One Response to Article 13: Tenure Review and Promotion

  1. M Raymer says:
    12/21/2012 at 5:14 am

    This starts out well, giving the departments the responsibility to develop all guidelines for area-specific promotion criteria. It becomes too micromanaging when it is says ‘Personal statement: A 3-5 page personal statement…’
    The Union and/or central Administration should not specify a page number!

    The faculty member should be required to provide ‘Student evaluations’ as stated in the draft.

    And only SIGNED ‘written comments from students’ should be part of the package.

    This sentence should be amended: ‘Faculty members have the right to 2 have a Union representative or colleague present at any such hearings or meetings.’ to read
    ‘Faculty members have the right to 2 have a Union representative or colleague present at any such hearings or meetings, but are not required to do so.’