|
Rank and
Tenure are at the heart of a mutually acknowledged and mutually
beneficial long-term relationship between the Ordinary Faculty and
the University. They deserve special attention throughout the
faculty member's career at the University. The Faculty Handbook
spells out the larger frame of reference for this relationship, and
individual departments provide the most immediate and long-term
favorable environment for faculty members' growth.
At certain
points during their employment history--whether at the time of
initial appointment or later in their careers at the
University--faculty members may elect or be required to apply for
tenure and/or promotion. This document (the Guidelines) is intended
to clarify the procedures pertaining to both of these application
processes. Given the importance of rank and tenure, all members of
the Ordinary Faculty will be provided with copies of these
Guidelines at the time of initial appointment. Furthermore, it is
the responsibility of the Department Chairpersons to inform faculty,
early on, of the expectations for the granting of tenure and
promotion that hold within a given Department and within the
University as a whole.
While these Guidelines are by no means exhaustive in that regard,
they can provide a useful framework for the procedural steps to
be taken in the actual application process.
General Statement
The
procedures for submitting applications for tenure and promotion at
Georgetown University are organized variously across the
University's major divisions. Though there are different
administrative entities and different decision-making bodies all
procedures should achieve a fair and objective evaluation of the
applicant's total record in terms of teaching, scholarship, and
service.
In general, this evaluation takes place in three stages, at the
departmental level, at the school level, and, finally, at the
level of the University Committee on Rank and Tenure. The University
Committee on Rank and Tenure (the Committee) serves as the President's
advisory body on all matters pertaining to the granting of tenure
and promotion. The Committee's deliberations are confidential
and the Committee reports only to the President. All decisions
on tenure and promotion rest with the President of the University.
Procedures at the Departmental or School Level
1.
Applications for tenure and promotion can be submitted by all
full-time members of the Ordinary Faculty who are eligible to be
considered for promotion and/or tenure in accordance with the
Faculty Handbook. Internal support, whether from the Department or
the School, is not a prerequisite for consideration by the
University Committee on Rank and Tenure. However, all applications
must be forwarded through the Department Chairperson or Dean or
other official who normally is responsible for applications. This
administrative officer will process them expeditiously through the
relevant channels and will assure that all materials that were
considered by the various deliberating bodies, whatever their
conclusions, are included in the file that is transmitted to the
Committee.
2. Whatever
procedural variations may exist in different originating bodies, the
following points apply to all applications:
a.
Candidates must be assessed in the three categories of teaching,
scholarship, and service.
b.
Excellence in teaching reveals itself in a variety of ways. Course
critiques submitted by students and faculty evaluations, although
imperfect, still provide a useful measure of the manner in which a
professor's teaching is received and perceived by students. Summary
data of the Teacher and Course Evaluation Forms should be included
in the application file. Obviously, the most useful evaluations are
those in which the majority of students enrolled in a course have
participated.
In addition,
systematic assessments prepared by the applicant's colleagues who
have observed selected classes over several years and, who, in
addition, may have obtained formal or informal input from students
can provide important additional information regarding
teaching.
Since
teaching is considered an important component of a faculty member's
professional life at Georgetown University, it is particularly
important to help younger colleagues at the beginning of their
career to become successful teachers. Thus, any indication of a
colleague's growth in that regard, particularly as it is documented
in the annual evaluations prepared by the department on tenure-track
faculty prior to the granting of rank and/or tenure, should receive
special note.
In some
fields, specifically within the Medical Center, teaching may be
conducted in clinical settings. When a standard evaluation form is
not available, evaluations from students, residents, and/or fellows
taught in such clinical settings would normally be in the form of
letters. Testimonials from selected students or friends should not
be expected to carry much weight in the Committee's
deliberations.
c. "While
there is no concise definition of what may constitute evidence of
scholarship, it is generally recognized that a scholar has a wide
and critical command of his or her field of study as well as broad
cultural interests. The highest indication of scholarship is the
ability to make original contributions in one's field of knowledge."
