1 / 9

Promotion and Tenure Implementation

Promotion and Tenure Implementation. Revised Recommendations for Implementation 2006-7 Doug Johnson Carol Johnston Susan Mattson Richard Morris Paul Patterson Duane Roen Nancy Gutierrez / Marjorie Zatz. Recent Developments in P&T. Max ten outside letters from top scholars

ipo
Download Presentation

Promotion and Tenure Implementation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Promotion and Tenure Implementation Revised Recommendations for Implementation 2006-7 Doug Johnson Carol Johnston Susan Mattson Richard Morris Paul Patterson Duane Roen Nancy Gutierrez / Marjorie Zatz

  2. Recent Developments in P&T • Max ten outside letters from top scholars • Dean approval of external reviewers • Justification of reviewers/credentials • Additional information added at each level • Units/Colleges confirm full documentation • Recommendations to Provost • President announces decision • President/Provost report, confer, and debrief • Senate Approval of P&T Revisions 2003/4 • Implementation Task Force 2004/5

  3. Senators Voiced Concerns with AY2004/5 Implementation Recommendations • Ad hoc Committees • High cost for “near expertise” • Possible unintended consequences • Consistency concerns • Additional uncertainty for candidate • Advocate • Internal Committee needs less local culture • Chair may not be effective advocate

  4. Role of University Committee Unit level committee and Chair By –Laws and communicated expectations Contributions to unit goals and mission Disciplinary contributions & scholarship Special knowledge of research, teaching, and service College level committee and Dean Contributions to mission and goals of College/School Local insight & broad disciplinary perspective University Committee Broad Perspective of University Convincing evidence of contribution to unit, college, & ASU Documented Scholarship

  5. Standing Area Committees • University Committee • Seven Members • Campus representative elected by faculty • Provost appointees to provide balance • Three year staggered terms • Normally full professors

  6. University Committees inSix Broad Disciplinary Areas • Art and Design • Humanities • Physical & Life Sciences • Social Sciences • Engineering & Technology • Managerial & Legal Studies

  7. Key Success Factors • Updated Unit By-Laws • Training for members Area Committees • Annual process review and adaptations • Formal Review of process after 3 Years

  8. Timeline • Fall 2005 – Senate review and acceptance • Spring 2006 – Beginning March • Candidates notify Provost • Campuses elect Area Committee members • Provost nominates members to balance • Senate Leadership approves nominations • Training and P&T Committee meetings scheduled

  9. Next Steps • Today – • Questions of clarification • Coming month • Senators discuss with faculty in units • September Meeting • Substantive Debate • Vote on recommendation

More Related