Department of Curriculum, Instruction, and Media Technology. Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Guidelines

Transcription

1 RPT Guidelines 1 Department of Curriculum, Instruction, and Media Technology Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Guidelines Faculty members in the Curriculum, Instruction, and Media Technology Department know the reappointment, promotion, and tenure processes are very important in the professional life of each faculty member. Steeped in peer review, the activities associated with reappointment, promotion, and tenure are engaging responsibilities on the part of the faculty to provide feedback and guidance regarding a colleague s professional development, quality of instruction, record of scholarship, and service to the department, college, university, community, and/or profession. The following information documents the Department s Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure (RPT) Guidelines as well as the Bayh College of Education s POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR REAPPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, AND TENURE. The CIMT faculty members provide herein the expectations for tenure-track assistant professors seeking reappointment, promotion and tenure as well as associate professors seeking promotion to the rank of full professor.

2 RPT Guidelines 2 Context In accordance with university guidelines, all assistant professors in the department receive peer and chairperson performance reviews. A faculty member who is tenure-track experiences a review each year during her/his first six years in the department with detailed, multi-committee peer reviews in the third and sixth years. Departmental Faculty Affairs Committee members, Department Chairperson, and Dean of the Bayh College of Education (BCOE) reviews occur in each of the six years. The RPT document exists to guide a tenure-track or a special purpose faculty member in her/his decision-making about which work is considered important and advantageous in obtaining reappointment, promotion, and tenure. While adherence to these guidelines significantly increases the likelihood that reappointment, promotion and tenure will occur in a timely manner, the review process takes into account additional professional behaviors and actions that may effect reappointment, promotion and tenure recommendations. An associate professor seeking the rank full professor is reviewed with regard to the guidelines articulated by the Department, Bayh College of Education, and University. CIMT Department Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure OVERVIEW The following information is adapted from the BCOE Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Policies. The Curriculum, Instruction, and Media Technology Department is an experiential learning community with a mission to preserve, transmit, apply, and develop knowledge related to the profession of education in its many dimensions. The Department fosters the scholarly development of its faculty and encourages their interaction with students and with their respective professional and disciplinary communities. As members of this learning community, faculty members are expected to contribute to the department, college, university, and community through the activities of teaching, scholarship, and service. Faculty members being reviewed are expected to provide evidence of continuing growth and superior achievement in teaching, scholarship, and service throughout their careers. Each faculty member bears professional responsibility for promoting, through her/his work, the values of knowledge acquisition, inquiry, and lifelong learning among students, colleagues, the community, and the profession. Basic regulations concerning reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions are contained in the Indiana State University Handbook. The university faculty appointment, promotion, and tenure (RPT) policies published in 2000 and the Bayh College of Education s revised RPT document dated January The College document charges the CIMT Department with identifying the specific evaluative criteria and performance standards for use in reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions. College and Departmental policies and procedures are required to comply with the minimum standards in the University s guidelines with the allowance to be more exacting. These Departmental guidelines require approval by the College promotion and tenure committee and the College Dean. The BCOE guidelines were approved by the College Faculty, the College Dean, the University Promotions and Tenure Oversight Committee, and the Provost.

3 RPT Guidelines 3 Reappointment, Promotion, Tenure Review Procedures Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Guidelines are explained in the BCOE RPT document (see appendix one). The CIMT Department complies with the stated process. In particular, the faculty evaluation process is initiated at the Department level by the Chair upon notification by the Dean that an evaluation is due. Typically, a faculty member is provided three to four weeks to prepare a portfolio of her/his work and to submit the portfolio to the CIMT Faculty Affairs Committee. Faculty Affairs Committee Review The Faculty Affairs Committee (FAC) consists of all tenured members in the department. With the exception of the departmental representative to the College Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Committee, all members of the FAC complete evaluations of faculty being considered for reappointment, promotion, and tenure. The FAC functions through a three-member leadership team who reads through the portfolio and jointly writes an evaluation over a two-week time period. Each departmental tenured faculty member makes comments to be included in the evaluation. Each faculty member who reviews the candidate completes a review document and indicates her/his vote to the FAC. During the FAC leadership team review period, the Department Chair also reviews the portfolio. A separate evaluation is written by the Chair to go forward with the FAC evaluation. Once both evaluations are ready to be sent to the Dean, the Department Chair meets with the faculty member being evaluated and reviews the evaluative statements. The materials are then sent to the next level for review and comment. Before evaluations are placed in faculty member s permanent files, s/he shall be given ample opportunity to append comments or rebuttal to the evaluation forms. See BCOE RPT Guidelines for the timeline to rebut. Responsibilities of the Candidate The candidate is responsible for being familiar with the Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure guidelines at Indiana State University. In particular, the candidate is expected to use self-study as well as work with the Department Chair and Departmental Faculty to understand the BCOE RPT Guidelines and the Departmental guidelines. At the start of the candidate s work and throughout her/his employment in the Department, the candidate will utilize her/his time to engage in the professional activities for which s/he is contracted. In doing so, familiarity with the guidelines during the tenure-track years and beyond will assist the candidate in documenting professional activities in teaching, scholarship, and service which are presented for tenure and subsequent ranks. Departmental and BCOE guidelines are connected structures in that the candidate documents professional activities and compiles them for review so that the same materials are considered by each reviewer at each level of review, e.g. once presented for an annual review, portfolio materials cannot be changed for that same review period. Responsibilities of the Chair The Department Chair will meet regularly with the candidate during the initial year and subsequent years during the tenure-track years and beyond. In addition, the Chair will provide information about the RPT guidelines and encourage and, as possible, support the candidate s professional activities through Departmental, College, and University resources as well as extramural funding when it is

