Authorizing a New Appointment

The decision to authorize a new faculty appointment is made by the president after discussions among members of the appropriate discipline and faculty group and the Curriculum Committee. Such conversations may be initiated by either the faculty group or the Curriculum Committee or brought to either from a third source. Ordinarily, new appointments will be made at a level parallel to that of assistant professor at other liberal arts colleges. Regular appointments offer initial three-year contracts, with a review for a second three-year appointment in the third year and a tenure review in the sixth year. (In rare cases, a faculty group may wish to request that a position carries with it the possibility of an early tenure review. Procedures for consideration of this request are included in the Faculty Bylaws, Article III, Section 5E.)

Appointing a Search Committee

After the Curriculum Committee has given approval for a search, the faculty group chair, having consulted with the Provost, the Assistant Vice President of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (AVP-DEI), and the other members of the faculty group, appoint a search committee to search for and screen candidates and to send finalists to the Advisory Committee on Appointments. The search committee consists of three or four regular members of the faculty. At least one member must come from outside the discipline or disciplines in which the search is taking place, or even outside the faculty group. Once the search committee is formed, they will meet with the Provost and AVP-DEI to discuss the position description and advertisement. The position description must be consistent with the policy regarding the possibility of an early tenure review as described in Article III, Section 5E(1) of the Faculty Bylaws and must be approved by the Provost and the Curriculum Committee.

Establishing an Inclusive Applicant Pool

Once Curriculum Committee has approved the ad, the AVP-DEI will meet with the search committee to focus on inclusive approaches to cultivating, considering, and categorizing applications. Together with the Office of the Provost, the ad will be posted in several sources in which the College routinely advertises positions to reach members of under-represented groups, as well as discipline-specific locations if requested by the search chair. The search committee may also contact the department chairs of institutions with established graduate programs in the area of a given search. Every ad must contain the following statement: “Sarah Lawrence College is an Equal Opportunity Employer and has as one of its goals the recruitment and retention of a racially and culturally diverse administration, staff, and faculty. To that end, every job opening is seen as an opportunity to increase diversity and every effort will be made to expand the applicant pool in accordance with these goals.” All open positions will appear on the College’s Web site for the search duration.

Application Process

Applications for all regular faculty positions will be received by the College’s online application management system, and instructions for accessing application materials will be sent to the search committee.

Candidates will be asked to submit a curriculum vitae, cover letter, sample course descriptions and/or syllabi, teaching and/or research statement, examples of their scholarly or artistic work and letters of recommendation, and more.

Screening Candidates/Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion 

As soon as the application deadline passes (or in the case of an “open until filled” position, when the review of applications has begun) the search committee will develop a provisional or “long-short” list of about eight to twelve semifinalists for the position. That list will be submitted to the AVP-DEI who will then meet with the search committee to discuss and focus on inclusive interview structure and questions. After this meeting takes place the search committee can move forward and conduct telephone or virtual interviews. 

After the long-short interviews have taken place, the AVP-DEI will meet with the search committee to focus on inclusive approaches to candidate interview assessment and post-interview categorization of candidates. 

Virtual Interviews

Normally, search committees interview candidates virtually.

Scheduling the Campus Visit

There will be four dates scheduled with the Advisory Committee on Appointments for each search; one for each of the three finalists, followed by one final appointment for the search committee members to meet with the Advisory Committee for final recommendations. As soon as the search committee has confirmed the three finalists and the dates for their campus visits have been confirmed (consistent with the pre-arranged Advisory Committee interview schedule), the finalists will then receive an e-mail from the Office of the Provost confirming the date/time of the Advisory Committee interview, instructions for submitting travel reimbursement forms, lodging information, campus maps, and more.

The search committee will then meet with the AVP-DEI regarding organizing inclusive campus visits and inclusive approaches to evaluating campus visits. All campus visits must include an interview with the search committee, an interview with students, and an open presentation of the candidate’s work, which must be announced in advance. The campus visit may also include a tour of the campus, visits to classes, and/or artistic presentations, and informal discussions with faculty members. When the campus visits are completed, members of the search committee will meet to review the candidates, prior to their meeting with the Advisory Committee. Prior to this meeting, the individual members of the search committee, including students, must submit letters via email to the Advisory Committee on Appointments (advisory@sarahlawrence.edu) by a specified deadline.

Arranging Finalist Presentations

The chair of the search committee must request to reserve space through EMS, and once approved may also request light refreshments (coffee, tea, water, cookies, etc). Instructions for submitting requests with EMS are on MySLC here. For assistance or questions, the chair should email Special Events (events@sarahlawrence.edu).

