Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
GUIDELINES FOR PERFORMANCE APPRAISAL, CONTINUANCE, PROMOTION,
TENURE AND POST-TENURE REVIEW OF FACULTY
Table of Contents
Department of Biology Tenure & Promotion Overview ................................................................................ 2
Revised 04 June 2012 ................................................................................................................................. 2
Appointment Rank ......................................................................................................................................... 3
Instructor .................................................................................................................................................... 3
Assistant Professor ..................................................................................................................................... 3
Associate Professor .................................................................................................................................... 3
Professor ..................................................................................................................................................... 3
Mentoring Process .......................................................................................................................................... 4
Annual Performance Appraisal ...................................................................................................................... 5
Faculty Evaluation Form ............................................................................................................................ 5
Continuance and Tenure ................................................................................................................................. 6
Recommendations on Continuance ............................................................................................................ 6
Recommendations on Tenure ..................................................................................................................... 6
Continuance Packet Guidelines .................................................................................................................. 7
Third Year Review Guidelines ......................................................................................................................11
Third Year Review ....................................................................................................................................11
Preparation of Third Year Review Dossier................................................................................................11
Promotion ......................................................................................................................................................12
Promotion from Instructor to Assistant Professor .....................................................................................12
Promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor .....................................................................................12
Promotion from Associate Professor to Professor .....................................................................................13
Policy for External Reviewers: Promotion to Associate Professor and Tenure .............................................14
Tenure and Promotion Guidelines .................................................................................................................15
Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor Guidelines ........................................................................15
Teaching ................................................................................................................................................15
Research and Other Scholarly Activity .................................................................................................17
University/Public/Professional Service .................................................................................................18
Promotion to Full Professor Guidelines ....................................................................................................19
Teaching ................................................................................................................................................20
Research and Other Scholarly Activity .................................................................................................20
University/Public/Professional Service .................................................................................................20
Post-Tenure Review ......................................................................................................................................21
Approvals ......................................................................................................................................................22
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Department of Biology Tenure & Promotion Overview
Revised 04 June 2012
Performance evaluation of faculty is guided by two primary objectives: (1) to assist the
individual faculty member in his/her continued professional development, and to reward
those individuals whose accomplishments exceed the minimum expectations of
effectiveness and productivity; and (2) to ensure the continued productivity of the
department in fulfilling its university mission and in advancing university strategic
priorities. In this way, the evaluation process serves to focus the efforts of individual
faculty toward activities that will contribute to affirmative recommendations throughout
the continuance, promotion, tenure and post-tenure review process. At the same time,
the process is designed to allow individuals flexibility to concentrate their efforts (within
the parameters expected of all faculty) in areas of particular strength or interest and to
modify their areas of emphasis over time. As the evaluation process itself is expected to
be dynamic and responsive to changes in the academic climate and/or university
mission, this document is subject to review by the entire faculty every five years or upon
significant change in university requirements relevant to the policies and procedures
described herein.
There exist two evaluative bodies within the department. The Department Head is
responsible for conducting an annual performance appraisal of each faculty member on
an academic year basis. This performance appraisal forms the basis for salary
recommendations made yearly by the Department Head to the Dean, and for allocation
of departmental personnel resources to ensure continuing productivity of the academic
unit. The departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee is charged with making
recommendations to the Department Head regarding continuance, promotion, tenure
and continued development of tenured faculty through the post-tenure review process.
The departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee is composed of all tenured faculty
members in the department, and is chaired by the tenured faculty member with the
longest term of service in the department. The Department Head serves as an ex officio
member. University guidelines stipulate at least six voting members must sit on
departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee s; if there are fewer than six tenured
faculty members in the department, the Faculty Handbook outlines appropriate
procedures for filling the committee.
Faculty at the rank of Instructor are required to undergo only the annual performance
appraisal; the Faculty Handbook specifies the term and conditions of appointment and
the mechanism for renewal of appointment. Faculty at or above the rank of Assistant
Professor are required to undergo both annual performance appraisal as well as
consideration by the departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee; the nature of this
latter consideration is dependent on the faculty member's rank and tenure status as
outlined below. The Faculty Handbook identifies university-wide criteria for decisions
regarding continuance, promotion, tenure and post-tenure review; however, faculty
should be aware that expectations held by the Department of Biology may in some
respects be more stringent (but never less stringent) than these general criteria.
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Appointment Rank
Regular, full-time faculty at Western Kentucky University may hold appointments at one
of four ranks: (1) Instructor; (2) Assistant Professor; (3) Associate Professor; and (4)
Professor. Faculty at or above the level of Assistant Professor may be tenure-track;
faculty at the level of Instructor or those at other ranks whose appointments specifically
preclude it are not eligible for tenure. The Faculty Handbook outlines university policies
and procedures regarding rank and appointment. The minimum qualifications for
appointment at each rank within the Department of Biology are as follows:
Instructor
-
Master’s degree in the biological sciences or professional qualifications
appropriate to the position.
Demonstrated training and ability in a technical field not covered by existing
faculty
Assistant Professor
-
Ph.D. or other terminal degree in the biological sciences
Evidence of strong potential to teach effectively
Evidence of strong potential for productivity in research or other scholarly activity
Evidence of strong potential to contribute to university/public/professional service
activities
Evidence of strong potential to contribute to the university mission and priorities
Involvement in ongoing professional development in teaching, research and/or
service
Associate Professor
-
Ph.D. or other terminal degree in the biological sciences
A minimum of five years of experience at the rank of Assistant Professor
A sustained pattern of excellent teaching performance
An exceptional and high-quality record of productivity in research or other
scholarly activity.
