The Department Of

Governance Document

The Department of

Educational Studies

IV.FACULTY REVIEW

A.Promotion and Tenure

1.Procedure

Procedures for promotion and tenure follow the timeline as adopted from the SOE procedures (see the SOE Policy Handbook IV.A).

2.The promotion and tenure process advances through the following assessment points by the recommended dates listed in the text below:

a. Department P&T Committee

b. Department Chair

c. SOE P&T Committee

d. SOE Dean

e. IPFW P&T Committee

f. VCAA

g. Chancellor

3.The Candidate for promotion and/or tenure should notify the department chair of their intent early enough to allow the case to be submitted to the Department of Educational Studies by September 1. Candidates are encouraged to begin preparing their case and seeking external letters of review during the spring semester prior to the submission of the case in the fall. For guidelines in soliciting external review letters, refer to OAA’s document titled “Best Practices in External Review Letters.”

4.The department chair will convene a departmental meeting to form a P&T Committee consisting of all faculty members possessing the same or higher rank to which the candidate aspires. When necessary, an appropriate committee will be formed for each candidate seeking promotion and/or tenure in a given academic year. . The department chair will participate as an ex officio member but may not vote. Enough faculty members are required to bring the committee to three. If fewer than three persons are eligible to serve on the departmental committee, the Dean appoints faculty member(s) from other departments who are deemed suitable to serve on the committee. All full-time, tenure and tenure-track members of the department shall have the opportunity to review and comment on each case for promotion and tenure.

5. The Department P&T Committee will elect a chair to preside over the P&T meetings, conduct necessary votes, and report the vote[1] in a letter to the department chair by October 1. The letter approved by the whole committee will include an explanation of the majority and minority opinion as represented by the vote.

6. The department chair will write a separate evaluation of the candidate. The chair’s evaluation, along with the Department P&T Committee’s vote and letter of explanation, will be forwarded to the SOE P&T Committee by October 15.

7. The SOE P&T Committee shall consist of three tenured members possessing the same or higher rank to which the candidate aspires from Educational Studies and three tenured members possessing the same or higher rank to which the candidate aspires from Professional Studies, all elected by the SOE tenure and tenure-track faculty. When necessary, an appropriate committee will be formed for each candidate seeking promotion and/or tenure in a given academic year. A Department Chair will not serve on the SOE P&T Committtee when the candidate is from her/his department. The SOE Leadership Committee will conduct the election process. Prospective P&T Committee members may be nominated by others or by themselves. If fewer than three persons from each department are eligible to serve on the SOE P&T committee, the Dean will appoint faculty member(s) from other departments who are deemed suitable to represent the department by serving on the SOE P&T committee. In addition, the committee will be constituted in such a way that a majority of its voting members will not have served on the departmental committees.

8. The SOE P&T Committee shall review P&T cases, solicit input from the rest of the tenured and tenure-track faculty, and vote on the case(s). The vote, plus a letter of explanation written by the SOE P&T Committee, will be forwarded to the Dean of the SOE, along with the letter of the department chair, and the vote and letter of the Department P&T Committee by October 30.

9. The SOE dean will forward an independent evaluation of a P&T case, along with departmental and school level assessments, to the Campus Promotion and Tenure Sub Committee before November 12.

B.Promotion and Tenure Guidelines

Preamble

Given that the University, the School of Education, and the Department of Educational Studies are self-governing entities, each full-time faculty member is expected to participate in the shared responsibilities of such governance. In accepting these responsibilities, each faculty member will strive to participate fully in the democratic processes that are necessary if the academic community's core values of teaching, research/scholarship/creative endeavor, and service are to be realized. By valuing such deliberative aspects of democracy as conversation, reasoned discourse, and debate, we center our work around professionalism, fairness, integrity, honesty, and civil respect for one another and other parties, such as students.

“The central functions of an academic community are learning, teaching, and scholarship. They must be characterized by reasoned discourse, intellectual honesty, mutual respect, and openness to constructive change. By accepting membership in this community, an individual neither surrenders rights nor escapes fundamental responsibilities as a citizen, but acquires additional rights as well as responsibilities to the entire University community. They do not require the individual to be passive and silent. They do require recognition of how easily an academic community can be violated.” (IU Academic Handbook, p.46)

We in the Department of Educational Studies are committed to the School of Education Conceptual Framework that guides our programs. Although we encourage these attributes in our students, faculty within the department should also be committed to: 1) fostering a democratic, just, inclusive learning community among its students, faculty, and staff, and with all other stakeholders in the educational enterprise; 2) the integration of crucial habits of mind in all aspects of the teaching/learning process; 3) understanding and encouraging the use of pedagogy creatively, and thereby ensuring active learning, conceptual understanding, and meaningful growth; 4) immersing educators in nurturing learning communities that deepen knowledge, and encourage on-going intellectual, emotional, and personal growth; 5) encouraging experiences that reflect the diversity of educators, students, and schools into all aspects of the curriculum, and help educators to assess and reflect their experiences; and 6) developing leaders within the profession and the community.

