Approved: April 3, 2002

Amended: October 2, 2002

Amended: October 29, 2004

Amended: January 26, 2006

Amended: April 23, 2009

Section I. Introduction

These Bylaws

  1. provide for faculty participation in the operations of the Department, in accordance with the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the American Association of University Professors – Wright State University Chapter (AAUP/WSU) and the Board of Trustees of Wright State University
  2. are subject to and consistent with the Bylaws of the College
  3. may be amended in accordance with the current CBA
  4. include operational procedures for each departmental committee.

Purpose: The Department faculty seek to promote and sustain teaching, (undergraduate and graduate) scholarship, and service, and to participate fully in the governance of the college and university. Bargaining Unit Faculty rights and responsibilities are given within the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

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

Terminology: Unless otherwise stated in this document, the term “faculty” refers to Full-time faculty who are members of the bargaining unit.

Section II. Faculty Governance

Faculty Governance

The faculty of the Department of Music seeks to conduct business in an efficient and orderly manner and desires input in the processes from all appropriate constituents. To that end the faculty establishes the following committee structure. All committee members, except the Department Chair, have voting privileges, except as noted below. The Department Committee (A), The Faculty Committee (B) and the Department of Music Promotion, Tenure, and Review Committee (E) are all chaired by the Chair, Department of Music. The sub-committee of Graduate Faculty will be chaired by the Director of Graduate Studies. The sub-committee of Music Education faculty will be chaired by the coordinator of Music Education. All other committees will elect chairs from the appropriate constituents at the first meeting in the academic year. The Chair, Department of Music, serves as an ex officio, non-voting member of all other committees and sub-committees. Each committee chair accepts agenda items from the appropriate faculty and notifies the committee membership of the agenda at least 24 hours prior to the meeting time.

  1. The Department Committee

    This committee will include all full-time faculty members, faculty associates, staff, and one student representative.

  2. The Faculty Committee

    This committee will include all full-time faculty members, interested faculty associates, and one student representative.

  3. The Performance Studies Committee
    1. Sub-committee of Wind and Percussion Applied and Ensemble Faculty
    2. Sub-committee of Vocal and Choral Applied and Ensemble Faculty
    3. Sub-committee of Keyboard, String, and Orchestral Applied and Ensemble Faculty

    This committee and its sub-committees will give advice and make recommendations to the chair and to the Faculty Committee, concerning curricular issues and scheduling relative to each appropriate area.

  4. The Academic Studies Committee
    1. Sub-committee of Graduate faculty
    2. Sub-committee of Music Education faculty
    3. Sub-committee of Music Theory and Music History/Literature faculty

    This committee and its sub-committees will give advice and make recommendations to the chair and to the Faculty Committee, concerning curricular issues and scheduling relative to each appropriate area.

  5. The Promotion, Tenure, and Review Committee
    1. The Department of Music Promotion, Tenure, and Review Committee will consist of five tenured faculty, elected annually by the bargaining unit members in the department, all of whom will be voting members. All members of the PT&R committee must be in the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.
    2. The Department of Music Promotion, Tenure, and Review Committee will be chaired by the Chair of the Department of Music, who will be an ex officio, non-voting member of the committee.
  6. The Faculty Development Committee
    1. The Faculty Development Committee will consist of 3 elected members of the Bargaining Unit faculty.
    2. The Faculty Development Committee will make a recommendation to the chair of the Department of Music for any faculty member seeking professional development leave.
    3. The Faculty Development Committee will meet with individual faculty as needed to make recommendations concerning ways to help these individuals improve areas of weakness
  7. Special Committees
    1. Honors Committee
    2. Other Ad Hoc committees deemed necessary for the smooth and efficient running of the Department of Music

Elections

The elections of music faculty members to serve on departmental committees, and as departmental representatives for various committees, including the Liberal Arts Senate, will be held at the first meeting of the Faculty Committee each year.

Section IIIProcedures by which Bargaining Unit Faculty give advice and make recommendations on items not covered under the committee structure listed above.

