Title: Purdue School of Engineering and Technology, IUPUI
1Purdue School of Engineering and Technology, IUPUI
- WORKSHOP ON DOSSIER PREPARATION FOR PROMOTION AND
TENURE - April 20, 1999
2Overview
- Objectives
- General Criteria for Excellence
- Overview of Process
- Dossier Preparation -- Documenting Excellence
3Objectives
- Familiarize with the PT process
- Assist in preparing good dossiers
- Emphasize the importance of early and complete
preparation
4Available Documents for Guidelines
- General PT guidelines published by the IUPUI
Dean of the Faculties -- updated frequently - IUPUI Supplement to the IU Handbook, 1997-1999
- ET Promotion and Tenure Guidelines, 1996
5Available Documents for Guidelines (contd)
- Following useful presentations are on the web
page of the IUPUI Faculty Development Office - E. Boschmann, Documenting Professional
Development, A New Faculty Orientation, August
20, 1996 - J. K. Austin, Promotion and Tenure Review
Process, IUPUI PT Workshop, March 11, 1998
6General Criteria for Excellence
- There are three categories of excellence
- (1) teaching
- (2) research, scholarship, and/or creative
endeavor - (3) service
- Note Candidate declares the area(s) of
excellence
7General Criteria for Excellence (contd)
- The School of ET requires that for promotion to
any rank, the candidates performance shall be
excellent in at least one of the above three
categories and at least satisfactory in the
other two - Marginal or unsatisfactory performance in any
category precludes promotion and tenure
8General Criteria for Excellence (contd)
- Promotion to Associate Professor
- Based on achievements in the area of excellence
reflecting a level of performance which brings
documented recognition to the individual from
outside IUPUI and promise of continued
professional growth and recognition
9General Criteria for Excellence (contd)
- Promotion to Professor
- Based on achievements beyond the level required
for an associate professor - Accomplishments in the area of excellence should
reflect documented national or international
recognition as an authority in the field of
specialization, and be valued for their
intramural contributions as a member of the
faculty
10General Criteria for Excellence (contd)
- Tenure
- Expectations and achievements are same as those
for academic promotion, even though it is a
different and separate consideration and issue
from promotion to an advanced academic rank - In general, tenure is not granted to a faculty
member who cannot be promoted
11General Criteria for Excellence (contd)
- Differences between Engineering and Technology
Programs - Technology faculty are more application oriented
while the engineering faculty are more research
oriented - Technology faculty have higher teaching loads and
do not have a graduate program
12General Criteria for Excellence (contd)
- Engineering faculty in general have stronger
research requirements - Because of the above, the expectations for
excellence differ mainly in the area of research - Candidates in technology programs are generally
expected to demonstrate and document excellence
in teaching - Their research and/or creative contributions may
be closely tied with their teaching activities
13General Criteria for Excellence (contd)
- Candidates in engineering programs are generally
expected to demonstrate and document excellence
in research and/or creative endeavor
14Levels of Review
- School Level Review
- IUPUI Campus Level Review
- University Level Review
15School Level Review
- Primary Committee (Department)
- Department Chair
- Unit Committee (School)
- School Dean
16IUPUI Campus Level Review
- IUPUI Promotion and Tenure Committee
- IUPUI Dean of Faculties and Chancellor (Joint)
17University Level Review
- IU and Purdue Vice Presidents of Academic Affairs
- IU and Purdue Presidents
- IU Board of Trustees
18Primary Committee
- Consists of all eligible full professors in the
department - Chaired by department chair
- Department chair does not have a vote
- If the chair is not eligible to serve because of
rank, the committee elects a chair from among its
members who has a vote
19Primary Committee (contd)
- If there are less than four eligible members,
additional members may be elected from other
departments to meet the membership requirement of
four - Associate professors may be elected as members if
the candidate is at assistant professorship rank
20Unit Committee
- Consists of seven full professors and dean
- Dean does not have a vote
- Committee elects a chair from among its members
and chair has a vote - Four members are elected by the entire faculty
