PROCEDURAL HANDBOOK FOR THE COMMITTEE ON …

UNIVERSITY OF HOLY CROSS

PROCEDURAL HANDBOOK

FOR THE COMMITTEE ON

PROMOTION IN RANK

Revised

Spring 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Philosophy of Promotion in Academic Rank .................................................................................1

Promotion in Rank Committee ......................................................................................................2

Committee Job Description............................................................................................................3

Calendar and Procedure for Promotion in Rank ............................................................................4

Letter to Chairs and Full-Time Faculty .........................................................................................5

Criteria for Promotion in Rank ......................................................................................................6-7

Instructions to Candidates and Promotion in Rank Faculty Evaluation Scale ...............................8

Candidate’s Memorandum of Intention for Promotion in Rank:

(To Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor) ....................................................9

Teaching .........................................................................................................................................10

Evaluation Instrument and Faculty Evaluation Scale ..........................................................10

In-Class Colleague Evaluation Instrument ..........................................................................11-12

Immediate Supervisor’s Evaluation Instrument ...................................................................13-15

Teaching Evaluation Worksheet ..........................................................................................16

Service (Contribution to the University) .............................................................................................. 17

General Instructions and Faculty Evaluation Scale .............................................................17

Service Evaluation Instrument for General Contribution to UHC.......................................18

Evaluation of Service Participation in Activities (Candidate to complete) .........................19

Scholarly Activities ...................................................................................................................... 20

General Instructions and Evaluation Rating Scale for Scholarly Activities ....................... 20

Candidate’s Scholarly Activities Contributions Evaluation Instrument ..............................21-22

Memorandum to President (Approval—Recommendation for Promotion) .................................. 23

Memorandum to President (Denial—Not Recommending Promotion) ........................................ 24

i

1

Philosophy of Promotion in Academic Rank

The faculty of University of Holy Cross is dedicated not only to the

maintenance of a high level of learning among its students and to the

promotion of their personal welfare, but also to the growth of the

University, to personal growth in the teaching profession, and to creative

and scholarly contributions to the academic community through research

and publication. To encourage, recognize, and maintain such a high level

of dedication among its faculty members, University of Holy Cross

assigns diverse levels of rank and offers opportunities for academic

promotion to full-time faculty members.

University of Holy Cross is concerned with undergraduate and

graduate education with emphasis on effectiveness in teaching and

professional growth. Other factors important in evaluating faculty

members for rank and/or promotion are efforts made in committee work,

research and other forms of scholarship, service to the University, service

to the community, involvement in professional activities, and the quality

of interaction in the University of Holy Cross community.

2

PROMOTION IN RANK COMMITTEE

MEMBERSHIP

Chairperson of the Promotion in Rank Committee (Ex Officio

President of the Faculty Assembly)

Six (6) Full-Time Faculty Members: Two (2) from each of the

three (3) academic divisions; elected by the Full-Time Faculty

TERM OF OFFICE

Chairperson: Concurrent with Faculty President election

Members: Two (2) academic years with the possibility of re-

election for another consecutive term

VACANCIES

Chairperson: Special election by Faculty Assembly to select

new President/Chairperson

Members: A Full-Time Faculty Member appointed by the

Chairperson to complete the term.

3

PROMOTION IN RANK

COMMITTEE JOB DESCRIPTION

1. Shall be chaired by the President of the Faculty Assembly.

2. Shall receive by the 3rd week of January recommendations and

supporting evidence for faculty promotions.

3. Shall evaluate faculty members for promotion according to defined

criteria set forth in the Procedural Handbook for the Committee on

Promotion in Rank.

4. Shall submit by the 2nd week in March to the President of the

University through the Provost the recommended rank of all

candidates eligible for promotion.

5. Shall review the Procedural Handbook for the Committee on

Promotion in Rank biennially in even-numbered years.

4

CALENDAR* AND PROCEDURE FOR PROMOTION IN RANK

2nd Week in September Letters are sent to all Deans and Full-Time

Faculty to solicit recommendations for promotion.

Last Week in September Nominations are due in office of Chairperson of

the Faculty Assembly

In October Promotion in Rank Committee schedules an

orientation for eligible candidates.