This document shall be distributed in writing to each faculty member upon becoming a member of the SOE faculty. Nothing in this document is to be construed as being in conflict with the criteria, policies, and procedures governing the reappointment, tenure, and promotion of faculty as set forth in the relevant documents of Indiana University or with those of IPFW as defined in OAA Memorandum 04-3 (Guidelines for Reappointment Review), SD 88-25 (Criteria for Tenure and Promotion), SD 94-3 (Promotion and Tenure Guidelines), OAA Memorandum 99-1 (Promotion and Tenure Dossier Format Guidelines), OAA Memorandum 03-2 (Examples for Documenting and Evaluating Teaching), OAA Memorandum 04-2 (Examples for Documenting and Evaluating Service), OAA Memorandum 05-6 (Examples for Documenting Research, Scholarship, and Creative Endeavor).

Faculty involved in the promotion and tenure assessment process will hold individual recommendations, committee deliberations, decisions, reviews, and voting outcomes in the strictest confidence.

1.General Definitions

a.Teaching

Teaching is a multidimensional issue that is fundamental to the mission of the School of Education. Teaching can no longer be defined only as the transmission of theoretical and practical knowledge. It also includes a spirit of scholarly inquiry which leads the teacher to develop and strengthen course content in the light of developments in the field in order to improve learning. Effective teachers are co-learners with their students as they investigate and participate in the teaching-learning process. Teachers develop personal skills, techniques, and theories to enhance the teaching-learning process while encouraging the development of them in our students. The effective teacher continuously engages in learning and continuously engages students in learning and is also one who guides and inspires students and stimulates their intellectual interest and enthusiasm.

b.Research/ Scholarship/Creative Endeavor

Research informs and improves the educational community by generating and disseminating theoretical and practical knowledge. It can be a systematic study directed toward more complete scientific knowledge of understanding of the subject of focus. The scholarship of knowledge integration also includes empirical, critical, or expressive activity in a variety of areas that explores the full range of social, cultural, historical, and literary/artistic pursuits common to the humanities and recognized by scholars in the field. The effective researcher demonstrates a well-defined agenda. In the School of Education, co-authored and/or or collaborative projects are viewed as contributing to the evidence of scholarly productivity and collegiality; however, faculty are also encouraged to demonstrate their ability to pursue independent projects.

c.Service

Although service may be integrated into a candidate’s scholarly activity or teaching agenda, the definition that follows distinguishes this activity from teaching and research/scholarship/creative endeavor. Service can be defined as taking an active role in the department or on campus that includes leadership activities and experiences. Service to the school/university allows a faculty member to participate in the governance process and to voice positions unique to the school of education. Service should advance the mission of the department and the institution and can also occur at the community, state, regional, and national levels through contributions to professional organizations related to the candidate’s area(s) of expertise.

Candidates should come to see their teaching, research/scholarship/creative endeavor and service activities as inseparable with each logically and appropriately supporting the other. However, it is the responsibility of candidates to clarify and distinguish among these three categories and to provide their best argument, supported by documentation, that they have met or exceeded the expected criteria at each decision point (reappointment, promotion and tenure).

2.Criteria for Tenure and Promotion

Teaching, research/scholarship/creative endeavor, and service are long-standing University promotion criteria. A candidate for tenure must show satisfactory performance in teaching, research/scholarship/creative endeavor, and service while demonstrating excellence in at least one of these categories is required for promotion. In all cases, the candidate’s area of excellence must be assessed through comprehensive and rigorous external peer review. Tenure and promotion are typically sought at the same time although the awarding of tenure and promotion are separate decisions. The duration of the probationary period and the time needed to build a record of teaching, research/scholarship/creative endeavor, and service meriting promotion to associate professor are equal, and the university can address the separate decisions simultaneously. Although tenure and promotion are separate decisions, tenure without promotion will generally not be conferred unless the candidate provides a strong promise of achieving promotion in rank in the near future. Promotion to any rank is recognition of achievement since being hired at IPFW and indicates that the individual is capable of accepting greater responsibilities and demonstrating accomplishments in the future.