The chair will then create a talk announcement (see template here) for each finalist and once complete email the Director of Faculty Affairs  who will then send it to the community on behalf of the search committee. The finalist will also need to sign a video authorization agreement to digitally record their public presentations, which will be provided by the Office of the Provost. These recordings will be made available to the SLC community for the duration of the search. At the conclusion of the search, these recordings will be deleted. Completed forms should be sent to the Assistant Director of Faculty Affairs in the Office of the Provost.

Meal Expenses for Search Committee Members and Finalists

On-campus dining: meal tickets can be provided only to faculty and students on the search committee finalists to use while on campus. A member of the search committee will need to request tickets at least two days in advance to the Assistant Director of Faculty Affairs and confirm the names of attending committee members and the date the cards will be used.

Off-campus dining: the Office of the Provost will cover expenses for one off-campus dinner per finalist with the faculty members on the search committee. The college has an arrangement with Underhills Crossing & La Casa in Bronxville for pre-fixe dinners. Underhill's Crossing (a pre-fixe dinner consisting of an appetizer, entree, coffee/tea, dessert, and one bar beverage. The amount is $60.00 per person, including gratuity) and La Casa (a pre-fixe dinner consisting of an appetizer, entree, coffee/tea, dessert, and one bar beverage. The amount is $56.00 per person, including gratuity). To make reservations please contact the Assistant Director of Faculty Affairs so that authorization can be provided to the restaurant. Underhills and La Casa will bill the college directly, so there is no need to present payment at the time of dining. If the search committee chooses to have off-campus dining with finalists elsewhere, then the maximum amount to be reimbursed is $60.00 per person. 

Reimbursement of Expenses

Requests for reimbursement should be emailed to the Director of Academic Budgets & Financial Planning (dtennenbaum@sarahlawrence.edu), and must include scanned copies of receipts along with the completed expense report found here.

The Role of Students

The search committee must appoint students to serve as student interviewers. If there is an internal candidate for the position, donnees of the candidate are not eligible to serve as student interviewers. The chair of the Search Committee asks the students to meet and talk with candidates. Students may also be invited to attend and respond to a public presentation or a class given by the candidate.

At the end of the presentation or interview, students are asked to report on their reactions through individual letters to the search committee and Advisory Committee. These letters must be emailed to the Advisory Committee on Appointments (advisory@sarahlawrence.edu) by a specified deadline. While student response is almost always helpful, the views of students who have seen all the candidates in a particular search are especially valued; the availability of students to meet with all candidates should be an important criterion in their selection.

Policy for Providing Candidates’ Materials to Students on the Search Committee

Members of the student search committee may be provided electronic copies of all materials submitted by the finalists, except letters of recommendation and transcripts. Letters of recommendation are available ONLY to the faculty members of the search committee and the Advisory Committee on Appointments.

Policy for Providing Candidates’ Materials to Faculty Outside of the Search Committee

If the search chair has asked colleagues not on the search committee to participate in the search (i.e., formally meet the finalists and attend their presentations), those faculty may request an electronic copy of the candidate’s CV and published writing samples only.  

Consideration of Current Guest Faculty Members

In some cases, a current guest faculty member will be a candidate, among others, for a tenure track position. In such cases, the search committee will interview the guest and will arrange an appropriate review process that is identical to the process used for external candidates. Some additional elements made possible by the candidate’s guest status such as course appraisals and class observations may also be included in the process. In addition, prior to that interview, the Provost will send a letter to the entire community, soliciting comments on the guest’s candidacy.

Arriving at a Decision

At the conclusion of the interviews, the faculty and student members of the search committee will write individual letters to the Advisory Committee before the faculty on the search committee meets as a group with the Advisory Committee to discuss their final recommendations.

After that meeting, on the basis of material from the candidate, the meeting with the search committee, student letters, comments from other faculty who met or observed the candidate, and from its own interview, the Advisory Committee will make a recommendation to the President. Prior to tendering an offer, the Provost will advise the chair of the Search Committee of the Advisory Committee’s intention.

Once the President has arrived at a decision, the Provost is authorized to make an offer and to conduct appropriate discussions with the candidate. When an offer is accepted the Provost will write a confirming letter to the candidate, and an official contract will be issued. The chair of the search committee will communicate the decision to the other finalists and to any candidates who were interviewed by the search committee. The chair of the search committee will then instruct the Assistant Director of Faculty Affairs to notify all other applicants that the position has been filled. 

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) Guidelines for Search Committees

Before screening, arranging interviews, or talking to candidates, it is important to understand that there are significant legal limitations on employment decisions. Whether the interviewer is a faculty member, the human resources director, an administrative department head or a supervisor makes no difference. Anyone screening resumes, conducting interviews, or contacting candidates represents the college and must know what information is or is not fair game and how to avoid unnecessary liability. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has developed guidelines for employers to follow for employment decisions. In addition, NY State Fair Employment Practice Law and other federal laws and regulations govern employment practices that affect the hiring process. The major federal laws that apply to most employers can be viewed here.

