Information on the School of Science's standards and processes for faculty promotions and tenure
The following aims to provide a broad overview of the promotion and tenure process used for faculty in the MIT School of School (“SoS”). It is not intended to be exhaustive or to replace the important advice that junior faculty obtain from their respective Department Heads during annual in-person meetings. The information on this page will be augmented from time-to-time to improve clarity.
General overview
The School of Science’s faculty promotion process is guided by MIT Policies and Procedures. In case of any unintended inconsistency between this document and MIT Policies and Procedures, then MIT Policies and Procedures is always the authoritative document.
There are four ranks of appointment to the faculty. Two ranks are appointments without tenure: Assistant Professor, and Associate Professor without Tenure (AWOT). Two ranks are appointments with tenure: Associate Professor with Tenure (AWIT), and Full Professor.
Evaluation for promotion is based on assessment of faculty achievement. Four areas of achievement are considered: scholarship/research, education/teaching, mentoring, and service. Scholarship and research achievement are evaluated by the originality and significance of research contributions to date, and the potential for future impact on the field. Education achievement is evaluated by review of contributions to the educational mission of the department and the Institute, curriculum development activities, course teaching evaluations, and student feedback. Mentoring achievement is evaluated by a review of the progress and experiences of post-doctoral, graduate, and undergraduate mentees. Service achievement is evaluated by consideration of both internal service (i.e., department, School, Institute) as well as service to the technical field.
Planning for promotion begins long before an official promotion package is put together. The department leadership is required to do annual reviews of each faculty member. In the case of Assistant and Associate Professors, that review will include a discussion of progress towards promotion. One or more senior faculty mentor(s) is assigned to each untenured faculty member. A principal role of the mentor(s) is to act as a source of advice and advocacy for the candidate during the promotion process.
Evaluation process stages
Each promotion case is reviewed in multiple stages. The system is designed to have a diversity of senior faculty considering the merits of a case at each rank.
(1) Department Review
A promotion is first considered at the department level, and each SoS department is slightly different in their approach. In most departments, the promotion process is initiated by naming a committee of senior faculty who conduct the initial review. The first phase of the process is to ask the candidate to prepare the necessary information (described below) and to seek external and internal letters of reference (described below). The committee reviews the information from the candidate and the letters, and prepares a recommendation. All of the written material is presented to the senior faculty of the department. The case is presented by the chair of the committee or by the department head, and reviewed and discussed in depth at a faculty meeting. The senior faculty then make a recommendation on the promotion to the Department Head. Recommendations from the senior faculty are advisory to the Department Head. That is, the Department Head makes the final decision on whether a case is brought forward to the next level review.
(2) School of Science Review
The SoS Science Council (SC) reviews all promotion cases brought forward from the departments and is chaired by the SoS Dean. SC’s members include its six department heads and SoS’s associate Deans. The Department Head presents the promotion case, summarizing the review of the faculty. SC considers and discusses each case on its own merits. The SC then makes an advisory recommendation to the SoS Dean. The Dean makes the final decision on whether a case is brought forward to the next level review.
(3) Academic Appointments Subgroup of Academic Council Review and Approval by Corporation Executive Committee
Cases that the SoS Dean decides to bring forward to the next level of review are presented to MIT’s Academic Council for its review and approval. The SoS Dean or Associate Dean presents the promotion case, summarizing the review of SC. Academic council discusses each case, and votes a recommendation to the President of MIT. Upon Academic Council approval, cases are sent to the Executive Committee of the MIT Corporation for review and approval. The department head notifies the candidate of the outcome of the process as early as possible. With rare exceptions, title changes and salary increases for all faculty promotions become effective on the first day of the fiscal year (July 1) following approval of the promotion.
Promotion to Associate Professor without Tenure (AWOT)
Most faculty members are first appointed without tenure, as Assistant Professors, for two consecutive three-year appointments. It is typically during the second three-year appointment (that is, during the fifth year of service) that an Assistant Professors will be considered for promotion to Associate Professor Without Tenure (AWOT).
The review process accompanying promotion to associate professor without tenure is rigorous and is designed to provide a clear view of the achievements of the Assistant Professor, as well as transparent feedback about areas that need improvement for promotion to tenure.
MIT Policies and Procedures 4.1 outlines the standard of excellence for its faculty as follows:
The ideal attributes of any departmental faculty, taken as a group, are scholarly achievement, creativity, collegiality, professional competence and leadership, ability and desire to teach, and willingness to cooperate with other departments in promoting the work and welfare of the Institute as a whole. It is the responsibility of the administration to ensure, within any department, not only a proper balance among these activities but also the maintenance of each at the highest level, together with suitable recognition of individual achievement and service.
Teaching and research are the primary functions of the Institute and are nourished by efficient and imaginative administration. Service to the community and the nation is an inherent obligation. These four — teaching, research, administration, and public service — are essential features in the MIT program and make comparable demands on ability and devotion.
When the performance of a faculty member is appraised, consideration will be given to high achievement in any of these areas, and the value of the faculty member’s total contribution will be measured not only by the extent and nature of their other activities but also by the effectiveness with which they are pursued.
