College of Education
Promotion/Tenure of Faculty
June 26, 2013
1. The Texas State University policy and procedure on Tenure and Promotion Review is contained in PPS 8.10 and is found on the Academic Affairs web site. The College of Education policy and procedure statement on Promotion and Tenure of Faculty is based on the University statement.
In addition to the University and College policies and procedures, each department in the College (Curriculum and Instruction; Counseling, Leadership, Adult Education, and School Psychology; and Health and Human Performance) has its own policy and procedure statement for promotion and tenure.
The College of Education criteria and procedures for promotion, and tenure must be inclusive of the needs of the three diverse departments. We are committed to holistic faculty assessment that credits faculty members for the quality of their unique expressions of scholarship, teaching, and service. More specific criteria and procedures are contained in the departmental policies and procedures.
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION EXPECTATIONS
College of Education faculty are expected to excel in teaching, scholarly/creative activity, and leadership/service in accordance with their workload assignment in order to be promoted and/or tenured.
Faculty performance in the College of Education is evaluated on documentation of teaching, scholarly/creative activity, and leadership/service. The following expectations for faculty performance are presented as guides for evaluation.
Excellent teaching is an essential criterion for appointment, tenure, and promotion decisions. Every effort shall be made to recognize and emphasize excellence in teaching. The general test to be applied is that the faculty member is engaged regularly and effectively in high quality teaching. Collaboration with colleagues is viewed as a means of enhancing teaching. Evaluation of teaching performance rests primarily on the faculty member’s departmental colleagues and the chair of the department. Specific criteria for the evaluation of teaching are contained in the departmental policies and procedures.
Documentation of Criteria for Teaching. Evidence of effective teaching and student advisement/mentoring can be established through careful consideration of productivity and quality. Materials to be used in these considerations may include the following items: student evaluations and peer ratings of teaching performance; copies of course syllabi; major assignments and examinations; instructional materials; documentation of efforts to improve pedagogy; letters, awards, and other evidence of teaching. No one criterion will be sufficient for evaluation of teaching.
Productivity. Productivity refers to the efficient application of time and energy to the instructional needs of the department and the College. Examples of documentation include:
nature of courses taught each semester
[Reviewers should recognize that some courses may place a heavier demand on faculty time and effort than others.]
number of completed doctoral dissertations and master’s theses/projects/exams supervised and reviewed. [Consideration should also be given to the number of doctoral dissertation and master’s thesis committees on which the candidate has served as a member and on the number of seminar papers directed.]
number of undergraduate and graduate student advisees/mentees
[Appropriate consideration should be given to the faculty member’s expected or assigned contributions to mentoring, recruitment, retention, and timely graduation of students.]
Quality. Effective teachers are instrumental in helping students learn, increase their critical thinking skills, value independent scholarly/creative activity, and achieve professional goals. Documentation of quality teaching may include:
• developing and/or revising programs, courses, seminars, and assessments
• participating in course, program, and departmental curriculum planning and development
• planning courses and lessons that are relevant, well organized and sequenced that follow accepted practices for good teaching and learning in a university setting
• using diverse styles, formats, and methods in course and lesson organization to enhance student learning
• using new and appropriate technology to support instruction and enhance student learning
• presenting engaging and intellectually challenging instruction appropriate to the discipline
• maintaining currency, significance, and relevance of course content and pedagogical techniques
• conducting systematic student evaluations of learning outcomes.
• assuring that current scholarly/creative activity is reflected in both the content and pedagogy of instruction
• earning a university or professional teaching or mentoring award.
• procuring a teaching grant to support the development or advancement of pedagogy.
• mentoring students in research that is submitted for presentation and/or publication
Scholarly/creative activities are among the primary functions of the University. A faculty member’s contribution will vary from one academic or professional field to another, but the general test to be applied is that the faculty member is engaged consistently and effectively in scholarly/creative activity of quality and distinction. Therefore, both quantity and quality of scholarly/creative activity are considered in tenure and promotion decisions. Collaboration with colleagues is also valued and viewed as a means of enhancing scholarly/creative activity. Effective collaboration only occurs when all parties contribute significantly to the scholarly/creative activity.
The College of Education recognizes that faculty scholarly/creative activity enhances teaching and vice versa; therefore, an inclusive view of scholarly/creative activity recognizes the importance of theoretical, applied, and pedagogical scholarship. Both quantitative and qualitative research are valued methods of inquiry.
