Summary Details
| Query: |
Tenure and Promotion
|
|
| Author: | Lynn Pearson | |
| Submitter Email: | click here to access email | |
| Linguistic LingField(s): |
General Linguistics
|
|
| Summary: |
Summary for Linguist List 13.687
Tenure requirements for Linguists in Foreign Language Depts. I apologize for the late posting of this summary. I received useful information regarding tenure and promotion criteria at universities in the U.S. and in Europe. Happily, my department is in the process of adopting a document that I will post at a later time that provides flexibility to everyone working in literary and linguistic studies. I will also propose to the Linguist List editors to add a site for Tenure and Promotion criteria so that linguists will have a resource about this issue in the future. Below you will find a short summary of the information in the message as well as a few examples of tenure and promotion criteria in place at various universities, edited from the messages. First, I would like to thank the following people for submitting comments: Barbara E. Bullock Jose Camacho Mark Greenberg Kirk Hazen Carol Klee Tom Klingler Carl Mills Johanna Rubba Deborah Ruuskanen Nick Sobin Rex A. Sprouse Rob Vann Dieter Wanner Stan Whitley Margaret Winters Anonymous Summary 1) Linguists in foreign language departments almost always have the same guidelines as colleagues working in literature and cultural studies. 2) There are efforts, both official (college or departmental policy) and unofficial (candidate's cover letter for the tenure portfolio), to explain and recognize differences in linguistic research (or other fields, such as creative writing) that make some requirements less or more appropriate for different fields represented in foreign language departments (book vs. articles, conference proceedings accepted as publications, etc.). 3) Linguists in foreign language departments should communicate information regarding linguistic research to their non-linguist colleagues by citing the expectations from Natural or Social Science model rather than the norms of humanities fields. Beyond the book vs. article quandary, the evaluators need to know about the process for selecting linguistics conference papers (i.e., anonymous submission with refereeing) and ''the relative ranking of conferences or journals in linguistics'' (Points contributed by Carl Mills). Providing tenure and promotion evaluators with this information will help them to effectively assess a candidate's research production. Examples of Tenure and Promotion Criteria/Procedures (contributors noted) 1. Herb Stahlke, Dept. of English, Ball State University: We have one P&T document for the entire department, including also English Education, Literature, and Rhetoric/Composition. You can take a look at our P&T policy and procedures at the English department web site at http://www.bsu.edu. We do have representatives from each of our areas on our P&T committee to make sure that differences in professional practice across the areas are made clear. 2. Dieter Wanner, Ohio State University: We have several linguists and a pedagogy specialist among a majority of literature/culture faculty. I give you here the text of the applicable statement of criteria and standards of research for the P&T aspect from assistant to associate professor. As you can see, they operate a differentiation between lit/cult and ling faculty according to the standard expectations in the respective fields. These criteria and standards have the explicit blessing of the College and the campus level review boards. Their application has proved to be very reassuring to everybody, since they spell out what is expected, and they provide for the necessary flexibility according to a colleague's discipline. For service and teaching aspects, no such differentiation is applied. Here it is: A,P&T Document, Dept. of Spanish & Portuguese, OSU (rev. 11/01) ''VII.A.3. Research No area of academic endeavor contributes as much as does research to the standing afforded the department both within the university and within the larger academic community. Thus, review committees at all levels of the university place great emphasis on scholarly achievement and productivity, and all candidates for promotion must demonstrate clear distinction in this area. Given the diverse interests and responsibilities of members of the department, the type and results of this activity may vary. Some research may emphasize the generation or reinterpretation of knowledge; other research may introduce new approaches or apply existing approaches to a new body of material; still other research may emphasize pedagogical concerns that incorporate theoretical advances in instruction and/or language acquisition or apply technology in innovative and creative ways. Still other recognized work could consist of such activities as translation, editing scholarly publications, or compiling bibliographies. Just as there are varying forms of scholarly activity and varying results of research efforts, there must be varying criteria and patterns for the evaluation of such efforts. In certain areas of research within the department, the publication of a series of extensive articles may represent work and accomplishment comparable to the publication of a book in another. Specifically, for recommending an assistant professor for promotion and tenure, a book (either published or in press), is a standard expectation in the fields of literary and cultural studies, while in linguistics and pedagogy more weight may be attributed to a series of substantive articles. The research standard in addition comprises a series of refereed journal articles and book chapters in high-quality outlets as documentation, in combination