Oregon State University faculty members are not happy about the way tenure and promotion are handled at the university, according to the results of a study presented Thursday at a Faculty Senate meeting.

In 2003, OSU began a study of its promotion and tenure process, prompted by research at other universities indicating that "marginalized" groups may receive different treatment than the majority.

The findings of that investigation were reported at Thursday's Faculty Senate meeting.

The study, co-sponsored by the Faculty Senate Promotion and Tenure Committee, the Association of Faculty for Advancement of People of Color and the President's Commission on the Status of Women, looked at the experiences of 36 individuals across 11 OSU colleges, the Extension Service and the OSU Library.

Anne Gillies, affirmative action associate, and others conducted interviews and led focus groups to determine if there was unfairness or the perception of unfairness in how candidates for promotion or tenure fared.

Concerns voiced by those interviewed included a lack of transparency, inexperienced department heads or chairs and "moving target" criteria.

Some faculty members also felt that their minority status put them at a disadvantage.

Of significant concern to the committee conducting the study, according to Gillies, were reports that the promotion and tenure process can vary widely depending on department or college. University-wide policies are not being applied consistently, she said.

Another problem was that sometimes people were denied tenure without being told why, the study said.

Juan Trujillo, assistant professor in the department of foreign languages and literatures, presented recommendations on how to help make OSU's existing promotion and tenure process more transparent and equitable.

These included clarifying roles of department leaders, clarifying for new hires what is expected of them and communicating better with promotion and tenure candidates throughout the process.

Angelo Gomez, director of the Office of Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity, then opened the floor for comments from senators.

Robin Galloway, Extension 4-H youth faculty in Linn County, said she was glad to hear the committee was looking at how being based outside the main campus might affect candidates' career advancement.

Deborah Pence, associate professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering, expressed concern over the criteria used to evaluate candidates.

"I think in this age we tend to set goals based on quantity of research or scholarship, not quality, and that's a real concern," she said.

Other senators said the process should rely less on student evaluations, and that junior faculty members needed more mentoring.

Deanna Kingston, associate professor of anthropology, suggested an annual workshop where junior faculty could learn about expectations and deadlines relevant to the promotion and tenure process.

David Sillars, associate professor of construction-engineering management, addressed the balance between service and research and scholarship in the evaluation process.

National data suggest that faculty in minority groups carry a heavier service burden than those in the dominant culture. This cuts into their research time, which can hurt them when they apply for tenure.

Mary Ann Albright covers higher education. She can be reached at maryann.albright@lee.net or 758-9518.