Department of Leadership Studies in Education and Organizations
Approved: May 12, 2003
Amended: January 23, 2007 retroactive to January 1, 2005
1. Departmental Procedures
1.1 Calling Meetings and Setting Agendas
A departmental meeting may be called by the Chair of the department or chair of a departmental committee. In addition, a departmental meeting may be called by petition of one-third of all department bargaining unit faculty members. Three university business day's notice must be given prior to the requested meeting. The bargaining unit faculty member(s) calling a meeting will clearly state the purpose of the meeting and call for any additional agenda items from the department bargaining unit faculty. Bargaining unit faculty may bring up issues of concern at any faculty meeting.
Minutes of each regular meeting of the Department of Educational Leadership shall be recorded. A copy of the minutes will be maintained in the office of the Chair, and a copy will be forwarded to the Office of the Dean of the College of Education and Human Services.
2. Criteria and Procedures for Annual Evaluation of EDL Bargaining Unit Faculty
The EDL department Chair (Chair) will annually evaluate all EDL bargaining unit faculty members following the procedures outlined in the current collective bargaining agreement (CBA).
2.1 Written Documentation and Procedure
In January of each year, all EDL bargaining unit faculty members (BUFMs) will prepare and submit to the Chair a summary of their accomplishments in teaching, scholarship and service for the preceding calendar year. At the beginning of the calendar year, each EDL bargaining unit faculty member will recommend a set of weights or percentages that anticipates his/her professional responsibilities in teaching, scholarship, and service for the upcoming year.
The EDL department Chair will evaluate each bargaining unit faculty member's performance based on the criteria for teaching, scholarship, and service described below. In the Department of Educational Leadership, teaching is regarded as most important. Scholarship and Service are rated as less important than teaching and are weighted accordingly in most instances. Each person's relative weights must total 100 percent. The typical bargaining unit faculty member's overall weighting will normally consist of a 40 percent teaching component, 30 percent scholarship component, and a 30 percent service component. However, weights are set by the Chair. Any BUFM may request adjusted weighting to better reflect his/her activities for the year to be evaluated.
Normally, such adjusted weighting will be within the following ranges:
Teaching - 20% to 60%
Scholarship - 20% to 50%
Service - 20% to 50%
The Chair will hold a private meeting with each bargaining unit faculty member to discuss the Chair's written annual evaluation of the bargaining unit faculty member in relation to the materials submitted by the BUFM and the criteria for evaluation. The bargaining unit faculty member will be provided a copy of the Chair's evaluation. Each bargaining unit faculty member will sign the evaluation form acknowledging receipt. If the bargaining unit faculty member wishes to rebut the evaluation, the bargaining unit faculty member may submit a written rebuttal. This rebuttal must be attached to the evaluation and forwarded as provided for in the current collective bargaining agreement.
2.2. Evaluation of Bargaining Unit Faculty Teaching
2.2.1. Peer Evaluation of Teaching
The department Promotion and Tenure Committee (P&T) will conduct a peer evaluation of teaching for all non-tenured bargaining unit faculty each calendar year and for tenured BUFMs who request a peer evaluation. A tenured BUFM may recommend the course(s) in which he/she prefers to be evaluated. The bargaining unit faculty member will provide the P&T Committee with course materials for the course(s) to be evaluated, which may include course syllabi, handouts, examinations, a statement on revisions to a course(s), a description of assignments, and/or evidence of how this course meets the conceptual strands of CEHS. The P&T Committee may request specific materials in addition to those submitted by the BUFM and may arrange for visitation of at least one class by a tenured BUFM. The P&T Committee's peer teaching report will include an evaluation of the course materials and a description of any class visit(s). Both the faculty member and the Department Chair will receive copies of the report and will have access to all materials used in the peer evaluation as well as written report(s) of all classroom visits. The Chair will use the peer evaluation report in his or her Annual Evaluation, while the P&T Committee will use the report(s) in its statement of progress toward promotion and tenure.
