Candidates will be evaluated on their teaching, scholarship, and service. University Criteria for Promotion and Tenure Minimum Qualifications for Tenure "The Candidate considered for tenure will normally hold the terminal degree in the field in which the faculty member is teaching. The decision to award tenure is the most significant decision that the University will make in regard to a faculty member. To be awarded tenure a candidate, during the course of his or her tenure-earning interval, must be excellent in teaching, excellent in scholarship as evidenced by an agenda of inquiry that has resulted in published scholarly or creative works of high quality, and must demonstrate continuing meaningful contributions in service." Minimum Qualifications for Promotion to Assistant Professor "The Candidate for promotion to Assistant Professor must hold the terminal degree appropriate to the discipline as determined by the Dean (or have completed a substantial portion of the work required for the terminal degree), or possess equivalent qualifications based on professional experience, and be otherwise qualified to perform assigned duties. To be promoted from Instructor to Assistant Professor, a candidate must be demonstrably competent in teaching and must have shown some scholarly promise." The School of Computing P&T Committee emphasizes that the criteria above are the minimum established by the University for promotion to Assistant Professor and successful candidates will generally be expected to have earned a Ph.D. in an appropriate discipline and demonstrated excellence in teaching and considerable scholarly promise. Minimum Qualifications for Promotion to Associate Professor "The Candidate for promotion to Associate Professor must hold the terminal degree appropriate to the academic discipline as determined by the Dean or Director or possess equivalent professional qualifications in the field above those which would be equivalent to the terminal degree. To be promoted from Assistant to Associate Professor a candidate must be excellent in teaching, excellent in scholarship as evidenced by an agenda of inquiry that has resulted in published scholarly or creative works of high quality, and demonstrate continuing meaningful contributions in service." Minimum Qualification for Promotion to Professor "The Candidate for promotion to Professor must hold the terminal degree appropriate to the academic discipline as determined by the Dean and be qualified for the rank of Associate Professor and, in addition, be an outstanding teacher, where "outstanding" is understood to be a consistent record of excellence over several years; and outstanding scholar as evidenced by an ongoing agenda of inquiry that has resulted in a body of published scholarly or creative works of high quality; and, demonstrate continuing meaningful contributions in service. A faculty member shall not be promoted to the rank of Professor without having achieved tenure, unless both actions occur simultaneously." School of Computing Expectations A faculty member seeking promotion or tenure is responsible for the preparation of a dossier that contains evidence of his/her performance during the entire term of employment at the University, as well as performance at other institutions which may be relevant to the decision under consideration. In preparing the dossier, the Candidate shall include: External Letters of Support At least two letters shall be obtained from external reviewers (by external, we mean not at UNF). These letters are to be, primarily, assessments of the Candidate's scholarship. By September 1 of the year the Candidate is applying for promotion and/or tenure, the Candidate will supply the Promotion and Tenure Committee with a list of at least five and at most seven names of potential reviewers. If a sufficient number of appropriate names are not provided to the Committee by September 1, the Committee may select additional reviewers from institutions it deems to be the peer-equivalent of UNF. At least three of the potential reviewers must meet all of the following criteria: They may not be family members of the Candidate or any person who has served as graduate advisor for the Candidate. They must have held at least the rank sought by the Candidate. They must have held said rank in a computing related academic unit that offers undergraduate and graduate degrees. They should be competent to assess the Candidate's work in his/her particular research area(s). Any potential reviewer not meeting all these criteria must meet at least criteria 1 and 4 and have a terminal degree in a computing or a related discipline. The Committee shall request additional names from the Candidate, to be received by September 15, if a sufficient number of appropriate names from the list do not agree to provide letters. By September 15, the Committee will select at least three names from the list of potential reviewers and solicit letters from those selected. The Committee chair will inform the Candidate of the names of reviewers selected. Packets sent to the reviewers will include the Candidate's C.V. and a sample of publications selected by the Candidate. Reviewers will be requested to return their letters, with a copy of their C.V., to the Promotion and Tenure Committee Chair by October 15 for inclusion in the Candidate's dossier. Evidence of Performance in Teaching The School of Computing utilizes the guidelines put forth in the University Promotion and Tenure Policies and Procedures as the primary guide to the evaluation of teaching. The