Political Science, Department of - Northern Michigan University

Department of Political Science

Northern Michigan University

Bylaws

 

1. Membership

1.1 The membership of the Department of Political Science shall consist of all members of the bargaining unit with appointments the Department of Political Science. All voting members of the department must be members of the Faculty Bargaining Unit of Northern Michigan University. A member of the department on leave retains all membership rights during his/her leave, consistent with the contract. A tenured person on reduced or limited appointment retains all membership rights.

1.2 Committee of the Whole. Membership of this committee shall include all members of the department. The department head will participate on the Committee of the Whole in a non-voting, ex officio capacity, as outlined in Article 1.1.10 of the Agreement.

1.3 Evaluation Committee. Membership will consist of all tenured members of the Department, with the exception of the department head.

1.4 Ad Hoc Committees may be formed to address other matters such as advising and curriculum, which require investigation and recommendations to either the department or the department head. These ad hoc committees will be formed at the request of the department head and/or upon the request of a majority of the voting members of the department. Committee members will be appointed from the membership of the department by the department head. Ad hoc committees will submit their recommendations to the department or the head, as designated during the formulation of the ad hoc committee, and will automatically dissolve with that submission.

2. Officers

2.1 Department Head: The selection and evaluation of the department head shall conform to Article 3.1.2 of the Agreement.

2.2 Faculty Chair: During the first meeting of the semester, the department members shall elect from among the committee of the whole someone to serve as Chair of the Faculty. This person will chair Committee of the Whole and of the Departmental Evaluation Committee and performs duties specified in Article 3.1.1.5 of the Agreement. This election shall take place at the first department meeting of every academic year. The term of office shall be one year. The Faculty chair shall conduct these meetings which can be called by the faculty chair, or by the faculty chair at the request of two members of the department. The faculty Chair will also be responsible for coordination and submittal of the department head’s evaluation as required in Article 3.1.2.4 of the Agreement. The Chair of the Faculty shall serve as department coordinator when the Department Head is unavailable.

2.3 Recording Secretary: The recording secretary is charged with keeping and publishing minutes of proceedings at department meetings for the information of department members. (These minutes are subject to approval by the members.) Appointment as recording secretary shall rotate each meeting in alphabetical order of the names of the department members (not including the department head).

2.4 Senate Representative: The department representative to the Academic Senate shall be elected at the first department meeting of every other academic year. If it is possible, the department member selected should have been on the faculty at Northern for at least three (3) years. The term of office shall be two years.

2.5 Bargaining Council Representative: The Bargaining Council representative shall be selected from among department members who are voting members of the AAUP. This individual will serve a three year term. Only members of the AAUP may vote in this election.

3. Appointment and Evaluation Process and Procedures

3.1 Appointment

3.1.1 Members of the Committee of the Whole shall participate in conducting a search for new faculty members, unless a member requests to be excused from the process. The appointment procedure shall follow the guidelines of Article 5.3 of the Agreement.

3.1.2 In recommending a candidate to fill a position, the department actions shall be consistent with Article 5.3 of the Agreement.

3.2 Faculty Evaluation Process

3.2.1 A written evaluation for each faculty member shall be completed in accordance with Article V of the Master Agreement
3.2.2 Formal, written evaluations shall be completed for each faculty member at the direction of the department head in accordance with departmental bylaws and the Master Agreement. However:
3.2.3 The Department’s Evaluation Committee shall undertake the evaluations following the guidelines in Article 5.4 of the Agreement.

3.2.4 Judgmental criteria for evaluations as well as tenure and promotion recommendations shall be based on evidence bearing on the quality of performance in each of the following areas:

3.2.4.1 Assigned professional responsibilities including teaching, advising, and additional assigned responsibilities as specified in 6.1.1.4.1 of the Master Agreement.

3.2.4.2 Scholarship and/or Professional development and other professional activities, as defined in the master agreement and these bylaws.

3.2.4.3 Service on University committees, service to the student body, service to the profession and professionally related community service.

3.3 Evaluation Procedures

3.3.1 The department member being evaluated shall excuse themselves from the evaluation process.

3.3.2 All Evaluation Committee members shall have access to the evaluation materials and must ground their recommendations on the evidence therein.

3.3.3 Candidates not recommended for promotion and or tenure by the departmental Evaluation Committee and/or department head shall be provided a written statement of the reason(s) upon request.

