Table of Contents

HANDBOOK

Index

TO: Academic Deans and Directors

FROM: William M. Plater
Dean of the Faculties and
Executive Vice Chancellor

SUBJ: Promotion & Tenure 1997-1998

DATE: June 13, 1997

Our records indicate that a decision on tenure is required next year for each of the faculty members listed on the attached sheet. Please examine this list carefully and inform Assistant Dean Shirley Nusbaum of any errors or omissions.

Enclosed is a copy of the guidelines for preparing promotion and tenure dossiers. There are only a few changes, and most of these are advisory. In addition to the materials required in the guidelines, we will require that the following documentation accompany each negative recommendation for tenure.

1. A copy of the letter sent to the faculty member which notifies him/her of a negative tenure recommendation and also provides him/her with a written statement of policies governing reappointment and non-reappointment.

2. Copies of the past two years' annual review summaries.

Your tenure and promotion dossiers are due in this office by November 14, 1997. Please note, we require the original dossier plus two copies, although a candidate for both promotion and tenure may submit one dossier (and two copies). Please forward all dossiers to the attention of Shirley Nusbaum, Room 126E, AO Building.

WMP:lvp

encs.

cc: Gerald L. Bepko, Chancellor

Erv Boschmann, Associate Dean

Shirley C. Nusbaum, Assistant Dean

INDIANA UNIVERSITY ­ PURDUE UNIVERSITY AT INDIANAPOLIS

DEAN OF THE FACULTIES

June 1, 1997

IUPUI Campus Review of Tenure and Promotion Dossiers

These guidelines apply to faculty and librarians who are subject to peer review at the IUPUI campus level, including faculty who hold appointments in Purdue Schools at IUPUI. These guidelines should be used in preparing dossiers for both promotion and tenure. Purdue faculty should use the Purdue University cover sheet for their dossiers but complete all other campus prescribed materials, including the dossier checklist.

Criteria

Criteria for tenure and promotion for faculty and for librarians are outlined in the Indiana University Academic Handbook, and candidates should recognize that criteria used for evaluation are separate and distinct from the following guidelines used to assist in the preparation of dossiers. Criteria are the standards by which candidates are evaluated. University criteria as well as department and school or library requirements should be consulted in the preparation of dossiers along with these guidelines. The criteria for promotion and tenure are not identical, but they are closely correlated. Decisions regarding promotion and tenure may be made separately. Because Purdue University criteria are very similar to Indiana University criteria, the statements of criteria in the Indiana University Academic Handbook will be used to evaluate faculty in Purdue schools and programs. Faculty should consult school-specific documents which interpret or apply criteria to the specific mission.

Evaluation Standards

Each school or library must have a document that states with reasonable specificity the standards that will be used to evaluate whether candidates meet the criteria for tenure and for promotion. In accord with school policies, departments or divisions may also have such documents. These documents must comply with the standards of the University and be accepted by and be on file with the Dean of the Faculties. Standards relating to librarians are contained in the Library Faculty Handbook. If the department, school, or library document changes during a faculty member's probationary period, the faculty member may choose to be evaluated under the written standards in effect at the time of appointment.

Promotion and tenure considerations must recognize the diversity of the missions and the contexts of the campuses of the University and must not ignore the mission of the particular unit as defined in its statement of criteria and procedures and the individual's contributions to that mission.

This document outlines campus standards for evaluating candidates for promotion and tenure. Candidates should recognize that there are few universal standards, or even aspects of faculty and librarian work, which are common to all of the missions of a campus as complex and diverse as IUPUI. However, there are broad dimensions of our work which campus level committees and administrative officers will take into account when assessing whether or not a candidate's actual achievementsas documented by the dossierwarrant advancement.

Faculty

The questions reviewers will ask when assessing a faculty dossier include the following:

1. Does the work of the faculty member in teaching, research and professional service reflect well- defined purpose and clarity of goals?

2. Has the faculty member made adequate preparation to carry out the work, including continuing professional development beyond formal education?

3. Has the faculty member used appropriate methods and procedures for the work, following methods that are regarded as valid and effective?

4. Has the work culminated in significant results or contributions to the discipline or to the campus academic community in ways that can be recognized and evaluated by peers?

5. Have the results of the work been disseminated, in an effective and appropriate means? In other words, how (and how well) has the faculty member communicated the results of teaching, research, and service to peers on campus and across the discipline?

6. Finally, how has the faculty member demonstrated the ability to grow and develop through critical self-assessment and reflection? Is there a strong prospect of continued professional development based on the candidate's own self-critique and understanding of past accomplishments?

Librarian considerations:

The questions reviewers will ask when assessing librarian dossiers include the following:

1. Does the work of the librarian in performance, professional development and service reflect well- defined purpose and clarity of goals?

2. Has the librarian demonstrated that he/she is, first and foremost, an effective librarian in the position held?

3. Is evidence of the librarian's effective performance documented from individuals who have been closely associated with his or her performance or in some other capacity?

4. Has the librarian demonstrated a definite continuing program of quality professional development activities?

5. The librarian is expected to assume service responsibilities which support the academic mission of the campus. Has the librarian demonstrated effectiveness in carrying out service activities? Is there a demonstration of the relationship of the service activities to the general welfare and mission of the University?

6. Has a librarian candidate for promotion from Assistant to Associate Librarian shown excellence in performance which exceeds the requirement of operational standards? In addition, has the candidate shown continued improvement beyond the satisfactory level in either Professional Development or Service and a satisfactory level in the other area of activity?

