|
Sherry Richer's Case |
|
Introduction Chair, Personnel Committee #1Harrison Spenser: Case #5 Resources CCCC Promotion and Tenure Guidelines for Work with Technology CCCC Statement of Professional Guidance CCCC Statement on Scholarship in Composition MLA Guidelines for Evaluating Work with Digital Media in the Modern Languages MLA Guidelines for the Institutional Support of and Access to IT for Faculty Members and Students
|
Characterization of Institution Research I University, State University
Ph.D.'s in English and in Composition Studies
I'd say that the department chair has already failed this faculty member. And so has the chair of the personnel committee. I've been both, so I feel this strongly. Both Chair and PC-chair should have made it clear that doing TA-training software will not substitute for the book, particularly when she's only teaching one class/semester! And (it's not clear in the case as presented) that she may even be released from that? So she has had plenty of time to do her book.
The chair would say that this person needed to get on with her publication. Was there a book in the works? And if so, had she thought about a publisher? If not, what book might she think of pulling together? From the outline of the case as you present it to me, "This is a university that wants a book for tenure." So those are the rules. The chair of the Department does not have the power to change the University's rules.
The Chair/PC Chair might go to the Dean and see if the Dean was willing and felt able to argue that X, Y, and Z were somehow to be considered a book-equivalent in this person's case.
If the Department and Dean could line up on this issue [that X, Y, and Z were somehow to be considered a book-equivalent in this pcase], then the book becomes less of an issue. But everyone needs to know, in writing at this point, what the rules are. The Dean can't guarantee the Provost's reaction either---so this is all problematic and depends upon the Chair's ability to talk frankly and openly with her Dean and her Dean's ability to talk frankly with her Provost. One could make the argument that times are changing and what this English Department really needs is people adept at and interested in emerging technologies--that the book-requirement is at odds with the university's need to move into new modes of education. But that argument should have been made during the hiring process.
Richer is responsible herself for making sure that she understands the criteria for tenure & promotion to Associate Professor. Her chair has, I'm sure, explained them to her. If Richer thinks that her good works with TA's will somehow 'count' as something else, does she have evidence that this will be the case? Or is she deluding herself? She needs to know whatWhat went wrong? What went right? I don't know what went wrong or right. If Richer does get tenure, then things went right. If not, not. It depends on the Chair & the Dean and their willingness/ability to negotiate a tenure contract for Richer that does not require the book. It also depends upon Richer's ability to push projects along and out the door. It does not seem that she's done a great deal in her first three years; if her second three years is more productive than her first, she might have a chance. |