Retention and Review Statement for Career-Line, Adjunct, and Visiting Faculty and Other Instructional Personnel

COLLEGE OF HUMANITIES | DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY

Faculty Categories, Ranks, Responsibilities, and Rights | Initial Appointment, Term Length, and Mentors | Procedures for Review |

Review Guidelines | Non-Faculty Instructional and Research Personnel

 

Approved by the Department of History Faculty: January 28, 2022
Approved by the Dean, College of Humanities: February 4, 2022
Approved by the Senate Faculty Review Standards Committee: March 25, 2022
Approved by the Senior Vice President: June 16, 2022, for implimentation on July 1, 2022.

 

Retention and Review Statement for Career-Line, Adjunct,
and Visiting Faculty and Other Instructional Personnel

 

This document serves as the Department of History’s Statement of retention and review criteria, standards, evidence, and procedures for Career-Line, Adjunct, and Visiting Faculty and Other Instructional Personnel as required by University Policy. This statement along with relevant University Policies, 6-310, found at http://regulations.utah.edu/academics/6-310.php, 6-302, found at http://regulations.utah.edu/academics/6-302.php, and 6-300, found at http://regulations.utah.edu/academics/6-300.php, govern these processes.

 

Mission Statement:
The Department of History embraces a mission of increasing historical understanding and knowledge by conducting and disseminating original research and teaching history as well as transferable skills leading to diverse careers for both undergraduate and graduate students. 

 

1. Effective Date and Application to Existing Faculty

The standards and procedures contained in this Statement are effective as of the implementation date on page 1. All Career-Line, Adjunct, and Visiting faculty members, and other instructional personnel appointed or reappointed on or after this date will be considered under this Statement with the exception that faculty members whose review for reappointment and/or promotion is 
within twelve months of the adoption of these standards shall have the option of selecting either (1) the prior review standards or (2) this new Statement. This Statement will apply unless the candidate’s choice of the prior requirements is communicated to the Department Chair and Dean by signed letter before September 1 of the academic year in which the review will take place.

 

2. Faculty Categories, Ranks, Responsibilities, and Rights

2.1 Faculty Categories

In addition to Tenure-Line faculty, the Department of History appoints faculty members as (1) Career-Line Faculty, which includes Lecturers and Research Faculty; (2) Adjunct faculty; and (3) Visiting faculty.

Career-Line, Adjunct, and Visiting faculty are formally appointed as members of the faculty of the Department of History and of the University and serve for fixed durational terms. Appointments may be renewed for additional terms through reappointment in accordance with University and Department of History policy. Promotions to a higher rank are (but need not be) considered at the time of reappointment to a new term with the higher rank, and such promotions require a reappointment process. Career-Line faculty also are responsible, as designated in their contracts and expected by their home units, for service at the Department of History, University, and community levels. The Department of History and University service includes a collective responsibility to help oversee and to participate in the administration and governance of those institutions.

In addition to formal appointment to the status of member of the faculty, Career-Line, Adjunct, and Visiting faculty members are hired as an employee of the University, in a position designated as either full- or part-time, and for a designated time period which may be equal to or less than the duration of the faculty appointment term. An individual contract for employment, including the full- or part-time position, the durational period of employment, salary and benefits, and specific individual duties, is administered by the Department of History and University administrative officers, with procedures separate from the faculty appointment 
processes described here. Career-Line faculty members are ordinarily hired as full-time employees, Adjunct faculty are ordinarily hired as part-time employees, and Visiting faculty may be hired as either part-time or full-time employees.

 

2.2       Responsibilities and Rights of Career-Line Faculty

All Career-Line faculty members appointed at .5 FTE or above have the following rights and responsibilities. Career-Line faculty appointed by special arrangement at less than .5 FTE will have those rights and responsibilities articulated in their contract with the university.

 

2.2.1    Responsibilities and Rights of Lecturer Faculty

Lecturers are primarily responsible for teaching and for the development and implementation of special programs connected with their teaching and other areas of expertise. Lecturers may also engage in scholarship, and may be eligible for support from the Department of History.

Lecturer faculty members are entitled to participate fully on Department of History, College, and University Committees (within limits prescribed by University regulations), in College Council, and at faculty meetings.

Lecturers at the rank of Professor are entitled to vote on all matters except appointment, retention, and promotion of Tenure-Line faculty. Lecturers at the rank of Assistant Professor and Associate Professor are entitled to vote on all matters except appointment, retention, and promotion of Tenure-Line faculty and appointment, reappointment, and promotion of Career Line faculty above their rank.

 

2.2.2    Responsibilities of Research Faculty

Research faculty are primarily responsible for research and publication, usually in conjunction with specially funded projects, typically under supervision by or in collaboration with one or more members of the Tenure-Line faculty or appropriate Department of History administrator. Research faculty also may be responsible for the development and implementation of special programs connected with their research and other areas of expertise. Research faculty may work onsite at the University, or at other locations depending on the nature and funding of the research projects. Research faculty ordinarily do not teach regular courses, but may be expected to give guest lectures, participate in other programs, or otherwise enhance the Department of History’s teaching mission as related to their research programs.

Research faculty may participate fully and vote in Department of History committees to which they are assigned, as related to their research activities. Research faculty may attend College Council and appropriate faculty meetings.

Research faculty at the rank of Professor are entitled to vote on all matters except appointment, retention, and promotion of Tenure-Line faculty. Research faculty at the rank of Assistant Professor and Associate Professor are entitled to vote on all matters except appointment, retention, and promotion of Tenure-Line faculty and appointment, reappointment, and promotion of Career-Line faculty above their rank.

 

2.3       Responsibilities and Rights of Adjunct Faculty

Adjunct faculty are appointed primarily to teach or to co-teach one or more courses in areas of special expertise or skills, or to address temporary or permanent gaps in courses taught by Tenure-Line and Career-Line faculty.

Adjunct faculty are not expected to serve on Department of History or University committees, but may do so at the discretion of the department chair. Adjunct faculty typically engage in community service as part of their professional lives.

 

2.4       Responsibilities and Rights of Visiting Faculty

isiting faculty appointments are ordinarily for no more than three years and may be either full or part-time. Visiting faculty typically are appointed for one or more of the following primary purposes: (1) to teach courses as needed because of sabbaticals, leaves, or vacancies in the Tenure-Line or Career-Line faculty; (2) to explore mutual interest in a permanent appointment at the Department of History in a Tenure-Line or Career-Line position; and (3) to gain experience in teaching, and to engage in productive scholarship under the mentorship of experienced members of the faculty. 

Visiting faculty members are responsible for teaching and/or scholarship as appropriate to the ranks to which they are appointed. Visiting faculty may participate on Department of History and University committees at the discretion of the department chair. 

 

3. Initial Appointment, Term Length, and Mentors

3.1 Initial Appointments

Career-Line, Adjunct, and Visiting faculty members are appointed at one of four ranks: Instructor, Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor. Initial appointment is based on demonstrated achievement and the expectation of future contributions. Number of years in a relevant profession, length of prior teaching or research experience, and other significant achievements, service, awards, and contributions to their profession or field shall be considered when determining the initial term and faculty rank.

Presumptively, Visiting faculty who hold a faculty appointment at another institution will be appointed at the rank they hold at that institution, so long as doing so is consistent with the criteria and standards otherwise provided in this Statement.

 

3.2 Appointment Body

Initial appointments of Career-Line, Adjunct, and Visiting faculty require a vote of the Faculty Appointments Committee. The Faculty Appointments Committee shall consist of all faculty members eligible to vote on an appointment or reappointment matter. The Faculty Appointments Committee shall only vote when a two-thirds or greater quorum exists, including any proxy votes provided in advance in writing. A majority vote by the quorum is required for a positive recommendation on the appointment from the committee. Votes by the Faculty Appointments Committee shall proceed by secret ballot.

 

3.3 Appointment Duration

(a) Career-Line and Adjunct faculty members appointed at the rank of Assistant Professor ordinarily serve for up to a two-year term. Career-Line and Adjunct faculty members appointed at the rank of Associate Professor ordinarily serve up to a three-year term. Career-Line and Adjunct faculty members appointed at the rank of Professor ordinarily serve up to a five-year term.

(b) Once appointed at the rank of Professor, Career-Line faculty members at that rank hold a five-year term with a presumption of renewal to subsequent five-year terms.

(c) Visiting faculty members may be appointed at varying term lengths within the University’s prescribed maximum of three total years, depending on funding and institutional need. Typically, Visiting Assistant Professors will be appointed for a two year term, consistent with the purpose of that position to help a candidate transition to a full-time Tenure-Line position.

