1 December 13 and 14, 2012
1 UNITED ACADEMICS PROPOSAL
3 ARTICLE 12
4 NTTF EVALUATION and PROMOTION
6 Section 1. All departments and programs that employ non-tenure-track faculty must have
7 a faculty-approved evaluation and promotion criteria policy for their NTTF. This policy
8 shall be made available to faculty and must be published on the Academic Affairs
9 website. Revisions to these criteria may not be applied so as to materially harm a
10 currently-employed faculty member’s progress toward promotion.
12 While the details and structure of NTTF evaluation are the responsibility of the
13 immediate academic unit in which the appointment is made, evaluations must follow
14 some general guidelines:
16 1. NTTF should be evaluated every 18 courses taught or 3 calendar years, whichever
17 comes first, but NTTF can request more frequent evaluations.
19 2. NTTF in instructional appointments are expected to have student course
20 evaluations offered for all courses with 10 or more students, and will undergo at
21 least one peer review of teaching each year. NTFF must be provided notice of the
22 standards for teaching on which he or she will be evaluated. The academic unit
23 shall identify the standards to be applied to such evaluation, and shall establish a
24 time frame for notification to the faculty member before a peer review is
27 3. NTTF in research appointments will be evaluated for the quality of the effort
28 expended and the outcomes of their contributions to the research program.
30 4. NTTF will be asked to discuss their efforts and performance with their immediate
31 supervisor at least once each evaluation period.
33 5. NTTF will submit a 3-5 page personal statement developed by the faculty
34 member that describes his or her conceptual, theoretical scholarly orientation,
35 productivity, service work, and impact. This personal statement should
36 correspond to the structure and general content expected of the statement that will
37 be required for promotion.
39 6. NTTF can only be evaluated on his or her professional development activities that
40 require funding in relation to the access they have had to professional
41 development funding from their department.
422 December 13 and 14, 2012
1 Evaluations of NTTF are for the purpose of determining if the faculty member is meeting
2 the standard of excellence appropriate to a major research university. They should be
3 designed to help the faculty member grow as a scholar, identify areas of strength, and
4 identify areas that need improvement. If the faculty member is a Career NTTF, the
5 evaluation must indicate if the faculty member is progressing toward promotion. If the
6 faculty member is not progressing toward promotion, the evaluation should identify
7 specific areas for improvement.
9 Section 2. Only Career NTTF are eligible for promotion. Career NTTF will be eligible
10 for promotion to the first senior level after accumulating eighteen (18) terms (consecutive
11 or not) of service, accrued at no greater than three (3) terms per academic year.
13 Section 3. Promotion is elective and does not involve an “up-or-out” decision.
14 Candidates wishing to be considered for promotion should notify their appropriate unit
15 head in the year prior to the year when promotion is sought, or equivalent FTE, in rank.
16 Career NTTF who do not wish to be considered for promotion may continue employment
17 at their current rank as long as eligible to do so under Article 9, Contracts.
19 An accelerated promotion review can occur in a meritorious case or when credit for prior
20 service at another institution has led to a contractual agreement to this effect at the time
21 of hire. The terms of hire should make clear where on the timeline an individual faculty
22 member stands; from that time on, subsequent advances in rank will be awarded
23 according to established promotion procedures. In all other cases in which credit for prior
24 service at another institution is agreed upon, scholarly work completed by the faculty
25 member during those years will receive full consideration during the promotion process.
27 Should a faculty member who has agreed to an accelerated review at the time of hire
28 choose to delay that review for the full six years of full time service, scholarly work
29 completed prior to arrival at the University of Oregon will be of secondary consideration
30 during the promotion and tenure process and consideration of scholarly achievement will
31 focus on work completed during the six full time years of service at the University of
34 Section 4. For faculty members holding multiple or joint appointments, a Memorandum
35 of Understanding will be entered into at the time of hire or assignment between the
36 different employing units specifying the expectations for promotion and tenure review.
38 Section 5. The Family Leave policy can affect the timing of promotion by “stopping the
39 clock” for a pre-specified and contractual period of time. Faculty members considering
40 such leaves should consult Article 24, Leave and the Office of Human Resources Leaves
41 Website. Faculty members should discuss the timing of leave and its relation to the
42 promotion decision with the department head who may also consult with the dean and the 3 December 13 and 14, 2012
1 provost to ensure that there is appropriate and clear written documentation of leave
4 Promotion Review
5 Section 6. Academic and research units must have on file and provide to their Career
6 NTTF statements of criteria for evaluation and promotion of Career NTTF. A unit’s
7 promotion review process will commonly include a review committee, and this
8 committee should include NTTF at or above the rank sought by the candidate in addition
9 to any tenure-track faculty. At no point in the review process can a faculty member be
10 evaluated by any standards other than those on file and provided to the faculty member.
12 Each unit, with appropriate communication with the appropriate dean/director, should
13 determine whether or not external review will be included as part of the review and
14 promotion process for Career NTTF. If external reviewers are included, reviewers should
15 be those who can present an unbiased, knowledgeable, and objective evaluation of the
16 candidate and his/her qualifications. Eternal reviewers must base his or her evaluation
17 and judgment on the criteria in use by the academic department or program.
19 Internally, it is to be expected that those serving in supervisory roles to the candidate
20 (e.g., department head for Instructors, research mentor for Research Assistants, etc.) –
21 will provide letters of evaluation.
23 Required elements of a promotion file include:
25 Statement of duties and responsibilities
26 A candidate’s statement
27 Letters of evaluation.
28 Candidate may propose names of qualified outside referees, some of whom will
29 be contacted, if necessary
30 Statement of waiver, partial waiver, or non-waiver
31 Conditions of appointment
32 Departmental criteria for promotion
33 Memorandum(s) of Understanding between departments in the case of joint
35 Teaching evaluations and supplemental teaching materials
36 Evidence of professional activities
37 Department committee recommendation
38 Department head’s evaluation and recommendation
39 Dean’s Advisory Committee recommendation, where applicable
40 Dean’s evaluation and recommendation
41 Voting summary4 December 13 and 14, 2012
1 Section 7. Faculty members may choose to waive in advance their legal right of access to
2 see the evaluative materials submitted by all referees in conjunction with their promotion
3 and/or tenure review. Such waivers shall not, however, preclude redacted versions of
4 these documents may, however, being used during the denial of promotion appeals
5 process described in Article 14, Tenure Denial Grievance.
7 Section 8. Faculty members shall receive at least three (3) days notice of any meeting or
8 hearing related to the promotion process and an agenda for the meeting. Faculty members
9 have the right to have a Union representative or colleague present at any such hearings or
12 Section 9. Following the unit’s review and evaluation of the promotion file, the unit
13 head or director will prepare a report on the merits of the promotion case, including a
14 voting summary and his/her independent recommendation. If the unit chooses to have a
15 unit-level review committee prepare a report and recommendation, this report should be
16 included with the unit head or director’s report.
18 The file will then be sent to the dean of the academic unit in which the department is
21 Section 10. Individual colleges may or may not choose to include a review by an
22 advisory committee prior to the dean’s recommendation. If they do, it will be necessary
23 for that college to constitute an appropriate NTTF Dean’s Advisory Committee (NTTF-
24 DAC), comprised primarily of tenured or tenure-track faculty, but also including
25 members who are themselves NTTF.
27 The dean (or other appropriate administrative head, for those units not reporting through
28 an academic dean) will prepare a report on the merits of the promotion case, including a
31 The file will then be sent to Academic Affairs.
33 Section 11. The Provost will review the file, with input from Academic Affairs and/or the
34 Office of the Vice President for Research and Innovation, and make a decision as to
35 whether to grant or deny promotion.
37 This notification will be provided in writing to the candidate by June 15.
39 Section 12. If, at any point in the promotion process a faculty member receives a
40 negative vote or evaluation, he or she will be notified, provided an written explanation of
41 the negative vote or evaluation from the appropriate supervisor (i.e., department head,
42 dean, Provost, or President), and the opportunity to submit rebuttal material within ten
43 (10) days.5 December 13 and 14, 2012
2 Section 13. Successful candidates for promotion will assume their new rank beginning
3 with the following Fall term, or the nearest next term of employment should their
4 contract not begin with the Fall term.
6 Successful candidates for promotion will receive a salary adjustment of at least 10%,
7 effective simultaneously with assumption of the new rank (see Article 20, Salary).
9 Section 14. Faculty who are denied promotion may appeal the decision through the
10 procedures in Article 14, Tenure Denial Grievance.
12 Unsuccessful candidates for promotion will remain employed at their current rank, as
13 long as their failure to achieve promotion was not for reasons that warrant termination
14 (see Article 9, Contracts or Article 18, Discipline and Termination). Career NTTF who
15 are terminated will receive timely notice and a terminal contract. If NTTF have served
16 three (3) or more years at .50 FTE or greater, they will receive the same timely notice as
17 tenure-track faculty (i.e., a year’s notice of non-renewal).
19 Career NTTF who are unsuccessful at securing promotion may be considered for
20 promotion again after accumulating an additional nine (9) terms (consecutive or not) of
21 service at .50 FTE or greater, accrued at no greater than three (3) terms per academic
23 Section 15. NTTF holding “affiliate,” “adjunct,” “visiting,” “fellow,” “postdoctoral” or
24 “emeriti,” appointments are not eligible for promotion. All faculty, however, shall have
25 the right to petition for rank reclassification if they believe that their work was
26 misclassified at the time of first hire or their position has evolved to more closely
27 resemble a different classification.
28 Adjunct NTTF who believe that their positions should be Career NTTF appointments,
29 can petition for reclassification after completing their second year of appointment and/or
30 evaluation as described in this Article (see also Article 2, Academic Rank).
Google Ads – all profits for single malt
Recent Comments. Deleted if (content + humor)/nastiness < Euler's number. Please use a screen name.
- Why UO should make economics... (4)
- just different Here's another one: Religious Studies. – Friday
- Conservative Duck Statistics would be a good inclusion as well, and for the same reason. Numbers get "massaged" and data "interpreted". Take crime statistics, for example. – Friday
- uomatters Comment of the month, contact our Marketing Department for your UO Matters (c) coffee mug. – Thursday
- UO community member Marketing should always be #1 – Thursday
- just different Mathematics, although it's usually not mathematicians who are wielding deceptive mathematics. And that's not the only reason to study mathematics, but there doesn't seem to... – Thursday
- Helpful Carolina woman uses ladder... (1)
- Rockaway Recycling We're paying $1.64 a pound for scrap bronze from Statues, Old Plumbing Fixtures, and Commercial Electrical pieces. If you need a certificate of destruction, that... – Wednesday
- Bring back Sharon Rudnick, Mike... (1)
- dog Seriously, when all the Union cheer-leading died down, did anyone really think it would continue to go uphill? Outcomes of decisions need to be suitably... – Tuesday
- Peaceful Eugene Anti-Hate march from... (14)
- Really? White man with a gun=exercising second amendment rights (see: Charlottesville). Black man with a gun=a threat to me and innocent people (see: Philandro Castile). Black... – Monday
- Hart I agree there's a low overall death rate. However, there is also a lot of data about patterns wherein brown people's interactions with police were... – Monday
- comeon Likely dead? The focus on gaps leads to base-rate bias. A very small minority of all individuals are killed by police. There is evidence of... – Monday
- Oryx "likely?" The spate of unwarranted police killings of African Americans is horrifying, but are you actually suggesting that more than half the encounters between police... – Monday
- just different Many on the left don't trust law enforcement because policing isn't applied equitably even when keeping the peace during political protests. Antifa or Black Lives... – Monday
- uomatters That likelihood does not escape me. – Monday
- uomatters We couldn't find any oil. Didn't know about shale oil back then. That and the weather. – Monday
- White Lies We Tell Ourselves Who knew about your checkered past? However, I believe the point is that if you had brown skin in any of those encounters you would... – Monday
- Duck fans won't pay to... (10)
- Anas clypeata Probably just offended sociology majors. – Friday
- honest Uncle Bernie Oh, I am quite sure -- from much observation in my classes -- that the athletes work much harder at athletics than do the vast... – Thursday
- Simplicius Simplicissimus ... or academic students... – Wednesday
- Eugenenative Not buying that football players work any harder than gymnasts, tennis players or soccer players. – Wednesday
- UO Matters And the Ducks would give the reporter the "Jacoby Treatment" – Wednesday
- dog I guess this bleacher report had high impact as this is all over ESPN today - with most people disagreeing with what he said. – Wednesday
- Steve P If this interview had happened at UO that quarterback would never be allowed to talk to another reporter. – Wednesday
- dog Honest voices are generally disruptive and institutions don't tolerate that. Still, kudos for speaking the on the ground truth. – Wednesday
- Athletic Director to pay University... (1)
- honest Uncle Bernie Ah, they respect and admire learning and education in those red states! – Friday
- How not to recruit top... (9)
- Dog When Streisinger was offered a job at the UO in 1959, UO had an enrollment of about 7500 students so nice scale, accessible administration, not... – Friday
- Old Man Once upon a time the UO hired beginners on the promise of accomplishment. It is widely appreciated that George Streisinger, hired here into his first... – Friday
- UO Matters Congratulations, you win the UO Matters second order effect comment of the week. – Friday
- Thedude they've just figured out hiring poor performing faculty is the best response to fixed merit pools by department. – Thursday
- Dog Schrodinger's duck would constantly be confused about which end was its ass and which was its brain -hmm - that kind of sounds relevant to... – Thursday
- UO Matters Yup, there's a reason they call it Schrodinger's cat, not his duck. Or maybe there's not. – Thursday
- Dog Wineland definitely came here because there are no goofy ducks in Boulder – Thursday
- honest Uncle Bernie Actually, it may be very telling. The progressive social justice warriors meet the progressive corporate world at the progressive corporate university. Look at the topics:... – Thursday
- Oregon Law School Deans failed... (13)
- uomatters Point taken, though I'm not sure where you got those numbers. The latest ABA employment data, for UO's class of 2016, shows 52% of the... – Friday
- Anonymous The letter from the deans is deceptive and this plan is poorly conceived. At UO Law 83% of students pass the bar the first time.... – Friday
- 2.5 months after public records... (1)
- Dog One thing to notice is that many of the approved searches in NS are continuations of failed searches from last year - I am involved... – Thursday
- UO is failing on economic... (7)
- UO Matters Your R pitch is noted. Free download here: https://www.r-project.org/ – Tuesday
- jackmccoy If we want to help people rise up economically, we need to focus on university educations that have will help translate into meaningful careers post... – Tuesday
- just different UO is way behind the curve in addressing the needs of underserved groups, including lower SES students. But the underrepresentation of these students says a... – Tuesday
- CSN What do you mean? UO set a goal of working on diversity in a couple of dimensions, and has met that goal. If the "vast... – Tuesday
- billygoat Very nice and thought-provoking. But consider that many of the programs that one can expect to drive mobility --professional degrees, engineer, med or nursing schools--are... – Tuesday
- Older »
- Why UO should make economics... (4)
- Montana newspaper calls for "deadly discouragement" of racist KKK - in 1921. https://t.co/o1PgiRmsp2, 11 hours ago
- Why UO should list economics as a Gen Ed requirement: - https://t.co/yQZaefkriz, 13 hours ago
- RT @ProSyn: Today’s quote is from Joan Robinson https://t.co/mpsAt3fzON, 15 hours ago
- RT @JeffmanningOre: We shined light on this predatory Aequitas deal back in July 2015. Finally, some justice for Corinthian students. https://t.co/GqpLlVazWn, Aug 17
- Ducks fire Coach Dana Altman for #blacklivesmatter comments - https://t.co/RK7OOuEw27, Aug 17
TagsAAUP-AFT Union? Academic Freedom administrative bloat Athletics athletics subsidy Beangrams Dave Frohnmayer: UO President Dave Hubin Diversity Faculty pay Faculty Union (United Academics of UO) free speech Jamie Moffitt Jim Bean: UO Provost Jim O'Fallon jock box Lariviere Firing Lorraine Davis March 8-9 rape allegations Melinda Grier Michael Gottfredson NCAA NCAA violations new partnership plan off topic OUS Board and Chancellor Pernsteiner PERS Public Records Public Safety Randy Geller General Counsel Research money Richard Lariviere: UO President Robert Berdahl Robin Holmes Rob Mullens Scott Coltrane Senate Sharon Rudnick Track and Field Championships Uncategorized UO Foundation UO Presidential Archives UO restructuring plan UO Trustees
- Why UO should make economics a mandatory Gen Ed requirement: 08/17/2017
- Ducks fire Coach Dana Altman for #blacklivesmatter comments 08/16/2017
- Helpful Carolina woman uses ladder to fix defective courthouse statue 08/15/2017
- Bring back Sharon Rudnick, Mike Gottfredson, and the goat! 08/15/2017
- Peaceful Eugene Anti-Hate march from EMU to downtown 08/14/2017
- Pres Schill: Denouncing hate and violence following Charlottesville terror 08/14/2017
- Athletic Director to pay University $5M for academic scholarships 08/11/2017
- UO opens public search for a job I have zero qualifications for 08/11/2017
- Oregon Law School Deans failed to convince Supreme Court to increase Bar exam pass rate from 58% to 78%. 08/10/2017
- 2.5 months after public records request, UO gives Emerald faculty hiring proposals 08/10/2017
- How not to recruit top tenure track faculty to a tier 1 research university 08/10/2017
- UO commemorates 3rd annual Gottfredson Day by not suing him for legal fees 08/09/2017
- Duck fans won’t pay to watch concussions or listen to control-freak coach 08/09/2017
- Administrator resigns after public records reveal public relations scheme 08/08/2017
- Executive Vice Provost for Academic Affairs Scott Pratt still searching for VPAA 08/08/2017
- Banavar appoints Karen Ford as interim Honors College Dean. 08/08/2017
- UO is failing on economic diversity. Where’s the “Economic Diversity Action Plan”? 08/07/2017
- Admins responded to last year’s heat emergency by banning new PLC window AC units 08/03/2017
- Panicked UO communicators spew nonsense in basketball allegation response 08/03/2017
- Has ex-Duck Mark Helfrich finally found gainful employment? 08/01/2017
UO Board Chair Chuck Lillis's grade so far
- A (10%, 30 Votes)
- B (5%, 15 Votes)
- C (13%, 39 Votes)
- D (23%, 66 Votes)
- F (49%, 142 Votes)
Total Voters: 292Loading ...
President Mike Schill's grade so far
- A (23%, 113 Votes)
- B (29%, 140 Votes)
- C (17%, 80 Votes)
- D (12%, 56 Votes)
- F (19%, 92 Votes)
Total Voters: 481Loading ...