(r9) TenureAndPromotion < Faculty

Tags: view all tags
---+ Tenure and Promotion Information

Due to concerns about ensuring accuracy of information about this highly sensitive issue, only information that's gathered from official UBC sources (e.g., the Faculty Association, or Faculty Relations), or approved by the head should be posted here.  Some of this external information has been cached in the Faculty Affairs Committee web space to ensure that it will not inadvertantly be lost, and also that it can be read by people not using Windows.  If you know of other good sources of information, please add them.

---++ Promotion & Tenure (P&T) Timeline for 2012:

June:
   * mini-committee (MC) composition finalized
June, July, August:  
   * draft materials to MC
   * feedback from MC
   * candidate suggests 7 letter writer names to head@cs and ah-fac@cs
   * MC proposes letter writers, independent of candidate's list 

Aug 22
   
   * MC produces merged list of names (and backups) to propose to the standing ctte when it meets (Aug 22)
   * revised materials from candidate, ready for standing ctte (Aug 22)

Aug 23,24  
   * Materials copied for distribution (or will move online?)

Aug 27 - Sept 10   
   * Standing committee meetings:  referee selection + feedback on materials

Sept 15
   * final materials with corrections due;  we can encourage earlier submission, but not require it

---++ Mini Committees

The candidate provides the head with 2--4 names of faculty they wish to see on their mini-committee, as well as any names they would prefer to avoid.   These will be used by the head in selecting the mini committee, with the help of the associate head for faculty affairs. The provided names are guidelines rather than hard constraints because faculty leaves-of-absence, multiple promotion cases,
and other constraints may also exist. 

All mini-committees should strive to help each candidate prepare the best possible case. In that
way, no one candidate is disadvantaged.

   1. Provide guidance and feedback to the candidate on their materials:
      * CV
      * Teaching statement<br> See also [[ProfessorOfTeaching][Professor of Teaching]] guidelines.
      * Research statement (except for instructor track)
      * Selected papers (selected teaching materials for instructor track)
   1. Develop a proposal for the external letter writers for discussion and approval by the standing committee.<br>See the following for the detailed requirements: [[%ATTACHURL%/MiniCommitteeDuties.pdf][MiniCommitteeDuties.pdf]]
   1. Digest and summarize the external letters, the teaching committee report and the candidates’ materials for the standing committee.

---++ Faculty of Science: updated documents on peer review of teaching (Aug 2012)

   * [[%ATTACHURL%/FoS-summative-assessment-guidlines-July-2012.pdf][Guidelines for Peer Review of Teaching and Summative Assesment]]
   * [[%ATTACHURL%/FoSPRTGuidelines-July2012.pdf][Summative Review for Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure:  Guidelines]]
   * [[%ATTACHURL%/FoSPRTTimeline.pdf][Summative Review for Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure:  Timeline]]

---++ CV preparation update (Feb 27 2012)

Susan Boyd, Chair of the Senior Appointments Committee (SAC), has asked that the following information be passed on to Deans and Department Heads. Please note for future promotion/tenure cases.

   1. According to the CV preparation guidelines in the SAC Guide, candidates are to keep their narrative comments regarding their "Special Interests and Accomplishments" in the areas of "Teaching" and "Scholarly and Professional Activities" to a maximum of 150 words. However, in several recent cases, candidates are including in their CV's several pages of narrative on their special accomplishments in teaching, research and scholarly and professional activities. Please caution candidates to restrict their narrative. In addition, copies of course outlines are not required.
   1. The SAC committee has requested the below in regards to what they require for a tenure case for Senior Instructors:<br><br>‘With both Senior Instructor files that SAC voted on last meeting, the “teaching dossier” was too long. It included 100-200 pages of more or less raw information on what is taught, detailed student comments, etc. Much of this would presumably be valuable for the departmental review and for the referees, but SAC does not require all the raw data. [The analogy is that for files in the scholarship stream, SAC does not see publications or syllabi, and instead only relies on the referee letters as well as the Head and Dean letters to review the merits of the contributions].<br><br>Instead, SAC prefers to see summaries provided of student evaluations, with sufficient detail to compare to departmental norms etc. SAC *does* want to see the peer reviews of teaching, however. And if the candidate provides a narrative of their teaching contributions and contributions to educational leadership, that too would be useful.’ 

---++ UBC documents

   * [[http://www.hr.ubc.ca/faculty-relations/tenure-promotion-reappointment-confirmation/tenure-promotion-reappointment-for-faculty-members/][Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment for Faculty Members]] web page, with a number of other useful links

---++ Joint Appointment information
   * [[http://www.hr.ubc.ca/faculty_relations/tenure/multipleappointments.html][Faculty Relations best practices]]
Attachments
Topic attachments
I	Attachment	History	Action	Size	Date	Who	Comment
pdf	FoS-summative-assessment-guidlines-July-2012.pdf	r1	manage	24.0 K	2012-08-22 - 18:43	MichielVanDePanne
pdf	FoSPRTGuidelines-July2012.pdf	r1	manage	111.9 K	2012-08-22 - 18:43	MichielVanDePanne
pdf	FoSPRTTimeline.pdf	r1	manage	18.3 K	2012-08-22 - 18:44	MichielVanDePanne
pdf	MiniCommitteeDuties.pdf	r1	manage	22.0 K	2012-06-17 - 00:26	MichielVanDePanne	Mini Committee Duties
tex	cs-cv.tex	r2 r1	manage	9.6 K	2008-08-27 - 05:34	KevinLeytonBrown	LaTeX CV style for UBC
Topic revision: r9 - 2012-08-22 - MichielVanDePanne