VI. Appointment Procedures for Professors, Full Time, Without Limit of Time or of Indefinite Duration; Associate Professors, Full Time, Without Limit of Time; Clinical Professors, Academic Part Time, of Unspecified Duration

C. Appointment Procedure for Clinical Professors, Academic Part Time (APT), Of Unspecified Duration (OUD).

1. Initiation of Promotion

a. Department head, after consultation with senior members of the department and the HMS departmental executive committee, prepares a letter to the dean recommending the promotion to clinical professor in the academic part-time category or the first appointment of an academic part-time professor from another institution. The letter should include:

1) Description of the job and the qualifications needed

2) Documentation of the candidate's accomplishments with regard to

a) Teaching
b) Clinical activities
c) Research
d) Administrative role (if appropriate)

3) Estimate of his/her academic stature compared with others in the field

4) Implications of the appointment for the hospital and the Medical School

b. Department head attaches to her/his letter the following items:

1) Letters from faculty members inside and outside the department and the Medical School assessing the candidate's accomplishments in teaching, clinical, and research activities (as appropriate). Usually no more than 8-10 letters should be solicited. Copies of letters of requests and replies should be submitted. (Click HERE for sample letter.)

2) Candidate's curriculum vitae and bibliography using the format described in section XV. Included with the curriculum vitae should be a list of all of the candidate's trainees with relevant years of training and current positions noted. In keeping with Harvard Medical School guidelines, which recommend a maximum number of publications on which appointments should be judged, the appointee, in consultation with the department head, should list on a separate sheet up to ten publications from her/his bibliography, annotated to indicate the significance of each. The candidate's C.V. should be seen as a dossier of the individual's activity; the publications listed should be those considered as having a significant impact on the candidate's field.

3) Letter from the representative of the affiliated institution, on behalf of the board of trustees, indicating their approval of the recommendation.

2. Preliminary Review

a. Council of Academic Deans reviews the proposal from perspective of academic and institutional needs

1.Council suggests members for an ad hoc committee or
2.Council recommends that the proposal be forwarded to the Subcommittee of Professors

1) One member of the Subcommittee of Professors is assigned to review the proposal. Consideration is given to whether or not the ladder (APT) is appropriate, whether or not there is a sufficient case to request an academic review, and whether or not there is sufficient documentation to inform the Subcommittee of Professors.

2) Department head who is submitting the proposal responds.

3) Subcommittee of Professors discusses the proposal and recommends an appropriate action: formation of an ad hoc committee or consideration as a committee of the whole.

4) If formation of an ad hoc committee is voted, the Subcommittee of Professors recommends members for the ad hoc committee.

5) If approval of the appointment is voted as a committee of the whole, the recommendation goes directly to the Dean for final consideration.

c. Notice of all actions by the Subcommittee of Professors is mailed to members of the Committee of Professors.

3. Review Process

a. Ad hoc committee is named by the Dean after consultation with the Subcommittee of Professors, the department head, and others. Ad hoc committee includes:

1) Persons from the field in which the candidate works; may include persons outside the Medical School and Harvard University
2) Persons from related fields

b. Ad hoc evaluators are provided with:

1) Initial letter from the department head
2) Curriculum vitae, bibliography, list of trainees, and copies of up to ten self-selected reprints/scholarly communications from the candidate

c. Ad hoc committee holds initial meeting to

1) Review the accomplishments of the candidate as described by the department head and other evaluators
2) Develop a list of other individuals from whom assessments of the candidate are requested
3) Call witnesses, if needed

d. Ad hoc committee reconvenes, when information from the above is available, to

1) Review new evaluations
2) Hear witnesses (as appropriate)
3) Decide whether or not any additional information is needed

f. Report and the supporting documents are forwarded to the Dean.

g. Dean reviews the committee report and forwards it to the Subcommittee of Professors.

4. Final consideration proceeds.

a. Report of the ad hoc committee is reviewed by the Subcommittee of Professors. One member of the subcommittee will act as the reviewer. The chair of the ad hoc committee will be present to respond. The subcommittee reviews the report, votes on the recommendation of the reviewer, and suggests appropriate action to the Dean.

b. Report of the subcommittee actions, when approved by the Dean, is mailed to the Committee of Professors. Any member of the Committee of Professors may review the report in the Dean's Office. If a petition with signatures of ten members of the Committee of Professors is received within two weeks of the announcement of the subcommittee action, a meeting of the full Committee of Professors will be called to review the recommendation.

c. Dean makes a final recommendation and transmits it to the President of Harvard University in a summary letter appended to the documentation of the appointment process.

d. Recommendation is considered by the President and Provost of Harvard University on behalf of the Governing Boards of Harvard University. Final approval is rendered by the President and Provost.