Approved:  April 19, 2001

Amended:  April 15, 2004

Amended:  January 27, 2006

Amended:  April 29, 2008

Amended:  July 7, 2010

Amended: October 12, 2012

Operations

Operating Structure:  In all matters concerning which the faculty are required or asked or choose to give advice and make recommendations the Department of Art and Art History full time faculty will act as a committee of the whole, except that in matters concerning annual evaluation of teaching, tenure and promotion only tenured faculty will be present.   In all matters the majority vote will constitute the faculty’s advice or recommendation. If agreed upon by the faculty, voting and/or input on issues or procedures may be done by memo, e-mail or other means which do not require meetings.

This procedure will be followed to provide faculty advice and recommendations concerning criteria for faculty appointments; criteria for reappointment and dismissal; individual reappointment, dismissal, tenure and promotion cases; professional development and mentoring of new faculty; teaching assignments and class schedules, including summer and overloads; graduate and undergraduate curriculum and academic standards; faculty involvement in review and selection of chairs and deans; and other issues affecting the college except that discussion and voting involving tenure and promotion will be limited to tenured faculty.

Committees:  If committees are required volunteers will first be solicited.  In the event that no volunteers come forward the Chair will appoint Bargaining Unit Faculty to committees. The Promotion and Tenure Committee will be a standing committee of all the tenured bargaining unit faculty members in the department and the department Chair as a non-voting member.  A committee chair will be elected by and from the voting committee members no later than one week after the university deadline for declaring candidacy for promotion or tenure.

Meetings:  The Chair and the Bargaining Unit Faculty in the Department of Art and Art History will meet a minimum of once each semester, excluding summer.  Additional meetings may be called upon request of one Bargaining Unit Faculty Member or the Chair.  Meetings will be held at times which do not conflict with teaching assignments.  The Chair will provide the agenda, which will include any items suggested by faculty members.  Roberts Rules of Order, Revised, will be the final authority as to procedures of meetings, insofar as they do not conflict with these By-laws.

Changing of By-laws:  Recommendations for changes in these by-laws may be made upon majority vote of the bargaining unit faculty providing notice of the exact language of the change has been sent to the full voting faculty at least 7 days before the meeting.

Annual Evaluations

Materials to be submitted.  In preparation for the annual evaluation of Bargaining Unit Faculty Members each member will submit to the Chair a report of his or her teaching, scholarship and service during the preceding year. The teaching material considered for untenured faculty members will include both the numerical and written information from the student evaluation forms; the material considered for tenured faculty members will include written information from student evaluation forms.  Numerical information from the forms may be considered for tenured bargaining unit faculty if requested by that faculty member, but the absence of this material may not negatively influence the evaluation.  Submitted material will also include a written peer evaluation of the individual’s teaching if required by the collective bargaining agreement.

Reviews of progress toward promotion and tenure.  The required reviews of cumulative progress toward tenure done by both the Chair and the department Promotion and Tenure Committee will indicate whether they believe that finished scholarly projects should count toward the number required for promotion and tenure.  The written review of cumulative progress toward tenure done by the Promotion and Tenure Committee will enumerate the various views of the entire committee. The chair of the P & T committee is responsible for the composition of the report.

Peer evaluation of teaching..  The department’s Promotion and Tenure Committee has responsibility for initiating and conducting peer evaluations of teaching as required by the collective bargaining agreement.

Evidence of teaching effectiveness to be examined by the Promotion and Tenure Committee may include but is not limited to numerical and written information from student evaluation forms; review of syllabi, exams, assignments, handouts, etc.; evaluation of student preparation in upper levels of sequenced courses; appraisal of student work seen in  student reviews, the senior show, department display cases, or senior papers; unsolicited testimonials; student interviews; consultation with other faculty members; work from independent studies; class observation; utilization of services offered by the Center for Teaching and Learning; teaching awards; grants for teaching; curriculum development; course revision and development; maintaining currency in one’s teaching field; publication as an illustration  in a textbook written by others; new facility development and/or significant maintenance or improvement of studios; class field trips; etc.  The written peer review statements should include an account of the evidence used to arrive at the assessment.  Before the peer review is conducted the faculty member must be asked to submit materials they would like to have considered.  The peer review statement will be submitted to both the faculty member and the Chair, and will enumerate the various views of the entire Promotion and Tenure Committee.The Chair of the Promotion and Tenure Committee is responsible for the composition of the report.

