ASA Document 236. Distinguished Prefix Review Committee - Policies and Procedures
ASA
Document #236
January 2001
DISTINGUISHED PREFIX REVIEW COMMITTEE
POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
I. DEFINITIONS
The definitions below originated in the
February 27, 1992, University of Wisconsin System guidelines for Distinguished
prefix interpretation.
Distinguished prefix
is defined as follows:
A Professional, Instructional or
Research academic staff member at the Distinguished level performs at a level
of proficiency typically requiring extensive experience and advanced knowledge
and skills. The expertise of an academic staff member at this level is
commonly recognized by his or her peers and through a reputation which extends
beyond his or her work unit. A Distinguished academic staff member is
expected to develop new approaches, methods or techniques to resolve or prevent
problems with little or no expert guidance and to cope independently with new,
unexpected or complex situations. At this level, an academic staff member
can be expected to guide or train other academic staff or to oversee their
work. Currently, only Category A academic staff in the Professional
title series and selected Category B academic staff in the Instructional and
Research title series are eligible for the Distinguished prefix (see
Unclassified Title Guideline, pages 6‑7 and 10-18, for definitions).
A work
unit is defined as follows:
The University of Wisconsin-Madison is
considered a "work unit" for purposes of prefix assignment.
Departments, schools, or colleges within the institution are not considered
"work units" for this purpose.
Peer
recognition is defined as follows:
Peers should not be interpreted to mean
"colleagues". While an employee may be recognized for
excellence, achievement or exceptional skill by academic staff colleagues
within the institution and within the UW System, "peer recognition"
applies to a reputation of excellence in a profession, recognized by
individuals or groups in the same profession normally found or organized
outside the UW System.
II.
ELIGIBILITY FOR NOMINATION
Promotion to the rank of Distinguished is
reserved for a small number of academic staff (normally at the senior level or
top level of their title series) whose superlative accomplishments are
evidenced by widespread peer recognition. Candidates for consideration
for the Distinguished prefix are expected to have had at least ten years of
progressively more responsible experience in their field. Attainment of the
Distinguished prefix is not the end result of normal career progression.
Neither seniority nor longevity is sufficient for award of this designation.
Candidates will be evaluated using the criteria described in Section III
(below) of this document entitled "Guidelines". Nominations may
be initiated by the candidate's director, departmental chair or unit head or by
the candidate. The candidate has the right to withdraw from the process at
any point during the review.
III. GUIDELINES
The
following guidelines are intended to help develop documentation for nomination
for the Distinguished prefix:
A.
A candidate nominated for the Distinguished prefix is expected to be truly
outstanding in his or her field of expertise, as evidenced by peer
recognition. The candidate must have consistently demonstrated
exceptional performance. Academic staff members on the University of
Wisconsin-Madison campus have varying commitments to teaching, research,
clinical activities, outreach, service and administration. It is expected
that any single candidate for Distinguished status will be
outstanding in one or more of these areas. In addition to evaluation of
specific areas of function, qualities such as those listed below should be
evaluated and this information incorporated into the document. These
qualities are not listed in order of importance, nor will all necessarily apply
to every candidate:
- Initiative and
self-motivation
- Problem solving
ability and creativity
- Technical
competence
- Productivity and
quality of work
- Judgment
- Ability to
communicate and interact with colleagues, patients and students, etc.
- Supervisory
skills
- Willingness and
ability to assume responsibility
- Coordinative abilities
B.The
Distinguished Prefix Review Committee (DPRC), charged with reviewing and
approving nominations, shall review three major criteria for awarding the Distinguished prefix.
1.
Expert Status
The
candidate must be a recognized expert in his or her field. The level of
peer recognition should normally extend outside the University of Wisconsin
System, i.e., state, regional, national, or possibly international.
Evidence of expert status may
include, but is not limited to:
- Serving as a
consultant for professional organizations or agencies
- Providing
expert advice or testimony in field of expertise
- Serving as a
reviewer for scholarly or technical publications
- Presenting
papers, abstracts, etc. at regional, national and international meetings
- Serving as an
editor for professional publications
- Serving as a
reviewer for granting organizations
- Being invited
to contribute book chapters
- Being selected
as the University of Wisconsin-Madison representative at workshops,
meetings, collaborative projects, etc.
