This page was created to make pertinent information available to CoS faculty for their career development. If you have any questions that are not addressed here, please contact Dr. Julia Kubanek, Associate Dean.
- Provost's guidelines for candidate materials - updated November 2015
- Example of GT formatted CV with explanations - updated November 2015
Contents of Package
1. Completed Cover Sheet (To be completed by School Chair)
2. Letter from School Chair/Head
3. Letter from School Committee*+
4. One paragraph biosketch – a summary of the faculty member's career at Tech. Example, "Dr. X has been at GT for x years. She has published x papers and has had $ in research proposals funded. Her research is in the area of xxx. She received her degree in x from x university in 19xx and has won the x prize.”
5. Curriculum Vitae (see the preferred Georgia Tech format )
6. Candidate's Statement of Teaching and Research Accomplishments and Service Contributions (no longer than five pages)*+
7. Reference Letters from External Reviewers (at least five)*
8. Biographical information on External Reviewers (Indicate which names provided by candidate)*
9. Sample of Letter sent to External Reviewers*
10. Summary of Teaching Evaluations for all courses taught at Georgia Tech
11. Other Evidence of Teaching Effectiveness
12. Statement from Candidate Affirming the Package is complete
*Required for Promotion and/or Tenure packages
+Required for Critical Reappointment packages
College of Sciences Promotion and Tenure Procedural Guidelines
A. Timing of Promotion and Tenure
1. Promotion to Associate Professor and awarding of tenure typically occur following at least six years of service at Georgia Tech. Thus, deliberations on these decisions usually start in the fall semester of the fifth year of service. Earlier promotions are unusual and are considered only when performance is outstanding and exceptional. Early cases must be thoroughly justified both in the letter from the School Chair and in the letter from the School P&T committee chair.
2. Promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor without tenure may be considered in exceptional cases. Strong justification by the Chair and the school P&T committee is necessary.
3. Promotion to full Professor is awarded to successful candidates after at least five years of service as an associate professor. The candidate and the Chair and/or the chair of the school P&T committee should discuss the timing of consideration for promotion to full professor. The candidate may request consideration for promotion even in the absence of agreement by the Chair and/or the chair of the school P&T committee. At the beginning of each fall semester, the office of the Dean of the CoS will provide school chairs with the names of those associate professors who are approaching the end of their fifth year as associate professor or who have been in this rank for longer than five years. In exceptional cases, promotion to full Professor may be considered earlier than indicated above, but such cases need to have strong justification by the Chair and the school P&T committee.
4. General exceptions to these timing guidelines based on the needs or norms of a particular field must be submitted to the College P&T committee at least two months in advance of their fall meeting (which typically takes place during Thanksgiving week).
B. Credit toward Tenure awarded at the time of hiring
The Faculty Handbook states:
A maximum of three years credit toward the minimum probationary period may be allowed for service in tenure track positions at other institutions or for full-time service at the rank of instructor or lecturer at the same institution [i.e., at Georgia Tech].
Nonetheless, the Institute has allowed the CoS to grant credit for previous equivalent service even when the candidate has not been in a tenure track position. This is particularly true for Mathematics, where postdoctoral positions often have a significant teaching component. The College has been relatively conservative in the total years of credit awarded.
1. The College requires a justification for the award of credit toward tenure, in writing, from the Chair. This justification should be part of the hiring package. In addition, in cases where credit is awarded, at least one of the outside supporting letters should provide significant commentary on the candidate’s teaching abilities.
2. The candidates need to be told what credit toward tenure means in a letter from the Dean to the candidate sent concurrent with the offer letter. The letter will contain the wording similar to the following:
Congratulations on your offer of a position at the Georgia Institute of Technology. While the terms and conditions of this offer are covered in the letter to you from the Chair, the purpose of this letter from the office of the Dean is to clarify what is meant by your award of credit toward tenure. The normal time for the tenure consideration is in the fall of the candidate’s sixth year, with successful cases leading to tenure awarded effective the following July 1. Exceptional cases may be considered in the fall of the candidate’s fifth year. Although the award of a specified number of years of credit implies that you may come up for tenure that number of years early, it does not necessarily mean that you should come up for tenure then. The timing of your consideration for tenure should be based on your progress at Georgia Tech in demonstrating that your independent research career is productive and adequately supported, that your teaching is excellent in a range of different types of courses, and that your service to the school, college and community is adequate. An indication of your progress in these areas will be provided by the critical review. This internal evaluation would normally take place during your third year. In any case, it must be completed at least one year before you are proposed for tenure.