An excellent record of ongoing involvement in university/public/professional
service activities
A record of contribution towards the university mission and priorities
Tangible evidence of ongoing professional development in teaching, research
and/or service
Professor
-
Ph.D. or other terminal degree in the biological sciences
A minimum of five years of service at the rank of Associate Professor
A sustained pattern of exceptional and high quality performance in teaching,
scholarship and service
A record of contribution towards the university mission and priorities
Tangible evidence of ongoing professional development in teaching, research
and/or service
The expectations of faculty at each rank will guide evaluation and rating of individuals as
part of the Annual Performance Appraisal, and will help shape the development of their
short- and long-term goals.
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Mentoring Process
1. By the end of his/her first full year, the new faculty member should choose a primary
mentor from the ranks of tenured faculty (in consultation with the Department Head). If
the tenured faculty member agrees to serve as a mentor, this responsibility will carry the
same recognized work load as chairing a standing committee.
The responsibilities of the primary mentor are to:
a. review the new faculty member’s continuance materials and activity reports, including
new goals, before submission and offer advice on improvement of performance and
reporting,
b. participate in /ad hoc /meetings with the new faculty member to offer advice and to
answer questions, and
c. serve as the primary liaison between the new faculty member and the T/P committee.
2. A process coordinator will be assigned by the department head in consultation with
the T&P committee chair. This person will have multiple years of experience on the T/P
committee. This activity will receive the same recognized workload as serving as a
member of a standing committee.
The responsibilities of the coordinator are to:
a. review the new faculty member’s continuance materials and activity reports, including
new goals, before submission, and
b. to *observe* the new faculty member's review with the Department Head to promote
some congruity between administrative and academic performance evaluations,
suggestions and mandates. It would be within the rights of the new faculty member to
decline this service on the basis of privacy. The same coordinator should be assigned to
the candidate throughout the continuance period barring exceptional circumstances such
as sabbatical leave.
3. The responsibilities of the primary mentor and coordinator will end when:
a. the T/P committee makes a final decision on tenure for the new faculty member
b. the Department Head reassigns the coordinator
c. the new faculty member requests a different primary mentor
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Annual Performance Appraisal
The annual performance appraisal conducted by the Department Head provides the data
upon which recommendations regarding salary, continuance, promotion, tenure and
post-tenure professional development will be based. The sequence of events and
timeline associated with the annual performance appraisal process is outlined in the
Faculty Handbook. Faculty are expected to collect and make available documentary
evidence outlining their accomplishments in the areas of teaching effectiveness,
research and scholarly activity, university/public/professional service and contribution to
the university. In addition, faculty are required to develop, in consultation with the
Department Head, a set of short- and long-term goals upon which future evaluations will
be based. Short-term goals should identify priorities and directions for the coming
academic year, while long-term goals should provide a roadmap to guide faculty
development over a five-year period, or until the faculty member is next eligible for
promotion. In the case of tenure-track faculty yet to attain the rank of Full Professor,
long-term goals should be carefully designed to ensure the potential for successful
progress through the next stage in the continuance/tenure and/or promotion processes.
Appropriate performance measures and expected levels of performance for each
category in the Annual Performance Appraisal are given in the relevant sections below.
Faculty Evaluation Form
The annual performance appraisal form, submitted each year by the Department Head,
consist of the following categories as regard performance in the relevant areas:
Performance Levels: Outstanding, Very Good, Good, Satisfactory Plus, Satisfactory,
Needs Improvement, Unsatisfactory
Categories: Teaching, Scholarship, Service, Development, Overall, Assessment of
Progress Toward Tenure and / or Next Promotion.
Department Head's Recommendation RE: Next Year Effort:
Increase Research Strength
More Attention to Professional Development
Focus on Maintaining / Improving Teaching Skills
Department Head Comments:
Faculty Comments:
Dean’s Comments:
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Continuance and Tenure
The continuance process provides the opportunity for tenured faculty in the department
to assist junior faculty in developing their professional skills and reputation, while
establishing themselves as productive and influential members of the university
community. The Faculty Handbook discusses the philosophical and practical aspects of
the continuance and tenure process.
Untenured and non-tenure track faculty at or above the rank of Assistant Professor are
required to undergo consideration for continuance by the departmental Tenure and
Promotion Committee on a regular basis. The continuance process follows directly from
the annual performance appraisal. Faculty enter the continuance process during their
second year of service at Western Kentucky University. Typically, considerations for
continuance occur annually; however, faculty employed under multi-year contracts will
be expected to undergo consideration for continuance only as a prerequisite to contract
renewal or renegotiation (though performance appraisals will be conducted annually), or
upon consideration for promotion and/or a switch to tenure-track status.
Recommendations on Continuance
Untenured and non-tenure track faculty will be considered for continuance based on
their overall contribution to the department and the university during the review period.
In addition, recommendations on continuance of tenure-track faculty will consider the
individual's progress towards tenure.
The Faculty Handbook outlines the procedures and timeline associated with the
continuance process. At the initiation of the process in a given review period, the
Department Head will inform the departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee of all
faculty subject to consideration for continuance. Upon receipt of this notification, the
Committee will convene to discuss and make a formal recommendation regarding
continuance to the Department Head.
Faculty are expected to collect and make available documentary evidence outlining their
accomplishments in the areas of teaching effectiveness, research and scholarly activity,
university/public/professional service and contributions to the university mission over the
review period. Appropriate performance measures for each category are the same as
those utilized in the annual performance appraisal. Tenure-track faculty should consider
the expectations and documentary requirements for tenure in preparing continuance
files, as the information contained therein will constitute the majority of the tenure file.
