SETH Term Faculty Guidelines for Merit and Promotion
Revised 6 July 2012
INTRODUCTION
The faculty of the School of Education, Teaching and Health (SETH) believe that its members should engage in
meaningful and significant contributions to the learning community in the areas of teaching, service, and scholarship.
Given that SETH wants its students to engage with faculty who not only understand the foundations of their fields, but
also to be presented with current and rigorous teaching practices and relevant issues and research, the School
expects its term faculty to strive to maintain their status in the field while interacting with students in substantial ways
in and out of the classroom. The establishment of clear pathways to reappointment and promotion for term faculty
members is an important step in ensuring that SETH is providing a high quality and intellectually rigorous education
for its students.
This document outlines SETH criteria and procedures for evaluating the work of term faculty members in the areas of
teaching, service, and scholarship. These procedures are based on principles of transparency and mutual respect.
The purpose of these promotion and reappointment procedures is to provide a context for collegial feedback,
encouragement and support for each term faculty member’s ongoing success and productivity.
Term faculty members seeking reappointment or promotion in SETH and at American University must demonstrate
effective teaching and meaningful service to the educational and health community as a whole. SETH expects term
faculty to prioritize teaching and service in their work profiles with scholarship as an optional, supplementary
endeavor. As part of the reappointment process, term faculty members will be asked to quantify the proportion of
time dedicated to each of these two key areas within the acceptable parameters established in these guidelines. The
Rank, Tenure and Promotion Committee will then use these proportions to analyze a term faculty member’s
achievements.
SETH follows the general standards, timetable, and procedures for reappointments, promotion, and/or tenure
detailed in the American University Faculty Manual and supplemented by instructions from the Dean for Academic
Affairs, the Committee on Faculty Actions, and the Dean of CAS. These documents will guide the Rank, Tenure and
Promotion Committee in evaluating the term faculty member’s work for the academic year. Evaluation of any given
file of a term faculty member in SETH requires the reviewer to carefully read, and if necessary, investigate the
teaching, service, and scholarship of that faculty member within his or her field(s), the department, and the university
community. This document seeks to make these criteria explicit and transparent both for term faculty members in
SETH applying for reappointment and/or promotion, and for the Rank and Tenure Committee and Dean of SETH, so
that they can adhere to shared standards when acting on reappointment or promotion recommendations.
SETH expects term faculty to focus on teaching. A faculty member is expected to be an effective teacher to receive
a departmental recommendation for reappointment and/or promotion as term faculty. A term faculty member who
excels in scholarship or service but who is an ineffective teacher will not be recommended for reappointment and/or
promotion.
The Rank and Tenure Committee and the Dean of SETH recognize that newly-hired or recently-hired term faculty
must build a record of teaching, first and foremost; and as appropriate, engage in service and scholarship. The
candidate is encouraged to consult the Dean of SETH on matters regarding development in teaching, service, and
where appropriate, scholarship. The Rank and Tenure Committee and the Dean of SETH will alert term faculty in
writing to deficiencies in their teaching and service that might result in their not being reappointed.
Teaching Effectiveness
Term faculty typically have a six-course teaching load (3 Fall courses and 3 Spring Courses), and we expect that
teaching will be the primary focus of their work. While we recognize that it is impossible to define the techniques of
SETH Term Faculty Guidelines, Page 2
"effective teaching" in a way that all teachers would endorse and understand that what might be effective for one
teacher might prove either difficult or disastrous for another, the outcome of effective teaching is that students learn,
that they achieve competence in the content of the material covered, and that they improve their critical faculties for
study across disciplines
The Faculty Manual (section 10, May 2010 edition) states:
Effective teaching enables students to acquire knowledge, develop critical thinking skills, and become active
participants in the learning process. Each teaching unit or academic unit establishes guidelines for evaluating
teaching by members of that unit. In each case, these evaluation metrics must extend beyond Student
Evaluation of Teaching scores. Faculty may demonstrate effective teaching in a variety of ways, including
course design, development of new curricular initiatives, up-to-date course content, student engagement and
achievement outside the classroom, and adherence to evaluation procedures that accurately reflect student
accomplishments. Teaching units or academic units may also view publication and presentation of teaching
materials and methodologies as a contribution to teaching.
