Demystifying P & T New Chairs 09

Demystifying the Promotion & Tenure Process for Chairs Arlene Carney Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs

Regents Policy on Faculty Tenure • • • •



Initially adopted in 1945 Last change was in 2007 Previous version approved in 2001 New document – Procedures for Reviewing Candidates for Tenure and/or Promotion: Tenure-Track and Tenured Faculty

Implications of Changes • Chairs/heads will be working with both the 2001 and the 2007 Faculty Tenure policies for several years. • Which version will depend upon the year a probationary faculty member was hired or the year a tenured associate professor was last promoted.

Criteria for Tenure • Section 7.11 of the Tenure policy - general statement of criteria for the entire university • Section 7.12 of the Tenure policy - refers to the department criteria for tenure and promotion in a unit

Section 7.11 of the Tenure Policy (2001) • Basis for awarding indefinite tenure: - “achievements of an individual have demonstrated the individual’s potential to continue to contribute significantly to the mission of the University and to its programs of teaching, research, and service” 

Section 7.11 of the Tenure Policy (2007) • Basis for awarding indefinite tenure: the determination that each has established and is likely to continue to develop a distinguished record of academic achievement that is the foundation for a national or international reputation or both.

Section 7.11 of the Tenure Policy (2007) • Qualitative evaluation of scholarly research or other creative work, teaching, or service • Primary emphasis on demonstrated scholarly or creative achievement and teaching effectiveness • Service alone not sufficient

Section 7.11 of the Tenure Policy (2007) • Take into account when applicable - interdisciplinary work - public engagement - international activities & initiatives - attention to questions of diversity - technology transfer - other special kinds of professional activity

Section 7.11 of the Tenure Policy (2007) • Strong promise of achieving rank of professor • Only modest service expected

Section 9.2 of the Tenure Policy (2007) • New section • Promotion to professor • Added substantially to already distinguished record • Established national or international reputation • Substantially more service expected

Section 7.12 of the Tenure Policy (2007) • Department statement of criteria for promotion and tenure • Must be shown to new faculty according to the tenure policy • Should reflect the values of the faculty for promotions and conferral of indefinite tenure

7.12 Statement • Indices & standards used to evaluate whether a candidate has met or exceeded criteria of section 7.11 • Developed by the faculty of a unit • Approved by the Dean and the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs and Provost (SVPP)

7.12 Statement • All 7.12 Statements are being revised across the University. • Approved by Provost’s office

Changes and Faculty • Tenure Code Interpretation 6 - probationary and tenured faculty can choose the 7.12 statement by which they will be evaluated (old or new) - have one year from time the new 7.12 is approved - each faculty member will sign an agreement about the form to be used

Changes and Faculty • Probationary faculty can also choose 7.11 by which they will be evaluated depending upon their date of hire. • If hired after June 8, 2007, they are bound by the new Regents Policy on Faculty Tenure. • Once promoted to associate professor, bound by new section 9.2 for promotion to professor

Process of Choice of 7.12 • A memorandum of understanding will be generated by the Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs for nonAHC faculty. • Each faculty member (probationary and tenured associate professors) will be contacted with a copy to the chair/head and the associate dean of the college.

Process of Choice of 7.12 • Faculty get a copy of both the old and new 7.12 statement and the old and new Faculty Tenure policy. • The e-mail explains the process. • Faculty respond with their choice. • AHC faculty will be contacted by Assistant Vice President Barbara Brandt in the AHC.

Specific Criteria for Tenure • Teaching • Research • Service

Teaching Effectiveness • Evaluated in a variety of ways - student ratings - peer observation and evaluation - letters from students - teaching awards - curricular development - syllabi

Professional Distinction in Research, Scholarship, & Creative Work • • • • • •

Peer-reviewed publications Books Scholarly presentations Evidence of impact (citation index) External funding from grants National and international venues for artistic work

Service • Professional association/offices and committees • Editorial boards of journals • University committees • Departmental committees • External community service • Faculty advisor

Section 5.5 of Faculty Tenure • Extension of probationary service is allowed for one year at the request of the probationary faculty: - on the occasion of the birth of that faculty member’s child or adoptive/foster placement of a child with that faculty member

