Central Connecticut State University
Promotion and Tenure Policy for Tenure-track Teaching Faculty
adopted by the Central Connecticut State University
Faculty Senate on October 22, 2007
I. Non-discrimination and Respect.
The promotion and tenure process shall be conducted in a non-discriminatory fashion; with respect for individual career, group, and disciplinary differences; with respect for the expertise of faculty in evaluating peers; and with maximum transparency regarding standards and practices consistent with privacy of individual candidates. In keeping with the policy of Central Connecticut State University, unlawful or arbitrary discrimination is prohibited in all determinations regarding promotion and tenure. No decisions may discriminate against any individual with respect to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, political opinions, sexual orientation, physical disability, or any other conditions established by the law.
II. C. Departmental guidelines archiving. Departmentally approved and administratively reviewed Departmental guidelines shall be deposited with the Faculty Senate and the Connecticut State University American Association of University Professors office, which are the repositories from which Departmental guidelines shall be made available to other departments on request.
II. D. Departmental guidelines modification. Any modifications to Departmental guidelines shall be initiated by the relevant Department and follow the above procedure.
II. E. Departmental mentoring programs. Each Department shall establish a mentoring program for junior faculty. Departmental mentoring programs shall be supported at the University-wide level by regular workshops for Department Evaluation Committee members and for junior faculty.
III. Candidate Portfolio Structure.
III. A. Summary Dossier. Each candidate for promotion, tenure or sexennial evaluation shall complete in a single dossier a succinct, comprehensive, uniformly formatted summary of his or her accomplishments. It is recommended that each dossier contain the following:
1. a current curriculum vitae;
2. at least the previous five years' (or as many years as the candidate has been at
CCSU if fewer than five years) evaluative letters from Department
Evaluation Committees, Chairs, and Deans at CCSU;
3. a narrative statement that should be limited to the recommended maximum of
2000 words (i.e., approximately 4 single-spaced pages);
4. a section labeled "Load Credit Activity" containing
a. a brief introductory narrative (if desired),
b. a summary of distribution of load credit for the period under evaluation,
c. statistical summaries of student opinion survey data for the period
concerning the evaluation, and
d. original peer teaching evaluations;
5. a section labeled "Creative Activity" containing
a. a brief introductory narrative (if desired), and
b. a list of creative works organized with subheadings as suggested in the
appendix and with clear indication for each item whether a work is
completed (e.g., published), accepted, submitted, or in progress;
6. a section labeled "Productive Service to the Department and University"
containing
a. a brief introductory narrative (if desired),
b. a list of Direct Service organized with subheadings as suggested in the
appendix, and
c. a list of Service as a Representative of CCSU organized with
subheadings as suggested in the appendix;
7. a section labeled "Professional Activity" containing
a. a brief introductory narrative (if desired), and
b. a list of activities organized using subheadings as suggested in the
appendix; and
8. a copy of the Departmental guidelines.
III. B. Supporting materials. Each candidate's portfolio should include supporting material for items listed in the summary dossier, organized into four separate dossiers according to the evaluative categories identified in the Collective Bargaining Agreement (load credit activity, creative activity, productive service to the Department and University, and professional activity). Lists of potential categories for inclusion as supporting material for the four evaluative categories are included as an appendix to this policy.
III. B. 1. Supporting material for load credit activity. Supporting materials for load credit activity should include a summary of distribution of load credit (including courses taught, reassigned time, etc.), a statistical summary of student opinion surveys, a reproduction of written comments from student opinion surveys, and original peer teaching evaluation letters. The list in the appendix to this policy includes potential additional categories of material for inclusion.
III. B. 2. Supporting material for creative activity. The summary section should present how the candidate has fulfilled Section 4.11.9.2 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement: “Creative activity appropriate to one’s field, such as delivering papers at professional conferences, production/performance of artistic works, research, study, and publication.” CCSU recognizes and values all four broad categories of scholarship identified by Ernest Boyer in Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professorate (1990): discovery of knowledge, integration of knowledge, application of knowledge, and the scholarship of teaching. Standards for assessing creative activity of candidates shall reflect realistic expectations for faculty consistent with the twelve load hour teaching load, with the understanding that candidates who receive load credit for research reassigned time or sabbatical leave may be expected to establish proportionally stronger records in this area. Creative activity should be appropriate to the individual's field or fields, including interdisciplinary work. This section shall present all relevant bibliographical information, including inclusive page numbers and dates. Candidates for full professor shall clearly explain what they produced before and after their last promotion. The list in the appendix to this policy includes potential additional categories of material for inclusion.
III. B. 3. Supporting material for productive service to the Department and University. This section should be divided into two parts: a) direct service and b) service as a representative of CCSU. The latter section should be limited to activities that use the candidate’s professional expertise. The list in the appendix to this policy includes potential categories of material for inclusion.
III. B. 4. Supporting material for professional activity. The list in the appendix to this policy includes potential categories of material for inclusion.
IV. The Evaluation Process.
IV. A. Overview of the evaluation process. The candidate portfolios provide documentation of accomplishments at Central Connecticut State University. When evaluating these portfolios, each Department Evaluation Committee, Department Chair, Dean, and the Promotion and Tenure Committee should use consistent reporting formats.