In accordance with Article III Section 5, B5 of the Faculty Bylaws:

“If an undergraduate guest teacher’s fields are incorporated into the regular curriculum, or if a rotating or special post is made a regular one by the relevant division and the Curriculum Committee, or if an opening in the regular faculty occurs in those fields, then that teacher, on the occasion of their next contact, may be considered by the Advisory Committee on Appointments for an appointment to the regular teaching faculty. Normally, however, a search for other candidates for the post shall be undertaken before a regular appointment is offered to the guest teacher.”

Therefore, guests who wish to receive regular contracts must, in all but extraordinary cases, compete in the external (national and international) searches conducted by their faculty groups. Appointing a guest to a regular teaching position without a search can only occur if their specific qualifications would preclude the possibility that an outside candidate might prove a better fit for the specific needs of the group or program. These qualifications must exceed participation in the Sarah Lawrence pedagogy and community.

One example of such an extraordinary case would be the following: Retirements will leave one faculty group or program without any member with history and experience in the College and with—its practices, colleagues, and how that program constructs its curriculum. In this case continuity would be the prime qualification for a candidate, and it would be impossible for an outside candidate to compete with an active, long-term guest.

However, it is still essential that the guest who is being considered for a regular appointment be vetted with reference to the College’s normal appointment guidelines: Teaching, Donning, and Relation of the Candidate’s work to the Curriculum and Scholarly or Artistic Growth and Intellectual vitality.

In these extraordinary cases, the protocol ought to be the following:

1. The request for a regular contract without search must come from the candidate’s faculty group or program director.
2. The job description must be reviewed and approved by the Curriculum Committee.
3. The request must then be approved by the president and the provost to determine if a regular appointment is feasible and advisable.
4. Once approved by the president, the request is sent to the Advisory Committee, which requests materials from the candidate and their program/group:

1. 1. Letter describing the circumstances that justify a regular appointment without a search (from the group chair or program director)
   2. A cover letter from the candidate
   3. Candidate’s CV
   4. Description of all courses taught by the candidate in the College
   5. Work samples
   6. Outside reviews of work
   7. Letters concerning the candidate from all regular members of the faculty group

5. A letter will then be sent from the Advisory Committee to all faculty and students requesting comments on the guest faculty member’s candidacy. These must be received one week prior to the Advisory Committee’s interview with the candidate.
6. The Advisory Committee will meet with the candidate.
7. The Advisory Committee will make a recommendation to the president.
8. In accordance with Article III, Section 5B6 of the Faculty Bylaws: “If a guest teacher is offered a regular teaching appointment, if the teacher so desires, some part of their service as a guest may be counted retroactively by the provost as part of the normal sequence of contracts leading to tenure.”

Searches for guest appointments need not be as extensive as searches for regular appointments. There are, however, three conditions that must be met:

1. At least two candidates for the position must be interviewed.
2. The candidates must be interviewed by at least two current faculty members.
3. The search must be conducted with adherence to the College’s stated policy regarding diversity: “Sarah Lawrence has as one of its goals the recruitment and retention of a racially and culturally diverse administration, staff, and faculty. To that end, every job opening is seen as an opportunity to increase diversity, and every effort will be made to expand the applicant pool in accordance with these goals.”

Once the ad for the position has been written, it should be given to the Faculty Support Coordinator x6074, who will arrange for the ad to be placed on the College’s website.

Online application site and advertised on sources the College uses for the purpose of reaching a diverse applicant pool. The Search Committee may also wish to send the ad to heads of relevant graduate schools, and/or colleagues who may be in a position to recommend suitable candidates.

While it is presumed that candidates for guest positions will live in commuting distance from the College, there may be times when a candidate not living in the area will be invited for an interview. In such cases, the chair of the search should consult with the provost about funds available to cover transportation expenses for the candidate.

A campus visit may include a meeting with several faculty members and students (if available), a campus tour, and an on-campus meal. Meal tickets are available for the candidate, as well as for faculty and students involved in the interview process. To arrange for posting an ad, reimbursement of expenses and meal tickets, or if you have any questions about the process, please contact Kristy Hartman, Director of Faculty Affairs, x2213; khartman@sarahlawrence.edu.

To arrange for the appointment of the successful candidate, please provide a copy of the candidate’s CV and contact information to the Associate Dean of the College, x2214.

Policy for Evaluating Guest Faculty

Materials to be considered in evaluating guest faculty will include course appraisals written by the students and any reports on class observations by tenured faculty.