3rd Week in January Faculty recommended for promotion submit

evidence to the Promotion in Rank Committee.

In February Regular meetings of the Promotion in Rank

Committee are held to consider evidence and to

finalize recommendations.

2nd Week in March Recommendations are forwarded to the Provost.

3rd Week in March Notification of action is sent to the Faculty by the

President

4th Week in March Faculty may arrange for review of the decision

with the Promotion in Rank Committee

*Note: These dates serve as a guide for the procedural timelines. Specific dates

are set at the discretion of the Chair of the Promotion in Rank Committee.

5

LETTER TO CHAIRS AND FULL-TIME FACULTY

Date:

To: Division Chairs and Full-Time Faculty

From: Standing Committee on Promotion in Rank

Re: Nominations for Promotion

The Procedural Handbook for the Committee on Promotion in Rank

indicates that during the 2nd week in September, the Chairs and Full-Time Faculty

be contacted regarding recommendations for promotion in rank.

The Qualifications for Appointment to Rank can be found in the Our Lady of

Holy Cross College (OLHCC) Faculty Handbook—2013 (so named prior to the conversion

of OLHCC to University of Holy Cross [UHC] under Section 2.4.1 (Assistant Professor—

2.4.4, Associate Professor—2.4.5, and Professor—2.4.6).

The Calendar For Promotion In Rank indicates that nominations are due to

the Chair of the Promotion in Rank Committee by the last week in September. The

Committee will meet with candidates in October.

Thank you for your attention to this correspondence.

cc: Provost

6

CRITERIA FOR PROMOTION IN RANK

To be considered for the rank of INSTRUCTOR, an individual will present

evidence of

an earned Master’s degree

the ability to teach

To be considered for the rank of ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, an individual

will present evidence of

an earned Master’s degree, plus three (3) years of full-time college

teaching (or its equivalent), or an earned terminal degree.

(Twenty-four [24] hours of part-time instruction at UHC equals

one [1] year of full-time instruction at UHC.)

the ability to teach

scholarship via one of the following:

progress toward a terminal degree

publications, presentations, and/or research

active membership in professional organizations

To be considered for the rank of ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, an individual

will present evidence of

an earned terminal degree plus four (4) years of full-time teaching at

the Assistant level at UHC (or its equivalent), or an earned Master’s

degree, plus thirty (30) hours and eight (8) years of full-time

teaching at UHC (or its equivalent), at the Assistant level. (Twenty-

four [24] hours of part-time instruction at UHC equals one [1] year

of full-time instruction at UHC.)

excellence in teaching

contributions to the University

7

scholarly attainment through publications, presentations, and/or

research

contributions to the profession

To be considered for the rank of PROFESSOR, an individual will present

evidence of

an earned terminal degree, plus five (5) years of full-time teaching

at the Associate level at UHC (or its equivalent)

excellence in teaching

continued record of scholarly attainment through publications,

presentations, and/or research

contributions to the institution in a leadership capacity (i.e., chair

of committee, elected position)

leadership role within the profession

8

INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES

FOR PROMOTION IN RANK

Candidates for Promotion in Rank are to submit to the Promotion in

Rank Committee the following:

1. Memorandum of Intention for Promotion (page 9 of this

Procedural Handbook)

2. Detailed CV articulating/substantiating how criteria were met,

Including

Teaching Activities

Service Activities

Scholarly Activities

3. Evidence of met criteria should be available for review if

requested by the Promotion in Rank Committee.