2.2.2. Criteria for the Evaluation of Teaching
"unsatisfactory" or 0: Student and/or peer evaluations reveal major problems in teaching. Evaluations and/or peer review may indicate that the BUFM--
• is unprepared for the teaching assignment and/or teaches in a completely unorganized manner;
• misses classes frequently (without informing the department chair and/or without adequate explanation);
• fails to keep student appointments, and/or keep appropriate office hours.
"adequate" or 1: The BUFM meets class on a regular basis and satisfactorily covers expected course content consistent with strands of the CEHS conceptual framework. Student and/or peer evaluation reveal no major problems. The BUFM satisfactorily performs other teaching related activities, such as maintaining office hours, working with students, and providing a syllabus for each course taught.
"meritorious" or 2: The BUFM meets expectations for “adequate,” maintains essential professional credentials (e.g., certification or licensure), and is effective in the classroom as evidenced by student and/or peer evaluations that reflect learning and generally positive feedback..
"outstanding" or 3: In addition to meeting expectations for “meritorious,” the BUFM also offers evidence of outstanding instruction by effectively accomplishing at least four of the following—
• introduces new teaching methods
• develops new courses and/or significantly revises existing courses
• supervises student(s) in independent study(ies), graduate theses, or other projects
• participates in service learning
• develops innovative course evaluation procedures or teaching strategies
• contributes significantly to recruitment activity
• consults and/or collaborates with other faculty and/or at community sites to better achieve course objectives and other learning goals
• serves as a member of a thesis/dissertation committee
• teaches professional workshops and seminars on and/or off campus
• develops instructional materials to be used in the classroom (e.g., power points, overheads, video modeling tapes, etc.)
• develops and teaches a new or substantially revised web enhanced or distance learning course
• receives external funding to enhance teaching
• demonstrates other equivalent teaching contributions to the Department's mission
"extraordinary" or 4: The BUFM fulfills all the requirements for an "outstanding” and also offers evidence of outstanding instruction from at least three more (total of 7) of the above activities and/or wins recognition for teaching excellence (receives college or university teaching awards or the equivalent).
2.2.3. Evidence for the Evaluation of Teaching
At a minimum, evidence used for the evaluation of teaching shall include student evaluations and available peer evaluations. In addition, bargaining unit faculty may submit any materials to the department Chair including (but not limited to) the following:
• Selected syllabi or other class materials (to demonstrate a particular classroom innovation, for example);
• A written response to peer evaluations;
• A description of a particular section or a response to the student evaluations for a particular section (if the BUFM believes the evaluations for that section need to be contextualized, for example);
• Additional student evaluation materials, including (but not limited to) a self-administered evaluation instrument, a mid-term evaluation, the numerical evaluations from the official university instrument, signed letter(s) from students in a particular course, etc.;
• Evidence showing student learning success, for example the results of a pre- and post-evaluation.
2.3 The Evaluation of Scholarship
The Department of Educational Leadership faculty value collaborative work, such as jointly authored papers or jointly authored or edited books.Furthermore, it is recognized that collaborative scholarship often requires as much effort as single-author scholarship and should be credited accordingly.
2.3.1 Criteria for the Evaluation of Scholarship
"unsatisfactory" or 0: The bargaining unit faculty member does not satisfy the requirements for an adequate evaluation.
"adequate" or 1: The bargaining unit faculty member demonstrates that he/she has developed a research agenda. To receive a score of 1 (Adequate) in scholarship, a faculty member must maintain currency in the scholarship of the professor's own field by providing evidence of one or more of the following:
• attending a state, regional, or national conference,
• membership on a panel,
• publishing a scholarly book review,
• submitting an article for peer review,
• submitting a proposal for a presentation,
• submitting a grant proposal for funding, or the equivalent
"meritorious" or 2 : In addition to the requirements for “adequate” scholarship, the meritorious researcher must go beyond the demonstration of scholarly competence by delivering a paper at a significant academic conference, publishing one or more reviews, preparing an article, editing an academic work, or the equivalent. Each bargaining unit faculty member's record should include at least two within the following:
• has presented research at a professional conference and at least one of which was at the regional, national, or international level;
• has submitted an external grant proposal(s) in excess of $5,000;
• has submitted a refereed or scholarly work;
• has served as a referee for federal grants.
