|
LCSC Faculty Senate
May 6, 2004
Minutes
I. Call
to Order: The Chair, Kathie Wilcox called the meeting to order at
3:05PM.
Present: Lynne Bidwell,
Larry Haapanen, Okey Goode, David McCullough, Anita Darrington, Scott
Brainard, Leanne Parker, Clay Robinson, Jason Blazzard, Julie Debuhr for
Verna Studer, Virginia Weber, Marilyn Heckendorn, Susan Odom, Chris Riggs,
Lana Elliott for Jeff Matthews, Mike Vernon, Heather Rogers, Robbie Reno,
Linda Coursey, Diane Johnson.
Absent: Jim Tarter, Wayne
Carroll, Gary Mayton, Victor White, Gene Straughan, Bill Clouser, Eric
Martin, Alan Marshall, Ed Miller, Tom Urquhart, Arnold Caines, Jeff
Matthews.
II. Introduction
of Visitors: Julie DeBuhr; Diane Driskill
III. Approval
of Minutes of April 15, 2004: There was a correction. The minutes will
be changed to reflect that Datatel use by faculty was to be discussed by
the divisions. There was a motion to approve the minutes as amended.
The minutes were approved as amended.
IV. Chair’s
Report
A.
Treasury Report: The
balance in the allocated account is $142.42. The balance in the service
account is $3566.56. The amount in the benevolence account is $855. The
Benevolence account will be reduced when reimbursement requests for
flowers and cards that have been sent are received. Diane Ames, Carol
Nelson, Lana Elliott are the committee.
B.
President’s Council:
No report
C.
ICHEF:
There was a meeting during the SBOE meeting. ICHEF will meet in June to
discuss the Idaho Coalition for Higher Education.
V. Provost’s
Report: CAAP supported the ICHEF definition of “financial exigency.” A
compromise of 36 calendar weeks was proposed as an alternative to the
State Board proposed change to one semester for notification of tenured
faculty.
VI.
Old Business
A.
Incomplete Grade Policy: Senate
has been asked by the Registrar to insert the phrase “…if at least 80% of
the course work is completed.” It was argued that this would give faculty
a clearer guideline for awarding an “I”. After discussion the policy was
amended to read: “The grade of “I” indicates that work is satisfactory
but, because of extenuating circumstances, has not been completed by the
end of the term. The grade is given at the discretion of the instructor
if the student has made substantial progress toward completion of the
coursework. For all “I” grades, the date of completion may be no
longer than one semester. The exact date of completion will be specified
by the instructor. On that date, the grade assigned by the instructor
will be posted to the transcript. If the incomplete is received during an
interim or summer session, the student has one full semester following
that session in which to complete the course. There are no provisions for
grades of “I” for variable credit professional-technical courses.”
The amended motion passed.
B.
Criteria for
Advancement in Rank Policy Revisions – 2nd Reading: Motion to
approve the Academic Section of Policy No. 2.107 relating to criteria for
promotion in rank for academic faculty.
·
There have been no
substantial changes since the presentation to the Academic criteria at the
04/15/04 meeting.
·
The titles have been
returned to those in the current policy and will reflect the same titles
across campus for both academic and professional/technical faculty.
·
Changes to the
Academic Advancement in Rank policy places the Divisions in charge of
developing the criteria for each division.
·
New criteria would
not apply to anyone who is up for promotion/tenure in 2004-2005.
·
The criteria will be
forwarded to the Provost upon completion.
·
Question from the
floor: If approved today, could the dual track be in place by the fall,
2004 for Business-Technical faculty? The Provost stated that this could
be possible if the policy is approved by the Administration.
Motion to approve the
recommended revisions to policy 2.107. Approved with one nay vote.
Full text of the proposal is in Appendix A of these minutes.
Motion: Each Academic
Division will provide for a formal Pre-Tenure Review in the faculty
member's second or third year. Discussion ensued. Questions raised
included who would serve on the Pre-Tenure Review committees, and the
procedures for such a review. There was general consensus that this idea
should be further developed by either the Administrative Procedures
Committee or the Standing Promotion and Tenure Review Committee next
year. The motion failed for lack of a second.
Motion: To charge the
Standing Promotion and Tenure Review Committee with oversight of
Divisions' compliance with regard to Pre-Tenure Review policies by
Dec. 1, 2004. During discussion it was noted that, if passed,
this Motion would have to be voted on by the Faculty Association
incorporated into the bylaws of the Faculty Constitution pertaining to the
Standing Tenure and Promotion Review Committee. The Provost pointed out
that the Administration is usually responsible for policy compliance, not
faculty committees. The motion failed for lack of a second.
