 |
|
|
|
|
Department
of Marketing Bylaws
Approved: 3/5/03
Section I. Introduction
- These
Bylaws:
- provide
for faculty participation in the operations of the Department of Marketing,
in accordance with the Agreement between the American Association of University
Professors – Wright State University Chapter, and Wright State University,
hereafter referred to as the agreement;
- are
subject to and consistent with the Bylaws of the Raj Soin College of Business
(RSCOB);
- may
be amended in accordance with the Collective Bargaining agreement;
- include
duties of each department standing committee.
- The
Purpose of these Bylaws
The Department Faculty (defined as full-time faculty in
the Department, excluding the Chair) seek to promote and sustain effective
teaching (undergraduate and graduate), scholarship, and service, and to participate
fully in the governance of the College of Business and the University, as allowed
by the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
Section
II. Procedures by which Bargaining Unit Faculty Give Advice and Make
Recommendations
- Faculty
Appointment, Reappointment and Dismissal
- Faculty
Appointment. Members of the Department Faculty are to be involved
in the recruitment and selection process for new faculty. Department faculty will
be chosen by the Chair to serve on the Search Committee. All members
of the Department Faculty will be provided the opportunity to: (1)
interview, individually and/or in small groups, those candidates who are
brought to campus; (2) participate in presentations made by the candidates;
(3) provide written and/or oral feedback to the Search Committee for each
faculty candidate. The search committee and the Department Faculty
shall make recommendations regarding whom to hire to the Department Chair
and the Dean after all candidates have been interviewed.
- Faculty
Reappointment. Faculty reappointment from an outside department
to this department will only occur after the recommendation of the department
bargaining unit faculty is obtained including the results of
a secret ballot taken at a department meeting. This recommendation
will be presented to the Dean. The reasoning behind the recommendation
will be derived from the discussion prior to the vote.
- Faculty
Dismissal. The dismissal of probationary tenure-track faculty may not
occur until the Dean has sought the recommendation of the department’s Promotion
and Tenure (P&T) committee. The department bargaining unit faculty
will be allowed full discussion of the dismissal case but only the department’s
P&T committee will vote, in a secret ballot, on whether or not to dismiss
the probationary faculty. The P&T committee’s written recommendation
and the results of the vote on whether or not they are in favor of dismissing
the probationary faculty will be conveyed to the Dean. The written
recommendation will allow for the expression of minority opinions.
- Promotion and Tenure
- To
Tenured Associate Professor. The department’s P&T committee will
review the faculty member’s promotion and tenure file at a special
P&T committee meeting. The department’s representative to the RSCOB
P&T committee will chair the meeting and will have a vote at the department
level. Furthermore, the department Chair may participate in the discussion
as a non-voting member of the committee. An elected secretary will
take notes of the discussion so that the reasoning behind the committee’s
recommendation may be summarized in a written letter. The letter should
include the finalized results of the secret ballot. The P&T committee
will consist of all department Bargaining Unit Faculty Members (BUFMs) who
hold the rank of tenured associate professor or tenured professor. If
there are not at least three BUFMs at the rank of associate professor or
professor, other faculty at this rank, from within the college or outside
the college as necessary, who would be qualified to evaluate the tenure file
will be invited by the committee to join the committee. The committee
will review and approve the letter summarizing the P&T committee vote
and the reasoning for the vote before it is sent to the RSCOB P&T committee.
- To
Tenured Full Professor. The procedures are similar to that described
in Section II, B.1 above but the group of department faculty present and
voting will be restricted to those who hold the rank of tenured professor.
If there are not at least three department BUFMs at the rank of professor
eligible
to vote, the committee will invite faculty at this rank from other departments
or outside the college as necessary who would be qualified to evaluate a
faculty member’s file to join the committee. The committee will review
and approve the letter summarizing the vote and the reasoning for the vote
before it is sent to the RSCOB P&T committee.
- Professional Development
The P&T
committee is responsible for giving advice and recommendations to the Chair
on matters related to professional development including the mentoring of new
faculty.
