Mount Royal University Human Resources and the Mount Royal Faculty Association.

Mount Royal University Human Resourcesand the

Mount Royal Faculty Association

Amended Collective Agreement institutes workshops for TPC (5.3.10) and ITPC (5.4.5) members

Topics to include:1. Responsibilities of committee members2. General criteria for tenure and promotion in Agreement3. Detailed criteria as established by GFC4. Congruence of scholarly expectations and resources5. Flexibility in assessing and weighting performance6. Principles of due process and natural justice

Challenges and Discussion Appendix: Tenure Process Timelines Appendix: Addendum on Teaching, Scholarship and Service Appendix: Principles of Tenure, Rank and Promotion

TPC conducts annual and mid-term tenure evaluations makes recommendations on applications for tenure

and promotion to FTC (for Tenure System I) or ITPC (for Tenure System II) (Article 5.3.2)

departmental, either an elected committee OR a committee of the whole (Article 5.3)

ITPC receives recommendations from TPCs and

Deans/Directors and makes recommendations to the President (Article 5.4.1)

created under the Collective Agreement, chaired by the Provost, with elected members from each Faculty Council and from the Faculty Association (Article 5.4.2)

Prior Tenure Structure

New Tenure Structure

New terminology for recommendation to the ITPC on candidate’s performance for tenure and promotion (5.5.1):◦ Does not meet the required standard◦ Meets the standard◦ Exceeds the standard

Applies to each of Teaching, Scholarship and Service

In an annual or mid-term evaluation, the TPC assesses “overall progress towards fulfilling the criteria” (Article 6.4.1) (emphasis added)

At the end of the probationary period, the TPC prepares a “final tenure review and recommendation” (Article 6.7.7)

ITPC reviews the dossier and recommends that the candidate◦ Be granted tenure◦ Be released, or◦ Be granted a further probationary year

Tenure System I

Tenure System II

Confidentiality (5.5.2)◦ Committee deliberations are strictly confidential.◦ Candidates may communicate with the

committee only through its Chair◦ Committee members may not discuss

applications with any person outside the committee

Falls under the MRFA Ethics Bylaw requirement of absolute confidentiality

Conflict of Interest (5.5.3)◦ Professional or personal relationship or competing

loyalties between the candidate and committee member

◦ Apprehension of Bias: reasonable and informed person with knowledge of all relevant circumstances, viewing the matter realistically and practically, would conclude that a conflict of interest might exist Requires formal disclosure in writing to the Dean/Director

for TPC or President for ITPC, and subsequent decision on participation to be made by Dean/Director for TPC or President for ITPC

Member may voluntarily withdraw Candidate may request that a member be removed Another Committee member may request review

Meaning of Tenure (6.1): ◦ Tenure is a permanent appointment representing

a major commitment between the institution and faculty member, including an obligation to continue to perform to a high standard

Teaching (Article 1.13)◦ Activities related to the delivery of credit

instruction (Article 1.13)

Scholarship (Article 1.14)◦ Activities related to research, scholarly and/or artistic

work which occurs through discovery, integration, teaching and learning, or application of knowledge and must be disseminated through peer-reviewed processes (Article 1.14)

Service (1.15): ◦ Activities in support of academic processes at the

departmental, faculty and institutional level. Service may also take the skills, disciplinary expertise, perspectives and leadership to the relevant communities (Article 1.15)

6.2.1 Tenure recommendations and decisions shall be made on the basis of meeting or exceeding the established standards . . . and of clear promise of continuing intellectual and professional development as demonstrated by the . . . general criteria:

6.2.2 Tenure recommendations and decisions shall be based solely on the general criteria in this article, the Addendum on Teaching, Scholarship and Service, and detailed criteria developed according to the MOU Regarding Implementation of a Rank and Promotion System at Mount Royal, and shall be made in accordance with the Tenure and Promotion Guidelines on the date of commencement of appointment.

Tenure Systems I and II overlap for 2009-2010 academic year, since both use the existing FTC criteria:◦ 1. professional qualifications and competence◦ 2. performance of duties and responsibilities◦ 3. professional commitment and activities◦ 4. commitment to the College and collegial

activity.◦ 5. commitment to scholarly activity.

