Approved: April 16, 2003

SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION

These bylaws

  1. provide for faculty participation in the Department, in accordance with the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the American Association of University Professors - Wright State University Chapter (AAUP/WSU) and Wright State University.
  2. are subject to and consistent with the Bylaws of the College of Science and Mathematics.
  3. may be amended in accord with the CBA.

SECTION 2. DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE STRUCTURE

2.1. Definition of voting members of the Department.

Faculty recommendations for the governance of the Department will be conducted by Bargaining Unit Faculty Members (BUFMs). For the rest of this document, "Faculty" will refer to BUFMs.

2.2. Committee membership

The Faculty Development Committee (see below) will consist of all tenured BUFMs who have primary appointments in the Department. All other committees will be formed from volunteers or by appointment by the Chair, subject to BUFM approval. Committees will be formed during spring quarter and will be for the following academic year.

2.3. Committee recommendations

Most committees are entitled to make recommendations related to their purview, unless otherwise indicated in the CBA, without requesting input from the whole Faculty. Specific exceptions are given below. Individual committees are encouraged to seek guidance or clarification from the whole Faculty before making major recommendations. "Majority vote of the Faculty" means a majority vote of a quorum of the BUFMs at a meeting in which the item is submitted for approval.

2.4. Committees and responsibilities

2.4.1. FACULTY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE (FDC)

This committee is concerned with matters of promotion and tenure, annual reviews, and professional development leaves. Because of the importance of these matters, they will be discussed at length later (Section 4). This committee serves the role of the Promotion and Tenure Committee mentioned in the CBA.

2.4.2. UNDERGRADUATE STUDIES COMMITTEE

This committee is concerned with making recommendations regarding the undergraduate programs, such as recruitment, admissions, curricula, and monitoring undergraduate student progress.

This committee reviews and makes recommendations regarding all petitions related to undergraduate degree programs within the Department.

2.4.3. GRADUATE STUDIES COMMITTEE

This committee is concerned with making recommendations regarding the graduate programs, such as recruitment, admissions, curricula, and monitoring graduate student progress.

This committee reviews and makes recommendations regarding all petitions related to graduate degree programs within the Department.

2.4.4. LIBRARY COMMITTEE or REPRESENTATIVE

This committee or representative serves as a liaison between the Department Faculty and the University libraries.

2.4.5. HONORS AND SCHOLARSHIPS COMMITTEE

This committee makes recommendations related to various WSU honors programs as they affect our majors. It evaluates and advises about proposals and theses for departmental honors. It also recommends the distribution of scholarship money as appropriate.

2.4.6. COMPUTER COMMITTEE

This committee makes recommendations related to use and acquisition of computational equipment within the department and replacement of such equipment. It also recommends how university funds for computers may be equitably distributed within the department.

2.4.7. SPACE AND RESOURCES COMMITTEE

This committee gives advice to the Department Chair on issues related to room use and major shared equipment within the department.

2.4.8. SAFETY COMMITTEE

This committee is concerned with all laboratory environments in the department to help ensure compliance with safety requirements. In addition the committee makes recommendations to assure that all faculty, staff, and graduate and undergraduate students follow safe laboratory procedures. The committee's goal is to assure a safe working environment for everyone in the department.

2.4.9. BUDGET REVIEW COMMITTEE

This committee serves in an advisory capacity to the Department Chair in regard to fiduciary matters.

SECTION 3. ANNUAL EVALUATIONS BY DEPARTMENT CHAIR

3.1. Overview

As indicated in the CBA, the Department Chair conducts an annual written evaluation of every BUFM and gives each a copy of his/her evaluation including the Chair's 0-4 integer rating of teaching, scholarship and service. Prior to writing the evaluation, by mutual agreement, the chair may meet with any BUFM to discuss his/her annual report.

Teaching, research/scholarship and service will be rated by the Department Chair as described in the CBA. Teaching will be normally weighted 45%, research 40%, and service 15%. Other weightings may be assigned by the Department Chair after consultation with the affected BUFM.

The criteria to be used by the Department Chair for the three areas of responsibility are given below. The categories for each area will be converted into an integer using the following equivalencies: 4="extraordinary," 3="outstanding," 2="meritorious," 1="adequate," and 0="unsatisfactory." Achievements that only count once per year are designated with an “S”. Achievements that count multiple times, for example, peer-reviewed publications, are designated with an “M”.