- Teaching Assignments and
Class Schedules, Including Summer and Overloads
Department faculty will have the opportunity
to provide the Chair with a list of their preferences for courses and times
for each quarter. Faculty may request from the Chair information regarding
what courses have been taught each quarter, at what times they have been
taught each quarter, and enrollments in each section over the past year. Faculty
may also ask the Chair to provide information regarding scheduling of courses
and class times. Faculty may recommend to the Chair ways to resolve
course and scheduling conflicts. Summer or overload teaching will not
be forced upon any faculty member.
In the event there are insufficient classes or projected
insufficient enrollments to fill all the requests made by bargaining-unit faculty
for upcoming summer, the most senior faculty (by rank and time in rank) will
receive the first opportunity to fill their summer teaching schedules. Bargaining-unit
faculty denied summer teaching because of insufficient classes or enrollments
will be given first priority to teach in the following summer.
- Graduate
and Undergraduate Curriculum
The department curriculum committee, with
input from the rest of the faculty, will review and make recommendations
on proposed new department courses, suggested modifications to existing department
courses, and proposed changes in requirements for all majors and minors offered
by the department.
- Advice
Given by Department Faculty in Naming of Chairs
The department faculty may provide the Dean
with a written recommendation for the naming of a Chair.
- Issues
Affecting the Department
Issues which affect the department should be presented to
the faculty by the Chair or other members of the department faculty and recommendations
from the faculty solicited.
Section III. Annual Evaluation of BUFMs
- Procedures
for Annual Evaluation
- Submission
of Materials for Annual Evaluation. Faculty
will submit to the department Chair a summary of their accomplishments in
Teaching, Scholarship and Service for the preceding year (January 1 to December
31st) by the last working day before February
7th of each year. It is the responsibility of each faculty
member to make the case for the rating expected in each category.
Also by the last working day
before February 7th of each year, all faculty submitting teaching
portfolios in accordance with the peer evaluation section of these bylaws
should forward these materials to the department's P&T committee and
the department chair to become part of the evaluation process.
- Merit
Rating Formula. The formula for the determination of the merit
rating is based on the rating for teaching, scholarship, and service. An
Unsatisfactory rating is awarded a score of ‘0’; an adequate rating is awarded
a score of ‘1’; a Meritorious rating is awarded a score of ‘2’; an Outstanding
rating is awarded a score of ‘3’; and an Extraordinary rating is awarded
a score of ‘4’. These scores are then weighted by category.
The weight assigned for each category
1) must fall into the following range and 2) must sum to 100
Teaching 30%-
50% or your merit evaluation must be for teaching.
Scholarship 30%-50%
of your merit evaluation must be for scholarship
Service
Assistant
Professor 10%-20% of your merit evaluation
must be for service
Associate
Professor 10%-30% of your merit evaluation must be
for service
Professor 20%-30%
of your merit evaluation must be for service
The
Department Chair will evaluate each area of each faculty member’s professional
activity and assign an integer to that area guided by the criteria stated below.
The Chair will then assign to each area a percentage from the range above that
gives the faculty member the maximum possible overall average.
The
Chair may assign a weighting different from that defined above in any of the
following situations:
- the
faculty member has work assignments that differ from those of other faculty
- the
Chair is imposing discipline pursuant to the contract
- the
Chair is acting to correct a pattern of substandard performance extending for
more than one year.
- Peer Evaluation of Teaching. Peer
evaluation will be conducted annually for all untenured BUFMs. Peer evaluation
will also be conducted for any full-time BUFM who specifically requests it.
The Department P&T committee will be responsible for the peer evaluation
of teaching. Peer evaluation for this department will normally consist
of review of the teaching portfolio. The portfolio will include: (1)
syllabi for each course taught; (2) where appropriate, a representative sample
of examinations administered; (3) where appropriate, a representative sample
of student papers/projects completed; (4) the written comments by students
on the student evaluation of instruction form; (5) a numerical summary from
the student evaluation of instruction form (untenured BUFMs); and, (6) any
other materials the individual chooses to include to demonstrate teaching effectiveness.
The
P&T committee will evaluate the teaching portfolios for a faculty member
(a person whose portfolio is being evaluated may not participate in the evaluation
process of his/her portfolio):
- to
determine the consistency of syllabi with topics to be covered in the course
- to
determine the consistency of examinations with topics listed on syllabi
- to
assess the appropriateness of projects/papers for the course
- to
identify areas from the student evaluation suggesting positive teaching practices
- to
identify areas from the student evaluation suggesting a need for improvement
in teaching practices
- to
identify areas of innovation in teaching applied by the faculty member
- to
identify teaching accomplishments.
