Department of Modern Languages Bylaws

Drafted by David Garrison, Chair, in collaboration with all tenured and tenure-track faculty members (Wendy Caldwell, Kirsten Halling, Allen Hye, Mari O’Brien, and David Petreman).

Approved: February 15, 2002

I. Operating Structure

In all matters concerning which fully affiliated faculty members choose to give advice and make recommendations, the department faculty will act as a committee of the whole, except that in matters concerning tenure, promotion, dismissal, reappointment, and evaluation of Bargaining Unit Faculty Members (hereafter, BUFMs), only BUFMs shall have a vote.

Committees

1. The department has three standing committees: Teaching and Learning; Promotion, Tenure, and Retention (hereafter, PTR); Curriculum and Scheduling. Members of these committees will be appointed by the Chair on a rotating basis each year. Faculty members may volunteer for these committees and an election will be held if any faculty member requests one. The Chair may appoint, or a majority of Bargaining Unit Faculty Members may elect, other committees as needed.
2. All tenured BUFMs will serve on the PTR Committee. The Chair acts as an ex-officio, non-voting member of this committee.
3. The Chair, or a delegate for the Chair, may act as an ex-officio, non-voting member of any committee.

Meetings

The department faculty meets once a month in September, October, November, January, February, April, and May, and may meet on an ad hoc basis (at the request of the Chair or any full-time faculty member) to deal with special issues that need immediate consideration. Meetings will be conducted according to Robert’s Rules of Order, Revised.

Changing of By-Laws

Recommendations for changes in these by-laws may be made upon majority vote of the bargaining unit faculty members.

Selection of CoLA Faculty Senator

The department's CoLA faculty senator will be elected from among the BUFMs each year, with each BUFM having a vote.

II. Annual Faculty Performance Summaries

Annual Faculty Performance Summaries shall be done by the Chair.

Materials to be submitted. In preparation for annual faculty performance evaluation, all BUFMs will submit to the Chair a report of their teaching, scholarship and service during the preceding year. The material used to evaluate untenured faculty members will include both the numerical and written information from the student evaluation forms. Tenured faculty members may choose not to submit the numerical information from these forms, and no negative consequences will result from a decision not to submit this information.

Weighting of areas for annual evaluation

The Department values effective teaching above all else, and no level of scholarship or service can compensate for ineffective teaching. The standard weighting of a faculty member’s overall annual average shall be: teaching, 50%, scholarship, 30%, service, 20%.. The Chair can deviate from this standard and will do so (provided the combined weightings add up to 100%) normally within the following ranges, teaching, 50% - 70%; scholarship, 20% - 40%; service, 10% - 30%. A large variation from this norm might be needed in the case of faculty members who are on professional development leave or who undertake some special assignment such as writing a lengthy grant proposal. The Chair will provide a rationale for all deviations.

Definitions of areas and ratings

Teaching

Teaching includes election of course materials, presentation of course content, classroom management, evaluation of students, supervising theses and independent studies, course revision and development, maintaining currency in one’s teaching field, innovative use of technology, and demonstrated teaching range and flexibility. It is evaluated using the data listed under peer evaluation below.

Peer evaluation of teaching

Each year, the department's PTR Committee will prepare a written evaluation of the teaching of all untenured BUFMs in the department.

Evidence of teaching effectiveness for purposes of both annual evaluation of all BUFMs by the Chair and peer evaluation of teaching of all untenured BUFMs may include but is not limited to: information from student evaluation forms; examination of relevant information from review of syllabi, exams, assignments, handouts, web pages, etc.; unsolicited testimonials; student interviews; consultation with other faculty members; work from independent studies; and teaching awards. For untenured BUFMs, evaluation of teaching must include classroom observation of the teacher or observation of a video of classroom performance by BUFMs. The written peer review statements should contain an account of the evidence that was used to arrive at the assessment. Before the peer review is conducted, untenured BUFMs will submit materials they would like to have considered. The peer evaluation statement will be submitted to both the faculty member and the Chair.

