The hype around the tenure and promotion process is intense. In my opinion, it’s also misplaced. The review year should be seen as the culmination of the probationary period. Candidates should have a pretty good idea of whether they have a solid case for tenure and promotion or not. Being jittery is natural, but it should not be overwhelming.
One of the keys to success for the tenure review is preparation. This does not just mean getting the portfolio ready for the committee. Rather, it involves understanding the tenure process at the institutions and conforming yourself to those standards. Different activities are valued differently at different universities or colleges. While one school (or even department) may place a great deal of weight on the scholarship of teaching and learning, another may not, or even see such activity as a negative. Understanding the institutional culture from the beginning of your career is important, if not essential.
Another important key to success is documentation. Keeping track of everything you do in a year is difficult, but it must be done. In five years, you will not be able to remember which committees you served on or which workshops you participated in if you have not filed that information away someplace that is accessible again when it comes time to compile your dossier. Keeping your CV up-to-date is a good way to start, but I’ve also found it helpful to have a Word file with the three major categories (research, teaching, service) and a miscellaneous area to include activities that might not neatly fit into one of the three traditional areas. In my case, it made it much easier to review all of these activities, sort them into some kind of order, eliminate the unnecessary or trivial activities, and whip them into presentable shape.
Robert Diamond has written a good, basic overview of how to begin preparing for tenure from day one on the tenure track. You may want to get his book from your library and give it a quick read.
