Revised October, 2022
I. Statement of Purpose.
This document describes the procedures and criteria under which Lecturers of the Department of Mathematics will be evaluated and considered for promotion. For information about College and University procedures and guidelines, see the following documents:
- University and College Tenure and Promotion Guidelines.
- University Constitution.
- Florida Administrative Code.
- University of Florida Faculty Handbook.
- Agreement between Board of Regents and the United Faculty of Florida.
II. Progress Toward Promotion Review.
Progress Toward Promotion (PtP) reviews are conducted in the Spring semester. Each Lecturer and Senior Lecturer (candidate) who has not received a PtP review and is in their third year of rank or beyond is eligible for a PtP review. The purpose of this appraisal shall be to assess the faculty member’s progress toward meeting the criteria for promotion and to provide assessments, suggestions, and guidance to assist the faculty member in fulfilling the University’s, College’s, and Department’s criteria. An eligible faculty member who declines to be reviewed under this PtP process must state so annually in writing by submitting a letter to the chair by January 10.
(a) A candidate undergoing review shall prepare an appraisal dossier containing the same kind of the same kind of information as would be included in the promotion dossier, but without letters of recommendation. In the first two weeks of the semester the tenure and promotion committee shall provide the faculty member with details of the required materials and a deadline for finalizing the dossier. This deadline shall be in the second half of the semester.
(b) Faculty members senior in rank (including both tenure track and non-tenure track faculty) eligible to vote on promotion will meet with the chair for consultation and assessment of the progress of the candidate. The appraisal dossier shall be available to the these faculty members for at least one week before this meeting.
(c) The appraisal process shall be confidential to the extent permitted by law and internal to the department and the college office. In particular, the appraisal shall not be placed in the faculty member’s evaluation file nor be included in the faculty member’s promotion packet.
III. Department Promotion Process.
1. The department chair shall initiate the promotion process upon the written request of a faculty member made no later than July 1, though faculty are encouraged to make their request during the Spring term. The department chair shall provide the applicant with the URLs of the University’s Guidelines and Information Regarding the Tenure, Permanent Status and Promotion Process, the College Tenure and Promotion Guidelines, the Department’s written clarifications of the University criteria, and other materials, information, and forms that are used in the preparation of the dossier. The department chair shall inform the candidate of the deadlines in the review process.
2. The department chair will compile a list of references, who will later be requested to write letters of evaluation, no later than the first week of July. The candidate shall be informed of the names of all references before the letters are requested.
3. University guidelines state that Lecturers do not need external letters. College guidelines call for five or six letters of evaluation. In accordance with University guidelines, the candidate suggests seven writers of evaluation letters, but the final selection is determined by the Chair so that at least half of the evaluators who agree to write letters come from the candidate’s list.
4. If the candidate wishes to waive the right to review the letters of recommendation, he or she must fill out the college waiver form before the letters are requested.
5. The department chair will write to each reference to request letters of recommendation. This should be done at least two months before completed packets are due in the College office (typically around the second week of October). The request will indicate whether the candidate has waived the right to review the letters of recommendation.
6. For each candidate, the committee will assist the Chair in preparing the tenure/promotion file, which will contain (1) the letters of recommendation, (2) the annual letters of evaluation by the chair for the past five years, (3) the curriculum vita, (4) all college and university forms and required attachments (5) any supplementary information which the faculty member may wish to include. University guidelines state that Lecturers should include in their packets samples of materials that document their instructional accomplishments, such as sample exams, excerpts from syllabi and any evidence of teaching effectiveness.
7. The faculty members at or above the rank sought by a nominee for promotion will meet for a discussion and assessment. Faculty voting on promotion of Lecturer to Senior Lecturer will be by Senior and Master Lecturers, and Associate and Full Professors. Faculty voting on promotion of Senior Lecturer to Master Lecturer will be by Master Lecturers and Full Professors. The file should be available to the appropriate faculty members for at least one week prior to this meeting. The secret ballot of the unit faculty eligible to vote shall be taken no earlier than one day following the meeting.
8. The ballot will allow the voter to vote for or against the promotion or tenure or to abstain from voting.
9. The department chair will transmit the file to the college for consideration, including the vote and the chair’s letter of recommendation. The chair’s letter should include a summary of the discussion and vote of the faculty.
10. The chair will communicate the vote and the letter of recommendation to the candidate. The candidate always has the right to withdraw from consideration at this time.
APPENDIX. Department Criteria for Promotion
From the College Guidelines:
“For promotion to Senior Lecturer there must be evidence of consistent meritorious achievement in teaching, advising, and in other assigned administrative administrative or service activities. Student evaluations of teaching should be superior. In addition, the evaluation will consider such items as strong peer reviews of teaching, importance to, and role in improving, the instructional or academic program in course development (or other areas of assignment), and use of innovative techniques or technologies.”
“For promotion to Master Lecturer, in addition to the above, there should also be evidence of superior achievements in teaching (or other areas of assigned duties), development of innovative techniques or technology, nominations or receipt of teaching awards, grants, or other forms of recognition for achievement.”
The following factors contribute to the recognition of excellence and promote the goals of the mathematics department and the University.
TEACHING:
Examples of factors which may be considered are: success of students taught, teaching awards, advising of students, instructional materials, published papers on the teaching of mathematics, conducting workshops for school teachers and teaching assistants, curriculum development, conducting and participating in seminars, receipt of grants.
SERVICE:
Examples of factors which may be considered are: chairing and serving on departmental, college and university committees, councils and senates, service in appropriate professional organizations, service to public schools, evaluating persons or programs within the University or for external groups, organization of meetings, coordinating courses, recruiting of students.
Previous Version