- About GSE
- Admissions & Financial Aid
- Faculty & Research
- Our Students
- Alumni & Giving
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
University of Pennsylvania
Most recent revisions approved by the Standing Faculty, September 19, 2012
II.A. Categories of Appointment
II.B. Criteria and Qualifications
II.C. Initial Appointment: Procedures
II.D. Reviews for Reappointment, Promotion, or Conversion to Tenure: Procedures
II.E. Non-Mandated Review for Reappointment, Conversion or Promotion: Procedures
GSE's mission is to promote excellence in education. By far the most significant consideration in attaining this goal is the development and maintenance of an academically/professionally excellent, relevant, and productive Faculty of Education. The faculty personnel policies and procedures described in this Manual have therefore been designed accordingly.
The Faculty Personnel Committee (FPC), appointed by the Dean, is composed of five members, four or five of whom shall be members of the Standing Faculty of Education at the rank of Professor of Education. One of the five members may be a faculty member holding a secondary appointment in the Faculty of Education with a primary appointment at the rank of Professor in a Faculty of the University of Pennsylvania.
The duties of the FPC are to:
Faculty personnel processes and decisions are made within a context defined by
GSE's faculty personnel policies and procedures must always be consistent with University policies and procedures, and GSE must operate in accordance with them. All appointments and promotions to the rank of professor, associate professor, or assistant professor whether in the Standing Faculty, or in comparable ranks in the Associated Faculty, are made, upon recommendation of the Faculty, the President and Provost, by positive action of the Trustees. No officer of the University has authority to bind the University to appointments or promotions in the ranks of assistant professor or above without the positive action of the Trustees. Within these limits, University policy accords a Faculty considerable flexibility in defining its own internal procedures. As official new and/or revised University policies and procedures are implemented, they assume precedence over any contrary provisions of this Manual. With the evolution of both University and School policy and practice over time, this Manual should be reviewed and revised periodically.
The Graduate School of Education subscribes to and is fully committed to the University's guidelines and procedures on affirmative action and equal opportunity. This policy is in Appendix B.
The Faculty of Education is composed of the following categories and is described in turn:
The Standing Faculty is composed of three ranks: Assistant Professor of Education; Associate Professor of Education; and Professor of Education. All members of the Standing Faculty are appointed full-time with tenure or in tenure probationary status (i.e., all are "tenure track").
Appointment as an assistant professor is for a fixed term or terms (ordinarily for an initial term of three years and a second term of four years) in tenure probationary status. Whatever the length of term or terms, the sum cannot exceed the University's limit of 7 years in tenure probationary status. Assistant Professors are accorded faculty vote.
Appointment as an Associate Professor may be either for a fixed term tenure probationary period or for an indefinite term with tenure. Faculty appointed from outside the Standing Faculty to the rank of Associate Professor without tenure have a probationary period of five years, except that faculty appointed to the rank of Associate Professor without tenure who have not previously held faculty appointments at other institutions may elect a probationary period of seven years. Associate Professors are accorded faculty vote.
Professors are appointed with tenure for an indefinite term. Professors are accorded faculty vote.
The overriding objective of the faculty appointment and promotion policy and procedures should be the recruitment and retention of a distinguished faculty. While the means to this end may vary, particularly in a professional school, generally the objective will be met by stressing intellectual leadership as the chief criterion. Accordingly, a high degree of excellence is expected in both research and teaching. The relative weight given to research and teaching varies from case to case, but always with significant achievements in research as a prime consideration. An acceptable standard of teaching competence should be required even of those outstanding in research. An acceptable standard of competence in research should be required even of outstanding teachers, and at a research institution, such as the University of Pennsylvania, an acceptable standard in research is very high indeed. For initial appointment, for reappointment, for conversion to tenure, and/or for promotion to a higher rank, members of the Faculty of Education are concerned primarily with the development, dissemination, and application of knowledge in the field of education. There are at least six potential means by which this is done:
These six means are relevant in various respects to the three academic criteria: (a) scholarly research or other creative work; (b) quality of teaching; and (c) academic service to the University, the community, and the profession. In addition, the factor of intellectual and professional growth is pertinent to reviews of assistant professors for term reappointments (i.e., not tenure appointments).
A faculty member's scholarly research and other creative work should advance knowledge and/or practice in the field of education. Communication and dissemination of such contributions normally find expression in publication, or in other ways appropriate to the field. Quality is judged in terms of creativity, significance, maturity, discriminating judgment, breadth of scholarship, and conformance with accepted standards of professional ethics and integrity.
Quality of teaching is commonly considered to include knowledge of a field and of developments in it; skill in communicating with students, arousing their interest, and helping them to learn substantive content and skills; stimulating students to think critically; leading them to appreciate the inter-relationships of fields of knowledge; and concern with the application of knowledge to solving vital human problems. Some specific aspects of teaching to be considered include course development, classroom teaching, student advising and mentoring, and responsibility for doctoral dissertations.
By virtue of their special scholarly or professional qualifications and expertise, faculty members often render distinctive academic service to various committees, boards, scholarly/professional organizations, councils, schools, and other entities outside the Graduate School of Education. This may include such service as membership on University committees, consultation with a local school district or governmental departments, appointment to a leadership position of a scholarly organization, and appointment to an editorship of a scholarly journal. The particularly relevant consideration in assessing academic service is that it entails the application at a high level of a faculty member's special scholarly or professional expertise instead of the expression of broader non specialized interests in community and professional issues.
In many instances, academic service to community organizations and governmental agencies in advisory or consulting roles constitutes an important factor for consideration in appointment, reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions. In general, a constructive record of academic service is a positive factor in appraising the advisability of appointment or reappointment (with or without tenure), conversion to tenure, or promotion, but the lack of such a record should not ordinarily be regarded as sufficient cause for denying appointment, reappointment, or promotion.
