Guidelines for Review of Promotions Federation Actions

MAKE SURE YOU REFERENCE THE APPROPRIATE CHECKLIST AVAILABLE ON THE VICE PROVOST'S WEBPAGE

Recommended Action form

Review Periods

If promotion from Assistant to Associate - review period is since the candidate received their Ph.D. (or equivalent)
If promotion from Associate to Full - review period is from when the candidate was promoted to Associate

Departmental Letter

Peer group - is date procedures were approved by JPC/Vice Provost referenced? NOTE: Procedures approved by CAP do not apply. Must have JPC/Vice Provost approval.
Is the required description of the peer group evaluation process included?
Is the vote reported clearly?
If there are "no" votes, is the required explanation included?
Is the first paragraph an accurate reflection of the review (i.e. does it state it is an acceleration, etc.)
Does the letter accurately state numbers that are listed elsewhere in dossier.

Peer Evaluation of Teaching (not required unless the individual holds a formal teaching appt)

REQUIRED for promotions. If there are peer letters, they must be signed and placed immediately following the departmental letter, prior to the disclosure statement.
Federation members, including Specialists in CE, are not considered peers when evaluating teaching performance

Disclosure statement:

Is it signed?
Is it checked off?
Does it indicate the candidate was given redacted copies of the extramural letters?
Date needs to be on or after the date of the departmental letter.

Extramural letters:

There should be a list of those individuals who were solicited for letters, and must include a brief statement of their expertise
The list should indicate whether the chair selected the individual or the individual was recommended by the candidate.
The Annual Call states at least five to eight letters should be included in the dossier.
Need original letters with original signatures. Fax copies are now acceptable. E-mail copies are okay ONLY when a signed reference letter is attached as a PDF file or if awaiting the arrival of the signed originals.

Candidate's Statement

Position Description - required.

Percentages required for each major job function. (See APM section for the required job functions for the series, e.g. research, professional competence, university service)
Candidate and Department Chair signatures required

List of Extending Knowledge

This will vary candidate by candidate. Insure that it makes logical sense and that the lines are drawn appropriately based on previous actions.

List of Extending Knowledge evaluations - if any

List of student evaluations submitted. (not required unless there is a formal teaching appt)

Only a list of those included in the supporting documentation should be listed here.
Should include:

Teaching and Advising Record (not required unless there is a formal teaching appt)

Page 1 can the Instructor Activity Report or can be a list prepared by the department. Either way, the percent of the contribution to each course should be included
Are the appropriate years indicated by a line excluding courses previously reviewed?
Numbers are often not reported the same here and in the departmental letter and candidates statement. Need to check.
Often faculty attach additional information that is not asked for. It is okay if they include lists of those students who they sat on their qualifying committee, visitors, etc. It is NOT okay to include course syllabi, outlines etc

List of Service Activity

List should be University, professional and public service.
Departments can include Outside Professional Activities reports in lieu of professional service on service list

Publication List

Put in the following order: Contributions to Jointly Authored Pubs, Cat. I, In press, in press letters, Submitted, Cat II, Cat III, Cat IV
Per the Supplemental Annual Call pub lists include

Category I - Refereed and non-refereed journal articles; books and monograph chapters; proceedings chapters (only if refereed)
Category II - Compendiums of data; reports, regular distribution items; proceedings chapters (non-refereed); extension teaching materials; video or audio tapes; popular articles; bulletins; leaflets; all publications distributed electronically
Category III: Items with limited distribution; progress or annual reports to funding agencies or commissions; comments for commodity group newsletters
Category IV: Published abstracts, book reviews, editorials

Is the line drawn appropriately? If promotion to Associate rank, all publications since Ph.D. are considered, but there should be a line that indicates when they were appointed at UCD.
Were previous "in press" items lined out, or are they above the line?
Refereed publications need to be indicated.
Need an indicator of those publications being submitted for review.
If a Proceedings is listed as refereed, is documentation included to substantiate that?
If an item is listed as in press is there documentation to show that it is accepted without revision? If not, is the publication in galley format?
All other lists, check for appropriateness of category, and whether the line is drawn correctly.

Grants

Awards

AES Project Reports (required only if hold an AES title)

Need copies of annual reports since 1994 or since last review, whichever is later.