PROMOTION IN RANK

FACULTY EVALUATION SCALE

CATEGORIES

DOES NOT

MEET

EXPECTATIONS

MEETS

EXPECTATIONS

EXCEEDS

EXPECTATIONS

TEACHING 0 - 59%

60%-79% 80%-100%

SERVICE 0 - 59%

60%-79% 80%-100%

SCHOLARLY

ACTIVITIES

0 - 59%

60%-79% 80%-100%

9

CANDIDATE’S MEMORANDUM OF INTENTION FOR PROMOTION

Date: ________________________________

To: Promotion in Rank Committee

From: Candidate’s Name: _____________________________________________

Subject: Consideration for Promotion to the Rank of Assistant Professor

EVALUATION CRITERIA:

1.______ Teaching (Must Meet or Exceed Expectations)

2.______ Service, Scholarly Activities (Must Meet or Exceed Expectations in 1 Other Category)

==============================================================================================

========


Date: ________________________________



Subject: Consideration for Promotion to the Rank of Associate Professor


1.______ Teaching, Service, Scholarly Activities (Must Meet or Exceed Expectations in All 3 Categories)

==============================================================================================

========


Date: ________________________________



Subject: Consideration for Promotion to the Rank of Professor


1.______ Teaching, Service, Scholarly Activities (Must Exceed Expectations in 2 Categories and

Must Meet Expectations in 1 Other Category)

==============================================================================================

========

CANDIDATE’S CALCULATION

CATEGORIES: % SCORED EXPECTATIONS

TEACHING

_________%

□ Does Not Meet Expectations

□ Meets Expectations

□ Exceeds Expectations

SERVICE

_________%




SCHOLARLY ACTIVITIES

_________%




I hereby certify that this information is substantially correct. ___________________________________

Candidate’s Signature

___________________________________

Immediate Supervisor’s Signature

10

TEACHING

Evaluation Instrument

Maximum

Possible

Points

1. Student Evaluation Instrument (Questions ___ - ___)

Or Student Evaluation Instrument (Graduate Program) Or Nursing Student Evaluation of Course Instructor Instrument And Nursing Student Evaluation of Clinical Instructor Instrument

2. Colleague Evaluation Instrument

(Required for rank of Associate Professor and Professor)

3. Immediate Supervisor’s Evaluation Instrument


CATEGORIES

DOES NOT

MEET

EXPECTATIONS

MEETS

EXPECTATIONS

EXCEEDS

EXPECTATIONS

TEACHING 0 - 59%

60%-79% 80%-100%

SERVICE 0 - 59%

60%-79% 80%-100%

SCHOLARLY

ACTIVITIES

0 - 59%

60%-79% 80%-100%

NOTE: Candidates should calculate their achieved points in each Category and divide by

the maximum points possible to identify their Evaluation Rating from the scale

above. For assistance, see the Teaching Evaluation Worksheet on page 16.

11

UNIVERSITY OF HOLY CROSS

IN-CLASS COLLEAGUE EVALUATION INSTRUMENT

(Must be performed by UHC Faculty)

Name of Faculty Member Being Evaluated

Signature of Evaluator

Date of Evaluation

Course Number and Name

Directions: Circle Rating Numbers as follows:

3 (Strongly Agree-SA), 2 (Agree-A), 1 (Disagree-D), 0 (Strongly Disagree-SD)

ORGANIZATION / PLANNING: SA A D SD

1. is well prepared and organized 3 2 1 0

2. objectives are clearly evident 3 2 1 0

3. designs appropriate activities for meeting objectives 3 2 1 0

4. starts/ends on time 3 2 1 0

COMMUNICATION SKILLS:

5. expresses self clearly, audibly, and understandably 3 2 1 0

6. explains, interprets material 3 2 1 0

7. projects confidence and assurance 3 2 1 0

8. appears knowledgeable of subject matter 3 2 1 0

INTERACTIVE TECHNIQUES:

9. establishes good rapport with students 3 2 1 0

10. creates an atmosphere of freedom to question, disagree, express ideas 3 2 1 0

11. elicits student participation appropriate to the class 3 2 1 0

12. is sensitive to student grasp of material 3 2 1 0

13. makes appropriate answers to student questions/comments 3 2 1 0

Continue on next page.