At the time of reappointment and/or promotional review of members of the Standing and Associated Faculties, a review relative to the proposed personnel decision is made of the following three organizational criteria:
The candidate's attainments and capabilities in light of the Division's, School's, and University's academic needs, plans, and objectives.
The candidate's citizenship activities such as divisional and School governance (e.g., administrative responsibilities, committee work, and student recruitment) and curriculum development.
The fiscal base of the candidate's position in relation to the budget and financial plans of the Division and the School.
23.If a majority of eligible faculty members vote negatively on a candidate’s appointment, the Dean will not forward the proposal to the Provost.
(The procedures described in this section are amplified in considerable detail in the "Review Committee Guidelines" found in Appendix A. These Guidelines should be consulted especially by the Review Committee and particularly with respect to the role of the Student Liaison and the assessment of the instructional performance of the candidate under review.)
For term appointments of members of the Standing Faculty that are for terms greater than one year, reappointment reviews must be held and concluded by the end of the penultimate year of appointment so that, if the decision is not to reappoint, the faculty member affected has a full year to seek appointment elsewhere.
Reviews for promotion to professor are non-mandated and occur according to the procedure for Non-Mandated Review for Reappointment and/or Promotion described later.
At any time that a review for reappointment, conversion to tenure and/or promotion is not mandated, any member of the Standing Faculty, including the nominee, may nominate a member of the Standing Faculty for a non-mandated review for reappointment, conversion to tenure, and/or promotion.
The Associated Faculty consists of four types of fixed term appointments: Practice, Adjunct, Research and Visiting.
The School is allotted a total of ten professors of practice, never to exceed thirty percent of the Standing Faculty. The role of Professors of Practice is to provide graduate instruction in the professional practice of educators, including the supervision of internships and other field experiences. The Professors of Practice are recommended for an appointment following a search, using the same teaching criteria as for the Standing Faculty, with an emphasis on potential for teaching professional practice courses; and for having a critical awareness of current controversies in educational research and practice. Professorships of Practice are full-time appointments.
Currently (and consistent with University policy) GSE has a graduate group dedicated to overseeing the PhD degree. Members of the graduate group may chair and serve on PhD dissertation committees. GSE has established a "graduate group" for the EdD degree in order to underscore our collective commitment to this degree and to provide adequate stewardship for EdD dissertations. This "EdD graduate group" would initially and immediately be comprised of all standing faculty members and professors of practice. All of these individuals are full-time, all are on multi-year contracts, all have terminal degrees, and are the product of national searches. However, this group should have the authority to approve of other individuals whose scholarly credentials and affiliation with GSE indicates that they are well-suited to serve as GSE’s representatives on EdD dissertation committees. Given the "graduate group" for the EdD, EdD students would be required to have at least one EdD graduate group member serving on their dissertation committee.
The two ranks of Practice faculty appointment are as follows:
Appointment as or promotion to Full Professor of Practice would be made for an initial term of five years and would be renewable for successive five-year terms without limit.
The term of appointment for Associate Professor of Practice shall be for three years. Appointment as Associate Professor of would be renewable for successive three-year terms without limit.
Appointment and reappointment must be reviewed and approved by the Standing Faculty, Personnel Committee, the Dean, the Provost, and the Trustees. All appointments are without tenure or tenure-probationary status.
Professors of Practice carry no voting rights related to personnel matters in the Standing Faculty, but may have voting rights on curriculum and instructional matters. They may serve as primary academic advisors for students in Masters and Ed.D. degree programs. Upon review and approval of the FPC, Professors of Practice may also serve as chairs of Ed.D. dissertation committees. In accordance with University rules, Professors of Practice may not serve as primary advisors for Ph.D. students, nor may they serve as chairs of Ph.D. dissertation committees. Scope and limits of responsibilities are specified in writing by the Dean at the time of appointment and reappointment, but Professors of Practice may not serve as divisional or doctoral specialization administrators
This group is composed primarily of faculty members whose primary careers are outside of the University, whether self-employed or with other institutions of higher education, venues of educational practice, business or non-profit organizations, or government agencies. Such persons are appointed to part-time academic status while continuing their principal associations or careers elsewhere. Such individuals may teach no more than three course units per academic year. Appointments may also be used for academically qualified persons employed by the University for non-academic or administrative duties. Such individuals may teach no more than one course unit per academic year.
Appointment, reappointment and promotion require a vote of the Faculty Personnel Committee. Persons may serve without limit of time through successive reappointments. The University does not assure continuity of appointment for any person in the Adjunct Faculty.
Adjunct Faculty may serve as voting members of dissertation committees but may not serve as chairs of Ph.D. dissertation committees nor serve as primary academic advisors to Ph.D. students. Upon the review and approval of the Faculty Personnel Committee, they may serve as primary academic advisors to Ed.D. students and as chairs of Ed.D. dissertation committees. Adjunct Faculty may be extended voting privileges at the divisional level by a vote of the Standing Faculty of that division; however, voting privileges are not extended to matters at the graduate group or school level. Scope and limits of responsibilities are specified in writing by the Dean at the time of appointment and each reappointment.
The three ranks of adjunct appointment are as follows:
The School recognizes the importance of the Adjunct Faculty as instructors and advisors in the Higher Education Executive Doctorate Program, the Educational Leadership Midcareer Doctorate Program, and other practice-oriented programs. For these programs adjunct appointments to leading educational practitioners and higher education administrators will typically be made at the level of Assistant or Associate Adjunct Professor.
