Approved: May 28, 2003

Amended: February 20, 2006

Amended: May 17, 2013

I. Membership

A. Faculty Ranks and Definitions

The Sociology and Anthropology faculty will include full-time faculty at some or all of the following ranks: Instructor, Lecturer, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor. Unless otherwise specified, references to “faculty” in these bylaws refer to full-time faculty other than the department chair.

B. Voting membership

The voting membership of the department includes all its full-time faculty, excluding the Chair. Each full-time Instructor, Lecturer, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor is entitled to one vote, except on issues reserved exclusively for the bargaining-unit faculty.

C. Adjunct Faculty

The Sociology and Anthropology faculty may include part-time faculty who teach a variety of courses. Adjunct faculty members are not voting members of the department. They are, however, invited to attend all official department functions and open meetings.

D. Emeritus Faculty

Retired faculty who have been granted emeritus status continue to be affiliated with the department and may teach upon occasion. Emeritus faculty are not voting members of the department, but are invited to attend all official departmental functions and open meetings.

E. Staff

The Department of Sociology & Anthropology may include a number of support staff, among them classified staff, who are responsible for managing the department office. Staff personnel are not voting members of the department, but may be invited to attend open meetings and are invited to attend all official departmental functions.

II. Organization

A. Meetings

The department faculty will use department meetings to make recommendations for decision-making. All recommendations will be made by simple majority vote.

B. Calling Meetings

There shall normally be at least two meetings of the faculty each semester (excluding summer), called by the Chair of the department. The Chair can also call additional meetings as necessary. A meeting will also be called when four voting members of the department faculty request it.

An agenda for each meeting will be circulated by the Chair at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. Faculty may suggest agenda items to the Chair before the agenda is circulated. Items can be added to the agenda by departmental vote at a meeting or by petition of a majority of the faculty. A quorum is defined as a majority of the bargaining unit faculty in the department. Written minutes shall be kept of each meeting.

Voting will be by open response except where otherwise stated in these bylaws, or a faculty member requests that the voting on a particular issue be by secret ballot.

C. Committees

Departmental Committees work to further the business of the department. Their nature and membership are specified below. If members cannot serve their entire terms, new members can be elected or appointed, as is appropriate to the basis for their original formulation.

  1. Faculty Governance Representatives

    Consistent with the College bylaws, the department faculty will be represented in the College Senate by a member chosen by majority vote for a two-year term. The department faculty will provide faculty to serve in the appropriate constituency slots in College and University committees.

  2. Promotion and Tenure Committee
    1. Membership

      The membership of this committee shall be the tenured bargaining-unit members of the department at the rank of Associate Professor or higher and the department Chair as a non-voting member. The chair of the committee shall be annually elected by its membership. If there are not three tenured bargaining-unit faculty eligible to vote, then one or more additional tenured, bargaining-unit Associate or full Professors from other departments will be selected by the Promotion and Tenure Committee, after it has received recommendations from the candidate(s).

    2. Duties

      The Promotion and Tenure Committee will evaluate candidates for promotion and tenure, and submit a written recommendation on each case using the criteria in Section V. It will provide an annual statement to each untenured member on his/her progress toward promotion and tenure. It will provide statements as required to each tenured Assistant and Associate Professor on his/her progress toward promotion. The committee will arrange with the Faculty Development Committee for the annual peer evaluation of teaching for non-tenured bargaining unit faculty at least once each year. The Committee, the department Chair, and the individual who is reviewed will have copies of the peer evaluation reports. The Chair will use them in his/her annual evaluation, while the Committee will use them in its statement of progress toward promotion and tenure.

  3. Faculty Development Committee
    1. Membership

      The Faculty Development Committee shall be composed of three tenured bargaining-unit faculty, including at least one sociologist and at least one anthropologist. Members are elected annually at the last scheduled department meeting of the academic year, and members shall elect their own committee chair.

    2. Duties
      • The Faculty Development Committee shall evaluate faculty requests for Professional Development Leaves.
      • The Faculty Development Committee will appoint mentors for newly-hired bargaining-unit faculty.
      • If the Promotion and Tenure Committee recommends that a faculty member improve his/her teaching, or if peer reviews indicate that improvement is needed, the Faculty Development Committee will work with the faculty member to effect improvements.
      • Members of the Faculty Development Committee will conduct peer reviews of teaching of all untenured bargaining unit faculty members. The peer review will include examination of course syllabi, tests and other available materials. If the review of these materials indicates that there are significant problems in teaching, then classroom visits by one or more members of the Faculty Development Committee will be arranged.
  4. Anthropology Curriculum Committee
    1. Membership

      The Anthropology Curriculum Committee shall be composed of all Anthropology faculty. A committee chair shall be elected annually by the members.

