NTID Administrative Guidelines and Criteria for Promotion to the Ranks of Senior and Principal Lecturer

Transcription

1 NTID Administrative Guidelines and Criteria for Promotion to the Ranks of Senior and Principal Lecturer National Technical Institute for the Deaf Rochester Institute of Technology May 2011: Approval by NTID Faculty March 2014: Revised to conform with E6.0 1

2 Table of Contents RIT Policy on Rank and Responsibilities of Non-Tenure Track Faculty... 3 NTID Promotion Committee... 5 Promotion to Senior Lecturer: Criteria... 5 Promotion to Senior Lecturer: Process... 8 Promotion to Principal Lecturer: Criteria Promotion to Principal Lecturer: Process Appendix A: Forms Form A.1: Department Peer Recommendation Form Form A.2: Chairperson Recommendation Form Form A.3: College Promotion Committee Recommendation Form A.4: President/Dean Confidential Recommendation Form Appendix B: Timeline Appendix C: Interpreting SLPI Rating Scale Appendix D: Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness Appendix E: RIT Policy on Service

3 NTID Administrative Guidelines and Criteria for Promotion to the Ranks of Senior and Principal Lecturer Based on E6.0 of the University Policies and Procedures Manual, this document contains the NTID Administrative Guidelines and Criteria for Promotion to the ranks of Senior and Principal Lecturer. Where the document cites continuous sections from E6.0, the text appears in italic typeface. The policies and procedures specific to NTID appear in ordinary typeface. RIT POLICY ON FACULTY RANK AND PROMOTION E6.0 III. Rank and Responsibilities of Non-Tenure-Track Faculty A. Definition of Non-Tenure Track A non-tenure-track faculty member is an employee of the university engaged in research or in teaching credit courses, non-credit courses, or special courses typically under the auspices of one of the colleges, whether full-time or less than full-time. A non-tenure-track faculty member is employed for a specific period of time and the university is not committed to provide employment beyond the time specified. Appointment to any of the non-tenure-track classifications presented in this policy does not qualify a person for consideration for tenure or other privileges accorded to tenure-track faculty. B. Non-Tenure-track Teaching - Lecturer Ranks 1. Definition The non-tenure-track teaching faculty category of lecturer is generally used in situations carefully tailored to university programmatic needs. Lecturer positions normally should not be created out of previously tenure-track positions. Lecturer ranks may be assigned to those whose talents and experience would give reasonable assurance of qualifying for consideration for a position as a teacher. a. Individuals appointed in the category of lecturer have teaching as their primary responsibility. b. Ranks of lecturer include: Lecturer, Senior Lecturer, and Principal Lecturer. 2. Responsibilities and Contracts for Each Rank a. Lecturer i. Description and Responsibilities: The primary responsibility of a lecturer is teaching. In addition, a lecturer may be assigned student advisees, and/or asked to participate in department-level service activities. A lecturer is not expected to participate in scholarship or college or university-level service. ii. Contracts: A lecturer may be reappointed annually to non-tenure-track employment. A lecturer s contract may be renewed at the sole discretion of the university. (aa) A lecturer in his or her initial year of appointment will be notified whether the appointment is being renewed by June 30. (bb) After the initial year of hire, any lecturer on a one-year contract must be notified whether the appointment is to be renewed by June 30. 3

