Appendix 1

Media School Guidelines for Tenure and Promotion

I. Preamble

Promotion and tenure are governed by procedures and guidelines at multiple levels of the institution. Preferred procedures and a digest of official policies endorsed by the Bloomington Faculty Council (BFC) and the College of Arts and Sciences are described on the website of the Office of the Vice Provost for Faculty & Academic Affairs.

This document is a statement of guidelines for Media School faculty rather than a document of policy.

The Media School’s guidelines for tenure and promotion stand at the intersection of supporting the professional careers of faculty, contributing to the research and creative reputation of our institution, and advancing our discipline. Granting tenure to junior faculty and eventually promoting them to full professors count among the most consequential acts of faculty governance. Thus, the tenure review process is grounded in the enduring principles and collegial values of the academy: (1) transparency and consistency in procedure and expectations and (2) fairness and justified decisions based on the merits of each case.

At IUB, tenure is earned in one of four ways: (1) excellence in research or creative activity with effectiveness in teaching and satisfactory service; (2) excellence in teaching, which requires demonstration of a national standing in pedagogy, along with satisfactory research or creative activity and satisfactory service; (3) excellence in service; and (4) a balanced case where the faculty member whose research/creative, teaching, and service accomplishments all are at least very good. The Media School expects tenure-line faculty to achieve tenure based on excellence in research or creative activity and this document highlights the markers of success in earning tenure on the basis of excellence in research or creative activity. The Media School will follow College and IUB guidelines for those seeking tenure on the basis of teaching, service or a balanced case.

II. Research

To earn tenure based on excellence in research, the Media School expects candidates will have an exemplary record of programmatic scholarship and consistent productivity pointing to national or international leadership in their field of inquiry. Greatest weight will be assigned to rigorous peer or equivalently reviewed manuscripts published as journal articles, monographs, books or book chapters. These contributions may be supplemented by conference papers and presentations, edited collections, non-refereed book chapters and additional forms of scholarship that the departmental unit determines has an important impact in the public domain.

Research fields are changed continuously by technology, therefore new forms of scholarly production and distribution continue to emerge and grow. Candidates may pursue these new forms of digital scholarly communication. However, candidates assume responsibility for providing evidence that digital publications meet the standards of rigorous peer review applied to more traditional scholarship.

III. Creative

To earn tenure based on excellence in creative activity, the Media School expects candidates will have an exemplary record of programmatic creativity pointing to national or international leadership in their medium. Greatest weight will be assigned to rigorous peer or equivalently reviewed works appearing publicly in some form (including but not limited to grant-funded work, screening, publication, online distribution, and exhibition). These contributions may be supplemented by conference presentations, non-reviewed or refereed forms of distribution, public and commercial commissions and contracts, professional practice, and work that has an important impact in the public domain. Creative fields are changed continuously by technology, therefore new forms of production and distribution are encouraged. However, it is up to the candidate to demonstrate that novel works meet the standard of rigorous peer review that applies to more traditional forms.

IV. Teaching

Junior faculty are expected to be thoroughly engaged in the enterprise of teaching across the graduate and undergraduate curriculum and demonstrating effectiveness in small and large class settings. Faculty are expected to maintain rigorous academic standards and incorporate pedagogical practices that stimulate thought, raise student aspirations and guide them to excellent performance. To this end, faculty are encouraged to make full use of university resources designed to enhance the quality of instruction in all our classrooms.

V. Service

Junior faculty are expected to contribute to the intellectual life, governance, and esprit de corps of their unit, school, college, and campus. They are also expected to provide strategic service to their profession and, as appropriate, to the community at large.

VI. Timeline for Promotion of Tenure Track Faculty

1. First year

1.1 Orient new faculty to expectations. Early first semester meetings with deans and unit directors.

1.2 The Unit Director serves as official mentor for the first year.

1.3 Annual review conducted by tenured faculty in the unit, written by sub-committee, delivered no later than the end of the spring semester.

1.4 In-person meeting with the Unit Director to discuss/expand upon the year’s written annual review.

2. Second year

2.1 Candidate submits the first draft of a personal statement outlining the path to tenure. This statement is revised annually.

2.2 Junior faculty seek advice from mentors of their choice on research, teaching, or service. The method will be determined by the unit, including the degree of formality by which the mentoring process works.

2.3 Annual review conducted by tenured faculty in the unit, written by sub-committee, delivered no later than the end of the spring semester.  

