Page tree

DOCUMENT INFORMATION

Document TitleDepartment of Language, Learning, & Leadership Department Handbook
Document Type
  • Bylaws
  • Policy Document
  • Procedures
  • Guidelines
  • Form
Office/Unit
Document Owner
Contact Information
Office Name Phone Email








Approval Date

April 9, 2018

Approved byDepartment of Language, Learning, & Leadership
Effective Date


Review Date/Schedule
Revision History

May 13, 2013 / September 13, 2017 (see * below for further details)

DOCUMENT CONTENT

Part 1: Introduction

In accordance with SUNY Fredonia Handbook on Appointment, Reappointment, and Promotion (HARP), this Department Handbook outlines, clarifies, and refines the procedures at the department level for reappointment, continuing appointment, and promotion relevant to faculty in the Department of Language, Learning and Leadership. These procedures are consistent with policies established by the SUNY Board of Trustees (Policies), which govern all SUNY campuses. This Handbook conforms to the terms of the Policies, HARP, and the Agreement negotiated between the local chapter of UUP and SUNY Fredonia. In the event of any inconsistency or conflict between provisions and policies of this Department Handbook and the UUP--State of New York collective bargaining Agreement and/or the Policies of the Board of Trustees, the provisions of the collective bargaining Agreement and/or Policies shall apply and take precedence. In the event of any inconsistency or conflict between provisions and policies of this Department Handbook and the HARP agreement, the provisions of the HARP agreement shall apply and take precedence. This Handbook, approved by the Provost in consultation with the Dean of the College of Education, will be reviewed every three years to ensure consistency with the SUNY Fredonia Handbook on Appointment, Reappointment, and Promotion (HARP).  

Part 2: Departmental Procedures  

The faculty of the Language, Learning and Leadership Department is a diverse group of educators representing various disciplines. The Department prospers with faculty members who are genuinely creative scholars and inspired teachers and who are dedicated to the pursuit of knowledge. Outstanding intellectual qualities are reflected in teaching, scholarship and service and are the primary criteria for recommending reappointment, continuing appointment, and promotion. To be successful in their efforts for reappointment, continuing appointment, and promotion, faculty should be proactive in reading and carefully following the various policies and procedures. All faculty should be actively engaged in their teaching, scholarship/research, and service to the Department, the College of Education, the University, and the professional community. The primary objective of these departmental procedures is to help academic personnel in the Department of Language Learning and Leadership gain reappointment and attain continuing appointment and promotion.  

2.1  The Departmental Personnel Committee

In accordance with the SUNY Fredonia Handbook on Appointment, Reappointment, and Promotion (HARP) section on the Departmental Personnel Committee (DPC), the DPC of the LLL Department will consist of all members of the Department who hold continuing appointment.     

In the Dept. of LLL, the DPC will meet in September of each academic year to develop a timeline of its activities for the rest of the academic year. This timeline will be shared with the Department Chair by September 30.  

HARP further indicates that the DPC “each year appoints one of its members as Chair” of the DPC. The DPC Chair for the upcoming academic year would be elected by LLL faculty in early May of the current academic year.  

The role of the Chair of the DPC is to call meetings, collect ballots, and summarize the DPC activities and recommendations. The DPC Chair is also responsible for drafting (or having drafted) the DPC recommendation letter to the Dept. Chair and sharing it with the DPC for finalization.

2.2  Procedures for Review of Candidates for Reappointment      

Both Career and Annual Timelines for review of candidates are given in the HARP section on the Appointment, Reappointment, Review and Promotion of Tenure-Track Faculty. This section of this Department Handbook incorporates the above timelines and areas for evaluation in order to detail the department level procedures in the review of candidates for reappointment other than promotion to higher rank or continuing appointment.   

2.2.a  Review of First Year Candidates   

First Year Candidates are not required to submit a Dossier for faculty review. Instead they are to write a Reappointment Statement and submit that along with their current curriculum vitae (CV) to the Department Chair by December 1. HARP explains the general procedures for a first year review and details the contents of a Reappointment Statement.

