DRAFT GUIDELINES

Promotion process for Adjunct Faculty Members

Promotion review of adjunct faculty members will be considered in the same cycle as regular faculty, with the same deadline for submission of the Dean’s recommendation to the Provost.  However, colleges may use an abbreviated process for review as long as the same procedure is used for all such reviews, and they may set different internal deadlines for each step.

This policy assumes that portfolios (individualized agreements) will be developed for adjunct faculty members in order to reflect their specific tasks and that adjunct faculty members will be evaluated for promotion based on the quality and significance of the contribution that they make in the area(s) described in their individual portfolios.  These portfolios need not be more than a simple letter of appointment that describes the nature of the contribution to be made by adjunct faculty members in a given semester or academic or calendar year. 

The Provost recommends the following minimum requirements for these reviews:

The dossier should include, at a minimum:

  1. A current CV
  2. Copies of any evaluations of classroom teaching or individual instruction and information about teaching regularity and quantity since appointment or the last promotion
  3. A brief (1-2 pages) personal statement regarding classroom teaching or individual instruction/supervision, scholarship, and/or service responsibilities (if applicable).
  4. Two to three letters of review from individuals outside of the unit who have direct knowledge of the performance of the adjunct faculty member for cases in which it is difficult for DCG members to directly evaluate the performance of the adjunct faculty member.  Colleges will have discretion with respect to the need for outside letters generally or in specific cases.

The process should include, at a minimum:

  1. Review of the dossier and a vote by the DCG (tenure- and clinical-track faculty at or above the rank to which the candidate is being consider for promotion); a written report is not required.

  1. Written recommendation and rationale by the DEO to the Dean.

  1. Written recommendation by the Dean to the Provost.

The candidate should be informed of the recommendations at the conclusion of both the departmental and collegiate reviews, and given the opportunity to respond to errors of fact in either the DEO or Dean’s letters.