Chapter 7E

The department chair writes to the divisional dean requesting authorization for a search.

The search plan should address:

• The names of the proposed search committee members, including the chair, who will have primary responsibility for ensuring that the search is broad, wide-ranging, and thorough. The committee must consist of at least 3 senior and/or ladder faculty members.
• How the anticipated appointment is expected to serve the needs of the department.
• The space that will house the proposed appointment.

The divisional dean reviews the request.

The divisional dean reviews individual requests in light of divisional priorities and resources (including space). If the search is authorized, the divisional dean will provide a written response to the department, setting out the conditions of the search.

The department advertises the position and makes inquiries at other institutions.

• All advertising copy must be reviewed and approved by the associate dean for the division/SEAS before it is submitted to the appropriate journals and other venues. Advertisements and inquiries should describe the position broadly and should list a date after which the department will stop accepting applications, or the department can encourage candidates to apply by a specific date, while indicating that applications will be reviewed until the position is filled. At least one form of the advertisement should be published in print. Advertisements should clearly state required documents and must indicate that Harvard is “an equal opportunity employer and all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, creed, national origin, ancestry, age, protected veteran status, disability, genetic information, military service, pregnancy and pregnancy-related conditions, or other protected status.”
• The dossier for the finalist must include a teaching/advising statement that describes the candidate’s philosophy and practices as well as their approach to creating a learning environment in which students are encouraged to ask questions and share their ideas. The dossier should also include teaching materials, including a teaching chart listing courses in reverse chronological order, any teaching awards, representative course syllabi, and teaching evaluations. (Note: In the teaching chart, please indicate which, if any, courses were taught remotely, whether partially or in full, due to the COVID-19 pandemic.) The advertisement should ask all candidates to submit with their original application materials a teaching/advising statement as well as a service statement describing that describes efforts to strengthen academic communities (e.g., the candidate's department, institution, and/or professional societies). The department may request the other teaching materials later in the process.
• Candidates should not solicit student letters and any unsolicited student letters will not be included in the final dossier.
• The dossier for the finalist must also include at least three letters of recommendation. The advertisement should ask candidates to submit contact information for references with their original application materials.

The department reviews the candidates’ materials and drafts a case statement for the finalist.

The draft case statement for the candidate summarizes the department’s conclusions, including the strengths and weaknesses of the case with regard to teaching/advising, service, and administration, including an evaluation of efforts to strengthen academic communities (see Step 6 for all of the necessary elements of the final case statement).

After reviewing all of the candidate’s materials, the department discusses the case and votes.

• The department reviews the draft case statement, all letters of recommendation (of which there must be at least three), and all of the candidate’s materials and discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the case. This discussion should be in-depth and rigorous. The department should also assess whether the candidate has met the criteria for senior preceptor.
• The department votes according to its standard procedures.

After a favorable vote, the case statement is finalized by the department chair.

The finalized case statement, prepared and signed by the department chair and the chair of the search committee, should include the following:

• Background and context: An explanation of how the appointment serves the needs of the department and how it fits in with the department’s future development, and why this need can be met better by a senior preceptor appointment than by annual appointments at the preceptor level. Describe the teaching needs that the appointment would address.
• The search process: A description of the search, including how the finalist was identified.
• The case for the candidate:
  • A discussion of the finalist’s expertise and teaching/advising abilities, as well as administrative experience, and an evaluation of efforts to strengthen academic communities.
  • A comparison of the candidate with all other leading candidates), and reasons why the other leading candidates were not chosen.
• A summary of the department's discussions of the case.
• Departmental vote: A record of the department vote, by name, with an “as of” date for the vote tally.
• Signatures: An indication of the primary author of the statement.

Note: The finalized case statement should be made available to the faculty in the department involved in the review.

The candidate’s dossier is prepared by the department and sent, with a draft offer letter, to the associate dean for the division/SEAS.

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, including a draft offer letter, to the associate dean. Please follow HUIT’s recommended practices for secure document transfer, which can vary by user platform. For a full checklist of what the dossier should include, please see below.

Note:  The divisional/SEAS dean and/or their designee and the Dean for Faculty Affairs and Planning can ask for changes to the dossier at any time.

The divisional dean, with a CAP subcommittee, reviews the dossier, and the divisional dean decides whether to approve the appointment.

If the decision is favorable, the offer letter is sent to the candidate.

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. 

Acceptances of the offers should be made in writing to the department chair.

If the offer is accepted, the appointment is processed in the Aurora system by the department. 

• The department sends 1 electronic PDF copy of the final dossier (excluding teaching evaluations), including the signed offer letter, to the Appointments Office in the Office for Faculty Affairs via Aurora.
• Completion of an I-9 on or before the appointment start date and submission of any other necessary documents is required of all new employees, or after a break in service of one year or more. Questions about I-9 completion should be directed to FAS Central Payroll for faculty appointed through FAS or SEAS Office for Faculty Affairs for faculty appointed through SEAS.
• The department securely sends 1 electronic PDF copy of the candidate’s acceptance letter to the associate dean for the division/SEAS. Please follow HUIT’s recommended practices for secure document transfer, which can vary by user platform.
• The department administrator will remind the faculty member to sign electronically the Harvard University Participation Agreement by the start of their appointment.

The department chair requests materials from the candidate during the penultimate year of appointment.