3. Third year

3.1 Significant review, consistent with campus and College policies and expectations.

3.2 Review includes at least one member from another unit in the school (or a representative on the school’s tenure committee).

3.3 Review includes clear assessment of how candidate’s trajectory fits with expectations for tenure.

4. Fourth year

4.1 Serious conversation about the substance of the case and how to put the dossier together.

4.2 Annual review conducted by tenured faculty in the unit, written by sub-committee, delivered no later than the end of the spring semester.

5. Fifth year

5.1 Annual review conducted by tenured faculty in the unit, written by sub-committee, delivered no later than the end of the spring semester.

5.2 Media School will follow College practices (please see #7 under Compendium of Procedures) and timeline for lists of external referees. The timeline for the tenure dossier looks like this:

6. The spring semester before going up for tenure

6.1 By end of March, complete discussions with Unit Director regarding the names of external referees.

6.2 1st week of April, submit list of External Referees to the Media School deans.

6.3 The month of April, negotiate the final list of external referees with the deans.

6.4 1st week of May, the Unit Director contacts referees.

6.5 Mid-June, provide to the College the names of external referees who have agreed to write letters.

6.6 1st week of September, tenure dossier due to unit level.

6.7 1st week of October, tenure dossier due to the Media School tenure committee.

6.8 Before Thanksgiving, tenure dossier due to the College dean.

6.9 1st Week of December, tenure dossier sent to the VPFAA office and tenure and promotion committee.

6.10 By May, notification to faculty on final decision.

Media School Guidelines for Promotion to Full Professor

Media School parameters for promotion from associate to full professor fall within the guidelines set by IUB and the College. The Media School generally expects faculty to be promoted on the basis of excellence in research or creative activity. However, the Media School will follow College and campus guidelines for those seeking promotion to full professor on the basis of teaching, service or a balanced case.

Media School parameters are deliberately broad in order to encompass disciplinary differences at the unit level. However, in general this means:

I. Excellence in Research and Creative Activity

Faculty seeking promotion to full professor on the basis of Excellence in Research and Creative Activity are expected to have achieved national or, when appropriate, international intellectual or creative leadership in their area of practice or inquiry. They are also expected to have a record of substantive achievements in rank. In addition, faculty are expected to be effective classroom teachers. In addition, if there are advanced graduate students in their area of inquiry or practice, they should have demonstrated effective mentoring skills. Finally, candidates are expected to have undertaken service responsibilities that provide significant support for their academic and professional communities. Should a faculty member choose to go up on excellence in teaching or service the University requirements for excellence are listed below. 

II. Excellence in Teaching (campus requirements)

Candidates seeking tenure and/or promotion on the basis of Excellence in Teaching must provide evidence for national/international visibility and stature in the area of pedagogy (effective teaching in the classroom is necessary but not sufficient). Indicators include: development of instructional/curricular materials; pedagogical publications (e.g., textbooks) and presentations; active engagement with the scholarship of teaching and learning (papers/books about teaching); participation in national conferences on teaching. External letters should focus on the candidate’s contributions to the improvement of pedagogy, locally and beyond.

III. Excellence in Service/Engagement (campus requirements)

Candidates seeking tenure and/or promotion on the basis of Excellence in Service/Engagement must provide evidence for national/international visibility and stature resulting from service activities (even abundant local committee work is insufficient). The key is to demonstrate that the candidate’s efforts have been sustained and transformative, for a professional association, government agency, or nonacademic community.

In exceptional circumstances, candidates may be put forward on the basis of balanced strengths that promise excellent overall performance of comparable benefit to the university – their performance in all three areas must be Very Good (“balanced case”). Except for the “balanced case,” candidates must choose one and only one performance area on which to base their case for tenure or promotion (although that choice does not preclude the possibility that performance in one or both other areas will be judged Excellent).

IV. Timeline

There is no set number of years in rank to be considered for promotion to full professor. In line with university expectations, associate professors will receive annual promotion reviews after seven years in rank. These reviews should serve as a guide assessing progress in rank. Associate professors may ask for a formal promotion review from their unit prior to the mandatory 7-year review. Consideration for promotion to full professor can be initiated by the candidate, the Unit Director, members of the faculty or by Media School deans. Faculty considering promotion to full professor are encouraged to discuss their prospects for promotion with their Unit Director. They also are encouraged to seek input from other full professors in their units.