Section 5.5 of Faculty Tenure • Extension of probationary service is allowed for one year at the request of the probationary faculty: - when the faculty member is a major caregiver for a family member who has an extended serious illness, injury, or debilitating condition (can use this no more than 2 times)

Section 5.5 of Faculty Tenure • Extension of probationary service is allowed for one year at the request of the probationary faculty: - when the faculty member has an extended serious illness, injury, or debilitating condition

Section 5.5 of Faculty Tenure • Extended the time window to make the request from 3 months to 12 months of the events giving rise to the claim

Stopping the Tenure Clock • Form provided and available on line • Goes from the department chair to the senior vice chancellor • Available for both female and male faculty for all areas

Tenure Cases • Annual review of probationary faculty • Tenured faculty review curriculum vitae and activity reports • Annual conferences with chair or head • Completion of Form 12 • Sent to Dean and SVPP

Tenure Cases • Tenure decision may be made at any time. • A decision to terminate the appointment can be made at anytime.

Department Level: Dossier • Selection of external reviewers - number varies by department & campus - new Procedures document specifies how many reviewers are needed and their backgrounds - selection by both candidate & the department

Department Level: Dossier • Selection of external reviewers - distinguished scholars in the field - peer institutions - individuals who will write evaluative letters - given enough time - have sufficient materials to evaluate

Department Level: Dossier • Best practices: - dossier “caseworker” - mentoring or synopsis committee

Department Level: Dossier • Provide information to the “caseworker” of the dossier - journals & publishers - scholarly & creative venues - conferences

Department Level: Dossier • Provide information to the “caseworker” of the dossier - accurate list of scheduled & unscheduled teaching - teaching evaluations - teaching materials •

Department Level: Dossier • Finished dossier should be: - clear to the campus readers - complete according to instructions - provide an accurate picture of who you are

College level • Each dean makes a recommendation to the provost about promotion and tenure. • Colleges differ in their processes.

Campus Level • P & T committee - made up of senior faculty - across disciplines in the campus - make a recommendation to the senior vice chancellor and chancellor

Provost’s Office Review • Each dossier is reviewed by several vice provosts. • SVPP reviews array of cases with particular emphasis on cases with negative votes or variance in voting.

Most Common Departmental Errors in the Tenure Process • Poor annual reviews – Sketchy reviews – Do not address the 7.12 criteria – Address performance issues not in the 7.12 – Address collegiality issues – Avoid problems until the very end –

Most Common Departmental Errors in the Tenure Process • Departmental report at the tenure decision time – Includes discussion of criteria not in the 7.12 statement or disregards criteria that exist – Includes erroneous information

Most Common Departmental Errors in the Tenure Process • Actions of the chair – Does not share the departmental report with all faculty – Uses language in the chair’s report that suggests a poor climate for the candidate

Most Common Departmental Errors in the Tenure Process • Failure to recognize what extension of the probationary period means – Put the correct probationary year on the President’s Form 12 – Address the expectation of performance correctly in the annual review (i.e. you cannot expect a year’s progress when the clock is stopped)

Most Common Departmental Errors in the Tenure Process • Failure to recognize what extension of the probationary period means – Make sure that you use the language recommended by the provost for external reviewers regarding the length of the probationary period

Most Common Departmental Errors in the Tenure Process • Choice of external reviewers – Chair/head should work with the candidate to choose reviewers. – Document this process in the dossier. – Choose enough reviewers. – Make sure that at least half but no fewer than 4 reviewers have no professional connection with the candidate.

Most Common Departmental Errors in the Tenure Process • Extreme care in tenure denial cases or split votes – Follow every procedure in the tenure policy, Procedures document, and your 7.12 to the letter. – Work with your associate dean and with me about procedure (but not evaluation)

Most Common Departmental Errors in the Tenure Process • Extreme care in tenure denial cases or split votes – Make sure that the file also reviews the positive performance on criteria in the 7.12 statement. – Avoid having duplicate faculty votes. If they happen, have a clear and compelling rationale and document this in the dossier.

Contact for Questions: • Arlene Carney Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs 220 Morrill Hall 626-9545 [email protected]

Contact for Questions: • Karen Zentner Bacig  Associate to the Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs  220 Morrill Hall  624-5082 

•