Confidentiality promotes candor and honesty among faculty and administrators involved with evaluation of faculty. Therefore, members of review committees and administrators will maintain confidentiality, whether at the planning unit, school, or College levels.
With the exception of confidential evaluative letters from colleagues external to Ithaca College, evaluative letters from alumni concerning teaching, and evaluative letters concerning service, the contents of the tenure and/or promotion file are open for review by the faculty member at any stage of the review process. Once it has been submitted by the faculty member, the file may not be physically removed by the candidate from the office of the person or body currently in possession of the document. A faculty member who wishes to examine the file will contact the person or body currently reviewing the file to make the appropriate arrangements.
4.12.2 Teaching, Scholarship/Professional Activity, Service
The primary responsibility of faculty at the College is teaching. The second important responsibility is scholarship and/or professional activity. Service is another important faculty responsibility. The goal of the faculty is overall excellence in the performance of these responsibilities.
Teaching is interpreted in its broadest sense to include academic guidance and intellectual motivation as well as classroom, laboratory, and studio instruction.
The characteristics of an excellent teacher are difficult to define as teachers must adapt to the particular subject matter, educational objectives, and instructional environment. With those caveats in mind, the following description is presented in order to provide guidance as to some of the characteristics of an excellent teacher.
An excellent teacher:
- Has command of the subject, an analytical approach to the material, and recognizes and contrasts variant interpretations of the data where appropriate;
- is informed of current work in the field, and has an ability to show the relationship between the particular subject and other areas of knowledge;
- demonstrates the ability to clearly explain expectations and subject matter, recognizes the students' level of comprehension, defines class objectives;
- summarizes major points, organizes the material logically, and emphasizes crucial ideas;
- encourages student participation, welcomes interaction with students, and is sensitive to the response of the class;
- deals ethically with students and seeks rapport with them;
- motivates and challenges students and is dedicated to the subject and the teaching profession;
- displays self-confidence, and communicates a sense of excitement for the pursuit of knowledge.
Academic advising is an important faculty responsibility. An advisor helps students:
- assess academic strengths and weaknesses;
- explore intellectual and career interests and goals;
- develop plans for a coherent academic program, monitor progress toward their degrees;
- evaluate their academic options; and
- understand the consequences of their decisions.
Academic advising has both developmental and prescriptive aspects. Developmental advising assists students in making the transition to higher education and making the transition from college to the world of work and/or continuing education. Prescriptive advising helps students understand the requirements of academic programs and the regulations of the College so they can take advantage of the many educational opportunities offered.
Advisors help students assume responsibility for their educational decision-making and access resources on campus where they can obtain academic counsel, assistance, and support. Advisors provide sufficient time for advising and maintain confidentiality in the advising relationship.
As teachers, scholars, and artists, faculty are expected to contribute to the fields of knowledge within their expertise. Scholarship and professional activity are manifested in many ways - for example, by research, paper presentations, publications, editorships, creative performance and exhibits, and by continued study in the discipline.
The primary standard for assessing scholarship is external peer review or endorsement. It is the duty of the school or planning unit to specify what constitutes meaningful peer review or endorsement in a given academic area. These criteria must be included in approved bylaws, policies and procedures. Upon initial adoption or revision by the provost and VPAA, the standards adopted by individual planning units and schools will be incorporated into Volume IV of this Ithaca College Policy Manual.
The specific form and intensity of scholarly activity within the College appropriately varies between academic departments due to inherent differences among the disciplines and includes, for example, articles in journals, research monographs, scholarly books, treatises, chapters in larger works, papers presented at academic meetings, and published instructional materials. In addition to traditional written works, scholarship may encompass peer reviewed activities that advance professional practice - stage productions, musical performances, art exhibits, mathematical and scientific formulas, and software creation.
The types of scholarship and assessment criteria are set forth below. Again, it is the task of planning units to elucidate in their policies and procedures how these criteria apply within their academic areas.
The College embraces five basic types of research activity adapted from the Boyer model of scholarship. The five categories defined below do not embrace the entire range of valuable scholarship, nor are they listed in order of priority. Rather, the categories denote five areas of scholarly activity that the College has chosen to recognize as particularly significant. By defining these categories, the College makes it possible for faculty members and individual academic planning units to identify more clearly the role of scholarship at the College.