Motion to charge the
Standing Tenure and Promotion Review Committee with annual review
of Divisions' compliance with creation of written Criteria for
Advancement in Rank
to
ensure compliance with the institutional and state policies. Discussion
included the following points: This review
should be completed each year by October
1st; since
both promotion and tenure materials are due by Dec. 1st, this would
provide enough time for applicants to speak to the criteria;
If passed this Motion would have to be voted on by the Faculty Association
and incorporated into the bylaws of the Faculty Constitution pertaining to
the Standing Tenure and Promotion Review Committee for academic faculty
and the Standing Promotion Review Committee for professional-technical
faculty The motion failed for lack of a second.
Motion to direct each
Academic Division to develop appropriate criteria for Advancement in Rank
by Oct.
1, 2004. If
passed this Motion should be forwarded to the Provost to be implemented.
The motion was amended to read “by December 1, 2004.” Motion
approved.
C.
Sabbatical changes:
The revised policy 2.114 was approved. The full text is in Appendix B of
these minutes.
VII. New
Business
A. Hearing Board
Appointments
1.
The Hearing board for
2004-2005:
Regular members: Jack
Hutson (T&I) 2004-2006, Marilyn Heckendorn (NU) 2004-2006, Delta Heath
Simpson (BU) 2003-2005, Gwen Taylor (ED) 2004-2006, Jerry Jolley (SS)
2004-2005, Joanna Schultz (NS) 2003-2005.
Bernice Harris, Division
Chair of Humanities, was nominated and elected to replace Lynn Mathers;
term 2004-2006.
2. Alternate Members:
Verna Studer (BTS) 2003-2005, Mary Flores (HUM) 2003-2005. Barbara
Barnes (LIB) was nominated and elected to replace Susan Niewenhous; term
2004-2006.
VIII. Final
Standing Committee Reports: The Chair asked all standing committees to
please forward hard copies of their final reports to her and to the
Library.
A.
Administrative
Procedures – Patricia Keith (See item B under Old Business)
B.
Budget Liaison –
Kathie Wilcox (No report)
C.
Curriculum – Mike
Vernon - The Curriculum Committee presented the proposals which had passed
the committee with a second reading. There was a motion to approve the
curriculum committee report as presented. The motion was approved.
Please see the full text of the committee report in Appendix C of these
minutes.
IX.
Adjournment 4:05PM
Reminder: There will be an all-campus meeting on May 11th.
APPENDICES:
APPENDIX A;
POLICY
FOR ADVANCEMENT IN RANK: POLICY 2.107:
A. Philosophy
Introduction
The quality of the College as an institution
is determined to a large extent by the quality of the faculty. In our
concern for the College's quality, the administration and faculty base the
criteria for appointment, tenure acquisition, tenure review, and promotion
in rank upon the faculty member's continued growth in professional skills
and performance throughout his or her career. The College, by whatever
means possible, encourages and assists each faculty member in efforts
to improve professionally.
A promotion is one means of encouraging
professional improvement, of reflecting the continuing value of the
faculty member to the college, and of rewarding merit.
meritorious service.
B. Eligibility for Advancement in Rank
The timeline for
one’s advancement in rank is established in the initial letter of
appointment.
The basic
requirements for advancement in rank are:
Instructor to Assistant Professor – no time
requirement
Assistant to Associate Professor—normally, a
minimum of four years as Assistant Professor
Associate to Full Professor—normally, a minimum
of five years as Associate Professor
C.
Criteria for Promotion in Academic Rank for Academic Faculty
Advancement in Rank
(Academic Faculty)
The criteria categories for
faculty evaluation reflect the primary role and mission of the College:
instruction; Teaching and Advising; scholarly achievement,
including research accomplishments; Scholarly/Creative Activity
and Professional Development; public service; and institutional
service, and Service including contributions toward College
governance and service to students, as through advising, particularly in
an alternative learning environment.
These criteria of performance expected of
faculty members seeking entry to each successive academic rank also
suggest the kinds of data appropriate to measure that performance.
Since the rank of instructor is the lowest entry level for members of
the full‑time faculty, and since that of assistant professor will be the
entry level for most, special emphasis is placed on the criteria for
promotion to the ranks of associate professor and professor.
A faculty member advancing through the ranks is
expected to meet escalating standards of performance. Generally
speaking, to be appointed or promoted to the rank of assistant professor,
one should have demonstrated competence in instruction, scholarship, and
service; to that of associate professor, superiority; and that of
professor, excellence. A faculty member who advances in rank will be
expected to demonstrate progress in assuming and to assume
additional responsibility. as well as in meeting escalating criteria of
performance.
