300.205.3 Procedures to Apply for Promotion in Rank
300.205.3.1 Academic Rank (Recognized Ranks at Montana Tech)
300.205.3.1.1 Instructor
This rank shall include both instructors, those who generally teach lower division and certificate-level courses, and instructor/lab directors, those who primary duties include teaching undergraduate laboratory courses, managing laboratories, supervising student employees and maintaining a safe laboratory environment. While level may be available within the rank, it is not normally expected that an instructor would become a Professor. Continued excellence in duties described above, along with continued effort and accomplishment in the areas of professional development and service, are expected for continued employment. In either case, there shall be three (3) levels; Instructor I; Instructor II; Instructor III. The minimum levels of education and experience for each level shall be: Faculty approved the following ranks at the April 26, 2005
Faculty Meeting:
Level I: No degree through appropriate Bachelor’s degree.
Level II: Either an appropriate Master’s degree or an appropriate Bachelor’s degree with five (5) years of full-time related teaching or occupational experience.
Level III: Appropriate doctorate degree or a Master’s degree and five (5) years of full-time related teaching experience at an accredited postsecondary institution.
300.205.3.1.2 Assistant Professor
Assistant Professor is the normal entry-level rank for faculty associated with the baccalaureate and graduate programs. An Assistant Professor at the time of initial employment is not expected to possess a great deal of expertise in research, teaching and service, but the potential must exist for rapidly developing excellence in these areas.
300.205.3.1.3 Associate Professor
The rank of Associate Professor designates those who have achieved considerable expertise in research, teaching and service and are making a significant contribution in their field. Competence and accomplishment in all areas of evaluation are necessary for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor.
300.205.3.1.4 Professor
The rank of Professor is reserved for those who have reached the top of their profession. In order to be promoted to the rank of Professor, it shall be necessary for a candidate to demonstrate excellence in two of three areas evaluated (teaching, research and service). Good effort and accomplishment must be demonstrated in the third area. A faculty member without a terminal degree may be considered for promotion to full professor if he/she demonstrates excellence in the areas of teaching, service and research and meets the requirements of their department’s Performance Standards.
300.205.3.1.5 Professor of Practice
The Professor of Practice (PoP) is a non-tenurable, annual appointment for a maximum of two consecutive semesters during the academic year. The PoP appointment is limited to those individuals who are highly experienced and have had a distinguished career in industry. The expectation is that these individuals have a demonstrated, unique set of experiences and skills that provides great benefit to both students and faculty. Professors of Practice are not to be used for positions that duplicate the responsibilities of tenuretrack faculty or Instructors. Faculty in Instructor ranks are generally not eligible for this appointment.
Departments wishing to hire a Professor of Practice must first have the faculty line and the associated requirements contained in the department’s tenure/promotion unit standard which are approved by the Department Head, Dean, and Provost/VCAA. Approval from the Dean and Provost/VCAA is required prior to commencing a search for a Professor of Practice. The position request should provide a description of the position and a rationale based upon the instructional and research needs of the program. The rational must include an explanation as to how the needs of the program cannot be met by the appointment of an Instructor or Visiting Professor.
PoP faculty shall have a minimum of a master’s degree within their field and a minimum of 10 years of distinguished full-time industrial and/or professional experience working directly in their field. Where applicable, shall have relevant professional licensure and/or professional certification. This requirement must be specified in the unit standard. In addition, POP faculty must not duplicate work experience and background of Instructors and tenurable/tenured faculty who are currently employed by Montana Tech.
Promotions for PoP faculty shall follow the same promotional titles as other instructional appointments: Assistant Professor of Practice, Associate Professor of Practice and Full Professor of Practice. Departmental standards must address the promotion timeline and requirements for promotion and rank. Promotion to the rank of Full Professor Practice requires a terminal degree. PoP faculty at a minimum shall follow the same timeline for promotion as regular tenure-track faculty. All PoP faculty shall be evaluated for instruction, service and scholarly-activity performance. Departmental unit standards shall specify requirements for each area of evaluation. For service and scholarly-activities, these requirements may be different than regular professor track faculty. The expectation is that instructional duties are weighted higher for PoP Faculty. Upon the hiring date for a given PoP faculty, the number of PoP faculty lines within the department shall be limited to no more than 25% of the total number of full-time tenure-track faculty lines.
