RPT Committee Procedural Document, Revised May 2008

Guidelines for Preparing Review Materials (revised April 2013)

The following recommendations are collected from the practice of the last ten years or so. The review committee liaison can help with questions pertaining to preparation of your materials.

CV and PARs (Professional Activities Reports)

A current CV is submitted to initiate the review and should be resubmitted with the review materials (updated). Consider reorganizing the CV with the review in mind, using a system that reflects your distinctive accomplishments and activities and presents them as clearly as possible. For example, publications could be listed in subcategories that indicate the type of review conducted or that represent the various fields in which the candidate publishes. Remember that some members of your review committee are not in your field; a well-organized CV can be a great help in illuminating your work. Professional Activities Reports are submitted with the rest of the review materials.

Organize by teaching, scholarship and service

The key to preparing materials for review is to organize them according to the three areas of evaluation: teaching, scholarship, and service. The organizational system should be clear and designed to assist the reviewer in understanding the case.

Electronic submission for teaching and scholarship

In most cases, candidates will submit their review materials online, as a website. A few items may need to be submitted in hard copy. See the document entitled “Electronic Submission of Review Materials.”

Faculty Services helps with course evaluations

Faculty Services will help the candidate prepare course evaluations, but they need significant advance notice in order to accommodate all candidates in a timely manner. Consult with Susan Dougherty at least three months in advance of the materials submission deadline, earlier if possible.

The statements on teaching, scholarship, and service

Candidates generally prepare three statements to cover the three areas of review (teaching, scholarship, service). Sections 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 of the RPT document discuss these three areas of the review. In the Materials for the Midterm (tenure, Promotion) Review sections of the document, the statements are defined in this way: “Statements on the candidate's philosophy and practice of teaching, scholarship, and service, discussing the period under review and the candidate's intentions for the period to follow.” The importance of the statements cannot be overestimated. The statements offer the candidate the opportunity to describe the unique configuration of his or her work and to guide the evaluators in understanding particular aspects of his or her field. It is a good idea to have a colleague (or more than one) read these essays and critique them. The review committee liaison can also help in this way. Proofreading is important. Very short or very long documents are not recommended. Three to ten double-spaced pages for each document seems to be the usual range.

The teaching statement

The teaching statement should cover the candidate’s “philosophy and practice of teaching.” Specific examples help the reviewers understand the candidate’s approach to teaching, and the statement should reflect the candidate’s range of courses, but it is not necessary to discuss every course taught.

The scholarship statement

The scholarship statement should cover scholarship since the last review, putting it in context with the previous work if necessary. It should also address how the current work is the foundation for future efforts and outline new or upcoming initiatives. Candidates for tenure or promotion to full professor may find it necessary to write a slightly different document for the external evaluators in order to explain things that don’t need explaining to an Agnes Scott audience. In those reviews, the scholarship document is usually prepared first, as it must be sent to the external evaluators before the deadline for the rest of the file. Similarly, in preparing the version of the scholarship document that is read by the Agnes Scott reviewers, candidates for tenure or promotion to full professor may find it necessary to explain things that don’t need explaining to scholars in the field.

The service statement

The service statement should discusses the candidate’s “philosophy and practice” of “service to students, the department, the college, the profession, and the broader community” (RPT policy 2.3) in the period under review. The CV and PARS will provide lists and dates for service activities; the service statement should present the broader context and the candidate’s reasons for emphasizing certain areas or activities.

Syllabi and teaching materials

Sample syllabi and original teaching materials for the period under review can help illuminate the candidate’s teaching philosophy and practice. The candidate need not represent every course taught but should draw materials from a variety of courses to demonstrate the range of teaching.

Update the file after the submission deadline.

Once the materials are submitted for the review, candidates may still add materials that arrive or occur subsequent to that date. The candidate should inform the review committee chair of any changes or additions to the review material.

Relevant Passages from the RPT Policy (amended 5-2-08)

4.2 The Professional Activities Report (PAR)

In addition to the formal review process, the dean monitors the activities of faculty members through the annual Professional Activities Report. The PAR covers the period June 1 through May 31, and is due in the dean's office June 1. Each faculty member sends one copy of the completed PAR and a current CV to the department chair and one copy to the dean. The dean may discuss this report with the faculty member or the department chair and is available to discuss it at the request of the faculty member or the department chair. The dean's role in the formal review process is described in section 6.3.