Recommendations on Tenure
University policy stipulates that a tenure decision regarding tenure-track faculty must be
made during or before the sixth year of the probationary period. The Department of
Biology views the recommendation on tenure made by the departmental Promotion and
Tenure Committee to represent the culmination of the continuance process. As such,
candidates for tenure should look to recommendations made as part of the continuance
process as a guide in preparing for the tenure decision.
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Tenure-track faculty in the Department of Biology are generally eligible for tenure upon
completion of six years of service at or above the rank of Assistant Professor at Western
Kentucky University. Faculty who have completed five years of service at a professorial
rank at Western Kentucky University, and two years of service at the rank of Instructor at
Western Kentucky University or at a professorial rank at another accredited college or
university are also eligible to apply for tenure. In cases where the department desires to
hire a tenured faculty member with an established record of productivity at another
institution (as in the appointment of a Department Head or other senior faculty member),
the residency requirements for tenure may be waived by a majority vote of the
departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee. It should be noted that, while the
tenure process is initiated at the beginning of the eligibility year, tenured status (if
granted) is not officially conferred until that year of service is completed; this delay does
not apply to senior faculty granted tenure upon appointment.
Eligible faculty are expected to notify the Department Head in writing of their desire to
seek tenure according to the timeline specified in the Faculty Handbook. The
Department Head will in turn notify the departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee.
Upon receipt of this notification, the Committee will convene to discuss and make a
formal recommendation regarding tenure to the Department Head.
Candidates for tenure are expected to collect and make available documentary evidence
outlining their accomplishments in the areas of teaching effectiveness, research and
scholarly activity, university/public/professional service and contribution to the university
mission. Appropriate performance measures for each category are the same as those
utilized in the annual performance appraisal; however, the tenure file must include data
from the entire probationary period. Candidates should be advised that demonstrating
effectiveness in the classroom (as part of the larger category of Teaching Effectiveness)
requires documentation beyond the results of SITE evaluations; while the nature of the
teaching portfolio developed is left to the discretion of the candidate, a multifactorial
approach is essential.
Faculty will be considered for tenure based on their overall contribution to the
department and the university. An affirmative recommendation on tenure by the
departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee will be based on those expectations of
faculty holding the rank of Associate Professor (see section on Rank above), and the
committee’s assessment of the candidate’s ability and potential to meet and sustain
those expectations. In some circumstances, exceptions to these general criteria may be
made when a candidate demonstrates outstanding levels of achievement in one or more
of the required areas; any affirmative tenure recommendation made in this way shall be
accompanied by written justification showing that such action serves the best interest of
the department or university.
Continuance Packet Guidelines
Documents for Continuance Packet
The Department of Biology at Western Kentucky University (WKU) follows the Faculty
Handbook and Departmental P/T guidelines to evaluate annual continuance toward
tenure and promotion of probationary faculty (Candidate). The Candidate is responsible
for initiating the continuance and P/T process, making sure his/her dossier is submitted
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
in a timely manner, and conforms to stated guidelines. The mentor shall advise the
Candidate on preparation of the document.
Each year, the candidate will submit his/her dossier and supplemental information to
their mentor, who will review it and provide feedback. The packet will then be sent to the
Departmental P/T committee for review.
Preparation of Continuance Packet
The purpose of the continuance packet is to document the candidate’s accomplishments
over his/her career, particularly those contributions at WKU. Clear differentiation
between “activities at WKU” from “activities before WKU” is important. This should be
done as completely but succinctly as possible, via simple summary statements or other
methods to keep the submission to a minimal size. All probationary faculty members
will submit the dossier each year (according to university deadline) for their continuance
review. The dossier may be populated in part by Annual Reports generated from Digital
Measures. As such, the candidate should ensure that their Digital Measures pages are
updated in a timely manner, and that they contain a current Curriculum Vitae.
Materials for Review by Faculty
Based upon the departmental P/T guidelines, the candidate is encouraged to rank each
item of activity as excellent, satisfactory, or unsatisfactory. The continuance packet
contains the dossier and supplemental information. The supplemental information may
be attached to strengthen the packet. This can include any other information that the
candidate deems important. The packet should be arranged in the following order:
1. Vita
2. Summary of accomplishments as follows:

Teaching:
 Lecture courses (arrange in summary table: Year and semester, title of
course, course #, new or old teaching prep, in-class or web course, student #;
and grade distribution)
 Lab courses (coordinator for multi-section lab, lab teaching, responsible for
lab prep, # TAs supervised)
 New courses and/or curricula developed
 Syllabi for the courses taught including lecture schedule
 SITE evaluation and student’s comments
 Research mentoring/co-mentoring (undergraduate and graduate): current
status of students (e.g. completed/non-completed student, etc.)
 Student advising (# of students, etc.)
 Participation in professional development activity centered on teaching
 Any other contributions in teaching, including grants involving teaching (see
“Grant proposals” section under “Research”
Teaching Supplemental:
 Class room observation comments by the Head or other faculty (e.g. Mentor)
 Other documents supporting teaching performance (may include
representative exams, review materials given to students, etc.)
Department of Biology



DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Recognition of teaching (e.g. Departmental/College/University nominations or
awards)
Any other pertinent information the candidate wishes to include
(comments/feed-back from former students, etc.)
