Wildcat Statue

Music, Department of

Music, Department of

To publish the bylaws of the Department of Music: approved by Interim Provost & Vice President Paul Lang on June 16, 2011.


Department of Music

Northern Michigan University



1.1 Members of the music faculty are members of the Bargaining Unit, as specified in Section 1 of the NMU-AAUP Agreement.

1.2 All members of the music faculty (as well as the Department Head) are eligible to vote on departmental matters. The Department Head is excluded in strictly AAUP issues (for example, selection of a Bargaining Unit representative).

1.3 A quorum of the department will be a two-thirds (2/3) majority of the voting membership. Except as noted, a simple majority vote of the voting membership will be required to pass a motion.


2.1 The Head will serve as the chief administrative officer of the department.

2.2 Selection Process

2.2.1 When a vacancy occurs in the headship of the department, credentials will be solicited and received by the Executive Committee, in accordance with Section 3 of the Agreement.

2.2.2 The Executive Committee will screen applicants and submit a list of names to the voting faculty for consideration.

2.2.3 The applicants recommended by the Department will be interviewed by the full faculty and appropriate administrators.

2.2.4 From these applicants a list of acceptable candidates will be chosen by a majority vote of the faculty and recommended to the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences in preferential order with a statement of reasons.

2.3 The Department Head will be evaluated in accordance with the Master Agreement, Section 3.


3.1 The membership of the Executive Committee will consist of three tenured members of the Department. In the event that there are not tenured members, non-tenured faculty may be elected.

3.2 Membership of the Executive Committee will be determined by ballot of the members of the AAUP bargaining unit in the Department each year. This normally shall be accomplished by June 1st. The Executive Committee normally begins with the fall semester.

3.3 The chair of the Executive Committee will be elected by the majority vote of the committee members.

3.4 Duties of the Executive Committee

3.4.1 The Executive Committee will serve as the chief recommending body.

3.4.2 The Executive Committee will serve as peer evaluation committee, including arranging colleague peer evaluations that should be referenced in the narrative statement of the faculty evaluation. Peer evaluation forms will be completed and faculty will provide those in the back-up documentation.

a. The Executive Committee will report as a whole on observations of teaching and where appropriate, on assigned duties and assigned responsibilities.

b. The Executive Committee will report on supported professional development activities in regard to teaching (see Master Agreement, Section 5.)

c. The Executive Committee will make recommendations in the annual faculty evaluation document for the following evaluation period.

d. The Executive Committee will confirm the faculty member's emphasis on scholarship and/or professional development or service along with the faculty member’s plan for achievement of that emphasis.

3.4.3 The Executive committee will be responsible for administering the evaluation of the Department Head.

3.4.4 The Executive Committee, usually with area faculty, will recommend the required qualifications for new appointments to the Department Head.

3.5 Meetings of the Executive Committee

3.5.1 Executive committee deliberations on personnel matters will be closed, but non-members may otherwise request to attend a non-personnel meeting or may be requested to attend.

3.5.2 All meetings will be conducted according to Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised.

3.5.3 The chair of the Executive Committee will prepare an agenda and will distribute it to each member prior to the meetings. Agenda items may be submitted to the Department Head for each full faculty meeting.

3.5.4 The Department Head will be advised of the recommendations of the Executive Committee after each meeting.

3.5.5 A quorum for voting purposes will consist of the entire committee. Work sessions may be fewer than three members present.


4.1 Normally, regular faculty meetings will be held once per month.

4.2 The Department Head and/or the Executive Committee Chair will call an additional meeting when deemed necessary.

4.3 All faculty meetings will be conducted according to Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised

4.4 A quorum will consist of two-thirds (2/3) of the voting members of the Music faculty.

4.5 The agenda for each faculty meeting will be prepared and distributed by the Head of the Department upon consultation with the chairperson of the Executive Committee.

4.6 The Head will preside at faculty meetings, but in the absence of the Head, the chair of the Executive Committee will preside.

4.7 The chair of each committee will make a report at every faculty meeting.

4.8 The Department Head will report on administrative developments at each meeting.


The judgmental criteria for tenure is the same as that for Associate Professor.