The Chair of the Department will notify all tenured and tenure-track faculty in writing of personnel deadlines, and distribute the appropriate Departmental rubrics and Departmental Personnel Committee (DPC) ballots (electronic or paper) to those faculty eligible to vote.     

The Chair of the Departmental Personnel Committee (DPC) will inform all voting faculty of the deadline for submission of completed rubrics and DPC ballots, and set a date for the DPC meeting. The DPC review of first year Reappointment Statement and CV must be submitted to the Department Chair by December 15. To insure adequate time for DPC deliberation, all ballots for first year tenure-track faculty should be submitted to the Department Secretary no later than close of business on December 10 (or 8:35 a.m. of the first business day after December 10 if the 10th falls on a weekend). [December 10 is arbitrarily selected, but it allows for 10 days to review then 4 days to draft the letter and meet with the DPC before submitting the letter to the Department Chair on December 15th]

All faculty who are members of the DPC and eligible to vote in the reappointment process will then review the Reappointment Statement and CV. Tenure-track faculty who are not eligible to vote may also read and review the submitted materials.

Current practice for reviewing first year tenure track faculty has been to report comments of all reviewers in answer to the following four questions (see Appendix B for Departmental Rubric):

  • How might the candidate’s experiences, credentials, & scholarly interests be valuable to the department & campus?

  • What comments & advice do you have for the candidate’s plan for professional development in the areas of instruction and advisement?

  • What comments and advice do you have for the candidate’s plan for professional development in the area of scholarship and creative endeavors?

  • What support (mentors & resources) would be valuable for the candidate to know about?

Voting faculty should complete the Departmental rubric appropriate for the submitted materials as well as cast their vote on a paper copy of the DPC Ballot (Appendix in HARP). Signed rubrics and ballots are then submitted to the Department Secretary who will store them in a secure location until the Chair of the DPC collects them. Ballots and rubrics are to be submitted in signed and sealed envelopes. If all eligible ballots are submitted prior to the deadline set by the Chair of the DPC, the Secretary may notify the Chair of the DPC who will then collect the ballots as soon as convenient and may call a meeting of the DPC earlier than te one previously set.

The Chair of the DPC shall collect the ballots after the submission deadline, or once all eligible ballots have been submitted, and shall call a meeting of the DPC for no later than December 14. According to HARP, the Chair of the DPC is responsible for collecting ballots, and summarizing DPC activities and recommendations. Therefore, the Chair of the DPC should draft a recommendation letter (see Appendix D for Template of Letter) summarizing DPC activities and recommendations.

The draft of this DPC recommendation letter should then be discussed at a DPC meeting. The Chair of the DPC will then make any DPC agreed upon revisions to the letter, and then forward the letter along with the signed ballots and the signed Departmental rubrics to the Department Chair no later than close of business on December 15 (or 8:35 a.m. of the first business day after December 15 if the 15th falls on a weekend). The Chair of the DPC shall also forward at the same time a copy of the recommendation letter and signed ballots and rubrics to the faculty candidate, as per HARP.  The DPC will not interview the candidate.    

The faculty candidate may comment on the ballots or summary of the DPC and may do so by submitting comments in writing to the Department Chair within five working days of receiving the signed ballots from the DPC Chair.   

2.2.b  Review of Candidates Beyond First Year  

Candidates beyond the first year are required to submit a Dossier to the Department Chair by October 1 for faculty review. Part 3.3.1 of this Handbook details the Dossier expectations for this Department. HARP explains in general the task of the Departmental Personnel Committee (DPC) in reviewing candidate’s submitted materials and making reappointment recommendations. This Handbook refines and details those procedures for this Department.   

The Chair of the Department will notify all tenured and tenure-track faculty in writing of personnel deadlines, and distribute the appropriate Departmental rubrics (see Appendix C) and DPC ballots (electronic or paper) to those faculty eligible to vote.  

