Promotion and Tenure Open Forum for Administrators May 6, 2011 Jim Liburdy Faculty Senate Promotion and Tenure Committee Becky Warner Academic Affairs

Faculty Senate Promotion and Tenure Committee Faculty Senate Promotion and Tenure Committee Membership Jim Liburdy, ‘11 (Chair)Mechanical Engineering Eric Hanson ’11Wood Science & Engineering Jennifer Field ’12Agricultural Sciences Michelle Kutzler ’12Agricultural Sciences Donna Champeau ’13WAGE/Public Health Yanyun Zhao ’13Food Science & Technology Executive Committee Liaison - Kate Hunter-Zaworski

Faculty Senate Promotion and Tenure Committee Review guidelines and propose changes, updates Act as observer at the University Promotion and Tenure Committee meetings Report to FS on annual P&T process (summary of actions) Provide an information source for faculty Six tenured faculty from across campus

Recent Guideline Changes: Unit Unit (supervisor and committee) is to assure proper format and inclusion of material prior to leaving the unit Unit is to provide a “fair and balance summary of all peer and external solicited evaluations” Candidate can request an external committee review the summary of external letters – report sent to college committee two weeks prior to completion of college review

Recent Modification to P&T guidelines? As stated in the Faculty Handbook, should the faculty member request it, a faculty committee appointed and authorized by the Faculty Senate shall examine the contents of the faculty member’s dossier to verify that all statements therein have properly summarized external evaluations. This review is to be completed and forwarded to the College at least two weeks prior to the scheduled completion of the College level review. The request by the candidate for this review must be submitted to the Faculty Senate within one week after receiving all unit level reviews.Faculty Handbook [Note: the P&T guidelines on the web have not yet been updated— waiting on president’s approval.]

Recent Guideline Changes: College Committee Duties delineated as: (i) independent evaluation of merits of candidate as presented in dossier (ii) opinion as to unit evaluation is “fair and uniformly assess merits…” (iii) assess uniformity of standards in the college (iv) check dossier for proper format and inclusion of all requested materials

General Purposes and Responsibilities Criteria for Promotion and Tenure Faculty Dossiers Mid-term review Post-tenure review Procedural Guidelines for Promotion and Tenure Waiver of Access Dossier Preparation Guidelines Policy on Salary Increases for Promotion in Rank Promotion and Tenure Guidelines guidelines

The promotion and tenure process begins at the time of hiring.  Letter of offer should be clear on the tenure clock  (granting prior service—think about evaluating against OSU criteria)  Position description should:  Articulate assigned duties clearly  Assigned duties should add up to 100%  The proportion of assigned duties expected to lead to scholarly outcomes should be at least 15% (clinical positions 5-15%)  Service is required in all positions

The process of promotion and tenure is ongoing.  For those on tenure-track, annual reviews are important.annual reviews  Position descriptions must be reviewed and revised as appropriate.  For those on tenure-track, mid-tenure reviews are critical.mid-tenure reviews  For those with tenure, use the periodic review of faculty (PROF), and post-tenure review process to get/give input for promotion.periodic review of faculty post-tenure review

Criteria for Tenure Tenure will be granted to faculty members whose character, achievement in serving the University’s missions, and potential for long-term performance warrant the institution’s reciprocal long-term commitment.  Typical clock is 6 years  Extensions possible  FMLA for 3 months or more  Extenuating circumstances  Request at the time of the event  Early request for tenure: must be extraordinary

Criteria for Promotion  Assistant to Associate:  Effectiveness in assigned duties  Achievement in scholarship/creative activity with the potential for distinction  An appropriate balance of institutional and professional service.  Associate to Full:  Distinction in assigned duties  Distinction in scholarship/creative activity  An appropriate balance of institutional and professional service.

