Senate
(Amends SD 88-25)
(As approved, click here)
To: Fort Wayne Senate
From: Faculty Affairs Committee
David L. Oberstar, Chair
Subj: Proposed amendment to SD 88-25: Advancement to Senior Instructor
Date: December 10, 2003
Disposition: To the Presiding Officer for Implementation
Whereas the rank of Senior Instructor,
created by IPFW SD 01-13 (attached) and incorporated into SD 88-25, is an
anomaly within both the
Whereas IPFW employs tenured and/or tenure-eligible Instructors who may aspire, based on a record of teaching excellence and competence in other duties, to advance professionally; and
Whereas it is possible to recognize such advancement within the existing systems by awarding the title “Senior Instructor” and allocating an appropriate increment;
Be it Resolved that SD 88-25, section
C, be amended as indicated on the attached copy (deletions in strikethrough,
additions in bold).
Approving: Disapproving: Absent:
Elaine Blakemore
Margit Codispoti
Susan Hannah
David Oberstar
Hedayeh Samavati
Nash Younis
Senate
(Amends SD 88-25)
(Last amended, 4/8/2002)
CRITERIA FOR TENURE AND PROMOTION
The
most important decisions in the academic profession, for the individual and for
the institution, regard the granting of tenure and the awarding of promotion.
The granting of tenure involves a commitment on the part of the University for
the working lifetime of the faculty member. Further, promotion may be granted
before tenure. Consequently, the granting of tenure is a more serious decision
than the award of promotion, as it has a significant impact on the faculty member,
the University community, its students, and the citizens of the state.
With
tenure a faculty member receives the opportunity to teach, study, and serve for
the duration of her/his professional career in a community which protects
academic freedom, provides adequate material rewards, and encourages
intellectual growth. The university, for its part, benefits from the confident
and disciplined pursuit of excellence undertaken by tenured faculty.
The
decision to grant tenure, usually made at an early point in a colleague's
career and/or after only a relatively short time has been spent at this
university, must depend in part on what has been achieved in teaching,
research, and service, and, to a greater degree, on what the candidate can
reasonably be expected to achieve in these areas in the future. Those
responsible for recommendations and decisions regarding tenure must also pay
due regard to the mission of the candidate's unit and her/his contribution to
it.
The
granting of tenure then results from positive university action rather than a
legal obligation or a reward; tenure can be acquired only as a result of
positive action. In contrast to tenure, promotion in rank is more heavily
dependent upon evidence of professional achievement. Considerations of promise
of continued development and the candidate's contribution to the particular
mission of her/his unit are also important, but less crucial. The application
of criteria in promotion decisions provides evidence of the university's values
and the seriousness with which they are applied. Promotions measure, reward,
and inspire accomplishment.
A. Criteria
for Tenure in the Professorial Ranks
Tenure at any rank is based upon a record of satisfactory
teaching, research, and service (see promotion and tenure guidelines in Senate
Document SD 94-3).
The award of tenure at the end of the probationary period
as an assistant professor is linked to promotion. This connection is
appropriate and even natural. In many careers the duration of the probationary
period and the time needed to build a record in teaching, research, and service
meriting promotion to associate professor are equal, and the university can
address the separate decisions simultaneously. Both
Senate
(Amends SD 88-25)
(Last amended, 4/8/2002)
be made at the same time and that, although the criteria are
the same, the weight assigned to each criterion differs from tenure to
promotion. The university grants tenure and promotion to associate professor in
the same year when a candidate meets the criteria established for both.
Whenever these decisions are made in different years, however, a recommendation
to award tenure is based upon evidence of:
1. a record of
satisfactory achievement in teaching, research, and service
2. (for the
award of tenure at the rank of assistant professor) the likelihood of promotion to a higher rank in the near future,
and
3. the unusual
importance of the individual's contribution to the university.
Cases for tenure in these
exceptional circumstances must address each of these points.
B. Criteria for Tenure for Instructors
Tenure decisions for instructors should
be based primarily on teaching and service.
A recommendation to award tenure to instructors is based upon evidence
of:
1. A high level of
teaching performance (as attested to by such traditional measures of classroom
instruction as student and peer evaluations, results of common examinations,
review of classroom materials and student work, contributions to curricular
development, and teaching awards).
2. A record of
satisfactory achievement in service, particularly service related to teaching.
3. Other
activities that support teaching, demonstrate a consistent pattern of
professional growth, establish connections with professional peers in the
region or nation, and maintain currency with pedagogic developments elsewhere
(as attested to by such activities as the design and analysis of instructional
innovations, presentations at conferences and workshops, or writing for
publication).
C. Criteria for Promotion Advancement to Senior
Instructor
A
tenured instructor who has established a record of excellence in teaching and
continued competence in the other duties under B above is eligible for promotion
to advancement to the title of Senior Instructor.
Senate Document 03-11
(Amends SD 88-25)
(Last amended, 4/8/2002)
D. Criteria
for Promotion within the Professorial Ranks
1. Teaching
A candidate who excels in teaching is one who guides
and inspires students and stimulates their intellectual interest and
enthusiasm; one who displays a spirit of scholarly inquiry which leads him/her
to develop and strengthen course content in the light of developments of the
field, as well as to improve methods of presenting material.
2. Research
A candidate who excels in research is involved in
scholarly or creative endeavor appropriate to the candidate's discipline. The
results of research should have been evaluated by authorities in the field.
3. Service
A candidate who excels in service contributes in
one or more of the following areas: Institutional service, professional service
to the community, or service to the profession. The evaluation of service
should be supported by evidence drawn from various sources.
E. Application of Criteria to Professorial Ranks
When considered for promotion, the individual should be
assessed in light of the criteria specified in section D above. Favorable action shall result when the
individual has demonstrated, in one area of endeavor, a level of excellence
appropriate to the proposed rank. Failure to promote may arise, however, from
unsatisfactory performance in the other areas.
1. Promotion to
Assistant Professor
Promotion to Assistant Professor is based upon a
strong academic record, and the individual should have in most cases completed
a terminal degree. There should be clear indications that the individual
possesses those qualities which will eventually assure promotion to the rank of
Associate Professor.
Senate
(Amends SD 88-25)
(Last amended, 4/8/2002)
2. Promotion
from Assistant Professor to Associate Professor
Promotion to Associate Professor is based upon
actual performance and the potential for continued professional growth.
3. Promotion from Associate Professor to
Professor
Promotion to Professor is awarded to individuals
recognized by professional peers as authorities in their fields. It is expected
that candidates will have made important and recognized contributions in at
least one of the areas: teaching, research, and service. Candidates will be
recognized and respected in state, regional, or national educational and
professional circles.
Senate
(Amends SD 88-25)
(Approved, 4/8/2002)
TO: Fort Wayne Senate
FROM: Faculty Affairs Committee
Sally Johnson Hartman, Chair
SUBJECT: Proposed amendments to SD 88-25 (Criteria for Tenure and Promotion)
DATE: March 18, 2002
DISPOSITION: To the Presiding Officer for implementation
Whereas, there are tenured and/or tenure-eligible Instructors in several departments in the university; and
Whereas, there is no higher rank to which the current tenured Instructors who excel in their work can aspire;
Be it resolved, That
1) The Senate support the creation of the rank Senior Instructor;
2) Tenured instructors who have established a record of excellence in teaching and continued competency in other duties prescribed in SD 88-25 be eligible for promotion to this rank;
3) The specific criteria for promotion to Senior Instructor be established by the individual departments; and
4) A salary increment will be awarded upon promotion to the rank of Senior Instructor which is equal to the increment for promotion to the rank of Assistant Professor.