Policies and Procedures Governing Clinical Faculty
College of Education
University of Maryland
Approved by COE Senate on Nov. 9, 2012
Clinical Faculty at the University of Maryland
The University System of Maryland (USM) Policy on Appointment, Rank, and Tenure of
Faculty (II-1.00) includes the ranks of Assistant, Associate, and (Full) Clinical Professor.
According to UMS, Clinical faculty must hold a terminal professional degree with
preparation and applied experience in his/her specialization. Appointments can be at
levels from 0-100%; initial appointments (at the Assistant Clinical Professor level) may
be made for up to three years, with the possibility of (re)appointment for up to five
years for more senior Clinical faculty. Clinical faculty may request promotion after five
years in rank.
Following a national trend, notably at research-intensive institutions, and at the request
of the Senior Vice President and Provost, with unanimous support from all campus
Deans, the University of Maryland Senate unanimously approved the activation of
Clinical Faculty titles in December of 2011. Consequently each College/School has been
charged with developing the criteria and review processes for the appointment and
promotion of Clinical Faculty at the ranks of Assistant, Associate and Full Clinical
Professor.
The following language was added to Section I of the University of Maryland Policy on
Appointment, Promotion and Tenure of Faculty II-1.00(A).
“Faculty engaged Exclusively or Primarily in Clinical Teaching
Clinical Assistant Professor
The appointee shall hold, as a minimum, the terminal professional degree in the
Field, with training and experience in the area of specialization. There must be
clear evidence of a high level of ability in clinical practice and teaching in the
departmental field, and the potential for clinical teaching and excellence in a
subdivision of the field. The appointee should also have demonstrated scholarly
and/or administrative ability.
Clinical Associate Professor
In addition to the qualifications required of a Clinical Assistant Professor, the
appointee should ordinarily have had extensive successful experience in clinical
or professional practice in a field of specialization, or in a subdivision of the
departmental field, and in working with and/or directing others (such as
7/17/16
1
professionals, faculty members, graduate students, fellows, and residents or
interns) in clinical activities in the field. The appointee must also have
demonstrated superior teaching ability and scholarly or administrative
accomplishments.
Clinical Professor
In addition to the qualifications required of a Clinical Associate Professor, the
appointee shall have demonstrated a degree of excellence in clinical practice and
teaching sufficient to establish an outstanding regional and national reputation
among colleagues. The appointee shall also have demonstrated extraordinary
scholarly competence and leadership in the profession.”
Clinical Faculty in the College of Education
The College of Education (CoE) has a long history of having expert practitioners fulfill
critical roles in its educator preparation programs. Formally identified as lecturers,
senior lecturers, research professors, and visiting professors within the College these
individuals have assumed such roles as Program Directors/Coordinators, Instructional
Faculty, University Supervisors and Professional Development School Coordinators.
Activation of Clinical Faculty titles on the UM campus affords the College the
opportunity to formally recognize the significant contributions and accomplishments of
those individuals through appointments as Assistant, Associate and (Full) Clinical
Professors.
Development of the College of Education Criteria and Review Processes for Clinical
Professors
The criteria and review processes for Clinical Professors have been developed after a
careful review of University of Maryland 2012-2013 Guidelines for Appointment,
Promotion and Tenure; the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education
(NCATE) Standard 5: Faculty Qualifications, Performance and Development; and an
analysis of criteria and review processes for Clinical Faculty at large, mostly research
intensive, educational institutions across the United States (e.g., The Ohio State
University, University of Georgia, University of Iowa, University of Kentucky, University
of Michigan, University of Illinois at Chicago, University of Southern California,
University of California at San Francisco, The Johns Hopkins University, Northeastern
University and the University of Maryland Baltimore County). To the extent possible,
Policies and Procedures Governing Clinical Faculty in the College of Education (said
document) have been developed to mirror the College of Education Guidelines for
Appointment, Promotion and Tenure.
7/17/16
2
Responsibilities and Rights of Clinical Faculty in the College of Education
Responsibilities: An analysis of the aforementioned documents in the context of the
educator preparation programs in the College (e.g., the need for faculty who are expert
practitioners and whose primary foci are instruction, supervision/mentoring, and
service/leadership) resulted in an overall description of Clinical Professors in the College
of Education as individuals whose greatest responsibility falls under the category of
Clinical Instruction, with additional responsibilities for Service/Leadership, as well as
Clinical Scholarship.