Weighting of areas for annual evaluation.  The department Chair will normally use the following weights to calculate a faculty member’s overall annual average:  teaching,  40%-70%; scholarship,  20%-50%; service,  5%-40%.    The Chair will evaluate each area of each faculty member’s professional activity and assign an integer to that area according to the criteria stated below.  The Chair will then assign the three percentages from the range above that give the faculty member the maximum possible overall average.  If a faculty member is  on Professional Development Leave for one or more semesters, the possible percentage awarded for teaching will be reduced proportionately for each semester of leave.  The Chair may assign a different weighting from that defined above in any of the following situations: the faculty member has work assignments that differ from those of other faculty; the Chair is imposing discipline pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement; or the Chair is acting to correct a pattern of substandard performance extending for more than one year.

Definitions of areas and ratings. 

Teaching.  Teaching includes course materials; presentation of course content; classroom management; evaluation of students; advising and mentoring students; supervising theses, independent studies and student exhibitions; class field trips; course revision and development; maintaining currency in one’s teaching field; and teaching range and flexibility. 

Teaching can also include new  facility  development and/or significant maintenance or improvement of studios; grants for teaching; curriculum development; and publication as an example in a textbook written by others.  Accomplishments that make a substantial contribution to the field of teaching shall raise ranking by one or more levels.

 Teaching is evaluated using the data listed under peer evaluation.

To receive a rating of extraordinary, a faculty member demonstrates that the classes taught include content and activities and provide outcomes which push well beyond the minimum expectations of the curriculum; that syllabi are clear, reasonable, and assignments well thought out; that classes are met and the faculty member is easily available to students; that with rare exceptions student comments and peer evaluations suggest that students are pushed beyond their expected limits and are very engaged and stimulated to learn in the faculty member’s courses, regardless of the subject matter or degree of difficulty of the material; that new courses are developed or courses taught regularly are substantially revised or rethought; that the faculty member remains current in his or her teaching field; or the equivalent of these examples. 

To receive a rating of outstanding, a faculty member demonstrates that the classes taught include content and activities and provide outcomes which more than fulfill the minimum expectations of the curriculum; that syllabi are clear, and reasonable; that classes are met and the faculty member is easily available to students; that student comments and peer evaluations suggest that in most courses students are pushed beyond their expected limits and are very engaged and stimulated to learn; that new courses are developed or courses taught regularly are substantially revised or rethought; or the equivalent of these examples.

To receive a rating of meritorious, a faculty member demonstrates that the classes taught include content and activities and provide outcomes that fulfill the expectations of the curriculum; that syllabi are clear, and reasonable; that classes are met and the faculty member is easily available to students; and that student comments and peer evaluations suggest that students are engaged and stimulated to learn; or the equivalent of these examples.

To receive a rating of adequate, a faculty member demonstrates that the classes taught include content and activities and provide outcomes that fulfill the minimal expectations of the curriculum; that syllabi are clear and reasonable; that classes are met and the faculty member is available to students; and that student comments and peer evaluations suggest that learning occurs but there may be issues to be addressed; or the equivalent of these examples.

To receive a rating of unsatisfactory there would have to be little to no evidence of good teaching as defined above.

Scholarship:  Faculty scholarship includes retrospective or solo exhibitions; group exhibitions (juried or invitational); exhibition awards; commissioned art work(s); invited lectures; participation on panels; work that is scheduled and in preparation for either exhibition, commission or publication; outside reviews published in either journals or catalogs; curatorial activities; paid jurying of professional exhibitions; receipt of internal funds; receipt of external grants or fellowships (wherein the dollar amount of the grant or fellowship is but one of the factors determining significance); exploration of new approaches; books; catalogs; articles; chapters in published anthologies; book reviews; manuscript reviews; professional reports; scholarly lectures and conference papers; serving as an expert panelist; editorships; scholarship submitted to a journal for review and possible publication; curatorial activities; art residencies paid jurying of professional exhibitions; receipt of external grants or fellowships;  and the equivalent of these examples.  For most of these activities  an outside review of the quality of the product elevates its importance. It is incumbent on the individual faculty member to make a case for the importance of the venue exhibition or publication.

