Changes in the Faculty Review Process for United Academics Faculty Presenter: Patricia Linton, College of Arts & Sciences.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Reappointment, Promotion & Continuous Appointment (Tenure) Process and Issues.
Advertisements

Tenure is awarded when the candidate successfully demonstrates meritorious performance in teaching, research/scholarly/creative accomplishment and service.
Promotion and Tenure Workshop for MUSM Faculty A Faculty Development Opportunity Mercer University School of Medicine 2012.
Retention Reviews Patricia Linton Associate Dean, College of Arts & Sciences.
Proposed Revisions to Section 5 (Review & Evaluation of Faculty Performance) of the Faculty Handbook Spring, T&P Oversight Committee Office.
Tenure and Promotion for Extension Faculty: Tips for the Evaluated and the Evaluators Larry Smith Executive Senior Vice Provost Utah State University Annual.
 UAFT *Collective Bargaining Agreement – Article 5  UNAC * Collective Bargaining Agreement – Article 9 Can access through Faculty Services website at:
PEER REVIEW OF TEACHING WORKSHOP SUSAN S. WILLIAMS VICE DEAN ALAN KALISH DIRECTOR, UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT OF TEACHING ASC CHAIRS — JAN. 30,
Faculty Affairs presents:. PPCs  Consist of 3 or 5 members  Are selected based on Program Personnel Standards (i.e. one per program or one per faculty.
 UAFT *Collective Bargaining Agreement – Article 5  UNAC * Collective Bargaining Agreement – Article 9 Can access through Faculty Services website at:
Performance, Merit and Post- tenure Evaluation Processes Proposals for Comment Faculty Senate, April 2014 Office of the Provost.
Introduction to the Faculty Evaluation System
2015 Workshop Permanent Status and Promotion Policy and Procedures Overview.
Workload Agreements New Faculty Orientation Patricia Linton Professor of English Associate Dean, College of Arts & Sciences.
Workload Agreements New Faculty Orientation Patricia Linton Associate Dean, College of Arts & Sciences.
Workload Agreements New Faculty Orientation Patricia Linton Associate Dean, College of Arts & Sciences.
Portfolio for Tenure & Promotion Grand Rapids Community College Faculty Evaluation System.
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN WORKSHOP. What is the Professional Development Plan? The Professional Development Plan is a directed planning and evaluation.
2015 UTIA P&T Workshop. UTK Faculty Handbook….  Section Faculty Review & Evaluation p 18  Section Probationary Period p 21 UTK Manual.
Promotion and Tenure Lois J. Geist, M.D. Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs and Development.
Portfolio for Tenure & Promotion
Preparation for Faculty Evaluation Patricia Linton Associate Dean, College of Arts & Sciences March 27, 2015.
Presented by the Faculty Affairs Office September 2013.
The P&T Process Roles of the Candidate, Supervisor and P&T Committee.
Promotion and Tenure for Chairs, Heads, & Administrators: Twin Cities Arlene Carney Vice Provost for Faculty & Academic Affairs.
Workload Fulfillment New Faculty Orientation Patricia Linton Senior Associate Dean College of Arts & Sciences.