4 (cc) After three consecutive years of annual appointments, a lecturer may receive a two-year contract, which may be renewed at the sole discretion of the university. If no notice of renewal is given, the contract ends at the end of the two-year period. If the two-year contract will be renewed, notice of the renewal shall be given by June 30 of the first year. The offer of a two-year contract does not guarantee subsequent two-year contracts. Continued employment and subsequent two-year contracts shall be conditional upon satisfactory annual performance, projected departmental needs and/or college resources, and compliance with RIT policies and procedures. Any notice of non-renewal or offer of a subsequent contract of less than two years shall be given by June 30. b. Senior Lecturer i. Description and Responsibilities: After five years of full-time teaching at RIT, a lecturer is eligible for promotion to senior lecturer. At the time of hire, a lecturer may receive up to two years of credit for teaching at RIT or another institution of higher education. Credit will be assessed based upon an equivalent full-time lecturer load. In addition to teaching students, a senior lecturer will engage in department or college level service activities. A senior lecturer may be asked to participate in service activities at the university level. A senior lecturer is not expected to conduct scholarship. ii. Contracts: A senior lecturer will receive a three-year contract, which may be renewed at the sole discretion of the university. If no notice of renewal is given, the contract ends at the end of the three-year period. If the three-year contract will be renewed, notice of the renewal shall be given by June 30 of the second year of the three-year contract. The offer of a three-year contract does not guarantee subsequent three-year contracts. Continued employment and subsequent three-year contracts shall be conditional upon satisfactory annual performance, projected departmental needs and/or college resources, and compliance with RIT policies and procedures. If a subsequent three-year contract cannot be supported, a senior lecturer may be offered a contract of less than three-year duration, but would nevertheless retain the rank of senior lecturer. Any notice of non-renewal or offer of a subsequent contract of less than three years shall be given by June 30 of the second year of the three-year contract. c. Principal Lecturer i. Description and Responsibilities: After five years as a senior lecturer at RIT, a candidate is eligible for promotion to principal lecturer. In addition to teaching, a principal lecturer is expected to engage in service activities to the department, college, or the university. A principal lecturer is not expected to conduct scholarship. ii. Contracts: A principal lecturer will receive a five-year contract, which may be renewed at the sole discretion of the university. If no notice of renewal is given, the contract ends at the end of the five-year period. If the five-year contract will be renewed, notice of the renewal shall be given by June 30 of the third year. The offer of a five-year contract does not guarantee subsequent five-year contracts. Continued employment and subsequent five-year contracts shall be a conditional upon satisfactory annual performance, projected departmental needs and/or college resources, and compliance with RIT policies and procedures. If a subsequent five-year contract cannot be supported, a principal lecturer can be offered a contract of less than five-year duration, but would nevertheless retain the rank of principal lecturer. Any notice of non-renewal or offer of a subsequent contract of less than five years must occur by June 30 of the third year of any five-year contract. 4. Promotion Process for Non-Tenure-Track Lecturers and Senior Lecturers a. Nominations 4

5 Nominations for promotion of a candidate to senior or principal lecturer may be initiated by the department chair, tenured faculty, non-tenure-track faculty senior to the candidate s present rank, or by the candidate. Moving the nomination forward is based upon departmental needs and available resources. b. Promotion Committee The Promotion Committee will be established and have the responsibilities as described in E6.0.II and the college procedures shall ensure the committee membership will include a non-tenure-track lecturer senior to the candidate s present rank for evaluation of the non-tenure track lecturer if one exists within the college. The Promotion Committee will review the candidate based on the promotion criteria of the university as outlined in this policy and those of the college; the candidate s documentation; and all written letters of review or evaluation. The Promotion Committee shall follow the voting guidelines set forth in E6.0.II.c and shall forward its recommendation to the dean of the college. NTID PROMOTION COMMITTEE Composition In accordance with the above-cited RIT Policy, candidates for promotion to senior lecturer will be reviewed by the NTID associate professor promotion committee with the exception that the at-large member on that committee will be replaced for this purpose by a senior lecturer, selected by lottery. Similarly, candidates for promotion to principal lecturer will be reviewed by the NTID full professor promotion committee with the at-large member being replaced for this purpose by a principal lecturer (should one be available.). NTID CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION TO SENIOR LECTURER Only lecturers hired into permanent lines are eligible for promotion. Lecturers hired into temporary positions are not eligible for promotion. However, if temporary lecturers are later hired into permanent lines, their time spent in temporary positions at the university, if these were 100% positions, may be counted toward eligibility for promotion. The following criteria will be used in assessing the candidacy of a lecturer for promotion to senior lecturer: (a) The major criterion for awarding promotion to senior lecturer is documented evidence of outstanding teaching and/or tutoring, as determined by the candidate s annual expectations. Types of evidence demonstrating outstanding teaching or tutoring may include the following 1 : peer evaluations and recognition evaluations by former and current students administrative evaluations during the most recent five-year period of full-time employment as a lecturer documented success in such areas as development or refinement of course materials and teaching/tutoring methodology. 1 For other types of evidence, see Appendix D, Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness. 5