- The Scholarship of Discovery encompasses those activities that extend the stock of human knowledge through the discovery or collection of new information. Such scholarship seeks to confront the unknown and typically exhibits a dedication to free inquiry, disciplined investigation, and the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake. The Scholarship of Discovery includes, but is not limited to, what is sometimes referred to as basic or original research.
Examples of the Scholarship of Discovery may be drawn from the sciences, such as the development of new materials and drugs, the discovery of unknown physical phenomena, and the identification of laws governing physics or mathematics. Across the disciplines, many types of empirical research, involving the use of quantitative techniques from the social sciences, fall within the Scholarship of Discovery. Work that is so highly original that it cannot fairly be regarded as merely interpretive, interdisciplinary or an extension of the work of others may constitute the Scholarship of Discovery.
- The Scholarship of Integration encompasses scholarly activities that are primarily interdisciplinary or interpretive in nature. Such scholarship seeks to better understand existing knowledge by making connections across disciplines, illuminating data in a revealing manner, drawing together isolated factors, or placing known information into broader contexts. It synthesizes, interprets, and connects the findings in a way that brings new meaning to those facts.
- Interdisciplinary works, such as those that use economic or psychological analysis, may qualify as Scholarship of Integration. The same is true of evaluative and interpretive works, such as review essays, which probe the merits of another's work from a particular viewpoint, such as a religious, political, or gender-based perspective.
- The Scholarship of Application encompasses scholarly activities that seek to relate the knowledge in one's field to the affairs of society. Such scholarship moves toward engagement beyond academia in a variety of ways, such as by using social problems as the agenda for scholarly investigation, drawing upon existing knowledge for the purpose of crafting solutions to social problems, or making information or ideas accessible to the public.
- Examples of the Scholarship of Application include such diverse forms of endeavor as drafts of model legislation; articles and books examining the legal, economic, or ethical implications of new social phenomena; editorials and opinion pieces involving issues in one's discipline; and certain types of research in the applied sciences.
- The Scholarship of Teaching encompasses scholarly activities that are directly related to pedagogical practices. Such scholarship seeks to improve the teaching and advising of students through discovery, evaluation, and transmission of information about the learning process.
- Examples of the Scholarship of Teaching include publications about pedagogy and methodology, development and publication of instructional materials, the conduct of workshops on innovative teaching methods, and the creation of computer exercises in areas relating to one's discipline.
- The Scholarship of Artistic Endeavor encompasses scholarly activities that are directly related to the creative process, especially in the fine or applied arts. Such scholarship may seek to bring about new artistic creations or to present existing works.
- Examples of the Scholarship of Artistic Endeavor include stage presentations (both drama and music), exhibitions, new editions of music or visual art, musical performances, art exhibits, and the creation of new art forms or new techniques within an art form.
Some works of scholarship have attributes that legitimately fall within more than one of the categories. For example, the scholarship of application partially overlaps with the requirement of service. In cases where public service involves the direct application of knowledge in one’s field to the affairs of society, the work counts toward satisfaction of both service and scholarship requirements for promotion, retention, and salary increases – provided the activity encompasses some facet of peer review or endorsement.
Similarly, the Scholarship of Teaching must be distinguished from teaching itself. The Scholarship of Teaching involves the discovery, evaluation, and transmission of information about the learning process. Teaching, in contrast, involves the application of that information through actual instruction.
Service includes both ad hoc, standing committees, and other ongoing activities within the planning unit, school, and College. In addition, faculty may choose to serve in external professional organizations, or provide service to the community related to one’s area of academic expertise.
Planning unit and/or School service is expected of all full-time (non-tenure-eligible notice, tenure eligible, and tenured) faculty. All other faculty may participate in service activities. Activities include, but are not limited to, participation in scheduled planning unit and school meetings, and participation on planning unit,and school committees. Other activities may include such duties as participating in admission-related events and being available to alumni.
This section applies only to non-unionized faculty. Terms and conditions of employment for faculty who are represented by a union should are governed by the applicable collective bargaining agreement.
