Search and Screening Guidelines

Search Committee Guidelines

Role and responsibilities

The committee may assist with the search process by recommending wording for advertisements and proposing appropriate advertising venues. In its screening role, the committee reviews the applicant pool in two or more stages, arriving at the names to be recommended to the hiring official. The membership may be drawn from the department only; in specialized cases, members also might be selected from other departments and sources external to campus to best serve the needs of the University.

The committee members become familiar with the position requirements and preferences. The hiring official provides a written or verbal charge to members with a search committee chair presiding. That chair commonly has voting privileges like other members, but in certain cases may be appointed to lead the committee without voting.

The committee members assess the Faculty Applicant Log after round one, when they have determined those candidates meeting minimum qualifications. The Faculty Applicant Log form, available on-line at the EO/AA Office website, will contain a listing of all applicants and an indication of which met minimum qualifications.

A&P logs are developed automatically within the on-line system. A&P applicants checked a box indicating that they met the minimum qualifications. The committee must assess their materials and change their status code if it is incorrect.

Self-identification of protected class status, by race and gender, is indicated as well. The on-line A&P process includes an automatically-generated Applicant Log. No further preparation steps are required.

The committee should check the race/gender diversity in the pool of qualified applicants after round one. A diverse pool of qualified applicants should be reflected on the log or the pool may need to be supplemented. If the search has reasonably reached the appropriate applicant pool and the applicant pool is not diverse, the search may proceed. If broader recruitment actions would reasonably let the university achieve its goal of diversity and inclusiveness, it should be re-opened to enhance the pool.

When the pool is appropriate for consideration, the committee should continue applying criteria as written in all advertising [and posting, if the Position Vacancy Announcement posting has been completed].

The hiring official may assign the committee to perform the preliminary reference checks. The names of those to be contacted may be supplied by the candidates or developed by members. References may be sought from any person who has job-related information about the candidate. The committee will use the results as a screening round. Their votes may be positive or negative to advance each candidate.

Three or more reference checks are considered standard for UCF faculty. In A&P, two or more from a supervisor are required; others may supplement this requirement. Documentation of this step should be produced by each participating committee member. This may include notes on a standard committee questionnaire or notations in the minutes that references were discussed, for example. Such documents will be included in faculty files, or uploaded as attachments to the on-line A&P file.

Committees normally are asked to participate in the interviewing of candidates during the campus visit. The format for recommendations might be written comment sheets, decisions/votes at a later meeting, or discussion with the hiring official, among other methods of communication. If written records are created, they should be included in faculty files or uploaded to on-line A&P files.

The committee is responsible for collecting documentation of each action taken. This includes criteria applied, action taken on each applicant, and the result of each action (votes to advance, or decline, candidacy; procedures in place; pertinent conversations with applicants during the process). These documents are included in faculty folders and uploaded to on-line A&P files.

Style of the search process

Technological advances can be useful to increase members’ participation in decisions at many steps. Options which are noted below as “approvable” are not required by the EO/AA office. They are offered as possible strategies that may be chosen without need for prior approval.

• Emailed committee scheduling is approvable.
• Emailed “attachments” of minutes circulated for committee review are approvable.
• Website posting of the printed ads, or publication of brief ad wording with a reference to a university homepage posting, is approvable. At least one advertisement must be published on paper or on a website external to the university. Other recruitment might include phone calls, discussions at conferences, or other verbal exchanges.
• Conference-call arrangements for members at another location for one meeting are approvable. (Face-to-face participation normally is considered the definition of a “meeting”, however.) This flexibility applies only to meetings where the off-site member can participate fully. If the agenda for the meeting includes such actions as a campus interview, or exchange of reference-call results, conference-call participation is not sufficient for including that member in a decision-making action.
• Video or telephone “screening interviews” of candidates by committee are approvable. Note: they do not replace a personal interview for finalists.

Stages of the Search: Expectations for Screening

Round one for faculty or A&P always screens for minimum qualifications as specified in the advertisements, recruiting materials, and Position Vacancy Announcement.

Faculty ads may indicate criteria that can be measured during screening, such as “degree expected by August.” If Ph.D. candidates are acceptable in the applicant pool, use of the wording quoted above is strongly encouraged.