understanding the tenure and promotion process david wm. reed · understanding the expectations for...

Understanding the Tenure

and Promotion Process

David Wm. Reed

College of Agriculture and Life Sciences

Texas A&M AgriLife Conference

2019

One Stop Shopping

Web Portal for Promotion and Tenurehttp://aglifesciences.tamu.edu/faculty-staff/promotion-tenure

PowerPoint and Video will be posted

Faculty WorkshopsCollege, AgriLife Research and AgriLife Extension• New Faculty Orientation – General Overview procedure & process

• Understanding the Tenure and Promotion Process

Staff Conference, January 7, 10 AM, AGLS 115

• Administrative Dossier Preparation Workshop

March 27, 3-5 PM, AGLS 129

• Candidate Dossier Preparation Workshop

April 3, 3-5 PM, AGLS 129

• Administrative Check-Off List Workshop

August time and place tba

Dean of Faculties (DOF website for time and place)

• Demystifying the Tenure and Promotion Process, Feb 27

• Academic Professional Track Promotion Process, March 21

• Is this the Right Time or Not? Promotion to Full Professor, March 6

Climbing the Professorial Ranks

Climbing the Professorial Ranks

Escalating Expectations Over Time

•The peak keeps getting higher

•The climb keeps getting steeper

Climbing the Professorial RanksYou don’t get to the top by just doing our job!

• Have you established an “independent program”?

• What is your “impact” outside your job?

• How has your “scholarship” advanced your field?

Understanding Expectations

for

Promotion and/or Tenure

In what areas will you be evaluated?As per, TAMU, AgriLife Research and AgriLife Extension rules

Teaching Research

The Dossier is organized around these areas of expectation.

ServiceExtension

How do you know if your achievements

meet expectations?

Two Approaches to assess your achievements.

Peer ExpectationsWhat are the expectations of the

current administrators and faculty?

Metrics of Successful and Unsuccessful DossiersCompare your record to other faculty

recently promoted or not promoted.

How do you determine Peer Expectations?

Annual review

Head should indicate progress towards promotion

If they do not, ASK!

Mid-Term Review for Assistant Professors

Pay close attention to results, especially head & faculty committees

Mentors

Utilize assigned mentors & seek-out mentors

Mock Review

Prepare your CV in dossier format & seek faculty reviews

Especially important for promotion to Professor

Don’t hesitate to contact me: [email protected]

Understanding Promotion and/or Tenure

Four topics to be covered

• Metrics of Successful Dossiers

• Metrics of Unsuccessful Dossiers

• Comparison of College to AgriLife Research

to AgriLife Extension Dossiers

• Understanding Guidelines, Procedure and Process

Compare your record to Dossiers of other faculty

recently promoted

Analyzed and characterized the metrics of Dossiers

from 2009 through 2018

10 years of data

This is “Reliable Data”

This is “Good Bull”

Metric Expectations

Metrics and Characteristics of Dossiers FY09-18

Metric Expectations

We are going to look at characteristics of

Successful Dossiers

College Faculty

AgriLife Research Faculty

AgriLife Extension Faculty


Metric Expectations

College Faculty• Professorial rank

• Tenure Track or Tenured

Will not cover

• Professional Track facultyTo few have been processed to have reliable

data


College FacultyAssociate

Professor

+tenure

Professor

TEACHINGIncreased

Grad

Undergraduate courses/year 1.7 1.6

Graduate courses/year 1.0 1.2

Student Evaluations 4.51 4.53

Dept Average 4.46 4.41

% of Dept Average 102% 103%

Metric Expectations

Mix



Professor

+tenure

Professor

TEACHING






Metric Expectations

You don’t want to be < dept aver



Professor

+tenure

Professor

GRADUATE TRAINING ~2X

Chair or Co-Chair: Masters 4.6 9.5

Chair or Co-Chair: PhD 3.7 7.5

Committee: Masters 5.8 13.0

Committee: PhD 7.1 15.1

Metric Expectations

Balanced

Mix


Professor

+tenure

Professor

PUBLICATIONS

Refereed Journal Articles 25 49

Since Last Promotion 14 25

Senior Author 10 14

Graduate Student Authors 5 19

Abstracts 30 49

Non-Ref./Editor Review 2 5

Books/Chapters 2 4

Extension/Industry Pubs 1 2

Metric Expectations

Balanced mix



Professor

+tenure

Professor

PUBLICATIONS



Senior Author 10 14

Graduate Student Authors 5 19

Abstracts 30 49


Books/Chapters 2 4


Metric Expectations


~2X~2X

~4X



Professor

+tenure

Professor

Refereed Publications

Median 22 45

Mean 25 49

Metric Expectations

Median is more typical

Both the mean and median can be misleading

because the distribution curve is skewed

Metric Expectations


Mean (25) & Median (22)

The curve is skewed

Metric Expectations


The curve is skewed

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Gra

nt

Do

llars

YEAR

Refereed Publications by Year

To Associate Professor + Tenure to Professor

MedianProfessor

MedianAssociate Prof

How does it change over time?



