Show More


Criteria for Decisions on Faculty Status (prior to 2004-05)

(Article mutually agreed to by administration and faculty. Includes clarifications adopted by vote of the faculty and agreed to by administration, April 5, 2004. For faculty members hired to teach full time prior to 2004-05, this Article will be in effect until after the first satisfactory promotion review following August 2004. See "Criteria for Decisions on Faculty Status (from 2004-05)".)

Decisions should express judgments about a candidate's merit using the principle of equity, which considers each individual faculty member in terms of his or her unique talents, abilities, and accomplishments in relation to the criteria for personnel decisions, and quality. A large amount of activity per se does not necessarily contribute to a superior academic environment. Criteria for possible dismissal (Article VI. B. below) are also applicable to decisions on faculty status.

  • Interim review. Required: good teaching during the probationary period, satisfactory professional growth, and service.
  • Tenure decision. Required: good teaching, including teaching in the school or department in which tenure will be granted, demonstrable achievement or unquestioned promise of accomplishment in the professional development category; and adequate contributions in service.
  • Promotion to associate or full professor. Required: continued good teaching; significant achievement or contribution in either professional growth or service since the initial appointment to the preceding rank and at least adequate performance in the other category.

A. Teaching

Good teaching is essential for a positive personnel decision. Candidates are required to provide broad-based and representative evidence of good teaching.

Candidates are required to show evidence in all of the following:

1. Content and rigor
a. Content: evidence to be drawn from course goals, syllabi, examinations and assignments, course materials, such as handouts, primary and secondary textual sources, textbooks and other course materials. The evidence should demonstrate that courses meet standards appropriate to the level of the course.

b. Rigor: evidence to be drawn from quizzes, tests, examinations, paper assignments, marked and graded material, distribution of grades as submitted to department chairs by the Office of Institutional Research, etc. The evidence should demonstrate that the course requirements are sufficiently challenging for the level of the course.

2. Teaching methods:evidence to be drawn from teaching philosophy, course goals, syllabi, examinations and assignments, other course materials, etc. The evidence should demonstrate that teaching methods are appropriate, given the contexts of the discipline, topic, and specific characteristics of a given class.

3. Effectiveness: evidence to be drawn from student opinion surveys, peer observations, annual reports, etc.; evidence should demonstrate that the candidate has been successful in implementing her or his teaching methods, has treated students with professional fairness and integrity, and has established relations with students that are conducive to the learning process.

B. Professional Growth

Continued professional growth is necessary for a positive personnel decision. Candidates are required to show:

  1. Continued development of professional competence in the field(s) or discipline(s). The evidence might include participation in learned societies, professional organizations, course development based on scholarly activity, and attendance at conferences; also from supporting documents in area 2 and similar activities. The evidence can be used to demonstrate development as a researcher (performer) or teacher, or both.

    Between the following areas (2.a. and 2.b.), more activity in one category may compensate for less in another.

  2. Intellectual liveliness

    a. Intellectual liveliness outside the university:

    i. Scholarly outreach. Evidence might include publications, presentations at conferences, public performances and exhibits outside of DePauw, writing grant proposals for external funding, and other activities of a similar nature.

    ii. Professional contributions. Evidence might include organizing conferences or competitions, reviewing manuscripts and grant proposals, giving master classes outside of DePauw, and scholarly work for publication houses, institutes, and governmental agencies, etc. Evidence related to professional service should not be included in this area (See C. 3. below.)

    b. Intellectual liveliness within the university community: Evidence might include workshops, participation at university, school, or departmental forums, panel discussions and presentations, on-campus recitals, teaching roundtables etc.

C. Service

Effective service to the department (school) or the university is necessary for positive personnel decisions. Evidence is not required in all categories, and unless there are special departmental requirements or responsibilities stated in the job description, a candidate is free to decide what area and categories of service should be documented to show effective service.

  1. Departmental Service. Evidence might include effective participation in departmental governance, including committee assignments; effective advising of majors and minors; participation in curriculum development; resource acquisition, laboratory supervision, maintenance of office and lab equipment or musical instruments; and similar activities.
  2. University Service. Evidence might include effective participation in university governance, including committee assignments; effective advising of first year students and/or student organizations related to the academic life; effective work in developing interdisciplinary or general education programs; administrative assignments and appointments; and similar activities that show a commitment to the good of the university.
  3. Professional Service. Beyond scholarly activities directly related to participation in learned societies, a candidate could supply evidence of service to professional societies, journals, institutes, governmental agencies, and the like. Evidence might include chairing conference sessions, being a juror at competitions, visiting schools for accreditation reviews, holding office in professional societies or foundations, and similar service activities which are related to the individual's fields as either a scholar or teacher.

D. Librarians serving as renewable term faculty are evaluated in the areas of teaching, professional development, and service, with the following difference: in the evaluation of teaching, the evaluation has a primary focus on library effectiveness. Librarians may also show evidence related to teaching (see Article V. A), but they must show evidence in at least two of the following areas of library effectiveness:

  1. reference services for the university community;
  2. development of library collections and information resources;
  3. provision of bibliographic organization and control over library collections;
  4. instruction in the use of information resources and services including workshops, library and information instruction sessions, and research consultations;
  5. creation of instructional materials and tools on the use of information resources and services including catalogs, bibliographies, and indexes.