Communication and Media Studies - Northern Michigan University

Purpose:

The faculty of the Northern Michigan University Department of Communication and Media Studies establish these bylaws in order that each of the said faculty will share in the responsibility for carrying out the department's mission to the University community, and a means whereby we conduct our internal affairs.  These bylaws are established in accord with and are not meant to contradict nor circumvent any provision of the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

Applicability:

Department Bylaws

 

ARTICLE I

            Departmental Voting Privileges

1.A.     Each faculty member of the Department of Communication and Media Studies shall have one vote for any departmental election.  Departmental faculty are defined as members in contingent, term, probationary, and tenured positions.

1.B.     Only members of committees may vote during committee meetings.

1.C.     The Department Head may also exercise one vote in all non-committee elections except those expressly forbidden by the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

1.D.     A quorum of the department meeting as a committee of the whole will be one-half plus one of the voting membership.

ARTICLE II

            Departmental Administrator

2.A.     The Department Head is the chief administrator of the Department of Communication and Media Studies. 

2.B.     The Department Head will seriously consider the recommendations of the faculty as expressed through departmental faculty, meeting as a committee of the whole, or through the Executive Committee.

2.C.     The Department Head will serve as an ex-officio member of the Executive Committee.

2.D.     The Department Head will evaluate and approve or disapprove use of Department of Communication and Media Studies faculty travel funds. Other expenditures of funds provided to the faculty under of the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement in support of professional development must be approved in advance by the Department Head. 

2.D.1.  Money available as per the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement shall be used to support acceptable travel requests and other approved expenditures in support of professional development within the department.

2.D.2.  Faculty members may choose to bank funds allocated for travel or professional development in accordance with the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement. Faculty members who do not expend current or banked money release it for allocation by the Department Head for those applicants who could use it appropriately.

2.D.3.  All applications for travel funds not previously banked as allowed for by the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement and which can also be used for other approved expenditures in support of professional development shall be submitted according to a schedule established by the Department Head.

2.D.4.  Should the Department Head turn down an application to use regular or released funds, the faculty member may seek an advisory opinion from the Executive Committee.  The Executive Committee will submit their opinion to the Department Head for final review.

2.E.      Filling a vacancy in the position of Department Head will be done in accord with the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

2.F.      The Department Head will be appointed for a five-year term. The individual may be reappointed to additional terms.

2.G      During the final year of each appointment, an evaluation of the Department Head will be conducted in accordance with the requirements and timetable in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement. 

2.G.1   The Department Head’s initial duty in the evaluation is to submit a self-assessment document to the Department Executive Committee or its designated representatives and to the Department Head's immediate supervisor. 

2.G.2   The initial duty of the Executive Committee or its representatives is to submit a Department Head evaluation statement to the Department Head. It will include assessments of the individual’s effectiveness in leadership, management, teaching, service and scholarship.  Each separate evaluation statement will include a summary rating of the Department Head’s leadership and management as Exceptionally Effective; Highly Effective; Effective; Less than Effective; Unsatisfactory.

2.G.3   A Department Head evaluation can be initiated by the faculty at any time by two-thirds majority vote of the department faculty. 

ARTICLE III

            Departmental Subareas

3.A.     The faculty of the Communication and Media Studies Department recognize a common core of communication within the background, training, and interests of its members. These faculty also recognize a wide diversity in the media of communication employed, the content, and style of their specific communication acts.  The faculty are divided into two subareas:  Communication Studies and Media Studies (including Multimedia Journalism and Multimedia Production).

3.B.     The faculty of these subareas shall operate as committees and make recommendations to the Department Head concerning:

3.B.1.  Class scheduling, class size, class staffing, advanced registration, and registration scheduling and procedures.

3.B.2.  Development of budget priorities within the subarea.
           
ARTICLE IV

            Standing Committees and Representatives

4.A.     Procedures

4.A.1.  Departmental subareas shall be responsible for filling the positions allotted to them on the standing committees in a fair and equitable fashion.  Appointment shall be made as soon as possible during the fall semester. 

4.A.2.  Each committee shall elect its own officers and determine a regular schedule of meeting times.  These times will be published and given to all Communication and Media Studies faculty.

4.A.3.  All committees shall have powers to appoint ad hoc subcommittee study groups.

4.A.4.  Except in cases involving promotion and tenure applications, all meetings of standing committees will be open to any faculty member of the Department of Communication and Media Studies and any member of the departmental faculty may have speaking rights.

4.A.5.  All meetings of standing committees and of the department as a whole will be governed by the Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure.

4.A.6.  The Departmental Faculty Council representative must be selected by and from the dues-paying NMU-AAUP members.

4.B.     Executive Committee

4.B.1.  The Department of Communication and Media Studies Executive Committee functions as the representative of the faculty to the Department Head, and serves as liaison to other governing bodies of the University, including College Advisory Council and senior administrative officers.  Any problem requiring a policy decision involving any areas described in the purview of other standing committees must be submitted to the appropriate committee for review. The Executive Committee functions to initiate, study, review and make recommendations to the department concerning:

4.B.1.a.            Overall administrative operation of the department.

4.B.1.b.           Evaluation of Department of Communication and Media Studies faculty members, including peer review of teaching, in accordance with the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement, and Article VI of these Bylaws. 

