- Teaching: 6 courses per calendar year minimum, assuming active engagement in scholarship & research (otherwise, 8 courses/year is expected)
- Scholarship: standard is "one scholarly article published in a peer-reviewed journal" per year.
This standard applies to full professors, who are expected to exemplify the model for assistant and associate professors.
Of note, DP teaches the minimum 6 courses per year - and has for the last 3 years (furthest back I bothered to check).
Therefore, peers in the Humanities department would reasonably expect their esteemed colleague to be pulling his proverbial weight, by actively contributing to peer-reviewed scholarship.
What of this scholarship standard?
Searches on Google Scholar and ResearchGate turn up nothing since 2007. He lacks so much as a profile page on either resource.
It is as if, to the academic universe, he does not exist, and has not existed for more than 10 years.
By comparison, a peer in Asian & Near Eastern Languages, full Professor Kirk Belnap shows 165 citations and 1,040 reads on ResearchGate. Google Scholar shows pages of articles written by Prof. Belnap. As it should be.
And this is no surprise! Why?
Because, even for a tenured polymath, publishing novel scholarship every year is simply impossible when one chooses to waste >40 hours per week, for more than a decade, obsessively satisfying an addiction to apologetic pornography.
Now I personally could not care less if DP chooses to spend his time on such activities. Have at it. But it continues to bother me that BYU pays for and tacitly endorses a full professor who:
(a) lies about what BYU pays him to do, when using ~half of a tenured professor's salary to play apologist
(b) dishonestly wields the authority of a serious scholar in writing on DesNews, editing and authoring at Interpreter, and countless tours, firesides, speeches, etc.
(c) safe in his ivory tower at BYU, mocks the serious scholarship of serious scholars whose work contradicts his or the church's dogma -- for instance, Brian Hauglid
Highlights from guidelines on rank and status for BYU Humanities professors below.
TEACHING
https://humanities.BYU.edu/wp-content/u ... elines.pdf
B. The Typical Workload for Professorial Faculty.
1. Scholarship. Faculty members in professorial ranks are expected to be actively engaged in ongoing scholarship. While recognizing that publishing schedules are sometimes long and variable, chairs have the responsibility to ensure that scholarly activity is significant and sustained.
2. Teaching. Assignment to the professorial track in and of itself is insufficient to qualify for a reduced teaching load. However, professorial faculty who meet research expectations generally receive lower teaching loads than are assigned to professional faculty and are assigned to teach six courses during a ten month contract (based on the assumption that in most cases, these courses are three credit hours).
SCHOLARSHIP
https://humanities.BYU.edu/wp-content/u ... n-2018.pdf
2.4. Scholarly and Creative Work (“University Policy” 3.6-3.7).
2.4.1. Humanities scholars at BYU are expected to be active contributors to peer reviewed, published conversations on topics in the humanistic disciplines in ways that capitalize on their academic training and expertise and that typically address current issues and problems with which their disciplines and the larger academic community wrestle. Each discipline and sub-discipline has its own standards and models for consequential scholarship; the evaluation of scholarly projects, products, and publication venues is best left to the discriminating judgment of qualified peers in the field. The quality of the work (as measured by such factors as its substance, originality, soundness of methodology, and demonstrated impact on the field as provided by the candidate under review for promotion) is more important than the quantity or type. At the same time, the type of work should be appropriate to the scholar’s faculty development plan and to the needs of the department, and the quantity should be sufficient to “demonstrate consistent productivity” over the course of a career (“University Policy” 3.4.3). As a general rule, “consistent productivity” is understood in the College of Humanities to approximate the equivalent of one scholarly article published in a peer-reviewed journal of national or international reach per year.
2.4.2.2 Peer review is the fundamental criterion to be used to determine whether
or not published faculty research meets the scholarship expectations that come
with a professorial faculty appointment. Although the ways in which peer review
occurs and is administered may vary somewhat from discipline to discipline, the
objectivity of the peer review process is most evident when it is “double blind.”
2.4.2.3 Faculty are expected to publish their work with organizations and
presses that are respected by peers in their particular disciplines and that observe
high editorial and professional standards. ...
2.4.2.5 Papers and presentations delivered at reputable professional meetings are
meaningful scholarly activities. They permit faculty to participate in productive
scholarly dialogue while becoming personally acquainted with other peer-scholars
who also contribute to that dialogue. But most important of all, conference
participation gives faculty an occasion to receive feedback from these peers on
work that will be turned into published pieces. ...
2.4.2.10 Electronic publications, including videos, compact disks, and web sites,
are not discounted simply because they appear in electronic form. Such work,
when presented as scholarship, should be judged by the same principles as apply
to the evaluation of printed scholarship, including peer review, intellectual
substance, originality, soundness of methodology, contribution to the field, and
the identity and reputation of the publisher.
(emphasis added)