Promotion & Tenure Workshop April 16, 2008

Agenda What is and when is the Mid-Tenure Review? What is and when is the Mid-Tenure Review? When do I apply for Tenure/Promotion to Associate Professor? When do I apply for Tenure/Promotion to Associate Professor? Can I delay my Tenure Review? Can I delay my Tenure Review? When do I apply for Promotion to Professor? When do I apply for Promotion to Professor? How does the review process work? What is the time table? How does the review process work? What is the time table? How do I get the External Review? How do I get the External Review? How should my Review Packet be organized? How should my Review Packet be organized? What areas are evaluated and what artifacts should I include in the packet? What areas are evaluated and what artifacts should I include in the packet? Your Questions Your Questions

What is and when is the Mid-Tenure Review? Mid Tenure Review is an opportunity for you to receive formal feedback from your department committee, department chair, and dean regarding your progress toward tenure. Mid Tenure Review is an opportunity for you to receive formal feedback from your department committee, department chair, and dean regarding your progress toward tenure. Mid Tenure Review generally occurs in the Third Year of your six year probationary period. Exact year is specified in your annual contract. Mid Tenure Review generally occurs in the Third Year of your six year probationary period. Exact year is specified in your annual contract.

What is and when is the Mid-Tenure Review? Your Department Chair is responsible for initiating the Mid-Tenure Review. However, if he/she has not already discussed it with you, go and talk with your chair ASAP. Your Department Chair is responsible for initiating the Mid-Tenure Review. However, if he/she has not already discussed it with you, go and talk with your chair ASAP. Process for the review is the same as the process for applying for Tenure and Promotion. You must submit an evaluation packet to your chair by October 15 th. An external review is not required, but would be beneficial. Process for the review is the same as the process for applying for Tenure and Promotion. You must submit an evaluation packet to your chair by October 15 th. An external review is not required, but would be beneficial.

When do I apply for Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor? Tenure Review generally occurs during 6 th year of Tenure-track status Tenure Review generally occurs during 6 th year of Tenure-track status Exact year of the review is designated in your contract. Exact year of the review is designated in your contract. Application for Promotion to Associate Professor generally occurs at the same time as Tenure Review, although the decisions are separate. Application for Promotion to Associate Professor generally occurs at the same time as Tenure Review, although the decisions are separate.

Can I delay my Tenure Review? Faculty may request a delay in tenure review due to external demands, such as Faculty may request a delay in tenure review due to external demands, such as Serious Illnesses Serious Illnesses Pregnancy, Adoption, Foster child care Pregnancy, Adoption, Foster child care Substantial Caregiver responsibilities Substantial Caregiver responsibilities Military Service, Legal Issues, etc. Military Service, Legal Issues, etc. Faculty member submits application, and appropriate documentation to Department Chair  Dean  Provost Provost makes final decision. Faculty member submits application, and appropriate documentation to Department Chair  Dean  Provost Provost makes final decision. Delaying Tenure review moves Mid-Tenure and Tenure Review dates back by one year. Expectations for Tenure review do not change. Delaying Tenure review moves Mid-Tenure and Tenure Review dates back by one year. Expectations for Tenure review do not change. Only one Delay is generally permitted. Only one Delay is generally permitted. Delay cannot be used to postpone an expected difficult or negative tenure review. Delay cannot be used to postpone an expected difficult or negative tenure review.

Eligibility to Apply for Promotion to Associate Professor Must teach full time as Assistant Professor at MWSU for at least: –six years*, if you hold the appropriate terminal degree or “have made exceptional contributions to the university or the profession” –ten years, if you have MA+30 status –fourteen years, otherwise. PG, p.75 * 5 yrs, if hired before July 1, 2005 and have earned tenure or are applying for tenure at the same time. ?

Performance Levels for Promotion to Associate Professor Strong teaching effectiveness when compared with other MWSU faculty. Strong teaching effectiveness when compared with other MWSU faculty. Continuous, significant growth in scholarship/creative activity Continuous, significant growth in scholarship/creative activity Active, constructive service to benefit students, the institution, the discipline/profession and/or community Active, constructive service to benefit students, the institution, the discipline/profession and/or community

When do I apply for Promotion to Professor? A minimum of 5 years full time experience as Associate Professor at MWSU (application made during 5 th year). A minimum of 5 years full time experience as Associate Professor at MWSU (application made during 5 th year). –Absence without pay does not count toward minimum time –Sabbatical Leave or reassigned time does count toward 5 years experience. Must hold appropriate terminal degree in the discipline of faculty appointment Must hold appropriate terminal degree in the discipline of faculty appointment Under exceptional cases, a candidate may be considered without the terminal degree. Under exceptional cases, a candidate may be considered without the terminal degree.

