Checklist for Rank and Promotion Application

When you apply for promotion in rank, present materials in a user-friendly and orderly fashion, filed by section in a box labeled with your name.

Your table of contents will let reviewers know exactly where they can find each piece of information. It is helpful if the first item following the table of contents is a copy of your full curriculum vitae to ground your readers in an overview of who you are as a professional. We suggest that you divide your narrative into the 3 main promotion criteria – Teaching, Service, Scholarship - each with supporting documentation and information. For example, the teaching section must demonstrate excellence in teaching and include statements on your philosophy and pedagogical approach along with the syllabi and evaluations required as documentation for that area. Do not include materials that relate to the previous promotion in rank.

Remember to document, reflect, and analyze!

The following checklist will help you prepare a thorough application for promotion in rank.

Teaching Documentation for this area includes:

• All of the past year’s syllabi and course evaluations (qualitative and quantitative)
• Samples of prior years’ syllabi and course evaluations

Your narrative should include the following information:

• A description of your workload
• Two additional copies of your curriculum vita and your narrative
• Student advisement, including specific information regarding the nature of advisement in your department and the number of advisees with whom you work
• Introduction to your teaching and educational background, including degrees, past years of teaching, number of years in current rank, and years at Lesley University
• Your philosophy of education and how this influences your pedagogical approach
• Reflections on your style of teaching as it relates to different delivery models and types of teaching experiences
• Reflections on your instructional impact and student feedback, addressing both quantitative and qualitative data. Comment in detail in the narrative on the lessons learned from both positive and difficult teaching experiences. Respond to specific student comments that are in the box.
• Reflect on documents that support your teaching ability, such as classroom observations, peer reviews, and student letters.

Make sure to clarify any terms specific to your field/discipline that may be unfamiliar to a committee member from another field/discipline.

Service and Leadership: Documentation for this area includes:

• Documents related to service, such as letters that acknowledge committee membership (Include dates of activity)
• Correspondence that attests to your level of contribution to committees
• Letters of acknowledgement - e.g. a memo expressing appreciation for attending Open House
• Curriculum development
• Course and adjunct faculty mentoring
• Academic support/administrative activities. Please indicate whether your achievements were in the context of compensated activities (by way of stipends or unit releases) or non-compensated activities.

Your narrative in this section should go beyond a simple list of your service activities. Present challenges and accomplishments and their relevance to your career. Reflect on the rationale and context of your service activities, being sure to separate those from contract responsibilities. Be sure to specify your role within various service activities and why you have selected these activities. Be explicit about the role you played on committees and in other service activities. Your narrative must include a description of your service activities since your last promotion within the following:

• Your department
• Your school within the university
• Cross-university committees/activities
• The external community (if applicable) – e.g. board memberships, pro bono consulting (paid consulting is not considered service), participation in legislative policy related to one’s field/discipline, review work for journals and organizations, advocacy work

Scholarship: Documentation for this area includes:

• Evidence of scholarship since your last promotion, including research articles, books, or monographs that are either already in print or in press; photos of artistic productions; exhibition documentation; or conference presentation documentation. For upcoming presentations, in press publications, or future exhibitions/performance, be sure to include letters of acceptance. If a project is collaborative, be specific about your role and contribution to the project.
• Please contextualize your scholarship within your field
• Letters and/or contracts related to scholarly activities
• Evidence of memberships and leadership in professional organizations
• A portfolio, if you have one
• A video, a media presentation, or other evidence of artistic achievements, if relevant
• If you have a coauthored publication, please delineate your role as author in the publication

In your narrative, list your scholarship activities. Reflect on the theoretical frameworks of your scholarship, its relevance to your discipline, and its influence on the field (local, regional, national, and international impact) and how it informs your teaching. If you are listed as one of two or more authors, you should clarify your role and contribution to the project/product.

Scholarship includes:

Additional Supportive Documentation that must be included:

• Diploma/transcripts (or note on where they are in the university)
• Letter from your immediate supervisor
• Letter from the Dean of your school
• Peer evaluations
• Solicited letters from internal and external colleagues who can comment on your professional contributions
• Unsolicited letters from students, colleagues, etc.
• Your annual reports since last promotion/ any other supervisor assessments
• Your professional development plans since last promotion

Note: Do not include materials that reflect work and accomplishments related to your previous promotion in rank.

Scholarship at Lesley

Lesley University places a high value on scholarship that informs teaching and learning at the University, as well as the liberal and professional fields of study in which our faculty and graduates participate. This document acknowledges three key criteria of scholarly work and defines “scholarship” within current literature.