The Chair of the DPC will inform all voting faculty of the deadline for submission of completed Departmental rubrics and DPC ballots and set a date for the DPC meeting. The DPC review of dossiers beyond the first year must be submitted to the Department Chair by November 1. To insure adequate time for DPC deliberation, all ballots for reappointment of tenure-track faculty beyond the first year should be submitted to the Department Secretary no later than close of business on October 24 (or 8:35 a.m. of the first business day after October 24 if the 24th falls on a weekend).  [October 24 is arbitrarily selected, but it allows for 3 weeks to review Dossier then a week to draft letter and meet with the DPC before submitting the letter to the Department Chair on November 1st]

All faculty who are members of the DPC and eligible to vote in the reappointment process will review the dossier. Tenure-track members of the faculty are encouraged to review their colleagues’ dossiers as a means of staying abreast of colleagues’ professional interests and activities, but tenure-track members of the faculty are not eligible to participate in DPC activities until they have achieved continuing appointment.  

Voting faculty should complete the Departmental rubric appropriate for the submitted dossier as well as cast their vote on a paper copy of the DPC Ballot (Appendix A of HARP). Signed rubrics and ballots are then submitted to the Department Secretary who will store them in a secure location until the Chair of the DPC collects them. Ballots are to be submitted in signed and sealed envelopes. If all eligible ballots and rubrics are submitted prior to the deadline set by the Chair of the DPC, the Secretary may notify the Chair of the DPC who will then collect the ballots as soon as convenient and may call a meeting of the DPC earlier than the one previously set.  

The Chair of the DPC shall collect the ballots and rubrics after the submission deadline, or once all eligible ballots have been submitted, and shall call a meeting of the DPC for no later than October 31. According to HARP, the Chair of the DPC is responsible for collecting ballots, and summarizing DPC activities and recommendations. Therefore, the Chair of the DPC should draft a recommendation letter (see Appendix D for Template) summarizing DPC activities and recommendations. Current practice has been to report both quantitative and qualitative data: a table showing the number of peer ratings at each level (Developing, Achievement, Achievement with Distinction) in each of the “Big Three” categories (Teaching, Scholarship, Service), and a bulleted listing of qualitative remarks from all reviewers. The DPC letter then typically identifies patterns that the DPC sees in the reviewers’ remarks and makes a recommendation regarding reappointment.    

The draft of this recommendation letter should then be discussed at a DPC meeting. The Chair of the DPC will then make any DPC agreed upon revisions to the letter, and then forward the letter along with the signed DPC ballots and Departmental rubrics to the Department Chair no later than close of business on November 1 (or 8:35 a.m. of the first business day after November 1 if the first falls on a weekend). The Chair of the DPC shall also forward at the same time a copy of the recommendation letter and signed DPC ballots and rubrics to the faculty candidate, as per HARP. The DPC will not interview the candidate.    

The faculty candidate may comment on the ballots or summary of the DPC and may do so by submitting comments in writing to the Department Chair within five working days of receiving the signed ballots from the DPC Chair.    

2.2.c  Length of Reappointment in 3rd year  

Typically, reappointment recommendations prior to a faculty member’s review for continuing appointment are for a term of one year. Current practice for third year review in the Language, Learning and Leadership Department has been for each reviewer to recommend either non-reappointment, a one-year reappointment, or a two-year reappointment. The rationale for the two-year recommendation has been to allow faculty candidates time to focus on their research agendas when their performance to date has been consistent with Departmental expectations for “new” faculty. Minimum criteria for a two-year recommendation would be agreement among the DPC members that all three areas of evaluation (Teaching, Scholarship and Service) reflected Achievement or Achievement with Distinction.  

2.3  Procedures for Review of Candidates for Continuing Appointment  

Both Career and Annual Timelines for review of candidates are given in the HARP section on the Appointment, Reappointment, Review and Promotion of Tenure-Track Faculty This section of this Department Handbook incorporates the above timelines and areas for evaluation in order to detail the Department level procedures in the review of candidates for promotion to continuing appointment.   

