Bylaws of the Department of Political Science at the University of Tennessee
Revised March 27, 2015
By the adoption and periodic review of these by-laws, the faculty reaffirms its commitment to full participation in the governance of the Department of Political Science. Through exercise of the decision-making responsibilities set forth below, the faculty seeks to organize its resources as a community of scholars to facilitate the operation of the Department. These by-laws seek to implement the spirit of cooperative departmental decision-making endorsed by the Faculty Handbook.
I. Meetings of the Political Science Faculty
A. The voting faculty of the Department shall consist of all tenured and tenure-track faculty. Proxy votes are not permitted in faculty or committee meetings.
B. At least 2 faculty meetings shall be scheduled during each semester of the academic year. Additional meetings may be called by the Department Head or by petition of 25 percent of the faculty. Petitions shall be presented to the head and distributed to the faculty at least four working days prior to the proposed meetings.
C. Unless otherwise indicated in these by-laws, all business transacted at faculty meetings shall be conducted in accordance with the most recent edition of Robert’s Rules of Order.
D. The Department Head shall distribute to the faculty written notification of and a proposed agenda for each faculty meeting at least four working days prior to the meeting. Additional items may be placed on the agenda by any faculty member. These items shall be distributed to the faculty at least three working days prior to such meetings.
E. A quorum for faculty meetings shall consist of a majority of voting faculty.
F. Minutes shall be taken at each faculty meeting, distributed to each member of the faculty, and approved at the next faculty meeting.
G. Through faculty meetings the faculty shall participate in the following:
(1) decisions pertaining to the hiring of new faculty, including the choice of Department Head; (2) decisions on political science curricula and degree programs and requirements; and (3) other matters of academic and personnel policy.
II. The Department Head
The Department Head is a member of the faculty who has been given certain administrative responsibilities and the authority to carry them out in consultation with the faculty. The Head serves as an ex officio member of all departmental committees.
A. Responsibilities of the Head
1. Care of the academic program through
a. Recruitment and development of the faculty, including recommendations for hiring, tenure, promotion and salary increments, assignments of courses, and allocation of office space.
b. Development and review of the curriculum;
c. Encouragement and support of research and teaching by the faculty;
d. Encouragement and support of faculty participation in departmental and university service;
e. Representation of the Department in the College of Arts and Science, and at Campus and University levels.
2. Advancement of the academic program through
a. Employment and supervision of clerical and supporting personnel
b. Management of departmental physical facilities and equipment;
c. Preparation and defense of the departmental budget
d. Authorization of expenditures from the departmental budget.
3. Appointment of faculty members to perform additional administrative responsibilities:
a. Associate Head: responsible for acting in the Department Head’s stead in the absence of the Head, representing the Department externally, advising the Head, and performing administrative duties delegated by the Head. The Associate Head shall represent the Department on the Social Science Divisional Curriculum Committee, shall serve as coordinator for SACS compliance, and also shall serve as the Department’s compliance officer with respect to research that impacts human subjects. The Associate Head may designate another faculty member to serve in this capacity in the Associate Head’s absence or recusal;
b. Director of Graduate Studies: responsible for chairing the Graduate Studies Committee, proposing and implementing policies and programs in accordance with the Graduate Handbook, supervising the review and revision of the graduate curriculum, recruiting and coordinating the admission of graduate students, and dealing with other matters pertaining to the graduate program;
c. Coordinator of the Master of Public Administration Program: responsible for supervision and periodic revision of professional curricula and related requirements of the master of Public Administration Program, participating in coordinating joint degree programs, assisting in the placement of M.P.P.A. graduates, and dealing with other matters pertaining to the M.P.P.A. program;
d. Director of Undergraduate Studies: responsible for chairing the Undergraduate Studies Committee, proposing and implementing policies pertaining to undergraduate programs, supervising the review and revision of the undergraduate curriculum, overseeing admission to the major, serving as undergraduate advising coordinator, directing the Honors Program, and dealing with other matters pertaining to undergraduate programs.