12

(In-Class Colleague Evaluation Instrument--Continued from Page 11)

SA A D SD

14. is receptive to student ideas 3 2 1 0

INSTRUCTIONAL SKILLS:

15. projects interest, enthusiasm 3 2 1 0

16. refers to previous lesson and/or outlines class agenda 3 2 1 0

17. provides clear directions 3 2 1 0

18. inspires, activates, and maintains student interest 3 2 1 0

19. tailors instruction to group and individual needs 3 2 1 0

20. relates the subject to student concerns, interests, and experiences 3 2 1 0

21. asks questions that require divergent and convergent thinking 3 2 1 0

22. reinforces students in a positive, varied manner 3 2 1 0

23. provides clear transitions 3 2 1 0

24. paces classroom activities efficiently 3 2 1 0

25. achieves closure by reviewing or summarizing the lesson

3 2 1 0

26. previews future class 3 2 1 0

27. utilizes a variety of instructional techniques if appropriate

3 2 1 0

13

IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR’S EVALUATION INSTRUMENT

INSTRUCTOR

IN COURSE

SEMESTER

Directions: Circle Rating Numbers as follows:

3 (Strongly Agree-SA), 2 (Agree-A), 1 (Disagree-D), 0 (Strongly Disagree-SD)

COURSE DEVELOPMENT SA A D SD

1. Demonstrates comprehensive knowledge of subjects taught 3 2 1 0

2. 2. Prepares and distributes concrete course objectives and course outline 3 2 1 0

3. Testing instruments (exams, papers, projects, cases, etc.) accurately reflect

content of lectures and/or study assignments

3 2 1 0

4. Provides adequate information on testing procedures and grading criteria 3 2 1 0

DISCIPLINARY CURRENCY

5. Familiar with available instructional materials (texts, readings, casebooks,

guest lecturers, etc.) in subject area

3 2 1 0

6. Familiar with recent and current literature in subject areas (resource

materials, academic, governmental, and private research reports,

professional journals, etc.)

3 2 1 0

7. Updates course objectives and syllabi as new developments occur 3 2 1 0

8. Revises testing instruments to reflect updated objectives and syllabi 3 2 1 0

INSTRUCTIONAL CREATIVITY

9. Integrates course content with relevant data from other disciplines 3 2 1 0

10. Encourages student inquiry and research beyond the scope of course syllabi 3 2 1 0

11. Experiments with innovative teaching, learning, and testing theories and

techniques

3 2 1 0

(CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE)

14

IMMEDIATE SUPPERVISOR’S EVALUATION INSTRUMENT – CONTINUED FROM PAGE 13

INSTRUCTIONAL METHODOLOGY

12. Expresses himself/herself clearly, understandably and interestingly 3 2 1 0

13. Relates theories and principles to applications and impacts 3 2 1 0

14. Fosters individual and group discussion, in and out of class 3 2 1 0

15. Utilizes multi-sensory exposure, where applicable, in presentation of subject

matter

3 2 1 0

16. Is regularly available to students for course, program, career, and/or

personal counseling

3 2 1 0

ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIVITIES SA A D SD

17. Meets all scheduled class sessions 3 2 1 0

18. Is competent in course, program, and career advising 3 2 1 0

19. Is always available during posted office hours 3 2 1 0

20. Performs administrative functions efficiently and in a timely manner 3 2 1 0

LIST COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS BELOW

15

(Immediate Supervisor’s Evaluation Instrument – Continued)

IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR’S WRITTEN COMMENTS

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

Suggestions for Improvement, if any:

Other:

16

Teaching Evaluation Worksheet

1. STUDENT EVALUATIONS

Compute score for each class taught

during the semester

For questions 11-26 ONLY, add together

all of “strongly agree” or “agree.”

Divide answer by number of questions

answered (typically 15).

%

Repeat for each course taught during the

evaluation period (2-4 semesters)

Add total percentages and divide by

number of courses used in calculation.

This is the total student evaluation

percentage

Total percentage

%

2. COLLEAGUE EVALUATION

Of the total questions answered, how

many are “strongly agree” and “agree”?


answered

%

3. IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR’S EVALUATION

Of the total questions answered, how

many are “strongly agree” and “agree”?


answered

%

TOTAL

Add percentages for student, colleague,

and immediate supervisor’s evaluations

Divide answer by 3

%

4. BONUS

Submit evidence of other kinds of

teaching effectiveness (i.e., teaching

workshops attended, students who

received awards, presentations, and

publications, etc.)