with regular conference participation, of a developing program of original research presented to the profession at large. In all instances, the basic criterion is not quantity alone but the quality and significance of the scholarly activity as an innovative contribution of relevance to the faculty member's and the department's appointed fields. Recommendation for appointment of a candidate to the rank of associate professor must be based on convincing evidence that the faculty member has achieved excellence as a scholar, and can be expected to continue a program of high quality scholarship relevant to the mission of the academic unit(s) to which the faculty member is assigned and to the University.'' Dieter adds ''our formulation may only make sense within the highly formalized context of P&T procedures at OSU.'' 3. Nick Sobin, Department of Linguistics, University of Wales, Bangor From my experience in English Departments, the lit group puts a premium on books, whereas for linguistics the stronger emphasis is on scientific articles in good places. One bibliometric study that I recall showed that the humanities tended to lack 'core' journals, a set that everyone recognized as very important to have their work appearing in. In contrast, the sciences have 'core' journals, and a bibliometric study on linguistics showed that it, like the sciences, valued articles and recognized such a set of core journals. For some background, see Zwaan, R. & A. J. Nederhof. 1990. Some aspects of scholarly communication in linguistics: an empirical study. _Language_ 66(3): 553-557. So, articles in Language, LI, NLLT, Lingua, Journal of Linguistics, etc. should stand you in good stead. 4. Marc Greenberg, Dept. of Slavic Languages and Literatures, University of Kansas We do make a distinction in the requirements for the research portion of the t. and p. profile. Typically, literature specialists can frame their major projects in book form, but linguists often cannot, as the linguistic writing tends to be more condensed. Therefore, in our department for a tenure-track linguist a substantial number of articles (with thematic coherence and high quality, of course) would be considered evidence towards a strong research program, rather than a book. 5. Barbara Bullock, Department of French, Penn State University Our T&P guidelines in French for ''Research, Creative Accomplishment, and Scholarship'' read: ''A book, monograph, textbook, critical edition, or critical bibliography, published or in final typescript accepted for publication, is required for tenure and promotion to the Associate rank. In some areas of French Studies where books or monographs are not the customary product of research (e.g., linguistics), an equivalent number of refereed articles or discipline related creative accomplishments may be substituted. In such cases, the number of articles should exceed that normally expected of candidates in other fields of French Studies.'' 6. Johanna Rubba, Dept. of English, California Polytechnic State University We revised our tenure and promotion requirements a few years ago so they would be as unambiguous as possible. We have people in our department who direct plays, so we had to be flexible without being too flexible. We came down to refereeing as the main criterion: Work submitted as support for a tenure/promotion decision has to have been peer-reviewed. This includes professional theater critics as well as journal referees, etc. In other words, the referees have to be professional peers of the candidate. 7. Stan Whitley, Romance Languages, Wake Forest University We finally hammered out a compromise statement for expectations at both levels of promotion: it's demanding ... and yet flexible enough to accommodate a variety of research programs and forms of publication, from paper to electronic. It's much more specific now and fairer to both sides, and it's held up well through years of T&P decisions. ... All professorial faculty in this department are held to the same standards, but those standards have been adjusted to ensure comparable scholarly activity across a range of rather disparate fields. 8. Carol Klee, Dept. of Spanish and Portuguese, University of Minnesota I have attached the criteria for tenure and promotion of the Department of Spanish and Portuguese Studies at the University of Minnesota. There is a distinction made between linguists and literary scholars in the statement on research and publication which I have copied below: ''There must be clear evidence of substantial accomplishment and promise as a scholar, critic, or theorist. Optimally, for indefinite tenure one of the candidate's works will be a book or equivalent. Substantial articles (quality as well as quantity) documenting highly developed expertise in at least one area of specialization can be considered the equivalent. This is particularly true for faculty members who specialize in linguistics.'' Thanks again to everyone for their contributions. Lynn Pearson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Spanish Dept. of Romance Languages Bowling Green State University Bowling Green, OH 43403 pearson@bgnet.bgsu.edu *********************************************************** Lynn Pearson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Spanish Undergraduate Advisor for Spanish Education Majors Romance Languages Bowling Green State University Bowling Green, OH 43403 (419) 372-7141 (office) (419) 372-7332 (fax) Alternate email: lpearson_ny@yahoo.com |
|
| LL Issue: | 13.1365 | |
| Date Posted: | 15-May-2002 | |
| Original Query: | Read original query | |
|
Back |
||
|
|
||
|
Sums main page
|
||
|
About LINGUIST
|
Contact Us
|
Report Broken Link
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents. |
|
