Introduction
Background
Cases
Jered
Johns:
Case
#1
Teresa
Thomas:
Case
#2
Maricela
Guzman:
Case
#3
Sherry
Richer:
Case
#4
Chair,
Personnel Committee #1
Chair,
Personnel Committee #2
Department
Chair #1
Department
Chair #2
Department
Chair #3
Dean
#1
Dean
#2
Harrison
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
Characterization of Department
Ph.D. granted in in English (Literature/Rhetoric & Composition)
M.A., granted in in English (Literature/Rhetoric & Composition)
M.F.A. in Creative Writing
B.A. granted in English (literature, creative writing, English education)
How would Sherry Richer's case turn out
in your department? At your university/college?
This case would not go forward.
What are the Department Chair's responsibilities
toward Richer?
Which did she/he fulfill? Fail?
At my institution the Department Head would undoubtedly say
that Richer was doing commendable teaching and professional service with
her list-serv, her involvement with professional organizations, and her
TA training work on campus, but that her ethnographic research needed to
lead to significant book-length publication that would be viewed by her
peers in the writing community as cutting-edge work that significantly
impacted the field.
He would remind her that three years of her probationary period had
passed and that she had in effect only two and one-quarter years left to
complete her book manuscript and get it accepted by a major press.
He would tell her that the department strongly supported her because of
her record of service and teaching and the potential of her research, but
that, unfortunately, the university was determined to enforce stringent
tenure standards and that only a well-reviewed book plus evidence of a
developing second project of great promise would be sufficient to make
her case.
He would urge her to apply for relief from teaching duties from the
university's released time program, to cut back her service commitments,
and to concentrate on finishing her manuscript. If she did not, he
would say, she would need to begin looking for a position at a university
with lower publication standards where solid teaching and service to the
profession, along with a modest publication record, were sufficient for
tenure.
What are the Personnel Committee's
responsibilities toward
Richer? Which did they fulfill?
Fail?
N/A
What are the responsibilities of the Dean?
Which did she/he fulfill? Fail?
N/A
What are Richer's responsibilities?
Which did she/he fulfill? Fail?
Richer may have done many things correctly, but if she could
not also demonstrate scholarly excellence through major publications, she
was not competitive enough to meet the university's standards.
What went wrong? What went right?
I do not agree with this one-size-fits-all approach to tenure
decision-making, but if it in fact the norm here, and it makes it especially
hard for the university to find people who can provide essential service
in untraditional, but needed areas.
|