Transcript Workshop Slides: Understanding and Implementing the New RTP Policies

Workshop
April 29, 2016
Elna Green, AVP Faculty Affairs
Kenneth Peter, Chair, Professional Standards
Academic
Assignment
Tenure or
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Do not retain
Academic
Assignment
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Service
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Good
Good
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Good
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
1)
2)
3)
Under S15-8, tenure and promotion is
determined indirectly—if the candidate has
met one of a variety of patterns available
in the rubric, then they are tenured and/or
promoted.
They key is to fairly determine what levels
of achievement a candidate has met in the
three categories of achievement, since
promotion and tenure—or denial—will
follow according to the levels.
How will this critical task of determining
the levels of achievement be made?

When evaluating a candidate, committees and
administrators must determine a level of
achievement in each of three categories of
achievement.
The policy gives descriptions of each level of
achievement for each category. For simplicity,
we call these “descriptors.”
For example, here are the descriptors for
“Scholarly, Artistic, and Professional
Achievement.”
(There are similar descriptors for “Academic
Assignment” and for “Service.”)


Scholarly, Artistic, or Professional
Achievement
3.3.2.2 Unsatisfactory. The candidate has not
created scholarly/artistic/professional
accomplishments that meet the baseline level
as described below. (S15-8).


Scholarly, Artistic, or Professional
Achievement
3.3.2.3 Baseline. The candidate has, over the
course of the period of review, created a body
of completed scholarly/artistic/professional
achievements and shows the promise of
continued growth and success within his/her
discipline. (S15-8).


Scholarly, Artistic, or Professional
Achievement
3.3.2.4 Good. In addition to the baseline as
described above, the candidate has created
scholarly/artistic/professional achievements
that constitute important contributions to the
discipline and that help to enhance the
scholarly/artistic/professional reputation of
the candidate’s department, school, college,
SJSU, or the CSU more generally. (S15-8).