Faculty Appointment, Reappointment and Dismissal

Faculty Appointment: A Search Committee, appointed by the Chair of the Department and consisting of at least 75% Bargaining Unit Faculty Members, will review candidate applications and recommend candidates to interview. A component of the interview process will involve an opportunity for the non-committee bargaining unit members to interview the candidates and provide input to the committee. After the last interview for a faculty position, the search committee, utilizing input received from all departmental constituencies, will present recommendations to the department chair.

Faculty Reappointment: Faculty reappointment from an outside department to this department will only occur after the recommendation of the departmental faculty is gathered at a departmental meeting. This recommendation will be presented to the Chair of the Department with the reason for the recommendation.

Faculty Dismissal: The dismissal of probationary tenure-track faculty will be made by the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts in consultation with the Chair of the Department of Music and the Departmental PT&R committee.

Promotion and Tenure: Faculty members desiring consideration of promotion and/or tenure will notify the chair in writing before the seventh (7th) day after the start of the fall term each year. The Chair of the Department of Music will announce at the first meeting of the Faculty Committee, the names of those members of the bargaining unit faculty who will be submitting materials for promotion or tenure.

Professional Development and Mentoring of New Faculty

New Faculty Mentoring

Each new full-time faculty member in the Department of Music will be assigned a faculty mentor from among the full-time bargaining unit faculty. The faculty mentor will be assigned by the Chair of the Department. The mentor will meet regularly with the new faculty member, at least throughout the new faculty’s first year, to help the new faculty member become familiar with the policies and procedures of the Department of Music, the College of Liberal Arts, and Wright State University, and to offer assistance with teaching, scholarship, and service.

Professional Development for areas of concern

Should the Department Promotion Tenure and Review Committee or the Department Chair identify an area in which a faculty member needs to improve, the Department Chair, and/or the PT&R Committee will meet with the faculty member to discuss the problem and identify methods by which the faculty member may improve in this area. Such methods might include: meeting with another faculty who has demonstrated excellence in the area of concern or meeting with the Faculty Development Committee to discuss other development options.

Teaching Assignments and Class Schedules, Including Summer and Overloads

Annually each full-time faculty will submit a Faculty Activity Plan to the Chair of the Department. This activity plan will include the faculty member’s recommended plan for scholarship and service for the upcoming year and the faculty member’s input and suggestion for their teaching assignment.

Faculty Involvement in the Review of Chairs: In accordance with the CBA, the faculty will notify the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts as to its recommendations of procedures to be used to evaluate the chair of the department of Music.

Section IV. Procedures and Criteria for Annual Evaluation of Faculty

PROCEDURE

Submission of Materials for Annual Evaluation. Faculty will submit a summary of their accomplishments in Teaching, Scholarship and Service for the preceding calendar year to their department chair and their PT&R committee (if being reviewed in that year). The faculty member must submit evidence of successful teaching beyond syllabi and final exams to the Department PT&R Committee for peer evaluation.

Peer Evaluation of Teaching. The Departmental PT&R committee will serve as the Peer Review Committee. The Committee will review materials submitted by faculty members and rate them according the criteria noted below. The department PT&R Committee will present a written summary of each faculty member’s teaching and a recommended integer rating to both the faculty member and the department chair prior to the chair’s annual evaluation of faculty. The written peer review statements should include an account of the evidence that was used to arrive at the evaluation.

Peer Evaluation of Teaching will be conducted for tenured Assistant Professors and Associate Professors in the years the faculty member is receiving the review for progress toward promotion to the next rank.

The Peer evaluation of Teaching for Professors must occur at least once every three years.

Evidence of Teaching Effectiveness, for faculty members, will be examined by the peer review committee and the Department Chair, and may include, but is not limited to, the following: student evaluations; syllabi, exams, assignments, handouts, and other course materials; student preparation in upper levels of sequenced courses; student work seen in sophomore reviews, board exams, recitals, concerts or senior papers; unsolicited testimonials; student interviews; consultation with other faculty members; class observation; utilization of services offered by the Center for Teaching and Learning; and teaching awards.

