Canadian Association of University Teachers

 
Home > Services > Collective Bargaining & Organizing > CAUT Model Clauses > Model Clause on the Evaluation of Research, Scholarship and Creative Activities

Services

Model Clause on the Evaluation of Research, Scholarship and Creative Activities¹

1
Evaluation of Research, Scholarship and Creative Activities

1.1
Whenever this agreement requires an evaluation of an academic staff member's research, scholarship and creative activities the evaluation shall be carried out in accordance with this article.
                                           
1.2
An evaluation shall consider a minimum of three years, unless it is for renewal of a contract of less than three years. Any evaluation of a member’s performance in research, scholarship and creative activities shall consider all aspects of a member’s research, scholarship and creative activities.

1.3
Any individual or committee evaluating a member’s performance must have the expertise necessary to evaluate all the material they need to consider. The initial evaluation by the member’s peers at the departmental level shall focus attention on the academic merits of the case. The expertise necessary at this level involves academic experience and judgment. Subsequent evaluation and review at the faculty or institutional level shall focus attention on the proper application of the collective agreement criteria and procedures and ensure fair and consistent application of equity and other policies agreed to by the parties. The expertise necessary at this level involves experience and judgement in the application of institutional policies and practices.

2
Factors to be considered

2.1
Research, scholarship and creative activities include the discovery, integration, interpretation and/or application of a member’s professional expertise. It includes the scholarship of teaching, which consists of original and innovative thought and analysis related to pedagogy and/or learning. Evidence of research, scholarship and creative activities includes, but is not limited to, the following:

    (a)    publication in print including but not limited to books, textbooks, library resource books, case studies, monographs, contributions to edited books, papers in refereed and non-refereed journals, book reviews;

    (b)     publication in electronic form published or made available on the web;

    (c)    work done in collaboration or partnership with other scholars provided that the extent of the member’s contribution to such work is identified;
    (d)    participation in panels and presentations delivered at conferences and professional, scholarly or community meetings;

    (e)    recognition by one’s peers including, but not limited to participation as an editor or as a member of an editorial board of a journal or scholarly publication or evaluating or refereeing the work of other scholars in the context, for example, of reviewing grant applications;

    (f)    intellectual and creative contributions to an academic discipline including designing, developing and conducting research projects, developing new methodologies, success in obtaining research and publication funding, conducting contract and/or applied research from which a report, study or text results, developing computer software, and commissions to create work of academic or artistic value;

    (g)    practice and/or application of a member’s professional expertise;

    (h)    development of library collections and services; and

    (i)    creative and artistic works, productions, and performances.

2.2
Unattributed or anonymous commentary shall not be used2 unless it is submitted by the member.

3
Whenever this agreement calls for the use of external referees the following procedures apply.

3.1 
The referee shall be a person who:

    (a)    can be considered as one of the member's peers;

    (b)    has the professional and academic expertise to assess the member’s research, scholarship and creative activities

    (c)    can be expected to give a fair and competent assessment of some or all of the member's research, scholarship and creative activities.

Referees shall be asked to limit their assessment to the research, scholarship and creative materials provided in 3.3.1 and shall not make a recommendation in support of any career decision.

3.2
Selection of referees

3.2.1   
The member shall provide the dean with a list of at least four (4) persons3 who have the expertise to assess the member’s research, scholarship and creative activities.

3.2.2   
The member may also provide the dean with

    (a)    a list of persons who, in his/her opinion, may be prejudiced or otherwise not qualified to assess his/her research, scholarship and creative activities.

    (b)    an indication of areas of expertise which would be appropriate for persons chosen to assess his/her research, scholarship and creative activities.

    (c)    an indication of areas of expertise which would not be appropriate for persons chosen to assess his/her research, scholarship and creative activities.

3.2.3
From the list of persons provided in 3.2.1 the dean shall choose no fewer than two (2) persons who will be asked to assess the member’s research, scholarship and creative activities.
 
3.2.4
Consistent with 3.2.2, the dean may select a third person to assess the member’s research, scholarship and creative activities, it being understood that the dean may select the third assessor from the list of persons provided in 3.2.1.

3.2.5
The dean shall ask such persons if they would agree to undertake an assessment of a member’s research, scholarship and creative activities and whether they would be able to provide that assessment within three (3) months.  When consulting potential external referees the dean shall make clear that any assessment together with the name of the assessor will be provided to the member for their comment. If for any reason the potential assessor is unwilling or unable to provide an assessment the dean shall, consistent with 3.2.2, select another potential assessor.

3.3
Assessment of research, scholarship and creative activities

3.3.1
The member shall provide the dean with a representative sample of the evidence of research, scholarship and creative activities consistent with 2.1.  This material will be provided to both internal committees and to external referees.

3.3.2
External referees shall also be provided with an extract of the collective agreement which outlines the criteria and standards to be used in the evaluation.

3.3.3
External peer referees shall be asked to provide expert opinion on whether the materials provided under 3.3.1 meet the collective agreement standard4 for research, scholarship and creative activities.

3.3.4
External referees shall be asked to provide their assessment within three months of receiving materials provided under 3.3.2.

3.4
External Assessments

3.4.1
Once all external assessments have been received, the dean shall provide the member with copies of the assessments, including the name of the assessor.  If external assessments are not received within three months they shall be excluded from the file and the matter will proceed on the basis of assessments received.

3.4.2
When providing the member with copies of external assessments the dean shall invite the member to comment in writing.  Should the member choose to comment in writing the member’s response shall be added to the file.

3.4.3
Notwithstanding 3.4.2 the member has a right to meet with any committee or person charged with making a recommendation or decision to raise any concern they might have prior to any recommendation or decision being made.

Approved by the CAUT Council, April 2010.

Endnotes
1. Collective agreement clauses governing renewal, tenure, promotion and other career decisions should provide a single evaluation of workload performance which establishes a proper balance between the teaching, research and service components of the academic job.  See CAUT, “Policy Statement on the Nature of Academic Work,” (November 2005).  Most agreements describe how these separate components are to be evaluated as part of the overall performance of workload responsibility.  Although practice varies, most agreements provide separate clauses for the evaluation of teaching.  In the case of research this model clause can either be included, like the evaluation of teaching, as a separate clause or integrated as a subsection of renewal, tenure, promotion or other clauses.

2. CAUT, “Model Clause - Letters of Reference” (November 2008) calls for “Openness of the referee process” and, consistent with principles of natural justice, recommends that “Immediately upon receipt, copies of each letter of reference, including the identity of the author, shall be given to the candidate and placed in the candidate’s official file.”

3. Practice in Canada varies on the number of external referees often requiring fewer than four referees.   Ensure that 3.2.1 and 3.2.3 is consistent with your existing practice.

4. The standards vary from institution to institution and from case to case.  Often the standard is very general and involves “satisfactory performance” or “performance which meets expectations.”  In the case of promotion to full professor the standard frequently involves some variation of “makes a substantial contribution to knowledge.”  Ensure that the wording of this clause is consistent with the tenure, promotion or other clauses of your agreement.