Evidence of teaching quality should be obtained in a variety of ways. Standardized student evaluations of teaching
are one indicator in evaluating faculty members for reappointment, promotion, and tenure, but these standardized
tabulations should not be the sole evidence of teaching effectiveness; rather, other sources of evidence can
demonstrate a well-organized, rigorous approach to teaching. These include, but are not limited to, course syllabi,
assignments, student work, and special lectures given to broad audiences of faculty, students, and others that might
provide evidence of skills inherent in effective teaching. In addition, faculty members should include documentation of
an observation of teaching conducted by a colleague at every review.
Effective teaching could be demonstrated in:
● Course design, content, methods (as evidenced in the syllabus, selected assignments and grading rubrics)
● Use of technology
● Observation by a fellow SETH faculty member (preferable on the Rank and Tenure Committee)
● Student evaluations
● Presentations to other faculty members on effective pedagogy
● New course development
● Implementation of innovative pedagogical methods (such as service learning)
In some cases, teachers effective in promoting students' mastery of course material and development of critical
faculties might well accomplish their ends without meeting all the elements previously described in equal proportions.
Also, a faculty member might achieve the fundamental goal of effective teaching—getting students to learn—through
innovative methods not included in the Manual's definition.
Evidence of effective teaching encompasses a demonstration of a variety of skills and accomplishments. Teachers
should be effective in large classes, workshops, seminars, online learning, and independent study courses. They
should be sufficiently perceptive, flexible, and knowledgeable to be able to educate a range of students, from
undergraduates to advanced graduate students, as well as continuing education students and career switchers.
Faculty should have a thorough, up-to-date, broad mastery of a field or fields in education and/or health, and they
should be able and willing to teach a variety of courses within their range of teaching and scholarly competence.
Ideally, faculty should also have sufficient knowledge of fields or disciplines outside their own specialties to situate
them within the context of their own areas of expertise. In commenting on students’ work, faculty should be able to
respond constructively and specifically, rather than simply expressing satisfaction or dissatisfaction.
Students should receive clear guidance to the sources of information in a field and to the development of course
themes through the distribution of syllabi and reading lists, as well as through written and oral comments.
SETH Term Faculty Guidelines, Page 3
Contact with students outside the classroom can constitute a meaningful part of the educational process, and the
effective teacher should be approachable outside the classroom and, on matters of great importance, outside office
hours as well. We hope that faculty will not only provide their students with new information in a field, but also
stimulate increased enthusiasm and respect for the fields of study, whether that includes the general fields of
education and health, or other, more specific subfields. Faculty members may also be able to help students develop
a link between their classroom studies and career objectives.
Service
Academic institutions flourish by blending a variety of abilities, interests, and commitments. Faculty involvement in
SETH, CAS, and University activities is essential, and the Rank and Tenure Committee and the SETH Dean should
give appropriate weight to faculty service in reappointment and promotion decisions. Although service is valued, it
should be kept in appropriate balance and not hamper or impede a term faculty member’s teaching priorities.
Service can be demonstrated through voluntary activities in support of the academic department, CAS, and the
University. Some examples of service include participating in student capstone projects, Student Research Projects,
thesis committees, advising student organizations, planning extracurricular activities to support learning (e.g. film
series), serving on administrative committees, and others. In addition to departmental, CAS, and University service,
SETH also values committee and organizational service in professional or scholarly associations, attending
professional conferences, work with schools and school systems, community organizations, work with advisory or
editorial boards of scholarly journals and book publication programs. Appointment or election to participate in such
activities is an expression of the scholarly regard in which one is held by one's peers. SETH faculty members are
encouraged to participate in such activities. In sum, faculty members should demonstrate a record of acceptance, in
a spirit of willing cooperation, of a normal number of committee assignments, participation in professional
organizations or service to other outside groups, and a record of involvement in the outreach efforts of the School of
Education, Teaching & Health to its various constituencies. SETH will communicate with term faculty members about
opportunities to engage in service activities.