The purpose of Research Faculty appointments is to increase the quality and productivity of the research programs by permitting the appointment of scholars to the faculty on a non-tenure basis in order to participate in and cooperate with the research efforts of the Standing Faculty. The Research Faculty is composed of individuals who hold a terminal degree and who choose to concentrate on research. Appointees are not part of the teaching faculty, although invitations to present guest lectures may be accepted. Members may not take responsibility for courses or seminars. These members may not chair doctoral dissertations unless prior approval of the Provost is obtained for each such activity. Over the term of an appointment, teaching by a member of the Research Faculty may not exceed 10 percent of the total teaching load of a member of the Standing Faculty and, in any one year, no more than 10 percent of the teaching in the School may be done by Research Faculty.
The term of appointment is for a fixed period of time, usually one, three, or five years, depending upon circumstances and rank, or for an indefinite period for senior ranks in some instances. The University of Pennsylvania is dedicated to an organizational strategy that supports the full realization of equal employment opportunity for all. As a full-time employment category, recommendations for appointment to the Research Faculty must be in compliance with the Affirmative Action Plan of the University.
Before the new or vacant faculty position may be filled, a search must be made to generate the broadest and strongest possible candidate pool. The search must be conducted in such a manner as to be reasonably likely to bring the vacancy to the attention of qualified minority and female candidates, and to ensure the inclusion of such candidates in the candidate pool. Searches based on "informal contacts" are unacceptable.
These individuals may be extended voting privileges at the divisional level by a vote of the Standing Faculty of that division; however, voting privileges are not extended to matters at the graduate group or school level.
The three ranks of research appointment are as follows:
Visiting appointments are intended for individuals who are temporarily appointed by the University while holding continuing academic appointments in another institution of higher education, or have continuing association with other organizations relevant to their academic/professional expertise. A visiting faculty member works full-time at GSE while on leave from his or her home institution. Appointment, reappointment and promotion require a vote of the Faculty Personnel Committee. Ordinarily visiting appointments are for one year or less and full-time appointment is limited to three consecutive years.
These individuals may be extended voting privileges at the divisional level by a vote of the Standing Faculty of that division; however, voting privileges are not extended to matters at the graduate group or school level.
The three ranks of visiting appointment are as follows:
The overriding objective of the Associated Faculty appointment and promotion policy should be distinguished achievements in their respective fields, whether as clinicians, researchers, administrators, teachers, policy makers, etc. The relevance of these forms of achievement vary with the category of Associated Faculty, as follows:
The Academic Support Staff is composed of the following ranks:
Lecturer appointments are reserved for scholars not otherwise eligible for membership in the Standing Faculty who undertake full-time (maximum of 3 academic years except), part-time instructional (maximum of 3 course units per academic year), or supervisory functions within the Graduate School of Education, except where additional appointments are approved by the Provost. Lecturers may not serve as primary academic advisors to doctoral students or as chairs of dissertation committees.
In GSE’s Executive Programs, upon the review and approval of the relevant Division Faculty, the Faculty Personnel Committee, and the Dean, Lecturers may serve as primary academic advisors to Ed.D. students and as chairs of Ed.D. dissertation committees.
These individuals are not appointed as members of the Graduate Group in Education nor do they hold voting privileges at the School level. Voting privileges may be extended at divisional level by a vote of the Standing Faculty of that division. Scope and limits of privileges and responsibilities are specified in writing by the Dean at the time of appointment and each reappointment.
Practice Lecturer appointments are reserved for scholars not otherwise eligible for membership in the Standing Faculty who undertake full instructional and supervisory functions with the Graduate School of Education. These appointments may extend from one year to three years and beyond, subject to reappointment reviews in three year cycles. Practice lecturers may not serve as primary academic advisors to doctoral students or as chairs of dissertation committees. These individuals are not appointed as members of the Graduate Group in Education nor do they hold voting privileges at the School level. Voting privileges may be extended at divisional level by a vote of the Standing Faculty of that division. Scope and limits of privileges and responsibilities are specified in writing by the Dean at the time of appointment and each reappointment.
The initial appointment as a Lecturer in Educational Practice will be for one year only. At the end of the first year, it is expected that the appointment will be extended for an additional two years on the basis of (1) performance and (2) the academic need for such services continuing to exist. The initial appointment and extension require the approval of the Dean upon the recommendation of the division.
The first professional review of the Lecturer in Educational Practice will take place prior to the end of the second year of service, at which time a division may decide to make the third year a terminal year of appointment or to recommend continuation for four additional years for a total of six years. Again, performance and academic need are the critical factors. A recommendation for continuation requires an evaluation by the division, the Faculty Personnel Committee, and the Dean. A recommendation for the Dean to continue an appointment beyond the third year will require approval of the Provost Staff Conference.
The second professional review of the Lecturer in Educational Practice will take place prior to the end of the fifth year of service, at which time a division may decide to make the sixth year a terminal one or to recommend continuation for three additional years for a total of nine. At this and all subsequent reviews, continued reappointments are to be based on professional performance and the academic need for services. The fifth year review and all subsequent reviews are as specified for the original second year review. The third professional review of the Lecturer in Educational Practice will take place prior to the end of the eighth year, at which time a division may decide to make the ninth year terminal or to recommend extension for an additional five years for a total of fourteen. The eight year review and approval will be similar to that conducted in the second year.
All subsequent reviews of the Lecturer in Educational Practice will be conducted prior to the end of the fourth year of each five year cycle, with either a recommendation for termination after an additional year or recommendation for an additional five years. The structure of the reviews and the approval mechanism are as specified for the original second year review.
While the number of people serving as Lecturer in Educational Practice may vary depending on enrollments in the professional education courses, that number will not exceed 15 percent of the standing faculty.
This position may serve as an entry position or promotion from full-time Lecturer in education or lecturer in educational practice. Senior Lecturers are responsible for teaching and contributing to academic programs, especially in areas where relevant expertise cannot be sustained on the standing faculty. They plan, supervise and evaluate students' performance; they work with faculty and staff to provide a supportive learning environment; they contribute to course development and revisions; they lecture in their area of expertise; and they participate in advising and recruitment activities. Unlike Lecturers, Senior Lecturers are eligible for retirement benefits.
