IV.  EXTERNAL LETTERS OF ASSESSMENT

Section Described by Gray Divider Card

NOTE:  This must be paginated D-1, D-2, D-3, etc.

Arrangement of Materials in this Section

(1)    Gray Divider Card

(2)    Sample of Department Head's letter requesting the assessment.  (Copies of the
        individual letters of request should not be included in the dossier; only one sample
        letter is necessary.)

(3)    Identification of those who have written assessments; including a brief statement
        of the evaluator's achievements and standing in his/her discipline.

Sample Identification of Evaluator:

Mr. Albert J. Bush
Research Civil Engineering
USAE Waterways Experiment Station
P. O. Box 631
Geotechnical Lab, WESGI
Vicksburg, MS 39180

Mr. Bush is a Pavement Engineer with the Geotechnical Laboratory of the
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station.  Mr. Bush is
nationally know for his work in the area of pavement deflection testing and
evaluation.  He was the project engineer for the development of the Army
16-kip vibratory pavement device.  Mr. Bush is the Chairman of the ASTM
committee D4.30 "Non-Destructive Testing of Pavement Structures."

(4)    Description of procedure for selection external evaluators, including who recommended
        each evaluator.

(5)    List of materials sent to external evaluators (e.g., copies of publications, vita, narrative statement, etc.)

(6)    Log of External Letters (the completed log form).  Note: only letters solicited by the
        Department Head should be included; do not include unsolicited letters.

(7)    Actual letters of reference, arranged in the same order as the authors' names appear
        on the Log Sheet.

(8)    The College of Engineering requires at least five external letters in each dossier.  The
        University P&T Committee stresses the importance that external letters come from
        diverse sources.

Late-Arriving Letters

(1) If assessment letters are received late, all previous levels of review must have an

opportunity to read late letters and reconsider earlier decisions.

(Administrative Guidelines III.G.4)

(2)    Assessment letters which arrive after the College Committee has met will not be
entered into the dossier or considered in the review process.

(3)    A written and signed statement from the Chair of the Department Committee must
be inserted into the dossier for each late-arriving letter, indicating that the committee
        has had the opportunity to review the late-arriving letter and it has not (or has)
        changed the committee's decision.  A similar signed statement by the Department
        Head must also be inserted into the dossier for each late-arriving letter.  In the case
        of non-University Park faculty, similar signed statements must also be obtained
        from the campus committee and campus CEO and inserted into the dossier.

(4)    The original Log Sheet must be removed from the dossier and a revised Log Sheet,
  indicating the arrival of the late letter, must be inserted.

Guidelines for Obtaining External Letters

(1)  In Engineering, the Department Head is designated as responsible for obtaining
external letters of assessment.  (Administrative Guidelines III.G.3)

(2)    Sources other than the candidate should create and submit lists of potential reviewers
in addition to those the candidate submits.  (The final list of reviewers does not require
        recommendations from the candidate.)  In no case should a candidate directly
        solicit the external letters. (Administrative Guidelines III.E.3, III.G.6)  The guidelines
        state that candidates may recommend some of the names, but they should never know
        who is being asked to write letters and they should never have any contact with
        potential referees before or during the promotion and tenure review process.  Reviewers
        should not be called in advance of receiving a letter requesting an assessment. (R. Secor
        memo of December 19, 1996)

(3)    The Department Head should request letters from the other appropriate individuals
        in addition to any selected from the list suggested by the candidate.  Include a resume
        or other pertinent biographical information about the candidate.

(4)    The College of Engineering requires that each dossier contain at least five external
        letters.  External letters should be selected carefully.  (Administrative Guidelines III.G.2)

(5)    External evaluators should not be former teachers, students, those who have
        collaborated significantly with the candidate or others whose relationship to the
        candidate might make objective assessments difficult.
        (Administrative Guidelines III.G.10)

(6)    If in academia, external evaluators should be of higher rank for promotion candidates,
        and they should be tenured for tenure candidates.  (Administrative Guidelines III.G.11)

(7)    While letters from individuals in industry and government (e.g. program sponsors) may
        be helpful, the majority of letters are normally expected to be from knowledgeable
        academics who are leaders in their field.

(8)    Requests for external letters should ask for professional assessment (not
        recommendation or endorsement) on the basis of the candidate's visibility, peer
        recognition, and professional contributions.

(9)    Assessment of teaching by external evaluators is, in most cases, not appropriate
        or required. (Administrative Guidelines III.G.9, Gray Divider Card, College
        Committee recommendation)

(10)   The request letter should ask the evaluator to describe the nature of his/her
         association with the candidate.  (Administrative Guidelines III.G.10)

(11)   Departments must keep logs of all letters, indicating dates requested and received;
         include requests on log form whether or not a response is received
         (Administrative Guidelines III.G.5, Gray Divider Card)

(12)   Appendix C of the University's Administrative Guidelines provides sample
          letters requesting an external evaluation for a tenure candidate.  This should be
          appropriately modified for a promotion candidate or for a candidate for both
          promotion and tenure.

(13)  When a candidate is being considered for both promotion and tenure, one letter
         from each external evaluator will serve both purposes.  Separate external letters for
         promotion and tenure are not required and should not be solicited.

(14)   External letters from a previous year should not be used.  If it is necessary to use
         such a letter, an updated letter should be requested from the evaluator.