Approved: 3/5/03

Section I. Introduction

  1. These Bylaws:
    • provide for faculty participation in the operations of the Department of Marketing, in accordance with the Agreement between the American Association of University Professors – Wright State University Chapter, and Wright State University, hereafter referred to as the agreement;
    • are subject to and consistent with the Bylaws of the Raj Soin College of Business (RSCOB);
    • may be amended in accordance with the Collective Bargaining agreement;
    • include duties of each department standing committee.
  2. The Purpose of these Bylaws

    The Department Faculty (defined as full-time faculty in the Department, excluding the Chair) seek to promote and sustain effective teaching (undergraduate and graduate), scholarship, and service, and to participate fully in the governance of the College of Business and the University, as allowed by the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Section II. Procedures by which Bargaining Unit Faculty Give Advice and Make Recommendations

  1. Faculty Appointment, Reappointment and Dismissal
    1. Faculty Appointment. Members of the Department Faculty are to be involved in the recruitment and selection process for new faculty. Department faculty will be chosen by the Chair to serve on the Search Committee. All members of the Department Faculty will be provided the opportunity to: (1) interview, individually and/or in small groups, those candidates who are brought to campus; (2) participate in presentations made by the candidates; (3) provide written and/or oral feedback to the Search Committee for each faculty candidate. The search committee and the Department Faculty shall make recommendations regarding whom to hire to the Department Chair and the Dean after all candidates have been interviewed.
    2. Faculty Reappointment. Faculty reappointment from an outside department to this department will only occur after the recommendation of the department bargaining unitfaculty is obtained including the results of a secret ballot taken at a department meeting. This recommendation will be presented to the Dean. The reasoning behind the recommendation will be derived from the discussion prior to the vote.
    3. Faculty Dismissal. The dismissal of probationary tenure-track faculty may not occur until the Dean has sought the recommendation of the department’s Promotion and Tenure (P&T) committee. The department bargaining unit faculty will be allowed full discussion of the dismissal case but only the department’s P&T committee will vote, in a secret ballot, on whether or not to dismiss the probationary faculty. The P&T committee’s written recommendation and the results of the vote on whether or not they are in favor of dismissing the probationary faculty will be conveyed to the Dean. The written recommendation will allow for the expression of minority opinions.
  2. Promotion and Tenure
    1. To Tenured Associate Professor. The department’s P&T committee will review the faculty member’s promotion and tenure file at a special P&T committee meeting. The department’s representative to the RSCOB P&T committee will chair the meeting and will have a vote at the department level. Furthermore, the department Chair may participate in the discussion as a non-voting member of the committee. An elected secretary will take notes of the discussion so that the reasoning behind the committee’s recommendation may be summarized in a written letter. The letter should include the finalized results of the secret ballot. The P&T committee will consist of all department Bargaining Unit Faculty Members (BUFMs) who hold the rank of tenured associate professor or tenured professor. If there are not at least three BUFMs at the rank of associate professor or professor, other faculty at this rank, from within the college or outside the college as necessary, who would be qualified to evaluate the tenure file will be invited by the committee to join the committee. The committee will review and approve the letter summarizing the P&T committee vote and the reasoning for the vote before it is sent to the RSCOB P&T committee.
    2. To Tenured Full Professor. The procedures are similar to that described in Section II, B.1 above but the group of department faculty present and voting will be restricted to those who hold the rank of tenured professor. If there are not at least three department BUFMs at the rank of professor eligible to vote, the committee will invite faculty at this rank from other departments or outside the college as necessary who would be qualified to evaluate a faculty member’s file to join the committee. The committee will review and approve the letter summarizing the vote and the reasoning for the vote before it is sent to the RSCOB P&T committee.
  3. Professional Development

    The P&T committee is responsible for giving advice and recommendations to the Chair on matters related to professional development including the mentoring of new faculty.

  4. Teaching Assignments and Class Schedules, Including Summer and Overloads

    Department faculty will have the opportunity to provide the Chair with a list of their preferences for courses and times for each quarter. Faculty may request from the Chair information regarding what courses have been taught each quarter, at what times they have been taught each quarter, and enrollments in each section over the past year. Faculty may also ask the Chair to provide information regarding scheduling of courses and class times. Faculty may recommend to the Chair ways to resolve course and scheduling conflicts. Summer or overload teaching will not be forced upon any faculty member.