Tenure-track candidates eligible for continuing appointment (tenure) are required to submit a Dossier to the Department Chair by October 1 for faculty review. Part 3 of this Handbook details the Dossier expectations for this Department. HARP explains in general the task of the Departmental Personnel Committee (DPC) in reviewing candidate’s submitted materials and making reappointment recommendations. This Handbook defines and details those procedures for this Department.  

The Chair of the Department will notify all tenured and tenure-track faculty in writing of personnel deadlines, and distribute the appropriate Departmental rubrics (see Appendix C) and DPC ballots (electronic or paper) to those faculty eligible to vote.   

The Chair of the Departmental Personnel Committee (DPC) will inform all voting faculty of the deadline for submission of DPC ballots and rubrics and set a date for the DPC meeting. The DPC review of dossiers beyond the first year must be submitted to the Department Chair by November 1. To insure adequate time for DPC deliberation, all ballots for reappointment of tenure-track faculty beyond the first year should be submitted to the Department Secretary no later than close of business on October 24 (or 8:35 a.m. of the first business day after October 24 if the 24th falls on a weekend).  [October 24 is arbitrarily selected, but it allows for 3 weeks to review Dossier, then a week to draft letter and meet with the DPC before submitting the letter to the Department Chair on November 1st]

All faculty who are members of the DPC and eligible to vote in the reappointment process will then review the dossier. Tenure-track members of the faculty are encouraged to review their colleagues’ dossiers as a means of staying abreast of colleagues’ professional interests and activities, but tenure-track members of the faculty are not eligible to participate in DPC activities until they have achieved continuing appointment.

Voting faculty should complete the Departmental rubric appropriate for the submitted dossier as well as cast their vote on a paper copy of the DPC Ballot (Appendix A of HARP). Signed rubrics and ballots are then submitted to the Department Secretary who will store them in a secure location until the Chair of the DPC collects them. Ballots are to be submitted in signed and sealed envelopes. If all eligible ballots and rubrics are submitted prior to the deadline set by the Chair of the DPC, the Secretary may notify the Chair of the DPC who will then collect the ballots as soon as convenient and may call a meeting of the DPC earlier than the one previously set.  

The Chair of the DPC shall collect the ballots and rubrics after the submission deadline, or once all eligible ballots have been submitted, and shall call a meeting of the DPC for no later than October 31. According to HARP, the Chair of the DPC is responsible for collecting ballots, and summarizing DPC activities and recommendations. Therefore, the Chair of the DPC should draft a recommendation letter (see Appendix D for Template) summarizing DPC activities and recommendations. Current practice has been to report both quantitative and qualitative data: a table showing the number of peer ratings at each level (Developing, Achievement, Achievement with Distinction) in each of the “Big Three” categories (Teaching, Scholarship, Service), and a bulleted listing of qualitative remarks from all reviewers. The DPC letter then typically identifies patterns that the DPC sees in the reviewers’ remarks and makes a recommendation regarding continuing appointment.   

Current practice regarding continuing appointment is that there should be general consensus (not necessarily unanimous agreement) among the reviewers that the faculty candidate for continuing appointment should demonstrate “Achievement With Distinction” in at least two of the “Big Three” categories, and that the dossier for continuing appointment summarizes the faculty candidate’s professional development from year one of the tenure-track to the time of continuing appointment review.   

The draft of this recommendation letter should then be discussed at a DPC meeting. The Chair of the DPC will then make any DPC agreed upon revisions to the letter, and then forward the letter along with the signed DPC ballots and Departmental rubrics to the Department Chair no later than close of business on November 1 (or 8:35 a.m. of the first business day after November 1 if the first falls on a weekend). The Chair of the DPC shall also forward at the same time a copy of the recommendation letter and signed DPC ballots and rubrics to the faculty candidate, as per HARP. The DPC will not interview the candidate.    

