1. Using MERLOT To Support Retention, Tenure, and Promotion Reviews
Gerard L. Hanley, Ph.D.
Executive Director, MERLOT
Senior Director, California State University
MERLOT International Conference
August 8, 2003

2. Technology and Tenure/Promotion Policies
Guidelines for evaluating technology in instruction are being published
Modern Language Association, American Association for History and Computing
University of Michigan, Duquesne University,
Peer evaluation & testimony by experts in field to verify quality & importance to discipline
Making digital scholarship “visible”
Electronic portfolios vs. Evidence files of the crime of doing good work
Evaluate materials in the medium in which the scholarship was created
Jessica Somers

3. Tenure & Promotion with MERLOT
MERLOT provides QUALITY REVIEWS
Standards-based evaluation
Independent panel of experts
Training for the reliable application of standards
MERLOT provides DOCUMENTATION
Documentation for Authors, Contributors, Reviewers, and Users
An electronic portfolio can be created within MERLOT
Teaching and Course Portfolios

4. MERLOT’s Value to Faculty Authors
Visibility of their Scholarship of Teaching through MERLOT website
Peer Review of their scholarship
Evaluation of quality, effectiveness, and usability
Feedback for improvements
Recognition and documentation
MERLOT publicly posts review on website
MERLOT Awards – Classics and Editors’ Choice
MERLOT citations in other’s Personal Collections
MERLOT sends two letters summarizing the review procedure and evaluation report to two of author’s designees
Document can become part of author’s tenure and promotion portfolio

5. MERLOT’s Value to Faculty Contributors & Users
Visibility of curriculum development & pedagogical innovations through MERLOT
Adding Materials
Adding Member Comments/Reviews
Adding Assignments
Creating Personal Collections
Recognition and documentation
MERLOT creates an ePortfolio of its members’
Special Benefits for Adjunct Faculty
Document can become part of Contributor’s Tenure and Promotion Portfolio

6. MERLOT’s Value to Editorial Board Members
Visibility of their expertise and authority through MERLOT website
Performing and publishing peer reviews
Recognition and documentation
MERLOT creates an ePortfolio of its Editorial Board’s peer reviews of materials within MERLOT
MERLOT provides “letter of appointment” describing qualifications and responsibilities
Documents can become part of Editorial Board member’s Tenure and Promotion Portfolio

7. Counter Forces
Creating new and unique scholarship, curriculum and pedagogy is valued
Reusing other’s ideas is not valued
How do you change the fundamental criteria for professional excellence?
Student learning outcomes by best means, even if you didn’t develop them
Excellent implementation of sound curriculum and pedagogy

8. Institutional Application of MERLOT’s Peer Review Process

9. Case Study in Progress CSU, Long Beach campus
Passed Academic Senate policy recognizing value of effective and creative teaching with technology
Question of implementation of policy in retention, tenure, and promotion (RTP) evaluations
Evaluations standards
Valid?
Reliable?
Training of evaluation committee?
Placement of reviews in candidate’s portfolio?

10. Institutionalizing Peer Review
Create College-Level academic technology peer review committees that are independent of RTP committees
Training peer review committee in MERLOT’s peer review processes
Use training process, evaluation standards, & tutorial
Customize evaluation standards for campus
Practice to achieve some level of inter-rater reliability
Candidate can choose to submit materials to college academic technology review committee
Academic technology review committee functions like an external reviewer
RTP committee learns to respond to evidence of good work