Date post: | 01-Apr-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | eva-sollars |
View: | 216 times |
Download: | 3 times |
Tenure and Promotion Workshop
May 20th, 2014
Agenda – 3 Parts PART ONE (1:00 – 2:00pm):
Review and Discussion of Criteria and Evidence for Professor of Teaching Stream
PART TWO (2:00 – 3:00pm): Welcoming Message – Nancy Langton Guide to Tenure & Promotion – Deena Rubuliak &
Mark Trowell Senior Appointments Committee – Judith Daniluk
PART THREE (3:00 – 4:00pm): Review and Discussion of Criteria and Evidence for
Professoriate Stream
2
Professor of Teaching Stream
3
The Professor of Teaching Stream
Instructor I Senior Instructor Professor of Teaching
The Criteria
4
The Professor of Teaching Stream
Service
Educational Leadership Teaching
Three pillars: teaching, educational leadership and service
Professor of Teaching Stream Criteria
Collective Agreement:
Senior Instructor – A. 3.04 Professor of Teaching – A. 3.05
SAC Guide: Appendix 1
5
Professor of Teaching Stream
A distinct career track with different expectations than professorial ranks
Requires evidence of excellence in teaching and educational leadership with impact beyond one’s own classroom
Research productivity is not required Excellence in teaching is not enough
6
Professor of Teaching Stream
Discipline and context specific opportunities within each department should be noted re: teaching, educational leadership and service activities
Evidence of external visibility and impact should be framed based on opportunities within units (e.g. access to grant & travel funds; teaching loads; etc.)
7
Senior Instructor A. 3.04
excellence in teaching demonstrated educational leadership,
involvement in curriculum development and innovation, and other teaching and learning initiatives
contributions to service
8
Senior Instructor, contd…
“It is expected that Senior Instructors will keep abreast of current developments in their respective disciplines and in the field of teaching and learning”
(SAC Guide, p. 49)
9
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
service to academic profession, University and community
10
Professor of Teaching, contd…
Demonstrated “educational leadership and impact beyond one’s own classroom, within the University and, as appropriate, externally in the broader academic community”
Demonstrated “impact on student learning and the quality of education at UBC and beyond”
“…scholarly teaching (teaching informed by research/scholarship of teaching and learning) is expected” (SAC Guide p. 48)
11
Evidence of Educational Leadership
(Appendix 1 of SAC Guide)
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 (e.g. accreditation)
Funding obtained for improvement of teaching and learning – new initiatives
Development and/or coordination of courses and programs and/or new assessment models/methods
13
Evidence of Educational Leadership
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)
Development and dissemination of instructional materials/pubs. (textbooks, training manuals, software)
Evidence of Educational Leadership
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.)
Contributions to professional training programs (e.g. TA/tutor training)
Mentorship of peers and students 15
Evidence of Educational Leadership Evidence of the ability to work individually and
collaboratively to enhance teaching and learning Evidence of relationships with other learning units
or institutions that fosters the exchange and development of information and resources on teaching and learning
Evidence of reflective teaching and learning practices
Evidence of initiatives that advance UBC ability to excel in its teaching and learning mandates
16
Referees
Letters of Reference
18
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
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 and 2 external to your
Department National vs. International - impact “beyond UBC”
19
Questions?
Tenure and Promotion Workshop
May 20th, 2014
Agenda – Parts 2 AND 3
PART TWO (2:00 to 3:00pm): Welcoming Message – Nancy Langton Guide to Tenure & Promotion – Deena Rubuliak &
Mark Trowell Senior Appointments Committee – Judith Daniluk
PART THREE (3:00 to 4:00pm): Review and Discussion of Criteria and Evidence for
Professoriate Stream
22
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.
23
Tenure & Promotion
Tenure & Tenure Clocks Promotion Reviews Procedures For Assistance…
24
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.
25
The Tenure Clock
26
The Procedures
The reappointment, tenure & promotionprocedures are set out in Articles 5 & 9 of Part 4:Conditions of Appointment for
Faculty, and are supplemented by the Guide to Reappointment, Tenure and
Promotion Procedures at UBC (the “SAC” Guide)
27
Periodic Review for Promotion
28
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
Head’s Meeting
29
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
30
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
31
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
32
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
33
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
34
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
35
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
36
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
37
Negative?