Annual Evaluation. Annual evaluations should recognize faculty for their successes in diverse areas of their professional lives. Thus, in some years, teaching, scholarship, or service may be weighted more highly than others. The Music Department adopts the following standard of percentages for weighting each of the three professional areas of teaching, scholarship, and service.

Relative Weights For Teaching, Scholarship and Service (the three percentages must add up to 100%

  1. Teaching: 25-50%
  2. Scholarship: 25-50%
  3. Service: 25-50%

Department Chair will evaluate each area of each faculty member’s professional activity and assign an integer to that area, using 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 different weighting from that defined above in any of the following situations:

  • The faculty member has work assignments that differ from those of other faculty.
  • The Chair is imposing discipline pursuant to the contract.
  • The Chair is acting to correct a pattern of substandard performance extending for

more than one year.

Faculty will review the integers assigned for annual evaluation by the department chair and the reasons given for their assignment. Faculty members who agree with the evaluation will sign a copy of the evaluation and return it to the department chair. Faculty who disagree with the evaluation, may prepare a rebuttal, which should be submitted to the chair. This rebuttal must be attached to the evaluation (per contract) and forwarded to all entities who will see the annual evaluation.

CRITERIA

Teaching. Teaching includes, but is not limited to, the development of course materials, presentation of course content, classroom management, evaluation of students, mentoring students, supervising theses independent studies and student performances, course revision and development, maintaining currency in one’s teaching field, and establishing teaching range and flexibility. It is evaluated using the data listed under peer evaluation.

Note:

  1. 1For ensemble directors one performance per ensemble done as a direct result of rehearsals during each quarter, will be counted as teaching and not as scholarship.
  2. Student achievement will be assessed through the level and improvement of student’s solo, ensemble, and academic performance, as appropriate.

RATING SYSTEM

To receive a score of 1 (Adequate) in teaching, a faculty member must teach a course load effectively.

To receive a score of 2 (Meritorious) in teaching, a faculty member must teach a course load effectively, and perform the following:

  • Show significant evidence of success in teaching
  • Perform other teaching-related functions effectively and responsibly as requested; e.g. advise honors students, supervise master's theses/projects/recitals, serve on thesis/project/recital committees, work with independent-study students, or the equivalent.

To receive a score of 3 (Outstanding) in teaching, a faculty member must teach a course load effectively and perform all three of the following well or two of the three with distinction:

  • Show clear and convincing evidence of special commitment to and outstanding success in teaching , or the equivalent
  • Perform other teaching-related functions effectively and responsibly as requested; e.g. advise honors students, master's theses/projects/recitals, serve on thesis/project/recital committees, work with independent-study students, or the equivalent
  • Develop new courses or significantly revise existing course content, pedagogy, or technology in a meaningful way, or the equivalent

To receive a score of 4 (Extraordinary) in teaching, a faculty member must teach a course load effectively and perform all four of the following well or three of the four with distinction:

  • Show clear and convincing evidence of special commitment to and outstanding success in teaching , or the equivalent
  • Perform other teaching-related functions as requested; e.g. advise honors students and master's theses/projects/recitals, serve on thesis/project/recital committees, work with independent-study students, or the equivalent, all with outstanding success
  • Develop new courses or significantly revise existing course content, pedagogy, or technology in a meaningful way, or the equivalent
  • Take a leadership role in the development and support of the teaching of other department faculty (especially of bargaining-unit faculty), e.g. by giving classes on pedagogical issues, by leading the way and helping others with classroom technology, by mentoring faculty who may be struggling with their teaching, by developing on-line courses that meet department needs and standards, or the equivalent

A score of 0 (Unsatisfactory) in teaching will be given to any faculty member who does not satisfy the requirements for an Adequate evaluation or who does not provide the Chair the evidence required for the Chair's evaluation. Symptoms of Unsatisfactory teaching performance may include (but are not limited to)

  • missed classes (without informing the department or without adequate explanation)
  • persistent and justified student complaints
  • erratic classroom behavior
  • failure to keep appropriate office hours and otherwise be available to students and advisees
  • failure or refusal to provide the Chair contract-requiredinformation, materials, or notification that are teaching related
  • failure to communicate effectively with students
  • refusal to teach assigned courses in the faculty member's field
  • refusal to teach standard assigned writing and general-education courses for which department faculty are normally responsible
  • failure to respond appropriately to reasonable student questions or complaints
  • irresponsible or unprofessional conduct with or in the presence of students in a university setting

Behaviors like those described may result in an evaluation of Unsatisfactory (if they are frequent and characteristic) or a lowered evaluation (from Meritorious to Adequate, for example).

