Pharmaceutical Care and Health Systems, Office of Education, Academic Health Center at the University of Minnesota

For Faculty
Introduction to Promotion and Tenure
712 Statements
Pharmaceutical Care and Health Systems

Guidelines for Departmental Statements Required by Section 7.12 of Regulations Concerning Faculty Tenure

June 3, 1999: Adopted by Department of Pharmaceutical Care and Health Systems
September 7, 2000: Revised
November 2, 2000: Revised

I. Introductory Statement
This document describes the indices and standards that will be used to evaluate whether candidates meet the general criteria in section 7.11 of the Regulations.  For a complete perspective, the reader is advised to review Section 7 in its entirety.

II. College and Department Mission Statements
The College of Pharmacy is responsible for the education of pharmacy practitioners who will meet the health needs of the people of Minnesota and society and deliver essential pharmaceutical services.  The College is committed to the improvement of human health through the creation and dissemination of knowledge leading to the development of new drugs and new drug delivery systems, the optimization of drug use and the improvement of pharmaceutical services.  Also the College is committed to the development of pharmaceutical technology to strengthen the economy of the State of Minnesota.

The Department of Pharmaceutical Care and Health Systems (PCHS) holds that advancement of pharmaceutical care is critical to the preparation of pharmacists for practice in the state of Minnesota.  Teaching, practice, administration, research and other scholarly activity related to development of the practice of pharmacy are essential to the Department's and the College's success in continuing to meet and advance the role of pharmacy within the health care systems serving the needs of Minnesotans.  The PCHS mission is to advance the practice of pharmaceutical care and its role in the health care system for the benefit of patients and society through education, research, service, administration, and practice.

III. Granting of Indefinite Tenure

A. Criteria for Tenure: General (Abridged from section 7.11 of the Regulations Concerning Faculty Tenure, July 1, 1985)
The basis for awarding indefinite tenure is the determination that the achievements of an individual have demonstrated the individual's potential to continue to contribute significantly to the mission of the University and to its programs of teaching, research, other scholarly activity, and service over the course of the faculty member's academic career.  The primary criteria for demonstrating this potential are effectiveness in teaching and professional distinction through research or other scholarly activity.  Throughout this document the term "research" will be used to imply 'research or other scholarly activity'.  Elements of research, scholarly activity and creativity to be used for evaluation are defined as presented in the document titled "University Workload Task Force report of 1992" (see attachment).  Service, practice, and administration will be taken into account and the expectation in the primary areas (education and research) will be adjusted proportionately to account for assigned duties in these other areas of professional activity.  Service, practice, and administration must be taken into consideration, but these activities alone will not be the sole basis for awarding tenure.

1. Teaching (Professional and Graduate)
The requisites for effectiveness of a teacher include intellectual competence, integrity, independence, leadership, collaboration, enthusiasm, a spirit of scholarly inquiry, and a continuous increase in knowledge of the subject taught, an ability to effectively transmit knowledge to healthcare students, to arouse curiosity in beginning students and to stimulate advanced healthcare students to creative work.  Evaluation of effectiveness of teaching will include classroom performance, curriculum materials, educational development activities, and externship/clerkship student evaluation.  The evaluation of effectiveness of teaching will be based on:

a. The candidate's overall teaching ability as perceived by healthcare students and residents and documented by their responses on periodic student opinion surveys in a course in which the candidate is the major instructor.
b. The candidate's teaching competence as determined through teaching evaluations by other faculty and/or comments of peers of equal or higher rank, in team taught courses.
c. The candidate's contributions to education may be demonstrated by, but not limited to, any of the following:

1) Developing a new course, new experiential education experience, new lab exercises or experiences, or revising an existing course.
2) Receiving an educational development grant or directing an experimental educational program.
3) Publishing a review article of an educational nature in a professional journal.
4) Authoring or co-authoring a chapter in pharmacy, medicine, or health care-related textbook.
5) Participating as an invited contributor in a national symposium or workshop on some aspect of healthcare education.
6) Publishing an article on subjects relating to healthcare education.
7) Developing and presenting a continuing education program(s).
8) Receiving a recognized teaching award.
9) Developing or adapting a course for delivery using technology enhanced learning.
10) Developing a certificate program or other form of advanced professional education.
11) Developing a residency or fellowship program.

Any of the candidate's contributions listed above must be judged by peer review as having academic character and consisting of high quality and significance.

d. Probationary faculty who are required to provide students of the College with experiential education opportunities (clerkships and externships) will be evaluated on their ability to establish and maintain a practice setting to serve as a vehicle for their teaching activities.  The candidate must demonstrate distinction and special competence in a specific field of pharmacy practice that may include general practice.  The candidate's professional activities should be scrutinized for evidence of achievement, leadership and the development or utilization of new educational approaches and techniques for the solution of professional problems or other creative activities.
e. Evaluation of the practice competence of the candidate should be made by peer practitioners.  This evaluation should include the candidate's contributions in the following areas:

1) Innovative practice activities or models.
2) Practice competence in the detection, assessment, and resolution of drug therapy problems. (as documented by progress notes, chart entries, etc.).
3) Provision of quality patient care services.
4) Other documentary evidence of achievement of a professional nature as provided by the candidate or health care peer that is capable of evaluating the individual candidate.
5) Post-graduate practitioner training programs.

