Sociology and Social Work, Department of
Purpose:
The Bylaws of the Department of Sociology and Social Work constitute the means whereby the department agrees to conduct its internal affairs and by which it shall address procedures and standards for faculty appointments, evaluations, promotions, and tenure recommendations. These procedures and standards shall address and be in compliance with the general standards and procedures specified in Article V of the Master Agreement. The Bylaws and any revisions or amendments become operative upon completion of the process stipulated in the extant Master Agreement.
Approved by Provost & Vice President, Dr. Susan Koch, on May 12, 2011
Proposed Bylaw Changes from Department of Sociology and Social Work
BYLAWS - Department of Sociology and Social Work
The Bylaws of the Department of Sociology and Social Work constitute the means whereby the department agrees to conduct its internal affairs and by which it shall address procedures and standards for faculty appointments, evaluations, promotions, and tenure recommendations. These procedures and standards shall address and be in compliance with the general standards and procedures specified in Article V of the Master Agreement. The Bylaws and any revisions or amendments become operative upon completion of the process stipulated in the extant Master Agreement.
Mission Statement
The Department’s mission is to foster the development of knowledge, values, and skills necessary to understand and positively influence the human condition. Through a rich selection of courses in Sociology, Social Work, and Anthropology, we create a learning environment that challenges students to think critically about our social world, and to seek creative solutions to human problems. We offer a welcoming and supportive environment that intentionally engages students in the community, and prepares them for both professional employment and graduate study.
Table of Contents
1. Membership and Voting ...................................................................1
2. Department Administration ..............................................................1
2.1. Department Head ..........................................................................1
2.2. Social Work Program Director .......................................................1
3. Committees .......................................................................................2
3.2. Executive Committee .....................................................................2
3.3. Annual Evaluation Committee ........................................................3
3.4. Tenure and Promotion Committee ..................................................3
3.4.2. Tenure and Promotion Committee—Tenure and/or Promotion to Associate Professor................................................................................................4
3.4.3. Tenure and Promotion Committee—Promotion to Professor.......4
3.5. Social Work Program Committee ...................................................5
3.6. Sociology Program Committee .......................................................5
3.7. Anthropology Program Committee .................................................5
3.7.3. Student Organizations..................................................................5
4. Curriculum Revision ..........................................................................5
4.1. Minor curriculum proposals ............................................................5
4.2. Major curriculum proposals ............................................................5
5. Terminal Qualifications and Requirements for New Academic Appointments ...6
5.1. Sociology: ............................................................................................6
5.2. Anthropology: .......................................................................................6
5.3. Social Work: .........................................................................................6
6. Promotion and Tenure ............................................................................6
6.1. Tenure and Promotion Review .............................................................6
6.2. Promotion Eligibility Criteria .................................................................7
6.2.1. Assistant Professor ...........................................................................7
6.2.2. Associate Professor ..........................................................................7
6.2.3. Professor ...........................................................................................7
6.3. Judgmental Criteria ..............................................................................8
6.3.1. Assigned Professional Responsibility ...............................................8
6.3.2. Scholarship and/or Professional Development ................................11
6.3.3. Service .............................................................................................15
6.4. Required Levels of Achievement for Promotion ..................................17
6.4.1. To Assistant Professor ......................................................................17
6.4.2. To Associate Professor .....................................................................18
6.4.3. To Professor ......................................................................................19
6.5. Tenure Criteria.......................................................................................21
7. Evaluations ..............................................................................................21
7.2. The Evaluation Process ........................................................................21
7.2.3. Evaluation Content .............................................................................21
9. Departmental Representatives ................................................................22
10. Travel and Professional Development Funding......................................22
10.2. Funding Methods: ...............................................................................22
10.2.1.1. Allocated funds ..............................................................................22
10.2.1.2. Pooled funds .................................................................................22
10.3. Faculty Guidelines ...............................................................................22
10.3.2. Allocation: ..........................................................................................23
10.3.3. Professional Development Reporting ................................................23
11. Professional Responsibilities ...................................................................23
11.1. Earned Reassigned Time Credits .........................................................23
12. Sabbatical Leave Policy ..........................................................................23
13. Faculty Searches .....................................................................................24
14. Student Grade Appeal Procedures ..........................................................25
15. Amendments ............................................................................................25
Appendix A: ....................................................................................................26
1. Membership and Voting
1.1. All full-time, bargaining unit faculty of the Department of Sociology and Social Work, not including the Department Head, are eligible to vote on departmental matters.
1.2. A quorum of the department will consist of a two-thirds (2/3) majority of the voting membership. Except as noted, a simple majority vote of the quorum is required to pass a motion.
1.3. The Department of Sociology and Social Work shall convene a departmental meeting during the first four weeks of each semester. The department head shall set the agenda and call the meeting. It is the responsibility of the department head or the executive committee to set the agenda and to call other department meetings.
2. Department Administration
2.1. Department Head
2.1.1. The Department Head serves as the chief administrative officer of the department and officially represents the faculty in the department's relationship with others. In addition to those functions that are specified by the Board of Trustees and the Master Agreement, the departmental faculty may request the Department Head to speak for them on matters of departmental concern.
2.1.2. No later than February 1, the Chair of the Executive Committee shall convene the departmental faculty, without the Head, to discuss evaluation of the Department Head according to specifications in Section 3.1.2.4 of the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement. The Chair of the Executive Committee shall oversee this evaluation process, unless otherwise voted by departmental faculty.
2.1.3. During a temporary absence of the Department Head, not covered by Section 3.1.2.3.1 of the Master Agreement, a departmental member designated by the Head will be appointed in an acting capacity, subject to approval by the Dean. The order of designation is as follows: the Social Work Program Director will be acting Head; if this person is unavailable due to absence or competing responsibilities, the Chair of the Executive Committee will be acting Head; if this person is unavailable, another member of the Executive Committee will be acting Head. The Department Head will notify faculty of this action.
2.2. Social Work Program Director
2.2.1. There shall be a Director of the Social Work Program who shall be a member of the Department of Sociology and Social Work, responsible directly to the Head of the Department of Sociology and Social Work.
2.2.2. It shall be the function of the Director to coordinate, manage, and generally facilitate the work of the Social Work Program Committee as described in Bylaw Sections 3.5 and 6.3.1.2.
2.2.3. The Social Work Program Director position shall be filled by a Council on Social Work Education qualified individual who holds a full-time department position in social work. The Social Work Program Director is subject to the same evaluation criteria and processes as other faculty members of the same rank and years of service. In accordance with Section 6.1.1.1 of the NMU-AAUP Master Agreement, the Social Work Program Director shall have appropriate reassigned time to attend to administrative responsibilities of the position and to comply with the requirements of the accrediting organization, CSWE, for BSW Program reassigned time.
3. Committees
3.1. Every voting departmental faculty member shall be eligible to serve on any departmental committee, except as noted below. Committee membership shall be established during the first thirty days of the academic year for all committees, except the Executive Committee, as noted below. Only continuing or tenure-earning or tenured faculty members are eligible to serve on the Executive Committee, or on any committee charged with faculty evaluation.
3.1.1. Standing committees for the Department of Sociology and Social Work will be the Executive Committee, the Social Work Program Committee, the Sociology Program Committee, the Anthropology Program Committee and the Annual Evaluation Committee.
3.1.2. Faculty members whose teaching schedules only cover a portion of the regular academic year are expected to participate in committee service during the portion of the year when they have assigned professional responsibilities.
3.2. Executive Committee
3.2.1. The Executive Committee will normally be chosen during the first faculty meeting of the academic year.
3.2.2. The membership of the Executive Committee will consist of three faculty members, including at least one representative from Sociology, one from Social Work, and one from Anthropology to be elected by the individual program.
3.2.3. Members elected shall assume responsibility at the beginning of the Fall semester.
3.2.4. The Executive Committee will serve as an advisory committee to the Department Head. It will serve as representative of the department as a whole, concerning itself with all matters referred to it by the Department Head or any department member.