All non-tenure eligible notice, tenure eligible, and tenured faculty are expected to attend Commencement, formal convocations of the College, and all-College faculty meetings; all faculty may participate. The standing committees of the College are a very important part of faculty responsibility, and availability for service on these standing committees and on all-College ad hoc committees is expected of all faculty. No faculty member shall be expected to serve on more than one all-College standing committee at a time.
Subject to planning unit and school standards, service to the profession may be considered as a partial substitute for service to the planning unit, school, and College. Professional service includes, for example, holding office in a professional organization, refereeing grant proposals for an external agency, or professional service in agencies or organizations. Planning unit standards should be written clearly and transparently, clarifying what and how much partial substitution for service to the profession is acceptable.
Subject to planning unit and school standards, service related to one’s area of professional endeavor provided to the community may be considered as a component of service to the planning unit, school, and College.
College policy requires periodic gathering of students’ course feedback for all faculty members. Subject to planning unit and school standards, feedback forms are administered at regular intervals each year, to be used as one element of evidence in the evaluation of a faculty member’s teaching.
Each planning unit or school develops appropriate and detailed personnel policies, standards, and procedures for appointment of faculty, reappointment of faculty, evaluation of faculty, and consideration of faculty for tenure and/or promotion.
In those schools in which different planning units develop separate personnel policies, standards, and procedures, the school's faculty selects a committee which reviews those planning unit personnel policies, standards, and procedures. The policies must be fair and appropriate across the school, and must comply with Volume IV of the Ithaca College Policy Manual (Faculty Handbook).
All planning unit and school personnel policies, standards, and procedures require the approval of the provost & vice president for academic affairs and the president. In reviewing such personnel policies, standards, and procedures, the provost and president will ensure that they are in compliance with the Ithaca College Policy Manual and are fair and appropriate across the College. In addition, the provost & vice president for academic affairs may call upon the All-College Faculty Tenure and Promotion Committee or a committee created by Faculty Council for the purpose of assisting in the review of planning unit and school personnel policies, standards, and procedures.
All faculty who will be offered appointment for the next academic year must receive annual evaluations for salary. These evaluations will consider teaching, scholarly/professional activity, and service.
If an annual evaluation of a tenured faculty member manifests the existence of serious instructional deficiencies which are deemed likely to persist, then further evaluation as described in section 4.14 must be conducted. This is the only circumstance in which such evaluation will be initiated.
All tenured faculty receive a cumulative written evaluation at least once every seven years. The value of the cumulative evaluation is that it provides the perspective of several years. For a tenured faculty member, the sole purpose of this evaluation is to aid in maintaining and enhancing the faculty member's overall excellence as a faculty member. In particular, for a tenured faculty member, the results of the cumulative evaluation will be given only to the faculty member. Cumulative evaluations should be conducted by a group of the faculty member's colleagues as specified in approved planning unit or school procedures. These approved planning unit or school procedures should specify what materials will be used in the evaluation, by what procedures, and with what frequency the evaluation will be conducted. For example, the cumulative written evaluation could incorporate evaluations and largely rely on a summary of them. Moreover, cumulative evaluations might rely on written statements by the faculty member being evaluated or on written statements by peers, the chair, and/or the dean. An evaluation of teaching must not rely exclusively on student statements and/or summaries of student statement. For tenure-eligible faculty, the more extensive evaluation for tenure or renewal of appointment will replace a cumulative evaluation; for non-tenure-eligible, adjunct, and tenured faculty, the more extensive evaluation for promotion will replace a cumulative evaluation.
An individual in a tenure-eligible position may present a written request to the chair or dean at any time asking that a written evaluation of the individual's progress be conducted by the chair, by an appropriate personnel committee, or by the dean. The results of the evaluation will be made available to the faculty member by the end of the following semester.
Major formal evaluations for tenure-eligible faculty normally occur in the second and fourth tenure-eligible years of a tenure-eligible notice appointment, as specified in planning unit and/or school policies and procedures. The tenure review normally occurs in the sixth year. When a faculty member comes to the College with credit for prior experience, the major formal review takes place at the mid-point of the stipulated tenure-eligible period. Departures from the above timetables providing more or less frequent formal reviews must be proposed by the planning unit and/or school and approved by the dean and provost & vice president for academic affairs.
