RESOLUTION ON DOSSIER SIMPLIFICATION
Approved by the Mānoa Faculty Senate on April 15, 2009
Tabled by the Mānoa Faculty Senate on March 18, 2009
Approved by the Mānoa Faculty Senate on November 19, 2008
Approved by the Mānoa Faculty Senate on April 16, 2008
|Date||Document & Link||Committee|
|April 15, 2009||CPM|
|March 18, 2009||CPM|
|November 19, 2008||
|April 16, 2008||
DOSSIER SIMPLIFICATION RESOLUTION: SUPPORTING MATERIALS COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL MATTERS
Whereas, the current dossier guidelines and forms are dated, unnecessarily complex and bureaucratic for the candidates and reviewing bodies,
Whereas, the current process is also wasteful and cumbersome producing huge stacks of multiple copies of large folders that must be securely transported and stored,
Whereas a review of the dossier process that included interviews with key stakeholders as well as two focus groups of faculty who had recently submitted dossiers produced no evidence that the dated format and submission process adds anything in terms of quality or value,
Whereas the 2007-08 University of Hawai’i at Mānoa Faculty Senate has passed a series of resolutions supporting the effort to streamline, simplify, and codify existing guidelines and forms to make for a more efficient submission and review process with the ultimate goal of a secure, paperless submission process,
Whereas, the result of these changes has been the following:
- Dossiers can now be doubled sided and placed in binders rather than folders with metal fasteners
- The statement of endeavors now has a suggested page length
- The application forms for tenure and promotion are now form fillable
Whereas, the new University of Hawai’i at Mānoa Faculty Senate emphasis on brevity and simplicity of dossier application and review led the Dossier Simplification Committee of the UHMFS to make the following changes to current guidelines:
- The dossiers will no longer require applicants to employ awkward pagination requirements (e.g. 4.1, 4.2), which is difficult for many applicants.
- The dossiers will no longer require an applicant’s name on every page, which makes submission of supplemental material time-consuming.
- The new guidelines specifically recommend that applicants submit only relevant materials instead of extensive submissions.
- The new guidelines encourage use of existing UHM forms (e.g. CAFÉ summaries, UHM course and program proposals).
Therefore be it resolved that the following Supporting Materials and Compiling the Dossier descriptions substitute for current language in the Criteria and Guidelines for Faculty Tenure/Promotion Application beginning Fall 2009:
B. Supporting materials in the Dossier. Appropriate supporting materials depend on your faculty classification. Faculty in the Instructional classification must submit documented evidence of teaching accomplishments, as outlined below.
1. Appendix A: Teaching. If you are in the Instructional classification, you must have documented evidence of your teaching ability and of your contributions to the curriculum.
- Teaching ability is usually documented by means of teaching evaluations. Quantitative teaching evaluations should be compiled in tables, supplemented by comments when available. Qualitative teaching evaluations should specify whether the lists include all or selected comments. For tenure, you should report all available course evaluations. For promotion, you should report a representative sample of all of the courses you have taught in recent years.
- You are encouraged to include any awards or citations for excellence in teaching.
c) Contributions to the curriculum may be documented by UHM curriculum forms. You may also want to include a few sample letters from students or peers regarding teaching innovations.
2. Appendix B: Scholarly Activity.
For both Instructional and Research faculty, a bibliography or other objective record of scholarly work is essential. Section a (below) gives the format you should use in compiling your bibliography. Faculty in fields such as the fine arts may substitute a list of shows, performances, etc., in lieu of a bibliography. Professional reviews of your work by peers not associated with UH Mānoa are important and should be included if available.
a. Your bibliography provides an invaluable objective record of your scholarly activity. The format which should be used is as follows:
1) Separate your published works, conference presentations and manuscripts into appropriate groupings. The following categories may be adapted to your discipline. Additional categories may be created as necessary.
• Books of original scholarship–author/co-author
• Chapters in books
• Edited volumes
• Articles in international or national refereed journals
• Articles in other periodicals
• Unpublished work, accepted for publication (with documentation: submitted, conditionally accepted, in press, etc.)