4 RPT Guidelines 4 available. The Chair serves to provide ongoing support for Departmental faculty in professional activities that meet the needs of the students, other faculty, the Department, College, University and profession. Responsibilities of the Faculty Faculty members in the CIMT Department are responsible for assisting the development of professional relationships. Specifically, a faculty member within a specific Departmental program for which the candidate provides professional services is expected to provide careful guidance in assisting the candidate to be an accomplished professional. Such a professional, collegial relationship serves the faculty and Department well in maintaining a work environment that enables cooperation and professionalism to meet the needs of the students, faculty, Department, College, University and profession. Annual Goals During the tenure-track years, a faculty member who is recommended for reappointment by the Dean will meet with the Department Chair to establish specific annual goals for the next evaluation period in the areas of teaching, scholarship, service, and other areas as appropriate. These goals and supporting documentation associated with each goal will be included in the subsequent year s dossier for evaluation. Given the significance of the goals in evaluation for the following year, the faculty member, the FAC leadership team, and the Department Chair will commit to the goals by reviewing and commenting on the goal statements. Periodic reviews of the faculty member s work toward accomplishing the goals during the academic year may occur upon request by the FAC and/or the Chair. Such reviews are constructive to encourage and guide the faculty member. STANDARDS FOR FACULTY RANKS The Indiana State University Handbook specifies the following standards of achievement for each faculty rank. These standards serve as the basis for the Bayh College of Education Promotion and Tenure Committee s as well as the Department s evaluation of a candidate relative to promotion and tenure decisions. Assistant Professor Documented evidence of adequacy in teaching; of potential for achievement in research, scholarship or creative activity; and of service appropriate to the mission of the faculty member s academic unit are required. Faculty members are to demonstrate continuous professional growth in teaching; research, scholarship, or creative activity; and service. Associate Professor Documented evidence of effective teaching; a record of research, scholarship or creative activity which has earned professional recognition at the national or regional level; and evidence of effective service to the University and to either the community or the profession are required.

5 RPT Guidelines 5 Professor Documented evidence of sustained effective teaching; of a record of substantial accomplishment in research, scholarship or creative activity which has lead to professional recognition at the national level; and of active and substantive service to the University and to both the community and the profession are required. Departmental Criteria for Evaluation of Faculty Activities The BCOE RPT Guidelines give the Department primary authority and responsibility for assessing discipline specific achievements of faculty for reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions. This is not to say that departments have ultimate authority in evaluating all aspects of a candidate s research, scholarship, or creative activity. The evaluation of a candidate s total performance is a shared responsibility. On the other hand, the Handbook statements do help differentiate the roles of Departmental reviewers and of College level reviewers in this critical evaluation and provide College reviewers with an opportunity to delegate part of their evaluation to the Department reviewers. Specifically, the CIMT faculty identified evaluative criteria to outline the areas of significant importance that will guide the Faculty Affairs Committee in making decisions for reappointment, tenure and promotion: 1. Refereed Journals 2. Service to Department, College, and/or University 3. Evaluation of Teaching 4. Conferences 5. Journals 6. Book Chapters 7. Textbooks 8. Grant Writing Proposals a. Credit given for effort expended to write grant b. Non-funded grants To reiterate, the Bayh College of Education s Policies and Procedures for Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure serve as the primary resource to guide Departmental faculty RPT decisions. While Department faculty reserves the opportunity to emphasize certain areas of expertise, there is a clear understanding among the faculty that BCOE policies are to be followed in assessing faculty work and making recommendations regarding RPT. The information listed below highlight those areas where candidates for reappointment, promotion, and tenure should provide evidence in teaching, scholarship, and service. Standard Expectations The candidate is expected to demonstrate growth from the previous year s accomplishments. Thus, there are signs of continuous improvement in selected areas stated below. The following CIMT RPT performance expectations are adapted from University of North Carolina Greensboro.

