here - UBC Human Resources

Tenure and Promotion
May 20th, 2014
Agenda – 3 Parts
PART ONE (1:00 – 2:00pm):
PART TWO (2:00 – 3:00pm):
Review and Discussion of Criteria and Evidence for
Professor of Teaching Stream
Welcoming Message – Nancy Langton
Guide to Tenure & Promotion – Deena Rubuliak &
Mark Trowell
Senior Appointments Committee – Judith Daniluk
PART THREE (3:00 – 4:00pm):
Review and Discussion of Criteria and Evidence for
Professoriate Stream
Professor of Teaching Stream
The Professor of Teaching Stream
Instructor I
Senior Instructor
Professor of Teaching
The Criteria
The Professor of Teaching Stream
Three pillars: teaching, educational leadership and service
Professor of Teaching Stream Criteria
 Collective Agreement:
 Senior Instructor – A. 3.04
 Professor of Teaching – A. 3.05
 SAC Guide:
 Appendix 1
Professor of Teaching Stream
 A distinct career track with different
expectations than professorial ranks
 Requires evidence of excellence in
teaching and educational leadership with
impact beyond one’s own classroom
 Research productivity is not required
 Excellence in teaching is not enough
Professor of Teaching Stream
 Discipline and context specific
opportunities within each department
should be noted re: teaching, educational
leadership and service activities
 Evidence of external visibility and impact
should be framed based on opportunities
within units (e.g. access to grant & travel
funds; teaching loads; etc.)
Senior Instructor A. 3.04
 excellence in teaching
 demonstrated educational leadership,
involvement in curriculum
development and innovation, and
other teaching and learning initiatives
 contributions to service
Senior Instructor, contd…
 “It is expected that Senior Instructors
will keep abreast of current
developments in their respective
disciplines and in the field of teaching
and learning”
(SAC Guide, p. 49)
Professor of Teaching A. 3.05
 outstanding achievement in teaching and
educational leadership
 distinction in the field of teaching and
 sustained and innovative contributions to
curriculum development, course design and
other innovations and initiatives
 service to academic profession, University
and community
Professor of Teaching, contd…
 Demonstrated “educational leadership and
impact beyond one’s own classroom, within the
University and, as appropriate, externally in the
broader academic community”
Demonstrated “impact on student learning and
the quality of education at UBC and beyond”
“…scholarly teaching (teaching informed by
research/scholarship of teaching and learning) is
expected” (SAC Guide p. 48)
Evidence of Educational
(Appendix 1 of SAC Guide)
Examples of Evidence of Educational
 Formal educational leadership responsibilities
within the Department and/or Faculty (e.g., on
teaching- and learning-related committees)
Contributions to substantive curriculum
development/redesign (e.g. accreditation)
Funding obtained for improvement of teaching
and learning – new initiatives
Development and/or coordination of courses and
programs and/or new assessment
Evidence of Educational Leadership
 Application of innovative, research-based
approaches to curriculum and pedagogy
 Application of scholarship of teaching and
learning, including resulting presentations and
publications (e.g., articles, abstracts,
conference proceedings, poster sessions)
 Development and dissemination of
instructional materials/pubs. (textbooks,
training manuals, software)
Evidence of Educational Leadership
 Organization and/or participation in conferences or
educational events focused on teaching and learning within
your program, department, faculty, University and/or
outside of UBC
 Contributions to university and faculty-based teaching and
learning initiatives (e.g., CTLT-based programs and
communities of practice; Peer Review of Teaching, etc.)
 Contributions to professional training programs (e.g.
TA/tutor training)
 Mentorship of peers and students
Evidence of Educational Leadership
 Evidence of the ability to work individually and
collaboratively to enhance teaching and learning
Evidence of relationships with other learning units
or institutions that fosters the exchange and
development of information and resources on
teaching and learning
Evidence of reflective teaching and learning
Evidence of initiatives that advance UBC ability to
excel in its teaching and learning mandates
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
Referees – Professor of Teaching Stream
 Senior Instructor/Tenure:
Familiarity with your teaching contributions
Not someone with whom you have co-taught
Outstanding teachers outside your Department
Can be outside UBC, but not required
 Professor of Teaching:
 At least 2 external to UBC and 2 external to your
 National vs. International - impact “beyond UBC”
Tenure and Promotion
May 20th, 2014
Agenda – Parts 2 AND 3
PART TWO (2:00 to 3:00pm):
Welcoming Message – Nancy Langton
Guide to Tenure & Promotion – Deena Rubuliak &
Mark Trowell
Senior Appointments Committee – Judith Daniluk
PART THREE (3:00 to 4:00pm):
Review and Discussion of Criteria and Evidence for
Professoriate Stream
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.
Tenure & Promotion
 Tenure
& Tenure Clocks
 Promotion Reviews
 Procedures
 For Assistance…
The Tenure Clock
The tenure clock begins on July 1 of the calendar year of
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.
The Tenure Clock
The Procedures
The reappointment, tenure & promotion
procedures are set out in Articles 5 & 9
of Part 4:Conditions of Appointment for
Faculty, and are supplemented by the
Guide to Reappointment, Tenure and
Promotion Procedures at UBC
(the “SAC” Guide)
Periodic Review for Promotion
Periodic Review
Assistant Professor
Year 5
then every 2 years
Associate Professor
Year 5
then every 3 years
Senior Instructor
Year 5
then every 3 years
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.
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.