For staff faculty whose duties
are primarily instructional, teaching and activities that develop and
improve instruction will be primary. It is recognized, however, that the
faculty of Lewis‑Clark State College perform quite different kinds of
tasks, and that the value placed on each category of functions--instruction,
scholarship, public service, and institutional service‑‑— Teaching
and Advising; Scholarly/Creative Activity and Professional Development;
and Service—must be adapted to these different roles. For those
engaged in non-instructional activities such as administrative tasks or
the operation of our library, criteria for instruction may be inapplicable
or of lesser importance. Any division or other unit employing faculty
members is responsible for determining the relevance of each criterion to
the individual faculty member's assigned duties, and for weighting each
activity in accordance with its value to the division and its
appropriateness to the College's role and mission. This weighting must be
considered consistently by divisions, faculty committees, chairs,
vice‑president and resident all reviewers in order to ensure
consistency with the intent of this policy.
A. Specific Performance and Promotion
Criteria
1.0 Lecturer
This position is reserved for faculty members hired to teach lower
division and
developmental courses for which they
have appropriate preparation. INDIVIDUALS
APPOINTED AS LECTURERS WILL NOT BE
ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION
OR TENURE.
The entering instructor must have the capacity
to perform assigned tasks. Evidence of that capacity might be obtained
from former teachers and employers, or others familiar with the
candidate's qualifications.
Indicators of competence for this rank include:
Instruction. Evidence for the candidate's
ability to teach college level courses should be provided by graduate or
advanced preparation in the discipline and/or by prior classroom
experience. The candidate is expected to perform the basic instructional
functions common to college level teaching within courses for which the
content, organization, and methods of presentation and assessment are well
prescribed.
Scholarship. Normally, the candidate must
possess the master's degree and demonstrate familiarity with scholarship
in the candidate's discipline.
1.1 Promotion from Instructor to
Assistant Professor (Academic Faculty)
For faculty members whose initial appointment
is at the assistant professor level, sources of evidence for professional
performance should be similar to those for instructor. The assistant
professor may have had prior teaching related experiences. The
candidate's ability may also be judged on the basis of the experience.
The faculty member should have
the appropriate terminal degree. (See “Terminal Degrees”) Each
division will maintain a current written policy articulating appropriate
Teaching and Advising, Scholarly/Creative Activity and Professional
Development, and Service criteria for advancement from Instructor to
Assistant Professor. Reviewers will evaluate and make a recommendation for
Promotion the basis of the following:
a. Candidate
Statement. A personal statement describing the faculty member's role
within the division or other unit and including appropriate statements on
all the
following functions: instruction, scholarship, institutional service,
and public servic
Teaching and Advising, Scholarly/Creative Activity and Professional
Development,
and Service. The statement should describe accomplishments, plans
for growth, special
problems encountered, innovations or activities attempted, and other
relevant materials.
Appropriate documentation and evidence should be available at the
committee’s request.
included.
b. Instruction Teaching and
advising. The candidate for assistant professor should demonstrate
competency appropriate to the discipline as established by the
candidate’s division. in the following: (1) selection and
organization of content consistent with the current state of knowledge,
skill and methodology of the discipline; (2) effective development and
executing of student learning experiences that include attention to the
student's understanding of the purpose of the instruction and the variable
approaches to teaching, particularly where courses or programs require a
high degree of individualization; (3) providing effective evaluation of
student achievement; (4) providing for evaluation of the courses
themselves; and (5) demonstrative effectiveness as a team member where the
team approach to instruction is used.
Methods of instructional evaluation
include:
Peer and division chair evaluation. A
formal written statement by colleagues in the discipline or in related
areas and another by the division chair, attesting to the instructor's
knowledge of his or her teaching area and ability to communicate this
knowledge to students. Wherever possible, direct observation of his or
her classes by colleagues should be included.
Student evaluation (both formal and informal).
Student evaluations which will permit comparison with division and
college‑wide norms should be included.
Other evidence of effective instruction. The
products of successful instruction such as sample student work,
descriptive material on current teaching responsibilities and practices
and steps taken to evaluate and improve teaching.
c. Scholarship
Scholarly/Creative Activity and Professional Development. The
assistant professor should demonstrate competence in the basic tools of
scholarship of performance common to the discipline.
Usually the completion of the course work and
research component of the terminal degree (i.e., ABD status or, where
appropriate, the master's degree) suffices as evidence for this criterion,
since in most cases demonstration of these tools is a requirement of the
degree. The candidate should, in
addition, demonstrate professional involvement at the local and state
level through presentations of his or her scholarly or creative work,
attendance and participation in workshops, conferences and clinics, or
service as consultant, adjudicator or otherwise.
d.
Institutional Service.
Service. The candidate should demonstrate effective service
according to division guidelines. to the institution (1)
through contributions to the work of College committees when requested to
do so; (2) through contributions to the division, on committees and
otherwise; (3) through effective academic advising of students.