If
the P&T committee review of these materials indicates that there may
be problems in teaching, a class visitation by one or more members of the
P&T committee may be arranged.
The
P&T committee will provide the Chair and each individual evaluated with
written feedback regarding peer evaluation to include a suggested rating
for the teaching component of the annual evaluation. This feedback
should address points a-g, above. If a class visitation is performed,
a written report will follow.
- Annual Evaluation. The chair will consider all submitted materials
when deriving an evaluation for each facet of faculty performance. A written
summary of this evaluation
will be provided to each faculty member in a timely manner.
- Faculty Review of Annual Evaluation.Faculty
will review the annual evaluation prepared by the department Chair and the
reasons given for the ratings. The faculty member will sign a copy
of the evaluation and return it to the department Chair. The signature
on the evaluation only acknowledges receipt of the evaluation. If the
faculty member disagrees with the evaluation, s/he may prepare a rebuttal,
which should be submitted to the Chair. This rebuttal must be attached
to the evaluation and forwarded to all entities seeing the annual evaluation.
- Criteria
for Annual Evaluation of BUFMs
- Teaching. The
evaluation of a faculty member's teaching is the responsibility of the department
Chair. All BUFMs shall be evaluated according to the following criteria:
- Unsatisfactory. A
faculty member will be assigned a rating of Unsatisfactory for teaching if
s/he fails to meet the requirements for a rating of Adequate.
- Adequate. A
faculty member will be assigned a rating of Adequate when s/he adheres to the
following except in exceptional circumstances:
- participates
in department assessment
- course
content is consistent with the college and department curricular missions
- student
evaluations do not show a preponderance of negative responses
- adheres
to provisions of the collective bargaining agreement related to faculty responsibility
regarding teaching
- Meritorious. Meritorious
teachers meet the requirements for adequate and demonstrate the following:
- peer
evaluations, if conducted, and/or student evaluations are generally positive,
and provide evidence that the instructor aids in the understanding of the material
- evidence
of at least one extra effort activity on behalf of students and/or the department's
teaching mission (for examples of extra effort activities see section III.B.1.f)
- evidence
of participation in a process of continual improvement.
- Outstanding. An
outstanding teacher meets the requirements for adequate and demonstrates
all of the following:
- peer
evaluations, if conducted, are positive; and/or a significant majority of student
evaluations are positive; and/or the teacher receives a department teaching
award
- evidence
of significant extra effort on behalf of students and/or the department’s teaching
mission (i.e., 3 or more of the activities listed in section III.B.1.f)
- evidence
of participation in a process of continual improvement.
- Extraordinary. An
extraordinary teacher clearly exceeds the requirements for outstanding
(four or more of the activities listed in section III.B.1.f). Demonstration
of this level of excellence requires that:
- peer
evaluations and/or student comments are overwhelmingly positive
- and/or
the individual wins a college or university teaching award or achieves a major
teaching accomplishment.
- Examples
of Extra Effort Activities. Examples of extra effort activities
include, but are not limited to the following:
- effectively
supervising independent study projects
- creating
innovative projects and assignments
- teaching
a larger than normal number of preparations or section sizes
- conducting
review sessions outside of normal class time
- effective
use of educational technology
- serving
as a teaching mentor for other faculty
- effective
involvement in student placement activities
- being
readily available to students beyond required office hours
- developing
a new course
- developing
a new teaching area
- mentoring
students
- incorporating
projects from local businesses into courses
- Scholarship. The
evaluation of a faculty member’s scholarship is the responsibility of the
department Chair. The most important scholarship is that appearing
in peer-reviewed publications. For purposes of evaluation,
the date of acceptance or the date of publication will be accepted. However,
they must not be double-counted.
The evaluation
of scholarship should reflect the quantity of the input and the quality of
the contribution. Collaborative efforts will be fully credited to each
author.
- Unsatisfactory. A
scholarship rating of unsatisfactory will be assigned if the faculty member
fails to meet the requirements for a rating of adequate.
- Adequate. A
scholarship rating of adequate will be assigned if the faculty member has one
peer-reviewed scholarly publication on a marketing-related topic within the
last five years and evidence of continuing scholarly activity during the evaluation
period (or the equivalent). (Note the publication of one scholarly book substitutes
for one peer-reviewed article).