1. Course appraisals.  Access to course appraisals for the guest faculty member shall be limited to:

• • The guest faculty member who taught the course (after all student evaluations and grades have been received by the registrar).
  • The relevant faculty group chair (or faculty group chair designee).
  • Members of the relevant Search Committee.
  • The Associate Dean of the College.

Please contact the Executive Assistant to the Provost and Dean of Faculty, x2304 in advance to arrange for access to course appraisals.

2. Class observations are part of the evaluation process. The chair of the relevant faculty group will designate a class observer for each new guest appointment. Class visits will take place in early November or in early April for those new guests who teach only in the spring semester. After the class visit, the class observer is asked to have a conversation about the class with the guest faculty member whose class s/he observed.  The report on the class observation should be submitted to the Associate dean of the college.  The observer has the option of also providing the guest faculty member with a copy of the report on the class observation, but is not required to do so. Other tenured members of the faculty group may view the report on the class observation upon request.

Candidates not standing for regular faculty positions. This procedure is used for both in- eternal and external candidates.

1. Directors of programs who are hired from outside the College will be vetted by a Search Committee chosen by the dean of graduate and professional studies in consultation with members of the program in question and the provost. The committee will include at least two members of the regular faculty of the College, one of whom is a member of the Committee on Graduate and Professional Studies.
2. After vetting applications, Search Committee members will solicit recommendations and invite candidates to campus (a minimum of two). Candidates will meet with faculty, students, key administrators, and the Advisory Committee.
3. Before the interview with the Advisory Committee, the committee will be provided with a dossier concerning the candidate, including, but not limited to, a CV, cover letter, and recommendations. In the course of the search, they will also be provided with faculty and student evaluations of the candidate, and the recommendation of the Search Committee.
4. The Advisory Committee meets with the Search Committee.
5. The dean of graduate and professional studies reports the recommendation of the Search Committee to the Graduate Studies Committee.
6. The dean of graduate and professional studies will make his/her own recommendation with reference to the particular interests of the graduate program in question to the Advisory Committee.
7. The Advisory Committee on Appointments will make its recommendation directly to the president.
8. The president makes the final decision.

Candidates who will also hold regular faculty positions

Directors of blended programs who are hired from outside the College as regular teaching faculty will be vetted by the same procedure as searches for regular faculty in the undergraduate College. In addition to considerations as a teacher and scholar/artist/practitioner, the committee will consider the candidate’s virtues as a program director and their management capacities.

This procedure is also followed in a case in which a candidate for the administrative position in question is already a regular faculty member at the College.

1. The Search Committee will be chosen by the Advisory Committee in consultation with the dean of graduate and professional studies. The committee will include at least two members of the regular faculty of the College, one of whom is a member of the Graduate Studies Committee.
2. The normal search procedure for a regular faculty member in the College will be followed. Besides the normal procedure with the Advisory Committee, the committee will report its recommendations to the dean of graduate and professional studies.
3. The dean of graduate and professional studies reports the recommendation of the Search Committee to the Graduate Studies Committee.
4. The dean of graduate and professional studies will make his/her own recommendation with reference to the particular interests of the graduate program in question to the Advisory Committee.
5. The Advisory Committee will make its recommendation directly to the president.
6. The president makes the final decision.

The Advisory Committee will devise a protocol for renewal of the positions described above informed by the appointment process.

What follows is an effort on the part of the Advisory Committee on Appointments, in consultation with the General Committee, to lay out for the College and candidates for appointment a more explicit description of both the criteria and the process for reappointment than presently exists in the Faculty Bylaws. Over the years, practice has added or refined a number of features in the appointment process. It is important that current practice be known and understood.

We should say at the outset that a set of principles underlies the design of the College and the process of education. While the concrete manifestations of these principles are always open to question and revision, the College, working through the Advisory Committee, looks to appoint and retain faculty who are in sympathy, broadly interpreted, with the basic principles of the College. Briefly, these principles include the commitment to the individualized nature of a Sarah Lawrence education and to the structures-seminars, conferences, and donning-that make that education possible.

These guidelines give the criteria for review in detail, and also discuss how evidence regarding the criteria are gathered. Candidates are evaluated in four main areas:

Teaching

At Sarah Lawrence, effective teaching is the sine qua non for faculty appointment and reappointment. No single definition of good teaching is sufficient, but among the attributes of good teaching, the College looks for the following:

• Mastery of the subject matter of the discipline
• Capacity to design interesting and sophisticated courses and to work with students in developing appropriate conference projects
• Breadth of teaching interests and subjects offered
• Capacity and flexibility to develop new interests and courses
• Skill in teaching students at all levels (e.g., from First Year Studies to advanced seminars) and across a range of abilities
• Sufficient teacherly presence and accessibility
• An ability to listen and take important cues from students
• Capacity to communicate enthusiasm and excitement, skill at engaging and motivating students
• Facility in helping students to see connections, to think across disciplinary lines, to place issues within a larger cultural context.