Assistant professors should work with their departments to submit the following information as part of the promotion process:
List of potential letter writers and when appropriate any letter writers to be avoided.
An up-to-date CV (a.k.a. electronic Personnel Record (ePR)). The CV should include standard education and training, honors and awards, a publication list, and list of invited talks, as well as:
Teaching and Educational Achievements
Mentorship: Undergraduate and Graduate Student supervised; Postdoctoral Associates and Fellows Supervised and where they are now employed.
When applicable: Research Contracts and Grants; Patents; Other published research outputs, such as openly shared datasets, reusable code, etc.
Service, both internal and external.
A 2-4 page statement of current and future research interests. The statement should be widely accessible (for example, to the Deans of all the Schools and College at MIT). It should include a summary in non-technical language covering:
The broad problem domain, and the importance of this area of research,
A summary of the candidate’s contributions, and the impact of these contributions.
A 1-2 page statement on teaching, mentoring, and service contributions.
At least two but not more than four reprints or preprints.
Teaching and Educational Achievements may include for example: teaching GIRs; curriculum development; special program teaching/leadership (e.g., Experimental Study Group); contributions to diversity inclusion and justice in MIT courses; developing, leading or teaching in outreach programs; creating educational materials like online courseware, textbooks, or case studies; or other achievements.
Internal Service Achievements may include for example: first year advising/mentoring and first year seminars; service on department, SoS and Institute Committees; serving as Heads of House or House Fellows; contributions to promote diversity, inclusion and justice in the department and School; or other achievements.
External Service Achievements may include for example: serving on National panels for grant reviews; as Chair of conference; as Workshop organizer; as Journal editor; serving on the board of academic societies or other organizations; or other achievements.
Please note that MIT policy requires faculty and staff to treat sensitive information contained in promotion and tenure cases, particularly the identity of referees and the content of their written assessments, with the highest degree of confidentiality.
Promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure (AWIT)
The process for promotion to associate professor with tenure is typically completed before the end of the candidate’s seventh year at the Institute. Faculty must receive an appointment with tenure after eight full years of service. Extensions of the tenure clock are available for parental leave and may be available for other extenuating circumstances.
MIT Policies and Procedures 3.2 outlines the following guidelines with regards to tenure:
The Institute regards tenure as important to ensuring academic freedom in teaching, research, and extramural activity. A department and School make a career commitment when the award of tenure is recommended. The Institute as a whole, acting through the Academic Council and the Corporation, joins in this commitment when tenure is awarded.
Persons awarded tenure must be judged by distinguished members of their discipline to be of first rank among scholars and to show promise of continued contribution to scholarship. Tenured members of the Faculty must also demonstrate outstanding teaching and university service; however, teaching and service are not a sufficient basis for awarding tenure.
A single standard for tenure applies across the Institute, for all Schools and disciplines and for all modes of inquiry. Although the single standard requires that all candidates be of exceptional quality as confirmed by distinguished members of their disciplines, it may be appropriate, based on the culture of the discipline or the modes of inquiry, to look at different factors as evidence of significant scholarly achievement.
The process for review is similar to that outlined above. Candidates will need to submit an updated CV with the components discussed above, an up-to-date research plan, recent publications, and input on letter writer selection.
Promotion to Full Professor
The promotion to full professor usually occurs four years after an associate professor is awarded tenure. Promotion to full professor is meant to recognize significant contributions in research, education, and service to MIT and to the broader scientific community. It is often expected to have more significant service component to the Institute.
Overview of Reference Letters
For cases at all ranks, reference letters are solicited from individuals both outside (external letters) and inside (internal letters) MIT based on suggestions by the department, suggestions by the candidate, and suggestions common to both parties. Letter writers should be of at least the rank for which the candidate is being considered.
While specific practices regarding references letters may differ slightly among Science departments, the following minimum numbers of letters are required by Science Council for promotion to each rank:
Promotion to AWOT: At least 8 external letters. At least 4 internal letters (see below), including 2 research letters, a teaching letter, and a mentoring letter.
Promotion to AWIT: At least 12 external letters. At least 5 internal letters, including 3 research letters, a teaching letter, and a mentoring letter.
Promotion to Full Professor: The number of external letters required for promotion to Full Professor is currently under review by Academic Council. At least 5 internal letters, including 3 research letters, a teaching letter, and a mentoring letter.
External letter writers are asked to provide a critical assessment of the candidate, covering as many of the following points on which they feel qualified to comment:
The originality and the significance of the candidate’s past research contributions;
The prospects for the candidate’s future research;
The candidate’s abilities as a teacher and mentor, if the letter writer is personally familiar with them;
Relevant comparisons to peers;
Potential for further leadership in an academic environment; and
Anything else the letter writer considers relevant.
For internal letter writers, the research letters should be written by senior colleagues who can evaluate the impact of the candidate’s research on the technical field. The teaching letter is typically written by the director of undergraduate or graduate education in the department, or the Associate Department Head for education. The mentoring letter is written by a senior colleague, for example a director of education or Associate Department Head, on the basis of both quantitative metrics (theses supervised, progress of mentees) and qualitative feedback from students and other mentees.
Each level of review will include a thoughtful evaluation of the research, teaching, mentorship and service achievements of the candidate.