Transcript Promotion and Tenure Open Forum for Faculty April 21, 2011 Jim Liburdy Faculty Senate Promotion and Tenure Committee Becky Warner Academic Affairs.

Promotion and Tenure Open Forum for Faculty
April 21, 2011
Jim Liburdy
Faculty Senate Promotion and Tenure Committee
Becky Warner
Academic Affairs
Faculty Senate
Promotion and Tenure Committee
•Review guidelines and propose changes, updates
•Act as observer at the University Promotion and Tenure
Committee meetings
•Report to FS on annual P&T process (summary of actions)
•Provide an information source for faculty
•Six tenured faculty from across campus
http://oregonstate.edu/senate/committees/ptc/index.html
Faculty Senate Promotion and Tenure Committee
Membership 2010-2011
Jim Liburdy, ‘11 (Chair) Mechanical Engineering
Eric Hanson ’11
Wood Science & Engineering
Jennifer Field ’12
Agricultural Sciences
Michelle Kutzler ’12
Agricultural Sciences
Donna Champeau ’13
WAGE/Public Health
Yanyun Zhao ’13
Food Science & Technology
Executive Committee Liaison - Kate Hunter-Zaworski
Promotion and Tenure Guidelines
Website
http://oregonstate.edu/admin/aa/faculty-handbook-promotion-and-tenureguidelines
General Purposes and Responsibilities
Criteria for Promotion and Tenure
Faculty Dossiers
Procedural Guidelines for Promotion and Tenure
Waiver of Access
Dossier Preparation Guidelines
Policy on Salary Increases for Promotion in Rank
The promotion and tenure process begins at the time of
hiring.
Letter of offer should be clear on the tenure clock
(granting prior service)
Position description should:
Articulate assigned duties clearly
Assigned duties should add up to 100%
The proportion of assigned duties expected to lead to scholarly
outcomes should be at least 15% (clinical positions 5-15%)
Service is required in all positions
The process of promotion and tenure is ongoing.
For those on tenure-track, annual reviews are important.
Position descriptions must be reviewed and revised as
appropriate.
For those on tenure-track, mid-tenure reviews are critical.
For those with tenure, use the periodic review of faculty (PROF), and
post-tenure review process to get/give input for promotion.
Criteria for Tenure
Tenure will be granted to faculty members whose
character, achievement in serving the University’s
missions, and potential for long-term performance warrant
the institution’s reciprocal long-term commitment.
Typical clock is 6 years
Extensions possible
FMLA for 3 months or more
Extenuating circumstances
Request at the time of the event
Early request for tenure: must be extraordinary
Criteria for Promotion
Assistant to Associate:
Effectiveness in assigned duties
Achievement in scholarship/creative activity with the
potential for distinction
An appropriate balance of institutional and professional
service.
Associate to Full:
Distinction in assigned duties
Distinction in scholarship/creative activity
An appropriate balance of institutional and professional
service.
Criteria for Promotion
Instructor to Senior Instructor
After 4 years of full-time service
After 3 years if prior service credit given
4 external letters (what is “external”)
If letter of offer indicated tenure track, same guidelines apply
as those for Assistant and Associate Professors on tenure
track
Faculty Research Assistant to Senior Faculty Research Assistant
After 4 years of full-time service
After 3 years if prior service credit given
4 external letters (what is “external”)
Senior FRA (and courtesy) stop at College
Dossier Preparation: Providing Evidence for Promotion
and/or Tenure
Form A
Include letter of offer for prior service credit
Confidentiality Waiver
Should not affect evaluation
Should never be mentioned in evaluation letters whether it was
assigned or not.
Position Description
If PD changes, include a table summarizing FTE distribution
over time
Candidate’s Statement
3 pages, 12-point font, 1-inch margins
Dossier Preparation: Providing Evidence for Promotion
and/or Tenure
“Effectiveness” and “Distinction”
Teaching/Advising
Instructional summary
Credit/non-credit course development
Mentoring undergraduate and graduate students
Team/collaborative efforts
International efforts
Student/client evaluation
Summarize, contextualize.
Peer teaching evaluations
Should be a summary of multiple reviews
Advising
Describe and evaluate
Other
Describe and evaluate
Dossier Preparation: Providing Evidence for Promotion
and/or Tenure
“Achievement with potential for distinction” and
“Distinction”
Scholarship and Creative Activity
Listing publications/presentations/exhibitions/ grants
appropriately
Refereed/juried, invited (how was work evaluated?)
Authorship ordering and clarification of effort
What is the impact of the work?
