skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


This content will become publicly available on July 6, 2026

Title: Towards More Inclusive Promotion and Tenure Criteria, Policies, and Processes
Promotion and tenure (P&T) criteria at research-focused universities typically emphasise research scholarship and productivity. Unfortunately, ‘research’ is often narrowly defined as activities specific to a particular discipline. Rarely does ‘research’ include other activities, even when they are supported by external funding or have archival journals dedicated to their subject. These other activities promote professional development of faculty while advancing university goals; however, despite their importance, these activities are rarely acknowledged in P&T criteria. This paper presents the results of a study that investigates how some universities have diversified P&T paths to be inclusive of broader faculty accomplishments. Recommendations are offered regarding steps to update or develop P&T policies and procedures that give credit for a wider spectrum of faculty activities.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
2204537
PAR ID:
10626641
Author(s) / Creator(s):
Publisher / Repository:
Sciedu Press
Date Published:
Journal Name:
International Journal of Higher Education
Volume:
14
Issue:
4
ISSN:
1927-6044
Page Range / eLocation ID:
66-76
Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
faculty promotion and tenure criteria promotion and tenure review processes promotion and tenure review policies broader pathways to faculty advancement pathways
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; ; ; (, PLOS One)
    Clark, Mary Diane (Ed.)
    Research-intensive universities aim to conduct cutting-edge research while providing the knowledge and skills necessary to prepare students to excel in their respective fields. As student enrollments surge, many institutions have turned to hiring teaching-focused faculty. In the University of California (UC) system, there exists a unique position known as the Professor of Teaching (PoT). This position is tenure-eligible, and members are required to engage in classroom teaching, scholarly activities, and service responsibilities. To shed light on the background characteristics, roles and perceptions of the impact of teaching-focused faculty in research-intensive institutions, we collected survey data from STEM PoT faculty across the UC system. We employed a mixed methods approach, using descriptive and inferential statistics to analyze quantitative responses and thematic analysis to examine open-ended qualitative data. Our analysis shows that pre-tenure PoTs place greater emphasis on scholarly activities relative to their peers who have been in the role for longer. However, their training and the institutional resources provided may not align with expectations for scholarly activities. Additionally, we find that PoTs who engage in research perceive that they have a more significant impact on their colleagues’ teaching. This finding underscores the value of research, even for teaching-focused faculty. This study informs the evolving landscape of teaching-focused faculty within research-intensive universities and provides recommendations for administrators considering how to ensure that their institutions are fulfilling their educational mission. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; (, Frontiers in Psychology)
    Over the past 50 years the diversity of higher education faculty in the mathematical, physical, computer, and engineering sciences (MPCES) has advanced very little at 4-year universities in the United States. This is despite laws and policies such as affirmative action, interventions by universities, and enormous financial investment by federal agencies to diversify science, technology, mathematics, and engineering (STEM) career pathways into academia. Data comparing the fraction of underrepresented minority (URM) postdoctoral scholars to the fraction of faculty at these institutions offer a straightforward empirical explanation for this state of affairs. URM postdoc appointments lag significantly behind progress in terms of both undergraduate and Ph.D.-level STEM student populations. Indeed, URM postdoc appointments lag well-behind faculty diversity itself in the MPCES fields, most of which draw their faculty heavily from the postdoctoral ranks, particularly at research-intensive (R1) universities. Thus, a sea-change in how postdocs are recruited, how their careers are developed, and how they are identified as potential faculty is required in order to diversify the nation’s faculty, and particularly the R1 MPCES professoriate. Our research shows that both Ph.D. students and postdocs benefit from intentional structure at various levels of their respective “apprentice” experiences, a factor that we believe has been neglected. Several key structural approaches are highly effective in these regards: (1) A collaborative approach in which leading research universities collectively identify outstanding URM candidates; (2) Faculty engagement in recruiting and supporting these postdocs; (3) Inter-institutional exchange programs to heighten the visibility and broaden the professional experiences of these postdocs; (4) Community-building activities that create a sense of belonging and encourage continuing in academia for each cohort; and (5) Continuing research based on outcomes and new experimental approaches. The California Alliance, consisting of UC Berkeley, UCLA, Caltech, and Stanford, has been engaged in such a program for almost a decade now, with most of the California Alliance URM postdocs now in tenure track positions or on the path toward careers as faculty at research intensive (R1) institutions. If this approach was brought to scale by involving the top 25 or so URM Ph.D.-producing R1 institutions in the MPCES fields, about 40% of the national URM postdoctoral population in these fields could be affected. Although this impact would fall short of bringing URM MPCES faculty ranks up to full representation of the United States population as a whole, it would vastly improve the outlook for URM students and their aspirations to take on leadership roles as scientists and engineers. 
    more » « less
  3. (, The Journal of Physical Chemistry A)
    The United States has a wide range of institutions of higher education, from two-year community colleges that focus primarily on job training to the research universities that train the next generation of Ph.D. scientists and produce a large share of knowledge. Some research universities are private, and others are public. Most states have a public flagship university or two, along with many more regional colleges where research has less emphasis and a slew of two-year community or technical colleges as well. The U.S. is also home to liberal arts colleges, which have no Ph.D. programs but where under- graduates benefit from small classes and intensive hands-on research experiences with the faculty. Most liberal arts colleges in the United States are private, although some states support a public liberal arts college as well. The nonflagship state and other private universities that do not have Ph.D. programs in chemistry and liberal arts colleges are collectively known as predominately undergraduate institutions or PUIs. PUIs play an important part in the United States scientific infrastructure, as they excel at providing the initial training of undergraduates, who learn the scientific method by hands-on research with their faculty mentors. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; (, Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE))
    Abstract—Expectations for faculty members are high: STEM faculty are expected to establish a sustainable research trajectory, a teaching practice, and a service/leadership role all while pursuing tenure and promotion success. Although many colleges and universities have established STEM faculty development programs, a deficiency in holistic professional support remains, specifically in the integration and alignment of these disparate professional activities with individual and institutional goals. This session will involve participants to continue the work undertaken to bring together multiple stakeholders in academia, government, and industry to establish a research agenda for STEM faculty development. The audience includes those interested in furthering this research agenda. Keywords—STEM, faculty development, research agenda 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; ; (, Education and Information Technologies)
    Abstract This qualitative case study examined how a multimodal professional network environment (STEM for all Video Showcase) affected five STEM educational researchers’ capacity to engage in grant funded research at U.S. Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). Guided by the social capital and professional network literature as a conceptual framework, we analyzed data from surveys, interviews, and online discussion posts. We aimed to understand HBCU-based researchers’ supports and barriers in writing and/or conducting grant funded research in STEM education, and ways in which the multimodal professional network experience supported their research and professional networking, if at all. We found that organizational structures shaped participants’ social capital as well as their grant funded research activities. Further, participating in a multimodal professional network enabled participants to further develop their research capacity and to also expand their collegial networks. We offer recommendations for institutions to support the research endeavors of their faculty and suggest ways in which organizations using or developing professional multimodal networks can enhance faculty research development. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email