7. Has a librarian candidate seeking promotion from Associate Librarian to Librarian shown superior performance? If professional development is the secondary criterion, has the librarian shown continued significant contribution at the state, regional or national level? If service is the secondary criterion, has the librarian shown a continued significant contribution at the community, state, regional or national level.

As candidates for promotion and tenure imagine by what standards they will be judged, these aspects of faculty and librarian work will inevitably come into consideration in some form and to some degree. By assuming that most evaluators will be interested in these questions, candidates can prepare dossiers which will address them and thus enhance their prospects for a favorable review.

Dossier Format

Dossiers must be submitted to the Dean of the Faculties at the announced time in accord with specific instructions that may affect the format of the dossier. The same dossier is to be used

for both tenure and promotion reviews. All dossiers should be divided into the following sections:

Faculty:

I. General Summary of Dossier Content

II. Personal Statement

III. Evaluation of Teaching and Teaching Scholarship

IV. Evaluation of Research or Creative Activity and Scholarship of Discovery

V. Evaluation of Professional Service and Scholarship of Application

VI. Appendices

Librarians:

I. General Summary

II. Performance

III. Professional Development

IV. Professional Service

V. Supporting Documents (for sections I, II, III)

VI. Supporting Documents required for promotion to the rank of librarian or
for local P & T Committee

Candidate's Responsibilities

Each section should be separated, labeled, and stapled, and the entire dossier should be placed into a single file folder; three ring binders may be used only for supplementary materials retained by the school or library. Binders and other supplementary materials should not be forwarded unless specifically requested. The contents of each section are described below. Although departmental, school or library procedures may allow for the addition of materials (e.g., external letters of evaluation), candidates for tenure and promotion prepare their own dossiers. Candidates must provide information and materials necessary for the review process, and they must be given adequate notice of deadlines. The dossier provides the evidence upon which promotion and tenure decisions are to be made. Dossiers are a succinct summary of accomplishments and they are expected to be brief. Length and volume are not viewed as measures by which decisions are made. In most cases, brevity is preferred and appreciated.

Chair's Responsibilities

Although candidates ordinarily prepare their own dossiers, chairs or their equivalent (or their designees) should be available to assist candidates in organizing the materials and in making certain that dossiers are in the proper format for review at the various school or library and campus levels. School or library procedures may also require that chairs (or designees) solicit external letters; letters solicited or received by candidates seldom are considered to be of significance. Most importantly, department chairs, or designees, provide candid advice to candidates throughout their probationary period to ensure that they have adequate documentation in each of the required areas for an effective dossier based on achievements. For librarians, the Libraries Personnel Officer and mid-tenure review assist the Indiana University Librarians Promotion and Tenure Committee with these functions.

Dean's Responsibilities

School deans or the Libraries' Personnel Officer are responsible for ensuring that dossiers are complete and in proper order when they are forwarded to the Dean of the Faculties Office. Candidates must be informed of any materials added or changes made; at each stage of review, candidates and all previous reviewers must be provided an opportunity to comment on or to

respond to such additions. The added information and the responses will then become a part of the dossier. Candidates must sign the "Routing and Action Form" to indicate that they have reviewed the dossier in the form in which it is to be reviewed by the primary committee. Candidates should be informed in writing of the recommendation at each stage of review as soon as possible, but not later than the time when dossiers are forwarded for the next level of review.

Tenure

At Indiana University, the faculty, librarians and Board of Trustees have embraced the following definition of the principle of tenure:

The principle of tenure imposes reciprocal responsibilities on the University as a body politic and on the faculty member and librarian. In order to meet its responsibilities to its students and to society, the University must attract and retain faculty and librarians of outstanding quality. To that end the University provides academic freedom and economic security, which are implicit in the principle of faculty and library tenure. The faculty members, on their part, are obligated to maintain high standards of teaching, research, service (or creative activity), and professional conduct. Librarians, on their part, are obligated to maintain high standards of professional service, research, and creativity, and performance in the development of library services, and the communication of information and knowledge to others. Librarians who are candidates for tenure should excel in performance and be satisfactory in the other areas mentioned above.

Academic Handbook

At IUPUI, the faculty and librarians have taken special note of the reciprocal responsibilities of individuals who hold tenure and of the institutionthe collective faculty, administration and trusteeswhich recommends and awards tenure. The University works to ensure the safeguards to academic freedom by way of employment security, while the faculty member or librarian works to fulfill the commitment demonstrated during the probationary period with respect to continued growth and productivity. Faculty and librarians who do not continue their professional development to enable their unit to carry out its mission should not expect to continue their employment at IUPUI.

The university vouchsafes the best possible continuing environment of support for such faculty contributions, just as the faculty member or librarian seeks to realize the best possibilities afforded by that environment. In terms of corporate makeup, the university comprises itself as a tolerant community of intellectual and academic interests, within which community the faculty member or librarian locates a commensurable self-interest and to which community he or she is fully responsive. In short, in the tenure agreement, the institution expresses its commitment to the faculty member or librarian at a number of levels, and the faculty member or librarian, in turn, commits for the period of association with the university to bring to complete realization that demonstrable promiseas a scholar, teacher, and colleaguewhich earned her or him tenured status in the first place.

As candidates for tenure prepare their dossiers for review by peers, they should bear in mind that the awarding of tenure marks the beginning of their responsibility to their colleagues and to the institution which bestows tenure. Tenure is the occasion to renew a personal commitment to achieve the promise of the probationary period and to accept the responsibility of membership in the academic community of IUPUI.