Yes
Supplementing the File
38
The University and the candidate have the right to supplement the file with new info at any stage prior to the President’s
decision
Use dated supplements to update your file!
For Assistance… The Collective Agreement, in particular
Articles 2 - 5 & 9 of Part 4: Conditions of Appointment for Faculty
Guide to Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion Procedures at UBC for 2013/14
Faculty Relations website: www.hr.ubc.ca/faculty_relations/tenure/
Faculty Association website:www.facultyassociation.ubc.ca/promotiontenure.php
Call us!
39
Senior Appointments Committee
Current SAC Chair: Professor Judith Daniluk
Incoming Chair: Professor Melanie Jones
40
Senior Appointments Committee
20 person committee of professors Representation from all Faculties (includes 2
UBC-O; 1 Faculty Association) Two Subcommittees: Associate and Professor
(members meet weekly September through June)
SAC reviews all tenure, promotion and new appointment files (180-200/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 (A 5.14; Section 10 SAC Guide)
Examples of Contextual Factors
Maternity or parental leaves Delays due to set-up requirements for research
or any other relevant information which may provide insight into timing issues
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
43
SAC Review Process
Files are reviewed in detail for merits & fairness by the Associate or Professor sub-committee members
Cases may be deferred pending receipt of additional information or procedural clarification
Cases are ranked: ‘A’ – no substantive issues or procedural concerns
‘B’ – negative recommendation by Dean or Head – 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 is taken in Dean’s absence Dean is immediately informed of the result
which is considered “confidential”
45
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
Documentation of teaching excellence UBC curriculum vitae Familiarity with the criteria specific to
your rank and promotion Examples of evidence External referee selection
47
Teaching Excellence
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, and mentorship of, students Influence on intellectual & scholarly development of
students (mentorship) 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
SAC 3.2 & Appendix 2 50
Curricula VitaeProfessoriate – Appendix 3 (SAC Guide)
Professor of Teaching Stream – Appendix 4 (SAC Guide)
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, is not dated, or is not in UBC format
Lack of clarity regarding the candidate’s role and contributions (pubs, grants, collaborative research and projects)
Full information is not provided on grants (competitive vs. non; status of applications) or publications (year, page numbers, authors, etc.)
52
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 you in case of multiple recipients
Teaching record is incomplete53
Curricula Vitae - Recommendations
Use UBC format; adapt as needed (see annotated versions in SAC Guide – Appendices 3 & 4)
Explain contributions to collaborative grants and initiatives, and co-authored publications
Consider numbering pubs and presentations Use narrative opportunities to provide context for teaching
(8a), educational leadership (9a), scholarly and professional activities (9a), and “additional information (13/14) – be concise “less is more”
Pipeline is important – indicate works/projects in progress
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 Don’t listen to rumors – go to the source for
information (CA & SAC Guide) Choose your service contributions very carefully Keep your vitae up to date Keep track of, & document your successes
55
Toot Your Own Horn
56
Questions?
Part Three:Criteria and Evidence for
Professoriate Stream
Professoriate Stream
59
The Professoriate Stream
Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor
The Criteria
60
The Professoriate Stream
Service
TeachingResearch
Professoriate Stream Criteria
Collective Agreement:
Tenure – A. 4.01 Assistant Professor – A. 3.06 Associate Professor – A. 3.07 Professor (research stream) – A. 3.08
(SAC Guide – Section 3)
61
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
62
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 service to the academic profession,
University & community 63
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, University , profession and community
64
Professor A. 3.08
NOTE: reserved for those whose “contributions are considered outstanding” meet appropriate standards of excellence in
teaching and scholarly activity high quality in teaching sustained and productive scholarly activity have attained distinction in their discipline have participated significantly in academic
and professional affairs 65
Sustained Scholarly Contributions – the Professoriate 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
67
Important Considerations In Framing A Professoriate Case Cases 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
68
Evidence
Some Sources of Evidence – Professoriate Stream
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-I Citations of your work; adoption of your work
70
Sources of Evidence, contd.
Referees’ verification of impact Awards and other forms of Recognition Discipline-specific norms – venues, grants,
publications, authorship, conference participation
Mentoring and publishing with grad students; grad students’ career accomplishments
Service is important, but can’t substitute for excellence in scholarship and teaching
71
Referees
Referees – Professoriate 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 field
Provide Head with detailed information on referees
National vs. International?? (rank and specialization/expertise)
Questions?