300.205.3.2 Years of Service Requirements
The following number of complete academic years of full-time service shall normally be required in rank prior to promotion. For promotion purposes, a complete academic year is defined as two semesters of the regular instructional sessions, not necessarily in the same catalog or calendar year.
Instructor I to Instructor II 5 years
Instructor II to Instructor III 5 years
Assistant to Associate Professor 4 years
Associate to Full Professor 5 years
300.205.3.3 Application Process and Assessment
Promotion in rank shall require the assessment of instructional performance, research and professional development, institution and public service, and progress toward a terminal degree (by those not holding such a degree) following the criteria and guidelines contained in the department’s Performance Standards. It is the applicant's responsibility to minimize the subjective or qualitative information in an application for promotion by providing clear, concise statements of fact supported by quantitative evidence wherever appropriate and normally available. Further, it is the faculty member's obligation to demonstrate meeting the requirements for promotion by submitting a complete, timely application that fully addresses the requirements and criteria. Incomplete or late applications shall not be considered. All applications for promotion shall be acted on by the Chancellor.
The completed application file is transmitted through the faculty member’s Department Head, Dean, the Collegiate Evaluation Committee and the Provost/VCAA. Each shall make a recommendation. The Provost/VCAA shall make a recommendation to the Chancellor. If the Chancellor recommends for promotion, the file shall be forwarded to the President. In the case of an affirmative decision by the President, the promotion shall be submitted to the Commissioner of Higher Education.
A faculty member may appeal a negative decision by the Chancellor or the President to the Academic Freedom and Tenure committee within 15 days of receiving the notification of the Chancellor’s proposed action. The committee shall make an inquiry and prepare a formal report to the President that shall be transmitted through the Chancellor’s Office. In the case of a negative recommendation by the President, a faculty member may appeal the President’s decision to the commissioner of Higher Education within 30 calendar days of receipt of notification of the President’s proposed action. The President’s recommendation, the Chancellor’s recommendation, and the Committee’s report shall be forwarded to the Commissioner of Higher Education for review.
300.205.3.4 Accelerated Promotion
Under extraordinary circumstances, a faculty member may be considered for accelerated promotion either one or two years earlier than the normally requisite time in rank. Such promotions shall be granted only rarely. Department Heads shall have responsibility for nominating extremely meritorious faculty members to their Dean according to the department’s Performance Standards. Deans formally request that the Provost/VCAA consider an accelerated promotion for the specified faculty member and communicate to that faculty member his/her opportunity to assemble a promotion file. From that time, the accelerated promotion procedure shall proceed in the normal fashion thereafter.
300.205.4 Performance Evaluation: Full-Time Faculty, Part-Time Faculty, and Deans
Evaluation of faculty members and program administrators at Montana Tech is an evolving process principally focused on insuring excellence in improvement of teaching and learning, research and public and professional service. It is the responsibility of the faculty member to initiate evaluation procedures: 1) annually, for all faculty with probationary appointments, assistant and associate professors, and instructors; 2) every third academic year for full professors 3) each semester that a part-time faculty member teaches. Full professors to be evaluated in a given year will be notified by the Provost/VCAA.
300.205.4.1 Evaluation of Full-Time Faculty
Faculty members shall be expected to prepare an evaluation portfolio following the guidelines listed below for evaluation of instructional performance, research and professional development, and institution and public service, as well as progress toward terminal degrees by those not holding such degrees and submit it to the respective Department Head. Using the evaluation portfolio as a guide, the Department Head shall interview each faculty member in his/her area to discuss the faculty member's evaluation portfolio, professional concerns and goals for the ensuing evaluation period, as well as student concerns that may have surfaced during the student rating of the instruction process. Identified strengths in some areas can offset weaknesses in other areas. The Department Head and the faculty member shall prepare a written statement that summarizes the faculty member's performance evaluation for the previous two semesters using the form contained in Appendix C of the Handbook. After being signed by both parties, this document becomes part of the personnel record. The evaluation portfolio along with the completed form (Appendix C) shall be forwarded to the appropriate Dean, who shall keep a permanent record of all evaluations. Each faculty member seeking promotion or tenure shall be apprised within five days of positive or negative recommendations at each step of this process (i.e., evaluation reports by the Department Head, Dean, Evaluation Committee, Provost/VCAA). He or she may modify and strengthen the application portfolio, however, documents may not be removed from the portfolio at any time. A record of any modifications, including the date upon which they were made will be kept as a preface document to the portfolio. The individual with the control of the portfolio has responsibility for enforcing this provision. He or she may also abandon the process at any intermediate step. Full-time faculty members preparing: an annual evaluation; and/or or applying for tenure; and/or promotion, should refer to relevant portions of this section (Section 205) and shall prepare an evaluation portfolio with documentation to be evaluated in each of the categories (1-4) listed in 205.4.3 below.