4.B.1.c.            Evaluating requests for sabbatical leaves in accordance with the timetable established in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

4.B.1.d.           Establishing and conducting departmental elections and regular meetings of the faculty.

4.B.1.e.            Appointing ad hoc committees to hear student appeals regarding departmental matters including grades. Such committees shall include the most senior faculty member from each subarea, provided that person is not party to the appeal, in which case the second most senior member from that subarea will be appointed.

4.B.2.  Composition of the Executive Committee shall include at least one representative from the Communication Studies subarea and at least one from the Media Studies subarea. The committee shall have a minimum of three members total and have an uneven number of faculty members if there are more than three. A reasonable attempt should be made to ensure the composition of the committee gives fair representation of each subarea.

4.C.     Curriculum and Strategic Planning Committee 

4.C.1.  The Curriculum and Strategic Planning Committee carries out two distinct but related functions:

4.C.2.  The curriculum function is to initiate, study, review, or make recommendations to the Department concerning:

4.C.2.a.            Course offerings, course requirements, and credit units per course.

4.C.2.b.           Major or minor curricula and development of curricula for both short and long range programs.

4.C.2.c.            Degree and certificate offerings.

4.C.3.  The strategic planning function is to study, review, and make recommendations to the Department Head concerning strategic planning, financial assets allocations (e.g., staffing, equipment acquisition), and outreach.

4.C.4.  The Curriculum and Strategic Planning Committee will be responsible for compiling the Scholarly Resources Assessment annually, in accordance the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

4.C.5.  Curriculum and Strategic Planning Committee shall consist of one faculty member from Communication Studies and one from Media Studies. The Department Head may attend Curriculum and Strategic Planning Committee meetings as an ex officio member.
           
ARTICLE V

            Search Committees for Departmental Positions

5.         When a fulltime position becomes available, a Search Committee shall be created and function according to the provisions in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

5.A.     Committee Membership

5.A.1.  The Search Committee shall include one faculty member from the Communication Studies subarea and one from the Media Studies subarea, as well as the Department Head.

5.A.2.  An additional faculty member in the subarea in which the position exists may join the committee and exercise full membership rights and obligations on the Search Committee.

5.A.3.  The Search Committee will elect a Chair to serve as the contact person for position applicants and to act as liaison with the Department Head.

5.B.     Rights and Functions of the Search Committee in accordance with the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement are as follows:

5.B.1.  The Search Committee shall advise the Department Head in the creation of a position description and the advertising plan.

5.B.2.  Subsequent to the approval of the position description form and the passage of the preliminary screening date advertised, the Search Committee shall review all applications received and advise the Department Head as to the candidate(s) it wishes to actively consider.
5.B.3. Interaction with applicants and semi-finalists will be conducted in accordance with the current AAUP contract and NMU Human Resource policies. This includes checking to determine whether semi-finalists are still interested in the position and reference checks. As current contract and policies permit, interactions should be coordinated between the Department Head and the Search Committee to ensure candidates are not receiving redundant, inconsistent, or unauthorized communications, and to fairly distribute the department’s workload.

5.B.4.  The Search Committee shall organize itineraries for campus interviews with the candidate(s).  The itinerary will afford all members of the faculty of Communication and Media Studies with the opportunity to meet the candidate(s).

5.B.5.  The Search Committee will provide all faculty members who have met the candidate(s) with a means of written input to the committee concerning their assessment of the candidate(s).

5.B.6.  The Search Committee will recommend to the faculty which candidate(s) should be offered the position, providing a ranking for the order in which the offer should be made.  To be considered acceptable for a position in Communication and Media Studies, a candidate must have the support of two-thirds of the membership of the Search Committee and the faculty. The faculty’s recommendation of candidates and their rankings shall be communicated, in writing, to the Department Head.  This document shall include the criteria used in reaching the decision.

ARTICLE VI

            Faculty Evaluation

6.         Faculty members will report their activities in the categories of assigned professional responsibilities, scholarship and/or professional development, and service.

The Department recognizes a wide diversity of interests, styles, and products of its members, and believes that the process outlined here will best assess the quality of performance of individual members.

6.A.     Procedure for Annual Evaluations and Promotion and Tenure Review

6.A.1.  The evaluee will submit the completed evaluation form to the Executive Committee in accordance with timetables established in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

6.A.2.  The responsibility for gathering, organizing and reporting supportive data will belong to the evaluee.  The Department will facilitate the gathering of student course and advising evaluation information and store the results for use by evaluees, the Executive Committee, and the Department Head in the evaluation process. The evaluee’s letter of appointment and annual evaluations are available to the Executive Committee as needed for this evaluation.  

6.A.3.  For annual evaluations, the Executive Committee will forward its evaluation to the Department Head who, upon review and independent evaluation, will express concurrence or non-concurrence and forward the document in accordance with timetables established in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

6.A.4.  Before the annual or five-year evaluations are sent to the College office, each faculty member and the Department Head will discuss the faculty member’s statement of the goals, objectives, expectations, and any special assignments against which the evaluation for that period was made.  In particular, "effectiveness in assigned professional responsibilities is the primary and most important criteria" beyond the relative weighting of the evaluee’s scholarship and/or professional development, and service.