Donning

In donning, the College looks for a capacity to work productively with donnees and other students: to advise, inspire, encourage, and set limits. This includes the ability to help donnees to reflect on their experience; to help them consider academic options and to choose wisely from among those options; to interpret the College to the student and vice versa; to intervene, where appropriate, in time of crisis; to be open to students' opinions, problems, needs. 

Scholarly or Artistic Growth and Intellectual Vitality

The College looks for demonstrated scholarly or artistic growth, intellectual vitality, and the promise of their continuation in the future. These qualities could be demonstrated in a number of ways, including, but not limited to: contributions to scholarly meetings; published articles and books; professional recognition through elections, awards, nominations; applications of one's own research to contemporary problems. Scholarly growth and intellectual vitality may also be shown by formal and informal presentations at Sarah Lawrence and through development of new ways to organize knowledge or approach a field, as illustrated, for example, by new teaching techniques.

For artists, writers and performers, shows, reviews, performances and other forms of external recognition measure creativity, vitality and leadership in one's field.

A completed Ph.D./terminal degree is a significant part of the case for reappointment. In the case of the Ph.D., the dissertation should be completed by the time of reappointment to a second three-year contract. The dissertation gives evidence of the ability to deal with an important intellectual question in a rigorous manner, and it gives an opportunity for scholars in the field to measure a candidate's promise.

Note: Review of scholarly or artistic work is part of the reappointment process, but is not a criterion for the reappointment decision. Consideration of scholarly and artistic work allows the Advisory Committee to guide candidates, post reappointment, towards the tenure review.

Contribution to the Educational Program of the College as a Whole

Leadership, Governance, Service

The College values intellectual and civic leadership as shown through inventing and enriching programs, arranging lectures and workshops, service on standing committees or on ad hoc projects (such as service on the Bookstore Committee or participating in Parents Day or Admitted Students Day).

Collegiality and relations among colleagues

In trying to build a humane and open intellectual community, the College gives relationships among colleagues high importance. Collegiality does not mean congeniality. Rather it means that the senior partners in the College need to be able, with confidence, to share with each other the tasks of leadership, governance and service to their College. The attributes for these roles are many, such as experience, vision, energy, depth, rigor, breadth, circumspection, clarity, flexibility, humor, responsibility, commitment and a robust sense of "troubleshooting."

Overall, the criteria should be considered as a constellation of desired strengths-pedagogic, scholarly, collegial-that are evaluated as a whole. While we look for excellence in all areas, we recognize that individuals contribute to the College in varying ways and weighting of the criteria will reflect that.

How the Criteria Are Measured

The Advisory Committee has available the following sources of information and data to assist its deliberations and judgments.

1. Material provided by the candidate

1. Candidate's letter to colleagues addressing their own particular goals and qualities as a teacher and scholar.
2. Candidate's résumé (including a list of activities at the College), course descriptions, syllabi.
3. Candidate's own written work, artistic product or performance.

2. Faculty letters

• 1. At the time of reappointment, the Provost and Dean of Faculty solicits letters about the candidate from members of the faculty.  Tenured members of the candidate's faculty group are required to write.
  2. In preparation for these letters, the faculty group chair arranges:

1. A presentation by the candidate to the faculty group, which may also include other faculty members outside the group.
2. A confidential discussion of the reappointment case by tenured members of the group.
3. A confidential meeting between the candidate and the faculty group chair.  The candidate is invited to bring a senior colleague to this meeting.

• 3. All other faculty, in and outside the faculty group, are invited to write. Additionally, the Advisory Committee shall also ask the candidate whether they wish to suggest to the Committee two faculty members in any field, other than the tenured members of their group, who in the candidate’s opinion are qualified to evaluate their work.

3. Class visits

Advisory requires each candidate standing for reappointment to be observed by two tenured members by the end of the second year. Each observer’s assessment is conveyed to the Advisory Committee in a confidential letter.

Any candidate who feels that class observations (or other mentoring) in addition to the two required class visits would be helpful, is welcome to request that support from tenured faculty members.

4. Course appraisals

Course appraisals are distributed by the Office of the Provost and Dean of Faculty in December for fall courses and May for spring and year courses. (All faculty, but particularly those up for reappointment, should encourage a full response in whatever ways they find effective and comfortable.) Students must sign course appraisals, but they may ask that their names be deleted from the faculty copy.

