HES P&T Policy

Current version approved 03/08/23.

Purpose and Introduction

These procedures provide guidance for Human-Environment Systems (HES) and its tenure-track faculty regarding the tenure and promotion process. This document summarizes both the criteria of evaluation and the process by which that evaluation is undertaken. The criteria and process outlined in this document are in addition to, and consistent with, those required by the College of Innovation and Design and the University (as stated in Policy 4340). This document applies to all HES tenure-track faculty members.

Definitions and Abbreviations

AC: The Advisory Committee

Candidate: Tenure and Promotion Candidate

College T&P Coordinator: Administrative professional who coordinates T&P submissions and review with the Provost’s Office.

Lead: Human-Environment Systems Lead (HES Lead). College of Innovation and Design-appointed tenured faculty member who provides similar duties as a departmental chair to HES.

Pre-tenure Period: The period from when a tenure-track faculty is hired until a tenure and promotion decision is rendered by the Unit, College, and University.

Tenure and Promotion Binder (T&P binder): The Candidate maintains a T&P binder (electronic) that consists of a collection of all documentation of progress towards tenure and promotion (e.g. annual reviews, committee letters, etc.). The T&P binder provides the basis for evaluation of the Candidate’s tenure and promotion application to the Unit, the College of Innovation and Design, and the University, and should be formatted according to Provost Office guidelines.

TPC: Tenure and Promotion Committee

Unit: Human-Environment Systems (HES)

Tenure and Promotion Criteria

Tenure is granted to faculty candidates who successfully execute their assigned workload of teaching, scholarship, and service activities while demonstrating impact, as is defined below. The HES tenure and promotion process is guided by the Boyer model of scholarship (Boyer, 1990; Boyer et al., 2015) that defines scholarship as expressed by four broad categories: discovery and creation, integration, application and engagement, and teaching and learning. The scholarship of discovery and creation is the production and dissemination of knowledge, most formally expressed through peer reviewed publication. As a research-intensive unit, this traditional definition of scholarship is an essential element of HES faculty productivity. However, the HES core values, described below, also explicitly embrace and reward the broad categories of scholarship articulated in the Boyer model.

The Human-Environment Systems program has a specific mission and associated Core Values that guide faculty activities and inform desired impact. The candidate should articulate the realized or intended impact of reported activities and products in teaching, scholarship, and service. The integration of teaching, scholarship, and service is valued, and the candidate is encouraged to report synergistic activities under multiple categories when appropriate. While effort is not a substitution for impact, effort is evidence of the career trajectory of the candidate. Pursuing high-risk, high-reward activities is encouraged and should be highlighted. During the pre-tenure period, the candidate should establish a trajectory in performance that demonstrates their ability to execute all the activities necessary to be an impactful scholar, teacher, and HES team member.

Teaching

Evaluation of teaching effectiveness is primarily based on student success and promoting learning. Impact can be demonstrated by both qualitative and quantitative metrics.

Teaching activities may include curriculum delivery in formal and informal courses within collaborating Departments and HES, as well as delivering ad hoc lectures to special audiences, participating in delivery of professional development opportunities, and other non-traditional pedagogical activities. Metrics used to evaluate the Candidate’s teaching effectiveness may include the delivery of curriculum aligned with the Human-Environment Systems mission, the number of students reached, the innovativeness or necessity of courses delivered, student class evaluations, in-class teaching evaluations, post-graduate surveys, etc. The development of new, impactful curricula is valued. The candidate is encouraged to evaluate the longer-term impacts of their teaching activities: How did their students perform in future classes? Did they graduate? How did the curriculum support or enable their career trajectory? Efforts to improve teaching effectiveness through formal trainings and workshops or adoption of evidence-based best practices are valued. Of note is the recruitment, mentoring, graduation, and post-graduation success of undergraduate and graduate students engaged in HES activities. While graduate students are integrated across teaching, scholarship, and service activities, HES considers the core activity of graduate student mentoring to be most aligned with teaching.

Scholarship/Research

The HES tenure and promotion process is guided by the Boyer model of scholarship (Boyer, 1990; Boyer et al., 2015) that defines scholarship as expressed by four broad categories: discovery and creation, integration, application and engagement, and teaching and learning. The scholarship of discovery and creation is the production and dissemination of knowledge, most formally expressed through peer-reviewed publication. As a research-intensive unit, this traditional definition and metric of scholarship is an essential element of HES faculty productivity. However, scholarship activities and desired impacts are guided by HES Core Values and should be documented in the context of those values.

Peer reviewed publications are an essential element of a successful candidate’s portfolio. However, the impact of those publications is of most importance. Citations, downloads, invited talks, requests to participate in review or synthesis papers, and press coverage are examples of impact on the research community. The candidate should document and explain how their publications have influenced the field. For example, a smaller number of publications that have measurable impact are of greater value than a larger number of publications with little evidence of impact. Similarly, authorship order is of less importance than the nature and magnitude of the contribution to the knowledge generated. Collaborative research requires a range of contributing efforts and a healthy research portfolio likely reflects the capacity and willingness to contribute in different ways. With all publications, the candidate should provide a few lines of explanation that describe their contribution.

Knowledge generation and dissemination that have impacts outside the scientific community are similarly highly valued. Valued broader societal impacts include, but are not limited to, creating knowledge that guides management activities, enhances decision-making processes, or brings value to the human-environment systems in which the research is conducted. Because the translation of knowledge into action often requires developing strong relationships and partnerships within human-environment systems communities, relationship-building activities are valued. Evidence of society-facing research activities may include, but are not limited to, reports, datasets, computer code, workshops, media coverage, meetings and presentations, or other ways that time is spent to promote impact. Impact can be expressed in diverse ways that may include, but are not limited to, changes in policy or procedures, evidence of improved functionality of the studied human-environment system, evidence of the use or application of knowledge generated, and expressions of benefit or value by stakeholders and community partners.

Collaborative research activities are an essential element of the successful HES candidate. Of note are activities that lead to innovative transdisciplinary perspectives in HES science. The fostering of research collaborations is considered an impact in and of itself; the candidate should document both their supporting and leadership roles in this area.

Generation of research funds is not a direct measure of scholarly impact, nor is it necessarily a direct reflection of productivity. However, fundraising is essential to the HES mission because the resources enable a candidate to engage students in their research. As a general rule, faculty with a research-intensive workload will typically obtain sufficient funding to support the majority of the students needed to conduct that research. Changes made to workload allocation should be made according to the process described under “Workload and Effort.”

Service

Service activities and desired impacts are guided by the HES Core Values (see Appendix 1) and should be documented in the context of those values. Service activities include intramural service (to the Unit, College, and University), extramural service (e.g., peer-reviewing, panels, activities with professional organizations) and public and community outreach and civic engagement.

HES has a strong engagement component and there may be considerable overlap between scholarship and service activities and how those activities are reported. The candidate is encouraged to articulate impacts of such activities in all relevant categories (service, scholarship, teaching, and administration, when appropriate).

Because the development of the HES program is ongoing, it is anticipated that candidates will invest effort into program development, both within HES and through collaborations across campus.

Administration

Generally speaking, pre-tenure faculty are discouraged from taking on formal administrative roles so that they may focus on building the research, teaching, and service elements of their portfolios. In rare cases, and/or once candidates have achieved tenure and promotion to Associate Professor, however, they may want to take on administrative roles at the program, School, College, or University levels. Workload percentages for administration should be clearly articulated vis-à-vis the faculty member’s other workload commitments. As with the other categories outlined in this document, administrative success should be focused on the impact of one’s efforts. Impacts could include updating or writing policy that improves unit efficiency, leading meetings that improve faculty communication and productivity, or designing processes that improve student outcomes, to name a few.

Workload and Effort

Faculty workload is allocated across teaching, scholarship, service, and administrative activities in accordance with University and College workload policies. Pre-tenure faculty should have a clear sense of their workload percentages allocated to various activities from year-to-year, articulated in consultation with the HES Lead. Changes to workload from year to year should be made in consultation with the HES Lead and with College leadership and/or other faculty mentors as appropriate. Changes to workload percentages should be matched by changes in the types of evidence the candidate submits in the T&P binder; effort, workload, and impact should all be aligned.

Because HES places a strong emphasis on research activities, it is anticipated that HES faculty will generally allocate significant workload to scholarship. However, differences in workload are anticipated both between faculty and for a given faculty member over time; these changes may be necessitated by programmatic or university needs, or may reflect evolving interests and expertise of individual faculty members. For this reason, a specific workload distribution is not required to achieve tenure and promotion. Whatever the workload allocation, the successful candidate must meet proportional expectations of activities and impact across teaching, scholarship, and service.

The successful candidate for tenure and promotion will, over the pre-tenure period, have established a trajectory in their scholarship, teaching, and service activities that indicates their capacity to maintain a productive and sustainable program in HES. While effort is not a substitute for success, it may demonstrate progress towards eventual success. Consequently, candidates are encouraged to document all relevant activities, even when those activities did not immediately result in a positive outcome. Candidates are particularly encouraged to highlight efforts that involve high-risk, high-reward activities. Effort is of particular value when evaluating teaching effectiveness and team-based scholarship. Candidates are encouraged to be proactive in developing their teaching and scholarly effectiveness through professional development activities.

Roles and Responsibilities

Duties of the Faculty Candidate

Every pre-tenure faculty will

be fully aware, understand, and comply with all Unit, College, and University tenure and promotion guidelines;
be aware and understand criteria used by the Unit, College, and University to assess tenure and promotion;
submit their tenure and promotion review materials according to the schedule and in the format required by College and University policy and procedures;
be proactive relative to the tenure and promotion process and ask the AC for guidance on any issue that is unclear or requires resolution. The Candidate and the AC may consult with, or refer to, the HES Lead on any issue as necessary.

Each year, the Candidate shall prepare their review document articulating their long-term vision, progress of the past year, and plans for the following year’s activities, for areas of teaching, scholarship, service and, when appropriate, administration. In HES, faculty update their T&P binder in February so that this information may also be entered into Faculty180—along with the required activity reporting required there—to meet the requirements for the annual review process (mandated by the State of Idaho). The state-mandated annual review process is procedurally distinct from the yearly T&P process, though there is overlap in that annual personnel reviews are included in the T&P binder and many of the same activities will be reported via both processes.

The Advisory Committee (AC)

The Advisory Committee (AC) has the following characteristics:

The AC mentors the Candidate, guiding the Candidate during the pre-tenure period and the tenure and promotion process. The AC will assist the Candidate in understanding both the process and the criteria used in the tenure and promotion assessment. The AC recommends constructive ways to improve performance when appropriate.
The AC consists of five (5) members, all tenured faculty, appointed by the Dean of the College of Innovation and Design in consultation with the HES Lead.
The AC may consist of tenured faculty within and outside the College of Innovation and Design.
There will be one AC chair, appointed by the Dean of the College of Innovation and Design in consultation with the HES Lead.
The AC membership may have a staggered rotation to ensure continuity.
Together, the expertise of the AC members will have disciplinary and interdisciplinary expertise such that they can effectively assess the Candidate.
The members of the AC are engaged in HES such that they understand the mission and Core Values of HES. The Lead and/or the HES AC Chair will ensure that the AC understands the mission, Core Values, and associated expectations of committee service.
The members of the AC are fully aware of and understand all Unit, College, and University tenure and promotion guidelines and criteria.

While an annual meeting will occur between the HES AC Chair and each Candidate, members of the AC may also meet on an as-needed basis with the Candidate. These formal meetings will be documented. Either the Candidate or the HES AC can request a formal meeting between the Candidate and the entire committee.

The AC annually evaluates the Candidate’s progress towards tenure and promotion by reviewing the Candidate’s electronic T&P binder. The AC communicates the outcomes of that evaluation to the Candidate and the HES Lead. This communication shall be in the form of an AC annual evaluation summary followed by an in-person annual meeting of the HES AC Chair and the candidate.

The AC Chair documents all relevant communications regarding the Candidate’s progress.

The College Tenure and Promotion Committee (TPC)

The College Tenure and Promotion Committee has the following characteristics:

The TPC serves in the year of the candidate’s application for tenure and promotion for the sole purpose of evaluating the candidate for tenure and promotion.
The TPC consists of tenured HES faculty. Additional committee members (tenured faculty) from outside of HES and/or the College of Innovation and Design may be added at the discretion of the Dean of the College of Innovation and Design in consultation with the HES Lead. The TPC will not exceed 7 members.
Membership of the AC and the TPC should not substantially overlap. This is to ensure independent levels of review.
The TPC chair is appointed by the Dean of the College of Innovation and Design in consultation with the HES Lead.
Together, the expertise of the TPC members will have disciplinary and interdisciplinary expertise such that they can effectively assess the candidate.

The College of Innovation and Design (CID)

The obligations of the CID Dean or their designee are as follows:

Appoint a T&P manager, consistent with Provost’s Office guidelines.
Work with the Lead to appoint the AC and TPC members and designate the AC and TPC committee chairs.
Ensure that the AC and TPC perform the above duties.
Assist to resolve any issues between the AC and/or TPC and the Candidate.
Ensure that the Lead acquires external reviews of the Candidate in a timely and appropriate manner.

Upon the candidate submitting an application for tenure and promotion, the AC votes on the candidate’s application. Voting procedures and forms must be followed in a manner consistent with Provost’s Office guidelines.

The Unit Lead

The obligations of the Lead are as follows:

The Lead meets with the Candidate upon their arrival to Boise State University to describe the T&P process.
The Lead works with CID to appoint the AC members and designate the committee chair.
The Lead meets annually with the HES AC Chair to review the HES mission, Core Values, and associated expectations of the state-mandated annual personnel review process and the yearly T&P process.
The Lead meets with the TPC Chair to review the HES mission, Core Values, and associated expectations.
The Lead oversees the acquisition of external reviews of the Candidate (see more about external review letters below). The Lead provides necessary background and documentation to the external reviewers in order to ensure the external reviews are guided by the HES Core Values and expectations of HES faculty.
The Lead provides a Lead annual evaluation document to the Candidate and the AC prior to the annual AC review.

The Annual Review Process

This section describes the steps and timeline associated with the annual review process. Importantly, in the event of conflict, college and university-level steps and timelines supersede this unit-level information.

T&P Binder

Every February, the candidate submits an updated electronic T&P binder, formatted according to Provost’s Office guidelines, to the HES AC Chair, and completes their annual evaluation in Faculty 180. These materials document their progress in the areas of teaching, scholarship, service, and administration (when appropriate) in preparation for application for tenure and promotion. The T&P binder will be used by the HES AC in evaluating the candidate’s annual performance and their progress towards tenure. The T&P Binder contains the following items:

Narrative/Cover Letter: The narrative is specific to the HES annual evaluation framework. The expectations of this document are described in greater detail below.
Extended Curriculum Vitae: The Extended CV is a detailed version of a typical academic CV. The expectations of this document are described in greater detail below.
Summary of Teaching: A document containing a running list of courses taught, enrolled students, and a summary of course evaluations since the faculty started at Boise State.
Annual Evaluation Document from the Lead: Each year, the Lead prepares an annual evaluation of the candidate’s T&P materials.
Previous year Annual Reviews: All previous Annual Review submissions, including reviews from Lead and AC.
Other: Candidate will include any additional information considered relevant to assessing their progress towards a successful tenure application.

Description of Narrative/Cover Letter

The Narrative/Cover Letter includes the following:

a career vision statement
workload distribution (% teaching, scholarship, service, and administration, when relevant, for each year)
teaching activities and impacts
scholarship activities and impacts
service activities and impacts
if relevant, administrative activities and impacts
a description of how the candidate’s activities and impacts align with each of the HES Core Values. A template for how to organize the letter according to the Core Values has been created for faculty reference.
Any additional narrative deemed relevant to the assessment process.

Description of Extended Curriculum Vitae

The CV shall follow a similar format to a typical academic CV, and must contain the following details:

Research Activities

Manuscripts: List all in-progress and submitted manuscript activity, inclusive of all bibliographical information, indicate candidate’s role in each of these manuscripts.

Proposals: List all proposal activity while at Boise State: Indicate funding agency, funding amounts and time period and the candidate’s title or role in the grant, especially as it pertains to interdisciplinary and team-scholarship. Indicate status of submittal (pending, funded, or declined).

Conference Presentations: List all talks and presentations inclusive of title, coauthors, venue, and if the presentation was invited.

Key Collaborators: Provide a list of up to 10 collaborators, indicating the nature and value of the relationship.

Teaching Activities

Courses Taught: List of courses taught since arriving at Boise State. Include course numbers, credit hours, dates, and number of students. Note any co-taught courses (and by whom) and the specific role of the candidate.

Graduate and Undergraduate Students Mentored and Supervised: List all students and describe the nature of that supervision or mentorship.

Evidence of Effective Teaching: Provide a tabular summary of quantitative course valuation data (course, annual and cumulative). Summaries of qualitative course evaluation data, and any other evidence of teaching effectiveness, should be presented. All raw course evaluation should be included as an appendix.

Service Activities

Document all service-related activities, highlighting the time commitment and the key objectives of the activities and the impacts.

Other Activities

The candidate may include any other activities not captured in the above headings that represented a significant time commitment or resulted in notable products and impacts, including a separate section detailing Administrative Activities and impacts, when appropriate.

The Tenure and Promotion Process

This section describes the steps and timeline associated with the tenure and promotion process. Importantly, in the event of conflict, college and university-level steps and timelines supersede this unit-level information.

Tenure and Promotion Binder (T&P Binder)

Upon applying for tenure, the candidate will be required to submit a complete T&P binder according to the Provost’s Office guidelines. The binder will be used by the Lead, the AC committee, the College T&P Committee and Dean’s Office, and the University in determining whether the candidate merits tenure. Please refer to the University guidelines for additional details regarding the components and formatting of the T&P binder.

Timeline

Year One

Within the first semester of a candidate’s contract, the Lead shall provide the candidate with information explaining the requirements of the University, College, and Unit.

Yearly

On a yearly basis during the pre-tenure period:

The candidate updates their T&P binder and their Faculty180 annual personnel review by February 1. The HES Lead provides a Lead Annual Evaluation Document by March 1st for inclusion in the T&P binder. The Lead submits the updated T&P binder to the AC each year by March 15th.

The AC reviews the submitted T&P binder and writes a letter to the candidate summarizing the outcome of that review. The AC Chair meets with the candidate to discuss that review; the candidate may choose to respond in writing to the review. The AC Chair maintains a record of all materials associated with the annual P&T review that is shared with the HES Lead. The AC completes the annual T&P review process by May 1st.

This annual review satisfies the Biennial Tenure Progress Review as stated in Policy 4340.

Tenure and Promotion Application Year

Due March 15^th: The candidate submits to the Lead the names and associated information of potential external reviewers (see details below under “External Review Letters”) by March 15th.

Due May 15^th:

The Lead, working with the TPC and College Dean, identifies additional potential external reviewers (see details below under “External Review Letters”)
The candidate shall provide to the Lead a 1-2 page career summary narrative, a CV (not to exceed 15 pages), and electronic copies of 3-5 representative products for distribution to potential external reviewers by May 15th. These materials are used to recruit external reviewers.

Due May 31^st: The Lead formally recruits external reviewers using the recruitment materials.

Due June 15^th: All Binder 1 research-related materials due to the College P&T coordinator. These materials will be shared with the external reviewers.

Due September 1^st: External review letters are due to the College T&P coordinator.

Due September 15^th: The candidate submits their updated and final T&P binder to the Lead and AC for review. The final version of the T&P binder shall comply with College and University format requirements.

Due October 15^th: The AC provides the Lead, College T&P coordinator, and the candidate with their recommendation.

Due December 1^st: The Lead provides a final assessment letter of the candidate’s T&P binder, which is forwarded to the College T&P Coordinator for review. The candidate must receive a copy of that letter within 3 working days.

Due December 15^th: The College TPC reviews the T&P binder and writes a summary and recommendation of the candidate’s progress, which is forwarded to the College T&P Coordinator, who forwards to the Dean. The TPC may also submit any relevant information regarding the tenure application to the CID Dean for consideration. The TPC must follow all voting guidelines and fill out all voting forms provided by the Provost’s Office.

Due January 15^th: The CID Dean reviews all material and, based on the outcome of the TPC vote, writes a letter, inclusive of the results of the vote and a recommendation regarding tenure and promotion, which is placed in the candidate’s T&P binder. The candidate must receive a copy of that letter within 3 working days.

Due January 31^st: The CID Dean forwards all recommendations and associated documents to the Provost.

External Review Letters

External review letters are intended to place the candidate’s work in a broader context and specifically the broader impact and value of the candidate’s scholarly productivity to HES. The candidate should provide a list of 5 external reviewers to the Lead. External reviewers should be tenured faculty and, according to university policy, “should be sufficiently independent of the candidate to provide fair and impartial reviews; they should not normally include mentors or recent collaborators of the candidate.” The candidate should provide the names, contact information, and brief explanation for why there were selected to the Lead. In line with university policy, “the candidate may also identify individuals that shall be excluded as reviewers.”

The Lead identifies up to 5 additional potential external reviewers not named by the candidate. The Lead forwards the candidate’s information up to approximately ten (10) identified examiners from the combined list of potential external reviewers. According to university policy, “the department chair is responsible for obtaining a minimum of three (3) external letters for a tenure and/or promotion candidate’s application…at least one external reviewer shall come from a recommendation other than the candidate.”

In preparation for recruiting external reviewers, the Lead will ask the candidate to provide a 1- to 2-page career summary narrative, a CV (not to exceed 15 pages), and electronic copies of 3-5 representative products in order to provide context for external reviewer invitations.

The candidate is also encouraged to solicit a minimum of two letters of support from external collaborators to include in their application.

Summary of Dates and Deadlines

Yearly

February 1st	T&P binder to HES Lead, Faculty180 reporting complete
March 1st	HES Lead provides annual evaluation document to candidate (for inclusion in T&P binder)
March 15th	T&P binder to AC
May 1st	AC letter to candidate, T&P binder, and Lead

Application Year

March 1st	Candidate notifies AC/Lead of intention to submit application for T&P
March 15th	Candidate provides names to Lead of 5 external reviewers
May 15th	Candidate provides materials to Lead for recruitment of external reviewers
May 31st	Lead formally requests letters from external reviewers
June 15th	Candidate provides materials to Lead for external reviewers
September 1st	External review letters due
September 15th	Candidate provides T&P binder to College T&P coordinator for submission to AC
October 15th	AC provides recommendation to candidate, Lead, College T&P coordinator
December 1st	Lead provides recommendation to candidate, TPC, College T&P Coordinator
December 15th	TPC provides recommendation to candidate, College T&P Coordinator, CID Dean
January 15th	CID Dean provides recommendation to candidate
January 31st	CID Dean provides recommendation to Provost

Appendix 1: HES Core Values

Updated and approved Spring 2022

1. Societally-Engaged Scholarship

We value societally engaged scholarship. We demonstrate this through activities that respond to societal needs and generate actionable knowledge, which we often co-produce with our community partners.

Examples:

Collaborate on a proposal with a community partner
Design/do research to meet a community partner’s needs
Advise/consult on a real-world issue
Conduct research that results in a real-world impact, for example the restoration of culturally important wetlands, or the integration of the research into a policy.
Pursue activities that result in capacity building for our partners and in our communities.
Create products from our research that are specifically designed for a non-scholarly audience, including white papers, story maps, press releases, and presentations in the broader community.

Develop collaborative relationships with community partners

2. Foundational Knowledge in HES

We value advancement and dissemination of foundational knowledge in support of human-environment systems science. We demonstrate this through engaging in scholarship that examines the complex, dynamic nature of human-environment relations, resulting in impactful publications and products.

Examples:

Scholarly publications
Scientific research grants
Conference participation and presentations
Editorial duties or reviewing for scholarly journals

3. Interdisciplinarity

We value interdisciplinarity. We demonstrate this by engaging in scholarship that crosses disciplinary boundaries.

Examples:

Submitting an interdisciplinary proposal
Publishing an interdisciplinary paper
Teaching an interdisciplinary class
Advising interdisciplinary students
Serving on committees of students in other departments and from other disciplines.
Co-teaching with faculty from other disciplines
Integrating different disciplines in a project

4. Collaboration and Team-Science

We value collaboration and team science. Examples of how we demonstrate this include collaborative research, teaching, and mentoring, in which we take both supportive and leading roles.

Examples:

Participating in an interdisciplinary team
Co-teaching a class
Co-advising a graduate student
Making a substantial contribution to a paper or proposal when not lead author / PI
Build relationships that create community

5. Promoting Learning in HES Science

We value transdisciplinary training rooted in human-environment systems science. Examples of how we demonstrate this include instruction, mentorship, the support of student-driven research projects, and other educational activities grounded in HES science.

Examples:

HES Certificate
VIPs
Service-Learning classes
Teach courses that include aspects of values 1-4 and 7

6. Structure for Our Culture

We value institutional structures that perpetuate our core values within HES and across the broader university. We demonstrate this by creating processes and policies that support our core values.

Examples:

A Tenure and Promotion policy that supports activities aligned with our core values
Evaluating our students’ success based on our core values.
Facilitating activities that build bridges across disciplines and across sectors (e.g. academia, industry, agency, etc.).
Supporting collaboration with stakeholders and communities.
Enabling collaborative teaching and research activities
Formalizing activities that support community building.

7. A Fair and Inclusive Community

We value mutual respect and the appreciation of all people. We embrace diverse perspectives and ways of knowing, we foster a welcoming and inclusive community, and we aspire to create knowledge that achieves a just world.

Examples:

DEIJ criteria in student recruitment
Collectively deciding to add a DEIJ value to our core values
Adapting teaching methods to better serve neurodiverse students
Participating in the BUILD certificate
EJ-aligned research
Activities that build capacity in rural or underserved communities