Content Comparison

...

The faculty member’s position responsibilities determine the appropriate audience for their teaching activities. Some faculty members work directly with undergraduate and graduate students, building their research skills. Some provide professional development to OSU faculty and researchers. Others will focus on library audiences, internally to build the capacities of library staff and externally teaching LIS courses and leading workshops for professional colleagues. We also teach members of the public, share information resources, and inform policy makers policymakers.

Teaching Philosophy

OSU librarians take a learner-centered approach, incorporating a variety of collaborative and active learning techniques. We respect the knowledge and experience our audiences bring to their learning and reinforce the understanding that learning is a dynamic, epistemic, and recursive process. We are committed to working with our audiences to help them excel as lifelong learners, able to meet the challenges of their professional, educational, or co-curricular landscapes.

...

• Supervisor forwards in writing the names of those candidates who are seeking promotion and tenure or promotion in rank to the appropriate Associate Dean.

By March 10

• The appropriate AUL Associate Dean provides written notification to the current P & T Committee Chair of faculty seeking promotion and tenure review or promotion in rank review.

...

• The initial dossier materials are prepared by the candidate working with a mentor (if applicable) and their supervisor.

By June 15

• The appropriate AUL Associate Dean identifies additional potential external reviewers, using the same criteria noted above.
• The appropriate AUL Associate Dean begins requesting 5-8 agreements to provide letters of evaluation from external reviewers (at least 3, but not more than half, should be from the candidate's suggested list).

...

• (or as letters are received) The AUL Associate Dean posts the external reviewers' letters to the a restricted share drive. When all letters are received, the P&T Committee Chair is notified.
• The supervisor receives the Student Review Committee summary letter and forwards it to the Library Administration Executive Assistant for addition to the open portion of the dossier by the posting it on the a restricted share drive. Library Administration Executive Assistant notifies the P&T Committee Chair that the letter has been received.

...

• The P&T Committee begins its review of the dossier and all signed letters of input, excluding the supervisor's letter.
• If the candidate has been granted credit toward tenure at hire, the review will generally take into consideration recent scholarship and professional service completed prior to the candidate's appointment at OSU, insofar as that work is clearly connected to the research agenda and service portfolio the candidate has developed as a faculty member at OSULP. For specifics, the P&T Committee should refer to the Credit Toward Tenure Letter, supplied by the candidate, documenting the prior-credit meeting between the candidate, the supervisor, the P&T Chair, and the Dean of Libraries. 
• The P&T Committee will prepare a letter that evaluates the relative strengths and weaknesses of the candidate's performance. The letter should comment on key points in the dossier and address all responsibilities identified in the position description, and provide a fair and balanced summary of all peer and external solicited evaluations. The review will include the candidate's dossier, the peer review of teaching summary letter, the student review of teaching summary letter, and the six external review letters. External evaluators should be identified only by a coded key when their comments are cited from these confidential letters. The voting members of the P&T Committee, those members at or above the professorial rank the candidate is seeking to attain, shall vote to recommend promotion and tenure and that recommendation shall be documented in the letter. The letter must include a description of the process used to constitute the committee.
• The supervisor (or, in case the supervisor is not professorial faculty, the appropriate AULAssociate Dean) begins their review of the dossier and all signed letters of input. The supervisor will also consult the candidate's personnel file maintained in the unit. The letter will evaluate the relative strengths and weaknesses of the candidate's performance. If the candidate reports to, or works closely with, more than one supervisor, letters from each supervisor should be included. These letters should comment on key points in the dossier and address all responsibilities identified in the position description, and provide a fair and balanced summary of all peer and external solicited evaluations. External evaluators should be identified only by a coded key when their comments are cited from these confidential letters. The supervisor may include comments on any information in the candidate's file that is relevant to the evaluation of assigned duties, collegiality, professional integrity, or willingness to accept and cooperate in assignments. If the individual serving in the supervisor role is on a 1040 assignment, they can write the supervisor's letter of evaluation.

...

By three working days after Jan 7

• The candidate signs an acknowledgement acknowledgment that they have read the Senior Review Panel letter.
• The candidate may add written comments to the file.

...

• The candidate reviews the open portion of the dossier.
• The candidate may sign the acknowledgement acknowledgment that this is their final review of the open portion of the dossier or may request, in writing, a meeting with the Dean of Libraries within the three days indicated above. (i.e. January 25 – 28)
  • • If a meeting has been requested by the candidate, the Dean of Libraries will meet with the candidate within three working days following the written request (i.e. the latest date for the meeting will be January 31). The candidate may present any information or evidence they believe may be germane to the evaluation and recommendation of the Dean of Libraries.
    • The Dean of Libraries may revise the letter of evaluation within three working days of the date of the meeting (i.e. latest date Feb. 3)
• The candidate may prepare a written statement to be included in the dossier supporting or refuting anything in the open portion of the dossier.
• Note that during this period, the original documents comprising the dossier remain in the Library Administration Office.