Performance Levels for Promotion to Professor High quality teaching when compared with other MWSU faculty. High quality teaching when compared with other MWSU faculty. Significant professional service to benefit students, the institution, the discipline/profession, and/or the community. Significant professional service to benefit students, the institution, the discipline/profession, and/or the community. A pattern of consistent, significant professional growth. A pattern of consistent, significant professional growth.

How does the review process work? Annual Reviews Annual Reviews –Self Evaluation: You set annual goals and analyze your efforts in teaching, service, and professional development. –Chair Evaluation: Department Chair reviews your Self Evaluation and offers his/her assessment of your efforts in teaching, service, and scholarship. –Dean / Provost Evaluation: Dean and Provost review Self and Chair Evaluations and offer comments.

How does the review process work? Mid Tenure Review Mid Tenure Review After two years teaching, candidate prepares initial tenure packet to show progress toward tenure.After two years teaching, candidate prepares initial tenure packet to show progress toward tenure. Packet is reviewed by Department CommitteePacket is reviewed by Department Committee Department Chair Department Chair Dean Dean Each reviewer writes a letter to applicant to advise on strengths and weaknesses. Particularly on areas that may need improvement to meet standards required for tenure.Each reviewer writes a letter to applicant to advise on strengths and weaknesses. Particularly on areas that may need improvement to meet standards required for tenure.

How does the review process work? Tenure and Promotion Review Tenure and Promotion Review Applicant prepares evaluation packet for submissionApplicant prepares evaluation packet for submission External Reviewer submits evaluation of professional developmentExternal Reviewer submits evaluation of professional development Packet is reviewed by Department Committee Department Chair Dean P&T Committee ProvostPacket is reviewed by Department Committee Department Chair Dean P&T Committee Provost Each reviewed recommends/not recommends applicant and submits letter to application informing him/her of their recommendation and reasoning.Each reviewed recommends/not recommends applicant and submits letter to application informing him/her of their recommendation and reasoning.

Responses to Evaluations Candidate can submit a written response to each of the evaluations. Candidate can submit a written response to each of the evaluations. Response must be submitted by 4:30 pm, on the day specified in the evaluation time table. Response must be submitted by 4:30 pm, on the day specified in the evaluation time table. Response is submitted to the person who receives the packet after the evaluator. Response is submitted to the person who receives the packet after the evaluator. Responses are then included in the packet. Responses are then included in the packet.

Review Process Time Table ASAP – Chair requests confidential external reviews Due: 10/17 Oct 15 – Candidate submit packet to Department Chair Oct 17 – Chair submits packet to Department Committee Dec 1 – Department Committee returns packet to Chair and delivers recommendation to candidate. Jan 7 – Department Chair submits packet to Dean and delivers recommendation to candidate. Feb 1 – Dean submits packet to Provost and delivers recommendation to candidate. Feb 3 – Provost submits packet to P & T Committee Apr 4 – P & T Committee returns packet to Provost and delivers recommendation to candidate. May 5 – Provost submits packet to President and delivers recommendation to candidate. May – President submits recommendation to Board of Governors.

How do I get the External Review ? Chair and candidate confer on 2-3 peers to perform review Chair and candidate confer on 2-3 peers to perform review Candidate submits brief disclosure statement to chair, giving any knowledge/relationships to proposed reviewers Candidate submits brief disclosure statement to chair, giving any knowledge/relationships to proposed reviewers Candidate provides chair with packet of scholarly work to submit to reviewer. Candidate provides chair with packet of scholarly work to submit to reviewer. Chair contacts reviewers to solicit confidential review. Chair contacts reviewers to solicit confidential review. Confidential reviews (at least one) are returned to chair (by Oct 17) and included in packet by dept. chair. Confidential reviews (at least one) are returned to chair (by Oct 17) and included in packet by dept. chair. Confidential reviews are removed from packet by Provost before packets are returned to candidate. Confidential reviews are removed from packet by Provost before packets are returned to candidate.

Department Committee Review Department Chair appoints committee (with consultation from candidate) Department Chair appoints committee (with consultation from candidate) Committee Membership: Committee Membership: –From candidate’s discipline, or allied disciplines –Tenured faculty –Committee should be small Members review the candidate’s packet and submit their evaluation to candidate and to department chair. Members review the candidate’s packet and submit their evaluation to candidate and to department chair. Where possible, same committee serves for Mid Tenure Review and Tenure Review. Where possible, same committee serves for Mid Tenure Review and Tenure Review.

