The University recognizes three broad areas of faculty endeavor – teaching, scholarship, and service – and expects that faculty members will be active in each of these areas, as described below.
Teaching
Teaching is a core activity of the University and all faculty members are expected to achieve excellence in this role. Teaching includes not only traditional classroom and laboratory instruction and experiential instruction, but also service-learning courses designed to enable student engagement in the community and other non-classroom instruction such as independent study. All faculty members are expected to teach the equivalent of at least one standard course (defined as 3-4 credit hours) that contributes to the instructional load of her or his program each semester. Teaching may include preparation of TBL readiness materials, TBL iRATs and tRATs, TBL application questions, as well as facilitating a TBL module or experiential laboratory session. Finally, all faculty members are expected to engage regularly in activities designed to enhance the effectiveness of their own teaching.
Scholarship
Scholarship is a core activity of the University, and all faculty members are expected to be productive scholars. Included in the University’s definition of scholarship are the scholarships of:
- Discovery: scholarship that adds to the field of knowledge of a particular discipline or combination of disciplines.
- Pedagogy: scholarship that adds to the knowledge and understanding of teaching.
- Integration: scholarship that makes connections among existing ideas within and/or across disciplines to provide new understandings.
- Application: scholarship that applies knowledge to issues of contemporary social concern in a manner that generates new intellectual understandings.
- Engagement: scholarship that applies knowledge and skills to elucidate the relationship between theory and practice in order to address significant local, national, and global issues.
Service
Faculty service is the foundation upon which effective shared governance is nurtured at the University. All faculty members are expected to engage in activities at the department, College, and university levels that contribute in a substantial manner to the important work of the institution. Additionally, faculty members are expected to contribute their disciplinary expertise to address issues of importance in the region, state, and nation. Further, all faculty members are expected to engage in academic advisement and/or mentoring of students. Of particular importance are activities in regional, state or national organizations relevant to their field of expertise, providing professional expertise to the community beyond the University, and to deliberations about important regional, state and national issues. The University expects that faculty members will become increasingly active in service, assuming increased responsibilities over the course of their careers at the University.
While most service activities are considered to be part of a faculty member’s normal responsibilities, there are times the faculty member might be asked to assume a mission-critical responsibility that is beyond what would normally be expected of a faculty member. In these cases the faculty member may receive reassigned instructional time to perform her or his responsibilities.
Assessing Faculty Activity
CHSU has adopted the Glassick model of academic assessment1.
- Teaching Assessment
CHSU is committed to excellence in teaching and scholarship. Faculty members are expected to be engaged, over time, with a broad cross-section of students in a variety of different learning circumstances and to continue to make substantial contributions to the instructional program of the University. Questions such as the following will provide a framework for the assessment of faculty teaching:- Clear Goals: Is there congruence between the faculty member’s espoused goals and values in teaching and faculty member’s goals and values in teaching? Has the faculty member set rigorous and appropriate, course-specific learning goals and measurable outcomes? Are the teaching activities appropriate to the achievement of the established learning goals and objectives? Are the learning outcomes clearly communicated to students (e.g., in the syllabus)? Does the faculty member choose course assignments, learning activities and assessments that enable students to meet the course’s stated learning outcomes?
- Adequate Preparation: Does the faculty member provide evidence of an intellectual understanding of, and engagement in, the continual process of reflection on, and improvement of, teaching? Does course content reflect current scholarship in the field? Are course syllabi, outlines, and/or any other materials for course use well-constructed, detailed, and informative and are they reviewed and revised regularly?
- Appropriate Methods: Does the faculty member demonstrate a broad repertoire of pedagogical strategies and show evidence of knowing when and how to use different strategies? Does the faculty member use appropriate and various pedagogical and instructional techniques to maximize student learning? Does the faculty member employ innovative and interesting pedagogical approaches? Does the faculty member use appropriate methodologies to measure student performance? In what ways has the faculty member used instructional technology to enhance course content and assignments? Does the faculty member provide timely and helpful feedback to students? Is there evidence that the faculty member is responsive to the needs of students?
- Significant Results: Does the faculty member demonstrate that the faculty member understands how to evaluate student learning in multiple, reliable and valid ways? What evidence is provided that student learning has occurred in a course?
