October 2015
DISTINGUISHED MCKNIGHT UNIVERSITY PROFESSORSHIPS for 2016
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION AND NOMINATING INSTRUCTIONS
Nomination Deadline: February 2, 2016 (midnight)
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
Purpose — The purpose of the Distinguished McKnight University Professorship program is to
honor and reward our most distinguished and highest-achieving mid-career faculty who have
recently attained full professor status—especially those who have made significant advances in
their careers at the University of Minnesota, whose work and reputation are identified with the
University, and whose accomplishments have brought great renown and prestige to Minnesota.
While distinction in individual research, scholarly, or creative work is required, the award may
also recognize leadership within research teams and collaborative or interdisciplinary efforts.
Terms of the Award — Recipients are honored with the title Distinguished McKnight
University Professor, which they hold for as long as they remain at the University of Minnesota.
The grant associated with the Professorship consists of $100,000 over five years to be used, in
accordance with University policy, for research, scholarly, or artistic activities, and expended at
the recipient’s discretion and with the approval of the academic dean of the appointment unit.
Appropriate uses include research equipment and supplies, support for research assistants,
professional travel, publication, or creative production costs. With the approval of the vice
provost for faculty and academic affairs, funds may also be used for sabbatical-leave salary
and/or two months’ summer salary for those on nine-month appointments.
Recipients will be required to remain at the University for the full five years of the award
payment period, plus one additional year, or repay in full the expended value of the
Professorship for the immediately preceding two fiscal years. Any such repayment must not
come from funds administered by the University or its foundations.
ELIGIBILITY
Eligibility is limited to tenured faculty who have made significant advances in their careers at the
University of Minnesota—especially those whose careers have developed and flourished at the
University—and who have been promoted to full professor within the past seven years, i.e., in
2008 or later. A faculty member promoted to full professor more than seven years ago may be
considered, as an exception, if a strong case can be made that the faculty member was promoted
unusually early and quickly through the ranks. If nominating someone promoted earlier than
2008, the nominator must confirm, in a separate paragraph, that the nominee is regarded as “midcareer” in all respects, by carefully and convincingly describing the individual’s career trajectory
in the context of the discipline’s convention for mid-career status. Also, typically the nominee
will have received the PhD or terminal degree in the field within approximately the past twenty
years. Re-nominations are welcomed, and even encouraged, for faculty members who remain
eligible.
1
NOMINATION PROCESS
All nominees should be apprised of the program’s Purpose and Terms of Award. In preparing
their nominations, departments/colleges should be mindful of the fact that the materials will be
reviewed and rated by a selection committee composed of faculty members from across the
University. Departments/colleges should assume, therefore, that most reviewers will be
unfamiliar with the nominee's particular area of scholarly or creative work, and should take care
to present the nomination using language that is accessible to a wide range of scholars.
A faculty member must be nominated by his/her academic home department or unit. Each
department or unit may nominate one faculty member. Many departments/units have a standing
faculty awards committee in place whose purpose is to promote the excellence of their faculty
colleagues by selecting nominees for internal and external honors and awards. For departments
that have such an awards committee, the nomination may come from the committee chair;
otherwise, it should come from the department head or chair. If the nominee is the chair or head
of a department/unit, the letter of nomination may come from an associate dean or dean.
The nominating letter and the supporting letters, which are weighed carefully by the selection
committee, must be persuasive in conveying to reviewers the nature and importance of the
intellectual underpinnings of the nominee’s scholarship that have led to an outstanding
reputation.
First, please complete and submit the Distinguished McKnight Nomination Form, available
at http://goo.gl/forms/lr7PFdsyTF (right-click and select Open Hyperlink). This form asks for
eligibility information concerning the nominee as well as contact information for the nominee,
nominator(s), chair/head, and dean.
