Department of Information Systems and Operations Management Bylaws

Approved 11/19/2002

Amended 10/20/2004

Amended 5/26/2006

Section I. Introduction

These Bylaws:

A.  Provide for faculty participation in the operations of the Department of Information Systems and Operations Management in accordance with the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the American Association of University Professors - Wright State University Chapter (AAUP/WSU) and Wright State University. 

B.  Are subject to and consistent with the Bylaws of the Raj Soin College of Business (RSCOB). 

C.  Include operational procedures for each departmental standing committee. 

D.  May be amended by a majority vote of Bargaining Unit Faculty in the department, subject to the approval of the dean and the Faculty Governance Committee. 

Section II.  Department Procedures   

A.    Membership of the Department Faculty

1. The department faculty shall be comprised of persons who hold full-time faculty appointments in the department. 

2. Individuals who are not members of the department faculty shall be eligible to participate in the discussions of the department faculty insofar as the members of the department faculty shall authorize; however, participation shall not include voting rights in meetings of the faculty.

3.  Affiliate Faculty

a.  Faculty from other Wright State University academic units who provide significant and continuing support for ISOM activities may be granted the status of "Affiliate" Professor, Associate Professor, or Assistant Professor in the ISOM department to formally recognize their contributions to the department.  Significant support may include activities such as teaching, curriculum development, advising projects, and marketing ISOM programs.

b.  The status of Affiliate Assistant/Associate/Professor will be granted when the folloiwng conditions are satisfied:

1)  The faculty member is a full time member of the Wright State University faculty who contributes to ISOM department activities in ways that are significant and continuing.

2)  All affiliate appointments must be approved by a majority of the bargaining unit faculty of the ISOM department, by the chair of the ISOM department, by the Dean of the individual's home college, and by the Dean of the Raj Soin College of Business.

3)  Appointments are for a maximum of three years and may be renewed thereafter.  However, the appointment ends when the faculty member leaves Wright State employment.

4)  Affiliate appointments do not affect the individual's applicable criteria for annual evaluation, promotion, or tenure.

5)  Affiliate members do not have voting rights in ISOM or elsewhere in RSCOB except as specifically described in these bylaws.

B.   Meetings of the Department Faculty 

1.  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. 

2.  Notice of regular faculty meetings should be provided in writing to all full-time faculty members at least one week prior to the meeting.  An agenda of business to be conducted shall accompany the notice.

3.  The chair may call special meetings.  In addition, the chair must convene a special meeting within ten days of receipt of a petition signed by at least a majority of members of the faculty.

4.  Meetings of the department faculty shall be conducted by the chair of the department.

5. The principle of majority vote among those department members present will prevail in all faculty votes unless otherwise agreed upon or on issues reserved for the Bargaining Unit Faculty only.  A majority of all Information Systems and Operations Management Department faculty will constitute a quorum.  On issues reserved for the Bargaining Unit Faculty only, a majority of Bargaining Unit Faculty will constitute a quorum.  In order to vote on any item, a quorum must be present.

6.  Proxy voting is not allowed.

7.  Minutes of all meetings of the department faculty shall be prepared by a department staff member or faculty member elected by the department faculty.  A written copy of the minutes shall be distributed to all full-time members of the department faculty, usually within ten days following the meeting. 

C.    Department Committees and Representatives 

1.  Departmental representatives to RSCOB standing committees shall be elected by the Information Science and Operations Management Department faculty as appropriate and should represent the interest of the department. Faculty may be appointed to ad hoc departmental or non-departmental committees by the department chair; the appointed faculty is expected to represent the interest of the department.  The department's representative to the RSCOB Promotion and Tenure Committee must hold the rank of Professor.

2.  Each full-time faculty member of the department shall serve on either the Management Science or the Management Information Systems Curriculum Committee.

3.  There are three departmental standing committees: (Operations Management [OM] Curriculum Committee, Management Information Systems Curriculum Committee, and the Promotion & Tenure Committee), and one standing subcommittee (the Master of Science in Logistics and Supply Chain Management [(MSLSCM] Curriculum Committee).    The MSLSCM Curriculum Committee is a subcommittee to the OM Curriculum Committee.

4.  Each curriculum committee will elect a chair from among the committee members. 

      Each curriculum committee has the following responsibilities: 

a.   to make recommendations on all aspects of the undergraduate and graduate curriculum, including assessment, 

b.   to forward curriculum changes requiring college approval to the department faculty for a vote, before sending them to the department chair, 

c.   to make recommendations regarding department scholarships and awards, and 

d.   to meet no less than once a term during the academic year, and at the first meeting of an academic year's committee, the chair of the previous year's committee must report to the committee on unfinished business. 

