While persons holding the positions detailed under the following headings are members of the Academic Faculty, they are not eligible for tenure. While they are subject to many of the general hiring and promotion criteria for tenure-track Faculty, there are significant differences.  The following sections identify non-tenure track positions in the Academic Faculty and their promotion criteria.

Professor of the Practice

The position of Professor of the Practice is for qualified academic, business, or government leaders. Due to the stature of individuals to be offered this position, the category will have only one rank:  Professor of the Practice.

The qualifications are:

  • Have substantial bases of experience, normally at least ten (10) to fifteen (15) years, and a national/international reputation for excellence.
  • Have rich and extensive backgrounds in fields and disciplines related to the school or college of appointment at the Institute.

And expectations for this position are:

  • Will serve as liaisons between industry or government and the Institute in identifying teaching and research opportunities that support the public interest and societal needs.
  • May be expected (depending on circumstances of their appointment) to generate financial resources to support and enhance the Institute programs in which they work.

The guidelines for implementation are:

  • General duties and responsibilities must be agreed upon in advance with each Professor of the Practice and their Chair, Dean or Unit Head. And documented in their letter of appointment.
  • Appointments as Professor of the Practice may be full-time or part-time. Eligibility for fringe and retirement benefits will conform to Georgia Tech employment policies.
  • “Professor of the Practice” is a non-tenurable title which is consistent with Board of Regents provisions for “Non-Tenure Track Personnel”. This classification carries with it membership in the Academic Faculty of the Institute.
  • The position may be described as “Professor of the Practice of X,” where X is an academic discipline or specialty. For communications purposes, a Professor of the Practice may represent himself or herself with a shorter title as “Professor of X.”
  • Professors of the Practice will be reappointed annually but with no limit as to the number of years that may be served.
  • Professors of the Practice will participate in an annual evaluation, as is regularly conducted for tenure track Faculty. Performance will be evaluated during this annual review, with actions and recommendations made as appropriate.
  • During the term of their appointment, Professors of the Practice are subject to, and protected by, the same Institute policies concerning academic freedom as tenured and tenure track Faculty.
  • Funding sources for Professors of the Practice may include the Institute, College, School, or Center, or some combination of these, and the funds may consist in whole or part of funds generated by the individual.
  • Schools, Colleges and Units at the Institute have considerable latitude in developing complementary policies and procedures for Professors of the Practice as long as they are consistent with overall policies detailed in this Section.
  • The Institute and its Schools, Colleges and Units will adopt appointment and reappointment policies. At minimum, these policies will involve letters of recommendation concerning the individual being proposed for a position as Professor of the Practice, on-campus interviews of the candidate, input into the decision by a body of the faculty in the School or College or Unit, recommendation of the Chair and/or Dean or Unit Head, and approval by the Provost. Faculty involvement in the decision to hire should be identical to those procedures used for hiring tenured Professors.

Academic Professionals

Board of Regents Policy Manual, Section 8.3.8.3.

Academic Professional titles may be assigned to appropriate positions (as defined below). Persons in such positions may be involved in duties of a managerial, research, technical, special, career, public service or instructional support nature. The ranks of the Academic Professional at Georgia Tech include: Associate Academic Professional, Academic Professional, Senior Academic Professional, and Principal Academic Professional.

The following stipulations apply to all Academic Professional positions:

  • The position requires an appropriate terminal degree, or in rare and extraordinary circumstances, qualification on the basis of demonstrably successful related experience, which exception is expressly approved by the President.
  • The Academic Professional designation may not be assigned to a position where the teaching and research responsibilities total 50% or more of the total assignment.
  • The position is not a tenure-track position, and the holder of the position is not eligible for consideration for the award of tenure, or for probationary credit toward tenure.

The designation Academic Professional would apply to a variety of academic assignments that call for academic background similar to that of a Faculty member with professorial rank, but which are distinctly different from professorial positions. Examples include, but are not limited to, the following:

  • instructional laboratory management,
  • academic program management,
  • program development and coordination,
  • program evaluation and assessment,
  • operating instructional technology support programs,
  • responsibility for general academic advising,
  • providing services or co-curricular educational opportunities for students,
  • professional student counseling center responsibilities,
  • providing specialized skill acquisition training as support for academic programs,
  • course, laboratory, and curriculum development, and
  • course delivery.