...

• If applicable, the Dean of Libraries' revised letter is added to the open portion of the dossier.
• The candidate is notified if the Dean of Libraries' letter was revised and has the opportunity to review it.
• The candidate may prepare a written statement to be included in the dossier.
• If the candidate did not previously sign an acknowledgement acknowledgment that they reviewed the open portion of the final dossier, this is done now.

...

• *NOTE: exact deadline posted on OSU P&T website
• The Dean of Libraries submits the completed dossier to the Office of Faculty Affairs to be reviewed by the campus Promotion and Tenure Committee. In addition, a copy of the completed dossier is placed in the Libraries' personnel files.
• When all necessary reviews and discussions have been completed, the Provost and Executive Vice President will make the final decision on promotion and indefinite tenure.

...

• Supervisor forwards in writing the name of the candidate who is seeking promotion to the Dean the Dean of Libraries (DOL) and appropriate the Associate Dean (AUL).

By March 10

• The appropriate AUL Associate Dean or DOL Dean provides written notification to the current P & T Committee Chair of faculty seeking promotion to full professor. If there are not enough librarians at full professor rank to form a review committee, the Dean the Dean of Libraries works with the OSU Libraries' P&T Chair and senior review panel to identify OSU faculty at full professor rank to form a Special P&T Committee.

...

• The candidate submits their suggested list of six external reviewers to their supervisor. Potential reviewers should generally be faculty at a tenure-track institution who have achieved tenure and are at the professorial rank to which the candidate aspires or individuals of equivalent stature outside of academe who are widely recognized in the field. Potential external reviewers should have experience with/insight into the candidate's primary area of assignment. Only in rare cases should potential external reviewers be co-authors, co-principal investigators, former professors, or former students.
• The supervisor submits the candidate's list of suggested external reviewer reviewers to the appropriate AUL Associate Dean or DOLDean.

Over the summer

• The initial dossier materials are prepared by the candidate.

By June 15

• The appropriate AUL Associate Dean or UL Dean identifies additional potential external reviewers, using the same criteria noted above.
• The appropriate AUL Associate Dean or UL Dean begins requesting 5-8 agreements to provide letters of evaluation from external reviewers. At least 3, but not more than half, should be from the candidate's suggested list.

...

• (or as letters are received) The AUL or UL Associate Dean or Dean of Libraries posts the external reviewers' letters to the a restricted share drive. When all letters are received, the Special P&T Committee Chair is notified.
• The supervisor receives the Student Review Committee summary letter and forwards it to the Library Administration Executive Assistant for addition to the open portion of the dossier by the posting it on the a restricted share drive. Library Administration Executive Assistant notifies the Special P&T Committee Chair that the letter has been received.

...

• The Special P&T Committee begins its review of the dossier and all signed letters of input, excluding the supervisor's letter. The Special P&T Committee may request the supervisor letter in cases where context about the candidate's work is needed. The Special P&T Committee will prepare a letter that evaluates the relative strengths and weaknesses of the candidate's performance. The letter should comment on key points in the dossier and address all responsibilities identified in the position description, and provide a fair and balanced summary of all peer and external solicited evaluations. The review will include the candidate's dossier, the peer review of teaching summary letter, the student review of teaching summary letter, and the six external review letters. External evaluators should be identified only by a coded key when their comments are cited from these confidential letters. The Special P&T Committee shall vote to recommend promotion and tenure and that recommendation shall be documented in the letter. The letter must include a description of the process that was used to constitute the committee.
• The supervisor (or, in case the supervisor is not professorial faculty, the appropriate AULAssociate Dean) begins their review of the dossier and all signed letters of input. The supervisor will also consult the candidate's personnel file maintained in the unit. The letter will evaluate the relative strengths and weaknesses of the candidate's performance. If the candidate reports to, or works closely with, more than one supervisor, letters from each supervisor should be included. These letters should comment on key points in the dossier and address all responsibilities identified in the position description, and provide a fair and balanced summary of all peer and external solicited evaluations. External evaluators should be identified only by a coded key when their comments are cited from these confidential letters. The supervisor may include comments on any information in the candidate's file that is relevant to the evaluation of assigned duties, collegiality, professional integrity, or willingness to accept and cooperate in assignments. If the individual serving in the supervisor role is on a 1040 assignment, they can write the supervisor's letter of evaluation.

...