Senior Lecturer appointments are reserved for scholars not otherwise eligible for membership in the Standing Faculty who undertake full instructional and supervisory functions within the Graduate School of Education. Persons appointed to this rank will normally not possess the scholarly credentials expected of members of the standing faculty, and no Senior Lecturers may be appointed from the ranks of the standing faculty.
Senior Lecturer appointments are made for three years, are subject to reappointment review at three-year intervals, and may be renewed as long as academic needs persist.
Senior Lecturers may serve as voting members of dissertation committees, but they may not serve as chairs of Ph.D. dissertation committees or as primary academic advisors to Ph.D. students. Upon the review and approval of the Faculty Personnel Committee, they may serve as primary academic advisors to Ed.D. students and as chairs of Ed.D. dissertation committees. Senior Lecturers may be given voting privileges at the divisional level, by a vote of the Standing Faculty of that division; however, voting privileges are not extended to matters at the graduate group or school level. Scope and limits of responsibilities are specified in writing by the Dean at the time of appointment and each reappointment.
While the number of people serving as Senior Lecturer may vary depending on enrollments, that number will not exceed a total 20 percent of the Standing Faculty.
A person appointed as a Senior Fellow in Education is a distinguished scholar who holds an appointment outside the Standing Faculty of the University for teaching or research, for a limited period of time..
Such individuals may not serve as primary academic advisors to Ph.D. students or as chairs of Ph.D. dissertation committees. Upon the review and approval of the Faculty Personnel Committee, they may serve as primary academic advisors to Ed.D. students and as chairs of Ed.D. dissertation committees. These individuals are not appointed as members of the Graduate Group in Education nor do they hold voting privileges at the school level. Voting privileges may be extended at divisional level by a vote of the Standing Faculty of that division. Scope and limits of privileges and responsibilities are specified in writing by the Dean at the time of appointment.
Senior Investigators, Investigators and Research Associates in Education work in sponsored research programs and must hold the appropriate terminal degree in their disciplines. Full-time service in these positions may not exceed three years, except with approval of the Provost.
The academic and scholarly qualifications of members of the Academic Support Staff must be commensurate with the rank and category of the appointment and the academic functions in teaching and/or research to be performed. Since there are such a wide variety of ranks in the Academic Support Staff, individualized review is particularly essential to insure minimum qualifications for particular ranks are satisfied by particular candidates.
For appointments in the Academic Support Staff which involve independent instructional responsibilities, the following minimum degree requirements have been established:
Course Level of Instruction
100 - 399
Relevant baccalaureate and pursuing studies toward relevant doctoral degree;
400 - 699
Relevant masters degree, plus pursuing studies toward relevant doctoral degree or significant relevant experience; may not teach Ph.D. students;
700 - 899
Relevant doctoral studies with approved doctoral dissertation proposal; may not teach Ph.D. students;
900 - 999 and Dissertation Committee Membership
Relevant doctoral degree
The Dean shall have sole authority to make appointments, reappointments, and promotions for all ranks of the Academic Support Staff. A vote of the FPC is not required for these appointments. Such appointments, reappointments, and promotions are considered annually and shall be reviewed by the Dean and the appropriate Division Chair to determine whether they are in keeping with the needs of the Graduate School of Education and whether the person involved meets established standards for appointment, reappointment, or promotion in the Academic Support Staff.
Promotions of members of the Academic Support Staff to the Standing Faculty shall be made in accordance with procedures for initial appointment to the Standing Faculty.
Promotions from Lecturer to Senior Lecturer may be made when a Lecturer gains significant experience in relevant fields, or significant recognition from external authorities, or when the Lecturer's performance is particularly important to the School. Cases supporting promotion must cite excellent teaching, extensive service, and a reasonable expectation of continued growth in professional skill, productivity, and recognition. Past performance is assessed through examination and analysis of annual self-appraisal reports, course evaluations, and evaluations by the Division Chair. Appointments, reappointments, and promotions are forwarded to the Faculty Personnel Committee for evaluation of the candidate's dossier, and an action is recommended to the Dean.
The first professional review of the Senior Lecturer will take place prior to the end of the third year of service, at which time a division may decide to make the third year a terminal year of appointment or to recommend continuation for three additional years. Senior Lecturers will be reviewed on the basis of (1) performance and (2) the academic need for such services continuing to exist. The initial appointment and extensions require an evaluation by the division, the Faculty Personnel Committee, and the Dean. A recommendation for the Dean to continue an appointment beyond the third year will require approval of the Provost. Subsequent reviews will take place using the same format, at three year intervals.
1. The relevant Division Chair consults with the divisional faculty concerning the reappointment.
2. The Division Chair then submits to the Dean a proposal containing the following elements:
a) a specific and detailed definition of the role to be filled;
b) recommendation as to term of reappointment proposed, and reasons for the reappointment as proposed;
c) specification of the funds needed to support the position and their source;
d) the full credentials of the candidate, including at a minimum: current curriculum vitae, at least three letters of recommendation, teaching evaluations, and a list of other accomplishments; and
e) a review and analysis of the qualifications of the candidate in relation to the criteria specified by GSE for Senior Lecturers
3. Upon receipt of the complete set of credentials defined above, the Dean forwards the candidate's dossier to the Faculty Personnel Committee for review and recommendation.
4. The FPC reviews the dossier and submits its vote and recommendation to the Dean on the type of personnel action to be taken.
5. Beyond three years, Provost's approval is required for the reappointment.
6. If the reappointment is approved, the Dean notifies the candidate in writing specifying scope and limits of responsibilities.
The title of Postdoctoral Fellow in Education is accorded to an individual who holds a relevant doctoral degree and comes to the University for the principal purpose of furthering his or her personal development by engaging in research or participating in advanced training programs. Appointments are made on an annual basis for no more than five years.