Section I. General Summary of Dossier Content

In general, the basic dossier is prepared by the candidate in accord with the instructions provided. However, certain materials are added to the dossier by others. Before the review process begins, for example, outside letters will ordinarily be added by the department, school

or library person designated to collect them. Unless explicitly protected by the candidate's having waived a right to access, anything included in the dossier must be accessible to the candidate.

Beginning with primary committee reviews, evaluative material will be added to the dossier by each committee or administrator. Copies of the evaluative statements are to be sent to the candidate as the dossier is forwarded. The cumulative evaluations become part of the dossier. The candidate is not expected to respond to or comment on these evaluative comments.

However, if other materials are introduced into the dossier and considered by one of the levels of review, then all previous reviewers, as well as the candidate, are obligated to receive copies. Earlier reviewers need not take any action as a consequence, but they must have an opportunity to reconsider their recommendations. Accordingly, the transmittal form asks that if any new materials are added to the dossier that they also be sent to all prior reviewers and the candidate. The dean is expected to certify that this condition has been met before dossiers are sent to the Dean of the Faculties. However, annual reviews may be consulted by any of the reviewing bodies without violating the obligation to notify the candidate or earlier reviewers.

A. Materials Provided by Initiating Unit.

The initiating unit should ascertain that the dossier includes the following:

1. Completed Checklist (see attached).

2. Routing and Action Form (see attached).

3. The written recommendation of the primary committee, and the committee's evaluation of the faculty member's teaching, research or creative activities, and service or the librarian's performance, professional development and service (in terms of excellent, satisfactory, or unsatisfactory). The statement should include an evaluation of the likelihood that the candidate will continue his or her activity in these three areas based on past performance and future plans.

4. The chair's individual recommendation regarding tenure and/or promotion and a summary evaluation of the teaching, research or creative activities, and service.

5. The candidate's current curriculum vitae prepared in accord with the standard format (see attached).

6. Outside, or external, evaluations from persons contacted by the primary committee chair, department chair, unit committee chair, dean, or designee. Candidates should be consulted about persons selected to provide evaluations. Every precaution should be taken to ensure that referees are objective and credible; persons closely associated with the candidate may not be perceived as being as objective as those who are not personally associated. School practices may vary in regard to who solicits external letters, but the candidate should not solicit his or her own letters. All letters received must be included in the dossier. Only candidates for full librarian are required to obtain outside letters; candidates for tenure and promotion to associate librarian must have letters from campus faculty, librarians or administrators external to the unit solicited in the same careful way as external letters to ensure objectivity.

7. It is requested that a brief (two or three sentence) statement of the expertise of each external letter writer be provided by the department (or the dean if she/he solicits the letters); these statements may be collected on a single sheet. If the letter writer is acquainted with the candidate personally, this circumstance should be noted and explained.

B. Materials Added at the School Level.

The dean of the school is responsible for adding the following to the dossier:

1. The School or IU Libraries Committee's written recommendation and the Committee's evaluation of the faculty member's teaching, research or creative activities, and service or librarian's performance, professional development and service.

2. The dean's personal recommendation regarding tenure and/or promotion and a summary evaluation of the candidate's professional activities. (including performance and professional development for librarians).

In the case of faculty, the evaluations of the dean and the department chairperson, as well as the evaluations of the primary and school (often referred to as Unit Committee) committees, must address the area the candidate advances as representing excellence. There may be more than one area of excellence, but there must be at least one identified unless in exceptional cases, a candidate presents evidence of balanced strengths that promise excellent overall performance of comparable benefit to the university over time. The area(s) of excellence should be identified on the routing sheet. Each of these evaluations should include a general assessment of each of the three categories (e.g., in terms of being excellent, satisfactory, or unsatisfactory). The Academic Handbook requires that a candidate for promotion normally excel in at least one area and be at least satisfactory in each of the other two or present a balance of highly satisfactory performance in all three areas sufficient to demonstrate comparable long-term benefits to the University. Tenure requires performance commensurate with rank and evidence of continued service with distinction. Accordingly, candidates for tenure at the rank of assistant professor should expect to offer clear evidence of promise of achieving promotion within rank.

In the case of librarians, evaluations cover the areas of performance, professional development, and service. For tenure, performance must be excellent, and professional development and service must be satisfactory. Tenure is granted to those librarians whose professional characteristics indicate they will continue to serve with distinction. For promotion from assistant to associate librarian, performance must be excellent, and the candidate must demonstrate a level of achievement beyond satisfactory in one of the other two areas. The third area must be satisfactory. For promotion to full rank, the librarian must demonstrate superior performance and either a continued significant contribution at the state, regional, or national level in professional development or a continued significant contribution at the community, state, regional, or national level in service. Performance in the third area must be satisfactory.

Section II. Personal Statement

Candidates for tenure and promotion should prepare a personal statement which reflects their own assessments of accomplishments in teaching, research (or creative activity), and professional service (faculty) or performance, professional development and service (librarians) and of prospects for continued development. The work of faculty and librarians is complex and involves many separate activities. However, all of these are related to learning, which is the essential mission of IUPUI as a shared commitment of students, faculty, and librarians. In their work, faculty are engaged in learning as a form of scholarship which, in turn, comprises overlapping functions: teaching, discovery of new knowledge through research, scholarship, and creative activity, application of knowledge through service, and the integration of work across specializations and disciplines to develop a shared intellectual community.