6.B.     Standards for Annual Evaluations, Promotion or Tenure

6.B.1.  The Department’s Executive Committee shall recommend the promotion of eligible  departmental members who meet the requirements for the new rank with reference to their performance in the three judgmental areas specified in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement (i.e., Assigned Professional Responsibilities, Scholarship and/or Professional Development, and Service).

6.B.1.a Applicants for promotion, tenure, Continuing Contract Status, or contingent promotion in rank shall follow procedures and processes outlined in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement, including years of teaching and/or professional experience, as well as terminal degrees as outlined in 6.C.2.a.

6.B.1.b Contingent faculty are eligible for promotion after six years of teaching starting at the time of their initial appointment as adjunct, contingent, or term status, whichever comes first.

6.B.1.c For promotion, contingent faculty will need to satisfy criteria in the CAMS bylaws commensurate with the rank for which they are applying.

6.B.2.  Operational Definitions

6.B.2.a.            Criteria for promotion in rank to Assistant, Associate, and Professor are specified in the following section with “minimum standards” and “exemplary performance levels” illustrated by examples.  Each of the judgmental areas of assigned professional responsibilities, scholarship and/or professional development, and service are examined with the intent of establishing benchmarks appropriate for the CAMS department.

6.B.2.b.           Candidates for promotion are expected to continue to meet the specified “minimum standards” for all lower ranks, as well as to satisfy the requirements for the “exemplary performance levels” in the judgmental areas they designate.  When a promotion is being considered, the Departmental Executive Committee will look for a record of sustained professional contribution or achievements within the evaluation period of the types identified in the CAMS Bylaws, or comparable ones established in a candidate’s promotion document and accepted by the Executive Committee, in accordance with the the AAUP-NMU Master Agreement.

6.B.2.c In the lists of expectations for each rank there is an implicit need for judgments of quality.  While expectations are described in value neutral terms, there is a need to determine how well the activities were performed because activities listed as achievements in the three areas of evaluation can vary significantly in their merits. Hence, the merits of two different combinations of well-performed activities can vary greatly.  Which combinations merit promotion or tenure is a matter for qualitative judgment. In addition, faculty must clearly indicate and support why different aspects of a particular activity could be counted as representing different categories of evaluation if so cross-applied.

 

6.B.2.d.           The terms scholarship or scholarly work(s) in the scholarship and/or professional development portions of this document are defined as the “scholarship of discovery,” the “scholarship of application,” the “scholarship of integration,” and the “scholarship of teaching.” The following definitions and examples reflect the disciplinary interests of the department, and are not meant to exclude those listed in the AAUP-NMU Master Agreement.

6.B.2.d.1.        The “scholarship of discovery” is work done by faculty members that advances knowledge and/or creates new artistic expressions.  Examples of such work shall include but not be limited to articles and conference presentations presenting original research (new topics, theories, and concepts), or creative works (audio/visual media).

6.B.2.d.2.        The “scholarship of integration” is work done by faculty members that attempts to make connections within and between disciplines.  Examples of such work shall include but not be limited to synthesizing a broad range of existing research, and creating new connections between disciplines by engaging in collaborative, interdisciplinary, or translational work in research, presentations, or grant applications.

6.B.2.d.3.        The “scholarship of application” is work that allows faculty members to apply their knowledge in solving practical problems within their field of study.  Examples of such work shall include but not be limited to professional consulting, practical research, such as conducting ratings analysis or feasibility studies, development of new techniques, system designs, or other academic, creative, scholarly, or technological work.

6.B.2.d.4.        The “scholarship of teaching” is work done by faculty members that enhances their knowledge of teaching and learning.  Examples of such work shall include but not be limited to contributing to conferences and workshops on how to incorporate technology or new teaching methods into the classroom, assessing the impact of incorporating new technology, or new methodologies such as academic service learning.

6.B.2.d.5         Faculty members are responsible for identifying the category of scholarship their activity falls into in annual and five-year evaluations.

6.B.2.e Because of the diversity of disciplines represented in the department, peer review can take a variety forms beyond those listed in the AAUP-NMU Master Agreement. These include but are not limited to:

6.B.2.e.1   the report of an external adjudicator of the creation, design, direction of a media production;

6.B.2.e.2   an externally published review of the creation, design, direction of a media production;

6.B.2.e.3   an invitation from a professional organization to create, design, direct a media production, or to contribute an article or chapter to an issue of a serial publication or book;

6.B.2.e.4   an invitation from a professional organization to exhibit a media production in an external context;

6.B.2.e.5   or an award from a professional association for the creation, design, direction of a media production.

6.B.2.e.6   In the case of five-year evaluations and applications for promotion and/or tenure, time will have passed since the production of the scholarly work. As a result, reference to or the

citation of one's scholarly work in the scholarly work of others represents a form of post hoc peer review, the presence of which confirms the judgment of the original peer review. The absence of such references and citations does not invalidate the judgment of the original peer review. 

6.B.2.f Professional Development and Service are defined by example with respect to the expectations for faculty at each academic rank, or who aspire to be promoted to the next rank in a manner consistent with the AAUP-NMU Master Agreement. However,

since the department recognizes the MFA as a terminal degree in Multimedia Production and Multimedia Journalism, it should be noted that work designed to expand one’s professional competencies need not be exclusively post-doctoral work to qualify as professional development for departmental faculty. 

