APPENDIX 6: Amendments to Department Bylaws Relating to In-Residence Faculty

Last update:  10-10-2023
This document is available as a PDF by clicking here.

Department of Geography, University of Connecticut

APPENDIX 6:  Amendments to Department Bylaws Relating to In-Residence Faculty

Passed unanimously, September 29, 2023.

 

Reappointment and Promotion Reviews

The purpose of this section is to outline the process and criteria for reappointment and promotion of in-residence faculty who hold an appointment in the Geography Department.

 

A.  Reappointment:

Reappointment is determined by the Head. Following the completion of the probationary year, in-Residence faculty members shall be eligible for one-year appointments up to a maximum of five (5) such one-year appointments, after which in-residence faculty members will receive multi-year contracts (between 3 and 5 years).  Faculty members will complete the Annual Merit, Reappointment and Promotion form as well write a narrative detailing their achievements during the academic year.  The Head retains the discretion to consider any other significant accomplishments.

 

B. Promotion

1.  Timeline:

As per Article 13 the AAUP contract, in-Residence faculty serve a one-year probationary period, and if eligible to continue, will be granted one-year appointments up to a maximum of five one-year appointments. Review of the one-year appointments shall be carried out by the Department Head.  At the end of a faculty member’s third year, the Head will meet with the faculty member to review the faculty member’s record and ensure they are on track to receive a favorable recommendation for a multi-year contract.  The faculty member will also meet with the PTR committee for feedback on their progress and recommendations for their path to promotion.  In-residence faculty can elect to consult with the PTR committee on their progress on a yearly basis if that seems appropriate.  By the start of the sixth year, eligible faculty should complete the Promotion and Reappointment form (found at the Provost’s website), and upon recommendation of the Head and approval by the dean, be reappointed and receive a multi-year contract of between three and five years in duration.  Eligible faculty may apply for promotion at the same time.

2.  Promotion Application:

In consultation with the Head, an in-Residence faculty member can submit an application for consideration for promotion (i.e., Assistant Professor in-Residence to Associate Professor in-Residence or Associate Professor in-Residence to Full Professor in-Residence).  Candidates for promotion from Assistant Professor in-Residence to Associate Professor in-Residence should discuss the promotion with the Head before the end of the Spring semester of their fifth year.

The Geography program follows the Promotion and Reappointment (PR) procedures adopted by the faculties of the University of Connecticut.  These procedures are available on the Provost’s website.  All eligible faculty seeking consideration for a promotion should complete the downloadable PR Application Form.  Candidates for promotion are responsible for completing the Cover Page and all sections related to their professional responsibilities.  It is the candidates’ responsibility to ensure the accuracy and completeness of these sections.  After completing the relevant sections, candidates should submit the electronic form and any appropriately labeled supplemental materials to a cloud-based storage system and provide access to the Head and members of the Promotion Advisory Committee.  The application is generally due before the start of the fall semester of their sixth year, but candidates should check exact dates on the CLAS calendar, posted annually on the Provost’s website.

The completed PR form and the complete promotion dossier will be reviewed by the department’s PTR committee.  At the end of its deliberations, the Committee will complete Section Eight, Part A of the application for promotion, making known its recommendation regarding promotion, including the vote of the members.  The Committee will share their evaluation with the candidate and allow the candidate to respond.  Any Committee member who has a dissenting opinion may write a section in the Committee evaluation describing the dissension.  The Committee’s evaluation should be submitted to the Head by the end of September (or the date set by the CLAS calendar).  The Head will complete Section Eight, Part C of the application.

Candidates will have access to their dossiers at all times including the reference letters (per AAUP contract, excluding those that have been redacted) and can add items as necessary.  Candidates may elect to include a formal letter of response to be included in the application packet.  The Head will submit the completed application and all relevant supporting material, including any additional information from the candidate, to the CLAS Dean by the end of September (or the date set by the CLAS calendar).

The Head and members of the Committee will state whether they have a conflict of interest (e.g., romantic/marital/familial relationship, ex-partner, financial grievance, University grievance, legal or personal adversarial relationship) in a faculty member’s case before review begins.  If the Head discloses a conflict, another tenured faculty member will be selected to write the letter for the candidate in place of the Head.  Conflicts disclosed by Committee members will be resolved by designating an alternate faculty member to the committee for that faculty member’s case.

 

C.  Criteria for Evaluation (in order of importance)

    a.  Teaching:

    The primary responsibility of in-Residence faculty members is to: teach assigned courses; advise students; and, to mentor students via internships and independent student research.  Candidates for promotion should demonstrate a commitment to teaching through more than just strong student evaluation of teaching scores.  It is important to consider multiple measures and multiple evidence of teaching effectiveness, for two reasons.  First, the faculty deserve to be recognized for the effort they invest in their teaching.  Second, feedback can help all faculty improve their approaches to teaching and mentoring students.  It is also the case that useful evaluations of teaching and improvement must, almost of necessity, extend beyond a single course or a single semester’s teaching.A more comprehensive evaluation of teaching attempts to sample and analyze a variety of evidence concerning teaching activities.  There are various methods that may be useful in documenting teaching ability and accomplishments, including (but not limited to):

        • Teaching materials review
        • Course formats and design
        • Teaching awards or grants
        • Curricular development
        • Assessment of a teaching portfolio
        • Scholarship of teaching and learning
        • Participation in workshops, symposia, panels, classes or meetings to improve teaching practices
        • Classroom interviews
        • Student focus groups
        • Peer review of teaching

    It is unnecessary to collect material in all of these categories.  This list is a menu of possibilities, rather than as a checklist of data required for reappointment or promotion.  At the same time, it is important to collect some type of evidence of teaching performance and effectiveness regularly to have ample documentation as needed for promotion and reappointment reviews.

    Additional information about the above list can be found (more information and examples can be found in Appendix B).

    Other techniques can be found in the CETL website: https://cetl.uconn.edu/resources/documenting-your-teaching/evidence-of-teaching-excellence/.

    b.  Service:

    The Geography Department only runs effectively when the faculty help the program reach its goals.  This labor can be difficult to define and quantify and this section is an attempt to do that.  In addition to programmatic, university or disciplinary service, an important part of the faculty’s job is to fulfill the mission of the Geography Department to engage students in the greater community.  Non-tenure track faculty requesting promotion may demonstrate a commitment to service learning and/or engaged scholarship, if applicable.  This may be demonstrated through student projects, testimonials from community members, community recognition and/or awards, as well as other forms of evidence.  Service to the program through student advising, recruiting, outreach, and development also offer suitable evidence of commitment to the program.

    c.  Scholarship:

    In-Residence faculty members may be engaged in some type of scholarship, whether that scholarship is within traditional disciplinary venues or focused instead on issues of pedagogy or issues that will strengthen the program in other ways.  Candidates for promotion may demonstrate their scholarly engagement through publications in books, peer-reviewed journals, or presentations at professional meetings or similar venues.  External research grants, journal editorial work, fellowships, museum exhibits, and other forms of professional recognition also provide evidence of scholarship.

     

    D.  Issues relating to external referees for tenure and promotion

    Candidates preparing for promotion will also need to prepare additional materials in the spring or early summer before they submit their PTR dossier to the Department.  This is because external reviewers are typically invited in late spring so that they can supply their letters in August.

    To guide in the selection of external referees, candidates are asked to suggest the names of five or more potential reviewers.  Candidates also have the option of listing people they would exclude as reviewers.

    Candidates should also be invited to prepare statements for the external reviewers detailing their research, teaching and service accomplishments.  This statement may be very similar to the responses included in the PTR form, but the PTR form is an internal UConn document and is not sent to external reviewers.  The purpose of the statement is to place the candidate’s accomplishments in the context of their overall record of research, teaching and service and to situate their work within broader disciplinary trends.

    Candidates should select samples of their teaching, research, and service contributions and accomplishments that can be sent to external reviewers in their dossiers.

    The dossiers sent to external reviewers should include the candidate’s:  1) CV; 2) statements on research, teaching and service accomplishments; and 3) samples of work.

     

    E.  The PTR committee and voting procedures

    As noted above under item II.C.6 of the Bylaws, The Promotion, Tenure and Reappointment (PTR) Committee varies in size.  It includes all members of the faculty who have achieved the rank or tenure status (or higher) for which a candidate is being considered.  In voting, tenure-track faculty can vote on PTR decisions to their rank or below for both tenure-track and CIRE faculty.  In voting, CIRE faculty can vote on reappointment and promotion to their rank and below, but only for CIRE faculty, not tenure-track faculty.  The PTR Committee’s chair is appointed by the Head.

    The charge to the committee is to evaluate each PTR dossier and advise the Head as to the candidate’s qualifications for promotion and/or tenure.  The committee invites all voting members of the faculty (except the candidate) to sit in during any committee deliberation.  As noted in Section 9 of this Appendix, the candidate can also ask to address the committee.  The final vote of the committee is by secret ballot, with the vote count recorded in the committee’s report to the Head.  A single final report is then prepared by the committee.  The Chair of the PTR Committee will write the majority opinion in the final report of the committee; if there is a minority opinion, the members of the minority will add their statement to the final report.  If the Chair is of the minority opinion, then another member of the committee will be appointed to write the majority opinion, and the Chair will write the minority opinion.  The final PTR committee report will be shared with the candidate by the Chair of the committee.

     

    F.  Feedback to associate in-residence faculty moving toward promotion to full in-residence professor.

    Associate professors in-residence may meet with the head or the department’s PTR Committee at any time to discuss progress toward promotion.  However, it is recommended that associate professors meet with the head and the PTR Committee at least every third year beyond promotion to associate rank to discuss plans for further advancement.  The suggested time for these meetings is in the late spring at the close of the merit review process.