2. Research and Other Scholarly Activity
The purpose of this evaluation is to determine whether or not the candidate has demonstrated leadership in research, either through independent and/or collaborative research activities, and is capable of directing and conducting research of high quality.  The candidate will be evaluated to determine if she/he has achieved the following standards.

a. Publications
The candidate is an author of original research published in peer-reviewed journals.  Non-peer reviewed articles of significant impact may also be considered.  The candidate must demonstrate significant contributions to the initiation, conduct and reporting of this research.  Scholarly publications in which the candidate is an author but not the primary author and other publications such as case reports, drug reviews or therapeutic reviews, published in peer-reviewed journals will be considered.  Publications resulting from work as a student or a post-doctoral fellow may also be considered in evaluating the candidate's research productivity as it relates to potential for continued significant contributions to the University mission.  In multi-authored articles, the contribution of the candidate should be specifically described and evaluated.

b. Research Funding
The candidate has secured funding from sources outside the University to support his/her independent or collaborative research efforts.  The candidate should also demonstrate the ability to obtain research funding from federal agencies, foundations, or private sources by competition at a national level.  Some of the funding of this research and scholarly activities should have gone through a peer review process that evaluates the quality of the work.

c. Training of Advanced Degree Professionals
The candidate has demonstrated the ability to train advanced degree professionals as evidenced by an ongoing post-doctoral research training program and/or advising of graduate students.  This may also include advanced training of professionals in an ongoing residency or fellowship program or advising such residents and fellows.

d. Peer Recognition
The candidate has demonstrated that she/he is recognized by peers as making significant contributions to the field.  Examples of such evidence include invited presentations in national scientific and professional meetings, receiving recognition awards (e.g., career development, young investigator), serving on national review committees and editorial boards and election to prestigious national organizations that recognize excellence in the discipline, or invited participation in legislative, regulatory, or public policy processes.

e. Quality of Work and Potential for Advancement
A review of three of the candidate's publications and other research efforts by at least three tenured members of the faculty who outrank the candidate and at least three academic peers with expertise in the same area at other universities must conclude that the work is scholarly, creative, original, and of high quality and significance.

3. Service, Practice, and Administration
Public service, professional practice, and University administrative activities must also be considered along with education and scholarly activities.  For faculty members with substantial effort in this area, the expectation in other areas (education and scholarly activity) will be adjusted to account for the relative proportion of time spent in each area.  The relevance of service, practice, and administrative activities to the missions of the department and the College of Pharmacy should be assessed.  Evidence of the strength and quality of these activities should be provided by the individual faculty member and by qualified peers or colleagues with first hand knowledge and experience related to such activities as a part of the annual review of activities.  Recognition should be given to scholars who make significant service contributions to student welfare through service to student organizations, to professional organizations, to other health professions, to the community, to the state and to the nation in their special capacities as scholars.  Service, practice, and administration will proportionately compensate for reduced contributions in teaching and research, but may not be considered as the primary area for tenure evaluation.  A strong record of service, practice, and administration is valued and will be given proportionate consideration and strength in the evaluation of a faculty member for tenure.

B. Procedures

1. Initiation of Recommendations for Tenure
Recommendations for tenure may be initiated by any member of the Department faculty.  Any faculty member may request the Committee to remove his/her name from consideration.  It is strongly recommended that a faculty member who believes she/he should be considered for tenure discuss these possibilities with the department head and obtain, if at all possible, the support of the head for consideration.  Members of the department who hold indefinite tenure or continuing appointment will be polled by secret ballot on the recommendation to nominate the candidate for consideration by the Promotion and Tenure Committee for the granting of tenure.  The Promotion and Tenure Committee will consider all candidates in accordance with its "Guidelines of Operation" and the document titled "Annual and Post-Tenure Review of Faculty in the Department of Pharmaceutical Care & Health Systems."  The Committee's recommendation will be considered in a special faculty meeting attended only by faculty eligible to vote.  Voting will be by secret ballot of all faculty who hold indefinite tenure in the Department of Pharmaceutical Care & Health Systems, regardless of rank, on the recommendation to grant indefinite tenure.

2. Recommendations for Continued Appointment
The review for continuation of appointment of probationary faculty or faculty with annually renewable contracts (T and N appointments) shall be conducted annually.  Documentation will be prepared by the faculty member under consideration and departmental head and shall include copies of annual evaluations and related materials and the faculty member's curriculum vitae.  The Department Promotion and Tenure Committee will conduct a review annually to assess the candidate's progress.  The Promotion and Tenure Committee will make recommendations to the Department faculty concerning continuation of appointment.  All members of the Department faculty who hold appointments of equal or higher rank, may vote, by secret ballot, on the recommendation for continuation of appointment.

3. Tenured Appointments (P) and Probationary Appointments (N)

a. Tenured appointments (regular positions) will be granted only to probationary (N) faculty or to faculty who hold a position funded with resources designated as being for a specific tenured (P) position.  College faculty with term appointments are eligible to apply for available "regular" positions through participation in the search process.
b. A tenured (P) appointment shall be made only after the Department's Promotion and Tenure Committee and the faculty who hold tenure have voted on the recommendation for tenure.
c. A probationary (N) appointment shall be continued only after the Department's Promotion and Tenure Committee and the faculty who hold tenure have voted on the recommendation for continued appointment.
d. The vote to grant tenure or continued appointment shall be separate from, precede, and be in addition to, the vote for promotion to a specific rank.

IV. Promotion

A. Criteria
Excellence in teaching, research and service, practice, or administration are meaningful parameters for academic promotion.  Although a balance among these functions is obviously desirable, it is recognized that the best use of professional talent may often dictate that a faculty member's contribution in one area will predominate.  Service, practice, and/or administration will proportionately compensate for reduced contributions in teaching and research and may be considered as the primary area for promotion.