Professor

+tenure

Professor

Type GrantGrants to My Program

Mean

External Competitive $810,877 $1,776,105

Internal Competitive $108,285 $202,353

Non-Competitive $105,996 $256,513

Total Grants $1,025,159 $2,211,601

Metric Expectations

Scary high numbers for

some fields and types research



Professor

+tenure

Professor

Total Grants Grants to My Program

Minimum $58,568 $91,789

Median $795,196 $2,060,297

Mean $1,025,159 $2,221,601

Maximum $3,797,212 $9,293,854

Metric Expectations

Median is more typical

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

3,500,000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Gra

nt

Do

llars

YEAR

Grants to My Program by Year

To Associate Professor + Tenure to Professor

MedianProf

MedianAssoc

How does it change over time?


Metric Expectations

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 4,000,000

Ref

eree

d P

ub

licat

ion

s

Total Grant Dollars to My Program

Grant Dollars Vs. Refereed Publications

To Associate Professor + tenure

Median line

Me

dia

n li

ne

.

....

.Indicates dossiers that were denied

promotion and tenure


Metric Expectations

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 4,000,000

Ref

eree

d P

ub

licat

ion

s




Median line

Me

dia

n li

ne

A very good quadrant in which to be


Metric Expectations

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

0 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000 3,500,000 4,000,000

Ref

eree

d P

ub

licat

ion

s




Median line

Me

dia

n li

ne

If your are here, then you need to market other strengths


Metric Expectations

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

0 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000 7,000,000 8,000,000 9,000,000 10,000,000

Ref

eree

d P

ub

licat

ion

s



To Professor

Median line

Me

dia

n li

ne

..Indicates dossiers that were denied promotion

.


Professor

+tenure

Professor

Significant Recognition

MUST HAVE

Indicators of

National

Recognition

Awards and Honors 1.8 3.0

National and International* 5.1 7.7

Metric Expectations


*Society Officer, Editor, Fellow, Grant

Reviewer, Invited Speaker, Fulbright, etc.

Understanding the Expectations for

Successful Promotion and/or Tenure

What are the “take-home” lessons?It is more than just metrics

• You must know what your department expects.

• You must have significant scholarship.

• You must have sufficient funding.

• You must demonstrate an independent program.

• You must show impact of your program.

• You must show significant national and

international recognition, especially for Professor.

• You must (College)/should (Agency) have significant

and productive graduate student training, which

contributes to all of the above.


Metric Expectations

Comparison of

Successful to Unsuccessful Dossiers

• College Faculty

• Tenure Track

• Promotion to Associate Professor + tenure

• Promotion to Professor


College Faculty

to Associate Prof

Associate Professor

and tenure

Promotion Decision

Yes (n=93) No (n=6)

TEACHING






Metric Expectations

< Grad


College Faculty

to Associate Prof

Associate Professor

and tenure

Promotion Decision

Yes (n=93) No (n=6)

GRADUATE TRAINING





Metric Expectations

< PhD


College Faculty

to Associate Prof

Associate Professor + tenure

Promotion Decision

Yes (n=93) No (n=6)

Publications

Refereed Journal Articles - Mean 25 20 <

Refereed Journal Articles - Median 22 18 <

Since Last Promotion 14 9 <

Senior Author 10 7 <

Graduate Stu. Authors 5 4

Abstracts 30 34



Metric Expectations

< # pubs


College Faculty

to Associate Prof

Associate Professor

and tenure

Promotion Decision

Yes (n=82) No (n=4)

Type Grant Grants to My Program

External Competitive $829,307 < $265,013

Internal Competitive $108,285 $104,683

Non-Competitive $105,996 < $3,720

Total $1,025,159 < $373,416

Metric Expectations

< grants


Metric Expectations

For faculty NOT Promoted to Associate

Professor + tenur

Trends that might be important• < Grad courses

• < Chair PhD

• < Refereed pubs

• < Competitive grants


College Faculty

to Professor

Professor

Promotion Decision

Yes (n=80) No (n=2)

TEACHING

Undergraduate courses/year 1.7 > 2.5

Graduate courses/year 1.0 < 0.2



% of Dept Average 101% < 91%

Metric Expectations

> UGrad & < Grad


College Faculty

to Professor

Professor

Promotion Decision

Yes (n=80) No (n=2)

