Procedures for Academic Ranks of Spencer Museum of Art Academic Staff

The Spencer Museum of Art (SMA) conducts the initial review of the candidate pursuant to the procedures and requirements of section 5 of Article VI of the FSRR in connection with the candidate’s responsibility in the area of Faculty Development.

Promotion Committee

The Spencer Museum of Art Promotion Committee shall evaluate the candidate’s professional performance, creative research and scholarship, and service.

The SMA Promotion Committee consists of 6 members, appointed by the SMA Director.  The committee will include the SMA Director, SMA Senior Curator, and four other appointed KU faculty/academic staff. The committee is responsible for acting on behalf of the Museum as a whole in all matters related to promotion. 

All candidates for promotion will make a presentation to the Promotion Committee to familiarize colleagues with their recent teaching, scholarly and/or creative activity, and service activities.  Presentations will be scheduled early in the fall semester of the mandatory year (or year in which an academic staff member is a candidate for promotion).

No students or untenured faculty members, except unclassified academic staff with the rank equivalent to or higher than associate professor, shall serve on the SMA Promotion Committee or vote on any recommendation concerning promotion.  All committee members must hold the appropriate academic rank of or above the rank for which the candidate is being considered.

Initiation of Review 

Candidates for promotion may be nominated by the SMA Director.  As part of the annual staff evaluation process, the SMA 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.  If the SMA determines that those qualifications may warrant promotion in rank, it shall initiate procedures for reviewing the staff member for promotion. 

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 area’s guidelines. Except in rare or unusual circumstances, the normal time in rank prior to a nomination is five years.

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 SMA.

The SMA Promotion Committee shall receive the form and accompanying materials from the candidate and finish compiling the record of the candidate’s professional performance, creative research and scholarship, and service in accordance with the Provost’s guidelines. 

The SMA Promotion Committee will allow the candidate to provide a list of 6 names as recommendations for the required outside reviewers to assist in the evaluation of academic staff.  The SMA Promotion Committee will select from this list a maximum of 3 reviewers, and add 3 additional reviewers, for a total of 6.  The candidate will not know who was selected from the list. Reviewers should hold positions in related disciplines and academic/professional rank equal to or greater than the rank for which the candidate is being considered. 

When soliciting external reviews of a candidate’s scholarship, the SMA Promotion Committee shall inform prospective reviewers of the extent to which the candidate will have access to the review.  The SMA’s confidentiality policy regarding soliciting external reviews for the promotion review process is as follows:

"As a part of the promotion review process, we are soliciting assessments of ____’s professional performance, creative research and scholarship, and service contributions from academic colleagues and museum 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."

The candidate and SMA designated supervisor are expected to work together regarding any questions about the preparation of the dossier. 

Recommendations

Upon completion of the record, the Promotion Committee will evaluate the candidate’s professional performance, creative research and scholarship, and service in light of the applicable standards and criteria and make recommendations in accordance with the voting procedures detailed below.

The SMA Promotion Committee shall evaluate the candidate’s record of professional performance, creative research and scholarship, and service in light of the applicable standards and criteria and vote to rate the candidate in each area of performance and make recommendations concerning the award of promotion in rank. The SMA Promotion Committee presents their recommendation as a motion. Voting privileges for promotion decisions are limited to KU academic staff or faculty of associate and senior rank. Each committee member may vote on any promotion motion, 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 committee members 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 SMA Promotion Committee shall prepare the final evaluation sections of the promotion forms. The forms and recommendations shall be forwarded to the SMA Director who shall indicate separately, in writing, concurrence or disagreements with the recommendations of the review committee.  The Director shall communicate the recommendations of the initial review, and concurrence or disagreement, 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 chair of the promotion committee shall inform the candidate that the candidate may request that the record be forwarded for further review. 

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

Intermediate Review

Favorable recommendations, together with the record of the initial review, shall be forwarded to the committee conducting the intermediate review. Negative recommendations resulting from an initial review shall go forward for intermediate review only if the candidate requests it. 

Upon receiving a negative recommendation, the candidate may submit a written response to the Office of Research Committee on Promotions (ORCP).  The candidate may also submit a written response to the ORCP when receiving a final rating of professional performance, creative research and scholarship, 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 ORCP.

A request for information by ORCP and/or UCPT shall be sent to the SMA Director who shall immediately provide a copy to the candidate’s review and inform the SMA Promotion Committee.  The Director and/or committee shall prepare the SMA's response in accordance with the initial review procedures.

The candidate shall be afforded an opportunity to participate in the preparation of the SMA's response and/or to submit documentation or comment to the ORCP and/or UCPT as applicable.