for two-year terms (two from engineering, two
from technology)
21Unit Committee (contd)
- Three members are appointed by dean each year for
a one-year term
22Pre-Tenure Evaluation -- Third Year
- Conducted by the Primary and Unit Committees at
the end of the third year of a tenure track
faculty, based on a dossier prepared by the
faculty member - The purpose is to provide feedback and guide the
faculty member - Starting from this year, similar evaluation of
tenure-track faculty will be performed annually
23Process
- Candidates should
- be informed in writing of the recommendation at
each stage - be informed when materials are added or changes
made to their dossier - be provided an opportunity to comment on or
respond to changes or add new material within two
weeks
24IUPUI Committee Review Process
- know that all reviews are confidential
- do not ask members
- Non-Controversial Case -- no divided votes at any
stage - Two reviewers (primary and secondary) each read
dossier and complete an evaluation form - Evaluation forms are distributed to committee
- Reviewers present to committee
25IUPUI Committee Review Process (contd)
- School representative is asked to comment
- Committee has minimal discussion on case
- Controversial Case -- differing recommendations
at least in one stage - All members read dossier
- Two reviewers complete an evaluation form
- Evaluation forms are distributed to Committee
26IUPUI Committee Review Process (contd)
- Reviewers present to committee
- School representative is asked to comment
- Committee has more discussion on case
27Time Table For Process
- April 15
- Chair notifies the faculty members
- April 26
- Candidate indicates intent and submits a list of
potential reviewers - Summer
- Chair seeks letters of references
28Time Table For Process (contd)
- candidates CV and collected copies of
publications are mailed to reviewers - August 15
- Candidate submits a copy of the complete
documents to the Chair - Candidate is notified by the Chair of any missing
material and correction
29Time Table For Process (contd)
- September 1
- Formation of Unit Committee is completed
- September 15
- The Committee is formed several days prior to
this - Copies of the candidates dossier are distributed
to the members
30Time Table For Process (contd)
- Primary Committee reviews the candidates dossier
- Dean informs the candidate of the Primary
Committees recommendation in writing no later
than five working days after the review - Candidate may review the documentation and
provide additional information if he/she desires
31Time Table For Process (contd)
- September 22
- The original dossier with the Primary Committees
recommendation and vote plus the Chairs letter
will be submitted to the Dean who will check for
completeness - October 1
- The chair shall submit the original plus six
copies of the dossier to the Deans Office
32Time Table For Process (contd)
- October 11
- Unit Committee meets
- October 15
- Dean will inform the candidate of the Unit
Committees decision in writing - Candidate can review his/her dossier and add
additional information if needed
33Time Table For Process (contd)
- November 4
- The original dossier plus two copies, all of
which now include the Primary Committees,
Chairs, Unit Committees, and Deans
recommendations are submitted to the Dean of
Faculties Office
34Purpose of External Reviewers
- External reviews are needed to obtain an external
evaluation of the candidates - accomplishments
- significance of scholarship
- stature of journals/works
- contributions to professional organizations
- professional standing
35Selection of External Reviewers (contd)
- Six external reviewers are required
- candidate provides a list of at least eight
candidates - chair prepares the final list with at least one
reviewer outside the list provided by the
candidate
36Selection of External Reviewers (contd)
- As a general rule, the reviewers are persons who
- are at a higher rank
- are at institutions of similar or higher status
- can evaluate national reputation
- can evaluate independence from mentor
- can evaluate accomplishments in the area of
excellence
37Selection of External Reviewers (contd)
- In general you should avoid asking
- social or family friends
- persons who were classmates
- more than one person at the same institution
- more than one person from your thesis committee
- more than one person with whom you regularly
publish
38Dossier
- A dossier is
- a summary of professional work and
accomplishments - the basis for promotion and tenure decisions
39Dossier (contd)
- A dossier is not
