Developmental reviews (#1301)

Topics/tags: Triennial reviews, Grinnell

This past spring, the Grinnell faculty voted to put a temporary hold on triennial post-tenure [1] merit reviews. Instead, we’re just doing developmental reviews. We’re getting closer to a point where every faculty member receives the same percentage raise, a system I’ve long advocated for. We’re not quite there: Most faculty will get a 3.75 merit score, newly promoted faculty will get a 5.0 merit score, and folks who were reviewed within the past three years will get the higher of 3.75 and their merit score. At least, I think that’s how it goes.

Since we’re moving from merit reviews to developmental reviews, they’ve changed what faculty are expected to submit [2]. We used to submit our CVs, our Faculty Activity Reports (FARs), a three-page statement on teaching, a two-page statement on scholarship, and a one-page statement on service. Now? Much less. From what I can tell from the online materials, there are three fields to fill out.

Reflect on the past 3 years. Some questions you may consider include, but are not limited to: Which activities were most meaningful? Which activities were especially difficult? What am I most proud of? Where do I see room for growth? As appropriate, with these general questions in mind, please consider how your activities over the past three years relate to broader efforts at the College regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion.

My plans for the next 3 years. What are my goals/intentions during the next review period? Given these goals, what will be the ideal balance between service, research, and teaching? What resources would help me achieve my goals and commitments? As appropriate, with these general questions in mind, please consider how your activities over the past three years relate to broader efforts at the College regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Is there anything else you think is relevant that was not covered above?

While it makes sense to ask about three-year chunks, I find the next 3 years to be somewhat problematic and not just because we used 3 rather than three. In particular, the first of the three years is the current year. So we’re really reflecting on the current year and the next two years. And, since I’m on leave next year, most of my plans for the next three years center on that year.

There’s another optional form for us to fill out as we prepare to answer the questions: A record of the past six years, with categories of Teaching, Teaching Goals/Development, Advisees, Heavy Service, Other Service, Research [3], Groundskeeping [4], Well-being, and Life events. There are also some examples in each. Let’s see.

Teaching: E.g., MAPs, new courses, significant projects, etc. [5].

Teaching goals/development: E.g., Attended nearly all teaching-centered Community Fridays, developing a new seminar, sharing student work (e.g. posters, website, presentations), ungrading, visit 2 colleagues’ classes (1 each term), implement ungrading [6], teach Tutorial [7], redesign lab, update studio classroom, work with DASIL.

Advisees: E.g. Tutorial advisees, total advisees, current advisees, goal for reasonable number of advisees [8].

Heavy service: E.g. Dept. Chair, Scholarship Committee, TT search chair [9], Serve on Curriculum Committee? [10]

Other service: E.g. Informal mentoring, served on PhD committee, FIS host, Peer reviews for [journals, presses], Department self-study [11], faculty mentor program.

Research, performance, exhibition, coaching, library, etc.: E.g. Book chapter published, presented at [meeting], present at [meeting] [12], fieldwork for next project, attend coaching clinic, finish book proposal, develop new library program.

Groundskeeping: E.g. Informal mentoring of BIPOC students, served as IPOP [14] facilitator, revise syllabi to be more inclusive, disrupt canon.

Well-being: E.g. ways of rest, things to shed.

Life events: E.g. births, deaths, health challenges, shifts, etc.

Those seem like good things to log or at least consider. Wouldn’t it be nice if our faculty records system was as easy to fill out as that spreadsheet?

I’m not sure why we are asked to look back six years since we’re only reporting on three. Perhaps three of the years are for looking backwards and three are for looking forward. Just to put another twist on it, the FAR that Interfolio generates has about four years on it.

Speaking of FARs, I need to update my FAR for my sabbatical application and my developmental review. Filling in the form seems like a good starting point. Stay tuned for the next musing!

Hmmm … I’ve mostly reported on what’s in the documents. I’ve made some side [15] comments as end notes. Does this musing need more? Nah. You can wait until I report on how I’ve filled in the notes form.

Postscript: Just to have a bit more here, I’m adding quick answers to the three questions.

Reflect on the past 3 years. Stressful. Stressful enough that I had a heart attack. Still made forward progress. Incorporated mastery grading in all my courses. Chaired a major conference and co-edited a 1000+ page proceedings.

My plans for the next 3 years. Survive. Chair another major conference. Finish clearing out my lab so someone else can have it. Use sabbatical to write textbooks. Get the Web Governance Committee to do work this year. Hope we hire more excellent new faculty members in CS.

Is there anything else you think is relevant that was not covered above? I don’t think I should publicly post my comments about issues at the College. I probably shouldn’t include them in my triennial developmental review either.

Wasnt that fun? I wonder what my final answers will look like.

[1] Or post-promotion, for Library and Physical Education faculty.

[2] They is The Dean’s Office, the Chair of the Faculty, and continuing members of the Faculty Salary Committee, or something like that.

[3] Well, Research, performance, exhibition, coaching, library, etc.

[4] The examples may explain what Groundskeeping is. I think it’s our new term for DEI efforts, one based on Form Dean Montgomery’s work on biological models.

[5] I was always taught to use either E.g., or etc., but not both.

[6] It appears that ungrading is important enough to list twice. I agree with that sentiment.

[7] I would have put Tutorial in the Teaching section.

[8] That would be awesome.

[9] I’ve chaired tenure-track searches. It’s much less work than being department chair. I’d also classify CAS, particularly the academic honesty subcommittee, as one of our heaviest kinds of service. Fortunately, we’re no longer measuring service.

[10] I don’t know why there’s a question mark here.

[11] I’ve written a department response as part of a department self study. That took me more work than any tenure-track search I’ve chaired and was much less rewarding.

[12] The examples are over multiple years, so these represent two presentations.

[14] International Pre-Orientation Program.

[15] snide?

Version 1.0 released 2024-08-15.

Version 1.1.1 of 2024-11-07.