6 In addition to demonstrating outstanding teaching/tutoring, all candidates are also required to satisfy the effective communication criteria listed below under (b). Finally, a candidate may also refer to activities listed below under (c), although reference is not required except where an activity was directly related to the candidate s annual expected outcomes. (b) Effective communication with people who are deaf and people who are hearing in all modalities as well as sensitivity to deaf cultural issues in order to foster full and equal participation by all members of the NTID community. 2 American Sign Language The expectation for NTID faculty is that they will strive for, achieve, and maintain the ability to communicate in American Sign Language (ASL) at a level of vocabulary, grammatical accuracy, comprehension, and fluency that allows effective participation in communication situations applicable to work and social topics. In consideration of the needs of the academic and social environment of NTID, the target goal as established in the Communication Task Force Recommendations and approved by faculty (February 1991) for all faculty is an ADVANCED level of knowledge and abilities. For promotion to senior lecturer, however, achievement of an INTERMEDIATE PLUS level is acceptable in cases where the candidate can clearly show strong evidence of progress and sustained effort toward an advanced rating. Such evidence may include SRS/SRATE ratings related to communication skills; rating observations by individuals qualified to assess sign language, ongoing participation in sign communication development activities such as ASL classes, individual tutoring, and videotaping of classroom performance; involvement with student clubs and other extra-curricular student activities; and interactions with the deaf community on and off campus. Promotion documentation must include documentation of the candidate s SLPI rating. (Candidates should refer to Appendix C for detail and clarification related to sign language achievement and Sign Language Proficiency Interview (SLPI) ratings.) Spoken Communication NTID faculty are also expected to strive for, achieve, and maintain the ability to use spoken communication strategies and techniques. Spoken communication is considered to be speech, with or without voice, used expressively and/or receptively, alone or to complement a message communicated with signs. Although no skill level is specified, faculty are expected to participate in learning activities whereby they develop a knowledge of specific spoken communication strategies and classroom techniques and their applicability in communication situations. Promotion documentation must include documentation of learning activities related to spoken communication. (c) Depending on annual assignment of service-related responsibilities, the candidate for promotion to senior lecturer may have made service contributions to NTID in one or more of the following ways: membership on department committees; contributions towards student recruitment, retention, and placement; services that support and enhance the campus community through complementary education, student organizations, and special programs and events; service to the community that advances public confidence in NTID as a college and RIT as an institution of higher education; and, service to the profession through participation in state, national or international societies, committees, or organizations. 2 Faculty expectations for both sign and spoken components relate only to the acquisition of communication knowledge and abilities; there are no requirements for what communication mode(s) a faculty member must use in any given professional circumstance. For a full description of communication expectations and documentation, please refer to Communication Task Force Report, November 1990, pp

7 2. Process and Schedule a. Nomination: By May 1 of the academic year immediately prior to the academic year in which the faculty member will undergo consideration for promotion, nominations for promotion will be received by the department chair. b. Acknowledgement: By May 15 of the academic year immediately prior to academic year in which the faculty member will undergo consideration for promotion, the candidate for promotion will receive a written acknowledgement of the initiation of the promotion process and a request of materials by the department chair. The department chair will also inform the dean of the college about the nomination. The dean will ensure that a Promotion Committee with an elected chair is in place by September 15 to receive the promotion documentation from the candidate. c. Submission: By September 15, the promotion candidate submits his or her documentation to the Promotion Committee chair for review. The candidate for promotion to senior lecturer shall assemble a portfolio that documents his or her accomplishments for the most recent five-year period of full-time employment as a lecturer. The portfolio shall focus primarily on the candidate s teaching expertise with examples of pedagogical approach and student and peer evaluations. The portfolio will also include documentation of the candidate s efforts to develop professionally as well as evidence of other areas of activity, such as advising and service, where these have been included in the candidate s plan of work. The portfolio shall include all administrative reviews for the specified time period. d. Request for Reviews and Letters for Support: By September 30, the Promotion Committee chair will solicit letters of recommendation for or against promotion from the candidate s department chair, and from the tenured faculty members and non-tenure-track teaching faculty senior in rank from within the candidate s department. e. Review Begins: By January 1, all materials, including all letters, should be made available for review by the Promotion Committee. f. Review Completion: By February 1, members of the Promotion Committee will complete the review of all promotion materials and the Promotion Committee chair will submit a letter of recommendation for or against promotion to the college dean, including the tally of votes from members of the promotion committee. This letter will be accompanied by all other letters and documentation. g. College Dean: By March 1, the college dean will submit his or her letter of recommendation for or against promotion to the provost. This letter will be accompanied by all other letters and documentation. h. Provost/President: Between March 1 and April 15, the provost and the president will work together to formulate recommendations for or against promotion. These recommendations will be informed by all other letters and documentation, including the promotion committee s vote. To form a promotion recommendation, the provost may call upon the department chair, the college promotion committee, or the dean for clarification or additional information and may meet with any of them, to reconcile opposing views. The provost may convene the chairs of each of the college promotion committees when: A college s promotion committee and dean are in dispute over a candidate s ability to be promoted; 7