(d) Notwithstanding the above, the appointment of Career-Line and Adjunct faculty members may be ended in conjunction with formal reviews, under University policy, or if there is financial exigency or discontinuation of a program or department of
instruction. The affected faculty member will be given notice as soon as possible consistent with their contract terms. Unless the contract specifies otherwise, notice must be provided at least three months in advance of the ending of the appointment if the faculty member has served at least three years continuously. 

(e)  The appointment of Research, Adjunct, and Visiting faculty also may be ended if there is no longer a need for the faculty member’s expertise or relevant teaching or research services in light of the teaching portfolios or expertise of other members of the faculty, or for lack of funding where such appointments are contingent on funding. The affected faculty member will be given notice as soon as possible. 

(f) The appointment of any Career-Line, Adjunct, or Visiting faculty member may be terminated for cause under University Policy related directly and substantially to the fitness of the faculty member in their professional capacity. Termination for cause shall not infringe on their right to exercise academic freedom or their rights as a citizen of the United States. 

 

3.4 Mentors

Until promoted to the rank of Professor, Assistant and Associate Career-Line faculty members may be assigned an appropriate mentor either in the Tenure-Line or the Career-Line.

 

4. Procedures for Review

Once appointed, all Career-Line, Adjunct, and Visiting Faculty will be regularly reviewed by the Department of History. This section describes the procedures for such reviews.

 

4.1 Informal Reviews

The Department of History tenure-line faculty will review teaching or research/scholarship/creative activity for Career-Line, Adjunct, Visiting Faculty, and other non-faculty teaching personnel at least annually. The tenure-line faculty will also ensure peer-review of the individual’s teaching and will solicit input and feedback from the Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence where appropriate. Any issues or problems are discussed and addressed individually, as needed. All informal reviews are included in a candidate’s formal review file. If, in an informal review, a Career-Line faculty member does not demonstrate clearly adequate progress toward reappointment, an early formal review may be “triggered” by the Review Committee or the department chair. Such “triggered” formal review shall occur the following fall unless a majority of the Review Committee votes to proceed with the review in the current academic year. Such a review, however, must not be conducted sooner than 30 days after written notice of the review is provided to the candidate. 

 

4.2 Formal Reviews

To ensure the continued quality performance of faculty members and make decisions about their continuation in a position or promotion to a different rank, the Department of History will conduct formal reviews of its Career-Line and Adjunct faculty as dictated by the length and terms of the contract provided to the faculty member.

 

4.3 Review Committee

The Department of History shall formulate a Career-Line, Adjunct, and Instructional Personnel Review Committee (Review Committee). The Review Committee shall be comprised of three (3) members of the tenured faculty and if available, one member of the Career-Line faculty who holds the rank of Associate Professor or Professor. These appointments are made by the tenured and career-line faculty through an annural election. In addition, a member of the tenured faculty shall be elected as Review Committee Chair by majority vote of the Tenure-Line and Career-Line faculty in the Department of History.

 

4.4 Report of Review Committee

The Review Committee is responsible for conducting formal reviews of Career-Line and Adjunct faculty and completing a report describing the findings of its review. Based on this report, the Review Committee shall recommend either (1) that the candidate be reappointed and, where appropriate, promoted, (2) that the candidate be denied reappointment or, where appropriate, promotion, or (3), where there are issues that require attention, that the candidate be reappointed for a one-year contract with the opportunity to be considered for reappointment in the following year. The report of the Review Committee shall: (1) summarize the evidence
considered; (2) state how the evidence considered satisfies or fails to satisfy the applicable standard(s); (3) make recommendations for rating the candidate in all applicable areas of evaluation (i.e., Excellent, Very Good, Effective, or Not Effective in Teaching); and (4) give the reasons for its recommendations.

 

4.5 Procedures for Career-Line Reviews

The Review Committee shall conduct its review of Career-Line faculty members using the following timeline and procedures:

1. By September 1 of the fall semester of the academic year for review, the Chair of the Review Committee shall solicit a Student Advisory Committee report on the candidate. Such report shall be submitted to the Chair by December 1.

2. By October 1, the Chair of the Review Committee shall designate one or more members of the Career-Line faculty (of a higher rank than the candidate) and one or more members of the Tenure-Line faculty to conduct at least two peer teaching reviews of any candidate who has teaching responsibilities. The reviewing faculty members may include members of the Review Committee. These peer teaching evaluations of the candidate shall be submitted to the candidate’s file by December 1.