3.2. Teaching

Using teaching-related information the Department Chair will assign a rating corresponding to one of the following categories:

Extraordinary

Both student and peer evaluations indicate effective teaching, and BUFM must document three achievements from the following list, or their equivalent.

Outstanding

Both student and peer evaluations indicate effective teaching, and BUFM must document two achievements from the following list, or their equivalent.

Meritorious

Both student and peer evaluations indicate effective teaching, and BUFM must document one achievement from the following list, or the equivalent.

Adequate

Both student and peer evaluations indicate no worse than minor problems in teaching.

Unsatisfactory

Does not meet requirements for a rating of Adequate.

Achievement options:

  • Development of a new course (M)
  • Development of new curricular materials or technology for new or existing courses (M)
  • Supervision of research personnel including undergraduates (independent research and reading) and graduate students (S)
  • Recognition at the college level or above for excellence in teaching (M)
  • Successful direction of a thesis to completion (M)
  • Grants for teaching equipment or for teaching activities (M)
  • Attendance at professional development opportunities and external workshops (S)

3.3. Research and Scholarship

Scholarship and research contributions will be evaluated using publications, funding, and presentations. The Department Chair will assign a rating corresponding to one of the following categories:

Extraordinary

BUFM must document four achievements from the following list, or their equivalent, which must include either a peer-reviewed publication, a patent, or an externally funded grant.

Outstanding

BUFM must document three achievements from the following list, or their equivalent, which must include either a peer-reviewed publication, a patent, or an externally funded grant.

Meritorious

BUFM must document two achievements from the following list, or their equivalent.

Adequate

BUFM must document one achievement from the following list, or its equivalent.

Unsatisfactory

No documentation of achievements from the following list, or their equivalent.

Achievement options:

  • A peer-reviewed publication (M)
  • A new or continuing grant for research, internal or external (M)
  • Submission of a grant or contract proposal to an external agency or internal department (M)
  • A patent (M)
  • An invited presentation of original research findings (S) [May count multiple times if at highly prestigious settings.]
  • Any presentation of original research findings at a professional meeting (S)

3.4. Service

Using the faculty member's annual report, the Department Chair will assign a rating corresponding to one of the following categories:

Extraordinary

BUFM must document five achievements from the following list, or their equivalent.

Outstanding

BUFM must document four achievements from the following list, or their equivalent.

Meritorious

BUFM must document three achievements from the following list, or their equivalent.

Adequate

BUFM must document two achievements from the following list, or their equivalent.

Unsatisfactory

BUFM does not meet requirements for a rating of Adequate.

Achievement options:

  • service on a department, college, or university committee (M)
  • service on a review panel for a state, federal, or international agency (M)
  • reviewing grant proposals or manuscripts (M)
  • serving on an editorial board (M)
  • organizing a symposium for a regional, national or international professional meeting (M)
  • serving as an officer in a professional association (M)
  • chairing a committee at the department, college and/or university level (M)
  • science-related community activities (M)

SECTION 4. FACULTY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE PROCEDURES AND CRITERIA

4.1. Membership

All tenured faculty members who have primary appointments in the Department and who are BUFMs are members of the FDC. The chair of the FDC will be a Professor and will be selected by secret written ballot of the whole committee each spring quarter. The candidate who receives the most votes and agrees to accept the position will be selected.

4.2. Annual evaluations by FDC

Independent of the Department Chair's annual evaluation, the FDC will provide an annual written statement of each untenured BUFM’s cumulative progress towards promotion and tenure. The FDC also reviews all tenured BUFMs at the Assistant or Associate rank and provides suggestions for improving their professional stature and contributions to the Department.

The FDC will review all untenured BUFMs in the Department by the middle of February each year. The Professors will evaluate the tenured Assistant and Associate Professors either annually or every three years per the individual’s request. The committees will evaluate progress toward promotion by examining teaching evaluations, the annual reports, and current faculty curricula vita. The FDC Chair will assign am FDC member to assemble a written review of each Assistant or Associate Professor. At the discretion of the FDC, additional information or clarification may be requested from the BUFM under review. A cumulative progress report will then be written by the FDC chair based on information in the review and consultation with its author. The individual being evaluated may provide a rebuttal to the evaluation. This process will be completed by the end of Winter Quarter. Professors will not be evaluated by the FDC. For Assistant and Associate Professors, progress toward promotion and/or tenure will be evaluated and the conclusions stated. The criteria for evaluation will be described later, under standards for promotion and tenure.