"outstanding" or 3 : In addition to meeting the requirements for “meritorious”, the bargaining unit faculty member demonstrates one of the following:
• has published or has in press a refereed article in a recognized external journal in one's field;
• has an external grant funded for at least $25,000 total costs ($50,000 if Co-PI);
• has published or has in press a chapter in a scholarly book;
• has received a college, university or professional organization award for scholarship.
"extraordinary" or 4 : The bargaining unit faculty member fulfills the requirements for “outstanding” scholarship and accomplishes at least one of the following:
• has published or has in press two or more refereed articles in a recognized external journal in one's field;
• has published or has in press a peer-reviewed book in his or her discipline;
• has an external grant funded of at least $50,000 total costs serving as principal investigator.
A faculty member's academic paper, book or similar work which has been accepted for publication but is not yet published shall be credited to the faculty member if he/she supplies adequate documentation confirming that the work is definitely scheduled for publication without further revision. This piece of scholarship may only be credited as published once in the annual review process, and may not be counted in the subsequent year(s).
2.3.2 Multiple Quality Activities in a Category
A situation may arise in which a faculty member has multiple quality activities in one category, but does not meet the specific criteria of the next higher level. In this case, the Chair may deem it appropriate to award the faculty member the next level because these activities are equivalent to specific criteria. For instance, a faculty member might receive a $ 20,000 grant and published two scholarly reviews. The Chair may deem it appropriate to award the faculty member "Outstanding" rather than "Meritorious".
2.3.3 Principal or Co-Principal Investigator
A faculty member is expected to be the Principal Investigator or the Co-Principal Investigator of the grant being credited to the faculty member. In instances where grant requirements prohibit the faculty member from being listed as the Principal Investigator or the Co-Principal, but the faculty member can provide documentation to the Chair of his/her leadership role with the preparation of the grant, this grant will be credited to the faculty member.
2.3.4 Submission of Evidence
In support of all claims of merit in scholarship, the faculty member should submit a copy of the manuscript or publication; conference program listings; letters of review or acceptance for articles, chapters, books, presentations, and grants; and any other material that documents the BUFM's scholarly achievements.
2.4 The Evaluation of Service
Bargaining unit faculty service contributes to the overall mission of the department, the discipline, college, university, or community. Service includes, but is not limited to, committee service, leadership in existing university programs, and development of new programs and initiatives. During the first two years of employment, new bargaining unit faculty will not be required to serve on college or university level committees. However, the faculty member will be expected to participate in departmental level committees as requested by the Chair, and develop their research agenda's or produce scholarly works. The annual faculty evaluation score for service for new bargaining unit faculty based on service during the first two full years of their probationary period shall not be reduced due to the lack of service on college or university committees.
2.4.1 Criteria for the Evaluation of Service
"unsatisfactory" or 0: The bargaining unit faculty member provides little or no evidence of service performed for the department, the college, the university, or for his/her profession or discipline.
"adequate" or 1 : The bargaining unit faculty member participates in service at the department level by attending department faculty meetings and responding to requests for activity reports, etc., in a timely fashion. In addition, “adequate” performance requires at least satisfactory performance in one of the following areas:
• Serve on one or two committees at the department level and/or at the college or university level; or
• Serve as a reviewer for the purposes of peer evaluation of teaching.
"meritorious" or 2: In addition to the criteria identified in “adequate”, a bargaining unit faculty member who has “meritorious” service regularly participates in service at the department level, contributes some service at the college or university levels, and documents at least one of the following:
• serves in a leadership role in some aspect of university work, e.g., in assisting with a search; or
• leads an assessment activity for the department, college, or the university; or
• supervises a significant student-centered activity.
