ACADEMIC PERSONNELREVIEW PROCESS

October 9, 2012SEPTEMBER 2, 2020

Presentation Outline

1. Academic Personnel due dates

2. AP: What’s new for 2020-21

3. AP: Reminders for 2020-21

4. CAP

Academic Personnel due dates

November 2 • Postponement of Tenure/Promotion Review

December 1

• Merits, including those with accelerations• No Change• Reappointments• Midcareer Appraisals

January 4• Fifth Year Reviews• Advancements to Professor VI

February 1• Promotions, including those with accelerations• Non-reappointments• Above Scale actions

March 1 • Merits, Dean Delegated• All other actions, including non-Senate actions

June 30 • Deferrals (Associate rank and above)Should be submitted by June 30, 2021

2. AP: What’s New for 2020-21

Declaration of Potential Conflict of Interest (COI) in Personnel Review Process

If there is a potential COI for reviewers above the department level (chair, associate dean, et) they should Complete new COI form UCI AP-COI

Submit form to AP before the review occurs

CAP will review and advise on course of action For example: No involvement in a faculty member’s review: Family relationship,

current close collaborator:

Reduced role that might include participation in a department letter, but not writing the chair’s letter: small # joint pubs or co-PI status in past.

Required SHORT form for Department Letter in merit reviews

Applies to all Dean-Delegated merit, CAP normal merits and first No Change

Department letter will be 3500 character maximum

Must be submitted on the UCI AP-12 form

APP 3-60-D2 has been updated

Modifications to Review for COVID-19

Files due in AP with standard deadlines

Temporary COVID modifications If tentative negative recommendation by School or CAP,

candidate can add new material up to Dec 31, 2020. Must submit updated AP-10 Material considered in this review will NOT be considered new

material again in the next action Review will include consideration of COVID impact CAP/VPAP are aware of potential gender and other disparities Faculty encouraged to explain changes in productivity/focus

Updated Dean Delegated Merit

Effective 2020-2021 review cycle: At the Associate rank, every other normal merit will be delegated to the dean

Irvine Delegation of Authority (IDA) currently in the process of being updated

Changes in Above-Scale Actions

Action Timing% increase on total salary

Clock Expectations

1 Merit Plus 4 or 5 years 10 reset Excellence in all three areas.

2 Merit 4 or 5 years 8 reset

Professor series*: excellence in scholarship and second area;Professor of Teaching: excellence in teaching and second area;No area subpar.

3 No change 4 years 0 not resetDoes not meet standards for merit at 4 years; Required review in year 5.

4 Satisfactory 5 years 4 resetContinuing contributions in all review areas. No area subpar.

5 Unsatisfactory 5 years 0 not resetThree year action plan with yearly progress reports required.

* Applies to the following titles: Professor/Professor In Residence/Professor Clinical X.

3. AP: Reminders for 2020-21

External Referees and AP-11 Form

Update: Description of referee qualifications can be a short biography and /or URL of referee’s website

Describe referee relationship to candidate Avoid using “not conflicted or conflicted”

Do use, for example: Does not personally know candidate

Has met the candidate at occasional meetings

Has published together recently (last 4 years) or in the past (> 4 years)

Is close personal friend

External letter writers need to be at or above rank to which candidate being promoted

Candidate Statements – 4 separate uploads(recommended but not mandatory, be as concise as possible)

Research, Teaching and Service Research and creative activities statement Reflective teaching statement, peer eval of teaching and/or

other evidence of teaching impact (upload required) Service activities statement

Inclusive excellence activities statement address contributions in research, teaching, and/or service

Guidance for preparing review files and statements https://ap.uci.edu/faculty/guidance/

Professor of Teaching

Professor of Teaching Expectations Parallel to Professor series, effort proportioned differently

Majority effort in teaching Remaining effort split between research/creative activity and

service For advancements impact expectations in teaching/pedagogy

National for advancement to Professor of Teaching, Step VI International for advancement to Above-Scale

Campus-wide discussions ongoing regarding types of evidence to support evaluation of research/creative activities in this series

Publications and Teaching Evaluations

Publications Live links Webfiles will still be available through June 30, 2021 Other Options: Google Drive

College of Health Sciences: continue to use Webfiles; there are issues using Google Drive

Teaching Evaluations All evaluations should be in one PDF File Only five years maximum required for any action (including creative

materials)

Review Profile/Addendum

Review Profile Download a comprehensive Review Profile (Word

document) to capture data that currently exists in myData through the Faculty Hub

Or

AP-10, Addendum Important to describe unique, independent contribution

to each publication – just reporting % effort is generally not helpful

CAP/AP visits with schools

Schools can request visit Contact AP and we will coordinate timing with CAP School equity advisor facilitated meetings in the past have

been very useful

4. CAP

Lee SwindlehurstProfessor

Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Samueli School of Engineering

Chair

Council on Academic Personnel

Council Members

Victoria BasoloSocial Ecology

Victor FleischerLaw

Michelle GarfinkelSocial Sciences

Alexander IhlerInformation and Computer Science

Victoria JohnsonHumanities

Young Jik KwonHealth Sciences (At Large)

Catherine LoudonBiological Sciences

Gudrun MagnusdottirPhysical Sciences

Sabee MolloiMedicine (Clinical)

Lisa Naugle (Vice-Chair)Arts

Connie PechmannBusiness

Bert SemlerMedicine (Basic)

Senate Analyst – Lynn Harris

COVID-19 Considerations Impact has been non-uniform – CAP is aware of issues with potential

gender disparity; discussions on-going w/AP to mitigate long-term effects

Goal is to fairly account for impact while maintaining high standards

Take advantage of accommodations, as needed

We will consider trends in performance pre- and post-COVID

As necessary, explain the HOW of COVID impacts, not the WHY(don’t share personal information, chair/dean letter can help here)

Not everything has been negative! CAP will favorably view extra efforts to mitigate the pandemic’s effect

2019-20 CAP Data

CAP cases overall: Agreement rate, incl. modified recommendations c. 84% More than 1/3 of modified recommendations were modify-up

Analysis on (presumptive) genderAccelerations

Women and men request accelerations in ratios comparable to overall case numbers for each

CAP agreed with accelerations slightly more for women than men

Promotions/Adv. (all levels, incl. Step VI and A/S) Women and men request promotions/advancements in ratios

comparable to overall case numbers for each Exception: Fewer women at Above Scale

Promotions approved at slightly higher rate for women than men

External Letters

Adv. to Above-Scale, or Promotion to Associate or Full Professor: 4-5 needed, at least 3 dept. nominated and non-conflicted, must be at or above rank of candidate.

On AP-11, detail connection with candidate for ALL letter writers, don’t evaluate connection (e.g., “has met at conferences”, “was a colleague of former advisor, but never formally collaborated”, rather than “Not conflicted”)

Short snippets from external letters can be included in dept. evaluation (sparingly), but only in support of statements of candidate’s qualifications. Otherwise, do not quote from letters.

Don’t “cherry pick” reviewers from previous actions

Dept/Chair/Dean Letters

Shorter is often better

Role is not to advocate for the candidate, but to evaluate in the local context

Don’t parrot content from AP-10 or lower-level letters, help CAP to read between the lines of the AP-10

Address negative aspects of the file, if any

Most effective letters provide useful context: “Prof. X’s service on this committee was commendable because …” or “Prof. X had a heavier teaching load than normal because …”

Research and Scholarly Activity

Explain contributions, significance and independence Author order has variable meaning, if any Did work originate with you & your students? Or were you a collaborator?

Was your role major or minor? Especially important for frequent co-authors or “team science” pubs Indicate student co-authors (e.g., underline or *) when appropriate

“Book” disciplines Explain venue, stature of publisher, rationale for placement Especially true for online or open-access contributions

The Arts Explain & discuss importance of venue, festival, exhibition, etc.

Is venue highlighting new/emerging or more traditional work? How does your work add to the context of this area?

Presentations or collaborations at national or international level generally carry more weight than on campus

Explain role in design and realization of collaborative projects

Research and Scholarly Activity (cont.)

Research grants A means for scholarship, and a mark of stature/ research accomplishments Not generally equal to research productivity Explain grant totals – if total amount is listed, indicate candidate’s portion

Given huge range of scholarly activity at UCI, we rely on Candidate’s statement CAP members’ expertise Context from dept/chair/dean letters External letters Above are more important than “analytics” (citations, # of products, etc.)

Teaching Reflective Teaching Statement

Show engagement with teaching evaluations (student and/or peer) Acknowledging (your) problems is a positive; explain how you address them On-going activities viewed positively, last minute repentance less so

Student Evaluations of Teaching (SET) Include most recent SETs, up to last 5 years Response rates are important Student comments are much more valuable than numerical scores CAP regularly discusses biases and related concerns

Student Mentoring Student mentoring outside the classroom is generally expected CAP views activities beyond normal roles as particularly positive Explain significance of mentoring activities rather than giving lists of thesis

committee membership, 199R courses, UROP, visitors, etc.

Service

Context for service activities is essential Can be provided on AP-10 (if short), or by candidate’s service statement,

dept/chair/dean letters For example:

How many hours/year?Compensated or volunteer?Editorial work: How many papers handled?

Long lists of service activities on AP-10 without differentiating level of effort hides the candidate’s main contributions; consider grouping, with major activities called out for emphasis

Higher levels of service required at higher steps “I wasn’t asked” is not generally viewed as convincing

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion

CAP notices and values DEI work Can help “fill buckets” for accelerations

List DEI activities on AP-10 under Research, Teaching, and Service (a single item can appear under multiple categories)

DEI statements primarily useful for highlighting and providing context for significant contributions Describing your life experiences and beliefs is less persuasive Normal activities that happened to involve an under-represented group

are not impressive (“I wrote a letter of recommendation for a female colleague” or “I advised a URM graduate student”)

Proactive work is considered more favorably, e.g., explaining what you have done to recruit/support URM students rather than listing names

Please do not share other’s personal data when describing DEI efforts

Questions?

Thank you for attending!