Summary of proposed changes to the Instructional Academic Staff (IAS) Career Progression Guidelines 1. Where possible, the document was reorganized to match the changes made by JPC to the Faculty Promotion Guidelines. Where possible, the same verbiage was used. Rationale: It will be easier for Department Chairs and others on promotion committees to follow the procedure when it closely parallels the faculty procedure. The one major area where IAS and Faculty differ is that IAS are required to show sustained excellence in either professional development/creative activity/scholarship or service. 2. Change the word “progression” to “promotion” Rationale: Career Progression rather than Promotion was originally proposed as a compromise to an objection by the former Dean of CLS (Dean Mason) to the concept of “promoting“ an IAS who was on a terminal contract. Since that time, there are fewer short-­‐term terminal contracts and more red-­‐book positions for IAS. Since ranked faculty use the term Promotion, this change would provide consistency within departments for members “going up for promotion”. 3. Change the specific requirement of the candidate’s narrative Previously the guide stated that the narrative had a maximum of 7 pages with 3 for teaching, 2 for professional development and 2 for service. The proposed change would keep the maximum of 7 pages but not define how many pages would comprise each section. This section was also expanded to provide a definition, expectation and evidence section for teaching, professional development and service. Rationale: This is consistent with the change made to the Promotion Guidelines for Faculty. 4. Recommend addition of a section (5.1.3) regarding reassigned time. Rationale: Reassigned time was previously not mentioned in the guidelines, even though there are IAS who have reassigned time (Program Directors for example). 5. Section 5.2 Departmental Materials was reorganized and some additions were made. Section 5.2.1 reflects a procedural update for submission of a scanned PDF of transmittal and signature form required in documents. Section 5.2.3.1 regarding SEI information was updated to be the same as the requirements for faculty. Section 5.2.3.2 was added in case the candidate’s department has a merit process for their IAS. 6. APPENDIX B: Change the number of titles within each IAS title series and the requirements for promotion eligibility . A. Changes to the Title Series Previous Title Series: Lecturer Series Clinical Professor Series Associate Lecturer Clinical Instructor Lecturer Clinical Assistant Professor Senior Lecturer Clinical Associate Professor Distinguished Lecturer Clinical Professor Distinguished Clinical Professor Proposed Title Series: Lecturer Series Clinical Professor Series Associate Lecturer Clinical Assistant Professor Lecturer Clinical Associate Professor Senior Lecturer Clinical Professor Rationale: a. The “Distinguished” title in each series was removed as it was never intended by system to have this title be part of normal career progression. This title is one that can be appointed by a Chancellor, but is rarely used across System. b. Removal of the Clinical Instructor will result in an equal number (three) of titles in each IAS title series which is more equitable. In addition, ranked faculty also have three titles in their series. B. Changes to the minimum Educational Preparation, Experience and Years in Rank for Promotion Eligibility. Previous eligibility requirements Semesters of teaching Semesters in rank Lecturer 8 2 Senior Lecturer 12 6 Clinical Associate Professor 12 6 Clinical Professor 20 10 Proposed eligibility requirements Semesters of teaching Semesters in rank Lecturer 10 6 Senior Lecturer 20 4 Clinical Associate Professor 10 6 Clinical Professor 20 4 Rationale: The previous requirements were not equitable between IAS title series. Since faculty also have the same number of titles in their promotion series, it seemed both logical and equitable to make the requirements for IAS the same as faculty.