Next, complete and submit the nomination dossier (as specified below) as a single PDF to
vpfaa@umn.edu, with the email subject line “Nomination: Distinguished McKnight 2016”. It is
anticipated that, in most cases, the nominee will author the materials requested in items 2
through 5 below. The PDF you submit will have higher resolution and be easier for the selection
committee to read if you create it by concatenating files in Adobe Acrobat (click on Create, then
Combine Files into a Single PDF) – this is the preferred method. However, it is acceptable to
create your PDF by using a copy machine. The PDF must include the following materials, in the
following order:
1. A nomination letter of no more than five pages from the department head/chair,
department nomination committee chair, or collegiate dean. If the nominee has a dual
appointment, a co-nominator from the second department may be included. Ultimately, the letter
must answer the question, “What is the nominee’s key contribution and how is it important?” and
it should establish that the nominee’s significant career advances have been made while at the
University of Minnesota. It should not quote extensively from letters of recommendation.
The nomination letter should first briefly describe the process by which the nominee was chosen.
Second, it should chronicle the nominee’s academic career path with a summary of promotion
dates from assistant to associate to full professor (with an explanation if the promotion date to
full professor exceeds seven years as described under Eligibility). It should then substantiate the
nominee’s national and/or international standing through a concise account of the following:
2







The nominee’s accomplishments in research, scholarly, or creative/artistic activity,
including a description of unique theories, discoveries, inventions, or creative products
that have brought renown to the University of Minnesota.
The nominee’s reputation and its impact, described in the context of the size of the field
or subfield, with external confirmation of impact (e.g., citation indices).
The potential for future accomplishments/breakthroughs.
In the context of the field, a commentary on: 1) the quality of the journals in which the
nominee has published, along with a description of the field’s convention for publication
authorship (e.g., authors listed alphabetically, primary author listed first); 2) the quality of
the presses that have published books or monographs; or 3) the quality of the artistic or
creative venues in which the nominee has displayed his/her work or performed.
The nominee’s leadership in research, scholarly, or creative work can manifest itself in a
number of ways, depending upon the nominee and the field.
o Leadership in research, scholarly, creative team efforts or collaborative work. For
a nominee who is part of a larger research team, or whose work is highly
collaborative, the letter must describe these efforts, including co-authorship, so
that the unique contribution of the individual to the research, scholarship, or
creative work comes through clearly.
o Individual leadership. A nominee may have scholarly or creative work that is
primarily singly authored. In these cases, emphasis should be placed on leadership
in the disciplinary or interdisciplinary field(s).
The nominee’s important contributions to teaching and advising at the graduate and/or
undergraduate level (For example, a list of graduated students, with thesis titles, should
be included if appropriate, along with their current affiliations; postdocs should also be
listed, if applicable).
A description of contributions to the wider community — e.g., within the University,
within the profession, and in the larger public setting, locally, nationally, and globally.
2. A layperson’s research title of up to 15 words, the name of the nominee as the nominee
wishes it to appear in any publicity, and a brief summary of up to 75 words describing the
nominee's work. The name as provided will be used on award materials, web pages, etc. if the
person is selected. The 75-word summary should be written in the third person and in broad
terms. It should describe the background, goal, and potential significance of the research,
scholarly, or creative/artistic activity in clear, concise language for the non-specialist. It must be
written without jargon so that it is readily understandable to individuals entirely outside the field.
Colleagues unfamiliar with the field should be asked to read the description, to ensure that it
meets this wide-audience test.
3. A broad non-technical description of the nominee's overall research, scholarly, or
creative/artistic activity — up to three pages. This description should lay out the nominee's
own distinctive theories or ideas, in the context of the discipline; it should state the objectives
and potential significance. (Any references are to be included in the page limitation.) This, too,
should be written in a manner that is understandable to colleagues outside the field. A description
that resembles a grant proposal submitted for federal agency peer review would not be suitable
for this all-University competition. This description should not be a narrative version of the
curriculum vitae.
4. A complete list of current and pending grants, internal as well as external, if applicable,
including sources of funds, amounts, and inclusive dates of awards. Be certain the list includes a
3
description of the nominee’s role on each grant, such as first PI or co-PI. It is not required that
the faculty member be a recipient of grant funds to be eligible for this award.