3. By October 1, the Chair of the Review Committee shall request a portfolio from the candidate. The candidate shall submit that portfolio by December 1 of that year. The portfolio shall include:

(a)   A curriculum vitae;
In describing their work faculty will follow lexicon recommended by the American Historical Association as follows:

• • •  ““In Press”: the manuscript is fully copyedited and out of the author’s hands. It is in the final stages of the production process.
    • “Forthcoming”: a completed manuscript has been accepted by a press or journal.
    • “Under contract to . . .”: a press and an author have signed a contract for a book in progress, but the final manuscript has not yet been submitted.
    • “Submitted” or “under consideration”: the book or article has been submitted to a press or journal, but there is as yet no contract or agreement to publish.” (Statement on Standards of Professional Conduct (Updated 
      2019) (https://www.historians.org/jobs-and-professionaldevelopment/statements-standards-and-guidelines-of-thediscipline/statement-on-standards-of-professional-conduct#Reputation) 

(b) A personal statement, including the following as appropriate: (1) a list of courses taught; (2) a description of course load and administrative responsibilities, which includes types of courses taught, student enrollment, student contact hours, and the types of student assessment for the courses; (3) a statement of teaching objectives and philosophy; (4) a description of research accomplishments, including any grant submissions and funding as well as publications.

(c) All publications and/or documentation of public history/Community Engaged Scholarship (CES) during the review period;

(d) Any prior written evaluations or reports from the Review Committee;

(e) Any other materials the candidate deems relevant, such as course materials, simulations, presentations, evidence of pro bono or other work or activities that serve to enhance the Department of History’s local, regional, national, or international reputation.

4. By October 1, the Review Committee Chair shall assure that —all teaching evaluations and recent syllabi for the candidate are placed in the candidate’s file. By December 1, the Reivew Committee Chair shall solicit comments about the candidate from other members of the Department of History.

5. The Review Committee Chair shall circulate the candidate’s portfolio to other Review Committee members, who shall read the complete file.

6. The Review Committee Chair shall assign a Review Committee member to prepare a draft of the Review Committee Report. The draft report shall be completed by February 1, and the Review Committee shall confer about the report and vote on its approval by February 10.

7. The Review Committee Chair shall expeditiously transmit the report to the candidate following its approval by the Review Committee. Upon receipt of the report, the candidate shall have five business days to make a written comment on any item in her file, or to indicate the candidate is waiving such right. The candidate has the right to review all contents in her file, except for any confidential letters of evaluation solicited from outside the Department of History.

8. By March 1, the Review Committee Chair shall circulate a copy of the report to the Faculty Appointments Committee and make the candidate’s file available for review. Thereafter, but no later than March 15, the Faculty Appointments Committee shall meet and discuss the recommendations and by a majority secret ballot vote make a final recommendation to the Department Chair on the candidate’s reappointment and, if applicable, promotion. The Chair of the Faculty Appointments Committee will appoint a secretary at the meeting to keep minutes, which will be made a part of the candidate’s file.

9. The candidate shall receive a copy of the vote and minutes at the time they are forwarded to the Department Chair.

10. The Department Chair shall receive the entire file and make their independent recommendation and forward the file to the appropriate University official for approval. Before forwarding the file, the Department Chair shall give the candidate a copy of their recommendation. The candidate has the right to make a written response to the Department Chair’s letter and/or the faculty vote and minutes within five business days of receiving the Department Chair’s letter.

11. The Department Chair shall notify the candidate of the decision no later than April 1 of the academic year for review.

4.6 Procedures for Adjunct Reviews

The Review Committee shall conduct its review of Adjunct faculty members using the following timeline and procedures:

1. By January 15 of the academic year for review, the Review Committee Chair and the Department Chair shall confer and create a list of adjunct faculty members with expiring terms whose reappointment will be sought.

2. By March 1, the Review Committee shall prepare, approve, and circulate a report to the Faculty Appointments Committee describing which adjunct faculty members it recommends for reappointment and, where applicable, promotion. The report shall summarize teaching evaluations of all adjunct faculty members addressed in the report, and attach current resumes of each adjunct faculty member to the report.

3. The Review Committee shall request a vote on its report from the Faculty Appointments Committee. Unless the Review Committee determines a need for a live meeting, the vote will be conducted by email. If the Review Committee determines the need for a live meeting, it shall make all reasonable efforts to schedule the meeting in conjunction with any Career-Line review meeting being held. If a live meeting is held, minutes will be kept. Whether the vote is live or by email, it shall be conducted by secret ballot.

4. The Faculty Appointments Committee Chair shall expeditiously forward the results of the vote to the Department Chairperson for any necessary further action.

 

5. Review Guidelines

A faculty member’s stature is based on an assessment of achievements in the area of faculty responsibility and the three functions of faculty members, as those functions are relevant to that faculty member’s appointment: (1) teaching, (2) service, and (3)
research/creative activity.

Summary ratings of performance in these three areas as relevant to the faculty member’s appointment serve as the standards for review, reappointment, and promotion. University Policy identifies a three-level scale of standards: excellent, effective, and not satisfactory. As permitted by Policy, this unit will use a four-level scale for evaluating performance: excellent, very good, effective, and not satisfactory. On this scale, the standard very good is located between the standards of excellent and effective in University Policy. The same criteria and standards apply to both formal and informal reviews. Evaluations of candidates are based on the evidence provided regarding a candidate’s research/creative activity, teaching, and service and are described in subsequent sections.

University Policy allows a candidate’s conduct as a responsible member of the faculty to be taken into consideration during a review. As a result, one’s failure to abide by the Faculty Code or any other rules or policies of the University may be considered in determining whether one will be retained, reappointed, or promoted.

 

5.1 Review Standards and Criteria

5.1.1  Evaluation of Teaching

Within the University system, the term teaching refers to regularly scheduled instruction, curriculum and program development, directing undergraduate and/or graduate student work, and counseling and advising of students in general. There are therefore three components of teaching: (1) course instruction, (2) curriculum and program development, and (3) student advising and mentoring.

(1) Course instruction

Course instruction encompasses (a) didactic classroom instruction; (b) online and distance education teaching; (c) the organization and facilitation of seminars and workshops that are related to curriculum needs; and (d) independent instruction involving one or more students on special topics. Specific sources of information to evaluate the candidate’s course instruction shall include: (a) the candidate’s statement of teaching philosophy as found in their personal statement; (b) peer review of the candidate’s syllabi, assignments, and other teaching materials; (c) peer observation of the candidate’s course instruction, seminars, workshops, and
other public presentations; and (d) information from student course evaluations. Other information about teaching, including, for example, a teaching portfolio, teaching awards, or any evaluation of the candidate’s teaching done by personnel from the University’s Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence (CTLE) or by the Student Advisory Committee (SAC) may also be included.

 

(2) Curriculum and program development

Academic programs require significant investments of faculty time in ongoing curriculum/program development and maintenance. The contributions of a candidate to such efforts, beyond regular teaching assignments, may therefore be considered as part of contributions in the area of teaching. Examples of these kinds of contributions include the development and teaching of new and novel courses and the publication of textbooks or other teaching materials.

 

(3) Student advising and mentoring

Work with undergraduate and graduate students outside of the classroom is also an important component of teaching. Activities of primary importance in this area include (1) general student advising and mentoring; (2) chairing and serving on graduate student committees; and (3) including students in research and as co-authors in scholarly work. Contributions in this area are evaluated with respect to both quantity and quality. 

 

(4) Summary Rating Scale for Teaching

Ratings on the four-point scale below reflect the joint consideration of the three components of teaching described above.

Excellent: The candidate has made substantial, sustained contributions in areas of course instruction, curriculum/program development, and student advising and mentoring.

Very Good: The candidate has made significant, sustained contributions in areas of course instruction, curriculum/program development, and student advising and mentoring.

Effective: The candidate has made acceptable, sustained contributions in teaching. The candidate shows sufficient progress in the areas of course instruction, curriculum/program development, and student advising and mentoring to suggest that the eventual contributions in these areas will be significant.

Not Satisfactory: The candidate has made insufficient contributions in teaching.

 

5.1.2    Evaluation of Service

Evaluations are made with respect to three areas of service: (1) professional service, (2) University service, and (3) public service. It is not necessary for a candidate to participate equally in all three service areas. Differing participation in the three service areas typically reflects the strengths and interests of individual faculty members.

