Posted on March 30, 2021 by Sarah Gillig

March 30th 2021

The goal with this iteration: work in any points from our discussion with the department chairs as well as the follow-up with the Provost and Associate Provost (on February 22, 2021). This will be shared with FEC, department chairs, Provost, and Associate Provost before being shared with the faculty at large.

Background

The Faculty Personnel Committee recognizes that the coronavirus pandemic is impacting how faculty allocate their time and energy amongst their teaching, scholarship, and service responsibilities. FPC also recognizes that, while restrictions on in-person gatherings and travel may soon be lifted, the impacts of pandemic-related disruptions on an individual’s work may persist for some time, and that the extent of these impacts will depend on the individual’s professional pursuits and personal situation.

To gain broader perspective on how candidate files for retention, tenure, and promotion might be reviewed in the wake of the pandemic, FPC has been consulting documents from academic associations that discuss review and reappointment procedures during the pandemic. We’ve also been gathering input and feedback from department chairs, the Provost, Associate Provost, and the Faculty Executive Committee on appropriate pandemic-related adjustments to the review process at K. This memo serves as an update to the February 3, 2021 memo from the Faculty Personnel Committee on alterations to the review process as a result of the pandemic.

Impacts of COVID on FPC Procedures

The Faculty Personnel Committee will take account of the pandemic when evaluating a candidate’s record of teaching/advising, scholarship, and service. FPC will continue to review candidate files using these traditional three areas of evaluation outlined in the FPC Procedures document while being mindful of the pandemic-related disruptions caused by shifts in teaching modality, restricted access to spaces and materials needed for scholarly and creative pursuits, and heightened calls to service. When composing the personal statement, FPC realizes that candidates may find more crossover between teaching and scholarship or service than under normal circumstances, or that their achievements in the three areas of evaluation are distributed differently than in pre-pandemic times. This is understandable. FPC will look at each case in light of the general impacts being felt across the entire faculty, and at the individual level, dependent on one’s professional pursuits and personal situation.

Statements from candidates, department chairs and advocates

A candidate’s personal statement, together with letters from the department chair and advocate, have always served the important role of providing context for a candidate’s review. In light of the disruptions and challenges posed by the pandemic, these letters become even more important in guiding FPC’s reading of a file. We recommend that candidates adopt a strengths-based approach in the personal statement to highlight their innovations and accomplishments rather than dwell on what didn’t happen because of the pandemic. If the candidate wishes, they may attach a one-page-long memo to the personal statement explaining the pandemic’s impacts on the three areas of review, rather than including this information in the body of the statement. Letters from department chairs and advocates should place the candidate’s work in context at the department/disciplinary and college level, while also addressing any personal circumstances of the candidate that may be relevant to the case.

Instructions sent to external reviewers by the Provost will be modified to reflect the need to consider pandemic-related disruptions on teaching and scholarship as well.

Concrete Adjustments

Research/Scholarship

FPC has never had specific requirements for scholarship, especially not for the number or type of works or the types of external validation, in recognition of the fact that these vary greatly from discipline to discipline and, within disciplines, by subfield and methods. In reading a file, FPC seeks to understand each candidate’s trajectory of scholarship, the kinds of external validation sought, and an account of the candidate’s progress and future plans. We rely on the department chair’s letter (and if applicable, the advocate’s) to help contextualize the candidate’s personal statement and convey this information.

In light of the pandemic’s impact, FPC will adjust expectations for scholarship and external validation to take account of challenges and disruptions to a candidate’s opportunities for scholarship and to receive external validation. Candidates should make clear what they have accomplished during the review period and any new directions their scholarly work has taken in response to the pandemic. Candidates may explain any challenges and disruptions experienced as a result of the pandemic—and their responses to them—in the memo attached to the personal statement, but FPC intends to pay special attention to the chair’s (and if applicable, the advocate’s) letter to explain the framework and context within which we should evaluate the candidate’s scholarly trajectory.

In discussions between FPC and other college bodies (department chairs, FEC, TLC, and the Provost), an understanding was reached that some aspects of faculty work traditionally associated with teaching could be considered forms of scholarship because of the research effort needed to transition to effective online teaching or provide expertise in a colleague’s class. Instances with some level of external validation (e.g. dissemination via websites like the TLC Teaching Commons site or external association sites; invited guest lectures to classes or groups) provide stronger evidence of scholarly engagement that does work that remains solely with the candidate. FPC recommends that candidates review the Boyer Model document that describes forms of scholarship for guidance on how best to frame their teaching-related work into a scholarship context. (For more on the Boyer Model, please see page 5-9 of the Faculty Handbook.)

Teaching

While the pandemic-imposed shift to online teaching has presented an array of significant challenges and required major change and innovation, FPC believes it important to continue using student evaluations as one measure by which teaching effectiveness is assessed. Course evaluations from Spring 2020, when faculty had to make the rapid transition to online instruction are the exception; these evaluations will not be reviewed. As with scholarship, FPC has never had specific criteria for judging candidates based on course evaluations, and always has taken into account the courses taught, class size and demographics, and specific pedagogies employed. This continues to be the case, and any evaluations from the pandemic period will be read in the context of pandemic-related changes and challenges. FPC understands that online teaching is not mastered in a single term. In recognition of the effort and learning required to take our classes online, candidates may designate up to two course evaluations during the pandemic period, outside of Spring 2020, to exclude from their file if they wish (from the 2020-2021 academic year).

In addition to student course evaluations, FPC also uses additional materials when reviewing a candidate’s teaching record. The candidate’s narrative in their personal statement is integral to understanding their approaches to teaching, and FPC expects the candidate to reflect on innovations, successes, and challenges—and their responses to these challenges—in their statement. Course syllabi and letters from the chair, advocate, other colleagues who have observed the candidate’s teaching, and alumni are also important. FPC will look to the chair and advocate letters for additional insights into the candidate’s accomplishments and course-related challenges. Associate Provost MacLean (in collaboration with some department chairs) prepared a document outlining alternative ways in which online teaching might be assessed by department chairs and we urge chairs to consult this document (available on the Department Chairs Teams site).

Service

Faculty responsibilities to college service did not stop when the pandemic began. In some cases, the pandemic may have added to those responsibilities, thereby impacting time allocation to other responsibilities such as teaching and scholarship. If a candidate’s service record has been impacted by the pandemic, in terms of what they took on, and how they met service responsibilities, this should be addressed in the candidate’s statement and, if appropriate, in the letters from the department chair and advocate.

Timing of Tenure Review

In response to the pandemic disruptions, current College policy allows a candidate to delay the tenure review for a year if they choose. To determine how best to proceed, FPC urges candidates to meet with their department/program chairs and the Provost to review priorities and expectations outlined in any prior review letters along, with progress made toward their stated goals while also considering FPC’s adjustments to the review process outlined in this memo. In light of these adjustments, FPC no longer recommends that candidates seek additional time beyond the one-year tenure clock extension before coming up for tenure.