Transcript Chairs’ Workshop JSM 2007 Vijay Nair University of Michigan [email protected] July 28, 2007 Topics Teaching & Education (SP &VN) – Keeping graduate programs healthy – Undergraduate majors – Service.

Chairs’ Workshop
JSM 2007
Vijay Nair
University of Michigan
[email protected]
July 28, 2007
Topics
Teaching & Education (SP &VN)
– Keeping graduate programs healthy
– Undergraduate majors
– Service teaching
– Interdisciplinary programs?
Faculty Reviews (VN & SP)
– Mentoring junior faculty
– Conducting faculty reviews
UM Background
UM ~ 38,000 students (28 + 10)
– Full service university
– Stat, Biostat, ISR, B-school, Eng., …
LSA (18K + grad students)
– Stat part of Nat Sc (collaborations with Soc Sc)
– One Dean, 3 area assoc deans, for budget + finance, &
for ugrad + grad education (Rackham)
– ~ 30 chairs and directors
– Dean “controls” budget, etc.
– Governance –elected ExCo – hiring, promotions, policy, …
– Two meetings a semester – Deans + all C + D;
– monthly meetings with Dean, Assoc Dean and
NS chairs + directors
Dept Background
Started in 1969
About 16 FTE + 5-6 lecturers/teaching faculty
3 grad programs (Ph D, Applied Master’s, Dual degree masters)
~100 grad students ~ 40 TA positions
Ugrad major (~15 grad per year) + 2 minors
Large service teaching (ugrad and grad)
Joint courses with Biostat, Econ, IOE, Math
New interdisciplinary ugrad concentration in Informatics
VN  chair for 8+ years.
Junior Faculty Mentoring
College/University view and environment
– Mentoring programs and documentation req’d
– Why do we need it? Large depts, failed tenure cases
Dept  mentoring document  process
New junior faculty assigned mentor in first semester – review and
modify as appropriate
Mostly based on chemistry, not nece same area
Scope of mentoring activities 
Annual discussion with mentor  not part of evaluation
Encourage discussion with others (get many views)
Mentoring by senior, junior faculty
Scope of Mentoring Activities
Format and approaches for mentoring defined by menor-menteer
Should involve discussion of the expectations for research, teaching,
and service to Department, University, and academic community.
Provide constructive feedback in timely and ongoing way.
Help to become a strong contributing member quickly
Teaching:
Offer advice on course outlines, HW assignments, mid-term and
final exams, how to handle difficult situations, etc.
Observe classes occasionally (not evaluative), esp first few courses,
provide informal suggestions on classroom teaching, help to
develop teaching skills; how to engage in other educational activies,
how to balance teaching and research …
Suggest other available resources as appropriate (e.g. visits to the
classrooms of established teachers or interactions with the Center
for Research on Learning and Teaching).
Scope of Mentoring Activities
Research and Service
Mentors need not be a match in research interests.
Advise and help with
– connections for collaborations and networking inside & outside
– writing grants, making research presentations, which journals to
submit papers, how to prepare papers for submission and
revision
– other ways to further development of a research career.
Orientation and introduction to university and profession,
Advise on service and administrative duties.
General resource person
Junior Faculty Mentoring
Challenges
– How to formalize an informal process? How to ensure
that “good” mentoring happens?
– Inherent variability in mentees’ needs and mentors’
skills
– Need to get multiple opinions
– Inherent conflicts in mentoring vs evaluation
– Depts with large number of junior faculty and few
senior faculty
– Special needs: women and under-represented groups
– Rely on faculty outside the dept and advisors.
– Role of dept chair in mentoring
– Mentee’s responsibilities
Faculty Review Process at UM Statistics
Annual reviews and discussion with chair and mentor
3-year review and feedback
End of 5th year, P&T committee set up – chair and committee works
with candidate to develop a casebook – includes CV, research
teaching and service documentation -- names of external letter
writers (number)?
Dept selects from candidates list and own list – some in your area,
others a bit more general, usually full prof’s – college committees
looks for big names from top universities; Some internal letters
P&T committee writes up evaluation. Candidate has opportunity to
respond.
Department level discussions and recommendation. Variation in
exact process.
To college-level review -- divisional review committee looks at
research case -- college ExCo makes decision based on this
review and overall case – Dean vs College ExCo
Provost (usually pro forma)
Negative decisions – dept vs college level; appeal?
Research
Quality of research is key – how to measure? this is the
problem!
Journals, funding, external letters, invited seminars, …
Quantity?
Moving beyond thesis research and establishing your
own niche and name recognition
Need not be a completely new area; but need to put
some distance between yourself and your advisor’s work
– cut the umbilical cord
Single vs multi-authored; order of authorship, …
Interdisciplinary research – how much does it counts –
how does your dept assess the quality of the work?
Ph. D. student supervision? Mixed bag. Joint supervision
Junior Faculty Responsibilities:
Understand your own process
Process: Within department, college, and higher …
Multiunit appointments; wet vs dry appointment
Understand key steps of the process – documents, players, … and
plan ahead
Components of the P&T casebook – how many external letters,
internal letters, emphasis on funding, teaching vs research, service
…
Annual and 3-year reviews – make sure to get feedback; talk to
senior faculty informally; listen to what they say but use your best
judgment
Personal issues – talk to chair, senior mentor, associate deans;
don’t be hesitant to raise important issues early on.
Ultimately, your research has to do the talking …
But how can you help yourself?
External letters are KEY
Plan ahead
Exposure in the profession – invited seminars (get senior faculty and advisor to help)
Networking – very important – nurture relationships with potential letter writes – invite
people to seminars; try to get invited, write to them, send copies of your preprints
and ask for advice/input – don’t be shy; be selective; not everyone will respond, don’t
get discouraged by non-response; talk to people at conferences – smaller
conferences are better – send e-mail before and introduce yourself.
Be assertive but not pushy
Importance of grants?
Choice of journals  major issue
Teaching and Service
Good teaching is necessary but outstanding teaching alone in not
sufficient
Quality of teaching – classroom teaching (student evaluations) key
component; But mentoring, curriculum development and other
initiatives also help
Keep a teaching portfolio – all teaching, mentoring, and curriculum
related activities, current e-mails of students who can write letters
Consult with colleagues and use university resources on improving
your teaching and organizational skills
Do not over-spend time on teaching;
Service – usually not key -- keep service within the department to
minimum; outside service (editorial; giving talks; organizing
sessions) carries more weight – but be wary of committee work that
does not help case for research and visibility
Mentoring and “Politicking” …
Quality and extent varies; experience at UM …
Outside the dept and outside university mentoring
Advice: Feedback on research areas, writing papers, choice of
journals, grant writing, getting invitations to conferences and
colloquia, editorial boards, …
Senior vs peer mentors
Get to know all senior faculty -- Make sure people know of your work
and you are good, but do it in a subtle way – use appropriate
occasions – like seminars to ask questions; be active in the
department, keep a high-profile, find out how things work; make
useful, constructive suggestions with new ideas, things like informal
seminars, brown bag discussions, etc.