The faculty candidate may comment on the ballots or summary of the DPC and may do so by submitting comments in writing to the Department Chair within five working days of receiving the signed ballots from the DPC Chair.    

The annual review timeline in HARP indicates that the Dean submits the recommendation, signed ballots and Dossier to the Provost on December 15, then the material becomes available on December 20 for review by the APC. The Chair of the APC then submits the APC recommendation to the Provost by February 15th.  

2.4  Procedures for Review of Candidates for Promotion

Both Career and Annual Timelines for review of candidates are given in the Appointment, Reappointment and Review section of HARP. In addition, that section of HARP states that faculty are evaluated primarily in the areas of teaching, scholarship/creative activity, and service, with an understanding that continued mastery of subject matter and continuing growth occur in each of these areas. All areas shall be considered in all faculty personnel reviews. This section of this Department Handbook incorporates the above timelines and areas for evaluation in order to detail the Department level procedures in the review of candidates for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor.  

HARP also indicates that the expectations are the same for Continuing Appointment (Tenure) and Promotion to Associate.  

Tenure-track candidates eligible for promotion to Associate Professor are reviewed at the same time as their review for continuing appointment. Candidates are required to submit only one Dossier to the Department Chair by October 1 for faculty review. Part 3 of this Handbook details the Dossier expectations for promotion within this Department. Part II Section E.2 of HARP explains in general the task of the Departmental Personnel Committee (DPC) in reviewing candidate’s submitted materials and making reappointment and promotion recommendations. This Handbook defines and details those procedures for this Department.    

Because promotion to the rank of Associate Professor and to continuing appointment (tenure) are synchronous, the Department procedures for Dossier review for promotion are those given above in Section 2.3 for promotion to continuing appointment and are not repeated here.   

2.5 Procedures for Early Continuing Appointment and/or Promotion to Associate Professor   

The HARP guidelines for Early Continuing Appointment refer to “exceptional cases” and “an extraordinary record.”   

Current practice indicates that this Department’s standard for “exceptional” and “extraordinary” would be consensus among the DPC members that, for the three years prior to the faculty candidate’s application for early review, the candidate has achieved the level of “Achievement with Distinction” on Departmental rubrics (see Appendix C) in all three areas of evaluation: Teaching, Scholarship/Creative Activity, and Service. The expectation is that the dossier submitted for early review would also meet the same level.

Further, the Department takes this opportunity to reaffirm that “early review for continuing appointment and promotion” should not be confused with “credit awarded for prior service” at another institution. Information about Prior Service Credit can be accessed from the Human Resources Office.  

2.6 Procedures for Selection of Department Chair

The Departmental Personnel Committee (DPC) Chair shall oversee the implementation process for the Chair selection in the Language, Learning, and Leadership (LLL) Department of the College of Education. Only tenured faculty are eligible to serve as LLL Department Chair. The DPC shall be responsible for vetting nominees regarding willingness to serve and eligibility.

All faculty and staff within the LLL Department may nominate candidates for the position of LLL Department Chair.  

  • Nominations and self-nominations for the LLL Department Chair Nominee shall be forwarded to the DPC Chair in a written format (letter, email, etc.).  

  • Tenured faculty, tenure-track faculty, and full time contingent faculty (Lecturer) are eligible to vote in the election for the LLL Department Chair Nominee. Part-time contingent faculty members are not eligible to vote.  

  • If the Associate Dean has retreat rights to the LLL Department and holds management confidential status, the Associate Dean’s eligibility and role in the election process shall be to serve as a tie-breaker vote, if needed.  

  • Prior to the date of the election, the DPC Chair shall arrange for at least one opportunity for dialogue and interaction between the voting parties and nominees. The voting parties will have the opportunity to discuss the slate of nominees without the nominees present.

2.6.a  Voting Procedures

A formal vote shall be conducted for the selection of the LLL Department Chair Nominee regardless of the number of nominees.  

  • A standard voting process via closed written ballots shall be utilized for the selection of the LLL Department Chair Nominee.  

