Skip Navigation

Policies

FH Appendix 5 Promotion Guidelines: College of Ps...

Effective Date Sep 7, 2016

FH Appendix 5: Promotion Guidelines: College of Psychology and Liberal Arts

Reviewed and approved by the Chief Academic Officer (formerly the Vice President for Academic Affairs), 9/7/2016
Reviewed and approved by the Vice President for Academic Affairs, 1/8/2015
Note: added Faculty Review Guidelines and evaluation form, 1/8/15
Note: edited by Chief Operating Officer (formerly titled 'Provost') for title updates: 7/4/11
Note: edited by Provost for currency: 3/31/05

These guidelines provide a basis for judgment in evaluating and rewarding meritorious performance of faculty in the Florida Institute of Technology’s College of Psychology and Liberal Arts (COPLA). Promotions are an acknowledgement of a faculty member’s achievements in the areas of Teaching/Supervision, Research/Scholarship, and Service/Administration.

Promotion Procedures

Collection of documentation for the promotion dossier is the responsibility of the candidate requesting promotion. The dossier must follow the same organization and use the same headings and sub-headings as those that are listed in Appendix I of the Faculty Handbook. The candidate will initiate the promotion procedure, but all documentation must go through the COPLA Promotions Committee whether or not it supports the request.

The COPLA Promotions Committee (hereafter referred to as the committee) is made up of full professors representing the schools within the College of Psychology and Liberal Arts. The committee members are selected by the faculty of the college with the dean’s or associate dean’s approval. The function of the committee is to advise the dean of the college on matters of faculty promotion.

Documentation for promotion (promotion dossier) is presented to and evaluated by the committee. External evaluations will be solicited from professionals familiar with the candidate’s work. Names of external reviewers will be provided by the candidate, the committee, and/or the dean. Those names may include reviewers who know the candidate personally and those who know of the candidate only through his/her research and publications.

The committee makes the recommendation by letter and forwards all documentation to the dean for evaluation. The committee recommendation should list, explain, and interpret the quality of the candidate’s accomplishments.

The dean forwards the recommendations of the dean and the committee to the chief academic officer

Promotion Eligibility

Assistant Professor

Appointment as an assistant professor will be based on a candidate’s potential to teach effectively and to advance scholarly knowledge. Potential will be determined typically through the examination of an academic curriculum vitae, letters of recommendation, an invited interview, and research presentation or seminar. Multiple-year appointment will be considered only for the holder of the terminal degree.

Conversion from Instructor to Assistant Professor

Promotion from instructor to assistant professor in the College of Psychology and Liberal Arts will be based on (a) attainment of the terminal or advanced degree in the faculty member's field, consistent with university policy for assistant professor rank, (b) fulfillment of potential to teach effectively and advance scholarly knowledge. Fulfillment of potential will be determined by examination by the COPLA Promotions Committee of the candidate's academic curriculum vitae, course syllabi, course evaluations and letters of recommendation.

Associate Professor

A candidate can be considered for promotion to associate professor in his/her sixth year in rank as an assistant professor. There is no maximum time limit.

Promotion of candidates to associate professor is not automatic; it is based on the fulfillment of potential in teaching/supervision, research/scholarship and service/administration.

Teaching/supervision performance of high quality will be expected of all faculty, and such performance will be judged on the basis of current and former student evaluations. Peer evaluation of teaching and supervision of undergraduate and graduate research and practicum can supplement student evaluations. In the absence of an adequate, universal metric to evaluate teaching/supervision performance, the candidate must provide sufficient documentation to support his/her candidacy for promotion. A candidate will submit his/her end of course evaluations for all of his/her courses and/or supervision units for at least the previous two years and/or statistical summaries for the courses/supervision units.

Research/scholarship qualifications will be judged on the basis of an active and meaningful program. The “Promotion Criteria” section below details the types of research/scholarship considered for promotion and to be submitted for review. The candidate’s research/scholarship program will be evaluated by the committee and at least three external reviewers.

Service/administration is a category that includes a faculty member’s contributions to the department, school, college, university and regional/national/international organizations. Qualification in university and professional service will be based on letters obtained from administrators, supervisors and colleagues in those endeavors and other documentation of activity. Performance in service activities must rise above the norm to be considered meritorious. For example, service on several thesis committees is considered the norm and would not itself be sufficient activity to advance the candidate’s merits in this area. For faculty members with administrative roles as part of their workload, those contributions are represented within this category. 

Professor

A candidate can be considered for promotion to professor in his/her sixth year in rank as an associate professor. There is no maximum time limit.