Academic Professionals at any rank will be evaluated annually.

Reappointment of Academic Professionals is made annually. Notice of non-reappointment must be made in a timely manner consistent with Board of Regents policy, using the three-, six-, and nine-month notification schedule depending upon length of service in the position, as outlined in the Notice subsection of 3.3.3.

Criteria or guidelines for reappointment in Academic Professional ranks generally follow those established for Instructional Units as set out in Section 3.3.3.  Additional criteria may be established by the President in consultation with the Faculty Executive Board, and shall be published and distributed to the Faculty.

Guidelines for Appointment and Promotion

  • Associate Academic Professional. This is the entry-level rank and normally requires completion of the terminal degree.  In exceptional cases, this rank may be used for individuals completing a terminal degree and for a period of two (2) years.  If the degree is not conferred, another position appointment is required.

  • Academic Professional.  This rank requires a terminal degree.  It also requires significant related experience or promotion from the rank of Associate Academic Professional.  Ordinarily at least three (3) years as an Associate Academic Professional is required before promotion to the rank of Academic Professional.  The quality of performance and potential for development must be recognized by peers. Credit for previous academic or professional experience should be explicitly stated at the time of employment.

  • Senior Academic Professional.  This rank requires a terminal degree.  It also requires evidence of superior performance in the chosen field, recognition by peers (whether national, regional, or local), and successful and measurable related experience.  Promotion to Senior Academic Professional from the rank of Academic Professional requires at least five (5) years at that level. Credit for previous academic or professional experience should be explicitly stated at the time of employment.

  • Principal Academic Professional. This rank requires a terminal degree.  It also requires evidence of superior performance in the chosen field, recognition by peers (whether national, regional, or local), and successful and measurable related experience, including but not limited to supervision of others’ work, significant responsibility and authority within program area, and demonstrated impact.  Promotion to Principal Academic Professional from the rank of Senior Academic Professional requires at least six (6) years at that level. Credit for previous academic or professional experience should be explicitly stated at the time of employment.

Academic Professional ranks constitute a career ladder, and minimum times in rank are generally required for consideration for promotion. However, promotion is not routine:  each rank has its own performance criteria. Thus, successful performance at one rank in and of itself does not necessarily imply having met the criteria for the next rank simply with the passage of time.

Minimum expectations for promotion in all Academic Professional ranks should be based on the five (5) criteria listed below. The candidate must demonstrate noteworthy achievement in number one (effective administration) and two of the others.

  1. effectively carrying out assigned administrative duties within unit;
  2. superior teaching and/or educational impact, if applicable;
  3. outstanding service to the Institute, and/or community
  4. outstanding research, scholarship, creative activity, or academic achievement, as defined by role; and
  5. professional growth and development.

Each Unit is expected to establish clear guidelines and examples based on these promotion criteria and the mission of that Unit. These guidelines should be easily accessible to all faculty.

As part of the promotion process, the supervisor should submit a written recommendation setting forth the reasons and justification, based on the above criteria, for promotion. The Academic Professional’s length of service with the Institute shall be taken into consideration in determining whether or not the individual should be promoted.

Promotion to the rank of Academic Professional or above additionally requires the earned doctorate or its equivalent in training, ability, and/or experience. Neither the possession of a doctorate nor longevity of service is a guarantee per se of promotion.

Any promotion denied for budgetary reasons alone shall be considered as deferred until sufficient funds become available.

After initial appointment, each candidate for promotion will be judged primarily on the basis of the quality of performance of her/his assigned responsibilities consistent with the appropriate position description and on whether or not she/he meets the criteria for the rank.  The candidate will also be expected to have made significant progress in her/his own professional area.  Documentation of this progress necessarily will be appropriate for the specific position and may include such items as professional recognition, awards, service in professional associations, creative activities, and service within the academic community and professional or disciplinary contributions. Section 3.3.7 of the Georgia Tech Faculty Handbook provides guidance related to the evaluation of faculty members as teachers and educators and the evaluation of the research and service contributions of faculty. This guidance may be used as a framework for promotion consideration; however, evaluators should keep in mind that teaching and research together should constitute less than 50% of any Academic Professional’s duties.