6 RPT Guidelines 6 Teaching, scholarship, and service are the primary activities of faculty in the Department of Curriculum, Instruction, and Media Technology. However, these are best carried forward in an environment of collegiality. Records of faculty practice should document evidence of significant impact in each of these areas of activity, as defined by the descriptions of each area and the levels of appropriate achievement that follow. While the weighting and proportion of achievements in these areas of activity may vary according to individual and programmatic circumstances, contributions in all areas are necessary; meeting the criteria in one or two areas is insufficient.

7 RPT Guidelines 7 Definitions of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service Congeniality cuts across teaching, scholarship, and service. It is an element of evaluation for decisions regarding promotion, tenure, reappointment, or merit. Documentation of this will be presented through narrative and explicit examples substantiating collegiality with others. A. Teaching. At any level of review, a candidate s portfolio should show evidence of demonstrable commitment to and effectiveness in teaching. Effective teaching means exhibiting verified best practice performance including technology integration in classroom, clinical, and technological settings as documented by student evaluations, systematic peer observation and reports, and self-reflection including a demonstrable commitment to equitable and effective teaching. The category of teaching includes not only instruction in assigned courses and clinical assignments, but also such related contributions as curriculum design and program development, advising and supervising students, directing research projects, leading workshops and institutes intended to improve the knowledge, skills, or dispositions of students, productive participation in interdisciplinary programs, developing innovative pedagogies, and preparing effective instructional materials. A sound record of teaching will include contributions and documented impact in a variety of these areas. B. Scholarship. Each candidate should maintain a scholarly agenda that is demonstrably original, significant, typically peer reviewed, publicly disseminated (normally through publication in worthy print and electronic media and by presentation at substantive meetings of scholars, practitioners, or policymakers where impact can be anticipated and ascertained), recognized, and sustained. Faculty in the Department value collaboration in scholarship and respect all types of collaboration, whether with students, practitioners, or colleagues at this or other institutions. Collaboration, either as first or supporting author, is respected and valued. However, timely and broadly supported progression through the academic ranks requires demonstration of proportional effort and influence. That is, any body of work offered in support of an application for reappointment, promotion, or tenure should contain a general ratio of single authorships, first authorships, and supporting authorships that is reasonably proportional to the total body of work. C. Service. Faculty service typically is of three types: service to the institution (Department, College, & University); service to the professional field of scholarship or practice; and service to the community. Adequate service is demonstrated through participation at the institution and one other area. 1. Service to the institution. Departments, academic programs, the College, and the University require the regular, sustained, and serious participation of faculty in their administration and governance. The Department expects the responsible participation of faculty in the academic community and looks for documented evidence of such participation in a candidate s record. During years one to three, service to the Department and College are expected. The third year and beyond, service at all three levels is expected. Service expectations beyond the Department are negotiated from year to year vis-à-vis teaching and scholarly loads. Communicating service opportunities with the Department Chair is especially important for assistant professors during the first two years.

8 RPT Guidelines 8 2. Service to the professional field of scholarship or practice. Faculty serve the professional field through a host of activities including peer reviewing, participation in academic conferences, service to and leadership in academic and professional organizations, and scholarly editorial work. The Department endorses, supports, and encourages such activities because they serve the interests of learning; because they are important forms of faculty development and scholarly participation in their own right, and because they are a source of pride and recognition to the Department, College, and University. 3. Service to the Community. Faculty serve the community in numerous ways, including, but not limited to, developing consulting relationships with schools, organizations, agencies, and other for-profit or non-profit entities. They also develop and participate in outreach programs that apply and/or disseminate knowledge, improved practice, or policy recommendations beyond the confines of the University; and they develop and participate in partnerships and alliances (including Professional Development School relationships and internships) between academic programs and external agencies. The Department endorses and encourages such service relationships because they are essential to the service, outreach, and strategic missions of the Department, College, and University; because they are viable and legitimate extensions of scholarship and teaching; because they help to support and enrich academic programs; and because they help to prepare students for lives of good and reflective practice, service, and leadership. An outstanding record of service involves substantial achievements in more than one of these categories. Criteria for Promotion to Specific Ranks and Conferral of Permanent Tenure REGARDLESS OF LEVEL OF PROMOTION, COLLEGIALITY WILL NEED TO BE DEMONSTRATED IN METHODS NOTED ABOVE. A. Reappointment as Assistant Professor Candidates for Reappointment demonstrate levels of success and promise in all three areas of activity (teaching, scholarship, and service) appropriate for their time on the faculty. In their teaching, they should show competence in their content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, pedagogical skills, and positive dispositions toward teaching and learning. In particular, they should demonstrate an understanding of the purpose of teaching as productive impact on student learning, and they should show commitment to continuous improvement in their teaching by utilizing cycles of reflection and by incorporating feedback from student evaluations and from peer observation. Documentation for teaching competence should include summaries of numerical ratings by students on approved course evaluations, and where available, peer observation reports. Samples of self-analysis and reflection on practice, reports of particular student successes or awards, and samples of student work that may include samples of their students work may be included in the documentation. Scholarly efforts should reflect a pattern of submission, publication, and presentation that is regular at least from the second year of appointment. Scholarship at reappointment also should reflect a focus (or foci) that is (are) recognizable as (an) emerging research agenda(s). Service activities typically will be at Department and College levels with University level by the third

