Tenure and Promotion Workshop Research Stream

Agenda Welcome & Opening Remarks – Angela Redish & Mark Mac Lean Guide to Tenure & Promotion – Mark Trowell & Deena Rubuliak Senior Appointments Committee – Melanie Jones Questions and Discussion Closing Remarks May 19, 2016

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. May 19, 2016

Tenure & Promotion Tenure Streams Criteria Tenure & Tenure Clocks Promotion Reviews Procedures For Assistance… May 19, 2016

The Tenure Streams The Professorial Stream Acting Assist Professor Assistant Professor Associate Professor Professor May 19, 2016

The Professorial Stream The Criteria The Professorial Stream Service Research Teaching May 19, 2016

The Procedures The reappointment, tenure & promotion procedures are set out in Articles 5 & 9 of Conditions of Appointment for Faculty, and are supplemented by the Guide to Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion Procedures at UBC (“SAC Guide”) May 19, 2016

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. May 19, 2016

Periodic Review for Promotion & Tenure May 19, 2016

Head’s Meeting 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. May 19, 2016

Head’s Meeting 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. May 19, 2016

The Initial File Unless otherwise agreed, the faculty member’s dossier and all relevant documentation necessary for review must be submitted by September 15. May 19, 2016

Eligibility to be Consulted 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. May 19, 2016

Letters of Reference 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. May 19, 2016

What referees receive 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. May 19, 2016

Tenure & Promotion Reviews Department Standing Committee meets after obtaining letters of reference Department Standing Committee votes & recommends to Head Serious concerns? No Yes Invited to respond in writing to serious concerns May 19, 2016

Tenure & Promotion Reviews Head recommends to Dean Head notifies candidate in writing of decision Negative? Yes Invited to respond in writing to Dean May 19, 2016

Tenure & Promotion Reviews Dean seeks Faculty Committee vote Dean recommends to President Senior Appointments Committee Recommendation to President May 19, 2016

Tenure & Promotion Reviews President New Serious concerns? No Yes Invited to respond in writing to President President notifies candidate of decision May 19, 2016

Supplementing the File 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! May 19,2016

For Assistance… The Collective Agreement, in particular Articles 2 - 5 & 9 of Conditions of Appointment for Faculty Guide to Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion Procedures at UBC for 2015/16 Faculty Relations website: www.hr.ubc.ca/faculty_relations/tenure/ Faculty Association website: www.facultyassociation.ubc.ca/promotiontenure.php Call us!

Senior Appointments Committee Professor Melanie Jones, SAC Chair May 19, 2016

Senior Appointments Committee 20 person committee of professors Includes representation from the Faculty Association, UBC O and all Faculties at UBC V Two Subcommittees: Associate and Professor (members meet weekly September through June) SAC reviews all tenure, promotion and new appointment files (170-200/year) and makes recommendations to the President May 19, 2016

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 (CA Article 5.14) May 19, 2016

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 the 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 May 19, 2016

SAC Review Process Files are reviewed in detail for merits & fairness by the Associate or Professor sub-committee Cases may be deferred pending additional information or procedural clarification Cases are ranked: ‘A’ – no substantive issues or procedural concerns ‘B’ – negative recommendation by Dean – conflicting recommendation from Head & Dean – SAC members have questions for the Dean (approximately 15% of all cases) May 19, 2016

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 taken in Dean’s absence Dean immediately informed of result which is considered “confidential” May 19, 2016

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 her recommendation to Board of Governors May 19, 2016

Important Considerations In Preparing Your Dossier Familiarity with the criteria specific to your rank and promotion Examples of evidence External referee selection Documentation of teaching excellence UBC curriculum vitae May 19, 2016

Professorial Stream Criteria Collective Agreement: Assistant Professor – A. 3.06 Associate Professor – A. 3.07 Professor (research stream) – A. 3.08 Tenure – A. 4.01 (SAC Guide – Section 3) May 19, 2016

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 May 19, 2016

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 May 19, 2016

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 May 19, 2016

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 May 19, 2016

Sustained Scholarly Contributions – the Professorial 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) May 19, 2016

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 May 19, 2016

Important Considerations in Framing a Professorial 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 May 19, 2016

EVIDENCE May 19, 2016

Some Sources of Evidence – Professorial Stream Invited presentations/performances (national & international) Article & grant reviews; editorial board work Publications in high-impact venues in the candidate’s field (provide descriptions, impact factors, rejection rates) Competitive grant funding – as PI and co-I Citations of work; adoption of candidate’s work May 19, 2016

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 May 19, 2016

REFEREES May 19, 2016

Referees – Professorial 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) May 19, 2016

TEACHING EXCELLENCE May 19, 2016

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 students Influence on intellectual & scholarly development of students (mentorship) Willingness to teach range of subject matter and levels May 19, 2016

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 May 19, 2016

CURRICULA VITAE May 19, 2016

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 or is not dated or is not in UBC format Lack of clarity regarding the candidate’s contributions (pubs, grants, collaborative research Full information is not provided on publications – year, page numbers, authors, etc. May 19, 2016

Common Problems with CVs (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 the individual in joint grants Teaching record is incomplete May 19, 2016

Curricula Vitae - Recommendations Use UBC format; adapt as needed (see annotated version in SAC Guide – Appendix 3) Explain contributions to collaborative grants & co-authored publications Consider numbering pubs and presentations Use narrative opportunities to provide context for teaching & scholarship (be concise - 150 words) Pipeline is important – works in progress Use dated supplements to update your file May 19, 2016

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 May 19, 2016

Toot Your Own Horn May 19, 2016

Questions? As always….. Please check the Faculty Relations website, email, or call Contact the Faculty Association for assistance Thank you!! May 19, 2016