"outstanding" or 3: The outstanding service record of a bargaining unit faculty member demonstrates a high level of service at the department, college, or university levels, or outside the university. In addition to fulfilling the requirements for “meritorious” service, the indicators of outstanding service include l eading a major aspect of the department's academic life. For example, leading a student organization, directing a departmental or interdepartmental program, chairing an important and productive committee, or the equivalent. Activities may extend beyond the department to leadership in an important aspect of college or university governance or organization. For example, chairing a committee that rewrites and implements changes or develops a new degree or program. This service should include at least two of the following:
• service as a chair of a standing or ad-hoc committee;
• service as a reviewer for the purposes of peer evaluation;
• service as a professional consultant within one's professional organizations directly related to teaching or administrative responsibilities;
• serves as a peer reviewer for a journal or professional organization;
• service as a departmental, college, or university program advisor or director;
• service to a community or professional organization/institution.
"extraordinary " or 4 : The bargaining unit faculty member performs some combination of "outstanding" activities in multiple areas of service and/or is able to demonstrate that service performed at the department, college, or university levels, or beyond the university, resulted in noteworthy accomplishments for the department, college, or university as a whole. Activities may also include taking a leadership role in a state or national professional or international organization, or function in a central capacity in the publication of a professional journal, or the equivalent.
Bargaining unit faculty who exhibit extraordinary service should also document their service in at least one of the following areas:
• service in a leadership role in an important aspect of departmental, college, or university governance;
• service in a leadership role in faculty governance, and/or in a professional, state or national organization;
• receive an award from the college, university, or from a professional organization.
3. Departmental Committees
The department chair and or the majority of Bargaining unit faculty or a committee may create ad hoc committees as needed to serve the needs of the department.
3.1. Curriculum Committee
a. The committee will include all full-time bargaining unit faculty members of the department.
b. The committee will choose its chair from the bargaining unit faculty.
The committee will review and make recommendations on all relevant curriculum matters.
3.2 Department P&T Committee
The tenured bargaining unit faculty at the ranks of Associate Professor and Professor will be the P&T Committee. The Department Chair serves as a non-voting member. If there are not at least four tenured Department BUFMs at the Associate/Professor rank, the EDL tenured bargaining unit faculty will invite faculty at the tenured Associate/Professor rank from other Departments of CEHS to be a member of the EDL P&T committee. The members of the comittee will elect their chair for the following academic year at a meeting during Spring Quarter.
3.2.1 Promotion and Tenure Process
The process for granting promotion and/or tenure to a bargaining unit faculty member may be initiated at the Departmental level by the bargaining unit faculty member. The member must submit a written letter of intent to the Department Chair and P&T Committee by May 15 of the academic year before the individual is to be a candidate. The candidate must also submit a complete promotion and tenure document, as specified by the collective bargaining agreement, to the Department P&T Committee by September 1 of the same year.
The candidate will provide a list of five to seven potential outside reviewers to the P&T Committee by September 1 of the same year. Outside reviewers should be qualified to evaluate the quality of the candidate's scholarship. Reviewers must be tenured, currently employed at a comparable university or higher, hold at least the academic rank which the candidate is seeking, and be qualified in the candidate's field. If the P&T Committee cannot find three appropriate and available reviewers from the candidate's initial list, the candidate will provide additional names, as requested, until the committee can find three appropriate and available reviewers.
The committee Chairperson will summarize the EDL faculty's recommendation in a written letter from the Department P&T Committee. The letter will include the finalized results of the vote. P&T Committee members will review and approve the letter before it is sent to the Dean. Any abstentions should be explained in the letter.
The candidate must be informed in writing of the Department P & T Committee's recommendation ten (10) working days before the file is submitted to the College.
3.2.2 Criteria for Promotion and/or Tenure
Candidates for promotion and/or tenure are expected to demonstrate productivity in teaching, scholarship, and service.
Candidates may present accomplishments dating from before their hiring at Wright State University . Scholarly work completed prior to the candidate's appointment at Wright State University will be considered on an equal level to scholarly work done while at this institution, but in no case shall all of the scholarship assessed be done prior to arrival at Wright State. A record of ongoing scholarship at Wright State must be demonstrated.
In support of scholarship, the faculty member must submit the following:
• For all published works: a copy of the publication.
• For all works listed as accepted but not yet published: a copy of the official letter from the publisher and/or editor along with a printed copy of the accepted manuscript or galley proofs of the printed publication.
