Department of Psychology
Procedures for Promotion to the Rank of Full Professor
1. Initiation
The process by which a
candidate may be advanced for promotion from Associate to Full Professor may be
initiated on two ways. First, any faculty member has the right to ask that he
or she be considered. This route
usually begins with several conversations with the Department Chair about the
process and its likely outcome. Second, the Executive Committee, comprised of
the full professors of the Department, may initiate the process with the
consent of any candidate. In general, both routes should be initiated near the
end of the academic year prior to the one in which the promotion is to be
considered. The Chair will be available throughout the process to answer any of
the candidate’s questions. In every case, the Promotion and Tenure Committee,
Dean, and Provost will be looking for strong departmental support for the
candidate.
1.2 Ad hoc Committee
A review committee will
normally be established for each candidate during the summer prior to the year
of review. The Chair consults with the
candidate regarding the makeup of the review committee to determine if potential
conflicts exist. The review committee
will consist of 3-4 Full Professors, with one serving as Committee Chair. The Departmental Chair serves as an ex officio member of the Committee. In
most cases, 2-3 committee members will be drawn from the candidate's area of
interest and 1-2 will come from outside of the candidate's area of
interest. The Chair schedules a
preliminary meeting of the Committee in late summer .
2.
Supporting materials to be submitted to Chair by candidate (Materials should be
submitted prior to the start of the fall semester):
Curriculum vitae, 1. A complete and up-to-date Vitae that divides
publications into the following categories:
books, articles in refereed journals, popular articles and related
publications, and project reports. All
published reviews of work done by the candidate, both positive and negative,
should be included. In addition, the
Vitae should include information on previous and current grant funding as well
as indications of national and international recognition (e.g., honors, awards,
invitations, committees, offices held, etc.) Furthermore, it should include a section on
teaching and service that specifies:
courses taught, advising activities, undergraduate and graduate
supervised thesis research.
Personal statements. The applicant should provide
two documents, one discussing teaching activities and the other research goals.
Each document should not be more than two single spaced pages.
A list of 8-10 outside experts (with full addresses) who would be capable
of commenting on the candidate’s work. The candidate should briefly specify his or
her relation to each expert listed
The candidate must provide the following material to the chair of the Departmental
Teaching Evaluation Committee, on or about September 1st:
A list of up to 12 current/former undergraduate and
graduate students who may be contacted for statements relating to the
candidate's teaching abilities, broadly defined. These may include advisees of the candidate, students from
classes taught by the candidate or students who have worked in the candidate's
laboratory. Current mail and email
addresses and telephone numbers would be most helpful to the committee.
3. Outside experts
Eight to ten letters from
experts outside the department will be required. Every effort will be
made to solicit letters from leading figures in the candidate's field of
specialty. The Chair of Department or chair of ad hoc committee will write a letter,
neutral in tone, to potential external reviewers in the late summer or early
fall of the academic year in which the tenure decision will be made, requesting
their help and submitting the candidate’s CV.
At least four of the outside experts approached will be from the candidate’s
list, although no more than 50% may come from the list of names provided
by the candidate. If a
referee accepts the task, the chair will send copies of the candidate’s
publications, manuscripts and other relevant material. Outside experts will
receive the candidate’s material early in the fall semester; they are asked to
complete their evaluations by October 15, if possible, and by Oct 30th at the
very latest.
4. Committee Evaluation
Process
The review committee will meet with the candidate on or about October 20th. At this time, the candidate may provide the review committee with additional information or may answer questions or provide clarification on matters of concern to committee members.
The candidate’s performance
in research, teaching, and service will be evaluated in a
Committee Report to the
Tenured Faculty of the department. This
report will eventually
be submitted both to the Dean of Arts and Sciences and to the University Provost
4.1 Evaluation of Research
The standard for promotion
to full professor is excellence of
scholarly work and establishment of
a national reputation in the field. Members
of the committee, in their report, succinctly summarize and analyze the work
and then judge it for its quality, quantity and significance. Among other
qualities examined are the novelty and importance of the ideas examined and the
impact the work has had upon the candidate’s field.
4.2 Committee Evaluation of
Teaching
The standard for promotion is excellence of teaching and advising.
