Section V.A.6: Clinical Faculty - Promotion and Tenure Reviews and Developmental Reviews - Graduate School

VI. Reviews for clinical assistant professors

Types of review: There are three types of review for clinical assistant professors: annual review, three-year review, and review for promotion to the rank of clinical associate professor. Clinical assistant professors must hold a terminal degree. Clinical assistant professors are not required to move toward promotion at either the clinical associate or clinical professor rank.

1. Annual Review
   1. Purpose: The purpose of the annual review is to provide formative assessment to clinical assistant professors, including progress toward successful review for promotion to clinical associate professor.
   2. Schedule: Clinical assistant professors complete a self-evaluation each year, unless they are scheduled for a three-year review or have submitted materials for promotion to clinical associate professor.
   3. Process: There are two steps in the process of annual review for clinical assistant professors.
      1. Annual self-evaluation: clinical assistant professors produce an annual self-evaluation.
      2. Chair consultation: The department chair reviews the annual self-evaluation and meets with the faculty member and/or produces a written evaluation If there is a written evaluation, the clinical assistant professor may write a response, to be included in the faculty member’s file for review in subsequent evaluations.
2. Three-year review
   1. Purpose: The three-year review is intended to provide clinical assistant professors with an assessment of their performance and progress toward promotion. The process is designed to meet the common goals of the faculty member, program, Graduate School, and College by identifying faculty strengths and suggesting areas for future development.
   2. Schedule: Three-year reviews of clinical assistant professors will take place every three years for the length of their appointment at this rank.
   3. Process: There are two steps in the three-year review process for clinical assistant professors.
      1. The clinical assistant professor, using the same format as the annual self-evaluation, provides documentation of their work over the previous three years.
      2. Chair evaluation: The department chair produces a written evaluation and shares this with the clinical assistant professor. The clinical assistant professor may write a response, to be included in the faculty member’s file for review in subsequent evaluations.
3. Review for promotion to clinical associate professor
   1. Purpose: This review serves to evaluate the faculty member’s performance for the purpose of granting promotion to the rank of clinical associate professor. The granting of this promotion requires successful contributions in the two following areas:
      1. Teaching: The candidate must demonstrate excellence in teaching. (See section 3 below.)
      2. Professional and institutional Service: The candidate must demonstrate evidence of consistent and valued contributions to the program, the Graduate School, professional associations, and the broader community. (See section 4 below.)
   2. Eligibility, timing, and schedule: Clinical assistant professor will normally be eligible for review for promotion to clinical associate professor beginning in their sixth year of full-time service. Timing for the review of part-time clinical assistant professors will be at the discretion of the department chair and dean. Faculty members awarded promotion shall meet the standards articulated in sections (3) and (4) below.
   3. Standards, criteria, and evidence concerning teaching
      1. Standards for excellent teaching: Excellent teachers inspire and challenge their students, communicate their knowledge of the field, use appropriate teaching methods, and foster students’ intellectual and professional growth.
      2. Criteria for excellent teaching
         1. Carefully plans and teaches well-organized courses; clearly states goals, objectives, and standards of student performance; and uses appropriate course materials.
         2. Maintains current knowledge of the field.
         3. Seeks to improve teaching techniques and performance.
         4. Provides accurate and timely academic advising.
         5. Actively involves students in the classroom learning experience.
         6. Regularly assesses student performance and apprises students of the results.
         7. Creates and maintains an atmosphere conducive to learning.
         8. Contributes to the development of curriculum.
         9. Provides assistance and supervision to students in field-based courses such as practica and internships.
         10. Encourages students to participate in joint scholarship projects.
         11. Maintains accessibility to students.
      3. Evidence of excellent teaching. The following materials will be included in the review file:
         1. A syllabus for each course taught that includes goals, readings, explication of written assignments, and methods of student evaluation.
         2. All student course evaluations obtained since the last promotion or since date of employment including those developed by the faculty member and a summary and interpretation of the evaluations.
         3. A narrative explaining teaching accomplishments and goals.
         4. A narrative describing advising responsibilities, and, where applicable, supervisory activities and accomplishments.
         5. Evidence from peers, colleagues in the field, past students, and others as appropriate.
         6. Other materials, such as letters, may also be included.
   4. Standards, criteria, and evidence concerning professional and institutional service
      1. Standards for service: Faculty members are expected to contribute actively to their department, the Graduate School, the College, their professional associations, and the broader community.