3.2.5. Any Executive Committee decision is subject to review by the department at the request of any department member. The Executive Committee shall communicate their decisions in writing to department faculty.
3.2.6. The Executive Committee is charged with making recommendations to the Department Head concerning all questions relating to: position descriptions for faculty searches except in those matters that fall within the domain of a Departmental Search Committee as provided in Section 12 of these Bylaws.
3.2.7. Subject to the provisions in Article IX of the Master Agreement, the Executive Committee, in consultation with department faculty, shall advise the Department Head on the distribution among departmental members of: summer courses and course overload teaching assignments (including both on campus and extension courses).
3.2.8. The Executive Committee shall be responsible for assuring compliance with the annual "scholarly resources assessment" (SRA) report preparation as specified in Master Agreement Section 6.5.2.9.
3.2.9. The Executive Committee shall oversee the design, review and revision of the Department Scholarship and Professional Development Rubric.
3.2.10. The Executive Committee shall have the responsibility for enumerating and establishing procedures for submitting recommendations to the Department Head on all matters of Professional Responsibility as stipulated by the AAUP Master Agreement, Article VI.
3.2.11. The Executive Committee or the Department Head will be empowered to create ad hoc committees for the conduct of departmental business.
3.3. Annual Evaluation Committee
3.3.1. The Annual Evaluation Committee will have the responsibility for the routine evaluation of department members who are scheduled to be evaluated. The Annual Evaluation Committee shall provide written feedback in accordance with section 5.4 of the Master Agreement regarding how effectively a faculty member is meeting performance expectations as outlined in the sections on assigned professional responsibilities (Section 6.3.1), scholarship and/or professional development (Section 6.3.2) and service (Section 6.3.3).
3.3.2. The Annual Evaluation Committee shall be composed of no less than three tenured members. Non-tenured faculty members are eligible to serve on this committee provided that they have completed a minimum of two years of service in a tenureearning position at Northern Michigan University. The committee shall select its Chair from among the tenured faculty on the committee.
3.3.3. The term of membership on the committee shall be for one year, but department faculty may serve in consecutive years. Whenever possible, there should be at least one person who serves a second year for purposes of continuity.
3.3.4. The Annual Evaluation Committee should reflect the composition of the Department: Sociology, Social Work and Anthropology. If there is only one tenured or tenure-earning faculty member in a particular program area, that person may serve in alternate years.
3.4. Tenure and Promotion Committee
3.4.1. A positive recommendation for tenure or promotion requires a majority vote (more than 50%) of the entire Tenure and Promotion Committee.
3.4.2. Tenure and Promotion Committee—Tenure and/or Promotion to Associate Professor
3.4.2.1. Normally, all tenured faculty of the department shall participate on the Tenure and Promotion Committee, which shall consist of a minimum of five members. However, in the event that five tenured faculty members are not available within the department, a tenured faculty member from another department will be selected for service on the Tenure and Promotion Committee. Once a chair has been selected by the department members of the Tenure and Promotion Committee, the chair will request that the AAUP Grievance Officer select a tenured faculty member from another department.
3.4.2.2. Exception to the provisions of Section 3.4.2.1 may occur as follows: In cases of a Social Work faculty member being considered for tenure and/or promotion, there must be at least one Social Work faculty member on the committee. If the provisions of 3.4.2.1 do not otherwise include a Social Work faculty member, then a Social Work faculty member may take the place of the outside departmental representative, if there is one; or, may become an additional member of the committee if all other members are tenured department faculty.
3.4.3. Tenure and Promotion Committee—Promotion to Professor
3.4.3.1. When a faculty member is being considered for promotion to the rank of Professor, all Professors of the department shall participate on the Tenure and Promotion Committee, which shall consist of a minimum of five members. However, in the event that five Professors are not available within the department, the following selection process shall occur:
3.4.3.1.1. If there are four Professors in the department, the fifth member will be a tenured Associate Professor, if possible, or of a lower rank if necessary. In the event that a faculty member is to serve on the committee who is not a Professor, whoever has the greatest length of academic service at NMU will be chosen.
3.4.3.1.2. If there are three Professors in the department, the fourth member will be a tenured Associate Professor if possible, or of a lower rank if necessary, as stated above. The fifth member will be a Professor from another department. Once a chair has been selected for the committee by the department members of the Tenure and Promotion Committee, the chair will request that the AAUP Grievance Officer select a tenured professor from another department to serve on the Tenure and Promotion Committee.
3.4.3.1.3. If there are two Professors in the department, the third member will be a tenured Associate Professor, if possible, or of a lower rank if necessary, as stated above. The fourth and fifth members will be Professors selected from outside the department, as stated above.
3.4.3.1.4. If there are fewer than two Professors in the department faculty, a Tenure and Promotion Committee will be selected by the Executive Committee in consultation with the entire department faculty.
3.4.3.2. Exception to the provisions of Section 3.4.3.1 may occur as follows: In cases of a Social Work faculty member being considered for promotion to Professor, there must be at least one Social Work faculty member on the committee. If the provisions of 3.4.3.1 do not otherwise include a Social Work faculty member, then a Social Work faculty member may take the place of the departmental member who is not a Professor, if there is one; or, may become an additional member of the committee if all other members are Professors.
3.5. Social Work Program Committee
3.5.1. The Social Work Program Committee shall have primary responsibility for the Social Work curriculum development, student admission to the Social Work Program, and advising the department on Social Work Program concerns.
3.5.2. Membership on this committee shall include all Social Work faculty and at least one student selected through a process established by Social Work faculty. Other faculty may serve by approval of the Social Work faculty.
3.5.3. The Social Work Program Director shall serve as Chair for the Social Work Program Committee.
3.6. Sociology Program Committee
3.6.1. The Sociology Program Committee shall have primary responsibility for Sociology curriculum development and advising the department on Sociology program concerns.
3.6.2. Membership on this committee shall include all Sociology faculty. Other faculty may serve by approval of the Sociology Committee.
3.7. Anthropology Program Committee
3.7.1. The Anthropology Program Committee shall have primary responsibility for Anthropology curriculum development and advising the department on Anthropology program concerns.
3.7.2. Membership on this committee shall include all Anthropology faculty. Other faculty may serve by approval of the Anthropology Committee.
3.7.3. Student Organizations Student organizations may be sponsored through the Department: by any of the individual programs, or by a combination of programs (e.g., Social Work and Sociology).
4. Curriculum Revision
4.1. Minor curriculum proposals Minor changes shall be understood as those which will not subsequently need review by the Committee on Undergraduate Programs (CUP). Respective program committees shall submit proposed changes to the Department Head.
4.2. Major curriculum proposals require submission to the Committee on Undergraduate Programs or Graduate Programs.
4.2.1. Changes initiated either by the Department Head or discipline component (Sociology, Social Work or Anthropology) shall be reviewed by the appropriate Program Committee and require a majority vote of the faculty in that Program Committee to be approved.
4.2.2. Program proposals shall subsequently be considered by the entire department prior to submittal to CUP. A two thirds (2/3) majority of the voting membership of the department shall be required to reject a proposal which has been formally approved by a Program Committee.
5. Terminal Qualifications and Requirements for New Academic Appointments
5.1. Sociology: The terminal qualification for Sociology is an earned doctorate within the field of Sociology from an accredited institution.
5.2. Anthropology: The terminal qualification for Anthropology is an earned doctorate within the fields of Anthropology from an accredited institution.
5.3. Social Work: Terminal qualifications for Social Work are the Master in Social Work (MSW) from a Council on Social Work Education accredited program and two or more years of post-MSW practice experience, plus an earned doctorate in Social Work or a related discipline with the exception of the Social Work Field Placement Director. The terminal qualifications for the Social Work Field Placement Director are the MSW from a Council on Social Work Education accredited program and four or more years of postMSW Social Work practice experience.
