The role of collegiality in academic review, promotion, and tenure

Review, promotion, and tenure (RPT) processes at universities typically assess candidates along three dimensions: research, teaching, and service. In recent years, some have argued for the inclusion of a controversial fourth criterion: collegiality. While collegiality plays a role in the morale and effectiveness of academic departments, it is amorphic and difficult to assess, and could be misused to stifle dissent or enforce homogeneity. Despite this, some institutions have opted to include this additional element in their RPT documents and processes, but it is unknown the extent of this practice and how it varies across institution type and disciplinary units. This study is based on two sets of data: survey data collected as part of a project that explored the publishing decisions of faculty and how these related to perceived importance in RPT processes, and 864 RPT documents collected from 129 universities from the United States and Canada. We analysed these RPT documents to determine the degree to which collegiality and related terms are mentioned, if they are defined, and if and how they may be assessed during the RPT process. Results show that when collegiality and related terms appear in these documents they are most often just briefly mentioned. It is less common for collegiality and related terms to be defined or assessed in RPT documents. Although the terms are mentioned across all types of institutions, there is a statistically significant difference in how prevalent they are at each. Collegiality is more commonly mentioned in the documents of doctoral research-focused universities (60%), than of master's universities and colleges (31%) or baccalaureate colleges (15%). Results from the accompanying survey of faculty also support this finding: individuals from R-Types were more likely to perceive collegiality to be a factor in their RPT processes. We conclude that collegiality likely plays an important role in RPT processes, whether it is explicitly acknowledged in policies and guidelines or not, and point to several strategies in how it might be best incorporated in the assessment of academic careers.

Care Work and Academic Motherhood: Challenges for Research and Tenure in the Canadian University

In Canada, women are earning an increasing number of doctoral degrees; yet, they are less likely to secure a tenure-track position. A feminist thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with 20 academic mothers from two Canadian universities reveals the range of challenges that mothers encounter in relation to care on the tenure-track. First, the theme of “fear of post-partum academic erasure” captured faculty mothers’ experiences of feeling compelled to assert their physical and intellectual presence in post-partum during peak periods of infant care. The second theme, “the mommy tenure track and care choices,” encapsulated academic mothers’ experiences of feeling unsupported by the university in their pursuit of promotion and tenure given care responsibilities associated with motherhood. The final theme, “research while caring,” captured the tensions academic mothers experience between the research process and caring. The findings of this research are particularly relevant in a pandemic and post-pandemic environment, where academic mothers have seen their care work swell to unprecedented proportions.

Lofty goals and strategic plans are not enough to achieve and maintain a diverse workforce: an American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Committee conversation

The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) Ad Hoc Committee organized a luncheon symposium with a distinguished panel of experts to discuss how to ensure a diverse surgical workforce. The panelists discussed the current state of DEI efforts within surgical departments and societal demographic changes that inform and necessitate surgical workforce adaptations. Concrete recommendations included the following: obtain internal data, establish DEI committee, include bias training, review hiring and compensation practices, support the department members doing the DEI work, commit adequate funding, be intentional with DEI efforts, and develop and support alternate pathways for promotion and tenure.

Anxiety and the Onset of COVID-19: Examining Concerns of Historically Excluded Scholars

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic increased uncertainty, leading to questions about how it spread, how long it would last, and its long-term effects. In academia, many scholars worried about their positions and career advancement. Our research focuses on how different groups within academia coped during the initial period of the pandemic, with particular attention paid to the role of anxiety. We argue that vulnerable groups, such as historically excluded individuals, graduate students, and women, felt even higher levels of anxiety. We use original survey data collected from international relations and political science scholars during May 2020. We content analyze open-ended responses to illustrate the impacts of the pandemic on our participants’ work life, including research productivity, the job market, promotion, and tenure. These analyses reveal not only what different groups of scholars are concerned about, but also the different ways in which they discuss the pandemic. Our research aims to highlight the social and mental health effects of the pandemic, with an eye toward addressing inequalities in academia.

How faculty define quality, prestige, and impact of academic journals

Despite the calls for change, there is significant consensus that when it comes to evaluating publications, review, promotion, and tenure processes should aim to reward research that is of high "quality," is published in "prestigious" journals, and has an "impact." Nevertheless, such terms are highly subjective and present challenges to ascertain precisely what such research looks like. Accordingly, this article responds to the question: how do faculty from universities in the United States and Canada define the terms quality, prestige, and impact of academic journals? We address this question by surveying 338 faculty members from 55 different institutions in the U.S. and Canada. While relying on self-reported definitions that are not linked to their behavior, this study’s findings highlight that faculty often describe these distinct terms in overlapping ways. Additionally, results show that marked variance in definitions across faculty does not correspond to demographic characteristics. This study’s results highlight the subjectivity of common research terms and the importance of implementing evaluation regimes that do not rely on ill-defined concepts and may be context specific.

Creating SPACE to evolve academic assessment

Universities and research institutions have to assess individuals when making decisions about hiring, promotion and tenure, but there are concerns that such assessments are overly reliant on metrics and proxy measures of research quality that overlook important factors such as academic rigor, data sharing and mentoring. These concerns have led to calls for universities and institutions to reform the methods they use to assess research and researchers. Here we present a new tool called SPACE that has been designed to help universities and institutions implement such reforms. The tool focuses on five core capabilities and can be used by universities and institutions at all stages of reform process.