• The candidate reviews the open portion of the dossier.
• The candidate may sign the acknowledgement acknowledgment that this is their final review of the open portion of the dossier or may request, in writing, a meeting with the Dean the Dean of Libraries within the three days indicated above. (i.e. January 25 – 28).
• If a meeting has been requested by the candidate, the Dean the Dean of Libraries will meet with the candidate within three working days following the written request (i.e. the latest date for the meeting will be January 31). The candidate may present any information or evidence they believe may be germane to the evaluation and recommendation of the Dean of Libraries.
• The Dean of Libraries may revise the letter of evaluation within three working days of the date of the meeting (i.e. latest date Feb. 3)
• The candidate may prepare a written statement to be included in the dossier supporting or refuting anything in the open portion of the dossier.
• Note that during this period, the original documents comprising the dossier remain in the Library Administration Office.

...

• If applicable, the Dean of Libraries' revised letter is added to the open portion of the dossier.
• The candidate is notified if the Dean of Libraries' letter was revised and has the opportunity to review it.
• The candidate may prepare a written statement to be included in the dossier.
• If the candidate did not previously sign an acknowledgement acknowledgment that they reviewed the open portion of the final dossier, this is done now.
• Following this, Library Administration Executive Assistant has 2-3 days to prepare the completed dossier to be submitted to the Office of Faculty Affairs.

...

• *NOTE: exact deadline posted on OSU P&T website
• The Dean of Libraries submits the completed dossier to the Office of Faculty Affairs to be reviewed by the University Promotion and Tenure Committee. In addition, a copy of the completed dossier is placed in the Libraries' personnel files.
• When all necessary reviews and discussions have been completed, the Provost and Executive Vice President will make the final decision on promotion and indefinite tenure.

...

• The faculty member may implement the PTR Committee's suggestions for strengthening the dossier and resubmits the updated dossier to the Committee.

...

• If external review is requested, the appropriate Associate Dean solicits external letters of evaluation.

The AUL Associate Dean will request 5-8 letters of evaluation from national leaders in the field (at least 3 should be from the faculty members member's suggested list). Only in rare cases should letters be solicited from co-authors, co-principal investigators, former professors, or former students. Letters should generally be from faculty at a tenure-track institution who have achieved tenure and are at or above the professorial level of the faculty member under review individuals of equivalent stature outside of academe who are widely recognized in the field.
The Libraries' Administration Office staff assists in the preparation and sending of packets to these reviewers. The packets should include a copy of the candidate's vita, position description(s), candidate statement, peer review of instruction summary letter and copies of (or links to) his/her publications. The Libraries' guidelines are not an official document and should not be sent to external reviewers; however, the web address for the University's Guidelines for Post-tenure Review of Faculty should be made available to external reviewers.
Week __ (or as letters are received)

...

• If the PTR Committee confirms unsatisfactory performance in any aspect of the position description, a plan for improvement shall be developed jointly by the faculty being reviewed and the unit head in consultation with the PTR committeeCommittee.

The plan should provide detailed actions, sufficient resources as are available and measurable goals to achieve satisfactory performance within a maximum of three years. Such resources might include support for scholarly professional activities (travel, time released from teaching, equipment, clerical or technical support, graduate assistants, laboratory or other workspace, etc.) or a program for the improvement of teaching.

...

• Supervisor forwards in writing the names of those candidates who are seeking promotion in rank review to the Associate Dean (AUL) for Learning Services.

By March 10

• The AUL for Learning Services Associate Dean provides written notification to the current P&T Committee Chair of faculty seeking promotion in rank review.

...

• The candidate submits their suggested list of four external reviewers to their supervisor. Potential reviewers, in general, should be be individuals who hold a rank at or above the level for which the candidate is being considered, or an experience level equivalent to such a rank. Ability to objectively evaluate is the driver in selecting evaluators. Evaluators may be internal or external to OSU. Internal evaluators may be individuals who have worked with the candidate but can objectively evaluate the candidate's dossier.
• The supervisor submits the candidate's list of suggested external reviewers to the appropriate AUL for Learning ServicesAssociate Dean.

Over the summer and fall

• The initial dossier materials are prepared by the candidate working with a mentor (if applicable) and their supervisor.

By June 15

• The AUL for Learning Services Associate Dean identifies additional potential external reviewers, using the same criteria noted above. Additional detail must be provided if an evaluator is not of a rank at or above the level for which the candidate is being considered, if they have been suggested based on experience level equivalency, and/or if they are internal to OSU and have worked with the candidate.
• The AUL for Learning Services Associate Dean begins requesting 4 agreements to provide letters of evaluation from external reviewers (2 should be from the candidate's suggested list).

...

• The candidate may implement the P&T Committee's suggestions for strengthening the dossier; the candidate resubmits the updated dossier to their supervisor.
• The supervisor reviews the dossier for completeness and forwards it to Library Administration Executive Assistant for final dossier processing
• The Library Administration Executive Assistant has the candidate sign that they have reviewed the open part of their dossier and that it is current and complete. All original print materials pertaining to the dossier are filed and kept in the Library Administration Executive Assistant's office.
• NOTE: Once the dossier is certified, the only materials to be added subsequently will be the letters of committee and Administration review, and in some cases the candidate's response to an evaluation as described below. If manuscripts are accepted for publication after the dossier is certified, it is the faculty member's responsibility to inform his or her supervisor. That information will then be considered in the review.