Those serving in these positions will typically be compensated through a release of one course per academic year.
B. Selection of the Department Head
As provided by the Faculty Handbook, the department head is appointed to a five-year term by the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences. The Head serves at the will of the Dean, and can be reappointed by the Dean. Prior to initiating a search for a new department head, the departmental faculty will meet and draft a statement, using input from all departmental constituencies including minority opinions, that is sent to the Dean, containing their expectations for the position in the context of the departmental vision and their recommendation for an internal or external search.
For internal and external searches, the Dean appoints the chair of the search committee from outside the department. Departmental tenure-track and tenured faculty members collectively recommend a slate of departmental faculty for the search committee, from which the Dean selects all departmental representatives on the search committee. A majority of the search committee is composed of tenured faculty members of the department, representing the academic constituencies of the unit, but the committee may include representation from tenure-track faculty members, non-tenure-track faculty members, students, and where appropriate, faculty members from outside the department, as covered by departmental bylaws. According to UT’s requirements for upper-level searches, committee members must include a representative of black or African-American faculty. The Dean has responsibility to assure appropriate representation in search committee membership.
The search committee follows the institutional procedures for an upper-level search as published by the Office of Equity and Diversity. After all candidates for the headship are interviewed, the departmental personnel meet to discuss their preferences. While all departmental constituencies have input into the discussion, only the tenure-track and tenured faculty members will conduct an anonymous vote for their choice. A summary of the faculty discussion and a record of the vote become part of the narrative that the search committee submits to the Dean with the recommendation of the committee about candidates for the headship.
C. Annual Evaluation of the Department Head
As provided by the Faculty Handbook, departmental faculty members will provide an annual evaluation of the head to the Dean. The procedure for the evaluation will be determined by the Dean.
III. Departmental Committees
Unless otherwise specified, all standing committees are responsible to and report to the Department.
A. Committee on Tenure and Promotion
Annually, at its last regularly scheduled meeting of the spring semester, the faculty shall elect a five-member Tenure and Promotions Committee. This committee shall consist of three tenured professors and two tenured associate professors. The Tenure and Promotions Committee shall provide to the Department Head and faculty a written report based on its evaluation of the performance of each probationary faculty member in the areas of research, teaching and public service. Participation in each promotion evaluation shall be limited to committee members, at or above the rank for which the candidate is being considered.
B. Executive Advisory Committee
The Executive Advisory Committee is the chief advisory committee to the Department Head. Members shall serve for terms of one year and shall be eligible for reelection. This committee shall consist of five faculty members elected annually by secret ballot at the last regularly scheduled faculty meeting of the spring semester. The Department Head shall chair this committee. At the discretion of the Head, members of this committee may have access to the budget and other departmental information. The Executive Advisory Committee helps formulate departmental policy on academic and personnel matters not delegated specifically to other committees or to the faculty at large.
C. Graduate Studies Committee
This committee shall consist of five faculty members, elected by the faculty at its last regularly scheduled meeting of Spring Semester. Members shall serve two-year terms and shall be eligible for reelection. In addition, the Director of Graduate Studies shall serve as an ex officio member and shall chair this committee. The Graduate Studies Committee shall make recommendations to the faculty regarding curriculum and program requirements and other matters related to the graduate program and advise the Department Head on the admission of graduate students and the awarding of assistantships.
D. Undergraduate Studies Committee
This committee shall consist of five faculty members elected by the faculty at its last regularly scheduled meeting of the Spring Semester. Members shall serve two-year terms and shall be eligible for reelection. The Undergraduate Studies Committee shall make recommendations to the faculty regarding curriculum and program requirements and other matters related to the undergraduate program. Decisions on undergraduate awards and student applications for independent study, off-campus study, or internship credit shall be made by the Department Head, or by an individual designated by the Head. The latter shall assist in the making of decisions regarding these awards and applications as the former deems necessary and appropriate. The chair, in consultation with the Department Head, shall appoint a three-member subcommittee responsible for admitting students to the Honors Program.
