Preparing an Application for Promotion (*Updated February 2016) Office of Academic Affairs, The American University of Paris 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
I: Calendar of Important Annual Deadlines II: Checklist for Application Dossiers III: Policies on Rank and Promotion (see faculty manual) IV: Procedures for Soliciting External Evaluation V: Guidelines for Preparing an Application Dossier VI: APPENDIX 1: Guidelines for Formatting the CV for Promotion VII: APPENDIX 2: The Teaching Dossier I: Calendar of Annual Deadlines •
•
•
•
•
•
•
April 30: meet with the Provost to announce wish to be considered for promotion. June 1: the candidate provides the Provost with a list of external reviewers ("arm's length" evaluators – not friends, thesis directors, graduate student friends, sister, etc.), a specially formatted and annotated CV for promotion purposes, and 3 recent writing samples that represent your best work. October 1: the complete promotion dossier is submitted to the Department Chair, who makes the dossier available to all departmental members, solicits the opinions of tenured or tenure track faculty, then presents a balanced view these opinions while objectively analyzing the dossier in his/her letter. October 25: the dossier is forwarded to the Provost’s office and made available to the Rank and Promotion Committee. January 15: deadline for receiving external evaluators’ letters. February 30: Rank and Promotion reports are transmitted to the Provost for budgeting purposes. May 1 (or before the final Senate meeting): decisions are announced to the applicant and the Rank and Promotion Committee. II: Checklist for the Application Dossier Candidate’s Name:___________________________ Rank Requested:________________ The candidate is invited to provide the following documents, including this checklist, electronically and in a series of sturdy folders or boxes labeled with his or her name, department, and requested rank (yes – for now we still need paper). When deciding which documents to include in the application dossier, the candidate should ensure that materials are strategically selected and presented to support the case for promotion as outlined in the letter of application and self-­‐appraisal. Folder 1: Organizing materials _____ Checklist (this document) _____ Candidate’s letter of application and self-­‐appraisal, addressing teaching, service and scholarship. _____ CurriculumVitae _____ List of at least three potential evaluators of the candidate’s work with complete addresses, telephone, and e-­‐mail address (these are the names already provided to the Provost by June 1) _____ Confidential Letter from Department Chair (to be added to the file by Department Chair) Folder 2: Teaching Dossier All candidates for promotion should prepare a teaching dossier documenting evidence of effective teaching or teaching excellence. The dossier should include teaching materials, an analysis of teaching evaluations with comments on strengths and weaknesses and what was done to address areas of concern. It should also include evidence of innovative pedagogical techniques, participation in Mellon pedagogy seminars or faculty retreats, use of the Teaching and Learning Center, etc. For suggestions on the construction of a teaching dossier, see Appendix 1 to this document. ____ Teaching Dossier Folder 3: Service All candidates for promotion should provide evidence of service to the department, institution and to the wider academic community, as defined below (see “Guidelines for Preparing an Application Dossier). _____ Service Dossier Folder 4: Scholarship All candidates for promotion should present evidence of all scholarly activity since the last promotion. As noted above, the definition of scholarship varies between disciplines. Scholarship usually signifies publication, but it may also include basic, applied, or pedagogical work in the discipline, and creative or professional activity. See "Guidelines for Preparing the CV" for what counts as evidence of scholarship: *Please note: The CV is one of the key pieces of the promotion file. For the CV to be clear and useful to the R & P committee members, please be sure to: 1) rigorously parse out under different subheadings the different types of publication or creative work and list your published work in descending order of significance, as determined by your field (e.g., university press monographs, double blind peer-­‐reviewed articles, invited articles, proceedings, book reviews, etc.). Please do not jumble everything together or expect readers to decipher the genres of your publications. 2) include in the list of publications only those works that are already in print or formally accepted in their final form for publication (with a letter from the editor). Put work that is unfinished, under review, to be revised and resubmitted, "in progress," under contract, etc., under a separated heading "works in progress". Avoid the use of the word "forthcoming" as it means different things to different people and is ultimately confusing to reviewers. "Under contract" is also ambiguous and unconvincing because a contract can be secured with a 5-­‐page proposal whereas the book may never be written or published. The "under contract" category is meaningful only when accompanied by a letter from the editor saying that the completed manuscript is slated for publication by a certain date. 3) annotate the scholarship section with a short statement under each bibliographic entry , making clear to readers the importance of the venue for your field (tier 1, tier 2, the flagship journal for your field, etc.), the "quantity" of your contribution if you are a co-­‐author (10%, 75%, etc.), or anything else that will help your colleagues understand the significance of your work. For more on how to prepare the CV for your promotion file, please see Appendix 1: "Guidelines for Preparing Your CV". III: Policies on Rank and Promotion: (please see the most recent version of the