Upload
chesmu
View
59
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Tenure and Promotion Workshop. May 7, 2013. Agenda. Welcome and Introductions – Pauline Brandes Opening Remarks –Wes Pue Guide to Tenure & Promotion – Deena Rubuliak & George Athans Senior Appointments Committee – Judith Daniluk Questions and Discussion. Our Objective. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Tenure and Promotion Workshop
May 7, 2013
Agenda
Welcome and Introductions – Pauline Brandes Opening Remarks –Wes Pue Guide to Tenure & Promotion – Deena Rubuliak &
George Athans Senior Appointments Committee – Judith Daniluk Questions and Discussion
2
Our Objective
To provide faculty members with an understanding of the tenure and promotion processes.
To support the success of faculty members going forward for tenure and promotion.
3
Tenure & Promotion
Tenure Streams Criteria Tenure Clocks Promotion Reviews Procedures For Assistance…
4
The Tenure Streams
5
The Professorial Stream
Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor
The Professor of Teaching Stream
Instructor I Senior Instructor Professor of Teaching
The Criteria
6
The Professorial Stream The Professor of Teaching Stream
Service
Educational Leadership Teaching
Service
TeachingResearch
The Tenure Clock The tenure clock begins on July 1 of the calendar year of
hire Extensions are granted for maternity & parental leaves
(automatic) and sick leaves (on a case by case basis) An individual may only be reviewed one time for tenure All ranks, except Assistant Professor, may be reviewed
early for tenure A tenure track Assistant Professor may be reviewed early
for promotion to Associate Professor and if granted, tenure will be automatic
7
The Procedures
The reappointment, tenure & promotionprocedures are set out in
Articles 5 & 9 of Conditions of Appointment for Faculty,
and are supplemented by the Guide to Reappointment, Tenure and
Promotion Procedures at UBC
8
Periodic Review for Promotion
9
Head’s Meeting
10
By June 30, the Head must meet with all tenure track faculty annually.
For tenured faculty, we encourage annual meetings or, at minimum, at least in the 2 years prior to a promotion review.
Head’s Meeting
11
It’s an opportunity to clearly note the strengths, deficiencies and opportunities for improvement
It is also important to receive advice re the CV & other relevant material required for the next review.
The Head & candidate must agree in writing on matters discussed.
The Initial File
12
Unless otherwise agreed, the faculty member’s dossier and all relevant documentation necessary for review must be submitted by September 15.
Eligibility to be Consulted
13
• The Head must consult with eligible members of the departmental standing committee on all reappointment, tenure and promotion cases.
• Each Academic Unit is required to have documented procedures regarding consultation with the departmental standing committee for all reappointment, tenure and promotion cases.
Letters of Reference
14
• All tenure and promotion cases require 4 letters of reference.
• The candidate provides 4 names, of which 2 must be solicited.
• The Head then consults with the departmental standing committee on choosing the final list of referees.
What referees receive
15
• The letter of request is only accompanied by the candidate’s CV and selected materials relevant for the assessment of scholarly achievements.
• Teaching dossiers are usually only included for cases involving Senior Instructor & Professor of Teaching.
Tenure & Promotion Reviews
Department Standing Committee meets after obtaining letters of reference
Department Standing Committee votes & recommends to Head
Invited to respond in writing to serious concerns
16
Serious concerns?
Yes
No
Tenure & Promotion Reviews
Head recommends to Dean
Head notifies candidate in writing of decision
Invited to respond in writing to Dean
17
Negative?
Yes
Tenure & Promotion Reviews
Dean recommends to President*Dean seeks Faculty Committee vote
Dean notifies candidate of decision
Invited to respond in writing to President
18
Negative?
Yes
Supplementing the File
19
The University and the candidate have the right to supplement the file with new info at any stage prior to the President’s
decision
For Assistance… The Collective Agreement, in particular
Articles 2 - 5 & 9 of Conditions of Appointment for Faculty
Guide to Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion Procedures at UBC for 2012/13
Faculty Relations website: www.hr.ubc.ca/faculty_relations/tenure/
Faculty Association website:www.facultyassociation.ubc.ca/promotiontenure.php
Call us!