By January 27

• The appropriate AUL Associate Dean solicits external letters of evaluation.
• The Library Administration Executive Assistant assists in the preparation and sending of packets to these reviewers. The packets should include a table of contents, the candidate's vita, position description(s), candidate statement, and copies of (or links to) his/her publications (if applicable). The web address for the OSU Promotion and Tenure Guidelines should be made available to external reviewers, as should the Libraries' specific criteria.
• The Student Review Committee is finalized by the supervisor and charged to write a summary letter from the individual student evaluation letters (see Student Review of Teaching appendix for additional details).

...

• The supervisor receives the Student Review Committee summary letter and forwards it to the Library Administration Executive Assistant for addition to the open portion of the dossier. Library Administration Executive Assistant notifies the P&T Committee Chair that the letter has been received.
• (or as letters are received) The Library Administration Executive Assistant posts the external reviewers' letters to the a restricted share drive. When all letters are received, the P&T Committee Chair and the supervisor is are notified.

By March 1

• The P&T Committee begins its review of the dossier and all signed letters of input. The P&T Committee will prepare a letter evaluates to evaluate the relative strengths and weaknesses of the candidate's performance. The letter should comment on key points in the dossier and address all responsibilities identified in the position description, and provide a fair and balanced summary of all peer and external solicited evaluations. The review will include the candidate's dossier, the peer review of teaching summary letter, the student review of teaching summary letter, and the four external review letters. External evaluators should be identified only by a coded key when their comments are cited from these confidential letters. The voting members of the P&T Committee, those members at or above the professorial rank the candidate is seeking to attain, shall vote to recommend promotion and tenure and that recommendation shall be documented in the letter. The letter must include a description of the process used to constitute the committee.
• The supervisor begins their review of the dossier and all signed letters of input. The supervisor will also consult the candidate's personnel file maintained in the unit. The supervisor letter will evaluate the relative strengths and weaknesses of the candidate's performance. If the candidate reports to, or works closely with, more than one supervisor, letters from each supervisor should be included. The supervisor letter(s) should comment on key points in the dossier and address all responsibilities identified in the position description, and provide a fair and balanced summary of all peer and external solicited evaluations. External evaluators should be identified only by a coded key when their comments are cited from these confidential letters. The supervisor may include comments on any information in the candidate's file that is relevant to the evaluation of assigned duties, collegiality, professional integrity, or willingness to accept and cooperate in assignments.

...

• Supervisor forwards in writing the names of those candidates who are seeking promotion and tenure or promotion in rank to the Associate Dean (AUL) for Research and Scholarly Communication.

By March 10

• The AUL for Research and Scholarly Communication Associate Dean provides written notification to the current P&T Committee Chair of faculty seeking promotion in rank review.

...

• Supervisor asks the candidate to sign Waiver of Access form indicating their decision to waive, or not waive, their right of access to external review letters and student review letters. The signed document is needed to solicit external review letters and student review letters. If the option to waive access is signed, this indicates that the candidate waives access to the letters from external reviewers and from student reviewers; he the candidate always retains the right to access letters from the Department Head, the Promotion & Tenure Committee, the Senior Review Panel, and the Dean of Libraries. External reviewers and optional student reviewers are notified about the candidate's status of access to external letters and from student reviewers.
• (and up to October 30 if Fall term is relevant) If Teaching/Advising/Mentoring is called out in Position Description, candidates candidate submits names for optional student reviewers to supervisor (see Student Review of Teaching section for additional details).

...

• The candidate submits their suggested list of four external reviewers to their supervisor. Potential reviewers, in general, should be individuals who hold a rank at or above the level for which the candidate is being considered, or an experience level equivalent to such a rank. Ability to objectively evaluate is the driver in selecting evaluators. Evaluators may be internal or external to OSU. Internal evaluators may be individuals who have worked with the candidate but can objectively evaluate the candidate's dossier.
• The supervisor submits the candidate's list of suggested external reviewers to the AUL for Research and Scholarly CommunicationAssociate Dean.

Over the summer and fall

• The initial dossier materials are prepared by the candidate working with a mentor (if applicable) and their supervisor.

By June 15

• The AUL for Research and Scholarly Communication Associate Dean identifies additional potential external reviewers, using the same criteria noted above. Additional detail must be provided if an evaluator is not of a rank at or above the level for which the candidate is being considered, if they have been suggested based on experience level equivalency, and/or if they are internal to OSU and have worked with the candidate.
• The AUL for Research and Scholarly Communication Associate Dean begins requesting 4 agreements to provide letters of evaluation from external reviewers (2 should be from the candidate's suggested list).

