tenure applications loaded up with virtual conferences

[clean]

Another issue would be the type of place that is reviewing the application. Here, publications count and presentations count in a lower level category of engagement.  Also presentation of the same work over and over again would be discounted a lot.

(Im quoting myself!)
For clarity, here, and Im sure at many similar universities - in my discipline it is publications earn tenure, not presentations. There is no Presentation track to tenure!  In fact, one can meet all of the requirements for tenure and not make a single presentation IF they have a sufficient quantity and quality of publications. (Presnetations support but do not supplant publications). Presentations are a way to get feedback to move a paper forward to publication.  IF there is no progress to publication (or if the progress is too late in the game like someone trying to get 1/2 of their 'count' in the last 12 months) then there is insufficient evidence to support a recommendation for tenure. 

[Ruralguy]

Yes, this would even be so, but to a lesser degree, at my teaching college. If you have no peer reviewed work, and many conference presentations, then for the vast bulk of fields, this would likely not get you tenure at my school with one exception. If you are one of the top several teachers, you might have a chance, especially if you also did good service, but it would be marginal.

[Vkw10]

Ignore the virtual aspect and focus on the value of conferences for your discipline, your school, and your department.

My department values conference presentations, but not as highly as publications. A solo presentation at a top international conference is roughly equivalent to a refereed article in a solid but not top ranked journal. But we expect many presentations to lead to publications, so a string of presentations with few articles will garner warning comments in annual reviews about failure to follow through and develop ideas to maturity. We also look closely at titles and abstracts; repeated presentations with minor tweaks are counted as one.

How does your department count presentations? What have you communicated to your TT colleagues about how you count them?

[Ruralguy]

We're.really want to communicate that peer reviewed scholarship, excellence in teaching and solid continued service are each sine qua non. No amount of excellence in one will negate any of the others completely. So an excellent  teacher with a lot of conferences, no publications, and solid service will really be on the bubble. A great scholar with poor teaching and solid service will be a no. No service and very good in others puts you on the bubble. I'd be a definite no vote. But others think that's fine. I think it's a grievous sin at a small college with strong faculty governance. But yes, I also agree that it shouldn't be virtual vs. in person for conferences, but how they fit into a successful continuing program of scholarship without being a replacement for publications.

[mamselle]

Glancing back through, was it clarified if these were in the sciences or the humanities?

And is the OP in a similar or different field?

Those issues may want consideration as well....it seems they were asked about but not yet answered.

M.

[Ruralguy]

We don't even really know why Lightning has this concern. Might be on P&T, might have just heard about it or is concerned because it is known what is on their CVs. Field and all might help us as a group narrow down a response, but actually we seem to converging on a "doesn't really matter that much in most cases," though there might be some sort of bias in the answers.

[mamselle]

Yes, I'm just thinking in some humanities areas, just getting conference presentations might represent a lot more effort than usual.

I was lucky to have gotten my research trip in on Dec 2019, and to have all or most of the MS material I needed in my own notes, photos,, or in digital online files. I had most of what I needed, so it worked.

But if people missed that window, or are working on books not found on the BnF/BL, et al websites, they could have had a harder time pulling things together.

M.

[Ruralguy]

My impression is that people were taking delays due to covid into account and not generally in favor of COVID related penalties. I think the idea here is that exceedingly high number of any kind of conference would usually not help unless  they were invited talks, subfiields with higher regard for role of conferences, obviously differing topics, etc..
The details will always matter.

[mleok]

My impression is that people were taking delays due to covid into account and not generally in favor of COVID related penalties. I think the idea here is that exceedingly high number of any kind of conference would usually not help unless  they were invited talks, subfiields with higher regard for role of conferences, obviously differing topics, etc..
The details will always matter.

Usually, the fields with higher regard for conferences are those where there are refereed conference proceedings as well, and extremely low acceptance rates, which are published and reported for each conference.

[pgher]

In my field, the year definitely matters: 2019 virtual conferences were vanity, pay-to-publish-anything affairs. 2020 virtual conferences were oh-crap-let's-post-something versions of regular conferences. 2021 virtual conferences have been pretty well-done virtual gatherings with lots of engagement.

