Reflections on the T&P Process: Voices from the Past and Present María Spicer-Escalante, Assistant Professor (LPSC) Eileen Doktorski, Assistant Professor.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Faculty Member as Teacher and Scholar How to get tenure without losing your mind (or yourself!) in the process Or.
Advertisements

THE ACADEMIC PERSONNEL PROCESS FOR SENATE FACULTY Maureen Stanton Vice-Provost – Academic Affairs September 21, 2012.
Performance Management Guide for Supervisors. Objectives  Understand necessity of reviews;  To define a rating standard across the Foundation for an.
Criteria of Effective Shared Governance Below are some criteria that I believe characterize successful and effective shared governance, with comments.
Tenure and Promotion for Extension Faculty: Tips for the Evaluated and the Evaluators Larry Smith Executive Senior Vice Provost Utah State University Annual.
Permanence in the STEM Workforce: The Route to Tenure in Academia Ricardo Cortez Mathematics Department 1 IMA Special Workshop Careers.
PROMOTION AND TENURE FOR CLINICAL ATTENDINGS Sameh Abul-Ezz, M.D. Carmelita Pablo, M.D.
Implementing an Ombudsperson Policy at USU Office of the Provost Utah State University.
How to make the most of your Academic Relationships Presented by Jennifer Duncan In association with the Academic Advisement Center.
Peggy Johnson Civil and Environmental Engineering.
ADVANCE Implementation Mentors (AIM) Network Women of Color Survey and Interview Results Funding for this presentation was made possible through the National.
Building a Tenure Portfolio Sean Ellermeyer Professor of Mathematics and Interim Chair Presentation for Project NExT Fellows Joint Mathematics Meetings.
The Graduate School Experience for Women in Mathematics National Information –Read “Has the Women-in-Mathematics Problem been Solved? Allyn Jackson, Notices.
Stacy A. Rudnicki, M.D. Brendan C. Stack, Jr., M.D., FACS, FACE.
1 Leadership Development Opportunities for Tenured Faculty Suzanne Zurn-Birkhimer, Ph.D. Deputy Director, Center for Faculty.
Getting Them Out Of Their Shells: Service Learning And CS Students Jim Bohy – Iowa Wesleyan College.
Student (and other) Course Evaluations Response Rates, Relevance and Results Kathleen Norris Plymouth State University, NH.
Dana Moshkovitz EECS, MIT
Temple University Russell Conwell Learning Center Office of Senior Vice Provost for Undergraduate Studies GETTING INVOLVED IN RESEARCH AT TEMPLE UNIVERSITY.
Introducing CLT While Avoiding Classroom Culture Shock Marla Yoshida.
Sex comparisons among science faculty at Hunter College Hunter College Gender Equity Project & Provost’s Office 2007 Science Faculty Survey Department.
Assessing employability through reflective diaries on teamwork CEC 202 A Sense of Place School of English Second Year Approved Module.
TEACHING EVALUATION CAN BE A ONE DISH MEAL Heather Campbell Brescia University College London, Ontario, Canada
Creating the gslp Fostering Leadership Through Curricular Design National Conference on Girls Education February 2012 Kristin Ryan
Department Head Expectations of Faculty Guidelines for New Faculty from a Department Head Perspective.
PROMOTION AND TENURE FOR CLINICAL ATTENDINGS Rhonda Dick, M.D. Tim Martin, M.D.
Evaluation of Women and Men Professors: How Gender Scripts Affect Students’ Assessments Elizabeth A. Hoffmann Sociology Department Purdue University.
Marlene Kim Faculty Staff Union President FACULTY STAFF UNION: X 6295.
Investigating K-12/University Partnerships: A Case Study Analysis Zulma Y. Méndez, Ph.D. Rodolfo Rincones, Ph.D. College of Education Department of Educational.
UNIVERSITY OF PORTLAND Teaching, Faith, & Service Michael Connolly, D.M.A. Workshop on Institutional Self-Study 2008.
School Connectedness: Obstacles and Solutions (Willmar Workshop) Robert Wm. Blum, MD, MPH, PhD William H. Gates Sr. Professor and Chair Population, Family.
Success in the AAE Job Market: An International Student Perspective By Octavio A. Ramirez Professor and Head Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics.
HECSE Quality Indicators for Leadership Preparation.
PROMOTION AND TENURE FOR CLINICAL SCIENTISTS – BOTH PATHWAYS Peter Emanuel, M.D. Laura Lamps, M.D.
Styles of Leadership LET II. Introduction Leadership styles are the pattern of behaviors that one uses to influence others. You can influence others in.
SELF ESTEEM. WHAT IS SELF ESTEEM? Is the way we think and feel about ourselves. It can impact on our lives.
Retention, Tenure and Promotion College of Natural Sciences and Mathematics.
 Mentorship Cindi Morshead, Professor and Chair, Division of Anatomy Graduate Coordinator, Institute of Medical Science.
Reflection helps you articulate and think about your processes for communication. Reflection gives you an opportunity to consider your use of rhetorical.
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of Peer Review Sarah Klotz 6/27/2015.
Retention and Advancement for Mid Career Faculty K.D. JoshiKelly Ward Associate Professor of Interim Chair and Information Systems Professor, Education.
Monday September 14th, 2015 Planner: – HW: Safety rules poster due Wed. 9/16 – Safety Quiz tomorrow - based on rules You Need: – Today: Daily 5 To Do:
Developing Thinking Skills Through Action LogoVisual Thinking across the curriculum: From the spoken to the written word Jo Little St Paul’s C of E Primary,
Gender & IT Education Gender and IT Education Conference, Indiana University, 2007 Gender & IT Education The Importance of Mentors Faculty and Student.
DOSSIER PREPARATION MENTORING PROGRAM Session #7July 14, 2015  PANEL: What do Department Chairs Look for in a Dossier?  Review Clinical Statement of.
UNIVERSITY OF PORTLAND Teaching, Faith, & Service Michael Connolly, D.M.A. Workshop on Institutional Self-Study 2007.
Steps to Tenure and Promotion at East Tennessee State University ETSU is a good place to work and a good place to build a professional career. Norma Hogan.
Self Evaluation. How well did your group work? A: Really well B: Fairly well C: OK D: poorly E: very poorly.
New Faculty Orientation …how to succeed at research / creative activity and have a little fun along the way Holly Wichman Department of Biological Sciences.
IF GIRLS AREN’T INTERESTED IN COMPUTING CAN WE CHANGE THEIR MINDS? Julie Fisher Monash University, Melbourne, Australia,
Statement of Teaching Philosophy and Practice
Multi-track Faculty System Changes from Ver to 1.5
IDEAL–N Kent State University
USCG – What Got You Here Won’t Get You There
Promotion in Extension Presented by: Ken Martin, Ph. D
Achieving Tenure and Promotion
Beyond Survival in the Academy
Janet Kistner VP Faculty Development & Advancement April 2018
Mid-Cycle Review Process
Promotion and Tenure From a Candidate’s Perspective
Academic scenarios.
INTERVIEWING SKILLS K B L Srivastava.
Director of Community Engagement, Office of the Provost
Department Head Expectations of Faculty
Provost Guidelines for Submission of Tenure on Hire Requests to the University Promotion and Tenure Committee.
SENIOR SYNTHESIS Period 6 Mr. Scott Drain
Mentoring clinical faculty in the Dept of Pathology
Review Committee Training – BEST Practices
Promotion & Tenure workshop
COURSE EVALUATION Spring 2019 Pilot August 27, 2019.
Presentation transcript:

Reflections on the T&P Process: Voices from the Past and Present María Spicer-Escalante, Assistant Professor (LPSC) Eileen Doktorski, Assistant Professor (Art Department)

Questions  How was your experience with the Tenure and Promotion Process?  What was the most difficult challenge you faced during this process?  What did you learn from this process?  What would be your advice to the women faculty members who are currently going through this process?

Participants 10 tenured, female  A total of 10 tenured, female professors:  5 Associate Professors  5 Full Professors  Colleges:  College of Agriculture  Jon M. Huntsman School of Business  College of Education and Human Services  College of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences  College of Science  Extension

1. How was your experience with the Tenure and Promotion Process? Difficult (non-positive)  8/10 women experienced some difficulties with the process  3 of them during the last year of the T&P  2 of them at other institutions Positive (smooth)  2/10 expressed that they had a MOSTLY easy or a fairly smooth process

Comments on the process... Positive:  “I had a terribly supportive committee. I had great letters each year... so it was a fairly smooth process”  “My T&P process was MOSTLY easy, with a committee that was LARGELY supportive and willing to listen to my needs for clarification and for advocacy”

Comments on the process... Difficult:  The process was not very nurturing  The DH was especially noncommittal about my file  USU's process with individual committees is much better. Although I had a committee member that I had to ask be removed because of harassment

Difficult (non-positive) Comments... when there was no blue binder  I went through the T&P process in the days when there was no blue binder... The T&P committees did not help with getting binders ready for outside review. No one on campus knew!  Because I am in a 'unique' position on campus, it was unclear to me how I was to get promoted. No one on campus knew! was vague were not excited about tenuring achievers.  At the first institution, the tenure process was vague and the department was full of underachievers who were not excited about tenuring achievers.

Comments from the last year of the process... Everything was fine until the last year... ... I had to make a change on my committee ... During the tenure decision process things turned surprisingly bad. My committee was supportive and encouraging throughout the process, however I do not think any of them ever actually read my notebook (binder) ... I switched my committee chair. I felt that this person had been deceitful. This person was obstructing the process, instead of making it smooth

2. The most difficult challenge...  Lack of information about the T&P  Obstruction from DH/Chair Committee or other Committee members  Lack of mentorship and female role models  Lack of guidelines  Not having a 'road map' and having poorly defined expectations  Being a productive scholar was the biggest challenge  “Being productive is not a good thing in my Department”

3. I learned...  Nothing! It is stressful!!!  I learned that the system works  We needed to help everyone know what the targets were  Administrators (and their ideas) come and go so your documentation should be “bullet proof” so that you don’t have to worry about that  Mentorship is critical as is having clearly spelled out expectations and criteria  It is critically important to take responsibility for understanding the process  When in doubt, frame your own questions and provide the answer to those questions  This process [the review] built my confidence in myself and my job

1. 1. What would be your advice...?  Know the deadlines and be your own best coach  Don’t wait for your DH or your committee chair to tell you what to do  Talk to others and keep your own file current  Publish, publish, publish!  Get lots of mentoring! Ask for help. Don't be shy. Toot your own horn.

 Find a mentor who is not on your committee and have them help you evaluate your teaching and research  Educate yourselves about the EVERYTHING related to the T&P process The truth is your committee knows very little! Self-Assessment Letter  Write a draft for your Self-Assessment Letter each year!!!  Get input from senior faculty who have recently gone through the process  Maintain a positive attitude as much as possible

Conclusions! “Women faculty are not good at ‘shameless self promotion’.” Thanks!