    In the event there are insufficient classes or projected insufficient enrollments to fill all the requests made by bargaining-unit faculty for upcoming summer, the most senior faculty (by rank and time in rank) will receive the first opportunity to fill their summer teaching schedules. Bargaining-unit faculty denied summer teaching because of insufficient classes or enrollments will be given first priority to teach in the following summer.

  5. Graduate and Undergraduate Curriculum

    The department curriculum committee, with input from the rest of the faculty, will review and make recommendations on proposed new department courses, suggested modifications to existing department courses, and proposed changes in requirements for all majors and minors offered by the department.

  6. Advice Given by Department Faculty in Naming of Chairs

    The department faculty may provide the Dean with a written recommendation for the naming of a Chair.

  7. Issues Affecting the Department

    Issues which affect the department should be presented to the faculty by the Chair or other members of the department faculty and recommendations from the faculty solicited.

Section III. Annual Evaluation of BUFMs

  1. Procedures for Annual Evaluation
    1. Submission of Materials for Annual Evaluation. Faculty will submit to the department Chair a summary of their accomplishments in Teaching, Scholarship and Service for the preceding year (January 1 to December 31st) by the last working day before February 7th of each year. It is the responsibility of each faculty member to make the case for the rating expected in each category.

      Also by the last working day before February 7th of each year, all faculty submitting teaching portfolios in accordance with the peer evaluation section of these bylaws should forward these materials to the department's P&T committee and the department chair to become part of the evaluation process.

    2. Merit Rating Formula. The formula for the determination of the merit rating is based on the rating for teaching, scholarship, and service. An Unsatisfactory rating is awarded a score of ‘0’; an adequate rating is awarded a score of ‘1’; a Meritorious rating is awarded a score of ‘2’; an Outstanding rating is awarded a score of ‘3’; and an Extraordinary rating is awarded a score of ‘4’. These scores are then weighted by category.

      The weight assigned for each category 1) must fall into the following range and 2) must sum to 100

      Teaching 30%- 50% or your merit evaluation must be for teaching.

      Scholarship 30%-50% of your merit evaluation must be for scholarship

      Service

      Assistant Professor 10%-20% of your merit evaluation must be for service

      Associate Professor 10%-30% of your merit evaluation must be for service

      Professor 20%-30% of your merit evaluation must be for service

      The Department Chair will evaluate each area of each faculty member’s professional activity and assign an integer to that area guided by the criteria stated below. The Chair will then assign to each area a percentage from the range above that gives the faculty member the maximum possible overall average.

      The Chair may assign a weighting different 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 contract
      • the Chair is acting to correct a pattern of substandard performance extending for more than one year.
    3. Peer Evaluation of Teaching. Peer evaluation will be conducted annually for all untenured BUFMs. Peer evaluation will also be conducted for any full-time BUFM who specifically requests it. The Department P&T committee will be responsible for the peer evaluation of teaching. Peer evaluation for this department will normally consist of review of the teaching portfolio. The portfolio will include: (1) syllabi for each course taught; (2) where appropriate, a representative sample of examinations administered; (3) where appropriate, a representative sample of student papers/projects completed; (4) the written comments by students on the student evaluation of instruction form; (5) a numerical summary from the student evaluation of instruction form (untenured BUFMs); and, (6) any other materials the individual chooses to include to demonstrate teaching effectiveness.

      The P&T committee will evaluate the teaching portfolios for a faculty member (a person whose portfolio is being evaluated may not participate in the evaluation process of his/her portfolio):

      1. to determine the consistency of syllabi with topics to be covered in the course
      2. to determine the consistency of examinations with topics listed on syllabi
      3. to assess the appropriateness of projects/papers for the course
      4. to identify areas from the student evaluation suggesting positive teaching practices
      5. to identify areas from the student evaluation suggesting a need for improvement in teaching practices
      6. to identify areas of innovation in teaching applied by the faculty member
      7. to identify teaching accomplishments.