Scholarship. Scholarship activities include, but are not limited to, activities listed in Appendix A.

RATING SYSTEM

To receive a rating of EXTRAORDINARY or “4”, a faculty member must be awarded by the Department Chair a total of 60 points as defined by the list given in Appendix A.

To receive a rating of OUTSTANDING or “3”, a faculty member must be awarded by the Department Chair a total of 40-59 points as defined by the list given in Appendix A.

To receive a rating of MERITORIOUS or “2”, a faculty member must be awarded by the Department Chair a total of 20-39 points as defined by the list given in Appendix A.

To receive a rating of ADEQUATE or “1”, a faculty member must be awarded by the Department Chair a total of 10-19 points as defined by the list given in Appendix A.

To receive a rating of UNSATISFACTORY or “0”, a faculty member must be awarded by the Department Chair a total of less than 10 points as defined by the list given in Appendix A.

Service. Service can include, but is not be limited to, the following activities: Timely submission of reports, paperwork or other assignments; academic and professional student advising; holding office in professional societies, chairing panels and being a discussant at professional conferences; institutional service, such as program administration, department, college or university committee service, special projects, recruitment, retention or alumni activities; community service such as holding a leadership role in civic and public organizations, guest lecturing at community events, jurying contests, or volunteering at public schools or service related performances not counted as scholarship or teaching.

RATING SYSTEM

It is expected that a faculty member in the Department of Music will engage in departmental service and obligations such as:

  • Active attendance and participation in regular faculty and departmental committee meetings
  • Submission of reports, paperwork, and other assignments in a timely manner
  • Service as an academic advisor to departmental students
  • Fulfillment of miscellaneous duties appropriate to their teaching assignment

In addition:

To receive a rating of EXTRAORDINARY or “4”, a faculty member must demonstrate significant leadership with tangible outcomes, such as extensive service on College or University committees, or holding office in a national professional society, or the equivalent (in addition to the Department Service obligations listed above under “Rating System”).

To receive a rating of OUTSTANDING or “3”, a faculty member must perform significant service with tangible outcomes on three other committees or projects described above, or the equivalent (in addition to the Department Service obligations listed above under “Rating System”).

To receive a rating of MERITORIOUS or “2”, a faculty member must perform sustained contributions to at least two other committees or projects described above or the equivalent. (in addition to the Department Service obligations listed above under “Rating System”)

To receive a rating of ADEQUATE or “1”, a faculty member’s performance in the standard activities listed above under “Rating System” must be satisfactory.

To receive a rating of UNSATISFACTORY or “0”, there would have to be minimal evidence of service as defined above.

Faculty with deficiencies in the expected service activities shall have their service rating lowered up to three levels even if their other accomplishments are "extraordinary." The department chair may request or the PT&R Committee may volunteer recommendations regarding whether a bargaining unit faculty member's expected service was deficient and to what degree.

Section V. Criteria and Procedures for Promotion and Tenure of Departmental Faculty

General Statements:

In addition to the normal review of untenured faculty members mandated by the CBA, the Department of Music lists the following requirements.

  1. In the second and fourth years of service at Wright State University, non-tenured faculty members will submit all materials to the Department PT&R Committee in the “tenure” format. The Department PT&R Committee will review these materials and make recommendations to the faculty members. These recommendations will include, but not be limited to, ways to improve the format of the promotion/tenure document.
  2. As part of the second and fourth year reviews of untenured faculty members, the faculty members will meet individually with the Department PT&R Committee to discuss the document and the faculty member’s progress toward promotion and tenure.
  3. In making recommendations regarding promotion and tenure, a faculty member’s teaching, scholarship, and service will be limited to activities and evaluations done while employed at Wright State University, except in cases where the following conditions apply, are approved by the PT&R Committee, the Department Chair, and the Dean and explicitly stated in the offer letter.
    1. High Quality work has been demonstrated in a previous full-time college or university position, or.
    2. High Quality work has been demonstrated in a professional musical position related to the current position.
  4. A faculty member may elect to apply for tenure and promotion earlier than the last year of the probationary period, provided the minimum requirements in teaching/scholarship/service have been met.
  5. External letters of evaluation must deal solely with scholarship completed while employed at Wright State University. The letters will be used to assess the faculty member’s scholarship as compared to the standards listed for promotion to Associate Professor or Professor.

Promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure:

Teaching

  1. Annual peer evaluation consistently indicates the faculty member is successful in teaching
  2. The faculty member has demonstrated excellence in teaching through such indicators as:

    student evaluation forms; syllabi, exams, assignments, handouts, and other course materials; student preparation in upper levels of sequenced courses; student work seen in sophomore reviews, board exams, recitals, concerts or senior papers; unsolicited testimonials; student interviews; consultation with other faculty members; class observation; utilization of services offered by the Center for Teaching and Learning; and teaching awards.

  3. Review of course materials indicates consistent high-quality

Scholarship

In order to be promoted to the rank of Associate Professor, a music faculty member must have demonstrated and carried out sustained scholarly activities such as those listed in Appendix A. Normally the successful candidate will have amassed a cumulative total of at least 180 points from activities listed in Appendix A; however, simply amassing points is not sufficient for promotionThe cumulative level of these activities must be of high quality, as determined by: the Department Chair, Departmental PT&R Committee, and the external letters of evaluation when compared to similar activities at NASM member institutions which are of similar size and mission to Wright State University. The cumulative progress reports by the PT&R committee and the Department Chair will provide independent statements about points and quality to date.

In addition:

Most of the required scholarship activities must be related to:

  1. The faculty member’s area of assignment as determined at the time of hire.

    Or

  2. The faculty member’s area of assignment as determined by mutual agreement of the faculty member and the Department Chair, and confirmed in writing.

Service

The candidate for promotion to Associate Professor with tenure must show that he or she has performed appropriate service successfully and effectively. Success in service should include at a minimum the following, or their clear equivalents:

  • Responding to requests for activity reports, workload plans, etc. in a timely fashion
  • Participating regularly in department faculty meetings
  • Attending and participating in commencement ceremonies regularly as required by the contract
  • Serving effectively on two or more service-intensive department committees
  • Serving, effectively on two or more other department committees
  • Serving effectively on one or more college or university committees or otherwise demonstrating involvement in university governance outside the department

Promotion to Professor with Tenure

For promotion to the rank of Full Professor with Tenure the activities and criteria for Associate Professor, must not only continue but lead to recognition for the faculty member’s status as a leader in the academic community and whose presence on the faculty brings prestige and a reputation for academic excellence to the university.

Teaching

  1. Annual peer evaluation consistently indicates the faculty member’s exemplary success in teaching
  2. The faculty member has demonstrated exemplary teaching through such indicators as:

    student evaluation forms; exit interviews; syllabi, exams, assignments, handouts, and other course materials; student preparation in upper levels of sequenced courses; student work seen in sophomore reviews, board exams, recitals, concerts or senior papers; unsolicited testimonials; student interviews; consultation with other faculty members; class observation; utilization of services offered by the Center for Teaching and Learning; and teaching awards.

  3. Review of course materials indicates consistent high-quality

Scholarship

In order to be promoted to the rank of Professor, a music faculty member must have demonstrated and carried out continuous scholarly activities such as those listed in Appendix A. Normally the successful candidate will have amassed a cumulative total of at least 300 points (since the promotion to Associate professor) from activities listed in Appendix A; however, simply amassing points is not sufficient for promotion. The cumulative level of these activities must be of significantly high quality as determined by the Department Chair, Departmental PT&R Committee, and the external letters of evaluation when compared to similar activities at NASM member institutions which are of similar size and mission to Wright State University. The cumulative progress reports by the PT&R committee and the Department Chair will provide independent statements about points and quality to date.