5. Other Letters

Currently enrolled students in the spring, the Student Senate sends to all students a list of the faculty being considered for reappointment. Students are invited to write confidential, signed letters to the Advisory Committee regarding any of the candidates. In addition, 20 randomly-chosen current students who have studied with the candidate will receive letters from the dean, inviting them to comment on the candidate.

6. Dean of Studies and Student Life

The Advisory Committee will write to the Dean of Studies and Student Life to ask for any information that they and/or their staff may be able to provide about the candidates as a result of interactions that the Dean of Studies Office may have had with the candidates or their students.

7. Registrar's data

Course enrollments, list of donnees, evaluations for students, record of dates of submission of candidate’s student evaluations and grades

8. Internal review of scholarly or artistic work

Candidates will be asked to identify representative pieces from their body of scholarly or artistic work to be reviewed. For the reappointment review, only an internal review of the representative work is required.

Advisory Committee suggests to the candidate, for their approval, the names of several faculty members who might be asked to review a representative sample (or samples) of scholarly or artistic work submitted by the candidate. Advisory Committee will choose one of the approved faculty members to review the work. The candidate does not know which faculty member has been chosen. The reviewer is asked to send their confidential comments on the work to the Provost.

Note: As stated in section IV, review of scholarly or artistic work is part of the reappointment process, but is not a criterion for the reappointment decision. Consideration of scholarly and artistic work allows the Advisory Committee to guide candidates, post reappointment, towards the tenure review. 

9. Interview

Following the confidential meeting between the candidate and the faculty group chair, the candidate meets with the Advisory Committee.

Consideration for reappointment provides both the candidate and the institution an opportunity for reflection.  As the institution evaluates the individual’s record, it is also evaluating its commitment to the area of initial appointment, and the evolving development of the area as it relates to institutional priorities.

The Decision

At the end of the process, the Advisory Committee makes a recommendation to the president. By November 1 the candidate will be told one of two things:

1. The candidate may receive a positive decision from the President about the granting of reappointment.

When the review is positive, the candidate will receive a letter from Advisory Committee which includes areas of concern that may have surfaced during the review.  The candidate may write a letter to the Advisory Committee or have a meeting with the Provost to request that factual errors in the letter be corrected.  They may also write a response to the final letter for the permanent record.

The letter will be followed by a meeting with the Provost.

2. The candidate may be told that there are serious questions about their candidacy that need further exploration. In that case, the process is as follows:
   • The candidate will meet with the President and the Provost to be informed of the questions.
   • The candidate will have the option of a second meeting with Advisory Committee to discuss the questions. For that second meeting, the candidate is given the choice of meeting with the full Advisory Committee or with only the elected members of the committee (i.e. without the President and the Provost).

The final decision will be communicated to the candidate by November 15.

What follows is an effort on the part of the Advisory Committee on Appointments, in consultation with the General Committee, to lay out for the College and candidates for appointment a more explicit description of both the criteria and the process for tenure than presently exists in the Faculty Bylaws. Over the years, practice has added or refined a number of features in the appointment process. It is important that current practice be known and understood.

We should say at the outset that a set of principles underlies the design of the College and the process of education. While the concrete manifestations of these principles are always open to question and revision, the College, working through the Advisory Committee, looks to appoint and retain faculty who are in sympathy, broadly interpreted, with the basic principles of the College. Briefly, these principles include the commitment to the individualized nature of a Sarah Lawrence education and to the structures-seminars, conferences, and donning-that make that education possible.

These guidelines give the criteria for review in detail, and also discuss how evidence regarding the criteria are gathered. Candidates are evaluated in four main areas:

Teaching

At Sarah Lawrence, effective teaching is the sine qua non for faculty appointment and reappointment. No single definition of good teaching is sufficient, but among the attributes of good teaching, the College looks for the following:

• Mastery of the subject matter of the discipline
• Capacity to design interesting and sophisticated courses and to work with students in developing appropriate conference projects
• Breadth of teaching interests and subjects offered
• Capacity and flexibility to develop new interests and courses
• Skill in teaching students at all levels (e.g., from First Year Studies to advanced seminars) and across a range of abilities
• Sufficient teacherly presence and accessibility
• An ability to listen and take important cues from students
• Capacity to communicate enthusiasm and excitement, skill at engaging and motivating students
• Facility in helping students to see connections, to think across disciplinary lines, to place issues within a larger cultural context

Donning

In donning, the College looks for a capacity to work productively with donnees and other students: to advise, inspire, encourage, and set limits. This includes the ability to help donnees to reflect on their experience; to help them consider academic options and to choose wisely from among those options; to interpret the College to the student and vice versa; to intervene, where appropriate, in time of crisis; to be open to students' opinions, problems, needs. 

