5.5.C Evaluation Process
Requests for appointment to Professor of the Practice arise from departments and must be approved by the school Dean prior to submission to the Provost. The Provost shall make appointments to this position in consultation with two members of the University Advisory Board designated by the Provost.
Procedures for the evaluation process at the department and School levels are described below. Departures from these guidelines should be rare and for good reason. Procedural questions should be addressed to the Office of Academic Affairs.
Instructions for assembly of the appointment or reappointment request, including the process for compiling a list of proposed evaluators (referees) is available on the Office of Academic Affairs website https://med.stanford.edu/academicaffairs/faa/guidelines-instructions/appointment-promotion/visiting-titles.html#about-professor-of-the-practice
The entire appointment or reappointment proceedings during which specific candidates are discussed are to be held in strict confidence by all participants. The opinions expressed by the School or department faculty or by internal or external referees shall not be discussed with the candidate or with other parties. This policy ensures that the candidacy of each person is treated with utmost confidentiality. It also provides an opportunity for those making the evaluation to have the freedom to provide written evaluation or to discuss the candidates during committee meetings without fearing that their comments will be shared outside the deliberations.
A breach of confidentiality by a participant in an appointment, reappointment or promotion case is a serious breach of professional ethics and may subject the individual to discipline.
The Vice Dean of the School of Medicine or the chair of the department (or his or her designate) will convey whatever information needs to be transmitted to the candidate.
Candidates will be evaluated for appointment to Professor of the Practice based on (a) fit with the programmatic need or opportunity and (b) evidence of exceptional distinction as a practitioner. Additional evidence may be required depending on the nature of the programmatic role.
Candidates shall be recommended with attention to the University’s overarching commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion. The recommendation should provide information on the specific responsibilities intended for the candidate and should discuss the evidence of the candidate’s qualifications for the position.
Reappointments are made using the same review process as the initial appointment except that teaching evaluations or other documentation may be reviewed as appropriate to the role, and justification for continued programmatic need or opportunity must be provided.
After an appropriate assessment of the candidate’s credentials, the department chair prepares a request. The initial appointment inquiry is submitted to the Vice Dean. If the Vice Dean is supportive, the department moves forward with preparing a formal evaluation of the candidate’s qualifications and appropriateness to meet the programmatic need or opportunity. The department chair shall convene either the Department’s standing A&P Professoriate committee or an all Professoriate faculty to review the request and vote on the action. The vote is advisory to the department chair, who ultimately makes the decision whether to recommend appointment or reappointment actions to the Vice Dean.
The School of Medicine Appointments and Promotions Committee a standing committee (A&P), advisory to the Vice Dean, will review and assess the academic credentials of the candidate for the initial appointment or reappointment.
Upon receipt of a recommendation (whether positive or negative) from the Appointments and Promotions Committee, the decision rests with the Vice Dean, in his or her judgment and discretion, whether to make a positive or negative recommendation to the Dean, whether to remand the file to the department with instructions, or whether to take such other action as in his or her judgment is deemed appropriate.
Before taking any of these options, the Vice Dean may also refer the case back to the department chair (who may decide to withdraw it) or ask the A&P Committee to reconsider.
Following receipt from the Vice Dean of a positive or a negative recommendation (such as following a review and vote by the A&P Committee), the Dean shall make his or her decision as to whether to forward the file with his or her positive recommendation to the Provost, whether to remand the file with further instructions, or whether to take such other action as in his or her judgment is deemed appropriate.
If the Dean’s (and hence the School’s) decision is negative, then notification of that negative decision is provided both to the candidate, the department and the Provost’s Office.
The Provost shall make appointments to this position in consultation with two members of the University Advisory Board designated by the Provost.