6. Promotion and Tenure
6.1. Tenure and Promotion Review
6.1.1. A tenure review based upon the criteria specified in Section 6.3 of these bylaws shall be made by the Tenure and Promotion Committee according to the specifications of Master Agreement Section 5.5.2 and within the probationary period identified in 5.5.3 of the Master Agreement.
6.1.2. A promotion review of an application for promotion to Associate Professor shall be made for applicants who meet the eligibility requirements as specified in Section 6.2 of the Bylaws upon application by a faculty member.
6.1.3. A promotion review on promotion to Professor shall be made for applicants who meet the eligibility requirements as specified in Section 6.2 of the Bylaws upon application by the faculty member.
6.1.4. The tenured Professors of the Department shall review and make recommendations in situations involving tenure or promotion which are not otherwise covered in these Bylaws.
6.1.5. It is the responsibility of the faculty member being considered for tenure/promotion to demonstrate that he/she has met the criteria as specified in the department Bylaws and his/her annual evaluations during the cumulative evaluation process.
6.1.6. Following a vote on tenure and/or promotion, the chair of the Tenure and Promotion Committee shall be solely responsible for communicating, in writing, the findings of the committee to the faculty member. Copies of a form acknowledging receipt shall be supplied to the faculty member, the department and the committee chair.
6.1.7. Effectiveness in assigned professional responsibilities is the primary and most important criteria for promotion (criterion 1); achievement should be unequivocal. The relative importance of scholarship and/or professional development (criterion 2), and service (criterion 3) shall be clearly chosen by the faculty member, and is subject to approval and confirmation by the Annual Evaluation Committee and the Department Head.
6.1.8. For Annual Evaluations, the level of achievement in each of the three judgmental areas shall be at least commensurate with the faculty member’s rank.
6.1.9. The judgmental criteria for promotion to Professor apply to achievements completed since the last promotion.
6.1.10. Full time faculty who are on term or continuing contract appointments are expected to fulfill all of the responsibilities of tenure-track faculty with the exception of scholarship and/or professional development.
6.1.11. The Department of Sociology and Social Work houses three distinct programs: Anthropology, Sociology and Social Work, and, therefore, recognizes that evidence of quality in performance and levels of achievement may be varied as a result of this diversity. The following criteria, which serve as standards for promotion and tenure are not an all inclusive list, but rather illustrative of various measures of assigned professional responsibilities, professional development and service activities. A faculty member would not necessarily be expected to meet every standard listed. Rather, performance will be assessed on an accumulation of accomplishment, creativity, and overall contributions in those areas identified in Section 5.5.6 of the Master Agreement.
6.2. Promotion Eligibility Criteria
6.2.1. Assistant Professor—Terminal qualifications as stipulated in Section 5 of the Bylaws.
6.2.2. Associate Professor—Terminal qualifications as stipulated in Section 5 of the Bylaws, and other qualifications as stated in Section 5.5.5 of the Master Agreement.
6.2.3. Professor—Terminal qualifications as stipulated in Section 5 of the Bylaws, and other qualifications as stated in Section 5.5.5 of the Master Agreement. The variables included in faculty evaluation are represented in the following diagram:
Evaluation Diagram
| Scholarship &/or Professional Development | Service | ||||||||||
| Assigned Professional Responsibility | Forms of Scholarship | Areas of Service | |||||||||
|
|
Teaching | Advising | Other | Scholarship of Discovery | Scholarship of Integration | Scholarhsip of Application | Scholarship of Integration | Professional Development | University | Community | Professional |
| Assistant Professor | |||||||||||
| Associate Professor | |||||||||||
| Professor |
6.3. Judgmental Criteria
6.3.1. Assigned Professional Responsibility
Consistent with the Master Agreement and as indicated in each faculty member’s contract letter, assigned professional responsibilities include teaching, reassigned time for purposes deemed necessary to sustain academic programs or services, and advising students.
6.3.1.1. Teaching
It is expected that each faculty member, regardless of tenure status or rank, will continually strive toward excellence in teaching.
6.3.1.1.1. Elements of Teaching is broadly defined to include the following elements:
6.3.1.1.1.1. Mastery of the subject matter including such facets as: content areas, comprehensiveness and currency of content, and objectivity.
6.3.1.1.1.2. Curriculum development includes design of the course to fit within the curriculum, revising the course to remain current or to respond to curriculum needs, and developing new courses.
6.3.1.1.1.3. Course design includes developing instructional goals and objectives, determining the range and depth of content coverage, selecting appropriate teaching methods and determining the assessment methods to be employed in the course, and developing instructional materials such as laboratory exercises.
6.3.1.1.1.4. Delivery of instruction includes: the methods of instruction such as lecture and discussion, instructional skills employed, the use of instructional resources such as handouts, exercises, use of audiovisual and computer technology. Effective delivery should stimulate student engagement and interest in the topic. Material should be presented in a clear and well-organized manner and encourage students to think critically, to question freely, and to master course objectives.
6.3.1.1.1.5. Assessment of student learning includes: the preparation, selection and use of means of determining student mastery of the course such as tests, papers, projects, and grading practices.
6.3.1.1.1.6. Availability to students includes: provision of sufficient office hours, electronic communication such as email, on-line chat and informal contact.
6.3.1.1.1.7. Administrative requirements of teaching include attending to such tasks as book orders, course website and other instructional technology requirements, library reserves, having syllabi on file, meeting classes as scheduled and timely submission of grades.
6.3.1.1.2. Evaluation approach for teaching
6.3.1.1.2.1. Forms of Assessment: It is understood that effective teaching may be achieved through a variety of approaches; individual differences in teaching methods are expected. Regardless of stylistic variation in approaches to instruction, the Evaluation Committee is responsible for rendering an overall determination of effective instruction. To that end, three sources of information about a faculty member’s teaching are to be included in the evaluation:
6.3.1.1.2.1.1. Approved departmental course evaluation results. The departmental teaching evaluation instrument is the approved standardized evaluation that all faculty members shall use at the conclusion of each semester.
6.3.1.1.2.1.2. Peer reviews of teaching, including direct classroom observation and consideration of course materials, including but not limited to: Syllabi, tests, assignments, grade distributions, course proposals and other artifacts of teaching activity. A colleague shall observe in-class teaching performance at least once a year. The expected outcome of this observation is a write-up of the faculty member’s teaching effectiveness. A copy of the observation report shall be provided to the Evaluation Committee, the Department Head and the faculty member.
6.3.1.1.2.1.3. Self-assessments of teaching and advising. The evaluation of effectiveness in teaching should include both quantitative and qualitative measures. Self-assessment should address the elements of teaching specified above in Section 6.3.1.1.1.
6.3.1.2. Social Work Program Director: A designated Social Work Program Director with sufficient reassigned time to carry out the duties of that role is a requirement of the Council on Social Work Education for social work program accreditation. The Social Work Program Director will receive sufficient reassigned time to meet these responsibilities as established through Master Agreement Section 6.1.1.1 regarding determination of reassigned time.
6.3.1.2.1. Social Work Program Director functions:
6.3.1.2.1.1. Managing Social Work Program admission, including: reviewing student curriculum completion, recommending course substitutions and assessing transfer equivalency, and approving exceptions to curriculum sequence.
6.3.1.2.1.2. Conducting formative social work program evaluation tasks such as: collecting and evaluating data on program operation, monitoring student program completion and timely graduation.
6.3.1.2.1.3. Coordinating social work program formative evaluation around curriculum consistency with CSWE expected content and documentation.
6.3.1.2.1.4. Coordination of social work program outcome data collection and analysis needed for accreditation documentation such as: exit exams, follow-up with alumni regarding employment, graduate school admission, etc.
6.3.1.2.1.5. Developing and maintaining curriculum policies to maintain compliance with CSWE requirements.
6.3.1.2.1.6. Identifying potential adjunct faculty and recommending selection to the Department Head on a semester by semester basis.
6.3.1.2.1.7. Playing a leadership role in social work faculty searches.
6.3.1.2.1.8. Representing the Social Work Program with CSWE and participating in CSWE required/recommended training regarding accreditation.