- a document for unrelated activities, e.g., boys
scout work, military service, etc. - meant to detail plans, hopes, and goals, but
accomplishments only
40Dossier (contd)
- A dossier must be
- limited to 25 pages with 11- or 12-point font
size and adequate margins (excluding the
Appendix) - complete
- brief
- well organized
- reader friendly
41Dossier (contd)
- A dossier is created by
- starting early
- Get a mentor to help (Chair)
- collecting everything and selecting the important
- frequently using and updating it
- reviewing good samples
- See samples at Center for Teaching and Learning
42Dossier (contd)
- In preparing a dossier you must avoid
- vagueness and inaccuracy
- repetition and redundancy
- accomplishments which may be representative of
more than one of the promotion criteria should be
cited only on one section of the document for
receiving proper credit with some comments
indicating the connection
43Dossier (contd)
- You must also avoid using
- padding
- abbreviations
- vagueness, exaggeration, and inaccuracy
- uncertain terms like numerous, several, plenty,
etc. (must quantify achievements with numbers)
44Portfolio
- Is a supplement to the dossier to reinforce the
areas of excellence and satisfactory performance - All supporting documents including copies of
publications, major course notes, course syllabi,
lab manuals, award certificates, etc., must be
included
45Portfolio (contd)
- Must be arranged in an orderly fashion under
separate categories or sub-categories - See Boschmann, for preparing a teaching
portfolio, 1996 (Faculty and Senior Staff
Development Office Web Page)
46Teaching Portfolio
- Candidates who declare teaching as the area of
excellence are urged to - adopt a mentor to receive guidance
- arrange peer evaluations of classroom delivery
- prepare a teaching portfolio for evaluation by
expert peers outside the university
47Sections of a Dossier
- Section I General Summary
- Section II Personal Statement
- Section III Evaluation of Teaching
- Section IV Evaluation of Research and/or
Creative Activity
48Sections of a Dossier (contd)
- Section V Evaluation of Professional Service and
Scholarship of Application - Section VI University Service and Citizenship
- Appendix
49Section I General Summary
- Complete Checklist
- Routing and Action Form
- Primary Committees Evaluation
- Chairs Evaluation
- Unit Committees Evaluation
- Deans Evaluation
- Current Curriculum Vitae (CV)
50General Writing Style
- Curriculum Vitae should be in the form of
itemized list of achievements - First person narrative style should be adopted in
the candidates personal statement section. - Third person narrative style should be adopted in
the rest of the dossier
51General Writing Style (contd)
- All pages must be numbered sequentially starting
with the first page of Vitae - Each main section should start on a new page
52Curriculum Vitae (CV)
- Included in the General Summary section
- Follow the standard format -- see Dean of
Faculties Guidelines for the standard format
(IUPUI Handbook) - Distinguish work done in rank from those prior to
rank - List all items in chronological order
53Curriculum Vitae Contents
- Education
- Academic Appointments
- Other Appointments
- Licensure and Certification
- Professional Societies
- Honors and Awards
- Teaching Assignments
54Curriculum Vitae Contents (contd)
- Service
- Professional Activities
- Grants, Fellowships, Awards
- Publications
55List of Teaching Assignments in Vitae
- List the course number, title, semester, and
enrollment for each course taught during at least
the preceding three years
56List of Service Activities in Vitae
- Distinguish service between the following
categories - professional
- state and regional
- national
- university, school and department
- community
57List of Grants, Fellowships and Awards in Vitae
- Distinguish internal grants from external
- Indicate title, name of the granting agent,
duration, and amount - For joint projects, specific involvement as PI,
Co-PI, or I must be designated including the
percent effort and share in the budget
58List of Publications in Vitae
- Distinguish teaching, research, and service
related publications - Distinguish those published in rank
- Separate into following groups
- teaching
- Research
- Professional service
- Integration two or more aspects of work
59List of Publications in Vitae (contd)
- Further sub classify each of the above as
- refereed articles
- refereed conference proceedings
- invited publications and/or presentations
- non-refereed conference proceedings
- book chapters, abstracts, book reviews, etc.