6.B.2.g Assigned Responsibilities are duties that a faculty member is required to perform for the university other than scholarship and/or professional development and service. Assigned responsibilities are defined in documents including but not limited to, the AAUP-NMU Master Agreement, a letter of appointment, or letter of assignment. Unless a document explicitly states otherwise, assigned responsibilities include teaching and advising responsibilities. Examples of other assigned responsibilities include, but are not limited to reassignments directed by the administration.

6.C.1   Evaluations for faculty at the rank of Instructor

6.C.1.a For term-appointment and continuing contract Instructors, teaching and/or other assigned responsibilities will be specified in their Letter of Appointment and will be evaluated annually by the Executive Committee.

6.C.1.b During the specified term(s) of their employment, individuals are expected to attain the following minimum standards in the areas of assigned professional responsibilities, service, and scholarship and/or professional development.

6.C.1.c The following are the minimum standards regarding assigned professional responsibilities, all of which must be met by faculty at the rank of Instructor.

6.C.1.c.1          Maintaining a successful teaching record based on peer evaluation, student questionnaires, and other appropriate material. The student questionnaires will include the eight criteria of the department student course evaluation form (i.e., and instructor’s preparation and presentation of lectures/discussions, the level of interest stimulated in class by lectures/discussions. An instructor’s encouragement of critical thinking, the clarity with which students’ responsibilities are defined, and instructor’s availability after class, during posted office hours, and/or by appointment to afford additional assistance, an instructor’s interpersonal competency in dealing with students, comparison of an instructor with other instructors in the students’ experiences, and the perceived educational value of courses taught by the instructor). An inspection of students’ qualitative remarks should reveal a pattern of positive evaluations that are at least commensurate with the quantitative evaluation data.

6.C.1.c.2          Using recent texts which reflect contemporary approaches to teaching subjects in the discipline (e.g., as demonstrated in course syllabi).

6.C.1.c.3          An understanding of University and departmental curricula and an ability to orient students to general education requirements (e.g., as demonstrated by peer and/or student evaluation and compliance with departmental procedures for evaluating advising effectiveness).

6.C.1.c.4          Participating in conducting outcomes assessments as demonstrated by self-report.

6.C.1.d The following professional development activities may contribute to teaching effectiveness and are recommended but not required:

6.C.1.d.1         Keeping current in one’s field through reading professional journals and/or attending conferences or workshops (e.g. as demonstrated by self-report and peer comments).

6.C.1.e The following is the minimum standard regarding service:

6.C.1.e.1          Attending and contributing to departmental, subarea, and committee meetings and satisfying any other service-related conditions specified in the candidate’s Letter of Appointment.           

6.C.2.  Promotion to Assistant Professor

6.C.2.a.  Candidates for promotion to the rank of Assistant Professor must meet the qualifications in accordance in the AAUP-NMU Master Agreement. This includes possessing a terminal degree such as an earned doctorate or M.F.A. from an accredited institution as provided in the Letter of Appointment.

6.C.2.b.           Individuals are expected to attain all minimum standards for the rank of Assistant Professor in the areas of assigned professional responsibilities, service, scholarship and/or professional development, and any other conditions stipulated in their Letter of Appointment.

6.C.2.c.            The following are the minimum standards regarding teaching and other assigned professional responsibilities, all of which must be met.

 6.C.2.c.1.        Maintaining a successful teaching record based on peer evaluation, student ratings, and other appropriate material.  The student ratings will include the eight criteria of the departmental student course evaluation form (i.e., an instructor’s preparation and presentation of lectures/discussions, the level of interest stimulated in class by lectures/discussions, an instructor’s encouragement of critical thinking, and the clarity with which students’ responsibilities are defined, an instructor’s availability after class, during posted office hours, and/or by appointment to afford additional assistance, an instructor’s interpersonal competency in dealing with students, comparisons of an instructor with other instructors in the students’ experiences, and the perceived educational value of courses taught by the instructor).  An inspection of students' qualitative remarks should reveal a pattern of positive evaluations that are at least commensurate with the quantitative evaluation data.

6.C.2.c.2.         Using recent texts which reflect contemporary approaches to teaching subjects in the discipline (e.g., as demonstrated in course syllabi).

6.C.2.c.3.         An understanding of University and departmental curricula and an ability to orient students to general graduation requirements (e.g., as demonstrated by peer and/or student evaluation and compliance with departmental procedures for evaluating advising effectiveness).

6.C.2.c.4.         Participating in conducting outcomes assessments as demonstrated by self-report.

6.C.2.c.5.         Providing positive written peer evaluations generated via colleagues' inspection of class materials, colleagues' classroom visits, or colleagues' discussions with the candidate's students.  It is the candidate's responsibility to include such written evaluations in her/his supporting materials.

6.C.2.d.           The following are the minimum standards regarding scholarship and/or professional development, all of which must be met by faculty at the rank of Assistant Professor or at the rank of Instructor to apply for Assistant Professor:

6.C.2.d.1.        Beginning to engage in one’s discipline, as demonstrated by papers presented at conferences, book reviews, conference seminars, substantive grants, consulting, workshops or creative works, scholarship accepted for publication, and/or artistic or creative endeavors associated with one’s discipline or other peer reviewed activities.