Characteristics of Scholarship

According to Shulman (2000), “For an activity to be designed as scholarship, it should manifest at least three characteristics: it should be public, susceptible to critical review and evaluation, and accessible for exchange and use by other members of one’s scholarly community.” The parameters of scholarship are broad and inclusive; yet, they share a common bond: the “products” of scholarly endeavors must meet these three characteristics in order to be considered scholarship.

The three characteristics of Shulman’s scholarly work can be interpreted in many ways. It is beyond the scope of this document to quantify each term. It is well known within academia that professional journals, artistic exhibitions, conference presentations, and so forth, are judged by each discipline on a continuum from less selective to highly selective, less competitive to highly competitive, and so forth. Faculty who are applying for promotion, contract renewal, and sabbatical must make the case that s/he has met Shulman’s characteristics of scholarship and must clearly articulate the “merit/status” of the scholarship within his/her field.

Defining Scholarship

Scholarship at Lesley University is informed by the work of Ernest Boyer (2016). Boyer’s four categories of scholarship and creative expression represent the breadth of scholarship and creative expression that take place at Lesley University. Faculty and students are encouraged to pursue the “Scholarship of Discovery,” “Scholarship of Integration,” “Scholarship of Application,” and “Scholarship of Teaching,” as well as the “Scholarship of Creativity.”

The Scholarship of Discovery , comes closest to what is meant when academics speak of “research.” No tenets in the academy are held in higher regard than the commitment to knowledge for its own sake, to freedom of inquiry and to following, in a disciplined fashion, an investigation wherever it may lead (p 69).

[Through] the Scholarship of Integration, we underscore the need for scholars who give meaning to isolated facts, putting them in perspective. By integration, we mean making connections across the disciplines, placing the specialties in larger context, illuminating data in a revealing way, often educating non-specialists, too. In calling for a Scholarship of Integration, we do not suggest returning to the “gentleman scholar” of an earlier time, nor do we have in mind the dilettante. Rather, what we mean is serious, disciplined work that seeks to interpret, draw together, and bring new insight to bear on original research (p 70).

The Scholarship of Application of knowledge moves toward engagement as the scholar asks, “How can knowledge be responsibly applied to consequential problems?” ... To be considered Scholarship, service activities must be tied directly to one’s special field of knowledge and relate to, and flow directly out of, this professional activity. Such service is serious, demanding work, requiring the rigor – and the accountability – traditionally associated with research activities (p73)

The Scholarship of Teaching. ... Teaching is also a dynamic endeavor involving all the analogies, metaphors, and images that build bridges between the teacher’s understanding and the student’s learning. Pedagogical procedures must be carefully planned, continuously examined, and relate directly to the subject taught. Educator Parker Palmer strikes precisely the right note when he says knowing and learning are communal acts (p 74, cites Palmer, 1983).

“The Scholarship of Teaching must be distinguished from teaching itself. The Scholarship of Teaching involves the disciplined discovery, evaluation, and transmission of information about the learning process” (Ithaca College…). In order for teaching to be “scholarship,” all three of Shulman’s characteristics must be met. “Teaching, in contrast, involves the application of that information through actual instruction” (Ithaca College…)

In addition, Lesley values the scholarship of creativity, meaning artistic products in visual, literary, and performance arts; for example, public performances and public exhibitions.

It is important to note that “scholarship” in each of these five categories presupposes the creation of something that did not formerly exist. Scholarship is not the mere reproduction or rearrangement of extant works; rather it is the production and contribution of new understanding to one’s field.

This document does not attempt to define where particular disciplines (arts, literature, science, social sciences, and so forth) fit within Boyer’s categories, for to do so would limit our definition of scholarship: no one discipline fits neatly into any one category; rather, every discipline fits into every category depending on the nature of one’s scholarly work. Furthermore, this document does not attempt to define where particular products (such as, but not limited to, publications, presentations, artistic exhibits and performances, development and publication of instructional materials, and so forth) fit within Boyer’s categories, since it could be argued that each type of product could also justifiably fit into each category. The following example makes explicit the distinctions made in our definition of scholarship: A member of the faculty has become interested in finding an answer to a course-based problem he has been struggling with for several semesters. He creates a comprehensive survey for his students to complete. An analysis of the data collected reveals some significant results, which he uses to redesign his course. This is an example of the overlap between discovery, application, and teaching, but it is not yet an example of scholarship. In order for this work to become scholarship, the instructor must present his work in some form to make public (i.e., beyond his classroom), must make his work susceptible to critical review and evaluation, and must provide a means for the work to be accessible for exchange and use by other members of one’s scholarly community.