Clinical Instruction: Clinical Professors are expected to embody the best in
innovative instructional practices across a variety of contexts with indisputable
evidence of effectiveness. When appropriate to the position description, Clinical
Professors may supervise and/or advise and/or mentor students. Candidates for
(Full) Clinical Professorships are expected to be Adjunct Members of the
Graduate Faculty and serve on Master’s Thesis and Doctoral Dissertation
Committees.

Service/Leadership: Clinical professors are expected to enhance and advance
the educator preparation programs throughout the College of Education through
programmatic evaluation and improvement; service to the college, campus,
community, state, federal government and professional associations; and fulfill
administrative responsibilities appropriate to the position. Candidates for (Full)
Clinical Professorships are expected to assume significant leadership roles in the
CoE and the Professional Community (e.g., hold positions as program
directors/coordinators).

Clinical Scholarship: Clinical scholarship is generally defined as professional
accomplishments that are respected, visible and validated by the professional
community. Clinical professors are not expected to have an original research
agenda in the sense of a traditional tenure track faculty member. However,
consistent with the research mission of the University, candidates for (Full)
Clinical Professor are expected to demonstrate accomplishments (a presence) in
both the clinical/professional and research scholarship communities.
Appendix A articulates the responsibilities, indicators and evidence required under each
of the aforementioned categories and at each faculty rank (e.g., Assistant, Associate,
(Full) Clinical Professor).
Rights: Clinical faculty positions at the UM have been activated to both retain
individuals currently serving in informal “clinical” faculty roles and to recruit those
whose expertise will afford the UM the opportunity to increase its connection with the
7/17/16
3
community. Moreover, as articulated in the “Activation of USM Clinical Faculty Titles”
document (Senate Faculty Affairs Committee, January 2012) the intent is to provide
“appropriate recognition for their status, qualifications and activities”; therefore, Clinical
Faculty should be afforded appropriate supports, structures, compensation, and
opportunities for engagement in faculty governance.
Supports and Structures: As is the case at other research intensive institutions,
notably the University of Iowa, all full-time clinical faculty members should be
listed as such on the department website and receive all the conventional
supports (e.g., professional development accounts) and structures (e.g., office,
computer, telephone, supplies, etc.) afforded to a tenure track faculty member.
Although Clinical faculty are ineligible for sabbatical, senior Clinical faculty (with
at least 10 years of service to the College and at no less than 6 year increments)
should be eligible for a limited number of College-level, annual awards that allow
for paid leave (full or part-time) to pursue professional development/service/
research opportunities. Clinical faculty with less than 100% appointments should
receive proportional supports and structures.
Compensation: In an effort to ensure consistency and fairness, College-wide
salary ranges should be identified for each clinical faculty level (Assistant,
Associate, Full Clinical Professor) with the upper level of the range afforded to
those with administrative responsibilities and notable professional
accomplishments. Clinical faculty are eligible for merit increases; the procedure
for which should be similar to tenure track faculty developed at the
departmental level.
Governance: Pursuant to UM and CoE Plans of Organizations, Clinical Faculty
should be actively engaged in faculty governance with both a voice and a vote
(excluding matters of Tenure Track promotion and tenure).
Appointment and Promotion
As per the Office of Faculty Affairs “Appointment and Promotion of Clinical Faculty
should require a similar process to research professorships, which are handled at the
unit-level with oversight of the Dean. At a minimum, this must include the development
of a dossier, a review by the department’s professorial and clinical faculty at or above
the rank that the faculty member is seeking, and a review by the College APT
Committee. The Dean or Provost (in the case of non-departmentalized colleges) should
make the final decision” (January, 2012, p. 1).
Eligibility. Lecturers and Assistant Research/Visiting Professors who meet the
qualifications and fulfill the responsibilities* of an Assistant Clinical Professor may be
eligible for appointments as Assistant Clinical Professors. Senior Lecturers and Associate
7/17/16
4
Research/Visiting Professors, who meet the qualification and fulfill the responsibilities*
of an Associate Clinical Professor may be eligible for appointments as Associate Clinical
Professors. Senior Lecturers and Associate/Full Research/Visiting Professors with 6 or
more years in rank, who meet the qualifications and fulfill the responsibilities* of a
Clinical Professor may be eligible for appointments as Clinical Professors.
*See Appendix A
Transition Plan: The forthcoming activation of Clinical Faculty titles in the CoE connotes
an absence of Clinical Faculty at all three ranks. While a number of lecturers/visiting
professors will be eligible for the rank of Assistant Clinical Professor, there are a number
of senior lecturers, research professors and visiting professors who may be qualified for
the more senior ranks of Clinical Faculty (e.g., Associate and Full Clinical Professor).
While the Appointment and Promotion processes articulated in this document/section
consider those who will be candidates at all ranks of the Clinical Professorships, the
appointment process in the CoE will be undertaken in Phases.
Phase I (Academic Year 2012/13). The first phase of the transition plan will
focus on appointing the more senior non-tenure track faculty (Senior Lecturers,
Associate/Full Research/Visiting Professors) in the College of Education who may
be eligible for consideration for Associate or (Full) Clinical Professor. For this
phase, only individuals with100% appointments who have been employed in the
CoE for at least 6 years will be considered. We estimate that approximately 6-7
such individuals currently have appointments in one of the three departments in
the college. These initial appointments will require that Tenure/Tenure Track
faculty who are familiar with the roles and responsibilities associated with
Associate or Full Clinical appointments serve to evaluate credentials and vote.
Campus does not that these faculty be the same as those on the departmental
APT committee.
Phase II . (Beginning Fall, 2013). Once senior clinical faculty/professors have
been appointed, these individuals will be asked to participate in the review
processes for the appointment/ promotion of more junior non-tenure track
faculty to the ranks of Assistant/Associate Clinical Professors in any of the
departments.
Initial Appointments in the College of Education
Appointment of current faculty to the rank of Assistant/Associate/Full Clinical Professor
may be initiated in one of two ways: 1. Candidates wishing to be considered for
appointment at the Assistant, Associate or (Full) Clinical Professor level can make a
formal request to the Department Chair for a nomination; or 2. Department Chairs may
nominate candidates for appointments. Candidates then prepare a dossier (Appendix
B), which is evaluated by the Departmental Review Committee (This need not be the
departmental APT committee; however, it must include clinical faculty and