  • The voting process shall be conducted by the DPC Chair and a designee (DPC member) within a scheduled LLL Department meeting.  

  • Absent eligible voting parties shall submit their written or electronic ballot to the DPC Chair within two (2) business days, before or after the scheduled vote.  

  • In the event of a tie-vote, a second round of voting shall be conducted electronically, led by the DPC Chair within five (5) business days.  

  • If the vote is tied for a second time, then the Associate Dean with retreat rights to the LLL Department shall cast the deciding vote to the DPC Chair within two (2) business days, written or electronically.  

  • In the event that the Associate Dean’s retreat rights are in the Curriculum and Instruction (C&I) Department of the College of Education, the deciding tie-breaker vote shall be cast by the Dean for the College of Education to the DPC Chair within two (2) business days, written or electronically.  

  • A final written announcement of the voting results shall be communicated by the DPC Chair to the LLL Department (via email or other form of formal documentation) and included in the minutes of the next scheduled LLL Department meeting.  

2.6.b  Notification Procedures  

When the current LLL Department Chair is planning to step down: optimally, written notification shall be provided to the Departmental Personnel Committee Chair (with copies to the LLL Department) by the end of the Spring semester of the 2nd year of the three year term.   

Whether the incumbent Department Chair intends to run for another term, or to step down, notification of her/his intentions must be submitted to the DPC Chair and LLL Department by the current LLL Department Chair by the end of the first week of classes in the Fall semester (which corresponds to the beginning of the 3rd year of service by the current Chair).  

In accordance with the Fredonia Senate Chair Selection Policy (approved November 7, 2016):

  • The Dean shall be notified by the current Chair and the DPC Chair of the current Chair’s intentions by the final Friday in September of the final Academic Year of the current Chair’s term.

  • The DPC Chair shall be responsible for maintaining the list of nominees for the LLL Department Chair and notifying the Dean for the College of Education of the slate of nominees by the final Friday of October of the final Academic Year of the current Chair’s term.

  • The LLL Department shall vote according to the Procedures in Section 2.6a on the selection of Department Chair during the first two (2) weeks of November of the final Academic Year of the current Chair’s term.

  • The DPC Chair shall disseminate the election results to the LLL Department and the Dean of the College of Education by the Friday before the Thanksgiving break in November of the final Academic Year of the current Chair’s term.  

In accordance with the Fredonia Senate Chair Selection Policy (approved November 7, 2016), after appropriate consultation with the LLL Department, and after receiving the results of the LLL Departmental election for Chair nominee, the COE Dean shall make a recommendation for chair to the Provost. The COE Dean shall share that recommendation with the LLL Department. The Provost may consult with the COE Dean and/or the LLL Department before making a recommendation to the President. The Provost shall share that recommendation with the LLL Department. The President may consult with the Provost, COE Dean, and/or the LLL Department before appointing the Department Chair.

If the COE Dean’s recommendation for Chair is contrary to the LLL Department’s vote, the LLL Department may appeal in writing to the Provost within 5 business days after the COE Dean’s recommendation is made. If the Provost’s recommendation for Chair is contrary to the LLL Department’s vote, the LLL Department may appeal in writing to the President within 5 business days after the Provost’s recommendation is made. The President’s decision may not be appealed.

Part 3: Related Departmental Topics  

While the SUNY Fredonia Handbook on Appointment, Reappointment, and Promotion (HARP) charges departments to create department handbooks that outline, clarify, and refine department level procedures for reappointment, continuing appointment, and promotion, the Department of Language, Learning, and Leadership feels that our Handbook provides a place for additional information about our Department’s policies and procedures. The following sections offer that information on topics related to Language, Learning, and Leadership Department faculty.

3.1  Dossiers       

A Dossier, from the French word dossier meaning a bundle of papers with a label on the back, is the primary means of displaying one’s professional growth in academia. It becomes the primary artifact during the academic review process here at the State University of New York at Fredonia. While a dossier has several uses, the essential structure of a dossier remains the same.

