New Appointments of Faculty Members to Higher Ranks
Definition of "Higher Ranks"
The College of Engineering Council on Promotion and Tenure must review documentation for recommendation of new faculty appointments, with or without tenure, to the following academic ranks:
- Associate Professor
- Associate Research Professor
- Professor
- Research Professor
with the following exception. For hires to temporary positions that require review by the P&T Council within two years (e.g. hire to Associate Professor Without Tenure), review of the initial hire is not required. More info
In this case, the current concern about the nature of letters at the time of appointment is moot since we will be reviewing a full dossier with the usual 4 Category A and 1 Category B letters within two years of the hire. We see no reason to review twice, once with letters obtained during the hire process and then a full dossier. We view this, as suggested by the COE Head of HR, more like a tenure track Assistant Professor appointment (which would not come before the P&T Council).
As stated in the University Handbook, Section 25-32. Criteria for Tenure, D. “Appointments to the rank of associate professor or full professor "without tenure," as specified under C.4 above, are limited to not more than three years.” Under this rule, dossiers of Associate Professors WOT must come before the P&T Committee in the second year of their three year appointment, leaving the required one year of appointment should the case be unsuccessful.*
Documents Not Reviewed by the Council on Promotion and Tenure
Any new appointment to an academic position requires certain new appointment paperwork. While these items are necessary for the appointment, many will not be reviewed by the Council on Promotion and Tenure; therefore, they do not need to be included in the 13 copies described below. Instead, these "New Appointment" materials should be submitted separately. A set of originals and 2 copies only are required of the following items:
- Offer Letter (sample offer letter available)
- Applicant Flow Report and copy of Job Advertisement (or waiver of search)
- UW biography form
- VISA documents as appropriate
- Affirmative Action Data Form
Documents Reviewed by the Council on Promotion and Tenure
The documentation for a new academic appointment to a higher rank with or without tenure should follow the guidelines established for promotion and tenure of internal candidates. In some instances, these guidelines either may not be applicable or the data cannot be readily obtained, and for such cases, the following minimum guidelines have been established.
- Table of Contents (A Table of Contents must be included in packet.)
- The Chair’s letter of recommendation;
- Concurrence of adjunct appointment; and/or joint appointment (as applicable);
- Report by the department search and / or review committee (if available);
- General biographical information (Curriculum Vitae);
- Publications;
- Documentation of teaching experience; (not required for Research appointments)
- Summary of external reviewers;
- Letters of external reviewers (see section below; SPECIFY A vs. B LETTERS)
- Copy of the cover letter sent to external reviewers;
- Copies of three most significant publications or other evidence of achievement.
LETTERS OF EXTERNAL REVIEWERS
- Overall a minimum of 5 letters must be included in dossier. A paragraph (in Section 14) should explain why each letter was solicited, e.g. why is the author’s opinion of the candidate important.
- A new appointment requires at least 3 Category A letters.
- Category A Letters meet the following four criteria:
- Reviewer is a recognized leader in the candidate’s specialty field
- Reviewer is currently active in this field
- Reviewer is independent, having no mutual career interdependencies with the candidate
- Reviewer is independently selected by the department’s review committee prior to any suggestions by the candidate.
- Category B letters do not meet all four criteria above. They are not required in the dossier, but may provide useful supplementary information. For example, a B letter from a close collaborator might clarify roles, when it is unclear who has been responsible for the research. At times, a B letter from a funding agency program director or society officer may provide useful perspective.
- New appointments typically have 3 category A letters and 2 category B letters. If upon receipt of what was expected to be an A letter, it becomes clear that there is a connection between the letter writer and the candidate that disqualifies the letter from being an “A,” then it is considered as an extra “B” letter.
- Reviews should be highly detailed and point to specific accomplishments of the candidate. Letters of a general nature are given less weight.
Refer to the Promotion and Tenure Toolkit for specific procedures and content guidelines for these sections.
Community of Innovators
Nominate a student, faculty or staff member who makes exceptional and meaningful contributions to the College.
Nominations due 5 p.m. March 1.
Nominees and awardees will be honored at the Community of Innovators Awards reception.
Wednesday, May 29, 2013
3:30 to 5:00 p.m.
Paul G. Allen Center,
Microsoft Atrium.