E. MPPA Program Committee
This committee shall consist of all tenure-line faculty members teaching regularly for the MPPA program. The committee shall meet at least once a semester and shall keep minutes of its meetings. The committee shall consider and make recommendations to the faculty regarding MPPA curriculum and governance. The committee shall also review applications for admission to the program and make admission recommendations to the Graduate Studies Committee.
F. Ad Hoc Committees
1. Recruitment Committees. The Department Head, in consultation with the Executive Advisory Committee, shall appoint a separate ad hoc committee of at least three faculty members to participate in the recruitment of candidates to fill each newly authorized or vacant faculty position in the Department. The composition of each recruitment committee shall include substantial representation from the academic field or fields for which the prospective faculty member will be responsible.
2. Other Ad Hoc Committees. Other ad hoc committees may be appointed by the Department Head to assist in the completion of specific tasks. Unless otherwise indicated, the term of each such committee will end with completion of the assigned task.
IV. Appointment, Retention, Tenure and Promotion of Tenure-Line Faculty Members
In accordance with procedures described in Chapter III of the Faculty Handbook, the Department Head, after full consultation with the faculty, has final responsibility for departmental recommendations regarding faculty appointments as well as the granting of tenure and promotion.
Prior to requests for approval by the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences and the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, the departmental faculty shall decide by majority vote on the creation of tenure-line and other full-time faculty positions that continue beyond one year. Recommendations of candidates to fill all faculty appointments in the Department shall be made by majority vote of the faculty.
Faculty members in attendance at a meeting to recommend a candidate to fill a faculty appointment shall cast a ballot for the preferred candidate from among those who were interviewed. The candidate that receives a majority of votes (50% plus one) will be ranked first (i.e., the most preferred candidate). If no candidate receives a majority of votes, a second ballot will be taken after eliminating from consideration for the first ranked position the candidate that received the fewest votes on the first ballot. On this second ballot voting faculty members will again identify the preferred candidate among those still eligible for consideration. This process will be repeated until one candidate emerges with a majority vote. After the first ranked candidate is determined, the second-most preferred candidate will be determined from among the unranked candidates using a process similar to that employed for identifying the first ranked candidate. If applicable, the voting process will be repeated again to identify the third-most preferred candidate, and once more to identify the fourth-most preferred candidate. If at any point a voting faculty member deems the remaining candidates to be inappropriate for the position, “none” shall be recorded on the ballot. At any stage, ties will be determined by a vote for the preferred candidate among those who tied (if a tie reoccurs the Head shall determine a mechanism for breaking the tie).
If the Department Head’s recommendation differs from that of the faculty, the Head shall provide to the faculty a detailed explanation of reasons for diverging from the faculty recommendation.
B. Annual Retention Review
An annual retention review of tenure-track faculty shall be conducted by the department head in consultation with the tenured faculty during the fall semester. As the first step in the annual retention review process, the tenure-track faculty member must prepare a summary of teaching, research / scholarship / creative activity, and service during the previous academic year, in accordance with departmental bylaws. The tenured faculty will review the summary and solicit input from the faculty member’s mentor or mentor committee. The tenured faculty review is intended to provide the faculty member with a clear, thoughtful, and professional narrative that describes and discusses his or her progress toward promotion and tenure in the context of his or her appointment and departmental bylaws. After completing its review, the tenured faculty will take a formal retention vote. The narrative developed by the tenured faculty and the record of the retention vote by the tenured faculty will be shared with the faculty member and the department head. In conducting his or her independent retention review, the department head will consider the narrative developed by the tenured faculty and the retention vote and may have other consultations with the tenured faculty as needed. After making an independent judgment, the department head will make a written recommendation to the Dean as to retention or non-retention, including an evaluation of performance that uses the ratings for tenured faculty members from “exceeds expectation” to “unsatisfactory.” The narrative developed by the tenured faculty and the retention vote of the tenured faculty will be included in the materials submitted by the department head to the Dean. At the same time, the department head will provide the faculty member with a copy of his or her retention recommendation and other materials submitted to the Dean.