In exceptional circumstances, prior to the tenure and promotion review, a candidate may request an extension of the probationary period. Such a request must be approved by the dean and provost/VPAA, in consultation with the planning unit personnel committee. As in all evaluations pertaining to tenure and promotion, the candidate will not be involved in these discussions.
In preparing and presenting a personnel file for formal review, a tenure-eligible faculty member and the faculty member's colleagues must follow the Procedures for File Preparation and Presentation. The Procedures are attached as an appendix to Volume IV of the Ithaca College Policy Manual. When a file reaches the first level of review it will be verified as complete employing a standard checklist available on the Provost’s Office website. If the tenure-eligible faculty member’s file departs from the Procedures for File Preparation and Presentation without approval as described below, any committee or individual in the review process should refuse to consider the file until it conforms with the procedures. Individual variations from the Procedures for File Preparation and Presentation are only permitted when approved by the planning unit, dean, and provost & vice president for academic affairs. Such exceptions must be approved before the file is submitted, must be in writing, and must be included in the file.
- In the second-year evaluation, there must be evidence that the terminal degree or the professional equivalent will be completed by the end of the third year, unless otherwise specified in the original letter of appointment. Peer evaluations of teaching and of student statements must demonstrate the potential for making significant progress toward the attainment of teaching excellence.
- The fourth year evaluation must show evidence of:
- Significant progress toward the attainment of teaching excellence (see Faculty Handbook section 220.127.116.11);
- Scholarship and/or appropriate professional activity beyond the terminal degree (see Faculty Handbook section 18.104.22.168); and
- Service in various combinations provided to the planning unit, school, College, profession, or community (see Faculty Handbook Sections 22.214.171.124.1-4). Service may be contingent upon opportunity/eligibility.
- The formal mid-point review of a faculty member who comes to the College with credit for prior experience must show evidence of:
- Significant progress toward the attainment of teaching excellence (See Faculty Handbook section 126.96.36.199);
- Scholarship and/or appropriate professional actrivity beyond the terminal degree (see Faculty Handbook section 188.8.131.52); and
- Service in various combinations provided to the planning unit, school, College, profession, or community (See Faculty Handbook section 184.108.40.206.1-4
- Copies of all written assessments of a candidate as described above will be provided to all personnel involved in the review process.
At the College the only criteria for tenure and/or promotion are those stated in 4.1.5-6 of the Ithaca College Policy Manual. Primary among these is teaching excellence. Another important criterion is a record of scholarly/professional attainment. A third criterion is service.
Attainment of the appropriate terminal degree or its professional equivalent is necessary but not sufficient for either tenure or promotion. For appointments to certain professional, technical, and artistic fields, commensurate preparation for appointment to a given rank may be recognized. Any additional exceptions to these criteria must be set forth in the letter of appointment and agreed to by the faculty member, planning unit, dean, provost & vice president for academic affairs, and president. In addition to the qualifications of the individual faculty member, reappointment and tenure are subject to the long-range curricular and staffing needs of the College as specified in the previously approved staffing plans.
A candidate for tenure is expected to fulfill the criteria specified for promotion to associate professor. A candidate for tenure who was appointed at the rank of professor is expected to fulfill the criteria for promotion to professor. A tenure-eligible notice faculty member holding the rank of assistant or associate professor normally is not promoted prior to the tenure review.
Faculty who have held non-tenure-eligible notice appointments in a school at Ithaca College, and who currently hold a tenure-eligible notice appointment (without interruption) are eligible for promotion under the same rules which would have applied had they continued in non-tenure-eligible notice appointments.
Each candidate's application for tenure and/or promotion will be reviewed by a committee or committees in accordance with approved planning unit and/or school procedures. Candidates should refer to planning unit and/or school procedures.
Tenure and/or promotion shall be granted only to faculty who have fulfilled all the prescribed requirements and whose credentials have been duly reviewed by the faculty of the planning unit (where appropriate), the chair (where appropriate), as well as the dean, the All-College Faculty Tenure and Promotion Committee, the provost & vice president for academic affairs, and the president. The president presents all recommendations, including the president's own, to the Ithaca College Board of Trustees.