Scholarship
This category is broadly construed to include all original inquiry, systematic attacks on problems (both practical and
theoretical) that result in original writings, other products such as educational assessment tools, and systematic
instructional development work. In general, this category involves the question of what, through scholarship and
creative efforts, the faculty member is contributing to the fields of education and health. The members of the SETH
faculty believe that what counts as creative, excellent and rigorous scholarship is situated within disciplines and their
subfields. Because scholars in the fields of education and health utilize different disciplines in their research activities,
the criteria and standards used to evaluate the research of individual faculty member should be based on the criteria
of the discipline (or disciplines) in which they pursue their work.
Scholarship is valued but should be kept in appropriate balance and not hamper or impede a term faculty member’s
teaching and service responsibilities. The evaluation of scholarly work by the Rank, Tenure and Promotion
Committee will be determined by the proportion of time the term faculty member designates for scholarship. When
appropriate, the term faculty should demonstrate that they are developing a program of research in a specific field
and are contributing to that field through some original inquiry, unique interpretations or syntheses that disseminate
new knowledge.
SETH Term Faculty Guidelines, Page 4
Merit, Reappointment and Promotion Allocation of SETH faculty
Each faculty member completes the following worksheet indicating selected weights for each of the following areas
within the following ranges:
Domain
Percentage Range
for
Tenure Track Faculty
Percentage Range
for
Term Faculty
Teaching
30 – 60%
60 – 90%
Service
10 to 30%
10 – 30%
Scholarship
30 – 60%
0 – 20%
Your
Allocation
Rank Criteria
The following section details specific performance expectations for each of the four ranks in the Professorial Lecturer
track. Please note that, although the Faculty Manual anticipates that Senior Professorial Lecturers and Hurst Senior
Professorial Lecturers will hold multi-year contracts ranging from three to five years, the recommendation to confer a
given rank and appointment to a multi-year contract are, strictly speaking, separate actions. As a general rule, the
College only considers term faculty for a multi-year appointment when a) the faculty member has taught at AU on a
full-time basis for one to three years, and b) the Provost’s office deems long-term funding of the position to be
secure.
Instructor
In the College of Arts and Sciences, the rank of Instructor is reserved for a) those term faculty members who have
not yet been granted their terminal degree, in which case the rank is “a temporary one-semester or one-year
appointment”; or for b) faculty in certain skill areas—such as writing, mathematics or foreign language instruction—
where the terminal degree is not deemed necessary (section 13). Reappointments at the rank of Instructor are
typically subject to annual review. Instructors will be evaluated on their teaching and service to their department or
college, relative to allocated job responsibilities.
Candidates for reappointment in the rank of Instructor should be successful teachers who have built well-thought-out
courses that foster student learning and achievement and that reflect the current state of their academic field(s).
Their course materials will state clear objectives that are informed by the goals of their academic unit or program.
Their professionalism will be displayed through their syllabi, assignments, evaluation of student work, advising or
mentorship, and Student Evaluation of Teaching scores that are generally in line with those in their department and
college. Candidates for reappointment as Instructor will also provide service to the teaching unit, academic unit, and
university, commensurate with the general expectations listed above.
Professorial Lecturer
The Faculty Manual states that “[t]erm faculty members are awarded the rank of Professorial Lecturer if they (1) have
demonstrated successful teaching in the rank of Instructor for a period of three years, or (2) hold the terminal degree
in the field, or (3) have professional experience and achievement equivalent to a terminal degree” (section 13). New
hires may be appointed to this rank if they meet criteria (2) or (3).
