Renewal, Tenure and Promotion

Tags

Renewal, Tenure and Promotion

Recommendations for Improving

Renewal, Tenure and Promotion

atSUNY Oneonta

The Final Report of the

Renewal, Tenure and Promotion Task Force 2 (RTPTF2)

Submitted by

Dr. Donna Vogler

Dr. William R. Proulx

Co-Chairs of the Renewal, Tenure and Promotion Task Force

June 20, 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary

Introduction

The Charge

Membership

Campus-Wide Input

Final Recommendations

Executive Summary

The Renewal, Tenure and Promotion Task Force 2 (RTPTF2), formed in March 2014, was charged with soliciting campus-wide input and recommendingways to improve the processes of contract renewal, tenure and promotion (RTP) at SUNY Oneonta by focusing onthe terminology and criteria for review, expectations for faculty at different ranks, and guidelines for improving clarity, transparency, consistency and fairness. From April 2014 to March 2016 the RTPTF2 solicited input and investigated renewal, tenure and promotion practices at SUNY Oneonta and other academic institutions and developed a set of recommendations that are listed below. The basis for each of these recommendations is outlined in the main body of this report. It must be emphasized that implementation of any changes to the RTP process must be done so as to not disadvantage anyone currently going through the process.

Dean’s Advisory Councils(DACs) and the Promotion and Tenure Committee (P&T)

  • The College should establish terms of service and membership criteria for the DACs and the P&T Committee and revise the membership of the P&T Committee to comprise representatives from all fiveSchools and the Library. A Director of Libraries Advisory Councilshould be created and should follow the same protocol as the other advisory councils.
  • The College should revise existing policies and practices that preventDACs and the P&T Committee from having access to DAC recommendation letters from previous evaluations.
  • Greater coordination between the DACs and the P&T Committee is necessary and should be facilitated by some shared membership and/or joint meetings.
  • Each DAC and the P&T Committee should follow discipline-specific standards when evaluating a candidate’s performance (see Performance Criteria and Standards section below).

Performance Criteria and Standards

  • All Departments and the Library should
  • Develop discipline-specific standards.
  • Establish rank-specific performance expectations.
  • Clarify performance expectations for all five criteria for each renewal cycle and tenure.
  • Clarify performance expectations for all five criteria for promotion to Associate Professor/Associate Librarian and Professor/Librarian.
  • Provide examples of the types of evidence that demonstrate effectiveness and proficiency.
  • Include levels of achievement for meeting the criteria.
  • Departments and the Library should submit their discipline-specific standards to their Dean/Director for review.
  • Candidates should include discipline-specific standards along with their chosen weighting for scholarship and servicein their dossier. The standards and chosen weighting should then be used as a reference by all individuals and committees involved in the evaluation of the candidate’s RTPmaterials.
  • The College should specify effectiveness in teaching (effectiveness in teaching and librarianship for Library faculty), scholarly ability and creative works, and effectiveness of university service as the primary criteria upon which RTP decisions will be based at SUNY Oneonta.
  • The Collegeshould weight teaching effectiveness and/or librarianship the same for all faculty, regardless of discipline, Department,School and/or Library.
  • Teaching effectiveness and/or librarianship should be given the greatest weighting in RTP decisions.
  • The weighting of scholarship and service should be established by each faculty member in consultation with the DepartmentChair/Head and Dean/Director of Libraries to best fit the nature of the faculty member’s work and meet the needs of the Department, School or Library, and College.
  • Faculty should maintain mastery of subject matter and demonstrate continuing growth throughout the RTP process since these are foundational for achieving proficiency in teaching, scholarship and service (see image 1.).
  • The definitions for scholarship should be broadened (e.g., as detailed by Ernest Boyer).

