Department of Psychological Science
Guidelines for Promotion and Tenure
These standards are provided to help candidates in the promotion and tenure process. In addition to reviewing the guidelines presented here, the candidate should refer to the University’s Personnel Policies and Procedures Document found in the Faculty Guide and to the Promotion and Tenure Guidelines created by the College of Health, Science, and Technology (CHST). Even when the credentials of a candidate are suitable according to the departmental standards described in this document, promotion and/or tenure cannot be guaranteed. A recommendation for promotion and/or tenure at the department level does not guarantee that the decision will be upheld at higher levels in the review process (college committee, dean, provost, and president).
The Department of Psychological Science guidelines are the same as those described in the College of Health, Science, and Technology Promotion and Tenure Guidelines with the following additional specifications. Therefore, this department document is not a comprehensive list of requirements for promotion and tenure. Instead, it is to be used as a supplement to the Faculty Guide and CHST documents.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND SELECTION
The department’s Promotion and Tenure committee will consist of all tenured faculty members in the Department of Psychological Science. Individual tenured faculty may request they be excused from serving on the Promotion and Tenure Committee under special circumstances, i.e. sabbatical, illness, temporary duty assignment. Such requests must be approved by the Chair of the Department. In no case shall the committee consist of less than five or seventy-five percent of the total number of tenured faculty, whichever is greater. The committee’s composition should be determined on or before March 1st of the semester preceding the candidate’s submission of his/her dossier. Additionally, as indicated in the CHST guidelines and in accordance with University policy, “Faculty elected to serve on departmental promotion and tenure committees or the College Promotion and Tenure Committee will exclude themselves from all promotion and tenure deliberations and votes whenever they deem that an ethical conflict of interest might exist that would unduly affect their impartiality and professional judgment in the vote or deliberations. Such elected faculty will be absolutely excluded from all votes or deliberations involving the promotion and/or tenure of their family members” (see the Board of Governors Policy 2.1.050 “Conflict of Interest or Commitment Policy for Employees” for further information regarding what constitutes a conflict of interest). Further, in accordance with the Faculty Guide (see Promotion and Tenure Policies), “only tenured full-time faculty who are not applying for promotion may serve on the department and College Promotion and Tenure Committees. In addition members of those promotion and tenure committees who fall under the nepotism rule are barred from participating in decisions to which that rule applies.”
TEACHING: DEPARTMENT SPECIFICATIONS AND EXAMPLES
Student Course and Teaching Evaluation Data
Student evaluation data obtained during the fall and spring semesters must be provided for a minimum of the past four years during the time in rank, and printouts from all of these evaluations should be supplied in the appendix to the dossier. If ratings from all classes for this time period are not available, the reason must be indicated. Evaluation data from summer courses can be provided, but are optional.
Peer Evaluations of Teaching
As required by CHST guidelines, candidates are expected to provide peer evaluations of teaching for the four years immediately preceding submission of the Dossier or for each year since their initial appointment if the appointment was less than four years prior. The evaluation should be concerned with the delivery of instruction, rather than content per se. Peer evaluation should include review of syllabi and course materials as well as classroom observations. The candidate will submit in writing the name of the peer evaluator to the chair of the department. The chair will provide the candidate with written approval/disapproval of the selection. Coordination of the observation will be managed by the candidate and the peer evaluator. Written documentation of approval by the chair of peer evaluations must be included in the appendices to the dossier.
Additional Supplemental Documentation of Teaching Effectiveness
● A potentially powerful but often under utilized way to demonstrate effectiveness is through student learning. In some instances, assessments of knowledge, skills, or attitudes may be available (e.g., national exams, pre- posttest assessments, licensure or certification tests or others). This information should be reported as completely as possible so that the committee has ample background to evaluate the data.
● Information about the teaching load of the candidate is often helpful in interpreting evidence from measures of student learning, student evaluations, and peer evaluations. This information may include evidence that the candidate typically teaches a full load with high enrollment, courses that are particularly demanding or difficult to teach, and uncompensated overload classes. Teaching of arranged courses, serving as a chair and/or member of thesis committees, and other mentoring of students are teaching activities that are also viewed favorably.
● Successful curriculum development is also viewed favorably. This could include developing new courses and/or teaching methods, developing or revising curricula, and preparation of instructional media.
● Evidence of continuing education that contributes to the candidate’s teaching skills or repertoire is viewed favorably. This could include evidence of:
○ Participation in professional conventions and conferences (e.g., attending presentations regarding techniques and/or content related to one’s area of expertise).
○ Post-doctoral course work.
○ Participation in workshops (e.g., attending workshops regarding techniques and/or content related to one’s area of expertise).
○ Sabbaticals that involve development of teaching competencies.
SCHOLARSHIP/CREATIVE ACTIVITY: DISCIPLINE-SPECIFIC EXAMPLES
1. Peer-reviewed publications are excellent evidence of scholarship. Publications that are not peer-reviewed are not considered in the candidate’s record of research.
2. Scholarship can also be shown by publication of academic books or chapters in edited academic books and/or academic textbooks.
3. Empirical investigations of the effectiveness of instructional methods are viewed as important scholarship when they are shared with the academic community via publications and/or conference presentations.
4. Evidence of grant activity also indicates scholarship.
5. Presentation of research at professional conferences at the state, regional, national, and/or international level is also indicative of scholarship.
6. Candidates may also show evidence of ongoing research activity, including unpublished research and research in progress.
7. Evidence of continuing education may be viewed as providing increased potential for scholarly contributions. This could include evidence of:
· Participation in professional conventions and conferences (e.g., attending presentations regarding techniques and/or content related to one’s area of expertise).
· Post-doctoral course work.
· Participation in scholarly workshops (e.g., attending presentations regarding techniques and/or content related to one’s area of expertise).
· Sabbaticals that involve the production of scholarly work and/or the development of research competencies.
8. Other activities as approved by the Department Chair.
SERVICE: DISCIPLINE-SPECIFIC EXAMPLES
Psychology is both a science and a profession; however, within the academy the emphasis of the discipline is that of the science of psychology. Scientific psychology is concerned with conducting basic and applied research. It is within this context that faculty members within a Department of Psychological Science may contribute service to the profession.
1. Evidence of service to professional organizations may include:
a Appointment to professional committees, panels, review boards, etc.
b Recognition from professional organizations (awards, Fellow status, etc.)
c Elected membership to selective professional organizations.
d Election or appointment as an officer or other position in a professional organization.
2. External consultation. This might include consultation with schools, businesses, other universities, and professional organizations.
3. Reviewing of textbooks, study guides, or other supplemental materials; ad hoc or invited reviewer or editor for a professional journal.
4. Reviewing submissions for professional conferences and/or student conferences.
5. Evaluating presentations or posters at professional conferences and/or student conferences.
6. Serving as chair or moderator of a symposium, round table, etc., at a professional conference and/or student conference.
7. Serving as a professional mentor as part of professional programs (e.g., mentor for the Preparing Future Faculty program, UCM Peer Mentor Program, etc.).
8. Serving as Faculty Advisor to a recognized psychology student organization, such as Psi Chi.
9. Participating in the planning of professional conferences and/or student conferences.
10. Sharing of scientific psychology with community groups and/or media, as advocated by psychology’s professional organizations (e.g., serving as a guest speaker for community organizations and functions; development of educational media, etc.).
11. Other activities as approved by the Department Chair.
Approved by Department 4/30/2013, Approved by Dean of CHST 5/5/2013 Page 1