The FDC will be responsible for the peer evaluation of teaching for all bargaining unit faculty in the department. Peer evaluation will normally consist of a review of submitted course materials. For probationary faculty, peer evaluation will include at least one classroom visit by two tenured BUFMs of equal or greater rank, appointed by the FDC, per calendar year. If a review indicates that there are significant problems in teaching, class visitation (1 to 3 class sessions) will be arranged by the FDC. A written report on the class visitation will be reviewed by the FDC and submitted to the department chair (copy to the individual) along with the peer evaluation report, for the annual evaluation.

4.3. Promotion and tenure

4.3.1. PROCEDURES FOR CONSIDERING CANDIDATES FOR PROMOTION

In the spring quarter the FDC may recommend that a Member be considered for promotion and/or tenure. The Member will be asked to prepare a promotion and/or tenure document in accordance with the CBA. Additionally, a Member may choose to initiate his or her promotion and/or tenure process by the first day of the Fall quarter classes. Each candidacy will be voted on by the FDC committees of appropriate rank (Professors vote on Associate Professors, and Professors and Associate Professors vote on Assistant Professors) during the fall quarter.

4.3.2. CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION TO ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR WITH TENURE

The candidate will be evaluated for promotion based on the following criteria.

4.3.2.1. Teaching

Candidates should be effective in the classroom and demonstrate an attempt to continuously improve the quality of their teaching.

Indices of teaching effectiveness (quality of teaching) will include:

  • Student evaluation numbers for untenured BUFMs
  • Written student comments from course evaluations
  • Peer reviews: review of course materials and presentation style, including at least one classroom visit per year for untenured faculty, by two department faculty members of equal or greater rank who have been appointed by the FDC.

Additional indices may include but are not limited to:

  • Course development
  • Documented attempts to improve teaching through CTL mid-term evaluations or self-reflection
  • Development of course materials
  • Self evaluation
  • Attendance at CTL professional development opportunities and external workshops
  • Grants for teaching equipment or for teaching activities
  • Written materials that support teaching such as textbooks and laboratory manuals, development of Web pages and use of multimedia.
  • Supervision of student research. The candidate will document the supervision of research at the level of undergraduate, undergraduate honors, masters, doctoral and postdoctoral. Students will be named, and the BUFM will define his or her role in supervision (major advisor, committee member, rotation supervisor, etc.).

4.3.2.2. Research scholarship

4.3.2.2.1. Overview

Recommending that a candidate receive tenure is a statement by the Department FDC that the individual has demonstrated sustained productivity (as defined by funding, presentations, and publications). The categories listed below provide evidence used to make this evaluation.

4.3.2.2.2. Publications, Presentations

Published research scholarship

  • Published research scholarship must be sufficient to demonstrate the establishment of a sustained, quality, independent research program within a defined area/field that has gained national recognition. The minimum expectation is four peer-reviewed research publications completed from work done at WSU and published as from WSU. A collaborative publication will be counted as a whole publication if the candidate played a significant role in the inception, design, or implementation of the research. Chemical educators may publish all four peer-reviewed publications in chemical education journals.

  • Non-refereed reports can be listed and may be considered as evidence of professional activity, but will not count as published scholarship.

Presentations

  • As a minimum, candidates will present an average of one paper/poster per year at a regional, national, or international meeting. Invited seminars at other institutions, corporations and federal agencies or other departments at WSU are also considered as signs of the candidate's professional stature and recognition. Invited symposium papers at international/national meetings, keynote addresses, and plenary lectures are viewed very favorably.

  • Sometime during the probationary period, the candidate is expected to present a research seminar to the Department.

4.3.2.2.3. Grants and Contracts

Obtaining external funding is required of all candidates for associate professor. This funding both supports research activities and provides one means of evaluating the quality of the research. Collaboration is encouraged. For collaborative funding candidates will document both the nature and extent of their independent involvement in the research and the amount of funds distributed to their research program. At least a total of $50,000 in direct cost from external funding for the candidate’s research is required.

4.3.2.2.4. Outside Letters

Letters from at least three external referees will be used to evaluate the quality of the scholarship including merit of the research and quality of journals. These letters should be from researchers who have not been mentors or collaborators of the candidate. The list of researchers from which the referees are drawn should be agreed upon mutually by the FDC and the candidate.

4.3.2.3. Service

Candidates should have demonstrated their willingness to contribute to the effective operations of the Department and to contribute professionally external to the Department. The normal requirements for internal service are to attend Departmental faculty meetings and to participate actively on 1-2 Departmental committees per year. Additionally, near the end of their probationary period, WSU service external to the Department is expected.