300.205.4.2 Evaluation of Part-Time Faculty
It is the responsibility of the Department Head to evaluate part-time faculty that teach courses which are under the direction of his/her department. Academic departments are encouraged to develop evaluation procedures of part-time faculty that will assist the parttime faculty member to grow as a collegiate instructor.
300.205.4.3 Evaluation Portfolio
1. Instructional Performance Instruction and learning are central to the mission of the Institution. The goal of instructional performance review is to help an individual to improve his/her teaching and to ensure excellence in teaching across the Institution. Where instruction is not the primary duty of a faculty member, evaluation of instructional performance shall be in line with the amount of teaching done.
a. Required Evaluation Materials
§ Narrative self-report, identifying goals which were established during the previous evaluations, and which have been discussed with the Department Head, along with a statement of progress toward those goals during the current evaluation period;
§ Identification of both the courses and the number of students enrolled in courses taught during the previous two semesters; and
§ Student-Rating of Instructional Performance of Faculty;
o Every individual responsible for a course shall have a student evaluation conducted of the instructor and course every semester.
o The method used shall be approved by the College/School Dean and the Provost/VCAA.
o All student-rating forms must solicit information about their methods of delivery of instruction, their assessment of instruction (tests, etc.) and their availability to students. Student rating forms are NOT limited to these areas of concern.
o The student evaluation for each course should include responses from a majority of the enrolled students.
o The faculty member shall include a copy of the instrument and summarize the results of the student evaluations for each course taught in their evaluation portfolio. The department shall also keep the originals on file for review, if requested.
All faculty members are encouraged to use the Small Group Instructional Diagnosis (SGID) procedure, or a similar mid-term evaluation or procedure, in at least one course each semester. Ideally, this procedure should be used about mid-term in the semester.
b. Additional Evaluation Materials
Other materials that may be included with the instructional performance evaluation materials:
§ Peer evaluations from faculty for non-tenured members that have observed classes and reviewed teaching materials for courses given by the instructor. This should be a short report on the instructor’s effectiveness in the course.
§ Letters written by former students or graduates. These letters should be solicited by the Department and should address the lasting effects of the instructor’s courses on the student.
§ Documentation of innovation in teaching methods. This may include teaching awards or materials demonstrating curriculum development.
c. Criteria for Evaluation of Instructional Performance
§ Generally supportive and positive student evaluations from the majority of students who have been instructed by the faculty member during the six semesters of instruction prior to application.
§ A clear indicator that the faculty member has successfully attempted to improve instructional performance in light of student input and/or an improvement program in which the faculty member's immediate supervisor has participated. Identified goals and accomplishments are important to evaluating this performance measure.
2. Research and Professional Development
The development of new knowledge is a necessary part of the professional life of all faculty members and is a central part to professional development. Performance review of research and professional development is carried out to assist a faculty member in these activities and to ensure that the faculty at Montana Tech maintains the professional competence necessary to perform their duties at the highest possible level.
a. Required Evaluation Materials
8Narrative self-report identifying the faculty member's professional development and contributions to research in the last five years, since hiring or any previous tenure or promotion action if less. Areas covered must include, but are not limited to:
§ Publications, presentations or book chapters written;
§ Research and research contacts;
§ Proposals submitted with an indication of funding;
§ Formal study or other creative work;
§ Attendance at professional meetings including presentations given; and,
§ Progress toward another degree. Where appropriate, the faculty member’s contribution to papers and proposals should be described.
b. Additional Evaluation Materials
Other materials that may be included with the research and professional development performance evaluation materials:
§ A set of publications and/or articles that represents the faculty members' best efforts to advance their discipline.