For each, add 1 point to the final

evaluation scale total

FINAL TOTAL

__________________________%

17

SERVICE

(General Contribution to University of Holy Cross)

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS:

A. Rating Scale for Service/General Contribution to UHC

Maximum Points = 77

B. EVALUATION INSTRUMENT ON PAGE 18:

To Be Completed by the CANDIDATE’S IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR

regarding:

1. Advising and Other Contributions to the Welfare of the Students

2. Support to the Functioning of the Department

3. Contributions to the growth of UHC

C. EVALUATION INSTRUMENT ON PAGE 19:

To Be Completed by the CANDIDATE/FACULTY MEMBER regarding

4. Level of Participation in Activities


CATEGORIES

DOES NOT

MEET

EXPECTATIONS

MEETS

EXPECTATIONS

EXCEEDS

EXPECTATIONS

TEACHING 0 - 59%

60%-79% 80%-100%

SERVICE 0 - 59%

60%-79% 80%-100%

SCHOLARLY

ACTIVITIES

0 - 59%

60%-79% 80%-100%

NOTE: Calculate the achieved points in each Category and divide by the maximum

points possible to identify the Evaluation Rating from the scale above.

18

SERVICE EVALUATION INSTRUMENTS FOR:

CANDIDATE’S IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR TO COMPLETE (pg. 18)

AND

CANDIDATE TO COMPLETE (pg. 19)

SERVICE/GENERAL CONTRIBUTION TO THE COLLEGE

MAXIMUM POINTS = 77

DIRECTIONS:

Candidate’s Immediate Supervisor evaluates items under each Sections 1, 2, and 3 by circling

the value points assigned.

Candidate completes point assignment for Section 4 as indicated.

Rating Scale: 3 (Strongly Agree), 2 (Agree), 1 (Disagree), 0 (Strongly Disagree), N.A. (Not Applicable)

TO BE COMPLETED BY IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR

SA A D SD NA

1. ADVISING AND OTHER CONTRIBUTIONS TO

THE WELFARE OF THE STUDENTS

A. Is available to students for course-related

conferences and advising

3 2 1 0 NA

B. Provides accurate and appropriate academic

and career advising on a frequent and regular

basis

3 2 1 0 NA

C. Maintains specific office hours 3 2 1 0 NA

D. Serves as Moderator of student organizations

and/or supports student activities

3 2 1 0 NA

2. SUPPORTS THE FUNCTIONING OF THE

DEPARTMENT

3 2 1 0 NA

3. GROWTH OF COLLEGE

E. Chairs Ad Hoc Committees 3 2 1 0 NA

F. Serves on Ad Hoc Committees 3 2 1 0 NA

G. Chairs Standing Committees 3 2 1 0 NA

H. Serves on Standing Committees 3 2 1 0 NA

END FOR IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR

TO COMPLETE

NEXT PAGE FOR CANDIDATE

19

TO BE COMPLETED BY CANDIDATE

4. LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION IN ACTIVITIES

(all within a 5-year span)

Add

Points

A. As a member of professional

organization(s), Local or Regional

1 point per organization per year

Up to 3 points maximum

B. As a member of a State, Regional,

National or International

professional organization(s)

1 point per organization per year


C. Professional committee at a State,

Regional, National, or

International level:

As Chairperson:

==================

As Committee Member:

2 point per group/committee per

year

====================

1 point per group/committee per

year


D. Chairperson of professional

committee on Local level

1 point per committee per yr.


E. As a Speaker/Presenter at National

or International level

2 points per speech / presentation

per year


F. As a Speaker/Presenter at Local or

Regional Conference or Meeting

1 point per speech / presentation per

year


G. As President, Director, or Officer

in a State, National, or

International organization

2 points per organization per year


H. Community Service: Religious

and/or Secular

1 to 5 points


TOTAL POINTS:

20

SCHOLARLY ACTIVITIES

(Maximum Points – 40)

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATE:

Candidate/Faculty Member is to complete the Scholarly Activities Evaluation

Instrument on pages 21 and 22.

