One Department's Guidelines.
Go to
How, specifically, did we change our TP&R guidelines to incorporate
language for evaluating computer-related activity?
Our departmental TP&R guidelines for evaluating traditional activities in
Research, Teaching, and Service are extremely detailed and explicit, providing
many examples of specific kinds of publications, presentations, development
activities, etc., and how they are to be weighted relative to each other in
the tenure and promotion processes. In trying to create language for
evaluating computer-related activity, the committee quickly realized that we
were not prepared to draft such detailed criteria for computer-related work
for three reasons:
- drafting such language would require a complete revision of our TP&R
guidelines, and we simply did not have the time (please see the section on "the particular circumstances that drove us to revise our
guidelines now");
- we do not yet have enough experience with computer-related work in our
department to know how to define categories of activities or criteria for
evaluating activities within those categories; and,
- as has become a commonplace in discussions of evaluating computer-related
work, many activities clearly bridge the traditional categories: e.g. if one
researches and develops a multimedia package that is used by several faculty
members in a general education literature course, is this a publication? Is
it course development (i.e. teaching)? Or is it service to the campus
community? Similarly, Janet
Cross and Kristian Fuglevik discuss their
unpaid labors as MOO administrators: certainly their work is a service to
the academy; but isn't it also indicative of
what our current TP&R document refers to as the `tenure candidate's efforts to
develop and improve teaching performance'?
Given these practical limitations on what we could do in revising our
guidelines, we decided to do two things:
- we added language to our TP&R document to make it clear that, for all
categories of activity, computer-related activities are to be evaluated along
with traditional activities--though the burden of explanation falls on the
candidate; and
- we appended the Modern Language Association's
Guidelines on Evaluating Computer-Related Work to our previous guidelines,
and made reference to the MLA "Guidelines" where appropriate in our existing
document.
Return to
- One Department's Guidelines.
Go to
E-mail: seth@bradley.bradley.edu
Last revised February 22, 1997