1. Assessment of Academic Activities

a. Teaching
The requisites for effectiveness of a teacher include intellectual competence, integrity, independence, leadership, collaboration, enthusiasm, a spirit of scholarly inquiry, a continuous increase in knowledge of the subject taught, demonstrated ability to effectively transmit knowledge to healthcare students, demonstrated ability to arouse curiosity in beginning healthcare students and to stimulate advanced healthcare students to creative work.  Evaluation of the professional, graduate, and continuing education teaching skills should include appraisals by other faculty and critical evaluation of student impressions of the candidate's performance as a teacher.  In judging teaching competence, special consideration should be given to formal evaluation of the candidate's teaching by peers with equal, or higher rank, and by students using the College's standard teaching evaluation procedures.  Educational review articles, contributions to textbooks, innovative and technology-enhanced learning activities, and investigation of teaching techniques should be given consideration in evaluating teaching ability.

The candidate's contributions to education as demonstrated by any of the Elements of Teaching used for evaluation of effort adapted from the University Workload Task Force Report of 1992 may be considered (see attachment).

The candidate's contributions to education may be demonstrated by, but not limited to, any of the following:

1) Developing a new course, new experiential education experience, new lab exercises or experiences, or revising an existing course.
2) Receiving an educational development grant or directing an experimental educational program.
3) Publishing a review article of educational nature in a professional journal.
4) Authoring or co-authoring a chapter in pharmacy, medicine, or health care-related textbook.
5) Participating as an invited contributor in a national symposium or workshop on some aspect of healthcare education.
6) Publishing an article on subjects relating to healthcare education.
7) Developing and presenting a continuing education program(s).
8) Receiving a recognized teaching award.
9) Developing or adapting a course for delivery using technology enhanced learning.
10) Developing a certificate program or other form of advanced professional education.
11) Developing a residency or fellowship program .

b. Research and other Scholarly Activities
The requisites for evaluating the quality of a candidate's research should include the following:

1) A critical review of three scholarly publications that reflect the candidate's most significant accomplishments by at least three members of the faculty who outrank the candidate.
2) A critical review by the faculty who outrank the candidate.
3) An appraisal of the candidate's research or scholarly potential by academic peers with expertise in the same areas at other universities.
4) Other evidence of recognition and acceptance by peers and outside constituents.

Throughout this document the term "research" will be used to imply 'research or other scholarly activity'.  Elements of research, scholarly activity and creativity to be used for evaluation are adapted from the University Workload Task Force Report of 1992 (see attachment).

c. Practice
A demonstrated distinction in the special competencies and activities of a specific field of professional practice (including general practice) should be recognized as a criterion for promotion.  The candidate's professional activities should be evaluated for evidence of achievement, leadership, collaboration, and the development or utilization of new approaches and techniques for the solution of practice-related issues.

Peer practitioners should make evaluation of the practice competence of the candidate.  This evaluation should include practice-related elements of effort as adapted from the University Workload Task Force Report of 1992 (see attachment) as well as the candidate's contributions in the following areas:

1) Innovative practice activities or models.
2) Practice competence in the detection, assessment, and resolution of drug therapy problems. (as documented by progress notes, chart entries, etc.).
3) Provision of quality patient care services.
4) Other documentary evidence of achievement of a professional nature as provided by the candidate or health care peer that is capable of evaluating the individual.
5) Post-graduate practitioner training programs.
6) invited presentations in national scientific and professional meetings.
7) receiving recognition awards.

d. University and Public Service
Recognition should be given to scholars who make significant service contributions to student welfare through service on student organizations, to professional organizations, to other health professions, to the community, to the state and to the nation in their special capacities as scholars.

e. Administration
Recognition should be given for the valuable contributions of administrators in directing the activities of the Department, College, or University.  The faculty member's administrative supervisor shall evaluate the leadership activities along with peer administrators in other units within or outside this University, and faculty under the direction of the administrator.

2. Specific Standards for Various Ranks

a. Assistant Professor
Promotion to Assistant Professor requires that a candidate has demonstrated a capacity for teaching and independent research or scholarly activity and, where appropriate, innovative pharmacy practice.  This rank may also be accorded a person who has completed only the educational program characteristic of this discipline when that person has given evidence of superior potential for professional growth and productivity.  A demonstrated capacity for university and public service or for superior professional activity may be used as a parameter for promotion to this rank.  The candidate should have the ability to participate in the training of research investigators, health care residents and fellows, or advanced degree professionals.

b. Associate Professor
Promotion to the rank of Associate Professor requires clear and demonstrable evidence that the candidate, has developed a program of original research or scholarly activity, teaching, and service.  The candidate should have demonstrated the ability to supervise the training of research investigators, health care residents and/or fellows, advanced practitioners, and advanced degree professionals.  Promotion to the rank of Associate Professor implies that the individual is growing in experience and academic maturity and has the future potential to achieve recognition as a national authority in his/her discipline through the development of an original program of research, teaching, and service.

c. Professor
Promotion to the rank of Professor implies advanced academic maturity and requires evidence that the candidate has achieved recognition as a national authority in his/her discipline through the development of an original program of research or scholarly activity, teaching, and service.  If research is the major aspect of the candidate's activities, he/she should have demonstrated accomplishments and ongoing potential.  If teaching is the primary criterion for promotion, the candidate should be clearly superior in the activity and there should be evidence of excellent performance by students whom he/she has prepared for careers in teaching, scholarship and service.  If professional service or university and public service represent a significant aspect of the candidate's activities; he/she should have obtained national recognition for his/her papers and activities in professional organizations and in public service.

B. Procedures

1. Initiation of Recommendations for Promotion
Recommendations for promotion may be initiated by any member of the Department faculty for himself/herself or for other members of the Department faculty.  Any faculty member may request the Committee to remove his/her name from consideration.  It is strongly recommended that a faculty member who believes she/he should be considered for tenure discuss these possibilities with the department head and obtain, if at all possible, the support of the head for consideration.  Members of the department who hold indefinite tenure (P), probationary (N) or term (T) appointments will be polled by secret ballot on the recommendation to nominate the candidate for consideration by the PCHS Department Promotion and Tenure Committee for promotion.  The PCHS Department Promotion and Tenure Committee will consider all candidates in accordance with its "Guidelines of Operation" and the document titled "Annual and Post-Tenure Review of Faculty in the Department of Pharmaceutical Care & Health Systems."  The Committee's recommendation will be considered in a special faculty meeting attended only by faculty eligible to vote.  Voting will be by secret ballot of all faculty in the Department of Pharmaceutical Care and Health Systems who hold an academic rank equal to or higher than the rank for which a nominee is being considered for recommendation for promotion.

2. Academic Ranks

a. Professor, Associate Professor and Assistant Professor: Promotion to the rank of full professor, associate professor or assistant professor, shall be made only after the PCHS Promotion and Tenure Committee and the College faculty eligible to vote have voted on the recommendation in accordance with established procedures.  Promotion of a tenure-track faculty member (probationary appointee) to the rank of Associate Professor or Professor must be accompanied by an appointment with indefinite tenure.  Initial appointment to the rank of full professor, associate professor or assistant professor will be made by the Dean based on the recommendation of the department head in which the candidate will have an appointment.  The department head's recommendation shall include the search committee's report and a vote of the faculty in the department who hold an academic rank equal to or higher than the rank for which a nominee is being considered for recommendation for promotion.
b. Joint Appointments: Initial appointments, or promotion of faculty with a primary appointment in the department with a secondary appointment elsewhere in the University, shall be reviewed in the same manner as a full-time, primary appointment in the department with the additional requirement that consideration will also be given to a recommendation from the head of the unit in which the faculty member has a secondary appointment.  The recommendation from the head of the unit that has given the faculty member a secondary appointment shall include relevant information on qualifications and performance of the faculty member.  The unit, school, or department in which the secondary appointment is held may conduct its own independent academic review.

3. Documentation
It is the responsibility of each faculty member to keep a record of his/her teaching, scholarly activity and service.  It is the responsibility of the department head to request each faculty member to update by September 1 each year this documentation of the faculty member's professional performance for the previous fiscal year (July 1 - June 30).

It is also the responsibility of the department head to review the performance of each department faculty member annually and enter a summary of this review as part of the documentation.  The written annual appraisal shall be made available to, and be discussed with, the candidate.

Materials to be submitted:

a. Letter of Nomination from the faculty member, other faculty in the department, and/or the department head.
b. A Summary Appraisal of the candidate's qualifications by the department head including the vote of the eligible department faculty.  In the case of a joint appointment, a similar appraisal and recommendation shall be made by the secondary department.
c. A Curriculum Vitae which shall indicate the candidate's degrees, honors, professional work experience (academic and otherwise), professional affiliations, committees, consultantships, etc.
d. A description of the candidate's teaching activities shall include, where applicable:

1) Current teaching responsibilities - course titles, credits and description; current teaching activities in clinical areas.
2) Teaching responsibilities during the full period of his/her service on the faculty to include those in professional, graduate and continuing education courses with corresponding titles, numbers, credits and descriptions.
3) The number of Pharm.D.IV (paper and presentation), other pharmacy students, graduate students and post-doctoral fellows currently supervised by the candidate, with their degree objectives.
4) The number of masters and doctoral degrees awarded graduate students supervised by the candidate.
5) The candidate's faculty status with the Graduate School.

e. Evaluations of the candidate's teaching ability at all levels of professional, graduate and continuing professional instruction offered by the unit and graduate programs, including student evaluations of the candidate's teaching ability.
f. A description of the candidate's research and scholarly activities which shall include:

1) A statement by the candidate of the nature and significance of the candidate's research.
2) A summary of all grant support and any evidence of potential for additional or continued support.
3) A complete bibliography.
4) A description of the candidate's responsibilities and/or contributions in publications and grants.
5) Five copies of three recent scholarly publications that reflect the candidate's most significant accomplishments.

g. Teaching or research awards, invited participation in symposium, lectures, contributions to textbooks, etc.  Any special professional honor or recognition.
h. Names of four to six persons from outside the College who are at equal or higher rank and who would be in a position to evaluate the candidate's professional standing.  No more than two of these persons may be from the University of Minnesota and affiliated institutions.  The candidate may request the identity of the outside reviewers so that he/she may solicit additional letters of support from other reviewers.  However, candidates will not be encouraged to obtain such letters.
i. A description of the candidate's professional practice activities which shall include: a statement by the candidate describing his/her practice including innovations or improvements in drug therapy or patient care services which he/she has developed or instituted, a statement by clinical practitioners from the candidate's area of practice evaluating the clinical competence and contributions of the candidate.
j. Service to the Department, College and University.
k. Service to community groups, professional associations, or other professional assistance to public or private agencies.
l. Service in Health Care Delivery Systems.
m. Other materials which the candidate wishes to submit.

The Promotion and Tenure Committee chairperson shall inform members of the faculty of their right under Minnesota law to examine or obtain copies of filed data of which they are the subjects and to have the meaning of it explained to them.