      If the P&T committee review of these materials indicates that there may be problems in teaching, a class visitation by one or more members of the P&T committee may be arranged.

      The P&T committee will provide the Chair and each individual evaluated with written feedback regarding peer evaluation to include a suggested rating for the teaching component of the annual evaluation. This feedback should address points a-g, above. If a class visitation is performed, a written report will follow.

    4. Annual Evaluation. The chair will consider all submitted materials when deriving an evaluation for each facet of faculty performance. A written summary of this evaluation will be provided to each faculty member in a timely manner.
    5. Faculty Review of Annual Evaluation.Faculty will review the annual evaluation prepared by the department Chair and the reasons given for the ratings. The faculty member will sign a copy of the evaluation and return it to the department Chair. The signature on the evaluation only acknowledges receipt of the evaluation. If the faculty member disagrees with the evaluation, s/he may prepare a rebuttal, which should be submitted to the Chair. This rebuttal must be attached to the evaluation and forwarded to all entities seeing the annual evaluation.
  2. Criteria for Annual Evaluation of BUFMs
    1. Teaching. The evaluation of a faculty member's teaching is the responsibility of the department Chair. All BUFMs shall be evaluated according to the following criteria:
      1. Unsatisfactory. A faculty member will be assigned a rating of Unsatisfactory for teaching if s/he fails to meet the requirements for a rating of Adequate.
      2. Adequate. A faculty member will be assigned a rating of Adequate when s/he adheres to the following except in exceptional circumstances:
        • participates in department assessment
        • course content is consistent with the college and department curricular missions
        • student evaluations do not show a preponderance of negative responses
        • adheres to provisions of the collective bargaining agreement related to faculty responsibility regarding teaching
      3. Meritorious. Meritorious teachers meet the requirements for adequate and demonstrate the following:
        • peer evaluations, if conducted, and/or student evaluations are generally positive, and provide evidence that the instructor aids in the understanding of the material
        • evidence of at least one extra effort activity on behalf of students and/or the department's teaching mission (for examples of extra effort activities see section III.B.1.f)
        • evidence of participation in a process of continual improvement.
      4. Outstanding. An outstanding teacher meets the requirements for adequate and demonstrates all of the following:
        • peer evaluations, if conducted, are positive; and/or a significant majority of student evaluations are positive; and/or the teacher receives a department teaching award
        • evidence of significant extra effort on behalf of students and/or the department’s teaching mission (i.e., 3 or more of the activities listed in section III.B.1.f)
        • evidence of participation in a process of continual improvement.
      5. Extraordinary. An extraordinary teacher clearly exceedsthe requirements for outstanding (four or more of the activities listed in section III.B.1.f). Demonstration of this level of excellence requires that:
        • peer evaluations and/or student comments are overwhelmingly positive
        • and/or the individual wins a college or university teaching award or achieves a major teaching accomplishment.
      6. Examples of Extra Effort Activities. Examples of extra effort activities include, but are not limited to the following:
        • effectively supervising independent study projects
        • creating innovative projects and assignments
        • teaching a larger than normal number of preparations or section sizes
        • conducting review sessions outside of normal class time
        • effective use of educational technology
        • serving as a teaching mentor for other faculty
        • effective involvement in student placement activities
        • being readily available to students beyond required office hours
        • developing a new course
        • developing a new teaching area
        • mentoring students
        • incorporating projects from local businesses into courses
    2. Scholarship. The evaluation of a faculty member’s scholarship is the responsibility of the department Chair. The most important scholarship is that appearing in peer-reviewed publications.For purposes of evaluation, the date of acceptance or the date of publication will be accepted. However, they must not be double-counted.

      The evaluation of scholarship should reflect the quantity of the input and the quality of the contribution. Collaborative efforts will be fully credited to each author.