      2. Criteria for service: A candidate’s service should include regular participation on at least one standing or ad hoc committee of the Graduate School during each year of their appointment. It should include assuming responsibilities in support of the candidate’s program and department as well as the Graduate School and the College. Participation in program development and accreditation processes is also expected. In addition, candidates should participate in service-related activities in their professional organizations and their community. Service may include various forms of leadership, including making substantial and ongoing contributions to the operation and development of a program, department, the Graduate School, or College. Examples of this service include, but are not limited to, serving as program director, clinical coordinator, department chair, or related leadership role. Leadership may also include developing new programs or undertaking significant changes in an existing program. Leadership is a distinct form of service and is recognized as an essential and unique aspect of our professional work in the Graduate School, particularly when clinical faculty undertake such work.
      3. Evidence of professional and institutional Service
         1. A narrative explaining the significance of one’s service contributions to the department, the Graduate School, the College, professional associations, and the broader community. Wherever appropriate, the narrative shall include a description of the candidate’s accomplishments related to assigned departmental responsibilities, developing and maintaining ties with professional associations, and curriculum or program development and leadership.
         2. Letters of testimony indicating the significance of the faculty review candidate’s service contributions.
   5. Process of review for promotion to clinical associate professor
      1. The candidate prepares a review file including: a self-evaluation letter, three-year reviews by the department chair, and supplemental materials addressing the two areas of review. [See section (6) iii below]
      2. The department chair reviews the candidate’s file, writes an independent report, and forwards these materials to the GFPTC through the office of the dean of the Graduate School. Before the report by the department chair is submitted to the GFPTC, the candidate shall have the opportunity to review the report. The candidate may offer corrections of any errors and may submit, within one week, a written response to the GFPTC, which will become part of the candidate’s review materials.
      3. Following their individual assessments and deliberations, the GFPTC makes a recommendation in writing and submits it to the dean. A copy of the GFPTC recommendation shall be sent simultaneously to the candidate. The candidate may submit within one week a written response to the GFPTC. The response will become part of the candidate’s review materials.
      4. Final decisions regarding matters of promotion for clinical faculty rest with the dean of the Graduate School.
   6. Responsibilities in the review process: The first level of review is conducted by the department chair; the GFPTC provides the second level; the dean provides the fourth level of review and the final decision regarding the promotion of clinical faculty.
      1. The dean shall:
         1. Prepare the schedule for review.
         2. Assure that the GFPTC is in place and that the committee includes at least one clinical faculty representative for years during which reviews of clinical faculty occur. The clinical faculty representative on the GFPTC will only be responsible for evaluating clinical faculty files and not files related to tenure track faculty.
         3. Serve as a non-voting member of the GFPTC.
         4. Review the file, write an evaluation, and notify the candidate of the decision.
      2. The department chair shall:
         1. Solicit additional information as deemed necessary to evaluate teaching and service.
         2. Write a letter of recommendation for the granting of promotion based on specific evidence and provide a copy of this to the candidate.
         3. Review and forward the file to the GFPTC through the office of the dean.
      3. The candidate shall:
         1. Prepare the review file. [See Standards, Criteria and Evidence for Teaching, VII.D (3); and Service, VII.D (4) above].
         2. Have the opportunity to read and respond in writing to the department chair’s report and the GFPTC report. In each case, the candidate must submit a response within one week from receiving a copy of the report. The response will become part of the review materials.
      4. The Graduate Faculty Promotion and Tenure Committee shall:
         1. Review the contents of the file, additional materials, and the chair’s evaluation and make an individual assessment in keeping with the standards outlined in this document.
         2. Solicit additional information regarding the candidate’s performance, if desired. The candidate will be informed regarding areas in which information is being formally requested.
         3. Meet as a committee to review each case, with the aim of reaching consensus whenever possible.
         4. Formally record each member’s vote.
         5. Provide a written summary of evaluation for both areas of review: teaching and service. The committee shall make a specific recommendation regarding promotion.
   7. Appeals
      1. Eligibility: The candidate may appeal to the president of the college within two weeks of written notification of the dean’s decision.
      2. An appeal to the president of the college is granted only on grounds of:
         1. Errors in procedures
         2. Discrimination
         3. Violation of academic freedom
         4. Failure to consider existing evidence adequately
      3. A decision cannot be overturned on appeal unless the candidate has sustained the burden of proof on one or more of these four grounds. The appeal will be reviewed by the president of the college, who will issue a final decision. In all cases, the president’s judgment shall be final.

Back to section V.A home