Department of Computer Science
at the University of Vermont
Reappointment and Promotion Guidelines for Lecturers and Senior Lecturers


Last modified: April 28, 2004.

1. Introduction

In accordance with the Agreement Between the University of Vermont and United Academics (AAUP/AFT) (referred to as the Union Contract hereafter), this document provides reappointment and promotion guidelines for Lecturers and Senior Lecturers in the Department of Computer Science. The Department applies the quality criteria for teaching, advising and service in the Evaluation of Faculty and Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure Criteria and Procedures in the Union Contract (Article 15), and has the following additional specifications.

2. Student Selection for Teaching and Advising Evaluations

  1. The candidate will nominate 4-6 students for teaching evaluations and 2-4 students for advising evaluations (with possible overlaps), and 6-8 and 4-6 respectively for Senior Lecturer promotions.

  2. An ad-hoc committee will provide up to 6 students for teaching and up to 4 students for advising (and up to 8 and 6 respectively for Senior Lecturer promotions):

    1. The ad-hoc committee will be formed each academic year for all RPT candidates.
    2. The ad-hoc committee will consist of at least two members.
    3. The Department Office will provide (i) the candidate's student lists with grades since the candidate's last greensheet review, (ii) the candidate's current advisee list, and (iii) the lists from the candidate (step 1 above).
    4. The candidate will be allowed to cross out students from each list with reasons.

  3. The Chair will contact all students from each of the lists in (1) and (2), and will provide a memo in the candidate's greensheets detailing the selection process. All students will be contacted by both e-mail and registered mail.

    In the event that the same student is selected to evaluate both teaching and advising, s/he may write a single letter that addresses both teaching and advising.

  4. If the response yield is inadequate, the candidate and the Chair may consult and make additional solicitations. Solicitations and deadlines for responses should be made early in the review process to achieve sufficient yield.

In extraordinary cases, exceptions to these guidelines may be worked out by the Chair with the candidate, and the Chair will document the reason for all adjustments.

3. Peer Teaching Evaluations

For each greensheet review, the Chair will invite 2-3 faculty members to provide peer teaching evaluations. The candidate may confidentially identify faculty members who should not be invited for this purpose.  Reasons must be provided beyond two exclusions.

All peer teaching evaluations will be done by qualified faculty. The Chair, in consultation with the candidate, may invite appropriate faculty members from other departments to provide peer teaching evaluations.

The peer evaluators are advised to look over the candidate's course materials as well as attend at least one of the candidate's lectures.

4. Advising

Candidates preparing greensheets are advised to have a separate section on advising.  In addition to student numbers, it is useful to include other information such as

  1. attempts to establish student contact,
  2. frequency of meetings and other interactions with advisees,
  3. inservice training for advising, and
  4. efforts to support the Department in advising.

5. Faculty Input and Eligible Voters for RPT Reviews

5.1. Faculty Input and Schedule for RPT Reviews

The Chair should set an appropriate schedule for each greensheet review, so that the complete greensheets will be ready for faculty review at least 2 weeks before the submission deadline to the Dean's Office.

Once the greensheets are ready for faculty review, all faculty members, tenured and untenured (including tenure-track/tenured faculty, research faculty, Lecturers, and Senior Lecturers) will be invited to review the greensheets and share their advice concerning the candidate with the Chair within a week. The feedback will be documented in the Chair's Evaluation.

At the beginning of the second week after the greensheets are complete, the Chair will convene (i) a meeting of all faculty members to discuss the greensheets, and (ii) a closed session for all eligible voters (as defined in Section 5.2) to vote on whether or not to recommend the candidate's application. This vote will be recorded in the Chair's Evaluation.

After the above faculty feedback and eligible voters' vote, the Chair will decide whether or not to recommend the candidate's application, and will inform the candidate with a detailed Chair's Evaluation.

5.2. Eligible Voters for Lecturer/Senior Lecturer Greensheet Reviews

The Chair is not an eligible voter.

6. Guidelines for Promotion to Senior Lecturer

The following guidelines for promotion to Senior Lecturer were formally approved by Dean Robert Jenkins on May 29, 2003.

An application for Senior Lecturer in Computer Science will be evaluated on the following criteria.