Promotion Procedures – Rank and Promotion Committee
This document describes the current operating procedures of the Rank and Promotion Committee and offers guidelines for candidates who are putting together applications for Rank and Promotion consideration. Lesley University’s Board of Trustees adopted the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) for core faculty in November 2016. Descriptions of rank, performance standards, the promotion process, and the grievance process are set forth in the CBA. All instances of faculty advancement in rank must conform to the policies and procedures as specified by the CBA and, for purposes of the Rank and Promotion Committee work, this Handbook on Promotion in Rank.
These guidelines were developed by the first faculty Rank and Promotion Committee in 1987-88, and they have been reviewed and revised by successive Committees.
Committee Composition
The Committee is comprised of 9 faculty members elected as follows: 2 representatives from the Graduate School of Education; 2 representatives from the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences; 2 representatives from the Graduate School of Arts and Social Sciences; 2 representatives from The Lesley University College of Art and Design, and one seat at-large. Members are elected for 3-year terms. In order to be eligible for election, a faculty member must hold Associate Professor or Professor rank and be contracted to work on a full or pro-rated basis. Applicants for promotion cannot serve as Committee members. The Provost and the Dean of Faculty serve in ex-officio, non-voting capacity, contributing only to clarify policies and procedures.
Committee Procedure
The Committee evaluates the candidate's professional accomplishments holistically; it views sustained achievement in the categories of teaching/instructional activity, service, and scholarship as important for promotion. "Sustained achievement" suggests to the Committee that one's academic accomplishments should be neither episodic nor maintained at a peak rate of performance for all areas. Although “a peak rate of performance for all areas” is not required, each candidate’s applications must demonstrate the level of accomplishments in teaching, service and scholarship that is consistent for promotion to the new level of rank.
As the Committee reviews each application, it takes into consideration the following areas: education, relevant experience, instructional activity, service, and scholarship. The Committee's deliberations represent a blend of objective criteria, a listing of strengths and weaknesses identified in each application, extensive discussion and pooled judgment regarding these criteria. The review process follows:
All Committee members read each applicant's file. Before discussion of a candidate begins, two members of the committee are selected to serve as the Presentation Team, consisting of a recorder and a reporter. The reporter presents the candidate's file, highlighting the ways in which a candidate meets the criteria as well as areas of concern. Other members then add further information that comes out of the information in the box until they collectively decide that the candidate's application has been fully and fairly represented. Information not contained in the box cannot be considered with the following exception: a member of the committee has verifiable evidence of inconsistency or misrepresentation of materials in the box. The recorder takes notes on the discussion.
The Committee votes on one rank at a time, considering the lower ranks first. Each member of the Committee votes on the applicant immediately after the discussion of said candidate. After all applicants for the rank have been completed, the rank is reviewed to make sure the Committee applied the criteria equitably across the rank. Committee members must be present for the entire discussion of a candidate’s application to be eligible to vote on that candidate's request for promotion. If the application is subject to review, all members present at that time are eligible to vote.
When all members are satisfied that discussion is complete, the Committee votes by secret ballot. A 2/3 vote to recommend promotion in rank is required. The Provost and the Dean of Faculty are aware of the vote. The Committee's actions on candidates are communicated by the Provost to the President and to the School Deans. The Deans know whether the vote is clear or divided, but not the actual count. The exact vote is communicated by the Provost only to the President. Committee members have agreed not to communicate the vote to anyone outside the Committee.
Following the resolution of all applications before the Committee, the reporter and the recorder for each applicant prepare the first draft of the letter to the President, and send that draft to the Chair for the Chair to review and finalize. The Chair sends the letter recommending for or against promotion to the President. At the same time, a copy of the letter is sent to the applicant’s Lesley email address with a copy to his/her campus mailbox, stating the Committee's recommendation.
In reporting the Committee’s reasoning to the President, the Presentation Team explains the process and describes how the current Committee saw the issues, applied the criteria, and viewed the application. While this process is meant to help the candidate with future applications, there is no guarantee that promotion will result when a newly configured committee deliberates on the candidacy in the future.