The responsibility for requesting consideration for tenure and/or promotion and for preparing the review file rests initially with the faculty member. In order to be considered for tenure and/or promotion, the faculty member must make a formal request to the dean on or before the date specified in the school and department personnel policies.
Note that the candidate may file an appeal, on procedural grounds only, after a recommendation at any level. Criteria and procedures for an appeal are specified in 220.127.116.11.
- In the spring semester prior to the review, on or before the date specified in the school and planning unit personnel policies, the candidate notifies the dean of the candidate’s intention to seek tenure and/or promotion.
- If a reviewing faculty members’ administrative or service duties create the possibility of voting on or reviewing a particular tenure and/or promotion case at more than one level, that faculty member may participate in the review process at one level only. The reviewing faculty member will recuse themself at all other levels of review.
- At any time in the promotion process, prior to the recommendation by the All-College Tenure and Promotion Committee, the candidate may withdraw the request for promotion without prejudice. If a candidate withdraws the request for promotion after the recommendation by the All-College Faculty Tenure and Promotion Committee or Provost and VPAA, or if promotion is denied, then the candidate may not request consideration for promotion in the next academic year.
If specified in the approved planning unit or school procedures, the planning unit:
- Evaluates the performance of the candidate and drafts a recommendation with justifications. A copy of the recommendation is provided to the candidate.
- Before forwarding to the next level of review, the planning unit and/or school committee will offer the faculty member the opportunity to respond either in writing or in a meeting, or both. The candidate will have a minimum of three working days from the receipt of the recommendation to accept or decline this opportunity.
- Following the responses, if they occur, the committee will consider whether to amend its recommendation. If it has been amended, the revised recommendation will be provided to the candidate.
- The planning unit and/or school committee will forward this recommendation and the review file to the faculty member’s chair.
If specified in the approved planning unit or school procedures, the planning unit chair:
- Reviews the recommendation of the planning unit for compliance with policies and procedures.
- If the chair is not satisfied that an evaluation thus far has complied with policies and procedures, the chair must return the recommendation with suggestions to the previous reviewing body for reconsideration and response. Copies of these communications are provided to the candidate.
- The chair evaluates the performance of the candidate and drafts a separate and independent recommendation with justifications. A copy of the recommendation is provided to the candidate.
- Before forwarding to the next level of review, the chair will offer to meet with the candidate. The candidate will have a minimum of three working days to accept or decline the offer of a meeting. Following the meeting, if one takes place, the chair will consider whether to amend their recommendation. If it has been amended following a meeting with the candidate, the revised recommendation will be provided to the candidate.
- The chair will forward this recommendation and the review file to the school personnel committee, if relevant, or to the appropriate Dean.
If specified in the approved school procedures, a school personnel committee:
- Reviews the recommendation of the planning unit and chair for compliance with policies and procedures.
- If the school committee is not satisfied that an evaluation thus far has complied with policies and procedures, the committee must return the recommendation with suggestions to the previous reviewer or body for reconsideration and response. Copies of these communications are provided to the candidate.
- The school committee evaluates the performance of the candidate and drafts a recommendation with justifications. A copy of the recommendation is provided to the candidate.
- Before forwarding to the next level of review, the committee will offer to meet with the candidate. The candidate will have a minimum of three working days to accept or decline the offer of a meeting. Following the meeting, if one takes place, the committee will consider whether to amend its recommendation. If it has been amended following a meeting with the candidate, the revised recommendation will be provided to the candidate.
- The committee will forward this recommendation and the review file to the appropriate Dean.
- Reviews all previous recommendations for compliance with policies and procedures.
- If the Dean is not satisfied that an evaluation thus far has complied with policies and procedures, the Dean must return the recommendation with suggestions to the reviewing body whose recommendation is out of compliance for reconsideration and response. Copies of these communications are provided to the candidate and prior reviewing bodies (typically the planning unit personnel committee).