    2. Duties

      The committee makes recommendations concerning curricular issues, including scheduling, new courses, and program revisions

  5. Sociology Curriculum Committee
    1. Membership

      The Sociology Curriculum Committee shall be composed of three members of the Sociology faculty, each of whom serve two years, with one member serving with a term that expires in a year different from the other two. A committee chair will be elected annually by the committee members. Committee members are elected at the last scheduled faculty meeting of the academic year.

    2. Duties

      The committee makes recommendations concerning curricular issues, including scheduling, new and revised courses, and program revisions.

  6. Student Affairs Committee
    1. Membershiphe Student Affairs Committee is composed of one Sociologist and one Anthropologist, who are elected annually at the last scheduled faculty meeting of the academic year.
    2. Duties

      The Student Affairs Committee makes recommendations concerning the distribution of scholarship funds and the naming of alumni who may be honored by departmental awards, collects information to be disseminated in the department newsletter, and hears student petitions.

  7. Search Committee
    1. Membership

      A Search Committee is formed when an opening in the faculty ranks exists. It will include at least three bargaining-unit members who are elected at a department faculty meeting. For an Anthropology opening, at least two Anthropologists will be asked to serve. For a Sociology opening, at least two Sociologists will be asked to serve.

    2. Duties

      The Search Committee recommends a position description to the Chair and it assists with the processing of all Affirmative Action documents related to the search. It recommends to the Chair and to faculty at a departmental meeting a short list of candidates it regards as most highly-qualified for the open position. The faculty then recommends to the Chair a short list of candidates, of a length specified by the Chair, to be invited to the campus for interviews. Following interviews, the faculty and the search committee recommend a ranking of the candidates to the Chair and Dean

  8. Ad Hoc Committees

    Ad hoc Committees may be formed for specific tasks or to fulfill specific needs. These committees will be formed by the Chair or the bargaining unit faculty, and will make recommendations concerning their task or the need they address to the faculty and/or the Chair, as indicated when the committee is formed.

III. Summer Teaching Formula

Faculty will make their availability to teach in the summer known to the Chair each year.

Schedule permitting, the department Chair shall offer one course to each bargaining-unit faculty member in an order of rotation based on rank, time in rank, and length of service at Wright State within each major (anthropology or sociology). A second course will then be offered to each bargaining-unit faculty member, in rotation and within each major, to as many faculty as can be accommodated. Faculty who are denied a summer teaching opportunity or who do not choose to teach in the summer go to the top of the list within their major the following summer.

IV. Annual Evaluation

The department Chair will annually evaluate all bargaining unit faculty members following the procedures outlined in the Contract (Agreement between Wright State University and the Wright State University Chapter of the American Association of University Professors).

Faculty will annually submit a Faculty Activity Report and updated Curriculum Vitae to the Chair. They will also provide course syllabi, indications of teaching success, copies of any publications or other scholarly materials (e.g. papers presented) claimed for that year, and any other materials they desire.

The Department Chair will evaluate each area of each faculty member's professional activity and assign an integer to that area based on the criteria stated below. The Chair will then assign to each area a percentage from the following ranges that gives the faculty member the maximum possible overall average and that adds up to 100%.

Teaching: weights may range from 40% to 60%

Scholarship: weights may range from 20% to 50%

Service: weights may range from 10% to 40%

The Chair may assign different weightings from that defined above in any of the following situations:

  • The faculty member has work assignments that differ from those of other bargaining unit faculty
  • The Chair is imposing discipline pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement
  • The Chair is acting to correct a pattern of substandard performance extending for more than one year

A. Evaluation of Teaching

A score of 0 (Unsatisfactory) in teaching will be given to any faculty member who does not satisfy the requirements for an Adequate evaluation as specified below. Indicators of “unsatisfactory” teaching performance may include (but are not limited to):

  • missed classes (without informing the department or without adequate explanation)
  • erratic classroom behavior
  • persistent and valid student complaints
  • missed advising appointments
  • failure to keep appropriate office hours
  • failure to communicate 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 the department is 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 (if they are frequent and characteristic) will result in an evaluation of “unsatisfactory” or a lowered evaluation (e.g. from “meritorious” to “adequate”).

