Promotion Procedures for Unclassified Academic Staff, Biodiversity Institute

General Provisions

Scope and Purpose. The award of promotion in rank is among the most important and far-reaching decisions made by the Biodiversity Institute because excellent academic staff is an essential component of any outstanding research center. Promotion decisions also have a profound effect on the lives and careers of researchers. Promotion in rank for unclassified academic staff follows the same general procedures as promotion for faculty members. Recommendations concerning promotion must be made carefully, based upon a thorough examination of the candidate’s record and the impartial application of these criteria and procedures, established in compliance with the Faculty Senate Rules and Regulations (FSRR) Article VI.

It is the purpose of this document to promote the rigorous and fair evaluation of unclassified academic staff performance during the promotion process by (a) establishing criteria that express the Biodiversity Institute's expectations for meeting University standards in terms of disciplinary practices; (b) providing procedures for the initial evaluation of professional performance, teaching, scholarship, and service; (c) preserving and enhancing the participatory rights of candidates, including the basic right to be informed about critical stages of the process and to have an opportunity to respond to negative evaluations; and (d) clarifying the responsibilities, roles, and relationships of the participants in the promotion review process.

Each level of review, including the initial review, the intermediate review, and the University level review, conducts an independent evaluation of a candidate’s record of performance and makes independent recommendations to the Chancellor. Later stages of review neither affirm nor reverse earlier recommendations, which remain part of the record for consideration by the Chancellor. It is the responsibility of each person involved in the review process to exercise his/her own judgment to evaluate a candidate’s professional performance, teaching, scholarship, and service (as applicable to each position) based upon the entirety of the data and information in the record. No single source of information, such as peer review letters, shall be considered a conclusive indicator of quality.

Academic Freedom. All faculty and unclassified academic staff members, regardless of rank, are entitled to academic freedom in relation to teaching and scholarship, and the right as citizens to speak on matters of public concern. Likewise, all faculty and unclassified academic staff members, regardless of rank, bear the obligation to exercise their academic freedom responsibly and in accordance with the accepted standards of their academic disciplines.

Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest. Consideration and evaluation of a faculty or unclassified academic staff member’s record is a confidential personnel matter. Only those persons eligible to vote on promotion may participate in or observe deliberations or have access to the personnel file (except that clerical staff may assist in the preparation of documents under conditions that assure confidentiality).

No person shall participate in any aspect of the promotion process concerning a candidate when participation would create a clear conflict of interest or compromise the impartiality of an evaluation or recommendation.

If a candidate believes that there is a conflict of interest, the candidate may petition to have that person recuse him/herself. If a committee member does not recuse him/herself, a decision about whether that person has a conflict of interest shall be made by a majority of the other committee members.

Promotion Standards

General Principles. The University strives for a consistent standard of quality against which the performance of all faculty and unclassified academic staff members is measured. Nonetheless, the nature of a candidate’s activities varies across the University and the candidate’s record must be evaluated in light of his/her particular responsibilities and the expectations of the discipline. These criteria state the Biodiversity Institute's expectations of performance in the areas of professional performance, scholarship (including graduate education), and service necessary to satisfy the University standards for promotion to associate or senior level.

Scientists, research professors and curators are evaluated on the basis of professional performance, scholarship (including graduate education), and service, with the relative weights of each component determined by unit policy and time allocations clearly articulated in writing at the time of appointment.

Unclassified academic staff should strive to develop a national and international reputation for their scholarship, one that enhances the recognition and reputation of their research center, survey, core lab, or academic department.

Reputation is based primarily upon publications, service, and external funding.

In the Biodiversity Institute, promotion to associate rank usually is considered after 5 years in service, i.e., during their 6th year in the assistant rank, although under exceptional circumstances, exceptions may be made. Individuals usually are considered for promotion to senior rank after 6 years in service as an associate. Under exceptional circumstances, exceptions may be made.

Professional Performance. If the details of the individual’s appointment include expectations of professional performance not encompassed within research, service, and teaching, expectations for the quantity and quality of professional performance requisite for promotion should be clearly articulated in the written position description to the candidate by the unit at the time that he or she receives the appointment.

The Biodiversity Institute bases its evaluation of an individual's professional performance on the annual reports submitted by that individual detailing the person's activities from year to year, the promotion packet submitted by the candidate, and extramural evaluations provided by peers.

In the Biodiversity Institute, the expectations for professional performance that apply for the award of promotion to associate rank are shown in unshaded cells in Table 1.