      1. Unsatisfactory. A scholarship rating of unsatisfactory will be assigned if the faculty member fails to meet the requirements for a rating of adequate.
      2. Adequate. A scholarship rating of adequate will be assigned if the faculty member has one peer-reviewed scholarly publication on a marketing-related topic within the last five years and evidence of continuing scholarly activity during the evaluation period (or the equivalent). (Note the publication of one scholarly book substitutes for one peer-reviewed article).
      3. Meritorious. A meritorious scholarship rating is awarded for having one peer-reviewed journal article published on a marketing-related topic in the past three years or two such articles in the past five years plus evidence of continuing scholarly activity during the evaluation period (or the equivalent). (Note the publication of one scholarly book substitutes for one peer-reviewed article.)
      4. Outstanding. An outstanding scholarship rating is awarded for having one peer-reviewed journal article published on a marketing-related topic in the current year or two peer-reviewed journal articles in the past three years with evidence of continuing scholarly activity during the evaluation period (or the equivalent). (Note the publication of one scholarly book substitutes for one peer-reviewed article.)
      5. Extraordinary. An extraordinary scholarship rating is awarded for two peer-reviewed journal articles published on a marketing-related topic in the current year or one peer-reviewed article published in the current year with two other peer-reviewed journal articles in the past three years (or the equivalent). (Note the publication of one scholarly book substitutes for one peer-reviewed article.)
      6. Evidence of Continuing Scholarly Activity. Evidence of continued scholarly activity includes but is not limited to the following:
        • the completion of a working paper
        • the submission of a scholarly article to an appropriate outlet
        • submission of cases, chapters, comments or invited articles
        • subsequent editions of previously published books
        • submission of a book review
        • presentation of a working paper at a seminar or symposium
        • other intellectual contributions appropriate to the College’s and Department’s mission
        • submission to non-refereed outlets within a marketing-related field
        • receiving a research grant within the university
        • winning a college or university scholarship award
        • receiving a grant from an outside funding agency
        • media appearance or trade conference presentation on a topic in a marketing-related field
    3. Service. The evaluation of a faculty member’s service is the responsibility of the department Chair. The evaluation of service must reflect both the quality and the quantity of the effort and the significance of the output. Service includes contributions to the department, the college, the university, the profession, and to the community.
      1. Unsatisfactory. An unsatisfactory service rating will be assigned to any faculty member who fails to meet the requirements of an Adequate rating.
      2. Adequate. An adequate service rating will be assigned to associate and full professors who meet the standards listed below. Assistant professors meeting the first two standards will be rated adequate. Attendance at department meetings, college meetings, university meetings and service organization meetings predicates on the compatibility of the faculty’s schedule for teaching and office hours with the meeting times.
        • active participation in department meetings
        • regular attendance at college meetings
        • actively serving on a department committee
        • serving on one college/universitycommittee
        • attending a university or college orientation/visitation session at least once every in two years
        • attending commencement ceremonies at least once every two years.
      3. Meritorious. A meritorious service rating will be assigned to associate and full professors who meet the requirements for an Adequate rating and document the following:
        • active participation in one local professional or service organization
        • one other activity from the list in III.B.3.f.

        A meritorious service rating will be assigned to an assistant professor who meets the requirements for an adequate rating and documents the following:

        • actively serving on a department committee
        • attending a university or college orientation/visitation session at least once every in two years
        • attending commencement ceremonies at least once every two years.
      4. Outstanding. An outstanding service rating will be assigned to BUFMs who meet the requirements for a meritorious rating and document a total of three (3) significant additional service activities or the equivalent. (For examples of other activities see section III.B.3.f) The faculty member must show evidence of taking an active role in each of these service activities.
      5. Extraordinary. An extraordinary service rating will be assigned to faculty members who clearly exceed the requirements for an Outstanding rating. Evidence of this might include:
        • winning a college or university service award
        • a total of six (6) items from the list in III.B.3.f
        • a major leadership accomplishment.
      6. Service Activities. The following may be used as evidence of service:

        Institutional Service

        i. effectively serving as advisor to an active club or student organization where a significant time commitment is required
        ii. serving effectively as a program director
        iii. effectively chairing or effectively serving on an active university or college or department committee or task force
        iv. working on special projects at the department, college or university level
        v. effectively working on student placement or recruitment activity
        vi. teaching overload courses or teaching in off-campus programs
        vii. student advising efforts
        viii. alumni relations/fund raising activity

