/Institutions/MGH-Institute-of-Health-Professions/json/2014-2015/Faculty-Handbook-local.json

/Institutions/MGH-Institute-of-Health-Professions/json/2014-2015/Faculty-Handbook.json

Faculty Handbook > Section II - Faculty Handbook > Guidelines for Faculty Rank and Promotion > Procedures for Promotion

Procedures for Promotion

The Rank, Promotion, and Reappointment Committee (the “Committee”) shall review all requests for promotion and make its determinations once a year in accordance with the timetable approved by the faculty and in accordance with the “Criteria for Promotion.”

I.  Application for Promotion

 A faculty member shall become a candidate for promotion (a “candidate”) via written request (“letter of application”) to the Committee by the date(s) specified in “Timetable and Process of Promotion Application” (Section IX below).

II.  Documentation

The candidate must submit to the Committee a letter of application for promotion specifying the rank and track being sought and including the candidate’s rationale for promotion. Additional supporting documentation should include a letter of reference from the candidate’s dean or director and department chair addressing the candidate’s merit in accord with the “Criteria and Interpretive Statements for Rank”. In addition, applications for Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Professor shall include at least one letter of reference from an academic peer of the desired rank or higher.

Candidates for Associate Professor and Professor must also include no more than four published scholarly manuscripts/products for review and evaluation.

The Committee chair will solicit letters from external reviewers based on names provided by the candidate’s dean, director, and/or department chair. One letter will be solicited for candidates for the Associate Professor level and two letters for the level of Professor.

The Committee reserves the right to request additional documentation and to waive any requested documentation if needed. All materials submitted to the Committee will be made available to the candidate upon request.

 III. Failure to Meet Deadline

In the event the Committee has not received all necessary documentation by the deadline specified in “Timetable and Process of Promotion Application,” the Committee shall not act on the candidate’s letter of application and shall consider the request to have been withdrawn.

IV. Committee Action

The Committee shall review all documentation and, by majority vote, make a recommendation in writing regarding promotion or denial of promotion to the Provost. This recommendation shall be accompanied by whatever documentation and/or explanation the Committee members deem appropriate.

V. Institutional Review

The Provost, upon review of the Committee’s recommendation and other available documents and explanations, shall decide whether or not to recommend promotion to the Board of Trustees, and shall notify the candidate of this recommendation in writing prior to the June meeting of the Trustees each year. If a candidate is not recommended for promotion, the Provost shall give the candidate the reasons for the recommendation of non-promotion.

 VI. Denial of Promotion

In the event a candidate is denied promotion, the candidate may not request consideration for promotion to the same rank during the following academic year unless recommended by the department chair, dean, or a faculty member from the candidate’s program who holds rank at least equal to the level at which promotion is being sought.

VII. Appeal

In the event a Candidate believes that denial of promotion is without merit, the candidate has the right to request review in accordance with the procedures for problem resolution as set forth in Section V of this Handbook.

VIII. Final Authority

Notwithstanding the appeals process, the Board of Trustees is the final authority on promotion in rank.

IX.  Timetable and Process of Promotion Application

The following timetable shall be followed each academic year. If any dates fall on a holiday or weekend, the due date will be the first working day following the deadline.

1. The candidate shall submit a written request for promotion, supporting documentation, and copies of the required number of published manuscripts per the Faculty Handbook and/or guidelines to his/her dean or director for review. The dean or director will then forward the package to the Rank, Promotion, and Reappointment Committee with a letter indicating approval/disapproval of the application no later than February 1. This letter will detail the rationale for the dean or director’s decision and will be directed to the chair of the Rank, Promotion, and Reappointment Committee.
2. The Committee will acknowledge receipt of all materials in writing to the candidate by February 15.
3. For candidates for the rank of Associate Professor or Professor, the candidate’s dean, director, and/or chair will submit names of three expert reviewers outside the Institute, who are generally recognized in the candidate’s field, to the Committee no later than February 15.
4. For promotions to the rank of Associate Professor and Professor, the Committee will forward the specified number of scholarly manuscripts/products with a formal letter asking the external reviewer(s) for an evaluation of the candidate’s work by March 1.
5. Reviewer(s) are expected to return their review and recommendation to the Committee by April 15.
6. The Committee shall make written recommendations for promotion to the Provost no later than May 15.
7. The Provost shall make written recommendations for promotion. Those recommendations are forwarded to the President for consideration at the Board’s June meeting.
8. Applicants will receive written notification from the Provost of the Board of Trustees’ decision no later than July 1, at which time approved promotions shall take effect.

X. Committee on Faculty Rank and Promotion

External Review Procedure

For candidates applying for Professor or Associate Professor, peer reviewers will evaluate the quality of the candidate’s scholarly work.

1. For promotion to Professor:
   1. The candidate’s dean, director, or department chair provides the Committee the names of three external reviewers in the candidate’s field. It is the dean, director, or department chair’s responsibility to solicit permission from external reviewers prior to submitting their names to the Committee.
   2. The candidate submits the documentation specified in section II to the Committee.
   3. The Committee asks two external reviewers to review and critically analyze the candidate’s scholarly manuscripts/products based on the following criteria:
      1. The originality and scholarly quality of the endeavor,
      2. The contribution the work makes to the candidate’s profession, and
      1. The clinical relevance to the candidate’s field.
2. For promotion to Associate Professor:
   1. Same as Professor above, except
   2. The Committee selects one external reviewer to critically analyze the manuscripts/products based on the aforementioned criteria
3. For either Associate Professor or Professor-level candidates in either track, external reviewer(s) will receive a copy of the:
   1. Committee Chair’s cover letter,
   2. Candidate’s letter of application to the Committee,
   3. Candidate’s curriculum vitae and scholarly manuscripts/products, and
   4. “Criteria and Interpretive Statements for Rank” from the Faculty Handbook.
4. The reviewer(s) will be informed that this evaluation may not be confidential and will be available to the candidate upon request.

Adopted by the Faculty, 1/82

Revised 2/84, 11/87, 6/88, 4/23/10, 11/8/2010, 6/2014