- Meritorious. A
meritorious scholarship rating is awarded for having one peer-reviewed journal
article published on a marketing-related topic in the past three years or two
such articles in the past five years plus evidence of continuing scholarly
activity during the evaluation period (or the equivalent). (Note the
publication of one scholarly book substitutes for one peer-reviewed article.)
- Outstanding. An
outstanding scholarship rating is awarded for having one peer-reviewed journal
article published on a marketing-related topic in the current year or two peer-reviewed
journal articles in the past three years with evidence of continuing scholarly
activity during the evaluation period (or the equivalent). (Note the
publication of one scholarly book substitutes for one peer-reviewed article.)
- Extraordinary. An
extraordinary scholarship rating is awarded for two peer-reviewed journal articles
published on a marketing-related topic in the current year or one peer-reviewed
article published in the current year with two other peer-reviewed journal
articles in the past three years (or the equivalent). (Note the publication
of one scholarly book substitutes for one peer-reviewed article.)
- Evidence
of Continuing Scholarly Activity. Evidence of continued scholarly
activity includes but is not limited to the following:
- the
completion of a working paper
- the
submission of a scholarly article to an appropriate outlet
- submission
of cases, chapters, comments or invited articles
- subsequent
editions of previously published books
- submission
of a book review
- presentation
of a working paper at a seminar or symposium
- other
intellectual contributions appropriate to the College’s and Department’s mission
- submission
to non-refereed outlets within a marketing-related field
- receiving
a research grant within the university
- winning
a college or university scholarship award
- receiving
a grant from an outside funding agency
- media
appearance or trade conference presentation on a topic in a marketing-related
field
- Service. The evaluation of
a faculty member’s service is the responsibility of the department Chair. The
evaluation of service must reflect both the quality and the quantity of the
effort and the significance of the output. Service includes contributions
to the department, the college, the university, the profession, and to the
community.
- Unsatisfactory. An
unsatisfactory service rating will be assigned to any faculty member who fails
to meet the requirements of an Adequate rating.
- Adequate. An
adequate service rating will be assigned to associate and full professors who
meet the standards listed below. Assistant professors meeting the
first two standards will be rated adequate. Attendance at department
meetings, college meetings, university meetings and service organization meetings
predicates on the compatibility of the faculty’s schedule for teaching and
office hours with the meeting times.
- active
participation in department meetings
- regular
attendance at college meetings
- actively
serving on a department committee
- serving
on one college/university committee
- attending
a university or college orientation/visitation session at least once every
in two years
- attending
commencement ceremonies at least once every two years.
- Meritorious. A
meritorious service rating will be assigned to associate and full professors
who meet the requirements for an Adequate rating and document the following:
- active
participation in one local professional or service organization
- one
other activity from the list in III.B.3.f.
A meritorious service rating will
be assigned to an assistant professor who meets the requirements for an adequate
rating and documents the following:
- actively
serving on a department committee
- attending
a university or college orientation/visitation session at least once every
in two years
- attending
commencement ceremonies at least once every two years.
- Outstanding. An
outstanding service rating will be assigned to BUFMs who meet the requirements
for a meritorious rating and document a total of three (3) significant additional
service activities or the equivalent. (For examples of other activities see
section III.B.3.f) The faculty member must show evidence of taking an active
role in each of these service activities.
- Extraordinary. An
extraordinary service rating will be assigned to faculty members who clearly
exceed the requirements for an Outstanding rating. Evidence of this might
include:
- winning
a college or university service award
- a
total of six (6) items from the list in III.B.3.f
- a
major leadership accomplishment.
- Service
Activities. The following may be used as evidence of service:
Institutional Service
i. effectively
serving as advisor to an active club or student organization where a significant
time commitment is required
ii. serving
effectively as a program director
iii. effectively
chairing or effectively serving on an active university or college or department
committee or task force
iv. working
on special projects at the department, college or university level
v. effectively
working on student placement or recruitment activity
vi. teaching
overload courses or teaching in off-campus programs
vii. student
advising efforts
viii. alumni
relations/fund raising activity
Professional Service
ix. effectively
serving on the editorial board of a journal
x. effectively
serving as an officer in or chairing a significant state or national or international
committee
xi. effectively
serving as a track chair at a national or international conference
xii. organizing
a conference workshop, session or panel for a regional, national or international
conference
xiii. reviewing
books, journals or other manuscripts
xiv. holding
an office in an active professional organization
xv. obtaining
and maintaining professional licenses and/or certifications
xvi. serving
as a guest speaker for area business government or community organizationxvii.
significant external service to community programs and/or companies, either
paid or
unpaid,
including consulting, training, etc.
xviii. serving
as a discussant at a conference
xix. serving
as an examiner/judge for Masters level thesis or a doctoral dissertation from
another university.
