Preparing a Dossier

For tenure-track faculty, creating a dossier for three-year reviews and the tenure-review, is full of important rhetorical choices. The dossier, composed of the dossier narrative and evidence, involves careful consideration of the context of the review, the audience(s) for the dossier, and the organization.

The dossier is your opportunity to show that what you have already contributed in your time at Columbia is substantial and that what you will contribute in the future is considerable. The dossier alone is what is reviewed. There is no more time for discussion – reviewers can only go by what is seen in the dossier.

Below, you’ll find broad suggestions for navigating the creation and presentation of your dossier.  

The Dossier

The dossier should not be viewed as a descriptive document, but as a rhetorical one. Ask yourself, “What story am I telling my colleagues about myself?” 

• The look and format of the document conveys a great amount to the evaluator. Consider how the dossier presents a professional appearance
• Consider necessary context/framework for scholarly and creative work
• The purpose of the dossier is to demonstrate and substantiate your work and the impact of your work. Reviewers want to know what professional discourse there has been about the work.

The Narrative

The tenure narrative is a perfect place to bring thematic coherence to the dossier. The narrative is more a reflection than a report. The narrative should not be simply a list of accomplishments, but should explain why your accomplishments are important and relevant. Your main focus should be on answering the question, “What do I bring to Columbia that no one else can?” 

• Go back and look to see if you were given specific suggestions by past evaluators, you should address how these were accomplished or why they were not accomplished. Ignore these suggestions at your peril.
• Have an awareness of your audience. Do not write just for your department – understand the various levels of evaluators your dossier will have, and be mindful of having readers outside your discipline (considering what terms/ideas need definition, context, and explanation of significance).
• Describe how much time goes into your work if it might not be obvious.
• If your field does not have much of an academic foundation or if there is not a lot of scholarly output, you will have to contextualize your work in order to explain its impact and significance. 

The Evidence

Think about how the materials in the various sections of your dossier relate to one another and create a whole picture. The sections are not simply “buckets” that need to be filled.

• Make a table of contents for each section.
• Have a rationale for the order in which you present your course evaluations (chronological order, course order, courses for which you are most responsible, etc.) and explain the order you have chosen.
• In the “Statement of Policy,” the Evaluation Areas are articulated in order of importance (with teaching being the most important, followed by scholarly or creative endeavor and then service); however, they are not mathematically weighted.
• Do not simply update documents you have been using; review them critically and make sure they are current.
• Do not put in “filler.” A dossier that goes too far beyond what is specifically asked for looks defensive. What you did before coming to Columbia may be interesting, but it has nothing to do with the case you are trying to make for yourself.
• Show how you have grown and how your work has evolved.
• Letters addressing specific projects or committee work are important, particularly to verify claims about service that might otherwise be hard to document. Such letters serve to demonstrate the consequentiality of your contributions.
• There is no distinction between college-wide service and school or department service, but there is a clear distinction between consequential and inconsequential service.