        Professional Service

        ix. effectively serving on the editorial board of a journal
        x. effectively serving as an officer in or chairing a significant state or national or international committee
        xi. effectively serving as a track chair at a national or international conference
        xii. organizing a conference workshop, session or panel for a regional, national or international conference
        xiii. reviewing books, journals or other manuscripts
        xiv. holding an office in an active professional organization
        xv. obtaining and maintaining professional licenses and/or certifications
        xvi. serving as a guest speaker for area business government or community organizationxvii. significant external service to community programs and/or companies, either paid or 
        unpaid, including consulting, training, etc.
        xviii. serving as a discussant at a conference
        xix. serving as an examiner/judge for Masters level thesis or a doctoral dissertation from another university.

        Community Service

        xx. holding positions of leadership in community organizations related to the profession
        xxi. involvement in community outreach/community programs
        xxii. participating (as a member or speaker) at local professional organizations.

Section IV. Department Criteria for Promotion and Tenure

  1. A. To Associate Professor with Tenure

    There are three tracks that a faculty member may satisfy to be promoted to the rank of Associate Professor: (1) a normal track, (2) an exceptional teaching track, and (3) an exceptional scholarship track. The requirements for each track are set forth below:

    Category

    Normal Track

    Exceptional Teaching Track

    Exceptional Scholarship Track

    Teaching

    Very Effective

    Exceptional

    Effective

    Scholarship

    Very Effective

    Effective

    Exceptional

    Service

    Effective

    Very Effective

    Effective

    The qualifications for effective, very effective and exceptional for each category are explained below.

    1. Teaching. To be considered an effective teacher, the faculty member must show evidence of the following:
      • student evaluations are generally positive .
      • a total of at least 7 extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department. Each annual extra effort activity counts toward the total. (see III.B.1.f)
      • regular participation in continuous improvement activities
      • a record of positive peer evaluations.

      To be considered a very effective teacher, the faculty member must show evidence of all the following:

      • a significant majority of student evaluations are positive.
      • a total of at least 10 extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department. Each annual extra effort activity counts toward the total.
      • very positive peer evaluations
      • a commitment to continuous improvement

      To be considered an exceptional teacher, the faculty member must show evidence of the following:

      • student evaluations are overwhelmingly positive
      • peer evaluations are excellent
      • a total of 15 or more extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department. Each annual extra effort activity counts toward the total.
    2. Scholarship. To be considered an effective scholar, the faculty member must have the following of which (except in an exceptional circumstance) at least one publication must have occurred while the faculty member was a Wright State University BUFM:
      • a minimum of five peer-reviewed journal articles, or their equivalent (one scholarly book may be substituted for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal article), plus evidence of continuing scholarly activity
      • favorable letters from outside reviewers.

      To be considered a very effective scholar, the faculty member must have the following of which (except in an exceptional circumstance) at least one publication must have occurred while the faculty member was a Wright State University BUFM:

      • a minimum of six peer-reviewed journal articles, or their equivalent (one scholarly book may be substituted for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal article), plus evidence of continuing scholarly activity
      • favorable letters from outside reviewers.

      To be considered an exceptional scholar, the faculty member must have the following of which (except in an exceptional circumstance) at least one publication must have occurred while the faculty member was a Wright State University BUFM:

      • a minimum of seven peer-reviewed journal articles, or their equivalent, including one in a nationally recognized journal (one scholarly book may be substituted for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal article), plus evidence of continuing scholarly activity
      • favorable letters from outside reviewers.
    3. Service: The faculty member must demonstrate consistent/effective participation in service activities.

      To be considered effective in the area of service, the faculty member must:

      • actively participate in department meetings
      • regularly attend college meetings
      • attend commencement ceremonies at least once every two years
      • actively serve on a department committee

      To be considered very effective in the area of service, the faculty member must exceed the requirements above by documenting five additional service activities as listed in section III.B.3.f:

  2. To Professor

    There are three tracks that a faculty member may follow to obtain a department recommendation for promotion to the rank of Professor of Marketing: (1) a normal track, (2) an exceptional teaching track, and (3) an exceptional scholarship track. The requirements for each track are set forth below:

    Category

    Normal Track

    Exceptional Teaching Track

    Exceptional Scholarship Track

    Teaching

    Very Effective

    Exceptional

    Effective

    Scholarship

    Very Effective

    Effective

    Exceptional

    Service

    Effective

    Very Effective

    Effective

    The qualifications for effective, very effective and exceptional for each category are explained below.