20
Senior Appointments Committee
Professor Judith Daniluk, SAC Chair
21
Senior Appointments Committee
20 person committee of professors Representation from all Faculties (includes 2
UBC-O; 1 Faculty Association) Two Subcommittees: Associate and Professor
(meets bi-weekly September through June)Reviews all tenure and promotion files (approx.
180/year) and makes recommendations to the president
SAC Terms of Reference Advise the President on the merits of individual cases according to: Concepts of procedural fairness Appropriate standards of excellence across
and within faculties and disciplines The Collective Agreement and SAC
guidelines
All relevant contextual matters (Article 5.14 Agreement)
Examples of Contextual Factors
maternity or parental leavesdelays due to set up requirements for research
or any other relevant information which may provide insight into timing issues
the candidate’s personal circumstances if relevant
Discipline and context specific opportunities within each department and faculty
Article 5.14e; SAC Guide Section 5.5.1
24
SAC Review Process
Files are reviewed in detail for merits & fairness by the Associate or Professor SC
Cases may be deferred pending additional information or procedural clarification
Cases are ranked: ‘A’ – no substantive issues or procedural concerns ‘B’ – negative recommendation by Dean – conflicting recommendation from Head & Dean – SAC members have questions for the Dean (approximately ¼ of all cases)
SAC Full Committee Review
‘A’ cases generally approved without substantive discussion by full SAC
‘B’ cases require full SAC discussion: Dean joins SAC for discussion of the case Vote taken in Dean’s absence Dean immediately informed of result
which is considered “confidential”
26
Recommendations & Decisions
SAC Chair informs the President of SAC recommendations and votes on each case
Chair provides the President with notes on SAC discussion with the Dean regarding all ‘B’ cases (notes added to candidate’s file)
President makes his recommendation to Board of Governors
Important Considerations In Preparing Your Dossier
Familiarity with the criteria specific to your rank and promotion
Examples of evidenceExternal referee selectionDocumentation of teaching excellenceUBC curriculum vitae
28
Professorial Stream Criteria
Collective Agreement:
Assistant Professor – A. 3.06 Associate Professor – A. 3.07 Professor (research stream) – A. 3.08 Tenure – A. 4.01
(SAC Guide – Section 3)
29
Professor of Teaching Stream Criteria
Collective Agreement: Senior Instructor – A. 3.04 Professor of Teaching – A. 3.05(SAC Guide – Appendix 1)
30
Professor of Teaching Stream
A distinct career track with different expectations than traditional professorial ranks
Three pillars: teaching, educational leadership and service
Research productivity is not required Excellence in teaching is not enough
31
Senior Instructor A. 3.04
excellence in teachingdemonstrated educational leadership,
involvement in curriculum development and innovation, and other teaching and learning initiatives
contributions to service
32
Professor of Teaching A. 3.05
outstanding achievement in teaching and educational leadership
distinction in the field of teaching and learning
sustained and innovative contributions to curriculum development, course design and other innovations and initiatives
33
Examples of Evidence of Educational Leadership
Formal educational leadership responsibilities within the Department and/or Faculty (e.g., on teaching and learning related committees)
Contributions to substantive curriculum development/redesign
Funding obtained for improvement of teaching and learning
Development and/or coordination of courses and programs
34
Evidence of Educational Leadership contd…
Application of innovative, research-based approaches to curriculum and pedagogy
Application of scholarship of teaching and learning, including resulting presentations and publications (e.g., articles, abstracts, conference proceedings, poster sessions)
Instructional materials/pubs. (textbooks, training manuals, software development)
Evidence of Educational Leadership contd…
Organization and/or participation in conferences or educational events focused on teaching and learning, within your program, department, faculty, University and/or outside of UBC
Contributions to university and faculty-based teaching and learning initiatives (e.g., CTLT-based programs and communities of practice; Peer Review of Teaching, etc.)