9 RPT Guidelines 9 year, with some participation in professional organizations at the local, state, regional, and national levels. If PDS is the primary focus, service activities will primarily be in support of public schools. The candidate should show promise of satisfying expectations for promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure. B. Promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure Candidates for promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure are successful and committed teachers who demonstrate verified best practice teaching, integrate theory and research into practice in the classroom, technology or distance based teaching and learning, and through supervision. They have an identifiable, articulated, and consequential scholarly agenda that has demonstrated, through regular and continuous patterns of submission, presentation, and publication its value and impact in the areas of theory and/or practice appropriate for their fields of study. There is active participation in professional service through state, regional, and national or international professional organizations, as well as important contributions to the University, College, Department, and/or Public Schools. Candidates for promotion and tenure at this level demonstrate a continuing, reliable and active commitment to program responsibilities and the development of students and colleagues. Documentation for the areas of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service is a continuation of the documentation for reappointment. Candidates for promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure are characterized by a level of momentum in teaching, scholarship, service, and collegiality that readily predicts a successful trajectory toward promotion to Professor. C. Promotion to Professor Successful candidates at this level are accomplished teachers, mature scholars, and leaders in the Department, College, University, and in their professional organizations. The candidate s scholarship and professional leadership has had an impact on the profession or field of study. The candidate s work integrates research and scholarship into her or his teaching, service, and leadership. Service contributions at this level include leadership roles in professional organizations, impact on policy, practice, or theory-building dialogues at the state or national levels, mentoring students and others, especially non-tenured faculty. Candidates for Professor should be exemplars of academic citizenship and collegiality, positively influencing the careers of others. The pattern of professional and personal performance indicates clearly that productivity and professional development will continue through the remainder of the candidate s career. Decisions regarding promotion to Professor are less matters of time in rank than of bodies of work and significant accomplishment. While the particular configuration of any individual s scholarly contributions will always be unique, it is nevertheless possible to anticipate recognizable profiles of outstanding achievement worthy of consideration for promotion to the rank of Professor, as described below. The application for promotion to Professor must define a profile that is to be used in evaluating the candidate. It is the candidate s responsibility to identify which profile, or combination of profiles he or she is using, and to present accomplishments, documentation, and justification for peer and administrator review arranged according to the framework outlined in the profile descriptions. In some cases, the candidate s record may fit clearly into one of the four profiles described below. In other cases, the candidate s accomplishments may include elements of two or more profiles so that the combination is considered

10 RPT Guidelines 10 sufficient to justify promotion. The portfolio and application should clearly define the candidate s achievements in each area and describe how the resulting record constitutes the sustained and significant contribution expected for promotion to Professor. Profiles of Achievement for Promotion to Professor 1. Research Profile A. Teaching The candidate s record demonstrates continuous commitment to and effectiveness in teaching as defined in Part II of this document. B. Scholarship The candidate s record shows clear evidence of scholarly achievements as defined in Part II of this document. A record of outstanding achievement under this profile is marked by attainment of a substantial national or international reputation in a scholarly field. The candidate will have produced significant works of scholarship in the form of books, refereed or invited articles or book chapters. Reviews, awards, citations, exhibitions, and or other forms of scholarly recognition, will confirm the positive reception and impact of these works, or other forms of scholarly recognition. The candidate will be judged to have made a significant impact upon a scholarly field, and this judgment will be confirmed by the testimony of qualified impartial external reviewers. C. Service The candidate has made significant service contributions to the Department, College, University, to the scholarly profession and/or in professionally relevant community service, as defined by the definitions of service in Part II of this document. 2. Applied Scholarship Profile A. Teaching The candidate s record demonstrates continuous commitment to and effectiveness in teaching as described in Part II of this document. B. Scholarship A record of outstanding achievement under this profile involves significant articulations of applied scholarship in a variety of settings, resulting in a strong cumulative documented impact over a period of time, or a concentration of scholarly energies into pedagogy, encompassing broader questions of curriculum and teaching in the discipline or field of study. The tangible scholarly products of applied research may take such forms as commissioned research reports, articles in the popular or regional press, curatorial or community education projects, substantial and sustained scholarly editorial work, textbooks, manuals, software and other course materials, articles on pedagogy or curriculum design, or