IV. B. Communication between levels regarding disagreement. In the case of disagreement at a higher level, consultation shall occur with the previous level before the recommendation is forwarded. That is, if a Dean disagrees with a Department recommendation, that Dean shall meet with the Department Evaluation Committee and Department Chair before forwarding a recommendation to the Promotion and Tenure Committee; if the Promotion and Tenure Committee disagrees with a Dean’s recommendation, the committee shall meet with that Dean before forwarding a recommendation to the President. Finally, if the President (or designee) disagrees with the Promotion and Tenure Committee recommendation, the President (or designee) shall meet with that committee before issuing a final decision. In the case of disagreement with or need for clarification from any other level, consultation is permitted.
IV. C. Department Evaluation Committees. All Department Evaluation Committee letters should be evaluative and shall demonstrate internal consistency within the Department. Department Evaluation Committee letters evaluating candidates shall refer to Departmental guidelines and shall be organized according to the evaluative categories (load credit activity, creative activity, productive service to the Department and University, and professional activity). Department Evaluation Committees should normally evaluate classroom teaching through peer evaluations. Department Evaluation Committees shall evaluate each candidate in each evaluative category as exceeds expectations, meets expectations, or does not meet expectations, and shall give each candidate an overall evaluation of recommend or do not recommend.
IV. D. Deans. Deans shall evaluate each candidate in each evaluative category (load credit activity, creative activity, productive service to the Department and University, and professional activity) as exceeds expectations, meets expectations, or does not meet expectations, and shall give each candidate an overall evaluation of recommend or do not recommend.
IV. E. Promotion and Tenure Committee. The Promotion and Tenure Committee letter on each candidate shall provide, at the very least, a summary evaluation (i.e., exceeds, meets or does not meet expectations) of the candidate's performance in each evaluative category (load credit activity, creative activity, productive service to the Department and University, and professional activity), and shall give each candidate an overall evaluation of recommend or do not recommend.
V. Scope.
This policy pertains to promotion and tenure decisions only for tenure-track, teaching faculty as described in the Collective Bargaining Agreement. To the extent applicable, and to the extent consistent with the Collective Bargaining Agreement, the procedures described in this document, especially section III on portfolio structure, should be used for annual and sexennial reviews. All aspects of previous policies pertaining to evaluation of faculty not specifically addressed in this document remain in effect, unless inconsistent with the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
VI. Implementation.
This policy as explained in
Articles I through IV shall take effect at the beginning of the Fall 2008
semester, except that Departmental Guidelines should be submitted by the beginning
of the Spring 2008 semester to CSU-AAUP and the Faculty Senate.
Appendix. Possible categories for inclusion in candidate portfolios.
The subheadings listed alphabetically and unranked below are indicative, not prescriptive or exhaustive. Candidates will not necessarily be expected to have accomplishments in every subheading; instead, they will use the applicable headings, including headings that might be applicable but that are not listed below, on the lists of activities in each evaluative category to organize their accomplishments. These lists are in addition to required materials listed in the policy. Portfolios and curricula vitae should be clearly organized with different categories and subcategories of activity clearly delineated and listed. Candidates are encouraged to discuss portfolio organization with Department Evaluation Committee members, especially in cases in which they are uncertain as to where to list an activity.
Load Credit Activity
Teaching:
Course syllabi
Course materials (handouts, exams, etc.)
Curriculum development grants
Electronic enhancement of courses
Interdisciplinary course(s) taught
New course(s) introduced
Online courses taught
Software developed for teaching purposes
Special projects developed for a course
Student opinion surveys (numerical/averaged)
Student opinion surveys (written comments/typed)
Teaching excellence presentations
Teaching philosophy
Other . . .
Other load activity:
Administrative responsibilities for which reassigned time was provided
Assessment activities for which reassigned time was provided
Research activities for which reassigned time was provided
Sabbatical leave
Other . . .
Details of these other load activities may be cross-referenced and included in the appropriate other assessment categories.
Creative Activity
Applications of research and technology
Articles and book chapters (peer-reviewed, non-peer-reviewed)
Books
Edited volumes
Exhibitions (juried, non-juried)
Externally funded grants
Internal grants
Ongoing creative activity program or programs
Patents
Performances (juried, non-juried)
Presentations and papers on teaching
Presentations at conferences
Research reports to external sponsors
Submitted manuscripts or grant applications (with explanation of current stage)
Other . . .
Productive Service to the Department and University
Direct Service:
Academic advising
Administrative support work (e.g., school-wide governance, admissions reviews, accreditation and assessment work, etc.)
Committee work at department, school, university, and system levels; service as a committee officer should be noted.
Contributions to enhance equal opportunity and cultural diversity on campus
Involvement with student organizations, residences, etc.
Other . . .
Service as a representative of CCSU (limited to activities that use the candidate’s professional expertise):
Expert witness testimony
Outreach and service to schools and other educational organizations
Participation in community affairs
Service to business and industry
Service to citizen/client groups
Service to government agencies
Service to public and private organizations
Other . . .
Professional Activity
Active participation in professional and learned societies
Attending conferences or seminars
Chairing conference sessions
Membership in professional and learned societies
Organizing conferences or serving on conference committees
Organizing sessions within conferences
Serving as a peer reviewer or juror for journals, granting agencies, etc.
Other . . .