Scholarly or Artistic Growth and Intellectual Vitality

The College looks for demonstrated scholarly or artistic growth, intellectual vitality, and the promise of their continuation in the future. These qualities could be demonstrated in a number of ways, including, but not limited to: contributions to scholarly meetings; published articles and books; professional recognition through elections, awards, nominations; applications of one's own research to contemporary problems. Scholarly growth and intellectual vitality may also be shown by formal and informal presentations at Sarah Lawrence and through development of new ways to organize knowledge or approach a field, as illustrated, for example, by new teaching techniques.

For artists, writers and performers, shows, reviews, performances and other forms of external recognition measure creativity, vitality and leadership in one's field.

At the tenure review, the candidate needs to demonstrate that he or she can develop a new intellectual question or project, moving beyond the supervised dissertation question.

Contribution to the Educational Program of the College as a Whole

Leadership, governance, service

The College values intellectual and civic leadership as shown through inventing and enriching programs, arranging lectures and workshops, service on standing committees or on ad hoc projects (such as service on the Bookstore Committee or participating in Parents Day or Admitted Students Day).

Collegiality and relations among colleagues

In trying to build a humane and open intellectual community, the College gives relationships among colleagues high importance. Collegiality does not mean congeniality. Rather it means that the senior partners in the College need to be able, with confidence, to share with each other the tasks of leadership, governance and service to their College. The attributes for these roles are many, such as experience, vision, energy, depth, rigor, breadth, circumspection, clarity, flexibility, humor, responsibility, commitment and a robust sense of "troubleshooting."

Overall, the criteria should be considered as a constellation of desired strengths-pedagogic, scholarly, collegial-that are evaluated as a whole. While we look for excellence in all areas, we recognize that individuals contribute to the College in varying ways and weighting of the criteria will reflect that.

How the Criteria Are Measured

The Advisory Committee has available the following sources of information and data to assist its deliberations and judgments.

1. Material provided by the candidate

1. Candidate's letter to colleagues addressing their own particular goals and qualities as a teacher and scholar.
2. Candidate's résumé (including a list of activities at the College), course descriptions, syllabi.
3. Candidate's own written work, artistic product or performance.

2. Faculty letters

• 1. At the time of tenure, the Provost and Dean of Faculty solicits letters about the candidate from members of the faculty. Tenured members of the candidate's faculty group are required to write.
  2. In preparation for these letters, the faculty group chair arranges:
     • A presentation by the candidate to the faculty group, which may also include other faculty members outside the group.
     • A confidential discussion of the tenure case by tenured members of the group.
     • A confidential meeting between the candidate and the faculty group chair.  The candidate is invited to bring a senior colleague to this meeting.
  3. All other faculty, in and outside the faculty group, are invited to write. Additionally, the Advisory Committee shall also ask the candidate whether they wish to suggest to the Committee two faculty members in any field, other than the tenured members of their group, who in the candidate’s opinion are qualified to evaluate their work.

3. Class visits

Advisory requires each candidate standing for tenure to be observed by two tenured members by the fall of their tenure review year. Each observer’s assessment is conveyed to the Advisory Committee in a confidential letter.

Any candidate who feels that class observations (or other mentoring) in addition to the two required class visits would be helpful, is welcome to request that support from tenured faculty members.

4. Course appraisals

Course appraisals are distributed by the Office of the Provost and Dean of Faculty in December for fall courses and May for spring and year courses. (All faculty, but particularly those up for tenure, should encourage a full response in whatever ways they find effective and comfortable.) Students must sign course appraisals, but they may ask that their names be deleted from the faculty copy.

5. Other Letters

1. Currently enrolled students

In the fall, the Student Senate sends to all students a list of the faculty being considered for tenure.  Students are invited to write confidential, signed letters to the Advisory Committee regarding any of the candidates. In addition, 20 randomly-chosen current students who have studied with the candidate will receive letters from the Provost, inviting them to comment on the candidate.

2. Alumnae/i

Candidates for tenure may give the Provost the names of up to 10 graduates. The Provost writes directly to these graduates, inviting them to submit letters. An additional 20 randomly-selected graduates will receive similar letters from the Provost.

3. Dean of Studies and Student Life

The Advisory Committee will write to the Dean of Studies and Student Life to ask for any information that they and/or their staff may be able to provide about the candidates as a result of interactions that the Dean of Studies Office may have had with the candidates or their students.

4. Registrar's data: Course enrollments, list of donnees, evaluations for students, record of dates of submission of candidate’s student evaluations and grades.