These ranks may be used for persons registered in a graduate degree program at the University. The principles covering such appointments are found in the Handbook for Faculty and Academic Administrators.
Members of the Standing Faculties of the University of Pennsylvania may be offered secondary appointments in the Faculty of Education. Such members are ordinarily expected to assume instructional, research, and/or organizational responsibilities part-time in GSE. Secondary appointments are offered for periods of up to three years, though successive appointments may be offered. The three ranks of secondary faculty appointments are:
1. Professor of ________________________________ and Education
2. Associate Professor of _______________________ and Education
3. Assistant Professor of _______________________ and Education
Faculty with secondary appointments are not ordinarily accorded vote in the Faculty of Education. Upon recommendation of the Division, a decision to accord Faculty vote to a member of the Secondary Faculty may be made on an ad hoc basis by the Faculty Personnel Committee at the time of appointment review. Voting principles pertinent to members of the Standing Faculty will then apply. Secondary Faculty are members of the Education Graduate Group and, as such, may chair doctoral dissertation commitees.
1 The relevant Division Chair consults with the divisional faculty concerning the appointment or reappointment to be proposed.
2. After consulting with Divisional Faculty, the Chair presents its rationale for proposing the appointment(s) or reappointment(s) to the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee will consider all proposals for appointment and reappointment at the same meeting.
a) The Executive Committee will discuss and will make a recommendation about whether or not to move forward with the proposed appointment(s).
b) In the case of a positive Executive Committee recommendation, the Division Chair will approach the candidate(s) about GSE's interest in offering him/her a secondary apointment. Faculty will not approach candidate(s) before the Executive Committee has given approval.
3. If the candidate(s) is willing to serve as a Secondary Faculty member in GSE, the Division Chair then submits to the Dean, a proposal containing the following elements:
a) a specific and detailed definition of the role to be filled;
b) recommendation as to rank (i.e., Assistant Professor of ________ and Education, Associate Professor of ________ and Education, or Professor of ________ and Education), term of appointment proposed, and reasons for the recommendation;
c) recommendation as to whether or not the appointment should include faculty vote (vote is not ordinarily accorded to secondary faculty), and reasons for the recommendation;
d) specification of the funds needed to support the position, if any, and their source; and
e) the full credentials of the candidate, including at a minimum:
1) in the case of a proposed initial appointment or reappointment without voting privileges:
2) in the case of a proposed appointment or reappointment which includes voting privileges:
4. Upon receipt of the credentials, the Dean forwards the candidate's dossier to the Faculty Personnel Committee for review and recommendation.
5. The FPC reviews the proposal and credentials, and submits its recommendation to the Dean on the type of personnel action to be taken, if any.
6. Only in the case of a positive FPC recommendation for secondary appointment or reappointment which includes voting privileges, the Dean invokes one of the following procedures. For proposed secondary appointments of faculty members who are not currently serving as secondary faculty members with vote, the Dean invokes the procedure for initial secondary appointment with vote. For proposed secondary reappointments of faculty members who are currently serving as secondary faculty members with vote, the Dean invokes the procedure for reappointment of secondary faculty members with vote.
a. Procedure for initial secondary appointment with vote. In the case of a positive FPC recommendation for a secondary appointment with vote of a faculty member who is not currently serving as a secondary faculty member with vote, the Dean initiates the following process upon receipt of the FPC recommendation to appoint:
1. All members of the Standing Faculty (and members of the Secondary Faculty who are accorded the right to vote) are invited to a special meeting to discuss the proposed appointment. For secondary appointments at the Associate or Full Professor levels, the Dean invites only members of the Standing Faculty (and Secondary Faculty accorded the right to vote) having a rank equal to or higher than the candidate.
2. After this meeting and upon recommendation of the Chair of the FPC, the Dean sends to members of the Standing Faculty (and Secondary Faculty accorded the right to vote) who were eligible to attend the aforementioned meeting, a secret ballot which is color coded based on the voter's rank and tenure status. The ballot does not require a signature. A separate form for comments is also included. Ballots and comments will be placed in an unsigned envelope. This unsigned envelope is placed in a pre-addressed envelope to the FPC Chair with provision for a signature on this envelope.
3. The FPC tabulates the votes according to the rank and tenure status of the respondents while preserving the anonymity of the ballot and comments.
4. The FPC Chair makes available to FPC members for review all credentials, ballots, comments, letters and relevant reports.
5. The FPC reviews the material, votes on the proposed appointment and makes a recommendation to the Dean based on all relevant considerations. The FPC transmits its vote, the faculty vote by rank, and its recommendation to the Dean along with the entire dossier assembled.
6. If a majority of the FPC vote for the proposed appointment, the Dean transmits to the Provost:
a) the Dean's independent assessment and recommendation;
b) the FPC Report, with vote and recommendation of the FPC, and vote of the members of the Standing Faculty (and Secondary Faculty accorded the right to vote) having the rank equal to or higher than that of the candidate;
c) letter of approval from the Chair of the Department in which the candidate holds his or her primary appointment; and
d) the proposal of the Division Chair, including the candidate's credentials.
e) If a majority of the Faculty eligible to vote and a majority of the FPC are negative, the Dean will not forward the proposal to the Provost.
b. Procedure for reappointment of secondary faculty member with vote. In the case of a positive FPC recommendation for reappointment with vote of a secondary faculty member who currently is appointed with vote, the Dean transmits to the Provost:
1. the Dean's independent assessment and recommendation;
2. the FPC Report, with vote and recommendation of the FPC;
3. letter of approval from the Chair of the Department in which the candidate holds his or her primary appointment; and
4. the proposal of the Division Chair, including the candidate's credentials.