To receive a score of 1 (Adequate) in teaching, a faculty member must teach an assigned course load and advise students in a satisfactory manner, absent a clear pattern of symptoms such as those noted in the category of Unsatisfactory (above).

To receive a score of 2 (Meritorious) in teaching, a faculty member must effectively teach an assigned course load and effectively advise students, as demonstrated in student evaluations and peer assessments (where available).

To receive a score of 3 (Outstanding) in teaching, a faculty member must meet all the qualifications for a “meritorious” rating, and perform other teaching-related functions effectively and responsibly as requested (e.g. advise honors students, supervise masters’ theses or projects, serve on masters’ committees, work with independent study students).

To receive a score of 4 (Extraordinary) in teaching, a faculty member must exhibit all of the qualifications for an “outstanding” rating, and either show evidence of recognition by students and peers of unusual teaching success in all evaluated courses, or take a leadership role in the development and support of the teaching of other department faculty (especially bargaining-unit faculty), or both.

Evidence for the Evaluation of Teaching

Two types of teaching evaluations are required of all untenured bargaining-unit faculty: peer evaluations and student evaluations.

  • Peer evaluations are performed by members of the Faculty Development Committee, and are submitted to that committee, the individual who is reviewed, and the Department Chair.
  • Student evaluations are written by students for at least one section of each different course offered by faculty during the year. The Contract specifies what portions of evaluations will be sent to the Department Chair.

Student and peer evaluations alone can support claims of “adequate” or “meritorious” teaching. Faculty who wish to make a case for “Outstanding” or “Extraordinary” teaching effectiveness should submit additional evidence to the department Chair.

B. Evaluation of Scholarship

Collaborative scholarship normally requires as much effort as single-author scholarship, and should be evaluated accordingly.

To receive a score of 1 (Adequate) in scholarship, a faculty member must

  • keep current with scholarship in an appropriate professional field
  • demonstrate that currency by attending a conference, chairing a panel, delivering local lecture(s) or presentation(s) on ongoing research, engaging in ongoing research and writing, or the equivalent.

To receive a score of 2 (Meritorious) in scholarship, a faculty member must

  • keep current with scholarship in an appropriate professional field
  • demonstrate that currency by attending a conference, chairing a panel, delivering local lecture(s) or presentation(s) on ongoing research, engaging in ongoing research and writing, or the equivalent.
  • Go beyond the demonstration of scholarly competence by delivering a scholarly paper at a significant academic conference, publishing one or more reviews, publishing an article or articles for a reference work, editing an academic series, submitting a scholarly article to a peer-reviewed academic journal, or the equivalent.

To receive a 3 (Outstanding) in scholarship, a faculty member must

  • keep current with scholarship in an appropriate professional field
  • demonstrate that currency by attending a conference, chairing a panel, delivering local lecture(s) or presentation(s) on ongoing research, engaging in ongoing research and writing, or the equivalent.
  • Demonstrate professional originality and independence, for example by publishing an article in a peer-reviewed academic journal, publishing a chapter in a peer-reviewed academic book with a recognized university or academic press, revising and republishing a previously published book or textbook, revising and collecting previously published work in a single volume, or the equivalent.

To receive a 4 (Extraordinary) in scholarship, a faculty member must do at least one of the following fully or some partial combination of at least two of the following, or the equivalent, in addition to otherwise keeping at least an Adequate or Meritorious level of scholarly activity:

  • Publish a peer-reviewed academic book with a recognized university or academic press
  • Publish a professional textbook with a recognized publisher of texts in the appropriate field
  • Publish two or more professional articles in peer-reviewed academic journals
  • Publish two or more chapters in a peer-reviewed edited book or books.

A score of 0 (Unsatisfactory) in scholarship will be given to any faculty member who cannot satisfy the requirements for an Adequate evaluation.

Evidence for the Evaluation of Scholarship

Faculty may claim a work for purposes of merit (above the level of “adequate”) in more than one year. For example, an article or manuscript may be reported in year one as being “in preparation” or “under consideration;” in year two it may be reported as having been “accepted” or “published.” It is useful for faculty to list both in order to establish their ongoing commitment to keeping current with their professional fields.

