Note – ALL solicitations for letters must be done by the department and not the candidate.
The chair should also provide brief biographies showing the referees’ credentials. Letters written by referees should be identified as being selected by the candidate, by the department, or by both, either in the chair’s covering letter or on a page preceding the external referees’ letters. The chair’s covering letter should explain why this is so. The candidate’s list and the department’s list might, in many fields, contain considerable overlap. If the department elects to write to scholars on the candidate’s second list, the resultant letters should be weighed in light of the candidate’s noted objections. Obtaining written assessments from faculty in other departments at Cornell may be appropriate, but departments should exercise discretion in soliciting opinions from Cornell colleagues because authors of letters of recommendation are excluded from service on the candidate’s ad hoc committee. To indicate whether, on the basis of the materials provided to them in the dossier, they think the candidate should be granted tenure at Cornell.To provide comparisons with scholars in the field at comparable stages in their careers, naming such scholars if particular comparisons would be helpful.At least five letters, however, should be from peers outside Cornell who have not been closely associated with the candidate. External associations of these sorts do not disqualify referees from offering their assessment of the candidate as long as they are clearly identified, since departments may well seek views informed by close collaborations of these sorts, as part of a well-rounded dossier. To indicate whether they have any current or prior collaborative or supervisory associations with the candidate - e.g., as on a research project or as a coauthor, or as a former teacher, advisor, or PhD director.Letters to external referees requesting an assessment of the candidate should ask referees: These letters should be written by referees from the department’s list of potential The dossier must contain at least seven letters from external referees. Referees which should not be discussed with the candidate.Īll three lists (the candidates’ two lists and the department’s list) constitute a permanent part of the The department also independently constructs its own relatively large list of potential
#EXAMPLES OF TENURE DOSSIER REVIEW LETTERS PROFESSIONAL#
An optional, separate list of scholars in the field who, the candidate believes, for either personal or professional reasons, might not write with objectivity and/or impartiality.Written assessments of the candidate’s qualifications for promotion from recognized Not been selected by the individual under consideration. Reviewers outside Cornell who have not been closely associated with the Candidate and who have No fewer than ten external review letters must be received.
The list should be compiled in time for the P&T Committee to send letters out by July The departmental P&T Committee solicits external letters, allowing ample time for peers to.TheĬhair/P&T Committee should call the proposed external reviewers in May to ascertain theirĪvailability and willingness to serve as external reviewers. The Chair shares the final list of external reviewers with the departmental P&T Committee.The Dean will review and approve the list.The Candidate (if the Candidate has done so) and those identified by the department.
The list of external reviewers should represent an appropriate balance between those identified by List of desired external reviewers and may also provide a list of reviewers deemed inappropriate.
0 kommentar(er)
