Senior Instructor Promotion Requirements

This LAS Policy outlines the requirements that an Instructor who is a candidate for promotion
must fulfill in order to be considered for promotion to Senior Instructor. It also makes as specific as reasonable those requirements that the Instructor's supervisor (Chair or Director, depending upon the Primary Unit's structure) must follow when preparing and submitting the dossier/recommendation.  It also references a standing committee of the LAS Faculty called the Dean's Instructor Review Committee (DIRC) which has been established to act as an advisory group to the Dean in Instructor promotions and other matters. More information on the DIRC can be found under the LAS Policies at

This document also makes recommendations designed to make the promotion process more transparent and accessible to the Instructor and the supervisor. Nothing in this document shall be construed or interpreted as being in conflict with any future University policies concerning Instructor promotions but rather as an augment to them.

  Requirements for Promotion to Senior Instructor

  1. The Department Chair or Program Director of a department or program in which the Instructor is currently teaching must make a recommendation for promotion to the Dean no earlier than the second semester of the Instructor's fifth full year (typically by March 15th) or by March 15th of any subsequent spring semester.
    1. An Instructor whose record is extraordinary may be considered for early promotion to Senior Instructor. The evidence required for an early promotion must be greater than that required for normal progress toward promotion.
    2. Time spent as a lecturer may count toward promotion to Senior Instructor, at the Department's and Dean's discretion. For example, an instructor who previously served 2 years as a lecturer teaching 4 courses per year could be given 1 year of credit toward the 5-year requirement.  However, no more than one year total may be credited toward the 5-year requirement under this protocol, regardless of how it is calculated.
  2. The Instructor must have been rated as "exceeding expectations" or "outstanding" in four of the previous five years' annual merit reviews (including the current year) and must have been rated no lower than "meeting expectations" in any of the previous five years' annual merit reviews (including the current year). Copies of these annual merit reviews must be included in the dossier.  Since promotion recommendations are typically submitted prior to the completion of the Instructor annual merit review (at the Dean's level) for the current year, the Chair or Director must at least include their rating for the Instructor candidate for the current year at the Chair or Director level. Final determination of the promotion will depend upon the final rating for that year as assigned by the Dean, however.
  3. The Instructor must have demonstrated substantial and significant accomplishment in teaching and be considered an excellent teacher as determined by the primary unit. In addition to teaching evaluation modalities (such as mentoring, portfolios, peer review, etc.) chosen by the Instructor and his/her Chair or Director, evidence of  substantial and significant accomplishments in teaching must include:
    • Official FCQ Summaries for all courses taught for the five (or more) years under consideration.
    • A discussion by the Chair or Director directly speaking to the teaching abilities and teaching successes of the Instructor, referencing the FCQ scores and the other evaluation techniques submitted by the Instructor.
    • If the Chair or Director discusses the Instructor's capabilities in areas that are not directly teaching-related, such as Service, there must be an agreement in place that the Instructor is to be rated in these non-teaching areas and that agreement must be referenced (a copy of the Instructor's contract, for example).
  4. The Chair or Director must discuss, and provide specific evidence, that the Instructor has the potential for continued excellence in teaching.
  5. Based on these criteria and the documentation submitted by the primary unit, the Dean will make the final decision reading promotion and will inform the Instructor and the recommending Department Chair or Program Director no later than May 15.
  6. For Instructors who are also up for a teaching award, the promotion packet should nonetheless contain all of the documentation required above, separate from the teaching award packet.

Other Requirements

  1. All new Instructor hires shall have their hiring letters (contracts) written as clearly as possible so that responsibilities inside and outside of classroom teaching are specified in the letter of hire. In that way, a promotion letter can refer to the letter of hire.
  2. As soon as practical, all letters of hire for currently employed Instructors shall be rewritten with the same goal in mind, that is to make as specific as possible their responsibilities inside and outside of the classroom. This is especially a timely matter for those Instructors who are, or who intend to be, engaged in activities outside of classroom instruction and for which they intend to be recognized.
  3. In the meantime, Chairs or Directors with supervisory authority over Instructors should sit down with the Instructor and write an "internal memo of understanding" so there is at least some documentation to refer to during the promotion or merit review process. It might even be worthwhile to have the Dean's signature on each of these MOU's in order to safeguard the College and to ensure common sense.
  4. The self-evaluations of NTTF shall be limited to 2 pages, one-sided, or one two-sided page.
  5. Those Instructors on a 100 % teaching contract shall not be penalized for not doing service or Professional Practice.
  6. The Dean's Instructor Review Committee (DIRC) shall be utilized in reviewing the dossiers and making recommendations to the Dean.


  • The Chair, or Director, should inform the Instructor about the promotion policy and process early on (from the date of hire), so that the NTTF member has time to impact the outcome in appropriate ways. In the annual review, the Chair or Director should help the NTTF member to assess his or her progress toward promotion and make recommendations about how to facilitate the process. Mentoring should be available for NTTF from the Chair or Director, other Senior Instructors, and/or the DIRC.
  • Because promotion to senior instructor is the only promotion available for NTTF, it should carry prestige and weight.
  • Since promotion to Senior Instructor depends upon many factors, it should not be assumed that the denial of promotion implies that the Instructor is not a valued member of the LAS faculty. Therefore, denial of promotion does not, per se, imply lack of performance on the part of the Instructor and, under normal conditions, the Instructor would continue in his or her employment as an Instructor in LAS.