7/17/16
5
tenure/tenure track faculty at or above the rank the individual is pursuing. The
committee then makes a recommendation to the College APT Committee who in turn
evaluates the dossier and makes a recommendation to the Dean. The Dean is the person
responsible for making the actual appointments of Clinical Professors.
Initial appointments, as Clinical faculty, for someone who is not currently on the faculty
of the CoE will be made after a search has been completed and a recommendation has
been made to the Dean.
Departmental Process
The Departmental committee will evaluate each candidate’s dossier (see
Appendix B for specific requirements and Appendix C for the required format) on
Clinical Instruction, Service/Leadership and Clinical Scholarship as the basis of
making a recommendation regarding the promotion of the candidate. The
Review Committee will solicit letters (N= 3) of evaluation from both former
students and those in the professional community of the candidate (see
Appendix D for sample letter). Given the nature of Clinical scholarship and
Service/Leadership evaluations do not have to come from individuals at arm’s
length. However, the candidate should identify 5 individuals and the Review
Committee shall select from that list. As per the UM APT process, the candidate
may submit two additional letters from mentors/collaborators/colleagues.
An assessment of the candidate’s accomplishments, the outcome of the
Committee vote and a recommendation regarding promotion will be submitted
to the Department Chair. In the case of a negative (or an abstention) vote, the
committee must explain said votes in the document.
The Department Chair completes an independent evaluation of the candidate’s
Clinical Instruction, Service/Leadership and Clinical Scholarship and prepares a
letter, which includes both a recommendation and the context of the candidate’s
work in the department. As stated in the University of Maryland 2012-2013
Guidelines for Appointment, Promotion and Tenure (page 5), it will be important
to “… address the following questions when preparing the Evaluative Report:
 What are the standards and expectations of the Department or discipline
with respect to the candidate as expressed in departmental criteria and
how are they measured?
 What are the candidate’s major contributions? Why are these
contributions important in the candidate’s field?
 Has the candidate met or surpassed the Department’s standards and
expectations?
 What evidence supports the Review Committee’s evaluation?
College Level Process
7/17/16
6
Although initial appointments/promotions of Clinical faculty will be approved by
the existing Departmental committee, once Clinical Faculty are in place Clinical
Professors from each of the three departments will be added to the College APT
Committee in order to participate (vote) in all future Clinical faculty reviews.
As per campus policy, the College APT committee will evaluate each candidate on
Clinical Instruction, Service/Leadership and Clinical Scholarship as the basis of
making a recommendation regarding the promotion of the candidate. An
assessment of the candidate’s accomplishments, the outcome of the College APT
Committee vote and a recommendation regarding promotion will be submitted
to the Dean. In the case of a negative (or an abstention) vote, the committee
must explain said votes in the document.
The Dean of the College of Education makes the final decision regarding the
appointment and promotion of all Clinical faculty. Candidates who are awarded
promotion will be notified in writing by the Dean.
Denial and Appeals Process
Candidate’s who are denied promotion will be notified in writing by the Dean.
The Grounds for Appeal and the Appeals Process will adhere to the Guidelines in
the UM APT Manual (APT Policy 1222-1250 and 1200-1340) although the
decision will lie with the Dean (versus the President of the University).
7/17/16
7
Appendix A
Clinical Instruction Responsibilities of UM Clinical Professors in the College of Education
Clinical Instruction: Clinical professors are expected to embody the best in innovative instructional practices across a variety of
contexts with indisputable evidence of effectiveness.
Responsibilities
Standard 1.1: Assistant,
Associate & (Full) Clinical
Professors-Superior Teaching
(credit and non-credit classes,
on campus and outreach)
Indicators
Evidence
Standard 1.1. Fulfillment of
departmental requirements for
teaching load, demonstrated command
of subject matter, innovative
instructional delivery and use of
multiple forms of assessment.
Standard 1.1
1.1.1 Evidence from course loads. A consistent record of
teaching can be demonstrated by documenting the
number of courses/ workshops and associated
enrollment of each, along with a description of how
these numbers relate to the benchmarks for other
faculty in the department and College1.
1.1.2 Evidence from student evaluations. An abovesatisfactory teaching performance and demonstrable
contribution to student attainment of learning
outcomes can be documented through evaluations by
students, which may be supplemented with CoE specific
questions. Student evaluation data need to be obtained
from the campus-wide standardized course evaluations
for all semesters the candidate has talked. Additional
student evaluations that have been solicited from the
departmental Promotions committee may be provided
in addition. However, since they are considered to be
Italicized text throughout Appendix A indicates language adopted from the CoE Guidelines for Appointment, Promotion and
Tenure in the College of Education (2012).
1
7/17/16
8
Responsibilities
Indicators
Evidence
less objective than the standardized ratings, a sole
reliance on such supplementary evaluations is not
deemed sufficient for demonstrating that this particular
standard has been met. Evidence of successful student
learning can also be demonstrated through program
specific learning outcomes assessments, which may
also serve as an important indicator of effectiveness.
1.1.3 Evidence from peer evaluations.
1.1.3. a. An above-satisfactory teaching performance
and demonstrable contribution to student attainment of
learning outcomes can also be demonstrated through a
minimum of 2 observation-based peer evaluations,
which speak to the candidate’s teaching performance as
observed first-hand by colleagues.
1.1.3.b. Peer assessment of syllabi, instructional
materials, and assessment strategies are also required
and should focus on:
 incorporation of pioneering research,
 diversity,
 critical thinking and reflection,
 professional dispositions,
 state and national standards
 innovative instructional techniques,
 the use of multiple forms of assessment with an
emphasis on data driven decision making,
The assessment of the candidate’s work must also
7/17/16
9
Responsibilities
Indicators
Evidence
include an evaluation of the candidate’s ability to
integrate technology successfully into instructional
practice.
1.1.4 Evidence from external means of recognition.
Additional evidence of attention to and quality of
teaching may include College-wide, campus-wide, or
external professional awards, citations, or similar forms
of formal recognition.
1.1.5 Evidence from professional development activities.
Candidates can demonstrate their commitment to
excellence in teaching via participation in professional
development activities offered by the Center for
Teaching Excellence on campus, the Office of
Information Technology in the College, other initiatives
at the College or the campus at large as well as at
institutions outside of campus (e.g., workshops at
conferences such as AERA).
Superior Teaching at the Associate and (Full) Clinical
Professor levels can be demonstrated if a candidate
has:


7/17/16
consistently taught a course load that is in
alignment with the expectations of the
department,
teaching evaluations at or above the
satisfactory in trend. That is, they must be either
10
Responsibilities
Indicators
Evidence
consistently at or above the satisfactory level or
show a trend toward this benchmark coupled
with appropriate professional development
activities such as participation in college or
campus-wide initiatives such as those offered by
the Center for Teaching Excellence.
Standard 1.2. Assistant,
Associate & (Full) Clinical
Professor-Advising and
Mentoring
Standard 1.2. When appropriate for the
position description, candidates advise
and/or mentor students at the
undergraduate or Master’s level on
degree requirements and/or
inquiry/research projects.
Candidates for (Full) Clinical Professor
7/17/16
Superior Teaching at the (Full) Clinical Professor level
can be demonstrated if a candidate has:
 a record of teaching evaluations that are
consistently above satisfactory, if not
exceptional,
 demonstrated superior teaching performance
through external means of recognition, including
peer observations and ratings of the candidate’s
teaching as well as peer assessment of syllabi
and use of instructional materials and
approaches.
 Additional evidence of quality teaching may
include awards or citations or similar college or
campus recognition.
Standard 1.2.
1.2.1 Evidence from advisees. Evidence for effective
mentoring and advising can be provided by the number
of candidate’s advisees or co-advisees that have
successfully completed their degrees.
1.2.2 Evidence from placement of graduates. Evidence
for effective mentoring and advising can also be
11
Responsibilities
Indicators
are members of the Graduate Faculty
and serve on Master’s Thesis and
Doctoral Dissertation Committees.
Evidence
provided by the placement of the students after
completion of their degrees. In addition, the candidate
may provide letters of reference for graduates from
their current employers.
1.2.3 Evidence from advisees and mentees. Evidence
for effective mentoring and advising can also be
provided by letters that are solicited from current and
former advisees and mentees that were solicited by the
first-level Appointment and Promotion committee. This
can include a documentation of advising and
mentorship in activities such as research, , early field
experiences, clinical internships, apprenticeships and
student organizations.
Advising and Mentoring at the Associate and (Full)
Clinical Professor levels can be demonstrated if a
candidate has:
 been involved in the advising/mentoring and,
potentially, co-advising/co-mentoring of a
number of students (to include undergraduate,
College of Education, Honors students) that is
commensurate with expectations in the
department. Some of these students should have
graduated during the candidate’s appointment.
Advising and Mentoring at the (Full) Clinical Professor
level can be demonstrated if a candidate has:
 “adjunct” graduate faculty status on campus
7/17/16
12
Responsibilities
Standard 1.3. Assistant,
Associate & (Full) Clinical
Professor-Supervision of
Clinical Experiences
Indicators
Standard 1.3. When appropriate for the
position description, candidates fulfill
Departmental requirements for a
supervision caseload and effectively
scaffold the development of students
within the clinical context.
Evidence
and in his/her department,
 served on graduate portfolio or comprehensive
exam committees,
 served on at least 5 (?) Master’s Thesis and
Doctoral Dissertation Committees.
Standard 1.3
1.1.1 Evidence from supervision loads. A consistent
record of supervision can be demonstrated by
documenting the number of students supervised and in
what context, along with a description of how these
numbers relate to the benchmarks for other faculty in
the department and College.
1.1.2 Evidence from student evaluations. An abovesatisfactory performance evaluation and demonstrable
contribution to student attainment of learning
outcomes/competence can be documented through
evaluations by students. Additional student evaluations
that have been solicited from the departmental
Promotions committee may be provided in addition.
However, since they are considered to be less objective
than the standardized ratings, a sole reliance on such
supplementary evaluations is not deemed sufficient for
demonstrating that this particular standard has been
met. Evidence of successful student learning can also be
demonstrated through learning outcomes assessments
(e.g., Performance Based Assessments, Portfolios,
Teacher Performance Assessments, etc.) may also serve
7/17/16
13
Responsibilities
Indicators
Evidence
as an important indicator.
1.1.3 Evidence from external evaluation (e.g., mentors,
principals, school system administrators, etc.)
Candidates are expected to have consistently received
above average performance evaluations from their
field-based colleagues. The results of which can be
obtained from the College Assessment Office.
Supervision at the Associate and (Full) Clinical
Professor levels can be demonstrated if a candidate
has:
 consistently carried a supervision load that is in
alignment with the expectations of the
department,
 performance evaluations at or above the
satisfactory in trend. That is, they must be either
consistently at or above the satisfactory level or
show a trend toward this benchmark coupled
with appropriate professional development
activities such as participation in college or
campus-wide initiatives such as those offered by
the Center for Teaching Excellence.
Supervision at the (Full) Clinical Professor level can be
demonstrated if a candidate has:
 a record of student evaluations that are
consistently above satisfactory, if not
exceptional,
7/17/16
14
Responsibilities
Indicators
Evidence