The Faculty Tenure Committee will consider the potential of all candidates to be involved in scholarly activity and for candidates who choose the Teaching/Scholarship/ Service stream, current scholarly activity will also be considered (FTC Brochure, August 2009)

Faculty Councils to work with APTC and GFC to develop detailed criteria

APTC has particular mandate to establish criteria

These are “to be forwarded to the negotiation committees by January 2010 for consideration in collective bargaining” (MOU, p. 79)

Pending so they do not apply to 2009-2010 year

Status and Processes: Detailed Tenure Criteria

Resource limitations: workload, funding, facilities

New performance measure and (for TSS) contractual requirement

Creates an expectation about rigour Emphasis since Task Force on Research has

been on more flexibility Flexibility applies both to the forms and

products of scholarship Critical to balance resources, rigour

mindfully

Core Issue: ◦ Tenure and Promotion systems at Mount Royal

require mindful flexibility in assessing performance relative to criteria

Context:◦ Collective Agreement (Appendix B) sets out

principles of a tenure, promotion and rank system: every measure and process is tested against these

Goal:◦ Measuring “meets” or “exceeds” within this flexible

framework

Background:◦ Considerable prior consultation and◦ Clear intention not to disadvantage faculty based on

work pattern or range of assigned activities◦ Assess faculty based on their agreed activities◦ Protects chairs and others who might not fit the TS

or TSS patterns precisely◦ Many faculty hired to a different career profile or

new to the streams◦ Performance review is a formative process

(feedback and improvement) based on “activities, achievements and plans”

◦ Lists of activities are inclusive rather than definitive

Measures of Assessment◦ May always present various challenges:

SEIs Peer Evaluations Annual Reports New Measures (especially re: scholarship)

◦ New to the system is written feedback from department colleagues, summarized in annual review

◦ All may be subject to critique, but Ideally created as products of institutional processes Careful critical judgment needed, with patterns and trends

more significant than isolated data Intended for use in a formative process Weighted in conjunction with other information

*CAUT Freedom and Tenure Committee Discussion Paper: What is Fair?; Duhaime.org Legal Dictionary; MRFA White Paper on Tenure

Candidates have Due Process rights:

*CAUT Freedom and Tenure Committee Discussion Paper: What is Fair?; Duhaime.org Legal Dictionary; MRFA White Paper on Tenure

Candidates have rights to a fair tribunal:

Related Principles: Committee Process1. Confidentiality protects the candidate’s privacy

and the process’s integrity, not a committee’s secrecy

2. The dossier is the dossier: it is the sole basis for review and recommendation

3. Information from department colleagues not on TPC is provided in writing and summarized to the dossier

4. A review committee reviews: it does not generate new information

5. Performance related to the whole range of expectations and criteria must be assessed

Related Principles: Committee Processes6. The annual review meeting is an opportunity for

the candidate to respond to the TPC’s draft report and for the TPC to gather relevant information to refine its final report

7. The conditions are the conditions: a committee may not impose arbitrary conditions or standards

8. A recommendation constitutes a majority or consensus view: dissenting views must also be represented

9. Some rights are reserved: a candidate or the ITPC (not explicitly a TPC) may consider a further probationary year.

Related Principles: Committee Processes10.Committee members’ signatures indicate that a

recommendation’s contents reflect the range of views, not unanimous agreement

11.A candidate’s signature on an evaluation or recommendation reflects that it has been received and reviewed, not that the candidate agrees with its contents

Related Principles: Dissent and Difference12.Personality is not a valid criterion.13.Interpersonal cooperation and professionalism

are valid criteria.14.Academic freedom may cause discomfort:

difference, dissent, non-conformity, controversy or intellectual conflict are an academic virtue

15.Suppressing academic freedom under other labels still denies a fundamental right

1. Scholarship potential or performance is listed among the FTC criteria, but supporting detailed criteria and processes are not in place for this year

2. TPCs and ITPC are asked to assess scholarship without relevant benchmarks either for either appropriate objectives or measures of achievement

3. TPC and ITPC are asked to assess whether standards in Teaching, Scholarship and Service are being met in a time of flux and redefinition.

4. TPC and ITPC are asked to assess standards according to a new framework with more detailed external standards – not relative to other present or past tenure candidates

5. TPC and ITPC members are asked for the first time to consider whether they are in conflict of interest and take formal action

6. Academic credential is not a tenure criterion, but an appointment criterion, and can not be a measure of progress in meeting the standards

System I  Applies:

◦ Hired before 1 July 2009◦ Hired 1 July – 31 August 2009

With 2 years’ TC and Full or partial credit from FTC (notified by 31 Oct 2009)

Process◦ 15 Sept of 4th probationary year notify FTC◦ Before 1 October submit dossier to FTC◦ 1 October notify MRFA President◦ 1 December advised of FTC recommendation

