Reappointment of Instructor-Rank and Scholar-in-Residence Faculty

[Materials for the AY 2023-24 process were shared to Department Chairs and HR Liaisons and via an email from Jess Rosso on 10/27/2022.]

Reappointment of an instructor-rank or Scholar-in-Residence faculty member requires an evaluation by the primary-unit evaluation committee and a vote of the primary unit. In general, instructors are expected to demonstrate excellence in teaching and meritorious performance in service and research (if relevant). The College requires the following documentation to be submitted to the Dean’s office by the end of January for reappointments:

  1. Chair or Director letter to the Dean summarizing the evaluation of the candidate by the primary unit review committee and reporting the primary unit vote on the candidate’s reappointment. The letter should state if teaching, service, and research (if relevant) are each “not meritorious,” “meritorious,” or “excellent.”
  2. Candidate’s vita. (Sample format for CV)
  3. Multiple measures of teaching including:
  • FCQ summaries including the student narrative sections from all courses taught, and at least two additional measures, which could include:
    • Peer evaluations of teaching
    • Letters from students (randomly solicited from among all of those enrolled in faculty member’s courses and/or solicited or unsolicited from specific students who have particular insight into faculty teaching and mentoring contributions).
    • Contributions to course and curriculum development
    • Evidence of student engagement, as evidenced, e.g., student mentoring.
  1. Evaluation of the candidate’s engagement in the field, in a manner consistent with the terms of the candidate’s discipline and appointment. 
  2. Drafts of the reappointment offer letter and the university contract, using the templates on the Faculty Affairs site.    

The reappointment of an instructor-rank or Scholar-in-Residence faculty member will be based according to performance and the instructional needs of the units they are serving. Such reappointments should be for three years and are recommended by a vote of the permanent faculty of a discipline. A reappointment for less than three years requires justification and approval by Faculty Affairs.

As of academic year 2021-2022, the Dean of the College of Engineering and Applied Science has final authority over the reappointment of Instructor-rank or Scholar-in-Residence appointments.

Promotion of Instructor-Rank Faculty

The promotion of an instructor-rank faculty member requires an evaluation by the primary-unit evaluation committee and a vote of the primary unit. In general, Senior Instructors (Associate Teaching Professors) are expected to demonstrate excellence in teaching and at least meritorious performance in service and research (if relevant) beyond the level demonstrated by Instructors (Assistant Teaching Professors). Principal Instructors (Teaching Professors) are expected to demonstrate a record of distinction, as described below. The College requires the following documentation to be submitted to the Dean’s office by the end of January for reappointments:

Promotion guidelines from Instructor to Senior Instructor (from Assistant to Associate Teaching Professor)  

We recommend following the procedures suggested above for reappointment, with modifications as appropriate to the particular academic unit. The criteria are set by the units and must be included in their official reappointment and promotion of teaching faculty criteria document.

  1. Faculty must be at least six years in rank as Instructors before advancing to Senior Instructors, but promotion is not simply a function of time in rank.  
  2. Promotion from Instructor to Senior Instructor requires a record of exemplary teaching.  Evidence of exemplary teaching would include FCQ summaries and at least two additional measures which could include, but are not limited to, the following:
    • Peer evaluations of teaching
    • Letters from students
    • Contributions to course and curriculum development
    • Evidence of student engagement, as evidenced, e.g., student mentoring.

Promotion guidelines from Senior Instructor to Principal Instructor (from Associate Teaching Professor to Teaching Professor

We recommend following the procedures suggested above for reappointment, with modifications as appropriate to each particular academic unit.

  1. We recommend at least three years in rank between Senior Instructor and Principal Instructor, but promotion is not simply a function of time in rank.
  2. Promotion from Senior Instructor to Principal Instructor requires a record of distinction.  Typically, this includes evidence that the Senior Instructor has had a major impact in the disciplinary unit (or at college and/or university level) and its students (e.g. on pedagogy and curriculum).  Evidence of exemplary performance constituting a record of distinction could include but would not be limited to the following:
    1. Consistently strong teaching metrics as demonstrated by FCQs
    2. Peer evaluations of teaching in multiple contexts
    3. Letters from students, including from graduates, and/or feedback on Senior Exit Surveys
    4. Contributions to course and curriculum development
    5. Evidence of student engagement as evidenced, for example, through mentoring of students, service on honors thesis committees, etc.  
    6. Leadership and service that have an impact on the unit, school/college, campus, and/or national communities.
    7. Contributions to the scholarship of teaching and learning, including the following:
      1. Contributions to local or national workshops on teaching
      2. Relevant publications such as textbooks, lab manuals, articles on pedagogy, etc.
      3. Work that improves teaching across multiple units
      4. Papers, posters, or presentations on pedagogical topics delivered at conferences
    8. Outreach to communities and partners beyond the university, including nonprofits, or disadvantaged groups, that draws upon the Instructor’s expertise.
    9. Practitioner experience that supplements a teaching career.

Non-Favorable Unit Vote

If a unit vote for reappointment is non-favorable (reappointment is not recommended), the unit Chair/Faculty Director will partner with College HR to supply a notice of non-favorable vote letter to be sent to the faculty member via email. The Associate Dean for Faculty Advancement will consult with the Teaching Faculty Advisory Committee, who will provide a written recommendation to the Associate Dean with a final recommendation. The final recommendation will be supplied to the faculty member via a letter. 

  •  If the outcome is still a negative recommendation, the faculty member will have 30 days to appeal to the Dean, who will provide a final recommendation.
  • The Dean will consider the recommendation of the Unit, Teaching Reappointment Advisory Committee, Associate Dean for Faculty Advancement, the arguments, and body of evidence, and render a written decision regarding the reappointment.

This procedure is not intended to restrict the rights of a teaching faculty to pursue other campus or University level appeal processes to which they are entitled.

Revised December 2021
Revised May 25, 2022: Moved assessment information to a separate website