If a majority of the Faculty eligible to vote and a majority of the FPC are negative, the Dean will not forward the proposal to the Provost.
At the time of retirement, emeritus status is normally conferred upon Professors of Education and Associate Professors of Education in the Standing Faculty.
1. Access to letters and other confidential materials submitted with respect to faculty appointments, reappointments, and/or promotions shall be limited to (a) the Dean, (b) the members of the Faculty Personnel Committee, (c) the members of the relevant Search Committee or Review Committee, (d) all members of the Standing Faculty for initial appointments, (e) members of the Faculty eligible to vote on the relevant faculty personnel action, and (f) staff members of the Office of the Associate Dean designated to process and receive such confidential materials. Confidential materials shall not be shown or given to candidates under review or other unauthorized individuals.
2. Confidential materials and minutes of the Faculty Personnel Committee shall be maintained at the Office of the Associate Dean only by the FPC Chair and designated staff member(s) of the Office of the Associate Dean. Minutes of the FPC meetings shall be maintained in a confidential file in the Office of the Dean where access shall be provided to FPC members only.
3. Confidential materials are not to be opened or seen by secretverdana or clerical staff outside of the Associate Dean's Office. Members of the Committee who authorize others to open their correspondence marked "CONFIDENTIAL" should indicate this to the Associate Dean's Office so that confidential material can be delivered personally.
1. When there is a recommendation to appoint, in accordance with affirmative action guidelines and procedures set out in Appendix B, the Search Committee Chair simultaneously completes and transmits to the Dean the appropriate equal opportunity compliance statement along with prescribed documentation.
2. Upon receipt and in accordance with affirmative action guidelines and procedures set out in Appendix B, the Dean completes and signs Section IV of the equal opportunity compliance statement and forwards it to the Faculty Affirmative Action Officer along with prescribed documentation.
3. Upon receipt, the Faculty Affirmative Action Officer completes and signs the equal opportunity compliance statement and forwards it to the Dean along with prescribed documentation.
4. All applications and supplementary material received from applicants for full-time faculty positions must be retained for at least three years after the position in question has been filled. In cases involving important or contested appointments, the statute of limitations is seven years.
(These guidelines are intended to supplement the Faculty Personnel Manual; any perceived discrepancy should be resolved in accordance with the official Manual. The Manual should be consulted for more detailed information on many points.)
Review Committees are appointed to review and analyze academic credentials of a member of the Standing Faculty of Education for reappointment and/or promotion either for a fixed term or with tenure. The product of the review is a report which includes a description and analysis of the credentials, and a judgment as to whether the credentials are of a sufficient order to support the personnel action under consideration.
The Review Committee is appointed by the Dean and is composed of a least three faculty members as prescribed by the Faculty Personnel Manual. Within the limits imposed by the Manual and faculty members available for membership on review committees, members are selected for their breadth of perspective and academic qualifications to review the academic credentials of the candidate. Thus at least one member is selected from the Faculty of Education whose primary affiliation is with a division other than that of the candidate's. Likewise a member of a University Faculty other than Education is often appointed to the Committee because of her/his academic relevance and to enhance the breadth of perspective of the Committee. Nonetheless, all appointees to the Committee are full participating members with vote. Because of the academic expertise and breadth of perspective represented on each Review Committee, the Faculty of Education depends upon such committees to make detailed and expert reviews of the candidate's academic credentials, and to report its findings and judgments without prejudice clearly and candidly.
Apart from the Review Committee, the Dean appoints an advanced doctoral student to assume responsibility for student input to the assessment of instructional performance of faculty members under reappointment and/or promotion review. This student is charged to report, discuss, and assess the instructional performance of the faculty member under review. The Student Liaison may also elect to comment on other aspects of a faculty member's performance, but his/her role is focused on the assessment of instruction. However, the student liaison is not a member of the Review Committee.
The Review Committee considers the following three categories of academic performance:
1. The quality of research, scholarship, and publications and other creative work, and their relevance to the field of education.
2. The quality of teaching.
3. Academic service to the University, the profession, and the community.
Review Committees do not have responsibility for reviewing or considering all important factors in the reappointment/promotional review process. Factors such as faculty needs, academic plans, priorities, and objectives of the Division and the School are reviewed by other means. Thus, an Review Committee should limit its review to the three academic categories specified.
The Chair of the Review Committee is appointed by the Dean and has the following responsibilities:
1. To advise the members of the Committee, preferably in writing, of their responsibilities as a committee members, the procedures to be used (a statement of these guidelines might be transmitted), the temporal schedule of the review, and the Chair's suggestions about when and how often to meet. (Please note the next major subsection of this point.)
2. To insure that a complete set of academic credentials is secured from the candidate. These credentials are:
a. Current curriculum vitae;
b. Reprints of published works;
c. Manuscripts in press and manuscripts submitted for publication;
d. Statement of future academic plans (for five years at least);
e. Teaching chronicle listing each course taught since the last review (in conformance with the Provost Staff Conference Guidelines)/
f. Copies of prior student evaluations of teaching;
g. List of advisees, list of dissertation committees chaired, and dissertation committee memberships;
h. Other relevant materials, such as a description of academic service activities
If additional materials are requested later, the candidate should be given at least two weeks notice.
3. The Associate Dean's Office transmits to the Student Liaison the candidate's student evaluations, as well as letters from the candidates' doctoral advisees and dissertation advisees (i.e., those on whose committees the candidate serves)
4. The Associate Dean's Office insures that letters requesting evaluative information on the candidate's advisory performance are sent to the candidate's current doctoral advisees and dissertation advisees (i.e., those on whose committees the candidate serves). The Associate Dean's Office will insure student anonymity by obscuring the signature on letters received while retaining the original letters in confidence.