Attachment
University Workload Task Force Report (1992)

I. Introduction
For several important reasons, the University community has been prompted to define and clarify the expectations of faculty effort at the University of Minnesota.  One reason is that the pressure to make the best use of the faculty's time is increasing.  Demands for teaching, research, and service/outreach output are generally growing while available resources fail to keep pace with inflation.  Another reason is that, in this time of economic difficulty and constricted budgets, the general public is demanding more accountability from tax-supported institutions.  Most importantly, our mutual responsibilities as a community of scholars who support the tripartite mission of the University require us to develop the means to guide our efforts.  This responsibility has its roots in the "moderate communitarianism" philosophy (Etzioni, 1990).  This philosophy is juxtaposed with a more individualistic philosophy, emphasizing individual faculty rights (Rawls, 1971), that some see as underlying other University policies such as the Tenure Code and the Policy on Academic Freedom.  A balance between rights and responsibilities is needed.  Faculty rightly believe that society has entrusted them with a major responsibility to create, organize, disseminate and apply knowledge for the common good.  As a professional community, the faculty must reward society's trust by ensuring the development and application of appropriate effort principles.  Failure to do so simply invites the imposition of inappropriate bureaucratic mechanisms.  In response to these concerns, the Faculty Consultative Committee (FCC), in consultation with the University administration, appointed the University Workload Task Force on July 15, 1992, with the general charge of developing proposed faculty effort principles by mid-September.

As the report below details, the Task Force has chosen to address effort clarification by specifying a process of individual effort determination.  This process is guided by a set of principles that applies to all University faculty.  Additional sets of principles with increased specificity apply to various divisions of the University.  The proposed process emphasizes decentralization in recognition of the diverse character of the University.

As a starting point in this project, the Task Force reviewed studies and relevant legislation from University researchers and administrators in other states where faculty effort issues have recently been considered.  Additionally, the Task Force met with University colleagues familiar with the issues of effort determination and reporting.  Based on these inputs, two distinct and important components of oversight related to faculty effort were identified.  One deals with establishing good administrative practices and procedures to ensure the development of policies to guide faculty effort.  The other ensures the availability of hard data on faculty activities and accomplishments.  Both approaches are needed.

Defining faculty effort expectations and keeping better records of effort and accomplishments will have several salutary effects.  They will:

* Help clarify variations in missions among units of the University and facilitate the development of a consensus regarding those missions within the University community.
* Link individual activities more clearly to the priorities of the University community.
* Facilitate the self-regulation of the faculty.
* Improve the University's ability to relate faculty effort to components of its tripartite mission.

The Task Force recommends that the University community adopt the administrative practices and procedures outlined in this report.  This includes the statement of principles and the effort determination process.  The list of faculty effort elements is seen as an evolving document that is the joint responsibility of the Faculty Consultative Committee and the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs.  We also recommend very prompt University attention to developing a faculty activities and accomplishments database.

We have argued that the topic of faculty effort is very important and it is clear that the brief time available to the Task Force makes a definitive treatment of this important and complex subject impossible.  We strongly urge members of the University community to adopt an incremental approach to this important topic.  From this perspective, adoption of the principles, process, and database recommendations presented below is just the first step in the development and reporting of faculty effort.  Given the experiences of other universities, the Task Force encourages all members of the University community to engage in the process of building on these initial steps as a way of ensuring the evolution of an effective system for dealing with faculty effort.

II. Principles
The following principles are to be used to develop a clear understanding between each faculty member and the appropriate University department/college/unit regarding expected effort.  The process envisioned is outlined in the next section.  A key concept is the development at one or more levels of a cascading set of principles.  Each set of principles is consistent with those at the more general level but is more specific to the local situation.  None of the developed principles is intended to conflict with existing University policies and procedures such as the Tenure Code and the policy on academic freedom.

* As units vary in their contributions to the University's tripartitemission of teaching, research, and service/outreach, so will the proportion of effort contributed by individuals to each component of the overall mission vary.  Each individual is expected to develop his/her intellectual efforts in accordance with his/her individual competencies and the needs of the unit in fulfilling its mission.
* All faculty members are expected to conduct some work that supports each of the three major mission components.  As faculty follow normal career life cycles, substantial shifts may occur in the proportion of effort devoted to each of the major components.  For example, some departments reduce the service/ outreach and administrative obligations of their non-tenured faculty so that they can devote additional time to research in order to reach the threshold for tenure.
* In addition to undertaking activities that support the University's tripartite mission, faculty are also expected to take part in administrative and governance activities that are needed.
* Teaching at research universities necessarily includes training in research, clinical, and artistic methods.  Regular classroom instruction is not effective in meeting some of these needs especially in professional and post baccalaureate programs.  Much of this training must be accomplished through informal one-on-one mentoring.
* For pay and promotion purposes, faculty will continue to be evaluated on the significance and magnitude of their accomplishments rather than on how hard they work.
* Faculty efforts must, in the aggregate, meet the workload of their unit and must be responsive to the mission of their unit.  Expectations for unit workload must be commensurate with available resources.  With appropriate consultation, academic officers (e.g. deans or department chairs) must set relevant effort guidelines and communicate them to the faculty as a group and individually.
* Accessibility to students, colleagues, administrators, and the public requires that appropriate time must be spent at the faculty member's University office.  It must be recognized, however, that many faculty activities are appropriately carried out at sites away from the faculty's University offices (e.g. libraries and archives on campus and elsewhere, research laboratories, home offices, industry sites and professional meeting locations).
* Both the individual faculty member and the University have a responsibility to maintain the individual faculty member's currency in his/her field of knowledge which is related to his/her unit's mission.
* The faculty member and his/her appropriate administrator must share a clear understanding of the effort expected of the faculty member and that understanding must be reviewed periodically.  This understanding should be developed in a timely fashion so that faculty can adequately plan their activities.
* As professionals, faculty are responsible for establishing a daily work schedule that allows them to meet their teaching, research, service/outreach, administration and governance obligations.  Persons of talent and energy will have difficulty accomplishing all that is expected of them within the limits of a 40 hour week.  Numerous national and local studies confirm that a typical faculty member works approximately 55 hours per week.

III. Effort Determination Process
In the university environment, there is a fine line between the institution's need to define how the institution will carry out its tripartite mission and the faculty member's obligation to determine what specific efforts best serve the institution's objectives.  As with most major research universities, the University of Minnesota has a tradition of collegiality and consultation in the determination of its mission, goals, and objectives.