faculty manual). IV: Procedures for Soliciting External Evaluation of Scholarly Activity Candidates are expected to demonstrate a record of active scholarship. Active scholarship usually signifies scholarly publication, but it may also be defined as basic, applied, or pedagogical research in the discipline, or creative or professional activity in the field. Excellent scholarship is characterized by its quality, originality, significance, and impact on the discipline as recognized by peers. As part of the process of demonstrating peer recognition of active scholarship, candidates’ work is submitted to external evaluation. Procedures for external evaluation: By June 1, candidates submit to the Provost a list of at least three names of potential external evaluators (longer lists, arranged in order of preference, are welcome). Your relationship to the evaluators should be "arm's length," meaning that they should not be close friends, thesis advisors, regular co-­‐authors or anyone else likely to be perceived as unreliable or presenting a conflict of interest. If you are in doubt about this, please consult with the Provost. Along with the names the following information please provide: Complete contact information, including e-­‐mail address and phone number; Professional title and status of the evaluator; Relationship of the evaluator to the candidate The Provost may disallow proposed evaluators; the Provost may also ask the candidate to supply other names. The Provost requests evaluations from the readers who have been agreed upon; candidates should not request their own evaluations. Evaluators who agree to assess the candidate’s work will be sent: 1) a letter asking for an analysis of the quality, originality and significance of the candidate's work 2) the candidate’s current CV, and, three representative samples (chapters or articles) of the candidate’s work, selected after consultation between the Provost and the candidate. External evaluations should be returned directly to the Dean’s office by January 15. V: Guidelines for Preparing an Application Dossier University Policy and Procedures on Rank and Promotion are set out in the Faculty Manual, and are extracted above, section III. A checklist of required materials is given above, section II. Candidates should respect closely the “Calendar of Annual Deadlines”, section I above. What follows in this section are guidelines, designed to offer the candidates examples of the kinds of materials which will help to establish a case for promotion. These examples are offered as suggestions: they are intended neither to be exhaustive nor compulsory. Three components of a candidate’s professional activity are considered by the Rank and Promotion Committee: teaching, scholarship, and service. Details of each of these components follow. Individual applications will differ in the proportion accorded to each. The committee will always consider each application qualitatively, and as a whole. The application is prefaced by a letter of application and self-­‐appraisal, typically 4 – 5 pages in length. This letter should summarize the candidate’s case for promotion, and should explicitly address under different subheadings the three components of professional activity which the Rank and Promotion Committee will consider: teaching, scholarship, and service. The letter should be the outcome of substantial and considered self-­‐appraisal and should serve as a framing device for the reader's understanding of evidence, artifacts and materials presented in the file. The file should not be considered a kind of scrapbook or "data dump" for the reader to rummage through in search of its meaning; it should be carefully constructed as a compelling narrative with your materials (publication record, teaching evaluations and dossier, evidence of addressing weaknesses or deficiencies, etc.) as corroborating evidence for how you have constructed your career, what contributions you have made to AUP and to the your discipline, how you have improved your teaching or scholarship, and so on. The candidate may wish to consult widely – with the Chair, with other members of the Department, with colleagues in his or her field, with the Provost – in the construction of the letter of application and of the file. The application includes a confidential letter from the Chair of the candidate’s Department. This letter should be based on the Chair’s knowledge of the candidate and on examination of the materials the candidate submits in support of his or her application (see the Calendar above for deadlines for submission of materials to the Chair); the Chair should consult with other department members in preparing this letter. It should comprise a frank appraisal of the candidate’s case for promotion according to the criteria defined in the Faculty Manual. In exceptional cases, and in consultation with the Provost, the letter from the Chair may be replaced with a letter written by another senior academic. Teaching includes classroom teaching, academic advising and mentoring, curricular development, and the development of instructional materials. Effective teachers are characterized by the breadth and depth of knowledge they communicate to their students, by their success in creating an environment conducive to learning and to stimulating imaginative thinking, and by sustained effort to improve the quality of their teaching. Effective teaching can be demonstrated by a teaching dossier, containing, for example: standardized student evaluations •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
syllabi, samples of student work (projects, research papers, etc.), course materials (handouts, tests, etc.), use of rubrics peer evaluations of teaching documented improvement in course offerings and curriculum in light of assessment development of new courses or new programs to meet department and university needs development of instructional materials awards and other recognition for excellence in teaching documented success in counseling and mentoring active participation in internal and external activities for the improvement of teaching and curriculum See Appendix 2: “The Teaching Dossier” for suggestions. Those candidates who elect to demonstrate excellent teaching as part of their case for promotion to Associate Professor should expect to submit an extensive and well documented teaching dossier. Active scholarship. All candidates are expected to demonstrate a record of active scholarship. Active scholarship usually signifies scholarly publication, but it may also include basic, applied, or pedagogical research in the discipline and creative or professional activity in the field. Excellent scholarship is characterized by its quality, originality, significance, and impact on the discipline, as recognized by peers. Peer recognition may be demonstrated by presenting a record of: •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
publication in refereed (peer reviewed) journals and presses or juried exhibitions presentations at selective professional meetings external grant support for research activities awards and other external recognition citations published reviews of the candidate’s work external evaluations (see section 4: ‘Procedures for Soliciting External Evaluation’, above) professional service, such as serving as an appointed or elected officer of an academic or professional association; organizing or leading workshops, panels, or meetings in areas of professional competence; editing professional journals or doing peer review for academically recognized presses; refereeing manuscripts or grant proposals submitted to journals, professional meeting programs, committees, funding organizations, and so on. Service to the institution and to the wider academic community can be demonstrated by providing evidence of the following (the list is offered as indicative – it is neither exhaustive not compulsory): •
•
•
•
•
•
serving as an appointed or elected administrator or head of any academic group at the department or university levels serving as a leader or member of a task force, committee, board, or commission providing service to the department, or the university, or the wider academic community serving on student-­‐faculty committees serving as advisor to student organizations serving on local, state, regional, national, or international organizations. serving as professional consultant to public or private organizations. In making a case for the quality and amount of their service contributions, candidates should document their level of involvement, and especially the outcomes of their efforts. VI. Appendix I. Preparing Your CV for the Purposes of Promotion at AUP
The headings and subheadings below are typical of an academic CV. In Section V, please pay close
attention to the enhanced formatting modifications required for the purposes of your promotion file.
Name
Campus Address, Email, and Phone number
I.
List degrees in reverse chronological order, university granting degree, date
received; include the title of your dissertation and, if applicable, your MA or MFA
thesis/work.
Education
II.
Academic Employment History
List role or title, place, dates of employment, again in reverse chronological order.
III.
Academic Awards and Honors
IV.
•
•
V.
•
•
•
•
•
Service
Consider using as sub-categories: University, Department, Professional; always state your
role: chair, member, etc.)
If applicable, include activities related to public outreach such as presentations to civic
groups, media appearances, or other public initiatives that extend from your work as a
professor.
Scholarly/Creative Work Published
Parse out publications according their precise categories. Use clear, accurate, helpful
categories (monograph, edited volume, peer-reviewed article, etc.). We given a sample list
here, but don’t list any of these categories if you haven’t done anything in them; and
reprioritize them according to your disciplinary standards (some disciplines value above
books, other disciplines value peer reviewed articles, etc.)
List all publications and professional papers and presentations in reverse chronological order;
that is, your most recent publication or presentation should come first, and so on.
If work is co-authored, describe your contribution (a percentage is helpful). A letter or note from
your collaborator describing your contribution would be helpful. (This goes in the
Scholarly/Creative Work section)
Be sure to follow established bibliographic style for your discipline, give full bibliographic
information, including page numbers or the number of manuscript pages if the work has
not yet appeared.
Annotate your entries so that we understand the importance of the venues in which you
have published your work.
A. Books/Monographs
B. Edited Books
C. Proceedings (Explain the selection and review process conference papers went through
before being included, and describe how much revising authors were required to do.
If the conference itself was very selective, explain that, as well.)
D. Textbooks
E. Peer-reviewed articles
F. Chapters in Books
G. Other types of non peer-reviewed articles
H. Translations
I. Encyclopedia Entries/Articles
J. Book Reviews
VI.
Scholarly/Creative Work Accepted for Publication (do not use “forthcoming”–too
ambiguous. Use same subcategories as above. If a work has been accepted but has not yet
been published, list as accepted with estimated date of publication, and include copy of letter
of acceptance or contract. (The letter or note goes in the Scholarly/Creative Work Section.)
VII.
Scholarly/Creative Work Submitted for Publication (Use subcategories as above. List the
venue to which you have submitted the work and how many manuscript pages it is. Indicate
if the work was invited.)
VIII.
Other Publications (Put non-academic writing or self-published and/or non-peer reviewed
academic work here.)
IX.
Professional Papers and Presentations
•
•
•
•
Give the name, dates, and location of the conference.