6.3.1.2.1.9. Serving as chair of the Social Work Program Committee, which formulates program policies and curriculum proposals.
6.3.1.2.1.10. Consulting with the Department Head and presenting social work recommendations for course offerings and course scheduling.
6.3.1.2.1.11. Provide consultation to faculty for interpretation of program/curriculum policies, and representing the social work program with offices such as records, degree audits and registrar regarding course substitutions and equivalencies and requirement waivers.
6.3.1.2.1.12. Represent social work program in planning and requesting resources and equipment for program operation.
6.3.1.2.1.13. Represent the program in outside affairs and organizations.
6.3.1.2.2. Social Work Program Director Performance Assessment
6.3.1.2.2.1. Evaluated by self-assessment on effectiveness of meeting role responsibilities.
6.3.1.2.2.2. Provision of reports and other artifacts generated in the process of fulfilling role as determined by the Program Director and described in Section 6.3.1.2.1.
6.3.1.3. Reassigned Time Social Work Field Placement Coordinator: Field instruction is considered the signature pedagogy of social work education. Consequently, a designated Field Coordinator with sufficient reassigned time to carry out the duties of that role is a requirement of the Council on Social Work Education for program accreditation. Reassigned time will be established as specified in Section 6.1.1.1 of the Master Agreement.
6.3.1.3.1. Field Placement Coordinator functions include:
6.3.1.3.1.1. Recruiting social agencies as partners in field instruction and maintaining affiliation agreements with field settings;
6.3.1.3.1.2. Identifying, approving and training field agency staff as social work field supervisors;
6.3.1.3.1.3. Screening, assessing and assigning students to field placement settings;
6.3.1.3.1.4. Preparing field placement communication materials such as: a field placement manual, agency affiliation agreements, student performance evaluation materials and program records;
6.3.1.3.1.5. Developing and implementing field polices in keeping with CSWE requirements;
6.3.1.3.1.6. Addressing student performance issues such as reassignment to another placement setting; and
6.3.1.3.1.7. Collecting and analyzing field placement data related to demonstrating compliance with field instruction accreditation standards.
6.3.1.3.2. Assessment of Field Placement Coordinator Performance
6.3.1.3.2.1. Evidence of student placements within the community such as a listing of students, placement agencies, and field supervisor credentials.
6.3.1.3.2.2. Evidence of administration of the social work field placement process, including: a narrative description and data pertaining to placements and artifacts such as placement affiliation agreements, field manual and placement related documents.
6.3.1.3.2.3. Evidence of coordination evaluation/comments by community partners such as an occasional satisfaction survey of field partners.
6.3.1.4. Other Reassigned Time Criteria for assessing reassigned time for responsibilities other than those identified above shall be determined at the time of assignment by mutual consent of the faculty member and the Department Head.
6.3.1.5. Advising Students:
It is expected that as advisors faculty will fulfill advisor duties in guiding students in major and minor options, courses, and academic advice. Advising and mentoring will also include recommending students for awards, scholarships or other recognition, and including students in professionally related research activities and/or other related endeavors. Advising includes both responsibilities to formally assigned advisees and assisting students in general. Advising responsibilities will vary from one faculty member to another including:
6.3.1.5.1. Assisting assigned advisees with course scheduling, registration, curriculum planning, reviewing graduation requirements and career planning.
6.3.1.5.2. Providing letters of recommendation of employment, graduate school, etc.
6.3.1.5.3. Conducting campus visits for prospective students.
6.3.1.5.4. Assisting students in summer orientation and advisement sessions.
6.3.1.5.5. Faculty should maintain regular office hours and be accessible to students outside of class, for advising and for supervision of projects or field placements.
6.3.2. Scholarship and/or Professional Development
6.3.2.1. Scholarship:
Consistent with the Master Agreement, scholarship incorporates four forms: the scholarship of discovery, the scholarship of integration, the scholarship of application, and the scholarship of teaching. In general, scholarship may be thought of as a process that creates something new that is communicated to, and validated by, peers outside the department The assessment of any of these forms of scholarship shall include attention to the following standards: (1) clear goals, (2) adequate preparation, (3) appropriate methods, (4) significance of results, (5) effective presentation and (6) reflective critique. [Based on Scholarship Reconsidered, Ernest L. Boyer; and Scholarship Assessed, by Charles E. Glassick, Mary Taylor Huber and Gene I. Maeroff]. All forms of scholarship must involve the production of a tangible artifact or outcome.
6.3.2.1.1. The scholarship of discovery involves original production or testing of hypotheses, principle, knowledge, or artistic creation. Artifacts or outcomes include:
6.3.2.1.1.1. A traditional experimental, survey, quantitative and/or qualitative study and research such as:
6.3.2.1.1.1.1. an anthropological study resulting in an original contribution to the discipline;
6.3.2.1.1.1.2. a social work study resulting in an original contribution to the discipline;
6.3.2.1.1.2. a documentary film representing an original contribution to the understanding of a topic relevant to the disciplines of the Department.
6.3.2.1.2. The scholarship of integration involves using knowledge found within and across disciplines to create an original understanding or insight that reveals larger intellectual patterns. To be truly integrative, professional work must synthesize diverse perspectives, as opposed to simply listing or identifying a variety of approaches. Artifacts or outcomes include:
6.3.2.1.2.1.1. a textbook or synthesis that summarizes what is known about a topic or process, for example a study of child abuse intervention, which incorporates material from sociology, anthropology and psychology;
6.3.2.1.2.2. an edited anthology;
6.3.2.1.2.3. a theoretical analysis, for example a theoretical paper critiquing socio-biological explanations of aggressive behavior in children.
6.3.2.1.3. 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. “Scholarship” is to be distinguished from “citizenship.” A faculty member may serve on community boards or organizations by virtue of professional expertise, and may use such expertise in the work of the board or organization. However, unless such work goes beyond citizenship and ( using the faculty member’s specific expertise), has the six attributes of scholarship, it does not qualify as scholarship of application. Work which does not meet these criteria might fit under the category of Service (6.3.3.2, 6.3.3.3, 6.3.3.4). Artifacts or outcomes include:
6.3.2.1.3.1. providing expert testimony,
6.3.2.1.3.2. production of a technical report,
6.3.2.1.3.3. preparing a substantive grant proposal,
6.3.2.1.3.4. authoring a white paper associated with consultancies or grants,
6.3.2.1.3.5. conducting a public policy analysis, for example:
6.3.2.1.3.5.1. a cultural resource management study and an accompanying appropriate peer reviewed plan to protect or preserve those resources,
6.3.2.1.3.5.2. an outcome assessment of community services,
6.3.2.1.3.5.3. a needs assessment, or
6.3.2.1.3.6. professional presentation.
6.3.2.1.4. The scholarship of teaching involves proposing and empirically testing a pedagogical procedure that transforms or improves teaching practices. The scholarship of teaching is not the same as teaching excellence, or scholarly teaching, i.e., knowledge of subject material, effective presentation, engaging students in discussion, and other characteristics related to teaching excellence. This area is not measured by student evaluations. It does not include normal course development, the preparation of syllabi or reading lists, advising/counseling students, directing independent studies and so forth; nor does the scholarship of teaching include general course revisions that would be considered a normal aspect of teaching. Work that does not appear to meet the criteria of the scholarship of teaching might fit under “assigned professional responsibilities” (Section 6.3.1). Artifacts or outcomes include:
6.3.2.1.4.1. a systematic comparison of learning environments, for example:
6.3.2.1.4.1.1. a study to determine if students in a web-based introductory course have the same understanding of key concepts as do students in a traditional classroom setting,
6.3.2.1.4.1.2. a study to determine if students develop a stronger orientation to ethical issues -- in classes where such issues are embedded in the curriculum -- than in a single course devoted to ethical considerations,
6.3.2.1.4.1.3. a study to assess and evaluate different classroom techniques for getting students to recognize and confront their ethnocentrism,
6.3.2.1.4.2. an impact analysis for learning activities beyond the classroom (such as academic service learning),
6.3.2.1.4.3. a comprehensive assessment of teaching methodologies,
6.3.2.1.4.4. 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.
