Please scroll down or click on the links below to read about this process.
a. Description
b. Search Flowchart
c. Steps
d. Dossier Checklist
(2) Reappointment of Professors in Residence
(1) Appointment to Professor in Residence
a. Description
Professor in residence appointments are reserved for senior scholars who, ordinarily, have held senior, tenured professorial appointments at another academic institution and (1) fulfill a well-defined but potentially time-limited programmatic or administrative need; (2) have the capacity to make significant contributions to the FAS throughout the term of their appointments; and (3) have had a considerable impact on their field, including demonstrated excellence in teaching and research. Candidates should ordinarily have a doctorate (with the exception, as appropriate, of appointments in the arts). Appointments to this rank are made for a term of up to five years with approval from the Dean and the Provost. These appointments are renewable for one additional five-year term contingent upon review and approval of the Dean and the Provost. Professors in residence have voting rights in the Faculty of Arts and Sciences and voting rights as senior faculty in the department, except on decisions relating to appointments to the tenured rank.
b. Search Flowchart: Professor in Residence
c. Steps: Appointment to Professor in Residence
Note: The appointment process for professors in residence closely resembles the appointment process for external appointments to tenure.
|
Step |
Explanation |
1 |
The department chair writes to the divisional dean requesting authorization for a professor in residence search |
The search plan should address:
In consultation with the Edgerley Family Dean of the FAS, the divisional dean reviews individual requests in light of divisional priorities and resources, including space. If the deans decide to pursue the appointment, they will seek approval to proceed from the Provost. |
2 |
After authorization from the Provost and divisional dean, the department advertises the position and makes inquiries at other institutions |
|
3 |
The department submits a short list of candidates for approval by the divisional dean |
The short list consists of candidates the department has determined are the most qualified for the job in terms of credentials, accomplishments, standing in the field, teaching experience, and field of expertise. To build the strongest pool for the short list, the committee should discuss in early and ongoing conversations how to attract diverse applicants, including women and minorities. The department sends the following to the divisional dean and the assistant dean for the division:
|
4 |
If approval is granted, the department invites short-list candidates to campus for interviews |
Candidates meet with members of the department. The visits may include formal seminars, lectures, or presentations of working papers, as well as informal meetings with faculty, graduate students, and others. The assistant dean for the division should be given a list of dates of any seminars, lectures, or presentations. |
5a |
The department requests authorization from the divisional dean to solicit external evaluation letters. With the request, the department should submit a draft of the blind letter, the recipient list (see Sample Table), and, if the department chooses to send an initial inquiry (see Step 5b) before the blind letter, a draft of the initial inquiry letter |
The blind letter (see the Sample Letters section of this handbook) should include:
The comparison list:
The recipient list (see the Sample Table in this handbook):
|
5b |
(Optional step, for departments choosing to send an initial inquiry) Once the divisional dean has approved the blind letter, recipient list, and initial inquiry letter, the department chair sends the initial inquiry to scholars on the recipient list |
The initial inquiry email (see the Sample Letter section of this handbook) asks recipients if they would be willing to write a letter, requesting their answer by a specific date.
|
6 |
The chair sends the blind letter to all scholars who have replied affirmatively to the initial inquiry email (see Step 5b). If the chair has chosen not to send any initial inquiries, the blind letter is sent directly to the scholars on the recipient list |
|
7 |
After discussing the external letters, the search committee selects a final candidate |
Note: In selecting the final candidate, if the research interests of the appointment overlap with a center, institute, or initiative, the department should take into account the views of that unit. |
8 |
The search committee drafts a case statement; the tenured members of the department review all materials, discuss the case, and vote |
|
9 |
After a favorable vote, the chair asks each tenured member of the department, including those on the search committee, to write a confidential letter to the Edgerley Family Dean of the FAS |
These letters express the faculty members’ views on the appointment and will be included in the candidate’s dossier to be reviewed by the Committee on Appointments and Promotions (CAP) and the Provost. A dossier is not submitted to CAP for initial review until a substantial number of letters from the tenured members of the department are received. (For inclusion in the dossier, letters should be sent electronically to the ad hoc coordinator in the Office for Faculty Affairs, ryoung@fas.harvard.edu.) |
10 |
The case statement is finalized by the department chair, for review by the divisional/SEAS Dean |
The finalized case statement, prepared and signed by the department chair and the chair of the search committee, for review by the divisional/SEAS Dean (see Step 11), should include the following sections:
Note: The finalized case statement should be made available to the faculty in the department involved in the review. |
11 |
The candidate’s dossier is prepared by the department and sent to the assistant dean for the division |
Note: The department should secure from applicants at the short-list stage (or from the finalist, if the department’s process does not include a short-list stage) a draft course title, course description, and syllabus for the course(s) that the candidate(s) intend to teach during their first semester, for approval. This information will be included in the finalist’s dossier. (Obtaining this information is not necessary for candidates who would be teaching established courses such as certain language or mathematics courses, etc.) Please securely send one electronic copy of the dossier to the assistant dean. Please follow HUIT’s recommended practices for secure document transfer (e.g., Accellion Kiteworks, encryption, etc.), which can vary by user platform. For a full checklist of what the dossier should include, please see below. The divisional dean/SEAS Dean and assistant dean will review the dossier, including close attention to the case statement. If the case statement needs further work, the assistant dean will convey feedback to the department, along with any questions or feedback about the other materials. Note: The divisional dean/SEAS Dean and/or their designee and the Dean for Faculty Affairs and Planning can ask for changes to the dossier at any time.