...

• The supervisor reviews the dossier for completion and then forwards the dossier to the AUL for Research and Scholarly Communication Associate Dean and the Library Administration Executive Assistant for processing.

...

• Library Administration Executive Assistant works with the supervisor and AUL for Research and Scholarly Communication Associate Dean to process the dossier and place it on the secured shared drive.
• The Library Administration Executive Assistant has candidate sign to acknowledge that the initial dossier is complete and current
• The Library Administration Executive Assistant notifies the P&T Committee Chair that the dossier is ready for preliminary review.

...

• The candidate may implement the P&T Committee's suggestions for strengthening the dossier; the candidate resubmits the updated dossier to their supervisor.
• The supervisor reviews the dossier for completeness and forwards it to Library Administration Executive Assistant for final dossier processing
• The Library Administration Executive Assistant has the candidate sign that they have reviewed the open part of their dossier and that it is current and complete. All original print materials pertaining to the dossier are filed and kept in the Library Administration Executive Assistant's office.
  • • • NOTE: Once the dossier is certified, the only materials to be added subsequently will be the letters of committee and Administration review, and in some cases the candidate's response to an evaluation as described in the following section. If manuscripts are accepted for publication after the dossier is certified, it is the faculty member's responsibility to inform his or her supervisor. That information will then be considered in the review.

By January 27

• The AUL for Research and Scholarly Communication Associate Dean solicits external letters of evaluation.
• The Library Administration Executive Assistant assists in the preparation and sending of packets to these reviewers. The packets should include a table of contents, the candidate's vita, position description(s), candidate statement, and copies of (or links to) his/her publications (if applicable). The web address for the OSU Promotion and Tenure Guidelines should be made available to external reviewers, as should the Libraries' specific criteria

...

• (or as letters are received) The Library Administration Executive Assistant posts the external reviewers' letters to the a restricted share drive. When all letters are received, the P&T Committee Chair and the supervisor is are notified.

By March 1

• The P&T Committee begins its review of the dossier and all signed letters of input, excluding the supervisor's letter. The P&T Committee will prepare a letter evaluates to evaluate the relative strengths and weaknesses of the candidate's performance. The letter should comment on key points in the dossier and address all responsibilities identified in the position description, and provide a fair and balanced summary of all peer and external solicited evaluations. The review will include the candidate's dossier, the peer review of teaching summary letter (if applicable), the individual student review of teaching/mentoring letters, and the four external review letters. External evaluators should be identified only by a coded key when their comments are cited from these confidential letters. The voting members of the P&T Committee, those members at or above the professorial rank the candidate is seeking to attain, shall vote to recommend promotion and tenure and that recommendation shall be documented in the letter. The letter must include a description of the process used to constitute the committee.
• The supervisor begins their review of the dossier and all signed letters of input. The supervisor will also consult the candidate's personnel file maintained in the unit. The supervisor letter will evaluate the relative strengths and weaknesses of the candidate's performance. If the candidate reports to, or works closely with, more than one supervisor, letters from each supervisor should be included. The supervisor letter(s) should comment on key points in the dossier and address all responsibilities identified in the position description, and provide a fair and balanced summary of all peer and external solicited evaluations. External evaluators should be identified only by a coded key when their comments are cited from these confidential letters. The supervisor may include comments on any information in the candidate's file that is relevant to the evaluation of assigned duties, collegiality, professional integrity, or willingness to accept and cooperate in assignments.

...

Anchor
_Toc520379538 _Toc520379538

Peer Review of Teaching Coordinator

The Peer Review of Teaching Coordinator (Coordinator) is a tenured library faculty member and member of the Promotion & Tenure committee. The coordinator is typically selected by the new P&T Committee Chair and serves a one-year term, September - August. 

Anchor
_Toc520379539 _Toc520379539

Procedure for Peer Review of Teaching

...

• The coordinator will meet with candidates within one year after their start date to explain the process and to begin planning to determine the best terms/classes to be observed, and to answer questions. To ensure enough reviews have been undertaken or will be undertaken, the coordinator will meet with:
  • Mid-tenure review candidates and instruction review candidates (and faculty research assistant candidates, if they have teaching duties), no later than November of the year prior to dossier submission
  • Tenure and promotion review candidates in August of the year prior to dossier submission (ex: meet August 2020 if submitting dossier August 2021).
• The candidate and the coordinator should discuss the types of teaching that should be included in the review. Both format and audience should be considered in this discussion, and the decision should be shaped by teaching responsibilities as they are specifically articulated in the position description. If desired, the candidate's supervisor may be included in this discussion.
• Formats can include, but are not limited to: face-to-face sessions, credit courses, webinars, workshops, tutorials, and handouts
• Audiences can include, but are not limited to: students, faculty, community members, and library employees.
• Once the candidates know their teaching schedules for upcoming instruction sessions, they will notify the Coordinator of classes they would like to have observed.
• If the candidate would like any non-library faculty to observe them, the candidate will provide names to the coordinator. If the candidate and coordinator agree that non-face-to-face teaching should be reviewed, they should identify specific teaching materials (tutorials, webpages, documentation, handbooks, etc.) to be reviewed.
• Each candidate should receive three different reviews, by three different reviewers before they submit their dossier for Mid-tenure review, for Tenure and/or Promotion review, for Promotion in Rank review, and for Post-tenure review.

