3.2 Joint Appointments
The following procedure is provided to guide units in preparing and adjudicating files of jointly appointed members of faculty:
- Committees: the File Preparation Committee and Adjudicating Committee will be constituted by the home unit.
- Membership: the File Preparation Committee should include a faculty member from the second unit. The Adjudicating Committee should include at least one member from the second unit.
- File Contents: the evidence in the file must be representative of the person's activities in both units, and should, to the degree appropriate, take into account the standards articulated by both units.
- Decanal Consideration: the Dean of the home Faculty, in consultation with the Dean of the second Faculty, shall write a letter of transmittal in accordance with the Procedures.
3.3.2. Are the candidate’s suggested referees for professional contribution and standing considered “arm’s length”?
3.3.5. The numbers of collegial referees selected by the candidate and by the File Preparation Committee are specified for Teaching and for Service, but not for Professional Contribution and Standing. How many referees should be selected by the candidate and by the File Preparation Committee for Professional Contribution and Standing?
3.3.6.The Procedures specify that Professional Contribution and Standing references are to be external. Does this prohibit internal colleagues from being solicited as professional contribution and standing referees?
3.3.7. Can members of Adjudicating Committees be solicited to write collegial letters of assessment on a candidate’s teaching or service?
However, where this principle is difficult to apply, a File Preparation Committee may ask a colleague who is also on an Adjudicating Committee to assess teaching or service. This arrangement would be appropriate where there are not enough qualified faculty members independent of the Adjudicating Committee to serve as referees, or where only a member of the Committee can properly assess a candidate’s contributions. Wherever possible, however, Faculties and departments should select the internal referees and Adjudicating Committee members to avoid overlap in the functions of referee and Committee member.
The File Preparation Committee should remind all collegial referees to be clear as to which aspects of teaching or service were assessed. In any event, members of the Adjudicating Committee are expected to ensure that their final assessment is based on a balanced view of the criterion area and of the file as a whole.
3.4 File Contents
- how and why the referees were chosen
- explanation for the choice of any non-arm’s-length referees, as allowed for in the Policy
- information on teaching, e.g., size of classes, whether courses taught are compulsory or elective.
- explanation for any substantial delays in assembling the file
- “…in cases where there may be division within a discipline, the File Preparation Committee should describe the nature of the conflict among schools of thought and present the Adjudicating Committee with a wider range of professional opinion.” (Section B.2.)
Since the Procedures do not make any reference to unsolicited material, it is not expressly prohibited. However, units are reminded that files would normally contain letters which have been specifically solicited by the File Preparation Committee, and more weight should normally be given to assessments which have been specifically solicited for a file. In the event that unsolicited material is contributed to a file, any necessary contextualizing commentary should be provided by the File Preparation Committee. File Preparation Committees could decide not to accept unsolicited material on the basis that it does not reflect the candidate’s academic career, and/or present that career in a fair and accurate light.
If the File Preparation Committee does choose to accept unsolicited material, the candidate shall see the material in its entirety, including signature, and may respond to that material. The candidate should be notified in a timely manner that unsolicited material has been received. The Adjudicating Committee may decide to give this material less weight than other material which was specifically solicited for the file.
No anonymous material may be contained in the file; all material must be signed.
3.4.3. Is there a standard format for preparing a curriculum vitae for tenure and/or promotion files?
3.4.4. Are the file contents limited to the items specified in the Tenure and Promotions Policy, Criteria and Procedures,
The [Adjudicating Committee’s] decision shall include an assessment of the candidate’s progress in the three criterion areas, a copy of the home unit’s standards for tenure and promotion, and clear guidance to the candidate on meeting the standards for tenure and promotion.
Section F.3.1.5.(b) of the Policy requires that "a copy of the letter advising the candidate of his/her advancement to Candidacy for tenure (or letter of appointment, if the candidate was appointed in Candidacy) which normally shall indicate the standards that the candidate is expected to meet if tenure and promotion are to be granted." While the Dean transmits the decision by way of a letter to the candidate, to ensure the file contains the required information, the Adjudicating Committee's report containing its assessment should be included with the letter.
The Policy also indicates that for the confidential letters of reference and for any signed student comments on teaching evaluation forms which are used as part of the tenure and/or promotion file, contextual identifiers and signatures will be removed or masked and the remaining text of the letter will be photocopied and provided to the candidate.
The File Preparation Committee should therefore ensure that a complete copy of the file is prepared with identifying information masked and provided to the candidate prior to adjudication. The candidate’s copy of his/her file should contain copies of the letters of reference with identifiers removed in place of the original confidential, signed letters of reference.[Tenure and Promotions Policy, Criteria and Procedures, Sections F.3.1.6.(b) and F.3.1.7.]
3.4.8. Must a candidate’s contribution to collaborative research projects and/or jointly-authored works be assessed?
Statements from some co-authors and/or collaborators therefore must be solicited. However, it should be clear in the letter of solicitation that co-authors/collaborators are not being asked to evaluate the candidate’s professional contribution and standing.