1.2 Advancement in Rank from Assistant
Professor to Associate Professor (Academic Faculty)
The candidate for promotion to the rank of
associate professor should have met all appropriate criteria for that of
assistant professor with superior
performance. Evidence for this performance should be accumulated
over a period of years in college service. Ordinarily, the candidate
should have served in the rank of assistant professor for a minimum of
four years and should have the appropriate terminal degree from an
appropriate or regionally accredited institution. Each division will
maintain a current written policy articulating appropriate Teaching and
Advising, Scholarly/Creative Activity and Professional Development, and
Service criteria for advancement from Assistant to Associate Professor.
All assistant professors may be considered for promotion upon
furnishing evidence of superior performance in each and every of the
appropriate functions of instruction, scholarship, institutional service
and public service consistent with the criteria set forth below.
Reviewers will evaluate and make recommendation for Promotion from
Instructor to Assistant Professor on the basis of the following:
Indicators of superior performance for this
rank include:
a. Candidate
Statement. A personal statement describing the faculty member's role
within
the division or other unit and including appropriate statements on all the
applicable
functions: instruction, scholarship, institutional service, and public
service. Teaching and
Advising, Scholarly/Creative Activity and Professional Development, and
Service. The
statement should describe accomplishments, plans for growth, special
problems
encountered, innovations or activities attempted, and other relevant
materials.
Appropriate documentation and evidence must should be
included. available at the
committee’s request.
b. Instruction Teaching and
advising. In addition to the demonstration of skill and competence
expected of those holding the rank of assistant professor, the candidate
should be able to contribute to the design and improvement of programs of
instruction within the College. Evidence of superior instruction
performance and of leadership in the development of courses or programs
should weigh heavily. The candidate for associate professor should
demonstrate competency appropriate to the discipline as established by the
candidate’s division.
Methods of instructional evaluation include:
Peer and division chair evaluation. Formal
written statements by at least three persons who have observed the
candidate's class performance directly during the last two years of
service at the College. One should be a member of the
candidate's own discipline, or a related discipline, one from another
division of the College, and a third by the Division Chair.
Student evaluations (formal and informal).
Student evaluations which permit comparison with division and
college‑wide norms. The candidate should present data accumulated
over a period of at least four successive years.
Other evidence of effective instruction. The
products of successful instruction such as sample student work,
descriptive material on current teaching responsibilities and practices,
and steps taken to evaluate and improve teaching.
c. Scholarship
Scholarly/Creative Activity and Professional Development. The candidate
should demonstrate continuing development or refinement of the
candidate's scholarly or creative capability should be evidenced in the
record. in this area as appropriate to the discipline.
The candidate for associate professor should demonstrate superior
performance in the application of the tools of scholarship or performance
appropriate to his or her discipline through a record of scholarly or
creative work recognized for its contributions.
Evidences of such scholarly activity include:
*Participation in state, regional, or national
study sessions, workshops, clinics, etc. dealing with new developments in
the discipline or profession;
*Engagement in organized research projects;
*Publication in scholarly journals;
*Publication of creative writing in
regional/national journals or in individual volumes;
*Presentation of papers at symposia or other
scholarly meetings;
*Design of instructional materials and/or
software;
*Award of grants or contracts;
*Exhibitions, solo and ensemble performances,
prizes and awards for creative works, commissions for creative works.
d. Institutional service.
Service The candidate should demonstrate a record of active
contribution and continuing growth as appropriate to the discipline.
to the governance of the division and of the college through (1)
service on the Faculty Senate, its standing committees, or special
committees; (2) contributions to the work of his or her division,
including committee assignments and program development; (3) contributions
to the development of the academic community; and (4) academic advising of
students. Evidence should be presented to support the expanded leadership
demonstrated by the candidate in service to the College.
e. Public service. The candidate should
demonstrate a record of service of a professional nature at the local,
state or regional level.
Evidences of such service include:
*Activity as consultant or
advisor to government agencies, school districts, professional societies,
businesses, service organizations and other groups;
*Articles in non‑scholarly publications;
*Hosting or sponsoring public or professional
groups on or off campus.
*Leadership role in a professional
organization.
f. Time in service. The candidate must
complete four years at Assistant Professor
rank before being eligible for promotion or, in exceptional cases, may
be recommended
by the division chair prior to completing four years. Application for
promotion may be
made during the fourth year.
1.3 Advancement in Rank from Associate
Professor to Professor (Academic Faculty)
All appropriate criteria leading to promotion
to the rank of associate professor should apply also to promotion to the
full professorship, and the professor should have performed at a level of
excellence. Such excellence in performance should result in a leadership
role beyond that expected of candidates for the junior ranks.