Criteria for Promotion  Instructor to Senior Instructor  After 4 years of full-time service  After 3 years if prior service credit given  4 external letters (what is “external”)  If letter of offer indicated tenure track, same guidelines apply as those for Assistant and Associate Professors on tenure track  Faculty Research Assistant to Senior Faculty Research Assistant  After 4 years of full-time service  After 3 years if prior service credit given  4 external letters (what is “external”)  Senior FRA (and courtesy) stop at College

Dossier PreparationDossier Preparation: Providing Evidence for Promotion and/or Tenure  Form A Form A  Include letter of offer for prior service credit  Confidentiality Waiver  Should not affect evaluation  Should never be mentioned in evaluation letters whether it was assigned or not.  Position Description  If PD changes, include a table summarizing FTE distribution over time  Candidate’s Statement (encourage faculty to think of audiences)  3 pages, 12-point font, 1-inch margins

Dossier PreparationDossier Preparation: Providing Evidence for Promotion and/or Tenure “Effectiveness” and “Distinction”  Teaching/Advising  Instructional summary  Credit/non-credit course development  Mentoring undergraduate and graduate students  Team/collaborative efforts  International efforts  Student/client evaluation  Summarize, contextualize.  Peer teaching evaluations  Should be a summary of multiple reviews  Advising  Describe and evaluate  Other  Describe and evaluate

Dossier PreparationDossier Preparation: Providing Evidence for Promotion and/or Tenure “Achievement with potential for distinction” and “Distinction”  Scholarship and Creative Activity  Listing publications/presentations/exhibitions/ grants appropriately  Refereed/juried, invited (how was work evaluated?)  Authorship ordering and clarification of effort  What is the impact of the work?

Dossier PreparationDossier Preparation: Providing Evidence for Promotion and/or Tenure  Service  University  Department/school  College  University  Profession  Public Is there an appropriate balance in levels of service (all promotions and tenure)? Is there distinction in service (for promotion to professor)?  Awards (all levels—good for establishing distinction in duties)

Promotion and Tenure: Steps in the ProcessSteps in the Process  External Reviews  Letters should be from tenured professors or individuals of equivalent stature outside of academe who are widely recognized in their field  Five minimum, eight maximum  No more than half from the candidate’s list  Watch for potential conflicts of interest  Co-PIs  Co-authors  Mentors  Students

Promotion and Tenure: Steps in the ProcessSteps in the Process  Unit review (Membership guidelines changed recently)  Student letter (process articulated in guidelines) Student letter  Unit committee review  Who can participate in discussion?  All ranked faculty (chair/head on invitation)  Be aware of conflicts of interest  Who can vote?  Those tenured, at or above current rank, for tenure review  Those above candidate’s current rank for promotion  Review is based on dossier, including external letters.

Promotion and Tenure: Steps in the ProcessSteps in the Process  Supervisor’s Review  Supervisor comments on relevant items in the personnel file  If other supervisors involved, include evaluation  Evaluation should be an independent review  Comment on external letters (don’t just quote), but don’t identify reviewers  Once the unit review is done:  Supervisor meets with candidate and shares the committee and supervisor evaluations  Informs candidate’s right to add written statement  What happens if evaluations are negative?

Promotion and Tenure: Steps in the ProcessSteps in the Process  College-level Review  New Guidelines approved by the Senate  Dean’s office should inform candidate when college letters have been added, and of their right to add a written statement  Dean’s review  Notify the candidate, and inform about adding a statement Note: colleges differ on the timing of notice—ask if you want to see the college letter before the Dean provides a review.

Promotion and Tenure: Steps in the ProcessSteps in the Process  University Committee  Reviews all files  Requests meetings with Deans/others when  Votes coming forward are not consistent across levels  Votes at all levels are negative  Other considerations require discussion  Faculty Senate P&T Committee representation  Committee makes recommendation to Provost  Provost’s decision given in writing  Appeal  Within 2 weeks of receipt of letter  Reasons for appeal: extenuating circumstances not previously considere,d procedural irregularities, factual errors  One letter from candidate; no supporting letters

Promotion and Tenure: Contacts for Questions Jim Liburdy: Becky Warner: