Promotion and Tenurefor Untenured FacultyPresented by Doug BlandySenior Vice Provost For Academic Affairs

NTTF FacultyReview and Promotion

Barbara Altmann12 November 2013

• Materials presented are for general informational purposes only and do not constitute official University rules, policies or practices, or interpretations or summaries of such rules, policies or practices. No warranties or representations are made as to the accuracy of any information presented. Any discrepancy between the information presented here and the official rules and policies of the University of Oregon and the Oregon University System is not intended to and does not alter or amend the official rules and policies.

DISCLAIMER

Reviews: regular reviews, associated with contract renewal

every contract period or every 3 years, whichever is sooner promotion reviews

only 1 review in a year when up for promotion independent decisions made on renewal and promotion

CBA: ARTICLE 19

Development of written procedures and criteria at unit level (Process: see Article 19.2)

Policies and procedures must be made available If procedure or criteria change over course of six

years, employee can elect current or prior version Promotion process must involve review committee Policy must include process for reviewing adjuncts Must specify whether external reviewers needed

POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

Purpose: to determine “if the NTTF member is meeting the standard of excellence appropriate to a major research university”

Goal: “to help the [BU members] grow as scholars, researchers and educators, identify areas of strength, and identify areas that need improvement”

Timing: each contract period prior to consideration for renewal or once every 3 academic/fiscal years, whichever is sooner

REVIEWS FOR CONTRACT RENEWAL OF CAREER NTTF

Instructional NTTFReview includes student evaluations and one peer review

per contract period Research NTTF

Assessment of quality of work and outcomes by established procedures

LibrariansReview of demonstrated achievement in professional roles

REVIEWS FOR CONTRACT RENEWAL OF CAREER NTTF (2)

Review process must include an opportunity for individual to discuss performance with supervisor

Evaluation of professional development activities will consider availability of support, opportunities, and individual’s efforts to secure funding

Faculty members will be evaluated only on criteria approved and made available

REVIEWS FOR CONTRACT RENEWAL OF CAREER NTTF (3)

Eligibility: 6 years of service at average of .4 FTE or greater (counting a maximum of 3 terms per AY on 9-mo contract, 4 terms per AY on 12-mo contract)

“Up or out”: no longer applicable except for librarians. Promotion is elective. Employment can continue at current rank

Accelerated review: possible for particularly meritorious case

PROMOTION REVIEWS OF CAREER NTTF

Credit for prior service: determined at time of hire; flexible use; consideration of 6 years prior to promotion

Multiple or joint appointments: expectations and process specified at time of hire; must be signed

Initiating promoting process: candidate notifies unit head in year prior to the year in which promotion is sought

PROMOTION REVIEWS OF CAREER NTTF (2)

CV Personal statement: teaching, scholarship, research and/or

creative activity, service, contributions to institutional equity and inclusion (all as measured against criteria)

As applicable:Teaching portfolio Scholarship portfolio Service portfolioProfessional activities portfolio List of qualified external reviewers

MATERIALS PROVIDED BY CANDIDATE

Waiver of access to materials: individual may choose to waive, in writing and in advance, access to evaluation materials (doesn’t preclude redacted versions or summary)

Notice of meetings: individual must be given 3 days notice of meeting; can bring colleague or union rep as observer

WAIVER AND NOTICE OF MEETINGS

Statement of duties and responsibilities Conditions of appointment Criteria for promotion Candidate materials: CV; personal statement; portfolios as applicable;

waiver if applicable Supervisors’ letters of evaluation External reviews, if applicable Committee report; unit recommendation and vote Unit head’s review and recommendation Review and recommendation by vice president, dean, or

director (added after that level of review)

EVALUATION FILE SUBMITTED BY UNIT

File reviewed by provost or designee, with input from Academic Affairs and Office of VP for Research and Innovation (as appropriate)

Candidate notified in writing

FINAL DECISION MADE BY PROVOST

Assumption of new rank: beginning of next academic or fiscal year (or nearest next term)

Reapplication for promotion if unsuccessful: possible after 3 additional years at average of .4 FTE or more

Appeal of denial: as provided by CBA Article 21 Withdrawal of application: made in writing to provost

and dean anytime before provost’s decision

AFTER THE REVIEW

Collective Bargaining Agreement available on Academic Affairs web site:

http://academicaffairs.uoregon.edu/Barbara Altmann, Vice Provost, Academic Affairs

baltmann@uoregon.edu (6-2172)Jane Gordon, Senior Project Leader, Implementation

jgordon@uoregon.edu (6-7891)

RESOURCES

Promotion and Tenurefor Untenured FacultyPresented by Doug BlandySenior Vice Provost For Academic Affairs