Even though faculty members may publish in many venues, peer-reviewed works will receive greater emphasis in decisions related to appointment, tenure, and promotion. A record of sustained, peer-reviewed publications is expected. The College of Education defines peer review as a process through which academic work is subjected to the scrutiny of the larger academic community. Peer review might consist of the editor of a reputable journal or book publisher assigning an editorial review team to review and rate the quality of a manuscript, or the program chair of a state, national, or international association assigning an editorial review team to review and rate a paper proposal or manuscript submitted for possible delivery at a conference. The examples provided here are not exhaustive and other methods of peer review may be recognized by the College. Venues that result in the greatest recognition by colleagues are preferred; therefore, more emphasis will be given to national/international works than to others.
Documentation of Criteria for Research and Scholarly/Creative Activity. Evidence of effective research and scholarly/creative activity can be established through careful consideration of productivity and quality. Materials to be used in these considerations may include the following items: published articles, books, book chapters, monographs, grants/contracts, proceedings, book reviews, abstracts, technical reports, internet products, software, tests or assessment instruments, journal editorships, and presentations.
Productivity. The productive scholar is consistently involved and successful in publication of peer-reviewed scholarly/creative achievements. (Note. “Refereed” indicates evaluation by peer-review or an editorial team that reviews manuscripts separately from the editor's review). Documentation of effectiveness and sustained work in scholarly/creative activity may include and generally will be considered and valued in this order:
• refereed journal articles published
• refereed books published
• refereed edited books published
• refereed book chapters published
• refereed monographs published
• award of competitive external grants or contracts for research
• refereed proceedings of professional presentations at national/international meetings
• refereed proceedings of professional presentations at state/regional/local meetings
• non-refereed journal articles published in journals that are recognized by the department as premier outlets for scholarship/creative activity
• non-refereed books published
• non-refereed edited books published
• non-refereed book chapters published
• non-refereed monographs published
• non-refereed proceedings of professional presentations at national/international meetings
• non-refereed proceedings of professional presentations at state/regional/local meetings
15. Scholarly/creative activity may also be demonstrated in a variety of other means. These include, but are not limited to the number of:
• external and internal grant/contract proposals that support scholarly/creative activity. Candidates will be credited with achievements in proposal submissions and grants/contracts funded, with greatest weight given to funded proposals. Internal grants, while important in many ways to faculty goals, will receive less consideration than external grant/contract activity in appointment, tenure, and promotion decisions.
• journal editorships and/or edited issues
• tests or assessment instruments developed
• software and/or multimedia products developed
• internet products developed
• non-refereed electronic publications
• technical reports published
• abstracts and/or proceedings of professional presentations published
• published book reviews
• refereed/invited presentations at national/international meetings
• refereed/invited presentations at state/regional/local meetings
Quality. In addition to productivity, the quality of each scholarly/creative activity must be carefully documented. Quality refers to characteristics such as originality, rigor, and contribution to the discipline or profession. Faculty candidates should provide direct evidence of quality of their achievements (e.g., insights, citations, awards, peer recognition, influence. impact); however, indirect evidence indicated by the stature of the venue is also acceptable (e.g., acceptance rate, journal bibliometrics, indexing, prestige).
In the case of candidates for tenure and promotion at the Associate Professor level or to Professor, external evaluations focusing on scholarly/creative activity will be obtained from appropriate disciplinary peers. These external evaluations may not be used as the sole basis for rejection of a candidate but will be used in a holistic sense when making judgments about the candidate’s qualifications.
The candidate, the chair, and the Personnel Committee will collaboratively identify at least three experts in the candidate’s area of specialization. The chair will contact the external reviewers to verify their willingness to evaluate the candidate, and he/she will subsequently send them copies of the candidate’s scholarly/creative activity. Details for this evaluation process will be explicated in departmental policy and procedure statements.
• External evaluations will be solicited from persons of repute in the candidate’s field.
• Each external reviewer will be asked for a statement regarding his or her acquaintance with the candidate.
• Guidelines for completing the external evaluation will be furnished to each external reviewer for consistency.
• Department chairs will notify candidates eligible for tenure and promotion to Associate Professor and promotion to Professor as early as possible. In all cases, candidate materials will be delivered to the external reviewers as mandated by University policy (UPPS 8.10). The faculty member’s Department Chair will be in charge of drafting a document detailing the guidelines for completing the external evaluation and procuring the external evaluation letters (please see the “Suggested Letter Format for External Reviews”).
• The candidate will provide two or three exemplars of scholarly/creative works with the curriculum vita and other materials sent to the reviewers.
• Each external evaluation received becomes a part of the candidate’s portfolio.
• The candidate’s department will determine an appropriate means of recognizing the service provided by the reviewers.