Community Service
xx. holding
positions of leadership in community organizations related to the profession
xxi.
involvement in community outreach/community programs
xxii. participating
(as a member or speaker) at local professional organizations.
Section IV. Department Criteria for Promotion and
Tenure
- A. To
Associate Professor with Tenure
There are three tracks
that a faculty member may satisfy to be promoted to the rank of Associate
Professor: (1) a normal track, (2) an exceptional teaching track, and
(3) an exceptional scholarship track. The requirements for each track
are set forth below:
|
Category |
Normal
Track
|
Exceptional
Teaching Track
|
Exceptional
Scholarship Track
|
|
Teaching
|
Very Effective
|
Exceptional
|
Effective
|
|
Scholarship
|
Very Effective
|
Effective
|
Exceptional
|
|
Service
|
Effective
|
Very Effective
|
Effective
|
The qualifications for effective, very effective and exceptional
for each category are explained below.
- Teaching. To
be considered an effective teacher, the faculty member must show evidence
of the following:
- student
evaluations are generally positive .
- a
total of at least 7 extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department. Each
annual extra effort activity counts toward the total. (see III.B.1.f)
- regular
participation in continuous improvement activities
- a
record of positive peer evaluations.
To be considered a
very effective teacher, the faculty member must show evidence of all
the following:
- a
significant majority of student evaluations are positive.
- a
total of at least 10 extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department. Each
annual extra effort activity counts toward the total.
- very
positive peer evaluations
- a
commitment to continuous improvement
To be considered an
exceptional teacher, the faculty member must show evidence of the following:
- student
evaluations are overwhelmingly positive
- peer
evaluations are excellent
- a
total of 15 or more extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department. Each
annual extra effort activity counts toward the total.
- Scholarship. To
be considered an effective scholar, the faculty member must have the
following of which (except in an exceptional circumstance) at least one publication
must have occurred while the faculty member was a Wright State University BUFM:
- a
minimum of five peer-reviewed journal articles, or their equivalent (one
scholarly book may be substituted for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal
article), plus evidence of continuing scholarly activity
- favorable
letters from outside reviewers.
To be considered a very effective scholar, the faculty
member must have the following of which (except in an exceptional circumstance)
at least one publication must have occurred while the faculty member was a
Wright State University BUFM:
- a
minimum of six peer-reviewed journal articles, or their equivalent (one
scholarly book may be substituted for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal
article), plus evidence of continuing scholarly activity
- favorable
letters from outside reviewers.
To be considered an exceptional scholar, the faculty
member must have the following of which (except in an exceptional circumstance)
at least one publication must have occurred while the faculty member was a
Wright State University BUFM:
- a
minimum of seven peer-reviewed journal articles, or their equivalent, including
one in a nationally recognized journal (one scholarly book may be substituted
for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal article), plus evidence of continuing
scholarly activity
- favorable
letters from outside reviewers.
- Service: The
faculty member must demonstrate consistent/effective participation in service
activities.
To be considered effective in the area of service,
the faculty member must:
- actively
participate in department meetings
- regularly
attend college meetings
- attend
commencement ceremonies at least once every two years
- actively
serve on a department committee
To be considered very effective in the area of service,
the faculty member must exceed the requirements above by documenting five additional
service activities as listed in section III.B.3.f:
- To
Professor
There are three tracks that a faculty member may follow
to obtain a department recommendation for promotion to the rank of Professor
of Marketing: (1) a normal track, (2) an exceptional teaching track,
and (3) an exceptional scholarship track. The requirements for each track
are set forth below:
|
Category |
Normal
Track |
Exceptional
Teaching Track
|
Exceptional
Scholarship Track
|
|
Teaching
|
Very Effective
|
Exceptional
|
Effective
|
|
Scholarship
|
Very Effective
|
Effective
|
Exceptional
|
|
Service
|
Effective
|
Very Effective
|
Effective
|
The qualifications for effective, very effective and exceptional
for each category are explained below.