The candidate for tenure must show satisfactory achievement in each of the three areas of teaching, research/scholarship/creative endeavor, and service. A recommendation to award tenure is based upon the following evidence and criteria established in the School of Education.

a.Teaching

Satisfactory. IPFW faculty are expected to be effective teachers and to have demonstrated a significant commitment to teaching. Multiple measures of evidence for satisfactory teaching should include an assessment on the dimensions of the (a) substantive and (b) pedagogical aspects of teaching indicating on-going growth and development. Efforts toward continuous teaching improvement and development of instructional innovations are encouraged and should be evaluated overtime for impact. Specifically,

1. Candidates provide multiple measures of teaching effectiveness as evidence of continuing growth as a teacher;
2. Candidates summarize comprehensive student evaluation data for each course taught. The data are analyzed for patterns, trends, and/or evidence of student learning;

i.On a 5-point course evaluation scale (1= poor; 5 = excellent) candidates receive evaluation scores consistently at or above 3.5;

ii.Qualitative student comments indicate patterns of strengths, abilities, and positive impact;

1. Candidates respond to and/or act on feedback from peers, on-campus and off-campus, demonstrating how they have improved their teaching;
2. Candidates show evidence of continuous course and/or curriculum development; and
3. Candidates document further evidence of satisfactory teaching (see Appendix B - Sources for Evidence for Promotion and Tenure: Teaching).

b.Research/Scholarship/Creative endeavor

Satisfactory. The evidence establishes that the faculty member has developed a program of research/scholarship/creative endeavor in a specific field and has contributed to that field either some original inquiry or unique interpretations or synthesis that are contributions to the dissemination of new knowledge. Progress beyond the doctoral dissertation should be evident in both publications and presentations.

The faculty member should have established a record of publications and presentations. Candidates should provide a minimum of three published works -- appropriate to the discipline – in quality journals and/or with quality publishers to be satisfactory in research/scholarship/creative endeavor. However, the quality of production is considered more important than mere quantity; both should be considered when evaluating research/scholarship/creative endeavor. The faculty member should have a clearly established agenda and should show promise of continued development as an independent scholar. Where appropriate to the discipline, the potential to compete for grant and/or contract support for research/scholarship/creative endeavor has been demonstrated. The following can be used to evaluate the work.

1.The quality of the published research/scholarship/creative endeavor. Considerations include: the rigor of the peer review involved in the publication; the appropriateness and status or reputation of the journal or publisher (e.g., acceptance rate, where journal is indexed, ranking of journal); the commentary from peer or outside reviewers on the importance and impact of the published work; and indicators that the work is cited by others and/or has had an impact on the field.

2.The quantity of the published research/scholarship/creative endeavor. Considerations include: whether the number of publications and presentations, considering the discipline and the nature of the work, are appropriate to the rank; and whether the record demonstrates a generally sustained flow of work (after due consideration for the nature of the work and review/publication timetables). Again, the quality of the work is more important than quantity, but the amount of the research/scholarship/creative endeavor produced is to be considered in context with the quality/value of the work.

3.Independence of output. Considerations include whether the faculty member has moved beyond the simple extension of his/her doctoral work and established a clear research agenda. Both single-authored and co-authored works are valued.Co-authorship with collaborators should follow the norms of the field. In each case the faculty member should explain his/her contribution to the published work.

c.Service

Satisfactory. IPFW faculty are expected to take an active role in the department beyond teaching and research/scholarship/creative endeavor. They are encouraged to contribute their expertise to the School of Education, university, community, state, and/or nation and to participate in professional organizations. Service to the profession extends the reputation of the university, advances the profession, and allows the faculty member to encounter emerging ideas. Service to the community places a faculty member in situations where theory is translated into practice. It compels the faculty member to recognize problems confronting the field of education. Therefore, satisfactory service includes evidence of:

1.Executing duties assigned by the Chair and Dean (e.g., program assessment);

2.Contributing to the day-to-day governance of the department, school, and university;

3.Serving on multiple department, school, or campus-wide committees;

4.Participating in and/or leading professional organizations; and

5.Showing evidence of interacting with the community in a manner that promotes the School of Education at IPFW.

3.Criteria for Promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor

Criteria for promotion from assistant to associate professor are based upon performance while employed at IPFW and the potential for continued professional growth. When considered for promotion, the individual should be assessed in regard to all three criteria from the preceding section (teaching, research/scholarship/creative endeavor, and service). Favorable action should result when the individual has demonstrated a level of excellence appropriate to the proposed rank in at least one area and satisfactory performance in the remaining areas. In considering the criteria for teaching, research/scholarship/creative endeavor, and service, evidence used to support a tenure case may also be used as partial support for a candidate considered for promotion along with the additional requirements specified below.

According to IPFW documents, the basis for promotion is a record of satisfactory teaching, research/scholarship/creative endeavor, and service with excellence exhibited in one of these areas. However, the Department of Educational Studies strongly suggests that candidates choose teaching or research as an area of excellence for promotion to Associate Professor.

In order to appropriately assess an area of excellence, external reviews must be gained for that area. For example, if a candidate is seeking promotion based on excellence in teaching, then documents and other sources of evidence related to teaching must be submitted for external review.

a.Excellence in Teaching

If teaching is the primary basis for promotion to Associate Professor, the candidate’s performance should demonstrate meeting all of the criteria for satisfactory teaching as well as the following criteria for excellence:

1.Additional measures (beyond section 2.a) of teaching effectiveness and outstanding performance as a classroom teacher.