Dossier Preparation: Providing Evidence for Promotion
and/or Tenure
Service
University
Department/school
College
University
Profession
Public
Is there an appropriate balance in levels of service (all promotions and
tenure)?
Is there distinction in service (for promotion to professor)?
Awards (all levels—good for establishing distinction in duties)
School of XXX : College of Engineering
Description
Faculty Member: XXX XXX
Appointment type: 9 month
Academic Faculty Position
Rank:
OSU FTE: 1.0
The primary responsibilities of this position lie in research, teaching, and service
within the School of XXX XXX. The duties of this position support the mission and
goals of the School, College and OSU. The nominal division of effort is 40% in
research, 50% in teaching, and 10% in service activities.
Research includes the development and leadership of a funded research program
that is nationally and internationally significant and visible. This includes: writing
proposals; conducting funded and unfunded research; presenting results at
professional conferences, meetings, other institutions and industry; and directing
and mentoring graduate students in all aspects of research and professional
development. The scholarly expectations for this position lie in the discovery,
understanding, and application of new knowledge through research, and the
dissemination of knowledge via peer-reviewed journals and conference
proceedings, placement of graduate students in industry, national labs and/or
academia, and when appropriate transfer of technology through
copyrights/patents, industry adoption, and commercialization.
Teaching responsibilities include developing and teaching courses in the
School’s engineering curriculum; advising and mentoring students in
projects, professional aspects of the field, and course selection;
conducting student assessments and proper documentation to support
ABET accreditation; participating as a committee member for graduate
students; holding office hours.
Service includes participation in the School’s committees, faculty
meetings and outreach activities, participation in college and university
committees, and participation and leadership in activities of professional
societies. Such activities include: reviewer or editor for journals and
conferences; leadership on program committees; reviewer of proposals;
conference organization.
YY% of these duties is expected to lead to scholarship or creative
outcomes, as defined in the Criteria for Promotion and Tenure,
http://oregonstate.edu/facultystaff/handbook/promocri.html.
Cooperation with the school faculty and staff members to support
ongoing efforts is expected. Specific workload assignments are at the
discretion of the School Head.
Promotion and Tenure: Steps in the Process
External Reviews
Letters should be from tenured professors or individuals
of equivalent stature outside of academe who are widely
recognized in their field
Five minimum, eight maximum
No more than half from the candidate’s list
Watch for potential conflicts of interest
Co-PIs
Co-authors
Mentors
Students
Promotion and Tenure: Steps in the Process
Unit review (Membership guidelines changed recently)
Student letter (process articulated in guidelines)
Unit committee review
Who can participate in discussion?
All ranked faculty (chair/head on invitation)
 Be aware of conflicts of interest
Who can vote?
Those tenured, at or above current rank, for tenure
review
Those above candidate’s current rank for
promotion
Review is based on dossier, including external
letters.
Promotion and Tenure: Steps in the Process
Supervisor’s Review
Supervisor comments on relevant items in the personnel
file
If other supervisors involved, include evaluation
Evaluation should be an independent review
Comment on external letters (don’t just quote), but don’t
identify reviewers
Once the unit review is done:
Supervisor meets with candidate and shares the
committee and supervisor evaluations
Informs candidate’s right to add written statement
What happens if evaluations are negative?
Recent Modification to P&T guidelines?
As stated in the Faculty Handbook, should the faculty
member request it, a faculty committee appointed and
authorized by the Faculty Senate shall examine the
contents of the faculty member’s dossier to verify that
all statements therein have properly summarized
external evaluations. This review is to be completed and
forwarded to the College at least two weeks prior to the
scheduled completion of the College level review. The
request by the candidate for this review must be
submitted to the Faculty Senate within one week after
receiving all unit level reviews.
18
November 7, 2015
Promotion and Tenure: Steps in the Process
College-level Review
New Guidelines approved by the Senate
Dean’s office should inform candidate when college letters
have been added, and of their right to add a written
statement
Dean’s review
Notify the candidate, and inform about adding a statement
Note: colleges differ on the timing of notice—ask if you
want to see the college letter before the Dean provides a
review.
Promotion and Tenure: Steps in the Process
University Committee
Reviews all files
Requests meetings with Deans/others when
Votes coming forward are not consistent across levels
Votes at all levels are negative
Other considerations require discussion
Faculty Senate P&T Committee representation
Committee makes recommendation to Provost
Provost’s decision given in writing
Appeal
Within 2 weeks of receipt of letter
Reasons for appeal: extenuating circumstances not previously
considered, procedural irregularities, factual errors
One letter from candidate; no supporting letters
Promotion and Tenure: Contacts for
Questions
Jim Liburdy: [email protected]
Becky Warner: [email protected]