Indicate if the paper was invited
Indicate who sponsored the conference if that isn’t obvious from the name
It may be appropriate to use as subcategories: International, National, Regional, Local
(n.b., international conferences are not necessarily held in other countries.
IX.
Work in Progress (optional). If you choose to do this category, do not pile up possible
projects. To do so suggests a lack of focus, and possibly inexperience or poor judgment.
X.
Citations (give full and proper bibliographic information)
XI.
Teaching
Courses Taught (list courses by catalog number and title, and indicate how many times
you have taught the course)
MA Theses (list student name, thesis title, and date completed)
Chair
Reader
Honors Thesis, Chair
Reader
VII: APPENDIX 2 The Teaching Dossier A teaching dossier allows the candidate to document effective or excellent teaching by providing evidence that supplements student evaluations. It offers an opportunity to document classroom practices that have sometimes gone unrecognized and un-­‐rewarded in the consideration of a candidate’s qualities. It also offers faculty an opportunity to reflect upon their teaching as they select and assemble documents, and as they write the narrative sections described below and the section on teaching in their letter of application and self-­‐ appraisal. Faculty members preparing for the promotion process are encouraged to seek comments from colleagues as they compile their dossiers. The Rank and Promotion Committee asks for convincing evidence of effective or excellent teaching. The case should be summarized in the candidate’s letter: the teaching dossier supports that case by providing the evidence in a structured form. It should generally include documentation in each of the categories listed below. References to these documents in the letter, and cross-­‐references between documents, should be straightforward and explicit. Candidates may wish to number documents in order to facilitate referencing. What follows is designed as a fairly exhaustive list of possible inclusions; it should be seen neither as a list of required items nor as excluding other evidence. The teaching dossier should be constructed in order to make the case for each individual teacher, respecting the specificities of his or her particular field. Presentation of Teaching: •
•
•
•
•
•
Statement of courses taught, including course numbers and titles, dates, and the position of the course in the curriculum (general elective, satisfying general education requirement, major elective, core course in the major, etc.) A reflective statement by the faculty member, describing his or her teaching philosophy, strategies and objectives, methodologies. Course syllabi and representative course materials. Description of curricular revisions, including new course projects, materials, and class assignments. Evidence of pedagogical innovation in courses and assessment of its effectiveness. Participation in conferences or workshops, or other research, devoted to pedagogical issues. •
Description of steps taken to improve teaching, including changes resulting from self-­‐appraisal, external appraisal, student evaluation, and pedagogical research. Other sources of appraisal: •
•
•
•
•
•
Statements from colleagues who have observed the professor's instruction in the classroom. Statements from colleagues appraising performance as an advisor to students. Statements from colleagues who have reviewed the professor’s teaching materials, such as course syllabi, assignments, testing and grading practices. Student course-­‐ or teaching-­‐evaluation data. Honors or other recognition from colleagues, such as distinguished teaching or student advising awards. Documentation of teaching-­‐development activity through grants, departmental work, etc. The Products of Teaching and Student Learning: •
•
•
•
•
•
•
Examples of graded student essays along with the professor’s comments and use of assessment rubrics. Examples of examinations particularly designed to promote student learning. A record of students who have succeeded in advanced study in the field. Student publications, conference presentations, reports on course-­‐related work. A student portfolio documenting progress through teacher response over the course of a term. Information about the effect of the professor and his or her courses on student career choices. Information about the help given by the professor to secure student employment or graduate school admission. Other Items which might be included: •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Evidence of help given to colleagues leading to improvement of their teaching, such as leading faculty development workshops or participating in pedagogical seminars. Evidence of having received a grant for improving teaching or making curricular revisions to one’s syllabi. A videotape of the teacher teaching a class. Evidence of technological innovation, such as: a web page designed by students in a course or an electronic syllabus designed by the teacher for the students. Invitations to present a paper on teaching in one’s discipline. Published work on pedagogy in one’s field. Contributing to, or editing, a professional journal or special issue of a journal on teaching in one’s discipline. Participation in off-­‐campus activities relating to teaching. Description of how field trips, computers, films, and other non-­‐print materials are used in teaching. Performance reviews as a faculty advisor. The Departmental Chair’s letter will be expected to address the candidate’s teaching, and may address any of the items listed above. Further Resources: The information in these pages has been culled from Peter Seldin. The Teaching dossier: A Practical Guide to Improved Performance and Promotion/Tenure Decisions. Bolton, MA: Anker, 1997 and PeterSeldin. The Successful Use of Teaching Dossiers. Bolton, MA: Anker, 1993. These volumes contain many sample portfolios, as well as practical suggestions for building effective portfolios, and are available for consultation in the Office of Academic Affairs.