|
12 |
The Committee on Appointments and Promotions reviews the dossier |
The Committee on Appointments and Promotions (CAP) reviews the dossier and advises the Edgerley Family Dean of the FAS on the next step for the dossier, which can include the following: (1) The case is sufficiently strong to forward to the Provost (2) CAP needs further information or the department needs to modify the case statement before the Dean decides whether to forward the case to the Provost, or (3) The case is not strong enough, and CAP advises the Dean to turn down the professor in residence case. In the latter case, the Dean notifies the department in writing within a reasonable timeframe. |
13 |
The Provost reviews the case |
The Office for Faculty Affairs forwards the case to the Provost, who makes the final decision on whether or not to approve the appointment. |
14 |
If the decision is favorable, the offer of appointment is issued by the Edgerley Family Dean of the FAS |
Once approval for the appointment has been granted, the department should ask the individual during the hiring process to confirm the department’s understanding of what the course title, description, and syllabus are. The offer letter (drafted in consultation with the divisional dean by the Office for Faculty Development) contains information on title, appointment, salary, responsibilities, etc. The Office for Faculty Development makes any revisions to the offer letter. When appropriate, the dean for faculty development will work with a center, institute, or initiative to develop a supplementary letter for the candidate that describes the resources available through the center. The candidate’s acceptance of the offer must be made in writing to the Edgerley Family Dean of the FAS. |
15 |
If offer is accepted, the appointment is processed in the Aurora system by Office for Faculty Affairs |
The Office for Faculty Development provides all documentation for processing, with the exception of the original I-9 form and any necessary payroll documents, which the FAS financial administrator or the department administrator delivers to Central Payroll. The department administrator will remind the faculty member to sign electronically the Harvard University Participation Agreement by the start of their appointment. |
Professor in Residence Targeted Searches
In rare cases, a professor in residence search may coincide with the recruitment of a specific candidate (a “targeted” search). In these instances, departments may skip steps 2 and 3 in the above process. Departments send an optional initial inquiry letter (which should not include the candidate’s name), followed by a blind letter. Additional materials such as curricula vitae and publications (or copies of creative works) are not sent out with the blind letter. The department should give letter writers at least six to eight weeks to prepare their letters—dating from the mailing of the blind letter. As always, the initial inquiry letter, blind letter, and recipient list (see Sample Table) are reviewed by the divisional dean prior to being sent. Note: In a targeted search of this kind, the search committee should not be chaired by an advisor of the candidate, but advisors are permitted to serve on the committee.
d. Dossier Checklist: Professors in Residence
Please securely send an electronic copy of the preliminary dossier to the assistant dean for the division (AD). Please follow HUIT’s recommended practices for secure document transfer (e.g., Accellion Kiteworks, encryption, etc.), which can vary by user platform. To facilitate storing and sharing of files, please name the file as follows: a) alpha-numeric characters only (no dashes, commas, slashes, etc.). b) [Last Name] [First Name] [Department Name] PIR dossier [Month, Date, and Year of dossier submission, expressed numerically: XX YY ZZ]. E.g., Smith John Psychology PIR dossier 1 4 15. c) If a dossier is revised and resubmitted, please repeat the original title, followed by “rev” and [Month of resubmission] [Date of resubmission] [Year of resubmission]. E.g., Smith John Psychology PIR dossier 1 4 15 rev 1 15 15. Departments should retain documents according to practices recommended by Harvard Archives at https://grs.harvard.edu/ (please log in).
______1. Case statement (including department vote by name). See description in Step 10 above. Note: The case statement must include a description of all efforts to identify candidates from diverse populations, including women and minorities.
______2. The Departmental EEO Report displaying aggregate demographic data from the search, available through ARIeS.
______3. The department’s request for search authorization, the divisional dean’s letter approving the search request, and the Provost’s letter approving the search request.