- Teaching. To
be considered an effective teacher, the faculty member must show evidence
of the following:
- student
comments are generally positive
- at
least 7 extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department since
the last promotion. Each annual extra effort activity counts toward the
total. (see III.B.1.f)
- regular
participation in continuous improvement activities.
To be considered a
very effective teacher, the faculty member must show evidence of the
following:
- a
significant majority of student evaluations are positive
- a
total of at least 10 extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department
since the last promotion. Each annual extra effort activity counts toward
the total.
- a
commitment to continuous improvement.
To be considered an exceptional teacher, the faculty
member must show evidence of the following:
- student
evaluations are overwhelmingly positive
- a
total of 15 or more extra effort activities on behalf of students or the department
since last promotion. Each annual extra effort activity counts toward
the total
- a
teaching award.
- Scholarship. To
be considered an effective scholar, the faculty member must have the
following which (except in an exceptional circumstance) must include a minimum
of four refereed journal articles since the last promotion and at least one
since being hired at Wright State University:
- a
minimum of nine peer-reviewed journal articles, or their equivalent, including
one in a nationally recognized journal (one scholarly book may be substituted
for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal article) plus evidence of continuing
scholarly activity
- favorable
letters from outside reviewers.
To be considered a very effective scholar, the faculty
member must have the following which (except in an exceptional circumstance)
must include a minimum of five refereed journal articles since the last promotion
and at least one since being hired at Wright State University:
- a
minimum of twelve peer-reviewed journal articles, or their equivalent, including
two in a nationally recognized journal (one scholarly book may be substituted
for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal article) plus evidence of continuing
scholarly activity
- favorable
letters from outside reviewers.
To be considered an exceptional scholar, the faculty
member must have the following which (except in an exceptional circumstance)
must include a minimum of five refereed journal articles since the last promotion
and at least one since being hired at Wright State University:
- a
minimum of eighteen peer-reviewed journal articles, or their equivalent, including
three in nationally recognized journals (one scholarly book may be substituted
for a maximum of one peer-reviewed journal article) plus evidence of continuing
scholarly activity
- favorable
letters from outside reviewers
- strong
evidence of being nationally recognized as an outstanding scholar.
- Service. The
faculty member must demonstrate consistent/effective participation in service
activities.
To be considered effective in
the area of service, the faculty member must:
- actively
participates in department meetings
- regularly
attends college meetings
- attends
commencement ceremonies at least once every two years
- actively
serves on a department committee each year (when feasible)
- regularly
serves on one college/university committee
- actively
participates in a local professional or service organization
- at
least five activities from the list in section III.B.3.f since the last promotion.
To be considered very effective in the area of service,
the faculty member must exceed the requirements for effective by documenting
ten additional service activities from the list in section III.B.3.f:
- C. Granting
of Tenure When Hired as an Associate Professor or Professor Without Tenure
- Teaching. For a faculty
member at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor without tenure, the
three tracks outlined in section IV.A and IV.B respectively will apply. However,
the qualifications for effective, very effective, and exceptional teacher are
modified as follows.
To be considered
an effective teacher, the faculty member must show evidence of the following
during the probationary period:
- student
comments are generally positive
- regular
participation in continuous improvement activities
- a
record of positive peer evaluations
To be considered
a very effective teacher, the faculty member must show evidence of the
following during the probationary period:
- a
significant majority of student evaluations are positive
- very
positive peer evaluations
- a
commitment to continuous improvement
To be considered
an exceptional teacher, the faculty member must show evidence of the
following during the probationary period:
- student
evaluations are overwhelmingly positive
- peer
evaluations are excellent
- significant
extra effort on behalf of students
- Scholarship. For
a faculty member hired at the rank of Associate Professor without tenure and
who desires to be tenured at the rank of Associate Professor, the criteria
specified in section IV.A.2 will apply with one addition: at least one publication
must list Wright State University as the faculty member’s affiliation.
