|
Theresa Thomas' Case |
|
Introduction Chair, Personnel Committee #1Maricela Guzman: Case #3 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
Ph.D. granted in English
I think that the department would grant tenure to Teresa. (The College response may follow the same that you present in the scenario.) She obviously is productive within her area of specialization. Not only that, she has performed productively in the three key areas assessed: teaching, research, publication--even though online. Whether some adminsitrative personnel and faculty are ready for online publications or not, they are fighting a losing battle. That should be a very plain and clear message to
The dept. Head must remain abreast of the reasons Thomas was hired. I think the Head failed to support Thomas the first-time around, standing up for the technological advancements that Thomas was to bring to the dept.What are the Personnel Committee's responsibilities toward Thomas? Which did they fulfill? Fail? The Personnel Committee is responsible for ensuring that adequate and appropriate mentoring has occurred and must take additional steps to protect and help Thomas successfully get tenure, even though her case is unique. The Committee fulfilled a portion of its responsibilities, yet seems reticent to explore and break new ground for publication possibilities, especially in the dawning of a new age of technology
The Dean must be abreast of situations such as this one that have
Thomas must recognize that she will need to publish some work in print. We have not become totally a Web-based society, especially as it pertains to academia.What went wrong? What went right? See above.
|