GRADUATE TRAINING Similar





Metric Expectations


College Faculty

to Professor

Professor

Promotion Decision

Yes (n=80) No (n=2)

Publications Similar



Senior Author 14 12

Graduate Stu. Authors 19 10

Abstracts 49 58


Extension/Industry Pubs 2 > 19

Metric Expectations


College Faculty

to Professor

Professor

Promotion Decision

Yes (n=80) No (n=2)

AWARDS &

RECOGNITION

Awards and Honors 3.0 0

National & International

Recognition7.7 3.0

Metric Expectations

Significantly

fewer


Metric Expectations

For faculty NOT promoted to Professor

Trends that might be important• < teaching graduate courses

• < competitive grants

• < award & national and

international recognition


Metric Expectations

Comparison of DossiersCollege

AgriLife Research

AgriLife Extension

Associate ProfessorTAMU

College

n=93

AgriLife

Research

n=21

AgriLife

Extension

n=32

Refereed Journal Articles 25 27 < 16

Since Last Promotion 14 15 < 7

Senior Author 10 10 < 7

Graduate Stu. Authors 5 3 < 1

Abstracts 30 38 < 17

Non-Ref./Editor Review 2 > 13 3

Books/Chapters 2 2 1

Extension/Industry Pubs 3 9 > 41

Metric Expectations


Similar Approx. 1/2

ProfessorTAMU

College

n=80

AgriLife

Research

n=12

AgriLife

Extension

n=26

Refereed Journal Articles 49 45 < 20

Since Last Promotion 25 24 < 9

Senior Author 14 13 < 7

Graduate Stu. Authors 19 13 < 3

Abstracts 49 50 < 26

Non-Ref./Editor Review 5 13 5

Books/Chapters 4 4 < 2

Extension/Industry Pubs < 5 < 15 69

Metric Expectations


Similar Approx. 1/2

Associate ProfessorTAMU

College

n=93

AgriLife

Research

n=21

AgriLife

Extension

n=32

Type Grants Grants To My Program

External Competitive $810,877 $894,841 < $423,262

Internal Competitive $108,285 $186,822 < $14,752

Non-Competitive $105,996 > $468,894 $220,476

Total Grants $1,025,159 $1,550,557 < $658,490

Metric Expectations


Similar Approx. 1/2

ProfessorTAMU

College

n=80

AgriLife

Research

n=12

AgriLife

Extension

n=26

Type Grants Grants To My Program

External Competitive $1,776,105 $1,523,248 $1,141,913

Internal Competitive $202,353 $238,361 < $36,928

Non-Competitive $256,513 > $767,475 $368,099

Total Grants $2,211,601 $2,529,084 < $1,436,443

Metric Expectations


Similar Approx. 1/2


AgriLife Faculty

No for Promotion

Extension

To Associate

(n=1)

Research

To Associate

(n=1)

Research

To Professor

(n=3)

Graduate Student Chair 1 1 4.7

Refereed Journal Articles 25 60 38

Grants to My Program $83,616 $227,648 $338,039

Awards and Honors 0 0 2

Metric Expectations

< grants and recognition

Understanding the

Procedures and Process

for Promotion and/or Tenure

The Review Process

Who is reviewed by the “promotion and

tenure” process?

• TAMU, AgriLife Research and Extension ad

loc faculty

• Permanent employees

• Faculty with “Professor” in job title

o With or without a modifier, ex. Extension

Specialist, Research, Instructional, etc.

• Lecturer to Senior Lecturer

The Review Process - Who Reviews Whom

Departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee

Department Head & Resident Director (for AgriLife Research only)

College and Texas A&M AgriLife Peer Review Committee

Dean

Provost

President Chancellor (+BOR for tenure)

Director

Vice-Chancellor

College AgriLife

VOTES - % YES* Associate Professor

Department P&T

Committee94% 88%

Head 98% 99%

College & Texas A&M

AgriLife Peer Review

Committee

96% 86%

Dean or Director 94% 98%

Which level is the toughest test to pass?

Toughest

*Average from Dossiers FY09-18, College

Toughest

Toughest – Review by faculty peers

Is this your “time”?