Librarians are similarly engaged through the maintenance of high standards of professional development and performance in the development and organization of library services and in the communication of information and knowledge to others.

The personal statement should thus address as interrelated aspects of a whole, integral career. Few faculty and librarians make sharp distinctions among the various aspects of their work, and the personal statement should indicate how the candidate views their integration even while assessing the level of performance in each. Special attention should be given to faculty and librarian work which cuts across specializations and disciplines and which helps integrate and apply knowledge to broad patterns of intellectual activity.

Candidates should also indicate the prospects for continued personal development in these three aspects of professional activity. Whenever possible, faculty members should state specific plans for a research agenda and for a plan to enhance teaching effectiveness. A special note of encouragement to candidates for tenure is appropriate in that tenure represents the beginning point of a new relationship between the faculty member or librarian and the University. Tenure provides the faculty member or librarian with academic freedom and security while obligating the individual member to maintain high standards in teaching, research, service, and professional conduct. Peer review at all levels requires an ability to evaluate the candidate's commitment to this standard of conduct after tenure has been awarded.

Candidates should address their contributions to the academic community through service to the University and the civic community. While promotion in rank and tenure for faculty may more often be awarded on the basis of accomplishments and promise in teaching, research, and professional service, and for librarians performance, professional development and professional service, service to the University and to the civic community is important and should be considered along with other work. Candidates whose area of excellence is based on attainments in service should give careful attention to documentation early in their career.

Section III. A. Faculty Evaluations of Teaching

This section should contain objective evidence of the candidate's performance and activities as a teacher. Evidence may be gathered at several levels, including the individual classroom, the school, and the discipline nationally. Evidence submitted should present as complete a description as possible of the quality of the candidate's teaching. A case based principally on excellence in teaching should ordinarily include evidence of an impact on all three levels.

Regardless, there must be evidence that teaching has been evaluated objectively. The teaching load of the candidate and an indication of whether it is greater or less than the average teaching load in the department should be reported. A large number of students taught is not of itself sufficient evidence of quality; teaching must be evaluated (see item A following). Similarly, a small number of students taught does not reflect adversely if the circumstances are explained and if there is a sufficient threshold for evaluating teaching. Generally, students can evaluate the effectiveness of classroom teaching and peers are most effective in evaluating other teaching activities. Some schools have effectively sought external evaluation of course design and materials as a part of their review of teaching accomplishments, especially when excellence in teaching is a basis for advancement. This type of evaluation may be especially helpful in considering materials prepared for use with the new technologies (e.g., videos, computer simulations, data bases, software) or in incorporating service learning as a part of courses.

One of the most important and convincing ways to document teaching effectiveness is to offer evidence or documentation that students have met specified learning objectives for individual courses, for a sequence ofrelated courses, or even for a degree program. The role of faculty in assisting students meet learning objectives should be documented and assessed in ways appropriate to the discipline and to the mission of the unit.

Additional points which may be addressed to support teaching are noted below; candidates should feel free to address other points not identified below since this is not an exhaustive list:

A. Evidence of the quality of teaching as evaluated by both students and colleagues, (including classroom visitations by colleagues and summaries of quantitative evaluations); actual questionnaires or raw data should be retained at the school or department. Student evaluations are most effective when conducted over a period of years and compared to other faculty in the school.

B. The number of student graduate committees the candidate has served on or chaired.

C. Local, regional, or national teaching awards, (including information about their nature and significance).

D. Teaching grants received.

E. Evidence of the nature and quality of course and curriculum development, including the use of technology to enhance the quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of teaching.

F. Evidence that students have met or exceeded course and/or curricular learning objectives.

G. Evidence of efforts by the candidate to improve his or her teaching by active participation in such educational projects and programs as those sponsored by the Schools, the campus, or the University.

H. Leadership roles in professional organizations or in presenting papers at conferences as related to teaching.

I. Evidence of mentor relationships with students (e.g., co- authored papers or joint conference presentations).

J. Evidence of incorporating service learning within courses or as an aspect of co-curricular activities (e.g., applying course materials to participation in campus organizations or student governance, completing an unsupervised internship, or similar activities which draw on a course but are not required or evaluated.)

Publications relevant to teaching should be listed in curriculum vitae in accord with instructions provided; they need not be listed again in this section.

Faculty who teach undergraduate students should also address how their courses and scholarship of teaching reflect the principles of general education.

Section III. B. Librarians: Evaluation of Performance

A librarian must be, first and foremost, an effective librarian in the position held at Indiana University. The evaluation of performance is so important that the case for tenure or promotion should include evidence drawn from supervisors and others who have been associated with the candidate's performance in some capacity. Evidence submitted in support of performance should consist of a written cumulation of performance activities. A revised cumulation of candidates' annual review statements in the area of performance is recommended, but candidates may, if they wish, simply import their annual review statements regarding performance into their dossiers. The former approach will allow candidates to put forward a stronger presentation. Annual reviews are available to promotion and tenure committees, and should not be included in dossiers. With evaluators' permission, candidates may include in their dossiers evaluators' statements from specific annual reviews. Such statements, if included, should be presented as documentation. In addition to the annual reviews, other documentation addressing the quality of performance should be included. Evidence in this area, in addition to the annual reviews, might include:

A. Statements from colleagues.

B. Statements from students, faculty, and other users of the library.

C. Grants received.

D. Materials prepared.

E. Evidence of performance-related training.

F. Teaching responsibilities Librarians who teach as part of their job assignment should follow the criteria established for faculty in Section III.

