This document addresses proposed guidelines for the EPSY department for each of the key areas considered in decisions around promotion, tenure, and reappointment, namely scholarship, teaching, and service. The scholarship area is divided into two parts: scholarship and grants. The teaching area is also divided into two parts: teaching and advising. The document reflects an integration of previous PTR guideline documents, current documents from the university and the Neag School of Education regarding PTR, and recent discussions and decisions among the faculty regarding expectations (e.g., decisions informing the merit procedures, evidence from new student evaluation system).
In each of the areas, the document provides the following, with attention to promotion both to associate and to full professor:
- Description of an overall concept of satisfactory performance
- Proposed guidelines detailing sources of evidence for satisfactory performance to provide guidance to the candidate – needs to be explained in writing
- List of sources of supplementary evidence, representing details that may inform PTR recommendations beyond the standard guidelines.
These guidelines are intended to provide support for faculty as they conduct their work and prepare for seeking annual reappointment and/or promotion. They also will guide the PTR committee in its review of faculty members’ documents for promotion and for annual reappointments. The guidelines are not intended to be a recipe, but rather an illustration of the typical pathway to successful promotion. However, the PTR committees within and beyond the department will examine each overall portfolio for evidence of satisfactory and exemplary demonstrations of scholarship, teaching, and service, with recognition that some faculty members’ pathways may vary somewhat from this typical path.
| Scholarship | |
| Overall concept of satisfactory performance is linked to the faculty member’s program of research and consistent, productive trajectory, with development of a national reputation in the field. | |
| Associate: Evidence of a developing program of research and a consistent, productive trajectory | Full: Evidence of a program of research and a consistent, productive trajectory contributing to national reputation in the field |
| Guidelines for candidates seeking tenure/ promotion to associate:
o Consistent, annual productivity with peer-reviewed journal articles § Progress should translate to at least 12 total across the review period § In press/accepted for publication counts in both the annual and promotion/tenure review o At least 5 peer-reviewed presentations at national/international conferences o Some evidence across the span prior to promotion of these things: § First author publications § Publications in leading journals in general and/or within specific field § Research publications o External letters document emerging national reputation in the field o Expectations at point of tenure review reflect attention to consistency of trajectory from the time of appointment. |
Guidelines for candidates seeking promotion to full:
o Consistent productivity with peer-reviewed journal articles over the course of at least the most recent 5 years prior to seeking promotion § In press/accepted for publication counts in promotion review. o Evidence of invited, keynote, and peer-reviewed publications at national/international conferences o Some evidence across the assistant/associate span prior to promotion of these things: § At least 8 first author publications § Evidence of invited chapters in edited books and/or of authored books § Research publications o External letters document national reputation o Evidence of increased research productivity and impact over the time spent in associate rank |
| Supplementary Evidence
– Awards for scholarship – Scholarly reputation – Evidence of collaboration with colleagues – Impact of scholarship – Citations of work/related evidence – Publications prior to employment at UConn – Publishing with students, especially if student is first author – Book chapters/books – Highly recognized/influential articles or other publications – Publications in highly ranked/highly read but non peer-reviewed journals – Technical reports – Additional national presentations – Local conferences Notes – Consider including evidence of impact of scholarship in PTR materials. – Recommendation to the department head and program coordinators to keep an updated list of top journals within the fields to share with PTR committee. |
|
| Grants | |
| Overall concept of satisfactory performance is linked to the faculty member’s development of a substantial, fundable program of research with evidence of grant-seeking. | |
| Associate: Evidence of work toward substantial funding and development of a program of grant-seeking in support of scholarship and writing | Full: Evidence of a substantial, fundable program of research that supports scholarship, writing, and national reputation
|
| Guidelines for candidates seeking tenure/ promotion to associate:
o Led or played major role in at least 1 grant proposal by the point of seeking tenure § Not just listed as “consultant” § Evidence of positive reviews OR o Active, supported grant/contract work over this span
|
Guidelines for candidates seeking promotion to full:
o Some earned external research funding as PI or co-PI, reflecting and contributing to national reputation
|
| Supplementary Evidence | |
| – Internal grants received
– Large amounts in grants awarded – Evidence of state and/or federal grant-seeking – Specific role played in various grant proposals and funded projects – Evidence of collaboration with colleagues both at the University of Connecticut and at comparable institutions
Notes: – Recommendation to the research office: Prepare guidelines around the types and amounts of grants that may be considered more and less favorable in reviews
|
|
| Teaching |
| Overall concept of satisfactory performance is linked to the faculty member’s quality teaching as demonstrated through varied sources, and evidence of attention to continually improving or strengthening teaching. |
| Guidelines for candidates seeking promotion to associate and full:
o Fulfilling current departmental/School expectations for teaching load o Evidence of positive student ratings for teaching § Average per year: at least 75% of student ratings at a score of 3 or higher on key items § Evidence over the span of some courses with at least 75% of student ratings at a score of 4 or higher on key items |
| Supplementary Evidence |
| – Awards for teaching
– Class size – Undergraduate versus graduate courses – Ratings as compared to department/school/university averages – Evidence of high percentages of student response to evaluations – Observations of teaching with documentation – Evidence of teaching innovations |
Advising
| Overall concept of satisfactory performance is linked to the faculty member’s work as major/associate advisor at levels commensurate with program expectations.[1] | |
| Associate: Evidence of serving as major/associate advisor at levels commensurate with program expectations | Full: Evidence of serving as major/associate advisor at levels commensurate with program expectations
|
| Guidelines for candidates seeking tenure/ promotion to associate:
o Service as major advisor to at least 1 PhD student over the span o Service as associate advisor on at least 3 dissertation committees over the span* o Evidence of undergraduate/graduate advising at levels commensurate with program expectations o Evidence of advisee progress toward completion on expected program timeline |
Guidelines for candidates seeking promotion to full:
o Evidence of completion of a minimum of 4 PhD students o Service as associate advisor on multiple dissertation committees o Evidence of undergraduate/graduate advising at levels commensurate with program expectations o Evidence of advisee progress toward completion on expected program timeline |
| Supplementary Evidence | |
| – Publishing with students
– Evidence from student statements about advising quality – Awards for advising – Evidence of supporting student growth through external activities (e.g., supporting students for conference participation, co-authoring papers with students) – Student employment after graduation – Advising load – Honors advising |
|
| *Revisit department guideline for readers to transfer to associate advisor after the proposal defense. | |
| Service | |
| Overall concept of satisfactory performance is linked to the faculty member’s consistent service and/or leadership within varied contexts within and beyond the university. | |
| Associate: Evidence of consistent service within varied contexts within and beyond the university | Full: Evidence of consistent service and leadership within varied contexts within and beyond the university, reflecting national reputation |
| Guidelines for candidates seeking tenure/ promotion to associate:
o Evidence of service on departmental committee/task force/working group in most years o Evidence of fulfilling expectations for departmental/school participation in faculty meetings and related activities annually o Evidence of some School/University service at the point of seeking promotion o Evidence of ad hoc reviews for journals o Evidence of service in one or more professional organizations (must be beyond just membership) o Evidence of service to the non-university community
|
Guidelines for candidates seeking promotion to full:
o Evidence of service on departmental committee/task force/working group in most years § Evidence of leadership in departmental committees o Evidence of fulfilling expectations for departmental/school participation in faculty meetings and related activities annually o Evidence of some School/University service at the point of seeking promotion o Evidence of service in one or more professional organizations (must be beyond just membership), reflecting national reputation o Evidence of service to the non-university community in the span, reflecting national reputation o Service on an editorial board for a peer-reviewed journal |
| Supplementary Evidence | |
| – Awards for service
– Level of commitment required for specific service activities – Scope and reach of service work – Service on grant review panel – Election/appointment – Reviews for conferences – Service on a journal editorial board (at first level only; listed as expectation at point of promotion to full professor) |
|
[1] “Program” refers to the seven specific concentration areas within EPSY.
Approved by EPSY Department faculty vote on November 05, 2015