§ Confidential external letters of evaluation. These letters must be requested by the department and address the professional potential and accomplishments of the faculty. These letters are required in the years a faculty member applies for promotion and/or tenure.
c. Criteria for Evaluation of Research and Professional Development
§ Active participation in research and/or scholarly activity as evidenced by published work, presentations to professional or peer groups, principal investigator or lead individual on contracts/grants, principal author of successful contracts/grants, patents or licenses held or awarded, and related activity as a major, not incidental, contributor;
§ Supervising or advising graduate student research, chairing thesis research committees, and/or significant contribution to Tech graduate research and academic programs;
§ Certification, license, or recognized credential in a field or professional discipline relevant to the faculty member's Tech assignment obtained by examination or by some equivalent rigorous demonstration of professional competence and expertise; and
§ Demonstration of continuing commitment to enhance and increase professional knowledge and capabilities through professional meeting attendance and participation, short courses and workshops completed, and related professional development activity.
3. Service to the Community, the Institution, and the Profession
All faculty members are expected to serve their community, their institution, and their profession. While instruction, scholarship, and research are themselves forms of service, this criterion assumes that, like professionals in other fields, faculty are expected to contribute their expertise more directly to meet the needs of the local community, the Institution, and the profession of which they are a part. This criterion reinforces the key concept articulated above under Section 201, “Academic Freedom,” that the college or university teacher is a citizen, a member of a learned profession, and an officer of an educational institution. Evaluation of service aims to assess the diversity, the level of activity, and the significance of the faculty member’s contributions beyond the scope of instructional and research performance.
a. Required Evaluation Materials
Narrative self-report identifying the faculty member's service contributions since hiring or since any previous tenure or promotion action. This report must consider service to the community, the Institution, and the profession. The following lists exemplify (but do not restrict) the sorts of activities that may meet this criterion.
Service to the Community
§ Contributing professional expertise to community groups and activities;
§ Participating in campus outreach efforts that support community needs; and
§ Engaging students in community-based learning 2activities that promote both civic responsibility and the application of academic instruction to practical settings.
Service to the Institution
§ Committee participation, with emphasis on contributions rather than membership only;
§ Support for institution sponsored or institution related activities;
§ Student advising of new and/or returning students, and of student groups;
§ Prospective student recruitment/retention advising;
§ Assistance in placement of new graduates and alumni; and
§ Non-remunerated service to academic or administrative units not articulated under instruction or research.
Service to the Profession
§ Contributions to professional societies in one’s discipline;
§ Contributions to professional societies or organizations devoted to improving higher education; and
§ Leadership roles at the local, regional, national, or international levels of professional organizations.
b. Criteria for Evaluation of Institution and Public Service
§ Active mentoring, advising, and assisting students and/or student groups or in helping ensure the success of students in such areas as placement, internships, recruitment, tutoring, etc.;
§ Active participation and contribution to campus committee activity, study groups, task groups, or other campus wide groups or activities in which faculty participation is solicited, requested, or voluntary;
§ Significant contribution to academic planning and curricular development, quality enhancements, and response to emerging academic needs such as in program review, distance learning, new program development, improved learning and teaching methodology development, etc.; and
§ Recognized contribution to the local community, professional groups, charitable organizations, and/or recognized local, state, and/or national organizations as evidenced by offices held, awards or other recognition received, or other tangible evidence of significant contributions.
4. Progress Toward Terminal Degree by Those Not Holding Such Degree
In all academic areas except the fine arts and library science, only doctoral level work is accepted within the academy as a terminal degree.
a. Required Evaluation Materials
• Self-report explaining progress made toward terminal degree.
b. Criteria for Evaluation of Progress Toward a Terminal Degree
• All faculty are urged to complete a terminal degree from an accredited institution in their chosen field of study and that supports their instructional assignment at Montana Tech.
