examples of tenure dossier review letters

EXAMPLES OF TENURE DOSSIER REVIEW LETTERS PROFESSIONAL

The Office of the Dean or designee should monitor the return of external reviews, sending reminders of deadlines to reviewers as appropriate to encourage the timely return of written external letters for the academic unit's assessment of the candidate’s credentials and prior to the unit vote.

Advice from the chair/director and academic unit colleagues should be strongly considered however, the final decision on what materials are included in the package rests with the candidate. The submitted review package should be manageable for the external reviewers while adequately representing the quality and impact of the candidate’s body of work. These should include the candidate’s vitae and generally a sample of preferably peer-reviewed artifacts of scholarly or creative activity from the submitted dossier and a narrative statement discussing the scholarly or creative activity.

The chair/director should consult with the candidate and the faculty who will be reviewing the candidate’s portfolio regarding the materials sent to reviewers.

Instructions for the external reviewers to a minimum of five external reviewers.

The Dean or designee will complete and send cover letters with The chair/director or designee forwards the names and contact information for external reviewers to the Dean.Phone calls are not substitutes for reviews, which must be submitted to the academic unit in writing. Affirmative responses should be confirmed in writing, clarifying the intent of the assessment and timeline.The email/conversation should follow a standardized script to model neutrality. The chair/director or designee should contact a minimum of five identified reviewers from the remaining list by phone or e-mail to request participation in the assessment of the candidate's credentials.Candidates should be reminded not to communicate with external reviewers while the review process is underway. The candidate should be given the option of removing the names of no more than two suggested reviewers from the list with no reasons or explanations required. The candidate also should identify suggested reviewers with whom he/she has the appearance of a conflict of interest at the chair’s/director’s discretion, these names should be removed from the list. The candidate should identify suggested reviewers with whom he/she has a conflict of interest these names should be removed from the list.The academic unit should compile a large list of suggested reviewers (e.g., 10 or more) to provide a list that is sufficient in number to allow for the removal of names due to identified conflicts and the candidate’s vetoes and assure that no fewer than three external reviews are completed in time to include in the promotion and/or tenure credential file.

EXAMPLES OF TENURE DOSSIER REVIEW LETTERS PROFESSIONAL

For example, reviewers should not be from the same graduate program (as peer or instructor), should not be a co-author, should not be more than a casual professional acquaintance, and should not have another relationship with the candidate that might undermine the credibility of the review. The candidate and the chair/director have a shared responsibility to avoid conflicts of interest and appearances of conflicts of interest. Reviewers for full-professor cases must hold the rank of professor. Reviewers must be tenured at their home institutions. Emeritus professors who are no longer active or scholars whose own research and reputation has moved outside the field of the candidate should be avoided. The academic unit should identify active and influential scholars in the field.The unit should avoid reviewers from less prestigious institutions, unless warranted by the expertise and reputation of the reviewers in the research area of the candidate. The academic unit should nominate reviewers who have recognized reputations in the field and who hold appropriate ranks at peer or aspirant institutions.

To do so, the chair/director will compare the candidate suggestions with the tenured faculty suggestions, identify the names in common, place those at the top of the composite list, then select alternately from the faculty list and the candidate list to complete the composite list. If candidates contribute names, the chair/director will prepare a composite list. Depending on policies of the academic unit, the candidate may also be asked to contribute names of potential reviewers.

The chair/director requests suggestions of reviewers from all tenured faculty members in the academic unit.

Examples of tenure dossier review letters