College of Engineering
Research Faculty Casebook Template
2011-2012
Name of Candidate
Name of Department
For consideration of promotion
from
[Example 1: Assistant Research Scientist]
to
[Associate Research Scientist]
FORMAT OF RESEARCH SCIENTIST PROMOTION CASEBOOKS
Length: Any casebook exceeding 20 pages (Sections E through H, not including CV, cover letters, internal or external letters of evaluation, appendix) will be returned.
Margins: 1” top, bottom, left, right
Font: Times New Roman or Times, size 11
Sections: Separate each major section (A, B, C, D…) with a page break.
Footer: Insert candidate name and the academic year of review in footer.
Note: Do not insert scanned documents into the casebook.
A. Cover letter prepared by the Dean 3
B. Chair/Department Letters 3
C. Curriculum Vitae 4
a. Candidate Information 4
b. Teaching 4
c. Research 5
d. Service 6
e. Summary of contributions to research, teaching and service 7
D. Documentation of Teaching 8
D.1 Committee’s Evaluation of Teaching (if applicable) 8
D.2 Courses Taught at UM and Evaluations 8
E. Documentation of Research 9
E.1. Committee’s Evaluation of Research and Impact 9
E.2 Ranking of Journals 9
E.2.1. Candidate’s own ranking of journals/conferences 9
E.2.2. Committee’s ranking of journals/conferences 9
F. Documentation of Service 10
F.1. Committee’s Evaluation of Service 10
G. Brief Description of Credentials of External Reviewers and Relationship to Candidate 11
H. Sample Letter Sent to External Reviewers 12
I. Evaluation Letters by all External Reviewers 13
J. Evaluation Letters by all Internal Reviewers 14
Appendix – Records of Communications 15
22
A. Cover letter prepared by the Dean
· Provide title page only – the ADAA office will prepare this section.
B. Chair/Department Letters
1. Letter prepared by Department Chair.
Document the department decision-making process (i.e., vote by faculty at rank or higher, or department executive committee), the vote tally, and the chair’s own recommendation. Please include signed letter with original casebook.
2. Letter from the Review Committee to the Department Chair presenting their conclusions and recommendation. (Include signed letter with original casebook. All members of the committee must sign this letter.)
The letter must include the vote tally of the committee’s recommendation. According to the Provost guidelines on promotion and tenure, “The assessment should be written from an evaluative, not an advocacy, perspective and should present a balanced summary of the strengths and weaknesses of the case. Be sure to discuss any negative reports or reviews included in the casebook.”
3. Letter prepared by joint/additional Department Chair.
Required only if candidate has an appointment (0% or higher) in another school or department.
4. Optional letters from Review Committee members, if they disagree with the Committee’s recommendation or wish to modify the letter. Absence of these letters will imply agreement with the Committee’s letter.
5. Letter from the Review Committee to the candidate.
(1 page maximum)
Written summary to the candidate including the salient aspects of the case, positive and negative, and a request for formal input from the candidate on the summary. A recommendation of the Review Committee should not be included. The original, signed assessment letter is submitted to the candidate simultaneously with submission of the casebook to the Department Chair. Please see the sample letter in Section H: Example letter from Review Committee to Candidate of the Guidelines. Please do not use this example as a template, but as an example of the level and tone of such letters.
C. Curriculum Vitae
Candidate must use template provided by ADAA office. The template is available for download at:
http://www.engin.umich.edu/admin/adaa/admins/ptr/index.html, or fill in contents below.
a. Candidate Information
a.1. Personal
a.1.1 Name
a.1.2 Education
(Degrees, dates, schools, title of doctoral thesis, and name of thesis advisor(s))
a.1.3 Positions at UM (titles and dates)
a.1.4 Positions at other institutions or organizations (titles and dates)
a.2 Honors and Awards
b. Teaching
Please note: If the candidate has not been involved in teaching, please mark this section as N/A.
b.1 New courses introduced at U of M
· Course number /title
· Course description and objective (1 paragraph per course)
b.2 Courses taught at U of M
Course # / Course title / Teaching Role1 / TermEx.CEE402 / Prof Issues & Design / Co-instructor / Winter 04
b.3 Ph.D. committees chaired/co-chaired
· Name of student, year or anticipated year of graduation, thesis title, chair or co-chair, student current position. Suggested format:
1. Theodor Freiheit, October 2002, “Reliability and Productivity of Reconfigurable Manufacturing Systems”. Chair. (Current position: Associate Professor, University of Calgary)
b.4 M.S. students advised/co-advised
· Name of student, year or anticipated year of graduation, thesis title, student current position, chair or co-chair. Use same format as b.3.