Research:
 Brief description of projects in progress
 Scholarly Contributions (distinguish WKU from pre-WKU accomplishments)
o Publications (peer-reviewed, non-peer-reviewed): journal articles, books,
book chapters, other articles, etc.
o Presentations (indicate student authors) and categorize as local, regional,
state, national/international; indicate any award or honor received
o Invited presentations, seminars, etc.
o Grant proposals (PI/co-PI/senior contributor/collaborator) external or
internal, research/teaching or training-oriented: submitted, pending,
declined or awarded, dollar amounts and agency name, start & end date,
etc.
o Research supervision (eg. undergraduate research, Honors theses,
graduate thesis or dissertation, post-doc/visiting scientist)
o Patent and invention disclosures or copyrights
o Participation in professional development activity centered on research
o Any other Research/Creative contributions
Research Supplemental:
 First page of each published manuscript/book chapter/book cover (should
contain appropriate information about publisher, journal name, volume,
pages, year, etc)
 Funding agency cover page of submitted proposal or letter from agency
 Recognition of research activity (e.g. Departmental/College/University
nominations or awards)
 Any other pertinent information the candidate wishes to include (e.g.
comments/feed-back from former students, etc.)

University/Public/Professional Service:
 WKU (state your roles, activities, and any significant achievements)
o Department-level
o Program of Distinction (ARTP center) level
o College-level
o University-level
 Regional or state level
 National or international level
 Service with K-12 schools, and Community/Technical College
 Professional service
o Reviewer of manuscripts, book chapters, etc.
o Reviewer for grant proposals (agency name, panel or ad hoc reviewer,
etc.)
o Leadership positions/memberships in professional associations
o Service to editorial boards
 Participation in professional development activity involving service
 Advising to on-campus student organizations
Department of Biology

DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Any other contributions in service, including grants involving service (see
“Grant proposals” section under “Research”
University/Public/Professional Service Supplemental:
 Documents showing your involvement in professional, community and other
services
 Recognition for service (professional, community,
Departmental/College/University nominations or awards), etc.

Contribution to University Mission
 Based upon the departmental P/T document, please address whether you
consider your performance as excellent, satisfactory, or unsatisfactory
towards meeting the university mission; indicate or highlight each activity
considered excellent.
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Third Year Review Guidelines
Third Year Review
In order to improve the tenure evaluation procedure for probationary faculty and
the Promotion/Tenure (P/T) committee, the Department of Biology at Western Kentucky
University (WKU) has implemented a third year review. This review is an opportunity for
the candidate to receive criticism and recommendations concerning his/her progress
towards meeting the evaluation criteria for promotion/tenure established by the
department and the university in the WKU Faculty Handbook (promotion and tenure
guidelines).
The third year review replaces the annual continuance review, and differs by
requiring the candidate to submit a dossier that documents all relevant accomplishments
during years 1-3. It also requires narratives covering teaching, research, service, and
the university mission, including future directions in these areas.
The tenure-track candidate is responsible for initiating the third year review
process, making sure his/her dossier is submitted by the required deadline, and that the
dossier conforms to format as outlined below. The candidate is encouraged to ask
his/her mentor(s) for advice and/or suggestions on the preparation of this dossier.
Preparation of Third Year Review Dossier
The purpose of the third year review packet is to document the candidate’s
accomplishments in a form that resembles the tenure application dossier, following the
guidelines stated above, including the departmental continuance document. This
document is due at the same time as the annual continuance document, following dates
set by the university. The first step in the process is a letter to Department Head
requesting third year review.
The Third Year Review Dossier should be arranged in the following order.
1. Cover letter: A formal request by the candidate to have his/her materials reviewed.
2. Curriculum Vitae
3. I. Summary of accomplishments in teaching, research, service, and university
mission.
II. Narrative in these four areas for the past three years, including future goals
and directions (both short and long term).
a) Teaching
Describe your accomplishments, experiences, and progress made in teaching.
b) Research
Describe the current status of undergraduate and/or graduate students (including
those graduated) from your lab. Also describe your research program,
emphasizing the nature of your project(s) (funded/non-funded) and status
(including progress made) of each project.
c) Service
Provide information on your service (e.g. were you a committee chair or
member), detailing effort, current status, and/or outcomes.
d) Contribution to University Mission
Provide information on how your activities and accomplishments have
contributed to the mission of WKU.
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Promotion
The promotion process is designed to recognize the continued professional development
of faculty and their contribution to the success of the department and university. While
the granting of tenure is based upon an evaluation of a faculty member's potential for
continued professional growth and development, promotion is based on the
demonstrated accomplishments of that individual over a requisite period of time. The
Faculty Handbook outlines the requirements and procedures relating to the promotion
process, as well as the philosophical relationship between tenure and promotion.
Promotion from Instructor to Assistant Professor
Faculty appointed at the rank of Instructor may be promoted to Assistant Professor upon
completion of all requirements and conferral of the Ph.D. or other terminal degree in the
biological sciences. A recommendation for promotion will be made by the Department
Head to the departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee; this recommendation will
be based on the Department Head’s assessment of the faculty member’s performance
while holding the Rank of Instructor and potential for continued professional
development sufficient to meet the expectations of the rank of Assistant Professor.
Upon receipt of the Department Head’s recommendation, the departmental Promotion
and Tenure Committee will convene to discuss and make a formal recommendation on
promotion to be forwarded to the Department Head. While the promotion process may
be initiated immediately upon conferral of the terminal degree, change in rank (if
granted) is not officially conferred until that year of service is completed.
Promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor
Tenure-track faculty in the Department of Biology are generally eligible for promotion to
the rank of Associate Professor upon completion of five years of service at the rank of
Assistant Professor; however, in most cases, the recommendation regarding promotion
to Associate Professor will be made contemporaneously with that of tenure. Faculty
entering the department from tenure-track positions at other institutions may receive
some years-of-service credit upon appointment; the extent of credit will be negotiated
and agreed to in advance by the faculty member, Department Head and Dean. While
the promotion process is initiated at the beginning of the application year, change in rank
(if granted) is not officially conferred until that year of service is completed.
Eligible faculty must notify the Department Head in writing of their desire to seek
promotion according to the timeline specified in the Faculty Handbook. The Department
Head will in turn notify the departmental Tenure and Promotion Committee. Upon
receipt of this notification, the Promotion and Tenure Committee will convene to discuss
and make a formal recommendation regarding promotion to the Department Head.
Eligible faculty will be considered for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor based
on their overall contribution to the department and the university. Recommendations by
the departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee regarding promotion to Associate
Professor will derive from the established expectations of faculty holding the rank of
Associate Professor (see section on Rank above), and the committee's assessment of
the candidate's ability and potential to meet and sustain those expectations.
Candidates for promotion to Associate Professor are expected to collect and make
available documentary evidence outlining their accomplishments in the areas of teaching
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
effectiveness, research and scholarly activity, university/public/professional service and
contributions to the university mission. Appropriate performance measures for each
category are the same as those utilized in the annual performance appraisal and (as
applicable) post-tenure review process; the promotion file must include data from the
entire period subsequent to attainment of the rank of Assistant Professor. Candidates
should be advised that demonstrating effectiveness in the classroom (as part of the
larger category of Teaching Effectiveness) requires documentation beyond the results of
SITE evaluations; while the nature of the teaching portfolio developed is left to the
discretion of the candidate, a multifactorial approach is essential.
Promotion from Associate Professor to Professor
Promotion to Professor requires a faculty member to demonstrate exceptional and high
quality performance in teaching, scholarship and service. Beyond these standards,
individual tenured faculty members may focus on one or two of these areas most
beneficial to their continued professional development and the overall productivity of the
department. Such areas of specialization will be delineated in the faculty member's long
term goals, and future assessments of performance and recommendations derived from
the post-tenure review process will be based on these targets.
Tenure-track faculty in the Department of Biology are generally eligible for promotion to
the rank of Professor upon completion of five years of service at the rank of Associate
Professor. Eligible faculty are expected to notify the Department Head in writing of their
desire to seek promotion according to the timeline specified in the Faculty Handbook.
The Department Head will in turn notify the departmental Promotion and Tenure
Committee. Upon receipt of this notification, the Promotion and Tenure Committee will
convene to discuss and make a formal recommendation regarding promotion to the
Department Head. University policy dictates that only those tenured faculty holding the
rank of Professor shall be involved in the process of promotion to Professor, but see the
Faculty Handbook for exceptions. While the promotion process is initiated at the
beginning of the application year, change in rank (if granted) is not officially conferred
until that year of service is completed.
Eligible faculty will be considered for promotion to the rank of Professor based on their
overall contribution to the department and the university. Recommendations by the
departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee regarding promotion to Professor will
derive from the established expectations of faculty holding the rank of Professor (see
section on Rank above), and the committee's assessment of the candidate's ability and
potential to meet and sustain those expectations.
Candidates for promotion to Professor are expected to collect and make available
documentary evidence outlining their accomplishments in the areas of teaching
effectiveness, research and scholarly activity, university/public/professional service and
contribution to the university mission. Appropriate performance measures for each
category are the same as those utilized in the annual performance appraisal and (as
applicable) post-tenure review process; the promotion file must include data from the
entire period since the last promotion, and only these data will be used to generate a
recommendation on promotion to Professor. Candidates should be advised that
demonstrating effectiveness in the classroom (as part of the larger category of Teaching
Effectiveness) requires documentation beyond the results of SITE evaluations; while the
nature of the teaching portfolio developed is left to the discretion of the candidate, a
multi-factorial approach is essential.
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Policy for External Reviewers: Promotion to Associate Professor and
Tenure
1) The candidate shall inform the P/T committee in writing of his/her intention to submit the
promotion/tenure dossier. This letter is due before the end of spring semester in the
calendar year promotion or tenure is requested. The letter shall include the names and
contact information of three potential reviewers from the candidate’s area of research
expertise. The candidate will include a brief description of their relationship to each
reviewer. The candidate may submit a list of individuals to exclude from the second
reviewer pool.
2) The suggested external reviewers cannot be those who have agreed to write letters of
support for the candidate. The reviewers also should not have conflicts of interest with
the candidate during the previous three years, e.g. not co-principal investigators on
grants, coauthors, etc. All reviewers will be selected with great care to ensure the
fairness of the review process.
3) The P/T committee will select one of the three names suggested by the candidate to
serve as an external reviewer. The P/T committee will identify a second set of possible
reviewers (three or more) from the research area of the candidate, preferably at one of
WKU’s benchmark universities; one of these individuals (selected by the P/T committee)
will serve as the second external reviewer.
4) Both external reviewers will be contacted by the Department Head and will have agreed
to serve in this capacity by the time the tenure /promotion dossier is due (date set by
university policy) early in the fall semester. As part of this process, each reviewer will be
sent a cover letter briefly describing WKU and copies of the promotion and tenure
guidelines of the University and the Department of Biology. Further, the reviewers will
be informed of the possibility that their names may have to be revealed to the candidate,
in the event of a promotion/tenure decision appeal.