• For all unpublished papers: a printed copy of the manuscript.
• For all conference papers: a printed copy of the manuscript.
• For all grants funded or pending: a copy of the grant proposal and grant funding notice.
3.3.3 Evidence of Successful Scholarship
External reviewers, scholars in the faculty member's field, will be used to validate the quality of the scholarship submitted. Reviewers will be asked to evaluate the quality of the writing, the quality of the journals and the appropriateness to the field.
3.3.4 Promotion from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor
There is no minimum time in rank requirement for promotion and tenure. However, an Assistant Professor must meet the following criteria.
• Teaching. Candidates should have compiled a record of effective teaching and advising at Wright State University . A statistical summary and frequency distributions of all student evaluations of teaching are required as evidence of teaching effectiveness and are to be included in the promotion and tenure document. Additional selected evidence, that includes but is not limited to peer evaluations of teaching, should demonstrate that the faculty member is consistently effective in the classroom.
• Scholarship. Candidates must show that they have pursued a successful program of continuous and ongoing scholarship at Wright State University . In addition, success in scholarship sufficient for promotion and tenure will include a minimum of five (5) external refereed journal articles, two of which may have equivalent substitutions. An equivalent substitution may be (but is not limited to) a book, an edited volume, a book chapter, a monograph, or a funded external grant totaling at least $50,000. Letters from external reviewers will be used to affirm the quality of a candidate's scholarship.
• Service. Probationary faculty are expected to participate in and render departmental, college, and/or university service and perform some external professional service. The candidate must demonstrate that he/she has been a contributing participant on committees and in activities necessary for the proper functioning of the Department and the College. Candidates will list service accomplishments on the curriculum vita included in the promotion and tenure document. Candidates must also include evidence of effective service performance (e.g., any testimonials, solicited or unsolicited) as part of an appendix to the promotion and tenure document.
3.3.5 Promotion from Associate Professor to Professor
Promotion to Full Professor requires productivity beyond that required for promotion to Associate Professor and demonstration of excellence in all three areas of faculty activity. The candidate's entire work will be evaluated and should demonstrate a reputation for excellence at a regional/national level.
• Teaching. A high level of teaching effectiveness must be demonstrated using multiple measures; e.g., student evaluations, peer evaluations,syllabi, course materials, use of technology, letters, and samples of student work. Full professors should not only be excellent teachers, but should also be role models for others in the department.
• Scholarship. The candidate must have a minimum of seven (7) external refereed journal articles beyond those required for promotion to Associate Professor rank, three of which may have equivalent substitutions. An equivalent substitution may be (but is not limited to) a book, an edited volume, a book chapter, a monograph, or a funded external grant totaling at least $50,000. Letters from external reviewers will be used to affirm the quality of a candidate's scholarship demonstrating a reputation at the regional and national level.
• Service. The candidate must provide significant evidence to document active participation and effective leadership performance in Department, College, and/or University service, as well as in external service to the profession and/or the community.
4. Hiring Procedures
4.1 Membership of Search Committees
Membership in the search committee for the hiring of new EDL bargaining unit faculty will include, at least three members of the bargaining unit faculty in the EDL department.
4.2 Duties of Search Committees
The search committee will:
• comply with the university's affirmative action policies and procedures;
• screen the files of the applicants;
• make a recommendation as to which candidates will be brought to campus;
• make arrangements for the candidate's visits, which should allow bargaining unit faculty members sufficient time to meet the candidates and allow the candidates to teach a class or give a public presentation;
• make a recommendation to the Dean regarding which candidate(s) are acceptable.
Any of the bargaining unit faculty of the department may make a motion at a departmental meeting to amend the departmental bylaws. The proposed amendment(s) must be submitted in writing. The motion to amend must be seconded by another Bargaining Unit Faculty. The department will then take the motion under consideration and discuss and vote on it at a subsequent departmental meeting. A majority of all Bargaining Unit Faculty in the department must vote affirmative for the amendment to pass. The proposed amendment will then be forwarded to the Dean and to the Faculty Governance Committee consistent with the current procedures of the CBA.