11 RPT Guidelines 11 reports based on program grants and contracts devoted to developing and disseminating innovative pedagogies (an enhancement of the scholarship categories listed in Part II of this document). This work may result in establishing programs integrating research with service to the community. It may also include establishing and managing academic programs within the University, or of faculty development, student development, or clinical operations that are adjunct to academic programs. It may include applications of scholarship to other fields. It may include curriculum design and program development, the direction of programs, mentoring of other teachers, the design and leading of workshops or institutes. It may include development of innovative pedagogies and technologies for teaching, and authorship of instructional materials. The result for the candidate may be a reputation that is more local and regional rather than national or international. The candidate s portfolio will attest to a) achievements that are demonstrable extensions or applications of scholarship and creative activity; b) achievements that further the mission of the department or program with respect to teaching and research; and c) contributions whose quality and impact are well documented and confirmed by appropriate experts in the discipline as well as those directly affected by them. The candidate will be judged to have made a significant impact on practice or policy in an area of importance through the work of applied scholarship or to have made a strong cumulative contribution to the teaching mission of the university and to teaching in the candidate s field. C. Service The candidate has made significant service contributions to the Department, College, and University, to the scholarly profession and/or in professionally relevant community service, as defined in this document. The submission of all documents for reappointment, promotion, and tenure follow the guidelines established in the BCOE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR REAPPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, AND TENURE. The CIMT Department Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure document was reviewed by Departmental faculty and approved as presented on: Vote: FAC Chairperson Date The CIMT Department Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure document was reviewed by the Bayh College of Education Promotion and Tenure Committee and approved as presented on: Vote: BCOE College Promotion and Tenure Com. Chairperson Date The CIMT Department Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure document was reviewed by the Dean of the Bayh College of Education and approved as presented on: BCOE Dean Date

12 RPT Guidelines 12 POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR REAPPOINTMENT, PROMOTION, AND TENURE BAYH COLLEGE OF EDUCATION INDIANA STATE UNIVERSITY Approved by Bayh College of Education Congress on (Day Month, Year)

13 RPT Guidelines 13 OVERVIEW The Bayh College of Education (BCOE) is a learning community with a mission to prepare, promote, and advance educational and human service professionals for a diverse and ever-changing world. The College seeks to foster the scholarly development of its faculty and to encourage their interaction with students and with their respective professional and disciplinary communities. As members of this learning community, faculty are expected to contribute to their departments, the college, and the university through the activities of teaching; research, scholarship, and creative activity; and service. Faculty are expected to evidence continuing growth and superior achievement in these areas throughout their careers. They bear responsibility to promote through engagement the values of knowledge acquisition, inquiry, and lifelong learning among students, colleagues, the community, and the profession. Basic regulations concerning reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions are contained in the Indiana State University (ISU) Handbook and may be found at In the university faculty appointment, promotion, and tenure policies published for all faculty, colleges/schools and departments are charged with identifying the specific evaluative criteria and performance standards for use in promotion and tenure decisions. College/school and departmental policies and procedures are required to comply with the minimum standards in the University s guidelines and may be more exacting. Departmental guidelines require approval by the college promotion and tenure committee and by the college dean; the college faculty, the college dean, the University Promotions and Tenure Oversight Committee, and the Provost approve college guidelines. This document, Bayh College of Education Policy and Procedures for Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure outlines the College s specific criteria and performance standard framework. The evaluation of an individual faculty member s performance and decisions about continuing employment and advancement involve multiple independent, although related, decisions. Annual reappointment decisions at the college level are the shared responsibility of the department faculty, the department chair, and the Dean. Mid-term comprehensive reappointment decisions and promotion and tenure decisions at the college level are the shared responsibility of the department faculty, the chair, the BCOE Promotion and Tenure Committee (PTC), and the Dean. Positive evaluations are required for reappointment, promotion, and tenure. Regular reappointment does not guarantee tenure, nor does tenure guarantee promotion beyond the level of associate professor. The evaluation of faculty performance at all levels must be based on evidence and follow published criteria and standards. Evaluations for reappointment, tenure, and promotion are based on teaching activity; research, scholarship and creative activity; and service activity. Evidence supporting faculty activity and achievement should include evaluative input from individuals or groups who are the recipients of the faculty member s teaching; research, scholarship or creative activity; or service (e.g., students, departmental colleagues, departments, schools, agencies, etc.) and/or disciplinary peers both inside and beyond Indiana State University.