G. The evaluator's portion of an annual review (with that evaluator's permission).

H. Candidates for tenure and/or promotion to associate librarians must provide documentation from faculty, librarians, or administrators external to the library; these must be selected under the same conditions as external letters selected for faculty to ensure

objectivity. Refer to section I.A. 6 and 7 above. Candidates for promotion to librarians should also have letters documenting performance from persons external to the campus.

Section IV. A. Faculty: Evaluation of Research, Scholarship, or Creative Activities

Evidence in this section should contain:

A. Full bibliography of the candidate's research or creative activities provided in the curriculum vitae as specified in the standard format. Refereed and nonrefereed publications should be designated by type. Publications need not be listed again in this section.

B. Department or school assessment of the contributions of the candidate who works with more than one author.

C. Identify the three to five most significant publications which reflect the candidate's major research accomplishments. IUPUI places a higher value on quality and value of research than numbers of publications.

D. Department or school evaluation of the stature of the journals in which the publications appeared, the museums or galleries showing creative work, etc. (Please avoid abbreviations since reviewers outside the candidate's field are not likely to be familiar with abbreviations no matter how widely recognized they may be in the field.)

E. A description of the candidate's continuing program of research or creative activity which will carry forward into the future. This may be included in the candidate's personal statement or it may be a separate, brief description of future research.

F. Documentation of quality of research or creative activity by experts in the candidate's field. Letters should be solicited by someone other than candidate as specified by school procedures. See section I.A. 6 and 7 above and the enclosed sample letter. Letters should be placed in "General Summary" section.

NOTE: Candidates offering evidence of creative works (e.g., visual or performing arts, including drama, dance, creative writing, computer software, painting, video, etc.) should anticipate the need for external review and, in consultations with their deans or department chairs, arrange for external reviews or critiques wherever the creative works are displayed or performed or otherwise accessible. Video records may be submitted as a part of the dossier when appropriate.

Section IV. B. Librarians: Evaluation of Professional Development

A librarian who is responsive to the demands of the profession must make contributions through professional development activities. The candidate should demonstrate a definite continuing program of professional development. The evaluation of professional development is so important that the case for tenure or promotion should include evidence drawn from supervisors and others who have been associated with the candidate's professional development in some capacity. Evidence submitted in support of professional development should consist of a written cumulation of professional development activities. This document should be a revised cumulation of candidates' annual review statements in the area of professional development, but the candidate may, if they wish, import their annual review statement regarding professional development. In addition to the annual review cumulation, other documentation addressing the quality of professional development should be included. Evidence in this area might include:

A. Evidence of continuing education.

B. Description and enumeration of research and creative activities.

C. Grants prepared outside the performance area.

D. Documentation of the quality of research, publications, papers, presentations, and other professional contributions.

E. Evidence of active participation in professional associations.

F. The evaluator's portion of an annual review (with that evaluator's permission).]

Section V. Evaluation of Service

Service is normally provided to three specific groups: the University, the public, and the profession. Service in all of these areas is expected of each faculty member and librarian although the degree of service in any one area is often a function of the discipline or the particular interests of the individual. The importance assigned to service in considering candidates for tenure or promotion will necessarily vary according to individual circumstances and the mission of the unit. Professional service is characterized by those activities conducted on behalf of the University which apply the faculty member's and librarians disciplinary expertise, experience, and knowledge of interrelated fields to the needs of the larger community. Ordinarily, professional service is the component considered in cases in which excellence in service is the basis for tenure or promotion. Peer review is an important component for evaluating service as it is for teaching, research, and other professional activities.

Faculty and librarian service to the University through committees and administration is also important and required. The community of scholars depends on the mutual responsibility of individuals to support and develop the institution which sustains them. Service must be a factor in these considerations, because unsatisfactory service to the University may preclude tenure and promotion. However, without additional significant accomplishments which are related to the practice of the candidate's discipline or profession and which can be evaluated by peers, service seldom becomes the critical element for either tenure or for advancement in rank. Faculty appointed in the clinical ranks ordinarily advance through the excellence of their professional service and teaching.

This section should minimally include the following items:

A. List of the candidate's professional service activities. Those activities which are truly exceptional should be annotated. While committee service should be listed, it should be annotated only when the candidate has played a singularly distinctive role.

B. List of the candidate's service-related publications should be included in the curriculum vitae as specified.

C. List of the candidate's service to the University. The extent of the role of the candidate should be documented if it is significant. Service on Committees is expected and will not ordinarily be a factor in advancement without documentation of a special contribution.

D. Evaluation of the quality of the candidate's service activities by the chair and professional colleagues or associates, including external peer evaluation when professional service is the primary basis for promotion or tenure.

In general, faculty should offer documentation of applying their knowledge and experience developed through research and teaching to the advancement of their profession and to society, and librarians should provide evidence that their service activities relate to the academic mission of the campus and enhance their value as members of the academic community and the library profession.

Section VI. Annual Reviews

Annual reviews should not be included in the dossiers of faculty. If the reviews are necessary for a committee's consideration they may be requested. Annual reviews, if considered, do not

constitute new material since they are part of a candidate's cumulative record. They may be reviewed at any level without obligation to notify earlier reviewers or the candidate.