6.C.2.d.2.        Keeping current in one’s field through reading professional journals and/or attending conferences or workshops (e.g., as demonstrated by self-report and peer comments).

6.C.2.e.            The following is the standard regarding service: 

6.C.2.e.1.         Attending and contributing to departmental, subarea, and committee meetings and satisfying any other university service-related conditions specified in the candidate's Letter of Appointment.

6.C.3   Promotion to Associate Professor

Candidates for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor are expected to continue to meet the specified “minimum standards” for all lower ranks, as well as to satisfy the requirements for the “exemplary performance levels” in the judgmental areas they designate.  When a promotion is being considered, the Departmental Executive Committee will look for a record of sustained professional contribution or achievements within the evaluation period of the types identified in the CAMS Bylaws, or comparable ones established in a candidate’s promotion document and accepted by the Executive Committee, in accordance with the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

6.C.3.a.            An earned doctorate or M.F.A. from an accredited institution as provided in the letter of appointment.

6.C.3.b.           Full-time higher education experience as specified in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

6.C.3.c.            Demonstrated attainment of all required exemplary performance standards the rank of Associate Professor in the areas of assigned professional responsibilities and either scholarship and/or professional development or service, as well as at least the minimum standards in the remaining area.

6.C.3.d.           Any other conditions stipulated in a candidate’s Letter of Appointment.

6.C.3.e.            For promotion, a candidate must meet all of the following exemplary standards regarding teaching and other assigned professional responsibilities:

6.C.3.e.1.         Maintaining a successful teaching record based on peer evaluation, student questionnaires, and other appropriate material.  The student questionnaires will include the eight course-

specific items on the departmental evaluation form (i.e., an instructor’s preparation and presentation of lectures/discussions, the level of interest stimulated in class by lectures/discussions, an instructor’s encouragement of critical thinking, the clarity with which students’ responsibilities are defined, an instructor’s availability after class, during posted office hours, and/or by appointment to afford additional assistance, an instructor’s interpersonal competency in dealing with students, comparisons of an instructor with other instructors in the students’ experiences, and the perceived educational value of course taught by the instructor).  An inspection of students' qualitative remarks should reveal a pattern of positive evaluations that are at least commensurate with the quantitative evaluation data.

6.C.3.e.2.         Incorporating current developments in the field into classroom lectures and discussion, as well as using updated texts which reflect contemporary approaches to teaching subjects in the discipline (e.g., as demonstrated in course syllabi).

6.C.3.e.3.         Preparing students for advanced undergraduate courses by providing out-of-class assistance, such as assisting with writing or performance skills (e.g., as demonstrated by peer review, self-report, and/or student comments).

6.C.3.e.4.         Helping students prepare for graduate school or careers by identifying appropriate venues for education, internships, auditions, practicums, the writing of recommendations, and/or individual coaching and consultation (e.g., as demonstrated by self-report and/or student comments).

6.C.3.e.5.         Effectively guiding students through the departmental curriculum with a minimum of errors in advising (e.g., as demonstrated by peer review and/or student comments and compliance with departmental procedures for evaluating advising effectiveness.)

6.C.3.e.6.         Positive annual evaluations by the Executive Committee.

6.C.3.e.7.         Participating in conducting outcomes assessments as demonstrated by self-report.

6.C.3.4.8.        Providing positive written peer evaluations generated via colleagues' inspection of class materials, colleagues' classroom visits, or colleagues' discussions with the candidate's students.  It is the candidate's responsibility to include such written evaluations in her/his supporting materials.

6.C.3.f.            For promotion, a candidate must meet all of the following minimum standards regarding scholarship and/or professional development:

6.C.3.f.1.         Keeping current in one’s field by attending professional conferences, workshops, university-sponsored field studies, presentations, conventions, or meetings (e.g., as documented by peers and/or other written evidence).

6.C.3.f.2.         Regularly engaging in one’s discipline (i.e., a consistent pattern of engagement), as demonstrated by papers presented at conferences, book reviews, conference seminars, substantive grants, consulting, workshops or creative works, scholarship accepted for publication, and/or artistic or creative endeavors directly associated with one’s discipline or other peer reviewed activities.

6.C.3.g.           For promotion, a candidate must meet all of the following minimum standards regarding service:

6.C.3.g.1.        Serving on a committee at the departmental level (e.g., as documented by letters of appointment and/or appreciation for services rendered).

6.C.3.g.2.        Serving on a College or University level committee or Academic Senate (e.g., as documented by letters of appointment and/or appreciation for services rendered).

6.C.3.g.3.        Attempting to recruit students for the department or institution (e.g., as demonstrated by self-report of involvement in campus visits, Wildcat Weekends, presentations at high schools, development of promotional material, or similar activities).

6.C.3.h.           In addition to meeting exemplary performance standards for assigned professional responsibilities, a candidate must meet exemplary standards in at least one additional judgmental area.  In the designated judgmental area, one must show achievements in three or more different categories (i.e., designated by separate lower-case letters such as a), b), c), etc.) found in the following lists, at least one of which must come from 6.C.3.h.1.a or 6.C.3.h.1.b., if exemplary performance is claimed for scholarship and/or professional development, or 6.C.3.h.2.a and 6.C.3.h.2.b., if it is claimed for service:

6.C.3.h.1.        Exemplary performance levels regarding scholarship and/or professional development include:

6.C.3.h.1.a.      Demonstrating the publication of peer reviewed scholarly or creative works dealing with subjects in one’s field (i.e., a journal article, review, case study, paper included in the proceedings of a professional association conference, book chapter, script, or textbook), as evidenced by photocopies.