4 Tenure

4.1 The probationary appointment period for each faculty member shall conform to Article 5.5.3 of the Agreement.

4.2 The department's Evaluation Committee shall recommend the granting of tenure to a department member on probationary appointment who meets the same judgmental criteria as an applicant for promotion to Associate Professor. (See Article 5 of these bylaws).

5 Promotion

5.1 General Considerations regarding promotion

5.1.1 The department's Evaluation Committee shall recommend the promotion of each department member who meets the requirements for the new rank in the three judgmental areas as specified in 5.5.6 of the contract. Elaboration of these judgmental areas as they relate to promotion, tenure, and evaluation are found in Articles 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4 below.

5.1.2 The task of making the case for achievement needed for promotion and/or tenure rests with the applicant, with guidance from the evaluation committee in the years prior to the year when formal application is made. This effort involves both quantity and quality/depth of achievement with respect to the criteria listed below. The standard for promotion to Professor is greater than the standard for promotion to Associate Professor as specified in Article 5.6 of these Bylaws.

5.1.3 The evaluation period for tenure ends the day before the first day of fall semester classes during the calendar year in which the application is initiated, and performance or accomplishments after that date cannot be considered by the evaluators. The evaluation schedule for tenure and promotion applications is set forth in Article 5.5.9.

5.1.4 For faculty members applying for promotion, the evaluation period covers multiple years, starting when employment commences at the University, or on the first day of fall semester classes in the calendar year when the last successful promotion application was initiated at the University, whichever date is later. Faculty members have the option to include employment at a prior institution as part of their evaluation period and in support of having fulfilled the eligibility requirements in Article 5.5.5.1.1.

5.1.5 It is the faculty member’s responsibility to demonstrate the separate nature of accomplishments in the areas of teaching and other assigned responsibilities, service, and scholarship and/or professional development.

5.1.6 When evaluating teaching, scholarship and/or professional development, and service below; an instance, occurrence, and/or achievement in a particular area is defined as happening once in an academic calendar year. Example: Serving on a particular committee can count as three instances if it occurs in three different calendar years.

5.1.7 The most important criterion for tenure and promotion is effectiveness in the area of teaching and assigned responsibilities. Continued effectiveness in the area of assigned responsibilities shall be demonstrated by evidence that plans in this area in prior evaluations have been achieved. The second most important criterion for tenure and promotion can be either “scholarship and/or professional development” or service. The relative emphasis on “scholarship and/or professional development” or service must be specified in evaluation materials each year, including the year of application. The determination of relative emphasis for tenure earning appointments will be initially established in the letter of appointment and must be made within the parameters described in the departmental bylaws. The relative emphasis may be redefined subsequent to tenure as a result of dialog between the faculty member, the departmental evaluation committee, and the department head.

5.2 PRIMARY JUDGMENTAL AREA: Teaching and Other Assigned Responsibilities:

Effectiveness will be based on:
1. An appraisal of student learning
2. Colleague evaluation
3. Student ratings
As specified in 5.4.1.5 of the Agreement. These may be used to establish that the following types of achievements have occurred:

(a). Demonstrates a solid understanding of the subject matter taught, and of the materials used as part of the courses;

(b). Creates a positive learning environment through good organization and appropriate use of instructional techniques and instructional technologies;

(c). Maintains effective rapport with students in the classroom that engages them in the learning process;

(d). Receives positive evaluations by students and colleagues. Multiple forms of evaluation are necessary;

(e). Continuously works toward improvement in existing courses, including the utilization of student feedback;

(f). Effectively advises students;

(g). Produces materials and instruction aids for use in the classroom, laboratory, internship, or experiential learning activities;

(h) Holds regular office hours, allowing the faculty member to be available for effective advising, consultation with students, etc.

(i) Provides instruction that results in student learning.

(j). Develops new course offerings and/or makes substantial revisions of existing courses, including the gathering and preparation of relevant materials for these courses;

(k). Integrates appropriate instructional technologies into classroom teaching such as designing of computer programs, manuals, simulations, guides, slide sets, equipment, etc.;

(l). Attends teaching workshops and subsequently incorporates material into course offerings;

(m). Provides educational opportunities that would not otherwise be available;

(n). Effectively directs student research projects, theses, or file papers;

(o). Becomes involved in extension ITV, online, and/or distance education efforts of the university;

(p). Demonstrates the ability to teach competently a wide variety of courses, and demonstrating a willingness to continue to broaden one's knowledge in order to teach in new areas;

(q). Does specialized advising for students such as those in the Pre-Law program, the General Studies program, or the graduate programs in the Department, and/or advising a larger number of student advisees than normal;

(r). Integrates academic service learning and experiential education projects into the curriculum.