Evaluation of Performance

  • The College should strengthen the evaluation of teaching by
  • Relyingmore on peer observations and supervisory evaluations (e.g., DepartmentChair/Head) and less on student perceptions.
  • Standardizing the protocol and methods for gathering student input including using one form across the institution and clarifyingwhether student free responses should be included in the dossier and,if so, where they should be included.
  • Standardizing the protocol and methods for peer observations of teaching.
  • Providing training onthe evaluation and observation of teaching and on writing evaluation and observation lettersfor DepartmentChairs/Heads and other evaluators.
  • Clarifying expectations for self-evaluationsincluding establishing reasonable word or page counts for self-evaluations.
  • The College should considerincluding external peer evaluation of dossiers for tenure and promotion.
  • The College should standardize the protocol and methods for the format, content, acquisitionand submission of internal and external recommendation letters.
  • The Collegeshould considerthe adoption of a different schedule from the current 2-2-2-1 for contract renewals.
  • The College should standardize dossiers by
  • Beingmoreexplicit about thetypes and amounts of materials to be included in dossiers.
  • Retaining DAC letters from previous renewals in dossiers throughout the renewal and tenure process. Until the Library forms a Director of Libraries Advisory Committee, letters from the Library Personnel Committee should be included in the dossiers.

Support

  • The College should establish best practices in mentoring throughout the College so mentoring is a part of every faculty member’s experience, from first-year faculty to full professors/librarians.
  • The College should maintain a webpage that provides a centralized, intuitive, and easy-to-navigate location for all RTP information.
  • The Faculty Center should support RTP by providing professional development and mentoring focused on RTP.

Monitoring

  • The College should establish a process for monitoring RTP policies and practices across the institution by a committee primarily composed of faculty.

Introduction

The first Renewal, Tenure and Promotion Task Force (RTPTF1)wasa fact-finding task forcethat worked from March 2013 through November 2013.The task force submitted its findings to President Kleniewski, Provost Thompson, and Dr. Paul Bischoff, Presiding Officer of the College Senate,in a final report titled “An Examination of Renewal, Tenure and Promotion Policies and Procedures at the SUNY College at Oneonta and Other Institutions.”Building on the work of the RTPTF1, a second task force, the Renewal, Tenure and Promotion Task Force 2 (RTPTF2),began its work in the spring of 2014. This report provides an overview of the work of the RTPTF2 including recommendations for strengthening renewal, tenure and promotion policies and practices at SUNY Oneonta.

Timeline

Phase One

  • March 2013 – Formation of the RTPTF1.
  • April 2013 - November 2013 – Fact-Finding work of the RTPTF1.
  • November 2013– Final report of the RTPTF1 submitted to President, Provost and Presiding Officer.

Phase Two

  • March 2014 – Formation of the RTPTF2.
  • April 2014 - May 2015 – RTPTF2 soliciting input from groups and individuals.
  • August 2015 – Interim report with initial recommended actions.
  • September 2015 - March 2016 – RTPTF2 soliciting input about initial recommendations.
  • March 2016 -May 2016 RTPTF2 prepares and submits final report to President, Provost and Presiding Officer.

The Charge

The RTPTF2 was charged with the following

Building on the research provided by the Renewal, Tenure and Promotion Fact Finding Task Force, the Renewal, Tenure and Promotion Task Force will solicit input campus-wide and recommend two or more models of review that would improve the processes of contract renewal, tenure and promotion. Such recommendations should include

  • Common definitions, terminology and criteria for review.
  • Expectations for faculty at different ranks.
  • Guidelines for developing a process that personnel reviews are clear, consistent, transparent and fair.

Membership

The membership of the RTPTF2includes

  • Five faculty members: one representing each of the College’s fiveSchools. (Tenured Associate Professors or Professors, elected/appointed by Senate).
  • OneLibraryfaculty member appointed by the CollegeSenate.
  • Threeadministrative representatives (Lisa Wenck, Donna Vogler and Bill Proulx from fact-finding committee).
  • One to two additional members if needed (e.g., balance gender, Schools).

Faculty Representatives

  • Craig Bielert, Professor, Psychology and Anthropology
  • Jerome Blechman, Professor, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences
  • Amie Doughty, Associate Professor, English
  • Kjersti VanSlyke-Briggs, Professor, Secondary Education
  • Stephen Walsh, Associate Professor, Management, Marketing and Information Systems
  • Michelle Hendley, Librarian, Reference and Instruction

Administrative Representatives

  • Donna Vogler, Professor, Biology (RTPTF2 Co-Chair)
  • William Proulx, Associate Professor, Human Ecology (RTPTF2 Co-Chair)
  • Lisa Wenck, Senior Executive Employee Services Officer
  • Venkat Sharma, Dean, School of Natural and Mathematical Sciences

