1 Promotion & Tenure Process and Thoughts Barry Flachsbart Bruce McMillin NFTS Course Design Retreat, 14 May 2007

2 Flow Chart (Excludes appeals) Dossier Dept. Comm. Dept. Chair External Reviews Ltrs. of Support Area Comm. Campus Comm. Provost, Chanc.

3 The Current Process Department (Chair) School/College (Dean) Candidate Campus (Provost) Committee Appeal The Proposed Process Area Subcommittee Appeal

4 First Hurdle Is Department May be most difficult Material needed here is needed everywhere Attention to detail A wonderful attribute not described doesn't exist Write well

5 External Reviewers: Important Play critical role Usually chosen by Department Committee or Chair You can suggest –People qualified –Areas they should know Need plenty of them

6 Letters Of Support Encouraged Not Decisive Wide range helps Co-authors can give emphasis to impact of research

7 Department Committee Vote May be unusual In final analysis: –Will vote for you if they feel you are an asset to the Department

8 Note: You Probably Get Tenure &/Or Promotion Because You Are Mobile! If you are attractive to other Universities, you're also attractive to UMR Attraction: Primarily research work & grants; reputation of your publications

9 But You Need To Be Effective At Teaching! Taken very seriously at UMR Let's return to this later

10 Department Committee Advises Department Chair Chair's letter can be a big help –Explain things –Emphasize key points of External Reviewers You'd rather, of course, not need any explanations

11 An Area Review Is Probably Next Replaces School or College Committee Will be organized on like disciplines with similar standards for excellence Again, if you'd be wanted by others, OK

12 Campus Committee Is Next Take job seriously Appear to look for "did candidate exceed the 'expected value'"? Very cognizant of publication records Careful in examining research & grants Strong on teaching

13 Teaching: Help For Low Class Scores Inputs from graduates can help See things now from more mature view Reflect back on what they learned, rather than what they liked

14 Personal Opinion About Reliance On Student "Scores" CET - Not the sole indicator, but is used heavily You or your chair/mentor should request peer reviews to supplement your CET scores. I think we need to evaluate what students learn, not what they like - present system may not do this consistently. Good teaching evaluations do have a correlation with effective learning.

15 NFTS Program NFTS will help you –Contacts –Examples –Ideas But what works in one context doesn't always work in others Situations are different

16 Service Haven't said much yet More like a hurdle than a big factor? There is an "expected" level - Chair sets expectations Significant service can be a plus, but not to distraction Work with Prof. Societies can help in multiple ways

17 Mentor Mentor can explain all this for your discipline Guide you through the process Help you through 3 rd year review

18 Summary You need Research, Teaching, & Service to get tenure and/or promotion Quality research is hardest to establish, so it often becomes most important Teaching is also important -- it really is! –You may be able to do extra well in some courses Service is necessary. Unless exceptionally weak, you'll probably be OK