A department recommendation that the University grant tenure to a faculty colleague is a positive assessment of the past and current performance of the individual being considered. It is also a judgment that high quality performance can be expected in the future. A decision to recommend tenure must include both of these assessments.
It is assumed that no person will be offered a regular tenure-track faculty appointment unless there is confidence that tenure can be achieved and promotion to higher rank be attained.
Ordinarily, tenure for an Assistant Professor will be considered in conjunction with a recommendation for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor.
Department decisions on tenure are governed by the standards and the procedures stated in the Faculty Handbook. Department decisions to grant or withhold tenure are recommendations that must be reviewed and approved by the appropriate administrative officers of the University of Tennessee.
All tenured members of the department faculty shall be eligible to vote on tenure decisions. Faculty recommendations for tenure shall be made by majority vote of the faculty. If the Department Head’s recommendation differs from that of the faculty, the Head shall provide to the faculty a detailed explanation of reasons for diverging from the faculty recommendation.
1. Department Standards for Tenure—Assistant Professors.
a. Consideration for tenure will normally not take place before the sixth year of credited service. – The original appointment letter shall state the length of the faculty member’s probationary period and the academic year in which he or she must be considered for tenure if he or she has met the minimum eligibility requirements for consideration. The stipulation in the original appointment letter of the length of the probationary period and the year of mandatory tenure consideration does not guarantee retention until that time. In any case, a minimum of two years of service must be spent at UTK before tenure can be recommended by the department.
b. Research and Publication. There must be evidence of scholarly productivity. A candidate for tenure should have published articles of high quality in refereed professional journals or books and there should be other demonstrable evidence (which may include grant submissions or successfully funded research) that scholarly research activity is continuing. In assessing the quality and quantity of published works, the department should be guided by the following considerations:
i. Greatest weight will be given to published high quality work of a scholarly and academic nature, regardless of the source of publication.
ii. The following list of publications outlets, in order of priority, is provided as a guide to departmental evaluation of publications:
1. books reflecting original scholarship and research;
2. articles in refereed journals;
3. original chapters in scholarly books;
4. edited scholarly books;
5. textbooks and edited books of readings
6. scholarly articles in non-refereed outlets
iii. In evaluating multi-authored publications the tenure/promotions committee should have information as to the extent of participation of the faculty member in research and writing of the publication (e.g., senior authorship, junior authorship, etc.). Recognizing the complexity of social science research and the prevalence of multi-authored publications, it is presumed that the individual contribution of each author diminishes as the number of authors increases.
iv. It is recognized that under some circumstances (e.g. the type of publication outlet) greater weight may be given to publications of high quality which are normally given lower priority.
v. If a publication is not already in print, and is to be considered relevant to assessing qualifications for tenure, the following guidelines must be met:
1. If an article, a copy of the completed manuscript with a letter from the journal editor stating that it will be published without substantial revisions; 9
2. If a book, or monograph, a copy of the completed manuscript with a letter from the publisher or editor stating that the manuscript will be published without substantial revisions within twelve months from the date of the written statement.
c. Teaching. A solid record of quality teaching must be shown, including the demonstration of personal and intellectual integrity in class materials assigned, classroom presentations, formulation and application of grading standards, and in the integration of new professional literature into courses taught. In addition, the following are relevant:
i. Positive “feedback” from students and faculty concerning the candidate’s ability to intellectually stimulate students.
ii. Availability to students for academic advising and assistance.
iii. Initiating new teaching techniques. Innovation is not synonymous with either quality or progress. However, it can be a positive factor in assessing good teaching.