For a
faculty member hired at the rank of Professor without tenure and who desires
to be tenured, the criteria specified in section IV.B.2 will apply with one
addition: at least one publication must list Wright State University as the
faculty member’s affiliation.
- Service. In
the case of an individual hired at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor
without tenure, the criteria specified in the previous section (IV.A.3 and
IV.B.3 respectively) will be applied over the faculty member’s academic career.
Emphasis will be placed on the continuation of and/or the development of a
strong service
record while at Wright State University.
Section V. Department Policies and Procedures
- A. Membership
of the Department Faculty
- The department faculty shall
be comprised of persons who hold full-time faculty appointments in the
department.
- Individuals who are not members
of the department faculty may be invited to participate in the discussions
of the department faculty but shall not have voting rights.
- Meetings of the Department Faculty
- Regular meetings of the department
faculty should be called at least once a term during the regular academic year
and at such other times as provided for in this document. The responsibility
for calling regular meetings shall reside with the Chair.
- Notice of regular faculty meetings
should be provided in writing to all full-time faculty members at least one
week prior to the meeting (except for emergencies). An agenda of business
to be conducted shall accompany the notice.
- Special
department meetings may be called by the Chair or by a majority of the bargaining
unit faculty. If called by a majority of BUFMs, the meeting may be chaired
by a BUFM selected by those present.
- Regular
meetings of the department faculty shall be conducted by the Chair of the department.
- The
principle of majority vote among those department members present will prevail
in all department faculty recommendations unless otherwise agreed or on issues
reserved for BUFMs only. A majority of the department’s faculty eligible
to vote on an issue will constitute a quorum. In order to vote on any
item, a quorum must be present.
- Proxy
voting is not allowed.
- Minutes
of the department faculty meetings shall be taken by the department secretary
or alternatively by a member of the faculty. A written copy of the minutes
shall be made available for faculty review in a timely manner.
- Department
Committees and Representatives
- Department
representatives to RSCOB standing committees shall be elected by department
faculty as appropriate and should represent the interest of the department.
Faculty may be appointed to ad hoc department or non-department committees
by the department Chair; the appointed faculty is expected to represent the
interests of the department. The department's representative to the
RSCOB P&T committee must hold the rank of tenured full professor.
- There
are three department standing committees: Curriculum Committee, P&T Committee
and Bylaws Review Committee.
- All
department full-time faculty members shall serve on the Curriculum Committee.
This committee is chaired by the department Chair who is a non-voting member
of
the committee.
The
Curriculum Committee has the responsibility:
- for
making recommendations on all aspects of the graduate and undergraduate curriculum,
including assessment
- for
making recommendations to the Chair regarding department scholarships and
awards, and
- to
meet no less than once a quarter during the academic year
- to
handle all student petitions.
- The P&T committee is chaired
by the department representative to the RSCOB
P&T committee and consists of all tenured bargaining unit associate and
full professors in the department. The department Chair is a non-voting
member of P&T committee.
The P&T committee
shall:
- be
responsible for peer evaluation of teaching
- provide
annual feedback to all untenured BUFMs on progress towards promotion and tenure
- make
recommendations on applications for promotion and tenure
- make
recommendations regarding professional development proposals submitted by department
faculty
- evaluate
all applications for graduate faculty status
- appoint
a mentor for all non-tenured, full-time faculty
- provide
all tenured Assistant & Associate professors in the Bargaining Unit an
annual statement on progress towards promotion unless the individual requests
in writing for the review to be every three years
- The Bylaws Review Committee
is formed by the election of three or more BUFMs. The primary responsibility
of the Bylaws Committee is the ongoing review of existing bylaws for consistency
with: College Bylaws, the Collective Bargaining Agreement, and changes
within the department. When inconsistencies are found, the Bylaws Review
Committee is responsible for drafting changes to the Department Bylaws to rectify
the inconsistencies. Proposed changes must be approved by a majority
of the department BUFMs. Once approved at this level, they must be approved
at the College Dean and the Faculty Governance Committee levels before they
can go into effect. The Bylaws Review Committee is also responsible for
reviewing suggested changes in the bylaws provided by members of the Department.
In response to these suggestions, the committee is to explain why a suggested
change may or may not be allowed under existing rules, contracts etc. and draft
changes where required.
- Department ad-hoc committees
may be formed at any time by the department Chair or by a majority vote of
the BUFMs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