3.1.a  Dossiers for Reappointment

An Appendix in HARP provides Suggestions for Preparing a Dossier. Appendix A of this Handbook provides guidelines for preparing a dossier for this Department of Language, Learning, and Leadership.  

Reappointment dossiers generally reflect the faculty candidate's work since the candidate’s last submitted dossier, or in the case of second year reappointment, the candidate’s work since the submission of the First Year Reappointment Statement.  

Dossiers submitted for reappointment in this Department are to consist of one 3-ring binder of supporting material and with the curriculum vitae (CV) inserted in the cover pocket on the inside flap of the dossier binder cover. The candidate has the choice to submit an electronic or paper dossier.  

Dossiers are to contain minimum of one peer observation. It is the responsibility of faculty coming up for reappointment to ensure that a peer observation is completed by an appropriate peer during the Academic Year (AY) prior to submission of the reappointment dossier. A letter from the faculty peer who observed the candidate should contain a description of the teaching session and of observed strengths and weaknesses. This letter should be part of the reappointment dossier.   

Dossiers are also to contain data from the on-line institutional course evaluations which provide student evaluations of the course and the course instructor. Current practice is for the faculty candidate to develop a table that summarizes student evaluations for all courses taught since the last dossier submission and that includes the students’ overall evaluation of the courses and their overall ratings of the course instructor. The faculty candidate may also present representative narrative comments from students. Past practice is that some faculty candidates have developed their own course evaluation forms which they use in addition to the on-line institutional course evaluation forms, and have chosen to include data from those student evaluations in their dossier as well. Explanation of relevant circumstantial factors affecting the data available for the “Student Evaluations” category of the Departmental Rubric should be included in the candidate’s Reflective Narrative for this section of the dossier: for example, a low response rate may be explained as coming from the circumstantial factor of on-line course evaluations.

3.1.b  Dossiers for Continuing Appointment and Promotion

Current practice is that the dossier for continuing appointment summarizes the faculty candidate’s professional development from year one of the tenure track to the time of dossier submission for continuing appointment and promotion review. Otherwise, the format of the continuing appointment and promotion dossier is the same as that for a reappointment dossier (see Section 3.1.a above).  

3.1.c  Dossiers for Promotion to Full Professor

Current practice is that the dossier for promotion to rank of full professor summarizes the faculty candidate’s professional development from the year of promotion to Associate Professor to the time of dossier submission for promotion to full professor. Otherwise, the format of the promotion to full professor dossier is the same as that for a reappointment dossier (see Section 3.1.a above).  

[Section under revision; draft to be completed by April 15, 2019, and approved by faculty by the last day of faculty obligations in May 2019.]

3.2  Department Level Rubrics

HARP summarizes institutional expectations for reappointment and for continuing appointment. The Department of Language, Learning, and Leadership has developed rubrics to reflect its interpretation and application of the institutional expectations for its tenure-track faculty. These rubrics with their descriptions of performance expectations are the primary means used by this Department for the evaluation of faculty academic performance.  

3.2.a  Rubric for Review of First Year Reappointment Statement

Since the State University of New York at Fredonia initiated the Reappointment Statement for all first year faculty as explained in HARP, current practice in this Department has been to review a Reappointment Statement by using review-focused versions of the four questions a faculty candidate is to address in the Reappointment Statement. These questions form the rubric used by this Department for First Year Reappointment (see Appendix B).  

3.2.b  Rubrics for Reappointment

The Departmental rubrics for reappointment consist of a specific rubric for each of the academic performance areas of Teaching, Scholarship, and Service. The current Departmental rubrics were extensively revised by a Rubric Review Committee containing both tenured and tenure-track faculty in the Department of Language Learning, and Leadership during the academic year 2012-2013. The revised rubrics (see Appendix C) were approved by all Department faculty on May 8, 2013.  