In addition:

Most of the required scholarship activities must be related to:

  1. The faculty member’s area of assignment as determined at the time of hire.

    Or

  2. The faculty member’s area of assignment as determined by mutual agreement of the faculty member and the Department Chair, and confirmed in writing.

Service

To be eligible for promotion to Professor a faculty member must show that in the area of service he or she has accomplished the following, or their equivalents:

  • Chaired several important department, college, and/or university committees with significant responsibilities
  • Taken a leadership role in some crucial aspect of university work, e.g. in assisting with a search, in evaluating required texts for a course, in leading an assessment activity for the department or the university, in developing a student-centered activity, or the equivalent
  • Performed service for professional organization(s) locally, regionally, or nationally
  • Performed community service related to professional expertise

Appendix A. Activities for Annual Evaluation and Promotion and Tenure

Scholarship

Under the appropriate items below, each bargaining unit faculty member will list all professional activities completed during the calendar year, and will enter a recommended number of points for each of the activities in the spaces provided at the left margin.

Any scholarship item with a variable range of points requires a brief rationale without which it will be counted at the minimum level. The faculty member must describe how the work is related to his or her area of assignment and explain the numbers suggested by making reference to the following criteria:

  1. Significance of the work
  2. Quantity of the work
  3. Quality of the work
  4. Involvement of peers

The Department Chair and the PT&R Committee will independently review the scholarship points suggested by each faculty member. If either changes the points, they will explain the rationale with the faculty member prior to making the alteration.

For the Annual Evaluation, the final decision on the exact number of points received in each area will be determined by the Department Chair.

A. Professional Development

  1. Held current membership in professional organization (.5 point each, 2 points maximum)
  2. Attended scholarly, pedagogical, or technological workshops or presentations at WSU (.5 point each, 4 points maximum)
  3. Attended workshops, summer institutes, short courses, master classes, continuing private study, etc. other than at WSU (.5–4 points each, 4 points maximum)
  4. Attended a professional conference at WSU (.5 point each, 1 point maximum)
  5. Attended a professional conference, other than at WSU, on the state level (1 point each, 1 point maximum)
  6. Attended a major regional or national professional conference not held at WSU (2 points each, 2 points maximum)
  7. Attend a major international professional conference not held at WSU (3 points each, 3 points maximum)

B. Research and Artistry (Scholarly and Creative activities)

Presentations

  1. Presentation or performance at a professional state conference (2-4 points each, 4 points maximum)
  2. Presentation or performance at a professional regional conference (3-4 points each, 4 points maximum)
  3. Presentation or performance at a professional national conference (4-6 points each, 6 points maximum)
  4. Presentation or performance at a professional internationalconference (6-8 points each, 8 points maximum)
  5. Served on a panel at WSU (.5 point each, 1 point maximum)
  6. Served on a panel other than at WSU (1 point each, 2 points maximum)

    Publications

  7. Published a refereed article or book chapter (8-16 points each, 32points maximum)
  8. Published an article in a non-refereed publication (4-8 points each, 8 points maximum)
  9. Published program notes or concert reviews (1 point each program, 4 points maximum)
  10. Published a monograph or monograph-length study (12 points each, 24 points maximum)Published a scholarly book (16-48 points each, 48 points maximum)
  11. Published a new edition of a book (8 points each, 16 points maximum)
  12. Published a review of a book or recording in a refereed publication (2 point each, 8 points maximum)
  13. Published a dictionary or encyclopedia entry (4-10 points each, 20 points maximum)
  14. Created a musical or media work that was published (2-8 points, 16 points maximum
  15. Served as editor of a book or professional journal (8 points each, 16 points maximum)
  16. Served as a referee for a professional article (2 point per submission refereed, 4 points maximum)
  17. Served as a referee for a book (4 points each, 8 points maximum)
  18. Served as a referee or evaluator for a book proposal (1 point each, 4 points maximum)
  19. Published a comment, note, or letter to the editor in a professional publication (1 point each, 2 point maximum)

    Performances

    For all items in this category, use the number of points indicated for the first performance of a piece or program. For all subsequent performances of essentially the same program or repertoire, enter one-half the number of points indicated. For any performance item of special significance, you may include the details under “E. Scholarship Activities of Special Significance” below.