Appearance before Promotion & Tenure Subcommittee The candidate has the option of appearing before the subcommittee reviewing his or her evaluation package to briefly discuss materials documented in the evaluation package. The candidate has the option of appearing before the subcommittee reviewing his or her evaluation package to briefly discuss materials documented in the evaluation package. Applicants will not have the option of appearing before the entire Promotion/Tenure Committee. Applicants will not have the option of appearing before the entire Promotion/Tenure Committee. No new materials may be introduced. No new materials may be introduced. To exercise this option, the candidate must notify the Promotion/Tenure Committee Chairperson in writing by February 3. To exercise this option, the candidate must notify the Promotion/Tenure Committee Chairperson in writing by February 3.

The Evaluation Packet One three-ring notebook, not to exceed TWO INCHES in thickness. One three-ring notebook, not to exceed TWO INCHES in thickness. –All material should be easily accessible without having to be removed to be read. –Tabbed index dividers are encouraged to help evaluators locate documentation –Plastic page protectors are not required. A second notebook containing ALL student evaluations received during the rating period, or for the most recent five years. A second notebook containing ALL student evaluations received during the rating period, or for the most recent five years.

Organization of the Packet Table of Contents Table of Contents Introductory Narrative Introductory Narrative –Explain to reviewers why you are qualified for tenure and/or promotion. –Include qualitative and quantitative comparisons which demonstrate your performance in relation to other departmental and institutional faculty. –Analyze, explain, and contextualize data presented in terms of teaching, scholarly/ creative activity, and service. –Reference specific documentation as evidence in your narrative. Curriculum Vita Curriculum Vita Sections for Teaching, Service, and Scholarship Sections for Teaching, Service, and Scholarship –Narrative at the beginning of each section presenting your analysis of the included documentation. Why and how is the documentation significant? –Artifacts. well organized, referenced artifacts

Required Documentation Annual Evaluation Forms (All since Hire or Last Promotion): Annual Evaluation Forms (All since Hire or Last Promotion): –Faculty Self-evaluation –Chairperson Annual Evaluation –Annual Evaluation Form Curriculum Vita Curriculum Vita Mid Tenure Evaluation Mid Tenure Evaluation All Student Evaluation Forms from last five years of evaluation period. All Student Evaluation Forms from last five years of evaluation period.

Evidence of Teaching Quality Narrative explaining and synthesizing the artifacts supporting the candidates teaching effectiveness. Narrative explaining and synthesizing the artifacts supporting the candidates teaching effectiveness. –Syllabi, teaching resource guides, web materials, posted notes, and other teaching materials –Creative, challenging, and competent student learning evaluation measures such as examinations, quizzes, writing assignments, and other assignments appropriate for the subject matter –Copies of graded material that shows appropriate rigor and engagement in the assessment of student work –New course preparation or course component, special pedagogical practices, and/or special tutorial/ individualized work –Curriculum development

Evidence of Teaching Quality (continued) –Records of advising, and/or counseling –Peer evaluations from colleagues –Letters of support from students –Evidence of student learning opportunities beyond the classroom that are relevant to the discipline such as a film program, a class trip, a campus event, or some similar co- curricular opportunity –Documentation showing participation in campus initiatives related to teaching such as learning communities, honors programs, and applied learning –Documentation showing respect for students.

Evaluation of Service Narrative describing and synthesizing the artifacts supporing the candidates service. Narrative describing and synthesizing the artifacts supporing the candidates service. Service is typically from a variety of the following areas: Service is typically from a variety of the following areas: –Service to Students –Service to Institution –Discipline/Profession –Community

Evidence of Service to Students Examples of student projects not associated with the faculty member’s assigned workload Examples of student projects not associated with the faculty member’s assigned workload Notes, slides, and or programs for out-of-class seminars to students on academic and student affairs topics Notes, slides, and or programs for out-of-class seminars to students on academic and student affairs topics Documentation of academic advising (including number of advisees) and mentoring activities such as sponsorship of independent student work. Documentation of academic advising (including number of advisees) and mentoring activities such as sponsorship of independent student work.

Evidence of Service to Institution Documentation showing leadership provided for a committee or an academic unit, such as reports, memos, and so forth (i.e., This PowerPoint may appear in my Promotion Packet) Documentation showing leadership provided for a committee or an academic unit, such as reports, memos, and so forth (i.e., This PowerPoint may appear in my Promotion Packet) Documentation showing membership on Faculty Senate or active membership on a Faculty Senate, institutional, or departmental committee, such as bills proposed, assignments completed and so forth Documentation showing membership on Faculty Senate or active membership on a Faculty Senate, institutional, or departmental committee, such as bills proposed, assignments completed and so forth Documentation of representation of the institution on a community project or in a partnership project. Documentation of representation of the institution on a community project or in a partnership project.