b.5 Undergraduate major projects directed
· Include project title, number of students involved and year.
b.6 Short courses and workshops taught
· Indicate course, location or institution, date, enrollment, nature of participation.
b.7 Outreach directly related to teaching
b.8 Other
(e.g., Scholarly work in education.)
c. Research
c.1 Research programs underway
Include a brief description of each research area and information regarding involvement of graduate and undergraduate students, research staff, and other faculty, both inside and outside the UM. Include outreach if that is part of research projects.
c.2 Past grants and contracts
Include sponsor, project title, dates, amount, names of principal investigators and/or co-principal investigators, candidate’s share and number of GSRAs supported by grant or contract. Grants and contracts must be sequentially numbered by start date, in reverse chronological order (newest item first). Suggested format:
1. National Science Foundation, “Modeling Product Variety Induced Manufacturing Complexity for Assembly System Design”, $349,767. Sept. 2008 – August 2011. PI: Hu. Co-PI: Judy Jin of IOE. Candidate’s share: $195,507. Support 1 GSRA.
c.3 Current grants and contracts
Include sponsor, project title, dates, amount, names of principal investigators and/or co-principal investigators, candidate’s share and number of GSRAs supported by grant or contract. Follow c.2 for format of listing
* All grants and contracts are subjected for verification by casebook committee/department.
c.4 New research directions (one page maximum)
Describe any new research directions, include pending grants. Follow c.2 for format of listing.
c.5 Publications and scholarly presentations
NOTES:
Publications in each category below must be sequentially numbered in reverse chronological order (newest items first). CVs without numbered publications will not be accepted for review.
Publication format may vary by discipline but should be consistent in casebook.
· Underline the names of current graduate student(s) to whom you’ve provided significant
guidance listed among the authors;
· Double underline the names of former graduate student(s) to whom you’ve provided significant guidance listed among the authors;
· Undergraduate students should be single underlined and noted by an asterisk * after their name.
The preferred format in the Provost’s office is for journal names to be spelled out (i.e. not abbreviated). If this is not possible, then the abbreviations must be included, along with the full journal names, in the qualitative ranking list of journals in the casebook template.
c 5.1 Full articles in refereed publications
(Full articles in refereed journals, transactions, or archives that have appeared or have been accepted only)
c 5.2. Shorter communications, letters or notes or briefs in refereed publications
c 5.3 Refereed conference or symposium proceedings
c 5.4 Refereed conference summaries or abstracts
c 5.5 Other submitted publications
c 5.6 Abstracts in non-refereed conference proceedings
c 5.7 Books
c 5.8 Chapters in books
c 5.9 Book reviews
c 5.10 Government, university, or industrial reports (non-refereed)
c 5.11 Publications in popular press/magazines
c 5.12 Invited presentations
(Invited keynote presentations at conference or symposium, or seminar series at peer institutions)
c.6 Technology Transfer and Entrepreneurship
c 6.1 US and international patents awarded (title, number, date issued)
c 6.2 Patents submitted (title, date submitted)
c.6.3 Licensing, startups and entrepreneurial activities
c 6.4 Other major technology transfer activities
(provide whatever information you find appropriate)
c 6.5 Industry interactions
c.7 Outreach Directly Related to Research
c.8 Other
d. Service
d.1 Major committee assignments in the Department, College, and/or University
(Name of committee, dates, member or chair status)
d.2 Administrative duties at U of M
d.3 Service to government or professional organizations, and service on review board/study panels
(Name of committee, chair or member, editorships etc.; dates)
d.4 Consulting arrangements
(and annual time spent consulting with industry and government agencies)
d.5 Contribution to diversity and climate
d.6 Outreach that is not part of research or teaching
d.7 Mentoring activities involving junior faculty or post-doctoral scholars
d.8 Other
e. Summary of contributions to research, teaching and service
Recommend one (1) page each on teaching, research and service, for a total of 3 pages. May use 2 pages to emphasize contributions in one particular area only, e.g., teaching. Total length cannot exceed 4 pages.
Research summary may also include contributions to tech transfer and entrepreneurship if applicable.
Service summary may include contributions to diversity and climate.
D. Documentation of Teaching
Please note: If the candidate has not been involved in teaching, please mark this section as N/A.
