Senate became aware of the need to consider a new faculty track last year as we researched promotion and tenure concerns at NLU. We realized that faculty take on many diverse roles, and that some faculty are not here on a teaching/research track, though they may engage in some limited research or active public speaking. (I am using research here broadly to encompass the many types of inquiry conducted here at NLU, which is often community-based, emerges from diverse paradigms and methods of inquiry and engagement, and based on our model of linking theory to practice.)
These faculty are sometimes older, experienced educational leaders and professionals who take on teaching, supervision of clinical experiences, community engagement, and leadership roles at NLU. They might be associated with a center or be engaged with a school district. They are networking, organizing professional development, and providing leadership to centers and schools. They might do some teaching, but have many other responsibilities They are individuals who are not interested in doing research or publishing at the same level as tenured/tenure track faculty, though often they are interested in being paired with a tenured/tenure track faculty member who would work on research related to the clinical/field work.
Placing individuals like these on a tenure track would not be appropriate, and would most likely lead to failure in the P&T process, which would cause the university to lose great faculty. They are different from non-core faculty, who should be primarily engaged in teaching, service, and some scholarship.
Senate also took into consideration that many institutions, such as Teachers College, for these same reasons, have similar positions, often called "professor of practice," or "clinical professor." Universities with such tracks frequently report that such a track strengthens the tenure-track because it would ensure that those faculty are really focused on research and publishing, while also letting clinical faculty focus on their interests.
For all these reasons, Senate asked the Promotion and Tenure Task Force to consider creating a new, separate track for such faculty that would provide a more appropriate career path. This career path would provide more security since they would not be at risk of failing at something in which they have little interest--the research required of tenure track professors.
Right now, full time tenured faculty have all of the security of tenure, and receive annual contracts. Tenure track faculty receive annual contracts as they work to build a record of teaching, scholarship, and service required to obtain tenure and/or promotion. The administration has proposed that time-tested, long term clinical faculty might receive longer contracts depending on funding and other variables. Clearly, clinical faculty still lack the employment security of tenure, but might get longer contracts to match their time-tested commitment and service to NLU.
This is a very complicated matter, and for that reason is a topic of discussion at the special faculty meeting in December. The Promotion and Tenure Task Force, and NCE Senators, will be present to hear your opinions and gain a sense of the faculty.
We are very fortunate that we have an administration and Board of Trustees that is focused on strengthening the tenure system when many universities are moving away from it or weakening it. Our president has told me countless times that she considers a strong research faculty as a core element in building our university for the future, and differentiating it from for-profits. Reserving the tenure track for engagement with research and publishing helps us focus on high quality research as a criteria for granting tenure and promotion, while creating the possibility of others pursuing their professional activities.
These faculty are sometimes older, experienced educational leaders and professionals who take on teaching, supervision of clinical experiences, community engagement, and leadership roles at NLU. They might be associated with a center or be engaged with a school district. They are networking, organizing professional development, and providing leadership to centers and schools. They might do some teaching, but have many other responsibilities They are individuals who are not interested in doing research or publishing at the same level as tenured/tenure track faculty, though often they are interested in being paired with a tenured/tenure track faculty member who would work on research related to the clinical/field work.
Placing individuals like these on a tenure track would not be appropriate, and would most likely lead to failure in the P&T process, which would cause the university to lose great faculty. They are different from non-core faculty, who should be primarily engaged in teaching, service, and some scholarship.
Senate also took into consideration that many institutions, such as Teachers College, for these same reasons, have similar positions, often called "professor of practice," or "clinical professor." Universities with such tracks frequently report that such a track strengthens the tenure-track because it would ensure that those faculty are really focused on research and publishing, while also letting clinical faculty focus on their interests.
For all these reasons, Senate asked the Promotion and Tenure Task Force to consider creating a new, separate track for such faculty that would provide a more appropriate career path. This career path would provide more security since they would not be at risk of failing at something in which they have little interest--the research required of tenure track professors.
Right now, full time tenured faculty have all of the security of tenure, and receive annual contracts. Tenure track faculty receive annual contracts as they work to build a record of teaching, scholarship, and service required to obtain tenure and/or promotion. The administration has proposed that time-tested, long term clinical faculty might receive longer contracts depending on funding and other variables. Clearly, clinical faculty still lack the employment security of tenure, but might get longer contracts to match their time-tested commitment and service to NLU.
This is a very complicated matter, and for that reason is a topic of discussion at the special faculty meeting in December. The Promotion and Tenure Task Force, and NCE Senators, will be present to hear your opinions and gain a sense of the faculty.
We are very fortunate that we have an administration and Board of Trustees that is focused on strengthening the tenure system when many universities are moving away from it or weakening it. Our president has told me countless times that she considers a strong research faculty as a core element in building our university for the future, and differentiating it from for-profits. Reserving the tenure track for engagement with research and publishing helps us focus on high quality research as a criteria for granting tenure and promotion, while creating the possibility of others pursuing their professional activities.
No comments:
Post a Comment