The Promotion Evaluation Process:

What, When, How, By Who..

Joel G Burken and Dee Montgomery8 May 2013

Basic University Policiesand

Insights/Advice for Success

Joel Burken, Associate Chair ofCivil, Architectural, and Environment Engineering

andDirector of the Center for Environmental Engineering

CRR Policy Excerpts 310.020 – Tenure: The probationary period is to allow reasonable time

for faculty members to establish their academic performance … to evaluate performance and future performance…

320.035 – Promotion and Tenure: The University seeks faculty members who are genuinely creative scholars and

inspired teachers and who are dedicated to the pursuit of knowledge and its transmission to others.

Outstanding intellectual qualities as reflected in teaching and scholarship are the primary criteria…

Additional criteria include professionally-oriented service contributions, and service to a faculty member’s department, school, college and univ.

In unusual circumstances, tenure may be recommended for demonstrated excellence in teaching, even in the absence of significant published research.

… service shall not substitute for teaching and scholarship Sustained contributions essential

CRR 320.025 – Promotion and Tenure The University will continue to strengthen its standards in all

disciplines. While specific criteria for judging the merits of individual faculty may vary among units, there must be no variation in standards.

Candidates for promotion and tenure should demonstrate sustained merit and contributions over an extended period of time.

The University expects faculty members to be engaged in scholarly or creative activities appropriate to their disciplines.

Metrics: Publications in journals, favorable reviews of books, appointments or

awards that require evaluation of professional competence, receipt of fellowships

Frequent citation by other scholars, service in editorial positions and other evaluative functions (panels)

Research grants awarded, programs initiated

S&T II-10 Policy Excerpts General guidelines and not rigid rules

For promotion to Associate Professor (TT to T) Possess the enthusiasm and capacity to motivate students Have demonstrated the capacity for independent creative

thinking Be recognized by colleagues and peers as making significant

contributions to departmental and institutional goals Participate as a respected colleague in deliberations

concerning the department and the University Recognized in the field through external evaluation by peers

Expectations: Where They Come From* UM System

CRR 310.020: Regulations Governing Application of Tenure CRR 320.035: Policy and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure

Campus II-10: Qualifications for Professorial Ranks

Self-Imposed Standard for effort as well as level of success and contributions expected of

yourself Career goals (Associate Professor, Professor, endowed professor, named

chair, administrative position…) Fellow status and awards (sought)

Others

* This information used in Freshman Faculty Forum presentation.

Those are the most important benchmarks in career…

Notice the standards and benchmarks... Me Neither.

What are the expectations?

Main Components Evaluated Teaching (NTT assistant teaching prof and TT)

Scholarship (NTT assist research prof and TT)

Service

Balance

Teaching

Service

Scholarship Research

Balance: Reality for TT Maximize synergy

and effort to be productive in demonstratingscholarly output and preparingfor a productive and sustained career

Research

TeachingService

P&T Process ONE decision… rest are recommendations

Dossier preparationExternal Reviewers’ LettersDepartment CommitteeChair’s RecommendationArea SubcommitteeCampus CommitteeProvost

Chancellor... Decision.

Campus P/T Process: Comments

All members on area and campus committees:Reminded of governing policies and criteria at

beginning of each year’s process.

Have historically referred to policies in making their recommendations.

Have some bias toward expectations of their department/field; but respect and understand differences.

Mentoring (during and after FFF):Setting Benchmarks and expectations

Most departments mentor new faculty» Talk to your chair» Develop relationships with senior colleagues» Look for folks you can go to for advice, in and out of

department» If not “assigned” a mentor(s), contact me.. others

Other mentoring opportunities» Annual review meeting with chair and provided

written summary » VPAA sessions with small groups of faculty» Meet with department P/T committee or member(s)

of committee (formalized in several departments)

Data Sources/Benchmarks for Progress Annual review (T/TT and NTT)

Thorough discussion with chair regarding contributions during previous year, opportunities for improvement, areas of concern

Feedback from senior colleagues Department P/T committee involvement (best practice)

Third year review (tenure track) Focused feedback from counseling team (chair, VPAA, three P/T

representatives) regarding progress and any areas of concern

Data Sources/Benchmarks for Progress Office of Sponsored Programs

Data available on research productivity as measured through proposals and grants.