Excellence in scholarship typically reveals itself as continuing
research documented primarily in publications appearing in the
relevant journals or in the form of books published by respected
publishing companies. It may also be "evidenced in certain areas of
creativity demonstrated through the medium of communication
customary in a discipline." Citation of a candidate's work in the
professional literature is another indicator of scholarly
standing.
"Consideration will be given to such subsidiary
evidence as direction of or significant participation in research
projects, particularly in the scholarly activities of learned
societies and professional consultative service."*
Major
invited addresses given at national and international conferences,
election to editorial boards, and service on peer review committees
also reflect the applicant's scholarly productivity and
ability.
The
publication of a textbook can be considered either under the
category of teaching or of scholarship, depending upon the nature of
the textbook and the contributions it makes to the field. A judgment
on this matter should be requested from the outside evaluators as
part of their written statements. A textbook would be viewed as
indicative of scholarship if, for example, extramural evaluators
cite evidence that the book exhibits exemplary scholarship, offers
original insights and perspectives in the field, and is read and
cited by scholars and researchers.
Extramural
research funding from organizations using peer review committees is
an index of scholarly potential for younger colleagues, and
sustained support denotes peer acceptance of the importance of the
research activity for senior members of the faculty.
Work in
progress is usually not considered by the Committee, unless it has
been subjected to the same extramural assessment as published
work.
d. It is the responsibility of the academic Department or other
appropriate faculty committee to secure genuine and timely evaluations
of the candidate's scholarship. The candidate may suggest appropriate
outside reviewers. However, the ultimate decision on the group
of reviewers rests with the academic department or the appropriate
faculty committee which, in consultation with other appropriate
faculty members, selects impartial and competent evaluators.
*Quotations in this and the preceding paragraph are from the
Faculty Handbook (1990), p. 28, with slight
modifications in style, but not substance.
A statement
describing the procedures followed to select outside evaluators
should be included with the application submitted to the University
Committee on Rank and Tenure.
Scholarship
must be evaluated by extramural authorities in the field who are in
a position to give an objective evaluation.
The
Committee requires a minimum of three written evaluations of
scholarship from extramural authorities. The Chairperson of the
Department or committee should submit a brief statement concerning
the qualifications of the external evaluators. Any social, academic,
or institutional relationship between the evaluators and the
applicant should be clearly indicated by the evaluators and on the
application's summary listing of reviewers.
At least two
evaluators should be distinguished scholars who are neither members
of the Georgetown faculty nor former teachers, co-workers, or
students of the candidate. That is, evaluators should primarily be
acquainted with the candidate through his or her published work or
other professional accomplishments. Where a field is so small that
this is not feasible, this should be justified in the
application.
All
evaluations received should be included in the application.
e. The
applicant's curriculum vitae and copies of appropriate publications
should be sent to the evaluators, together with an explanation of
the conditions and expectations under which the applicant has
worked. Since standards of acceptable scholarship may properly vary
within a single unit from one time to another, from one unit to
another within an institution, and from one institution to another,
it is important that the standards applicable to a given application
be clearly explained to each evaluator. A copy of the explanation of
conditions and expectations which was furnished to each evaluator,
should be included with the application.
The rank,
experience, and overall standing of these evaluators determine the
confidence the Committee has in the extramural letters of
evaluation.
Statements
from extramural evaluators should provide answers to some of the
following questions: Have the publications of the candidate added to
or modified existing knowledge and how was this accomplished? Has
the candidate developed a new idea? Has the candidate provided
additional examples or applications for the theories stated by
others? Has the candidate explained, at least partly, a difficulty
encountered by other researchers? Has the candidate tested any
theorem or idea under different conditions, or in new
circumstances?
Each
reviewer must be requested to justify any conclusions regarding the
quality of scholarship of the applicant and do so at a level of
detail that permits an understanding of the achievement of the
applicant relative to standards of excellence in his or her field.
Evaluations that do not identify clearly specific components of the
applicant's work which support the evaluator's conclusions cannot be
considered as persuasive.
f. Service
recognizes the applicant's record as a colleague rather than as a
teacher or scholar. It covers departmental and extra-departmental
administrative, committee-work, and community service. Of particular
importance is the advising that faculty offer to students in their
own or in other departments.