- international
use Preparing articles, teaching materials, or other materials that
receive national or
- Being selected
to receive an award for excellence in the field
2.
Outstanding Accomplishments
The
candidate must demonstrate unique and outstanding performance in his or her
field of expertise. Evidence of outstanding performance may include, but
is not limited to:
- Research,
technical or related publications
- Awards from
professional organizations
- Extramural grant
awards
- Summaries of
teaching or other performance evaluations
- Recognition of
outstanding performance by clients or other members of the public
3.
Breadth of Impact
The
candidate's expertise and accomplishments must be of such stature as to
influence significantly the direction of his or her field of work.
Evidence of breadth of impact may include, but is not limited to:
- Development of
innovative methods, techniques or professional skills that are normally
recognized and applied beyond the University of Wisconsin System
- Service in
leadership positions within the candidate's field that can influence the
direction of the profession
- Contributions
that affect legislative or governmental policy
IV.
DOCUMENTATION
A.
REQUIRED
In order to facilitate
the Distinguished Prefix Review Committee (DPRC) review of documentation for
academic staff recommended for the Distinguished prefix, the following minimum
materials are to be provided as a single packet:
1. A completed “Request for Rate and/or Title Change” form.
2. A one- or two-page personal statement by the candidate indicating why he or
she is qualified for the Distinguished prefix.
3. A cover letter from
dean or director. (If the appointment is split among two or more units,
the packet must include letters from all deans/directors involved.)
4. A cover letter from
the unit head or departmental chair, including an indication of the vote of the
Executive Committee or equivalent, if applicable. (If the appoint-ment is split
among two or more units, the packet must include letters from all department
chairs or unit heads involved.) This letter should include a proposed effective
date of the Distinguished prefix. Since the most important consideration is the
extraordinary qualities of the candidate, the letter should describe the
distinctive capabilities, performance and contributions of the
individual. A statement from the unit or department evaluating the
candidate's value to the department, unit or program is required.
5. A cover
letter from the candidate's supervisor if that person is not the unit head or departmental chair. (If the
appointment is split among two or more units, the packet must include letters
from all supervisors involved.)
6. A job
description for the current position, including the nature and scope of the
duties and responsibilities. Documentation should reflect the relative
weight of each area and contributions of the candidate in each area.
7. A detailed
résumé or curriculum vitae indicating background and experience, annotated as
appropriate to provide information on previous training, job responsibilities
and professional development efforts.
8. A minimum of
four and a maximum of six letters of recommendation from those who can speak to
the talents of the individual and evaluate his or her performance. At least two
letters must be from outside the University of Wisconsin System. Letters
should compare the quality and productivity of the candidate with others of
similar rank and experience, if applicable. A copy of the soliciting
letter from the departmental chair or unit head must be included along with a
brief explanation of how individuals were selected for this process and their
relationship to the candidate. In addition, a short description of the
qualifications of each respondent must be included. A copy of all letters
of response to the departmental or unit head must be submitted to the DPRC for
review. The candidate should not submit letters written by a member of
this Committee.
B.
OPTIONAL
Any
additional material the candidate or nominating unit feels would be helpful in
the evaluation process may be submitted. This may include but is not
limited to unsolicited letters from clients, patients, students, or
outside agencies.
V.
ORGANIZATION OF THE PACKET
The packet should be
fastened with a metal clip and include a Table of Contents with all pages
numbered sequentially. The following order is suggested as optimum for
preparation and presentation of the document:
Section 1: Completed
Request for Rate and/or Title Change Form
Section
2: Personal statement
Section
3: Cover letter from the dean or director
Section
4: Cover letter from the unit head or
departmental chair
Section 5:
Cover letter from supervisor
Section
6: Job description
Section
7: Résumé or curriculum vitae
Section
8: Letters of recommendation
Section
9: Any optional material
VI.
SAMPLE PACKET
An exemplary sample packet is available for examination in the Academic
Personnel Office, 174 Bascom Hall.
VII. SUBMISSION OF PACKET
Packets may be submitted
at any time. Packets received by the Distinguished Prefix Review
Committee before February 1st will be reviewed at the Committee’s Spring
meeting(s). Packets received before August 1st will be reviewed at the
Committee’s Fall meeting(s).