Materials should include:

• Curriculum vitae.
• Teaching and advising materials, including representative course syllabi and evidence of teaching effectiveness, such as teaching awards.
• A teaching/advising statement that describes the candidate’s philosophy and practices related to undergraduate teaching and advising. In the statement, the candidate should reflect on continuing areas for growth and ways in which they might improve as a teacher and advisor.
• A statement regarding administrative duties, accomplishments, and supervisory responsibilities.

The chair requests divisional dean approval of a proposed review committee and, following this approval, appoints the committee.

The committee should include at least two tenured faculty members, including a tenured faculty member from another department/SEAS area or Harvard school. The request should name the committee chair and other review committee members.

The department compiles a summary teaching chart and gathers information on the candidate’s performance as a teacher and administrator, if applicable.

• The summary teaching chart summarizes, in reverse chronological order, all courses the candidate has taught, including course titles, enrollments, and overall course scores and instructor scores. (Note: In the teaching chart, please indicate which, if any, courses were taught remotely, whether partially or in full, due to the COVID-19 pandemic.)
• All teaching evaluations not already seen during the last review should be collected. Please include:
  • 1 electronic PDF of student teaching evaluations
    • For evaluations prior to Fall 2019, please follow the instructions from Harvard FAS Course Evaluations (https://q.fas.harvard.edu/reports-prior-2019-20).
    • For evaluations from Fall 2019 onward, please go to https://q.fas.harvard.edu/results-2019-20-and-later.
      • Click on “Click Here to View Your Results Now" and log in.
      • Select user group “Harvard_Faculty_Staff.”
      • Select the “Course Heads-Instructors report” for the specific year/term.
      • Type the course number abbreviation (e.g. COMPSCI 50) in the “Search report title” field and click to search.
      • Download for each course:
        • Select "View the {term} Individual Report -- Comments included report" and click on the course from the listing. Click the (PDF) icon next to the corresponding instructor to download the report.
• The review committee should:
  • Solicit feedback from the candidate’s current and former students, as appropriate. To gather student feedback, which should be summarized in the case statement, the department chair (or their designee) either speaks with or writes to the candidate’s students. If the feedback takes written form, the chair should make clear that the emails or letters will be kept confidential and students’ names will be redacted (as is also the case with oral feedback) before the emails or letters are shared with committee members (although the dean or the dean's designee may request any information regarding the case if questions arise). The emails or letters should not be included in the dossier.
  • Solicit feedback from the candidate’s teaching fellows, teaching assistants, and/or preceptors under the candidate's supervision, as appropriate.
  • Observe the candidate’s teaching.
  • Review the candidate’s teaching evaluations.
  • Evaluate the candidate’s administrative and supervisory capabilities.
  • Evaluate the candidate's role and their performance relative to the role: i.e., what are the person's duties (and what proportion of their time is spent on teaching vs. other responsibilities), how do those duties relate to the position description, and how is the individual's performance of those duties?

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 and administrative service, if applicable. 

The committee decides if the case is sufficiently strong to warrant reappointment, 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, service, and administration (see Step 7 for all of the necessary elements of the final case statement).

Members of the department review the materials, discuss the case, and vote on the reappointment.

This discussion should be in-depth and rigorous. 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.

After a favorable vote, the department sends the dossier, including a draft letter for the candidate, to the associate dean for the division/SEAS.

Please securely send one electronic copy of the dossier, including a draft letter for the candidate, to the associate dean. Please follow HUIT’s recommended practices for secure document transfer, which can vary by user platform.

The dossier should consist of:

• A case statement describing the review procedures and making the case for the reappointment of the candidate. It includes an evaluation of the candidate’s teaching and advising effectiveness (including a summary of student feedback solicited by the department chair); the strengths and weaknesses of the case with regards to teaching/advising, research or professional activity, and citizenship; a summary of the department’s discussions of the case; and a record of the department vote, by name, with an “as of” date for the vote tally. The case statement should also indicate who authored it and be signed by both the author and the chair. Note: The finalized case statement should be made available to the faculty in the department involved in the review.
• The candidate’s curriculum vitae.
• Summary teaching chart.
• A teaching/advising statement describing the candidate’s philosophy and practices as well as their approach to creating a learning environment in which students are encouraged to ask questions and share their ideas.
• Teaching and advising materials, including: representative course syllabi and evidence of teaching effectiveness, such as teaching awards.
• All teaching evaluations not already seen since the last review.
• The candidate’s statement regarding administrative duties, accomplishments, and supervisory responsibilities.
• A draft letter to the individual, to be reviewed by the divisional dean, discussing the review. The letter covers any concerns about performance and/or need for services that might affect the future. The letter also indicates the dates of reappointment and the schedule for the next review.

Note: The candidate should not solicit student letters, and any unsolicited student letters will not be included in the dossier.

Note:  The divisional/SEAS dean and/or their designee and the Dean for Faculty Affairs and Planning can ask for changes to the dossier at any time.

The dossier is reviewed by the divisional dean.

Following approval by the divisional dean, the department issues the final signed letter to the candidate and processes the reappointment in Aurora.

• The department securely sends 1 electronic PDF copy of the final letter for the candidate, signed by the department chair, to the divisional dean, cc’ing the associate  dean. Please follow HUIT’s recommended practices for secure document transfer, which can vary by user platform.
• The department sends 1 electronic PDF copy of the final letter for the candidate, signed by the department chair, and 1 electronic PDF of the review dossier to the Appointments Office in the Office for Faculty Affairs via Aurora.