(s). Performs administrative assignments including, but not limited to; department head, assistant department head, graduate director, internship coordinator, Mock Trial adviser, and Model UN adviser.

5.3 JUDGMENTAL AREA 2: Scholarship and/or Professional Development based on one or more of the Four Forms of Scholarship:

5.3.1 Scholarship involves one or more of the four (4) forms of scholarship: the scholarship of discovery; the scholarship of integration; the scholarship of application; the scholarship of teaching. All forms of scholarship must involve the production of a tangible artifact or outcome. For most forms of scholarship, peer review is expected.

5.3.1.1 The scholarship of discovery involves original production or testing of a theory, principle, knowledge, or artistic creation. Examples include a traditional experimental, survey, quantitative and/or qualitative study and research). Artifacts of this form of scholarship could include a journal article, a book or a peer-reviewed conference presentation.

5.3.1.2 The scholarship of integration involves using knowledge found within and across disciplines to create an original understanding or insight that reveals larger intellectual patterns. Examples include a textbook or synthesis that summarizes what is known about a topic or process, an edited anthology or a theoretical analysis.

5.3.1.3 The scholarship of application involves bringing knowledge to bear in addressing a significant issue or problem by using existing research or creative activities to influence current or future conditions. Examples include providing expert testimony, production of a technical report, a substantive grant proposal, white paper associated with consultancies or grants, public policy analysis or professional presentation.

5.3.1.4 The scholarship of teaching involves proposing and empirically testing a pedagogical procedure that transforms or improves teaching practices. Examples include a systematic comparison of learning environments, an impact analysis for learning activities beyond the classroom (such as academic service learning) or a comprehensive assessment of teaching methodologies. The scholarship of teaching also includes writing/preparing peer reviewed pedagogical material that draws on the professional training and scholarly capability of the faculty member and are evaluated for their effectiveness.

5.3.1.5
An activity that qualifies as scholarship, regardless of type, must meet the following general criteria: (1) there is clear evidence of methodological rigor; (2) the activity results in substantive outcomes or implications beyond the scope of the activity itself; and (3) the outcomes are disseminated to a professional, governmental, or scholarly audience.

Common types of peer review include (but are not limited to): publication in a peer reviewed journal, or in settings acceptable to one’s department, and presentation of scholarly work as a result of a competitive selection process acceptable to one’s department. Peer review may also take the form of a written review of one’s research, evaluation of a grant proposal, or a peer letter acknowledging scholarly accomplishments. Recognition of scholarly activity is also a type of peer review and can include an invitation to present scholarly work, receiving a professional award, or obtaining a grant.

Professional development includes activities intended to maintain currency in one’s discipline, developing new professionally related expertise, or participation in other professionally related activities that don’t necessarily result in a scholarly outcome.

Examples of professional development are:
(1) Attending professional conferences
(2) Attending professional workshops
(3) Developing a new, or maintaining a current, certification
(4) Obtaining an additional degree or training related to one’s field
(5) Engaging in post-doctoral work designed to expand one’s professional competence
(6) Other appropriate professional activities, when confirmed by the departmental evaluation committee and the department head.

5.3.2 Criteria for judging achievements in this area of Scholarship and/or Professional Development. Peer reviewed Scholarship in the Department of Political Science, regardless of the Boyer category involved, will be based on the concept of a “unit” of work, which generally reflects the expectation for most faculty members for a normal year. The Evaluation Committee will judge whether a unit has been achieved on a case-by-case basis, but the following provides general guidelines:

a) Published pieces are valued more highly than unpublished pieces.
b) The quality of the journal in which an article appears will play a role in determining the value of the contribution.
c) The department values multi-disciplinary research but candidates should show competence in political science and/or public administration
d) The department values collaboration and co-authorship, but sole author status is valued slightly higher than the other alternatives.
e) Presentation at national or international conferences is valued more highly than presentation at regional or local conferences.
f) Publishing the first edition of a book is valued more highly than publishing subsequent editions of that book.
g) With published books, scholarly treatises that involve some degree of original research are valued more highly than the production of textbooks.
h) Technical reports such as outcome evaluation projects or “white papers” will be evaluated differentially based on factors including scope, societal impact and size and sophisticated of intended audience.
i) When acquiring grants, external grants are more highly valued than internal grants
j) Applying for a grant, and being unsuccessful, is valued more highly than not applying for any grants.
k) The department expects faculty to have a well formulated research agenda indicating future projects and activities.

