IU Southeast Academic - Professional Recruitment and Search Guide

HOOSING THE

INALIST

(

)

“The more diverse college and university faculty are, the more likely it is that all students will be exposed to a wider range of scholarly

perspectives and to ideas drawn from a variety of life experiences.”

- Association of American Colleges and Universities

(Turner 2000:

Shattering the Silence

1997)

It is crucial that job criteria remain the basis for the

decision through the concluding phase of the selection

process.

Departmental practices vary as to whether, how, and at

what point candidates are numerically ranked. It is beyond

the scope of this document to recommend a particular

method. However, as in every other stage of the search

process, there must be consistency in how candidates are

evaluated and ranked vis. a vis. each other.

There should be a written rating for each candidate in

regards to how they fare in relation to the job criteria.

At the early phase of the search process, that could take

the form of a simple checklist of the agreed-upon minimum

qualifications. A second screening should include

thorough written comments on a spreadsheet outlining all

the selection criteria.

At the final stage of evaluating candidates,

documentation should reflect the results of the

interview itself, as well as reference checks, job

talks or other presentations, and any other selection

method utilized for all semi-finalists and/or final

candidates.

Different departments have created varying practices

regarding the format for presenting the finalist(s) to

the hiring authority. A good rule of thumb is this:

only objective, job-related information should be

presented to the person making the final decision.

A summary of each individual’s weaknesses and

strengths as it pertains to the job criteria would be

appropriate.