Skip to main content
  Cornell University

The University Faculty

Office of the Dean

4.1.5A The Dossier Checklist

[This webpage is being edited. Until it becomes official, refer to what the current faculty handbook says on this topic.]


The materials listed below are expected for an internal candidate for promotion. Some of these materials may not be available or applicable for external candidates, but a CV, letters of evaluation in addition to references suggested by the candidate, as well as evaluations of teaching, should be provided as a minimum for external candidates.

Dossier contents:

  • Letter from the chair presenting the case for promotion and addressing disagreements and matters of serious concern in the file
  • Departmental vote (including abstentions)
  • Confidential letters from individual faculty members explaining their reasoning for their vote. Alternatively, a department may provide a collectively drafted faculty letter, independent of the department chair’s letter, that is reviewed and approved by all voting faculty and that objectively details the various faculty views underlying the faculty vote.
  • Report of any departmental review committee or letters from department colleagues that are part of the review process
  • Comment on quality of journals, presses, and other venues where the candidate’s work has appeared
  • Curriculum Vita – A complete CV, including a list of publications and/or artistic work, funded research, extension work, and university, professional, and service activities
  • Candidate Statements – Statements from the candidate about his/her research, teaching, advising, service (if applicable)
  • Appointment/Performance Review Letters

o   Initial job description

o   Appointment and reappointment letters

o   Any subsequent change in the terms of appointment

o   Any written responses by the candidate to the above

  • External evaluation letters

o   All letters received from outside experts about scholarly, creative and extension work

o   List of external evaluators solicited, indicating which were suggested by the candidate and which by the department

o   A brief explanation of the evaluators’ qualifications and their relationship (if any) to the candidate

o   A copy of the letter requesting evaluations

  • Teaching evaluation

o   List of courses taught, with enrollments

o   Summary of teaching evaluations, prepared by someone other than the candidate.

o   Letters from students and advisees

o   Copy of letter(s) requesting student evaluations

o   Assessments by colleagues of teaching and course materials (e.g. syllabi, project assignments, homework sets, field studies, lab experiments)

Optional materials

In addition, FACTA and the provost have found the following information especially helpful:

  • An assessment of the candidate’s contributions to co-authored publications, explaining the conventions of the field in listing authors.
  • Comments on candidate’s efforts to improve instruction.
  • Statement of how student evaluators were selected, the rate of response, and the usual rate of response in the department.

Data on how candidate’s teaching evaluations compare to those of other faculty teaching the same or similar courses.

Last Updated: October 11, 2017 at 7:30 am