7/17/16
demonstrated superior supervision performance
through external means of recognition, including
peer observations and above average ratings of
the candidate by field-based colleagues.
Additional evidence of quality supervision may
include awards or citations or similar college or
campus recognition.
15
Service/Leadership Responsibilities of UM Clinical Professors in the College of Education
Service/Leadership: Clinical professors are expected to enhance and advance the educator preparation programs throughout
the College of Education through programmatic evaluation and improvement; service to the college, campus, community, state,
federal government and professional associations; and administrative responsibilities appropriate to the position.
Responsibilities
Standard 3.1: Assistant,
Associate & (Full) Clinical
Professors-Service
7/17/16
Indicators
Evidence
Standard 3.1. Candidates are expected
to advance and enhance the educator
preparation programs in the College of
Education through service to the
professional and campus communities.
Standard 3.1
3.1.1 Evidence for a consistent record of service. The
candidate’s curriculum vitae must demonstrate
consistent participation in a variety of endeavors or
continuous involvement in a select few endeavors at
the professional levels of service, as well as on
Service is defined as: collaboration, campus.
presentations and active engagement in
P-12 schools/communities. The range of Evaluation of evidence for a consistent and broad
service can include the following:
record of service. In order to demonstrate consistency
and breadth, it is not necessary that the candidate has
 providing professional
provided service at all levels every semester; however,
development services (e.g.,
service activities should be evident for each year of an
workshops, seminars, inquiry
individual’s appointment. Moreover, some service
groups, study groups,
activities are viewed as mandatory in some
presentations, etc. both within
departments while others are voluntary; participation
the community and on campus)
in both types of service activities is generally viewed
 serving on a School Improvement favorable. Serving as a consultant or technical
Team,
advisory board member and activities similar to these
 assisting with the
can also be seen as service , even work paid by an
conceptualization and
external entity.
implementation of
16
Responsibilities
Indicators