[lightning]

I probably should have mentioned in my original post that the boatload of virtual conferences were in addition to the usual grants, pubs, & decent teaching that are expected at any place. Conferences at my university count for something, but not as much as grants (where applicable) and of course peer-reviewed publications.

I can't imagine a scenario at any university where a tenure application bid is based mostly on conference presentations, so that's why I never mentioned that my university wants pubs/grants first, with conferences (with and without proceedings) in addition to pubs/grants. But thanks for all of your insights. I'm sure my unit's P&T committee will get derailed about virtual conferences, so it was good to read some reactions before we deal with tenure applications filled with virtual conferences.

IMO, too many conferences (virtual or otherwise) makes it harder to highlight the important stuff like pubs/grants or the norms for the field.

[Ruralguy]

It sounds like you are well within the norms that most of us  stated, so I doubt it will end up mattering much in most tenure cases. It's P and Ts job , at many places anyway, to get derailed, so to speak, on what means what.  It's better to do this for a little while then just make it up as they go along and treat everyone differently.

[Hegemony]

If the tenure file had no conference presentations for the period of the pandemic, would it still pass muster?  If so, it's useless debating the weight of conference presentations.  Or if only in-person presentations count, then you have to omit the pandemic period altogether.

I also agree with LarryC's point about the greater reach of conference presentations in the past year. I presented at a seminar series that said they normally got 15-20 attendees. When I presented in the series during the pandemic, they had to cut off the number of attendees for my session because the Zoom license only allowed for 300. There were scholars from New Zealand and even one from Egypt, people who never would have been able to attend in normal circumstances. It was unquestionably the presentation with the longest reach of my career.

[mleok]

I probably should have mentioned in my original post that the boatload of virtual conferences were in addition to the usual grants, pubs, & decent teaching that are expected at any place. Conferences at my university count for something, but not as much as grants (where applicable) and of course peer-reviewed publications.

I can't imagine a scenario at any university where a tenure application bid is based mostly on conference presentations, so that's why I never mentioned that my university wants pubs/grants first, with conferences (with and without proceedings) in addition to pubs/grants. But thanks for all of your insights. I'm sure my unit's P&T committee will get derailed about virtual conferences, so it was good to read some reactions before we deal with tenure applications filled with virtual conferences.

IMO, too many conferences (virtual or otherwise) makes it harder to highlight the important stuff like pubs/grants or the norms for the field.

Sounds like you're just borrowing trouble then, if the candidate has all the usual grants, publications, who cares if they also have a boatload of conference presentations (virtual or otherwise)? I don't see how that makes it any harder to highlight the important stuff.

You make it sound like your colleagues on the P&T committee have the attention span of a goldfish. If so, just put the important stuff at the front of the promotion file, which you should probably do in any case.

[lightning]

I probably should have mentioned in my original post that the boatload of virtual conferences were in addition to the usual grants, pubs, & decent teaching that are expected at any place. Conferences at my university count for something, but not as much as grants (where applicable) and of course peer-reviewed publications.

I can't imagine a scenario at any university where a tenure application bid is based mostly on conference presentations, so that's why I never mentioned that my university wants pubs/grants first, with conferences (with and without proceedings) in addition to pubs/grants. But thanks for all of your insights. I'm sure my unit's P&T committee will get derailed about virtual conferences, so it was good to read some reactions before we deal with tenure applications filled with virtual conferences.

IMO, too many conferences (virtual or otherwise) makes it harder to highlight the important stuff like pubs/grants or the norms for the field.

Sounds like you're just borrowing trouble then, if the candidate has all the usual grants, publications, who cares if they also have a boatload of conference presentations (virtual or otherwise)? I don't see how that makes it any harder to highlight the important stuff.

You make it sound like your colleagues on the P&T committee have the attention span of a goldfish. If so, just put the important stuff at the front of the promotion file, which you should probably do in any case.

Yes. Many of them have the attention span of a goldfish. That's really funny, BTW, but it does describe a lot of the P&T members.