Report From the ISAT PAC 5/11/05 David McGraw. Overview Reminder to prospective 2005 promotion & tenure applicants (20% of Department!) Proposed Changes.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Maximizing Your Chances for Promotion and Tenure School of Medicine March 19, 2013.
Advertisements

Promotion and Tenure in Department of Family Medicine Faculty Development Workshop August 12, 2011.
1 Whats All This Fuss About Promotion & Tenure? Sandra Burge, Ph.D. Dept. Family & Community Medicine Sandra Burge, Ph.D. Dept. Family & Community Medicine.
Tenure is awarded when the candidate successfully demonstrates meritorious performance in teaching, research/scholarly/creative accomplishment and service.
UNLV FACULTY SENATE TENURE & PROMOTION FORUM Oct. 2, 2012 Oct. 2, 2012 Thanks to the Past Chairs: Dr. John Filler Dr. Ceci Maldonado Dr. Nasser Daneshvary.
Promotion & Tenure New Faculty Workshop December 7, 2012.
Promotion and Tenure Workshop for MUSM Faculty A Faculty Development Opportunity Mercer University School of Medicine 2012.
Carolyn M. Byerly, Ph.D., professor Department of Journalism and Graduate Program in Mass Comm & Media Studies TENURE: BASIC INFO AND ISSUES.
Service to the University, Discipline and Community Academic Promotions Briefing Session Chair, Academic Board Peter McCallum.
Professor of Teaching Tenure Track Stream at UBC Anna M. Kindler, Vice Provost and AVP Academic May 2013.
Service to the University, Discipline and Community Academic Promotions Briefing Session Chair, Academic Board Peter McCallum.
PEER REVIEW OF TEACHING WORKSHOP SUSAN S. WILLIAMS VICE DEAN ALAN KALISH DIRECTOR, UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT OF TEACHING ASC CHAIRS — JAN. 30,
2014 CLA Retreat Mission, Vision, Strategic Planning.
Academic Faculty Evaluation Workshop November 7, 2005.
Promotion and Tenure Workshop May 2005 PURPOSE CRITERIA Lou Malcomb 5/2005
Facilitators: Janet Lange and Bob Munn
Promotion & Tenure Workshop The Dossier. What the Committee Looks for: I nnovation I nitiative I mpact.
Tenure and Promotion The Process: –Outlined in Article 15 of the FTCA. When you are granted tenure, you are also promoted to Associate (15.7.6). One application.
Demystifying Academic Appointments and Promotions Karen Freund MD MPH Jane Freedman MD – Department of Medicine Appointments and Promotion Committee Jackie.
Senior Appointments Committee J. M. Friedman, MD, PhD.
College Strategic Plan by Strategic Planning and Quality Assurance Committee.
Career Advancement and Promotion Criteria for Clinical Educators Council of Academic Programs in Communication Sciences and Disorders 2015 Annual Conference.
Faculty Evaluation Policy Why: – Needed to comply with SACS accreditation guidelines – Must comply with UL System requirements – Needed to improve the.
FOLLOW UP SITE VISIT Dr Robert Schofield Dr Arthur Brown Advisors to the Quality Assurance and Accreditation Project Republic of Egypt.
Student Advisor Training. Senator Advisor Trainging This meeting is intended as a brief overview to help you understand your role as a Student Senate.
Western Carolina University faculty visit to Guilford College – April 16, 2008 Using Boyer’s Model of Scholarship Our thoughts and experience on changing.
1. Continue to distinguish and clarify between Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and Service Area Outcomes (SAOs) 2. Develop broad SLOs/SAOs in order to.
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN WORKSHOP. What is the Professional Development Plan? The Professional Development Plan is a directed planning and evaluation.
Promotion and Tenure Lois J. Geist, M.D. Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs and Development.
The P&T Process Roles of the Candidate, Supervisor and P&T Committee.
Promotion and Tenure Faculty Senate June 12, 2014.
PROMOTION AND TENURE FOR CLINICAL SCIENTISTS – BOTH PATHWAYS Peter Emanuel, M.D. Laura Lamps, M.D.
Promotion in the Clinical Track Lois J. Geist, M.D. Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs and Development.