SETH Term Faculty Guidelines, Page 5
Candidates for promotion to (or reappointment in) the rank of Professorial Lecturer should be successful teachers
who have built well-thought-out courses that foster student learning and achievement and that reflect the current
state of their academic field(s). Their course materials will state clear objectives that are informed by the goals of
their academic unit or program. Their professionalism will be displayed through their syllabi, assignments, evaluation
of student work, advising or mentorship, and Student Evaluation of Teaching scores that are generally in line with
those in their department and college. Candidates for Professorial Lecturer will also provide service to the teaching
unit, academic unit, and university, with the expectation that their service profile will both broaden and deepen over
time.
Senior Professorial Lecturer
After five years of service, Professorial Lecturers are eligible for promotion to Senior Professorial Lecturer. The
Faculty Manual describes the rank of Senior Professorial Lecturer as recognizing “the contributions of faculty
members who have served in the rank of Professorial Lecturer and have demonstrated superior performance as a
teacher. An academic unit may also appoint to this rank those who have equivalent professional experience” (section
13). Appointments at the Senior Professorial Lecturer rank typically “range from three to five years, depending on the
needs of the teaching unit.”
Candidates for Senior Professorial Lecturer should be expert teachers whose courses foster, in challenging and
motivating ways, student learning and achievement. Their course materials will promote the goals of their academic
unit or program and demonstrate currency in their academic field. Their professionalism and expertise will be
displayed through their course and curriculum development, syllabi, assignments, evaluation of student work,
advising or mentorship, and Student Evaluation of Teaching assessments. They will provide significant service and
contribute to professional development, which might include leadership activities such as faculty mentoring,
assessment work, or research in their field, in addition to significant service to their department or program, college,
and/or university.
Hurst Senior Professorial Lecturer
The Faculty Manual describes this rank as “a term appointment an academic unit awards to a senior professorial
lecturer who has provided particularly meritorious performance to the university over a period of years or to a new
faculty member whose previous career and experience are notably prestigious” (section 13).
Senior Professorial Lecturers who are candidates for Hurst Senior Professorial Lecturer should demonstrate a
consistent record of marked teaching excellence. Their professionalism and expertise will be displayed through their
course and curriculum development, syllabi, assignments, evaluation of student work, advising or mentorship, and
Student Evaluation of Teaching assessments. Their application portfolios will show that they have continually refined
their teaching, adapted to new student populations, and attended to innovations in the field. These candidates will
also have demonstrated strong leadership in their academic unit or program, have contributed to professional
development initiatives in their department or program and in their field, and have engaged in notable service to their
department, college, and university
1
7 March 2011
AMERICAN UNIVERSITY
School of Education, Teaching and Health
Faculty Guidelines and Procedures for
Merit, Promotion, Tenure, and Annual Review
Introduction
The faculty of the School of Education, Teaching and Health (SETH) believe that its
members should engage in meaningful and significant contributions to the learning community
in the areas of scholarship, teaching and service. SETH is a multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary
school that draws from a wide variety of disciplines in the arts, sciences, and professional
domains. Faculty members therefore have diverse but complimentary research agendas.
Evaluation of any given file of a faculty member in SETH requires the reviewer to carefully read,
and if necessary, investigate the scholarship, teaching, and service of that faculty member
within his or her field(s), the department, and the university community. The diverse agendas
of SETH faculty strengthen our academic programs, provide the foundation for our work as
scholars and teachers, and bring recognition to the individual, the teaching unit, and the
university. Given that we want our students to engage with faculty who not only understand
the foundations of our fields, but also to be presented with current and rigorous research, we
continue to strive to maintain our status in the field while interacting with our students in
substantial ways in and out of the classroom.
Below, we have outlined our criteria and procedures for evaluating the work of SETH
faculty members in the areas of scholarship, teaching, and service. These procedures are based
on principles of transparency, mutual respect, and mentorship. We are committed to the goals
of providing collegial feedback, and of encouraging and supporting each faculty member’s
ongoing success and productivity.