To receive a rating of extraordinary, a faculty member must  be represented in a major exhibition or retrospective at a museum or gallery with a national reputation and audience (such as the Museum of Modern Art or the Wexner Center or the Marlborough Gallery); or curate a particularly complex exhibition in the University Art Galleries or elsewhere with responsibility for a significant publication  and programming and fundraising; or win a highly competitive award or grant with a complex application/process and a national application pool (such as NEA or NEH); or publish or have accepted a book or book length catalog or two or more substantial scholarly articles in refereed journals; or two achievements from the outstanding list; or the equivalent of these examples. 

To receive an outstanding rating, faculty must have a solo exhibition in a gallery with a regional reputation and audience (such as the Solway Gallery or Spaces of Herron School of Art or Purdue University); or curate  an exhibition with programming in the University Art Galleries or elsewhere; or win a  highly competitive award or grant with a complex application/process and a regional applicant pool (such as the Ohio Arts Council); or have published or accepted for publication one substantial scholarly article in a refereed journal or an essay in an anthology; or edit an anthology; or five achievements from the meritorious list; or the equivalent of these examples.

To receive a rating of meritorious, a faculty member must be active in exhibiting on the regional or local level (such as in group shows at Rosewood);  or coordinate a packaged show in the University Art Galleries; or win  an award or grant with a short application and a local applicant pool (such as Montgomery County Arts and Cultural District); or have published or accepted for publication a book review, exhibition review or dictionary or encyclopedia entry; or review a manuscript; or present a paper at a scholarly conference; or deliver an invited public lecture; or serve on a major panel; or the equivalent of these examples.

To receive a rating of adequate, a faculty member must demonstrate that he or she has produced work or has work in process in the preceding year; or the equivalent of these examples.

To receive a rating of unsatisfactory there would have to be little to no evidence of scholarship as defined above. 

Service.  Service includes professional service, such as consulting, conducting training seminars and workshops, holding office in professional societies; institutional service, such as program administration, department, college or university committee service, time-intensive special projects such as being on the senior show committee or chairing the department promotion and tenure committee when there is a tenure or promotion case or serving on a search committee or coordinating a departmental field trip, recruitment, retention or alumni activities; and community service such as holding a leadership role in civic and public organizations, guest lecturing at community events, jurying contests, volunteering at public schools , donating artwork; or the equivalent of these examples.  It is expected that all faculty members will perform basic department service such as attending meetings, and participating in recruitment, retention or alumni activities and special projects.

To receive a rating of adequate or better, a faculty member must perform basic department service in addition to the following.

To receive a rating of extraordinary, a department faculty member must demonstrate a significant leadership position with tangible outcomes, such as chairing an important University committee; or holding national office in a professional society; or demonstrate sustained contributions to at least  five of the committees or projects described above; or the equivalent of these examples.

To receive a rating of outstanding, a department faculty member must demonstrate sustained contributions to at least  four of the committees or projects described above; or the equivalent of these examples.

To receive a rating of meritorious, a department faculty member must demonstrate sustained contributions to at least three committees or projects described above; or the equivalent of these examples.

To receive a rating of adequate, a department faculty member must demonstrate basic department service

To receive a rating of unsatisfactory, there would have to be little to no evidence of service as defined above.

Promotion and Tenure

Promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor with Tenure.  When making its recommendation regarding promotion and tenure the department shall consider the annual statements summarizing cumulative progress toward tenure from both the Department Chair and from the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee as well as any information offered by the candidate including work done prior to tenure-track appointment at Wright State.  Scholarly work done prior to appointment at Wright State may be worth up to 75% of the total required scholarly accomplishment.  It will be assessed at the first annual evaluation by the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee  Letters from external reviewers shall be used to help determine the quality of the candidate’s scholarship and may be used to help determine the quality of teaching or service if the reviewer has first-hand knowledge of them.  The department values teaching above all else, and no level of scholarship or service can compensate for ineffective teaching.

When voting on promotion and tenure cases, voting members of the Promotion and Tenure Committee will vote by written ballot.  Committee members will have seven calendar days to cast their ballots after the committee has met and discussed the case.  While the vote constitutes the Promotion and Tenure Committee recommendation, the committee report on the case should enumerate the various views of the entire Promotion and Tenure Committee..  The chair of the P & T committee is responsible for the composition of the report. 

Teaching.  To be recommended for tenure, a faculty member must submit a teaching portfolio which demonstrates good student achievement and engagement; positive comments from students; positive peer evaluations of teaching; or the equivalent of these examples.  If at any time during the candidate’s probationary period peer evaluations of teaching have indicated areas of concern the candidate must show evidence that the issues of concern have been successfully addressed.  The committee may also gather information to determine if teaching issues have been corrected.  It is the responsibility of the Promotion and Tenure Committee to validate any data it gathers and to provide a copy of all to the faculty member and the Department Chair...

