advisory Committee. The acceptance
of a role as counselor in no way compromises the tenured person’s right to
come to an independent judgment and to vote as he/she sees fit.
(c)
Information and Confidentiality. It is the responsibility of the chair and
the counselor to keep the candidate informed of the status of the case,
including a summary of the Advisory Committee’s general reactions to the
evidence on teaching and scholarship. But, in aiding the candidate, the chair
and counselor are cautioned not to impair the confidentiality of the Advisory
Committee’s procedures and discussions.
Sec. 104. Departmental Consultation in the Evaluation
Chairs should consult all members of the
department below the rank of professor except those in their first and last
years at Wesleyan. The counsel of those consulted may be oral or written. After
appropriate consultation with the department, and with the concurrence of a
majority of the full professors, the chair recommends to the president that the
candidate be promoted or not.
II. The Department's
Relations to the Office of Academic Affairs and the
Advisory Committee
Sec. 201. Deadlines for Preparing the Evaluation
(a)
By October 1, the chair of a department that plans to consider a promotion to
the full professorship will inform the Office of Academic Affairs of the
deadline set by the department for the submission to it of the candidate’s
current curriculum vitae and the body of scholarly and/or other creative work to
be evaluated.
(b)
By February 1, the chair will inform the Office of Academic Affairs of the
anticipated time for the completion of the department’s evaluation.
(c)
March 1 is the deadline for the submission to the Advisory Committee of all
materials to be evaluated. Extension of this deadline must be requested in
advance from the Office of Academic Affairs and Advisory Committee and must
receive their approval.
Sec.
202. Department’s Presentation of the Recommendation
(a)
Scheduling Meeting with Advisory Committee. The chair, working through
the Office of Academic Affairs, should make an appointment with the Advisory
Committee as far in advance of the intended appearance as possible.
(b)
Presentation of the Written Case. As soon as possible, and not later than
two weeks before the appointment with the Advisory Committee, the chair should
deposit at the Office of Academic Affairs 13 copies of the following:
1. the department’s recommendation and rationale for it;
2. the candidate’s current curriculum vitae;
3. the letter or letters soliciting evaluations;
4. the letters of evaluation.
[For
more detail, see the Advisory Committee policy on Presentation of Cases for
Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion.]
In
addition, the chair should deposit at the same time and place two copies of each
of the candidate’s writings and/or other works that have been completed since
the candidate received tenure.
(c)
Department’s Oral Presentation of the Case. All full professors of the
department should be requested to meet with the Advisory Committee at the
appointed time to explain the reasons for their
adherence to or dissent from the department’s recommendation, and answer such
questions as are put to them. The counselor, if a member of another department,
shall be requested to attend as well. In addition, the department chair may
invite to be present and testify such Wesleyan colleagues outside the department
as he/she sees fit.
(d)
Additional Information. The department chair should stand ready to supply
the Office of Academic Affairs and the Advisory Committee with additional
information as desired, and, with senior colleagues, to meet again with the
Advisory Committee for additional testimony if required.
III. The Relation of
the Office of Academic Affairs and the Advisory Committee
to Candidates
Sec.
301. Notification.
The Office of Academic Affairs will notify candidates in writing as far ahead as
possible of the date on which their case is to be introduced in the Advisory
Committee.
Sec.
302. Response to Student Evaluations.
When student evaluations are returned to faculty members, they shall be
routinely invited to return a written
comment
on them to the Office of Academic Affairs as well as to their department chairs.
They shall be invited again by the office, when their case is considered, to
make a general summary comment on the evidence provided by the student
evaluations. These comments shall be made available to the Advisory Committee.
Sec.
303. Record of Leaves.
In addition the Office of Academic Affairs shall make available to the Advisory
Committee the candidates’ applications for and
reports
on sabbaticals and leaves of absence.
Sec. 304. Additional Outside Opinions.
The Office of Academic Affairs and the Advisory Committee, after notification
and discussion with the department chair, the counselor, and the candidate, may
solicit additional opinions of a candidate’s work from outside and inside
authorities. These opinions and the invitations to offer them are to be subject
to the procedures guiding the department chair, the counselor, and the candidate
in their solicitation of opinions [see Sec. 102 (b). and Sec. 202 (b)].
Sec.
305. Candidate May Meet with Advisory Committee.
The candidate may appear, at his/her request, before the Advisory Committee, and
he/she may submit statements in writing to that body.
Sec.
306. Informing the Participants.
It is the responsibility of the Office of Academic Affairs to keep the
department chair (and the candidate’s counselor if these are not the same)
informed of the status of the case.
|