Senior
Appointments
Committee
J. M. Friedman, MD, PhD
Terms of Reference
◊ Advise the President on individual
cases with respect to promotion,
tenure, and senior appointments
according to
• Concepts of procedural fairness
• UBC policy, SAC guidelines, the
Collective Agreement
• Appropriate standards across and
within disciplines
Terms of Reference
◊ Consider the merits of each
specific case
◊ Assure that all deliberations
on the case are consistent
with UBC policy, the
Collective Agreement and
concepts of procedural
fairness
SAC Process:
Subcommittee Review
File
reviewed in detail by
one of two subcommittees
If satisfactory, case ranked
“A” and forwarded to full
SAC for approval
SAC Process:
Subcommittee Review
 Ranking
may be deferred for a
set amount of time pending
– Receipt of additional information
or clarification from Dean
– Resolution of procedural concern
by Faculty Relations
SAC Process:
Subcommittee Review
 Cases
ranked “B” referred to
SAC for discussion with Dean
– About 1/4 of all cases
– Tenure cases with a negative
recommendation
– Conflicting recommendations
from Head and Dean
– SAC members raise concern
SAC Process:
Full Committee Review
 “A”
cases generally approved
without discussion
 Entire process usually
completed in 2-4 weeks
SAC Process:
Full Committee Review
 Questions
regarding “B” cases
sent to Dean with invitation to
attend full SAC meeting
 Dean must be present for all
discussion of a case by SAC
 Vote taken in Dean’s absence
 Dean informed of result
SAC Process
Chair
informs President of
SAC recommendation and
vote on each case
Chair also provides President
notes on SAC concerns and
discussion regarding “B”
cases
SAC Process
 SAC
recommendation and
vote confidential – should
not be given to candidate
 Provost and President review
case and recommend action
to Board
Frequent SAC Issues
 External
referee letters
 Professional contributions
 Scholarship of teaching
 Teaching documentation
 Curricula vitae
External Referee Letters
 At
least 4 arms-length
referees for promotions and
tenure
 At least 2 arms-length
referees for new appointments
 Senior Instructor letters need
not be external but should
avoid conflict of interest
Professional Contributions
 May
constitute a portion or all
of scholarly activity
 Must be “work of distinction”
– Creative, standard-setting,
changes practice of profession
– Not routinely available from
professionals in field
 Not
a consolation prize
Professional Contributions
 Explicitly
recognize and
consider from outset and at all
levels of review
 Referee’s assessment of
professional contributions and
stature is critical
– Explicitly request
– Provide UBC evaluation criteria
Scholarship of Teaching
 May
constitute a portion or all
of scholarly activity
 Broad contributions to the
improvement of teaching and
learning
– Beyond excellence in teaching
– Original, innovative, impact and
change field, substantial and
sustained use by others
Scholarship of Teaching
 Explicitly
recognize and
consider from outset and at all
levels of review
 Referee’s assessment of
contributions, leadership and
stature is critical
– Explicitly request
– Provide UBC evaluation criteria
Teaching Documentation
 Required
in all cases
 Effectiveness primary criterion
– At all levels
– Graduate supervision especially
important
 Methods
may vary, but all
substantial contributions must
be documented and evaluated
Teaching Documentation
 Full
teaching dossier not useful
for SAC
 Quantitative and qualitative
summary and assessment of
–
–
–
–
All teaching responsibilities
Student and peer evaluations
Graduate student supervision
Other teaching contributions,
accomplishments, awards, etc.
Curricula Vitae
 Use
UBC format
 Avoid duplication
 Explain contributions to
collaborative research, grants
and publications
 Keep up to date
– Provide dated supplements as
necessary