In addition to demonstrated excellence in teaching and scholarly/creative activity, candidates for appointment, tenure, and promotion should have a commitment to the University and their professions through participation in leadership/service activities. Such participation may take several different forms: leadership/service to the University [leadership/service on committees charged by the Texas State Faculty Senate or by an administrator at the Dean level or higher]; leadership/service to the College [service on a committee charged by the Dean of the College of Education]; leadership/service to the department [service on a committee charged by the chair of the department]; and leadership/service to the profession or to local/global communities relevant the candidate’s field [leadership/service representing professional organizations, public schools, cities, states, or the nation].
Faculty members are expected to participate in the conduct and governance of their program, department, college, and university; in professional organizations in their field; and in professional leadership/service to schools, colleges, universities, and other agencies in the community. Evidence of superior leadership/service may be established through careful consideration in the areas of productivity and quality.
Establishing a record of excellence in teaching and scholarly/creative activity demands careful time management those new to the University. Therefore, leadership/service expectations of untenured faculty members will be lower than those for tenured faculty members.
Documentation of Effective Leadership/Service. Lists and descriptions of activities, copies of materials produced, letters from groups served, and any forms of recognition will be examples of supporting data for effective leadership/service.
Productivity. Evidence of a faculty member’s productivity is manifested by participation in service-related activities in the departmental, college, and university committees; in professional organizations and community, state, and nation. Examples of documentation may include:
• member and/or chair of departmental committee
• member and/or chair of college committee
• member and/or chair of university committee
• involvement with professional organizations
• service grants/contracts
• outreach activities related to student settings
• service to the local/global community relevant to the applicant’s field of expertise.
It should be noted that the level, frequency, and stature of participation as well as compensation or reassigned time (i.e., released from teaching) should be considered when evaluating service.
Quality. Leadership/service involves working creatively with others so that professional knowledge has an impact on the schools, colleges, professional organizations, community agencies, and other institutions. The impact of leadership/service on the group served is of critical importance in evaluating quality of leadership/service.
PROCEDURE FOR DOCUMENTATION
A complete, accurate, and up-to-date Curriculum Vitae presented in the approved Texas State format shall serve as the primary documentation of teaching, scholarly/creative activities, and leadership/service activities.
Either the candidate’s assigned mentor or a recently tenured or promoted faculty member solicited or appointed by the department chair will serve as portfolio advisor for the candidate.
A showcase portfolio that contains examples of documentation, as specified in paragraph 27, must accompany the Texas State Curriculum Vitae to display selected works in each of the three areas of teaching, research and scholarly/creative activities, and leadership/service activities. This documentation should be arranged and presented in the order of categories prescribed by the Texas State Vita form (PPS 8.10, Form 1A or 1B).
Documentation supplied in the portfolio should be original documents or clear copies of originals. When summary documentation is provided, such as evaluation data by students, an explanation describing how the data were analyzed should be included. Candidates should include samples of best work and avoid the temptation to document every item in the Curriculum Vitae.
Sequence of Items in the Portfolio. Items may be organized to suit the candidate’s preference; however, the items should be placed in the portfolio in the following sequence:
• Fully completed and signed tracking forms appropriate to the action (i.e., appointment, tenure, or promotion)
• Texas State Curriculum Vitae.
• A three- to five-page, single-spaced essay providing an overview of her/his:
a) teaching philosophy and accomplishments
b) scholarly/creative activity agenda and accomplishments
c) leadership/service agenda and accomplishments
Additionally, the applicant will discuss:
d) any unique circumstances, contributions, or potential contributions that should be considered by reviewers.
The applicant may address these four areas sequentially or as part of a holistic essay with interwoven discussions of the four areas. The essay will be included with tracking forms and the applicant’s vita in the file that is reviewed at the department, College and university level
• External evaluations required of the candidate.
• Documentation of productivity in teaching, scholarly/creative activity, and leadership/service.
Attachment: Suggested Letter Format for External Reviews
Reviewer Name and Address
Dr. (Candidate’s name), an (Assistant/Associate) Professor in the Department of (Candidate’s department) in the College of Education at Texas State University-San Marcos, is being considered for promotion to Associate Professor/Professor. Include a brief description of the candidate’s typical workload responsibilities). We appreciate your help in providing an evaluation of this candidate’s scholarly/creative achievements.
Our criteria for promotion are enclosed for your use. When making your evaluation, please respond to the following items:
Evaluate the candidate against other scholars in the same field of study with similar years of experience.
Comment on the degree of recognition already achieved by the candidate in the discipline, noting any distinctive contributions.
Evaluate the scope and significance of the candidate’s research and scholarly/creative activity in the discipline.
Evaluate the candidate’s promise for future growth and likelihood of achieving a similar faculty position and rank at other institutions.
For your convenience, we have enclosed the candidate’s Curriculum Vitae, exemplars of their scholarly/creative work, and other materials that may help with your evaluation. . We appreciate your reply by (date).