Faculty members seeking reappointment, tenure, or promotion in SETH and at American
University must demonstrate effective teaching, substantive and creative scholarship, and
meaningful service to SETH, the university, the Greater Washington area, the nation, and the
world, as well as to the educational and health community as a whole.
SETH follows the general standards, timetable, and procedures for reappointments,
promotion, and/or tenure detailed in the American University Faculty Manual and
supplemented by instructions from the Dean for Academic Affairs, the Committee on Faculty
Actions, and the Dean of CAS. This document seeks to make these criteria explicit and
transparent both for faculty members in SETH applying for reappointment, promotion, and/or
tenure and for the Rank and Tenure Committee and Dean of SETH, so that they can adhere to
shared standards when acting on reappointment, promotion, or tenure recommendations.
SETH expects faculty to be active scholar-teachers. A faculty member who does not
make a significant contribution to scholarship during his or her pre-tenure years will not be
recommended for promotion to Associate Professor or tenure, even if his or her teaching
record is excellent. Likewise, a faculty member is expected to be an effective teacher to receive
a departmental recommendation for promotion to Associate Professor or tenure. An excellent
scholar who is an ineffective teacher will not be recommended for promotion or tenure.
The Rank and Tenure Committee and the Dean of SETH recognize that newly-hired or
recently-hired faculty must build a record of teaching and scholarly excellence. The candidate
is encouraged to consult the Rank and Tenure Committee and the Dean of SETH on matters
regarding appropriate rate and methods for developing into a high-achieving scholar and
teacher. The Rank and Tenure Committee and the Dean of SETH are responsible for alerting
tenure-track faculty to serious deficiencies in their scholarly, teaching, or service record at each
annual review.
Scholarship
This category is broadly construed to include all original inquiry, systematic attacks on
problems (both practical and theoretical) that result in original writings, other products such as
educational assessment tools, and systematic instructional development work. In general, this
category involves the question of what, through scholarship and creative efforts, the faculty
member is contributing to the fields of education and health. The members of the SETH faculty
believe that what counts as creative, excellent and rigorous scholarship is situated within
disciplines and their subfields. Because scholars in the fields of education and health utilize
different disciplines in their research activities, the criteria and standards used to evaluate the
research of individual faculty member should be based on the criteria of the discipline (or
disciplines) in which they pursue their work.
SETH recognizes that quantitative measures of scholarship and hierarchies of formats
for publication are imperfect and not always relevant. For example, a single groundbreaking
article might advance the discipline as much as a shelf of books. The measurement of the
impact of such an article, like the rating of other scholarship, should come in part from outside
the University. The Rank and Tenure Committee and SETH Dean should obtain unbiased
evaluations of a faculty member’s work from the best available sources.
Within SETH, there are certain benchmarks of achievement that deserve mention.
Faculty members must demonstrate that they are producing peer-reviewed publications each
year and they must actively participate in grant writing. We note that scholarship in digital
formats is currently evaluated in the same way as “paper-based” scholarship. However, we
look to scholarship in peer-reviewed venues to be evaluated in ways that are consistent with
the medium and relevant to professionals and scholars in our particular fields. A corpus of peerreviewed journal articles might constitute evidence of scholarly productivity in some fields,
whereas a book published by a press with a history of influential scholarship might be expected
in other fields. Each faculty member should demonstrate scholarly achievements in venues
relevant to the field of specialization. The product of one's creative scholarly activity must be
accessible to, and evaluated by, the faculty member's peers in his or her specialty, as well as
within the university and scholarly communities.
Review of co-authored writing is informed by a statement from the faculty member
describing the process of collaboration and the nature and extent of his or her contributions,
submitted on the understanding that it may be circulated for comments to the other author or
authors of the writing in question. While a citation with the candidate as first author is more
esteemed than other ranks in a publication with multiple authors, collaboration is highly valued
and is expected in our fields. Furthermore, scholarship completed prior to joining American
University should be included to demonstrate the candidate’s history of scholarship.