Promotion to professor will be based on the establishment of a university-wide and national reputation for research/scholarship.

The criterion elements for promotion to professor will be the same as those for promotion to associate professor. However, the requirements within these criteria will be more extensive for promotion to professor, and letters will be solicited from at least five full professors with strong reputations in the candidate’s area(s) of specialization.

Promotion Criteria

The three areas in which a candidate will be evaluated for promotion are Teaching/Supervision, Research/Scholarship and Service/Administration. Each area represents an important measure of a faculty member’s performance. As merit in individual areas will be evaluated in relation to the candidate’s official roles and responsibilities, the weight of the individual categories may vary. 

The criteria for promotion are described below. In making a promotion recommendation to the dean, the committee will use these criteria. These criteria set minimum thresholds for promotion eligibility. Faculty who meet these criteria may be considered for promotion, but candidates are encouraged to exceed the minimum standards to make a stronger case for promotion.

Promotion to Associate Professor

Teaching/Supervision

General categories for consideration and sources for evaluation:

  • Strong teaching/supervision record in classroom/online teaching, clinical supervision and research supervision
    • Current student evaluations
    • Former student evaluations
    • Peer evaluations
  • Developed and introduced innovative pedagogical techniques
    • Commentary from peers and students
    • Syllabi and representative lesson plans/assignments
  • Introduced new courses into the curriculum, developed new academic programs or made significant modifications to existing academic programs at the undergraduate or graduate level, or contributed to development of university assessment measures
    • Syllabi, program descriptions, assessment measures and commentary from peers and program chairs
  • Received funding from outside agencies or foundations for curriculum development, enhancing teaching laboratories, etc.
    • Documentation of awards
  • Presentations/publications with students as coauthors
    • Copies of documents
  • Published or made significant contributions to textbooks in his/her field or published articles/essays on pedagogy
    • Excerpts from textbooks
    • Articles/essays
  • Development of teaching manual, study guide, workbook, etc.

Expectations for threshold performance:

It is expected that assistant professors have at least 2/3 of their courses and/or supervision units in the previous two years rated “good” or higher to be eligible for promotion to associate professor. Assistant professors will also demonstrate achievements across the categories listed above.

Research/Scholarship

Sources for evaluation will be copies of product, tables of contents, award letters, etc. General categories of scholarship for consideration:

  • Scholarly books in field
  • Editor of book series or collected works
  • Refereed articles (print and online)
  • Book chapters
  • Received grants and/or contract support for research from federal, state or private sources
  • Received awards for scholarly activities from university or regional, national or international organizations
  • Editor or associate/assistant editor of professional journal in field
  • Journal editorial board member
  • Development of assessment instruments
  • Computer software
  • Recordings as primary performer or composer
  • Published musical compositions
  • Article- or abstract-reviewed presentations at regional/national/international meetings
  • Invited clinician, conductor or performer at regional/national/international venues
  • Non-refereed publications
  • Reviewer for books or journal articles
  • Served as session organizer/chair at regional/national/international society meetings

Expectations for threshold performance during the previous five years:

  • Refereed articles or book chapters: at least three wherein the candidate is major contributor, published in high-quality journals or books as evaluated by the committee and external reviewers. With multiple-authored texts, candidates should represent their levels of contribution and indicate the significance, if any, of their positions in the author lists.
  • Article- or abstract-reviewed presentations at regional, national or international conferences: at least three wherein the candidate is major contributor

Activity in these additional areas may make a stronger case for promotion:

  • Scholarly books in field
  • Received grants and/or contract support for research from federal, state or private sources
  • Received awards for scholarly activities from university or regional, national or international organizations
  • Editorial board member or editor for professional journal in field

Service/Administration

Sources for evaluation will be letters of appointment and recognition and copies of organizations’ conference programs/mailings. Candidates with administrative roles are required to submit letters from their supervisors evaluating their performance and contributions to the university.

General categories of service for consideration:

  • University (e.g., Faculty Senate and Curriculum Committee)
  • Served as faculty representative (advisor) to student clubs, societies and organizations
  • Thesis/dissertation committee membership (non-chair)
  • Professional society service (e.g., board of directors, planning committees and website/newsletter editor)
  • Community service (e.g., board of directors for charitable groups, advisor for schools and involvement in charitable organizations)

General categories of administration for consideration:

  • Curriculum development
  • Pursuit of applied contracts
  • Developing strategic partnerships
  • Strategic planning and operations
  • Client relationship management
  • Program development internal to FIT (seminars, workshops, etc.)
  • Development of policies and procedures 

Expectations for threshold performance during the previous five years:

It is expected that assistant professors will have service commitments at the department, college and university levels to be eligible for promotion to associate professor.

