AUFA RENEWAL, TENURE, PROMOTION INFORMATION SESSION

AUFA organised an information session on Article 12 on August 10, 2006. It was well attended with many questions addressed to the panel, which consisted of Barry Moody (Arts), John Sumarah (Professional Studies), Phil Taylor (Sciences), Karmen Bleile (Instructors) and Mary McLeod (Library). A summary of some of the main points follows:

• The onus is on the applicant to make the case for renewal, tenure and promotion.

• Seek the guidance of the head or director and others familiar with the review process.

• The applicant should present in a clear and well organised form the substance of the case.

• The language of the agreement should be used as the applicant demonstrates for the URC how the criteria are met.

• Write as little or as much as it takes to make the case. For example, the covering letter is an introduction to the application and while no length is recommended, it is a summary of the salient points of the application. Understating or overstating the case is not useful.

• URC members review only what is in the dossier so make no assumptions that they know about your discipline or your scholarship.

• The higher the rank the more important the word “impact” becomes. Quantity and quality are words used in Article 12 but the word “impact” is implied in words such as “consistent performance” (associate), “distinctive contribution” (professor).

• While applicants are part of a cohort for the term of the collective agreement each application is reviewed individually. All three categories of teaching, scholarship and service are voted on; then an overall vote is taken. The cohort concept simply acts as a way to ensure that applicants have been treated as fairly as possible.

• Since all three academic areas need to be present in an application, service does count even though teaching and scholarship are rated more highly. While performance differs across disciplines the application should demonstrate performance in all three areas.

• The URC is a peer review process. Six colleagues (two from the Arts, two from Science and two from Professional Schools) vote on the applications. A majority vote is required.

John Sumarah

Table of Contents