• Internal reports and other unpublished work
• Invited conference presentations
• Refereed conference contributions
• Departmental seminars
• Published abstracts
• Other scholarly products (such as major software, video or film)
• Grants (indicate funded, approved but not funded, submitted but not approved, etc.)
2) Within each category, list your works in order of publication or completion, with the most recent works first. Make a clear division between work published or completed since your last promotion at UHM (or initial hire if you have not previously been promoted) and earlier work.
3) For each item, give complete citation. An entry for a published article, for example, should include all the authors as listed in order by the journal, complete title, volume, year, and pagination. On-line publications should include the Web address.
4) Make a clear distinction between works for which you were an author and those for which you were an editor.
5) For all jointly authored and edited works, you must estimate the percent of your contributions.
6) Faculty in disciplines such as the fine arts, music, drama, etc., should provide a complete listing of exhibitions, performances or other appropriate presentations of their creative work. A clear division should be made between presentations since your last promotion (or initial hire if you have not previously been promoted here) and earlier ones. Complete information as to the nature of each presentation, place, dates, etc., should be provided.
b. You should include letters of acceptance for publications in press.
c. Peer evaluations of contributions. You should include relevant external reviews of your published work or creative productions. These include published reviews, grant reviewers’ comments, letters to the editor, readers’ comments of manuscripts submitted for publication and unsolicited letters from peers in response to publication of your work. Inclusion of testimonials that do not provide specific substantive support may detract from the effectiveness of your presentation.
3. Appendix C: Service
Faculty whose job descriptions include Service should list University, Professional and Community Service and may include a few carefully selected letters of recognition.
a. University service. Academic service activities may include (but are not limited to): participation in faculty governance by membership in standing and ad hoc organizations, committees and task forces at the university, college/school, and department/unit levels.
b. Professional service. You should include activities related to service to your discipline and professional organizations. Professional service activities may include (but are not limited to): serving as an officer in a professional organization, editing a professional publication, organizing conferences/workshops, creating discipline-related instructional models and resource materials for use in K-12 education, etc.
c. Community service. Public service that is related to your profession is considered a positive factor in reviewing faculty for promotion. Still, for Instructional and Research faculty, the lack of professional public service accomplishments (unlike University service) is not detrimental to advancement–a recognition that the opportunity for such work in some fields is quite limited. Public service is not a substitute for research and teaching achievements. It is complementary to these other types of activities for Instructional and Research faculty. While not weighted equally with research and teaching, meritorious public service activities–if linked closely to the other two areas–can have a favorable impact on tenure and promotion decisions.
C. Compiling the Dossier
· Paginating. Be sure that every page of material you submit has a page number. Labels may be used to paginate supplemental materials. Appendices can be indicated by tabs.
· Binding. Dossiers should be bound in a three-hole binder or a manila file folder.
When using a three-hole-punch binder the dossiers may be printed double-sided.
For dossiers bound in manila file folders, fasten at the left side of the page with a prong paper fastener. The margins for each appended page should be wide enough to ensure that no part of the text is obscured when the dossier is bound.
• Submitting. EIGHT COPIES SHOULD BE SUBMITTED Label the original dossier as “Original” and number it “Copy 1.” Number the subsequent copies “2” through “8.” Place a file label with the applicant’s full name, college/unit, department, and copy number on the front of each three hole binder or manila file folder tab. Confidential letters in their own manila envelopes should be included in the dossiers (but not attached) by the Department Chair.
D. Supporting Materials Box
Candidates should prepare a box for materials that document their accomplishments as presented in the dossier.
Section A: Teaching:
(1) Actual course evaluation forms in folders by course/semester
(2) Unsolicited letters from students and peers about teaching innovations
(3) Course syllabi for each different course taught in the period under review
Section B: Scholarship: Publications, as listed in your bibliography
Section C: Service: Selected letters regarding quality of your contributions