- Reflective Critique: Does the faculty member regularly seek feedback from students and colleagues on the effectiveness of her or his teaching? What evidence is presented that this feedback has been used to improve her or his teaching? Have appropriate learning assessment techniques been applied and is there evidence that results of these assessments have been used to inform course refinements and improve student outcomes in the future?
- Effective Mentoring: What services has the faculty member provided to students outside the instructional context – academic or career advising, for example? What evidence is provided about the effectiveness of these services?
- Enhancement of Teaching: Does the faculty member have clear goals for the ongoing development of faculty member’s teaching expertise? Does the faculty member actively engage in conversations about teaching and learning? Does the faculty member engage in activities designed to enhance the effectiveness of her or his teaching?
Assessment of Scholarship
Faculty members engaging in any form of scholarship are expected to share their experiences with the wider academic community. The projects in which they engage should reach a level of excellence sufficient to yield materials which, following rigorous external peer review, are selected for dissemination through published articles, books, presentation, posters, and other national/international venues accepted as equivalent to these within the faculty member’s discipline. Questions such as the following will provide a framework for the assessment of faculty scholarship:
- Clear Goals: Does the faculty member state the basic purposes of the faculty member’s work clearly? Does the faculty member define objectives that are realistic and achievable? Does the scholar identify significant questions in the field?
- Adequate Preparation: Does the faculty member show an understanding of existing scholarship in the field? Does the faculty member bring the necessary skills to the faculty member’s work? Is faculty member proactive in acquiring sufficient resources necessary to move the project forward?
- Appropriate Methods or Techniques: Does the faculty member use methods or techniques appropriate to the goals of the discipline or disciplines in which s/he is working? Does the faculty member apply them effectively? Do the methods or techniques of the faculty member have the potential to enhance or expand the discipline or disciplines?
- Collaborations: Where appropriate, does the faculty member collaborate with other scholars or professionals and participate with strong research teams, both within and beyond the University?
- Significant Results: Does the faculty member achieve the goals? Does the faculty member’s work add consequentially to the field and/or to learning and teaching in the field? Does the work open additional areas for further exploration?
- Evidence of Impact on the Field: Does the work result in peer-reviewed publications, professional presentations, external grants or commissions, invited lectures, invitations to review manuscripts, the award of fellowships, the production of letters, reviews and other forms of validation by qualified experts, and/or major professional recognition? Are the publications cited by other scholars?
- Reflective Critique: Does the faculty member critically evaluate the faculty member’s own work and demonstrate progress in depth and impact of faculty member’s scholarship? Does the scholar bring an appropriate breadth of evidence to the scholar’s critique?
- Assessment of Service
All service activities should be carefully evaluated by assessing the impact of the service and by comparing the stated objectives with the achieved outcomes. Questions such as the following will provide a framework for the assessment of faculty service:- Clear Goals: Do the activities of the faculty member show evidence of a clear understanding of, and commitment to, service to the University, the profession and the larger community?
- Appropriate Methods: Does the faculty member exercise academic leadership and responsibility at the department, College, and University levels that is appropriate for faculty member’s rank, experience and expertise? Has the faculty member been responsible for developing and implementing any major academic initiatives? Does the faculty member exercise academic leadership in the discipline or field at the regional, national, and international level that is appropriate for faculty member’s rank, experience and expertise?
- Scholarly Service beyond the Campus: Does the faculty member exercise academic leadership in faculty member’s discipline or field at the regional, national, and international level that is appropriate for faculty member’s rank, experience and expertise? Does the faculty member provide services directly related to faculty member’s academic expertise to external agencies, Colleges, organizations, communities, and similar groups?
- Significant Results: To what extent were the goals of the service achieved? What tangible products have resulted from the service provided? What impact have the service activities had? Has the faculty member been called upon by governmental agencies, community organizations, Colleges, and/or scholarly or professional organizations to contribute faculty member’s expertise?
- Evolving Engagement: Does the faculty member, over time, assume increasing responsibility for providing academic leadership within the University, or at the regional, national and international level?
1Glassick CE, Taylor Huber M, Maeroff GI, Boyer EL: Scholarship assessed: evaluation of the professoriate, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997.