Gerard L. Hanley, Ph.D.

1

Using MERLOT To Support Retention, Tenure, and
Promotion Reviews

• Gerard L. Hanley, Ph.D.
• Executive Director, MERLOT
• Senior Director, California State University

MERLOT International Conference August 8, 2003
2
Technology and Tenure/Promotion Policies

• Guidelines for evaluating technology in
  instruction are being published
• Modern Language Association, American Association
  for History and Computing
• University of Michigan, Duquesne University,
• Peer evaluation testimony by experts in field
  to verify quality importance to discipline
• Making digital scholarship visible
• Electronic portfolios vs. Evidence files of the
  crime of doing good work
• Evaluate materials in the medium in which the
  scholarship was created

Jessica Somers
3
Tenure Promotion with MERLOT

• MERLOT provides QUALITY REVIEWS
• Standards-based evaluation
• Independent panel of experts
• Training for the reliable application of
  standards
• MERLOT provides DOCUMENTATION
• Documentation for Authors, Contributors,
  Reviewers, and Users
• An electronic portfolio can be created within
  MERLOT
• Teaching and Course Portfolios

4
MERLOTs Value to Faculty Authors

• Visibility of their Scholarship of Teaching
  through MERLOT website
• Peer Review of their scholarship
• Evaluation of quality, effectiveness, and
  usability
• Feedback for improvements
• Recognition and documentation
• MERLOT publicly posts review on website
• MERLOT Awards Classics and Editors Choice
• MERLOT citations in others Personal Collections
• MERLOT sends two letters summarizing the review
  procedure and evaluation report to two of
  authors designees
• Document can become part of authors tenure and
  promotion portfolio

5
MERLOTs Value to Faculty Contributors Users

• Visibility of curriculum development
  pedagogical innovations through MERLOT
• Adding Materials
• Adding Member Comments/Reviews
• Adding Assignments
• Creating Personal Collections
• Recognition and documentation
• MERLOT creates an ePortfolio of its members
• Special Benefits for Adjunct Faculty
• Document can become part of Contributors Tenure
  and Promotion Portfolio

6
MERLOTs Value to Editorial Board Members

• Visibility of their expertise and authority
  through MERLOT website
• Performing and publishing peer reviews
• Recognition and documentation
• MERLOT creates an ePortfolio of its Editorial
  Boards peer reviews of materials within MERLOT
• MERLOT provides letter of appointment
  describing qualifications and responsibilities
• Documents can become part of Editorial Board
  members Tenure and Promotion Portfolio

7
Counter Forces

• Creating new and unique scholarship, curriculum
  and pedagogy is valued
• Reusing others ideas is not valued
• How do you change the fundamental criteria for
  professional excellence?
• Student learning outcomes by best means, even if
  you didnt develop them
• Excellent implementation of sound curriculum and
  pedagogy

8
Institutional Application of MERLOTs Peer Review
Process
9
Case Study in Progress

• CSU, Long Beach campus
• Passed Academic Senate policy recognizing value
  of effective and creative teaching with
  technology
• Question of implementation of policy in
  retention, tenure, and promotion (RTP)
  evaluations
• Evaluations standards
• Valid?
• Reliable?
• Training of evaluation committee?
• Placement of reviews in candidates portfolio?

10
Institutionalizing Peer Review

• Create College-Level academic technology peer
  review committees that are independent of RTP
  committees
• Training peer review committee in MERLOTs peer
  review processes
• Use training process, evaluation standards,
  tutorial
• Customize evaluation standards for campus
• Practice to achieve some level of inter-rater
  reliability
• Candidate can choose to submit materials to
  college academic technology review committee
• Academic technology review committee functions
  like an external reviewer
• RTP committee learns to respond to evidence of
  good work