Using these general guidelines, the department’s Evaluation Committee will determine “unit” totals for each faculty member being reviewed. Although what constitutes a unit cannot be defined absolutely, the following should be useful to the candidate and to the committee. Some items are of such high value that they will be awarded two or four units, most items will earn one unit, and some items will earn a half unit. It is important to recognize what follows are examples and do not exhaust the possible ways in which units can be earned.

Category A - four units:
o Authorship of a first edition book with a university press or equivalent
o Authorship of an article in a refereed journal that is widely recognized as having the highest status within the discipline
o Authorship of the first edition of a textbook
o Editorship of an edited book with a university press or equivalent

Category B - two units:
o A chapter in a scholarly edited book
o An article in a law review

Category C - one-unit:
o Authorship in a refereed state-level journal or equivalent
o A scholarly book review (Scholarship)
o Presentation at a professional conference
o A successful internal or external grant proposal (excludes travel grants)
o An article in a magazine or other publication (including electronic publications
o An encyclopedia entry in a scholarly publication
o A technical report for a program evaluation project or government agency if subject to external peer review process (e.g., Citizen Satisfaction Survey)
o Consulting in the area of one’s expertise

Category D – one-half unit:
o Sharing of knowledge with colleagues and students through seminars or other activities, or via speeches and other avenues outside the university community;
o Developing new course offerings and making major revisions of existing courses which rely on incorporation of one's scholarly knowledge;
o Involvement in major curriculum development projects at the university, regional or national level;
o Unsuccessful external grant applications
o Serving as an editor or reviewer for professional organization publications or grant applications
o Participating in opportunities for continuing education

5.4 JUDGMENTAL AREA 3: Service:

Using these general guidelines, the department’s Evaluation Committee will determine “unit” totals for each faculty member being reviewed. Although what constitutes a unit cannot be defined absolutely, the following should be useful to the candidate and to the committee. Some items are of such high value that they will be awarded two or four units, most items will earn one unit, and some items will earn a half unit. It is important to recognize what follows are examples and do not exhaust the possible ways in which units can be earned. Each activity (not bullet) may be counted only once per academic year. Faculty members are expected to complete three units per year, with such exceptions as allowed by the department (sabbatical, heavy research load, etc.).
Criteria for judging achievements in this area include but are not limited to the following:

Category A – 2 Units
o Leadership in department, university, professional, community, or public organization(s) that produces major changes or significantly impacts that organization’s goals, mission, or effectiveness beyond normal expectations of that position.
o Elected to public office.

Category B – 1 Unit

o Leadership in department, university, professional, community, or public organization(s) that meet on a regular basis.
o Advising and meeting with a student group that meets on a regular basis.

Category C – .5 Units

o Participation/Service/membership in department, university, professional, community, or public organization(s) that meet on a regular basis.
o Running for public office

Category D – .25 Units

o Participating/Service in a department, university, professional, community, or public event that occurs once per calendar year, examples- scholarship interviews, graduate exams, search committee, skill builder workshops, etc.

5.5 Promotion to Assistant Professor Requirements

5.5.1 Promotion to Assistant Professor will be in accordance with judgmental criteria in Article 5.5.6 of the Master Agreement.

5.5.2 For those whose letters of appoint do not address the issue of promotion to associate professor, the following will apply:

5.5.2.1 An earned Ph.D. from an accredited institution in Political Science or Public Administration;

5.5.2.2 Six years of full-time higher education experience;

5.5.2.3 Achievements in Teaching and Assigned Professional Responsibilities; this must include performance of all items (a) through (i) in Article 5.2 for those seeking this rank;

5.5.2.4 Achievement in Scholarship and Professional Development; the form of scholarship engaged in needs to be carefully explained, and the scholarship and/or professional development must include four units from categories A-D in 5.3.2 with at least one unit being scholarship. When this is the area of emphasis, scholarship and professional development must include four units from categories A-D in 5.3.2 with at least two units coming from categories A and/or B.

5.5.2.5 Achievement in Service Activities; faculty member must meet the goal of three units of service per year (evaluation period), with such exceptions as the department may make. When this is the area of emphasis, service must include four units from category A.

5.6 Promotion to Associate Professor Requirements

5.6.1 Promotion to Associate Professor will be in accordance with judgmental criteria in Article 5.5.6 of the Master Agreement.