Publications record Scopus, Scholar citations index - H Index = x paper cited x times Impact factor of journals http://www.scopus.com/home.url; http://scholar.google.com/

Teaching effectiveness CET (Committee for Effective Teaching), student comments, peer

evaluations, chair evaluation Mid-semester teaching evaluations (seek feedback, honest

feedback)

Be findable

Some Advice Discuss expectations with chair and colleagues:

Scholarship and publications Teaching – load, course development, effectiveness Grantsmanship Look for consistency in comments regarding expectations

Be a good department citizen Be active in your professional societies (targeted) Serve as proposal reviewer when invited (know what happens…

and let them know You.) Write a UMRB proposal – seed $. Campus Centers Submitting one good proposal is better than sending out two

average ones

Still More Advice Balance in collaborative opportunities (e.g., working with

centers or as Co-PI) and making a name for yourself (TT); e.g., becoming an “independent scholar” not just ‘Coat Tails’

Continually document your contributions (TT and NTT) Use (Faculty Accomplishments System) FAS or Departmental

system as you complete things to document your contributions Update your CV Create your P or P/T binder from day one

Read (and know) the CRR and campus policy documents regarding criteria for P or P/T (TT and NTT)

Get out of your office sometimes!

Comments From P&T andThird Year Review Committees

Scholarship Publications with advisor are not valued as are ‘new’

papers Such papers are expected but do not help make the case

of “independent scholarship” that is expected in the CRR. In engineering and science, competitive funding is

expected. (scholarly reputation & $$)• Plus-up (earmark) and non-competitive grants are viewed less

favorably than competitively awarded grants. • Research Board and LWI grants are not viewed as favorably

as external competitively won grants.

Sustained contributions essential (as related to concern expressed regarding progress of certain candidates)

Closing the loop: use of research funding in the education of graduate students and dissemination of research results (publications).. New ideas and proposals

External letters critical: How are letters solicited?

Comments FromPromotion Review Committees

Third Year Review – TT Occurs in April of your third year Committee includes VPAA, chair, department,

area, and campus P/T committee members Review process based on dossier binder

similar to P/T dossiers A formal review and counseling session to

Assess your progress toward P/T Identify any areas that require attention

Provide formal feedback to faculty member

Third Year Review Committee Membership Department chair Department P/T committee representative Area P/T committee representative Campus P/T committee representative Vice Provost for Academic Affairs

Area and campus committee members should know where “the bar is set” and how the criteria are applied.

Purpose of Third Year Review• Promoting a common level of expectation in the

department, area, and campus committee reviews.

• Providing timely counsel to a faculty member relative to progress toward tenure.

• SEEK for thorough, critical feedback.

• Ask Questions! Follow up!

Biggest Challenges (?) – TT Balance in:

Teaching, research and service (as expected in your department/academic field)

Professional vs. personal lifeConsistently finding time to write (proposals and

scholarship) Time management and using time wisely Pedagogical and teaching philosophy

development (identifying what works best for you)

Other Resources Your academic support system:

» Chair» Senior colleagues, new Associate Professors» Peers» FFF Director, VPAA, other VP’s

Mentor in a Manual by Clay Schoenfeld and Robert Magnan

Mentornet (www.mentornet.org) Policy documents

Biggest Challenges (?) – NTT Teaching effectiveness (T-NTT) Grantsmanship (R-NTT) Balance in professional and personal lives to

achieve long term career and family goals Time management and using time wisely

P&T for TT Faculty and P for NTT P&T for TT Faculty and P for NTT Faculty at S&T: Processes and ThoughtsFaculty at S&T: Processes and Thoughts

Frances (Dee) Haemmerlie Montgomery, Ph.D.Curator’s Teaching Professor (note: only S&T female CP-anything, ever)

Hired, 1978; Promoted to Associate Professor, 1984, Full Professor 1991, & Curator’s Professor 1995

Freshman Faculty ForumMay 8, 2013

28

I. BIG PICTURE FACTORS

A. Organizational Structure of the Campus 1. No College/Schools or Deans 2. College/Schools and Deans B. Personnel in Structure: Chancellor, Provost, VPAA/Deans, Department ChairsC. Guidelines: UM System Collected Rules, Campus Rules, & Department GuidelinesD. Individual Faculty Member: prepares dossier/portfolio

= can change unexpectedly

29

II. CURRENT ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

30

Dossier Department Review Committee

Dept. Chair

Chancellor

Campus Review Committee: 4 Area Subcommittees •Arts &Humanities•Engineering•Sciences•Social Sciences

PROVOST

III. IMPORTANT INFORMATIONProvost Webpage: For Faculty

Promotion and Tenure Campus Policy System-wide Perspectives on Promotion and Tenure Documentation for Promotion and/or Tenure Recommendations Campus-Based Third-Year Review UM CRR 320.035 UM CRR 310.020 Qualifications for Academic Ranks

Non-Tenure Track Promotion NTT Promotion Procedures NTT Policy Memorandum II-13

Awards Campus Faculty Awards System Awards Selection Criteria for Outstanding Teaching Award

31

IV. SO…OVERALL SUGGESTIONS

A. Department Criteria for P&T or P -foundation on which to build a career at S&T -should be considered a floor/minimum B. Dossier -work on preparing it from day 1 -include all evidence of success C. Mentors -formal and informal mentors, in and outside of department and campus -can help you build your dossier -under current structure, important = area subcommittee departmentsD. Campus Awards: impressive evidence of comparative success at S&T

32

Provost Webpage: Missouri S&T Faculty Awards

Faculty Excellence - The Faculty Excellence Award recognizes faculty members who have demonstrated sustained excellence in all three missions of the institution: teaching, research and service.