  20. Performed in a WSU ensemble performance (1 point each, 4 points maximum)
  21. Performed in an ensemble in a performance other than at WSU (1 point each, 8 points maximum)
  22. Conducted a non- WSU ensemble performance (2 points each, 8 points maximum)
  23. Conducted an off-campus WSU ensemble performance concert tour (8-12 points each, 12 points maximum)
  24. Performed as a soloist in an WSU performance (3 points each, 6 points maximum)
  25. Performed a solo recital at WSU performance (3-6 points each, 6 points maximum)
  26. Performed in a collaborative recital at WSU (faculty woodwind and brass quintets, string quartet, and/or other chamber groups) (3-4 points, 8 points maximum)
  27. Performed in a collaborative recital other than at WSU (faculty woodwind and brass quintets, string quartet, and/or other chamber groups) (3-4 points, 8 points maximum)
  28. 2Performed as a soloist in a performance other than at WSU (4 points each, 8 points maximum)
  29. Prepared an ensemble for a collaborative performance directed by another conductor (1 point each, 4 points maximum)
  30. Performed on a collaborative or solo released CD* as a member of an ensemble (2-4 points each, 8 points maximum)

    *A released CD is a major recording sold commercially or distributed over a large potential audience outside of the performance audience and performers.

  31. Performed on a collaborative or solo released CD* as a soloist, conductor, or composer (3-6 points each, 12 points maximum)

    *A released CD is a major recording sold commercially or distributed over a large potential audience outside of the performance audience and performers.

  32. Created a musical or media work that was given its first performance (3-6 points, 12 points maximum)
  33. Directed a theatrical or musical theatre piece outside the department (2-4 points, 12 points maximum)

    Technology

  34. Software development and/or implementation (1 – 4 points, 4 points maximum)
  35. Hardware development and/or implementation (1 – 4 points, 4 points maximum)
  36. Production and/or engineering of media works (1 – 4 points,4 points maximum)

C. Professional Recognition

  1. Received a non- WSU award, grant, commission, fellowship, prize, honorable mention, appointment as a visiting scholar or artist, or corporate sponsorship (1-4 points, 8 points maximum)
  2. Received a WSU award or grant (1-4 points, 4 points maximum)
  3. Received a review in a professional publication for a performance, recording, or publication (1 point, 4 points maximum)
  4. Citation count (1 point per publication, 4 points maximum)
  5. Post-premiere performances or broadcast of a composition or media work (1-2 points, 8 points maximum)
  6. Winning a competition (1-4 points, 4 points maximum)
  7. Guest conducted at a district or state music festival (1 point, 2 points maximum)
  8. Guest conducted at an all-state festival or institution of higher learning (4 points, 8 points maximum)
  9. Served on a grant review panel (1 point each, 2 points maximum)
  10. Prepared internal grant application (.5 point each, 2 points maximum
  11. Prepared external grant application (1-2 points each, 4 points maximum)

D. Other Scholarship Activities

  1. Activities other than the specific items listed above. Include a brief description. (.5-24 points each activity, 24 points maximum) Points assigned should be comparable to other listed activities of similar significance.

E. Scholarship Activities of Special Significance

  1. Activities already noted above that are of special significance. Identify each entry by its related category and item number (e.g. Publications 16), and include a brief rationale. (1-8 points each activity, 8 points maximum)

Note: These points are in addition to the points awarded for each category above, to allow for special significance of various activities.

F. Ongoing Research or Creative Activity

  1. Scholarly or creative work, both theoretical and applied (1-20 points each activity, 20 points maximum). Specify the year that an item was first reported; don’t report the same item for more than five years.

[ ] SCHOLARSHIP TOTAL