- Number the publications sequentially and
chronologically within each group
60List of Publications inVitae (contd)
- For jointly authored papers
- all authors names should appear as in the actual
publication - primary author or authors must be indicated with
an asterisk, e.g., - student authors must be indicated with double
asterisks - Smith, S., Yee, H.C., and Wesson, W.,
Efficient Solvers for High Speed Flows, ASME
Journal of Fluids, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 100-110.
61List of Publications inVitae (contd)
- Papers in print or accepted for publication must
be identified - Papers that have been submitted to journals must
be identified. Status of submission should be
included - Papers in preparation should not be included --
may be mentioned in the candidates statement
62Section II Personal Statement
- Should address all areas
- Should be brief (not more than 3 pages)
- Should be well organized with headings and
subheadings for categories of teaching, research,
and service, and future plans - should be understandable to those outside of
discipline (avoid abbreviations)
63Section II Personal Statement (contd)
- should have a clear statement of program of
scholarship and future plans in the area of
excellence
64Section III Evaluation of Teaching
- Subcategories of teaching are
- instructional delivery
- instructional development
- Excellence requires substantial accomplishments
in both subcategories - See the listings provided in ET Guidelines for
items which may be included in these subcategories
65Section III Evaluation of Teaching (contd)
- This section should provide
- an objective evidence of candidates performance
and activities as a teacher - information on the impact of teaching
- information on scholarly work
- do not repeat the publications listed in CV --
instead dwell on selected works, their quality,
impact, etc.
66Section III Evaluation of Teaching (contd)
- information on student evaluations and teaching
awards - evidence of peer/external evaluations via
portfolio reviews, class room visits, etc. - course and lab development
- instructional grants received
67Section IV Evaluation of Research -- Engineering
- Three subcategories of Research and/or Creative
Activities are - Publications
- Funding
- Graduate student activities
- Excellence requires substantial accomplishments
in all subcategories and outside recognition of
ones work
68Section IV Evaluation of Research -- Engineering
(contd)
- This section should provide
- an objective evidence of accomplishments and
activities in the area of research - information on the quality and impact of
publications - do not repeat the publications listed in CV --
instead dwell on selected works, their quality,
impact, etc. - Information of funded and unfunded research and
their outcome
69Section IV Evaluation of Research -- Engineering
(contd)
- Graduate student supervising
- Evidence of external evaluations
- See the listings provided in ET Guidelines for
items which may be included in the three
subcategories of research for engineering
70Section IV Evaluation of Research -- Technology
- This section should provide
- an objective evidence of accomplishments and
activities in the area of research and/or
creative endeavor - information on the quality and impact of
publications - do not repeat the publications listed in CV --
instead dwell on selected works, their quality,
impact, etc.
71Section IV Evaluation of Research -- Technology
(contd)
- Information of funded and unfunded research and
their outcome - Excellence requires outside recognition of ones
work - See the listings provided in ET Guidelines for
items which may be included in research and/or
creative endeavor category for technology
72Section V Evaluation of Service
- Three subcategories of service are
- Internal Service Activities -- committee works,
etc., indicating good citizenship - Professional Society Activities
- External Outreach Activities
- Excellence requires intellectual content,
scholarly aspect, and significant impact at least
in the external outreach category
73Section V Evaluation of Service (contd)
- Promotion and tenure in this area occurs only in
exceptional cases - See the listings provided in ET Guidelines for
items which may be included in service category - do not repeat the service activities listed in CV
-- instead dwell on selected works, their
quality, impact, etc.
74Appendix
- This section is attached to the end of the
dossier and includes - letters of references including a sample letter
sent to reviewers - a brief (two or three sentences) statement of the
expertise of each external letter writer - departments evaluation of the stature of the
journals where the scholarly work are published
75Appendix (contd)
- Selected (not more than three pages) important
documents supporting excellence, such as - grant reviews
- paper reviews
- official documents
76Final Words
- Start early
- Keep up the good work
- The School of Engineering and Technology needs
your success - Good luck in your endeavors