    1. Teaching. To be considered an effective teacher, the faculty member must show evidence of the following:
      • student comments are generally positive
      • at least 7 extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department since the last promotion. Each annual extra effort activity counts toward the total. (see III.B.1.f)
      • regular participation in continuous improvement activities.

      To be considered a very effective teacher, the faculty member must show evidence of the following:

      • a significant majority of student evaluations are positive
      • a total of at least 10 extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department since the last promotion. Each annual extra effort activity counts toward the total.
      • a commitment to continuous improvement.

      To be considered an exceptional teacher, the faculty member must show evidence of the following:

      • student evaluations are overwhelmingly positive
      • a total of 15 or more extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department since last promotion. Each annual extra effort activity counts toward the total
      • a teaching award.
    2. Scholarship. To be considered an effective scholar, the faculty member must have the following which (except in an exceptional circumstance) must include a minimum of four refereed journal articles since the last promotion and at least one since being hired at Wright State University:
      • a minimum of nine peer-reviewed journal articles, or their equivalent, including one in a nationally recognized journal (one scholarly book may be substituted for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal article) plus evidence of continuing scholarly activity
      • favorable letters from outside reviewers.

      To be considered a very effective scholar, the faculty member must have the following which (except in an exceptional circumstance) must include a minimum of five refereed journal articles since the last promotion and at least one since being hired at Wright State University:

      • a minimum of twelve peer-reviewed journal articles, or their equivalent, including two in a nationally recognized journal (one scholarly book may be substituted for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal article) plus evidence of continuing scholarly activity
      • favorable letters from outside reviewers.

      To be considered an exceptional scholar, the faculty member must have the following which (except in an exceptional circumstance) must include a minimum of five refereed journal articles since the last promotion and at least one since being hired at Wright State University:

      • a minimum of eighteen peer-reviewed journal articles, or their equivalent, including three in nationally recognized journals (one scholarly book may be substituted for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal article) plus evidence of continuing scholarly activity
      • favorable letters from outside reviewers
      • strong evidence of being nationally recognized as an outstanding scholar.
    3. Service. The faculty member must demonstrate consistent/effective participation in service activities.

      To be considered effective in the area of service, the faculty member must:

      • actively participates in department meetings
      • regularly attends college meetings
      • attends commencement ceremonies at least once every two years
      • actively serves on a department committee each year (when feasible)
      • regularly serves on one college/university committee
      • actively participates in a local professional or service organization
      • at least five activities from the list in section III.B.3.f since the last promotion.

      To be considered very effective in the area of service, the faculty member must exceed the requirements for effective by documenting ten additional service activities from the list in section III.B.3.f:

  3. C. Granting of Tenure When Hired as an Associate Professor or Professor Without Tenure
    1. Teaching. For a faculty member at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor without tenure, the three tracks outlined in section IV.A and IV.B respectively will apply. However, the qualifications for effective, very effective, and exceptional teacher are modified as follows.

      To be considered an effective teacher, the faculty member must show evidence of the following during the probationary period:

      • student comments are generally positive
      • regular participation in continuous improvement activities
      • a record of positive peer evaluations

      To be considered a very effective teacher, the faculty member must show evidence of the following during the probationary period:

      • a significant majority of student evaluations are positive
      • very positive peer evaluations
      • a commitment to continuous improvement

      To be considered an exceptional teacher, the faculty member must show evidence of the following during the probationary period:

      • student evaluations are overwhelmingly positive
      • peer evaluations are excellent
      • significant extra effort on behalf of students
    2. Scholarship. For a faculty member hired at the rank of Associate Professor without tenure and who desires to be tenured at the rank of Associate Professor, the criteria specified in section IV.A.2 will apply with one addition: at least one publication must list Wright State University as the faculty member’s affiliation.