6.3.2.2. Peer Review. It is the responsibility of a faculty member submitting a peer reviewed work to describe the peer review process and provide documentation of that process along with the work.
6.3.2.2.1. Common types of peer review include (but are not limited to):
6.3.2.2.1.1. publication of a book with a scholarly press,
6.3.2.2.1.2. publication of an article in a peer reviewed journal,
6.3.2.2.1.3. publication of a chapter in an edited book,
6.3.2.2.1.4. publication of conference proceedings or collections of articles,
6.3.2.2.1.5. presentation of scholarly work as a result of a competitive selection process,
6.3.2.2.1.6. a written review of one's research,
6.3.2.2.1.7. evaluation of a grant proposal,
6.3.2.2.1.8. a peer letter acknowledging scholarly accomplishments
6.3.2.2.1.9. an invitation to present scholarly work,
6.3.2.2.1.10. receiving a professional award, or obtaining a grant.
6.3.2.2.1.11. Peer review of creative works includes:
6.3.2.2.1.11.1. The report of an external adjudicator of the creation, design, direction, performance or execution of a theatrical, video, or audio production;
6.3.2.2.1.11.2. An externally published review of the creation, design, direction, performance or execution of a theatrical, video, or audio production;
6.3.2.2.1.11.3. An invitation from a professional organization to create, design, direct, perform or execute a theatrical, video, or audio production, or to contribute an article or chapter to an issue of a serial publication or book;
6.3.2.2.1.11.4. An invitation from or requirement of a professional organization to exhibit a theatrical design, video, website or audio production in an external context;
6.3.2.2.1.11.5. An award from a professional association for the creation, design, direction, performance/execution of a theatrical, video, or audio production.
6.3.2.3. 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 artifact such as an article or book chapter. Examples of professional development are:
6.3.2.3.1. attending professional conferences,
6.3.2.3.2. attending professional workshops,
6.3.2.3.3. participating in university training on educational technology,
6.3.2.3.4. developing a new, or maintaining a current, certification,
6.3.2.3.5. obtaining an additional degree or training related to one's field,
6.3.2.3.6. engaging in post-doctoral work designed to expand one's professional competence, or
6.3.2.3.7. other appropriate professional activities, when confirmed by the departmental evaluation committee and the department head.
6.3.2.4. Documentation of professional development
6.3.2.4.1. Conference programs, certificates of completion or other program documents may serve as documentation for evaluation purposes.
6.3.2.4.2. Master Agreement Section 6.5.1.4 requires a written report on funded professional development activity; this report serves as professional development documentation for the faculty member's evaluation.
6.3.2.5. Scholarship and/or professional development rubric
6.3.2.5.1. The record of accomplishment may include a diverse variety of scholarly products and professional development activities. The department approved rubric shall be the guide employed by annual evaluation, promotion and tenure committees for operationalizing sufficient achievement and the relative weight of each contribution to the overall record of achievement within the parameters of these bylaws and for specifying required and optional accomplishments and activities.
6.3.2.5.2. The Executive Committee shall be responsible for designing and revising the rubric. Any proposed changes must be approved by a majority vote of the department. The current rubric shall be an attachment to these bylaws.
6.3.3. Service
6.3.3.1. Service is the application of a faculty member’s knowledge, skills, and expertise as an educator, a member of a discipline or profession, or a participant in an institution to benefit students, the institution, the discipline or profession, and the community in a manner consistent with the missions of the university.
6.3.3.2. Institutional Service: Academic programs, departments, schools, and the university as a whole are communities depend upon their members for the energy, time, and leadership to sustain and develop them. Service to the institution involves activities that help sustain or lead academic community endeavors. Examples of institutional service include but are not limited to:
6.3.3.2.1. contributing as a member or leader of a task force to address an issue facing the campus or university community,
6.3.3.2.2. participating as an elected member in faculty governance,
6.3.3.2.3. leading faculty governance activities,
6.3.3.2.4. serving as an appointed or elected chair of an academic group at the department, college, or university levels,
6.3.3.2.5. providing mentorship to junior faculty in the areas of assigned responsibilities, professional development and service,
6.3.3.2.6. helping a committee to meet its goals,
6.3.3.2.7. chairing a search committee,
6.3.3.2.8. contributing to a search committee,
6.3.3.2.9. bringing new campus or university initiatives to fruition,
6.3.3.2.10. conducting program development (fundraising) activities,
6.3.3.2.11. representing the university in a public media forum,
6.3.3.2.12. serving as a student organization adviser,
6.3.3.2.13. managing a department website or editing a department newsletter,
6.3.3.2.14. engaging in student recruitment events and campus visits,
6.3.3.2.15. advising non-assigned advisees with curriculum and career concerns,
6.3.3.2.16. engaging program alumni for program development, program advisement, and community relations purposes.
6.3.3.3. Service to the Discipline or Profession: Service to the discipline or profession involves activities designed to enhance the quality of disciplinary or professional organizations or activities. Examples of service to a discipline or profession include but are not limited to:
6.3.3.3.1. serving as an officer of an academic or professional association,
6.3.3.3.2. organizing or leading workshops, panels, or meetings in areas of professional competence,
6.3.3.3.3. contributing time and expertise to further the work of a professional society or organization,
6.3.3.3.4. performing as a site visitor or other role for an accrediting organization,
6.3.3.3.5. editing a professional journal,
6.3.3.3.6. refereeing manuscripts or grant proposals submitted to journals, professional meeting program committees, and funding organizations.
6.3.3.4. Community Service: Community engagement involves activities that contribute to the public welfare beyond the university community and call upon the faculty member's expertise as scholar, teacher, or administrator. Examples of community service and outreach include but are not limited to:
6.3.3.4.1. participating in collaborative endeavors with schools, human service agencies, or civic groups,
6.3.3.4.2. consulting with private and public, profit, and not-for-profit organizations by applying expertise to enhance the efficiency or effectiveness of the organizations served,
6.3.3.4.3. serving as a board member of a national, state or local human service organization,
6.3.3.4.4. providing public policy analysis for local, state, national, or international government agencies,
6.3.3.4.5. communicating in popular and non-academic media including newsletters, radio, television, and magazines,
6.3.3.4.6. giving presentations or performances for the public,
6.3.3.4.7. evaluating programs, policies, or personnel for agencies,
6.3.3.4.8. engaging in seminars and conferences that address public interest problems, issues, and concerns and that are aimed at either general or specialized audiences such as practitioner, or occupational groups,
6.3.3.4.9. participating on governmental or social service review panels,
6.3.3.4.10. engaging in economic or community development activities,
6.3.3.4.11. civic board memberships where such membership specifically represents university participation in the organization, or
6.3.3.4.12. creating education and training opportunities for area residents (non-students), including continuing education opportunities.
6.3.3.5. Service Evaluation Criteria. Excellence in university service is based on the impact one’s work has on the service function rather than simply one’s formal position such as being a committee chair. Documentation of impact, significance of the faculty member’s role and other quality indicators should be the deciding factors in measuring the quality of service. It is the faculty member’s responsibility to provide evidence of achievement. In general third party assessment and artifacts related to the service are preferred. Documentation may include:
6.3.3.5.1. Self-report describing extent of contribution, time commitment and value of contribution;
6.3.3.5.2. Report from colleague(s)and administrators knowledgeable of the activity and the candidate’s role;
6.3.3.5.3. Independent third-party evaluation describing extent of contribution, time commitment and value of contribution;
6.3.3.5.4. Report or other product generated; new policy or process created;
6.3.3.5.5. Presentations related to new or revised policies, procedures, programs, etc.;
6.3.3.5.6. Record of ongoing participation showing increased levels of responsibility over time;
6.3.3.5.7. Proposal, report, or other documentation of the activity and how it links the goals of the department, school, campus, community or profession;
6.3.3.5.8. Outcome products (e.g., technical reports, formal recommendations to a community agency or group);
6.3.3.5.9. Reports of continuous improvement of the process/service provided;
6.3.3.5.10. Invitations to review or perform other professional service.
6.4. Required Levels of Achievement for Promotion
6.4.1. To Assistant Professor
6.4.1.1. Assigned Responsibilities
6.4.1.1.1. Develops proficiency in class preparations and presentations, as demonstrated in course syllabi, assignments, required reading material, use of appropriate instructional technology, colleagues’ observation and letters, use of the Department approved standardized departmental teaching evaluation and other relevant course materials.