Ordinarily, a candidate should serve in the rank of associate professor
for a minimum of five years before consideration for promotion to the rank
of professor. Each division will maintain a current written policy
articulating appropriate Teaching and Advising, Scholarly/Creative
Activity and Professional Development, and Service criteria for
advancement from Associate to Full Professor. The following
criteria are directed at evidences for the continued, enthusiastic growth
in the professional skills and scholarship during his or her service in
the junior ranks to the assumption of a leadership role among the faculty
of the division and the college. Indicators of excellent performance for
this rank include: Reviewers will evaluate and make recommendation
for Promotion from Associate Professor to Professor on the basis of the
following:
a.
Candidate Statement. A personal statement describing the faculty
member's role within
the division or other unit that includes appropriate statements on all the
applicable
functions: Teaching and Advising, Scholarly/Creative Activity and
Professional
Development, and Service. instruction, scholarship,
institutional service, or public
service. The statement should describe accomplishments,
special programs encountered,
innovations or activities attempted, a plan for continued excellence, and
other relevant
materials. Appropriate documentation and evidence should be included.
available at the
committee’s request
b. Instruction Teaching and
advising. The candidate for professor should be one who has shown
show excellence in teaching and advising as appropriate to the
discipline. and positive leadership in the improvement of
instruction within his or her division, by stimulating course and program
development, by providing leadership to less experienced colleagues, by
development of methods and techniques of instruction worthy of
dissemination or circulation, and by a record of stimulating instructional
improvement through seminars and workshops.
Methods of instructional evaluation include:
Peer and division chair evaluation. Formal
written statements including at least three from persons who have observed
the candidate's class performance directly, one of whom shall be a member
of his own discipline, and one
from another division of the college, and a third by the division chair.
Student evaluations (formal and informal).
Student evaluations which permit comparison with division and
college‑wide norms. The candidate should present data accumulated
over a period of at least five successive years.
Evaluation by former students. The candidate
should submit a list of former students, no longer attending LCSC, and
from the list, his or her chairperson should select at least three; a
letter should be sent to each explaining clearly the purpose of the
questionnaire and the kinds of data desired and solicit an evaluation of
the professor's qualities as an instructor.
Other evidence of effective instruction. The
products of successful instruction such as sample student work,
descriptive material on current teaching responsibilities and practices
and steps taken to evaluate and improve teaching.
c. Scholarship.
Scholarly/Creative Activity and Professional Development. The
candidate should provide evidence of continuing scholarly and
professional growth as appropriate to the discipline.
Evidences of such growth should include those listed for promotion to
associate professor. Additionally, the candidate for promotion to the
rank of professor should be one who has assumed a leadership role in
guiding the professional activities of his or her colleagues, for example,
in encouraging research and publication, or participating in state,
regional, or national development activities.
To a greater degree than would be true of faculty in the junior ranks,
the candidate
should have attained a measure of recognition at the state, regional,
or national level.
Evidences of such recognition include:
*Special citations and awards;
*Invitations to serve on consortiums;
*Invitations to deliver lectures at other
institutions;
*Citations of one's research by other scholars;
d. Institutional service.
Service. The candidate for the rank of professor should engage in
service as appropriate to the discipline. The candidate for the
rank of professor should be one who has played a major role in the
administration or governance of the division and in the governance of the
College, and whose qualities of leadership have been recognized by
fellow faculty members.
Within the division, the candidate should have
been active in the work of major committees and may well have served as a
discipline coordinator or program director. Evidence of recognized
leadership qualities at the college level, in addition to service on
policy recommending committees, include:
*Election or appointment to selection
committees or other major ad hoc bodies;
*Committee chairships;
*Election to offices in the Faculty Senate;
*Membership on interinstitutional policy
recommending bodies.
e. Public service. The professor should
be someone who has brought recognition to the College and furthered its
goals by extending professional services to public groups and agencies to
a degree greater than that indicated for promotion to the rank of
associate professor, above.
Evidences of such service include:
*Hold office or leadership position in a
regional or national professional association;
*Consultancies
f. Time in service. The candidate
must complete five years at Associate Professor rank before being eligible
for promotion or, in exceptional cases, may be recommended by the division
chair prior to completing five years. Application for promotion may be
made during the fifth year.
Criteria for Promotion in Rank for
Professional-Technical Faculty
The strength of Technical Programs Professional-Technical
Programs is in part an extension of the quality and expertise of its
faculty. The philosophy of Technical Programs
professional-technical education on a national scale, as well as
regionally and locally, is to provide a quality educational
experience by employing hire
faculty members who are proven experts
in their crafts profession and who engage in the unique art of
teaching someone else what they know. , and from this group of
potential faculty, are chosen individuals who show that they are or can
soon become adept at the unique art of teaching someone else what they
know.