Annual reviews are available to promotion and tenure committees and should not be included in librarians dossiers. Evidence submitted in support of Performance, Professional Development and Service should consist of a written cumulation of these activities. This document should be a revised cumulation of candidates' annual review statements in the various areas, but the candidate may, if they wish, import their annual review statements instead of a cumulation. However, the cumulation will allow candidates to put forward a stronger promotion and tenure presentation. With the evaluators' permission, candidates dossiers may include the evaluators' statement from specific annual reviews. Such statements, if included should be presented as documentation.

Candidate School

Department Area(s) of Excellence

Faculty

Tenure and Promotion Dossier Checklist

( ) Submit Three Copies of Full Dossier

General ( )*Completed Checklist

Summary: ( )*Routing and Action Form

( )*Dean's recommendation and summary evaluation of candidate's teaching, research or creative activities and service.

( )*School Committee's recommendation and evaluation of candidate's teaching, research/creative activities and service.

( )*Chair's recommendation and evaluation of teaching, research/creative activities and service.

( )*Primary Committee's recommendation and evaluation (including statement concerning candidate's potential for continued development).

( )*Copy of candidate's curriculum vitae.

( )*External letters of evaluation and statement of expertise of letter writers.

( )*Candidate's own statement on teaching, research or creative activities, and service.

Teaching: ( ) Teaching load information; graduate committees served on or chaired.

( ) Evidence of quality of teaching (evaluations and awards).

( ) Evidence of nature and quality of course and curriculum development.

( ) Evidence of participation in educational projects or programs.

( ) Peer evaluation of teaching.

( ) Student evaluation of teaching.

( ) Evidence of students meeting learning objectives.

Research or ( ) Departmental evaluation of stature of journals in which publications

Creative appear or galleries in which showings have been presented, etc.

Activities: ( ) Research load information; amount of time devoted to research.

( ) Statement of candidate's future research program.

Service: ( ) Summary of professional service activities and service load information, including administrative service.

( ) University and community service; list committees.

( ) Evaluation by Chair of quality and quantity of service.

( ) Evaluation by professional colleagues of quality as well as quantity of service.

Appendices: ( ) As determined by candidate and department.

*These materials will be retained by Dean of the Faculties Office for permanent file.

Candidate School

Department Area(s) of Excellence

Librarian

Tenure and Promotion Dossier Checklist

( ) Submit Three Copies of Full Dossier

General ( )*Completed Checklist

Summary: ( )*Routing and Action Form

( )*Dean's recommendation and summary evaluation of candidate's teaching, research or creative activities and service.

( )*School Committee's recommendation and evaluation of candidate's teaching, research/creative activities and service.

( )*Chair's recommendation and evaluation of teaching, research/creative activities and service.

( )*Primary Committee's recommendation and evaluation (including statement concerning candidate's potential for continued development).

( )*Copy of candidate's curriculum vitae.

( )*External letters of evaluation and statement of expertise of letter writer.

( )*Candidate's own statement on teaching, research or creative activities, and service.

Performance ( ) Position descriptions.

( ) Summary of performance activities.

Professional ( ) Summary of professional development activities.

Development

Service ( ) Summary of service activities.

Appendices ( ) Supporting documents for performance.

( ) Supporting documents for professional development.

( ) Supporting documents for service.

( ) *External letters of evaluation and statement of expertise of letter writers.

(Applies to candidates for full librarian only.)

*These materials will be retained by Dean of the Faculties Office for permanent file.

1997-98 Academic Year

Indiana University - Purdue University at Indianapolis

Faculty Routing and Action Form for Tenure and/or Promotion Review

NAME __________________________________

DATE _____________________________

SCHOOL ________________________________

DEPARTMENT ________________________

PRESENT RANK __________________________

YEAR ACHIEVED ______________________

RANK RECOMMENDED ________________________________________________________________

DATE OF INITIAL FULL-TIME ACADEMIC APPOINTMENT ______________________________

CANDIDATE'S DECLARED AREA(S) OF EXCELLENCE ___________________________________

SECONDARY AREA OF EXCELLENCE (IF ANY) _________________________________________

I. Candidate's Review of Dossier

I have reviewed the contents of the dossier and have had an opportunity to provide necessary information in accord with the guidelines for preparing dossiers issued by the Dean of the Faculties and in accord with school and department guidelines.

Signature of Candidate

Date

The upper portion of this routing form should be completed before the dossier is evaluated at the department or school level.

II. Review Process

As applicable, the Primary Committee, Department Chairperson, Unit Committee, and Dean should attach supporting statements for their recommendation. The vote in each committee should be recorded below; if there are abstentions, this fact should be explained. If new materials were added, please indicate at what level and certify that earlier reviewers and the candidate received copies of the new materials.

A. Promotion Recommendation (record actual committee votes):

Primary Committee Approval ____ Disapproval ____ Abstention ____

Department Chairperson Approval ____ Disapproval ____ Abstention ____

Unit Committee Approval ____ Disapproval ____ Abstention ____

Dean Approval ____ Disapproval ____ Abstention ____

IUPUI Committee Approval ____ Disapproval ____Abstention ____

B. Tenure Recommendation (record actual committee votes):

Primary Committee Approval ____ Disapproval ____ Abstention ____

Department Chairperson Approval ____ Disapproval ____ Abstention ____

Unit Committee Approval ____ Disapproval ____ Abstention ____

Dean Approval ____ Disapproval ____ Abstention ____

IUPUI Committee Approval ____ Disapproval ____ Abstention ____

When there is such divergent evaluation of a dossier to result in different recommendations on promotion and tenure, the unit committee should consult with the department chair or primary committee. The consultation must be noted in the Unit committee's report, including notice of whether the vote of a committee was changed as a result. Only the final vote of committees and administrators should be recorded on the transmittal form. In consultation with the Dean of the Faculties, the Chancellor makes recommendations to the President or to the Vice President (Bloomington) for units which report through this officer.