3. The College, Chairs and CoS P&T committee members have agreed that any candidate for tenure be required to come up for a critical review at least one year before being proposed for tenure. Thus, even in the (fairly rare) event that a candidate has three years of credit toward tenure, he or she would be required to undergo a critical review before being considered for tenure. The reason for the proposed change is that it is in the best interest of the candidate to get feedback before the tenure decision. This rule is to be implemented for those being proposed for tenure in the fall of 2010 and beyond, so that those being proposed for tenure in the fall of 2009 will not be affected.
C. Additional Issues
1. A summary of student teaching evaluations for all courses taught at Georgia Tech must be included in all tenure packages. The School Chair and faculty committee will also include other measures of teaching effectiveness such as peer teaching evaluations from the Director of Teaching Effectiveness (DoTE) and mentoring of graduate and undergraduate students in research. Prior to submission of their package, candidates should request from their School Chair a copy of the DoTE report in order to consolidate outcomes from different sources (DoTE, student evaluations, and self-assessment) in their Candidate's Statement of Teaching and Research Accomplishments and Service Contributions.
2. All tenure and promotion packages must contain at least five letters from outside referees. The candidate may suggest some referees, but the faculty committee and School Chair will select the majority. The referees selected by the candidate will be indicated as such. A list of all people asked to write letters will be included in the package. All letters received concerning the candidate must be included in the package together with a short biographical description for each referee.
3. Generally, the referees should not have personal or professional relationships with the candidate (i.e., collaborators, mentors, or co-workers). If letters from such persons are included, they must be justified by the School Chair and identified as such. Candidates should provide the names of Ph.D. and postdoctoral mentors on their CV.
4. The candidate will be asked to sign a statement indicating that he or she will not ask to see external reference letters or the identity of the external referees. Referees are asked to sign a separate note indicating that they expect their identities and remarks to be confidential.
5. The candidate will be asked if there are potential outside referees who they would not want to review their work. Such requests are normally honored.
6. The candidate will be asked to prepare a statement indicating their accomplishments in research, teaching, and service (maximum of five pages). The candidate should be aware that this statement will be read both by experts and non-experts in their field.
7. If the candidate's research involves a significant collaborative effort, there must be some indication of relative contributions in the research statement. The Chair or faculty committees will evaluate this information.
8. The Chair or faculty committees will evaluate the impact of the journals in which the candidate has published.
9. After the package has been assembled, the candidate will review the contents of the package without seeing the actual review letters or the identity of the referees. The candidate will then sign a statement indicating that she or he has reviewed the package.
D. Common Problems concerning the Dossier
The following are issues that commonly cause problems.
1. The CV should be in Georgia Tech format ( The reason for this directive is that both the college and institute P&T committees often have to review a large number of cases. If information cannot be found quickly when questions arise, the candidate's case might be unnecessarily jeopardized. Having the candidate adhere to the standard format aids in quick retrieval of information.)
2. The external reviewers should be clearly identified as to whether they were chosen by the candidate, the committee, (or both).
3. At least half of the external letters should be from the list chosen by the committee.
4. External letters should not be solicited from previous mentors unless there is a good reason for doing so, and if so, that reason must be described in the letters from the chair and school P&T committee. It is always best in such cases to have at least five letters from other external reviewers.
5. The letters forwarded by the school P&T committee and the chair should refer to the external reviewers by letter (e.g., Reviewer A ...) rather than by name. The list of reviewers should then identify individuals as being Reviewer A, Reviewer B, etc. The reason for this is that the actual letters themselves (though not the reviewer list) may subsequently be requested by the candidate.
