Reviewers

At least two external reviews must be obtained for the appointment procedure. The reviewers, generally professors of other universities, are asked to give a comparative opinion on the proposed candidates and to rank them in order of preference. The reviewers base their assessment on the job advertisement, the decision criteria and the application documents of the respective candidates. As the expertise contributed by the reviewers to the evaluation of the applicants greatly supports the decision-making process of the committee, it makes an important contribution to the further development of the respective discipline.

five students and a professor sitting aroung a table

Information for reviewers

(Appearance of a) conflict of interest

To ensure that the best applicant of all the candidates is appointed, it is important that you as reviewers are able to form an objective and independent opinion of the applicants. For this reason, TU Dortmund University has to assure that persons who have a (potential) conflict of interest are not allowed to participate in the appointment process. This results from Sections 20 and 21 Administrative Procedure Act NRW (Verwaltungsverfahrensgesetz für das Land Nordrhein-Westfalen, VwVfG NRW).

The appearance of a conflict of interest exists if there are objectively ascertainable reasons which can raise doubts about an impartial and unprejudiced decision (Section 21 VwVfG). Therefore it is irrelevant, if there actually is a conflict of interest or not.

For this reason, we would like to ask you to check first of all, whether a conflict of interest according to Section 20 VwVfG or one of the following constellations is given and then inform us:

ongoing or recognizably planned close scientific cooperation,
scientific competition with own projects and plans,
institutional connections (e.g. affiliation to the same department or research institution, a visiting professorship at the same department),
participation in mutual reviews (also in doctoral or postdoctoral lecture qualification phase),
economic interests or economic interests of relatives,
economic/work-related dependency or supervisory relationship (e.g. teacher-student-relationship including postdoctoral qualification phase),
close personal ties or personal conflicts.

Please use the following form for reporting a potential bias: Declaration of (potential) conflict of interest / reviewers.

Peer Review

As a reviewer, you will be provided with all the documents submitted by the according applicants, as well as the selection criteria and the text advertising the professorship. Depending on the respective procedure, the documents sent to you may also include further documents from the applicants, such as several publications, a research/teaching concept, drafts or a detailed portfolio. The aim of the review is to assess which applicants appear to be the most suitable for the respective professorship, taking into account the selection criteria, and to rank these applicants accordingly. Those applicants who appear unsuitable in your opinion do not have to be included in the ranking at all. The period of time in which the reviews should be prepared is usually 4 to 8 weeks.

Note: Of course your reviews will be treated confidentially and generally only be made available to the persons involved in the selection decision.

Thank you very much for your support!

By car

By bus and train

The H-Bahn (Monorail System)

By plane

Map