While freedom of action is a significant corollary of academic responsibility, individuals at all levels are not assumed to be free to follow only their own interests.  Similarly, departments and colleges must recognize the validity of extra- departmental or extra collegiate workload. In a very real sense, effort determination is a "team" decision.

At a minimum, all faculty members should have a clear understanding of the effort that the institution expects them to provide.  This expectation should at least address how much effort should be allocated to each component of the University's tripartite mission (teaching, research, service/outreach) and how much to administration and governance activities.  The nature of work can vary according to the varying missions of units within the University and according to the stage of development of individual faculty members.  Thus, the University cannot prescribe a uniform expectation of effort for all faculty members.  The University can, however, ensure the timely determination of individual effort expectations by defining an appropriate process of faculty and administrative involvement.  While it is clear that each faculty member is entitled to significant professional latitude in determining how his/her efforts are carried out, it is also clear that the University has an obligation to establish reasonable expectations regarding both the effort and accomplishments of each faculty member.

The process to follow in developing effort expectations is outlined below:

1. Upon passage of the Faculty Effort Principles and the Effort Determination Process by the Faculty Senate and their approval by the Administration, the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs will direct the deans of the colleges and the vice-chancellors for Academic Affairs of the Morris and Crookston campuses, to develop, consistent with these institutional faculty effort principles, elaborations of these principles for their units which will provide more specific guidance in the determination of individual faculty effort expectations.
[Footnote: It is hoped that the Duluth campus administration and faculty will consider these principles as part of their collective bargaining process. It is assumed that the medical faculty at Duluth will participate in the Health Sciences process.]
2. Consistent with the Principles above, each college or campus will use its regular faculty consultative process to develop college or campus effort principles.  Since effort expectations may vary by department or division within colleges or campuses, the college or campus may choose to have both a unit-wide set of principles and a more specific set for individual departments or divisions.
3. Upon the development of college, campus and subunit faculty effort principles, the dean or vice chancellor shall forward such principles to the appropriate vice president for approval.  When approved at the vice president level, the principles shall be forwarded to the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs.  All principles will become effective when they are approved by the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs.
4. All revisions of college, campus, or related subunit faculty effort principles will follow this process.
5. When all of the relevant effort principles are approved, the appropriate administrator will meet with each individual faculty member to develop a clear understanding of the expected faculty effort.  Normally effort expectations will be set sufficiently in advance of their applicability that faculty can adequately plan their activities. Appropriate documentation of these understandings is desirable.

It is expected that the first cycle of this process will be completed within twelve months of its approval by the administration.

IV. Terminology
As administrators and faculty develop an understanding of effort expectations, they will need a common set of terminology to identify specific elements of faculty effort. To promote standardization of the terminology, the Task Force is providing an initial list of the elements of effort (see attached).  The major categories in the list are the three traditional mission areas - teaching, research, and service/outreach.  In addition, we have identified a fourth category to include administration and governance activities.  This categorization is consistent with the Tenure Code separation of professional service and other service activities.  There are numerous subcategories within each category.  The Task Force is aware that the Outreach Council is proposing to eliminate the use of the term service in describing mission related activities.  The judgment of the Task Force as reflected in the proposed list of elements is that activities in support of professional groups belong in a mission category and should not be viewed as simply support service.  If the recommendations of the Outreach Council are adopted by the University, the existing wording in the Tenure Code and other documents will need to be changed.

This extensive list of elements of faculty effort is an indication of the complex and comprehensive set of duties that faculty members typically perform.  Obviously, not all of the faculty engage in all of these specific activities.  We expect that units will make use of this list in developing their effort principles, making explicit which aspects are most applicable and most important to the mission of the unit.  The initial list should not be seen as a fixed document, but rather one that is intended to evolve over time.  Presuming that our initial effort will receive considerable refinement as this report is implemented, we recommend that together with the Faculty Consultative Committee (FCC), the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs institute a systematic process for reviewing and updating this list on a regular basis.

V. Database of Activities and Accomplishments
Most of this document is directed to the statement of institutional faculty effort principles and the process for elaborating and utilizing these principles within units.  It is also important to include here a recommendation for reporting the activities and accomplishments of the faculty.

Faculty effort principles and development processes will provide a necessary basis for accountability, but they may not be sufficient by themselves.  The record of actual faculty effort and accomplishments is a form of accountability that is commonly expected.

While the institution must be careful not to impose onerous reporting requirements on itself and its faculty, it must have a means of summarizing faculty effort and accomplishments.  Currently nearly all faculty members prepare an annual statement of activities and the University's Course Inventory provides information on some aspects of teaching.  However, the current institutional information seems substantially deficient in providing an overview of the full range of effort and, most importantly, of the broad array of faculty accomplishments.

In response to this need, the Task Force recommends the following action:

The Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs will, in consultation with the FCC, appoint a task force to recommend the most appropriate means of collecting and reporting data on faculty activities and accomplishments.  Consideration should be given to data that reflect unit activities and accomplishments to the extent that they are more than a simple aggregation of the data for individuals.  The recommendations of the Task Force will be available for action by June, 1993.  With this recommendation, the Faculty Workload Task Force is specifically not suggesting a very detailed data collection activity in which form triumphs over substance.  In particular, we would expect a data collection effort that is designed around the list of effort elements but does not address detail below the level of the first major subdivisions under each of the four major categories (Teaching; Research, Scholarly and Creative Work; Service/Outreach; and Administration and Governance).