SETH faculty also recognize the importance of scholarship related to professional
communities, including original research designed to bring relevant information and methods
to broad constituencies, including teachers, health practitioners and other professionals. The
weight given to such work depends on the amount and quality of original research, the extent
of peer review before or after it reaches the public, and the size or importance of the audience.
We expect that faculty should demonstrate that they are active in both research and
development. Faculty members should demonstrate that they are developing a program of
research in a specific field and are contributing to that field either some original inquiry, or
unique interpretations or syntheses that are contributions to the dissemination of new
knowledge. Progress beyond the topic of one’s doctoral dissertation should be evident. There
should also be evidence that the faculty member has followed a systematic development
procedure in addressing an educational problem and that the solutions have been recognized
by the affected populations as valuable.
Outside scholarly evaluations of the candidate's work and career trajectory are required
for all tenure and promotion reviews. During such reviews, the SETH Dean will solicit external
letters following guidelines from the Dean for Academic Affairs, the Committee on Faculty
Actions, and the Dean of CAS.
Teaching Effectiveness
We recognize that it is impossible to define the techniques of "effective teaching" in a
way that all teachers would endorse. We also understand that what might be effective for one
teacher might prove either difficult or disastrous for another. Nonetheless, the outcome of
effective teaching is that students learn, that they achieve competence in the content of the
material covered, and that they improve their critical faculties for study across disciplines.
Effective teaching can be described as “cumulative process” towards a specific degree, wherein
individual courses are then mapped to academic program assessment.
The Faculty Manual (section 10, May 2010 edition) states:
“Effective teaching enables students to acquire knowledge, develop critical thinking
skills, and become active participants in the learning process. Each teaching unit or
academic unit establishes guidelines for evaluating teaching by members of that unit. In
each case, these evaluation metrics must extend beyond Student Evaluation of Teaching
scores. Faculty may demonstrate effective teaching in a variety of ways, including
course design, development of new curricular initiatives, up-to-date course content,
student engagement and achievement outside the classroom, and adherence to
evaluation procedures that accurately reflect student accomplishments. Teaching units
or academic units may also view publication and presentation of teaching materials and
methodologies as a contribution to teaching.
Additional ways of evaluating teaching may include, but are not limited to, the items
made available to faculty by academic units and on the Office of the Dean of Academic
Affairs web site.”
In some cases, teachers effective in promoting students' mastery of course material and
development of critical faculties might well accomplish their ends without meeting all the
elements previously described in equal proportions. Also, a faculty member might achieve the
fundamental goal of effective teaching—getting students to learn—through innovative
methods not included in the Manual's definition.
Evidence of effective teaching encompasses a demonstration of a variety of skills and
accomplishments. Teachers should be effective in large classes, workshops, seminars, online
learning, and independent study courses. They should be sufficiently perceptive, flexible, and
knowledgeable to be able to educate a range of students, from undergraduates to advanced
graduate students, as well as continuing education students and career switchers. Faculty
should have a thorough, up-to-date, broad mastery of a field or fields in education and/or
health, and they should be able and willing to teach a variety of courses within their range of
teaching and scholarly competence. Ideally, faculty should also have sufficient knowledge of
fields or disciplines outside their own specialties to situate them within the context of their own
areas of expertise. In commenting on students’ work, faculty should be able to respond
constructively and specifically, rather than simply expressing satisfaction or dissatisfaction.
Students should receive clear guidance to the sources of information in a field and to
the development of course themes through the distribution of syllabi and reading lists, as well
as through written and oral comments.
Contact with students outside the classroom can constitute a meaningful part of the
educational process, and the effective teacher should be approachable outside the classroom
and, on matters of great importance, outside office hours as well. We hope that faculty will not
only provide their students with new information in a field, but also stimulate increased
enthusiasm and respect for the fields of study, whether that includes the general fields of
education and health, or other, more specific subfields. Faculty members may also be able to
help students develop a link between their classroom studies and career objectives.
