CBAPPS 5.08 External Review Policy
CBAPPS 5.08
Effective Date: 9/1/2023
Last Review Date: 4/20/2023
Next Review Date: 09/01/2025
Sr. Reviewer: Dean, McCoy College
McCOY COLLEGE OF BUSINESS
CBAPPS 5.08: External Review Policy
POLICY STATEMENT
The purpose of this policy is to establish McCoy College requirements for external evaluation of professional contributions of candidates for tenure and promotion. Professional contributions include contributions in research, teaching and service.
RELATED POLICIES
AA/PPS 04.02.20 (8.10) Tenure and Promotion Review
CBAPPS 5.05 Tenure/Promotion Policy
Tenure and Promotion Policy of the Applicant’s Academic Department
GENERAL INFORMATION
This policy delineates guidelines for external evaluation of professional contribution of candidates for tenure and promotion in the McCoy College of Business. While the primary focus is on evaluation of the candidate’s intellectual contributions, an assessment of the candidate’s other components of professional qualifications may also be requested if and when appropriate. External evaluations will be used as an important factor when making professional judgments about the candidate’s qualifications. Each external evaluation received becomes a part of the candidate’s portfolio. This policy outlines the procedure for the selection of external reviewers.
Guidelines for Selecting External Reviewers
1. The selection of external reviewers should be guided by the goal of obtaining independent and objective confirmation of a candidate’s professional contributions. The College expects external letters to come from individuals who are at "arm's length" from the candidate, meaning that the reviewers do not have a significant professional or personal relationship with the candidate such as teachers, advisors, mentors, current colleagues, co-authors/collaborators, and dissertation committee members. Preference is for letters from persons who do not know the candidate but can comment on the quality/impact of their work.
2. Normally, external reviews are solicited from qualified reviewers who are presently in the professoriate at peer, aspirant, or competitor institutions, who are of national or international standing in the candidate’s discipline, and who can provide objective assessment. External reviewers should hold the terminal degree appropriate to the candidate’s discipline and the same or higher faculty rank than the candidate. The department chair, the department personnel committee, and the candidate are the best judges of determining the appropriateness of reviewers; department chairs are encouraged to consult with the Associate Dean for Faculty Success and Research in advance of the selection process if there are questions.
3. By June 1 of the application year, the department chair will collaborate with the personnel committee and the candidate to identify at least six, ideally eight, qualified potential reviewers. These will form an initial pool of external reviewers for the candidate.
4. The department chair will solicit reviewers from the pool until at least four reviewers have agreed to supply evaluations; typically, at least one of the selected reviewers should come from the candidate’s suggested list. A sample email is provided as Appendix A. Under no circumstances should the candidate solicit or contact external reviewers themselves.
5. The department chair will send a formal request to those reviewers who have agreed to supply evaluations. The formal request should clearly state what is being requested of the external reviewer and be accompanied by appropriate examples of the candidate’s work to be evaluated. Additionally, the department chair should notify reviewers that the University policy on the Freedom of Information Act stipulates that the candidate has access to all external evaluations of his/her qualifications. The chair should request the reviewer’s response and a copy of their vita, by a specific date to allow for the candidate’s portfolio to be completed by October 15 of the application year. A sample formal request is provided in Attachment B.
6. The department chair should send reminders to selected reviewers to ensure timely receipt of evaluations. It should be requested that reviewer letters be sent to the department chairs. Candidates should not have access to the letters until after the tenure/promotion process is complete.
7. If the reviews from selected reviewers are not received in a timely manner, that is before the application submission date, upon receipt the department chair will insert them into the candidate’s portfolio for reference.
Information Provided to External Reviewers
1. The guidelines provided to reviewers will be developed by the McCoy College of Business Administration Council (CBAC). At a minimum, the packet of information provided to all external reviewers should include:
A. The formal request for external evaluation of the candidate’s work
B. Candidate’s Curriculum Vita
C. Copies of selected samples of materials to be evaluated in electronic or digital format
D. McCoy College Mission and Vision statements
E. McCoy College’s guidelines for tenure and promotion (CBAPPS 5.05), or where relevant, the College’s promotion guidelines for faculty of practice (CBAPPS 5.09) or clinical faculty (CBAPPS 5.10).
CERTIFICATION STATEMENT
This CBAPPS has been approved by the reviewers listed below and represents the McCoy College of Business policy and procedure from the date of the document until superseded.
Last Update: 4/20/2023
Review Cycle: E5Y Review
Next Review Date: September 1, 2025