Presentation on theme: "Tenure and Promotion for Extension Faculty: Tips for the Evaluated and the Evaluators Larry Smith Executive Senior Vice Provost Utah State University Annual."— Presentation transcript:
Tenure and Promotion for Extension Faculty: Tips for the Evaluated and the Evaluators Larry Smith Executive Senior Vice Provost Utah State University Annual Utah Extension Conference March 5, 2014
Tips for the Evaluated and the Evaluators Larry Smith Executive Senior Vice Provost Utah State University Annual Utah Extension Conference March 4, 2014 Know for certain what your role and responsibilities are, both as a candidate and as a member of the advisory committee– DON’T GUESS Read the Faculty Code Section
4.2 Criteria for the Award of Tenure and for Promotion from Extension Assistant Professor to Extension Associate Professor Tenure and promotion from extension assistant professor to extension associate professor are awarded on the basis by which an extension faculty member performs his or her role statement. Although extension faculty are expected to carry out the major university functions of teaching, research or creative endeavors, extension, and service, individual emphasis will vary as described in the extension faculty member's role statement. Each candidate must present evidence of effectiveness in all of the professional domains in which he or she performs and must present evidence of excellence in the major emphasis of his or her role statement Tenure and Promotion: Criteria for Faculty with Extension Ranks
4.4 Criteria for Promotion from Extension Associate Professor to Extension Professor In addition to the criteria for promotion to extension associate professor, promotion to the rank of extension professor: shall require an established outstanding reputation for excellence in teaching, development of programs relevant to the identified population, and extension, according to the role statement Tenure and Promotion: Criteria for Faculty with Extension Ranks
Old Code: (1) Tenure advisory committee The role of the tenure advisory committee is to assist the faculty member in the achievement of tenure through appropriate counsel and advisement and to render judgment that the faculty member has or has not attained the criteria for tenure. Fight TTWWADI: “That’s The Way We’ve Always Done It” Role of Tenure Advisory Committee Current Code: (1) Tenure advisory committee (TAC). The role and responsibility of the TAC is to provide an annual evaluation of a faculty member's progress toward tenure and promotion. The TAC is responsible for providing feedback to the faculty member with regard to progress toward tenure and promotion, and shall recommend (a) to renew the appointment or (b) not to renew the appointment ( (5)). In the final year of the pre-tenure probationary period, the committee shall recommend (a) awarding promotion and tenure or (b) denying promotion and tenure ( (5)).
Tips for the Evaluated and the Evaluators Larry Smith Executive Senior Vice Provost Utah State University Annual Utah Extension Conference March 4, 2014 Make sure your role statement reflects what you are supposed be doing. Your tenure and promotion evaluation is focused on performance relative to the role statement. When constructing the tenure and promotion dossier, provide evidence that you are performing duties defined by the role statement. Both candidate and advisory committee members should be intimately familiar with the role statement. Make sure evaluative weights assigned to you are correct.
Tips for the Evaluated and the Evaluators Larry Smith Executive Senior Vice Provost Utah State University Annual Utah Extension Conference March 4, 2014 Code: Candidate's File The candidate is responsible for keeping his or her professional file current and complete. This file is the primary source of information for the tenure advisory committee or promotion advisory committee. The file should include thorough documentation related to the responsibilities outlined in the role statement. The dossier is the candidate’s responsibility Any advice to the candidate about dossier content should be made carefully!! Advisory committee members - WARNING!!
One binder Provide evidence of performance in line with duties in role statement. Be creative in design and content, but make it easy to read and follow. Self Assessment Statement Don’t just summarize the CV. You did X, Y, and Z…Why, and what IMPACT did it have, and HOW do you know? Candidates and the Dossier EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE! IMPACT, IMPACT, IMPACT! CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT!
Write so someone outside Extension can understand. Candidates and the Dossier This is not a scrapbook! Don’t include Extension Philosophy!!
Advisory Committee Members and Candidate Review Concentrate on assessment and evaluation, not dossier design and construction. Committee letters should NOT be CV summary; should be serious assessment of performance: What are the candidate’s strengths and weaknesses, and WHY – what is evidence? Exert professional discretion; be honest and forthright. Conduct meetings properly. (Chairs) Discuss with others (in or outside of Extension) how to conduct T & P meetings. Review role of ombudspersons.
Be accurate in your letter, don’t exaggerate or gloss over important feature of binder. “elephants in the room” Address…
External Peer Reviews Selected by department head and advisory committee: (1) “The department head or supervisor and the tenure advisory committee shall mutually agree to the peer reviewers from whom letters will be solicited.” Up to half of external peer reviewers from the head and committee; at least half from the candidate. “At least one-half of the reviewers must be selected from the candidate's list.” External peer reviewers should be qualified to evaluate the candidate. “The reviewers must be external to the university and must be held with respect in academe.”
External Peer Reviews (Continued) External peer reviewers should not have a conflict of interest with candidate. “The candidate will be asked … to state the nature of his or her acquaintance with each of them.” Should be objective evaluators. Should not be letters of recommendation or reference. Department Heads: 1.Add paragraph biographies of the external peer reviewers and explain why they were chosen. 2.Full length CVs not necessary. 3.Add copy of letter that went to external peer reviewers. 4.Add a list of materials that the EPR’s received.
Recommendation Letters from Advisory Committees, Department Heads, or Deans: NEVER INCLUDE NAMES OR IDENTIFYING INFORMATION OF EXTERNAL PEER REVIEWERS!
INCLUDE NAMES OR IDENTIFYING INFORMATION OF EXTERNAL PEER REVIEWERS! NEVER
Take Home Messages Understand correct process and responsibilities in code. Candidates: Make case for tenure and promotion relative to the role statement. Candidates and Reviewers: Provide context and evidence for strengths and weaknesses Be thorough and honest. Address ‘elephants’.