8 There is a disagreement between the provost and the dean as representative of the college regarding the candidate s ability to be promoted; In special circumstances, to evaluate a proposal the title of distinguished to a faculty member who is a person widely recognized for his or her knowledge and expertise. The group will relate its findings in writing to the provost. When satisfied on all points, the provost shall make the final recommendation to the president that considers all prior recommendations received. i. Final Decision: Notification regarding the promotion decision will be sent by the provost to the candidate by April 15. NTID PROCESS FOR PROMOTION TO SENIOR LECTURER Initiation of Promotion Process Lecturers who have taught for five full years and who wish to be considered for promotion to senior lecturer should inform their department chairperson or immediate supervisor in writing by May 1. The candidate prepares a promotion portfolio in a single binder, of which two copies must be provided to the candidate s department chair by September 15 th. (Where the number of peers needing to review the documentation warrants more than two copies, the office of the AVP will assist the candidate as necessary.) All documentation remains confidential and access to it is limited to those from whom recommendations are solicited. It is kept in the office of the candidate s chairperson during the period of review by departmental peers. In those instances where peers are physically located apart from the department chair s office, arrangements will be made by the department chair to place documentation in an accessible and secure location. 1. Organization of Portfolio 3 The documentation contained in the candidate s portfolio must be assembled in one binder 4, with the following tabs: A: The candidate s original letter of hire. B: Curriculum Vitae - The CV should document the candidate s entire academic career with accomplishments since the last promotion clearly distinguished. C: Statement summarizing the candidate s teaching philosophy, goals, and accomplishments, as well as a list of courses taught/tutored. The statement should also address the candidate s performance relative to the criteria for promotion for the most recent five-year period, including efforts to develop professionally. 5 D: Statement on Service (where appropriate) E: A copy of the SLPI rating letter. F: Student evaluations since the last promotion G: Letters of support from peers, students, and others competent to comment on the merit of the candidate s accomplishments 6. 3 No materials may be added to the portfolio or sent to the promotion committee after submission to department chair. 4 Candidates should expect that additional material or clarification may be requested by peers during the departmental review period, and/or by the college promotion committee. Candidates are therefore advised that they may wish to have supporting documentation prepared in advance so that, if requested, they can provide information in a timely manner. 5 The candidate may include additional material that he or she feels would support promotion to senior lecturer. Such material might include examples of syllabi, instructional materials, teaching strategies and representative examples of student work. 6 Occasionally, providers of support letters prefer to send their letter directly to the promotion committee through the office of the AVP or president/dean. 8

9 The statements in C-D should summarize the candidate s achievements in that area while in the current rank. The material provided in these two sections must not exceed 20 single-sided pages. 2. Promotion Review (see Appendix B for timeline) a. The AVP for academic affairs provides the candidate s portfolio to the department chairperson. The chairperson prepares his or her review using Form A.2 and shares this with the candidate by October 4 at the latest. The candidate sends Form A.2 to the Office of the AVP together with any response or rebuttal. b. The AVP for academic affairs makes the candidate s portfolio available for review by the candidate s eligible department peers (all tenured and tenure-track faculty and senior and principal lecturers). Each department peer provides his or her recommendation on Form A.1 and submits this to the office of the AVP by October 24. c. The AVP for academic affairs provides the candidate s portfolio, the chairperson and departmental peer reviews and the candidate s annual appraisals for the last five years, to the chair of the promotion committee. d. As part of its review, the committee may feel it needs more information to reach an informed judgment. It may wish to solicit such information from the candidate or the candidate s peers (in the latter case, it must inform the candidate). If the committee decides that it needs more information from the candidate, it must inform him or her in writing, stating exactly what information it needs. The candidate may provide the requested information in written form and/or by appearing in person before the committee. The candidate must let the committee know within two working days after receipt of the committee s request how they would like to respond. e. When a candidate chooses the in writing option, he or she will have three additional working days after notifying the committee to submit the requested information. If a candidate opts to appear before the committee, the meeting should be scheduled three days after the committee receives that candidate s request to appear. f. Based on its deliberations, the committee prepares a recommendation for or against promotion on Form A.3. This recommendation, together with the candidate s portfolio and the chairperson and peer reviews, must be submitted to the AVP for academic affairs, together with the candidate s portfolio by February 1. g. The AVP for academic affairs provides the candidate with a copy of the committee recommendation. In the event of a recommendation against promotion, the candidate may opt to withdraw or write a response or rebuttal statement, which is sent to the office of the president/dean. The candidate may also request a meeting with the president/dean. h. If requested, the president/dean meets with the candidate. At this juncture, the president/dean may seek further information from the committee. i. Based on the committee s recommendation and accompanying documentation, the president/dean writes a recommendation on Form A.4 and submits this to the provost. j. The provost informs the candidate of the final decision. 9