The professional development of the faculty is
an ever ongoing process, and is in keeping with the role and mission of
the institution: primarily instruction, but also includes scholarly
upgrade in both teaching skills and technical skills; both public and
institutional service; and to a lesser extent research and publication for
the professional technical faculty as a group.
The performance of a faculty member should show
increasing competence and excellence
as he or she strives to be rewarded promotion to each progressive rank.
A faculty member advancing through the ranks is expected to meet
escalating standards of performance. This process should reflect
at least competence in both technical and instructional skills upon entry
as instructor or assistant professor, and eventually demonstrating
superior and excellent technical skills and those of a master
teacher as the ranks of associate and full professor are achieved.
It is also important for the faculty member to be willing to take on an
ever‑increasing role in the governance and other activities in the
institution, and to some extent provide assistance in the professional
development of new faculty as they arrive, so that they will have a chance
to become firmly established primarily in their teaching role.
In addition to the specific criteria for
promotion listed, other indicators of success can be used to determine the
performance of faculty. These may include but are not limited to:
primarily instruction, scholarly upgrade in both teaching skills and
technical skills; public and institutional service; research and
publication, recruitment efforts, student retention in the programs,
and a high percentage of positive placement of
graduates into the job market, and in the instructional area,
new and innovative teaching methods used, effectiveness of the live
shop environment, and especially the emphasis on performance‑based
instruction as dictated by industry. It is also important that the
level of competence of the students doing performance‑based tasks can be
accurately evaluated.
For staff faculty whose duties
are primarily mainly instructional, teaching and activities
that develop and improve instruction will be primary considerations.
Since the vocational Professional-Technical disciplines
vary, it is recognized that the faculty perform varied kinds of tasks and
that the value placed on each category of functions‑‑instruction,
scholarship, public service, and institutional service Teaching;
Advising: Curriculum Development; Scholarly Activity/Professional
Development; and Service‑‑must be adapted to the different roles and
may differ by discipline program. It is up to the
discipline program, or more specifically the promotion
committee itself, to weigh these criteria, especially those not
specifically spelled out in the promotion requirements. This weighing of
values must be considered consistently by
division, faculty committee, chair, dean, vice president, and president
all reviewers in order to ensure consistency with the intent
of this policy.
Dual-Track Process
The
Professional-Technical faculty member may choose to apply for either the
academic or business/industry-based path. Thus, it is expressly noted
that there are two paths for Professional-Technical faculty.
Professional-Technical faculty may choose a business/industry-based path
that emphasizes professional growth as evidenced by individual
professional development activities (which may include return-to-industry
work). This business/industry-based path leads to Professor rank.
Professional-Technical faculty members who wish to move through the
academic ranks will need to fulfill the requirements as listed in the
specific promotion criteria respective to each rank. This academic degree
path leads to the Professor rank.
A. Basic Promotion Criteria
1.0 Promotion from one rank to the next will
be determined on the basis of the following indicators of competence:
a. Evidence of teaching ability as
shown by vocational Professional-Technical certification by the
State of Idaho
b. Acceptable competence in the
performance of job description as evidenced by the by
Division Chair recommendation
c. Time in service at present rank
1.1 In addition, the following areas will be
considered as defined on each Job Description and Annual Plan:
Job Description/Annual Performance Review:
a. Service to the community and/or
college
b. Professional development and continuous
professional growth as evidenced by a professional development plan filed
with the Office of the Dean respective Division Chair’s Office
with achievement in such areas as: coursework, content activities,
related work experiences, and experience in research, publications,
exhibitions, presentations, workshops, technical consultations, and
return to industry.
c. Student evaluations. Student
Reaction to Instruction forms, other forms of student evaluations and/or
industry evaluations.
d. Division chair and peer evaluations
B. Specific Promotion Criteria
1.0 Lecturer
This position is reserved for faculty members hired to teach lower
division and
developmental courses for which they
have appropriate preparation. INDIVIDUALS
APPOINTED AS LECTURERS WILL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR
PROMOTION OR TENURE.
1.1 Instructor to Assistant Professor
In addition to the basic criteria:
a.
Candidate Statement. A personal statement describing the faculty member's
role within the division or other unit and including appropriate
statements on all the following functions: Teaching; Advising: Curriculum
Development; Scholarly
Activity/Professional Development; and Service. The statement should
describe accomplishments, plans for growth, special problems encountered,
innovations or activities attempted, and other relevant materials.
Appropriate documentation and evidence should be available at the
committee’s request.
a.b.