active engagement in a
local/state chapter of a
professional association,
active engagement in Collegewide collaborations with school
system colleagues,

reviewing proposals for external
funding agencies,

serving as program chair or cochair for a local or state
conference,

Standard 3.2: Assistant,
Associate & (Full) Clinical
Professors-Leadership
school/community based
programs,
membership on community
advisory board,
mentoring colleagues (e.g.,
training of trainers)
Standard 3.2. Leadership is not
expected for Assistant Clinical
Professors, unless required as part of the
position description.
Evidence
Service at the Associate and (Full) Clinical Professor
levels can be demonstrated if a candidate has:
 been involved in faculty governance
(department and/or college)

been involved in program evaluation

served as a consultant (paid or unpaid)

served as Specialized Program Association
(SPA) reviewer.
Service at the (Full) Clinical Professor level can be
demonstrated if a candidate has:
 been an invited speaker at the state
(preferably outside of MD) or national level,
 has provided sustained service to multiple
committees/organizations in
schools/communities and on campus,
 served on state and federal grant and/or
curriculum review panels.
Standard 3.2
3.2.1 The candidate’s curriculum vitae must
demonstrate leadership activities that have advanced
and enhanced his/her educator preparation program,
as well as the Department and the College.
Candidates at the Associate and Full
Clinical Professor levels are expected to Leadership at the Associate and (Full) Clinical
fulfill leadership roles for some Professor levels can be demonstrated if a candidate
service/campus activities.
has:
7/17/16
17
Responsibilities
Indicators
Candidates at the (Full) Clinical
Professor level are expected to assume
significant
leadership/administrative
roles in the College and the Professional
Community.
Evidence




