DEANS
DEPARTMENT AND PROGRAM CHAIRS
DEPARTMENT AND PROGRAM MANAGERS
DIVISIONAL ACADEMIC PERSONNEL COORDINATORS
RE: Updates Following the CP/EVC and CAP Chair Discussion of Academic Personnel Topics
Dear Colleagues:
We write to provide further information and/or clarification on five items that were discussed at the Annual CP/EVC and CAP Chair Presentation of Academic Personnel Topics on October 2, 2012. The following items apply to Senate faculty advancement reviews.
Expectations in book based disciplines
For promotion to tenure, if the decision for promotion hinges on the publication of a book, the expectation is that the review file will contain a copy of the completed book manuscript with documentation of acceptance from the publisher. The external letter writers must be provided the manuscript for review.
In cases where the book manuscript is complete, but it has not yet been accepted for publication, the review file must contain: 1) the completed draft manuscript; 2) letters from external reviewers who were provided a copy of the completed manuscript; and 3) an explanation with accompanying documentation of the current status of the manuscript (e.g., was submitted for publication but the publisher was not taking any new manuscripts at that time; out for initial editorial review – supported with a copy of communication(s) from the publisher). In these cases, the external letter writers must represent multiple areas in the discipline in order to provide varied perspectives on the manuscript.
The link to the workgroup report on book-based discipline guidelines for post-tenure is available on the CAP webpage: Best Practices for Personnel Reviews in Text-Based Disciplines (Humanities Division and Social Sciences Division).
Campus Special Salary Practice
Beginning in 2011-12, accelerations for faculty advancing to Professor, Step 6, or above were considered for the special additional off-scale salary component equivalent to a half-step. This change in practice was discussed with CAP prior to the receipt of 2011-12 accelerated files and consideration for off-scale salary was applied consistently. This consideration will continue as part of the campus special salary practice and department chairs and deans should include it in their recommendations when warranted.
Salary Recommendation Calculator
The salary recommendation calculator is designed to calculate a faculty member’s potential salary based on the campus special salary practice. The calculator is available as an Excel spreadsheet. The spreadsheet has been distributed to the Divisional Academic Personnel Coordinators who in turn will make it available to their departments.
CAP Top 10 List
The CAP Top 10 List for Personnel Files for Deans & Chairs is available on the CAP webpage and has been updated to reflect the revised policy of no external letters for midcareer appraisals.
Past Review Annotated Biobibliography
When forwarding the review file, please include both the entire current biobibliography and the annotated research section of the biobibliography from the last personnel advancement review. It is not necessary to submit the entire biobibliography—only submit a copy of the annotated research section from the last advancement action (e.g., appointment, reappointment, merit, promotion, or mandatory review).
In addition to the items above, information will be forthcoming regarding expectations for the first academic personnel advancement action following a retention-based salary increase.
Thank you for attending the annual CP/EVC and CAP Chair discussion of academic personnel topics. For those who were unable to attend, the PowerPoint presentation from the discussion is available on the APO website (apo.ucsc.edu) in the Resources for Department Chairs under the Trainings/Past Workshops section.
We wish you well on your 2012-13 academic personnel actions.
Sincerely,