Promotion Procedures

Candidate’s Responsibility

Preparation of the promotion dossier is the responsibility of the candidate in consultation with and support of his/her supervisor. The candidate has the responsibility to prepare and review the documentation that is submitted, except for the evaluation letters.  However, the list provided by the candidate for external evaluators should be included in the package.  When this documentation is complete, and in the proper format, the candidate will sign a statement that it is both accurate and complete.

Should the candidate fail to meet the deadlines established by the Unit for submission of the required documentation, consideration of promotion may be delayed until the following year.

The candidate should include at a minimum the following information:

  • A position description (provided in conjunction with the supervisor), if the promotion includes a change in professional responsibilities.
  • A self-statement by the candidate.
  • A curriculum vitae that summarizes biographical, personal, and professional data using the Institute standard format for academic professionals. 
  • The candidate may also submit evidence of three (3) to five (5) examples of their relevant best work that represent their administrative and/or creative capabilities. These may include reports, published papers, books, software, patents, art productions, or other relevant examples that reflect their superior performance and will be recognized by their peers as such.
  • If the candidate has teaching responsibilities, the candidate should provide their own table of student evaluation scores from the Course Instructor Opinion Survey (CIOS). The table should be in the Institute standard format and include the scores from the question: “Is the instructor an effective teacher?” Other evidence of effective teaching may be provided with the guidance of the supervisor.
  • Names of Reviewers. The candidate should provide the names of at least three (3) people who are in a position to evaluate the dossier for promotion. 
  • Signed Statement of Completeness and Waiver of Access forms provided by the Unit.

External Peer Review

Letters of evaluation. Depending upon the nature of the candidate’s responsibilities, these letters may be national, regional, or local. There should be at least three and need not be more than five, but each should be from an evaluator outside of the unit (i.e. outside of the college, vice provost, or vice president’s unit), address the substance of the candidate’s accomplishments and be solicited either by the supervisor or Unit head with an explanation of the criteria for evaluation, as appropriate. At least one (1) letter of evaluation should be from an individual external to the Institute for promotion to Academic Professional or Senior Academic Professional and at least two (2) should be external to Georgia Tech for promotion to Principal Academic Professional.

The list of individuals from whom letters are to be obtained shall be developed jointly by the candidate for promotion and the supervisor. The final decision regarding who is selected to provide evaluations from the list shall rest with the supervisor. It is appropriate to use the same letters for two (2) consecutive years of the process.

A candidate for promotion shall have the right to request that a particular individual not be contacted as an external reviewer. Such requests are typically honored. If the supervisor concludes that circumstances require use of that reviewer, the letter must be in addition to those normally required, identified as such, and filed separately from the other external letters. A justification for including the letter must be included in the package.

External evaluations shall be solicited by the supervisor or Unit Head and supplied to the other levels of review on campus. These letters shall be solicited with the understanding that, insofar as possible, access to them will be limited to persons involved in the promotion decision.

All candidates will be asked to sign a waiver indicating whether or not candidate “waives all rights to see the identity of the external letter writers and/or the content of their letters”. The waiver form with the candidate’s decision will be included in the package.

Internal Review

Based on the candidate’s dossier and the external letters, the supervisor will provide a letter of evaluation addressed to the Unit Head. This letter should provide an analysis of the candidate’s experience and performance using the relevant criteria related to their position, a summary of the external letters, and a recommendation for or against promotion.  If the promotion also includes a change in or additional professional responsibilities, the change should be described. This letter from the supervisor will be added to the candidate materials and external letters.

The Unit Head will convene a committee which may include tenured faculty as well as academic professionals at or above the rank being considered (the members of the committee may be external to the home unit).  Based on the results of an official vote, the committee will send its recommendation to the Unit head describing the rationale of the vote either for or against promotion.

The Unit head will write a letter to the Provost summarizing the main strengths and/or weaknesses of the case and whether he/she recommends promotion or not. In a case in which the supervisor is the Unit Head, for example when the candidate reports directly to the dean of a college, the Unit Head may provide the committee with written guidance that describes what the candidate has accomplished and what there is about the quality of the candidate’s work and expertise which warrants promotion at this time.  If the promotion also includes a change in or additional professional responsibilities, the change should be described. The Unit Head will write his/her letter to the Provost following the recommendation by the committee.

Institute Review

The Unit Head forwards his or her letter with the completed package to the Provost through the Office of Faculty Affairs for final review. The final outcome of the decision is communicated in writing to the Dean of the College or appropriate Unit Head, who in turn communicates the decision to the faculty member at the end of the review process.

Feedback to Faculty Members

After the final decision has been made and communicated in a letter from the President, It is important for the Faculty member to receive feedback regarding the assessments involved. The appropriate place for the individual Faculty member to receive this feedback is from the supervisor. The supervisor shall receive a copy of the recommendations prepared by the committee and all other reviewers (with the exception of the reviewers’ letters). At the end of the review process, the supervisor shall review each recommendation, including his/her own, with the candidate, and counsel the candidate appropriately.

In cases of disapproval of promotion, a candidate shall be counseled concerning the reasons for a negative decision.

The candidate may withdraw his/her promotion package at any time prior to submission of the package to the Office of the Provost.

 

Lecturers

Full-Time Lecturers
Board of Regents Policy Manual, Section 8.3.8.1

To carry out special instructional functions such as basic skills instruction, the Institute may appoint instructional staff members to the position of Lecturer. Lecturers at any rank are not eligible for the award of tenure. Reappointment of a lecturer who has completed six (6) consecutive years of service to the Institute will be permitted only if the lecturer has demonstrated exceptional teaching ability and extraordinary value to the Institute. The reappointment process must follow Institute procedures. Not more than twenty (20) percent of the Institute’s FTE corps of primarily undergraduate instruction may be Lecturers, Senior Lecturers, and Principal Lecturers.

Senior and Principal Lecturers
Board of Regents Policy Manual, Section 8.3.8.2

The titles of Senior Lecturer and Principal Lecturer may be used at the discretion of the Institute.   The Institute is discouraged from initial hiring at the Senior and Principal Lecturer levels. Both Senior and Principal Lecturers are expected to participate fully in the School/College and at a more robust level than Lecturers. Their participation may include new course development, service on internal/external committees, research and implementation regarding pedagogy, and/or leadership within the School/College. In addition to time in rank at the Senior Lecturer level, Principal Lecturers also are expected to show more leadership and educational impact than a Senior Lecturer and their participation may include cutting-edge pedagogical practices and/or leadership within the Institute.

Lecturers who have served for a period of at least six (6) years at the Institute may be considered for promotion to Senior Lecturer. Senior Lecturers who have served for a period of at least five (5) years in rank at the Institute may be considered for promotion to Principal Lecturer. Promotion to Senior Lecturer or Principal Lecturer requires approval by the President.

Hiring and Reappointment
Board of Regents Policy Manual, Section 8.3.4

Full-time Lecturers, Senior Lecturers, and Principal Lecturers are appointed on a year-to-year basis and reappointment procedures are the same at all ranks. Since individuals in these positions serve in Instructional Units, procedures for consideration of reappointment are handled by those Units in the same manner as for other Reappointments, as set out in this Handbook, Section 3.3.3. Hiring of Lecturers at all ranks should include letters of recommendations, on-campus interviews, official transcripts, background checks, a job description specific to the appointment, other supporting documentation, request by the Chair and/or Dean, and approval by the Provost.

Lecturers of all ranks who have served full-time for the entire previous academic year have the presumption of reappointment for the subsequent academic year unless notified in writing to the contrary as follows:

  • For Lecturers of all ranks with less than three (3) years of full-time service, the Institute shall provide non-reappointment notice as early as possible, but no specific notice is required.
  • For Lecturers of all ranks with three (3) or more years but less than six (6) years of full-time service, the Institute must provide non-reappointment notice at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to the first day of classes in the semester.
  • For Lecturers of all ranks with six (6) years or more of full-time service, the Institute must provide non-reappointment notice at least one hundred and eighty (180) calendar days prior to the first day of classes in the semester.

Lecturers of all ranks with six (6) or more years of full-time service who have received timely notice of non-reappointment shall be entitled to a review of the decision in accordance with the procedures in this Handbook.  For additional appeal procedures see Section VIII of the Bylaws of the Board of Regents.

In no case will service as a Lecturer, Senior Lecturer, or Principal lecturer imply any claim upon tenure or reappointment under conditions other than those above.

