Professor Jonathan has applied for promotion and tenure at a local university. He is required to compile a portfolio, evidencing his accomplishments and qualifications. This portfolio is then evaluated by his Departmental Promotion& Tenure Committee,

Question

consisting of tenured departmental members, who makes a recommendation to the Department Chair. The Chair makes a recommendation to the Dean, who then makes a recommendation to the University wide P & T Committee. The University Committee is made up of various faculty members from throughout the university, some of whom know Jonathan and some of whom don't. This committee makes their recommendation to the Provost who in turn makes a recommendation to the University President. The process ends when the President makes a recommendation to the Board of Trustees. Jonathan's portfolio travels from level to level and is reviewed prior to each recommendation. However, Jonathan is not permitted to address any of the decision makers during their review. Assuming that you can't change the number or order of steps in the review process, what are some of the concerns that need to be addressed in order to keep this system free from discrimination or other legal issue?

Answer 1

For the performance review to be valid and free from legal issues, the school needs to be sure that its performance standards are (1) openly established and communicated to Jonathan before he begins the process; (2) as specific and objective as possible; (3) job related and consistent with Jonathan's responsibilities and his field; and (4) applied by each level as consistently as possible. In this situation, potential problems may arise as the matter moves from level to level if the standards that apply to Jonathan are not specified and adhered to. Jonathan needs to be apprised of what the content of a typical portfolio should be and the manner and quality of evidence required. This allows him to properly prepare and it avoids surprises and misunderstandings. Particularly when the portfolio moves out of Jonathan's immediate school or college and goes to the University wide committee, there can be serious problems should the standards not be clear and adhered to. For example, the amount of publications and quality of required journals may fluctuate as one moves from a Management Department to a History Department to a Nursing Department or to an Art or Music Department. Evaluators must refrain from imposing standards they, themselves, must adhere to, to someone with different responsibilities. Certainly, the university may impose a general minimum to which all must adhere, but anything above and beyond that minimum must not be arbitrary and should be dictated by those in the field. As each recommendation is made, it should be in writing, clearly spelling out the justification for the recommendation, whether pro or con and communicated to Jonathan. Specific references to the portfolio should be made to alleviate any questions as to whether it was properly considered. Finally, the university should have a written and published appeals process to allow validation should there be a procedural or application question


Chapter 18
TERMINATING INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEES
Test Bank Questions, 5e

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS