Wright State University - College & Department Bylaws

The Department Bylaws specify procedures for the participation of appropriate Bargaining Unit Faculty (BUF) in the governance of the HPR (Health, Physical Education and Recreation) Department in accordance with the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between the American Association of University Professors / Wright State University Chapter (AAUP/WSU) andWright State University.

The Department faculty seek to promote and sustain teaching, service, and scholarship and to participate fully in the governance of the Department, College, and University. Bargaining Unit Faculty rights and responsibilities are given within the Collective Bargaining Agreement, the College Bylaws, and these Department Bylaws.

The Department Bylaws are subject to and consistent with the Bylaws of the College and the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) and may be amended in accordance with the current CBA.

1.4.1 AAUP/WSU

The American Association of University Professors / Wright State University Chapter.

1.4.2 BUF - Bargaining Unit Faculty

Full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty in the HPR department as defined by CBA.

1.4.3 CBA - Collective Bargaining Agreement.

The current Agreement between Wright State University and the Wright State University Chapter of the American Association of University Professors.

1.4.4 Chair

Chair refers to the Chairperson of the HPR Department.

1.4.5 College or CEHS

College refers to the College of Education and Human Services (CEHS)

1.4.6 Dean

Dean refers to the Dean of the College of Education and Human Services

1.4.7 Department or HPR

The Department of Health, Physical Education and Recreation (HPR) in the College of Education and Human Services (CEHS).

1.4.8 Department Faculty

The voting membership of the HPR Department. (HPR Bylaws 2.1)

1.4.9 Department Faculty Meetings

A Department Faculty Meeting is a meeting called to discuss issues pertaining to the HPR Department Faculty, the Department, the College or the University. Department Faculty Meetings are for Faculty and invited guests.

ARTICLE 2. DEPARTMENT MEMBERSHIP

The Department Faculty will be the voting membership of the Department and comprises the full-time faculty assigned to the Department who hold one of the following ranks: lecturer, instructor, assistant professor, associate professor, professor, or University professor.

2.2 Adjunct Faculty, Emeritus Faculty, Graduate Assistants and Support Staff

Adjunct faculty, emeritus faculty, graduate assistants and support staff may attend and participate in faculty discussions and are invited to attend all official Department functions and open meetings. In specific cases, they may serve on and provide recommendations to Department committees. They are non-voting members of the Department.

Student workers may not attend and participate in faculty discussions, but are invited to attend all official Department functions and open meetings. In specific cases, student workers may serve on and provide recommendations to Department committees. Student workers are non-voting members of the Department.

ARTICLE 3. FACULTY APPOINTMENT, ASSIGNMENT, AND DISMISSAL

Department BUF faculty will have an opportunity to review candidate credentials and recommend candidates to be invited for an interview. All fulltime faculty will have the opportunity to meet with candidates that have been invited for an interview. After the interviewing process has been completed, Department faculty will indicate candidates as acceptable or unacceptable. A list of strengths and weaknesses will be provided to the Chair and Dean. The Dean will make the final selection.

Faculty assignment from a WSU Department other than the HPR Department may occur after the recommendation of HPR BUF members is sought. BUF will discuss the assignment, make a list of pros and cons, determine a recommendation, and submit the recommendation to the Chair and Dean. The Dean will make the final decision.

Before a probationary tenure-track faculty member is dismissed, the HPR P&T Committee will be allowed full discussion of the dismissal case and will vote on whether or not to support the dismissal of the probationary faculty. Either the Dean or the HPR P&T Committee may request a meeting with the other to discuss the reasons for the recommended dismissal. The probationary tenure-track faculty will be given the opportunity to make a statement but not be present for the discussion and vote. The HPR P&T Committee’s written recommendation and the vote count will be sent to the Chair and the Dean. The Dean will make the final decision.

ARTICLE 4. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND MENTORING NEW FACULTY

The P&T Committee will provide all untenured faculty members with a tenured Associate or Professor faculty mentor(s). Furthermore, the Department P&T Committee shall provide all untenured BUF members with an annual statement summarizing the individual member's cumulative progress toward obtaining tenure. The Department P&T committee shall provide all tenured Assistant and Associate Professors in the Bargaining Unit an annual statement summarizing the individual member's progress toward promotion to the next rank, unless the individual requests, in writing, that the evaluation be conducted once every three years.

The Department P&T Committee will review all applications for professional development leave and make recommendations to the Chair. The HPR faculty and Chair recommendations will be forwarded by the Chair for review by the College.

ARTICLE 5. TEACHING ASSIGNMENTS AND CLASS SCHEDULES, INCLUDING SUMMER

The Chair will provide Department Faculty with tentative teaching assignments four months prior to the quarter the courses will be taught so that the faculty can provide alternate suggestions to the Chair, if they wish. The Chair makes the final assignment.

BUF members on academic year appointments shall be given an opportunity to teach in the Summer quarter when the Department schedules classes that they are qualified to teach. If sufficient classes are not scheduled to accommodate all BUF who wish to teach in the summer, summer teaching assignments will be given first to the highest-ranking faculty member with the longest time in rank.

ARTICLE 6. GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM STANDARDS

The Department Faculty will review all proposals for new and/or existing Department courses, programs, or degrees. The HPR Curriculum and Academic Policies Committee, consisting of all HPR BUF Members, will provide recommendation(s) to the Chair who will in turn submit them to the CEHS Curriculum and Academic Policies Committee.

ARTICLE 7. FACULTY INVOLVEMENT IN REVIEW OF CHAIRS

The Department Faculty may provide their opinion on the performance of the Chair by participating in informal and formal reviews as specified in the CBA.

ARTICLE 8. CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES FOR ANNUAL EVALUATION

The Chair will annually evaluate BUF members following the procedure outlined in the CBA. The Contract specifies the process by which BUF members will submit a report to the Chair and the Chair will evaluate their professional activities.

The purpose of this section is to establish (1) the procedures by which the Chair will weigh the different areas of activity, and (2) the criteria the Chair will use in evaluation.

Faculty will submit a summary of their accomplishments in teaching, scholarship and service for the preceding year (January 1st to December 31^st) in the third week of January to the Department Chair.

Within 30 days of receiving the previous year’s annual evaluation, each BUF member will recommend to the Chair a set of weights which anticipates his/her activities during the current year. The Chair determines the percentages for teaching, scholarship and service, usually within the following ranges:

8.4.1 Traditional Weights

Teaching: weights normally range from 40% - 60%

Scholarship: weights normally range from 20% - 40%

Service: weights normally range from 20% - 40%

8.4.2 Calculation of Merit

After evaluating each area of each faculty member’s professional activity, the Chair will then assign an integer (0-4) to each area. Integers represent performance ranging from unsatisfactory (0) to extraordinary (4).

8.4.3 Non-Traditional Weights

The Chair may assign a percentage weight outside the traditional ranges to accommodate unusual workload assignments, as part of discipline pursuant to the CBA, or to correct a pattern of substandard performance extending for more than one year.

8.4.4 Mid-Year Change in Weights

The faculty member may request, in writing, a change in the percentages. The Chair makes the final decision.

The Departmental P&T Committee will be responsible for the peer evaluation of teaching for untenured BUF. The untenured BUF may recommend the course(s) in which he/she will be evaluated. The untenured BUF will provide the P&T Committee with course materials for the course(s) to be evaluated. Course materials may include: course syllabus, handouts, examinations, a statement on revisions to course, description of assignments, and evidence of how this course meets the conceptual strands of CEHS. A member or members of the P&T Committee will arrange a class visitation. The P&T Committee will provide a written copy of the peer teaching evaluation to the faculty member and the Department Chair.

After receiving the evaluation the faculty member will sign a copy of the evaluation and return it to the Department Chair. If requested by the faculty member, the Department Chair will meet with the faculty member to review the annual evaluation. If the faculty member disagrees with the evaluation, he/she will acknowledge receipt in writing (via signature) but may prepare a rebuttal, and submit it to the Chair. This rebuttal will be attached to the evaluation.

ARTICLE 9. ANNUAL EVALUATION OF TEACHING OF BARGAINING UNIT FACULTY

Teaching is an important component of the tripartite mission of the University. Faculty envision a teaching continuum that begins with basic course preparation, progresses to becoming more involved in the teaching process and ends with recognition for quality teaching. At the beginning level of this continuum, faculty undertake activities such as meeting classes, maintaining office hours, advising students and collecting student feedback. At the middle level of the continuum, faculty may incorporate guidelines from learned societies or the College's Conceptual Framework into their courses, develop or revise courses or programs, use a variety of teaching methods, employ multiple forms of student assessment, and/or utilize a variety of media and technologies in their teaching. At the highest end of the continuum the faculty member is recognized for teaching excellence and shares his/her teaching ideas with peers.

Faculty are encouraged to operate at the highest level of this continuum that meets his/her goals for a given year and also takes into account the stage of the faculty member's professional career and opportunities that are available in scholarship and professional service.

9.1.1 Unsatisfactory

Faculty members who do not fulfill at least the requirements for Adequate will receive a score of 0.

9.1.2 Adequate

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

Give evidence of basic course preparation.
Meet classes regularly including the final exam time.
Maintain appropriate number of office hours and fulfill advising responsibilities.
Receive teaching evaluations from students and peers (as available) that indicate no significant problems in the classroom.

9.1.3 Meritorious

To receive a score of 2 (Meritorious) in teaching, a faculty member must meet the requirements for “Adequate” and in addition complete the following:

Give evidence of careful preparation of syllabi and tests. Syllabi reflect current Ohio, NCATE and Learned Society Guidelines.
Be available for independent studies and mentoring of students, when appropriate.
Participate in professional development opportunities.
Receive teaching evaluations from students and peers (as available) that indicate a positive learning experience in the classroom.

9.1.4 Outstanding

To receive a score of 3 (Outstanding) in teaching, a faculty member must meet the requirements of “Meritorious” and in addition complete the following:

Give evidence of significant time and attention being devoted to teaching by, for example, the development of new courses, major revisions of current courses, experimenting with a variety of new teaching methods, the utilization of multiple forms of student assessment, the utilization of a variety of media and technologies in teaching, and performing other teaching related tasks as requested (senior theses, independent studies, Masters committees, and such).
Demonstrate involvement in pK-12 schools or agencies in line with CEHS Mission statement.
Receive teaching evaluations from students and peers (as available) that indicate a significant successful learning experience.

9.1.5 Extraordinary

To receive a score of 4 (Extraordinary) in teaching, a faculty member must meet the requirements of “Outstanding”, and in addition complete one of the following:

Receive recognition from peers and/or students that the quality of the teaching is well beyond the normal as demonstrated by excellent performance in a variety of classes and other instructional settings.
Show evidence of special commitment to teaching and to sharing teaching strategies and developing new techniques.
Lead program review and development in relation to Ohio, NCATE and Learned Society Guidelines.

9.2.1 Student Evaluations

Student evaluations of teaching are required of all bargaining-unit faculty. The Contract specifies what part of the student evaluations will be sent to the faculty member only and what information will be sent to the Chair. If they wish, faculty may provide additional evaluation material or may provide information explaining or responding to the student evaluations.

9.2.2 Peer Evaluations

Peer evaluations are required of all probationary bargaining-unit faculty. At least one written peer evaluation will be conducted for each untenured bargaining-unit faculty member per year. The Chair and the Department Promotion & Tenure Committee will arrange for the peer evaluation of untenured bargaining-unit faculty. Both the P&T Committee and the Chair will have access to all written peer evaluation reports. The Chair will use them in his or her Annual Evaluation, while the P&T Committee will use them in its statement of progress toward promotion and tenure. Faculty who wish to present additional evidence of their teaching effectiveness may arrange on their own for peer evaluation visits.

9.2.3 Evidence of Engagement in Student Related Professional Responsibilities

Documentation of office hours, advising sessions, program brochures, advising sessions on Praxis I, II, III materials, etc.