Criteria for the Evaluation of Teaching

In the following description, the phrase "course load" refers to the load assigned to each individual faculty member by the university. Depending upon other responsibilities, the actual number of courses taught may differ from one faculty member to another. In describing teaching, advising, and related activities, the adverb "effectively" refers on the one hand to demonstrable overall success in conveying appropriate information and building appropriate skills, and on the other hand to demonstrable effort in attaining such success. Thus, a faculty member may demonstrate the effectiveness of his or her teaching with evidence showing classroom success (e.g. positive student comments on evaluations, peer reviews of teaching by colleagues, recognition given to work completed by students in class), and (if needed) with evidence showing the kind and quality of effort he or she has made in meeting students' needs (e.g. a teaching journal or log, a portfolio of teaching materials, a discussion of special problems faced in a particular class).

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

• Advise students effectively

• Show clear and convincing evidence of special commitment to and outstanding success in teaching and advising, or the equivalent

• Perform other teaching-related functions as requested; e.g. advise honors students and thesis candidates, serve on thesis committees, work with independent-study students, or the equivalent, all with outstanding success

• Develop new courses or significantly revise existing course content, pedagogy, or technology in a meaningful way, or the equivalent

• Take a leadership role in the development and support of the teaching of other department faculty (especially of bargaining-unit faculty), e.g. by giving classes on pedagogical issues, by leading the way and helping others with classroom technology, by mentoring faculty who may be struggling with their teaching, by developing on-line courses that meet department needs and standards, or the equivalent

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

• Advise students effectively

• Show clear and convincing evidence of special commitment to and outstanding success in teaching and advising, or the equivalent

• Perform other teaching-related functions effectively and responsibly as requested; e.g. advise honors students and thesis candidates, serve on thesis committees, work with independent-study students, or the equivalent

• Develop new courses or significantly revise existing course content, pedagogy, or technology in a meaningful way, or the equivalent

To receive a score of 2 (Meritorious) in teaching, a faculty member must teach a course load effectively, and perform all three of the following well, or any two of the following with distinction:

• Advise students effectively

• Show significant evidence of success in teaching and advising

• Perform other teaching-related functions effectively and responsibly as requested; e.g. advise honors students, supervise master's theses, serve on thesis and portfolio committees, work with independent-study students, etc.

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

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

• missed classes (without informing the department or without adequate explanation)

• missed advising appointments

• persistent and justified student complaints

• erratic classroom behavior

• failure to keep appropriate office hours and otherwise be available to students and advisees

• failure or refusal to provide the Chair contract-required information, materials, or notification that are teaching related

• failure to communicate effectively with students

• refusal to teach assigned courses in the faculty member's field

• refusal to teach standard assigned writing and general-education courses for which department faculty are normally responsible

• failure to respond appropriately to reasonable student questions or complaints

• irresponsible or unprofessional conduct with or in the presence of students in a university setting

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

Tenured BUFMs who wish to present additional evidence of their teaching effectiveness may arrange on their own for peer evaluation visits. Reports of any peer evaluation activities are due to the Chair by the date on which the activity reports are due.

Other Evidence: Faculty may submit additional evidence to the department Chair. Supporting evidence may include (but is not limited to) the following:

• Selected syllabi or other class materials (to demonstrate a particular classroom innovation, for example)

• A peer evaluation of teaching (for example, a colleague's report of a classroom visit)

• A written response to any peer evaluation

• A description of a particular section or a response to the student evaluations for a particular section (if the faculty member believes the evaluations for that section need to be contextualized, for example)

• Additional student evaluation materials, including (but not limited to) a self-administered evaluation instrument, a mid-term evaluation, the numerical evaluations from the official university instrument, signed letter(s) from students in a particular course, etc.

• Evidence showing student learning success, for example the results of a pre- and post-evaluation

The Chair may also gather evidence to be used as part of the evaluation of teaching. In such cases, the Chair will make all written records and/or summaries of evidence available to the faculty member.

Scholarship

To receive a rating of extraordinary, a faculty member would have to publish at least two articles in refereed scholarly journals.

To receive a rating of outstanding, a faculty member would have to publish one article in a refereed scholarly journal or submit an article for publication in such a journal and deliver a conference paper.

To receive a rating of meritorious, a faculty member would have to submit one article for publication in a refereed scholarly journal or deliver one substantial conference paper.

To receive a rating of adequate, a faculty member would have to show evidence of some scholarly endeavor--a draft of an article not yet submitted, a project proposal for professional development leave, or a grant application.

To receive a rating of unsatisfactory, a faculty member would have to publish nothing at all and show little or no evidence of scholarly endeavor.