Since an
applicant's record of relevant service may not always be known
within the Department or School, and may thus be overlooked easily,
it is important to direct particular attention to this category in
the preparation of the file.
g. Secret
and separate votes shall be taken on applications for promotion
and/or tenure. These are to be reported to the Committee. In the
case of applications for tenure, all tenured members of the
Department are entitled to vote. In the case of applications for
promotion all members holding at least the rank to which the
applicant is applying are entitled to vote. Voting should take place
at a meeting at which the application can be discussed by the group
as a whole. Absentee votes, if permitted by the Department, should
be so noted in the transmission of the file.
In Schools or Departments having Executive Faculties or separate
committees on rank and tenure, applications will indicate the
votes submitted by such bodies as well as votes obtained from
the relevant Department(s). Where applicants have interdisciplinary
responsibilities they should also be assessed by their interdisciplinary
program.
The University Committee on Rank and Tenure
The
Committee, and therefore each member serving on it, is charged with
judging each application according to the best interests of the
University in terms of the candidate's record of teaching,
scholarship, and service. In arriving at its recommendations to the
President the Committee is guided by the Faculty Handbook and
considers all information which is relevant to the assessment of
candidates in those three categories.
Membership
on the University Committee on Rank and Tenure comes about either by
Presidential appointment (half of the membership) or by election by
the Faculty Senate. It is offered for a three year term. Although it
is customary for members of the Committee to be drawn from a variety
of academic divisions of the University, the members of the
Committee are not "representatives" of particular Departments or
Schools. An individual may serve on the Committee for no more than
two terms in succession, and must remain off the Committee for at
least one term between appointments.
At its
initial meeting of the academic year, the Committee elects its
officers, the Chairperson, the Recording Secretary, and the
Corresponding Secretary.
The officers of the Committee may serve for no more than three
consecutive years. As much as possible, successive chairpersons
should come from different campuses of the University. Individual
members of the Committee, as well as its officers, are not available
to discuss the business of the Committee except with the President
and those designated by him.
Preparation and Submission of Applications
Complete
applications must include all of the following:
1. A
covering SUMMARY SHEET (a copy is attached on the last page), with
all applicable items completed;
2. The
applicant's current curriculum vitae, including earned degrees (with
institutions and dates), academic and professional history,
publications, academic honors, speeches and addresses, professional
memberships, and academic and public service;
3. Material
demonstrating the applicant's record as a teacher, including student
evaluations and assessment by colleagues;
4. All
letters from extramural experts addressing the quality of the
applicant's scholarly contributions, including information about any
relationship to the candidate;
5. Copy of
letters sent to the outside evaluators; a statement regarding the
procedures used in selecting them, and a brief statement concerning
their qualifications;
6. Letters
from appropriate Deans and Chairpersons evaluating the candidate's
record of teaching, scholarship, and service;
7. Letters,
or summaries of letters, submitted by Georgetown colleagues;
8. Two
copies of representative publications.
All pages of the application are to be numbered consecutively.
Submission of the full application IN SEVENTEEN COPIES, no
later than March 15, is required for action during the current
academic year. When practical, earlier submission is
encouraged.
Applications
dealing solely with promotion of current Georgetown faculty who
already hold tenure are to be submitted prior to January 15 for
action during the current academic year.
Under
extraordinary circumstances, at the request of the Executive Vice
President for the Main Campus, the Executive Vice President for
Health Sciences, Director of the Medical Center, or the Dean of the
Law Center, applications will be accepted for review in the current
year after the deadline date for submission. However, the request
for special consideration must be received at the Office of the
Corresponding Secretary by the deadline date and the completed
application must be received no later than May 1.
A completed
application includes all of the above components and is delivered
to:
The Corresponding Secretary
University Committee on Rank and Tenure
Office of the Executive Vice President for the Main Campus
650 Intercultural Center
Inquiries regarding the mechanics of the application process
that go beyond these Guidelines may be directed to the Corresponding
Secretary or the Chairperson, c/o Office of the Executive Vice
President for the Main Campus, 650 Intercultural Center.
June 5,
1992
Related document:
Tenure and Promotion Memo
Back to the top
Back to Faculty
Senate Home Page
|