9.2.4 Evidence of Course-Related Professional Responsibilities

Documentation of attending professional development opportunities, course and program development, use of technology, accreditation materials.

9.2.5 Evidence of Teaching to CEHS Conceptual Framework

Syllabi, course materials, sample artifacts or demonstrations of student learning.

9.2.6 Other Evidence

Faculty may submit additional evidence to the Department Chair. Supporting evidence may include, but is not limited to, the following: self-assessment of teaching, grade distribution, unsolicited testimonials, sample artifacts/demonstrations of student learning as related to course objectives, a written response to any peer evaluation, a self-administered evaluation instrument, a mid-term evaluation, the numerical evaluations from the official University instrument, signed letters from students in a particular course, evidence showing student learning success, e.g., the results of a pre- and post-evaluation. Tenured BUF members who chose not to submit numerical information will not suffer negative consequences.

ARTICLE 10. EVALUATION OF SCHOLARSHIP OF BUF MEMBERS

Scholarship is an important component of the tripartite mission of the University. Faculty envision a scholarship continuum which begins with the faculty member becoming active in his/her professional field, progresses to the publication of written scholarship and then peer-reviewed scholarship, and finally reaches a point where the faculty member's scholarship makes an impact in the field or discipline. The faculty believe that real scholarship often bears fruit only after a researcher spends considerable time preparing the ground. Furthermore, it is recognized that collaborative scholarship often requires as much effort as single-author scholarship and should be credited accordingly.

10.1.1 Unsatisfactory

Faculty members who do not fulfill the requirements for Adequate, will receive a score of 0.

10.1.2 Adequate

To receive a score of 1 (Adequate) in scholarship, a faculty member must maintain currency in the scholarship of the professor's own field by providing evidence of one or more of the following: attending a conference, membership on a panel, responding to a paper, publishing a book review, submitting an article for peer review, submitting a proposal for a presentation, submitting a grant proposal for funding, or the equivalent.

10.1.3 Meritorious

To receive a score of 2 (Meritorious) in scholarship, a faculty member must meet the requirements of Adequate and in addition, meet one or more of the following:

deliver at least two scholarly papers, at least one of which must be at the national level
publish a non-peer reviewed article or chapter,
edit an academic series,
publish a textbook review,
secure funding of at least $5,000 total costs, or
the equivalent.

10.1.4 Outstanding

To receive a score of 3 (Outstanding) in scholarship, a faculty member must meet the requirements of Meritorious and in addition, meet one of the following:

publish an article in a peer-reviewed journal,
publish a chapter in a peer-reviewed book,
edit or co-edit a peer reviewed book,
republish a major revision of previously published book or textbook,
secure external funding of at least $25,000 total costs, or
the equivalent.

10.1.5 Extraordinary

To receive a score of 4 (Extraordinary) in scholarship, a faculty member must present evidence of two or more peer-reviewed scholarship pieces from the following list:

publish an article in a peer-reviewed journal,
publish a chapter in a peer-reviewed book,
edit or co-edit a peer reviewed book,
republish a major revision of previously published book or textbook,
secure external funding of at least $50,000 total costs, or
the equivalent.

10.2.1 Crediting Scholarship

A faculty member's academic paper, book or similar work which has been accepted for publication but is not yet published shall be credited to the faculty member if he/she supplies adequate documentation confirming that the work is definitely scheduled for publication without further revision. This piece of scholarship may only be credited once in the annual review process, and may not be counted in the subsequent year(s).

10.2.2 Multiple Quality Activities in a Category

A situation may arise in which a faculty member has multiple quality activities in one category, but does not meet the specific criteria of the next level. In this case, the Chair may deem it appropriate to award the faculty member the next level because these activities are equivalent to specific criteria. For instance, a faculty member might receive a $ 9,000 grant and have a non-peer reviewed article accepted for publication. The Chair may deem it appropriate to award the faculty member "Outstanding" rather than "Meritorious".