Other kinds of scholarship will also be taken into consideration by the Chair and may be deemed equivalent to some of the above requirements, for example: translations; textbooks; creative writings related to a faculty member’s field; awards or special recognition for scholarship or for creative work. For instance, publication of a literary translation (such as a volume of poetry or a novel) or a language textbook (authored or co-authored) by a reputable press would merit a rating of extraordinary.

Service

Multiple criteria will be used in judging a faculty member's service because service can take many forms and include service to the department, to the college, to the university, or to the profession. In addition to service on department, college, and university committees, other sorts

of service may include: coordination of multi-sectioned courses, writing grant proposals; outreach to public schools; liaison with other departments for programs or activities of joint interest; development of innovative technology for teachers; community service that involves the use of a person’s language or professional skills (working on an international “sister city” program or interpreting for a community organization, for example); and service to professional organizations as an officer, member of a committee, journal editor or referee. In all cases, both the quality and the quantity of the accomplishments in service shall be assessed by the Chair.

To receive a rating of extraordinary, a faculty member’s service must be of exceptional quantity and result in a significant accomplishment. For example, a faculty member receiving a rating of extraordinary might serve actively and effectively on four committees (at least two outside of the department), write a successful service-related grant application, and be an officer in a professional association. Regardless of the type of service performed, the faculty member receiving this rating must evidence outstanding leadership and commitment.

To receive a rating of outstanding, a faculty member’s service must either be of exceptional quantity or result in a major accomplishment. For example, a faculty member receiving a rating of outstanding might serve actively and effectively on three committees (at least one outside of the department), represent the department in recruitment or technology initiatives, help out with language club or honorary society activities, and be active in a professional association.

To receive a rating of meritorious, a faculty member’s service must demonstrate active participation and commitment. For example, a faculty member receiving a rating of meritorious might serve actively and effectively on two committees (at least one outside of the department) and represent the department in recruitment or technology initiatives.

To receive a rating of adequate, a faculty member will be expected to participate fully in departmental activities and serve on at least one departmental committee.

To receive a rating of unsatisfactory, a faculty member would have a general lack of participation in departmental activities and serve on no committees at all.

III. Procedures for all promotion actions:

Selection of ad hoc PTR Committee Members from outside the department

In the event that the department does not have three tenured associate and/or full professors to serve on the PTR Committee, the Committee, in consultation with the Chair, shall select faculty members from outside the department. The candidate shall be allowed to submit a list of suggested candidates for consideration.

Letters of Recommendation from outside WSU

The candidate shall submit a list of at least six candidates to write letters of recommendation for his/her promotion dossier attesting to the candidate’s scholarly achievements. The candidate must indicate the position of each prospective recommender and the nature of the candidate's relationship to that person, and should briefly indicate why that person qualifies to write a recommendation. The PTR Committee shall choose three recommenders from that list, requesting additional names if needed to secure three acceptable recommenders. The PTR Committee shall consider these letters before taking its vote on the candidate’s promotion and/or tenure. The letters shall be used to evaluate the candidate’s scholarly achievements.

Voting by the PTR Committee

Voting by the PTR Committee shall be by secret ballot.

IV. Criteria for Recommendation for Promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor with Tenure

Probationary period

Normally, faculty are considered for promotion and tenure during their final probationary year; however, a candidate with an exceptionally strong case may go up earlier. While the candidate may nominate himself/herself, the nominating decision is ordinarily made by the department’s PTR Committee.

Teaching

The department values teaching above all else, and no level of scholarship or service can compensate for ineffective teaching.

To be recommended for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor with tenure, a candidate must:

1. establish a pattern of teaching effectiveness as demonstrated by peer and student evaluations, syllabi, tests, course materials during the probationary period;

2. demonstrate currency in his/her teaching fields by attending conferences and/or workshops, giving scholarly papers, and keeping abreast of new pedagogical developments.

Scholarship

Candidates must demonstrate expertise in their field and an ability to publish quality work. They must publish (or have accepted for publication): 1) four articles in refereed scholarly journals in the person's field, or 2) a substantial scholarly book in their field, or 3) publications that are deemed equivalent to these things. Work published prior to employment at Wright State University can be counted, but the candidate must demonstrate continuing publication during employment at WSU.

