Dean’s Advisory Committees and the Promotion and Tenure Committee Currently, there is no standard institution-wide protocol for membership of the DACs. Consequently, there exists variation in qualifications for serving on DACs, the size of DACs, the way in which members are appointed, and the terms of service. For example, in the past Department Chairs did not serve on DACs, but this is no longer the situation. Also, Schools differ with regard to the number of tenured faculty who can serve on the School’s DAC. The P&T Committee serves as an review board for tenure and promotion. The “all-College” present make-up of the P&T Committee does not reflect the College’s present administrative structure because there is no Library representative on the P&T Committee. The Provost appoints P&T Committee members but criteria for membership and terms of service are not clear. Also, although the membership of the P&T Committee is not withheld, it is not readily available or accessible. Also, the DACs and the P&T Committee are accountable to different administrators. As a result, there has not been any collaboration or communication between the DACs and the P&T Committee, with each working in isolation from the other. DACs have existed primarily as renewal committees while the P&T Committee has focused on promotion and tenure. The only unifying element between the DACs and the P&T Committee is the guidance on promotion and tenure decisions set out by the SUNY Board of Trustees. Finally, the Library does not have the equivalent of a DAC, and the P&T Committee does not review the dossiers of Librarians. Based on these findings the RTPTF2 recommends The College establishes of service and membership criteria for the DACs and the P&T Committee, and revises the membership of the P&T Committee to comprise representatives from all five Schools and the Library. A Director of Libraries Advisory Council be created and follow the same protocol as the other advisory committees. The College revises existing policies and practices that prevents DACs and the P&T Committee from having access to DAC recommendation letters from previous evaluations. The College increases coordination between the DACs and the P&T Committee facilitated by some shared membership and/or joint meetings. The College requires that each DAC, the Library Director’s Advisory Council, and the P&T Committee follow discipline-specific standards when evaluating a candidate’s performance. Performance Criteria and Standards
Dean’s Advisory Committees and the Promotion and Tenure Committee Currently, there is no standard institution-wide protocol for membership of the DACs. Consequently, there exists variation in qualifications for serving on DACs, the size of DACs, the way in which members are appointed, and the terms of service. For example, in the past Department Chairs did not serve on DACs, but this is no longer the situation. Also, Schools differ with regard to the number of tenured faculty who can serve on the School’s DAC. The P&T Committee serves as an “all-College” review board for tenure and promotion. The present make-up of the P&T Committee does not reflect the College’s present administrative structure because there is no Library representative on the P&T Committee. The Provost appoints P&T Committee members but criteria for membership and terms of service are not clear. Also, although the membership of the P&T Committee is not withheld, it is not readily available or accessible. Also, the DACs and the P&T Committee are accountable to different administrators. As a result, there has not been any collaboration or communication between the DACs and the P&T Committee, with each working in isolation from the other. DACs have existed primarily as renewal committees while the P&T Committee has focused on promotion and tenure. The only unifying element between the DACs and the P&T Committee is the guidance on promotion and tenure decisions set out by the SUNY Board of Trustees. Finally, the Library does not have the equivalent of a DAC, and the P&T Committee does not review the dossiers of Librarians. Based on these findings the RTPTF2 recommends The College establishes of service and membership criteria for the DACs and the P&T Committee, and revises the membership of the P&T Committee to comprise representatives from all five Schools and the Library. A Director of Libraries Advisory Council be created and follow the same protocol as the other advisory committees. The College revises existing policies and practices that prevents DACs and the P&T Committee from having access to DAC recommendation letters from previous evaluations. The College increases coordination between the DACs and the P&T Committee facilitated by some shared membership and/or joint meetings. The College requires that each DAC, the Library Director’s Advisory Council, and the P&T Committee follow discipline-specific standards when evaluating a candidate’s performance. Performance Criteria and Standards
RTPTF2FinalReport.docx