6.C.3.h.1.b.     Demonstrating the completion of peer reviewed scholarly or creative works based upon the fields represented by subareas in the CAMS department (e.g., regional, national, or international professional association conference papers; media production or editing).

6.C.3.h.1.c.      Demonstrating one has provided compensated or pro bono consulting activities dealing with the applications of one’s field such as organizational audits, technical or artistic assistance, group facilitation; training and development; media or informational campaigns (e.g., as evidenced by (i) contracts and/or (ii) letters of appreciation).

6.C.3.h.1.d.     Demonstrating one has obtained a substantive grant from University or external sources in support of professional research and/or development (e.g., as evidenced by written grant award).

6.C.3.h.1.e.      Demonstrating one has obtained an externship (external professional work experiences) as evidenced by letters of acceptance or evaluation.

6.C.3.h.1.f       Engaging in additional formal study beyond one’s terminal degree to expand one’s professional competence as described by the applicant and confirmed by the Executive Committee.

6.C.3.h.1.g.     Other achievements deemed meritorious by the applicant and the Executive Committee, based upon evidence presented in promotion documents.

6.C.3.h.2.        Exemplary performance levels regarding service include:

6.C.3.h.2.a.      Demonstrating one has served on a departmental committee in a leadership capacity (e.g., as evidenced by written peer recognition specifying the significant outcomes that were achieved).

6.C.3.h.2.b.     Demonstrating service on a committee at the college or university level or Academic Senate in a leadership capacity (e.g., as evidenced by (i) letters of appointment and/or (ii) written appreciation for services rendered specifying the significant outcomes that were achieved).

6.C.3.h.2.c.      Providing services to a community or University group beyond assigned responsibilities (e.g., as demonstrated in letters recognizing such service specifying the significant outcomes that were achieved).

6.C.3.h.2.d.     Demonstrating one has provided service to a state, regional, or national professional organization such as committee leadership, workshop presentations, or direction of projects (e.g., as evidenced by written recognition of such service specifying the significant outcomes that were achieved).

6.C.3.h.2.e.      Demonstrating fund raising or recruiting activities on behalf of the Department or University (e.g., as evidenced by letters of appreciation specifying the significant outcomes that were achieved).

6.C.3.h.2.f.      Other achievements deemed meritorious by the applicant and the Executive Committee, based upon evidence presented in promotion documents.

6.C.4.  Promotion to Professor.

Candidates for promotion to the rank of Professor are expected to continue to meet the specified “minimum standards” for all lower ranks, as well as to satisfy the requirements for the “exemplary performance levels” in the judgmental areas they designate.  When a

promotion is being considered, the Departmental Executive Committee will look for a record of sustained professional contribution or achievements within the evaluation period of the types identified in the CAMS Bylaws, or comparable ones established in a candidate’s promotion document and accepted by the Executive Committee, in accordance with the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

6.C.4.a.            An earned doctorate or M.F.A. from an accredited institution as provided in the letter of appointment.

6.C.4.b.           Full-time higher education experience as specified in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

6.C.4.c.            Demonstrated attainment of all exemplary standards for the rank of Professor in the areas of teaching and other assigned responsibilities, scholarship and/or professional development, and service.

6.C.4.d.           Demonstrated attainment of exemplary performance levels in teaching and one other area.

6.C.4.e.            Any other conditions stipulated in a candidate’s Letter of Appointment.

6.C.4.f.            For promotion, a candidate must meet all of the following exemplary standards regarding teaching and other assigned professional responsibilities:

6. C.4.f.1.        Maintaining a successful teaching record based on peer evaluation, student questionnaires, and other appropriate material.  The student questionnaires will include the eight course-specific items on the departmental evaluation form (i.e., an instructor’s preparation and presentation of lectures/discussions, the level of interest stimulated in class by lectures/discussions, an instructor’s encouragement of critical thinking, the clarity with which students’ responsibilities are defined, an instructor’s availability after class, during posted office hours, and/or by appointment to afford additional assistance, an instructor’s interpersonal competency in dealing with students, comparisons of an instructor with other instructors in the students’ experiences, and the perceived educational value of course taught by the instructor).   An inspection of students' qualitative remarks should reveal a pattern of positive evaluations that are at least commensurate with the quantitative evaluation data.

6.C.4.f.2.         Using recent research in classroom presentations and using texts or materials which reflect contemporary approaches to teaching subjects in the discipline demonstrated in a comprehensive teaching portfolio including a teaching philosophy, syllabi, instructional materials, and peer review.

6. C.4.f.3.        Participating in conducting outcomes assessment, and improving one’s teaching and assessment abilities as demonstrated in annual evaluations by the Executive Committee and either written student feedback or documented attendance at “in service” teaching workshops/institutes.

6.C.4.f.4.         Developing new course offerings or making revisions in existing courses (e.g., as demonstrated in syllabi exhibiting modifications in curricular content and written peer recognition.)