Table 1. Expectations for professional performance for promotion to associate (unshaded cells) and senior ranks (shaded cells) in the Biodiversity Institute.

Responsibility	Faculty Curators & Research Scientists	Collection Managers and other with academic equivalency
Administration:
Staff:	Evidence of participation in team management of personnel in scientific division—e.g., collection manager, student assistants, postdocs, etc.	Evidence of participation in team management of graduate and undergraduate students, and visitors using collection resources. Provision of lab safety training and monitoring adherence to regulations.
	Ability to direct staff activities as Curator in charge.  Assure that personnel in division adhere to University and state regulations regarding travel and purchasing.	Ability to oversee personnel in the absence of curators. Assure that all lab users adhere to lab regulations.
Resources:	Contribute to decisions involving expenditure of divisional budget, as well as grant and endowment funds.	Contribute to establishment of laboratory budget, as well as the purchase of supplies and equipment for laboratory use.
	Ability to take charge of fiscal matters and involve appropriate staff in decisions about expenditures. Make sure that personnel follow mandated protocols for expenditures and reimbursements.	Work with curators to establish budget priorities for unit. Assure that budget is not exceeded. Follow state rules for purchasing. Oversee research library resources.
Permits:	Application for appropriate permits for fieldwork and import/export of scientific specimens.	Maintain files of permits and reports.
	Assure that all personnel are following permitting procedures—i.e., curators, students, and collection manager	Maintain files of permits and reports.
Reports:	File state, federal, and international reports as required by permits; file BI annual staff performance evaluations and reports.	Provide annual reports on collection activities and statistics as required by BI.
	Assure that all state, federal, and international reports as required by permits are filed in appropriate manner. Assemble and submit BI annual staff performance evaluations and reports.	Provide annual reports on collection activities and statistics as required by BI.
Collection Stewardships:
Collection development:	Contribute to the development of strategic plan(s) for collection accessions/deaccessions and use.	Assist in the development of collection strategic plans regarding collection maintenance and care.
	Lead development of strategic planning with regard to collection growth and priorities.	Develop strategic plans for improved maintenance and accessibility of collections and their data.
Collection management and use:	Help develop policies governing management and use of collections—e.g., loans, permissions, terms of use.	Manage day to day collection activities—i.e., accessions, cataloguing, loans/loan returns, databasing specimens. Integrate new material into collection.  Update taxonomic, locality and other specimen data in consultation with the faculty curator(s). Enable and track collection use; keep collection database current and accessible to the community.
	Develop and adjudicate policies governing management and use of collections—e.g., loans, permissions,	Monitor compliance with collection policies on management and use, in addition to above.
Collection improvement:	Participate in preparation of proposals for extramural funding for physical and digital improvements of collections.	Assist faculty curator(s) with extramural collection improvement proposals; monitor and maintain the physical and digital state of collections, ensuring they meet discipline standards.
	Seek and develop proposals for extramural funding for physical and digital improvements of collections.

In the Biodiversity Institute, the expectations in the shaded cells of the preceding table apply for the award of promotion to senior rank.

Scholarship. The concept of “scholarship” encompasses not only traditional academic research and publication, but also the creation of artistic works or performances and any other products or activities accepted by the academic discipline as reflecting scholarly effort and achievement for purposes of promotion. While the nature of scholarship varies among disciplines, the University adheres to a consistently high standard of quality in its scholarly activities to which all faculty and unclassified academic staff members, regardless of discipline, are held.

In the Biodiversity Institute, scholarship is defined as research and graduate/research training; it is assessed by peer-reviewed publications or creation and development of software, professional presentations, extramural funding, and external peer evaluations. The Biodiversity Institute bases its evaluation on annual reports submitted by that individual that detail the per- son's research, research/graduate training activities, extramural grants, publications and presentations from year to year, the promotion packet submitted by the candidate, and extramural evaluations provided by peers.

Under the University standards for promotion to associate rank, the record must demonstrate a successfully developing scholarly career, as reflected in such factors as the quality and quantity of publications or creative activities, external reviews of the candidate’s work by respected scholars or practitioners in the field, the candidate’s regional, national, or international reputation, and other evidence of an active and productive scholarly agenda.

When appropriate to his or her duties, the individual is expected to successfully seek external funding to support his or her research program. The acquisition of competitive external funding is an important measure of the success and stature of the individual’s research program.

In the Biodiversity Institute, the scholarship expectations to meet University standards for promotion to associate rank are shown in unshaded cells in Table 2.

