Emailing Potential Evaluators (for the Review Committee Chair)

The Review Committee Chair, using the approved email templates, solicits at least six evaluations of the candidate's work. Contact with evaluators should always be initiated by email rather than by telephone. All email contact with external evaluators should be included in the candidate’s file. In rare cases where contact is made by telephone, the conversation should be limited to a discussion of the potential evaluator’s willingness to be a reviewer, and the details of the conversation should be logged and included in the candidate’s file.  If following up is necessary, use the approved email template.

INITIAL EMAIL CONTACT WITH EXTERNAL EVALUATORS (Approved Sample)

Revised: July 2018

Dear [__________]:
We are reviewing the dossier of Professor. [_______], currently [_________], for potential [appointment as ___________]/[promotion to ___________]/[award of tenure]. I am contacting you in my role as [_______], to ask if you would be willing to review Dr. [______]'s scholarly materials and provide a letter of evaluation. You are recognized as an expert in Dr. [______]’s field, and we would very much appreciate your evaluation. Please let me know if you will be able to provide an evaluation. If you agree to help with our review process, we will send you the official request approved by the Provost, together with Dr. [______]’s CV and statement of intellectual development, as well as copies of work [he/she] has identified as the most significant. We would like to receive your evaluation by [date], and we ask that you consider the specific questions in the cover letter as well as all of the materials that we will send you.

As part of our review process, we strive to find evaluators who neither are, nor have been, colleagues, collaborators, students, or supervisors of the candidate. Unless I hear otherwise, I will assume that to be the case. We will keep your letter confidential as stipulated by University policy.

Thank you very much for considering this request.


Sincerely,

 

 

Evaluator Follow-Up Email (Approved Sample)

Revised: July 2018


Dear [_______]:


I am writing to follow up on an email message I sent to you on [date]. In that message, appended below, I
asked if you would be willing to evaluate the scholarly accomplishments of [__________]. I do not
believe I have heard from you and wish to know if you have been able to consider this request. I would
appreciate your response as soon as possible.


Thanks,
[_______]
<previous message appended here>

 
 

Communicating with Confirmed Evaluators (for Review Committee Chair)

Once an evaluator agrees to write a letter and has been identified as arms-length, the Reviewer Committee Chair sends the following materials digitally, using a secure Duke Box folder:

  • Official Evaluation Request Letter for the appropriate appointment/promotion
  • Candidate’s CV 
  • Intellectual Development Statement 
  • Top 10 Publications in .pdf format 
  • Duke University Confidentiality Policy

FOR EXTERNAL ASSISTANT PROFESSORS APPOINTMENT TO ASSOCIATE WITH TENURE (Approved Sample Letter)

Revised: January 2022


CONFIDENTIAL
Dear :
Professor ___________, now a/an professor of at is going to be reviewed this fall by our department/program/section and the College / School of , Duke University for possible appointment to associate professor with tenure. Tenure decisions are among the most important a university makes, and we would be most grateful if you could help us by evaluating Professor ___________'s scholarly achievements. Duke values diversity in scholarly approaches, topics, and methodologies. Our tenured associate professors are expected to stand in competition with the top scholars of similar rank in their fields nationally and internationally. During the tenure review process, we look for clear indications that the candidate's performance as scholar and teacher
is widely perceived as outstanding. In your evaluation of Professor 's accomplishments, please comment on the following:


1. Your relationship to the candidate: If you are not a fully arm’s length reviewer, please describe the nature of any past collaboration.

2. The strengths and weaknesses of Professor ______'s scholarship and their standing in the discipline. Please describe the scope and significance of the candidate’s research and other scholarly activities. We are particularly interested in your sense of the original or otherwise significant contributions that s/he has
made to the discipline and subfield. Where relevant, address the candidate’s public engagement, particularly engagement that is grounded in and draws on the candidate’s research.

3. Who the top scholars are in Professor ______'s peer group and where the candidate ranks in that group. We are interested in your evaluation of Professor 's achievements and stature compared to the best scholars in their discipline and field who are at similar stages in their careers.

4. Names of several other experts who would be qualified to provide an objective evaluation of the candidate. Professor 's dossier will ultimately be evaluated at the university level by scholars who may not be familiar with the candidate’s field of research. To assist with this portion of the review, it would be helpful to know who else might provide evaluations of the candidate’s research accomplishments.