      For a faculty member hired at the rank of Professor without tenure and who desires to be tenured, the criteria specified in section IV.B.2 will apply with one addition: at least one publication must list Wright State University as the faculty member’s affiliation.

    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 section (IV.A.3 and IV.B.3 respectively) will be applied over the faculty member’s academic career. Emphasis will be placed on the continuation of and/or the development of a strong service record while at Wright State University.

Section V. Department Policies and Procedures

  1. A. Membership of the Department Faculty
    1. The department faculty shall be comprised of persons who hold full-time faculty appointments in the department.
    2. Individuals who are not members of the department faculty may be invited to participate in the discussions of the department faculty but shall not have voting rights.
  2. Meetings of the Department Faculty
    1. Regular meetings of the department faculty should be called at least once a term during the regular academic year and at such other times as provided for in this document. The responsibility for calling regular meetings shall reside with the Chair.
    2. Notice of regular faculty meetings should be provided in writing to all full-time faculty members at least one week prior to the meeting (except for emergencies). An agenda of business to be conducted shall accompany the notice.
    3. Special department meetings may be called by the Chair or by a majority of the bargaining unit faculty. If called by a majority of BUFMs, the meeting may be chaired by a BUFM selected by those present.
    4. Regular meetings of the department faculty shall be conducted by the Chair of the department.
    5. The principle of majority vote among those department members present will prevail in all department faculty recommendations unless otherwise agreed or on issues reserved for BUFMs only. A majority of the department’s faculty eligible to vote on an issue will constitute a quorum. In order to vote on any item, a quorum must be present.
    6. Proxy voting is not allowed.
    7. Minutes of the department faculty meetings shall be taken by the department secretary or alternatively by a member of the faculty. A written copy of the minutes shall be made available for faculty review in a timely manner.
  3. Department Committees and Representatives
    1. Department representatives to RSCOB standing committees shall be elected by department faculty as appropriate and should represent the interest of the department. Faculty may be appointed to ad hoc department or non-department committees by the department Chair; the appointed faculty is expected to represent the interests of the department. The department's representative to the RSCOB P&T committee must hold the rank of tenured full professor.
    2. There are three department standing committees: Curriculum Committee, P&T Committee and Bylaws Review Committee.

      The Curriculum Committee has the responsibility:

      1. All department full-time faculty members shall serve on the Curriculum Committee. This committee is chaired by the department Chair who is a non-voting member of the committee.
        • for making recommendations on all aspects of the graduate and undergraduate curriculum, including assessment
        • for making recommendations to the Chair regarding department scholarships and awards, and
        • to meet no less than once a quarter during the academic year
        • to handle all student petitions.
      2. The P&T committee is chaired by the department representative to the RSCOB P&T committee and consists of all tenured bargaining unit associate and full professors in the department. The department Chair is a non-voting member of P&T committee.

        The P&T committee shall:

        • be responsible for peer evaluation of teaching
        • provide annual feedback to all untenured BUFMs on progress towards promotion and tenure
        • make recommendations on applications for promotion and tenure
        • make recommendations regarding professional development proposals submitted by department faculty
        • evaluate all applications for graduate faculty status
        • appoint a mentor for all non-tenured, full-time faculty
        • provide all tenured Assistant & Associate professors in the Bargaining Unit an annual statement on progress towards promotion unless the individual requests in writing for the review to be every three years
      3. The Bylaws Review Committee is formed by the election of three or more BUFMs. The primary responsibility of the Bylaws Committee is the ongoing review of existing bylaws for consistency with: College Bylaws, the Collective Bargaining Agreement, and changes within the department. When inconsistencies are found, the Bylaws Review Committee is responsible for drafting changes to the Department Bylaws to rectify the inconsistencies. Proposed changes must be approved by a majority of the department BUFMs. Once approved at this level, they must be approved at the College Dean and the Faculty Governance Committee levels before they can go into effect. The Bylaws Review Committee is also responsible for reviewing suggested changes in the bylaws provided by members of the Department. In response to these suggestions, the committee is to explain why a suggested change may or may not be allowed under existing rules, contracts etc. and draft changes where required.
    3. Department ad-hoc committees may be formed at any time by the department Chair or by a majority vote of the BUFMs.