Dossiers that do not meet these requirements will be returned to the schools by the college for correction.
College of Sciences Normal Criteria for Promotion and Tenure
- This is first and foremost in the evaluation for tenure and promotion.
- Based on the evaluation of Impact and Discovery [(see below)].
- Full and effective participation in the teaching program is necessary (but not sufficient) for tenure and promotion.
- Documentation of teaching effectiveness should be accumulated not only throughout the probationary period but also during periods leading up to critical reviews and reviews considering promotion from associate to full professor.
- Service to the profession, Georgia Tech, and the community (local,state,national, or global)
- Service does not normally play a pivotal role in consideration for tenure, but sometimes does in promotion to Full Professor.
Impact and Discovery are evaluated by the following criteria:
- The number and quality of publications and the quality of the journals or other sources in which the publications appeared. For multiple author publications, the extent to which these represent accomplishments of the candidate must be made clear.
- Evaluations by the outside referees
- The Extent to which the publications define a coherent, important field of endeavor identified with the faculty member
- Grants awarded from national and international competitions in relation to levels commensurate with the norms of the field. (Such grants often serve as a validation of research accomplishment, creativity, and financial security.)
- Recognition of scientific accomplishments through honors, awards, editorships, appointments, patents and other intellectual property.
- Citations or similar direct indications of the influence of publications (used primarily for promotion from associate to full, given the time lags involved)
- Graduate and undergraduate research students mentored, and the impact of their research
- Invitations to speak at national and international meetings and symposia, etc. In evaluating the promotion from associate to full professor, international, not just national, recognition is important.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. How do the committees at levels beyond the department evaluate Impact and Discovery?
For each candidate, the CoS P&T committee member from their school and one other committee member are assigned to present the candidate’s case. The Dean presents the case and answers questions at the Provost's level. Each committee considers the whole file including the external letters.
2. Why are grants so important?
First, of course, is the fact that money is needed to run and maintain a laboratory, computer equipment and graduate students. Secondly, success in obtaining peer-reviewed grants from a scientific funding agencies (such as NIH, NSF, etc.), is a further indicator of your status in the scientific community.
3. What types of service are good to do?
- Service on Institute and School Committees
- Professional review panels (e.g., NIH review panels, National Lab review panels, Advisory Boards, etc.)
- National Committees (e.g., Scientific Society Committees)
- Organizing and/or chairing sessions at scientific meetings
- Reviewing journal articles
- Recruiting graduate students
NOTE: Large service roles at Tech are not expected of faculty until after tenure.
4. What do I do if I feel overloaded with service responsibilities?
First of all, it is important to know that turning down committee work at Tech for a substantive reason will not count against your tenure. Service is not pivotal for tenure but often plays a role in promotion to Full. Tech is the place that wants to support your efforts to establish your national & international reputation as a scholar. So, you may want to focus on the service activities that further that goal.
College of Sciences Decision Description
THIRD YEAR REVIEW DECISION DESCRIPTION
Four possible outcomes:
(if you have questions about the outcome of your own review feel free to contact Dean of Sciences or your school chair):
1. Reappointment: This decision means you are well on track for tenure. Good start! Keep going...
2. Reappointment with counseling: This decision means you are largely on track for tenure. However, there are some concerns that you need to address. You will go up for critical review again the following year.
3. Reappointment with warning: This decision means you are not on track for tenure. There are definite areas you need to work on. You will go up for critical review again the following year.
4. Non-Reappointment: This decision occurs when you are clearly not making adequate progress. You will be issued a terminal appointment.
TENURE REVIEW DECISION DESCRIPTION
1. Yes. You are now a tenured member of the Georgia Tech Faculty. Congratulations.
2. No. You have not met the expectations for tenure at Georgia Tech. The fall of your seventh academic year as academic faculty is your last opportunity to be reconsidered. If the final decision is no, your academic faculty appointment at Georgia Tech terminates at the end of the seventh academic year.