14 RPT Guidelines 14 Significance and quality are the primary considerations in assessing faculty achievements in all three areas of faculty performance teaching, scholarship, and service and in decisions regarding reappointment, promotion and tenure. Quantity of faculty achievements, while not to be ignored, is not to be considered as important as significance and quality. Appointment SPECIFIC GUIDELINES The appointment letter for new faculty identifies the expectations for teaching/librarianship, research, scholarship, and service. This letter also includes any years of previous service that have been awarded toward tenure and the faculty member s dates of eligibility for promotion and tenure. Reappointment New faculty members serve a probationary period during which time they are appointed for a specified term, normally one year. The length of the probationary period is dependent upon the new faculty member s previous experience and is specified in the initial appointment letter. Early in the probationary period, reviews of faculty members who are new to the teaching profession usually emphasize teaching performance and departmental service; however, attention to research/creative activity should not be delayed. The awarding of promotion and tenure requires effectiveness in teaching, research, and service. University policy requires that each department maintain specific evaluative criteria and performance standards for promotion and tenure. Furthermore, university policy requires that specific performance goals be established during the annual reviews of probationary faculty. At the time of annual probationary reviews, probationary faculty members submit to their department materials documenting achievement in teaching; research, scholarship, and creative activity; and service during the specified period of service. Copies of the initial letter of appointment with any change or renegotiation, and annual evaluation reports must be included in the documentation. The department s chairperson and personnel committee review the materials independently and each makes a separate recommendation on the candidate s evaluation form. The candidate is notified of these recommendations and their rationales through a meeting with the department chairperson. Within 60 calendar days, the faculty member and the department chairperson cooperatively develop annual performance goals. These performance goals are placed in the faculty personnel file and should be included in future review documentation. The faculty member s materials and recommendations from the chair and personnel committee is forwarded to the Dean, who reviews them, makes an independent recommendation. The Dean then meets with the candidate to discuss the outcomes of the reviews and the recommendations and to provide the faculty member with copies of the departmental and Dean s comments and recommendations. The candidate signs the review form in the appropriate place to acknowledge the meeting and discussion have been held. The probationary faculty member has three working days to submit a rebuttal to the Dean. The Dean then forwards the recommendation and any faculty rebuttal to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs. Annual reviews will result in a recommendation for reappointment, conditional

15 RPT Guidelines 15 reappointment, or non-reappointment. Faculty members are notified of their reappointment or nonreappointment by written statement from the President or the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, no later than the dates specified in the ISU Handbook. Each year of probationary review, faculty members shall sign their evaluation forms to indicate awareness of the comments on the forms. Faculty members will have three working days to make written comments concerning the comments and recommendations. The signed forms and written comments are returned to the chairperson and the Dean to be forwarded. No rebuttals from committees, chairs, or the Dean will be allowed to be included in documentation that moves forward. In the instance of conditional reappointment, the Dean and department chairperson will jointly prepare a plan for remediation in writing for the candidate. The Dean will present the remediation during the review meeting. Recommendations of non-renewal during the probationary period may be appealed to the University Promotions and Tenure Oversight Committee as set forth in the ISU Handbook Faculty Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure Policies. Comprehensive Reappointment Review All probationary faculty members will undergo a comprehensive probationary review no later than the third year of service. At the time of comprehensive probationary reviews, probationary faculty members submit to their department materials documenting achievement in teaching; research, scholarship, and creative activity; and service during the specified three-year period of service. Copies of the initial letter of appointment with any change or renegotiation, and annual evaluation reports must be included in the documentation. The department s chairperson and personnel committee review the materials independently and each makes a separate recommendation on the candidate s evaluation form. The candidate is notified of these recommendations and their rationales through a meeting with the department chairperson. At this time, the faculty member and the department chairperson cooperatively develop annual performance goals. These performance goals are placed in the faculty personnel file and should be included in future review documentation. The faculty member s materials and recommendations from the chair and personnel committee are forwarded to the Dean and the BCOE Promotion and Tenure Committee for their separate reviews and separate recommendations. The Dean then meets with the candidate to discuss the outcomes of the reviews and the recommendations and to provide the faculty member with copies of the departmental, BCOE PTC and Dean s comments and recommendations. The candidate signs the review form in the appropriate place to acknowledge the meeting and discussion have been held. The probationary faculty member has three working days to submit a rebuttal to the Dean. The Dean then forwards the BCOE PTC and Dean recommendation and any faculty rebuttal to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs. Comprehensive probationary reviews will result in a recommendation for reappointment, conditional reappointment, or non-reappointment. Faculty members are notified of their reappointment or non-reappointment by written statement from the President or the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, no later than the dates specified in the ISU Handbook.

