1. Tenure and Promotion Workshop
Research Stream

2. 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

3. 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

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

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

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

7. 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

8. 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

9. Periodic Review for Promotion & Tenure
May 19, 2016

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

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

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

20. 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

21. For Assistance…
The Collective Agreement, in particular Articles & 9 of Conditions of Appointment for Faculty
Guide to Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion Procedures at UBC for 2015/16
Faculty Relations website:
Faculty Association website:
Call us!

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

23. 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 ( /year) and makes recommendations to the President
May 19, 2016

24. 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

25. 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

26. 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

27. 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

28. 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

29. 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

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

31. 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

32. 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

33. 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

34. 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

35. 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

36. 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

37. 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

38. EVIDENCE
May 19, 2016

39. 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

40. 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

41. REFEREES
May 19, 2016

42. 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

43. TEACHING EXCELLENCE
May 19, 2016

44. 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

45. 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

46. CURRICULA VITAE
May 19, 2016

47. 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

48. 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

49. 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 words)
Pipeline is important – works in progress
Use dated supplements to update your file
May 19, 2016

50. 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

51. Toot Your Own Horn
May 19, 2016

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