Scholarly, Artistic, or Professional Achievement
3.3.2.5 Excellent. In addition to a good
performance as described above, this level
requires achievements of both sufficient quality
and quantity to establish a significant, important,
and growing reputation within the candidate’s
field. Excellence in scholarly/artistic/professional
achievement requires a body of work that is
recognized as significant within the discipline.
(S15-8).
Descriptor
Defines this level
Descriptor
Defines this level
Descriptor
Defines this level
Descriptor
Defines this level
The task of
committees and
administrative
evaluators is to match
the appropriate
descriptor to the
evidence in the
dossier, and thus
determine the level of
achievement.
Descriptor
Defines and Guidelines
illustrate this level
Descriptor
Defines and Guidelines
illustrate this level
Descriptor
Defines and Guidelines
illustrate this level
Descriptor
Defines and Guidelines
illustrate this level
The task of
committees and
administrative
evaluators is to match
the appropriate
descriptor to the
evidence in the
dossier, and thus
determine the level of
achievement.
(S15-8)
4.1.3 Standard for tenure and promotion to
Associate. Faculty must meet or exceed one
of these profiles across the three categories:
4.1.3.1
Excellent in either Academic
Assignment or in
Scholarly/Artistic/Professional
Achievement and at least Baseline in
the other two categories:
4.1.3.2
Good in any two categories and at
least baseline in the remaining
category.
What are the various profiles, or
combinations of achievements, that satisfy
the requirements for promotion and
tenure at the normal time?
There are five ways provided by policy to
qualify:
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Service
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Academic
Assignment
Excellent
Good
Academic
Assignment
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Service
Excellent
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Academic
Assignment
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Good
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Service
Academic
Assignment
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Good
Service
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Service
Good
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Academic
Assignment
4.14 Early decisions. Favorable early decisions require a
significantly higher level of achievement than a favorable
decision after the normal period of review. Candidates may
be tenured and promoted to Associate prior to the end of
their probationary period if they attain evaluations of
Excellent in two categories and Baseline or better in the
remaining category.
There are three ways provided by policy to
qualify:
Academic
Assignment
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Service
Excellent
Excellent
Good
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Academic
Assignment
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Excellent
Excellent
Good
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Service
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Service
Excellent
Excellent
Good
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Academic
Assignment
(S15-8)
4.2.2 Standard for promotion to Professor. Faculty
must meet or exceed one of these profiles a
cross the three categories:
4.2.2.1 At least Excellent in two categories and
at least Baseline in the remaining
category.
4.2.2.2 At least Excellent in one category
and at least Good in the remaining two
What are the various profiles, or
combinations of achievements, that satisfy
the requirements for promotion to
Professor at the normal time?
There are six ways provided by policy to
qualify:
Academic
Assignment
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Service
Excellent
Excellent
Good
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Academic
Assignment
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Excellent
Excellent
Good
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Service
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Service
Excellent
Excellent
Good
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Academic
Assignment
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Service
Good
Good
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Academic
Assignment
Excellent
Academic
Assignment
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Service
Excellent
Good
Good
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Academic
Assignment
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Service
Excellent
Good
Good
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
4.2.3 Early decisions. Associates may be promoted to
Professor prior to serving five years in rank if they meet the
standards for Excellent in two categories and Good in one.
There are three ways provided by policy to
qualify:
Academic
Assignment
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Excellent
Service
Excellent
Good
Good
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Academic
Assignment
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Excellent
Excellent
Good
Good
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Service
Scholarly,
Artistic,
Professional
Achievement
Service
Excellent
Excellent
Good
Good
Good
Baseline
Baseline
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Academic
Assignment
Voting for a level of Achievement
within any given category
1. To determine the level of achievement to assign to a
category, committees will vote. This means that
there will be three votes—one per category.
2. If committee members carefully read and apply the
descriptors, there should not be wide
disagreements about the appropriate levels of
achievement.
3. However, voting will decide a level of achievement
in the event that there are disagreements between
committee members.
4. The level of achievement assigned by a committee
will be the highest level that receives a majority of
the votes.
Voting for a level of Achievement
within any given category
(6 person committee)
The levels
The votes
Majority?
Excellent
2
2/6 NO
Good
2
4/6 YES
Baseline
2
6/6 YES
Unsatisfactory
Excellen
t
Excellen
t
The outcome
and why
The committee
decision is
“Good” since
Good is the
highest level to
receive a
majority of
votes
Voting for a level of Achievement
within any given category
(8 person committee)
The levels
The votes
Majority?
Excellent
4
4/8 NO
4
8/8 YES
Excellen
t
Excellen
t
Good
Baseline
Unsatisfactory
The outcome
and why
The committee
decision is
“Good” since
Good is the
highest level to
receive a
majority of
votes
Voting for a level of Achievement
within any given category
(8 person committee)
The levels
The votes
Majority?
Excellent
1
1/8 NO
Good
3
4/8 NO
Baseline
4
8/8 YES
Unsatisfactory
Excellen
t
Excellen
t
The outcome
and why
The committee
decision is
“Baseline” since
Baseline is the
highest level to
receive a
majority of
votes
Voting for a level of Achievement
within any given category
(5 person committee)
The levels
The votes
Majority?
The outcome
and why
Excellent
Good
1
1/5 NO
Baseline
2
3/5 YES
Unsatisfactory
2
2/5 NO
The committee
decision is
“Baseline” since
Baseline is the
highest level to
receive a
majority of
votes
The Special case of
“Unsatisfactory”
“Unsatisfactory” is different from “Baseline” or “Good” or
“Excellent” in several ways.
1. A candidate who receives an “Unsatisfactory” in ANY of the
three areas of achievement is denied.
2. When counting votes, it makes sense to say that anyone
voting for “Good” or “Excellent” also agrees that the
candidate has at least met the criteria for lower categories;
but it obviously does NOT make sense to say they think the
candidate has also met the criteria for Unsatisfactory.
3. Therefore, a committee cannot assign an “Unsatisfactory”
rating unless a majority directly vote for the rating
“Unsatisfactory.”
Voting for a level of Achievement
within any given category
(5 person committee)
The levels
The votes
Majority?
The outcome
and why
Excellent
Good
Baseline
2
2/5 No
Unsatisfactory
3
3/5 Yes
The committee
decision is
“Unsatisfactory”
since there is an
absolute
majority for
unsatisfactory
Voting for a level of Achievement
within any given category
(6 person committee)
The levels
The votes
Majority?
The outcome
and why
Excellent
Good
1
1/6 No
Baseline
2
3/6 No
3
3/6 No
Unsatisfactory
The committee is
deadlocked since
there is no majority
for any outcome. 3 is
not a majority of 6.
This results in “No
recommendation” and
is listed as “split.”
SPLIT
How do I know which criteria and standards
to apply to each candidate?
How do I know that I applied the correct
standards and criteria?
Single document, no more
than 2000 words
Secret ballots