See Appendix 2 of SAC Guide
36
Sustained Scholarly Contributions – the Professorial Stream "Scholarly activity" means:
• research of quality and significance• in appropriate fields – distinguished,
creative or professional work of a scholarly nature
• and the dissemination of the results of that scholarly activity
(Article 4.03; Section 3 – SAC Guide)
Types of Scholarship
“Traditional” Scholarship – A 4.03 & 3.1(i) SAC Guide
Scholarship of Teaching – A. 4.03(a) & 3.1(ii) SAC Guide
Professional Contributions – A.4.03(b) & 3.1(iii) SAC Guide
38
Important Considerations In Framing A Professorial CaseCases may be framed as “blended”Professional Contributions or Scholarship of
Teaching may constitute all or a portion of your case for scholarly contributions & significance
Must be explicitly stated and considered from the outset, at all levels of the review process
Must be capable of assessment – referee assessment of significance & impact is critical
39
Some Sources of Evidence
Invited presentations/performances (national & international)
Article & grant reviews; editorial board work Publications in high-impact venues in your field (provide
descriptions, impact factors, rejection rates) Competitive grant funding – as PI and co Citations of your work; adoption of your work Mentoring and publishing with grad students; grad
students’ career accomplishments 40
Sources of Evidence contd.
Referees’ verification of impactAwards and other forms of RecognitionDiscipline specific norms – venues, grants,
publications, authorship, conference participation
Quality vs. quantityService is important, but can’t substitute for
excellence in scholarship and teaching
41
Referees – Professor of Teaching Stream Senior Instructor/Tenure:
Familiarity with your teaching contributions Not someone with whom you have co-taught Outstanding teachers outside your Department Can be outside UBC, but not required
Professor of Teaching: At least 2 external to UBC; 2 external to your
Dept. National vs. International? - impact “beyond UBC”
42
Referees – Professorial Stream
Choose well-qualified, arm’s length referees, preferably from universities/programs with stature comparable to UBC
Choose referees who are known leaders/experts in your area
Provide Head with detailed information on referees
National vs. International?
Teaching Effectiveness A. 4.02; SAC 4.3
Effectiveness primary criterion, not popularity
Command over subject matter
Familiarity with recent developments
Preparedness & presentation Accessibility to students
Influence on intellectual & scholarly development of students
Willingness to teach range of subject matter and levels
Evidence of Teaching Excellence
Teaching awards and nominations beneficial but not essential (one form of evidence)
Student evaluations – quantitative and qualitative Peer teaching reviews Student supervision – professional, research,
internships, residency, etc. Multi-section course coordination Professional development activities
SAC 3.2 & Appendix 2 45
Curricula VitaeUse UBC format; adapt as needed (see annotated
version in SAC Guide – Appendix 3)Explain contributions to collaborative grants & co-
authored publicationsConsider numbering pubs and presentationsUse narrative opportunities to provide context for
teaching & scholarship (be concise - 150 words)Pipeline is important – works in progressUse dated supplements to update your file
Common Problems with CVs
Information (e.g., a paper presentation) is duplicated or repeated in different sections of the CV and publication record
CV is not up to date or is not dated or is not in UBC format
Lack of clarity regarding the candidate’s contributions (pubs, grants, collaborative research
Full information is not provided on publications – year, page numbers, authors, etc.
47
Common Problems with CV’s contd.
Candidate’s role in supervising graduate students, residents or post docs is not clear (primary supervisor; co-supervisor; committee member)
Failure to properly distinguish between peer-reviewed publications and those not peer-reviewed
Failure to include the dollar value of grants or to indicate the proportion allocated to the individual in joint grants, or role in grant
Teaching record is incomplete48
Final “Words of Wisdom”Start early – “hit the ground running” – know
what you need to do and be sure to do it (publishing, conference presentations, etc.)
Find a senior mentor familiar with the criteriaDon’t listen to rumors – go to the source for
informationChoose your service contributions very carefullyKeep your vitae up to dateKeep track of, & document your successes
49
Toot Your Own Horn
50
Key Insights
Importance of Teaching
Scholarly Activity
Fairness of Review Process
51
Closing Questions??
As always….. Please check the Faculty Relations website,
email, or call Contact the Faculty Association for
assistance
Thank you!!
52