d. Service. No department or university can properly fulfill its mission and responsibilities unless all faculty members are willing to devote time and effort to committee activity, program and coordination tasks, special projects, etc. The privileges associated with faculty membership carry a reciprocal responsibility for periodic service to various departmental, college, university, or external functions. A record of competent performance in department, college, university, professional, and/or community service is requisite to a favorable tenure or promotion decision.
e. In the case of non-tenured faculty the department recognizes that the expectations associated with research, publication, and teaching reduce the demands that should be made on a non-tenured person. Accordingly, department committee assignments and other service-associated activities must be limited. Equally, a non-tenured colleague should restrict service activity beyond the department to those areas that will no affect performance in meeting the expectations and requirements for research, publication and teaching. Although some record of service is expected of all candidates for tenure or promotion it does not provide sufficient basis for tenure or promotion in the absence of satisfactory performance in teaching and research/publication.
2. Department Standards for Tenure—Associate Professors and Professors.
a. In the case of persons who join the department with the rank of Associate Professor or Professor tenure will normally not be considered before the end of the first year of service. In the case of either a non-tenured Associate Professor or a non-tenured Professor a total of at least six years of full-time academic service must have been completed before tenure can be recommended. Credit for prior full-time academic service will be specified at the time of hiring.
b. Research and Publication. A strong and continuing record of research and publication following promotion to the rank presently held is expected. Such a record would be indicated by publication of articles in refereed journals or publication of substantial monographs or books by a university or commercial press or international, national, or regional stature. Further evidence of a strong and continuing record of research might include submission of grant applications, and successfully funded research. The guidelines for assessing the quality and quantity of published works, as described earlier in the context of assistant professors, also apply to tenure decisions for Associate Professors and Professors.
c. Teaching. The same criteria in judging good teaching in the case of Assistant Professors should be applied to those holding the rank of Associate Professor or Professor.
d. Service. Generally, the same considerations governing tenure for Assistant Professors should apply to Associate Professors and Professors. However, persons holding these ranks are more well-established professionals and therefore the department expects greater service activities from them.
3. Evaluation of research/publication, teaching and service is required under existing UTK standards governing promotion and tenure. In assessing the qualifications of a candidate for promotion and/or tenure the following relative weight should be accorded each area. (a) Research/publication will be given priority over teaching; (b) Teaching effectiveness is a necessity for promotion/and or tenure but it will not be a sufficient condition by itself. The absence of a strong research/ publication record must be considered fatal in evaluation qualifications for tenure or promotion in rank; (c) Contributions to public/university/department service are to be considered as of lesser importance than research/publication and teaching effectiveness.
All tenured members of the departmental faculty at or above the rank for which the candidate is being considered shall be eligible to vote on promotion decisions. Faculty recommendations for promotion shall be made by majority vote of eligible faculty. If the Department Head’s recommendation differs from that of the faculty, the Head shall provide to the faculty a detailed explanation of reasons for diverging from the faculty recommendation. (Criteria and procedures for promotion are contained in the Appendix.)
A decision to promote should be based on evaluation of the same general criteria as applied to a recommendation of tenure. In addition, the following considerations apply.
1. As previously indicated, promotion to the rank of Associate Professor will normally be considered in conjunction with a recommendation that tenure be granted to persons holding the rank of Assistant Professor.
2. Normally, a minimum of six years in rank as an Assistant Professor and five years in rank as an Associate Professor is required for promotion to the next higher rank.
3. Promotion to upper ranks must be clearly justified within the understanding that quality research, publication and quality teaching are indispensable requirements. The candidate must demonstrate that scholarly research and publication of high quality is continuing and that promise exists for a significant contribution to the development of the department and to the field of political science.
4. In addition to meeting the requirements for promotion or appointment to the rank of Associate Professor, a person under consideration for promotion to the rank of Professor must have demonstrated visible contributions of high quality to the discipline.