6. External and internal review of scholarly or artistic work

Candidates will be asked to identify representative pieces from their body of scholarly or artistic work to be reviewed. For the tenure review, the representative work will be reviewed both internally and externally. The procedures to be followed:

For external review:

1. Both the candidate and a senior member of the candidate’s discipline (or a related discipline) are asked by the Provost to provide, independently, the names of five outside reviewers who would be in a position to offer an opinion on the intellectual or artistic value and sophistication of the work submitted by the candidate for evaluation. Candidates should consult Tenure Review Schedule for the guidelines to follow in developing this list. (Note: Candidates should not contact the suggested reviewers in advance.)

2. The senior member of the candidate’s discipline may consult with tenured SLC colleagues to develop the list. The candidate is given the opportunity to veto one of the suggested names. From the remaining list, the Provost will choose three reviewers, at least one of whom has been suggested by the candidate. These names are not revealed to the candidate. The Provost will contact the reviewers directly, asking them to review the materials and send their confidential comments to the Provost.

For internal review: 

Advisory Committee suggests to the candidate, for their approval, the names of several faculty members who might be asked to review the same scholarly or artistic work submitted for external review. Advisory Committee will choose two of the approved faculty members to review the work. The candidate does not know which two have been chosen. Reviewers are asked to send their confidential comments on the work to the Provost.

Interview

Following the confidential meeting between the candidate and the faculty group chair, the candidate meets with the Advisory Committee.

Consideration for tenure provides both the candidate and the institution an opportunity for reflection.  As the institution evaluates the individual’s record, it is also evaluating its commitment to the area of initial appointment, and the evolving development of the area as it relates to institutional priorities.

The Decision

At the end of the process, the Advisory Committee makes a recommendation to the president. In the case of a positive decision, the President then makes a recommendation to the Board of Trustees, with which the authority of conferral of tenure rests.

By April 15th the candidate will be told one of two things:

1. The candidate may receive a positive decision from the President about the granting of tenure, in which case the process will be over.

2. The candidate may be told that there are serious questions about their candidacy that need further exploration. In that case, the process is as follows:

1. • The candidate will meet with the President and the Provost to be informed of the questions.
   • The candidate will have the option of a second meeting with Advisory Committee to discuss the questions. For that second meeting, the candidate is given the choice of meeting with the full Advisory Committee or with only the elected members of the committee (i.e. without the President and the Provost).
   • The final decision will be communicated to the candidate by May 1.

Generally, hearings will follow the order of business listed below, variations may occur depending on the circumstances of the individual cases:

1. Introductions
2. Chair explains the process
3. Opening statement by complainant, which may be read by their advisor
4. Opening statement by the faculty member, which may be read by their advisor 5.  Panel questions the complainant
5. Panel questions the faculty member
6. Complainant and faculty member may ask questions of each other. If, prior to asking questions, the complainant and/or faculty member requests a brief (up to 10 minutes) recess to consult with their advisors, this may be granted by the chair
7. Witnesses speak
8. Questions from the parties and further questions from the panel
9. Final statement by complainant, which may be read by their advisor
10. Final statement by faculty member, which may be read by their advisor
11. Dismissal of complainant, faculty member, and advisors
12. Deliberation by the panel

1. The requirement that faculty complete evaluations in a timely manner is a contractual obligation written into all faculty contracts and yearly faculty employment letters.

2. All faculty groups should discuss the evaluation writing process together in their group meetings every year. The discussion should involve the importance of evaluations for student learning; the need to plan for evaluation writing during the semester; strategies for writing evaluations; overcoming writer's block and writing quality evaluations for students. All faculty should be engaged in these discussions.

3. Regular evaluation writing workshops are offered by the College every semester. Faculty will be given access to a set of past evaluations, and topics might include the importance of evaluations for student learning; planning for evaluation writing during the semester; strategies for writing evaluations; overcoming writer’s block; and quality evaluations for students. These workshops are especially important for new faculty, and are part of their orientation, but all faculty are welcome.

4. Faculty who have not completed their grades/evaluations in a timely manner in a semester will not be eligible for privileges or benefits beyond their regular teaching and service demands until and unless they are caught up and current with their work for an entire academic year. For example, faculty will not be eligible for faculty research awards, or course releases, will not be allowed to engage in college-funded summer research or to otherwise steward college funds.

5. Faculty who are chronically or egregiously late (e.g., repeatedly late over several years, or routinely late by more than one month) as recorded by the Office of the Provost/Registrar, and have not completed their grades/evaluations by the published deadlines for both semesters of a given academic year, will not be eligible for any salary increases in the subsequent academic year.

6. Faculty who have been subject to the measures above and who still fail to complete their grades/evaluations by the published deadlines, will be issued a written warning, which, if not heeded, will be followed with a one- semester suspension from teaching without pay.