4.3.3. CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION TO PROFESSOR

4.3.3.1. Overview

Promotion to the rank of Professor indicates that the individual's research is characterized by steady, continued productivity and national and international reputations. The individual also has achieved a leadership position in terms of teaching and service, the latter both internal and external to WSU.

4.3.3.2. Teaching

Candidates must have established themselves as effective teachers with a demonstrated interest in continuously improving the quality of their instruction. Student and peer evaluations will be used to help judge teaching effectiveness. Usually the individual has played a leadership role in a major instructional area within the Department.

4.3.3.3. Research scholarship

Candidates should have established a sustained independent research program documented, for example, by publication in peer-reviewed journals, symposium presentations, keynote addresses and invitations to write scholarly reviews.

The minimum expectation is 15 peer-reviewed publications with at least 8 since the previous promotion, completed from work done while employed at WSU and published as from WSU. During the 5 years before promotion, the candidate must have at least 3 peer-reviewed publications. For candidates who are not chemical educators, three publications in chemical education journals may count toward the total of 15. Up to 2 book chapters or review articles, published after promotion to associate professor, may count toward the publication requirement. A collaborative publication will be counted as a whole publication if the candidate played a significant role in the inception, design, or implementation of the research. Invited reviews may be counted in this total as long as they undergo peer review. Chemical educators may publish all fifteen peer-reviewed publications in chemical education journals.

External reviewers will evaluate the quality of publications.

Candidates are expected to demonstrate a sustained record of presentations/seminars to the scientific community. At least a total of $100,000 in direct cost from external funding for the candidate’s research is required. For collaborative funding, candidates will document both the nature and extent of their independent involvement in the research and the amount of funds distributed to their research program.

4.3.3.4. Service

For this promotion candidates are expected to have undertaken significant service to the profession through such means as service on panels of funding agencies or on editorial boards, reviewing manuscripts and grants, officer positions in professional associations, or organizing symposia. Typically they should have demonstrated a leadership role in service activities within the Department, college and/or university.

4.3.4. GRANTING OF TENURE FOR INDIVIDUALS HIRED WITHOUT TENURE AS ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OR PROFESSOR

Individuals hired without tenure at the level of Associate Professor or Professor must meet the requirements given below during their probationary period.

4.3.4.1 Research scholarship

For a candidate hired at the rank of Associate Professor without tenure who desires to be tenured at the rank of Associate Professor, the criteria specified in Section 4.3.2 (e.g. career totals of at least four peer-reviewed publications and total extramural funding support of at least $50,000 in direct cost) apply with the following additions. The candidate must publish at least one peer-reviewed publication after coming to the department with WSU listed as the employer. At least $20,000 of the required total in direct cost of external funding needs to be awarded since coming to WSU or transferred to WSU.

For a candidate hired at the rank of Professor without tenure who desires to be tenured, the criteria specified in section 4.3.3 (e.g. 15 peer-reviewed publications and total extramural funding support of at least $100,000 in direct cost since the last promotion) apply with the following additions. The candidate must publish at least one peer-reviewed publication after coming to the department with WSU listed as the employer. At least $20,000 of the required total in direct cost of external funding needs to be awarded since coming to WSU or transferred to WSU.

4.3.4.2 Teaching

Candidates for tenure with either rank should have demonstrated teaching effectiveness at WSU as indicated in sections 4.3.2.1 for Associate Professor and 4.3.3.2 for Professor.

4.3.4.3 Service

In the case of an individual hired at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor without tenure, the criteria specified in the previous sections (4.3.2.3 for Associate Professor; 4.3.3.4 for Professor) will be applied over the candidate’s academic career. Emphasis will be placed on the continuation of and/or the development of a strong service record while at WSU.

4.4. Professional development leaves and faculty awards

When appropriate the FDC will nominate individuals for university awards. In Fall Quarter or when appropriate the FDC will review any applications for professional development leaves (PDL) by BUFMs. Such issues may be handled by circulation of paperwork; they may not require a formal meeting. If two or more individuals request PDLs then a formal meeting will be necessary to rank their requests for forwarding to the college.

SECTION 5. OTHER PROCEDURES

5.1. Faculty appointment, reappointment and dismissal

5.1.1. FACULTY APPOINTMENT

The Department Chair determines who will be on a search committee for a new faculty member, the chair of the search committee, and the procedures to be followed by the committee. Department BUFMs will constitute the majority of the committee. The search committee will review the applications and present to the Faculty for their recommendations a list of qualified applicants to interview. The list of applicants will be given to the Department Chair along with the recommendations of the Department BUFMs. After the candidates invited by the Department Chair are interviewed, a recommendation to the Department Chair of the preferred candidates in rank order also will be made by majority vote of the Department BUFMs.