6.4.1.1.2. Demonstrates a willingness to assist students in their academic development as measured by maintaining regular office hours, providing assistance outside of the classroom setting (such as making arrangements for alternative times to assist with course related issues), or by letters of appreciation from students, recommendation of students for awards, scholarships or other recognition, or inclusion of students in professionally related research activities and/or other related endeavors.
6.4.1.1.3. Develops positive and appropriate interactions with students which can be measured by results from student evaluations, peer observation and written comments, letters from students and/or related material.
6.4.1.2. Scholarship and/or Professional Development
6.4.1.2.1. Establishes a record of professional development activities as described in 6.3.2.3.
6.4.1.2.2. Begins to engage in scholarship related activities as described in 6.3.2. and identified in the Department Scholarship and Professional Development Rubric, and that the faculty member and the evaluation committee agree upon are appropriate as stated in the future plans section of the faculty evaluation.
6.4.1.2.3. Service
6.4.1.2.3.1. At a minimum, shall have departmental as well as college or University-wide committee responsibilities as specified in Master Agreement Article 6.1.1.4.
6.4.1.2.3.2. Begins to establish a record of service to the university, the profession or discipline and the community at large. Beyond the minimum expectation of participation in departmental and university committees, service may take many forms as listed in Section 6.3.3. Documentation according to Section 6.3.3.5 should be provided.
6.4.2. To Associate Professor
6.4.2.1. Assigned Responsibilities
6.4.2.1.1. Provides convincing evidence of a high level of proficiency related to teaching methods, as specified in Section 6.3.1.1 and in other assigned responsibilities as may apply in Sections 6.3.1.2 or 6.3.1.3.
6.4.2.1.2. Exhibits continued competency in academic and career advising measured by a consistent pattern of assisting students in these areas as specified in Section 6.3.1.5.
6.4.2.2. Scholarship and/or Professional Development
6.4.2.2.1. For all:
6.4.2.2.1.1. A record of scholarship as describe in article 6.3.2.1 and confirmed by the peer review standards in article 6.3.2.2; the record must include at least one peer reviewed publication in a professional journal or other peer reviewed creative work as described in Sections 6.3.2.2.1.1 to 6.3.2.2.1.3.
6.4.2.2.1.2. A commitment to professional development as confirmed by multiple activities described in 6.3.2.3.
6.4.2.2.1.3. The combination of scholarship and professional development activities must meet the point distribution and total point requirements for all associate professors as specified in the Department Scholarship and Professional Development Rubric.
6.4.2.2.2. Designated emphasis area:
6.4.2.2.2.1.1. When scholarship and/or professional development is the designated area of emphasis, the performance level according to Section 6.4.2.2.1 must meet the specialty point distribution and total point requirements specified in the Department Scholarship and Professional Development Rubric for Associate Professors. The specialty designation includes the following features:
6.4.2.2.2.1.2. Sustained Scholarship: The faculty member must demonstrate engagement in scholarly activity throughout the probationary period by participation in activities listed in Sections 6.3.2.1. and 6.3.2.3. This requires continued research beyond that which was done for the dissertation. Completion of additional peer reviewed products identified in Section 6.3.2.2.9 and documentation of professional development are expected.
6.4.2.2.2.1.3. Contributory Scholarship: There must be clear evidence of the individual faculty member’s contribution to scholarly work. Both single-authored and collaborative projects can establish such productivity, but the candidate needs to clearly document her/his role in completing projects so that evaluators can assess capability to carry out a research agenda.
6.4.2.2.2.1.4. Developing Scholarship: This criterion is evidenced by generating new research questions, theoretical models, or hypotheses; expanding existing case studies; authoring grant applications that initiate new scholarly agendas; collecting new data; or authoring new works outside of the dissertation context. Part of this post-dissertation scholarship must have occurred while the candidate was at NMU.
6.4.2.2.2.2. A record of active participation in professional development activities listed in Section 6.3.2.3 and specified in the Department Scholarship and Professional Development Rubric.
6.4.2.3. Service
6.4.2.3.1. For all: At a minimum, the faculty member shall have departmental as well as college or University-wide committee responsibilities as specified in Master Agreement Article 6.1.1.4. Service expectations may be met through participation in activities from the list in Bylaw section 6.3.3.
6.4.2.3.2. Designated Emphasis Area: The faculty member’s performance must reflect clear and cumulative achievement of the judgmental criteria set forth in Section 6.3. In order to provide sufficient evidence for promotion review, thorough documentation of service should be maintained by way of a cumulative service portfolio over the years covered by the promotion application. Such a portfolio documents both process and product, shows a faculty member’s professional expertise and experience as important inputs into the process, and displays a purposeful, sustained approach to service as part of the faculty member’s academic life. Ways of documenting outstanding service are specified in Section 6.3.3.5.
6.4.3. To Professor
6.4.3.1. Assigned Responsibilities
6.4.3.1.1. Continues to maintain a high level of performance in teaching. Evaluation committee review of student and peer evaluations of teaching are consistently positive. The faculty member provides evidence of leadership in curriculum development such as new courses, substantial course revisions and artifacts of performance in teaching and other assigned responsibilities as specified in Section 6.3.1.
6.4.3.1.2. Continues to provide competency in academic and career advisement measured by a consistent pattern of assisting students in these areas as specified in Section 6.3.1.5.
6.4.3.2. Scholarship and/or Professional Development
6.4.3.2.1. For all:
6.4.3.2.1.1. A record of scholarship as describe in bylaws section 6.3.2.1 and confirmed by the peer review standards in article 6.3.2.2; the cumulative record as defined in Master Agreement article 5.5.8.4.2 must include at least one peer reviewed publication in a professional journal or peer reviewed creative work as described in bylaw section 6.3.2.2.1.1 to 6.3.2.2.1.3.
6.4.3.2.1.2. The combination of scholarship and professional development activities must meet the point distribution and total point requirements for all professors as specified in the Department Scholarship and Professional Development Rubric.
6.4.3.2.2. Designated emphasis area:
6.4.3.2.2.1.1. When scholarship and/or professional development is the designated area of emphasis, the minimum performance level according to Section 6.4.2.2.1 must meet the specialty point distribution and total point requirements specified in the Department Scholarship and Professional Development Rubric for Professors. The specialty designation performance includes the following features:
6.4.3.2.2.1.2. Sustained Scholarship: The faculty member must demonstrate scholarly production throughout the eligibility period by accumulating a record of participation in activities listed in Section 6.3.2.1. and 6.3.2.3. Completion of additional peer reviewed products identified in Section 6.3.2.2.9 and documentation of professional development are expected.
6.4.3.2.2.1.3. Contributory Scholarship: There must be clear evidence of the individual faculty member’s contribution to scholarly work. Both single-authored and collaborative projects can establish such productivity, but the faculty member must clearly identify her/his contribution toward completing projects so that evaluators can assess capability to carry out a research agenda. In collaborative works, evidence of a leadership role is desired.
6.4.3.2.2.1.4. Developing Scholarship must be demonstrated by such indicators as: generating new research questions, theoretical models, or hypotheses; or by expanding existing lines of research, and establishing recognition of expertise in a field of study. Professional growth may result in a more specialized focus and/or a new emphasis or direction. These activities become part of a coherent plan.
6.4.3.2.2.2. A commitment to professional development activities described in 6.3.2.3. and confirmed through the departmental Scholarship and Professional development Rubric.
