sections of this checklist may not be applicable for certain classifications,
candidates are all asked to use the same checklist for providing information to
PROMOTION AND REAPPOINTMENT
SCHOOL OF COMPUTER SCIENCE
following items must be included in the documentation in support of a
recommendation for reappointment, promotion or tenure. Other materials not
mentioned here may also be included when appropriate. The candidate should also
provide a collection of supporting materials which is not part of the case
proper, but which may be used by the committees if necessary. This includes
reprints and preprints of articles, copies of books, lecture notes, etc. These
will be returned to the candidate at the completion of this process.
Suggested Template - MS Word.
- Recommendation of SCS Dean and Review
- Recommendation of Department Head and Review
- Curriculum Vitae
- Candidate's Statement of Career Goals
- Publication List
- Evidence of External Reputation
- External Professional Activities
- Contract and Grant Support
- Internal Recommendations
- External Recommendations
- Student Recommendations
- Evidence of Teaching Performance
- Contributions to Education
- Student Supervision
- University Service
- #Recommendation of SCS Dean and Review
- #Recommendation of Unit Head and Review
Committee - includes
opinions of senior faculty, as determined by interviews or at meetings.
The narrative will include:
#Digest - a summary of the case being presented, prepared by an
*Curriculum Vitae - biographical data, educational record,
thesis advisor, and all previous appointments. "Personal"
section is optional.
*Statement by the candidate - outlining career highlights, career goals
and describing the role s/he hopes to play in the Department, School and
University -- in dimensions of both teaching and other educational
activities, and research, scholarly and artistic activity.
*Publication list separated as follows: (List entries in each
of the categories in reverse chronological order. Number sequentially
throughout the section.
- a descriptive synopsis of
the candidate's research
- an assessment of the
quality of the candidate's achievements
- a description and
evaluation of the role which the candidate is expected to fill in the future
- Chapters in Books
- Refereed Journal Papers -
- Refereed Journal Papers -
- Refereed Journal Papers -
- Technical Reports
- Other Publications
- Patents and Invention
- Software Artifacts
- Video Productions
Papers published in multiple places (e.g., first a tech report,
then a journal or conference paper, then included in an anthology) should be
cited only once, in the section of highest significance, with the following
notation as appropriate:
"Originally published as and later included in ."
- *Information reflecting the candidate's
external reputation -
include citations and awards, all invited papers and colloquia at
professional meetings and conferences, seminars and colloquia at
universities, industry, etc. (provide date and location for each);
- *Professional activities outside the
University - include
outside committee work, consulting, membership in and offices held in
professional societies and associations, editorial duties and major
activities in professional societies and meetings, participation in
student or faculty organizations, committees, and/or ad hoc appointments,
participation in civic, regional and/or national service organizations
(please give dates).
- #Contract and grant support - include funding which the candidate has
received in the past that which is current, and proposals which have been
submitted but not yet funded. Gifts may be included in this section as
- #Letters of recommendation from current
Carnegie Mellon faculty.
- #+Letters of recommendation from people
outside Carnegie Mellon who
are qualified to speak on the faculty member's work.
*Candidate should provide list of suggested names, including
current addresses and email, to the chair, for final selection of
Letters should be preceded by a list of those from whom letters were
Chair should indicate the relationship of each recommender to the
candidate, i.e., PhD thesis advisor, co-author, co-PI, collaborator,
program manager, or other as appropriate.
- #Letters from students, preceded by a list of those from whom
letters were requested, including:
1. Students suggested by the candidate.
Usually no more than six student names, equally divided among grad and
2. Students selected by the department.
Include all current and former PhD students. Masters students may be included
at the discretion of the department.
3. Randomly selected students.
A randomly generated list of students from the roster of courses taught in the
past, usually ~3 from each course for the past two years.
- *Available evidence bearing on the quality
of the candidate's teaching performance (excluding letters from students, which appear above). Include
a list of courses taught (show units and class level, number of students
taught, and date), results of Faculty Course Evaluations (Overall course
and instructor rating)
- *Available evidence bearing on the
candidate's contributions to education, apart from classroom performance and supervision; i.e.,
curriculum development, new programs, unsolicited evaluations by
colleagues, teaching materials, textbooks, lecture notes, examinations,
original laboratory exercises.
- *Student Supervision - candidate should provide lists of current
students (including expected thesis titles and dates of completion),
former students (including thesis titles, dates of completion, and present
occupation/employer, and any thesis committee service or other
supervision, as appropriate.
- *Service and committee work within the University.
*to be provided by the candidate
#to be provided/solicited by the department
+Not required for reappointments at or below the rank of assistant
Last updated Fall 2001.
Maintained by Rachel Shackelford