been a chair or co-chair of a committee,
taken charge in developing and implementing
certain initiatives either as the chair or a
member, and
other activities that shape the direction of a
particular institution or discipline (e.g., serving
as TPA liaison for the program area)..
Evidence of leadership can also include
activities such as being an invited speaker at a
policy forum or being a member of a
commission.
Leadership at the (Full) Clinical Professor level can be
demonstrated if a candidate:
 serves as an Academic Program
Director/Coordinator,
 has administrative oversight of all aspects (on
campus and off) of an academic program,
 provides or has provided leadership in a
national professional organization (e.g. board
member, Team Leader for a Specialized
Program Association/SPA review, etc.),
 supervises other clinical faculty and graduate
assistants and/or staff,
 has served as a consultant (paid or unpaid),
 facilitates collaborative partnerships between
the program, program faculty and school
system colleagues.
7/17/16
18
Clinical Scholarship Responsibilities of UM Clinical Professors in the College of Education
Clinical Scholarship: Clinical scholarship is generally defined as professional accomplishments that are respected, visible and
validated by the professional community. Clinical professors are not expected to have an original research agenda in the sense of a
traditional tenure track faculty member.
Responsibilities
Indicators
Evidence
Standard 2.1: Assistant,
Associate & (Full) Clinical
Professors-Clinical Scholarship:
Programmatic Contributions
Standard 2.1: Programmatic
Contributions are defined as program
documents/manuals, program evaluation
reports, as well as the conceptualization
and development of a new course and/or
curriculum.
Standard 2.1
2.1.1 The candidate’s curriculum vitae must
demonstrate programmatic contributions that have
improved and/or enhanced the academic program.
Programmatic contributions at the Assistant,
Associate and (Full) Clinical Professor levels can be
demonstrated if a candidate has:
 contributed to annual program evaluations
and Specialized Program Reports,
 assisted in the development of new courses
and curricula,
 implemented and/or offered professional
development on research based practices to
the professional community.
Programmatic contributions at the Associate and
(Full) Clinical Professor levels can be demonstrated if
a candidate has:
 developed new courses based on program
data/contemporary issues/needs.
7/17/16
19
Responsibilities
Standard 2.2: Assistant,
Associate & (Full) Clinical
Professors-Clinical Scholarship:
Inquiry/Research Projects,
Presentations and Publications
Indicators
Evidence
Standard 2.2: Inquiry/Research Projects,
Presentations and Publications
demonstrate professional
accomplishments that are respected,
visible and validated by the professional
community.
Programmatic contributions at the (Full) Clinical
Professor level can be demonstrated if a candidate
has:
 conceptualized, designed and implemented an
academic program,
 overseen the preparation and “successful”
submission of all programmatic reports
(College Program Profile, SPA, NCATE/MSDE
Explication Papers, etc.) as evidenced in the
“official” response/recognition,
 reviewed and analyzed annual program data
and recommended programmatic changes as
evidenced through a program profile or
program report.
Standard 2.2
2.2.1 The candidate’s curriculum vitae and supporting
documentation (e.g., publications, papers, speeches,
etc.)
must
demonstrate
professional
accomplishments that are respected, visible and
validated by the professional community.
Consistent with the research mission of Scholarship at the Assistant, Associate and (Full)
the University candidates for (Full) Clinical Professor levels can be demonstrated if a
Clinical Professor are expected to candidate has:
demonstrate accomplishments in both
 organized, supervised and evaluated student
the clinical/professional and research
(and other professionals, as appropriate)
scholarship communities.
research/inquiry projects,
 prepared and presented research based
presentations/briefings for the community.
7/17/16
20
Responsibilities
Indicators
Evidence
Scholarship at the Associate and (Full) Clinical
Professor levels can be demonstrated if a candidate
has:
 prepared (program) manuals,
 authored or co-authored and published
articles and/or books for the professional
community.
Scholarship at the (Full) Clinical Professor level can be
demonstrated if a candidate has:
 sought and obtained external funding to
support/enhance an academic program,
school/community partnership or professional
growth of the candidate,
 authored or co-authored a peer reviewed
paper or publication,
 presented peer reviewed papers at a national
conference (e.g., AERA, SRCD, APA),
 chaired or co-chaired a paper session at a
national conference (e.g., AERA, SRCD, APA,
etc.),
 served as a manuscript reviewer for a research
journal.
*Italicized text was taken from the College APT Guidelines (Spring 2012)
7/17/16
21
7/17/16
22
Appendix B
University of Maryland 2012-2013 Guidelines for Appointment, Promotion and Tenure
Dossier Requirements-Modified for Clinical Faculty
1. Transmittal Form
2. Dean’s Letter
3. College APT Committee Report
4. Department Chair’s Letter
5. Department APT Committee Report and Department Evaluation
6. Curriculum Vitae (signed & dated by candidate)
7. Candidate’s personal statement, to include a statement of impact and technology integration
(signed & dated)
8. Letters of Evaluation (to include former students and, perhaps, employers of former
students, not necessarily at arm’s length)
9. Credentials of External Evaluators
10. Sample letter used to Solicit External Evaluations
11. Responses of External Evaluators
12. Student Evaluations of Teaching
13. Peer Evaluations of Teaching