Table 2. Expectations for scholarship (professional performance) for promotion to associate (unshaded cells) and senior ranks (shaded cells) in the Biodiversity Institute.

Responsibility	Faculty Curators & Research Scientists	Collection Managers and other with academic equivalency
Scholarly Research and Research/Graduate Training:
Publication:	Dissemination of original research results in peer-reviewed print or electronic journals and other media, and creation and development of software. Productivity is measured both quantitatively and qualitatively rather than solely quantitatively.	For those for whom research is required, creation and development of software constitutes publication of results of research, as do peer-reviewed publications.
	Evidence of a sustainable, focused research trajectory with demonstrably synthetic contributions to the discipline.
Extramural funding:	Seek and obtain regular funding in support of research and graduate students.	Assist the faculty curator(s) and research scientists in seeking extramural funding, as appropriate.
	Demonstrate sustained extramural funding. Participate in collaborative intramural and extramural research efforts.	Manage grant-­‐funded projects and personnel associated with collection improvement and support.
Research/Graduate training:	Mentor graduate student research; serve on graduate student committees; mentor and assist graduate students in seeking extramural research funding.	Train graduate students in the care, management, and responsible use of collections and associated data.
	Mentor postdoctoral scholars.
Professional meetings:	Participate and present research results at professional congresses and meetings.	Attend and make presentations at professional congresses and meetings.
	Convene and participate in workshops and symposia.

Under the University standards for promotion to senior rank, the record must demonstrate an established scholarly career, as reflected in such factors as a substantial and ongoing pattern of publication or creative activity, external reviews of the candidate’s work by eminent scholars or practitioners in the field, the candidate’s national or international reputation, and other evidence of an active and productive scholarly career.

When appropriate to their duties, the individual should have established a continuous, successful record of competitive external funding that enhances their research program.

In the Biodiversity Institute, the expectations that apply for the award of promotion to senior rank are shown in the shaded cells in Table 2.

Service. Service is an important responsibility of all faculty and unclassified academic staff members that contributes to the University’s performance of its larger mission. Although the nature of service activities will depend on a candidate’s particular interests and abilities, service contributions are an essential part of being a good citizen of the University. The Biodiversity Institute accepts and values scholarly service to the discipline or profession, service within the University, and public service at the local, state, national, or international level.

Under the University standards for promotion to associate rank, the record must demonstrate a pattern of service to the University at one or more levels, to the discipline or profession, and/or to the local, state, national, or international communities.

In the Biodiversity Institute, the service expectations to meet University standards apply for promotion to associate rank are shown in unshaded cells in Table 3.

Table 3. Expectations service for promotion to associate (unshaded cells) and senior ranks (shaded cells) in the Biodiversity Institute.

Responsibility	Faculty Curators & Research Scientists	Collection Managers and others with academic equivalency
Service to VI, University and the Disciple:
Proposal review:	Extramural agency and internal proposal review.
	Should have a diverse reviewing profile and have been invited to serve on panels.
Manuscript review:	Journal, book manuscript review, and student MS review.
	Should have a diverse reviewing profile in terms of scientific publications in their discipline and allied areas.
Editorial service:	Some editorial service for journals, publishers, or professional societies.
	Service on editorial/advisory boards of discipline‐specific professional organizations	Editorial service for journals, publishers, and professional societies related to collections care and management.
Committee service:	Committee service for BI, KU, and professional societies.
	Committee service for national and international scientific organizations and advisory groups. Some committee chairships.	Committee service for BI, KU, and professional societies.
Public Programs and Outreach Activities
Exhibits, Public Education & Visitor Services:	Contribute and participate as needed to Public Programs of the Natural History Museum; participate in community/K-­‐12 outreach activities.	Contribute and participate as needed to Natural History Museum exhibits, and to Public Education & Visitor Services programs; participate in community/K-­‐12 outreach activities.
	Integrate public programs and community outreach into broader impacts of extramural proposals.  Encourage graduate student involvement in these activities.
Museum Studies:	Collaborate, as needed, with Museum Studies in training student interns, and participate in lectures and seminars.	Collaborate, as needed, with Museum Studies in training student interns, and participate in lectures and seminars.
	Continued involvement.
Media:	Participate, as appropriate, in media outreach on BI research, collections and graduate education.	Participate, as needed, in media outreach on BI research, collections and graduate education.
	Continued involvement.

