1. Preparing for the 3-year review Presented by Paulette Clancy Samuel W. and Diane M. Bodman Professor School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering Updated 2012

2. Preparing for the 3-year review Goals of the 3-year review For the candidate: To provide a required point to stop and reassess their own goals and progress towards tenure. To receive feedback to let you know “How am I doing?” For the department’s tenured faculty: To take time to focus on the candidate’s progress To provide feedback on their view of the candidate’s progress To reassess their own mentoring of the candidate and consider what they might do to help the candidate’s external and internal visibility Ideally, the process should not be viewed as a “hurdle,” but as a boost to your progress. You will find the time well spent.

3. Preparing for the 3-year review Mechanics of the 3-year review Reappointments normally begin the July 1 (or Jan 1) that starts your fourth year About 6 months in advance: Talk to your mentor(s) and your Chair/Director about the details of the process. What is expected of you? Will external letters be required? Letters from students? Do you have any say in the choice of letter writers? And so on… About 3 months in advance: Prepare the following An updated CV. [More on this on the next slide] A document that defines your vision of your research program [more on this later] A shorter document that gives your teaching philosophy and experiences, including challenges in the classroom. Give this material to your mentors for quick feedback prior to submitting to the department

4. Preparing for the 3-year review Mechanics of the 3-year review (continued.) After the tenured faculty meeting: You may get feedback asking you to rework your documentation Expect to meet with the Chair/Director to discuss the outcome in detail. Expect (or prompt) the Chair to be very honest. At this point, you do not need “rosy” pictures, but clear direction, esp. w.r.t. perceived weaknesses or concerns in your package. It’s a rare candidate who should be told: everything is perfect. If you don’t get feedback, ask for some! The Chair’s formal submission of the package to the Dean: After the meeting and after discussion with the candidate, the Chair/Director will write a letter to the Dean giving a recommendation with respect to reappointment. They will include your CV, research and teaching visions.

5. Preparing for the 3-year review: CV Information Include the following All publications; helpful to divide into pre- and post- Cornell appointment and to note authorship of Cornell graduate students and post-docs (say, by putting their names in italics). Include patents. Students advised, including post-docs, PhD students, MS students, M. Eng. students, UG researchers and visitors. In the case of MS/PhD students, indicate progress towards degree (e.g., Mary Brown, A exam 7/03; John Wilkins Booth, A exam expected summer 05). Include a list of students for whom you are a thesis committee member. All proposals submitted. Divide into awarded, pending, declined. If joint with other faculty, indicate your contribution and share of the award. All seminars and conference talks (indicate any invited talks) Awards (but don’t go back to UG or grad. School) Courses taught (with course title, years taught, enrollment) Service responsibilities (in the department, at Cornell, outside Cornell including panels, editorial help, etc.) Cornell field membership and in professional societies

6. Preparing for the 3-year review: Research Vision Document Provide the “big picture”. If you were writing a fictitious citation of your contribution to the field at the end of 5 years, what would it read? What progress have you made towards this goal? Don’t be afraid to use phrases like “we are the first group to…” or “we resolved a long-standing misunderstanding in the literature…” Faculty outside your area cannot see the ‘light and shade’ without your guidance. Give it to them. What plans do you have for the next 3 years? What challenges have hampered progress or are expected to appear in the next 3 years? What can the department do to help you? Length: Typically around 3 pages including figures and references. [Check for your department’s norm for length & format]

7. Preparing for the 3-year review: Teaching Statement Indicate your teaching contributions to the department What’s your teaching philosophy (briefly)? What successes have you had? [Say course restructuring, innovations in format or content] What challenges have you encountered? What can the department do to help you improve? Length: No more than a page

8. Preparing for the 3-year review: Sources of help Sources of help and being pro-active You have an assigned research and teaching mentor in your department. Find out who they are and talk to them. Seriously consider getting feedback from someone outside your department, even if they are not in your area Women faculty: You have an open invitation to use senior women faculty to look at your “package”. I would be happy to review anyone’s material. If you perceive that your dept. mentor is not very helpful, discuss this with your Director and ask for their help or a reassignment of mentor. At any stage in your pre-tenure career, remember that the advancement of young faculty is arguably your Director’s premier concern. Talk to him or her. Get advice annually; don’t wait till the last minute.