Faculty will present supporting evidence in the annual evaluation as outlined below. See Master Agreement Section 5.

5.1 Teaching and Assigned Responsibilities for all faculty

The most important criterion for tenure and promotion is effectiveness in the area of teaching and assigned responsibilities. The annual evaluations are the cumulative record. The Department has primary responsibility and expertise in the determination of achievement in the discipline.

At each level of promotion, each faculty member is judged on the following:

5.1.1   maintaining a grading policy designed to give the student an accurate indication of his performance in class; the instructor must develop an objective means for evaluating the class and performance lessons  

5.1.2 exhibiting impartiality

5.1.3 demonstrating good mastery of materials and effective presentation

5.1.4 maintaining appropriate records, including control of equipment under the faculty member’s supervision

5.1.5 employing strong instructional practices and, establishing appropriate grading standards

5.1.6 maintaining effective rapport with students in the classroom that engages them in the learning process and provides a positive learning environment

5.1.7 creating a positive learning environment through good organization and appropriate use of instructional techniques and instructional technologies

5.1.8 employing effective advising of students when assigned

5.1.9 maintaining a file on each advisee when assigned

5.1.10 receiving positive evaluation by students and peers

5.1.11 reviewing and/or revising course materials on a continuing basis including notes, course outline; particularly in response to student evaluations and the results of student proficiency exams

5.1.12. maintaining office hours, providing students with the opportunity for consultation

5.1.13 fulfilling and annually describing any other assigned responsibilities e.g. curriculum coordination, assessment activities, ensemble activities, technology, supervision of student teachers.

5. 2  Teaching and Assigned Responsibilities 

At each stage of promotion faculty should give attention to teaching and assigned responsibilities and demonstrate a pattern of responsiveness to recommendations by the department head and the departmental executive committee, including items above and particularly including the maintenance of accreditation by the National Association of Schools of Music.

5.2.1 Promotion to Assistant Professor

a. demonstrate organization of the assigned courses, course content and materials

b. demonstrate development of the student and course through appropriate assignments

c. exhibit strong teaching in classroom and/or studio

5.2.2 Promotion to Associate Professor

a. enhance the structure or organizational skills in assigned courses

b. refine teaching in assigned courses especially outside the primary teaching specialty

c. demonstrate grading practices and appropriate levels of difficulty of class material to meet accreditation standards

5.2.3 Promotion to Professor

a. continue to maintain a high level of performance in teaching

b. continue to examine and maintain integrity of courses

c. provide leadership in departmental curricular needs and other assigned responsibilities

5.3 Scholarship and/or Professional Development  (Master Agreement, Section 5) 

For the judgmental area of Scholarship and/or Professional Development, the applicant, the departmental evaluation committee, and the department head must have agreed upon the relative emphasis between the area of Scholarship and/or Professional Development and the area of Service and the kinds of achievements needed to meet the requirements of that relative emphasis.

To demonstrate effectiveness in scholarship and/or professional development, the applicant’s plans must be stated and described in the annual evaluative statement, and the evaluation must demonstrate continued work toward achievement of this plan.

Scholarship involves one or more of the four forms of scholarship And all forms of scholarship must involve the production of a tangible artifact or outcome. For most forms of scholarship, peer review is expected.

The following descriptions of the four (4) forms of scholarship as stated in the Master Agreement, Section 5, are to be used as guides:

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, as well as an artistic or literary artifact (such as a fiction or non-fiction writing, art exhibition or musical performance).

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, a curated artistic exhibition, an edited anthology or a theoretical analysis.

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.

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 Scholarship (Illustrative Examples of artifacts and outcomes that demonstrate the forms of scholarship for the music discipline):

1. Scholarship of Discovery

a. producing and/or performing creative works; providing recitals at colleges and/or universities, or other appropriate venue

b. presenting lectures, papers, or other musical presentations in a professional setting

c. composing musical compositions, or arrangements that are published, or receive performances at a local, regional or higher level that is peer reviewed

d. publication of such items as monographs, textbook, chapters in textbooks; articles in professional journals

2. Scholarship of Integration

a. producing or performing a work that integrates disciplines (music and literature; music and theatre; music and physics)

b. contributing to a textbook that integrates disciplines

3. Scholarship of application

a. writing a substantial grant proposal

b. presenting a professional presentation

4.Scholarship of Teaching

a. advancing learning theory through classroom or studio research, developing and testing instructional materials

b. designing and implementing a program assessment system.