5.6.2 An earned Ph.D. from an accredited institution in Political Science or Public Administration;

5.6.3 Full-time higher education experience as specified in Article 5.5.5.1.1 of the Agreement;

5.6.4 Achievements in Teaching and Assigned Professional Responsibilities; this must include performance of all items (a) through (i) in Article 5.2 for those seeking this rank;

5.6.5 Achievement in Scholarship and Professional Development; the form of scholarship engaged in needs to be carefully explained, and the scholarship and/or professional development must include six units from categories A-D in 5.3.2 with at least two units being scholarship. When this is the area of emphasis, scholarship and professional development must include six units from categories A-D in 5.3.2 with at least two units coming from categories A and/or B.

5.6.6 Achievement in Service Activities; faculty member must meet the goal of three units of service per year (evaluation period), with such exceptions as the department may make. When this is the area of emphasis, service must include four units from category A.

5.7 Promotion to Professor Requirements

5.7.1 Promotion to Professor will be in accordance with judgmental criteria in Article 5.5.6 of the Master Agreement.

5.7.2 An earned Ph.D. from an accredited institution in Political Science or Public Administration;

5.7.3 Full-time higher education experience as specified in Article 5.5.5.1.1 of the Agreement;

5.7.4 Achievement in Teaching and Assigned Professional Responsibilities; all criteria (a) through (i) under Article 5. Teaching and Assigned Professional Responsibilities should be met, and at least four criteria among (j) through (r) in Article 5.2;

5.7.5 Achievement in Scholarship and/or Professional Development; the form of scholarship engaged in needs to be carefully explained, and the scholarship must include eight units from categories A-D in 5.3.2 with at least two units coming from categories A & B. When this is the area of emphasis, scholarship and professional development must include eight units from categories A_D in 5.3.2 with at least four units coming from categories A and/or B

5.7.6 Achievement in Service Activities; faculty member must meet the goal of three units of service per year (evaluation period), with such exceptions as the department may make. When this is the area of emphasis, service must include six units from category A.

5.8 Term Contract, Adjuncts and Continuous Appointments: Evaluations and Promotion

5.8.1 Faculty hired under a term contract, contingent faculty and adjuncts must undergo annual evaluations as defined in Article 3.2 of the bylaws.

5.8.2 Faculty members applying for Continuing Contract Status will do so as defined within Article 5.4.1.

6. Student Grievances

6.1 Student grievances shall be resolved through the process outlined in the student handbook. If a grievance reaches the departmental level, the department shall appoint a three-member ad hoc committee to consider the grievance.

7. Teaching Assignments and Professional Responsibilities

7.1 Class schedules shall be arranged by the department head in consultation with each member of the department, and if necessary, with the department as a Committee of the Whole. Consultation with faculty also must occur with regard to class size and enrollment caps, taking into consideration classroom capacity, instructional needs, and technology requirements for the particular courses.

7.2 The Department head in consultation with the Committee of the Whole will determine subject matter qualifications for teaching additional assignments.

8. Campus Overload Courses, Spring Session, Summer School, Extension Courses, Directed Studies, Thesis and Practicum

8.1 In the assignment of overload assignments, summer school courses or extension courses, the controlling procedures shall be those specified in Article IX of the Agreement.

8.2 Qualified Term and Continuing faculty members shall be given first opportunity to teach campus overload for which the department head gives approval during the academic year. Summer College teaching assignments shall be made in accordance with the Agreement and based upon programmatic needs as determined by the department head and dean.

8.3 Graduate thesis direction as part of teaching load will be determined under 6.1.1.1 of the Agreement

9. Contractual Professional Development and Other Funds

9.1 Each faculty member is entitled to professional development funds as specified in the Agreement.

10. Meetings, Amendments & Ratification

10.1 The department normally shall meet once a month at a regularly scheduled time. At their discretion, the department head may call other meetings of the department. Upon the request of three voting members of the department, the department head shall be asked to convene a meeting of the department within seven (7) days.

10.2 A quorum consisting of at least one-half of the faculty members of the department who are teaching at least one course shall be required for the transaction of business at the meeting.

10.3 Faculty chair will serve as parliamentarian. On instances of procedural disputes, the parliamentarian shall be consulted; the parliamentarian will be guided by the most recent edition of Robert's Rules of Order.

10.4 The department may, by vote of the majority of the members, call a special meeting of the Committee of the Whole to reach a consensus in advising the department head on matters of department business.

10.5 Amendments to these bylaws must begin with proposals from one or more department members which must be distributed to the members of the department one week before they are to be discussed, and voted on one week after they have been discussed.

10.6 Ratification of these bylaws and amendments hereto shall go into effect after approval by the department and the Provost and as specified in 3.1.1 of the agreement.