By Jade Pearce
The University of Washington School of Public Health (SPH) Academic Affairs Handbook (AAH) has needed a mission-focused review and expansion of what faculty activities are considered in its promotion and tenure practices. Since 2022, faculty advocated that the handbook should incorporates anti-racist and equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) practices and thus be better aligned with the SPH mission and values. The Faculty Council collaborated with the School’s newly formed EDI handbook subcommittee to explore the best approaches to incorporate anti-racist, community engagement and de-colonizing principles into the AAH. Additionally, in partnership with the Faculty Council, there was a necessity to update the current bylaws to ensure they were aligned with the Faculty Code and Governance. Finally, the council collaborated with the EDI subcommittee to revise the entire handbook to clarify language, and enhance inclusivity by expanding the types of activities that can count towards promotion, among others. Ultimately, expanding the types of activities that count towards promotion and tenure is indirectly related to uncovering the hidden curriculum and recognizing the hidden work that many faculty engage in throughout their career.
This article provides an overview of the revised handbook, which will also be discussed at the all-faculty meeting on Mar 13. The council aims to hold a faculty vote on the newest version with revised bylaws in May 2024.
Analysis of (AAH) Using Anti-racism Framework
Approach
Composed of a member of each department within SPH, the EDI subcommittee met regularly from Dec. 2022 to Dec. 2023 to map out improvements to the current handbook such as ways to enhance it using an anti-racism framework. Commencing with a review of the handbook through the Public Health Critical Race Praxis (PHCRP) lens, subcommittee members discussed various aspects of the promotion and tenure process. Discussions included how the current AAH may inadvertently reinforce social hierarchies and inequities for faculty as they come up for promotion and tenure. Additionally, this framework encouraged committee members to address these inequities within their respective departments and how the AAH could be leveraged. Subcommittee members also led discussions in faculty meetings within the five departments, gathering initial feedback on the need for revising the current handbook. The subcommittee discovered that the current handbook inadvertently created obscure language and invisible barriers that disadvantaged certain faculty members in advancing their careers. This was particularly evident for the newly established track of teaching faculty, where, for example, publications were considered high value products within the current handbook, yet a more expansive set of research activities, including academic public health practice activities, were not brought forward as important activities for promotion.
Utilizing the framework above, the subcommittee devised a series of phases for their revision work. Phase one (P1) involved expanding the types of eligible faculty activities for promotion and providing example activity tables for each track (tenure and without tenure, research and teaching) within the handbook. These example tables provide an expanded list of activities that can contribute to a faculty member’s promotion and tenure packet. These example tables were then placed in the AAH appendices. For validation, or the start of Phase 2 (P2a), the subcommittee proposed conducting a series of focus group discussions with various groups, including teaching track faculty, assistant professors via the Faculty Development Program, the Faculty of Color Affinity Group, and Practice Council members. Prior to the discussion groups, faculty were given electronic copies of the example tables for review. This would help the committee include any missing activities from the table and address concerns from discussion group participants.
Following the focus groups, a School-wide survey was distributed between Dec. 2023 and Jan. 2024 which included a link for faculty to view the example tables. The survey employed a mixed-methods approach, incorporating quantitative and qualitative questions to collect data, including inquiries about whether faculty members felt their work was represented in the example tables and incorporating questions about updating the bylaws. Regular reminders were issued throughout the four-week period via various listservs and in-person meetings. Both the discussion groups and survey provided a mixed methods approach that would allow the EDI subcommittee to get a fuller picture of faculty thoughts of the example tables as well as include as much faculty input as possible.
P2b also involved a new core writing group consisting of both a subset of members from faculty council and the EDI subcommittee who reviewed the current structure of the handbook, re-envisioned the organization to better expose the hidden curriculum, and edited the entire document making it more relevant for and accessible to all faculty. Significant changes included, but are not limited to, 1.) ensuring an inclusive AAH that recognizes the diverse areas and approaches to scholarship, which reflect the School of Public Health’s values, 2.) eliminate duplication/redundancy and potential discrepancy by referencing existing policies, 3.) integrating academic public health practice into the scholarship activities in the AAH, and 4.) integrate the principles of diversity equity and inclusion throughout.
Results
P2a included the data analysis of the discussion groups and survey with several themes. Faculty participants expressed a need for the faculty council and the EDI subcommittee to explicitly state the purpose of the handbook (what it does and does not do) and to provide clear instruction on how to use the example tables. Many faculty members found the list of activities for the tracks long, overwhelming and potentially misleading. This could be problematic, especially for assistant professors applying for associate positions. Faculty suggested adopting a "pick your own adventure" format for the example tables, where faculty are instructed on the handbook's parameters and encouraged to choose activities based on their track requirements.
The School-wide survey received responses from 85 participants, with 62 faculty members completing the entire survey. Overall, the survey results indicated that most faculty felt their activities were represented in the example tables linked from the survey, and over half of the respondents believed that the proposed faculty activities would support the promotion and tenure process at SPH. Faculty survey feedback concurred with the discussion groups that when reviewing the example table appendices, the list of eligible activities was long and overwhelming. This made it difficult to review the example tables. Survey respondents asked for methods to measure these activities, such as how much of each activity should count when putting together their promotion packet. Finally, faculty expressed a need for buy-in from senior faculty on the AAH revisions. Since senior faculty always participate in making promotion and tenure decisions, survey participants wished to ensure accountability from them when considering these various types of work.
In sum, much work has been done to revise the AAH. The latest draft was shared with the entire SPH faculty right before the all-faculty meeting. Faculty are encouraged to review and comment on the changes by April 24. There are multiple major components of the revised handbook to consider. Highlights include the Recommendations for Assessing Faculty Contributions in Section 6B. As noted in the AAH, “This section's goal is to provide candidates and those assessing promotion/tenure packages with guidelines for how faculty contributions should be assessed.” It is also important to consider are the Expectations for Effectiveness in Faculty Role tables in Sections 7-9. These provide specific expectations for promotion into higher ranks by track. Finally, Part 3, Navigating the Promotion Process, is intended to expose the hidden curriculum. This final part of the AAH provides faculty candidates with an overview of all of the various steps and aspects of the promotion process. We encourage faculty to come ready to hear more about the AAH revisions for the Mar 13 at the all-faculty meeting and eventually for the faculty vote in May 2024.