10 d. Promotion from Senior Lecturer to Principal Lecturer 1. Criteria Promotion to principal lecturer is based on meeting promotion criteria and on demonstrated evidence of outstanding teaching, service, and successful performance of other duties as assigned and where appropriate. Department- and college-level service is expected. Additional service to the candidate s professional community and the community at large is also considered. NTID CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION TO PRINCIPAL LECTURER The following criteria will be used in assessing the candidacy of a senior lecturer for promotion to principal lecturer: (a) The major criterion for awarding promotion to principal lecturer is documented evidence of sustained outstanding teaching and/or tutoring, as determined in the candidate s annual expectations. In order to satisfy the standard for promotion, the candidate must be seen as a role model for other professionals. Types of evidence demonstrating outstanding teaching or tutoring may include the following: 7 peer evaluations and recognition evaluations by former and current students administrative evaluations during the most recent five-year period of full-time employment as a senior lecturer documented success in such areas as development or refinement of course materials and teaching/tutoring methodology. In addition to demonstrating sustained excellence in teaching/tutoring, all candidates for promotion to principal lecturer are required to satisfy the effective communication criteria listed below under (b) and to have developed a record of service as described under (c) below. (b) Effective communication with people who are deaf and people who are hearing in all modalities as well as sensitivity to deaf cultural issues in order to foster full and equal participation by all members of the NTID community. 8 American Sign Language The expectation for NTID faculty is that they will strive for, achieve, and maintain the ability to communicate in American Sign Language (ASL) at a level of vocabulary, grammatical accuracy, comprehension, and fluency that allows effective participation in communication situations applicable to work and social topics. In consideration of the needs of the academic and social environment of NTID, the target goal as established in the Communication Task Force Recommendations and approved by faculty (February 1991) for all faculty is an ADVANCED level of knowledge and abilities. For promotion to principal lecturer, however, achievement of an INTERMEDIATE PLUS level is acceptable in cases where the candidate can clearly show strong evidence of progress and sustained effort toward an advanced rating. Such evidence may include SRS/SRATE ratings related to 7 For other types of evidence, see Appendix D, Evaluation of Teaching Effectiveness. 8 Faculty expectations for both sign and spoken components relate only to the acquisition of communication knowledge and abilities; there are no requirements for what communication mode(s) a faculty member must use in any given professional circumstance. For a full description of communication expectations and documentation, please refer to Communication Task Force Report, November 1990, pp

11 communication skills; rating observations by individuals qualified to assess sign language, ongoing participation in sign communication development activities such as ASL classes, individual tutoring, and videotaping of classroom performance; involvement with student clubs and other extra-curricular student activities; and interactions with the deaf community on and off campus. Promotion documentation must include documentation of the candidate s SLPI rating. (Candidates should refer to Appendix C for detail and clarification related to sign language achievement and Sign Language Proficiency Interview (SLPI) ratings.) Spoken Communication NTID faculty are also expected to strive for, achieve, and maintain the ability to use spoken communication strategies and techniques. Spoken communication is considered to be speech, with or without voice, used expressively and/or receptively, alone or to complement a message communicated with signs. Although no skill level is specified, faculty are expected to participate in learning activities whereby they develop a knowledge of specific spoken communication strategies and classroom techniques and their applicability in communication situations. Promotion documentation must include documentation of learning activities related to spoken communication. (c) The candidate for promotion to principal lecturer should have made service contributions to NTID, the greater university and his or her professional community in one or more of the following ways: leadership on department and/or college committees; contributions towards student recruitment, retention, and placement; services that support and enhance the campus community through complementary education, student organizations, and special programs and events; service to the community that advances public confidence in NTID as a college and RIT as an institution of higher education; and, service to the profession through participation in state, national or international societies, committees, or organizations 2. Process and Schedule a. Nomination: By May 1 of the academic year immediately prior to the academic year in which the faculty member will undergo consideration for promotion, nominations for promotion will be received by the department chair. b. Acknowledgement: By May 15 of the academic year immediately prior to academic year in which the faculty member will undergo consideration for promotion, the candidate for promotion will receive a written acknowledgement of the initiation of the promotion process and a request of materials by the department chair. The department chair will also inform the dean of the college about the nomination. The dean will ensure that a Promotion Committee with an elected chair is in place by September 15 to receive the promotion documentation from the candidate. c. Submission: By September 15, the promotion candidate submits his or her documentation to the Promotion Committee chair for review. The candidate for promotion to Principal Lecturer shall assemble a portfolio that documents his or her accomplishments for the most recent five-year period of full-time employment following promotion to senior lecturer. The portfolio shall focus primarily on the candidate s teaching expertise with examples of pedagogical approach and student and peer evaluations. The portfolio will also include documentation of the candidate s efforts to develop professionally as well as evidence of other areas of activity, such as advising and service, where these have been included in the candidate s plan of work and as required for eligibility for promotion. The portfolio shall include all administrative reviews for the specified time period. d. Request for Reviews and Letters for Support: By September 30, the Promotion Committee chair will solicit letters of recommendation for or against promotion from the candidate s department chair, and from the tenured faculty members and principal lecturers from within the candidate s department. 11