14. Evidence of Mentoring, Advising, Research (Clinical Scholarship) and Supervision
15. Appendices (additional indicators of excellence such as recognition letters, presentations,
publications, etc.)
7/17/16
23
Appendix C
University of Maryland 2012-2013 Guidelines for Appointment, Promotion and Tenure
Required CV Format--Modified for Clinical Faculty
The CV should present an accurate portrait of the candidate’s accomplishments in as concise a
manner as possible. To aid the review committees, it should include, in the order shown, the
following information:
1. Personal Information. List the candidate’s name, Department (joint appointments should
indicate percentage of each appointment), current rank, year of University appointment to
current rank, educational background (including institutions, dates and degrees), and
employment background (in chronological order or its inverse).
2. Teaching, Mentoring and Advising.
a. Courses taught in the last five years. Indicate
approximate enrollments and any unusual formats.
b. Course or Curriculum Development.
c.
Textbooks, Manuals, Notes, Software, Web pages and Other Contributions to Teaching.
d.
Teaching Awards and Other Special Recognition.
e. Advising (other than research direction):
Indicate approximate numbers of students per year.
i.
Undergraduate.
ii.
Graduate.
iii.
Other advising and mentoring activities (advising student groups, special
assignments, recruiting, faculty mentorship, etc.).
f. Advising: Inquiry/Research. This refers to students whose projects the candidate has
directed as chair or served as a committee member. The name of student and academic
year(s) involved should be indicated, as well as placement of the student(s), if the
project is completed. List completed work first.
i. Undergraduate.
ii. Master’s.
iii. Doctoral.
3. Service/Leadership.
a. Professional.
i.
7/17/16
Administrative responsibilities/accomplishments.
24
ii.
Offices and committee memberships held in professional organizations
(include dates).
iii.
Reviewing activities for agencies.
iv.
Other unpaid services to local, state and federal agencies.
v.
Other non-University committees, commissions, panels, etc.
vi.
International activities not listed above.
vi.
Paid consultancies (optional).
b. Campus.
i. Departmental.
ii. College.
iii. University.
iv. Special administrative assignments.
v. Other.
c. Community, State, National.
d. Service Awards and Honors.
4. Research, Scholarly and Creative Activities.
In each category, published works should be
listed first, in either chronological order or its inverse, followed (or preceded) by works not yet
published but accepted for publication. Pieces in preparation that are not completed and not
accepted for publication should not appear on a CV. The candidate should distinguish between
authored and edited works and between refereed and unrefereed outlets and should clarify the
status of unpublished works (e.g. accepted, in press). All authors should be listed in the order
they appear on the publication. In exceptional cases, e.g., when the work is a product of a large
group (more than 10 authors), not all authors need be listed.
a. Books4
7/17/16
i.
Books authored. Specify original or revised edition.
ii.
Books edited.
iii.
Chapters in books.
25
b. Articles in Referred Journals.
Full citation, inclusive of all authors in the order of
publication and page numbers. Review articles and invited articles should be so
identified.
c. Monographs, Reports and Extension Publications.
d. Book Reviews, Other Articles,
Notes.
e. Talks, Abstracts and Other Professional Papers Presented.
i.
Invited talks, etc.
ii.
Refereed conference proceedings.
iii.
Unrefereed conference proceedings.
f. Contracts and Grants. List source, title, amount awarded, time period and role (e.g., principal
investigator) in reverse chronological order. If there are co-investigators, please list these.
j. Fellowships, Prizes and Awards.
k. Editorships, Editorial Boards and Reviewing Activities for
Journals and Other Learned Publications.
l. Other (specify type).
7/17/16
26
Appendix D
University of Maryland 2012-2013 Guidelines for Appointment, Promotion and Tenure
Sample Letter to External Evaluator--Modified for Clinical Faculty
Dear Dr. XXXXXX:
Dr. XXXX XXX is due to be reviewed for _______ Clinical Professor in academic year YYYY-YYYY. I
am writing to request your confidential evaluation of the qualifications of Dr. XXX for promotion
to the rank of _______ Clinical Professor of XXXX.
In accordance with Appointment and Promotion Policy and Guidelines adopted by the
University of Maryland, College of Education and Department of XXXX at College Park, I am
required to indicate the criteria for promotion and request your evaluation of the following:
• the nature of your professional interaction with the candidate, if applicable,
• your assessment of one of more of the following:

the quality of candidate’s instructional delivery and effectiveness,

the candidate’s service to the professional community,

the candidate’s leadership within the profession, and/or

the candidate’s clinical scholarship.
To assist in your evaluation, I am enclosing the following information: Dr. XXX’s latest
curriculum vitae and personal statement and a brief summary of the promotion criteria. I
realize that this information is rather extensive and will require considerable effort on your
part to review. However, your assistance in helping evaluate Dr. XXX’s credentials will be
greatly appreciated and will constitute an important element in the overall evaluation. I
would be very grateful if you could respond to us in writing no later than........ If possible,
would you send your reply electronically to ........umd.edu as an attachment? Sincerely, XXXX X. XXXXXX
Chair, APT Review Committee Department of XXX enclosures: CV, personal statement, Department promotion criteria
7/17/16
27