5) The candidate’s promotion and/or tenure package will be sent to the reviewers as soon
as possible after the candidate’s materials have been submitted.
6) If a candidate applies for and is promoted to associate professor before applying for
tenure, the latter application will not require a second round of external reviews, unless
specifically requested by the P/T committee.
7) The P/T committee reserves the right to proceed with the evaluation of the candidate
without any external reviews, if one or both are not received by the established deadline.
8) External reviewers will have an advisory role only. Additionally, they will remain
anonymous to the candidate and all others outside the P/T committee, except possibly
under an appeal of the P/T committee decision. External reviews will not be included as
part of the dossier submitted by the candidate.
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Tenure and Promotion Guidelines
It is the responsibility of the Promotion/Tenure Candidate to build his/her dossier in a
clear, concise manner following the guidelines in the Faculty Handbook (June 2011
edition). In an attempt to standardize the documents submitted for promotion and tenure,
as well as the format in which the dossier is constructed, the P&T Committee
recommends the following as the minimum format and content. If the Candidate so
chooses, he/she may be more creative in building his/her dossier but the following must
be addressed at a minimum.
Dossier Style:
 Limited to the space provided by a 1", 3-hole binder, OR
 Limited to a similar amount of material (~100 pages) that will fit on a compact
disc
 Each section demarcated in some manner (e.g. tabs, colored dividers, etc.) so
they can be located with minimal effort
Dossier Format:
1. Cover Letter - a formal request by the candidate to have his/her materials
considered for promotion and/or tenure
2. Curriculum Vitae
3. Concise narrative explaining teaching, research, and service philosophies
4. A summary of the candidates’ performance relative to Departmental Performance
Review Guidelines below.
University policy requires the following for promotion at every rank: sustained
achievement appropriate for this rank in teaching effectiveness, research/creative
activity, and University/public service. Further, only contributions since the last
promotion will be considered for the next promotion.
Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor Guidelines



Teaching Effectiveness: a tangible record of excellent performance according to
department standards.
Research/Creative Activity: a tangible record of exceptional and high-quality
performance.
University/Public Service: a tangible record of excellent performance.
Note that the exceptional level guidelines under the promotion to full professor for both
teaching and service can also be used as a guide to help build the dossier of the
candidate.
Teaching
Western Kentucky University recognizes teaching as its primary mission, and is
committed to providing its students the highest quality of instruction possible. In addition,
the department places a priority on providing experiential opportunities for
undergraduate students and on fostering a dynamic and challenging environment for
learning.
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Criteria for judging teaching effectiveness as excellent may include, but are not limited to
(cite examples/provide explanations for each with one or more bulleted supporting
statements):
- A pattern of median ratings at or above 3.5 across multiple university and
departmental core items on SITE evaluations.
- Favorable evaluations of teaching performance based on self-appraisal, peerappraisal, and/or letters of support from past and current students.
- Evidence of systematic presentation of accurate, current information in the
subject field.
- Regular availability for student consultation.
- Demonstrable efforts to challenge and develop the scientific, writing, and critical
thinking skills of students.
- Maintenance of current course syllabi and lecture/laboratory schedules on the
Internet.
- Maintenance of good teaching habits, including beginning class on-time,
returning examinations in a timely manner, maintaining clear and consistent
grading policies, and treating students in a fair, impartial and respectful manner.
- Willingness to engage undergraduate students in meaningful independent
research experiences.
- Involvement in academic advising of students.
- Teaching awards won.
Unsatisfactory teaching activity may include, but is not limited to (cite examples/provide
explanations for each with one or more bulleted supporting statements):
- A pattern of median ratings below 3.0 across multiple university and
departmental core items on SITE evaluations or the future equivalent.
- Failure to maintain current course syllabi and lecture/laboratory schedules on the
Internet.
- Failure to maintain good teaching habits as defined above.
- Unwillingness or inability to engage undergraduate or graduate students in
meaningful independent research experiences.
- Unwillingness to assist in academic advising of students when asked.
Teaching Effectiveness: (Summary of your years of accomplishments at WKU)
 Lecture courses (arrange in summary table: Year and semester, title of
course, course #, new or old teaching prep, in-class or web course, student #;
and grade distribution)
 Lab courses (coordinator for multi-section lab, lab teaching, responsible for
lab prep, # TA's supervised)
 New courses and/or curricula developed
 Syllabi for the courses taught including lecture schedule
 SITE evaluation and student’s comments
 Research mentoring/co-mentoring (undergraduate and graduate): current
status of students (e.g. completed/non-completed student, etc.)
 Student advising (# of students, etc.)
 Participation in professional development activity centered on teaching
 Any other contributions in teaching, including grants involving teaching (see
“Grant proposals” section under “Research”)
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Research and Other Scholarly Activity
Western Kentucky University is committed to scholarship in its broad sense, and
particularly to the involvement of students in the generation of new knowledge and the
creative process. The department views research and scholarship as an important
contributor to its teaching mission, the professional development of faculty, and the
maintenance of academic vitality within the department.
Biology is a diverse discipline and we recognize that publications, grant submissions,
and other aspects of scholarship vary by sub-discipline in their ease of production and
impact on the scientific community. Hence, research productivity will be evaluated in
part using criteria that evaluate the depth and breadth of scholarship of the candidate
and consider the amount of effort needed for tangible results in his or her particular
research field.
Exceptional or significant, high quality research activity/performance may include, but is
not limited to (cite examples/provide explanations for each with one or more bulleted
supporting statements):
- Sustained publication record of research findings appropriate to the candidate’s
field in peer-reviewed scientific journals, monographs or books.