12 e. Review Begins: By January 1, all materials, including all letters, should be made available for review by the Promotion Committee. f. Review Completion: By February 1, members of the Promotion Committee will complete the review of all promotion materials and the Promotion Committee chair will submit a letter of recommendation for or against promotion to the college dean, including the tally of votes from members of the promotion committee. This letter will be accompanied by all other letters and documentation. g. College Dean: By March 1, the college dean will submit his or her letter of recommendation for or against promotion to the provost. This letter will be accompanied by all other letters and documentation. h. Provost/President: Between March 1 and April 15, the provost and the president will work together to formulate recommendations for or against promotion. These recommendations will be informed by all other letters and documentation, including the promotion committee s vote. To form a promotion recommendation, the provost may call upon the department chair, the college promotion committee, or the dean for clarification or additional information and may meet with any of them, to reconcile opposing views. The provost may convene the chairs of each of the college promotion committees when: A college s promotion committee and dean are in dispute over a candidate s ability to be promoted; There is a disagreement between the provost and the dean as representative of the college regarding the candidate s ability to be promoted; In special circumstances, to evaluate a proposal the title of distinguished to a faculty member who is a person widely recognized for his or her knowledge and expertise. The group will relate its findings in writing to the provost. When satisfied on all points, the provost shall make the final recommendation to the president that considers all prior recommendations received. i. Final Decision: Notification regarding the promotion decision will be sent by the provost to the candidate by April 15. NTID PROCESS FOR PROMOTION TO PRINCIPAL LECTURER Initiation of Promotion Process Senior lecturers who have taught for five full years and who wish to be considered for promotion to principal lecturer should inform their department chairperson or immediate supervisor in writing by May 1. The candidate prepares a promotion portfolio in a single binder, of which two copies must be provided to the candidate s department chair by September 15 th. (Where the number of peers needing to review the documentation warrants more than two copies, the office of the AVP will assist the candidate as necessary.) All documentation remains confidential and access to it is limited to those from whom recommendations are solicited. It is kept in the office of the candidate s chairperson during the period of review by departmental peers. In those instances where peers are physically located apart from the department 12

13 chair s office, arrangements will be made by the department chair to place documentation in an accessible and secure location. 1. Organization of Portfolio 9 The documentation contained in the candidate s portfolio must be assembled in one binder 10, with the following tabs: A: The candidate s original letter of hire. B: Curriculum Vitae - The CV should document the candidate s entire academic career with accomplishments since the last promotion clearly distinguished. C: Statement summarizing the candidate s teaching philosophy, goals, and accomplishments, and address his or her performance relative to the criteria for promotion for the most recent five-year period, including efforts to develop professionally. 11 D: Statement on Service (where appropriate) E: A copy of the SLPI rating letter. F: Student evaluations since the last promotion G: Letters of support from peers, students, and others competent to comment on the merit of the candidate s accomplishments 12. The statements in C-D should summarize the candidate s achievements in that area while in the current rank. The material provided in these two sections must not exceed 20 single-sided pages. 2. Promotion Review (see Appendix B for timeline) a. The AVP for academic affairs provides the candidate s portfolio to the department chairperson. The chairperson prepares his or her review using Form A.2 and shares this with the candidate by October 4 at the latest. The candidate sends Form A.2 to the Office of the AVP together with any response or rebuttal. b. The AVP for academic affairs makes the candidate s portfolio available for review by the candidate s eligible department peers (all tenured and tenure-track faculty and principal lecturers). Each department peer provides his or her recommendation on Form A.1 and submits this to the office of the AVP by October 24. c. The AVP for academic affairs provides the candidate s portfolio, the chairperson and departmental peer reviews and the candidate s annual appraisals for the last five years, to the chair of the promotion committee. d. As part of its review, the committee may feel it needs more information to reach an informed judgment. It may wish to solicit such information from the candidate or the candidate s peers (in the latter case, it must inform the candidate). If the committee decides that it needs more information from the candidate, it must inform him or her in writing, stating exactly what information it needs. The candidate may provide the requested information in written form and/or by appearing in person before the committee. The candidate must let the committee 9 No materials may be added to the portfolio or sent to the promotion committee after submission to department chair. 10 Candidates should expect that additional material or clarification may be requested by peers during the departmental review period, and/or by the college promotion committee. Candidates are therefore advised that they may wish to have supporting documentation prepared in advance so that, if requested, they can provide information in a timely manner. 11 The candidate may include additional material that he or she feels would support promotion to principal lecturer. Such material might include examples of syllabi, instructional materials, teaching strategies and representative examples of student work. 12 Occasionally, providers of support letters prefer to send their letter directly to the promotion committee through the office of the AVP or president/dean. 13

