Department of Social Work Bylaws

Approved:  February 10, 2003

Amended:  May 25, 2004

Article I Organization and Structure

The chair and all full-time faculty will meet to discuss issues and give advice and recommendations via faculty meetings, Professional Advisory Council (PAC) and Standing Committees.

A. Faculty Meetings

Faculty will meet at least once per month during the academic year to conduct business.

B. Professional Advisory Council

The Professional Advisory Council (PAC) is composed of representative/ leaders of social service agencies, social work students, full-time social work faculty members and alumni. PAC makes recommendations to the faculty for improving the curriculum and operations of the social work department. This Council meets once per quarter.

C. Standing Committees

1. Nominations Committee has the responsibility to bring nominees for membership on PAC. The committee is composed of representatives of social service agencies, social work faculty and students.

2. Assessment Committee has the responsibilities to implement the social work assessment plan as well as to make recommendations for modifications to the assessment plan. This plan is to assure that the department is achieving its goals and objectives. The committee is composed of representatives of social service agencies, social work faculty and students.

3. Scholarship Committee makes recommendations for social work scholarships. The committee is composed of representatives of social service agencies, social work faculty and students. The full-time faculty recommends the recipient of the Ellen Weiderman Berger scholarship.

4. Distinguished Alumni Award Committee recommends the recipient of this annual award. The committee is composed of representatives of social service agencies, social work faculty and students.

5. Enrollment Management Committee recommends criteria for admissions to the social work majors. The committee is composed of representatives of social service agencies, social work faculty and students.

6. Gerontology Certificate Committee advises the social work department on the standards, criteria, and curriculum for the program. The committee is composed of WSU faculty representing various disciplines, community gerontology leaders, social work faculty and students.

7. Faculty Development Committee (FDC) makes recommendations about professional travel, professional development leaves, promotion and tenure, annual evaluations, and mentorship of new faculty. The committee is composed of all tenured bargaining unit faculty at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.

8. Graduate Program Committee makes recommendations with respect to strategies and plans for the development of a graduate social work program.

9. Curriculum Committee makes recommendations with respect to the social work curriculum. The committee is composed of social work faculty (bargaining unit/ tenure/tenure track faculty).

D. Membership on Committees

The chair will appoint faculty for membership on departmental committees except for the Faculty Development Committee. The PAC will elect non-faculty for membership on committees.

Article II Faculty Appointment, Reappointment and Dismissal

Faculty Search Committee

Department Search Committee will be formed for the purpose of providing input with respect to faculty appointments. A majority of search committee members will be BUFMs (Bargaining Unit Faculty Members) selected by the bargaining unit faculty in the department. The Search Committee will review the applications. The candidates/applicants found acceptable will be recommended to the department chair for campus interviews. After the campus interviews the Search Committee will evaluate the applicants and forward their recommendations to the department chair.

Chair Selection

When there is a vacancy, the bargaining unit faculty members in the department will evaluate candidates for the vacancy and forward recommendations to the Dean.

Article III Procedures and Criteria for Annual Evaluation of Departmental Faculty

A. Procedures for Annual Evaluations

1. Peer Evaluation of Teaching:

   The departmental Faculty Development Committee (FDC) will be responsible for the peer evaluation of teaching for probationary bargaining unit faculty. Tenured bargaining unit faculty may also be evaluated, if they request. Peer evaluation may include, but is not limited to, review of the preceding calendar year’s course syllabi, examinations, faculty summary statement on revisions to courses; and a summary of mentoring/advising, liaison, and field coordinator evaluations. Faculty must submit their materials for evaluation to the Faculty Development Committee by mid-January. If a review of these materials indicates that there may be problems in teaching, a class visitation will be conducted by one or more members of the Faculty Development Committee. A report on the class visitation will be included in the evaluation by the Faculty Development Committee. Upon completion of the entire review, the Faculty Development Committee will provide a written evaluation of the individual’s teaching to the department chair and the faculty member. If the faculty member disagrees with the evaluation, he/she may prepare a rebuttal, which should be submitted to the Faculty Development Committee and the chair for attachment to the peer evaluation of teaching.

2. Chair’s Evaluation of Teaching, Scholarship & Service:

   The Chair reviews the Faculty Activity Report and accompanying documentation as well as the Faculty Development Committee’s peer evaluation of teaching. Probationary faculty must submit the student narrative and numerical evaluation of teaching. Tenured faculty must submit the student narrative of teaching. Tenured faculty are not required to submit the numerical portion of their student evaluations of teaching, but may do so if desired. Failure to submit numerical information will not have a negative impact on teaching evaluations.The Chair will evaluate and rate teaching, scholarship and service using the criteria specified in the Department’s By-laws. A written evaluation will be issued to the faculty member. Faculty will review the integers assigned for the annual evaluation by the department chair and the reasons given for their assignment. If the faculty member agrees with the evaluation, he/she will sign a copy of the evaluation and return it to the department chair. 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 and forwarded to all entities that will see the annual evaluation.

3. Weighting of Teaching, Scholarship & Service:

   The chair will determine a weighting for the annual merit evaluation after considering recommendations from the BUFM. Faculty members may submit a written request to revise these percentages should circumstances change during the year. The chair will provide a written acceptance, denial, or revision to the recommendation for change. The Department Chair will set the weighting of teaching, scholarship and service, normally within the following range:

   1. Teaching: 20% - 60%

   2. Scholarship: 20% - 60%

   3. Service: 10% - 20%

   The assigned percentages shall total 100%.

B. Criteria for Evaluation

1. Teaching
   1. 0 = “unsatisfactory”:

      There are major problems in teaching, which are confirmed by class visitation of peers and/or the Chair. The faculty member is unprepared for the teaching assignment, and/or teaches in a completely unorganized manner. Peer evaluation shows there is a major disconnect between the teacher and the students, and suggestions for improvement have not been followed. Mentoring/advising, liaison, and/or field coordinator evaluations indicate that faculty are not fulfilling these responsibilities.

   2. 1 = “adequate”:

      The faculty member is prepared for his/her teaching. Mentoring/advising, liaison, and/or field coordinator evaluations indicate faculty is performing the assigned tasks without major problems.

   3. 2 = “meritorious”:

      Faculty member consistently demonstrates effectiveness in teaching as evidenced by both students’ and peers’ evaluations. Additionally, the faculty member:

      • Advises students effectively as reflected on the advising evaluation forms

      • Performs the faculty-field liaison role effectively as evidenced by faculty-field evaluations and feedback from the Coordinator of Field Practicum

      • If applicable, performs the role of Coordinator of Field Practicum effectively as evidenced by field supervisor orientation evaluations and the end-of-the-year field coordinator evaluations.

   4. 3 = “outstanding”:

      Evidence of outstanding teaching includes positive student and peer evaluations and effective advising and mentoring as reflected on the annual advising evaluation forms as well as the student advising logs and folders and at least two of the following:

      • positive student feedback related to student honors projects, thesis committee, and/or independent study course

      • high ratings on workshop evaluations

      • high ratings on the faculty-field liaison evaluations and feedback from the Coordinator of Field Practicum

      • development of new courses or significant revisions to existing courses or integrating computer technologies into classes in a meaningful way

      if applicable, high ratings on the field supervisor orientation evaluations and high ratings on the end-of-the-year field coordinator evaluations unsolicited cards or letters of thanks/appreciation from students

   5. 4 = “extraordinary”:

      The faculty member receives very positive student and peer evaluations indicating exceptional teaching. Additionally, the faculty member provides evidence of effective advising and mentoring, performs two of the items listed above for outstanding, and either demonstrates a substantial leadership role related to teaching or receives a university teaching award.

2. Scholarship

   Multiple and single author scholarship are equally credited.

   1. 0 = “unsatisfactory”:

      There are no proposals, publications or the equivalent, research presentations or research grants (pending or obtained) in the past year. There is minimal indication of work in progress over the past year.

   2. 1 = “adequate”:

      The faculty member provides evidence of currency in scholarship as demonstrated by one of the following: documenting scholarship in progress; presenting his/her work minimally at a forum at the university; attending a professional conference or workshop; submitting a proposal to present at a professional conference or workshop; or chairing a panel.

   3. 2 = “meritorious”:

      The faculty member demonstrates evidence of currency in scholarship as indicated by one of the activities described above and has completed one of the following: submitted a substantial scholarly article for review; presented research at a state, regional, national, or international forum; applied for an external research or education grant; received an internal research or education grant; edited an academic series; or had a book review, encyclopedia entry, or conference paper published or accepted (with no revisions); or the equivalent.

   4. 3 = “outstanding”:

      A substantial peer reviewed scholarly article, manuscript, or book chapter has been published or accepted for publication without further revisions; or an external grant has been funded; or the equivalent.

   5. 4 = “extraordinary”:

      Two or more peer-reviewed journal articles, manuscripts or chapters have been published or accepted for publication without further revisions; or external grants have been funded for research; or a book in the faculty member’s discipline has been published or accepted for publication without further revisions; or a single article has been published or accepted for publication without further revisions that is seminal to the research field; or the faculty member is a keynote speaker at a national or international conference; or the equivalent.

3. Service
   1. 0 = “unsatisfactory”:

      The faculty member has minimal evidence of service performed at the department, college, university, or community level related to the social work profession.

   2. 1 = “adequate”:

      The faculty member participates in service at the department level, minimally by attending department faculty meetings and the Professional Advisory Council meetings, and serving on at least one department committee; or the equivalent.

   3. 2 = “meritorious”:

      In addition to items under “adequate”, the faculty member participates on at least one additional committee (two total) at the departmental level, and is involved in at least one community service activity; or the equivalent.

   4. 3 = “outstanding”:

      In addition to fulfilling the requirements for meritorious, the faculty member participates on two additional committees at the departmental level and chairs at least one committee and either participates on a college or university committee or holds a leadership role in a community service activity, task force, advisory council, or professional organization; or the equivalent.

   5. 4 = “extraordinary”:

      Faculty member meets department expectations as described in d. and demonstrates that service performed at the department, college, university, or community (related to social work) level resulted in major accomplishments; or the equivalent.

Article IV Promotion and Tenure

New faculty already tenured at a previous university must still apply for tenure and promotion and may count towards promotion and tenure all scholarship published from the time of first being appointed a tenure track faculty member at prior universities. New faculty, who held prior tenure track appointments which did not result in tenure, will also receive credit for scholarly work published prior to appointment at WSU. However, in both cases, evidence of a successful and effective program of ongoing scholarship while at Wright State University must be present in the record.

A. Committee Responsible for Promotion and Tenure

The Faculty Development Committee makes recommendations regarding promotion and tenure. Persons who serve on the Faculty Development Committee (FDC) within Social Work are tenured, bargaining unit faculty at the associate or full professor rank. There should be at least three tenured faculty members at the rank of Associate Professor or Professor on the committee to address promotion and tenure. If there are fewer than three tenured faculty in the department who are eligible and available to serve on the Faculty Development Committee, the candidate seeking promotion or tenure may suggest tenured bargaining unit faculty at the rank of associate or full professor in other departments at Wright State for membership on the Faculty Development Committee. However the FDC will have final approval of additional members.

B. Process

A candidate seeking promotion and/or tenure must submit a letter of intent to the Department Chair, with a copy to the Faculty Development Committee, by October 1. Upon receiving the letter, the Chair will instruct the FDC to arrange a special meeting and elect a chair of the committee. The candidate must then submit a complete promotion and tenure document to the Faculty Development Committee by the deadline established. The candidate must be informed in writing of the Department Committee’s recommendation ten (10) working days before the file is submitted to the college.

In addition to the three letters of evaluation from peers external to the University, the candidate may seek up to five additional letters (which are not part of letters required by the CBA). These additional letters of recommendation can be from WSU and non-WSU persons, including students, faculty, staff, and community persons. They are used as evidence of the candidate’s teaching, service, and/or research accomplishments.

C. Criteria for Promotion

1. Criteria for Promotion to Associate Professor with Tenure

   Below are the minimum expectations to merit promotion to Associate Professor with tenure in Social Work.

   1. Teaching
      1. Student evaluations and peer evaluations demonstrate teaching effectiveness.

      2. Candidate provides evidence of continued effectiveness or improvement in course design, syllabi, assignments and exams.

      3. Candidate provides evidence of adding to the curriculum within the Department, College, or University through one of the following ways: preparing a new course within the department; teaching a graduate level course within the department and/or within another WSU department; teaching a course in the Honors program; teaching a course in the community and/or WSU continuing education curriculum; serving as chair of a Social Work Honors thesis; serving on a Social Work Honor’s committee or other department or graduate level thesis committee; or supervising an Independent Study.

      4. Faculty shows evidence of having effectively mentored/advised social work majors. Positive feedback on annual advising evaluation forms (see appendix A) is expected. Additional evidence of successful advising may include reports of group advising/mentoring sessions with assigned students, letters sent to advisees/mentees stating availability and encouraging advising/mentoring sessions, letters of recommendation written for graduate school and/or employment, or other pertinent materials.

      5. Candidate’s annual agency reviews demonstrate effective implementation of practicum liaison assignments.

      6. Field Coordinator’s annual evaluation of performance by agency representatives demonstrates effective implementation of coordinator’s duties related to field orientation, placement process, problem solving, and communication.

         [Expectations 1-3 are key. The remaining expectations cannot offset poor performance in the classroom.]

   2. Scholarship

      The faculty are expected to meet the criteria for b.1) and b.2).

      1. Published Works

         Faculty will produce a minimum of four (4) substantial works of scholarship. Candidates will receive equal credit for scholarly work published while on tenure track at a previous university. However, work completed while at WSU should indicate a successful and effective program of ongoing scholarship. External peer-review letters will be used to help affirm the quality of a candidate’s scholarship. Works of scholarship must be either published or accepted for publication without further revision.

         1. Each of the following, or its equivalent, will count as one substantial scholarly work:
            1. An article accepted for publication in a peer-reviewed publication.

            2. A peer reviewed chapter accepted in a scholarly book related to social work.

         2. A substantial scholarly book in the faculty member’s field of research will count by itself as meeting the expectations for published works.

         Although scholarly publication is a goal, we recognize that not all significant faculty scholarship eventuates in publication. Candidates for promotion with tenure may further demonstrate their successful and effective program of ongoing scholarship by listing activity like the following, or the equivalent:

         • Conference papers

         • Research-related grant proposals

         • Published reviews, notes, and other short articles

         • Entries in reference works

         • Editorial work

         • Preparation of unpublished drafts

         • Conference attendance

         • Scholarly consulting

      2. Presentations and Grants-Faculty members will do a. or b.
         1. Faculty member presents on her/his research at a minimum of four (4) forums including state, regional, national, or international forums. At least two (2) of these presentations should be at a national or international conference related to social work. Being an invited speaker at a state, regional, national or international conference is equivalent to two presentations.

         2. Faculty receives an external grant of at least $1500 and is the principal/co-principal investigator.

         Faculty members are expected to demonstrate the minimum accomplishments in a) or b) of "Presentations and Grants." However, if faculty members fall short in presentations/grants, they may exceed the minimum requirements in Published Works.

   3. Service

      Faculty members are expected to do all of the following or the equivalent:

      1. Faculty member attends departmental faculty meetings and contributes productively to the discussions at these meetings.

      2. Annually, faculty member serves effectively on at least one (1) departmental committee.

      3. Faculty member regularly attends the Department Professional Advisory Council meetings and Department retreats.

      4. Faculty member serves on at least one (1) college or university committee.

      5. Faculty member provides an average of at least one of the following professional services each year:
         1. Serves as faculty liaison to a student organization.

         2. Serves on a Board of Trustees or Advisory Board.

         3. Serves as an evaluation or planning consultant for a social service agency.

         4. Holds a leadership role in a professional organization related to social work.

         5. Is a reviewer for external grants, manuscripts.

         6. Provides testimony at a hearing related to social services.

2. Criteria for Promotion to Full Professor

   Below are the minimum expectations to merit promotion to Full Professor in Social Work.

   1. Teaching
      1. Candidate provides evidence of continued classroom effectiveness and adds to the curriculum within the Department, College, or University through one of the following ways: preparing a new course within the department; teaching a graduate level course within the department and/or within another WSU department; teaching a course in the Honors program; teaching a course in the community and/or WSU continuing education curriculum; serving as chair of a Social Work Honors thesis; serving on a Social Work Honor’s committee or other department or graduate level thesis committee; or supervising an Independent Study.