Scholarship.  To be recommended for tenure a faculty member must demonstrate a history of high quality scholarly accomplishment confirmed by  letters from external evaluators. Art history faculty must have at least three activities from list B Art History and a curatorial activity or four activities from list B Art History.  An activity from list A Art History can substitute for four activities from list B Art History.  Studio faculty must have at least three activities from list B Studio and a curatorial activity, three activities from List B Studio and an art residency, or four activities from list B Studio.  An activity from list A Studio can substitute for four activities from list B Studio. 

Criteria for Interpreting Studio Faculty’s Exhibition Activity

In  assessing studio faculty’s exhibition activity, the committee will consider the prominence of venue(s); where applicable, prominence of juror; in the case of group exhibitions, prominence of other participating artists; touring (number and prominence of venues), critical attention beyond the local and other pertinent factors.  Since exhibitions in the same venue can vary in terms of interest and significance (international, national, regional, local), it is incumbent on faculty to explain the nature of an activity in those regards.

List A Studio (equivalent of four activities from list B Studio)

A major solo exhibition or retrospective at a museum or gallery with a national reputation and audience; or the equivalent of this example.

List B Studio

A solo exhibition in a gallery with a regional reputation and audience; or the equivalent of this example. 

Criteria for Interpreting Art History Faculty’s Scholarly Activity

In assessing art history faculty’s scholarly activity, the committee will consider the prominence of the journal or publication, the prominence of the juror or editor, and any outside reviews.

List A Art History (equivalent of four activities from list B Art History)

Publishing or having accepted for publication a substantial scholarly book; or the equivalent of this example.

List B Art History

Publishing or having accepted for publication an article in a refereed journal or an essay in an anthology; editing an anthology; or the equivalent of these examples.

Service.  To be recommended for tenure, a faculty member must demonstrate a sustained record of service to the department as well as examples of service to the university or the community, or the equivalent.

Promotion from Associate Professor to Professor.

Normally, during or after the sixth year after promotion to Associate Professor a candidate may choose to stand for promotion to Professor; earlier promotion may be sought. Recommendation regarding promotion shall consider the statements summarizing cumulative progress toward promotion as well as any information offered by the candidate including work done prior to tenure-track appointment at Wright State. Scholarly work done prior to appointment at Wright State may be worth up to 75% of the total required scholarly accomplishment.  It will be assessed at the first annual evaluation by the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee. Letters from external reviewers shall be used to help determine the quality of the candidate’s scholarship and may be used to help determine the quality of teaching or service if the reviewer has first-hand knowledge of them.  The department values teaching above all else, and no level of scholarship or service can compensate for ineffective teaching.

When voting on promotion and tenure cases, voting members of the Promotion and Tenure Committee will vote by written ballot.  Committee members will have seven calendar days to cast their ballots after the committee has met and discussed the case.  While the vote constitutes the Promotion and Tenure Committee recommendation, the committee report on the case should  enumerate the various views of the entire Promotion and Tenure Committee. The chair of the P & T committee is responsible for the composition of the report. 

Teaching.  To be recommended for promotion, a faculty member must submit a teaching portfolio which demonstrates good student achievement and engagement; positive comments from students; positive peer evaluations of teaching; or the equivalent.  If at any time the candidate’s peer evaluations of teaching have indicated areas of concern the candidate must show evidence that the issues of concern have been successfully addressed. The committee may also gather information to determine if teaching issues have been corrected.  It is the responsibility of the Promotion and Tenure Committee to validate any data it gathers and to provide a copy of all to the faculty member and the Department Chair. 

Scholarship.  To be recommended for promotion a faculty member must demonstrate a continuing history of high quality scholarly accomplishment confirmed by letters from external evaluators.  Studio faculty must have since promotion at least four activities in scholarship; at least two must be from list B Studio and two from either list B Studio, curatorial activities or art residencies.  An activity from list A Studio can substitute for four activities from list B Studio.  Art history faculty must have since promotion at least four activities from list B Art History and/or curatorial activity.  An activity from list A Art History can substitute for four activities from list B Art History. 

Service.  To be recommended for promotion, a faculty member must demonstrate a sustained record of service to the department as well as examples of leadership in service to the university or the community, or the equivalent.