10.2.3 Principal or Co-Principal Investigator

A faculty member is expected to be the Principal Investigator or the Co-Principal Investigator of the grant being credited to the faculty member. In instances where grant requirements prohibit the faculty member from being listed as the Principal Investigator or the Co-Principal, but the faculty member can provide documentation to the Chair of his/her leadership role with the preparation of the grant, this grant will be credited to the faculty member.

10.2.4 Submission of Evidence

In support of all claims of merit in scholarship, the faculty member must submit the following documentation: (1) a copy of the publication; (2) for all works "in progress", a copy of the article submitted and a copy of the letter of review and (3) a copy of the conference documents. Letters of acceptance for articles, chapters, books, presentations, and grants can also serve to document the scholarship.

ARTICLE 11. EVALUATION OF SERVICE

Professional service is an important component of the tripartite mission of the University. Faculty envision a service continuum which begins with the faculty member becoming active in Department affairs and then broadening to initiatives outside the Department and finally demonstrating a leadership role which requires considerable time and effort. Professional service includes service to the University, College, Department, professional organizations, and community agencies and schools. Service also includes local, state, regional, national, and international professional participation.

11.1.1 Unsatisfactory

Faculty members, who do not fulfill the requirements for Adequate, will receive a score of 0.

11.1.2 Adequate

To receive a score of 1 (Adequate), the faculty member is reliably involved in the work of the Department and College as demonstrated by doing the following:

Serve on one committee at the Department or College level.
Respond to requests for reports in a timely fashion.
Participate at the Department and College level by attending Department and College faculty meetings.

11.1.3 Meritorious

To receive a score of 2 (Meritorious) the faculty member must meet the criteria for Adequate and in addition, undertake new assignments and initiatives within the Department, College, community, and/or professional organizations by doing one of the following:

Chair one Department committee.
Serve as a member on two or more committees at the Department, College, and/or University.
Provide service to a professional organization.
Provide professional service to a community organization.
Or equivalent service.

11.1.4 Outstanding

To receive a score of 3 (Outstanding) the faculty member must meet the criteria for Meritorious and in addition, undertake assignments that require leadership and or considerable effort by the faculty member at the College, University, professional organization or community level or the equivalent.

11.1.5 Extraordinary

To receive a score of 4 (Extraordinary) the faculty member must perform some combination of outstanding activities in multiple areas of service.

A faculty member must submit a list of service activities performed during the year. Documentation may include, but is not limited to minutes of meetings, committee lists, testimonial letters, thank-you letters, or the equivalent.

ARTICLE 12. PROMOTION AND TENURE

The tenured bargaining unit faculty at the ranks of Associate Professor and Professor will be the P&T Committee. If there are not at least three tenured Department faculty at the Associate/Professor rank, the HPR bargaining unit faculty will invite faculty at the tenured Associate/Professor rank from other Departments of CEHS to be a member of the HPR P&T committee. The Chairperson of the P&T Committee will be the full professor or highest-ranking with longest –time at rank HPR faculty member.

The process for granting promotion and/or tenure to a BUF Member must be initiated at the Departmental level by the BUF Member. The Member must submit a written letter of intent to the Department Chair and P&T Committee by July 15. The candidate must also submit a complete promotion and tenure document, as specified by the CBA, to the Department P&T Committee by September 1 of the same year.

The candidate will provide a list of five to seven potential outside reviewers to the P&T Committee by September 1 of the same year. Outside reviewers should be qualified to evaluate the quality of the candidate’s scholarship. Reviewers must be tenured, currently employed at a comparable university, and be qualified in the candidate’s field. If the P&T Committee cannot find three appropriate and available reviewers from the candidate’s initial list, the candidate will provide additional names, as requested, until the committee can find three appropriate and available reviewers.

The committee Chairperson will summarize the HPR faculty’s recommendation in a written letter from the Department P&T Committee. The letter will include the finalized results of the vote. P&T Committee members will review and approve the letter before it is sent to the Dean. Any abstentions or non-votes should be explained in the letter.

The candidate must be informed in writing of the Department P & T Committee’s recommendation ten (10) working days before the file is submitted to the College.

