Candidates should be allowed to submit a “no-contact” list with a brief rationale for each entry. Several colleges mention the no-contact list in their documentation (AAP, CALS, CAS, JCB). If provided, the list should be part of the dossier.

Examples of legitimate reasons for including an individual on the do-not-contact list are (a) Concern that the reviewer might “scoop” a partially developed research idea or incomplete study, (b) Prior disagreement, which may have been acrimonious, or (c) Potential conflict of interest, e.g., both involved in competing proposals. It is not sufficient to add someone to the no-contact list on the sole basis of a belief by the candidate that the person will not view their work favorably. The department is not bound to honor a no-contact list. However, it should provide an explanation in the dossier should a reviewer from that list be chosen.

Whereas there are legitimate reasons for being concerned about the objectivity of an external reviewer;

Whereas it is the responsibility of the candidate to articulate those concerns by providing an annotated no-contact list that includes a brief justification for each entry;

Whereas it is the responsibility of the department to justify the selection of an external reviewer who is chosen from the candidate’s no-contact list;

Whereas fairness and transparency are key attributes of a tenure review;

Be it resolved that a candidate can choose to include an annotated no-contact list in the dossier;

Be it further resolved that a department can choose an external reviewer from a no-contact list, but must provide a written justification for inclusion in the dossier.

Vote results:

86 Yes, 6 No, and 6 Abstain; 33 DNV

Vote Comments