Attachment
Attachment to Workload Task Force Report (1992)

Elements of Faculty Effort

I. Elements of Teaching (Undergraduate, Graduate and Professional)

A. Large Basic Lecture Courses

- Lecturing Preparation and updating syllabi
- Preparing current lectures
- Arranging guest lectures by other faculty and professionals in the field or subject area
- Preparing text materials
- Reviewing and selecting textbooks
- Preparing visual aids and demonstrations
- Reading to keep up with recent developments
- Preparing problem sets, homework assignments and exams
- Publishing lecture notes
- Meeting with students during office hours and at other times
- Training and supervising teaching assistants and graders
- Maintaining course records
- Coordinating with other faculty in multi-section courses
- Managing discussion sessions
- Grading exams Responding to student questions and comments

B. Regular Lecture and Lecture Discussion Courses

- Lecturing
- Preparing and updating syllabi
- Preparing current lectures
- Arranging guest lectures by other faculty and professionals in the field or subject area
- Reviewing and selecting textbooks and other readings
- Preparing visual aids and demonstrations
- Framing activities designed to facilitate focused discussions
- Reading to keep up with recent developments
- Preparing text materials
- Publishing lecture notes
- Preparing problem sets, homework assignments, and exams
- Grading problem sets, homework assignments, and exams
- Meeting with students during office hours and at other times
- Maintaining course records
- Responding to student questions and comments

C. Laboratory and Field Courses

- Revising and testing field exercises, laboratory experiments, and models
- Devising computer exercises
- Teaching the laboratory or field exercise (lecturing and leading)
- Arranging professional contacts to meet with students in field settings
- Organizing equipment for practice
- Planning and supervising field trips
- Preparing reagents, specimens, etc.
- Supervising teaching assistants
- Devising lab quizzes and exams
- Grading exercises, quizzes and written and practical exams
- Developing and presenting lectures on laboratory material
- Guiding students and answering questions in lab and at other times
- Maintaining course records

D. Seminars and Advanced Courses

- Lecturing when appropriate, or evaluating student presentations
- Reading extensive specialized literature
- Reading lengthy student papers
- Choosing, inviting, and hosting guest lecturers
- Meeting extensively out of class with students
- Assigning grades and maintaining course records
- Advising and directing student tutorials
- Selecting readings and other class materials

E. Clinical Professional Courses

- Clinic and bedside teaching
- Individual or small group discussions and evaluations
- Patient related seminars and clinical materials review
- Developing and presenting lectures on clinical materials
- Lecturing
- Preparing and updating syllabi
- Devising clinical quizzes and exams
- Grading quizzes and exams
- Evaluating papers and care plans
- Maintaining course records
- Responding to student questions and comments
- Guiding students and answering questions in clinic/hospital and at other times
- Teaching patient examining techniques
- Maintaining course records
- Planning and chart reviewal for student clinical experiences

F. Instructional Preparation and Follow-up

- Learning about general institutional resources, e.g. computer facilities
- Consulting internally on scientific methods
- Handling post-course problems and complaints
- Working with publishers to provide advice on needed texts and appropriate authors
- Maintaining artistic and intellectual standing in the discipline

G. Instructional Improvement

- Revising and designing curriculum
- Exploring new teaching approaches
- Obtaining and implementing student course evaluations
- Evaluating the teaching of peers
- Developing and participating in internships and international programs
- Preparing and teaching honors courses
- Attending relevant professional meetings
- Previewing audiovisual and computerized programs for classroom use
- Updating study guides and other educational materials

H. New Course Development

- Reading texts, monographs, and research journals
- Consulting with other faculty at UM and elsewhere
- Preparing grants for course and curricular development
- Preparing new lecture notes, visual aids, etc.
- Writing textbooks, study aids, etc.

I. Undergraduate Creative Work and Research Supervision

- Meeting with prospective students to explain research possibilities
- Planning suitable research projects
- Training in necessary lab and data analysis techniques
- Frequently discussing results, giving guidance on next steps to take, troubleshooting
- Editing research papers
- Helping prepare research presentations
- Obtaining grant support

J. Student Advising (Graduate and Undergraduate)

- Giving advice on course selection
- Providing career guidance
- Providing personal counseling and referral
- Writing letters of recommendation
- Supervising pre-professional student organizations
- Serving on thesis guidance and oral exam committees
- Devising, administering, and grading graduate written prelim exams
- Providing approvals for use of university services
- Advising ad hoc student groups
- Providing guidance and direction in the field

K. Working With Other Faculty on Curricular Decisions and Development

- Coordinating multi-section courses
- Preparing syllabi, textbooks, and exams
- Revising existing courses
- Coordinating sequences of courses
- Devising new courses
- Developing new curricula, majors, minors, etc.

L. Creative Work and Research Activities That Should Be Counted Under Teaching

- Guiding and mentoring Master's and PhD candidates
- Supervising and training postdoctoral students
- Attending research group conferences, journal clubs, and meetings related to training young scholars
- Obtaining and administering training and instructional development grants
- Reviewing theses and participating in review or examining committees for post baccalaureate programs
- Colloquium coordination and presentation

II. Elements of Research, Scholarly, and Creative Work

A. Hands-on Faculty Creative Work and Research

- Pursuing scholarly investigation in the laboratory, the library or in the field
- Participation in research as a faculty member/scientist in the Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station or similar unit
- Creating works of art, writing music, designing, architecture, performing works of art, etc.
- Undertaking scholarly investigations with colleagues at other institutions (e.g. during quarter leave, or via telecommunications)
- Applying art and facilitating arts and activities
- Writing and publishing* research papers
- Reviewing articles and monographs of peers
- Writing research publications* with post-doctoral associates or colleagues
- Preparing scholarly presentations for local, national and international meetings Editing collections of essays
- Carrying out clinical research (laboratory, epidemiological, etc.)
- Clinical collaboration with basic researchers
- Writing Review articles
- Developing innovative models of teaching, practice or service

* Publication within the arts means placing work before professional communities and public.