Evidence of teaching quality should be obtained in a variety of ways. Standardized
student evaluations of teaching are one indicator in evaluating faculty members for
reappointment, promotion, and tenure, but these standardized tabulations should not be the
sole evidence of teaching effectiveness; rather, other sources of evidence can demonstrate a
well-organized, rigorous approach to teaching. These include, but are not limited to, course
syllabi, assignments, student work, supporting student research through independent research
projects, participating in thesis committees, and special lectures given to broad audiences of
faculty, students, and others that might provide evidence of skills inherent in effective teaching.
In addition, faculty members should include documentation of an observation of teaching
conducted by a colleague at every review, including reappointment to the 4th, 5th and 6th years
and promotion to tenure.
Service
Academic institutions flourish by blending a variety of abilities, interests, and
commitments. Faculty involvement in SETH, CAS, and University activities is essential, and the
Rank and Tenure Committee and the SETH Dean should give appropriate weight to faculty
service in reappointment, promotion, and tenure decisions. Although service is valued, it should
be kept in appropriate balance and not hamper or impede a faculty member’s scholarly and
teaching priorities. Tenure track faculty members should understand that an outstanding
service record does not compensate deficiencies in other areas.
In addition to departmental, CAS, and University service, SETH also values committee
and organizational service in professional or scholarly associations, work with schools and
school systems, community organizations, work with advisory or editorial boards of scholarly
journals and book publication programs. Appointment or election to participate in such
activities is an expression of the scholarly regard in which one is held by one's peers. SETH
faculty members are encouraged to participate in such activities. In sum, faculty members
should demonstrate a record of acceptance, in a spirit of willing cooperation, of a normal
number of committee assignments, participation in professional organizations or service to
other outside groups, and a record of involvement in the outreach efforts of the School of
Education, Teaching & Health to its various constituencies.
Criteria for Promotion to Professor
Scholarship
The candidate for promotion to the rank of Professor should provide evidence of having
maintained a sustained program of research in a specific field and having contributed to that
field either original inquiry, or unique interpretations or syntheses. Evidence that the candidate
has followed a systematic development procedure in addressing an educational or health
problem must be included along with evidence of the effective dissemination of findings.
Teaching
Evidence should include an assessment on each of the teaching dimensions emphasized under
promotion to Associate Professor indicating that there are no uncorrected serious faults or
deficiencies. Evidence of continuous growth as a teacher beyond the level attained upon
promotion to Associate Professor should be provided. Evidence of teaching effectiveness could
include:
Versatility, that is, excellence in teaching at more than one level (undergraduate, masters,
advanced graduate) and in more than one form (e.g., lecturing to large groups, conducting
discussion groups and seminars, directing laboratory or clinical experiences, guiding
independent study or research);
Excellence in course or program development;
Exemplary or unique student achievement;
International impact of scholarship on teaching, including published materials, conference
presentations, and related activities (e.g., textbooks, videos, web pages, publications,
conference presentations);
Widespread reputation for excellence in teaching (e.g., testimony from former students and
colleagues, from client groups, data on various awards or other recognition relevant to this
category);
Concerted effort to engage colleagues, locally and nationally, in conversations about
teaching and learning (e.g., organizing or leading teaching workshops, teaching-related
conference presentations).
Service
To assure strong and effective faculty governance, tenured members of the faculty have a
special responsibility to contribute to the health of their department, school, and university. To
merit promotion to the rank of Professor, a candidate must have a record of active and
constructive contributions to faculty governance at all levels of the university community. We
expect from full Professors not only individual excellence in scholarship and teaching, but
leadership in service that builds the collective excellence of the department, school, and
university, and a strong record of mentoring early career faculty. A candidate for the rank of
Professor should likewise present a record that demonstrates a willingness and ability to
provide leadership. The candidate should provide evidence of outstanding performance in
leadership and innovation in professional service over a period of years to the unit and the
university, as well as on the local, national, or international scale.