Faculty preparing material for consideration for DSI should create two folders:

• Case Presentation Folder
  • Annual summary covering the period under review, organized by the Criteria for Personnel Decisions in the Policies of the Board of Trustees, and including brief characterizations of the significance of the activities. The format for the annual summary is available at http://www.cs.oswego.edu/~dab/dsi/annualsummary.doc. Faculty should use that as the outline for the presentation of their arguments for merit. In other words, the annual summary should itemize the evidence relating to the faculty member's performance and offer brief evaluative statements (e.g., departmental comparisons of teaching evaluations, description of the significance of a publication, level of work associated with committee membership).
  • Current curriculum vitae.
  • Summary documentation (teaching evaluation summaries, summary of assessment of innovative teaching technique, summary of scholarship and service, etc.) where appropriate.
• Supporting source material Folder
  • Journal articles, manuscripts, poster presentations
  • Course syllabi, exams, raw assessment data, raw teaching evaluations
  • Committee assignments and evaluations of committee work from committee chairs
  • Etc.

The Case Presentation folder will be the only folder forwarded to subdivisional committees, the Dean, the Provost, and the President.

Source material should be used by the department chair and department review committee in making evaluative judgements of the strength of the case presented by each candidate. The department chair and department peer review committees are the ones best able to evaluate a candidate's scholarly record. Their obligation is to examine the source material and include evaluative comments in the letters of support that are sent forward along with the Case Folder.

Letters of support for each candidate from both the department chair and the department review committee should begin with a summary evaluation and then, organized by the Criteria for Personnel Decisions in the Policies of the Board of Trustees, provide evaluative statements within criteria in a bulleted fashion indicating what was particularly illustrative of meritorious activity:

• Effectiveness in Teaching
  • Judgement of colleagues through direct classroom observation
  • Development of teaching materials, New curricular initiatives, Curricular renewal
  • Student reaction (surveys, interviews, classroom observation)
  • Innovations, technological advances
• Scholarly Ability
  • Success in developing and carrying out significant research work in the subject matter field
  • Contribution to the arts
  • Publications, Presentations
  • Reputation among colleagues
  • Grant development
• Effectiveness of University Service
  • College and university public service, Committee work, and Administrative work
    • Within the profession
    • Within the college
    • Within the community
  • Formal student-teacher relationships
    • Advisement
• Mastery of Subject Matter
  • Advanced degrees or licenses
  • Honors, awards, reputation in the subject matter field
• Continuing Growth
  • Reading, research, or other activities to keep abreast of current developments in the field
  • Being able to handle successfully increased responsibility
• Other