Tenure Release by 31 December Further probationary year

System II: Annual Evaluations in Years 1, 2, 4◦ Measures overall progress towards fulfilling tenure criteria◦ 30 April dossier goes to TPC◦ 3rd week of May TPC delivers draft report to candidate◦ At least 3 working days later TPC meets with candidate◦ At least 3 working days before 14 June, TPC delivers final

annual report to candidate◦ By 14 June dossier, report and any candidate response go

to Dean; may recommend Dean meet with candidate◦ By 31 August but not during vacation, Dean to meet with

candidate if recommended◦ Dean produces written report of meeting and remedial

strategies, attaches to dossier

System II: Mid-Term Evaluation in Year 3◦ Comprehensive review of progress toward fulfilling tenure

criteria◦ By 30 April dossier to TPC◦ By 15 May elected TPC delivers draft report to all tenured

members◦ By 1 June TPC delivers draft report to candidate◦ At least 3 working days later candidate meets with TPC◦ At least 3 working days before 14 June, TPC delivers final report

to candidate◦ By 14 June dossier, report and candidate response go to Dean◦ By 15 September Dean advises in writing whether progress is

satisfactory◦ By 30 September Deans meets with chair and candidate to

discuss remediation

System II: TPC◦ 15 January Chair submits names of candidates to ITPC◦ 1 February candidate with assistance of Chair submits

dossier and advises President of MRFA◦ 15 February TPC meets with candidate to review dossier◦ 1 March TPC makes draft recommendation available to

tenured members of academic unit◦ 5 working days later members submit written feedback;

TPC may meet with members; must include summary of feedback in draft recommendation

◦ 15 March TPC provides draft to candidate◦ meets with candidate at least 3 working days later, then

completes final review and recommendation

System II: TPC Continued◦ three working days before 31 March Chair of TPC

provides final recommendation to candidate◦ 31 March Chair of TPC forwards dossier and

recommendation to Dean/Director◦ 15 April Dean completes final tenure review and

recommendation◦ Three working days later candidate includes

Dean/Director’s review in dossier

System II: ITPC◦ By 14 June ITPC advises candidate in writing, with

reasons, of recommendation of ITPC and decision of President

◦ An employee released according to the President’s decision is terminated on 15 June

Teaching includes but not limited to:

Credit instruction Student consultation and

advice Practicum and field

supervision Major project supervision Curriculum and course

development Pedagogical design and

preparation Materials development Assessment design and

implementation

Maintenance of academic and professional currency

Self-reflection on pedagogical practices

Application of the literature on teaching and learning

Development, identification and communication of best practices

Promotion of evidence-based professional and pedagogical practice

Scholarship includes but not limited to:

Research Scholarly and artistic work Professional work Publishing Presenting at, participating

in and coordinating conferences

Collaborating with, and reviewing and editing the work of, peers

Developing primary and secondary texts and learning materials

Providing scholarly opportunities for students

Scholarship of teaching and learning

Dissemination of effective teaching and learning resources and strategies

Creation and extension of resources or programs to support teaching

Sharing teaching expertise externally

Significant leadership in teaching excellence beyond the institution

Service includes but not limited to:

Participation in department, faculty and institutional governance

Selection, support, development and evaluation of colleagues

Appropriate student support including advising

Development and application of academic policies

Creation, development, evaluation and revision of academic programs

Liaison, partnership and leadership work with disciplines, organizations and communities relevant to academic or professional expertise

Participation in the Mount Royal Faculty Association, its processes and committees

All full-time and limited-term employees will be appointed to an appropriate academic rank.

The same academic rank structures should apply to both the Teaching-Service and Teaching-Scholarship-Service work patterns.

The processes, committees and general criteria for appointment and promotion to different academic ranks will be stipulated in the collective agreement and aligned with the roles and mandate of General Faculties Council.

There will be no system of merit pay based on evaluation of performance.

An appeal process will be stipulated in the Collective Agreement. The processes of tenure and promotion should support the

achievement of our mission to become Canada’s best instructionally focused and scholarly informed undergraduate institution.

Tenure and promotion are awarded to recognize achievement in teaching, service and, where applicable,scholarship.

Both the processes and criteria for the assessment of tenure and promotion must be transparent, effective and efficient.

A fair, evidence-based assessment of criteria by peers, working collegially and ethically, is at the heart of Mount Royal’s tenure and promotion system.

The degree of accomplishment necessary for achieving tenure and promotion must be equivalent across academic units and between work patterns.

Assessments and recommendations for tenure and promotion will be made from an academic unit to an institution-wide committee which will make a final recommendation to the President. Chairs and Deans will participate in the recommendation process.

The processes and results of the tenure and promotion system will seek to retain the collegial and noncompetitive culture valued by faculty and administration at Mount Royal.

Promotion processes and criteria will not disadvantage those faculty who choose to engage primarily in service activities (i.e. Chairs, President of the MRFA, secondments).

Tenure and promotion criteria must recognize the value of Mount Royal’s unique instructionally focused work patterns within the context of Canada’s university standards.

Switching work patterns will not affect promotions which have already been granted.

Tenure processes will be based on the Collective Agreement and the policies which were in place when employment commenced.

The implementation of a ranking system will address the fact that faculty tenured prior to July 1/2009 worked under different terms and conditions of employment.