following is a key paragraph from the University document: "All committees and administrators evaluating the Candidate must consider the following categories: the presentation of the University's curriculum in lecture, seminar, laboratory, studio, practicum, or independent study courses; the development of new courses, degree programs, and other efforts to improve and enhance the University's curriculum; academic and career advisement, if part of the candidate's assigned duties; also to be considered are evaluations of the candidate's teaching by students and academic colleagues through University sanctioned methods such as survey instruments, questionnaires, and in-class visitations, observations and interviews; and in addition, administrators and committees shall consider any other relevant information in the dossier concerning teaching ability and accomplishments, such as awards or other formal recognition for outstanding teaching, grants or financial aid obtained for innovation and experimentation in teaching, and so forth." In addition to formal instruction, contributions in the category of teaching may include academic advising and mentoring, supervision of internships, laboratory work, supervision of independent study, and advising graduate students concerning their research and theses. Where products, such as theses, papers, presentations, and publications, arise out of these interactions, they should be noted in the dossier. Contributions to pedagogy may also be considered in the evaluation of teaching. This category includes course development, curriculum development, workshop development, and the development of teaching materials and techniques. Any publications, texts, or grants related to these items should be noted by the Candidate in the dossier. Multiple sources of evaluative information are important to the promotion and tenure decision. In respect to teaching, such sources include, but are not limited to the following: Student evaluations of instruction Peer evaluations of instruction Teaching awards Letters from students or alumni (which should be labeled as solicited or unsolicited); Alumni surveys Documentation of other efforts, such as those described above The Candidate should provide such evidence in his/her dossier, to assist the Committee and other reviewers in assessing teaching performance. Evidence of Performance in Scholarship In evaluating the Candidate's record of scholarship, the emphasis will be on assessing the quality of the scholarship. It is incumbent upon the Candidate to document the quality of his/her record by means such as, but not limited to, the following: Journal or conference reputation or standing in the discipline Acceptance rates of conferences or journals Level of peer-review of papers (e.g., the Candidate may wish to include copies of referee reports or review procedures in their dossier) Impact factor of journal or conference proceedings (e.g., CITESEER (http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/impact.html) provides information on impact factors of over one thousand Computer Science journals and conferences) Program Committee or Editorial Board of journals and conference proceedings in which the Candidate has published Sponsor or publisher of conference or journal (e.g., IEEE, ACM, SIAM, AIS, IFIP) Citations of the Candidate's work in the literature Published reviews of the Candidate's work (e.g., in Computing Reviews or Mathematical Reviews) Awards received (e.g., outstanding paper, outstanding researcher) Peer-review procedures and for grants received, as well as awards/applicants ratio for program List of invited or keynote presentations at conferences Inclusion of any scholarly books/research monographs published The School of Computing Promotion and Tenure Committee recognizes that in some specialties of Computing, timely dissemination of results is crucial, due to the rapidly changing technologies involved. In such cases, conference publication or publication in electronic journals may be appropriate and prestigious and will be recognized accordingly. The School Committee also recognizes that, according to the "Best Practices Memo" from the Computing Research Association (http://www.cra.org/reports/tenure_review.html) "computational artifacts - software, chips, etc., are a tangible means of conveying ideas and insight." Further, "a key research tradition is to share artifacts with other researchers to the greatest extent possible" and "the fundamental basis for academic achievement is the impact of one's ideas and scholarship on the field." For proper consideration in promotion and tenure cases, the Candidate should include detailed information regarding such artifacts and their impact in their dossier. Evidence of Performance in Service The Candidate is expected to provide evidence in their dossier of meaningful contributions in service. Service includes service to School of Computing, college, and university governance; discipline-related service to the community; and service to the discipline/profession. Such documentation includes, but is not limited to, the following: Letters of acknowledgement for participation on a committee Acknowledgements that the Candidate has refereed papers, participated on a program committee, or otherwise served as a reviewer for grants, papers, or the like Award letters (e.g., for being elected as a fellow for a professional organization) Acknowledgement of participation as an official in a professional organization Letters of acknowledgement/support/thanks from community/industry