Additional education beyond the entry-level certification requirements of
the State Division of Vocational Education
Professional-Technical Education as evidenced by the completion of the
following:
1. Sixty clock hours of pre‑service teacher
education to provide increased competence in instructional functions such
as instructional design, delivery, and evaluation, or current teaching
certification.
2. Thirty clock hours of work identified by
a personal needs assessment and formalized in a Personalized In-service
Training Plan Professional Development Plan.
Fifteen hours of this work must include return
to industry or discipline specific renewal content.
b.c.
Time in service at instructor rank: two years minimum, or
exceptional cases, may be
recommended by the division chair prior to this time period. or
sooner with division chair
recommendation.
c.d.
Evidence of increased teaching competence as shown by a current Type
"A", "B" or "D" Standard Vocational Certification A
Postsecondary Limited Occupational Specialist Certificate or a
standard secondary teaching certificate with appropriate vocational
professional-technical endorsements. (See Idaho Credentials
Standards for Postsecondary Professional-Technical Faculty and
Administrators for the most recent revision of standards).
d.e
Show evidence of professional competence by:
1. Each candidate must demonstrateing
teaching effectiveness through a Portfolio presented to Committee
that is included in the promotion packet, which will include
student evaluations.
2. Demonstrated teaching effectiveness as
determined by division chair recommendations based upon student
evaluations.
1.2 Assistant Professor to Associate
Professor
a. Candidate Statement. A personal statement describing the
faculty member's role within
the division or other unit and including appropriate statements on all
the following
functions: Teaching; Advising: Curriculum Development;
Scholarly Activity/Professional
Development; and Service. The statement should describe
accomplishments, plans for
growth, special problems encountered, innovations or activities
attempted, and other
relevant materials. Appropriate documentation and evidence should be
available at the
committee’s request.
a.b.
Four years at Assistant Professor rank completed before being eligible for
promotion or, in exceptional cases, recommendation by division
chair prior to completion of four years. Application for promotion may be
made during the fourth year.
b.c.
Evidence of increased teaching competence as shown by c Completion
of requirements for Standard Vocational Specialist Certificate or
Postsecondary Standard Occupational Specialist Certificate. (See
Idaho Certification Standards Handbook Idaho Credentials Standards
for Postsecondary Professional-Technical Faculty and Administrators
for the most recent revision of standards).
c.d.
Business Technology and Service faculty with the exception of Graphics
Arts/Printing must obtain A a minimum of a bachelor’s
degree at this rank for faculty in Office and Business
Technology and Related Instructional Services Divisions. Graphic
Arts/Printing, Technical, and Industrial faculty are not required to have
a degree at this rank.
d.e.
Professional-Technical faculty pursuing the business/industry-based
path The candidates who are not required to complete the bachelor’s
degree must show proof of the following:
1. Evidence of escalating teaching and
professional competence as shown by completion of eight or more academic
credits since entering into the teaching profession. These credits should
be part of an organized Professional Development Plan that results in a
cohesive core of educational competence. These should include Tteacher
Eeducation, professional education in one's discipline or
accumulated trade competency equivalent hours. Noncredit Pprofessional
education workshops development activities will be
accepted at a ratio of one credit for 15 clock hours.
2. Show evidence of
professional responsibility by:
a. Demonstrated teaching superiority as
determined by student evaluations for at least four successive years.
b. Demonstrated teaching superiority as
determined by division chair evaluations for the past two years and peer
evaluation by colleagues in the area.
c. Demonstrated industrial competence
resulting from continuous experience in private sector, if applicable.
d. Other evidence of superior
instruction. The products of successful instruction such as sample
student work, descriptive material on current teaching responsibilities
and practices, and steps taken to evaluate and improve teaching.
1.3 Associate Professor to Full Professor
In addition to the basic criteria:
a. Candidate Statement. A personal
statement describing the faculty member's role within the division or
other unit and including appropriate statements on all the following
functions: Teaching; Advising: Curriculum Development;
Scholarly Activity/Professional Development; and Service. The
statement should describe accomplishments, plans for growth, special
problems encountered, innovations or activities attempted, and other
relevant materials. Appropriate documentation and evidence should be
available at the committee’s request
a.b.
Five years at Associate Professor rank completed. Application for
promotion or recommendation by division chair prior to completion of
four years may be made in the fifth year.
b.c.
Professional-Technical faculty pursuing the academic degree path must
complete the Completion of terminal degree in related field
(See policy 2.106).
c.d.