Guidelines for Promotion and Evaluation

Lecturers are expected to focus on classroom instruction, but service activities can be part of their duties.  The development of original course material and syllabi in line with the learning outcomes of the course(s) may also be part of their duties. Service may be included in the evaluation.  Some examples of service may include participation on internal or related external committees, faculty advisor for student organizations, advisor for senior design projects, or other meaningful engagement with the campus community.

Professional development may also be included in the evaluation.  Examples of professional development are publication of papers or technical reports, attendance at field-related conferences, incorporation of recent research into courses, attendance at teaching workshop, or creative contributions.  Any expectation of service or professional development activities should be outlined in the appointment letter. In rare cases, administrative duties may be assigned as a small percentage of the position responsibilities. However, classroom instruction should account for a majority of the workload for lecturers of all ranks.

Lecturers at any rank will be evaluated annually and should demonstrate excellence in teaching.  Each unit is expected to establish a set of clearly defined criteria for promotion defined in accordance with the mission of that Unit. These criteria should be easily accessible to all faculty.

Lecturers shall prepare a teaching portfolio which should include materials for the course(s) taught, self-evaluation, student evaluations, and other related information.

The teaching portfolio will be reviewed as part of the evaluation processes by a committee constituted in each School and/or College. 

In addition to an annual evaluation, Lecturers in their third year will have a third-year review initiated by the Unit head and conducted by the School/College Committee.  This review will also be used to determine progress toward promotion to Senior Lecturer. Promotion from Lecturer to Senior Lecturer may be considered after six (6) years at the Institute. Promotion from Senior Lecturer to Principal Lecturer may be considered after five (5) years in rank as a Senior Lecturer. Time in service at any rank does not necessarily imply having met the criteria for the next rank simply with the passage of time.

Formal evaluation for promotion should include the teaching portfolio, a current curriculum vitae including service and professional development activities, and a minimum of three (3) letters of evaluation external to the unit. At least one evaluation letter should be from an individual external to the Institute; for promotion to Principal Lecturer, at least two letters should be from individuals external to the Institute. 

Materials will be reviewed by a School/College committee.  The School/College Committee will submit a letter of support for and the reason for the promotion as well as the official vote to the school chair or dean (depending on if the candidate is at the school or college level). The school chair or dean will write a letter to the Provost summarizing the main strengths and/or weaknesses of the case and whether he/she recommends promotion or not.

Promotion to Senior Lecturer or Principal Lecturer requires approval by the President.

 

Instructors

A person hired with the academic rank of Instructor is not eligible for tenure under Board of Regents policies.  They are however afforded the same expectations and procedures for reappointment as set out in this Handbook in Section 3.3.3.  The maximum period of time that may be served at the rank of full-time Instructor shall be seven (7) years.

Librarians and Archivists

Georgia Tech Library is a member of the Association of Research Libraries (ARL), a nonprofit organization of over 120 research libraries at comprehensive, research institutions in Canada and the US that share similar research missions, aspirations and achievements.  Georgia Tech Librarians and Archivists follow similar guidelines and practices as other ARL member libraries where librarians and archivists are non-tenured track faculty.

The position of Librarian or Archivist is for qualified individuals within the Georgia Tech Library who provide complex information services to:

(a) ensure students and faculty have necessary information resources; (b) teach students information and data literacy to ensure that they become proficient life-long learners; (c) support and facilitate faculty in their teaching and research endeavors. Librarians or Archivists may focus on one or more areas within the information lifecycle, which encompasses information creation, selection, acquisition, organization, retrieval, access, dissemination, discovery, evaluation, display, and preservation. For example, a cataloging librarian is involved primarily in information organization, access, and discovery. A digital scholarship librarian concentrates on information creation, organization, and dissemination. An instruction librarian’s job centers on information retrieval, dissemination, and evaluation; and an archivist focuses on information preservation and access.

 

Career ladders are established for Librarians and Archivists, using the following titles: Librarian/Archivist I, Librarian/Archivist II, Librarian/Archivist III, and Librarian/Archivist IV.   Eligibility for promotion consideration is based on (a) years of service as a Librarian/Archivist at the current rank; (b) years of professional experience as a Librarian/Archivist in general; and (c) a mandatory 3rd year review. Years of service is calculated based on the Georgia Tech fiscal year. A Librarian/Archivist’s first year of service at Georgia Tech starts on July 1 of the calendar year when the Librarian/Archivist is employed on or before October 15. Otherwise, a

Librarian/Archivist’s first year of service at Georgia Tech starts on July 1 of the following calendar year. A Librarian/Archivist at any rank must submit their dossier for a mandatory 3rd year review at the beginning of their 3rd year of service at the Library.