- It is expected that a minimum of one of these within each five year period should
be co-authored with either an undergraduate or graduate WKU student who were
researchers in the lab of the candidate.
- Articles on the scholarship of teaching.
- Sustained attempts or receipt of funding from external sources for research,
equipment, and/or professional travel.
- Pursuit of intramural funds for research, equipment, and/or professional travel.
- Leadership in obtaining funding for large-scale or multiple-investigator projects.
- Dissemination of research findings, at the national and international level, either
by students or the faculty member.
- Dissemination of research findings in non-peer-reviewed outlets (i.e., nonrefereed journals/magazines, technical or contract reports, oral or poster
presentations,
electronic publications, databases.
- Publication of novel approaches or findings related to the scholarship of teaching.
- Receipt of patents or copyrights.
- Development of other forms of intellectual property of demonstrable value.
- Involvement in professional development activities centered on research.
- Acquisition of new research equipment or capabilities.
- Research awards won.
- If a sabbatical was awarded based on scholarship, tangible results must be
shown.
Unsatisfactory research performance may include, but is not limited to (cite
examples/provide explanations for each with one or more bulleted supporting
statements):
- Failure to generate publications based on research efforts.
- Unwillingness to seek internal or external funds.
Department of Biology
-
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Lack of tangible results or contributions from research efforts and/or sabbatical
leave.
Failure to participate in professional development activities related to research or
scholarship.
Research: (Summary of your years of accomplishments at WKU)
 Brief description of projects in progress and completed
 Scholarly Contributions (distinguish WKU from pre-WKU accomplishments)
o Publications (peer-reviewed, non-peer-reviewed): journal articles, books,
book chapters, other articles, etc.
o Presentations (indicate student authors) and categorize as local, regional,
state, national/international; indicate any award or honor received
o Invited presentations, seminars, etc.
o Grant proposals (PI/co-PI/senior contributor/collaborator) external or
internal, research/teaching or training-oriented: submitted, pending,
declined or awarded, dollar amounts and agency name, start & end date,
etc.
o Research supervision (e.g. undergraduate research, Honors theses,
graduate thesis or dissertation, post-doc/visiting scientist)
o Patent and invention disclosures or copyrights
o Participation in professional development activity centered on research
University/Public/Professional Service
Western Kentucky University views a record of service as evidence of the candidate’s
commitment to furthering the missions of the department, college and university.
Moreover, service to the department, college, university, and community at large is
recognized as an essential component of good academic citizenship.
Criteria for judging service performance as excellent may include, but are not limited to
(cite examples/provide explanations for each with one or more bulleted supporting
statements):
- Conscientious service on departmental, college and university committees.
- Service activity on behalf of POD centers.
- Availability for consultation and intellectual discourse with peers.
- Regular attendance at faculty meetings and departmental seminars.
- Sustained efforts directed at recruitment of new students to the department.
- Work with K-12 schools, community groups, and the public on behalf of the
department.
- Participation in programs/activities that enhance the reputation of the
department, college, and university.
- Referee/reviewer of manuscripts or grant proposals.
- Service to local, state and national governmental agencies and commissions.
- Involvement in professional development activities centered on service.
- Involvement with Freshman Seminar or other university retention initiatives.
- Efforts at recruiting new students on behalf of the university.
- Contribution to the mission of trans-departmental units (e.g., International
Programs, University Honors Program, Women's Studies, African-American
Studies, Center for Gifted Studies, Center for Teaching and Learning).
- Efforts associated with initiatives to increase diversity on campus.
- Regular attendance at Commencement.
Department of Biology
-
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Involvement in professional development activities centered on university
initiatives.
Service awards won.
Unsatisfactory service performance may include, but is not limited to (cite
examples/provide explanations for each with one or more bulleted supporting
statements):
- Failure to regularly attend faculty meetings and departmental seminars.
- Unwillingness or inability to serve productively on departmental, college and
university committees.
- General unavailability to students and colleagues, i.e. poor academic citizenship.
- Unwillingness to participate in or support university initiatives.
University/Public/Professional Service: (Summary of your years of accomplishments
at WKU)
 WKU (state your roles, activities, and any significant achievements)
o Department-level
o Program of Distinction (ARTP center) level
o College-level
o University-level
 Regional or state level
 National or international level
 Service with K-12 schools, and Community/Technical College
 Professional service
o Reviewer of manuscripts, book chapters, etc.
o Reviewer for grant proposals (agency name, panel or ad hoc reviewer,
etc.)
o Leadership positions/memberships in professional associations
o Service to editorial boards
 Participation in professional development activity involving service
 Advising to on-campus student organizations
 Any other contributions in service, including grants involving service (see
“Grant proposals” section under “Research”)
Promotion to Full Professor Guidelines



Teaching Effectiveness: a tangible record of exceptional and high-quality
performance.
Research/Creative Activity: a tangible record of exceptional and high-quality
performance.
University/Public Service: a tangible record of exceptional and high-quality
performance.
The Biology Department values exceptional and high quality performance in teaching,
research and service. Sustained achievement in all three categories is expected,
although all three areas do not have to show an equal level of achievement; an
emphasis in one or two areas that offers the flexibility for faculty to best express their
talents in service to the department is possible. All guidelines for promotion to Associate
Professor apply to promotion to full professor, in addition to the following.
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Teaching
Exceptional or significant, high quality teaching activity/performance may include, but is
not limited to (cite examples/provide explanations for each with one or more bulleted
supporting statements):
- A pattern of median ratings at or above 4.0 across multiple university and
departmental core items on SITE evaluations or the future equivalent.