...

Per the OSU promotion and tenure guidelines, students will be invited to participate in the review of faculty for promotion and tenure. OSULP interprets "students" to include all constituents of the candidate's teaching audience, internal or external to OSU, for whom the candidate has provided instruction, consultation, advising, or mentoring. The following guidelines from the OSU Promotion & Tenure Guidelines (Student Letter of Evaluation section) have been modified for OSULP.
The purpose of the student evaluation letter is to document the student perspective of the candidate's effectiveness as a teacher, research consultant, advisor (if applicable), or mentor (if applicable). In order to provide the university with a consistent source of information for the process, the unit P&T committee and the unit supervisor should endeavor to organize student committees for faculty evaluation using the following process.
NOTE: the timeline below specifically addresses the Associate Professor and Professor reviews. Timeline modifications for Senior Instructor I/II review and Faculty Research Assistant I/II review are specifically noted in those timelines.
By March 15

...

• The unit P&T committee and the supervisor jointly generate an additional list of student names taken from class lists of the courses, workshop attendees lists, research consultations, and advisees (if appropriate).
• The supervisor begins to request review letters from the combined list of students. Students graduating in June or August must be contacted before graduation. The supervisor may wish to work with Library Administration Executive Assistant to determine when students are graduating. An attempt should be made to request input from students whose collective experience represents the profile of the teaching, research consultation and advisory (if appropriate) duties of the faculty member. For example, if a faculty member teaches all undergraduate courses, it is appropriate for all letters to come from undergraduates. If the faculty member teaches, consults with or advises a mixture of undergraduate and graduate students, the chosen students' backgrounds should reflect that diversity in order to provide sufficient information to evaluate the candidate's performance.
  • Letters to the students requesting the evaluative reference must inform the student as to who will see their review letters. Access to those letters will be determined by whether the candidate has signed a waiver of access. Students must also be informed that only signed letters will be used as part of the process. Sample letters are available on the share a restricted shared drive: Shared\P-&-T\Student_review_of_teaching\Sample_letters
  • As a rule, one half of the letters should be from the list generated by the candidate and one half from the list generated by the unit. In practice, the supervisor and candidate work together to generate the list of student names.
  • There is no specific minimum number of letters required. The total number of letters should be on the order of 4-12, depending on the complexity of the candidate's teaching duties.
  • If an insufficient number of students agree to write letters, the P & T Committee and the supervisor should select an additional set of names from the existing lists and request letters from those students.
• Supervisor begins planning the formation of the Student Review Committee in order to have this committee in place by October deadline.

...

Candidates for promotion and tenure, candidates for promotion in rank, as well as some who will go through the post-tenure review process, will be evaluated by external reviewers (6 minimum, 8 maximum for professorial faculty; 4 for Faculty Research Assistants and Instructors). Candidates must submit a list of at least 5 evaluators (4 for FRAs and Instructors) who meet the criteria stated below and from this list at least three letters (two letters for FRAs and Instructors) will be obtained for the final dossier. If additional names are needed, these will be obtained from the candidate by the unit head. The other evaluators are to be selected by the AULAssociate Dean.
Letters should generally be from leaders in the candidate's field, chosen for their ability to evaluate the candidate's scholarly work. Letters should not be solicited from co-authors or co-principal investigators who collaborated with the candidate in the last five years. In general, letters should not be solicited from former post-doctoral advisers, professors, or former students. If such letters are necessary, include an explanation and state why the evaluator can be objective. Letters should generally be from tenured professors or individuals of equivalent stature outside of academe who are widely recognized in the field. External letters for professorial faculty should never be solicited from clients or others whom the candidate has directly served in his/her work. For FRA's and Instructors, the letters can be from internal evaluators who have worked with the candidate but can objectively evaluate the candidate's dossier. Careful consideration should be given to minimizing conflict of interest when choosing all evaluators.
This web page provides additional tips: https://academiclibrarianstatus.wordpress.com/. 

By May 31

• The candidate for Promotion and Tenure or promotion to Professor submits a list of 5-8 potential external reviewers to their supervisor, who forwards them to their AULthe Associate Dean.
• The candidate for Promotion in Rank (Instructor or FRA) submits a list of 4 potential external reviewers to their supervisor, who forwards them to their AULthe Associate Dean.