Under the University standards for promotion to senior rank, the record must demonstrate an ongoing pattern of service reflecting substantial contributions to the University at one or more levels, to the discipline or profession, and/or to the local, state, national, or international communities.

In the Biodiversity Institute, the expectations listed in the shaded cells of Table 3 apply for the award of promotion to senior rank.

Rating for Performance. Using the criteria described above, the candidate’s performance in the areas of professional performance, teaching, scholarship, and service (as applicable to each position) will be rated using the terms “excellent,” “very good,” “good,” “marginal,” or “poor,” de- fined as follows:

1. “Excellent” means that the candidate substantially exceeds expectations for promotion to this rank.
2. “Very Good” means the candidate exceeds expectations for promotion to this rank.
3. “Good” means the candidate meets expectations for promotion to this rank.
4. “Marginal” means the candidate falls below expectations for promotion to this rank.
5. “Poor” means the candidate falls significantly below expectations for promotion to this rank.

Absent exceptional circumstances, no candidate may be recommended for promotion without meeting standards in all applicable areas of performance.

Promotion Procedures

The Biodiversity Institute conducts the initial review of candidates who do not report directly to the Vice Chancellor for Research. The review is conducted pursuant to the procedures and requirements of section 5 of Article VI of the FSRR in connection with the candidate’s responsibility in the Biodiversity Institute.

Joint appointments. Guidelines for the handling of joint appointments have been established by the Provost’s Office and will govern the interaction between KU Office of Research (KURES) initial and intermediate level reviews, and those conducted by the other unit in which appointment is held. These guidelines can be found at:

  https://policy.ku.edu/provost/joint-appts-guidelines

Each unit (either within KURES, or in KURES and a College or School) in which the candidate holds appointment conducts its own initial review and makes an independent recommendation regarding promotion (or promotion and tenure). However, the various units in which a candidate holds appointment must consult closely about the review since only one set of promotion and tenure materials will be prepared and one set of external evaluations will be solicited.

The primary unit as designated at the time of appointment is responsible for initiating the consultation, soliciting external evaluations, and sharing the evaluations with the other unit(s). (Note that for candidates who hold both an academic staff appointment and an appointment in an academic department, the academic department will always be the primary unit.)

Promotion Committee. The Biodiversity Institute Promotion Committee shall evaluate the candidate’s professional performance, teaching (if applicable), research, and service. In the Biodiversity Institute, the Promotion Committee, appointed by the Director, is composed of the BI Associate Director and faculty-curators and research scientists. When possible, at least one member of the review committee also serves on the P&T committee of the cognate academic department in which the candidate has a joint appointment. The BI P&T committee usually comprises five (5) persons and is chaired by the BI Associate Director.

No students or untenured faculty members, except unclassified academic staff with the rank equivalent to or higher than associate professor, shall serve on the Biodiversity Institute Promotion Committee or vote on any recommendation concerning promotion.

Initiation of Review. Candidates for promotion may be nominated by the administrative principal investigator of a major project, by the director of a unit or sub-unit, or by a unit promotion committee. In addition candidates may self-nominate. The number of years elapsed in rank before nomination is dependent upon the progress made by the individual and the specific center’s guidelines. Except in rare or unusual circumstances, the normal time in rank prior to a nomination is five years.

In addition, candidates who hold also a tenure-track appointment in an academic unit will go through review in the Biodiversity Institute when they go through mandatory review in the corresponding academic unit. Prior to the beginning of the spring semester, the Provost notifies all tenure-track faculty whose mandatory review year will be the following academic year, with copies provided to the unit administrators. Upon receipt of this notice or if a faculty member re- quests it prior to the mandatory review year, the Biodiversity Institute shall initiate procedures for evaluating the candidate for the award of promotion.

As part of the annual staff evaluation process, the Biodiversity Institute shall consider the qualifications of all unclassified academic staff members below the senior rank, with a view toward possible promotion in rank during the following academic year. After considering a staff’s qualifications, if the Biodiversity Institute determines that those qualifications may warrant promotion in rank, it shall initiate procedures for reviewing the staff member for promotion. After seven years in the associate rank, a staff member who believes he or she has the qualifications for promotion may initiate the promotion review process him/herself.

Preparation of the Promotion File. It is the responsibility of the candidate to complete the appropriate portions of the form and provide necessary documents and information in accordance with the Provost’s guidelines, with assistance from the Biodiversity Institute.