Professional Schools Libraries

Routing and Action for Tenure and/or Promotion Review

SIGNATURES (if not applicable, write N/A in the appropriate section):*

1. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

Supervisor Date________

2. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

Head Librarian Date________

3. RecommendationCommittee Vote:

Promotion: __Yes __No __Abstentions

Tenure: __Yes __No __Abstentions

___________________________________

Chair Date________

Indiana University Librarians Promotion and Tenure Committee, for the Committee (comments attached)

4. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

Dean of University Libraries Date________

5. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

Dean of the Professional School Date________

6. Recommendation:

Promotion: __Yes __No

Tenure: __Yes __No

___________________________________

IUPUI Promotion and Tenure Committee Date________

7. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

IUPUI Dean of the Faculties Date________

8. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

Chancellor, IUPUI Date________

9. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

Vice President, Bloomington Date________

10. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

Office of the President Date________

IUPUI University Libraries

Routing and Action for Tenure and/or Promotion Review

SIGNATURES (if not applicable, write N/A in the appropriate section):* 1. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

Supervisor Date________

2. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

Unit Head Date________

3. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

Indiana University Libraries Promotion and Tenure Committee Date________

4. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

Director, University Libraries

Date__________

5. .RecommendationCommittee Vote:

Promotion: __Yes __No __Abstentions

Tenure: __Yes __No __Abstentions

___________________________________

Chair Date________

Indiana University Librarians Promotion and Tenure Committee, for the Committee (comments attached)

6. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

Dean of University Libraries

Date________

7. Recommendation:

Promotion: __Yes __No

Tenure: __Yes __No

___________________________________

IUPUI Promotion and Tenure Committee Date________

8. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

IUPUI Dean of the Faculties Date________

9. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

Chancellor, IUPUI Date________

10. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

Vice President, Bloomington Date________

11. Recommendation: __Yes __No

___________________________________

Office of the President Date________

Curriculum Vitae Format

for

Tenure and Promotion Dossiers

NAME:
(Last) (First) (Initial)

EDUCATION:

UNDERGRADUATE:

GRADUATE:

POST DOCTORAL:

ACADEMIC APPOINTMENTS (inclusive dates):

OTHER APPOINTMENTS AND PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTSHIPS (including other remunerated employment):

LICENSURE AND CERTIFICATION:

PROFESSIONAL SOCIETIES (including offices held and committee memberships):

HONORS AND AWARDS:

TEACHING ASSIGNMENTS:

List the course number, short title, term, and appropriate enrollment for each course taught during at least the preceding two years.

SERVICE:

Distinguish carefully between the following categories of university and public service and record your service activities as follows: (1) professional service (a) state and regional (b) national (public offices, committees, organizations), (2) university administrative service (administrative unit, position/role, percentage of appointment, duration), (3) university committee service (name of committee, nature of participation, duration), (4) community service.

PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES:

Record professional activities in current rank which you consider significant and which are not covered elsewhere in curriculum vitae, including international activities not listed elsewhere.

GRANTS, FELLOWSHIPS, AND AWARDS:

Indicate the name of the granting agency, title of the project, and duration of all grants and fellowships received.

PUBLICATIONS:

Divide publication or creative works into one of three areas: (I) teaching, (II) research or creative activities, or (III) service. List publications only once, even if a publication might be applicable to more than one area. Refereed works should be noted. Publications should be numbered sequentially within each of the three sections.

Authors should be listed as they appear in publication. Entries should be listed chronologically with most recent listed last. The exact status of each publication should be noted if the status is ambiguous. For example, articles which have been officially accepted by an editor or publisher should be identified as "in press". Articles which have been submitted for editorial review, but which have not been accepted or which have been accepted subject to revision should be identified as "submitted" or "under editorial review". Work in preparation should not be listed in vitae. Projected work or work in progress should be reported in the appropriate section of the dossier.

Software, films or videos, and other scholarly or creative works designed for electronic technologies should be similarly listed in one of the three categories and be designated as refereed or not. If additional explanatory information would be helpful to reviewers, this information should be provided in an appendix to the dossier.

__________________________

(Date)(Signature of Candidate)

Sample Letter To Request An External Evaluation

(Schools may develop their own letters, but they should use the same format to contact all persons asked to provide evaluations)

Dear (___________________):

Professor (_________________) is being considered for promotion (and/or tenure) at the rank of (_____________) in the Department of (______________) within the School of (_____________________) at Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis. In considering (his/her) candidacy, we would appreciate your evaluation of the professional activities (i.e., research or creative activity, service and teaching) for which you have sufficient knowledge regarding the performance of Professor (_____________________). We would be particularly grateful for your comments on the significance of the publications and research/creative work. Consequently, your evaluation of the journals (or any other publication/exhibition media) would be most useful.

It would also be helpful for us to know how long and under what circumstances you have been familiar with Professor (____________). (Optional: To provide other reviewers at the campus level with a context for your comments, we would welcome a copy of your vitae or biography.)