By January 31^st (and only if external review was requested)

• The faculty member going through post-tenure review submits a list (minimum of 5 names) of external reviewers to their supervisor, who forwards them to their AULthe Associate Dean.

To facilitate contact with the external reviewers, candidates should provide the following info for each external reviewer: Name, Title, Rank, Mailing Address, Phone, Email.
Home

...

• The hiring manager will contact the Dean of Libraries and the P&T Committee Chair to inform them a request for hire with credit toward tenure has been made. 
  • 1-2 paragraphs (no more than 1 page) describing their research agenda and how they intend to build off of existing research and research outputs in relation to the OSULP position, as well as their previous and future intended service to the profession   
  • An up-to-date and unabridged CV; if applicable, the same CV submitted for the application to the position may be submitted if there haven’t been any updates
• The hiring manager will provide a copy of the P&T Guidelines and ask the candidate to submit the following materials within 3 business days of the request for a review:
• The P&T Chair will send a request to the P&T Committee asking for 2-3 volunteers, in addition to themselves, to serve on a Review for Hire with Credit Toward Tenure Sub-Committee. The Sub-Committee should include at least two tenured members.
• Upon receipt of the submitted materials, the P&T Sub-Committee, the Dean, and the hiring manager will have a maximum of 1 week to review the materials and meet to discuss the candidate’s materials. 
• Only the sub-committee members will receive the candidate materials. All promotion and tenure deliberations are confidential. 
• The P&T Sub-Committee, the Dean, and the hiring manager will come to consensus to recommend the candidate be hired with 1, 2, or 3 years of credit toward tenure. No more than 3 years of credit toward tenure may be granted. The group can also recommend to not offer credit toward tenure. 
• No external review letters or references are needed for this decision-making process. 
• Without naming the candidate, the P&T Chair informs the entire P&T Committee of the group’s recommendation for hire with credit toward tenure (or not).  
• The hiring manager informs the candidate of the decision to offer credit toward tenure and how many years (or not) are offered.
• The hiring manager ensures that the employment offer letter includes the number of years of credit toward tenure offered, along with the date by which tenure must be granted. The offer letter should also include a statement expressing that OSULP is granting credit toward tenure based on the expectation that the candidate will continue their research agenda started prior to their time at OSU. 
• The hiring manager informs the P&T Chair the candidate has accepted the offer. Within 2 weeks, the P&T Sub-Committee delivers a summary of the credit toward tenure discussion and decision-making to the Dean and the hiring manager, and places a copy on the a restricted P&T shared drive.
• After the candidate’s start date, the credit toward tenure will be further clarified in a meeting between the candidate, the candidate’s supervisor, the Dean, and the P&T Committee chair within the first 1-3 months of the candidate’s start date. Using the summary documentation to engage in the conversation, the meeting notes will be captured by the P&T Committee Chair in a Credit Toward Tenure Letter that connects the number of years of credit toward tenure granted by the Dean of Libraries to the relevant scholarship and service applicable for consideration. The Credit Toward Tenure Letter is shared with the relevant parties after the meeting, and is subsequently shared by the candidate with the P&T Committee during the midterm and final dossier submission review processes. It is the candidate’s responsibility to retain and submit the Credit Toward Tenure Letter to the P&T Committee prior to their mid-term review as well as prior to their promotion to associate professor and indefinite tenure review. It is the candidate’s responsibility to articulate the impact of the scholarship for which they are credited. The P&T Committee will consider previous publications and service as documented in the Credit Toward Tenure Letter during the promotion and tenure review processes, however, the P&T Committee retains the right to determine that the publications and service credited do or do not demonstrate sufficient impact and contribution to the profession.
• The years toward credit is added to the tenure timeline spreadsheet and a copy of the Credit Toward Tenure Letter is placed in the a restricted P&T shared drive. 

...

• The P&T Committee Chair communicates the outcome of the P&T Committee vote to the Dean and hiring manager for review.
• A Senior Review Panel review of this process is NOT required.   
• The OSUL Dean of Libraries communicates with the P&T Committee Chair and the hiring manager of their decision whether or not they will move forward with a recommendation for hire with tenure. 
• Within 2 business days, the OSUL Dean of Libraries submits the compiled documentation and, in the form of a letter, the final recommendation for tenure and rank to the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs.
• Once the P&T Hiring with Tenure Process is completed and approved by university administration, then the offer letter will be drafted by HR and sent to the candidate to be officially accepted.  
• The offer of employment letter should note whether or not the position is being offered as a hire with tenure or credit toward tenure.

...