 

Librarians/Archivists are expected to, first and foremost, excel in their positions held at Georgia Tech. As a result, the vast majority of their time should be spent on carrying out assigned duties within the Library. The rest of a Librarian/Archivist’s time should be distributed equally to scholarship and service. Service typically include service to the Library, Institute, and the library profession which are beyond those mandated by the individual’s primary job responsibilities. Exceptions to this typical effort distribution should be documented in writing, acknowledged by the Librarian/Archivist, their supervisor and the Dean of Libraries. The primary indicator of excellence is impact. As a librarian/archivist approaches higher ranks, demonstrated impact beyond the Institution is expected.

 

Librarians/Archivists at any rank will be evaluated annually.

 

Reappointment of Librarians and Archivists is made annually. Notification of non-reappointment must be made in a timely manner consistent with Board of Regents policy, using the three-, six-, and nine-month notification schedule depending upon length of service in the position, as outlined in the Notice subsection of 3.3.3.

Guidelines for Appointment and Promotion

Librarian/Archivist I. This is an entry-level rank. Individuals are not permitted to remain at this rank permanently. A Librarian/Archivist I must submit their dossier for promotion review, at the latest, by the end of their fourth year of service at Librarian/Archivist I rank at Georgia Tech Library. Appointment to this rank requires an appropriate terminal degree, typically an American Library Association (ALA) - accredited master’s degree, a degree in a subject related to archival work, and/or in the appropriate area of specialization. Additional expertise and/or experience may be required for specific positions. Up to two (2) years credit for previous professional experience at this level may be given at the time of employment, in which case such credit must be stated in the offer letter.

Librarian/Archivist II. This is an intermediate rank. Individuals can stay at this rank permanently. This rank requires an appropriate terminal degree, typically an American Library Association (ALA) - accredited master’s degree, a degree in a subject related to archival work, and/or in the appropriate area of specialization. It also requires consistent and solid performance in primary job functions, with evidence showing the individual’s ability to fulfill the strategic goals of the Library and the Institute. Either evidence of scholarship or evidence of service is required, but not both. Evidence of scholarship or evidence of service should be commensurate with effort distribution. Promotion to the rank of Librarian/Archivist II also requires at least five (5) years of service at the Librarian/Archivist I rank. Up to two (2) years credit for previous professional experience at this level may be given at the time of employment, in which case such credit must be stated in the offer letter.

Librarian/Archivist III. This is an intermediate rank. Individuals can stay at this rank permanently. This rank requires an appropriate terminal degree, typically an American Library Association (ALA) - accredited master’s degree, a degree in a subject related to archival work, and/or in the appropriate area of specialization. It also requires superior performance in primary job functions, demonstrated by significant contributions to the Library, Institute, and profession. The quality of performance and impact must be recognized by peers through at least two (2), but no more than five (5) external review letters. A strong record of both scholarship and service is required. Evidence of scholarship and evidence of service should be commensurate with effort distribution. Promotion to the rank of Librarian/Archivist III also requires at least five (5) years of service at the Librarian/Archivist II rank and at least ten (10) years of professional experience in general. Up to two years credit for previous professional experience at this level may be given at the time of employment, in which case such credit must be stated in the offer letter.

Librarian/Archivist IV. This is the highest rank that individuals can achieve at the Library. This rank requires an appropriate terminal degree, typically an American Library Association (ALA) - accredited master’s degree, a degree in a subject related to archival work, and/or in the appropriate area of specialization. It also requires longstanding leadership in consistently improving and innovating library services, broadening the impact of library programs, and strengthening the Institute’s reputation. Individuals at this level maintain the highest standards of professional practice, and their outstanding contributions to the Library, Institute, and profession are recognized widely as verified by peers through at least three (3) but no more than five (5) external review letters. A record of excellence in both scholarship and service is required. Evidence of scholarship and evidence of service should be commensurate with effort distribution. Promotion to the rank of Librarian/Archivist IV also requires at least five (5) years of service at Georgia Tech Library at the Librarian/Archivist III rank and at least fifteen (15) years of professional experience in general.