Administrative Support

  • Deborah Wolfanger, Senior Staff Assistant, Facilities Planning
  • Lisa Keaney, Secretary, Academic Administration

Campus-Wide Input

Open Forums

The RTPTF2 began meeting early in fall2014 and met on a regular basis throughout fall 2014 and spring 2015. The RTPTF2 hosted a series of open forums during the spring 2015 semester that focused on improving transparency, clarity, equity and fairness in the renewal, tenure and promotion process at SUNY Oneonta.The open forums took place in Craven Lounge from 3:30-5:00 pm on February 3, February 24, March 17 and April 14, 2015. The forums were relevant to everyone involved in the renewal, tenure and promotion (RTP) process, including faculty seeking renewal, tenure and promotion, members of Department personnel committees, DepartmentChairs/Heads, Deans/Director of Libraries, P&T Committee members, and Dean's Advisory Committees.Everyone was welcome to attend.

The first open forum took place on Tuesday, February 3, 2015 and was entitled"The Priorities of the Professoriate – Reconsidering Scholarship."

“At the very heart of the current debate – the single concern around which all others pivot- is the issue of faculty time.What’s really being called into question is the reward system and the key issue is this: what activities of the professoriate are the most highly prized?”

The above quote is taken from Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate by Ernest L. Boyer (1990).In his book Boyer presents an expanded model for scholarship that is comprised of four categories

  • The Scholarship of Discovery.
  • The Scholarship of Integration.
  • The Scholarship of Application.
  • The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.

Dr. Joanne Curran, Dean of Sage College of Albany, and former Associate Dean of Education at SUNY Oneonta, was invited to speak during the open forum about her experiences working at an institution that has adopted the Boyer model of scholarship.A discussion with Dr. Curran followed immediately thereafter.

The RTPTF2’s second open forum took place on Tuesday, February 24, 2015.This open forum was entitled “The ABCs of RTP – Understanding the Language of Renewal, Tenure & Promotion.”Scholarly ability, service, effectiveness in teaching, continuing growth, proficient,mastery of subject matter and continuing appointment are just a few of the terms associated with the renewal, tenure and promotion processes.Forum participants spent the first hour defining the terms listed above and identifying and defining other terms associated with the RTP process that they found to be particularly confusing or problematic.The last half hour of the forum was devoted to an open discussion on RTP processes. A draft of the full glossary of terms was made available at theforum for feedback.

The RTPTF2’sthird open forum took place on Tuesday March 7, 2015.This open forum was entitled “Clarifying Expectations– Using Rubrics and Checklists in the RTP Process.”This open forum focused on the tools and criteria we use to assess achievement, proficiency and success in teaching, librarianship and other criteria in the RTP process.

The RTPTF2’s fourth open forum took place onTuesday, April 14, 2015.This open forum was entitled“Creating a Climate of Mentoring at SUNY Oneonta.”Discussion at this open forum focused on the followingquestions as they relate to mentoring at SUNY Oneonta:

  • People define mentoring in many different ways.What is mentoring to you?
  • What are we, both within Departments and as a College, doing well?
  • What more should we do? Where are we lacking?
  • What will it take to create a climate of mentoring at SUNY Oneonta?

Meetings

The RTPTF2also met with the following individuals and groups to discuss renewal, tenure and promotion policies and practices at SUNY Oneonta:

  • The CollegeSenate Steering Committee, March 2, 2015.
  • The Academic Deans, March 20, 2015.
  • The Promotion and Tenure Committee, March 24, 2015.
  • Librarians, Tenured and Untenured, April 3, 2015.
  • The Council of Chairs, April 9, 2015.
  • Director of Libraries, April 10, 2015.
  • Untenured Librarians, April 24, 2015.

Preliminary RTPTF2 Recommendations

Based on information solicited from the four open forums and from meetings with the individuals and groups listed above the RTPTF2 developed the following set of preliminaryrecommendations.