300.205.4.4 Request for Peer Review of Evaluation for Reconsideration of Evaluation Results
Faculty members may request reconsideration of the results of their evaluations to the Provost/VCAA who shall appoint a faculty committee of three (Peer Review Committee) consisting of one faculty member selected by the Provost/VCAA from a list of three submitted by the faculty member, one member selected by the Provost/VCAA from a list of three submitted by the Dean, and one member selected by the Provost/VCAA from the faculty at large. The Peer Review Committee shall review the appropriate documents and the subsequent recommendations of the Dean and the evaluation committee prior to the submission of a recommendation to the Provost/VCAA. The Provost/VCAA shall determine the results of the request for reconsideration. The individual may subsequently request a review by the Chancellor of the recommendations of the Dean, Peer Review Committee, and Provost/VCAA.
If a faculty member feels that there is an issue of unlawful discrimination in the tenure/promotion review process, the faculty member may solicit advice from the Affirmative Action Officer in regards to possible grievance actions or file a formal grievance in accordance with established policies. The Provost/VCAA determination may be appealed within 15 days of notification to the Academic Freedom and Tenure Committee.
300.205.4.5 Evaluation of Department Heads
Department Heads shall be evaluated annually to assure the highest possible level of effectiveness. At a minimum, evaluation criteria shall include consideration of:
§ The demonstrated ability of the Department Head to command respect as an academic administrator and to effectively represent the academic program to the administration and vice-versa;
§ Demonstration of ability to interact with faculty and peers in a fair and equitable fashion;
§ Demonstration of a commitment to the growth and continuing improvement of the quality of the academic programs (both research and instruction) of the department; and,
§ Ability to perceive the role of the department in the Institution as a whole and to facilitate the interaction of the department in institutional growth. Deans represent both the academic faculty and the administration. They carry responsibility for maintenance and growth of the academic programs of the Institution.
300.205.4.6 Evaluation of Deans
Deans are appointed by the Provost/VCAA in consultation with the Chancellor and members of their relevant academic programs. Deans do not have tenure in the administrative component of their appointment. To ensure that the administration of the academic programs is conducted in a fashion which best serves the Institution, deans shall be evaluated annually. At a minimum, evaluation criteria shall include consideration of:
§ The demonstrated ability of the Dean to command respect as an academic administrator and to effectively represent the academic program to the administration and vice versa;
§ Demonstration of ability to interact with faculty and peers in a fair and equitable fashion;
§ Demonstration of a commitment to the growth and continuing improvement of the quality of the academic programs (both research and instruction) of the Institution; and
§ Ability to articulate the role of the department in the Institution as a whole, and to facilitate the interaction of the Institution in institutional growth.
300.205.5 Evaluation, Tenure, and Promotion Deadlines
This schedule of deadlines is followed by all assistant and associate professors yearly. Full professors complete performance evaluations every third year. All portfolios must follow the guidelines outlined in Section 205.3.
300.205.5.1 Faculty Tenure/Promotion
This section applies to tenured or probationary faculty applying for promotion or tenure.
ON or BEFORE:
September 20 Faculty wanting tenure/promotion notifies the Department Head of intent in writing. Accelerated promotions are also identified at this time.
October 1 Faculty sends tenure/promotion portfolios to Department Heads.
November 1 Department Head sends tenure/promotion portfolio to Deans.
December 1 Deans forward the tenure/promotion portfolio to the Collegiate Evaluation Committee.
February 21 The Collegiate Evaluation Committee sends faculty tenure/promotion portfolios to Provost/VCAA.
March 15 Provost/VCAA sends faculty tenure/promotion portfolios to Chancellor with written recommendations.
April 1 Faculty tenure/promotion recommendations made by Chancellor and sent to the President for approval.
April 15 Notification of the President’s tenure/promotion decisions provided to faculty candidates.
300.205.5.2 Tenured or Probationary Faculty -- Evaluation Only
This section applies to tenured or probationary faculty not applying for tenure or promotion.
ON or BEFORE:
February 1 Tenured or probationary faculty not applying for tenure or promotion submit their annual evaluation portfolios to Department Heads. Probationary faculty who are Department Heads send their annual evaluation portfolios to Deans.
March 15 Department Heads provide faculty with assessment summary on progress toward tenure.
April 15 Department Head meets with tenured faculty and provides faculty with written assessment.