5. In the case of promotion to the rank of Professor all books, articles, and other publications must have been published or accepted for publication if they are to be counted as relevant to consideration of promotion.
6. The refusal to recommend promotion is an essential prerogative since it is one of the two major means (the other being salary increments) by which the department can insist on high quality performance by tenured faculty. No member of the department may expect to receive a department recommendation for promotion simply through the accumulation of years in rank.
E. Procedures for Tenure and Promotion
The following organization and procedures shall govern Department deliberations regarding both tenure and promotion decisions.
1. All members of the Committee shall take part in the consideration of recommendations for tenure and of recommendations for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor. Consideration of and recommendation for promotion to the rank of Professor shall be by members of the Committee with the rank of Professor.
2. Early in the fall semester of each academic year members of the Tenure and Promotions Committee, consistent with the provisions of section 1 above, shall review all potentially eligible candidates for promotion and/or tenure.
3. The Department Head may not indefinitely postpone holding a formal promotion consideration for a faculty member. A person who has been in rank for two years beyond the stipulated years required before promotion to the next rank but has not yet been formally considered for promotion has the right to request and be granted a formal promotion review. If the promotion is not approved, after three years the individual has the right to request and be granted another formal review. Subsequent requests may be made and granted at the same interval.
4. The faculty member must submit material relevant to consideration for tenure on or before the date specified in the notice from the Academic Affairs Office. Before the tenure review file is presented to the departmental faculty for review, the faculty member must attest in writing that he or she has inspected the file (excluding external reference letters). The candidate is to be informed of any additions made to his/her file after handing it in and be given an opportunity to review and respond to the addition at any stage of the process. The candidate has a right to review his/her file at any stage of the process.
5. External references. After consultation with the faculty member, the Department Head will seek the advice of at least five persons not on the faculty of the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, those expertise is close to that of the candidate and who are willing to provide thoughtful evaluation of the candidate’s written work or other suitable evidence of scholarly and/or creative research performance. None of these references may be the former thesis advisor, postdoctoral mentor, or a collaborator.
6. The Tenure and Promotions Committee shall, after full deliberation concerning all candidates nominated through Committee or faculty action, submit its recommendations to all faculty of the department eligible to vote on the candidate’s promotion.
7. Meeting of faculty. There will be a meeting of the tenured faculty to debate and discuss a tenure candidacy. There will be a meeting of all persons holding the rank of professor to discuss a promotion from Associate Professor to Professor. There will be a written summary of the faculty’s deliberation, in addition to a formal record of the vote. Ballots will have space for written comments on strengths and weaknesses along with space for recording the vote. Voting on department recommendations for tenure or promotion shall be governed by procedures covered in section 1 above. A vote on tenure and/a promotion is characterized as positive if a majority of the faculty eligible to vote has voted for the promotion and/or tenure.
8. Department Head’s recommendation. The vote of the tenured faculty is advisory to the department head. After making an independent judgment on the tenure candidacy, the head shall submit his or her recommendation to the Dean with a written summary of his or her judgment. If the head’s recommendation differs from the recommendation of the tenured faculty, the summary must explain the reasons for the differing judgment, and the head must provide a copy of the summary to the tenured faculty. Tenured faculty, individually or collectively, may forward a dissenting report to the next level of review.
V. Faculty Performance Evaluation
Tenure-line faculty members are rated annually over three criteria: scholarship, teaching, and service. In each area, faculty members are rated as exceeding expectations, meeting expectations, needing improvement or unsatisfactory. Faculty are also given an overall rating of “exceeds expectations,” “meets expectations,” “needs improvement,” or “unsatisfactory.”