  5.  In addition to the general requirements of section C.4, the MSLSCM Curriculum Committee shall be governed by the following:

a.  Voting membership in the committee shall consist of members of the OM Curriculum Committee and Affiliate faculty who have taught in the MSLSCM program within the last calendar year, or are scheduled to teach in the program in the next calendar year.

b.  MSLSCM instructors who are not full-time WSU faculty are encouraged to participate in MSLSCM curriculum discussions, but are not eligible to vote.

c.  The Chair of the MSLSCM Curriculum Committee will be elected from among the non-affiliate ISOM faculty on the committee.

  6. The Promotion and Tenure Committee is chaired by the department representative to the RSCOB Promotion and Tenure Committee and includes all tenured bargaining unit Associate Professors and Professors in the department.  The department chair is a non-voting member of the committee. The committee shall:  

a.  evaluate all candidates for promotion and tenure and submit a recommendation on each case, using the criteria and procedures in Section V of this document. 

b.  review and advise the chair regarding individual faculty development plans, 

c.  give recommendations to the chair regarding the department faculty development plan, 

d.  be responsible for peer evaluation of teaching, 

e.  provide annual feedback to all untenured Bargaining Unit Faculty members on progress towards tenure, 

f.   provide annual feedback to all tenured Assistant and Associate professors on progress towards promotion unless a tenured Bargaining Unit Faculty member requests that the evaluation be conducted once every three years, 

g.  make recommendations regarding professional development leave proposals submitted by department faculty, 

h.  evaluate all applications for full graduate faculty status, and   

i.  appoint a mentor for all non-tenured, Bargaining Unit Faculty members. 

  7. Departmental ad-hoc committees may be formed at any time by a majority vote of the department.

Section III. Procedures By Which Bargaining Unit Faculty Give Advice and Make Recommendations

 A.    Faculty Appointment, Reappointment and Dismissal

1.  Faculty Appointment.  For full-time faculty, a search committee will review candidate applications and recommend applicants to be interviewed.  At least 50 percent of the search committee members will be departmental Bargaining Unit Faculty Members (BUFMs) elected by the Bargaining Unit Faculty in the department.  Full-time faculty of the department will be provided the opportunity to: (1) interview, individually and/or in small groups, those candidates who are brought to campus; (2) attend presentations made by the candidates; (3) provide written feedback to include whether each candidate meets the criteria defined by the Search Committee.  The Search Committee will make recommendations regarding whom to hire and forward all recommendations received from the faculty to the department chair and the dean after all candidates have been interviewed.

        2.    Faculty Reappointment.  Faculty reappointment from an outside department to this department will only occur after the recommendation of the department Bargaining Unit Faculty is sought in a secret ballot, to be taken at a departmental meeting.  This recommendation will be presented to the dean. The reasoning behind the recommendation will be derived from the discussion prior to the vote.  

        3.    Faculty Dismissal.  The dismissal of probationary tenure-track faculty may only occur after the recommendation of the department Promotion and Tenure Committee is sought by the dean.  The department chair should present the recommendations for dismissal from the chair and the dean to the Promotion and Tenure Committee at a special meeting, discussing the reasoning behind these recommendations.  The Bargaining Unit Faculty Members on the Promotion and Tenure Committee will be allowed full discussion of the dismissal case and will vote, in a secret ballot, on whether or not to recommend dismissal of the probationary faculty.  The Promotion and Tenure Committee recommendation must be written, with the vote tallied and majority reasons expressed, and will allow for the expression of minority opinions.  The written recommendation will be sent to the department chair and the dean of the RSCOB.  

B.     Promotion and Tenure 

 1.  To Tenured Associate Professor.  The department Promotion and Tenure Committee will review the candidate’s file at a Promotion and Tenure meeting. The department's representative to the Raj Soin College of Business Promotion and Tenure Committee will chair the meeting but will have no 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.  Balloting will continue, with further discussion between ballots, until identical results are obtained in two successive ballots, at which time the results are finalized. The Promotion and Tenure Committee will be restricted to Bargaining Unit Faculty Members who hold the rank of tenured Associate professor or tenured Professor. If there are not at least four -department tenured Bargaining Unit Faculty Members at the rank of Associate professor or Professor, other tenured Bargaining Unit Faculty Members in the college or discipline at this rank who would be qualified to evaluate the file will be invited by the committee with consultation of the candidate, to join the committee.  The faculty who vote will review and approve the letter summarizing the departmental faculty vote and the reasoning for the vote before it is sent to the dean.   

2.    To Professor.  The procedures are similar to that described in III.B.1. above, but the group of departmental faculty present and voting will be restricted to those who hold the rank of tenured Professor.  If there are not at least four tenured department faculty at the rank of Professor, the committee will invite other tenured Bargaining Unit Faculty Members in the college or discipline at this rank who would be qualified to evaluate the candidates’ file to join the committee.  The Promotion and Tenure Committee will review and approve the letter summarizing the vote and the reasoning for the vote before it is sent to the dean.   

C.    Professional Development 

       The Promotion and Tenure Committee reviews individual faculty development plans for consistency with department goals; appoints a mentor for all non-tenured Bargaining Unit Faculty Members; ensures that peer evaluation of instruction is conducted for all non-tenured Bargaining Unit Faculty Members; provides all non-tenured Bargaining Unit Faculty Members with an annual statement regarding progress towards tenure; provides all tenured Assistant and Associate professors in the bargaining unit with an annual statement regarding progress towards promotion unless the individual requests that the evaluation be conducted once every three years; reviews and makes recommendations on all professional development leave proposals and makes recommendations to individual faculty on areas that may need improvement. 

D.    Teaching Assignments and Class Schedules, Including Summer and Overloads 

        Department faculty may submit written requests to the department chair regarding teaching assignments and class schedules at least one month before the scheduled date to the registrar.  Summer teaching will not be forced upon any faculty member on an academic contract.  If faculty members wish to teach a summer course, they may indicate such in writing, identifying the course or courses they believe themselves qualified to teach.  In the event of limited availability of summer teaching, allocation will be given based on rank, time in rank, and length of service at Wright State, in that order.  However, the chair will give first preference in summer teaching to faculty who notify the chair in writing that they intend to retire within three years. This provision may be exercised only once. 

        If due to the limited availability, the chair was unable to assign a faculty member for summer teaching, then this faculty shall have the highest priority among the faculty members of the same rank in the ensuing summer teaching assignments. 

E.     Graduate and Undergraduate Curriculum and Academic Standards 

The departmental curriculum committees will review proposed new department courses, suggested modifications to existing department courses, and proposed changes in requirements for all majors and minors offered by the department and make written recommendations for approval or disapproval. 

F.    Advice Given by Departmental Faculty in Naming of Chairs 

        A majority of the search committee for the department chair will be elected by and from the department Bargaining Unit Faculty members.  The search committee after consulting with the department faculty will provide the dean with written recommendations for the naming of a chair. These recommendations will include the search committee’s ranking of possible candidates for chair with a written reason for the ranking.  Those candidates whom the search committee find absolutely unacceptable at any level should be so indicated. 

G.    Issues Affecting the Department 

Issues affecting the department will be presented to the faculty at regularly scheduled departmental faculty meetings by the department chair and by faculty members, so that the recommendations or advice of the departmental faculty may be heard by the department chair.    

Section IV.  Annual Evaluation of Faculty 

A.    Procedures for Annual Evaluation 

1.    Submission of Materials for Annual Evaluation.  Faculty will submit a summary of their accomplishments in teaching, scholarship and service for the preceding year (January 1 to December 31st) to the department chair no later than February 7. The chair will provide copies to Department Promotion and Tenure Committee as needed.  

Non-tenured Bargaining Unit Faculty Members must submit a teaching portfolio each year.  The portfolio should 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) any other materials the individual chooses to include to demonstrate teaching effectiveness.  In addition, the department maintains records of the written comments by students on the student evaluation of instruction form and a numerical summary from the student evaluation of instruction form. 

2.    Peer Evaluation of Teaching.  The department's Promotion and Tenure Committee will be responsible for the peer evaluation of teaching for all non-tenured Bargaining Unit Faculty Members.  Peer evaluation for this department will normally consist of review of the teaching portfolio and the narrative portion and the numerical portion of the student evaluation of teaching.  The peer evaluation report from the Promotion and Tenure Committee is submitted to the chair.  If a review of these materials indicates there may be major problems in teaching, a class visitation will be arranged by one or more members of the Promotion and Tenure Committee.  A report on the class visitation will be reviewed by the Promotion and Tenure Committee and sent to the department chair to be considered for their annual evaluation.  A copy will also be sent to the Bargaining Unit Faculty Member being reviewed. 

3.    Annual Evaluation.  Faculty will review their annual evaluation prepared by the department chair and the reasons given for their ratings.  The faculty member will sign a copy of the evaluation acknowledging its receipt and return it to the department chair by the requested date.  If the faculty member disagrees with the evaluation, he/she may prepare a rebuttal, which should be submitted to the chair.  This rebuttal must be attached to the evaluation (per contract) and forwarded to all entities who will see the annual evaluation.  

B.    Criteria for Annual Evaluation 

1.    Teaching.  The evaluation of a faculty member's teaching is the responsibility of the department chair with input from the Promotion and Tenure Committee’s peer evaluation report.  

               a.    A faculty member will be assigned a rating of Unsatisfactory for teaching if he/she fails to meet the requirements for a rating of Adequate.  

               b.    A faculty member will be assigned a rating of Adequate when student and peer evaluations confirm that he/she 1) provides an environment conducive to learning and 2) adheres to the following: 

i.    having an appropriate syllabus which is made available  the first day of class,

ii.   regularly meeting class on time,

iii.  keeping course content current with developments in the field,

iv.  incorporating current AACSB business context and functional area requirements into the appropriate courses as defined by the college and departmental curricular missions,

v.    participating in the department’s assessment activity,

vi.   adhering to departmental policies regarding student  evaluations, and submission of materials for peer-review,

vii.  maintaining reasonable office hours,

viii. regularly submitting course grades in a timely manner, and

ix.      providing students with an opportunity to review all exams and papers. 

                          c.   Meritorious teachers meet and exceed the requirements for a ranking of adequate and have good peer evaluations and student evaluations.  In addition, they demonstrate many of the following traits: enthusiasm for the subject matter; effective communication skills; prepares appropriate course materials and examinations; motivates students of varying abilities; integrates state of the art thinking about the subject matter into the course; and is readily available to meet with students for advising and mentoring.  Several of the following items can be used as evidence of meritorious teaching: 

i.    serving as a teaching mentor to other faculty,

ii.   prepare for and effectively deliver a course they are teaching for the first time,

iii.  having a teaching portfolio demonstrating effective teaching,

iv.  providing evidence of continual improvement,

v.   effectively teaching large section sizes,

vi.  effectively teaching more than the departmental average number of preparations per year,

vii.  effectively teaching in one of WSU’s off-campus programs,

viii.  having consistently positive student evaluations of teaching,

ix.   being readily available for discussion and student mentoring outside of class time, and

x.   effectively teaching writing intensive courses regardless of the course's university designation.  

               d.    Outstanding teachers meet and exceed the requirements for a ranking of meritorious.  In addition, they attend or offer seminars or colloquia for teaching improvement or attempt new pedagogical methods and techniques in the classroom.  A significant number of the following items can be used as evidence of outstanding teaching: 

                      i.     serving as a teaching mentor to other faculty with distinction,

                      ii.    effectively teaching large section sizes with distinction,

                     iii.    effectively teaching more than the departmental average number of preparations per year with distinction,

                     iv.    effectively teaching more than once in one of WSU’s off-campus programs,

                     v.    supervising independent study/internship/honors projects,

                     vi.    maintaining a commendable level of teaching performance for the courses taught as evidenced by formal student evaluations and/or peer evaluations,

                     vii.   demonstrating a highly commendable enhancement of teaching and learning as evidenced by the creation of class materials that are challenging and informative, or the equivalent,

                     viii.   receiving student chapter/college teaching honors, and

                        ix.  effectively teaching a new course in a different academic discipline.

                e.    Extraordinary teachers clearly exceed the requirements for outstanding.  External to the college recognition and student evaluations demonstrate that the faculty member is truly exceptional. 

        2.   Scholarship             

The evaluation of a faculty member’s scholarship is the responsibility of the department chair with input from the Promotion and Tenure Committee’s annual promotion and tenure progress report, where applicable.  The evaluation of scholarship must reflect the continuous nature of scholarship.  The most important scholarship is that appearing in peer reviewed journal publications. For purposes of evaluation, the date of acceptance is considered the date of publication. Other evidence of intellectual activities to be considered includes scholarly books, chapters of a refereed book, research grants, submissions to peer reviewed journal publications, publications in a refereed proceedings, presentations at academic meetings, and serving as a paper discussant. The evaluation of scholarship should reflect the quantity of the effort and the quality of the contribution.  Normally, collaborative efforts will be fully credited to the individual authors.  

a.    A scholarship rating of Unsatisfactory will be assigned if the faculty member fails to meet the requirements for a rating of adequate.   

b.    A scholarship rating of Adequate will be assigned if the faculty member has 1) published one peer reviewed journal article within five years and the faculty member provides evidence of one additional intellectual activity during the current evaluation period, or 2) two intellectual activities in the current year. 

c.    A Meritorious scholarship rating is awarded for 1) publishing one peer-reviewed journal article in the current year or 2) two peer-reviewed journal articles in the past three years plus one intellectual activity in the current year. 

d.    An Outstanding scholarship rating is awarded for 1) publishing  two peer-reviewed journal articles in the current year, or 2) publishing two peer-reviewed journal articles in the past three years (with one in the current year), or 3) publishing three peer-reviewed journal articles in the past three years and evidence of at least one intellectual activity in the current year.  

e.    An Extraordinary scholarship rating is awarded for 1) publishing three or more peer-reviewed journal articles in the current year, or 2) publishing five peer-reviewed journal articles in three years including at least one in the current year.  

3.    Service 

The evaluation of a faculty member’s service is the responsibility of the department chair with input from the Promotion and Tenure Committee’s annual promotion and tenure progress report, where applicable.  The evaluation of service must reflect both the quality and the quantity of the effort and the significance of the output.   

The following may be used as evidence of service activities: 

A.  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.     Student advising efforts

vii.    Alumni relations/fund raising activity

viii.   Serving the University through the WSU-AAUP. 

           B.  Professional Service 

i.      Effectively serving on the editorial board of a journal.

ii.          Effectively serving as an officer in or chairing a significant state or national or international committee.

iii.        Effectively serving as a track chair at a national or international conference.

iv.         Organizing a conference workshop, session or panel for a regional, national or international conference.

v.      Reviewing books, journals or other manuscripts.

vi.           Holding an office in an active professional organization.

vii.         Obtaining and maintaining professional licenses and/or certifications.

viii.       Serving as a guest speaker for area business, government or community organization.

ix.           Significant external service to community programs and/or companies, either paid or unpaid, including consulting, training, etc.

              C.  Community Service Related to the Discipline 

i.  Holding positions of leadership in business/community organizations.

ii.            Involvement in community outreach/community programs.

iii.          Maintaining membership in community organizations.

iv.           Professional activities that reflect normal and expected public service for which compensation is limited to reimbursement of costs or nominal honoraria such as invited lectures and peer review panels. 

a.   An Unsatisfactory service designation on service will be assigned to any faculty member unable to meet the requirements of an Adequate rating.   

b.   An Adequate service rating will be assigned to faculty who meet the standards listed below: 

i.    actively serves on a departmental committee,

ii.   regularly attends and actively participates in department meetings,

iii.   regularly attends college meetings. 

c.   A Meritorious service rating will be assigned to faculty members who exceed the requirements for an Adequate rating by documenting at least one additional effective service activity, such as, 

i.   actively participates in one professional or service organization, and

      ii.  serves on one college/university committee. 

d.   An Outstanding service rating will be assigned to faculty members who exceed the requirements for an Adequate rating by documenting at least three (3) significant additional service activities or the equivalent.  Candidates must also show evidence of taking leadership roles in several service activities and the outcomes of these activities.  

e.   An Extraordinary service rating will be assigned to faculty members who clearly exceed the requirements for an Outstanding rating. 

4.    Weighting 

The formula for evaluating Bargaining Unit Faculty 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, normally as follows: 

        Teaching       30% - 50% of your evaluation is for teaching

        Scholarship   30% - 50% of your evaluation is for scholarship

        Service        10% - 30% of your evaluation is for service 

After the chair has completed the annual evaluation and assigned 0-4 integers for each individual’s teaching, scholarship, and service, percentages are assigned by an algorithm that gives each individual the maximum possible overall average.        

This evaluation scheme applies to all BUFMs in the department unless the chair assigns a different weighting to allow for: 

a.         unique work assignments that differ from those of other BUFMs;

b.         discipline pursuant to Article 14 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement; or

c.         correction of a pattern of substandard performance extending more than one year.