D.1 Committee’s Evaluation of Teaching (if applicable)
(Two page maximum)
Overall assessment of candidate’s teaching contributions including: classroom instruction; supervision of graduate student instructors in undergraduate courses; conduct and supervision of laboratory instruction; mentoring of undergraduate and graduate students in research; advising students in the major; supervision of field work; and supervision of clinical and practicum experiences. REMINDER: For faculty with interdisciplinary appointments, please comment on his/her contributions to interdisciplinary activities with regards to teaching.
D.2 Courses Taught at UM and Evaluations
Please use the table provided to insert course information adding rows as needed. You may type over the example shown in italics. Provide mid-year CRLT course evaluation results, if instituted by department.
(This list should be assembled by the committee/department and verified by the candidate)
Course # / Course title / Teaching Role1 / Term / Enrollment/ Responses / Q1 / Q2Ex.CEE402 / Prof Issues & Design / Co-instructor / Winter 04 / 50/43 / 3.4 / 3.8
1Co-instructor, recitation/discussion leader, sole instructor
Please send an appendix with Fall 2011 course evaluations to the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs as soon as available in 2012.
E. Documentation of Research
E.1. Committee’s Evaluation of Research and Impact
(Two page maximum)
· Overall assessment of candidate’s contributions to research. Provide a qualitative assessment of the intellectual contributions made by the candidate in these projects. REMINDER: For faculty with interdisciplinary appointments, please comment on his/her contributions to interdisciplinary activities with regards to research.
· Contributions to technology transfer and entrepreneurship, if applicable.
· Assess the national and international visibility of the candidate and his/her impact on his/her field. Indicate criteria for assessment (invited talks, conference papers or journal articles, citations, etc.). Your assessment should also include comments on the impact of the candidate’s work.
E.2 Ranking of Journals
E.2.1. Candidate’s own ranking of journals/conferences
E.2.2. Committee’s ranking of journals/conferences
· Committee’s qualitative ranking of the journals, conferences, and proceedings in the candidate’s list of publications, and implications of impact factors of journals if any.
· Comment on conventions of order of authors in the candidate’s discipline (e.g., lead author last).
· If citations and H-index are used, please verify with the candidate.
F. Documentation of Service
F.1. Committee’s Evaluation of Service
(One page maximum)
Overall assessment of candidate’s contributions to service including diversity and climate activities
G. Brief Description of Credentials of External Reviewers and Relationship to Candidate
External reviewers (listed alphabetically by last name) who provided review letters; designate each reviewer as either “arm’s length” or “not arm’s length” and note whether the reviewer was suggested by the candidate or by the department. Please explain the choice of this reviewer as well. Please use Attachment G as an example of format (http://provost.umich.edu/faculty/promotion_guidelines/Attachment%20G.pdf)
Arm’s length letters can be from persons who have been co-authors or major research collaborators with the candidate only when the shared work occurred over 10 years prior to the promotion.We do not consider letters from persons who have served as a candidate’s thesis adviser/mentor or taught the candidate to be “arm’s length.” CoE practice has been that half of the external reviewers are selected from the candidate’s list and the other half from the committee/department list. The university guidelines now requires that at least one letter must be from a reviewer that wassuggested by the department with no input from the candidate. All reviewers must be at or above the proposed rank of the candidate.
Note: If a non-academic external reviewer is identified as being “arm’s length”, provide justification that the title held by the reviewer equates to or is at a level above the academic rank to which the candidate is being considered for promotion.
· name and title(s)
· institution or corporation
· brief description of his/her credentials, including well understood measures of stature such as: fellows of societies, members of the NAE, editorships, endowed chairs and leadership in professional society offices
· his/her relationship to the candidate (e.g. classmate, personal friend, graduate instructor, dissertation committee member, co-author, or co-investigator). Dissertation advisors, major collaborators, if included, are not considered part of the minimum count for external letters
· A brief explanation of the choice of the reviewer
H. Sample Letter Sent to External Reviewers
Include a sample letter sent to all the external reviewers. The letter of request must be the same for
all external reviewers and include the required text shown in the CoE Guidelines Section G:
Sample Letter for External Recommendations.
I. Evaluation Letters by all External Reviewers
Include letters from evaluators outside the U of M (minimum of five (5) “arm’s length” letters). While letters from persons who have served as the candidate’s thesis adviser or major collaborator can be especially helpful (because they can be presumed to have a good sense of both the person and the work), it is also true that their own reputations are involved in the work being evaluated. If such letters are included, they must be in addition to the minimum requirement of five.