The PAR also provides a guide for candidates in the submission of review materials. All reviews make use of the candidate's reports for the period under review, and the candidate may submit evidence of any of the activities listed on the PAR. The department and the individual faculty member are responsible for the relative weighting of specific scholarly activities and the establishment of individual priorities. (See section 2.4, paragraph 4 and section 4.0.)

The RPT committee and the dean review the PAR form from time to time in order to ensure that it reflects the interests of the review process.

The PAR form appears as an appendix to these policies; the form is faculty legislation and may be substantively changed by faculty vote.

7.2 Materials for Midterm Reviews

The candidate submits the following required materials:

A current curriculum vitae
Statements on the candidate's philosophy and practice of teaching, scholarship, and service, discussing the period under review and the candidate's intentions for the period to follow.
Professional Activities Reports for the period under review
Student course evaluations for the period under review
Course syllabi for the period under review (sample syllabi for frequently taught
courses)
Material evidence of finished scholarship, of scholarship in progress, if ready for review, and, if appropriate, of unpublished scholarship.

The candidate may also submit additional evidence of any of the activities reported on the PAR. The midterm review does not include the external review of scholarship.

In addition to evidence submitted by the candidate, the review committee draws on the departmental recommendation letter from the new faculty review and on the comments of at least two committee members who have visited the candidate's classes. The review committee draws on other evidence as appropriate, including evidence of the candidate's professional ethics.

8.2 Materials for Tenure Review

The candidate submits the following required materials:

A current curriculum vitae
Statements on the candidate's philosophy and practice of teaching, scholarship, and service, discussing the period under review and the candidate's intentions for the period to follow (see section 2.4).
Professional Activities Reports for the period under review
Student course evaluations for the period under review
Course syllabi for the period under review (sample syllabi for frequently taught courses)
Annotated list of six qualified external reviewers of scholarship. This list should be compiled in consultation with the department chair and the review committee liaison.
Material evidence of finished scholarship, of scholarship in progress, if ready for review, and, if appropriate, of unpublished scholarship.
Portfolio of scholarship for external review. This portfolio may be designed with the help of the department chair and the review committee liaison. It must contain a current CV, a statement about the candidate’s scholarship, and tangible evidence of the candidate's work as a scholar.

The candidate may also submit evidence of any of the activities reported on the PAR.

In addition to evidence submitted by the candidate, the review committee draws on the following kinds of evidence:

Copies of the review committee chair's cover letter and the dean's recommendation letter from the midterm review (supplied by the dean)
Comments of at least two review committee members who have visited the candidate's classes
Responses of external reviewers of scholarship.

The review committee draws on other evidence as appropriate, including evidence of

the candidate's professional ethics.

9.2 Materials for Promotion Review

The candidate submits the following required materials:

A current curriculum vitae
Statements on the candidate's philosophy and practice of teaching, scholarship, and service, discussing the period under review and the candidate's intentions for the years to follow (see section 2.4). These statements may also place the period under review in the context of earlier work, discussing important points of continuity or changes of direction in the candidate's overall career.
Professional Activities Reports for the period under review
Student course evaluations for the period under review. If the period under review is greater than six years, the review considers evaluations for the six most recent years.
Annotated list of six qualified external reviewers of scholarship
Course syllabi for the period under review (sample syllabi for frequently taught courses)
Material evidence of scholarship, of scholarly work in progress, if ready for review, and, if appropriate, of unpublished scholarship
Portfolio of scholarship for external review. This portfolio may be designed with the help of the department chair and the review committee liaison. It must contain a current CV, a statement about the candidate’s scholarship, and tangible evidence of the candidate's work as a scholar.

The candidate may also submit evidence of any of the activities reported on the PAR.

In addition to evidence submitted by the candidate, the review committee draws on the following kinds of evidence:

Comments of at least two review committee members who have visited the candidate's classes
Responses of external reviewers of scholarship.

The review committee may draw on other evidence as appropriate, including evidence of the candidate's professional ethics.