Section V.A.7: Clinical Faculty - Promotion and Tenure Reviews and Developmental Reviews - Graduate School

VII. Reviews for clinical associate professors

Types of review: There are three types of review for clinical associate professors: annual review, three-year review, and review for promotion to the rank of clinical professor.

1. Annual review: Clinical associate professors produce an annual self-evaluation. Annual self-evaluations are reviewed by the department chair. No written response from the department chair is required. A meeting can be held or a written report can be completed at the request of the faculty member or at the discretion of the department chair.
2. Three-year review
   1. Purpose: The three-year review is intended to provide clinical associate professors with an assessment of their performance and progress toward promotion to clinical professor. 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 associate professors will take place every three years for the length of their appointment at this rank, except in the case where a clinical associate professor is submitting a file for promotion to clinical professor.
   3. Process: there are two steps in the three-year review process for clinical associate professors.
      1. The clinical associate 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 associate professor. The clinical associate professor may write a response, to be included in the faculty member’s file for review in subsequent evaluations.

3. Reviews for promotion to the rank of clinical professor
   To be promoted to clinical professor, candidates must demonstrate continued excellence in teaching, a record of professional and institutional service consistent with expectations associated with the rank of clinical professor, and significant engaged scholarship.

   1. Purpose: This review serves to evaluate the faculty member’s performance for the purpose of promotion to the rank of clinical professor. The granting of promotion requires successful contributions in each of the following three areas:
      1. Teaching: The candidate must demonstrate excellence in teaching. [See section VII.D (3) above.]
      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 VII.D (4) above.
      3. Scholarship: The candidate must make significant contributions to scholarship through the development, application, or dissemination of knowledge that improves professional practice. This may be through traditional forms of scholarly publication (peer reviewed articles, book chapters, etc.) or through the production of engaged scholarship. (see section (2) e below).
   2. Standards, criteria, and evidence concerning scholarship
      1. Standards for scholarship: Scholarship contributes to professional and disciplinary knowledge.
      2. Criteria for scholarship: Significant contributions to scholarship may include any of the following, though expectations for clinical faculty scholarship (in contrast to expectations for tenure-track faculty) may focus on engaged scholarship (see section e below):
         1. Peer-reviewed publications, which include (i) articles published in peer- reviewed professional journals, and (ii) book chapters, and (iii) books published by presses that employ peer review.
         2. Invited chapters in edited volumes, articles in non-refereed journals that are recognized by peers as high-quality journals, articles in non-refereed regional journals, bulletins, or digital publications, and book reviews.
         3. Refereed presentations accepted at professional conferences represent contributions to knowledge in the field and demonstrate the status of work in progress. Invited presentations are also evidence of a candidate’s standing among peers. Solicited and evaluated consultations, competitively reviewed grants and contracts, presentations to professional colleagues and practitioners, and other professional engagements that apply knowledge to improve professional practice are likewise evidence of scholarly impact.
         4. Creative works (literary, theatrical, or artistic) clearly related to the candidate’s field of inquiry, scholarship and/or teaching.
         5. Engaged scholarship constitutes work conducted in collaboration with communities or organizations outside the college, or institutional scholarship completed within the college, such that a faculty member’s expertise and research are applied in a specific context to demonstrable effect. Evidence of engaged scholarship must include a detailed description of the work, a clear connection to the faculty member’s research agenda, and evidence of significant impact. The publication or dissemination of such reports, media coverage of these activities, and documents from community members that specify the candidate’s contribution will be considered as measures of impact. Any of the following that have been prepared by the candidate or with the candidate’s input are examples of evidence that may be submitted for the purpose of documenting engaged scholarship: technical or advisory reports; policy papers or recommendations; data gathered to evaluate a project’s outcomes; proposals for organizational change or restructuring; and significant changes in educational practice or clinical treatment based on the candidate’s work and participation.
         6. Grant submissions are considered evidence of engagement in the professional field. Successful grant applications are evidence of positive peer review and achievement.
         7. Scholarly work initiated since a candidate’s hire is an essential demonstration of the candidate’s ability to balance this work with teaching and performing service at all levels required for promotion and tenure. Publications of work initiated before the candidate’s time of hire are considered as part of the candidate’s scholarly output.
      3. Evidence of scholarship provided by candidate
         Evidence of scholarly work provided by the candidate includes a narrative explaining past, current, and future work, highlighting major areas of interest, research, and particular challenges. In addition, evidence of scholarship provided by the candidate may include:
         1. Copies of books, chapters, and articles published or currently under review.
         2. Reviews of books or articles published.
         3. Presentations at professional conferences.
         4. Evidence of engaged scholarship
         5. Grant proposals written, with reviewers’ comments. Information concerning grants awarded, denied, and pending.
         6. Professional communications and/or artifacts indicating the quality of the candidate’s research program, publications, presentations, invited consultation and/or engaged scholarship
   3. Schedule: Faculty members shall normally be eligible for review for promotion beginning six years after their promotion to the rank of clinical associate professor. A request for an accelerated or delayed review must be approved by the dean prior to the submission of the review file. Clinical assistant professors are not required to move toward promotion at either the clinical associate or clinical professor rank.
   4. Standards for promotion: To be promoted to clinical professor, candidates must demonstrate continued excellence in teaching and significant scholarship, and a record of professional and institutional service consistent with expectations associated with the rank of clinical professor. [See section VII.D (3) on teaching, VII.D (4) on professional and institutional service and VIII.D (2) on scholarship.]
   5. Process: See section VII.D (5).
   6. Responsibilities: See section VII.D (6).
   7. Appeals: See section VII.D (7).

Back to section V.A home