5. All available instructional assessment materials collected under points 3 and 4 above shall be collected in a file, and made available to the members of the Review Committee. The Chair will insure that all questionnaire data is appropriately tabulated, and that all data and reports on teaching and advising are assembled, integrated, and available to the Review Committee.
6. The Review Committee may request letters of recommendation from on-campus sources who may be helpful in evaluating the candidate's teaching and academic service. For example, the Chair of a dissertation committee on which the candidate serves may be asked to evaluate his/her performance on the committee, and the Chair of a Faculty Senate committee may be asked to evaluate the candidate's performance on such a committee. This step is optional but should be used if such letters will be useful in evaluating a candidate's teaching and academic service.
7. When a Review Committee is reviewing a candidate for reappointment for a fixed term (not with tenure), internal (to the University) letters on the quality and relevance of scholarship and publications are not required but optional. The Committee's report is "the letter" on this topic. The Dean invites members of the Standing Faculty to submit letters relevant to reappointment review to the Associate Dean, who forwards all letters received to the Chair of the Review Committee. External letters shall not be solicited for term (i.e., non-tenure) reappointment reviews.
8. When a Committee is reviewing a candidate for reappointment with tenure, letters from at least six expert extramural consultants are required. The Chair should ask each Committee member and the candidate to nominate such expert consultants, to assemble a master list on forms provided by the Office of the Provost (available from the Office of the Associate Dean), and to note on the list which names (not to exceed three) were nominated by the candidate. (The Review Committee Chair may, however, ask the candidate under review to designate the leading scholars in the candidate's field(s) of research.) Candidates under review may, at their option, submit up to three names to be excluded. The Chair should consult with members of the Committee as to the list of names to be recommended to the Dean by the Committee. Although names may be added to or deleted from the list, every effort should be made at this stage to nominate al least six extramural consultants. A meeting of the Committee is not required for this step, though the Chair may call a meeting if he/she wishes. The Dean is responsible for recommending a list to the Provost, who may add to and/or delete names from the list. The candidate's credentials are mailed by the Dean to the expert consultants selected by the Provost. When letters are received, they are transmitted to the Chair of the Review Committee. The Chair of the Review Committee is also responsible for obtaining intramural letters of recommendation from at least three senior faculty members qualified to evaluate the candidate's credentials. For recommendations to promote, the Chair of the Review Committee should simultaneously complete "The Faculty Equal Opportunity Compliance Statement" for promotion and transmit the completed statement along with prescribed documentation to the Dean who, after completion of Section III.I., forwards these materials to GSE's Faculty Affirmative Action Officer. In these and subsequent steps, affirmative action procedures follow the guidelines defined in the Faculty Personnel Manual (Appendix B).
9. When a Review Committee is reviewing a tenured associate professor for promotion to the rank of professor, at least six letters of recommendation from distinguished scholars external to the University of Pennsylvania and qualified to evaluate the candidate's credentials are needed, as are letters of recommendation from at least three senior faculty members of the University of Pennsylvania who are qualified to evaluate the candidate's credentials. For recommendations to promote, the Chair of the Review Committee should simultaneously complete "The Faculty Equal Opportunity Compliance. Statement" for promotion and transmit the completed statement along with prescribed documentation to the Dean who, after completion of Section III.I., forwards these materials to GSE's Faculty Affirmative action procedures following the guidelines defined in GSE's Faculty Personnel Manual.
10. The Associate Dean's Office is responsible to keep the members of the Review Committee generally informed of progress made in securing materials necessary for the review of the Committee, and to provide access to all materials to members of the Committee. It is suggested that copies of the following materials be duplicate and sent to each member of the Committee:
a. Curriculum vitae;
b. Statement of academic plans;
c. Letters received;
11. The Chair will appraise periodically the candidate of the stage of the progress of the Committee's review and any procedural problems encountered. However, the Chair shall not report the findings of substance of the review in process, and shall maintain strict confidentially of all Committee deliberations and materials received.
While the Review Committee may elect to meet as often as it determines is necessary, only one meeting is typically needed if the Chair follows the applicable steps outlined above. When all materials are available, the Chair should next, as the last step, advise members of the Committee that a meeting is scheduled for a certain time and place. Each Committee member should study thoroughly all materials, be prepared to discuss them knowledgeably, and be prepared to formulate conclusions and recommendations at the time of the scheduled meeting. If members are not so prepared, additional meetings will be necessary. At least one of the Committee meetings, the Chair should invite the Student Liaison to be present especially for the purpose of reporting, discussing, and assessing the instructional performance of the faculty member under review. This student may also elect to comment on other aspects of a faculty member's performance. The student will submit a written report to the Committee. When the discussion with the student is complete, the Committee may elect to adjourn or may continue its business after the student has departed. The Student Liaison is to be accorded access to confidential Committee materials or deliberations other than that pertaining to instructional performance. Furthermore, the Committee may elect to discuss instructional performance in the absence of the Student Liaison. Upon the completion of discussion and assessments by the Committee, its conclusions and recommendations should be reached in a Committee meeting attended by all members, instead of by bilateral discussion between the Chair and individual committee members.
The final responsibility of the Chair of a Review Committee is to draft the report of the Committee's findings, analyses, and recommendations. The report should present a cogent analysis of the candidate's academic credentials in relation to the nature of the proposed personnel action. The recommendations made should be justified by the findings and analyses offered.
Committee reports are not a pro forma step. Reports should not avoid critical judgment, when justified, and should not simply try to make the best case possible on behalf of the person in question. A report should be balanced and thoughtful, representing the best academic analysis and judgment possible. The Faculty must have confidence that a serious and cogent analysis has been made of the candidate's academic performance.
The Committee's report will be submitted in letter form to the Dean and must be signed by all committee members who support the majority view. Members who may not agree with the findings and/or conclusions of the report are welcome to submit minority reports to the Dean. An index of all materials received and reviewed by the Committee, including the written report submitted by the student liaison, should be appended to the report. These materials should also be transmitted to the Dean.