A. Criteria for Performance Evaluation
In general, to receive a research rating of meeting expectations, faculty members are expected to publish the equivalent of one referred journal article during the performance year. A rating of exceeding expectations shall be considered in cases where faculty publish the equivalent of two or more refereed journal articles during the performance year. A rating of exceeding expectations shall also be considered in cases where faculty publish less than two refereed journal articles during the performance year, but make substantial progress on a grant submission, or successfully garner grant funding. A rating of needs improvement or unsatisfactory shall be considered in cases where faculty fail to publish the equivalent of one refereed journal article during the performance year and/or there is no or little discernible productive research activity. In determining research accomplishments, allowances will be made for grant submissions that require substantial faculty time and effort. As for published work, allowances should be made for delays in publication beyond the control of faculty and for significant progress on research products, including books. Only research products that have been published, are in press or have been accepted or their equivalent can be used (and used only for one annual review) to support the rating of exceeds expectations. The quality of the publications, as indicated by their place of publication, reviews, and number and nature of citations, as well as to the degree of difficulty of the project undertaken, should also be considered in the evaluation of research accomplishment.
In general, faculty members are expected to maintain good teaching records and working relationships with students. Outstanding teaching evaluations, awards for teaching and other types of commendation, leading independent study, directing theses and dissertations, teaching new subjects, and fulfilling department needs are the types of accomplishments that shall provide support for a rating of exceeds expectations. Poor teaching evaluations, lack of progress in improving one’s teaching, an excess of student complaints, and a general unwillingness to contribute to the educational mission of the department shall provide support for a rating of needs improvement or unsatisfactory.
In general, faculty members are expected to provide service to the department, college, university, profession and community, including the wider world. Outstanding and largely non-remunerated service should support the rating of exceeds expectations. Faculty who have few or no service commitments and actively decline and/or seek to avoid such commitments shall be strongly considered to need improvement or unsatisfactory on this faculty performance criterion.
Many factors enter into the determination of a faculty member’s overall performance rating, including mutually agreed upon goals in the three areas of research, teaching and service. In general, faculty should meet expectations in two of three categories to receive a rating of meeting expectations overall. Also, in general, faculty judged to need improvement or are unsatisfactory in two of three categories should receive a rating of needs improvement or unsatisfactory. Lastly, in general, an overall rating of exceeds expectations will only be given if research output over the past year is judged to exceed expectations (and teaching and service at least meet expectations) because scholarship shall be weighted more heavily than teaching and service.
VI. Faculty Workload Policy
The State of Tennessee has provided a very broad set of guidelines concerning faculty workloads. According to these guidelines, 100% effort by a faculty member at UTK is the equivalent of teaching four undergraduate courses per semester. Explicit in these guidelines is the recognition that faculty do more than teach undergraduate courses. Implicit, however, is the assumption that the single most important thing faculty do at state-supported institutions is teaching undergraduates. Also implicit here is the assumption that all faculty functions can be empirically expressed in terms of the “undergraduate course” metric.
A. Criteria for Performance Evaluation
The maximum course load a faculty member will be expected to carry is one of four courses per semester, for the two semesters of the academic year (hereinafter denoted a “4-4” load). The minimum load will vary, depending on a variety of circumstances, but generally will not fall below 2-2. The most important variable in determining course load is whether the faculty member has an active research program, defined as one or more lines of research ultimately resulting in published research products (journal articles, books, book chapters, etc).
B. Guidelines to be Used by the Department Head in Determining Teaching Loads
1. 4-4 Load: Faculty whose sole responsibility is to teach will carry a course load of eight courses per academic year.
2. 4-3 Load: Faculty who teach and engage in advising undergraduate and graduate students will carry a load of seven courses per academic year.
3. 3-3 Load: Faculty who teach, advise undergraduate and graduate students and perform departmental service consistent with academic rank, including serving on departmental standing and ad hoc committees and sponsoring student organizations will carry a course load of six courses per academic year.
4. 3-2 Load: Faculty who teach, advise undergraduate and graduate students, perform departmental service consistent with their academic rank and
a. perform service beyond that described – including service on college and university committees, serving on thesis and dissertation committees, community service and disciplinary service or
b. are engaged in a maintenance research program will carry a course load of five courses per academic year
5. 2-2 Load: Faculty who perform all of the functions described in #4, including both a and b, and are engaged in an active research program, will carry a course load of four courses per academic year.