The Biodiversity Institute Promotion Committee shall receive the form and accompanying materials from the candidate and finish compiling the record of the candidate’s professional performance and/or teaching, scholarship, and service, and in accordance with the Provost’s guide- lines.

The Biodiversity Institute Promotion Committee shall provide for the solicitation of outside reviewers to assist in the evaluation of a faculty member’s scholarship and in accordance with the Office of Research procedures located at:

  https://policy.ku.edu/research/promotion-procedures-research

Emphasis shall be placed on selecting independent reviewers in the same or related discipline who hold academic rank or a professional position equal to or greater than the rank for which the candidate is being considered. Unit procedures related to the solicitation and handling of external evaluations may vary, but they must conform to the general guidelines and requirements for external evaluations established by the University Committee on Promotion and Tenure and elaborated at:

http://facultydevelopment.ku.edu

The Biodiversity Institute Promotion Committee will collaborate with the review committee of the unit in which the candidate is jointly appointed to select extramural independent reviewers.

When soliciting external reviews of a candidate’s scholarship, the Biodiversity Institute Pro- motion Committee shall inform prospective reviewers of the extent to which the candidate will have access to the review. KURES’s confidentiality policy regarding soliciting external reviewers for the promotion review process is as follows:

"As a part of the promotion and/or tenure review process, we are soliciting assessments of [title] _[name]___’s research contributions from academic colleagues and distinguished professionals. These letters will become part of the candidate's promotion dossier and are treated as confidential by the University to the extent we are permitted to do so by law."

Recommendations. Upon completion of the record, the committee conducting the initial review shall evaluate the candidate’s record of professional performance and/or teaching, scholarship, and service in light of the applicable standards and criteria and make recommendations in accordance with the voting procedures detailed below.

In the Biodiversity Institute voting procedures are, as follow. The Biodiversity Institute Pro- motion Committee presents their recommendation as a motion to members of the BI Advisory Council who are qualified to vote. (See BI Bylaws: Article II. Section 3.C.) Membership in the Advisory Council, according to formal BI Bylaws, consists of BI faculty-curators and research scientists, one representative from each of the following groups—collection managers, graduate students, Public Programs, Informatics Department and Administration. However, for the pur- poses of Promotion the representatives from the collection managers, graduate students, Public Programs, Informatics Department and Administration will not participate in the review.

Voting privileges for promotion decisions of faculty-curators and research scientists are limited to BI faculty-curators and research scientists of associate and senior rank. (See BI Bylaws: Article II. Section 3.C.) Each faculty-curator or research scientists may vote on any promotion/tenure motion before the Council except under special circumstances as recognized by University policies, procedures, or practice, or when a case of a clear conflict of interest is identified. A majority of the faculty-curators and research scientists must be present for a vote to be binding, unless such circumstances exist that prohibit a member from voting. Proxy votes are not accepted. All votes are by secret ballot.

The BI Promotion Committee shall prepare the evaluation and summary evaluation sections of the promotion form. The forms and recommendations shall be forwarded to the director, who shall indicate separately, in writing, whether he or she concurs or disagrees with the recommendations of the review committee. The Biodiversity Institute director shall communicate the recommendations of the initial review, and his or her concurrence or disagreement with the recommendation, to the candidate and provide the candidate with a copy of the summary evaluation section of the promotion form. Negative recommendations shall be communicated in writing and, if the review will not be forwarded automatically, the director shall inform the candidate that he or she may request that the record be forwarded for further review.

Favorable recommendations, together with the record of the initial review, shall be forwarded to the committee(s) conducting the intermediate review. Negative recommendations resulting from an initial review shall go forward for intermediate review only if it is the candidate’s mandatory review year for a candidate holding also a tenure-track appointment or if the candidate requests it.

Intermediate Review. The candidate may submit a written response to a negative recommendation by the Biodiversity Institute or to a final rating of professional performance, teaching, research, or service below the level of “good” included in the evaluation section of the recommendation. The written response goes forward with the dossier to the next level of review by the Office of Research Committee on Promotions (ORCP).

A request for information by ORCP and/or UCPT shall be sent to the Biodiversity Institute di- rector who shall immediately provide a copy to the candidate and inform the Biodiversity Institute Promotion and Tenure Committee. The director and/or committee shall prepare the Biodiversity Institute's response in accordance with the initial review procedures.

The candidate shall be afforded an opportunity to participate in the preparation of the Biodiversity Institute's response and/or to submit his/her own documentation or comment to the ORCP and/or UCPT as applicable