  • Revise existing policies and practicesthat prevent DACs and the P&T Committee from having access to a candidate’s most recent RTP recommendations.
  • Ensure that the P&T Committee’s membership is comprised of representatives from all five Schools and the Library.
  • Establish a webpage that provides a centralized, intuitive, and easy-to-navigate location for all RTP information including the standards and procedural information for Departments and the Library.
  • Each DAC should develop standards that make expectations for performance for RTP clear and transparent, including the performance expectations for faculty at different phases of the renewal process (e.g., first renewal versus third renewal).
  • If they currently do not have them, Departments, Schools, and the Libraryshould develop discipline-specific rubrics or checklists to be used to assess achievement, proficiency and success in the RTP criteria areas.
  • Distribute theRTP glossary created by the RTPTF2.
  • Establish a coordinated system for mentoring faculty that helps create a culture of mentoring across the institution.
  • Complete the transition to an online submission process and system

To obtain greater faculty input on the preliminary recommendations drafted by the RTPTF2, members of the RTPTF2 attended all-faculty meetings of each of the five Schools and the Library during late fall 2015 and early spring 2016 to discuss

  • EstablishingDiscipline-Specific Standards: All Departments and the Library should develop discipline-specific standards that provide guidance and clarify the kinds of documentation and evidence specific to the discipline. This is especially true for scholarly and creative work.Attempts to designate a minimum number of publications should be strictly avoided, but each discipline should provide the candidates, the DAC and the P&T Committee with clear directives as to the value of the kinds of peer-reviewed publications or externally-acclaimed scholarly work appropriate to that area. Department criteria should be publically available, as they are in other Colleges and universities. Department-level criteria should be reviewed for consistency with School and College standards and the SUNY Board of Trustee criteria.
  • Specifying Teaching, Scholarship and Service: The current 3-4-5 system is an Oneonta campus-specific system where excellence in 3 of the 5 categories provided by the SUNY Board of Trustees is the accepted benchmark for achieving tenure, 4 of the 5 for promotion to Associate Professor and 5 of the 5 for promotion to Professor.The RTPTF2 is recommending an alternate system that specifies teaching, scholarship and service as the primary performance criteria for renewal, tenure and promotion similar to that used at other institutions. As an example, for tenure, candidates could demonstrate 1) excellence in teaching, 2) excellence in either scholarly achievement or service, with at least good performance in one of the other categories, and 3) at least good performance toward professional growth. The level of mastery of subject mattercould be established by the Department or School such that one Department may require a Ph.D., whereas another would require different academic credentials. Mastery of subject matter at tenure could be simply the terminal degree, whereas mastery at Professor could be a measure of reputation among peers.
  • Broadening Scholarship and Valuing Service: Scholarship needs to be broadened to incorporate scholarly activities beyond traditional research to include the scholarship of integration, the scholarship of application and the scholarship of teaching. Many institutions have incorporated aspects of the Boyer model that include scholarship of discovery, integration, application and teaching/learning.The College needs to value service more in the renewal, tenure and promotion process considering the emphasis being placed on service-learning and engaging the community through service.
  • Establishing Expectations for Ranks:For example, new faculty memberswould be expected to demonstrate “effectiveness in teaching” (“effectiveness in teaching and librarianship” in the case of Library faculty) when applying for initial contract renewal and show “progress toward” developing their scholarship, service, and continued growth. By contrast, those seeking promotion to Associate Professor/Associate Librarian or Professor/Librarian would demonstrate achievement of external reputation and/or campus leadership in addition to sustained excellence in teaching.
  • Revising the Membership of the P&T: Ensure the Promotion and Tenure Committee’s membership is comprised of representatives from all five Schools and the Library.
  • Reviewing of Recommendation Letters from Previous Reviews:Letters from previous reviews, including the DAC letters, should be accessible to the DACs and P&T Committee at tenure review. The DACs and the P&T Committee need to work together to ensure that the candidate receives guidance from the DAC that is relevant to building a file for tenure review.Letters from the Library’s Personnel Committee from previous renewals should be accessible to the personnel committee and the P&T Committee at tenure review.
  • Establishing a Culture of Mentoring: Departments, Schools, the Library, and the Faculty Center should carry out the mentoring of new faculty. Mentoring should not be restricted to untenured faculty alone, but should include all faculty and be broadened to cover all aspects of teaching, scholarship, service and professional development.Furthermore, mentors should receive training. Service as a mentor should be recognized and credited as part of that mentor’s own contributions towardCollege service, and advising and mentoring students beyond curriculum issues should also be counted toward service rather than teaching.

During the meetings with Schoolsand the Library the RTPTF2wasmade aware of the following areas of the RTP process that faculty felt needed to be addressed including

Top View