5.3.2 Scholarship - Peer Review I

In most cases, peer review will consist of the standard types listed in the Master Agreement. In certain instances (e.g. a solo recital on campus), peer review may be done by the three members of the Executive Committee or by reviewers that the Executive Committee has enlisted for this purpose (for example if members of the Committee are performing). The Executive Committee must be notified well in advance if peer review of a performance is required.

The recital request will include a performance prospectus indicating the purpose and projected outcome. This must be approved prior to the event. The Evaluation Committee will render a judgment that will be included in the appropriate sections of the annual evaluation. See Appendix for the plan and the performance rubric.

5. 3.3 Professional Development (Illustrative Examples)

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 do not necessarily result in a scholarly outcome. Illustrative examples of professional development activities specific to the Music discipline are:

1.attending professional conferences workshops, short courses

2.engaging in continuing education activities to enhance or maintain currency in one’s academic field(s); for example continuing private study on an instrument including voice or conducting; faculty development or sabbatical leaves

3. engaging in other appropriate professional activities, when confirmed by the departmental evaluation committee and the department head.

5.3.4 Scholarship and/or Professional Development- Levels of Achievement for Promotion

1. All faculty should annually engage in scholarship and/or professional development activities such as those listed above, achieving a record that enhances development and demonstrates a sustained pattern of contributions.

2. Faculty seeking promotion to Assistant Professor should demonstrate the potential for achievements in Scholarship and/or Professional Development, engaging in activities described for all faculty

3. Faculty seeking promotion to Associate Professor are required to complete at least one example of peer reviewed scholarship, in addition to other achievements in Scholarship and/or Professional Development

4. Faculty seeking a promotion to Professor must achieve at least two Peer reviewed examples and the applicant should show promise for future contributions

5. Faculty who adopt Scholarship and/or Professional Development as the area of emphasis are expected to develop a strong cumulative record that enhances development and demonstrates a sustained pattern of contributions. The quantity and quality of work should significantly exceed that listed in the descriptors under “all faculty” (an average of 4 per year, including an additional peer reviewed work per promotion application)

5.4 Service Requirements (Master Agreement, Section 5)

For the judgmental area of Service, the applicant, the departmental evaluation committee, and the department head must have agreed upon the relative emphasis between the two areas (area of Scholarship and/or Professional Development and the area of Service) and the kinds of achievements needed to meet the requirements of that relative emphasis.

5.4.1 For promotion to the rank of Assistant Professor, in the area of Service, all faculty, regardless of emphasis, are expected to serve on departmental or university committees, usually after the first year at NMU; and all are expected to demonstrate activities related to and in support of recruitment and retention of students at NMU.

5.4.2 For promotion to the rank of Associate Professor, all faculty, regardless of selected emphasis, will continue to achieve a record including serving on departmental or university committees and expected to demonstrate activities related to recruitment and retention. In addition, faculty are expected to contribute Services in the community, or in professional organizations relevant to their role at the university; and provide frequent music related service.

5.4.3 For promotion to the rank of Professor, all faculty, regardless of selected emphasis will continue to achieve a record serving on department and school committees. Faculty should demonstrate leadership on department/college/university committees or professional organizations (i.e. by serving as an officer or making a particularly notable contribution. It is expected that they will continue to demonstrate a substantial service record.