6.C.4.f.5.         Preparing students for graduate school or careers by identifying appropriate venues for education and writing recommendations (e.g., as demonstrated in self-reports and student comments).

6.C.4.f.6.         Effectively advising students throughout their University careers (e.g., as demonstrated in peer reviews, student comments, and compliance with departmental procedures for evaluating advising effectiveness.)

6.C.4.f.7.         Providing positive written peer evaluations generated via colleagues' inspection of class materials, colleagues' classroom visits, or colleagues' discussions with the candidate's students.  It is the candidate's responsibility to include such written evaluations in her/his supporting materials.

6.C.4.g.           For promotion, a candidate must meet three of more of the following minimum standards regarding scholarship and/or professional development:

6.C.4.g.1.        Keeping current in one’s field through peer reviewed scholarly, artistic, and/or creative activities such as presenting scholarship, creative works, and/or workshops at regional, national, and/or international professional conferences, conventions, or meetings on a regular basis (e.g., as demonstrated in written reports).

6.C.4.g.2.        Regularly engaging in one’s discipline through the publication of peer reviewed journal articles, reviews, book chapters, case studies, scripts, textbooks, media presentations, and/or artistic productions relevant to the field (e.g., as demonstrated in photocopies or published materials or reviews or acceptance letters by editors or media personnel).

6.C.4.g.3.        Compensated or pro bono consulting activities related to one’s field such as organizational audits, technical or artistic assistance, group facilitation; training and development; media or informational campaigns (e.g., as demonstrated in contracts and/or letters of appreciation).

6.C.4.g.4.        Receiving a substantive grant from University or external sources in support of professional research and/or development (e.g., as evidenced by written grant award).

6.C.4.g.5.        Obtaining an externship (external professional work experiences) or engaging in additional formal study beyond one’s terminal degree to expand one’s professional competence as described by the applicant and confirmed by the Executive Committee.

6.C.4.h.           For promotion, a candidate must meet three or more of the following minimum standards regarding service:

6.C.4.h.1.        Serving on a departmental committee in a leadership capacity (e.g., as demonstrated in written peer recognition appreciation specifying the significant outcomes that were achieved).

6.C.4.h.2.        Serving on a committee at the college or university level or Academic Senate (e.g., as demonstrated in letters of appointment and written appreciation for services rendered appreciation specifying the significant outcomes that were achieved).

6.C.4.h.3.        Providing services to a community or University group beyond assigned responsibilities (e.g., as demonstrated in letters recognizing such service appreciation specifying the significant outcomes which were achieved).

6.C.4.h.4.        Providing service to a state, regional, or national professional organization such as committee leadership, workshop presentations, directions of projects, chairing of panels, and reviewing convention or journal submissions (e.g., as demonstrated by letters of appreciation for such service).

6.C.4.h.5.        Assisting the University in fund raising or recruitment (e.g., as demonstrated in letters of appreciation specifying the significant outcomes that were achieved).

6.C.4.i. In addition to meeting exemplary performance standards for assigned professional responsibilities, a candidate must meet exemplary standards in at least one additional judgmental area. In the designated judgmental area, one must show achievements in three or more different categories (i.e., designated by separate lower-case letters such as a), b), c), etc.) found in the following lists, at least one of which must come from 6.C.4.i.1.a., 6.C.4.i.1.b., or 6.C.4.i.1.c., if exemplary performance is claimed for scholarship and/or professional development, or 6.C.4.i.2.b. or 6.C.4.i.2.c., if it is claimed for service:

6.C.4.i.1.         Exemplary performance levels regarding scholarship and/or professional development include:

6.C.4.i.1.a.      Evidence of sustained engagement in one’s discipline through regular presentation of peer reviewed conference papers, being invited to present scholarship, professional development, or creative works as a keynote speaker or other expert, or leadership of professional seminars.

6.C.4.i.1.b.      Evidence of sustained engagement in one’s disciple through regular publication of peer reviewed journal articles, reviews, book chapters or textbooks.

6.C.4.i.1.c.      Evidence of sustained engagement in one’s disciple through regular production of peer reviewed artistic or broadcast presentations or scripts.

6.C.4.i.1.d.      Completion and subsequent use of post-terminal degree studies, certifications, or professional internships which significantly enhance one’s professional competence or scholarly or creative activities.

6.C.4.i.1.e.      Receipt of and reports for substantive grants to support professional activities pertinent to one’s discipline (e.g., NMU Faculty Research Grants, Peter White Scholarships, Fulbright Awards, government-agency sponsored research).

6.C.4.i.1.f.       Evidence demonstrating one has performed compensated or pro bono consulting related to one’s field (e.g., organizational audits, technical assistance, group facilitation; training and development; program evaluation; media or informational campaigns).

6.C.4.i.1.g.      Other activities deemed pertinent by the applicant and the Executive Committee, based upon evidence presented in promotion documents.

6.C.4.i.2.         Exemplary performance levels regarding service include:

6.C.4.i.2.a.      Leadership of departmental committees resulting in a significant enhancement to the department (i.e., revisions of departmental procedures, major changes in curricula, and/or other weighty assignments instituted to meet departmental needs).

6.C.4.i.2.b.      Leadership of a college- or University-wide organization (e.g., College Advisory Committee, Academic Senate, Committee on Undergraduate Programs, Faculty Review Committee).