If you are aware of any of Professor (________'s) contributions to professional organizations or the discipline through (his/her) service activities and participation in meetings, we would welcome your comments in this area as well. Indeed, any information you may have about Professor (_____________'s) qualifications would be appreciated. To assist you in your evaluation, I am enclosing a curriculum vitae and copies of recent publications.

Needless to say, we will appreciate your assistance as we consider Professor (__________'s) candidacy. We are keenly aware of the demands this request places on you, and we assure you that your comments will be very highly valued. Although letters are not normally disclosed to candidates, a state law permits employees to gain access to their personnel files. We can appreciate concerns you might have about writing a candid assessment under this condition, but we sincerely hope you will agree to assist us. If upon reflection you feel that you cannot be completely candid, however, we will respect your decision not to write an evaluation.

In order to complete Professor (___________'s) dossier for University review, we would appreciate receiving your comments by (________).

I hope you will be able to assist us.

Sincerely,

Chair

Initials

IUPUI: June 1997

NOTE: If a candidate waives right of access and this condition is stated in the letter requesting a reference, please note that there may be some circumstnaces under which the candidate may gain access at a later time, such as through legal proceedings.

Indiana University - Purdue University at Indianapolis

Dean of the Faculties' Comments

Regarding Outside Letters

Practices and procedures for obtaining outside letters of review vary among the departments and schools. Most frequently, outside letters are sought to help evaluate research, scholarship, or creative activity. However, increasingly, it may be useful to seek outside letters of evaluation regarding service or teaching, and the same care should be exercised in soliciting letters for these purposes. A decision to seek letters of evaluation regarding teaching or service should be made by the appropriate person in consultation with the candidate in consideration of particular circumstances. Ordinarily, chairs should solicit outside letters. However, chairs may delegate this responsibility to another member of the department, such as the chair of the primary committee, in accord with established departmental or school procedures. If outside letters are added by the candidate, these must be clearly designated as such and candidates should recognize that letters solicited by them do not have the same value; candidate-solicited letters should ordinarily be placed in an appendix to the dossier. The value of external letters is greatly enhanced by the objectivity and credibility of the author. Care should be taken to avoid relying on persons closely affiliated with the candidate.

1. The chair (primary or unit committee chair, dean, or other person specified by department or school procedures) should request and receive these letters.

2. The solicitor should use identical letters of solicitation for all referees, and a copy of the letter which is actually used should be included in an appendix of the dossier. If circumstances require different letters, then copies of all letters used should be included.

3. All letters should be solicited at the same time; specifically, additional letters should not be requested following receipt of a negative evaluation. If additional letters must be sought because a referee declines, the reason should be explained.

4. All letters solicited and received must be included in the dossier; neither the candidate nor subsequent reviewers may exclude letters.

5. Referees should be selected on the basis of their ability to comment on the candidate's professional accomplishments.

6. Referees for service, teaching, and some other areas of creative or scholarly work, may not necessarily hold academic appointments, but they should be selected on the basis of having an established expertise to evaluate the evidence presented to them. Letters from former students, of course, constitute a special category and should be used judiciously. Referees for scholarship and research are usually expected to hold at least the rank for which the candidate is being considered.

7. If dissertation committee members are asked to serve as referees, they should be clearly identified as having served in their prior capacity.

8. The dossier should contain a brief statement of professional qualifications for each referee sufficient to establish the authority of the referee in relation to the specific case under review; ordinarily, two or three sentences should suffice.

9. When writing to referees, include the vitae and copies of publications, including books, unless you are certain they are available to the referee. In instances in which a referee is asked to read a book-length manuscript, consider offering an honorarium.

10. Evaluators should not be asked to make a recommendation on promotion or tenure; they should be asked to evaluate the candidate's work or activities. The purpose for seeking these letters is to obtain an objective review, and, hence, they should be phrased in a neutral fashion without any implication of the department's eventual recommendation.

11. In providing information for review beyond the department level, avoid using abbreviations which are not likely to be known to colleagues outside the field.

12. Special considerations must be given to evaluating creative work (especially when performances or exhibitions are available for a short period of time). The same degree of objectivity should be maintained in evaluating creative works as in evaluating research. In some cases, it may be necessary to invite external evaluators to campus to view works or performances.

Sample Letter For Recommendation To Full Rank Librarian

Dear :

is being considered for promotion to the rank of Librarian at Indiana University. It would be very helpful to me and the Indiana University Librarians' Promotion and Tenure Committee to receive your evaluation of 's contribution to and standing in the profession.

The established criteria at Indiana University for promotion and from the rank of Associate Librarian to the highest rank of Librarian are described as follows:

Superior performance is the primary criterion. The candidate must show evidence of performance that is achieved by few others at Indiana University. If professional development is the secondary criterion, the librarian must show a continued significant contribution at the state, regional or national level. If service is the secondary criterion, the librarian must show a continued significant contribution at the community, state regional or national level. Performance in the third area must be at least satisfactory.

In order to evaluate objectively the criterion of state, regional, or national recognition in the library profession, we will depend heavily upon the opinions of prominent colleagues outside Indiana University who are knowledgeable in the field of specialization of the library faculty member in questions. Your frank appraisal of the candidate's contributions to the profession is very important.

has signed a waiver of her/his right to inspect letters of evaluation, but may request a detailed summary of the major points raised in all external letters, in one combined document, in a manner which protects the identity of the evaluators.

I appreciate your time and aid in allowing us to compile as thorough a dossier as possible for . We would be grateful for your reply by . Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Dean of University Libraries