Presented by the Faculty Affairs Office September 2013.
Portfolio for Tenure & Promotion Grand Rapids Community College Faculty Evaluation System.
Jeff Waddoups Chair, Sabbatical Leave Committee Department of Economics
Retention, Tenure and Promotion College of Natural Sciences and Mathematics.
Key HOP Policies and Recent Guidelines Jesse T. Zapata & Gail Jensen September 2, 2015.
Columbia University School of Engineering and Applied Science Review and Planning Process Fall 1998.
Faculty Affairs presents:. PPCs  Consist of 3 or 5 members  Are selected based on Program Personnel Standards (i.e. one per program or one per faculty.
Faculty Reviews Promotion & Tenure. Outline  Overview of the process  Recommendations for file presentation  Evaluation of files  Levels of Evaluation.
Retention Reviews Patricia Linton Associate Dean, College of Arts & Sciences August 1, 2008.
Patricia Linton, Ph.D. Professor of English Senior Associate Dean for Academics College of Arts and Sciences Retention / Progress toward Tenure.
>>>Faculty & Staff >>>Faculty Appointment & Review >>>Tenure Guidelines 2008 edition.
RETENTION, TENURE, PROMOTION WORKSHOP Presented by the Faculty Affairs Office September 2012.
DOSSIER PREPARATION MENTORING PROGRAM Session #7July 14, 2015  PANEL: What do Department Chairs Look for in a Dossier?  Review Clinical Statement of.
Patricia Linton, Ph.D. Professor of English Senior Associate Dean for Academics College of Arts and Sciences Faculty Evaluation.
PREPARING FOR THE RENEWAL AND TENURE PROCESSES Michael Smith Department of Sociology.
Overview of Policies and Procedures University of Missouri-Kansas City.
Preparation for Faculty Evaluation Marian Bruce, Assistant Vice Provost, Faculty Services Patricia Linton, Senior Associate Dean, College of Arts & Sciences.
University p&t forum Introductions April 24, 2017.
Tenure and Promotion at University of Toledo
Building Your Personnel Action Dossier
Workload Fulfillment Term Faculty Appointments Patricia Linton
Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion (RTP) Processes and Procedures
PAc-17 Sabbatical Leave of Absence
New and Improved Annual Reviews
Academic Year UNC Asheville
Training for Reviewers Fall 2017
Introduction to the Faculty Evaluation System
Evaluation of Tenure-Accruing Faculty
Faculty Evaluation Faculty Workshop on Retention April 2, 2010
Patricia Linton Associate Dean, College of Arts & Sciences
Your Career at Queen’s: Merit Review and Renewal, Tenure, & Promotion New Faculty Orientation August 24, 2017 Teri Shearer Deputy Provost (Academic.
2017 Workshop Tenure and Promotion Policy and Procedures Overview
Achieving Tenure and Promotion
Professor Salary Incentive Program
FROM A PROVOST’S PERSPECTIVE
2016 Tenure and Promotion Workshop Policy and Procedures Overview
Promotion/Tenure Portfolio
Your Career at Queen’s: Merit Review and Renewal, Tenure, & Promotion New Faculty Orientation August 23, 2018 Teri Shearer Deputy Provost (Academic.
New Faculty Orientation
PAc-28 Educational Leave of Absence
Training for Reviewers Fall 2018
Promotion and Tenure.
New Faculty Orientation Non-tenure-track Faculty Appointments
Preparation for Faculty Evaluation
Presentation transcript:

Changes in the Faculty Review Process for United Academics Faculty Presenter: Patricia Linton, College of Arts & Sciences

Overview of Changes  Importance of the Annual Activity Report  Sequence of reviewers  Contents of files submitted for tenure and/or promotion reviews  Changes in post-tenure review

Focus of Evaluation  Extent of professional growth and development;  Prospects for continued professional growth & development;  Changes or improvements required for tenure, promotion, and continued professional growth;  Processes available to assist in improving performance.

Annual Activity Report  Previous function at UAA.  Annual submission of current CV, Annual Activity Report, including brief narrative self-evaluation (due September 10).  Requires a response by Dean or designee with respect to the “sufficiency” of the faculty member’s performance. (new)

Annual Activity Report  Format of the Annual Activity Report may vary across MAUs.  Not a “file” like those required for more extensive reviews.  Annual responses of the Dean become part of the faculty member’s file at the next comprehensive review (4 th year, tenure and/or promotion, post-tenure review).

Annual Activity Report  Evaluation of performance is based upon the allocation of effort specified in the Workload Agreement.  Annual evaluation places greater emphasis on the fit between the Workload Agreement and the Annual Activity Report.  Changes in the workload must be approved and formally documented.

Annual Workload Agreement  Approved faculty Workload Agreement is the basis for evaluation. Approved workload = signed by the Dean.  CBA allows flexibility in allocation of units across areas of the workload. Revise if workload changes.  Teaching assignment: specific courses listed accurately Research: topic, expected product, level of development Service: revise as needed; stay within assigned units

Sequence of Reviews  Department chairs do not serve as reviewers in their capacity as chairs - For major reviews, the college-level peer review committee is the initial reviewer.  Department chairs may serve as members of Peer Review Committees.  Program directors who are represented faculty may serve on peer review committees. Directors who have administrative appointments may review as the Deans’s designee, at the discretion of the Dean.

Sequence of Reviews  Most evaluations end with the review of the Dean or designee. - All annual evaluations in response to Annual Activity Report end at the Dean’s level (pre-tenure and post- tenure) - Post-tenure comprehensive reviews end at the Dean’s level unless the faculty member is seeking promotion or receives an unsatisfactory evaluation.

Contents of File for Major Reviews  Major reviews are the following: - 4 th Year Comprehensive Review (occurs in year 4, covers 3 prior years) - Review for Tenure (review of all prior years) - Review for Promotion (all prior years or all since initiation of last review for promotion) - 6 th Year Comprehensive Post-Tenure Review (all years since initiation of tenure and/or promotion review or last comprehensive post-tenure review) - Special review requested by either the faculty member or the Dean.  Most file contents are the same for all major reviews, except for evaluation by external reviewers and discretionary materials.

Contents of File for Major Reviews specified in the CBA 1. Current CV 2. Annual Workload Agreements for the period under review Cumulative Activity Report one comprehensive 3. A Cumulative Activity Report for the period under review (one comprehensive activity report documenting productivity in each area of the workload during the full period under review)

Contents of File for Major Reviews (CBA) response to Annual Activity Reports 4. Feedback from the Dean in response to Annual Activity Reports throughout the period under review (copy of each annual response) 5. Summarized teaching evaluations 6. Self-evaluation 6. Self-evaluation summarizing scholarly contributions and achievements

Contents of File for Major Reviews (CBA) summary of progress in addressing those areas 8. If any response of the Dean or designee noted areas for improvement, the self-evaluation must include a summary of progress in addressing those areas. 9. External review letters (only for tenure and/or promotion reviews) 10. Materials specified by MAU criteria 11. Materials at discretion of faculty member.

Additional Materials specified by MAU  Table of Contents  Initial Letter of Appointment (if needed to document prior years of service)  Verification of Degree, Certificate, or License  Copies of Findings & Recommendations from most recent major review (tenure, promotion, or comprehensive review)

Additional Materials Specified by MAU  IDEA Student Evaluation Summary Report for each course section taught  One selected example of a syllabus for each course number/title taught  Copies of individual Annual Activity Reports for the years under review

Post-Tenure Review  Tenured faculty submit CV and Annual Activity Report with self-evaluation each year (not new)  Tenured faculty receive annual feedback concerning sufficiency of performance and progress toward promotion, if relevant (new)  Dean’s responses to Annual Activity Reports become part of the file for comprehensive post-tenure review or promotion review (new)

Comprehensive Post-Tenure Review  Comprehensive post-tenure review occurs every 6 th year (no 3-year cumulative review)  Includes review by the college peer review committee and Dean  Ends with the Dean’s review if the faculty member’s performance is judged satisfactory by peer review committee and Dean. If either review is unsatisfactory, proceeds to UFEC and Provost.

Post-Tenure Review current  Performance is satisfactory if it meets standards for the faculty member’s current rank.  Feedback on progress toward promotion, if applicable, is a separate judgment and does not affect the determination that performance is satisfactory at the current rank.  Consequences of unsatisfactory comprehensive review addressed in the CBA.

Final Comments  For UAA faculty, the Annual Activity Report is a much more important document than it was in the past.  Annual review by the Dean or designee in response to the Annual Activity Report will be a significant component of the faculty member’s record.  The necessity (or the opportunity) for review beyond the college level is reduced.