TRUFA and TRU administration have successfully concluded post-bargaining negotiations on revisions to the Tenure and Promotion language in Article 6 of the TRU/TRUFA Collective Agreement. Work on these revisions began in about 2009, the parties recognizing after two years of vetting Tenure and Promotion applications, that the 2006 language needed to be both clearer and presented in a more logical order.
Please note that changes to the mandatory components of the teaching dossier will not take effect until 2017, so that those of you currently finalizing your portfolios for submission this year will not be affected.
Revisions were designed to create more logical structure and clear categories of focus:
- Definitions and eligibility for tenure (6.1 – 6.2)
- Definitions and eligibility for promotion (6.3)
- Application procedures for tenure and promotion (6.4)
- Membership and procedures of the Division, Faculty, School T & P Committee (6.5)
- Membership and procedures of the Senate T & P Committee (6.6 – 6.7)
- Timeline and deadlines (6.8)
- Appeals Committee and Procedures (6.9)
- Annual Reports (6.10)
- Criteria for Rank, Tenure and Promotion (6.11)
- Appendix 1 – Teaching Dossier
Some key additions and changes:
6.4.1 and 6.4.2
Applicants must submit a list of at least six (6) external reviewers to the chair of the Division/Faculty/School T & P committee (DFSTPC). Applicants must notify the DFSTPC chair if there are any potential external reviewers who may not be suitable based on reasonable apprehension of bias or conflict of interest.
Each DFSTPC will hold its initial meeting on or before September 15 (instead of the original September 30).
The DFSTPC chair will provide each applicant with a list of the members of the committee no later than September 10th. The applicant has the right to object to one or more members on the grounds of reasonable apprehension of bias or conflict of interest. The committee will replace that member or members.
An applicant has the right to object to one or more members of the Senate T & P Committee (STPC) on the grounds of reasonable apprehension of bias or conflict of interest.
The all-faculty University Appeals Committee (UAC) is no longer required to conduct a full assessment of five years of tenure/promotion cases in cognate departments when inconsistency of application of standards is alleged. Rather, the TRUFA observer on the STPC will provide any necessary evidence of inconsistency of applications of standards to the committee in those cases.
The UAC will provide recommendations to the TRU President in cases where procedural errors are not corrected by the STPC or inconsistency of applications of standards are not remedied.
Appendix 1 – Teaching
For 2016 applications, the existing language for what must be included in the teaching dossier remains in effect, as follows:
(c) Teaching Dossier
(i) List of courses taught, including the course number and title, credit value, and enrolment;
(ii) The outline for each course listed above;
(iii) List of individual student projects supervised, if any (e.g. honours theses or similar individually-supervised projects, master’s theses), whether completed or in progress, and the nature of the faculty member’s involvement (principal advisor, second reader, external examiner, etc.) at the University or elsewhere;
(iv) The student teaching evaluations in the member’s personnel file by the University under Article 7 shall be considered as part of the Teaching Dossier. A Member may wish to place additional copies of the teaching evaluations in the Dossier, but there is no requirement to do so.
Beginning in 2017, additional mandatory components of the teaching dossier will be added (highlighted items plus (v) and (vi), which are optional in the current language.
(iv) A minimum of three sets of course evaluations and three sets of peer observation data across a range of courses, if applicable, within the three-year period preceding the application.
(v) A statement of the Faculty Member’s teaching philosophy and pedagogical goals and objectives.
(vi) A description of professional development in the pedagogical area. Here one might describe steps taken to improve one’s own teaching and how each activity has directly impacted one’s own teaching, such as
- participating in seminars, workshops, or professional meetings concerned with the improvement of teaching;
- presenting or publishing articles, commentaries or reviews related to teaching;
- receiving instructional development grants;
- use of instructional innovations and evaluating their effectiveness;
- evidence of special assistance given to colleagues in the area of improvement of teaching (e.g. through a Mentorship program), or activities connected with the training and orientation of teaching assistant; and
- analysis of course evaluation data that demonstrates a reflective scholarly teacher.