Department of Computer Science
at the University of Vermont
Reappointment and Promotion
Guidelines for Lecturers and Senior Lecturers
April 28, 2004.
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
- 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.
- 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):
- The ad-hoc committee will be formed each academic
year for all RPT candidates.
- The ad-hoc committee will consist of at least two members.
- 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).
The candidate will be allowed to cross out students from
each list with reasons.
- 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.
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.
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
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.
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
- attempts to establish student contact,
- frequency of meetings and
other interactions with advisees,
- inservice training for advising, and
- efforts to support the Department in
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
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
The Chair is not an eligible voter.
- For a Lecturer reappointment with a greensheet review, Senior
Lecturers, tenure-track/tenured faculty members, and those Lecturers
who have successfully passed a reappointment review in the past and
are not applying for a reappointment in the current year, are eligible
- For a Senior Lecturer application, Senior Lecturers and
tenure-track/tenured faculty members are eligible voters.
- For a Senior Lecturer reappointment with a greensheet review,
tenure-track/tenured faculty members, and those Senior Lecturers who
have successfully passed a reappointment review in the past and are
not applying for a reappointment in the current year, are eligible
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.
- A minimum of 6 years (within an eight year period) of service, as
specified in the Union Contract
Subject to a regular RPT review without the research expectations
- A good citizenship in terms of service activities within the
- Evidence of sustained quality teaching