Preparing and Evaluating 21 st Century Faculty Aligning Expectations, Competencies and Rewards The NACU Teagle Grant Nancy Hensel, NACU Rick Gillman, Valporaiso.
Preparing for the renewal and tenure processes Bernard Robaire Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics MAUT Tenure Workshop April 24, 2015 – Faculty.
Sabbatical Workshop Sabbatical Workshop Friday, April 13, :30 – 4:45 p.m. Room N28 Dr. Wallace Smith, VPAA Dr. Elizabeth K. Hawthorne, Chair, Faculty.
Work of the Faculty Leadership Team An Overview. Our Charge Serving to recommend process Serving to set up a strategic plan.
 Traditional View of Excellence Research funding- whatever the topic Number of Doctoral Degree Programs Selectivity Invention/discoveries Size International.
1 Faculty Motivation and Policies Steven R. Hall Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics Chair of the MIT Faculty.
Changes in the Faculty Review Process for United Academics Faculty Presenter: Patricia Linton, College of Arts & Sciences.
POST-TENURE REVIEW: Report and Recommendations. 2 OVERVIEW Tenure Field Test Findings Recommendations This is a progress report. Implementation, assessment,
Promotions on the Clinician Educator Track Larry L. Swift, Ph.D. Vice Chair for Faculty Affairs Department of Pathology, Microbiology & Immunology.
So You Want to Get Tenure? One Perspective from the Faculty of Medicine Barbara Hales Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics.
Demystifying Academic Appointments and Promotions Karen Freund MD MPH Chair, Appointments and Promotions Boston University School of Medicine FDDC September.
Matthew L. S. Gboku DDG/Research Coordinator Sierra Leone Agricultural Research Institute Presentation at the SLARI Annual Retreat 26 – 28 October, 2015.
Planning for School Implementation. Choice Programs Requires both district and school level coordination roles The district office establishes guidelines,
DOSSIER PREPARATION MENTORING PROGRAM Session #3 June 17, 2014  CV and Summary Statements (feedback)  Review Teaching Statement of Endeavors and Supporting.
PROMOTION AND TENURE FOR BASIC SCIENTISTS – BOTH PATHWAYS Dana Gaddy, Ph.D. Patricia Wight, Ph.D.
Promotions on the Physician Scientist/Basic Science Investigator Track Larry L. Swift, Ph.D. Vice Chair for Faculty Affairs Department of Pathology, Microbiology.
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, HAYWARD Academic Affairs MEMORANDUM DATE: October 3, 1995 T0: Department Chairs FROM: Frank Martino Provost & Vice President,
Guidelines and Process. AIAA TCM Membership Selection Guidelines (page 1 of 2) A formal education in both the technical (engineering and/or science) and.
Tenure and Promotion Workshop November 1, Workshop Logistics Overview of SUNY tenure and promotion criteria Overview of SUNY tenure and promotion.
Fall 2006 Faculty Evaluation and Tenure Review Process Tenure Review Process Riverside Community College District.
Standards of Achievement for Professional Advancement District 2 Career Ladder Training April 29, 2016 Ronda Alexander & Michael Clawson.
Promotion and Tenure. Quick overview of P&T Requirements Each of these areas has a defined standard/benchmark that faculty are expected to achieve (below-meet-exceed)
Cañada College Professional Development Committee Determining Participants.
The Promotion and Tenure Process at Alabama State University.
Building Your Personnel Action Dossier
Graduate School Orientation
PAc-17 Sabbatical Leave of Absence
Faculty Toolkit: Promotion & Tenure
What you need to know now to be promoted later!
Considerations in Engineering
Academic Promotion Information session, 22 March 2018.
Heather Brod, Executive Director of Faculty Affairs and FAME
Promotions on the Physician Scientist/Basic Science Investigator Track
Maximizing Your Chances for Promotion and Tenure
Tenure and Promotion: Article 6
Early Career Participation in Professional Societies: Service with Benefits Jean Bahr UW - Madison.
Faculty Evaluation Policy
Presentation transcript:

Report From the ISAT PAC 5/11/05 David McGraw

Overview Reminder to prospective 2005 promotion & tenure applicants (20% of Department!) Proposed Changes to the PAC Guidelines –Composition of PAC & terms of PAC service –“Entire relevant career” language –Professional Service standards The Merit Increase and Annual Review Process

Reminders to Applicants Applications are due September 15 (by tradition, this is a firm deadline) Please meet with PAC members to learn more about putting together a good package Please take the time to look at a good application (such as Bob Kolvoord’s 2002 application, Maria Papadakis’ 2003 application, Anne Henriksen’s 2004 application) General principles: –Organization is the key – the PAC won’t search through documents looking for needles in the haystack. –Make sure you organize around the criteria and link the criteria with what you’ve done. –It’s up to you to make your case! –Be sure to document everything – a major concern of the PAC in the past has been a lack of documents to substantiate claims.

Proposed Change 1 “Time off” after service on the PAC After having served on the PAC, faculty shall not be required to serve for twice the length of time actually served on the PAC Examples: –One year as an alternate gets you two years off –Three years of actual service gets you six years off –Three years on the PAC with one year recusal gets you four years off. Effect: No more than 14 members will have “time off” at any one time, leaving at least 30 possible candidates to serve on the 7-member PAC

Proposed Change 2 Filling of “alternate” positions by lottery among those who have never served on the PAC (or those with longest time since last service on the PAC) –Rather than filling the “alternate” positions by election, the Department Head shall identify all faculty who have never served on the PAC, and randomly select from this group until all alternate positions have been filled. –If all ISAT faculty have served on the PAC, then the Department Head shall identify the faculty who have had the longest time since PAC service, and select from this group randomly.

Proposed Change 3 For both promotion and tenure, the standards applied shall consider all accomplishments of the faculty member’s entire career that are relevant to the member’s role in the ISAT Department, but with greater emphasis placed on recent accomplishments by the faculty member. Note: This has been the de facto rule the PAC has been following – we’re just trying to make this explicit so everyone will understand the rule and so the PAC will be consistent from one year to the next.

Proposed Change 4 Revisions to the Professional service standards. This proposal would: –Remove the two-tiered system, and instead have a single set of criteria. Ratings of “unsatisfactory,” “satisfactory” or “excellent” will be based on a qualitative assessment of how well one meets the criteria. –Reorganize the criteria into three logical groupings: Service that advances one’s professional scholarly community Service that advances the mission of JMU, CISAT, and ISAT Service that benefits society in areas related to one’s professional expertise

Professional Service includes activities that advance one’s professional scholarly community, activities that advance the mission of The University, the College, or the Department, and activities that benefit society in areas related to one’s professional expertise. To receive a Satisfactory rating for Professional Service, the individual must participate in many of the activities listed below at an acceptable level. To receive an Excellent rating, the individual must be at least Satisfactory in performing the activities below, must demonstrate leadership in service, and must demonstrate many of the achievements listed below to an extraordinary level. A faculty member who shows serious deficiencies in either quality or quantity of effort shall be rated as Unsatisfactory.

1. Service that advances the mission of James Madison University, the College of Integrated Science and Technology, and the Department of Integrated Science and Technology a) S erving and participating as a valued team member on Departmental, College and University committees, including ISAT representative to the Faculty Senate. b)Participating in public relations events and student recruiting. c)Participating in grant proposals for external funding for teaching and equipment sup-port. d)Serving as a faculty advisor to student organizations. e)Serving as a satisfactory student curriculum advisor. f)Initiating and carrying out a program which leads to a significant increase in ISAT or JMU resources, or in ISAT’s or JMU’s ability to perform its mission. g)A major service or office at the Department, College or University level. h)Service leadership, e.g., the ability to initiate and execute constructive change in the ISAT program. i)Other professional service which the PAC deems to be a leadership contribution.

2. Service that advances one’s professional scholarly community a)Serving as a referee or reviewer of scholarly articles or textbooks. b)Reviewing proposals for sponsored government, academic, or industry programs. c)Serving as an officer of a national or international professional organization. d)Serving as an editorial member of a professional journal. e)A major effort conducting workshops, symposia, and training sessions in one's professional area. f)Other professional service to the faculty member’s professional scholarly community which the PAC deems to be a leadership contribution.

3. Service that benefits society in areas related to one’s professional expertise a)A contribution which applies the resources of the University to solving a problem of local, regional, state, national, or international concern. b)A major effort to solve a problem at the local, state, national, or international level providing a significant benefit to society and in an area directly related to one’s professional expertise. c)A major service or office at the local, state or national level related to one’s professional competence. d)Other professional service directed at the betterment of society in the area of one’s professional competence which the PAC deems to be a significant contribution.

Proposed Change 5 In order to receive a rating of satisfactory or excellent, the faculty member must perform satisfactory service to the Department. Argument: Service to the professional community and service to the society at large are good things, which we want to reward, but they should not be done in lieu of the more important service, that to the Department – this service should be mandatory for all.

Implementation We suggest that all of these changes go into effect immediately Would a one-year delay be better? Or, should this year’s class of applicants be given an option?

Annual Review Issue The JMU Faculty Handbook reads: “The [PAC] shall be involved in the evaluation, an appeal of the evaluation or both.” Question: To what degree should our PAC be involved?

Annual Review Issue The PAC Recommends that it have as little involvement as possible in the annual review process. According to our interpretation of the Handbook, we could decide that the Chair would do the evaluation, and then the PAC would become involved only for appeals.

Merit Increase Issue In the PAC’s view, the merit increase process last year was fine – many were unhappy with the result, but that’s inevitable, given that the system requires that a few get more of an increase than the majority. The PAC Recommends that it have as little involvement as possible in the merit increase process. If absolutely necessary, the PAC could become involved in helping the Department Head establish a procedure, but then step back and let the Department Head implement that process.