B. Graduate and Professional Student Creative Work and Research

- Assisting research students outside of the instructional setting
- Supervising creative works outside of the instructional setting
- Writing research publications in conjunction with graduate assistants
- Assisting students in travel, and attendance at research meetings
- Preparing students for their research presentations
- Attending graduate research presentations
- Preparing and presenting research at local, national and international meetings
- Writing laboratory specifications, and documentation (e.g. lab safety)
- Supervising medical and other health sciences resident research contributions

C. Undergraduate Creative Work and Research

- Assisting in preparing material for undergraduate research projects
- Counseling graduate students in assisting undergraduate research
- Assisting undergraduates in summer undergraduate research projects
- Attending undergraduate research presentations
- Maintaining relationships with organizations supporting undergraduate research projects
- Conducting tutorials and directed studies activities
- Consulting internally on scientific methods

D. Supporting a Creative Work and Research Base

- Writing unsolicited proposals to federal, state and local government funding agencies
- Writing unsolicited proposals to private foundations
- Writing solicited proposals through the federal registry
- Writing solicited proposals to private industry
- Obtaining research funding support
- Managing budgets, contracts and grant requests
- Selecting and supervising technical support staff
- Writing specifications for capital equipment purchases
- Writing specifications for building and laboratory renovation
- Attending committee meetings for managing laboratory facilities (e.g. the High and resolution electron microscopy center and human subject and animal experimentation review)
- Preparing interim and final project reports
- Arranging and conducting project site reviews
- Attending meetings to discuss preparation of proposals to funding agencies
- Attending meetings to coordinate inter-institutional research projects
- Reading appropriate journals and other publications

III. Elements of Service/Outreach

A. Professional Reviewing grants and manuscripts of peers

- Serving on advisory boards of government and foundation -granting agencies
- Serving on national examining boards (e.g. The American Board of Medical Examiners)
- Providing editorial functions for professional journals or collections of essays
- Serving as officers and counselors for professional societies
- Evaluating non-University of Minnesota faculty accomplishments for promotion and tenure
- Maintaining liaison relationships with local, state and national professional societies
- Reviewing external books/papers/proposals as requested by others Organizing and presenting workshops, symposia, and sessions at meetings
- Visiting other major research institutes and universities at the request of funding agencies or other universities
- Meeting with government, industrial and private foundationleaders to generate funding proposal interest
- Hosting faculty visitors
- Mentoring junior colleagues
-Serving on accrediting bodies

B. Clinical Service

- Diagnosing and treating patients
- Holding diagnostic conferences
- Preparing and reviewing patient records
- Providing public education about health-related issues
- Facilitating patient care/management seminars

C. Extension and Outreach

- Needs assessment
- Program evaluation
- Research synthesis and developing interpretations
- Writing periodic consumer interest articles for the popular press
- Developing research based "fact sheets," bulletins, audio-visual and other educational materials on new technology and other ideas useful to consumer groups
- Serving on advisory committees to various community and commodity groups
- Coordinating county and providing input to state 4-H youth programs
- Conducting periodic mass media educational programs
- Establishing demonstration plots illustrating new crop varieties and experimental treatments
- Developing and carrying out informational conferences, workshops, field tours, and field day demonstrations
- Responding to individual requests for information on horticulture, forestry, agronomy, soils, pest control, etc.
- Relaying consumer issues and problems to University specialists and responding with recommendations
- Carrying out applied research directed at specific short term needs and problems
- Providing expertise to public agencies
- Developing field trials and demonstrations
-Consulting on scientific methods

D. Community Service and Education

- Working with other parts of the higher education system
- Consulting without compensation with units of local, national and international government
- Collaborating and consulting with local industry
- Facilitating the transfer of technology to industry
- Serving without compensation as expert witnesses
- Providing outreach programs to community professionals and consumers of their services or products
- Assisting local school systems
- Providing expertise to the media, community groups and the general public
- Answering phone and other contacts of the general public
- Delivering non credit courses
- Providing lectures, seminars, and workshops for the public
- Preparing publications and other materials to communicate information to the public

E. Quasi-State Agency Functions

- Coordinating or conducting activities with government constituents

IV. Elements of Administration and Governance

- Preparing course schedules
- Providing leadership for specific departments, colleges, or the University
- Allocating space and facilities allocation
- Supervising shared research facilities
- Recruiting faculty and staff
- Making hiring, promotion and tenure decisions
- Taking part in faculty governance Developing educational policy
- Providing advice to administration
- Handling grievances
- Assisting with undergraduate student recruitment and orientation (including minority and international students)
- Assisting with graduate student recruitment and orientation (including minority and international students)
- Developing library acquisition policy
- Developing research policy
- Supporting fund-raising and other development activities
- Serving on committees
- Ordering laboratory supplies for teaching and research
- Administering clinical programs
- Directing technology transfer activities with government and industry
- Managing shared research facilities
- Recruiting and evaluating students for admission
- Facilitating communication between faculty and central administration

Addendum

The workload principles and guidelines in all units shall enable its Full-Time Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty to devote sufficient time to meeting their responsibilities as would reasonably be necessary:

(a) for all ranks, to make scholarly contributions expected of their facilities, and
(b) in the case of assistant and associate professors, to sustain the quality of continuing contributions required in the respective unit to achieve tenure and promotion.

This policy establishes a standard applicable to all faculty ranks.  It recognizes that University research is inextricably interwoven with teaching and often with service, and that the proportion of effort devoted to research need not be identical for each individual faculty member in a unit, but may vary around the unit's average.  Such activities are to form a part of the faculty member's normal work effort during his or her term of appointment.

www1.umn.edu/usenate/reports/facworkload.html