6.C.4.i.2.c.      Providing leadership to a state, regional, or national professional organization associated with one’s field (e.g., elected officerships, coordination of major conferences, serving as  chair for paneled conference presentations, being invited by the conference organizers because of one’s expertise to provide a formal response to others’ presentations, reviewing articles and texts, editing journals, serving as a reader for convention submissions.

6.C.4.i.2.d.      Ongoing service to a student organization, beyond regularly assigned duties, resulting in demonstrable enhancement of learning opportunities (e.g., establishing pre-professional networks for campus groups, coordinating student seminars that go beyond the NMU community).

6.C.4.i.2.e.      A record of significant leadership of a community, state, or national organization that establishes positive relations between the university and the public.

6.C.4.i.2.f.       Initiation of activities that help recruit, retain, and/or recognize students attending the institution.

6.C.4.i.2.g.      Successful efforts which obtain financial assistance for the department, college, or University (e.g., grant generation, Development Fund activities).

6.C.4.i.2.h.      Other activities deemed pertinent by the applicant and the Executive Committee, based upon evidence presented in promotion documents.

6.D      Continuing Contract Appointment

Faculty members appointed to term contracts who qualify for Continuing Contract status may apply according to the terms specified in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

6.D.1   Applicants must demonstrate they have consistently met the standards specified in 6.C.1.c in performing their assigned professional responsibilities and must provide positive written peer evaluations generated via colleagues' inspection of class materials, colleagues' classroom visits, or colleagues' discussions with the candidate's students.  It is the candidate's responsibility to include such written evaluations in her/his supporting materials.

6.D.2   While the decision regarding Continuing Contract appointments will be based upon an evaluation of the faculty member's cumulative record of teaching and departmental service, applicant may include evidence of scholarship and/or professional development as described in 6.C.1.d.1 and 6.C.2.d.1 for consideration.

6.D.3   Applicants must demonstrate they have consistently met the standards for service specified in 6.C.1.e and must have served on committees at the departmental level as documented by letters of appointment and/or appreciation for services rendered.

6.E.      Tenure

The judgmental criteria for tenure evaluation excluding those related to time are the same criteria used for promotion.  An applicant for tenure shall offer evidence of meeting the same standards as those required of candidates for promotion to Associate Professor (specified in Section 6.C.3 of the Bylaws and the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement).
           
ARTICLE VII

            Overloads

7.         In situations where the department offers more course sections than faculty can teach given their normal assignments per semester, the teaching of these extra sections will first be offered to qualified term-appointment and continuing contract faculty during fall and winter terms. If term-appointment or continuing contract faculty do not wish to teach an overload course, other faculty will then be offered the opportunity. If there is more than one faculty interested in an overload opportunity, qualified faculty will be selected based on the rotation system specified in Section 7.A.3.

7.A.     Tracking of Overload Course Teaching (ECTO)

7.A.1.  Two distinct lines, one for teaching and one for regular overload teaching, reflecting the relative priority faculty members have for claiming the right to teach an overload course are in effect.

7.A.2.  Priorities on either list will be established via the same system as outlined below.

7.A.3.  The order of names on those separate lists shall be in reverse chronological order based on when members of the department last taught an extra course.  If two or more members teach during the same session, the placement of names on the list will also take into account whether the course taught was a summer session or fall/winter assignment. People who teach courses paid via the latter method will be placed higher than faculty who teach courses paid via the former. As specified in the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement, contingent faculty seeking an overload will always receive first priority.

 

7.A.4.  The person whose name appears at the top of the list may choose not to teach an extra course.  In that circumstance the person whose name appears second on the list shall be given the opportunity to teach and so on until one person chooses to accept the course.  When a faculty member uses the option to pass, or when a course is not offered for whatever

            reason (it doesn't make required enrollment, for example), his/her name remains at the same position on the ECTO list.

7.A.5.  In the event that the same faculty member has first priority on either list, and both types of extra-courses are available in the same semester, she or he will indicate which of the separate tracks is available for others to teach.  Relative priority will be given to individuals based on their order on that ECTO listing. 

7.A.6.  As fulltime faculty enter the department, they enter on the top of the list and separate lists are kept for term-appointment/continuing contract, contingent, and tenure-track/tenured faculty.

ARTICLE VIII

            Bylaws

8.A.     Ratification

These bylaws will become effective immediately following an affirmative vote of no less than two-thirds of all departmental faculty members, and concurrence by the Bylaw Review Committee and the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.

8.B.     Amendments to these bylaws

Amendments to these bylaws may be submitted by a faculty member of the Department of Communication and Media Studies at any time, in writing, to the Executive

Committee.  At least three supporting signatures from the department faculty must accompany the petition.  Copies of the petition will be distributed to the faculty within one week following its submission to the Executive Committee.  A two-thirds affirmative vote of those faculty voting is required to approve a change in these bylaws which must then be submitted for review in accordance with the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement.

APPENDIX A

In accordance with the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement, the Department of Communication and Media Studies identifies the following peer institutions that establish a circle of comparison for the disciplines represented in the department.

Multimedia Production / Multimedia Journalism

            Central Michigan University
            Ferris State University

Communication Studies

            Central Michigan University
            Ferris State University