VIII.
REVIEW PROCESS
A. The candidate's materials should be forwarded to the appropriate department
or unit office.
B. Following review by the candidate's director, departmental chair or unit
head, 1 copy of the packet together with a cover letter shall be forwarded to
the appropriate dean's or director's office.
C. The dean's or director's office shall submit 13 copies of the complete
packet together with a cover letter to the Academic Personnel Office which will
forward 12 copies to the members of the Distinguished Prefix Review Committee
(DPRC), and will also notify the candidate of receipt of the packet.
D. After review, the DPRC will send its recommendation and one copy of the
complete packet to the Academic Personnel Office (APO). The APO will
notify the dean or director, the candidate and the department(s) or unit
office(s).
E. Within 30 working days, the dean or director will accept or reject the
recommendation and will notify the candidate in writing with copies to APO and
the candidate's department(s) or unit(s).
IX.
APPEAL PROCESS
A.
If the DPRC finds that a candidate meets the criteria for the
Distinguished prefix:
1. If the dean or director agrees with the recommendation of the DPRC, the
candidate receives the Distinguished prefix. Disputes about starting
date, salary increase, etc. shall be resolved within the department or unit,
with assistance from the dean's or director's office, to the extent
possible. If the candidate is not satisfied with the resolution, disputes
may be handled under the regular grievance procedure of ASPP Chapter 7.
2. If the dean or director does NOT agree with the recommendation of the DPRC,
the candidate does not receive the Distinguished prefix. The dean or
director shall notify the candidate in writing of the reasons for the
decision. A copy of this letter shall be forwarded to the chair of the
DPRC, the APO, and the department or unit. The candidate may appeal under
the grievance procedure outlined in ASPP Chapter 7, but the grievance commences
at Step 2 (appeal to dean or director).
B. If
the DPRC finds that a candidate does NOT meet the criteria for
the Distinguished prefix:
1.The candidate may ask DPRC to reconsider the candidate's qualifications; the
candidate may provide additional information to DPRC; the candidate may ask to
make a 10-minute presentation to the Committee in defense of the candidate's
qualifications.
2. If the dean or director does NOT agree with the recommendations of the DPRC,
the candidate receives the Distinguished prefix. In cases where the
DPRC's recommendation is not being followed, the dean or director shall explain
the reasons in writing to the chair of the DPRC. Copies are to be sent to
the Chancellor, the APO, and the candidate.
3. If the dean or director agrees with the recommendations
of the DPRC, the candidate does NOT receive the Distinguished prefix. The
candidate may appeal only as follows:
a. The
scope of review is limited to the question of whether the DPRC's decision was
based in any significant degree upon one or more of the following factors, with
material prejudice to the individual candidate:
(1) Factors proscribed by applicable state or
federal law regarding fair employment practices were present
(2) The procedures required by the
DPRC were not followed.
(3) Available information provided
by the candidate bearing on the quality of the candidate's qualifications was
not considered by the DPRC.
(4) Unfounded, arbitrary or
irrelevant assumptions of fact were made by the DPRC about the candidate's
qualifications.
b. The burden of proof in such an appeal shall be on the
candidate.
c. The Academic Staff Appeals Committee shall hear the appeal.
- The Academic
Staff Appeals Committee shall present written findings of fact and
recommendations to the Chancellor or designee and to the appropriate dean
or director, with a copy to the candidate. The Chancellor or
designee shall implement the recommendations or give the candidate
written reasons for modifying the recommendations. The decision of
the Chancellor or designee shall be final.
X.
COMMITTEE AND STRUCTURE
A.
Membership: The Distinguished Prefix Review Committee shall consist of 12
members who have either served on an Area Review Committee for indefinite
status or been granted the Distinguished prefix. The committee shall be
appointed by the Chancellor or designee upon recommendations made by the Academic
Staff Executive Committee with the advice of the Nominating Committee.
B. Term: Each term shall be for three years. Appointments to complete the
terms of members who resign shall be made by the Chancellor or designee upon
recommendation of the Academic Staff Executive Committee.
XI.
REPORTS
The chair of the DPRC shall provide an annual report to the Personnel Policies
and Procedures Committee detailing the number of nominees reviewed, the
Committee's recommendations and the number of Distinguished prefixes awarded.