- Development of a new course or laboratory and/or new laboratory procedure(s)
for an existing course.
- Significant effort directed at developing the scientific, writing, and critical thinking
skills of students, without a reduction in other responsibilities.
- New teaching preparations without reduction in other responsibilities.
- Service as coordinator of a multiple-section course.
- Demonstrable and sustained effort to improve quality and/or quantity of course
materials available over the Internet.
- Incorporation of field trips or other experiences beyond the normal scope of the
course.
- Involvement in distance learning (teaching at satellite campuses or via ITV).
- Chairing or extensive service on graduate or undergraduate honors thesis
committees.
- Involvement in training a large number of undergraduate research students
without a reduction in other responsibilities.
- Acquisition of new equipment, facilities, etc. for instructional purposes.
- Submission of grant proposals to external agencies for acquisition of equipment,
facilities, and/or supplies for instructional purposes.
- Shouldering a large academic advising role without reduction in other
responsibilities.
- Demonstrable effort to improve teaching effectiveness through professional
development.
Research and Other Scholarly Activity
See the Guidelines for promotion to Associate Professor.
University/Public/Professional Service
Exceptional or significant, high quality service activity/performance may include, but is
not limited to (cite examples/provide explanations for each with one or more bulleted
supporting statements):
- Shouldering a large, pivotal service or administrative role without reduction in
other responsibilities (e.g. service on ad hoc and/or search committees, chairing
committees, graduate student coordinator, director of a POD center,
departmental class scheduling, significant effort directed at recruitment, retention,
or increasing diversity on behalf of the university, teaching or administrative
service on behalf of trans-departmental units).
- Advisement of student organizations.
- Scholarly development and professional support of students.
- Performance of service to the larger scientific community through leadership in
scientific societies, service on editorial boards and grant review panels.
- Involvement in obtaining capital gifts to the department, college, or university.
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
Post-Tenure Review
The post-tenure review process is designed to allow tenured faculty the means to plot a
professional trajectory consistent with their current responsibilities and ambitions, as well
as the priorities of the department and the university. The overarching objective of the
post-tenure review process is to ensure that the best interests of the students, individual
faculty member, department and university continue to be recognized and served.
University policy dictates that all tenured faculty undergo post-tenure review on an
annual, academic year basis. The post-tenure review process follows directly from the
annual performance appraisal. Faculty enter the post-tenure review process during the
year following the granting of tenure, at which time they are required to develop, in
collaboration with the department head, a set of goals designed to guide their
professional activities and development over the subsequent five years. This plan will
form the foundation of the faculty member's post-tenure review file; documentation will
be added to this file on an annual basis until five year's worth of documentation is
compiled. At this time, a new set of long-term goals will be developed, and the posttenure review file will include a rolling compilation of the most recent five years of
documentation.
There exist two aspects to post-tenure review within the Department of Biology. First, as
part of the annual performance appraisal, the Department Head will consider the
accomplishments of tenured faculty with respect to their established long-term goals and
(as appropriate) their progress towards promotion. Appropriate performance measures
and categories are the same as those utilized in the annual performance appraisal;
however, the faculty member may wish to provide additional documentary evidence
above that provided for the annual performance appraisal to support this evaluation.
The Department Head will forward one of two recommendations on each tenured faculty
member to the departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee: (1) Recognize
Satisfactory Progress; and (2) Review for Remediation.
It is expected that, in most instances, the Department Head will forward a
recommendation of Recognize Satisfactory Performance. The category Review for
Remediation will be reserved for those instances when a tenured faculty member's
pattern of performance is consistently below that expected and/or compromising to the
mission of the department or the university that development of a plan to monitor and
correct such deficiencies is justified.
In the second aspect of the post-tenure review process, all members of the departmental
Promotion and Tenure Committee will have the opportunity to review the post-tenure
review files of each tenured faculty member with respect to the recommendations made
by the Department Head. By secret, written ballot, the Promotion and Tenure
Committee will vote to accept or reject the Department Head's recommendation on each
tenured faculty member. In the case when the recommendation is rejected by the
majority vote of the committee, an alternative recommendation will be adopted.
In such cases when the departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee concludes that
a recommendation of Recognize Satisfactory Performance is appropriate, the chair of
the committee will return that recommendation to the Department Head to be included in
the faculty member’s post-tenure review file and forwarded to the Dean and the Provost.
Department of Biology
DRAFT
For Fall 2012 Approval
If this recommendation is at odds with the original recommendation made to the
committee by the Department Head, a written justification will also be provided.
In such cases where the departmental Promotion and Tenure Committee concludes that
a recommendation of Review for Remediation is appropriate, the entire committee (with
the exception of the faculty member at issue) will convene to discuss and develop a
written justification for the recommendation. This document will provide the committee's
assessment of the severity of the deficiencies, and suggest a plan of action and timeline
to ameliorate the deficiencies. The recommendation, along with the written justification,
will be returned to the Department Head to be included in the faculty member's posttenure review file and forwarded to the Dean and the Provost. It will then be the
responsibility of the Department Head to work with the faculty member to develop a set
of concrete steps to address the deficiencies in a timely manner; this plan will also be
included in the faculty member's post-tenure review file.
Approvals
This document has been reviewed and approved by:
__________________________________________ Date ___________________
Department of Biology Faculty
__________________________________________ Date ___________________
Head, Department of Biology
__________________________________________ Date ___________________
Dean, Ogden College of Science, Technology and Health
__________________________________________ Date ___________________
Provost and Vice-President for Academic Affairs