6.4.3.3. Service
6.4.3.3.1. For all:
6.4.3.3.1.1. At a minimum, the faculty member shall have departmental as well as college or University-wide committee responsibilities as specified in Master Agreement Article 6.1.1.4.
6.4.3.3.1.2. Assumes leadership positions in some departmental, college, and/or university committees as described in Section 6.3.3.2 of the Bylaws. Documentation of these contributions must be provided as specified in Section 6.3.3.5.
6.4.3.3.1.3. Continues active participation in professional and community service roles described in bylaw Section 6.3.3.4.
6.4.3.3.1.4. Provides mentorship to junior faculty in the areas of assigned responsibilities, professional development and service.
6.4.3.3.2. When service is the designated area of emphasis, the faculty member’s performance must reflect sustained and cumulative achievement in the judgmental criteria set forth in Article 6.3.3. Thorough documentation of service should be maintained by way of a cumulative service portfolio over the years covered by the promotion application. The portfolio must document both process and product of the service, and demonstrate how the faculty member’s professional expertise and experience contributed to significant service outcomes. Documentation of outstanding service includes sources specified in Section 6.3.3.5.
6.5. Tenure Criteria
6.5.1. A positive recommendation for tenure is contingent on cumulative achievements in the judgmental areas of assigned professional responsibilities (Section 6.3.1), scholarship and/or professional development (Section 6.3.2) and service (Section 6.3.3). Because tenure signifies an intention to retain the individual for a long period of time, clear and consistent evidence of professional growth and potential for sustained, high-level performance in the judgmental areas is essential. Performance must meet or exceed the standards for promotion to Associate Professor.
7. Evaluations
7.1. Evaluations shall be conducted in accordance with the schedule and requirements of the Master Agreement.
7.2. The Evaluation Process
7.2.1. In cases where a faculty member does not submit the required material by the due date, the Annual Evaluation Committee, in consultation with the Department Head, will determine whether late submission is justified. In the absence of acceptable reasons for late submission, the failure to submit the required documentation by the established date will constitute cause for a summary unsatisfactory annual evaluation, and absolve the committee of the responsibility of reviewing such material which is submitted.
7.2.2. A meeting between the faculty member and an Evaluation Committee (Annual, or Tenure and Promotion) will be held if any of the following occurs:
7.2.2.1. The committee wishes to meet with the faculty member.
7.2.2.2. The faculty member is under review for tenure, promotion, or retention.
7.2.2.3. The faculty member requests a meeting,
7.2.2.4. For faculty meeting with the Evaluation Committee, one hour shall be deemed the standard length of an evaluation interview.
7.2.3. Evaluation Content
7.2.3.1. General content for the evaluation is specified in the Master Agreement Article 5.4. Specific content for the major topical areas are: assigned professional responsibilities (Section 6.3.1), scholarship and/or professional development (Section 6.3.2) and service (Section 6.3.3).
8. In the area of scholarship and/or professional development, the statement of the departmental committee shall summarize progress according to the Department Scholarship and Professional Development Rubric.
9. Departmental Representatives
9.1. The department shall elect a representative to the Academic Senate. The representative shall be elected annually, or in accordance with the Bylaws of the Academic Senate, if the term of office would be other than one year. In those years in which an election for Academic Senate representative must be held, said election shall be completed by the end of the first week in April.
9.2. The department shall elect a representative to serve as a member of the AAUP Bargaining Council as needed. Those standing for election and those voting must be dues paying members of the AAUP.
9.3. The department shall elect a representative to the College Advisory Committee of the College of Professional Studies.
10. Travel and Professional Development Funding
10.1. This policy shall govern faculty travel and professional development expenditures other than that defined as instructional travel.
10.2. Funding Methods:
10.2.1. The Department shall allocate funds in two ways.
10.2.1.1. Allocated funds will be distributed according to Master Agreement Section 6.5.
10.2.1.2. Pooled funds distribution shall be determined by the Department Head in consultation with the Executive Committee.
10.2.1.2.1. Travel and professional development funds will be allocated using a system of priority levels. These levels are based on the type of participation to be funded.
10.2.1.2.1.1. Level 1: Major participation (e.g., presenting a paper, organizing and chairing a session) at a nationally or regionally professionally recognized program; or substantial demonstration (in the form of a detailed plan) that conference travel, or professional development activity is significantly influential in terms of performance in their primary professional role.
10.2.1.2.1.2. Level 2: Participation as a contributor in a program or in another role (e.g., acting as a discussant at a national meeting) or substantial demonstration (in the form of a detailed plan) that the travel, or professional development is influential in terms of performance in their primary professional roles (e.g., in conference attendance, additional training, enhancement of teaching, the conduct of research). Unanticipated travel or professional development, where prior planning and submission of rationale are not feasible, may be prioritized for funding at this level.
10.2.1.2.1.3. Level 3: General attendance at national, regional, or local professional meetings or other professional development.
10.3. Faculty Guidelines
10.3.1. Three times during the academic year (April 1, September 1, and January 31) the Department Head will survey the members of the department for travel or professional development plans and present the results to the Executive Committee.
10.3.2. Allocation: In allocating pool funds, consideration will be given to individuals receiving no funding beyond the contract-specified amount during the previous year due to unavailability of pool money.
10.3.2.1. In allocating pooled funds, the department shall strive to meet the following goals within funding constraints.
10.3.2.1.1. Level I travel or professional development: 100% funding
10.3.2.1.2. Level II travel or professional development: at least 80% funding
10.3.2.1.3. Level III travel or professional development: at least 70% funding
10.3.2.2. When making its September allocation of pool travel and professional development money, the Executive Committee will reserve some funds for allocation in January to fund travel or other professional development that could not be anticipated earlier.
10.3.2.3. Each year, based on the September travel survey, the Executive Committee shall establish an individual funding ceiling for a single academic year that might come from the pool travel and professional development fund. This ceiling shall not be exceeded except under unusual circumstances.
10.3.3. Professional Development Reporting Faculty who utilize funding shall submit a written report covering each trip or activity as required by Master Agreement Section 6.5.1.4. These reports will be available to the Department Head and Executive Committee for review and serve as documentation for professional development in the faculty evaluation.
11. Professional Responsibilities
11.1. Earned Reassigned Time Credits
11.2. Faculty members applying for four (4) hours or less of earned reassigned time credits are required to notify the Department Head, in writing, at the time they complete the application form. Faculty members planning to utilize reassigned time must inform the Department Head and the chair of the appropriate program committee of their intent at least one full semester prior to the semester in which the reassigned time is to be taken. Approval of the Department Head and appropriate program committee is required prior to the official scheduling of classes for the semester in which the reassigned time is to be taken.
12. Sabbatical Leave Policy
12.1. Applicants for sabbatical leave shall inform the Department Head who shall forward the request to the Executive Committee and to the respective Program Committee (Anthropology, Sociology, and Social Work).
12.2. The Executive Committee shall be charged with reviewing and ranking the requests in accordance with the "eligibility criteria" and the "evaluation criteria" as specified in the AAUP/NMU Master Agreement.
12.3. The Department Head, in consultation with the effected Program Committee, will devise a plan for continuance of the Program while faculty are on sabbatical.
13. Faculty Searches
13.1. All appointments for academic rank, except as specified in the Master Agreement, shall originate within the department. In general, recruitment procedures shall emphasize maximum faculty involvement in the hiring process.
13.2. When a staff position changes from a non-tenure position to a tenure track position, the department will advertise and recruit nationally for that position. If appropriately qualified, an individual filling a non tenure track position will be advised in writing by the Department Head that the status of the position has changed, and shall be given serious consideration for the position.
13.3. Position recommendations may be initiated by the Department Head, representatives of standing program committees, or individual faculty.