5.4.4 Service Emphasis for Promotion For those faculty selecting Service as the area of emphasis, it is expected that in addition to those specifications for all faculty (above), at each rank they will make substantial contributions in a minimum of two of the following areas (,,, contribute services in/on community or professional organizations, boards or councils relevant to the faculty member’s role at the University or area of expertise provide Music-Service performances for department, campus, community, and region. The number/level of Music-services must be established in a plan and approved.

a) Music -Service is defined as contributing through performance/conducting to a product. Although music faculty members are typically expert performers, some products may not be acceptable in the discipline as a professional creation (scholarship). In these instances, the purpose is to enable or contribute to a student recital, student ensemble, or a non-professional community group

For faculty selecting Music-Service as a strong component, an extensive cumulative record should be developed. Examples include service- through-performances at University functions, Community functions, Marquette Symphony concerts, accompanist for students, conducting, musical and opera production, clinics, workshop performances, summer band.

The quality, number, weight and significance shall be determined by the Departmental evaluation Committee and the Head in advisement with the Faculty member. This will be stated in the annual Evaluation establishing the plan of the faculty member. It is understood that where this is the Service focus this will normally be of substantial quantity (for example, around 50 services since the last promotion)

b) Faculty completing this standard as an emphasis, are advised that this must be established in a plan (can be a stated plan in the annual evaluation) with the faculty member, Department Head and Executive Committee stating agreement on the proposed plan. It must be evaluated in regard to quantity and quality planning and leading non-credit workshop or institutes music coaching for no load credit or pay (when not on-load) may be accepted when officially approved by the dept. head as Service Further examples of Service are: equipment inventory and maintenance in the department; serving as a mentor for new faculty.

5.5 Continuing Contract Status

The annual evaluations will be part of an ongoing record of the faculty member’s progress toward promotion and/or tenure or Continuing Contract Status. The evaluations of a faculty member on a term appointment or continuing contract appointment will focus on their effectiveness in assigned responsibilities and service to the Department. They are not judged on University Service or Scholarship. (Master Agreement, Section 5).


Professor of Emeritus signifies recognition of an outstanding academic career and noteworthy contribution to the University and may be granted to those who have retired after having been granted tenure at the University. The Department of Music will determine its nominations by at least a 2/3’s majority vote of the faculty who had served a minimum of three years with that retired faculty member. The nomination process may include a review of annual evaluations.


These Bylaws will become effective immediately following an affirmative vote of no less than two-thirds (2/3) of all voting members, and approval of as specified in the Master Agreement Section 3



for peer reviewed recital or presentation



recital/ or presentation  _______________________________________________

Prospectus Statement (submit 4 weeks prior to prospective event)

  1. a clear, concise introduction to the presentation
  2. the main question(s) or rationale for presentation; OR

the basis for the performance

  1. research materials (list or annotations) for presentations
  1. list of works (recital program)
  2. Other performers- listing credentials if not NMU faculty
  1. Date, Venue; other needs or equipment

(Use the back of this page if needed)                                                                                                                            

Please return this                                                       

form to the

Executive Committee Northern Michigan University.

Approval date __________________

Return acceptance statement to performer


Peer Review Committee

Music Presentations (recitals or music presentations)-peer review comment sheet

Comments on achieved expectations are required for music




4. Above Standard

3. Meets Standard

2. Approaching Standard

1. Below Standard


 & technical


 Displays artistry Creative

 Proficient          Command of medium

 Musically        compelling


Appropriately    Creative

Generally  Proficient

Demonstrating    high level in musical ability



Some promising   elements; a few areas lacking


Some points of interest shows promise  





Lacking in         key areas



Exceptionally well prepared

Appears to be well prepared  with few flaws

Appears to be lacking in  preparation


Lacking in  control of  some aspects




 Creative and    original in material or  approach



Successfully achieves expectations

Informative Bears new findings or reveals new   approach

      Appropriate        Goals Some Weaknesses





Some areas     Appropriate     but falls Short     of expectations


ATTACH PROGRAM/OR complete the following:

Name of Performer:___________________   Recital __  or Presentation ___

Venue _________________________

Recital Participants _______________________________________________________________

Date   ____________Size of Audience _____________________



not required to use the numbers) Please attach your comment sheet, or use the back of this sheet).



signature _______________________________                                

returned: ________________


Date Approved:6-16-2011
Last Revision:6-16-2011
Approved By:Provost
Oversight Unit:MUSIC
Attached form file: Musicbylaws.pdf