5. Your evaluation of whether Professor ______ would receive tenure in your university. Given your knowledge of the candidate’s research contributions, please assess whether they would be tenured in your university and whether you would support that decision. We also would welcome any additional insights that may be helpful to the department's faculty committee, the dean, and the Provost's Advisory Committee on Appointment, Promotion and Tenure in determining whether to recommend this appointment with tenure.

Please use the secure link below to access the candidate’s curriculum vitae, intellectual development statement, reprints of publications, and a few items of work in progress.


*dummy link to secure box folder*


Thank you in advance for taking the time to do this evaluation. We would appreciate a reply by ______ if possible. Your response will be maintained in confidence as stipulated in the enclosed University policy. Likewise, it is very important to the integrity of our process that this request be kept confidential.

 

Sincerely,
Department
Chair
Or Search/Review Committee Chair

 
 

FOR EXTERnal PROFESSORS APPOINTMENT TO full professor (Approved Sample Letter)

Revised: January 2022

CONFIDENTIAL

Dear                      :

Professor ______ , now tenured associate/full  professor of ______ at _______ (Enter Current or Most Recent University/Institution), is going to be reviewed by both our department/program/section and the School of ______ for a possible appointment to full professor with tenure.

As you know, full professors play a critical role in establishing the intellectual quality of a university. We would be most grateful if you could help us by evaluating Professor______ 's scholarly achievements

Our criteria for promotion to full professor with tenure include outstanding performance as evidenced by recognition among peers in the field worldwide.  In your evaluation of Professor______ ‘s accomplishments, please comment on the following:

  1. Your relationship to the candidate. If you are not a fully arm’s length reviewer, please describe the nature of any past collaboration
     
  2. The strengths and weaknesses of Professor______ 's scholarship and their standing in the discipline. Please describe the scope and significance of the candidate’s research and other scholarly activities. We are particularly interested in your sense of the original or otherwise significant contributions that s/he has made to the discipline and subfield.
     
  3. Who the top scholars are in Professor______ 's peer group and where the candidate ranks in that group. We are interested in your evaluation of Professor   's achievements and stature compared to the best scholars in their discipline and field who are at similar stages in their careers.
     
  4. Public engagement. Where relevant, address the candidate’s public engagement, particularly engagement that is grounded in and draws on the candidate’s research.
     
  5. Names of several other experts who would be qualified to provide an objective evaluation of the candidate. Professor______ 's dossier will ultimately be evaluated at the university level by scholars who may not be familiar with the candidate’s field of research. To assist with this portion of the review, it would be helpful to know who else might provide evaluations of the candidate’s research accomplishments.
     
  6. Your evaluation of whether Professor ______ would receive this promotion in your university. Given your knowledge of the candidate’s research contributions, please assess whether they would receive this promotion in your university and whether you would support that decision.

We also would welcome any additional insights that may be helpful to the department's faculty committee, the dean, and the Provost's Advisory Committee on Appointment, Promotion and Tenure in determining whether to recommend this promotion.

Please use the secure link below to access Professor______ ’s  curriculum vitae, intellectual development statement, reprints of publications, and a few items of work in progress.

 

*link to secure box folder*

 

Thank you in advance for taking the time to do this evaluation. We would appreciate a reply by, ______ , if possible. Your response will be maintained in confidence as stipulated in the included University policy. Likewise, it is very important to the integrity of our process that this request be kept confidential.

 

Sincerely yours,

Department Chair

or Search/Review Committee Chair

Duke University Confidentiality Policy


Pursuant to university custom and policy, all documents contained in the dossier with the exception of the materials directly submitted by the candidate are considered confidential, as is the identity of all external reviewers. The total dossier is made available only to those individuals officially responsible for recommendations and/or decisions on the candidate's status. These individuals include (1) the voting members of the departmental faculty in cases of appointment; (2) tenured departmental faculty of rank higher than the candidate in cases of reappointment, promotion, and tenure within the university; (3) the departmental chairs and administrative assistants of the chairs; (4) the appropriate deans, the provost, the provost's Advisory Committee on Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure, and related committees; (5) the president; and (6) the Board of Trustees. All individuals participating in the APT process are expected to adhere to this statement regarding confidentiality. Ad hoc panels and/or individual additional external reviewers may be consulted by any of the above listed university administrators or faculty bodies with the expectation that the privacy and confidentiality of the dossier is protected.

Academic Council
March 31, 1988
Revised September 2001