The following equivalencies may be deemed acceptable: 1) A scholarly book of literary or cultural criticism authored by the candidate and published in the candidate’s field by a reputable press can be counted as up to six refereed articles in his/her field. 2) Two substantial scholarly articles in the candidate's field in non-refereed journals can be counted as equivalent to one article in a refereed one, but at least half of the required articles must be in refereed journals. 3) Published creative work related to the faculty member’s field (a body of separate translations or original poems, for example) can be counted as equivalent to up to a total of two refereed journal articles. 4) A book of translations of poetry or fiction, or a textbook that results from significant applied research and is published by a reputable publisher, or a substantial critical edition of a literary work, or an edited collection of critical essays, can count as the equivalent of up to three refereed articles.

These equivalencies are set down as general guidelines for the PTR Committee members, the Chair, and others who will review the file. Higher or lower values can be assigned to various publications in accordance with their scholarly contribution.

Service

To be recommended for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor and receive tenure, a candidate must:

1. serve actively and effectively on at least one department committee each year and on at least one college or university committee during the probationary period.*

2. share in an equitable fashion with other faculty members in performing departmental service duties such as: overseeing the language laboratory, taking a turn at editing the department’s alumni newsletter, working with language clubs, promoting the department through presentations within and outside of the university, attending department meetings regularly, submitting committee reports when asked.

Other kinds of service will also be considered: holding an office in a professional organization; working as a journal editor or referee; volunteering one’s professional expertise in community projects; and managing one of the department’s web sites.

* During a candidate’s first year of employment at WSU, he/she shall not be required to serve on any committees outside of the department.

V. Criteria for Recommendation for Promotion from Associate Professor to Professor

A candidate must normally have at least five years of full-time employment at the university as an Associate Professor before being considered for promotion to Professor. It is possible to be considered before this period is up if the candidate demonstrates unusually strong achievement. While the candidate may nominate himself/herself for promotion, normally the nominating decision is made by the department’s PTR Committee.

Teaching

The department values teaching above all else, and no level of scholarship or service can compensate for ineffective teaching. To be recommended for promotion from Associate Professor to Professor, a candidate must:

1. evidence a high level of teaching effectiveness as demonstrated on peer and student evaluations, syllabi, tests, course materials as an Associate Professor;

2. demonstrate continuing currency in his/her field(s) of teaching by attending conferences and/or workshops, giving conference papers, keeping abreast of new pedagogical developments.

3. demonstrate consistent leadership in teaching within the department.

The department values teaching above all else, and no level of scholarship or service can compensate for ineffective teaching.

Scholarship

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

• Published a scholarly book, scholarly monograph of literary or cultural criticism, or at least six substantial refereed articles, chapters, or other publications beyond the number required to achieve Associate Professor.

The following equivalencies may be deemed acceptable: 1) Two substantial articles in non-refereed journals may be counted as equivalent to one article in a refereed one, but at least half of the required articles must be in refereed journals. 2) Published translations of poetry, fiction, or essays, may be counted as up to two refereed journal articles. 3) Published creative work in the faculty member’s field (a body of translations or of original poems relating to his/her field, for example) may be counted as equivalent to up to two refereed journal articles. 4) A book of translations of poetry or fiction, or a textbook that results from significant applied research and is published by a reputable publisher, or a substantial critical edition of a literary work, or an edited collection of critical essays, shall count as the equivalent of up to three refereed articles.

These equivalencies are set down as general guidelines for the PTR Committee members, the Chair, and others who will review the file. Higher or lower values can be assigned to various publications in accordance with their scholarly contribution.

Service

To be recommended for promotion to the rank of professor, a candidate must:

1. serve actively and effectively on at least one department committee every year and on at least two college or university committees as an Associate Professor;

2. share in an equitable fashion with other faculty members in performing departmental service duties such as: coordinating multi-section courses, overseeing the language laboratory, taking a turn at editing the department’s alumni newsletter, working with language clubs, promoting the department through presentations within and outside of the university; and substantial work on department web sites;

3. demonstrate leadership within the department and the university by chairing or actively participating in some major committees or service projects;

4. demonstrate leadership by serving within professional organizations--for example, as an officer or a journal referee--or doing community work related to the person's professional expertise, helping to recruit students through outreach programs involving area schools, and finding new ways to support the study of foreign languages at WSU.