Upon submission of the signed report, the work of the Committee is concluded, and it is considered dismissed with deep appreciation.
The University of Pennsylvania intends to provide the highest quality of research, education and service. In support of this mission, we seek talented individuals who contribute unique strengths and a diversity of talents to our community. We therefore promote opportunities for all qualified persons in accordance with the laws governing equal opportunity in employment and this Affirmative Action Plan.
Penn is committed to ensuring that all educational programs and personnel actions including application, hiring, promotion, compensation, benefits, transfers, layoffs, training, tuition assistance, social and recreational programs are administered without regard to race, color, sex (except where sex is a bona fide occupational qualification), sexual orientation, religion, national or ethnic origin, age (except where age is a bona fide occupational qualification), disability, or status as a disabled or Vietnam Era veteran. The University's policy is applicable to faculty and staff, applicants for faculty and staff positions, and applicants to educational programs and other activities. This policy is fundamental to the effective functioning of the University as an institution of teaching, scholarship and public service.
The application of Penn's policy is reflected in the following statements:
a. University officials will be resourceful and creative in their recruitment efforts.
b. University officials will use the principles of equal employment opportunity in making employment decisions.
c. Analyses of faculty and staff units will be periodically conducted to determine areas of concern.
d. Units which have been identified as having practices that are inappropriate or inconsistent with this policy statement will receive direct and firm guidance.
The President, Provost and Executive Vice President will support the Director of the Office of Affirmative Action in administering the Affirmative Action Plan. They are responsible for assuring that the University's equal employment opportunity and affirmative action policy is practiced in their administrative areas.
The University has written equal opportunity and affirmative action policies that are monitored by the Office of Affirmative Action. Questions or concerns regarding these policies should be directed to the Office of Affirmative Action, Suite 228 3600 Chestnut Street/6106, (215) 898-6993 (Voice) or (215) 898-7803 (TDD).
(Effective March 28, 2006)
1. Commencing academic year 06/07, the Provost's Office will implement a new web-based system for PSC. This system will allow schools to assemble dossiers on a password protected intranet website for our review. The use of this system will significantly expedite the movement of dossiers through the various stages of school and University reviews. Paper copies of the dossier will be provided at PSC meetings only if requested as we assume most deans will prefer to have their own hard copy of the dossier that they have marked up. The web-based system will support many of the changes below (summer meetings, urgent approvals).
2. In exceptional cases in which a faculty appointment is urgent or time-sensitive (recruitment or retention issue), we will commit to electronic dissemination of a candidate's file as soon as it is received in the Provost's Office. In these cases of urgency, we will expect PSC members to register their views on the file within a 48 hour period. If members do not see any need for discussion or simply have questions of clarification that can be addressed by the sponsoring dean without convening a full meeting, and provided that I am in support of the file, I will approve the candidate's appointment or promotion without the need for a meeting or telephone conference call. If there is a need for discussion, the file will be remitted to the next scheduled PSC meeting for discussion. For greater emphasis, standards of assessment for these files will be the same as the standards used in regular meetings. There is no presumption that the standards of excellence that we apply to faculty appointments or promotions should be altered for these urgent files.
3. Commencing summer 06, I will schedule (well in advance) PSC meetings in July and in August. These meetings will be designed to accommodate the consideration of urgent files that are forwarded to me by school personnel committees that would otherwise have to wait until September. This is obviously not an invitation to delay the consideration of cases that should have been approved earlier in the year, but rather an opportunity to react quickly to proposed personnel decisions in a recruitment or retention context. The meetings will permit telephonic participation.
4. In light of the pre-screening review that Peter Conn began last year (which, among other things, has streamlined the PSC meeting), and in an effort to ensure that the bulk of our work is completed by the end of April, we will expand the caseload of PSC to a maximum of 15 per meeting. I suspect that this caseload can be accommodated under the new rules of the road.
5. As part of the new web-based system, the Provost's Office will commit to a paperless external reviewer approval process. Specifically, the Provost's Office will review and comment on/approve proposed external reviewers within 2 working days of receipt.
6. To reduce the clustering of PSC files at the end of the academic year, we will adopt the following deadlines for our normal course tenure and promotions process:
a. Lists of proposed external reviewers for internal tenure cases must be received by the Provost's Office by September 15 each year.
b. All planned promotion files (associate professor to full professor) must be received by the Provost's Office by February 1 of each year.
c. All internal tenure files must be received by the Provost's Office by March 15 of each year.
To optimize the impact of these changes, we will be seeking the following assistance from schools:
1. Each school should have a school-based manual which will include information on all aspects of the appointments process particular to the school. This will ensure that all persons involved in compiling dossiers understand university policies and procedures with respect to appointments.
2. School personnel committees will need to be receptive to one or two summer meetings so as to take advantage of PSC's summer meeting times.
3. The Provost's Office will strongly urge schools to require the candidate's portion of the dossier to be completed by September 1st each year. This will ensure that the Provost Office's deadline of September 15 for receipt of external reviewer lists will be met.
4. The Provost's Office will strongly encourage schools to complete and submit the Affirmative Action form once a decision to hire has been made rather than wait until the time the file is sent to the Provost's Office.
5. We encourage department chairs/committee chairs/deans to send out solicitations to external reviewers by both email and regular mail. In addition, where appropriate, we encourage solicitation letters to external reviewers provide a six week deadline from the date of the solicitation letter for receipt of their letter.
6. To assist external reviewers, we encourage department chairs/committee chairs/deans to ensure greater clarity in their solicitations to external reviewers as is appropriate. For example, some schools may wish to provide a page length range for the external reviewer's letters to help clarify the school's/department's expectations. Other schools may wish to communicate that a summary of each article reviewed is not required.