The Initial File
 Unless otherwise agreed, the faculty
member’s dossier and all relevant
documentation necessary for review must
be submitted by September 15.
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.
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.
What Referees Receive
 The letter of request is only accompanied by
the candidate’s CV and selected materials
relevant for the assessment of scholarly
 Teaching dossiers are usually only included
for cases involving Senior Instructor &
Professor of Teaching.
Tenure & Promotion Reviews
Department Standing Committee meets after
obtaining letters of reference
Department Standing Committee votes &
recommends to Head
Invited to respond in writing to serious
Tenure & Promotion Reviews
Head recommends to Dean
Head notifies candidate in writing of decision
Invited to respond in writing to Dean
Tenure & Promotion Reviews
Dean seeks Faculty Committee vote
Dean recommends to President*
Dean notifies candidate of decision
Invited to respond in writing to President
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
Use dated supplements to update
your file!
For Assistance…
The Collective Agreement, in particular
Articles 2 - 5 & 9 of Part 4: Conditions of
Appointment for Faculty
Guide to Reappointment, Tenure and
Promotion Procedures at UBC for 2013/14
Faculty Relations website:
Faculty Association website:
Call us!
Senior Appointments Committee
Current SAC Chair:
Professor Judith Daniluk
Incoming Chair:
Professor Melanie Jones
Senior Appointments Committee
 20 person committee of professors
 Representation from all Faculties (includes 2
UBC-O; 1 Faculty Association)
 Two Subcommittees: Associate and Professor
(members meet weekly September through
 SAC reviews all tenure, promotion and new
appointment files (180-200/year) and makes
recommendations to the President
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
 All relevant contextual matters
(A 5.14; Section 10 SAC Guide)
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
 Candidate’s personal circumstances, if
 Discipline- and context-specific opportunities
within each department and faculty
Article 5.14e; SAC Guide Section 5.5.1
SAC Review Process
 Files are reviewed in detail for merits & fairness by
the Associate or Professor sub-committee members
 Cases may be deferred pending receipt of
additional information or procedural clarification
 Cases are ranked:
‘A’ – no substantive issues or procedural concerns
‘B’ – negative recommendation by Dean or Head
– SAC members have questions for the Dean
(approximately ¼ of all cases)
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 is taken in Dean’s absence
 Dean is immediately informed of the result
which is considered “confidential”
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 his recommendation to
Board of Governors
Important Considerations In Preparing
Your Dossier
 Documentation of teaching excellence
 UBC curriculum vitae
 Familiarity with the criteria specific to
your rank and promotion
 Examples of evidence
 External referee selection
Teaching Excellence
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, and mentorship of, students
 Influence on intellectual & scholarly development
of students (mentorship)
Willingness to teach range of subject matter and
Evidence of Teaching Excellence
 Teaching awards and nominations beneficial
but not essential (one form of evidence)
 Student evaluations – quantitative and
 Peer teaching reviews
 Student supervision – professional, research,
internships, residency, etc.
 Multi-section course coordination
SAC 3.2 & Appendix 2
Curricula Vitae
Professoriate – Appendix 3 (SAC Guide)
Professor of Teaching Stream –
Appendix 4 (SAC Guide)
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, is not dated, or is not in UBC
Lack of clarity regarding the candidate’s role and
contributions (pubs, grants, collaborative research
and projects)
Full information is not provided on grants
(competitive vs. non; status of applications) or
publications (year, page numbers, authors, etc.)
Common Problems with CV’s 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 peerreviewed publications and those not peerreviewed
Failure to include the dollar value of grants or to
indicate the proportion allocated to you in case of
multiple recipients
Teaching record is incomplete
Curricula Vitae - Recommendations
 Use UBC format; adapt as needed (see annotated
versions in SAC Guide – Appendices 3 & 4)
Explain contributions to collaborative grants and
initiatives, and co-authored publications
Consider numbering pubs and presentations
Use narrative opportunities to provide context for
teaching (8a), educational leadership (9a), scholarly and
professional activities (9a), and “additional information
(13/14) – be concise “less is more”
Pipeline is important – indicate works/projects in
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
Toot Your Own Horn
Part Three:
Criteria and Evidence for
Professoriate Stream
Professoriate Stream
The Professoriate Stream
Assistant Professor
Associate Professor
The Criteria
The Professoriate Stream
Professoriate Stream Criteria
 Collective Agreement:
 Tenure – A. 4.01
 Assistant Professor – A. 3.06
 Associate Professor – A. 3.07
 Professor (research stream) – A. 3.08
(SAC Guide – Section 3)
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
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
Associate Professor
A. 3.07
evidence of successful teaching and scholarly
activity beyond that expected of an Assistant
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
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
Sustained Scholarly Contributions –
the Professoriate 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)
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
Important Considerations In Framing A
Professoriate 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
Some Sources of Evidence – Professoriate
 Invited presentations/performances (national &
 Article & grant reviews; editorial board work
 Publications in high-impact venues in your field
(provide descriptions, impact factors, rejection
 Competitive grant funding as PI and co-I
 Citations of your work; adoption of your work
Sources of Evidence, contd.
 Referees’ verification of impact
 Awards and other forms of Recognition
 Discipline-specific norms – venues, grants,
publications, authorship, conference
Mentoring and publishing with grad students;
grad students’ career accomplishments
Service is important, but can’t substitute for
excellence in scholarship and teaching
Referees – Professoriate 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
 National vs. International?? (rank and

similar documents