Evidence of Service to Discipline Documentation of accreditation activities Documentation of accreditation activities Documentation of professional journal editorship or serving as a peer reviewer or juror Documentation of professional journal editorship or serving as a peer reviewer or juror Documentation of professional conference, panel, or event organization Documentation of professional conference, panel, or event organization Documentation showing elected office in a professional society Documentation showing elected office in a professional society Documentation showing other work in a professional association Documentation showing other work in a professional association

Evidence of Service to Community Program from presentations or performances open to the public Program from presentations or performances open to the public Documentation from economic or community development activities Documentation from economic or community development activities Documentation showing service as a board member for a community non-profit organization Documentation showing service as a board member for a community non-profit organization Documentation showing program consultation Documentation showing program consultation Documentation showing work with area literacy groups Documentation showing work with area literacy groups Written or video work in non-academic media outlets. Written or video work in non-academic media outlets.

Evidence of Scholarship/Creative Activity Narrative that explains and synthesizes the artifacts included in support of scholarship/creative activity Narrative that explains and synthesizes the artifacts included in support of scholarship/creative activity All evidence of scholarship or creative activity must be accompanied by, or show evidence of, peer review. All evidence of scholarship or creative activity must be accompanied by, or show evidence of, peer review. Types of Scholarship Activity: Types of Scholarship Activity: –Scholarship of Discovery –Scholarship of Integration –Scholarship of Application –Scholarship of Teaching

Evidence of Scholarship of Discovery A published article, monograph, or book that advances understanding (Such artifacts have been reviewed by peers in the publication process) A published article, monograph, or book that advances understanding (Such artifacts have been reviewed by peers in the publication process) Original research presented in an academic paper or other academic venue (Such artifacts have been judged by peers in the review process as worthy of public discussion) Original research presented in an academic paper or other academic venue (Such artifacts have been judged by peers in the review process as worthy of public discussion) Artifacts such as poems, paintings, theatrical productions (or other works of original expression) that have been reviewed in a jury process Artifacts such as poems, paintings, theatrical productions (or other works of original expression) that have been reviewed in a jury process A successful grant application for basic research/ scholarly/ creative activity. A successful grant application for basic research/ scholarly/ creative activity.

Evidence of Scholarship of Integration Published article or textbook or a juried presentation that summarizes or synthesizes earlier scholarly work and/or crosses disciplinary boundaries. Published article or textbook or a juried presentation that summarizes or synthesizes earlier scholarly work and/or crosses disciplinary boundaries. A published book or software review or a review article. A published book or software review or a review article. Presentations selected for a scholarly/professional meeting which present a critique or frame a position (paper) in a scholarly/professional debate Presentations selected for a scholarly/professional meeting which present a critique or frame a position (paper) in a scholarly/professional debate Published bibliographies Published bibliographies Artifacts that are published or presented that provide critical analysis of scholarly projects, artistic exhibits or performances, or museum exhibits Artifacts that are published or presented that provide critical analysis of scholarly projects, artistic exhibits or performances, or museum exhibits Successful grant applications for projects that integrate already existing scholarly resources. Successful grant applications for projects that integrate already existing scholarly resources.

Evidence of Scholarship of Application Artistic exhibits or performances, or museum exhibits Artistic exhibits or performances, or museum exhibits Publications or juried presentations that focus on applications or practical problems in the field Publications or juried presentations that focus on applications or practical problems in the field Activities to acquire or maintain certification for disciplinary specialties (process should be described) Activities to acquire or maintain certification for disciplinary specialties (process should be described) Consulting (peer reviewed) Consulting (peer reviewed) Successful grant applications for projects that focus on application problems Successful grant applications for projects that focus on application problems

Evidence of Scholarship of Teaching Publications or juried presentations that focus on issues of pedagogy or any aspect of the instructional mission of the institution Publications or juried presentations that focus on issues of pedagogy or any aspect of the instructional mission of the institution Written studies or reviews (that include a peer review element), which focus on assessment Written studies or reviews (that include a peer review element), which focus on assessment Successful grant applications for projects that focus on practical problems linked to any dimension of instruction. Successful grant applications for projects that focus on practical problems linked to any dimension of instruction.

Questions?