Best Practices for Tenure and Promotion Review | Pepperdine University

Best Practices for Tenure and Promotion Review



Some "Best Practices" for Tenure and Promotion Preparation for Review at University Level

As you prepare your tenure materials, please keep the following matters in mind. These recommendations are intended to ensure uniformity in presentation, to put applicants' portfolios in the best possible light, and to clarify expectations.

1. Make sure your file is complete. Include what is asked for; exclude what is not asked for. Only four major items go forward to the University Tenure Committee, the Provost, the President, and the Board of Regents: 1) the Faculty Data Form, 2) the Supervisor's Evaluation Form, 3) the Dean's letter of recommendation, and 4) the letter of recommendation from the RTP or personnel committee chair. Separate letters from the Dean and the RTP/personnel committee chair are required for those candidates being considered both for tenure and promotion. All letters must be originals with signatures.

2. Items 7-10. Please note that the University is committed to building a culture of assessment. Your faculty colleagues believe that effective teaching includes evidence of student learning. Therefore, I encourage you to include on your Faculty Data Form information about how you have advanced and contributed to the assessment of student learning. Please decide where you wish to report evidence of student learning. It may fall under either the "teaching," "scholarly achievement," or "service" categories.

3. Item 14. NOTE WELL: The Regents have asked that special care be given when replying to item 14 on the Faculty Data Form. In particular, they expect applicants to include the following elements in the category:

    (1) a clear expression of support for the mission of Pepperdine University
    (2) a clear expression of support for the Christian values of the University
    (3) a statement concerning one's involvement in a local community of faith
    (4) a statement of how one relates or integrates faith and learning in one's teaching.

4. Format and length. The Faculty Data Form and the Supervisor's Evaluation Form should be submitted in hard copy with original signatures. These two forms will be seen, as submitted, by the school tenure committees, Deans, University Tenure Committee, the Provost, the President, and the Board of Regents. The Faculty Data Form should be viewed as a stand-alone document. Remove references to ancillary materials, links, binders, or other supporting materials, since those items will not go forward and may create confusion for reviewers at the University level. All necessary information must be contained within the Faculty Data Form. Do not include materials that would require additional or independent explanation. Remember that supporting materials (including course syllabi, publications, and any other documents) remain with the school. University-level reviewers may call for these materials if they wish, but one cannot assume that they will. Although there is no prescribed length for Faculty Data Forms, please note that successful candidates in recent years have submitted Faculty Data Forms ranging from 16 to 30 pages. It is not the case that longer is automatically better.

5. Peer Evaluation Forms may be completed by computer or by hand.

6. Accuracy and clarity. It is essential that all materials submitted be in excellent form. Spelling, grammar, punctuation, and style should be thoroughly checked. Note well: Typographical errors and misspellings reflect poorly on a tenure applicant. Please adhere to a standard bibliographical format, either the APA, MLA, or another well recognized form of citation. Some achievements (speeches, presentations, lectures, etc.) may fit in more than one category on the data form. In these cases, take care to list the achievement only once, in the category that makes the most sense to you. Avoid redundancies whenever possible.

7. Unpublished works (works in progress, works "under review" for publication, etc.) must be clearly distinguished from published works. A work that is "forthcoming" (a work for which one has a signed contract or a written agreement to publish) may appear in the "published" category, as long as there is a clear designation such as "Forthcoming" beside the entry.