 

(1) Professional Service

This refers primarily to professional participation at a national or international level. Service in this category can be oriented toward national professional organizations and include such activities as holding offices; participating in the organization or operation of conferences; attending professional meetings; serving as chair, discussant, or reviewer for presentations at professional meetings; serving on various professional committees, panels, or boards (e.g., accreditation boards); and presenting professional workshops. Significant professional service contributions can also include serving as editor, associate editor, editorial review board member, or regular reviewer for scholarly or professional journals.

 

(2) University Service

This category refers to service within the University, including at the levels of the Department of History, College, and overall institution. A candidate’s shared-governance activities, including chairing and/or serving on standing and ad hoc committees, councils, and task forces, or serving in administrative positions, at any of these levels, represent valuable University service contributions.

 

(3) Public Service

This category includes service related to the candidate’s area of expertise in various local, regional, national, and international public settings and can take many forms, e.g., serving on boards and committees for governmental and/or non-profit organizations, consulting with and/or providing direct service to community agencies as appropriate within University guidelines.

 

(4) Summary Rating Scale for Service

Ratings on the four-point scale below reflect the joint consideration of service contributions in the three areas described above.

Excellent: The candidate has made substantial, sustained contributions to the profession, the University, and/or the public.

Very Good: The candidate has made significant, sustained contributions to the profession, the University, and/or the public.

Effective: The candidate has made acceptable, sustained contributions in service. The candidate shows sufficient commitment to service in at least one area, suggesting that the eventual contributions of the candidate will be significant.

Not Satisfactory: The candidate has made insufficient contributions in service.

 

5.1.3    Evaluation of Research

Judgments about a candidate’s research are based on both the quality and quantity of research and its relevance to the academic community and the Department of History’s needs. The characteristics of productive research, however, differ depending on the candidate’s area(s) of specialization and professional goals and the Department of History’s needs for research in a given area.

 

(1) Description of Research Activity

We expect candidates to contribute significantly and distinctly to the development and dissemination of new knowledge. In order to do so, we expect candidates to produce high quality scholarly work. Quantity of research/creative activity is not judged by simple publication counts or impact factors. A series of publications over time that represents sustained research in one or more topic areas is expected. We also expect the candidate to demonstrate that their research program is on a positive and productive trajectory over time and is sustainable.

It is understood that candidates engaged in public history and community engaged scholarship (CES) may produce forms of scholarship that differ from published monographs and articles, and that work should also be evaluated as research/creative activity. In this regard, public history and CES projects that represent significant contributions to historical knowledge and demonstrate professional skills of a high order may be considered in place of, or in addition to, publications. Such scholarship might include: historic preservation and cultural resource management projects; oral history and community history projects; museum exhibition and curatorial projects; documentary films, television, radio programs, and podcasts; contract research reports and expert testimony or consulting reports; digital history projects such as online exhibitions, digital documentary editions, online collection databases, and other forms of content development for history-based websites. Candidates submitting such scholarship should provide evidence of peer review .

 

(2) Research Funding

Acquiring funding to support research is valued by the University and the Department of History and is necessary to sustain the research mission of the university. All successful as well as unsuccessful efforts to obtain such funding will be considered as appropriate to contributing positively toward one’s research.

 

(3) Summary Rating Scale for Research/Creative Activity

Ratings on the four-point scale below reflect the joint consideration of quantity and quality of research/creative activity as described above.

Excellent: The candidate has made substantial, sustained contributions in one or more topic areas of research. The quality and quantity of research reflect a coherent agenda in at least one topic area.

Very Good: The candidate has made significant, sustained contributions in one or more topic areas of research. The quality and quantity of research reflect a coherent agenda in at least one topic area.

Effective: The candidate has made acceptable, sustained contributions in one or more topic areas of research. The quality and quantity of research reflect a coherent agenda of work and suggest that significant contributions will be made over time.

Not Satisfactory: The candidate has made insufficient contributions in research/creative activity.

 

5.2 Review Standards for Career-Line Faculty

Two different sets of standards apply to the review of Career-Line faculty, depending on the faculty member’s appointment category. One set of standards applies to Lecturers, whose primary responsibilities are teaching and service. The other set of standards applies to Research faculty, whose primary responsibilities are research and service.

 

5.2.1    Review Standards Lecturers

(a) To be reappointed, a Lecturer must demonstrate that they are (1) at least Effective in teaching and (2) at least Effective in service.

(b) To be promoted from the rank of Assistant to Associate Professor, a Lecturer must demonstrate that they are (1) at least Very Good in teaching, or that they have made substantial progress toward becoming Excellent in teaching, and (2) at least Effective in service. 

