The screening process conducted by the search committee must accomplish two ends: identify the most qualified applicants, and ensure fair treatment of all applicants. The search committee will need to balance the need to reduce the number of contenders against the need to search for talent. They also need to keep in mind the requirements of appointment to the particular academic title under recruitment, so that those individuals selected from the search are likely to meet the criteria for appointment. The search committee should thoroughly discuss the manner in which each member will review applications.
Inappropriate criteria should not be used in any way to determine an applicants qualifications for advancement through the recruitment process. Criteria such as references to age, sex, ethnicity, or marital status, cannot be part of the screening process. These areas are defined by various state and federal laws. Evidence of the use of inappropriate criteria could delay or invalidate the entire recruitment, or lead to charges of unfair or discriminatory employment practices. Areas that are acceptable and unacceptable are discussed under permissible questions in CAPM 100.500 - Appendix I , Interviewing Candidates and Selecting a Final Candidate .
Applicant data is solicited for all senate faculty and full-time temporary recruitments. The Academic Personnel Office (APO) provides mechanisms to solicit information from applicants. Applicants for employment are asked to submit applicant data indicating their gender and ethnicity. This information is confidential and submitted directly to APO . It is essential that the hiring unit ensure that applicant data requests are sent to every applicant as soon as possible, since the data reported by this method is needed to evaluate the screening process. Applicants' completion of the data card is voluntary.
Methods of evaluating applications
Depending on the search, the methods of evaluating applications will vary, but need to be clear, reportable, and consistently applied. APO provides a campus-wide database to successfully computerize the recordkeeping and applicant tracking process. The search committee may wish to develop one or several means of evaluating files, including determining the screening comments and rating methods . APO is available to assist units in developing methods tailored to their particular recruitment. Whatever method is used, the final record must be specific to the individual and to the requirements as defined in the position description.
Eliminating applicants on the basis of the position description
The initial elimination of applicants on the basis of the position description may be delegated to one member of the search committee or handled by the chair. This initial screening eliminates any applicants who do not meet the minimum qualifications listed in the advertised position description . A position description that does not contain specific requirements makes it difficult to justify eliminating applicants at this stage.
For example , "lack of degree" cannot be a basis for eliminating applicants if no educational requirements were listed under minimum qualifications. Applicants cannot be eliminated for being in the "wrong field" if no sub discipline or teaching area was listed as a requirement.
Documenting the screening process (Part B of the Academic Recruitment Record)
Documenting the screening process is the responsibility of the search committee. The record must accurately reflect the committee's decisions and provide sufficient information for subsequent reviewers to evaluate the process.
The recruitment record submitted by the Search Committee must document three things:
1. Every applicant for the position must be listed and identified as an applicant . If any applicants do not meet the minimum qualifications for the position, specific, job-related reasons must be given.
Examples: No teaching experience (if that was listed as a requirement).
No Ph.D. (if completion of the degree was specified).
Wrong field, ______________ (if competence in a particular area was specified).
Incomplete file (if specific information required of applicants was not received).
2. Those applicants who do meet the minimum qualifications, shall be indentified as candidates . If any candidates are eliminated from further consideration, specific reasons must be given.
Examples: Meets minimum requirements, but lacks depth of preparation as evidenced by recommendations submitted.
Wrong emphasis for advertised program needs; emphasis is in ______________.
Lack of sufficient research, as evidenced by vita and samples submitted.
Relatively little teaching experience compared to those identified as interviewees or alternate interviewees.
Research program not clearly defined, as evidenced by letter of application.
Meets minimum requirements, but does not have the strengths in preferred areas of research that other interviewees or alternate interviewees do.
3. Those candidates who meet the minimum qualifications and are being seriously considered for the position shall be identified as interviewees or alternate interviewees . These include those the search committee would like to bring to campus for interview, or if needed, alternate interviewees should others drop out or be eliminated from the process. A job-related reason for selecting these individuals must be given. In addition, rank any alternate interviewees in order of desired interview and provide brief reasons for why alternate interviewees are not selected for interview at this time.
Examples: Strong research in preferred areas and teaching experience. Will interview.
Innovative research program and strong letters of support.
Strength in research, but thin teaching record. Will be alternate #1 after the interviewee list has been exhausted.
Competence in the field and evidence of effective teaching.
For senate faculty positions, the date of the Ph.D. must be listed, and copies of the vitas of interviewees and alternate interviewees must accompany the screening record.
Review of the screening process
The review of the screening process differs depending on the level of the position under recruitment.
For senate faculty positions , the screening record is compiled and submitted immediately to APO . Applicant statistics (from returned applicant data requests) are added for all applicants, for those identified as candidates, and for those identified as interviewees or alternate interviewees. The screening record is then forwarded to the dean for review. The dean may require additional information from the search committee concerning the selection or elimination of individuals. When the screening record is approved, a copy of the signed approval sheet is sent to the search committee, indicating that the interviewing and selection of final candidates may proceed. The original screening record is returned to the APO.
Occasionally a search committee may wish to meet with candidates before approval of the screening process, in order to take advantage of a professional conference or an otherwise scheduled visit by a promising applicant. Such meetings will not replace formal campus interviews, unless prior approval is received from the assistant vice chancellor for Academic Personnel.
For full-time or part-time temporary positions , the screening record should also be completed as soon as possible in the recruitment. Documentation is held and submitted to APO at the end of the recruitment, as part of a complete recruitment record. The entire record is then reviewed for compliance by the dean.
*** DISCLAIMER : This document is intended to supplement the Academic Recruitment policy. Please refer to CAPM 100.500 - Academic Recruitment, for complete discussion of policies and procedures regarding academic recruitments