- Chair's Letter
The Professors and Associate Professors of the department should
evaluate the candidate for reappointment in terms of the candidate's
performance to date as measured against the department's initial
expectations for scholarly development and teaching as documented in the
recommendation for initial appointment.
If a candidate has not met the department's expectations, the
department should give serious consideration to recommending the
termination of the appointment at the end of its current term. However,
the review for reappointment is not intended to be a review for ultimate
tenure, and the candidate should not be expected to have demonstrated that
he or she will clearly merit a future recommendation for a tenured
appointment. The review for reappointment is an excellent occasion to
make a careful analysis of the candidate's teaching record, and to provide
appropriate advice if he or she appears to be deficient in this area.
When recommending a candidate for reappointment the Chair's letter should
comment on the extent to which the candidate has fulfilled his or her
initial promise as indicated in the initial appointment documentation.
However, the Chair's letter should not speculate on the likelihood that
the department will eventually forward a positive recommendation for the
The Chair's letter must report the formal vote of the faculty in
the department, including the manner in which the vote was taken.
Positive votes, negative votes, abstentions, and absences must all be
included in this statement. No dossier will be considered by the
Personnel Committee if it lacks an explicit statement of the formal vote.
Minority opinion, when present, should be expressed in the Chair's letter
or in a separate letter written by another faculty member selected by the
- Curriculum Vitae of the Candidate
The candidate is responsible for preparing an up-to-date
curriculum vitae which includes scholarly accomplishments and plans,
teaching experience at the University (course numbers and descriptions,
numbers of students, dissertation supervision, graduate student placement,
if any, and undergraduate independent study supervision), and
administrative and committee service. All works published and in progress
should be included in the bibliography.
Candidates must provide inclusive pagination of all
bibliographical citations in the curriculum vitae (exact page numbers for
articles, number of pages for books and monographs). In addition, the
Chair should annotate the curriculum vitae or append to it a statement
that will enable readers of the dossier: (1) to distinguish the journals
in which the candidate's work appears that are refereed from those that
are not; and (2) to identify the writings that are primarily by the
candidate in cases of multiple authorship. The Chair should identify the
most significant scholarly journals in the field and indicate the protocol
for the field with regard to the order of names on jointly authored works.
No dossier for the reappointment of an Assistant Professor will be
considered by the Personnel Committee if it lacks this information.
Include all professional reviews of books written by the candidate.
When a candidate for reapointment has, had, or will have grant support
from outside agencies, the Department should use SAS Forms 99-28, 99-29,
and 99-30 to elaborate.
- Personal Statements
The candidate is to provide a personal statement(s) detailing research,
teaching, and service approaches and goals. Typically, this
statement--or these statements--greatly strengthen the understanding of
the candidate in the various stages of review.
- Teaching Chronicle (SAS Form 99-15)
- Evaluation of Teaching
The teaching evaluation for reappointment as assistant professor
should give a clear indication of the candidate's record and promise for
future growth as a teacher. It need not be as thorough an analysis as is
required for tenure discussions. School or departmental course
evaluations must be included. If small advanced graduate courses have not
been evaluated, that fact should be noted on the teaching chronicle.
Departmental mentorship activities should be described. TA's with whom
the candidate has worked should be consulted.
The Chair is responsible for providing enough information so that
the teaching data can be appropriately assessed. A departmental analysis
of the teaching data in a format that is consistent from case to case
within the department would be helpful. Average departmental ratings and
plots of instructor quality ratings versus class size can be helpful. In
interpreting the teaching evaluation of a faculty member teaching a
specific course, it might be helpful to know how those ratings compare
with the ratings of other faculty who have taught the same course.
- Faculty Distribution by Rank (SAS Form 99-16)
- Supporting Letters
At least three letters from University faculty commenting on the
candidate's performance to date should be included. External letters, if
appropriate, may be included in addition to or in place of some of the
internal letters. The report of an ad hoc department committee may be
substituted for individual letters. Letters from faculty in departments
in which the candidate holds a secondary appointment should also be