Candidates should be able to document activities in the areas of teaching, scholarship and service on a continuous and ongoing basis from the time of hire to the date of evaluation for promotion and tenure. Candidates for promotion and tenure may present accomplishments dating prior to his/her hiring at Wright State University; however the candidate must document an established pattern of published scholarship while at WSU, a pattern of ongoing service on behalf of WSU and a pattern of superior teaching at WSU. Superior teaching is defined in sections 12.5 and 12.6 of this document.

In support of all claims in scholarship, the faculty member must submit the following documentation: (1) a copy of the publication; (2) for all works "in progress", a copy of the article submitted and a copy of the letter of review and (3) a copy of the conference documents. Letters of acceptance for articles, chapters, books, presentations, and grants can also serve to document the scholarship.

External reviewers, scholars in the faculty member’s field, will be used to validate the quality of the scholarship submitted. Reviewers will be asked to evaluate the quality of the writing, the quality of the journals and the appropriateness to the field.

Promotion to Associate Professor requires superior achievement in both teaching and scholarship, and significant achievement in service. Teaching will be considered superior when there is consistent evidence of considerable time and attention being devoted to the elements of teaching, such as: course development, pedagogical technique and student tutoring, and when peer and student teaching evaluations indicate consistently significant learning experiences. In evaluating teaching, primary weight will be given to the immediately preceding three years.

Scholarship will be considered superior when there is evidence of research and scholarship that has resulted in the publication of at least five high quality refereed articles in external journals or refereed chapters or funded external grants totaling at least $50,000 total costs, with a minimum of three refereed articles or chapters. As with annual evaluations, co-authorship will normally be fully credited to each author. External reviewers will be used to validate the quality of the scholarship submitted.

Service will be considered significant when there is consistent and effective involvement in the work of the department and the broader community (college, university, profession, or general public).

Promotion to Professor requires achievements in teaching, scholarship and service significantly beyond that required for promotion to Associate. The candidate must demonstrate superior achievement in the categories of teaching, scholarship and service. Superior teaching for purposes of promotion to Professor means the candidate is considered by students and peers to be a consummate teacher. There must be strong evidence of commitment to teaching and to sharing teaching strategies with others, together with strong evidence of success in teaching. Student evaluations of teaching must show that significant learning experiences occur in a variety of courses.

Scholarship will be considered superior when there is evidence of research and scholarship that has resulted in the publication of at least 12 high quality refereed articles in external journals or refereed chapters or funded external grants totalling at least $50,000 total costs, with a minimum of seven refereed articles or chapters. As with annual evaluations, co-authorship will normally be fully credited to each author. External reviewers will be used to validate the quality of the scholarship submitted and to demonstrate a scholarly reputation at the regional and national level.

Service will be considered superior when there is consistent effective leadership in the work of the department and the broader community (college, university, profession, or general public).

ARTICLE 13. ISSUES AFFECTING THE DEPARTMENT

Faculty meetings are an opportunity for the Chair and faculty members to present and discuss issues which affect the Department.

The Chair of the Department calls department meetings. The Department Faculty values full faculty participation in Department meetings. A Special Department meeting can be called by a majority of the Department full-time faculty members.

The individual(s) who called the meeting will announce the purpose of the meeting and call for any additional agenda items from the Department faculty at least three working days prior to the meeting. Faculty requested items will be added to the agenda or the agenda shall contain a standard item titled “Faculty Issues” in which faculty may bring up issues of concern at the meeting.

All HPR full-time faculty members will have one vote for each Department issue being voted on except for issues reserved in the CBA for BUF. All voting will be open response unless a faculty member requests that the voting for a particular issue use secret written ballot.

HPR committees shall consist of a standing Promotion and Tenure Committee (P&T), a standing Curriculum and Academic Policies Committee (Curriculum) and as needed ad hoc committees. The need for ad hoc committees will be determined at the Department meetings. Ad hoc committees may include a select number of faculty or be a committee of the whole.

The Department faculty will provide the Dean’s office with a written recommendation for the naming of a Chair. This recommendation will include the faculty’s ranking of possible candidates for Chair with a written reason for the ranking.

Department of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation Bylaws

ARTICLE 1. GOVERNANCE