(c) To be promoted to the rank of Professor, a Lecturer must demonstrate that they are (1) they are Excellent in teaching and (2) at least Effective in service.

(d) Lecturers are not expected to engage in research and published scholarship. However, the Department Chair and faculty encourage and support Lecturers who wish to engage in scholarship.

 

5.2.2 Review Standards for Research Faculty

(a) To be reappointed, a Research faculty member must demonstrate that they are (1) at least Effective in research; and (2) if the faculty member teaches, at least Effective in teaching; and (3) at least Effective in service.

(b) To be promoted from the rank of Assistant to Associate Professor, a Research faculty member must demonstrate that they are (1) at least Very Good in research; and (2) if the faculty member teaches, at least Effective in teaching; and (3) at least Effective in service

(c) To be promoted to the rank of Professor, a Research faculty member must demonstrate that they are (1) they are Excellent in research, and (2) if the faculty member teaches, at least Effective in teaching, and (2) at least Effective in service

 

5.3 Review Standards for Adjunct Faculty

(a) To be reappointed, an Adjunct faculty member must demonstrate that they are at least Effective in teaching.

(b) To be promoted from the rank of Assistant to Associate Professor, an Adjunct faculty member must demonstrate that they are at least Very Good in teaching. In evaluating promotion of an Adjunct faculty member, the value of the faculty member and the courses they teach to the Department of History may be taken into account.

(c) To be promoted to the rank of Professor, an Adjunct faculty member must demonstrate that they are Excellent in teaching. In evaluating promotion of an Adjunct faculty member, the value of the faculty member and the courses they teach to the Department of History may be taken into account

 

5.4 Review Standards for Visiting Faculty

(a) As their appointments are by definition temporary, Visiting faculty typically do not undergo formal reviews. Visiting faculty who are subsequently considered for a permanent position will be reviewed in conjunction with the regular faculty appointment process.

(b)  If a Visiting faculty member is appointed for longer than a semester, the department chair will review their teaching evaluations at the end of each semester and consult with the faculty member if any issues warrant attention. If, at any time, the department chair and associate chair agree that a visiting faculty member is not Effective in teaching, they may terminate the appointment. 

(c) If the faculty member has served fewer than three years and is being considered for reappointment, to be reappointed, a Visiting faculty member must demonstrate that they are (1) at least Effective in teaching and (2) at least Effective in service.

 

6. Non-Faculty Instructional and Reserach Personnel

Non-faculty instructional personnel do not hold faculty appointments but teach credit-bearing courses within the unit. They include associate instructors, research associates, graduate student instructors of record, or postdoctoral fellows. Non-faculty research personnel are responsible for research. Non-faculty instructional and research personnel do not have voting rights and are
not expected to serve on committees.

Non-faculty instructional or research personnel shall undergo a formal review every academic years of service at the University. To be reappointed, a non-faculty instructional and research personnel undergoing formal review must demonstrate that they are at least Effective in teaching and/or at least Effective in research, whichever is applicable, using the same standards that define Effective teaching and Effective research for Career-Line faculty within the Department of History. 

The Review Committee shall conduct its review of non-faculty instructional personnel using the following timeline and procedures:

1. By January 15 of the academic year for review, the Review Committee Chair and the department chair shall confer and create a list of non-faculty instructional and research personnel for whom a formal review is required.

2. By March 1, the Review Committee shall prepare, approve, and circulate a report to the department chair describing its findings on all reviewed non-faculty instructional and research personnel. The report shall explain how the committee gathered information for the review, including steps taken to collect information from the personnel being reviewed. The report shall also summarize all teaching or other evaluations of all personnel reviewed, and attach current resumes/CVs of each such individual to the report.

3. The department chair shall consider and take into account the Review Committee’s report when determining whether to appoint the instructional personnel to teach courses or conduct research in the subsequent academic year.

The appointment of non-faculty instructional and research personnel also may be ended if there is no longer a need for the personnel’s expertise or relevant teaching or research services in light of the teaching portfolios or expertise of other members of the faculty, or for lack of ffunding where such appointments are contingent on funding. The affected person will be given notice as soon as possible.

The appointment of any non-faculty instructional or research personnel may be terminated for cause under University Policy related directly and substantially to the fitness of the person in their professional capacity. Termination for cause shall not infringe on their right to exercise academic freedom or their rights as a citizen of the United States.