In support of all claims of merit in scholarship at the “meritorious” level or above, 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 printed copy of the accepted manuscript and the letter of acceptance, or galley proofs of the printed publication
  • For all conference papers: a printed copy of the manuscript

In addition, all faculty may (if they wish) submit a statement describing their research program and publication plans, as a way of placing in context the performance for a given year.

C. Evaluation of Service

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 or initiatives.

Activity including at least the following will be typical of an Adequate level of service and will receive a score of 1:

  • Serve on one or two committees at the department level and/or the college or university level; attend regular department meetings
  • Respond to requests for activity reports, workload plans, etc. in a timely manner

To receive a score of 2 (Meritorious) in service, a faculty member will have met the requirements for an “adequate” rating and will be typically involved in activity that includes at least two of the following:

  • Chair a department committee or serve on two or more department committees or committees at the college or university level, or the equivalent
  • Take a leadership role in some aspect of university work, e.g. assisting with a search, developing a new course, leading an assessment activity for the department or university, developing a student-centered activity, or the equivalent
  • Serve as a reviewer for the purposes of peer evaluation of teaching
  • Perform some community or professional service related to professional expertise.

To receive a score of 3 (Outstanding) in service, a faculty member will maintain an otherwise “meritorious” level of service and perform some activity like the following:

  • Lead a major aspect of the department’s academic life beyond the regular activities of teaching, advising, and service; for example, chair a successful search committee, chair a departmental committee that achieves a significant accomplishment, successfully direct an interdepartmental program, or the equivalent
  • Take a leadership role in an important aspect of college or university governance or organization; for example, chair a committee that rewrites and implements changes in general education or develops a new degree program, take a leadership role in faculty governance, or the equivalent
  • Take a leadership role in a state, regional, national or international professional organization, or function in a central capacity in the publication of a professional journal, or the equivalent.

To receive a score of 4 (Extraordinary) in service, a faculty member must perform some combination of outstanding activities in multiple areas of service; for example, take a major leadership role in the university while heading a state professional organization.

Evidence for the Evaluation of Service

Faculty should submit to the Chair

  • A list of all service activities performed during the year, arranged in order from the most important to the least important
  • A description of all service activities performed that represent special commitment or effort beyond the norm
  • Any testimonial letters received that describe a particular act of service and its effects
  • Any other material that may support a claim of a rating in service above that of “meritorious.”

V. Promotion and Tenure

A. In the Department of Sociology and Anthropology, it is the candidate who is primarily responsible for securing a recommendation for promotion and/or tenure. This responsibility involves completing each of the following actions by the dates specified in the "Promotion and Tenures Schedules" in the CBA

  • Notifying both the department and promotion and tenure committee that the individual seeks such promotion and/or tenure.
  • Submitting to the Promotion and Tenure Committee the names of five recommended external referees who can review the case in a clearly unbiased manner.  A brief biographical overview of the potential referees including their institutional affiliation, rank, and areas of expertise must also be provided. All of this information is typically due on or around March 25th of the calendar year prior to that during which promotion and tenure would be granted by the university.
  • Gathering the necessary documentation to support the case.
  • Submitting to the current Promotion and Tenure Committee chair all materials to be sent to outside reviewers.  This is typically on or around April 22nd.
  • Submitting to the Department Chair the complete P&T document along with other materials required by the CBA.  This is typically on or around September 9th.

B. Criteria for promotion and tenure

  1. A recommendation for promotion and/or tenure must be based on the following criteria regarding teaching, scholarship, and service, and shall take into account letters from outside reviewers.
  2. For promotion to Associate Professor
    1. Teaching

      Over the probationary period the candidate should have compiled a record of consistently effective or steadily improving teaching and advising. By at least the end of the probationary period there should be strong evidence of successful teaching, which normally includes strong student and peer evaluations, and may include other evidence submitted by the candidate. The faculty member must have contributed to the teaching mission of the department.

    2. Scholarship

      A candidate for promotion and tenure should have substantial evidence of a continued program of serious independent scholarship, coupled with proof of peer acceptance by the publication of his/her scholarly work. Published scholarship is necessary for promotion and tenure in the department of Sociology and Anthropology. This scholarship may take many forms, but there must be evidence of an ongoing program of research, presentation of research to scholarly audiences at meetings, submission and publication of work, and professional involvement in the candidate’s discipline. Scholarship submitted as evidence of the candidate’s worthiness for a recommendation of promotion and tenure must include substantial work done while a member of the department of Sociology and Anthropology at Wright State. Although credit is given for research done prior to appointment at Wright State, evidence of ongoing scholarship while at Wright State must be present in the record.

