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.
- UO Prof calls out VP... (18)
- uomatters Dear Ib - Your comments on this blog and in our conversations always make me think harder about the wisdom of the economic approach to... – Sunday
- Ib Gassama In 1999, I was part of a group that met with Fidel Castro in Havana to discuss the persistence of racism in the Cuban justice... – Sunday
- Sanjay Srivastava The survey question asked respondents to provide a specific example of implicit bias from their day-to-day lives. We do not have good, direct access to... – Sunday
- mindless husk uom: Am inclined to agree with you about using the money where it would directly help, scholarships for low ses students. Without regard to race.... – Saturday
- hmmm Agreed - pipeline programs are always critical and always need to be maintained, and there are indeed already a whole lot of existing programs especially... – Saturday
- uomatters I didn't think it was a crock. I do think that we'd do more for diversity by spending the money all this cost on scholarships... – Saturday
- Elliot Berkman Agreed. I was focusing on faculty, but we do have funds for increasing diversity in our doctoral programs through the grad school (e.g., Promising Scholar... – Saturday
- uomatters Any sensible effort to address diversity should start with some data showing what the problem is. On the student side, UO's diversity problem is about... – Saturday
- RG's Mark Baker writes about... (2)
- New Duck Coach Mario Cristobal... (2)
- Oregon Bach Festival Artistic Director... (14)
- It was evidently a "secret" to the musicians he worked with, and the board members who knew him, and the staff who supported him and... – Tuesday
- just different I can't comment on whether Halls is "spoiled" or was responsible for trashing someone's house, but the fact that he was at least a bit... – Tuesday
- just different I'm still wondering why McCoy went to AAEO. Were there legitimate complaints, or was she simply abusing the university's antidiscrimination procedures to try to misdirect... – Tuesday
- uomatters Dog, of all my commenters, you should know that "there are no bad dogs - just bad dog administrators." – Tuesday
- Dog well to state the obvious always blame it on THE DOG – Tuesday
- Amy Adams It's weird...There's a whole plethora of executive directors somewhere on the spectrum between "Royce Saltzman" and "Utter Disaster." Can't the Oregon Bach Festival find one... – Tuesday
- Amy Adams Hmm. "formerly"...did you mean to write "formally"? I think someone needs to simmer down, as she said over on the R-G comments. :-) You say... – Tuesday
- Seasoning Queen It was burglarized. I don’t know the answer re: insurance. – Tuesday
- Phone logs show Dana Altman... (27)
- Fishwrapper OSU, with a similar on-campus population, located in a physically smaller, less-populous community, has a rather comprehensive Department of Safety that includes managing law enforcement... – Tuesday
- Dog While I agree that the UOPD in its current form, is an unnecessary entity, you need to remember that there are a bunch of mindless... – Monday
- Eugenenative OSU, with a nearly 1/3 larger campus population than UO still relies on an unarmed campus safety department- leaving law enforcement to the Corvallis PD. – Sunday
- Embarassed for the UO Kenny Jacoby is the one and only good thing about this situation. Yes, the UO should be proud of Jacoby. Why is local media not... – Saturday
- Fishwrapper Thank you, Dog, for that link - I was unable to get to that one with my (obviously) meager searching skills. You can see the... – Friday
- Dog 1989 is a particularly bad year to use since the 1990 Post Measure 5 downsizing of the UO was significant, enrollment won't build back to... – Friday
- Fishwrapper Undergrad enrollment in 2014 of 20,569. That alone is a 27% increase. The city of Eugene went from 113, 913 in 1990 to 160,561 in... – Friday
- Eugenenative Undergrad enrollment at UO was 15,000 in 1989 (well after OHSU separated from UO) and 19,300 this fall. That’s not much growth in nearly 30... – Friday
- All Bargaining Unit Faculty must... (1)
- dog I was "fully engaged" once - not pretty - never again – Monday
- Board of Trustees to meet... (11)
- mindless husk So much to relish here, I don't understand why eyes glaze over. The trustees want "metrics" on the immeasurable. Why not pay attention to the... – Saturday
