Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion Workshop
June 18, 2013
Agenda
Welcome and Introductions Guide to Reappointment, Tenure & Promotion –
Fran Watters & Mark Trowell Senior Appointments Committee – Judith Daniluk Insights – Fran Watters Questions and Discussion
2
Our Objective
To provide Heads and Administrators with an understanding of the reappointment, tenure and promotion processes.
To support you in enabling the success of faculty members going forward for reappointment, tenure and promotion.
3
Reappointment, Tenure & Promotion
Tenure Streams Criteria Tenure & 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 Tenure Clock
8
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
9
Reappointment Reviews
The process for reappointment reviews is the same as the process for tenure and promotion reviews EXCEPT External letters of reference are only required where
the Head and/or Department are considering a negative recommendation
The President does not consult with the Senior Appointments Committee (SAC)
10
Periodic Review for Promotion
11
Rank Periodic Review Year
Assistant Professor
Year 5
then every 2 years
Associate Professor
Year 5
then every 3 years
Senior Instructor
Year 5
then every 3 years
Promotion Reviews
Review Scheduled? Obligation to Initiate?
Who can stop the
process?
Periodic Yes UniversityCandidate
only
Non-Periodic
NoCandidate
or the University
Candidate or the
University
12
Head’s Meeting
13
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
14
It’s an opportunity to clearly note the strengths, deficiencies and opportunities for improvement
It is also important to provide 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
15
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
16
• 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
17
• 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
18
• 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
19
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
20
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
21
Negative?
Yes
Supplementing the File
22
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/
Call us!
23
Senior Appointments Committee
Professor Judith Daniluk, SAC Chair
24
Senior Appointments Committee
20 person committee of professors (meets bi-weekly September through June)
Representation from all Faculties (includes 2 UBC-O; 1 Faculty Association)
Two Subcommittees: Associate and Professor (meets bi-weekly)
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
27
Timing of Submitting Files to SAC
Meeting with candidate by June 30th
Candidate submits dossier by Sept. 15th Completed dossier with recommendation to
Dean by Dec. 1st
File to SAC by March 31st (end of April at the latest)
Prioritize – tenure and promotion cases (more time sensitive)
Head’s and Dean’s Letters
Of critical importance when file is reviewed by SAC: Explain process, referee selection and assessment,
and results of vote Provide detailed explanation of any negative votes
(don’t dismiss these) Provide details of contextual issues, unique
contributions (e.g. collaborative work, aboriginal scholarship, etc.)
Frame case within collective agreement
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 Result communicated to Dean
31
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 the Dossier
Familiarity with the criteria specific to rank and promotion
Examples of evidenceExternal referee selectionDocumentation of teaching excellenceUBC curriculum vitae
33
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)
34
Assistant Professor A. 3.06
evidence of ability in teaching and scholarly activity
involved in scholarly activity is a successful teacher is capable of providing instruction at the
various levels
35
Associate Professor A. 3.07
evidence of successful teaching and scholarly activity beyond that expected of an Assistant Professor
teaching effectiveness (A. 4.02) sustained and productive scholarly activity ability to direct graduate students willingness to participate, and participation
in, the affairs of the Department and the University
36
Professor A. 3.08
NOTE: reserved for those whose contributions are considered outstanding meet appropriate standards of excellence and
have wide recognition in the field of their interest high quality in teaching sustained and productive scholarly activity attained distinction in their discipline participated significantly in academic and
professional affairs
37
Tenure A. 4.01
granted to individuals who have maintained a high standard of performance and show promise of continuing to do so
judged principally on performance in both teaching and in scholarly activity
service is important, but cannot compensate for deficiencies in teaching and in scholarly activity
evidence of competence is required both in teaching and in scholarly activity
38
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
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
40
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 the 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
41
Some Sources of Evidence
Invited presentations/performances (national & international)
Article & grant reviews; editorial board workPublications in high-impact venues in the candidate’s
field (provide descriptions, impact factors, rejection rates)
Competitive grant funding – as PI and coCitations of work; adoption of candidate’s workMentoring and publishing with grad students; grad
students’ career accomplishments 42
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 teaching43
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 candidate’s area
Candidate should provide Head with detailed information on referees and this should be included in Head’s letter
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 activitiesSAC 3.2 & Appendix 2
46
Documentation of Teaching Effectiveness A. 4.02Context is critical - identify norms in your
unit/faculty, and how candidate comparesProvide quantitative and qualitative summary
and assessment of: All teaching responsibilities Student and peer evaluations Graduate student supervision incl.
expectations Other teaching contributions,
accomplishments, awards, etc. Explanation for low scores
Professor of Teaching Stream Criteria
Collective Agreement:
Senior Instructor (2010 criteria) - A. 3.04
Professor of Teaching – A. 3.05(SAC Guide – Appendix 1)
48
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
49
Senior Instructor A. 3.04
Old Agreement: teaching excellence and contributions to service
New Agreement (2010): excellence in teaching demonstrated educational leadership,
involvement in curriculum development and innovation, and other teaching and learning initiatives
contributions to service50
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
51
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
52
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
54
Referees – Professor of Teaching Stream Senior Instructor/Tenure:
Familiarity with candidate’s teaching contributions Not someone with whom candidate has co-taught Outstanding teachers outside candidate’s
Department Can be outside UBC, but not required
Professor of Teaching: At least 2 external to UBC; 2 external to candidate’s
Department National vs. International? - impact “beyond UBC”
55
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 progressCandidate should use dated supplements to
update 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.
57
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
Teaching record is incomplete
58
Important Issues for Heads Ongoing mentoring of new and junior faculty
regarding: expectations at UBC top journals and presses tri-council funding expectations re: conference participation &
graduate supervision authorship (single; multiple; order)
Overburdening junior faculty with service work Orienting members of DSPC and DACOPAT
Critical Resources
The Collective Agreement, in particular Articles 2-5 & 9 of the Agreement on Conditions of Appointment for Faculty
SAC 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
Process Considerations (SAC Guide) Acting Head – co-author etc. (Note 3 - 5.0) Timeliness of file (Note 4 – 5.0) Importance of 5.02 meeting (5.2.1) Early discussions regarding areas of scholarly
activity – single or blended case (5.2.1) Eligible members to be consulted (5.4.3) Selection of referees (5.4.4 a) Importance of confidentiality (5.4.22) Identification of “serious concerns” (5.4.26) Separate votes on promotion and tenure (5.4.27) Initial appointments – separate vote – rank/tenure
61
Key Insights
Importance of Teaching Sustained Scholarly Activity and
Impact Fairness of Review Process
62
Closing Questions??
As always…..Please check the Faculty Relations website, email, or call us
Thank you!!
63