16 RPT Guidelines 16 Before evaluations are placed in faculty members permanent files, they shall be given ample opportunity to append comments or rebuttal to the evaluation forms. In the event a substantive change is made in an evaluation at any point subsequent to the department level, the faculty member will be provided a copy of the revised evaluation and shall be given an opportunity to respond in writing. The response will be given to the Dean to be forwarded to Academic Affairs. No rebuttals from committees, chairs, or the Dean will be allowed to be included in documentation that moves forward. In the instance of conditional reappointment, the Dean and department chairperson will jointly prepare a plan for remediation in writing for the candidate. The Dean will present the remediation during the review meeting. Recommendations of non-renewal during the probationary period may be appealed to the University Promotions and Tenure Oversight Committee as set forth in the ISU Handbook Faculty Appointment, Promotion, and Tenure Policies. Tenure and Promotion Assistant professors are considered for promotion to associate professor and tenure at the same time. Individuals beginning their probationary period as assistant professors become eligible to apply for tenure during the sixth year of continuing regular faculty appointments in accredited institutions, at least four years of which must be served under a regular faculty appointment at ISU. Assistant professors must be considered for promotion and tenure by the year specified in their letter of appointment. Such individuals are awarded tenure only upon meeting ISU s evaluative criteria and performance standards for promotion to the rank of associate professor. Individuals beginning their probationary period at the rank of associate professor may be given credit for up to three years of faculty achievements at other accredited institutions. Individuals beginning their probationary period at the rank of professor may be given credit for up to five years of faculty achievements at other accredited institutions. If such credit is granted, individuals may apply for tenure during the year in which the years credited and the years of service at ISU total six. Such individuals are awarded tenure only upon meeting ISU s evaluative criteria and performance standards for promotion to the rank of associate professor. Associate professors are considered eligible to apply for promotion to full professor in the fourth year of service in their current rank. While a faculty member s entire career record is relevant for tenure and promotion decisions, evidence produced since attainment of current rank are particularly important and should be submitted for review. Procedures for promotion and tenure reviews and for appeals are outlined in the ISU Handbook. CRITERIA FOR ACADEMIC RANK A terminal degree in a field appropriate to the discipline in which the candidate teaches and

17 RPT Guidelines 17 conducts research, scholarship, or creative activity is required for tenure or promotion. Exceptions may be made in cases of persons of indisputable national renown. Each department in the Bayh College of Education shall make appropriate determination as to what qualifies as a terminal degree within their academic disciplines. STANDARDS FOR FACULTY RANKS The ISU Handbook specifies the following standards of achievement for each faculty rank. These standards serve as the basis for the Bayh College of Education Promotion and Tenure Committee s evaluation of candidates and promotion and tenure decisions. Each department will determine the specifics standards of performance for each academic rank. Assistant Professor Documented evidence of adequacy in teaching; of potential for achievement in research, scholarship or creative activity; and of service appropriate to the mission of the faculty member s academic unit are required. Faculty members are to demonstrate continuous professional growth in teaching; research, scholarship, or creative activity; and service. Associate Professor Documented evidence of effective teaching; a record of research, scholarship or creative activity which has earned professional recognition at the national or regional level; and evidence of effective service to the University and to either the community or the profession are required. Professor Documented evidence of sustained effective teaching; of a record of substantial accomplishment in research, scholarship or creative activity, which has lead to professional recognition at the national, level; and of active and substantive service to the University and to both the community and the profession are required. BCOE CRITERIA FOR THE EVALUATION OF PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES Departmental Criteria for Evaluation of Faculty Activities Because of the highly specialized nature of faculty expertise, departments are assigned a major role in assessing the significance and quality of discipline-specific faculty achievements for reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions. The ISU Handbook stipulates that each academic department must publish guidelines that stipulate the discipline specific criteria and performance standards to be used in departmental faculty personnel decisions. Furthermore, it gives departments primary authority and responsibility for assessing discipline specific achievements of faculty for reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions. This is not to say that departments have ultimate authority in evaluating all aspects of a candidate s research, scholarship, or creative activity. The evaluation of a candidate s total performance is a shared responsibility. On the other hand, the ISU Handbook statements do help differentiate the roles of departmental reviewers and of college-level