3.2.c  Rubrics For Continuing Appointment and Promotion   

Tenure-track candidates eligible for promotion to Associate Professor are reviewed at the same time as their review for continuing appointment. Candidates are required to submit only one Dossier to the Department Chair. Current practice is to use the Departmental rubrics for reappointment (see Appendix C) to review this one dossier for both continuing appointment and promotion. Recommendation for both continuing appointment and promotion to associate professor is contingent upon Departmental Personnel Committee (DPC) consensus that the faculty candidate has demonstrated the rubric level of “Achievement with Distinction” in at least two of the three areas of evaluation.  

3.2.d  Rubrics For Promotion to Full Professor  

Current practice is to use the Departmental rubrics for reappointment (see Appendix C) to review the dossier submitted for promotion to full professor. However, only faculty who have already attained the rank of full professor may review a dossier submitted for promotion to full professor.

[Section under revision; draft to be completed by April 15, 2019, and approved by faculty by the last day of faculty obligations in May 2019.]

3.3  General Expectations for Promotion to Full Professor     

[Section under revision; draft to be completed by April 15, 2019, and approved by faculty by the last day of faculty obligations in May 2019.]

3.4  Procedures for Review of Post Tenure Promotion    

[Section under revision; draft to be completed by April 15, 2019, and approved by faculty by the last day of faculty obligations in May 2019.]

3.5  Faculty Mentors  

[Section under revision; draft to be completed by April 15, 2019, and approved by faculty by the last day of faculty obligations in May 2019.]

*Chair’s Note:  After a review of the 2017 edition of this Handbook by the Provost, the LLL faculty met to address the points and questions raised by the Provost in her review. The faculty met and made decisions regarding the Provost’s Review and revised this Handbook accordingly. At the April 9th, 2018, department meeting, the revisions were reviewed by the faculty, and this new April 9, 2018, edition of the Handbook was approved.    

~ Cindy M. Bird, Ph.D.   Dept. Chair. May 7, 2018

*Chair’s Note:  Following approval by the Senate in Spring 2017 of a Fredonia Policy on department chair selection, the LLL Dept. formed a DPC subcommittee headed by Dr. Anna Thibodeau to revise the 2013/15 edition of this Handbook to include a section on chair selection (Section 2.6). The revised edition was shared with the faculty for discussion and vote. Faculty approved the revised Handbook on Wednesday, September 13, 2017.   

~ Cindy M. Bird, Ph.D.   Dept. Chair. September 13, 2017

*Chair’s Note: This initial working draft Handbook was developed collaboratively by the faculty of the Department of Language, Learning & Leadership under the leadership of Dr. Charles Stoddart, chair of the current LLL Standing Personnel Committee. Following the general release of the HARP document during the Fall 2012 semester, a portion of each subsequent LLL departmental meeting, and sometimes the whole meeting, was devoted to HARP discussion. Dr. Cindy Bird took a leadership role in crafting the language of this draft document, but all members of the faculty had the opportunity to comment and recommend changes throughout the process. The final version of the working draft was shared with the LLL faculty via Google Docs/Drive on February 21, 2013 so that faculty could make any remaining changes that were felt to be in the best interests of the department. On March 20, the faculty reviewed the working draft in a departmental meeting and endorsed sending the working document forward to the Dean for her review and recommendations. This writer added notes reflecting current departmental practice before sending the document to the Dean. Drs. Karen Lillie, Xiaoning Chen, Jennifer Moon Ro, and Rhea Simmons developed the rubric that the Departmental Personnel Committee (DPC) will use when evaluating dossiers starting in the Fall of 2013. That committee’s next goal is to develop an interactive electronic rubric/feedback form for use by new Departmental Personnel Committees moving forward.   

~ Anna M. Thibodeau, Ph.D.  Dept. Chair. May 13, 2013

FAQ's
Keywords

Category(s)
  • Academic Affairs
  • Advancement
  • Financial
  • Governance
  • ITS
  • Operational
  • Personnel
  • School/College
  • Student Life
Sub-Category(s)