Applicant's Portfolio
 

Since the major responsibility for review rests with the department and college, thorough documentation should be submitted as evidence for all items claimed in the candidate's vita. However, before the portfolio is sent for university-level review, the candidate should select the best representation of his/her career highlights and submit three copies of the candidate's file in a three-inch (maximum) three-ring binder, including attachments. The dean's designee then prepares the candidate's promotion/tenure application portfolio with the materials listed below.

A. Face Sheet

This form should be prepared by the candidate's department chair or dean and should accompany each set of materials sent forward. If the information on the face sheet is not accurate, the Provost will return the file.

B. Internal Letters

The transmittal letters should include any department or college committee evaluation reports, letters from chair to dean and dean to Provost, and any appeals letters.

Copies of the initial letter of appointment to the university and the results of probationary reviews must be included for candidates for mandatory review. Non-mandatory review candidates should include documentation of their previous promotion.

Letters from department chairs and deans should address the strengths and weaknesses of the candidate. Negative letters should explain reasons and specify areas of weakness which justify the negative recommendation. Justification for each recommendation should be clearly and fully stated. Moreover, justification should address the merits of each individual case and should not be mere summaries or restatements of earlier assessments. The dean's letter of recommendation is especially important in evaluating each case. The initial letter of appointment to University of Houston faculty should also be included. University policy mandates that no extraneous letters or materials be included.

C. External Review Letters

The file must contain a minimum of three letters and no more than six letters from external "arm's length" referees who have achieved senior status and national recognition. The file must contain one sample copy of the request letters to referees, a one-paragraph description of the qualifications of each external "arm's length" reviewer with the relation to the candidate clearly stated, and a list of the nominators of outside reviewers.

Letters requested from thesis advisors, co-authors, or former students are not considered to be "arm's length" and will not be considered at the university level. The chairperson or dean should explain the method for selecting external references and provide the name, title, rank, position, and institutional affiliation of each referee. In requesting evaluations, the writer should ask the referees:

Does the candidate's work, taken as a whole, constitute a serious and significant contribution to the discipline?

What is your assessment of the candidate's contributions in the areas of research, scholarship, or other creative activity?

Is the candidate likely to emerge as a scholar whose work is currently known and respected by leaders in the field? (assistant professors)

At what types (e.g. research, comprehensive, or other) of institutions do you believe this faculty member would be a credible candidate for promotion/tenure?

What is the nature of your professional contact with and knowledge of the candidate?

Letters to referees should include a brief description of the candidate's department and outline the general direction and/or mission of the department. Letters should also specify a date for return of the evaluation.

D. Candidate's Statement

The candidate may include a statement of his/her métier, including academic career goals, accomplishments, and directions for future work. The candidate may describe how all facets of his/her career form an integrated, successful profile or the candidate may identify achievements in the areas of teaching, scholarship, and service separately.

E. Vita

The candidate should include a traditional vita with the categories below. Additionally, corroboration of the information in the vita should be included as follows:

1. Teaching and Student Learning

Documentation in this section includes evidence of a commitment to teaching and learning, including:

a. Student Evaluations of Teaching. Teaching evaluations of all classes are

required by university policy. Student evaluation data should include summaries of teaching evaluations with comparative departmental data. Teaching effectiveness ratings should include all classes taught at the Assistant or Associate level. Candidates for full professor may include only those classes taught since the last promotion or in the last 10 years. Results should be summarized in a single table which includes evaluations for all courses taught and information about the instrument's items and response scale. In programs where individual classes, small studios, or performances are the norm, special care should be taken to assure full and comprehensive teaching evaluations.

b. Peer Evaluation of Teaching. Though not required in all departments,

candidates may include formal or informal peer assessment of the candidate's teaching effectiveness.

c. Course and Program Development and/or Revision. Information about

course, curriculum, and program development can provide evidence of a commitment to student learning. The candidate's contribution to course development may be documented with sample course syllabi, teaching-grant proposal abstracts, courseware, cases and simulations, brief descriptions of student projects, examples of modifications for Instructional Television or Internet teaching, etc. Evidence of program development may include student recruitment, advising, and retention; directing graduate research; interdisciplinary program development, etc.

d. Other Evidence of Teaching, Student Learning, and the Scholarship of

Teaching. Candidates may submit evidence that they have facilitated students' success. Examples may include contributions to students who have won awards, letters from community members who have benefited from student projects or internships, and other evidence that the candidate contributed to student learning. This section may also contain evidence of the candidate's commitment to enhancing his/her teaching ability. Professional developments activities, scholarly approaches to evaluating teaching effectiveness, teaching excellence awards, and guest lecturing or team teaching or recruiting quality students should also be documented here.

2. Research, Scholarship and Other Creative Productivity

The research mission of the University of Houston is to create, discover, disseminate, and preserve knowledge and understanding by engaging in basic and applied research and scholarly and artistic activities that benefit students, scholars, and external constituencies. The following categories are suggested for candidates to document how they have carried out the university's research mission.

a. Scholarly/Creative Work: Works should be listed in the following order:

books, monographs, and articles (refereed journals should be marked with an asterisk), juried exhibits, shows, recitals, etc. Within each of these sections, the citations should be listed in reverse chronological order (starting with the most recent). Articles should be cited following the discipline style sheet and must include the exact title and the names of any co-authors in the order in which they appeared in print, and the page length. Citations of creative presentations must be listed as on public announcements. For exhibits, shows, recitals, etc., the information forwarded must include the dates and nature of the event(s). Copies of programs and reviews, if any, of each creative activity are also desirable. Works actually in press may be included here, but works accepted or under review are to be listed below.

b. Representative Works: Reprints of articles, published reviews, programs,

and other substantial scholarly/creative products should be sufficient to demonstrate the scope and quality of the candidate's scholarly activities. Include samples of printed material, pictures of artistic creations, reviews, and other replaceable items in all three copies of the candidate's portfolio. Do not send books, compact discs, or other valuable samples to the Provost's Office.

c. Published Reviews: Copies of relevant reviews.

d. Other Work Products: One copy of other substantial work products (e.g.

books, slides of artistic creations, etc.).

e. Technical Reports: The listing should specify the title, date, and length of

the document, and the sponsoring agency or individual.

f. Research Grants: The following information should be included for each

grant:

(1) Name of the principal investigator and all co-investigators;

(2) Title of the grant proposal;

(3) Funding agency;

(4) Amount of the grant; and

(5) Time period of the grant.

g. Major Work(s) in Progress: The information provided here should

comment on the nature of the work(s) and identify anticipated date of completion. The solicitation letter to external evaluators should specifically request an assessment of major work(s) in progress.

h. Other Indicators of Scholarly Creative Work: List scholarly papers,

book reviews, book chapters, editorial contributions, citations, research awards, and other indicators of contributions to the discipline/profession, cited in the format of the discipline's style sheet.

3. Service

The candidate should provide a complete listing with documentation of the categories below.

a. Service to the Department, College, And University: List committee

membership, administrative roles, and other contributions to the university.

b. Service to the Profession/Academic Discipline: Include activities that

strengthen the profession, including leadership in professional organizations.

c. Service to the Community Or Public: Document public involvement that

is related to the candidate's area of expertise, including speeches, expert advice to community organizations, donations of creative or scholarly efforts to public institutions, consultations with private organizations, etc.

d. Other Contributions: The candidate may provide evidence of other

significant contributions that advance the profession/discipline.