The
Teaching Evaluation Committee will examine the record of courses taught, enrollment numbers,
grade distribution and average grade whenever possible in each course,
statistical and narrative summaries of student course evaluations since
appointment, evaluations by faculty members, numbers and kinds of advisees
(graduate and undergraduate), and the letters solicited from former and current
students. It will prepare a written evaluation that will be placed in
the candidate's file in the departmental office on or about November 10th.
It will be the
responsibility of the candidate to save course evaluations for the four to five
years before coming up for promotion.
4.3 Committee Evaluation of
Service
The Tenure Review Committee
will evaluate the candidate’s performance looking for evidence of a serious
commitment to assist in the operation of the Department, College and
University. Service to the Profession and Community will also be examined.
5. Departmental Vote
After meeting with the candidate, the review committee will prepare a written report detailing the research, teaching and service activities of the candidate. A critical summary of the responses of the outside examiners will also be included. The report should explain the credentials of the reviewers, and should make explicit which were chosen by the candidate. Finally, the review committee will provide its recommendation on promotion to Professor. If a split vote results, dissenting views may be expressed in the written review committee report. The written report will be completed prior to November 10th and placed in the candidate's file in the departmental office with the Assistant to the Chair. The review committee report, vitae, publications, letters from outside examiners, brief descriptions of outside examiners, teaching evaluation report and associated materials will be available for review by members of the Executive Committee of the Department of Psychology for a period of at least 1 week prior to a meeting of the tenured faculty. Files must remain within the departmental office.
The Executive Committee of the Department of Psychology will meet on or about November 15th to discuss each candidate. The chair of the review committee will present a summary of the evaluation and the review committee's recommendation. Ample time will be available for discussion. A ballot will be available following the meeting and a 48-hour period for return of ballots will be in effect.
Each candidate will meet with the
Chair of the Department of Psychology in early December. This meeting will allow time for a
discussion of the candidate's record of research and teaching activities and
the review. At or before this time the Chair will tell candidate of outcome of the vote,
but not the actual numerical results of the balloting.
In some instances, the time frame
for review described above may not be followed. For example, a candidate may initiate an early review after
receiving a competing offer from another institution. In such cases, the review occurs during the Spring semester. However, the standards for review shall
remain at the highest possible level.
6.
Statement
of Confidentiality
All
matters concerning reviews of faculty for promotion are held in the strictest
confidence. These issues include
results of review committee and tenured faculty votes and the identities of
outside experts.
7.
Promotions
Materials for Promotion and Tenure Committee and Provost
Regardless of the outcome of
the considerations, the Departmental Chair prepares a set of promotions
materials as specified by the Dean’s Promotion and Tenure Committee and as
specified in the document “Arts and Sciences, Procedures for Renewal and
Promotion”.
8. Arts and Sciences Promotion and Tenure Committee
As its deliberations
proceed, the Dean’s Promotion and Tenure Committee will tell the Chair of any
concerns it has about a candidate who has been recommended for promotion by the
department. The Chair, after preparing
carefully, will appear before the Promotion and Tenure Committee, briefly
present the case, and answer any questions the Committee poses. The Committee
expects the Chair to consider not just the candidate, but also the perspective
and welfare of the department as a whole.
After the Promotion and
Tenure Committee votes on each candidate, the Dean decides whether or not to
concur in the recommendations of the committee. The Dean informs the Chair of
the decision, and the Chair immediately passes on this information to the
candidate.
9. Consideration at the Provost’s level:
Information regarding this
step in the process can be seen in the document “Arts and Sciences Procedures
for Renewal and Promotion” as well as the policy described on the Provost’s WEB page,
(http://minerva.acc.virginia.edu/~provost/uvap&t.htm).
10. Denial and departmental appeal
A candidate who has been
denied promotion to Full Professor will be reconsidered only when there is new
and significant information about the candidate’s case.
11. Candidate’s appeal mechanism
A candidate wishing to appeal a negative decision should consult
the Dean’s “Procedures for Renewal and Promotion” and Faculty Handbook of the
University of Virginia (section on “Promotion and Tenure Policy”). The Handbook
is available on the Provost’s WEB page,
(http://minerva.acc.virginia.edu/~provost/uvap&t.htm).
Revised 4/1/1999