• Day 0: The hiring manager contacts the Dean of Libraries and the P&T Committee Chair to inform them a request for hire with tenure has been made. 
• By Day 5: The candidate submits their materials 
• Between Days 6-10
• The P&T Committee meets to discuss the candidate’s materials, votes, and writes a letter documenting the outcome of the vote. 
• The Dean contacts the external references provided by the candidate, as well as contact at least one external reviewer not provided by the candidate. 
• By Day 10
• The P&T Committee Chair communicates the outcome of the P&T Committee vote to the Dean and hiring manager for review.
• External reviewers submit their evaluations to the Dean.
• By Day 12: 
• The OSUL Dean of Libraries communicates with the P&T Committee Chair and the hiring manager of their decision whether or not they will move forward with a recommendation for hire with tenure. 
• The Dean of Libraries submits the compiled documentation and, in the form of a letter, the final recommendation for tenure and rank to the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs.

...

Anchor
_Toc520379545 _Toc520379545

Promotion & Tenure Committee (for "unit" review)

• Overview
  • The The Libraries' Promotion and Tenure Committee (P&T Committee) is a peer review group that conducts a critical, objective, and fair evaluation of each candidate being considered for mid-term review, promotion associate professor and tenure review (promotion and tenure review), and promotion in rank review. The supervisor and the P&T Committee work with the candidate in accordance with the OSU/OSULP Promotion and Tenure Guidelines to ensure that the strongest dossier possible is presented for review. Additionally, the P&T Committee serves in an advisory capacity to the Dean of Libraries.
  • For the promotion and tenure review and promotion in rank reviews, the P&T Committee forwards its work to the SRP along with its review and recommendation to the Dean of Libraries.
  • For the mid-term review, the P&T Committee serves in an advisory capacity to the Dean of Libraries and forwards its review to the Dean of Libraries and to the candidate's supervisor.
• Composition and Service
  • The P&T Committee shall consist of all library academic faculty (assistant/associate/full professors; instructors; faculty research assistants) with the following exceptions:
    • Dean of Libraries
    • Associate Deans
    • Faculty undergoing review
    • Faculty members elected to serve on the Senior Review Panel, including the immediate Past Chair of the P&T Committee
  • Approval must be sought from the Dean of Libraries if academic faculty members are unable to serve for other reasons.
  • Academic faculty members who have an ethical conflict of interest ( https://facultyaffairs.oregonstate.edu/faculty-handbook/promotion-and-tenure-guidelines#procedural Section: Declaration and Management of Conflicts of Interest) in any particular dossier review are expected to recuse themselves in writing to their supervisor and the current P&T chair, detailing the conflict. They will continue to serve on the P&T Committee for reviewing other dossiers that year.
  • Changes to the Committee composition need to be approved by vote by the Library Faculty Association.
  • Special Committee Members
    • There are certain circumstances where peers may be recruited from outside the library to join the P&T Committee
      • A candidate is being reviewed for promotion and there is an insufficient number of eligible academic library faculty at the appropriate rank to vote as part of the review (at least three voting faculty needed)
      • Conflicts of interest ( https://facultyaffairs.oregonstate.edu/faculty-handbook/promotion-and-tenure-guidelines#procedural Section: Declaration and Management of Conflicts of Interest) lead to an insufficient number of eligible academic library faculty to vote as part of the review (at three voting faculty needed).
        • E.g., An Associate Dean is being reviewed and there is an insufficient number of eligible academic faculty to vote as part of the review.
        • E.g., A Department Head is being reviewed and there is an insufficient number of eligible academic library faculty to vote as part of the review.
    • If there are no academic library faculty eligible to serve on the review committee, the Dean of Libraries must be consulted for input regarding the composition of a special review committee (see Special Review Committee guidelines below).

...

  The committee will generally be formed by the end of the summer term or early fall term - as close to the the candidate’s dossier submission as possible - so that the established review timeline can be followed. If constitution of the review committee is delayed, the review timeline will need to be adjusted.

...

It is not mandatory for candidates to submit teaching evaluations for review for the period beginning in Spring Term 2020 and continuing until the University reverts to mandatory collection of student evaluations of teaching. Due to major disruptions in the teaching and learning experience due to the COVID-19 pandemic, including the rapid transition to remote instruction and balancing work and life from home, teaching evaluations are optional for this period. If the candidates collected teaching evaluations during this period, they may choose to include all or some of them in their dossier. Candidates cannot be penalized in any way for not including teaching evaluations during this period, regardless of whether they collected them or not. This decision was made based on direction and input from the OSU Provost, as well as the OSU Libraries Promotion & Tenure committeeCommittee.

Candidates are encouraged to explain how Covid-19 affected the different areas of their position, and how they addressed these challenges, throughout the document. For example, in providing context to the teaching and research areas of the Vita section. See this document for suggested best practices from UMass on documenting COVID in dossiers.

...