Professional-Technical faculty pursuing the business/industry-based
path The candidate who does not complete the terminal degree
must show proof of the following:
Evidence of escalating teaching and
professional competence as evidenced by
c Completion of 40 or more academic credits since entry into
the teaching profession. These credits should be part of an organized
Pprofessional Ddevelopment Plan that
results in a cohesive core of educational competence. Course work should
include Tteacher Eeducation, professional
education in one's discipline and the accumulated SBVE State
Division of Professional-Technical Education trade competency
equivalent hours. Non-credit professional education workshops
development activities will be accepted at a ratio of one credit for
15 clock hours.
de.
Current Type "A", "B" or "D" Advanced Vocational Certification
Postsecondary Advanced Occupational Specialist Certificate or a
standards or advanced secondary teaching certificate with
appropriate vocational endorsements.
1. See Idaho Certification
Standards Handbook Idaho Credentials Standards for
Postsecondary
Professional-Technical Faculty and Administrators (most recent
revision) for specific teacher education classes required to maintain
certification.
2. Secure an additional 160 hours of
employment in the specific occupational field or 30 cumulative hours of
attendance at technical related conferences, institutes or
workshops as approved by the State Division of Vocational Education
Professional-Technical Education.
ef.
Show evidence of teaching responsibility and excellence as determined by:
1. Student evaluations covering at least
five successive years, and
2. Division chair evaluations for the
past two years while in this rank.
3. Other evidence of effective
instruction. The products of successful instruction such as sample
student work, descriptive material on current teaching responsibilities
and practices, and steps taken to evaluate and improve teaching.
·
Terminal degrees or certification are
found in Appendix A.
C. Appendix A: Terminal
Degrees (See policy 2.106)
APPENDIX B:
SABBATICAL LEAVE:
Draft 4/16/04
LEWIS-CLARK STATE COLLEGE
SABBATICAL RECOMMENDATION FORM
COVER SHEET
DATE:
______________ NAME: __________________________________
DIVISION:
_____________________________________________________
FACULTY RANK:
_______________________________________________
Indicate the nature of
your request:
_____ One year at half pay
beginning _________________________________
(date)
_____ One-half year at
full pay beginning ______________________________
(date)
_____ Other (please
explain)________________________________________
(date)
For Faculty Development Committee use
Proposal Ranking ____________ of
______________________________________
Recommended by:
____________________________________________________
Chair, Faculty Development Committee date
LEWIS-CLARK STATE COLLEGE
SABBATICAL LEAVE REQUEST FORM
DATE: __________________ NAME:
_______________________________________
DIVISION: __________________________ RANK:
___________________________
I. Purpose of sabbatical leave: (Attach
additional sheets as needed.)
II. How purpose is to be achieved:
(Including how extraordinary expenses will be covered. Attach additional
sheets as needed.)
III.
Expected benefits: (Proposal should
indicate linkages among contribution to the faculty, division, college,
and profession. (Attach additional sheets as needed.)
How will your sabbatical benefit your
personal renewal?
How will your sabbatical benefit students
and teaching?
How will
your sabbatical benefit your scholarly/creative activity and professional
development?
How will your sabbatical benefit your
profession and division?
F.
Does your proposal include a prestigious award, such as a Fulbright?
Please explain.
IV. Additional Information:
A. Number of years served as full-time
faculty member or number of years since last sabbatical leave at this
institution:
FROM: ________ ________
TO: ________ ________
(month)
(year)
(month)
(year)
TOTAL YEARS___________
B. If you have received sabbatical leave in
the past from this institution, indicate purpose and time:
C. If you expect to engage in any
money-earning activities during the time of your sabbatical, please
explain:
Attach a current vita
to this application and submit three (3) 8 copies to the
chair of the Faculty Development Committee. Submit one (1) each to your
division chair and dean.
REVISED 5/03
APPENDIX C:
CURRICULUM REPORT:
We request approval for
the following routine curricular changes:
BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY
AND SERVICE DIVISION
Change in Major For
Early Childhood Development:
(T04-338, T04-339)
Add course numbers to
BTS prefix: (T04-341)
Change Program Title
for Legal Assistant: (T04-367)
Add Prerequisites to
Digital Image Preparation Courses and Cooperative Education:
(T04-368, T04-369, T04-370, T04-371)
Change in Degree
Requirements for Medical Office AAS:
(T04-372)
NURSING DIVISION
Add new course in
Radiobiology: (A04-328)
HUMANITIES DIVISION
Add new courses – Study
Abroad and Theater Practicum:
(A04-373, A04-375)
Change in Course Number
for Forensics and Theater Activities:
(A04-374)
Change Catalog
Description for Communication Theory, Elementary Spanish, Intermediate
Spanish: (A04-376, A04-378, A04-379)
Change Program
Description and Program Requirements for Spanish and Upper Divison
English: (A04-380, A04-387)
NATURAL SCIENCES
Change in Course
Prerequisites for Principles of Chemistry I:
(A04-386)
|
