58 · SPEC Kit 293
University of Kansas
xx
2. Evaluation of Research, Scholarship, Creative and Artistic Performance
Qualitative Evaluation *Evaluate each item (since the last promotion) on in Sections IV.A.3 (a) and (b),
pages 13-15 according to the procedures described on page 12. Use the
following rating scale:
E =Exceptional VG=Very Good G =Good M =Marginal P =Poor
(Page 21) In this section of the form, separate comments may be provided
regarding significant presentations, consulting activities, and external and
internal funding awards.
(Page 22) 3. Expectations in Field and Overall Quality
Field Expectations *The research/scholarship/creative work of the candidate and its quality is
evaluated in relation to school or departmental expectations. The evaluation
should include any statements that will assist the UCPT in its evaluation of
the contribution of the candidate to the particular field of study or discipline.
Special information deemed necessary to establish the quality of the
candidate's research, scholarship, creative or artistic performance may be
provided through outside letters or statements. Such statements may include
such matters as standards of the discipline, level of involvement of the
candidate in a project, the expectations for and role of collaborative research,
descriptions of specialized evaluation strategies, such as special peer review
panels of specific work. Letters or statements solicited in support of the
evaluation process must be labeled as such and placed in Folder G.
4. Overall Research, Scholarship, Creative, or Artistic Performance
Overall Rating of Research, Mark the appropriate category reflecting an overall rating of the research,
Scholarship, Creative, or scholarship or creative artistic performance of the candidate. The full range
Artistic Performance *of the scale should be considered when judging the candidate’s performance.
E =Exceptional VG=Very Good G =Good M =Marginal P =Poor
The final judgment should reflect the evaluations included in this section and
the accompanying documentation. This rating should reflect a critical
assessment of the content, significance, quality and quantity of the candidate’s
research, scholarly or creative activity and the extent to which the work has
earned the candidate regional or national recognition, as appropriate. Provide
comments describing the basis for this rating.
If there is a vote on individual ratings, please show the distribution of votes for
each rating.
Provide the rationale for the rating under comments.
For recommendations for promotion to full professor, national and/or
international stature of the candidate should be indicated, where applicable, and
the basis for this assessment should be included.
http://www.provost.ku.edu/faculty/tenure/pt_guidelines_06_07.doc
University of Kansas
xx
2. Evaluation of Research, Scholarship, Creative and Artistic Performance
Qualitative Evaluation *Evaluate each item (since the last promotion) on in Sections IV.A.3 (a) and (b),
pages 13-15 according to the procedures described on page 12. Use the
following rating scale:
E =Exceptional VG=Very Good G =Good M =Marginal P =Poor
(Page 21) In this section of the form, separate comments may be provided
regarding significant presentations, consulting activities, and external and
internal funding awards.
(Page 22) 3. Expectations in Field and Overall Quality
Field Expectations *The research/scholarship/creative work of the candidate and its quality is
evaluated in relation to school or departmental expectations. The evaluation
should include any statements that will assist the UCPT in its evaluation of
the contribution of the candidate to the particular field of study or discipline.
Special information deemed necessary to establish the quality of the
candidate's research, scholarship, creative or artistic performance may be
provided through outside letters or statements. Such statements may include
such matters as standards of the discipline, level of involvement of the
candidate in a project, the expectations for and role of collaborative research,
descriptions of specialized evaluation strategies, such as special peer review
panels of specific work. Letters or statements solicited in support of the
evaluation process must be labeled as such and placed in Folder G.
4. Overall Research, Scholarship, Creative, or Artistic Performance
Overall Rating of Research, Mark the appropriate category reflecting an overall rating of the research,
Scholarship, Creative, or scholarship or creative artistic performance of the candidate. The full range
Artistic Performance *of the scale should be considered when judging the candidate’s performance.
E =Exceptional VG=Very Good G =Good M =Marginal P =Poor
The final judgment should reflect the evaluations included in this section and
the accompanying documentation. This rating should reflect a critical
assessment of the content, significance, quality and quantity of the candidate’s
research, scholarly or creative activity and the extent to which the work has
earned the candidate regional or national recognition, as appropriate. Provide
comments describing the basis for this rating.
If there is a vote on individual ratings, please show the distribution of votes for
each rating.
Provide the rationale for the rating under comments.
For recommendations for promotion to full professor, national and/or
international stature of the candidate should be indicated, where applicable, and
the basis for this assessment should be included.
http://www.provost.ku.edu/faculty/tenure/pt_guidelines_06_07.doc