18 RPT Guidelines 18 reviewers in this critical evaluation and provide college-level reviewers with an opportunity to delegate part of their evaluation to the department reviewers. In addition to discipline-specific evaluative criteria and performance standards, departments are encouraged to include the following in their personnel guidelines: departmental mission and goals; procedures for establishing and agreeing upon annual goals; procedures for annual and comprehensive reappointment reviews for probationary faculty including guidelines for documenting and presenting professional activities; procedures for tenure and promotion reviews; processes for providing candidates with feedback on performance and recommendations for continued progress toward tenure and/or promotion; and explication of the responsibilities of the departmental personnel committee, chair, and candidate. BCOE Criteria for the Professional Relevance of Faculty Activities Faculty are members of the University as well as the Bayh College of Education and are responsible for advancing the missions of both. In recognition of these institutional commitments, the Bayh College of Education employs the University s institutional strategic goals and the Bayh College of Education s mission, vision, and values statements as criteria for evaluating the professional relevance of faculty activities in reviews at the college-level. Community engagement and experiential learning are a central part of the college and university vision and mission statements. Faculty are encouraged to engage in quality community engagement and experiential learning relevant to their professional field. These activities may apply to teaching; research, scholarship or creative activity; and service as determined by department and college criteria. Criteria for the Significance and Quality of Faculty Activities Many of the professional activities of faculty members lead to results that can be evaluated by recipients of the activities such as students and colleagues and by established peer review procedures. However, much of what faculty are expected to do involves staying up-to-date as teachers, scholars, and professional servants and learning and refining methods which can increase the likelihood of significant results in their professional efforts. For these reasons, the criteria for evaluating the significance and quality of faculty accomplishments include adequate preparation and the use of appropriate methods as well as the significance of results. Evidence for assessing the significance and quality of a faculty s teaching, research scholarship, creative activity and service comes from three primary sources: recipient assessments, peer review processes, and the academic department. Adequate preparation. In teaching, research, scholarship, creative activity and service, the faculty member demonstrates adequate preparation for the work, including clarity of goals and knowledge of the field. This criterion poses the questions: Does the faculty member state basic purposes of the work clearly? Are the defined objectives realistic and achievable? Are the questions important to the field? Does the faculty member show an understanding of existing scholarship in the field? Does the faculty member have the necessary skills to do the work? Is the faculty member able to bring together the resources necessary to move the project forward? Appropriate methods. In teaching, research, scholarship, creative activity and service, the

19 RPT Guidelines 19 faculty member uses methods appropriate to the state goals. The criterion poses the questions: Does the faculty member use appropriate methods and are they applied effectively? Are procedures modified in response to changing circumstances? Quality of Results. In teaching, research, scholarship, creative activity, and service, the faculty member achieves goals pursued and is able to effectively communicate the work to appropriate audiences. The criterion poses the questions: Does the faculty member achieve the goals? Does the work add consequentially to the field? Does the work open additional area for further scholarship? Does the faculty member use suitable style and effective organization to present the work? Is it presented with clarity and integrity? Does the faculty member use appropriate forums for communicating the work to intended audiences? ACTIVITIES CATEGORIES AND DOCUMENTATION A primary part of an application for reappointment, tenure, or promotion should be a listing of professional activities and achievements. Providing the detail specified by the most recent version of the University's Faculty Report of Professional Activities. The same activity categories are used in judgments about reappointment, promotion, and tenure. In general, the candidate should apply the universities, colleges, and appropriate department s strategic goals as criteria in deciding which activities and achievements to include in the listing. In addition to an organized listing, certain types of documentation facilitate the review of a reappointment, tenure, or promotion application and help ensure that the evaluation of the application reflects the true merit of the activities and achievements reported. Suggestions for assembling that documentation are presented below in the three categories in which faculty performance is evaluated. Directions to Documentation A cumulative record of faculty work is presented for consideration of reappointment, promotion, or tenure. For regular reappointment consideration, accomplishments since the start of the appointment period under review are particularly important. For promotion consideration, accomplishments since appointment to current rank are particularly important. To ensure that reviewers see documentation supporting the quality of the results or methods of or preparation for a certain activity, the candidate must provide convenient presentation and understandable directions. Candidates have the option of submitting a narrative statement with each set of documentation related to a category of faculty performance teaching, scholarship, or service and incorporating directions into each narrative. When important activities and achievements are not self-evidently important and the documentation associated with them is not self-explanatory, narratives for the three categories may be suitable and even desirable. Also, narratives are advisable early in a faculty member s career when much work may still be in process and when few significant results that is, trends, clusters, or bodies of accomplishment can be presented. Similarly, narratives can be helpful for annual reviews for reappointment when the accomplishments of only the past twelve months may not by themselves demonstrate patterns of performance. When the candidate is confident that the professional activities and achievements are

20 RPT Guidelines 20 primarily of a conventional nature, the documentation is easily understood, and their significance is evident, the directions to the documentation can be incorporated into the listing of activities and achievements. For instance, in the listing of classes taught, the candidate can add Tab 1 beside the information on a certain class and then can provide evaluative documentation about the class at that tab. In the scholarship section, the candidate can add, for example, Tab 15 beside the bibliographic information on an article and then can present the page copies documenting the article at that tab. For third-year probationary reviews and for tenure and promotion applications, faculty members submit a one-inch notebook that includes: 1 The appointment letter with any changes that have been renegotiated; 2 Copies of annual evaluations; 3 Annual performance goals; 4 A descriptive listing of faculty work that covers the categories and subcategories outlined in the FRPA form; 5 Self-assessment or other narrative related to the candidate s work that she/he chooses to submit; representative documentation of accomplishments in teaching; research, scholarship and creative activities; and service. Faculty will include a maximum of four samples of their best work in research, scholarship or creative activities. All other documentation should be organized by the candidate in a supplemental binder and be available upon request.