The Tenure and Promotion

Clocks

Texas A&M University

Texas A&M AgriLife Research

Texas A&M AgriLife Extension

TAMU Tenure ClockAssistant to Associate

Probation

Period

Mid-Term

Review

Mandatory

Review

Evaluated

Summer Fall

Last

Year

7 years 2021 2023 5th year 2025

6 years 2020 2022 4th year 2024

5 years 2019 2021 3rd year 2023

4 years 2018 now 2020 2nd year 2022

3 years na 2019 Now! 2021

Mid-Term Review Year = Calendar Year hired +3 = 2018 + 3 = 2021

Mandatory Year = Calendar Year hired + Probationary Period – 2 =

2018 + 7 – 2 = 2023

For Fall 2018 Hire

Mid-Term Review

• TAMU and AgriLife Research

• “Required” for 7-year probationary period

• “Encouraged” for 4-6 year probationary period

• Review Dept Committee, Head, Dean/Director

• AgriLife Extension

• “Not required” by Agency

• Maybe required by Department.

• Review does not go beyond the Department

Decision

•The mid-term review is a mentoring process. There is

no decision made.

•But, prior to the mandatory year, there can be “non-

reappointment”.

Promotion and Tenure ReviewAssistant to Associate with tenure

Tenure TrackDecision

Prior to Mandatory Year:

Yes = promotion and tenure granted

No = decision is not terminal – no risk, except to ego

Mandatory Year:

Yes = promotion and tenure granted

No = notified by end of 6th year, that the 7th year will be the last

year.

FormulaWithin 5 years of appointment and prior to the 6th year,

e.g. Review in 5th year

(same as year of hire +7 -2)

Decision

• Recommend promotion

• Recommend re-evaluation the following year.

• Recommend non-reappointment, with 1 year to relocate.

Texas A&M AgriLife Research Promotion ClockAssistant to Associate Professor

Assistant to Associate Research Professorhttp://agrilifeas.tamu.edu/documents/129999a003.pdf

Timeline

“Following appointment to the initial professorial rank,

an Extension faculty member will annually be eligible

for consideration at the next higher rank based on

recommendation of the designated unit head.”

In Practice

The timeline typically follows the TAMU and AgriLife

Research timelines.

Decision

Guidelines are silent

The decision will be detailed in Director’s letter

Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Promotion ClockAssistant to Associate Professor

http://extensionemployees.tamu.edu/files/2010/06/faculty-promotion-extension-professorial-career-ladder_Guidelines.pdf

TAMU

Promotion to Professor

There is no “Clock”

•Individual faculty member decides

What is the “Norm”?

Historically, total years in rank

•12.1 College

Is the decision terminal?

No

FormulaAfter 6 years in rank and prior to the 7th year,

~12 years total

Historically, what is the “Norm”?

• 11.5 total years in rank

Decision

• Recommend promotion

• Recommend evaluation after 2 years (e.g. after year 8)

o Recommend promotion

o Remain in rank (it is possible for reconsideration later)

o Non-reappointment; one year to relocate

Texas A&M AgriLife Research

Promotion to Professor

“Following appointment to the initial professorial rank,

an Extension faculty member will annually be eligible

for consideration at the next higher rank based on

recommendation of the designated unit head.”

In Practice

The timeline typically follows the TAMU and AgriLife

Research timelines.

Historically, what is the “Norm”?

• 13.6 total years in rank

Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Promotion ClockAssociate Professor to Professor

Are there exceptions to normal requirements

in teaching, research and service?(http://rules-saps.tamu.edu/PDFs/12.01.99.M2.pdf, 4.5.4)

TAMU: One can request evaluation based on a sole

criteria:

•Gifted and productive master teacher

•Exceptionally outstanding researcher

•Unselfish, distinctive and outstanding service

Not commonly requested.

One has to be truly “gifted” and “exceptional”.

Yes, usually one year

• TAMU: Requires approval of Head, Dean and

Dean of Faculties

• AgriLife Research: Special request to Head and Director

• AgriLife Extension: NA because there is no clock

Reasons:

• Certain leaves w/o pay or service <50%

• Serious illness or injury

• Primary care of infant/child, close relative disable

elderly or seriously ill.

• Serious disruption beyond faculty members control

Can you request an extension to

Probationary Period?

Can you request “early” evaluation for

promotion?

Yes

Is the decision terminal? No

Is it wise?

• If the reward outweighs the risks?

• If you can handle the risk?!!!!

• Ask yourself : Why do I want to go up early?

Make sure

• The candidate, independently and originally, has achieved the

standards and expectations of promotion, and

•The candidate has a track record that demonstrates the ability

to sustain that level of performance.

Thinking of Going up Early

“Best Management Practice”

Request a preliminary evaluation.1. By a mentor or senior faculty that knows the system.

2. By the Departmental P&T Committee Chair

3. By Head and/or Station Director

Progress towards next promotion should be discussed at

every Annual Review

4. Visit with the Associate Dean for Faculty Development

Mentoring Beyond the Department

understanding the tenure and promotion process david wm. reed · understanding the expectations for...

Documents