- The Dean evaluates the performance of the candidate and drafts a recommendation with justifications. A copy of the recommendation is provided to the candidate.
- When the Dean is satisfied that the evaluations have complied with all policies and procedures, the file along with the recommendation will be forwarded to the All-College Tenure and Promotion Committee and the Provost/VPAA.
- The Dean provides the faculty member with written copies of all recommendations being forwarded to the All-College Faculty Tenure and Promotion Committee and the Provost/VPAA. The faculty member may choose to submit additional documentation for clarification purposes only. Notification to submit additional material must be received by the Provost/VPAA within three business days of the faculty member’s receipt of the Dean’s recommendation. The additional information must be submitted within the time period determined by the Provost/VPAA in consultation with the faculty member. The planning unit/school personnel review committee, chair (as appropriate), and Dean must be given a chance to comment on such additional information before the Provost/VPAA and the All-College Faculty Tenure and Promotion Committee consider it in rendering their final decision on the issues of tenure and/or promotion.
The All-College Tenure and Promotion Committee:
- Makes a recommendation on tenure and/or promotion following the procedures in section 18.104.22.168.
- Reviews all previous evaluations for compliance with policies and procedures.
- If after receiving the recommendation of the All-College Faculty Tenure and Promotion Committee the Provost/VPAA is not satisfied that the review has complied with policies and procedures, the Provost/VPAA must return the recommendation with suggestions to the previous reviewer or body for reconsideration and response. Copies of these communications are provided to the candidate and prior reviewing bodies.
- Evaluates the performance of the candidate and drafts a recommendation with justifications. A copy of the recommendation is provided to the candidate and prior reviewing individuals and bodies (the Dean, and typically the planning unit personnel committee). The candidate shall be provided three days to appeal a negative recommendation of the Provost to the Faculty Personnel Appeals Committee before the Provost and VPAA forwards all recommendations to the President.
- When the Provost/VPAA is satisfied that the evaluations have complied with all policies and procedures, the file along with the recommendation will be forwarded to the President.
- Evaluates the performance of the candidate and drafts a recommendation with justifications. A copy of the recommendation is provided to the candidate.
- Forwards all recommendations, including the President’s own, to the Board of Trustees.
The Board of Trustees
A formal resolution, adopted by the Board of Trustees, is required for the conferral of tenure and/or promotion. A candidate for tenure and/or promotion is notified of the board’s action within two weeks after the board meeting at which the faculty member’s candidacy is considered.
Tenure is granted in the faculty member’s planning unit. If approved staffing plan changes (see section 4.9.8) result in the transfer of a tenured faculty member from one planning unit to another, tenure will be transferred to the faculty member’s new planning unit.
Tenure and/or promotion become effective on the first day of the contract for the next academic year.
Full-time administrators holding faculty rank shall be eligible to be considered for promotion only if a majority of faculty of that individual's planning unit has agreed by secret ballot to such consideration. The criteria for promotion are the same as for any other faculty member.
Policies and procedures pertaining to NTEN faculty appointment renewal are those established by planning unit or school bylaws. Faculty members on NTEN appointments seeking clarification on their planning unit’s appointment renewal procedures should consult with their personnel committee chairperson and/or dean.
Policies and procedures pertaining to part-time per-course and adjunct faculty evaluation refer to Article 17 of the SEIU Collective Bargaining Agreement between Ithaca College and SEIU Local 200.
Regardless of the type of review undertaken (annual merit review, tenure and promotion review, post tenure review), it is important that each be based on solid, consistent, and clear documentation. It is incumbent upon each faculty member to document teaching, scholarship, and service activities, continuing professional development, honors, and awards. Documentation of the evaluation criteria listed below may include but should not be limited to the following:
- Peer evaluations;
- Student statements;
- A review of course syllabi by peers;
- Further course work or other continuing education in one's field;
- Participation in seminars or workshops designed to improve teaching or advising skills;
- Awards, fellowships, grants, etc.;
- Election to a scholarly or professional post;
- Letters of reference from organizations, student groups, and individuals; and
- Evidence of scholarship consistent with departmental, planning unit, or school bylaws; and
- Evaluations by applicable dean.
Last Updated: May 25, 2021