1. Tenure Promotion Jason Cong cong@cs.ucla.edu cong@cs.ucla.edu Professor and Past Chair Computer Science Department University of California, Los Angeles

2. Important Factors for Tenure Decision by the Department u Candidate’s record  Research  Visibility  Teaching  Service u Outside letters u Comparative Metrics u Faculty committee report

3. Research Contributions u Publications,  Journal papers and full-length refereed conference papers,  The selectivity, quality, and prestige of the journal/conference are important.  Quality is more important than quantity (about 5 papers will be mailed to the references) u Funding  A measure of the interest of the broader community in the candidate's research.  Both the size of the grants, and the quality of the review process are important measures. For example, DARPA vs NSF grants  When there are several PI/CO-PIs on a grant, a % of the candidate's participation should be stated. u Both research independence and collaboration are important and should be represented in candidates' research.

4. Funding u Target prime funding opportunities  Bookmark and visit funding agencies sites regularly Find out hit rates if possible (e.g., equip. grants) Find out hit rates if possible (e.g., equip. grants)  Industry career development monies to dept.  NSF/ONR/ARL CAREER competitions borrow sample proposals from successful colleagues borrow sample proposals from successful colleagues u Schedule a visit to funding agency u Volunteer to be on NSF review panels u Ask successful colleagues to review your proposal outline, read your proposal and listen to their feedback u If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again

5. Visibility u Awards and honors: e.g., NSF career award, best paper awards, etc. u Professional services  Serving as a member or chair of TPC of high-quality conferences and workshops;  Being active in reviewing papers  Serving on the editorial board, of high-quality journals, and comparable responsibilities. u Invited talks, and external seminars u Citations  Total  Top citations (would like to see a few high-impact work)  H-number  Use of research results by others as contrasted with a simple citation.

6. Teaching u The quality of a candidate's teaching will be assessed against that of other members of the department.  Standard course evaluation metrics will be used primarily.  Peer teaching review consisting of lecture evaluation lecture evaluation course material evaluation. course material evaluation.  The production of top graduate students, as measured by their Resumes and Resumes and Place of employment (esp. major research universities) Place of employment (esp. major research universities)

7. Teaching Portfolio u Teach a blend of courses (small/large, undergrad/grad, etc.) u Teach as few different courses as possible  Courses that are easy for you or graduate courses in your area stay away from weeder courses and large time commitment junior courses if possible stay away from weeder courses and large time commitment junior courses if possible  Invest your time in developing a good set of notes and use them over and over again  Good learning is not hard teaching u Learn when/how to say no (no because …) u Negotiate for release from teaching  As part of start-up package, for developing new courses and labs, pretenure mini-sabbaticals

8. Research Advising u Recruit good graduate students  Balance PhD and MS students Try to graduate at least one PhD by year six Try to graduate at least one PhD by year six Don’t take on too many MS students Don’t take on too many MS students  Offer grad level reading course as overload  Use start-up RA and equipment monies wisely  Serve on dept. grad recruiting committee  Learn when and how to say “no” A bad student is worse than no students A bad student is worse than no students Don’t agree to work with any student you haven’t seen “in action” Don’t agree to work with any student you haven’t seen “in action”

9. Service u The fulfillment of "good citizen" duties is important. u Opportunities for service  Department  School  Campus  Research community u Budget your time properly  Feel free to tell your department chair if you are overloaded.

10. Outside Reference Letters u Very important in the decision making process u The candidate suggests half and the department chooses half for a total about 10-12 references u Plan your references earlier (in 3 rd or 4 th years)  Get to know them at conferences  Visit their departments to give seminars  Send them your important work

11. Comparative Metrics u A small Paragon Set (PS) of young scholars will be identified from the candidate's research area.  Consist of 3-5 leading scholars, including some who have just made tenure, or are in the process of making tenure, at the top- ten research universities.  Selected by the department, in consultation with the candidate, and faculty in his/her field of research.  Compare the candidate and the PS Research Research Visibility Visibility

12. Knowing Your Rights u Able to see redacted copies of the outside letters and departmental reports (at least in the UC system) u Can provide rebuttal before and after  Faculty committee report  Departmental vote, and  Chair’s recommendation

13. Acknowledgements u “Excellence in Tenure Decisions” by UCLA CSD former department chairs (R. Muntz, M. Ercegovac, J. Cong) u “The Tenure Process”, Debra Richardson, Janie Irwin, and Sandhya Dwarkadas