14 know within two working days after receipt of the committee s request how they would like to respond. e. When a candidate chooses the in writing option, he or she will have three additional working days after notifying the committee to submit the requested information. If a candidate opts to appear before the committee, the meeting should be scheduled three days after the committee receives that candidate s request to appear. f. Based on its deliberations, the committee prepares a recommendation for or against promotion on Form A.3. This recommendation, together with the candidate s portfolio and the chairperson and peer reviews, must be submitted to the AVP for academic affairs, together with the candidate s portfolio by February 1. g. The AVP for academic affairs provides the candidate with a copy of the committee recommendation. In the event of a recommendation against promotion, the candidate may opt to withdraw or write a response or rebuttal statement, which is sent to the office of the president/dean. The candidate may also request a meeting with the president/dean. h. If requested, the president/dean meets with the candidate. At this juncture, the president/dean may seek further information from the committee. i. Based on the committee s recommendation and accompanying documentation, the president/dean writes a recommendation on Form A.4 and submits this to the provost. j. The provost informs the candidate of the final decision. 14

15 APPENDIX A FORM A.1: DEPARTMENT PEER RECOMMENDATION I have worked with the candidate for years in the capacity of In my judgment and on the basis of my evaluation of all available information, has satisfied the criteria for promotion to the rank sought. has not satisfied the criteria for promotion to the rank sought. My recommendation is based upon the following assessment of the candidate s performance relative to the criteria for promotion as these are stated in the NTID Administrative Guidelines and Criteria for Promotion to Senior and Principal Lecturer (pp. 5-6 and 10-11). Academic and Professional Qualifications a) Teaching/Tutoring b) Effective communication c) Service (if applicable) 15

16 d) Other (if applicable) Prepared by Department Date Return this form directly to the office of the AVP for academic affairs by October

17 APPENDIX A FORM A.2: CHAIRPERSON RECOMMENDATION I have worked with the candidate for years in the capacity of In my judgment and on the basis of my evaluation of all available information, has satisfied the criteria for promotion to the rank sought. has not satisfied the criteria for promotion to the rank sought. My recommendation is based upon the following assessment of the candidate s performance relative to the criteria for promotion as these are stated in the NTID Administrative Guidelines and Criteria for Promotion to Senior and Principal Lecturer (pp. 5-6 and 10-11). Academic and Professional Qualifications a) Teaching/Tutoring b) Effective communication 17

18 c) Service (if applicable) d) Other (if applicable) Prepared by Department Date Return this form directly to the office of the AVP for academic affairs by October 4. 18

19 APPENDIX A FORM A.3: COLLEGE LECTURER PROMOTION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The recommendation of this College Promotion Committee regarding promotion of to the rank of is as follows: number of votes in support of promotion number of votes against promotion It is therefore the judgment of the committee, on the basis of evaluation of all available information, that has satisfied the criteria for promotion to the rank sought. has not satisfied the criteria for promotion to the rank sought. In the following, we provide a rationale for our judgment of whether the candidate has satisfied the criteria for promotion as these are stated in the NTID Administrative Guidelines and Criteria for Promotion to Senior and Principal Lecturer (pp. 5-6 and 10-11). Academic and Professional Qualifications a) Teaching/Tutoring b) Effective communication 19

20 c) Service (if applicable) d) Other (if applicable) Committee Chairperson Date / Committee Member / Date / Committee Member / Date / Committee Member / Date / Committee Member / Date Return this form directly to the office of the AVP for academic affairs by February 1. 20

21 APPENDIX A FORM A.4: PRESIDENT/DEAN CONFIDENTIAL RECOMMENDATION In my judgment, and on the basis of my evaluation of all available information, has satisfied the criteria for promotion to the rank sought. has not satisfied the criteria for promotion to the rank sought. My recommendation is based upon the following assessment of the candidate s performance relative to the criteria for promotion as these are stated in the NTID Administrative Guidelines and Criteria for Promotion to Senior and Principal Lecturer (pp. 5-6 and 10-11). President/Dean Date 21

22 TIME* ACTION APPENDIX B TIMELINE April 1 May 1 May 15 June 1 June 30 Sept. 15 Appointment of college promotion committees is completed. Lecturers and senior lecturers who wish to be considered candidates for promotion inform their respective department chairs. The department chair prepares a list of all candidates for promotion from the department and forwards it to the AVP for academic affairs. The AVP for academic affairs prepares a list of all candidates for promotion from within the college and forwards it to the president. The office of the president/dean randomly assigns candidates to committees. Candidate submits two copies of his or her portfolio and documentation to the AVP for academic affairs Sept. 25 Department chairperson shares his or her written recommendation on Form A.2 with the candidate. Sept. 30 Oct Oct. 27 Feb.1 Feb. 2 Feb Feb Mar. 1 April 15 Unless the candidate chooses to withdraw, he or she sends the chairperson s recommendation to the promotion committee through the office of the AVP. (The candidate may prepare and attach a response or rebuttal.) In case of withdrawal, the candidate notifies the president/dean. Eligible department peers prepare individual recommendations using Form A.1 and send these to the office of the AVP. The promotion committee receives the candidate s documentation (departmental peer recommendations, chairperson recommendation, candidate s portfolio and documentation) from the office of the AVP. The committee delivers its recommendation on Form A.3, as well as the candidate s documentation, to the office of the AVP. The office of the AVP delivers a copy of Form A.3 to the candidate. In the event of a negative committee vote, the candidate may elect to withdraw his or her candidacy, in which case he or she notifies the office of the president/dean. Alternatively, the candidate may prepare a response or rebuttal, which is sent to the office of the president/dean. The candidate may also request a meeting with the president/dean. The president/dean meets with the candidate if he or she has requested it The president/dean may also seek input from the promotion committee. The president/dean sends his or her recommendation using Form A.4 to the provost. The provost informs the president/dean of promotion decisions. *Next working day will be used for any date that falls on a weekend or holiday. APPENDIX C 22