      2. Faculty shows evidence of having effectively mentored/advised social work majors.

      3. Candidate’s annual agency reviews demonstrate effective implementation of practicum liaison assignments.

      4. Field Coordinator’s annual evaluation of performance by agency representatives demonstrates effective implementation of coordinator’s duties related to field orientation, placement process, problem solving, and communication.

         [Expectations 1 and 2 are key. The remaining expectations cannot offset poor performance in the classroom.]

   2. Scholarship

      Faculty must demonstrate a national reputation in social work research as evidenced by the following:

      1. Published Works

         Faculty will produce a minimum of four (4) substantial works of scholarship or equivalent (at Wright State University) beyond that required for promotion to Associate Professor. External peer-review letters will be used to help affirm the quality of a candidate’s scholarship.

         Each of the following will count as one substantial work of scholarship:

         1. An article accepted in a peer-reviewed publication.

         2. A peer reviewed chapter accepted in a scholarly book related to Social Work scholarship.

         One book in the faculty member’s field of research will be counted equivalent to four (4) substantial scholarly works listed above.

         Although scholarly publication is a goal, we recognize that not all-significant faculty scholarship eventuates in publication. Candidates for promotion may further demonstrate their successful and effective program of ongoing scholarship by listing activity like the following, or the equivalent:

         • Conference papers

         • Research-related rant proposals

         • Published reviews, notes, and other short articles

         • Entries in reference works

         • Editorial work

         • Preparation of unpublished drafts

         • Conference attendance

         • Scholarly consulting

      2. Presentations and Grants—Since promotion to Associate Professor
         1. Faculty member will present on her/his research at a minimum of four (4) forums including state, regional, national, or international forums. At least two (2) of these presentations should be at a national or international conference related to social work. Being an invitational speaker or panelist at a state, regional, national or international conference is equivalent to two presentations.

         2. Faculty receives an external grant of at least $1500 and is the principal/co-principal investigator.

            Faculty members are expected to demonstrate the minimum accomplishments in a) or b) of "Presentations and Grants". However, if they fall short in Presentations/Grants, they may exceed the minimum requirements in Published Works.

   3. Service

      Faculty members are expected to do all of the following or the equivalent, since promotion to Associate Professor.

      1. Faculty member attends departmental faculty meetings and contributes to the discussions at these meetings.

      2. Annually, faculty member serves in a leadership role on an average of at least two (2) departmental committees and chairs or co-chairs one committee.

      3. Faculty member regularly attends the Department Professional Advisory Council meetings and Department retreats.

      4. Faculty member serves for at least two (2) years on college or university committees.

      5. Faculty member is a leader in an average of at least one of the following professional services per year:
         1. Serves as faculty liaison to a student organization.

         2. Serves on a Board of Trustees or Advisory Board.

         3. Serves as an evaluation or planning consultant for a social service agency.

         4. Holds a leadership role in a professional organization related to social work.

         5. Is a reviewer for external grants, manuscripts, a refereed journal or P & T packet from a non-WSU candidate.

         6. Provides testimony at a hearing related to social services.

         7. Serves on a community task force

Article V Summer Teaching

Summer opportunities may be available to social work faculty on academic year appointments. The faculty member must submit a request and identify the course or courses which he/she prefers to teach. The Department will use a rotation system based on the order of seniority/longevity at WSU. Schedule permitting, after each faculty is assigned a course, a second course will be offered in the order of seniority.

Faculty who requested but were not selected for teaching opportunities, are placed at the highest seniority level for the next summer.

Article VI

Any amendments to these By-laws must be approved by a majority of the bargaining unit members in the Department of Social Work, by the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts, and by the Faculty Governance Committee.

Wright State University

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WORK

EVALUATION OF ACADEMIC ADVISING/MENTORING

Please take a few moments to complete these questions related to the academic advising you received. Thanks for your comments and opinions. THE ADVISOR BEING EVALUATED IS _____________________________.

n n n n n PLEASE PLACE AN “X” IN THE APPROPRIATE SPACE.

n n n n PLACE ONE CHECK MARK (3) PER QUESTION IN THE APPROPRIATE BOX. n n n n