=====================================================================


CATEGORIES

DOES NOT

MEET

EXPECTATIONS

MEETS

EXPECTATIONS

EXCEEDS

EXPECTATIONS

TEACHING 0 - 59%

60%-79% 80%-100%

SERVICE 0 - 59%

60%-79% 80%-100%

SCHOLARLY

ACTIVITIES

0 - 59%

60%-79% 80%-100%



21

SCHOLARLY ACTIVITIES (Maximum - 40 points)

TO BE COMPLETED BY CANDIDATE

SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS

All Within the Last 5 Years,

Unless Otherwise Specified

Add

points:

1. Professional Book published (Non-Vanity

Press) (within 5 years)

Each Book – 15 points

2. Contributing Authorship or Chapters in

book(s) publication (Non-Vanity Press) or

Electronic Media

Each Work – 6 points

3. Professional Article(s) or comparable

Electronic Media appearing in refereed

National Journal(s) or Artistic Work(s)

presented within 5 years

Each Article/Work – 6 points

4. Professional Article(s) or comparable

Electronic Media appearing in refereed

national journal(s) or Artistic Work(s)

presented within 5 to 10 years

Each Article/Work – 3 points

5. Professional Article or comparable Electronic

Media appearing in Local, State or Regional

publications

Each Article – 3 points

6. Editorship of Professional International or

National publications within 5 years

Each Editorship – 8 points per

year

7. Editorship of Profession Regional, State, or

Local publication within 5 years

Each Editorship – 4 points per

year

8. Author of Proposal submitted to Funding

Agency within 5 years

Each Proposal – 5 points

9. Peer Review Activities (Formal reviews of

texts and/or screening of articles under

consideration for publication)

Each Review – 2 points

CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE

22

(Scholarly Activities Form Continued)

10. Author of Grey Literature, White Paper, or

Commissioned Reports (within 5 years)

Each Publication – 2 points

11. National, Regional, or State Accreditation

Self-Studies

Per Sub-Study – 4 points

12. Papers/Presentations at International or

National conferences within 5 years,

including Artistic Works

Per Paper/Pres. – 3 points

13. Papers/Presentations at Local, State, or

Regional conference within 5 years, including

Artistic Works

Per Paper/Presentation –

2 points

14. Director of Research Project

(specify scope in C.V.)

Per Research Project – 4 points

15. Chair of Dissertation Per Committee – 3 points

16. Chair of Thesis Committee Per Committee – 2 points

17. Member of Dissertation Committee Per Committee – 2 points

18. Member of Thesis Committee Per Committee – 1 point

19. Disciple Specific Internet, etc. Publications

(i.e., Blogs) At Immediate Supervisor’s

Discretion: 2-10 points

TOTAL POINTS:

TOTAL ÷ 40 =

EVALUATION SCALE

CATEGORIES

DOES NOT

MEET

EXPECTATIONS

MEETS

EXPECTATIONS

EXCEEDS

EXPECTATIONS

TEACHING 0 - 59% 60%-79% 80%-100%

SERVICE 0 - 59% 60%-79% 80%-100%

SCHOLARLY

ACTIVITIES

0 - 59% 60%-79% 80%-100%



23

(Approval of Promotion in Rank Request)

MEMORANDUM

Date:

To: President

From: Promotion in Rank Committee

RE: Recommendation for Promotion of ______________________________

Name of Candidate

From

(Rank)

To

(Promotion Rank)

The Promotion in Rank Committee has studied the materials submitted as substantiating

evidence of meeting the criteria for promotion. Based on the findings, it is the recommendation

of this Committee that you take the appropriate action prior to the awarding of contracts for the

next academic year.

Thank you for your attention that you to this matter.

24

(Denial of Promotion in Rank Request)

MEMORANDUM

Date:

To: President

From: Promotion in Rank Committee

RE: Candidacy of ________________________________________________

Name of Candidate

For Promotion from

(Rank)

To

(Rank)

The Promotion in Rank Committee has studied the materials submitted in support of the

application for promotion. However, the Committee finds that the criteria for promotion have

not been met. Therefore, the Committee does not make a recommendation for promotion at this

time.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Documents

PROCEDURAL HANDBOOK FOR THE COMMITTEE ON …