10 May 2008

 

To:       Faculty Senate

 

RE:      Instructional Academic Staff Career Progression Committee (IAS CPC) Annual Report

 

Committee Members:     George Arimond, Ashley Burrowes, Elise Denlinger, David Howard (Chair), Tom Reinert, Melissa Wallace (Secretary)

 

 

This was the first year that the IAS CPC was in existence.  All committee charges were met on time, and the committee made progress on improving the IAS career progression process.  Summary of committee accomplishments includes:

 

·        Reviewed career progression files of 14 IAS.  After careful review, all candidates were recommended for career progression.

·        Created worksheets to assist committee members in the evaluation of candidate files.  These documents were based on those used by the Joint Promotion Committee but modified based on the criteria for IAS career promotion.  These documents are attached, but the committee identified ways to improve them.  Editing of the evaluation worksheets should be a goal for IAS CPC in the Fall 2008 semester.

·        Established committee procedures for the review and discussion of files.  Betsy Morgan, Faculty Intern to the Provost, met with the committee to provide guidance based on the procedures of JPC.

 

During the review and discussion of applicant files, the committee identified procedural problems that occurred prior to the transfer of files to the IAS CPC.  In addition, we identified several ways to improve the content and handling of applicant files.  Suggestions to improve the career progression process at the Provost/College, Departmental, and candidate level are addressed below.

 

Provost or College Level

 

1.      The formatting and organization of candidate files needs to be consistent between all colleges.  Colleges loaded files onto an IAS CPC D2L site, and there was tremendous variability between colleges and even within colleges.  Files varied in how many documents were loaded onto D2L, organization within documents, ability to link from one document to the next, etc.  This variability made it difficult to locate the appropriate information for review.  One format should be used for all candidate files.

2.      There should be consistency in the support letters from Deans.  Either all deans should use the simple statement that they “support progression of the candidate” (specified in the Guide to Instructional Academic Staff Career Progression), or all deans should write more detailed support letters for all candidates. 

3.      The Digital Measures Candidate Report needs to have a clear statement of current position title and which title is sought via career progression.  The indication of which position title is sought should be in the same place in all files, preferably at the start of the file.

4.      Instructional academic staff members on the committee could not access some files because they did not have the appropriate security level clearance.  At a minimum, IAS members of the IAS CPC need easy access to all files.  Preferably, all IAS should have the same security clearance as tenure track faculty on our computer system.

 

Departmental Level

 

1.      Departments should provide a clear statement of their expectations for IAS. These expectations and review criteria need to be included because the expectations regarding teaching, scholarship, and service for IAS vary by department.

2.      Departments and programs are strongly recommended to use a committee for the review of IAS career progression files.  The review of a candidates file by a departmental or program level committee and the reporting of the committee vote provides the IAS CPC with a clearer picture of the candidate’s achievements than a letter by a single chair or director alone.  Career progression files that lack input from a departmental or program level committee will likely put the IAS applicant at a disadvantage.

3.      If the candidate is not eligible and not reviewed for merit in the department, this fact needs to be specified in the department’s report.  If the candidate is reviewed for merit, departments should report scores and rankings as indicated in the guidelines.  Because of the high degree of variability in IAS opportunity for merit, the merit status or lack of opportunity needs to be communicated to the IAS CPC.

4.      Job descriptions should be included in IDPs.

 

Candidate Level:

 

1.      Candidates are encouraged to clearly state what the terminal degree is in their department, as it varies by discipline.

2.      Candidates are encouraged to provide more evidence than SEIs demonstrating the effectiveness of their teaching.  The Guide to Instructional Academic Staff Career Progression provides several specific examples, but it is worth pointing out a few that the committee specifically identified.

    1. Peer review of teaching, including classroom observations.
    2. Use of assessment tools like additional quantitative student surveys, pre- and post-tests, performance on standardized exams or standardized exam questions.
    3. Reflection and responses to assessment outcomes.

 

The members of the IAS CPC felt honored to serve on such an important committee. 

 

Respectfully Submitted,

 

 

 

David R. Howard, Ph.D.

Chair, IAS CPC