5.1.2. FACULTY REAPPOINTMENT

Faculty reappointment is the transfer of faculty from one program or department within the university to another. Faculty reappointment from an outside department to this Department will occur only after the recommendation, by a majority vote, of the Department faculty is sought in a secret ballot, to be taken at a Departmental meeting. This recommendation will be presented to the Dean with the reason for the recommendation given.

5.1.3. FACULTY DISMISSAL BEFORE END OF PROBATIONARY PERIOD

The decision to terminate an untenured BUFM before the end of the probationary period will be made by the Dean who shall first consult with the Department Faculty Development Committee. The Department Chair and/or the Dean will present the recommendation and the reasons for dismissal to the Departmental FDC. The FDC will be allowed full discussion of the dismissal case and will vote, in a secret ballot, on whether or not to recommend dismissal of the probationary faculty. The FDC's recommendation must be written, with the vote tallied and majority reasons expressed, and will allow for the expression of minority opinions. The written recommendation will be sent to the Chair and the Dean's office.

5.2. Course changes

Proposals to modify or add courses will first be made to the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee or to the Graduate Committee. If those proposals are approved within the committee they will be presented to the whole Department faculty for voting. A majority vote is required to recommend a proposal.

5.3. Assigning summer teaching

The Department Chair will schedule summer courses. Priority for teaching assignments will be for BUFMs first. If the number of BUFMs who would like to teach exceeds the number of available courses a lottery will be used to determine the order in which qualified BUFMs are offered a course. Each BUFM will be offered one course before any is offered a second course. Where there is not a sufficient number of second courses, a lottery will be used to decide the order in which BUFMs will be offered second courses. If lotteries are used, BUFMs denied teaching opportunities in one year should be given priority the following year.

5.4. Scheduling faculty meetings and setting agendas

A Department meeting will occur in the first or second week of each quarter of the academic year, at which the Faculty and Chair will determine the time block of necessary department meetings for the remainder of the quarter. There will be at least one meeting each month. Meetings other than regularly scheduled meetings may be called at the discretion of the Department chair or at the request of any three Faculty members. An agenda for any meeting will be made available to each Faculty member one week prior to the meeting. An announcement of any meeting will be made at least 2 days prior to the release of the agenda to allow any Faculty member to place items on the agenda. Proxy votes are allowed only if a motion appears on the agenda for the meeting.

5.5 Faculty involvement in the Selection of the Chair: The procedures by which the BUFMs in the department give advice regarding the appointment of the Chair are as follows.

A Chair Search Committee will be created. The majority of the membership of the Search Committee shall include BUFMs elected by the Department BUFMs.

Subject to this restriction, the Search Committee, and its chair, will be appointed by the Dean.

The candidate’s application in full (vita, letter of application, letters of recommendation if any, etc.) shall be available for examination by BUFM in the Department.

There shall be one or more public forums of sufficient duration to provide BUFMs in the Department with an opportunity to meet and question the candidate. The candidate is also required to present a seminar to the Department in the field of his/her research.

The Search Committee shall distribute a secret advisory ballot to Faculty in the Department. The ballot may include any items chosen by the Search Committee. However, the ballot shall include:

  • for each candidate, the question “Is [name of candidate] acceptable to you for appointment to the position of the Chair of the Department?” with answers “Yes” or “No”

  • an opportunity to rank the candidates

  • an opportunity to comment upon each candidate

  • clear instructions for the return of the ballot: where it may be returned, plus due date and time

Along with its recommendations, the Search Committee will transmit to the Dean the names of candidates acceptable to a majority of the BUFM of the Department who responded to the advisory ballot and other information as appropriate. The Search Committee will provide to the Dean a summary of the advisory ballot results. The Dean will consider this information before appointing a Chair.

5.6. Faculty involvement in the Review of Department Chairs

When the performance of the Department Chair is to be reviewed, a meeting of the Department BUFMs may be held to recommend ways that faculty input into the review may take place.

5.7. Bylaws: procedures for amendment

These bylaws may be amended by a majority vote of the BUFMs in the Department and with approval by the Dean and by the Faculty Governance Committee. Any BUFM in the Department may bring alternatives to the present bylaws forward.