Section V.  Criteria for Promotion and Tenure 

A.    To Associate Professor with Tenure.  When applying for promotion and tenure, Assistant professors must submit to the Department Promotion and Tenure Committee all materials and documentation outlined in the Collective Bargaining Agreement by the date specified by the Provost in the fall of the year the individual is to be considered. The following minimum requirements must be met by the candidate seeking promotion and tenure: 

1.    Teaching.  The candidate must show evidence of the following: enthusiasm for the subject matter; effective communication skills; prepares thorough and appropriate course syllabi, course materials, and examinations; motivates students; integrates the state-of-the-art thinking on the subject matter into the course; positive peer and positive student evaluations; and is readily available to students outside class time for discussion and mentoring.  A number of the following can be used as evidence of fulfilling the foregoing teaching requirements for promotion. 

               a.   Positive student evaluations.

               b.   Having a teaching portfolio demonstrating effective teaching.

               c.    Providing evidence of continual improvement (e.g., partnering with the Center for Teaching and Learning, etc.).

               d.    Supervising an Independent Study/Internship/Co-op/ Honors project.

               e.    Receiving teaching honors.

               f.     Effectively teaching writing-intensive courses regardless of the course's university designation.

               g.    Having teaching evaluations in which the students reflect the candidate’s enthusiasm for the subject matter/course; the candidate’s availability outside the classroom; the integration of state-of-the-art thinking.

               h.    Being readily available to students at times other than posted office hours for discussion and mentoring or meeting office hours of more than six hours per week.

               i.     Having designed new courses.

               j.     Effectively teaching more than the departmental average of course preparations per year. 

        2.    Scholarship.  To be promoted to the rank of Associate professor, the candidate must demonstrate quality scholarship with:The equivalent of a minimum of five peer-reviewed/refereed publications with at least two published while at Wright State University in respected, scholarly journals in the field. 

a.         External review letters are required and will be considered heavily in determining the quality of journals and of the candidate’s scholarship.

b.    Invited articles published by a refereed and respected journal in the field will be counted the same as publication of original research.

c.    For articles published in lesser known peer-reviewed journals, the number of citations may be used to demonstrate that the quality of scholarship is equivalent to that in more universally respected journals. 

3.    Service.  The candidate must demonstrate that he/she has been a contributing participant on committees and in activities necessary for the proper functioning of the department and college.  

B.    To Professor.  When applying for promotion, Associate professors must submit to the department Promotion and Tenure Committee all materials and documentation outlined in the Collective Bargaining Agreement by the date specified by the Provost in the fall of the year the individual is to be considered. The candidate seeking promotion to the rank of Professor must meet the following criteria in their overall record: 

1.         Teaching.  The candidate must show evidence of the following: enthusiasm for the subject matter; effective communication skills; prepares thorough and appropriate course syllabi, course materials, and examinations; motivates students; integrates the state-of-the-art thinking on the subject matter into the course; and is readily available to students outside class time for discussion and mentoring.  A significant number of the following can be used as evidence of the foregoing criteria for very effective teaching. 

a.         Effectively preparing for a course that the candidate is teaching for the first time.

b.    Having a teaching portfolio demonstrating effective teaching.

c.    Effectively providing evidence of continual improvement (e.g., partnering with the Center for Teaching and Learning, etc.).

d.     Effectively teaching large section sizes.

e.    Supervising an Independent Study/Internship/Co-op/Honors project.

f.     Receiving teaching honors.

g.    Effectively teaching writing-intensive courses regardless of the course's university designation.

h.    Having teaching evaluations in which the students reflect the candidate’s enthusiasm for the subject matter/course; the candidate’s availability outside the classroom; the integration of the state-of-the-art thinking.

i.     Effectively teaching more than the departmental average number of preparations per year.

j.     Being readily available to students at times other than posted office hours for discussion and mentoring or scheduling office hours of more than six hours per week.

k.    Leadership in curriculum development. 

2.    Scholarship.  The department’s Bargaining Unit Faculty Members consider scholarship to be critical to the candidate, particularly scholarly leadership and sustained scholarly expertise. 

To be promoted to the rank of Professor, the candidate must demonstrate quality scholarship with: 

a.         A minimum of the equivalent of at least 12 high quality articles in good peer-reviewed journals, seven of which must be published since the last promotion.

b.         Evidence of significant scholarship recognition within the academic community. The external review letters as required by the contract will be considered heavily in determining the quality of journals and of the candidate’s scholarship.

c.    Of the seven peer-reviewed publications since the last promotion, at least one article is solely written by the candidate.

d.    Invited articles published by a refereed and respected journal in the field will be counted the same as publication of original research.

e.    For articles published in lesser known peer-reviewed journals, the number of citations may be used to demonstrate that the quality of scholarship is equivalent to that in more universally respected journals. 

3.    Service.  The candidate must show evidence of taking leadership roles in several service activities and significant outcomes of these activities.   

        The following may be used as evidence of leadership roles in service: 

        a.    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