13.3.1. Each position recommendation should include a description of envisioned duties and a rationale for that position in terms of the department mission, curriculum goals, enrollment trends, and other relevant considerations. In addition, each position description shall include a statement regarding the skills and personal characteristics in the areas of teaching, research, and service essential for successful job performance. (Example: Oral and written communication skills, time management skills, and positive interpersonal skills are essential for success in this position).
13.4. The Executive Committee will rank these recommendations for the purpose of prioritizing staffing needs. This ranking will be in the form of a recommendation to the Department Head. Normally, the committee's recommendation will be made by September 15, or earlier, for appointments for the next academic year.
13.5. After the Dean and Provost have authorized recruitment for a position, the Executive Committee will establish a Search Committee of at least three faculty to work with the Department Head. Whenever possible, the majority of the recruitment committee shall reflect the discipline of the position being recruited; however, up to two other faculty members may serve.
13.5.1. This committee will assist with preparing position announcements, publicizing the position, and the initial screening of applicants. During interviews, the committee will assist in planning the schedule and serving as hosts. Following the initial screening of applicants, the Search Committee will work with the Department Head on the selection of candidates to be interviewed.
13.5.2. When the search has been closed, the Search Committee will initiate a candidate selection process to identify and rank those candidates who are acceptable.
13.5.3. During on-campus interviews, opportunity should be provided for all faculty to participate in the interview process.
13.5.4. Upon completion of the interviewing phase of recruitment, the Search Committee is responsible for communicating the faculty's assessment of the candidate(s) and recommendations to the Department Head.
13.5.5. The Department Head makes a formal recommendation to the Dean as to the acceptability of the candidates who have been interviewed, along with salary recommendations for each. It is expected that the Department Head will reflect the opinions of the Search Committee and the Department in his or her communications to the Dean. Consistent with section 5.3.4 of the Master Agreement, it is the responsibility of the Department Head alone to forward a recommendation to the Dean (copied to faculty).
14. Student Grade Appeal Procedures
14.1. Adjudication of student grade appeals will conform to the procedures specified in the current Northern Michigan University Student Handbook, (or its equivalent should the title change).
14.2. Students having a grading complaint shall first attempt to resolve the matter directly with that faculty member. Evidence of such attempts is to be in writing (e.g., email or letter) and should be available to the appropriate person at the next level.
14.3. In the event of a student appeal, the Executive Committee shall form the Student Grade Appeals Committee.
14.4. If the appeal is against a member of the Executive Committee, an alternate shall serve on the Student Grade Appeals Committee, the alternate shall be chosen by the other members of the Executive Committee.
15. Amendments
15.1. Amendments, in addition to these Bylaws, shall require approval of a two thirds (2/3) majority of the voting department members. The Bylaws and amendments must be approved in accordance with the current NMU AAUP Master Agreement.
Appendix A:
(Approved by Department Majority Vote 5/10/2011)
Department of Sociology and Social Work Rubric
for Assessing Scholarship and/or Professional Development
The following rubric is intended to serve as a guide to the Annual Evaluation Committee and to the Promotion and Tenure Committee in assessing the accomplishments of a faculty member in the area of Scholarship and/or Professional Development. There are many ways by which one may demonstrate accomplishments. The application of rubric is intended to communicate relative significance of various activities and to provide consistency and fairness across committees over time and between faculty members in our multidisciplinary department. In addition to determining a numerical point score, it is essential for the respective committees to provide a coherent rationale for the ratings obtained with the rubric.
Promotion to Associate Professor
To be recommended for promotion from Assistant to Associate Professor, faculty must earn a minimum of 12 points which includes at least one peer-reviewed creative work as described in section 6.3.2.2.1.1—3
When scholarship and/or professional development is specified as the area of emphasis for promotion to Associate Professor, the applicant must:
- Earn at least 16 points which includes at least two peer-reviewed creative works as described in article 6.3.2.2.1.1—3 or
- Earn at least 20 points which includes at least one peer-reviewed creative work as described in article 6.3.2.2.1.1—3
Promotion to Professor
All points must be earned since promotion to Associate Professor.
Recommendation for promotion to Professor requires that the applicant earn a minimum of 12 points which includes at least one peer-reviewed creative work as described in section 6.3.2.2.1.1—3
When scholarship and/or professional development is the area of emphasis the applicant must:
- Earn at least 18 points which includes at least two peer-reviewed creative works as described in article 6.3.2.2.1.1—3 or
- Earn at least 24 points which includes at least one peer-reviewed creative work as described in article 6.3.2.2.1.1—3
Rubric Categories:
|
Category 1: Scholarship: Peer Reviewed Creative Works specified in Section 6.3.2.2.1.1 to 6.3.2.2.1.3 of bylaws (At least one of these is mandatory for promotion to each the Associate Professor and Professor levels) |
Minimum Points Required =6
|
|
Maximum Points: Unlimited |
|
|
Artifact Generating Activity |
Points |
|
6.3.2.2.1.2. Publication of a peer reviewed article or peer reviewed report in a professional/scholarly journal |
6-8 |
|
6.3.2.2.1.3. publication of a chapter in an edited book, (peer-reviewed, as in an edited collection) by a scholarly press |
6-8 |
|
6.3.2.2.1.1. publication of a book (within a scholarly press) |
8-12 |
|
|
|
|
Category 2 Scholarship: Other Scholarly Products |
Minimum: None
|
|
Maximum: Unlimited |
|
|
Artifact Generating Activity |
Points |
|
Other peer-reviewed publications (e.g., a paper in a publication of conference proceedings) |
1 |
|
Peer-reviewed publication submitted (under review, in revision, or not accepted). |
1 |
|
Original publication of a textbook |
6-8 |
|
Publication of textbook revised edition |
4-6 |
|
Creation/design/production of scholarly, discipline related, product such as a documentary or ethnographic video, web site, or book |
2-8 |
|
Peer-reviewed Report of Investigations/Fieldwork/Progress Report (State or Federal requirement for permits on public land, minor and major submissions) |
2-6 |
|
Non peer-reviewed publication (e.g., a book review or article) |
1 |
|
Grant: internal grant award |
2 |
|
Grant: external grant award |
2-8 |
|
Grant: external grant application submitted but not awarded |
1 |
|
Academic /professional peer reviewed paper presentation |
3 |
|
Academic /professional poster presentation |
2 |
|
Non-academic presentation (e.g., a presentation to a non-academic professional association) |
1 |
|
Internal paper presentation (e.g. Psychology Colloquium) |
1 |
|
Article in non-academic publication (e.g., historical society bulletin) |
1 |
|
Other unspecified accomplishment/activity approved by the Evaluation Committee |
1-6 |
|
Professional Development |
Maximum Points = 10 |
|
Minimum: None |
|
|
Category 3a: Major Professional Development |
Maximum = 10 |
|
Minimum: None |
|
|
6.3.2.3.5. obtaining an additional degree or certification related to one's field (beyond Section 5 Terminal Qualifications) |
Tenure Promotion Committee Discretion |
|
6.3.2.3.6. completing post-degree program designed to expand one's professional competence such as summer institute or research methods training session) |
Tenure Promotion Committee Discretion |
|
6.3.2.3.7. other major professional development activities such as completing training as accreditation site visitor training. |
Tenure Promotion Committee Discretion |
|
Category 3b: Routine Professional Development |
Maximum Points= 5 |
|
Minimum Points: None |
|
|
Activity |
Points |
|
6.3.2.3.1. attending professional conferences |
1 |
|
6.3.2.3.2. attending professional workshops |
1 |
|
6.3.2.3.3. participating in university training on such as educational technology workshop |
1 |
|
6.3.2.3.4. developing a new, or maintaining a current, certification |
1 |
|
6.3.2.3.7. other appropriate professional development activities, when confirmed by the departmental evaluation committee and the department head.
|
Tenure Promotion Committee Discretion |
| Date Approved: | 5-12-2011 |
| Last Revision: | 5-12-2011 |
| Approved By: | Provost |
| Oversight Unit: | SOCIOLOGY/ANTHROPOLOGY |
| Attached form file: | SociologySocialWorkbylaws.pdf |