      The general practice in the department is that the publication of four peer-reviewed scholarly articles (at least two of them published while at Wright State University) in well-respected, scholarly journals, or a written (not edited) scholarly book published by a reputable press is needed for promotion and tenure, assuming all other criteria are met. A chapter in a peer-reviewed academic book is normally considered equivalent to a peer-reviewed scholarly article. Collaborative scholarship normally requires as much effort as single-author scholarship, and so co-authored works are generally credited fully to the individual. To ensure that the candidate has established a program of independent scholarship, however, at least two of the four required peer-reviewed works must be single authored.

      Evidence of Successful Scholarship

      The candidate must provide copies of all publications. Works accepted but not yet published must be provided in the form of galley proofs or typescripts with a letter of acceptance.

      The candidate must provide the Promotion and Tenure Committee with a list of five potential outside reviewers qualified to evaluate the quality of his or her work. The Committee will solicit letters from three of these reviewers. If the 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 enough appropriate and available reviewers. The reviewers should be scholars qualified in the candidate’s field, and who were not part of a candidate’s graduate evaluation committees.

      The letters will be used to help gauge the candidate’s contributions to his or her field.

    3. Service

      Candidates for promotion to Associate Professor are neither expected nor encouraged to have extensive involvement in service activities. A demonstrated willingness to participate in and render departmental, college, or university or community service is expected for promotion, but in no case will it substitute for deficiencies in teaching and/or research.

      A candidate for promotion must list service accomplishments on his/her curriculum vitae (required as part of the promotion and tenure document). The candidate may also include any testimonials, solicited or unsolicited, relating to service as part of an appendix to the promotion and tenure document.

      The Department of Sociology and Anthropology will not recommend that a grant of tenure (only) be given without promotion to the rank of Associate Professor.

  3. For promotion to Professor

    Promotion to Professor is the culmination of an academic career, involving excellence in all areas of evaluation. There is no exact time frame for recommendation to this rank. Candidates for Professor should show a consistency of achievement in the three areas outlined below for several years prior to seeking a recommendation from the department.

    1. Teaching

      Professors should not only be excellent teachers, but they should be role models for others in the department. They should have maintained high and appropriate standards in their classes, advised and taught students with great success overall, and taken the lead to develop appropriate and effective teaching materials and, as needed, new and revised courses.

    2. Scholarship

      For recommendation to the rank of Professor, a candidate should present evidence of achievements since his/her promotion to Associate Professor which have been evaluated positively by his/her peers in his/her given field. Evidence should include either (1) the publication of four substantial articles in well-respected refereed journals or (2) a written (not edited) scholarly book published by a reputable press. The candidate should also demonstrate participation at national and/or international conferences, or positive citation by others of his or her published work in books or scholarly publications in major journals, or the award of major research grants. A chapter in a peer-reviewed academic book is normally considered equivalent to a peer-reviewed scholarly article.

      The candidate must provide the Promotion and Tenure Committee with a list of five potential outside reviewers qualified to evaluate the quality of his or her work. The Committee will solicit letters from three of these reviewers. If the 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 enough appropriate and available reviewers. The reviewers should be scholars qualified in the candidate’s field, and who were not part of a candidate’s graduate evaluation committees.

      The letters will be used to help gauge the candidate’s contributions to his or her field.

    3. Service

      A candidate for Professor must show evidence of continuing substantial service on behalf of the university, such as faculty governance, as a committee chair, or as a member of the Faculty Senate. Mentoring and leadership of student organizations over a long period of time is another indicator of continuing substantial service. The service record should document specific accomplishments in service roles.

      Work in the community at large, or for the individual’s discipline, is also an important required aspect of service for Professors. Examples may include leadership roles on boards of local organizations, professional organizations, journal editorial boards, and contributions to successful community initiatives.

VI. Amendments

Amendments to these bylaws must be approved by a majority of the bargaining-unit faculty members of the Department of Sociology and Anthropology, by the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts, and by the Faculty Governance Committee. Amendments must be introduced in written form at a regular faculty meeting and voted on at a subsequent regular faculty meeting.