Promotion Procedures

Candidate’s Responsibility

Preparation of the promotion dossier is the responsibility of the candidate in consultation with their supervisor. The candidate has the responsibility to prepare and review the documentation to be submitted, with the exception of external evaluation letters. When the documentation is complete and in the proper format, the candidate will sign a statement that the dossier is both accurate and complete.

Should the candidate fail to meet the deadlines established by the Library for submission of the required documentation, consideration of promotion may be delayed until the following year.

The candidate’s promotion dossier should include at a minimum the following information:

• Coversheet

• Biosketch

• Current position description

• Personal narrative

• Curriculum vitae

• CV addendum or updates (if applicable)

• Teaching and training assessment (if applicable)

• Statement of Completeness

• Waiver of Access form

• List of five (5) potential external reviewers (if applicable)

• Examples of relevant creative work

The candidate may withdraw their promotion package at any time prior to receipt of the final decision by the Provost.

External Peer Review

For promotion to Librarian/Archivist III and Librarian/Archivist IV, external letters of evaluation are required. A minimum of two (2) letters, of which at least one (1) letter should be from an individual external to the Institute, must be included in each dossier for promotion to Librarian/Archivist III. A minimum of three (3) letters, of which at least two (2) should be from individuals external to the Institute, must be included in each dossier for promotion to Librarian/Archivist IV.

The supervisor (and/or appropriate associate dean) and candidate should jointly develop the list of five (5) potential external reviewers, and submit the list to the Library Faculty Review Committee, which will request the letters of review using the External Review Request Letter Template.

All candidates will be asked to sign a waiver indicating whether or not the candidate “waives all rights to see the identity of the external letter writers and/or the content of their letters.” The waiver form with the candidate’s decision will be included in the dossier.

Internal Review

Each candidate’s dossier must go through the following stages of internal review before reaching the Provost for a decision.

1. First-level Review – Supervisor and/or Associate Dean. Based on the candidate’s dossier, the supervisor will provide a letter of evaluation addressed to the Dean of Libraries. This letter should provide an analysis of the candidate’s experience and performance using the relevant criteria related to their position. If the supervisor is not an Associate Dean, an appropriate Associate Dean may comment briefly (one paragraph) on the supervisor’s letter to either agree or disagree with the supervisor’s evaluation. This letter from the supervisor will be added to the candidate’s dossier.

2. Library Faculty Review Committee. The Dean of Libraries will convene the review committee(s), which may include faculty members from outside

the Library at the Professor or Principal level for non-tenure track faculty. After deliberations, the committee will conduct an official vote, record the vote on the coversheet, and describe the rationale of the vote in a recommendation letter addressed to the Dean of Libraries. This letter should include the date of deliberation and the vote. Where the vote is split, the views of members who voted with the minority should be represented in the letter if at all possible. Any conflicts of interest addressed in the committee’s work should also be described. This letter from the Library Faculty Review Committee will be added to the candidate’s dossier.

3. Dean of Libraries. The Dean of Libraries will write a letter to the Provost summarizing the main strengths and/or weaknesses of the case and where the Dean agrees with or differs from the previous levels of review. The Dean’s recommendation is recorded in the letter and on the coversheet. This letter from the Dean of Libraries will be added to the candidate’s dossier.

Institute Review

Institute Non-Tenure-Track Faculty Review Committee. The Dean of Libraries will forward the completed dossier to the Provost through the Office of Faculty Affairs for final review by the Institute Non-Tenure Track Promotion Committee and the Provost. The final outcome of the decision is communicated in writing to the Dean of Libraries, who in turn communicates the decision to the candidate at the end of the review process.

Feedback to Faculty Members

After the final promotion decision has been made and communicated in writing to the candidate through the Dean of Libraries, it is important for the faculty member to receive additional feedback regarding the assessments received. The candidate’s supervisor will also receive a copy of the recommendations prepared by the Institute Non-Tenure-Track Faculty Promotion Review Committee and all other reviewers (with the exception of any external peer review letters). At the end of the review process, the supervisor will review each recommendation, including their own, with the candidate, and counsel the candidate appropriately.

In cases of denial of promotion, the candidate will be counseled concerning the reasons for the negative decision.