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?