Promotion to Professor

Teaching/Supervision

General categories for consideration and sources for evaluation:

  • Strong teaching/supervision record in classroom/online teaching, clinical supervision and research supervision
    • Current student evaluations
    • Former student evaluations
    • Peer evaluations
  • Developed and introduced innovative pedagogical techniques
    • Commentary from peers and students
    • Syllabi and representative lesson plans/assignments
  • Introduced new courses into the curriculum, developed new academic programs or made significant modifications to existing academic programs at the undergraduate or graduate level, or contributed to development of university assessment measures
    • Syllabi, program descriptions, assessment measures and commentary from peers and program chairs
  • Received funding from outside agencies or foundations for curriculum development, enhancing teaching laboratories, etc.
    • Documentation of awards
  • Presentations/publications with students as coauthors
    • Copies of documents
  • Published or made significant contributions to textbooks in his/her field or published articles/essays on pedagogy
    • Excerpts from textbooks
    • Articles/essays
  • Development of teaching manual, study guide, workbook, etc.

Expectations for threshold performance:

It is expected that associate professors have at least 2/3 of their courses and/or supervision units in the previous two years rated “good” or higher to be eligible for promotion to professor. It is also expected that associate professors have made significant contributions to their programs at this stage in their careers.

Research/Scholarship

Sources for evaluation will be copies of product, tables of contents, award letters, etc. General categories of scholarship for consideration:

  • Scholarly books in field
  • Editor of book series or collected works
  • Refereed articles (print and online)
  • Book chapters
  • Received grants and/or contract support for research from federal, state or private sources
  • Received awards for scholarly activities from university or regional, national or international organizations
  • Editor or associate/assistant editor of professional journal in field
  • Journal editorial board member
  • Development of assessment instruments
  • Computer software
  • Recordings as primary performer or composer
  • Published musical compositions
  • Article- or abstract-reviewed presentations at regional/national/international meetings
  • Invited clinician, conductor or performer at regional/national/international venues
  • Non-refereed publications
  • Reviewer for books or journal articles
  • Served as session organizer/chair at regional/national/international society meetings

It is expected that associate professors will solidify their scholarly programs during their minimum five years in rank. Promotion to professor will emphasize not only documentation of individual categories of evaluation but also an active and vigorous research agenda and output. Hence, in addition to the demonstration of activity listed below, a characterization of the programmatic quality and overall contribution to the scholarly field is expected from external references.

Expectations for threshold performance during the previous five years:

  • Books: one book or the prospectus (defined in accordance with the publisher’s guidelines) for one is expected. However, if the candidate is in a field where journal articles are prioritized over books, a sequence of journal articles can be substituted for the book.
  • Refereed articles or book chapters: at least five wherein the candidate is major contributor, published in high-quality journals or books as evaluated by the committee and external reviewers. With multiple-authored texts, candidates should represent their levels of contribution and indicate the significance, if any, of their positions in the author lists.
  • Article- or abstract-reviewed presentations at national and/or international conferences: at least five wherein the candidate is major contributor.
  • Appointment for a journal in field: ad hoc reviewer, part of a panel of reviewers, editorial board member, editor.

Activity in these additional areas may make a stronger case for promotion:

  • Received grants and/or contract support for research from federal, state or private sources
  • Received awards for scholarly activities from university or regional, national or international organizations

Service/Administration

Sources for evaluation will be letters of appointment and recognition and copies of organizations’ conference programs/mailings. Candidates with administrative roles are required to submit letters from their supervisors evaluating their performance and contributions to the university.

General categories of service for consideration:

  • University (e.g., Faculty Senate and Curriculum Committee)
  • Served as faculty representative (advisor) to student clubs, societies and organizations
  • Thesis/dissertation committee membership (non-chair)
  • Professional society service (e.g., board of directors, planning committees and website/newsletter editor)
  • Community service (e.g., board of directors for charitable groups, advisor for schools and involvement in charitable organizations)

General categories of administration for consideration:

  • Curriculum development
  • Pursuit of applied contracts
  • Developing strategic partnerships
  • Strategic planning and operations
  • Client relationship management
  • Program development internal to FIT (seminars, workshops, etc.)
  • Development of policies and procedures

Expectations for threshold performance per year during the previous five years:

It is expected that associate professors will have service commitments at the university level and in the larger academic community in national and international organizations to be eligible for promotion to professor.