______4. Candidate’s curriculum vitae and bibliography.
______5. Summary teaching chart (ideally listing ten years of courses) and teaching/advising materials (including teaching awards, list of undergraduate and graduate theses supervised (and postdoctoral advisees, as relevant), representative course syllabi, and teaching evaluations).
______6. A teaching/advising statement, describing philosophy and practices related to undergraduate, graduate, and (as relevant) postdoctoral teaching and advising and including the number of graduate students for whom the candidate had primary responsibility (required only if the candidate knows they are under consideration for the appointment).
______7. Course title, course description, and syllabus for the course(s) the candidate intends to teach during their first semester.
______8. A research statement.
______9. Statement describing efforts to encourage diversity, inclusion, and belonging, including past, current, and anticipated future contributions in these areas.
_____10. A copy of the optional initial inquiry letter, if used, the blind letter (including the comparison list), and the recipient list (see Sample Table) (indicating who did and did not reply). See description in Step 5a above.
_____11. Copies of all responses to the optional initial inquiry letter, if used, and responses to the blind letter, including those from anyone who declined to give a formal response, with English translations of any written in a foreign language and typed copies of any handwritten letters.
_____12. A list of all publications (or in art-making fields, creative works).
_____13. Total citation count for the candidate and comparands (please use the Sample Citation Table, if appropriate to the field, in Chapter 15).
_____14. Citation count for each of the candidate’s publications.
_____15. Selected significant articles and most recent articles, major books, significant unpublished manuscripts, and important reviews of the candidate’s major publications. In art-making fields, copies, as appropriate, of selected significant creative works and most recent creative works, and important reviews.
Note: The candidate should not solicit student letters, and any unsolicited student letters will not be included in the dossier.
(2) Reappointment of Professors in Residence
|
Step |
Explanation |
1 |
The department chair requests materials from the candidate during the penultimate year of appointment |
Materials should include:
|
2 |
The chair requests divisional dean approval of a proposed review committee. After approval from the divisional dean, the chair appoints the committee. |
The committee consists of tenured colleagues who will evaluate the case, including a tenured faculty member from another department/SEAS area. The request should name the committee chair and other review committee members. |
3 |
Department compiles a summary teaching chart and gathers information on the candidate’s performance as an adviser of undergraduates and mentor of graduate students and, as relevant, postdoctoral fellows |
|
4 |
The committee considers the case |
The review committee should take into account all aspects of the candidate’s job description, including the candidate’s teaching/advising, scholarship, and administrative service, if appropriate. |
5 |
The committee drafts a case statement and reports its findings to the department |
The draft case statement for the candidate summarizes the committee’s conclusions, including the strengths and weaknesses of the case with regard to teaching/advising, research, and citizenship (see Step 8 for all of the necessary elements of the final case statement). |
6 |
The department reviews the materials, discusses the case, and votes on the reappointment according to its standard procedures |
This discussion should be in-depth and rigorous. A favorable vote does not have to be unanimous but must comprise affirmative votes by a significant majority of the voting faculty. If the department decides against reappointment, the department chair sends to the divisional dean the current dossier, including a record of the department vote, and a draft of the letter to the candidate and explains the department’s decision. After divisional dean approval, the department gives the letter to the candidate. |
7 |
After a favorable vote, the chair asks each tenured member of the department, including those on the review committee, to write a confidential letter to the Edgerley Family Dean of the FAS |
These letters express the tenured faculty members’ views on the reappointment and will be included in the candidate’s dossier to be reviewed by the Committee on Appointments and Promotions (CAP). (For inclusion in the dossier, letters should be sent electronically to the ad hoc coordinator in the Office for Faculty Affairs, ryoung@fas.harvard.edu.) |
8 |
The department sends the candidate’s dossier, including a draft letter to the candidate, to the assistant dean for the division |
Please securely send one electronic copy of the dossier, including a draft letter to the candidate, to the assistant dean. Please follow HUIT’s recommended practices for secure document transfer (e.g., Accellion Kiteworks, encryption, etc.), which can vary by user platform. The dossier should consist of:
Note: The candidate should not solicit student (or postdoc) letters, and any unsolicited student (or postdoc) letters will not be included in the dossier. Note: The divisional dean/SEAS Dean and/or their designee and the Dean for Faculty Affairs and Planning can ask for changes to the dossier at any time. |
9 |
The Committee on Appointments and Promotions reviews the dossier |
The Committee on Appointments and Promotions (CAP) reviews the dossier and advises the Dean on whether the case warrants reappointment. The Dean then decides whether or not to approve the reappointment and forwards the case to the Provost for final review. |
10 |
The Provost reviews the case |
The Office for Faculty Affairs forwards the case to the Provost, who makes the final decision on whether or not to approve the reappointment. |
11 |
If reappointment is authorized, the divisional dean issues a final letter to the candidate |
|