5. The nominee's curriculum vitae, with the most important publications or scholarly works
designated (to designate please place a # before the first author’s name). The curriculum vitae
should follow the preferred university/college format used for promotion and tenure decisions.
6. Brief background information on each of the recommenders to provide context to their
letters (no more than two pages total).
7. Up to six letters of recommendation should be submitted from individuals who can provide
an objective evaluation of the nominee’s prominence in the field. Generally, external letters from
experts in the nominee's field and who are neither collaborators nor associates of the nominee are
preferred. However, in the case of nominees whose discipline is intrinsically highly
collaborative, such that the nominee is a co-author/collaborator with the top leaders in that field
(and it would therefore be difficult to obtain letters from unconnected individuals), it is
permissible to include letters from one or more collaborators. Such letters should include a
detailed description of the nominee’s specific contributions to the collaborative work. For each
nominee, the selection committee will look for strong letters of recommendation from influential
leaders in the nominee’s field (or related fields) who know the nominee primarily by their work
and reputation. Recommenders should be apprised of the all-University nature of the award.
They should be informed that the selection committee is composed of prominent faculty
members drawn from across the University, not the nominee's field, so that they grasp the
importance of describing the nominee’s merit in non-specialized terms. Recommenders should
also be asked to speak to the individual’s contributions in cases where the research is highly
collaborative.
8. A description of the context of the field and the department to help reviewers understand
the environment in which the nominee works. This may include information on the number of
courses typically taught, average number of advisees in the department, availability of
disciplinary awards nationally and internationally, whether in the nominee’s field it is customary
for the lead author to be listed first or last and other information that will help reviewers compare
nominees across a wide range of fields. Please limit this section to one page.
No other materials, such as copies of course summaries, teaching evaluations, summaries of
other research proposals, or the like, may be included. Any such extraneous material will be
removed from the file before forwarding to the selection committee.
REVIEW AND SELECTION CRITERIA
While distinction in individual scholarly work is required, the award may also recognize
leadership associated with research teams, collaborative efforts, or interdisciplinary work. The
nominations will be reviewed by a committee composed of distinguished faculty from across the
University, which will select recipients based on the following:


The merit and impact of the nominee’s research, scholarly, or creative achievements;
the level of distinction and prestige that the nominee's scholarly work brings to the
University;
4





the dimension of the nominee's national and/or international reputation;
the nominee’s potential for future contributions/breakthroughs;
the extent to which the nominee's career has flourished at Minnesota and the extent to
which the nominee's work and reputation are identified with Minnesota;
the quality of the nominee’s teaching and advising; and
the nominee’s contributions to the wider community.
SUBMISSION, DEADLINE AND NOTIFICATION
The Distinguished McKnight University Professor nomination form (at
http://goo.gl/forms/lr7PFdsyTF) and the nomination dossier are both due by Tuesday,
February 2, 2016 at midnight. Please save the nomination dossier as one PDF file with items in
the same order as listed above (1 through 8). Please name the final document as follows:
NomineeLastName_NomineeFirstName_2016_DMUP_[Campus]_[College]
Example of file name: Doe_Jane_2016_DMUP_UMTC_CLA
Please email the nomination dossier to vpfaa@umn.edu, with the subject line “Nomination:
Distinguished McKnight 2016”
Nominators and awardees will be notified of the outcome in March, 2016.
Distinguished McKnight recipients will be honored at the May meeting of the Board of Regents
(notification of date and time will be sent to awardees). Recipients, nominators, chairs, and deans
are also invited to the annual McKnight awards dinner, at which both Land-Grant and
Distinguished professorship awardees are recognized. The 2016 dinner is scheduled for Tuesday,
May 10, 5:30-8:00 PM. Further information will be sent after the awards are announced.
Questions concerning the nomination and selection process may be directed to Chris Bremer at
breme006@umn.edu.
5