23 INTERPRETING SIGN LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY INTERVIEW RATING SCALE 13 It is the position of this Communication Task Force that faculty peers and administrators need only address two questions in developing their judgments regarding an individual s sign language skills: 1. Has an individual fully met the university s expectations? 2. If not, has the individual made acceptable progress toward the goal? It may be deemed appropriate in light of other qualifications and given extenuating circumstances to accept other than the stated level at the time of the evaluation with the expectation that the individual will achieve that level of sign language in the reasonably near future. It is to be judged whether an individual s professional development effort up to the time of the review documents a sustained and good-faith effort, as well as whether an individual s SLPI rating suggests he or she will meet the University's expectations. The issue of sufficient documentation will probably always remain primarily a judgment call (e.g., has there been sustained participation and effort within a defined professional development plan, or spotty participation over time, or last-minute rush to attempt to meet expectations, etc.). Nevertheless, these judgments should be guided by the intent and spirit of the recommendations. If an individual does not attain the expected rating on the SLPI by the time of review for tenure, and if it is determined by those conducting the review that it is appropriate to assess progress rather than current level of achievement, the question arises, What rating is considered to be close enough to indicate that, with additional sustained effort, he or she would reasonably be able to successfully attain the expected rating in the near future? We make the following recommendations for interpreting achievement of SLPI ratings: SLPI RATING SCALE Tenure Review and Promotion to Associate Professor 14 Superior Plus Superior Advanced Plus Advanced Meets University expectations. Intermediate Plus Acceptable if candidate shows good progress toward Advanced rating; must be accompanied by strong evidence of a variety of ongoing efforts to improve performance. Intermediate Generally not acceptable. (See pp ) Survival Plus Not acceptable regardless of job responsibilities. Survival Novice Plus Novice 13 Reference to Communication Task Force Report, pp. 29 and Now applies also to promotion to senior and principal lecturer. 23

24 APPENDIX D EVALUATION OF TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS (From Provost Haefner s Summer 2012 Guidance) 1. There must be multiple forms of evidence to support teaching effectiveness. While student ratings of teaching are one form of evidence that can be used to assess teaching, other forms are needed to provide the complete and holistic assessment of teaching effectiveness. Effective forms of evidence to support teaching assessment include: a. Student ratings of teaching; b. Collegial peer review of teaching pedagogy; c. Collegial peer review of the candidate s courseware, e.g.: i. Syllabi and assignments ii. Text and other materials iii. Graded work iv. Exams d. Collegial peer outcomes assessment, e.g., student preparedness for and success in subsequent courses; e. Assessment results that demonstrate student learning of course outcomes; f. Teaching awards and other recognitions, either internal or external; g. Alumni evaluations/feedback; h. Development of curriculum and/or instructional materials; i. Innovations in teaching; j. Quality and effectiveness of mentoring graduate students on projects, MS theses and PhD theses; k. Student advising assessment; l. Student performance on standard professional examination; m. Student project supervision; n. Demonstrated effectiveness in teaching courses that are understood to be the most challenging from an instructional viewpoint; o. Enrollment in elective courses i.e., a willingness to teach undesirable courses; and p. Active interest in and concern for student welfare. 24

25 APPENDIX E RIT POLICY ON SERVICE E4.0.4, section c c. Service While teaching and scholarship are important faculty responsibilities, services performed by faculty members are an indispensable part of the university s daily life. Faculty members at all ranks are expected to provide some forms of service to the university, their college, their department, their professional community, or the community at large. They are encouraged to provide service at different levels and areas of the university. The university values all forms of faculty service. Typical faculty service activities include but are not limited to the following: committee work at the departmental, college, or university level; improving the university s program quality, reputation and operational efficiency; student academic or career advising; advising a student group; faculty mentoring; linking the professional skills of members of the faculty and students to the world beyond the campus; development of new courses and curriculum; and service to the faculty member s professional societies, such as reviewing articles, organizing professional conferences, or serving a professional organization. 25