Faculty Teaching - The Faculty Teaching Award recognizes faculty members who have demonstrated excellence in teaching-related activities.  Nomination packages include student and peer evaluations of teaching effectiveness and other supporting documentation of pedagogical innovation and effectiveness.

Faculty Research - The Faculty Research Award recognizes faculty members who have demonstrated excellence in research and scholarship.  Awards are given based on the significance of the contributions of the individual in the preceding two years, as well as the long term impact of the individual’s research.

Faculty Service - The Faculty Service Award recognizes faculty members who display exemplary, sustained service to the university and their profession.  The intent of the award is to honor outstanding citizens of the university for their commitment and service.  The nomination and selection of individuals for the award is based on any combination of service to the university and the individual’s profession.

Faculty Achievement - The Faculty Achievement Award recognizes non-regular faculty who have demonstrated sustained excellence in the categories of teaching or research or service. The nomination and selection of individuals for the award shall be based on teaching or research or service to the university and to the individual’s profession.

Outstanding Teaching Award - The Outstanding Teaching Award Committee recognizes those faculty members who have demonstrated a high level of instructional effectiveness as measured by student evaluations of teaching effectiveness.  The Outstanding Teaching Award Committee typically recognizes approximately 30 faculty members per year for their excellence in instruction.

Award Announcements & Solicitation  

33

V. PROMOTION FOR NTT FACULTYA. Recent titles and still developing procedures•Policy Memorandum No. II-13: defines titles and criteria; revised 1/1/2011•Procedures for Promotion: draft approved by faculty senate on 2/17/11; must be consistent with UM’s Collected Rule and Regulation # 310.035, Non-Tenure-Track Faculty•Memorandum & Procedures: Provost Website•Main differences from TT Faculty -appointments are for 9- or 12-months or 3 years -require re-appointment -no tenure or 3rd year review -tasks are more narrowly defined (Teaching &/or Research &/or Service) -campus review committee must include NTT & TT faculty members

34

B. NTT Overall Procedures (2/17/11 Draft NTT Promotion Procedures Document)

35

Dossier Department Review Committee

Dept. Chair

Chancellor or Designee (p. 5 of Policy Memo No. II-13)

Campus Review Committee:2/3 = Members of Campus TT Committee & 1/3 = elected NTT Faculty**4 chairs of TT Area Subcommittees + TT representatives from departments with NTT candidates under consideration + NTT representatives elected by NTT faculty

PROVOST

C. Promotion: Policy Memorandum II-13

1. General Attributes for Associate Teaching Professor: candidate should demonstrate most or all of the following•Effectiveness over several years in teaching as assessed by students & peers•Production of effective learning support materials•Creative & significant teaching contributions to the profession•Record of sustained advisement of undergraduates•Record of service relevant to a teaching career in a university

Portfolio must include formal peer evaluations by individuals in the candidate’s home department

More specific attributes = spelled out by department & approved by Provost in advance

36

2. General Attributes for Associate Research Professor: candidate should demonstrate•Excellence in research & capability of continued contributions•Excellence in research based on assessment of peers•National recognition as a leader in the profession•Ability to produce published works•History of external funding with promise of ability to maintain funding•Leadership role in professional societies•Expertise in advising or co-advising graduate students

More specific attributes = spelled out by department & approved by Provost in advance

37

D. Summary for NTT Faculty

• Department Chair: NTT faculty need to work closely with chair from date of hire and at all dates of reappointment• Contributions: need specific information regarding what

specific Research, Teaching, & Service activities the NTT faculty member is expected to do…and any changes in these expectations

• Quality research, teaching, and service: activities need to be consistent with one’s departmental expectations and accepted standards

38

VI. CONCLUSIONS

No formulas or guarantees Marathon and not a sprint If at first you don’t succeed: re-do,

re-work, re-apply, re-submit, or revise Connect with others—especially with mentors in

and outside of department, on and off campus Department criteria: meet…or better yet… exceed! Develop evidence for YOUR Dossier

39