C. Untenured Assistant Professors and Faculty Members with Administrative Duties
Assistant professors in the tenure stream will carry a 2-2 teaching load. Faculty with significant administrative duties, i.e., Director of Graduate Studies, Coordinator of the MPPA Program, and Director of Undergraduate Studies may receive a one course per year reduction in their teaching loads, in lieu of monetary compensation.
VII. Contingent and Adjunct Faculty
Contingent faculty are those faculty members who do not hold tenure-track appointments, but rather serve as teaching faculty for specific terms. All contingent faculty shall have the title of “Lecturer.” Lecturers shall not participate in departmental governance but may engage in academic advising, assisting student organizations, and supervising undergraduate research. Adjunct faculty members are those who hold other faculty or administrative positions at UTK or another college or university and who have agreed to serve in an adjunct capacity for the Political Science Department. Adjunct faculty may be appointed as adjunct lecturers, adjunct assistant professors, adjunct associate professors or adjunct professors. Adjunct faculty members do not engage in departmental governance, but may serve on undergraduate and graduate student committees. In accordance with procedures described in the Faculty Handbook, the Department Head, after consultation with the faculty, has responsibility for departmental recommendations regarding the appointment and termination of lecturers and adjunct faculty members.
A. Appointment of Contingent Faculty
Lecturers shall be hired by the Department Head with the advice of the Executive Advisory Committee or any ad hoc committee convened by the Head for this purpose. When the need for new non-tenure-track teaching faculty is identified, the department head will initiate the hiring process as soon as possible by contacting the Office of Equity and Diversity. As soon as possible, but normally no later than May 1, a departmentally designated group of faculty will review applications in accordance with departmental and college bylaws. The department head will then recommend appointments to the Office of the Chancellor or Vice President, after obtaining approval of the Dean and chief academic officer. In those cases where immediate replacements of faculty are required, the department head may recommend appointments without prior faculty review. However, in such cases, departmental faculty should be notified of the appointment as soon as possible. After their initial appointment, non-tenure-track faculty must complete a reapplication process each year, preferably by March 1.
B. Appointment of “Senior Lecturers” and “Distinguished Lecturers”
After five years as a Lecturer, faculty members are eligible to apply for a position as Senior Lecturer. Promotion to the rank of senior lecturer may be accompanied by a renewable contract of up to three years. The main criteria for promotion to Senior Lecturer are: Demonstration of outstanding teaching of undergraduate courses as evidenced by student evaluations, supervisor evaluations, peer evaluations, and annual departmental evaluations. Other criteria used to determine promotion would be those related to the enhancement of teaching, including professional development, course or curricular development, advising or mentoring, administration or service, and scholarly or creative work.
Senior Lecturers who have demonstrated significant achievement in two or more of the areas outlined above since their promotion to Senior Lecturer may apply for a position as Distinguished Lecturer. The time frame for this promotion is flexible, but a three-to-five year period of time as a Senior Lecturer before initiating the promotion process is suggested. Promotion to the rank of distinguished lecturer may be accompanied by a renewable contract of up to five years.
Lecturers who wish to be considered for promotion must submit a portfolio for departmental review. A departmental review committee shall review the portfolio and make a recommendation to the faculty. Following deliberation and vote by the tenure-line faculty, the Head shall make a recommendation to the Dean.
C. Appointment of Adjunct Faculty
The granting of adjunct status requires a majority vote of the departmental tenure-line faculty and a recommendation by the department head to the Dean’s office. Ultimately, adjunct appointments must be granted by the Office of the Chancellor.
These by-laws may be amended by two-thirds vote of the faculty at any regularly scheduled faculty meeting, provided that each proposed amendment is communicated in writing to all faculty members not less than thirty days prior to such meeting.