- honest Uncle Bernie Re VP for Enrollment Roger Thompson and the seriously declining enrollment -- in my humble opinion, very predictable from the exit out of the recession,... – Thursday
- honest Uncle Bernie Ah, very good, sounds right. A measure of change over multiple years. The numbers very revealing. "Instruction" -- the budgets for the departments, basically --... – Thursday
- uomatters Whoops, fixed. Thanks. – Thursday
- honest Uncle Bernie uomatters -- you say "On a Full Time Equivalent basis, faculty numbers are up 22%, since 2014-15, while administrator numbers are up 43%" -- surely... – Thursday
- uomatters Compounded Annual Growth Rate? Just guessing, I'm an economist, not a CPA. – Thursday
- honest Uncle Bernie Lot's of interesting stuff there in that budget graph (Audit Financial). But does anyone know what CAGR means? I assume 16/17 refers to the change... – Thursday
- Trustees to review, discuss report... (5)
- Me again You're such a card! It may not have been clear but my point was that I think personal attacks from afar are cowardly and attacks... – Thursday
- uomatters Sorry. I'll try some personal insults tomorrow - on a randomized basis of course - and let you know how it shakes out. – Thursday
- Me again My apologies for being a bit harsh. I appreciate that you did call out the board for asking soft ball questions but you haven't called... – Thursday
- uomatters I told the trustees in public at their last meeting that I didn't think they were doing their due diligence. I said that they were... – Thursday
- Older »
- UO Prof calls out VP... (18)
- RT @I_am_orange: @usatodaysports #goducks assistant salary pool in 2017 = $3,945,000. $1.7 million in 2017 dollars would be 43% of t… https://t.co/6uopQNdlVP, 5 hours ago
- RT @DanielLibit: This doesn’t look good. https://t.co/81MvzuExqh, 8 hours ago
- RT @ChrisYandle: Unless Bowl gift suite is worth $125k, the Boise State players got a raw deal, but they do get: an Oakley backpack… https://t.co/eot5N21Qbx, Dec 17
- RT @ByBerkowitz: Per NCAA reporting forms compiled by @Schrotenboer, conferences and schools combined for $517 million in net bowl r… https://t.co/HF14k9pqfP, Dec 15
- RT @ShellyJLundberg: Substantive policy changes will do more to increase diversity than mandatory workshops. https://t.co/7wi181n35s, Dec 15
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 Rob Mullens Scott Coltrane Senate Sharon Rudnick Tim Gleason Track and Field Championships Uncategorized UO Foundation UO Presidential Archives UO restructuring plan UO Trustees
- RG’s Mark Baker writes about Ronnie Lee’s return to Eugene 12/16/2017
- UO Prof calls out VP for Equity for wasting money on Implicit Bias Training 12/14/2017
- Oregon refunds $500 fine, DOJ lawyer begs judge to drop engineer’s lawsuit 12/12/2017
- Oregon Bach Festival Artistic Director was fired for his big ego and bad dog 12/11/2017
- All Bargaining Unit Faculty must be fully engaged over winter break 12/11/2017
- New Duck Coach Mario Cristobal pledges to split $2.5M salary with players via untraceable bitcoin transfers 12/08/2017
- Phone logs show Dana Altman knew about player rape allegations from start 12/08/2017
- Dec 8th, 8 AM Meeting of the Board 12/08/2017
- Rob Mullens negotiates porkalicious deal with Nike for Duck athletics cash 12/07/2017
- Board of Trustees to meet last days of finals week, to avoid pesky students 12/07/2017
- Trustees to review, discuss report on General Counsel Kevin Reed’s activities 12/06/2017
- Rob Mullens played short-term Taggart hiring into a fat long raise for himself 12/05/2017
- Students want to remove insipid, racist UO Mission Statement from library wall 12/04/2017
- UO librarians crush Duck coaches $6K to $0 in Charitable Fund Drive giving 12/03/2017
- Johnson Hall working on IRS “business purpose” justification for Vegas junket 12/03/2017
- Board of Trustees to hear appeal from tenured professor, sanctioned for cause 12/01/2017
- FINAL: Senate motion to support Collective students passes 23-21 11/29/2017
- Pres Schill to throw more money at Duck coach Willie Taggart? 11/29/2017
- Student Conduct Office drops charges after FIRE free-speech investigation 11/28/2017
- Pres Schill appoints Kevin Marbury as permanent VPSL w/o search 11/28/2017
I've been at UO since 2014, and relative to then I think the overall campus climate is
- much worse (14%, 15 Votes)
- worse (28%, 31 Votes)
- same (18%, 20 Votes)
- better (17%, 19 Votes)
- much better (16%, 18 Votes)
- don't know (6%, 7 Votes)
Total Voters: 110Loading ...
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 ...