During the spring semester prior to submitting their dossier for promotion to full professor, the candidate and the unit must prepare a list of potential external reviewers. Potential external reviewers are expected to be full professors, at peer or better institutions, who have distinguished careers with significant scholarly or creative accomplishments. On occasion, potential reviewers may have distinguished careers outside academe relevant to the faculty’s candidacy. A description and listing of the relevant accomplishments of each potential external reviewer must be included. The campus requires a minimum of 6 external letters 3 from people selected from the candidate’s list and 3 from people selected from the unit’s list.

No later than the second week of April, the candidate and unit lists of potential external reviewers must be submitted to Media School deans. In turn, the Media School deans need to select at least 3 reviewers from each of the submitted lists by the third week in April so initial email requests to selected reviewers can be sent no later than the last week of April.

The candidate’s statement and supporting research or creative material must be submitted to their Unit Director by May 1 so that material can be sent to external reviewers by the end of the last week in May.

Over the summer months, the candidate–working with the Unit Director as needed–will prepare the documentation needed for the electronic dossier. The dossier must be submitted to the Unit Director no later than the first day of Fall semester classes.

Units have until October 1 to review the candidate’s dossier and to prepare and submit their vote and assessment of the candidate’s dossier to Media School deans. This includes a separate Unit Director’s statement.

The Media School’s Promotion Committee will review, vote, and prepare an evaluative report on the candidate. It will be entered into the dossier together with a separate letter of evaluation co-authored by the Media School Deans. The next levels of assessment are the VPFAA & Campus Promotion Committee, the Provost & President, and the Trustees of Indiana University.

Media School Guidelines for Promotion to Senior Lecturer

I. Criteria

Lecturers seeking promotion to the Senior level are evalated on teaching and service.

See the campus policy

A four-option continuum is used to rate candidate performance in teaching: Excellent, Very Good, Effective and Ineffective. In service, the options are: Excellent, Very good, Satisfactory and Unsatisfactory.

Candidates for promotion to Senior Lecturer must be Excellent in teaching and at least Satisfactory in service at the school and unit level.

1. Excellence in teaching may include–but is not limited to–the following:

1.1 A record of high quality teaching demonstrated by sustained excellence in classroom performance.

1.2 A trajectory of improved teaching skills as shown by various measures of teaching, including student evaluations.

1.3 Evidence of peer observation and evaluation of teaching.

1.4 Evidence of successful teaching across the undergraduate curriculum within an area of expertise and, when applicable, in different teaching environments (large and small class sizes).

1.5 Unsolicited letters from students in addition to those solicited by the unit or school.

1.6 Undergraduate and graduate student advising/mentoring activities.

1.7 Teaching awards and other similar recognition of pedagogical excellence.

1.8 Participation in course and curriculum development and innovation.

1.9 Evidence of leadership/participation in the Media School’s instructional goals and objectives.

1.10 Development of new teaching materials such as textbooks, cases, instructor manuals, student guides, websites, and videos.

1.11 Participation in teaching and learning activities within the Media School, IUB or peer professional groups. [For examples, see IUB’s Mosaic Active Learning Initiative and the Faculty Learning Communities hosted by CITL.

1.12 Published peer-reviewed, non peer-reviewed, and invited articles related to teaching.

1.13 Presentations at local, statewide or national/international conferences about teaching.

1.14 Supervision of independent study students.

1.15 Evidence of continued practice in the areas of teaching expertise.

1.16 Committee membership for IMP students.

2. Satisfactory service contributions may include—but is not limited to—the following:

2.1 Participation in service activities that support teaching/learning.

2.2 Membership on graduate student MA/MS committees.

2.3 Supervision and mentorship of AIs with significant instructional responsibilities.

2.4 Involvement in student groups/clubs that support student learning and professional development.

2.5 Development of service-learning components to the Media School’s curriculum.

2.6 Internal or external service awards and grants.

2.7 Participation or leadership in unit, Media School, and campus committees.

2.8 Participation in Media School and IUB activities in support of the teaching mission (e.g., attending commencement, supporting activities related to student scholarship and professional development).

2.9 Development of educational programs, workshops, and other training ventures for Media School constituencies.

2.10 Public service to the community that calls upon professional expertise as a teacher, pedagogical scholar, or practitioner.

2.11 Leadership in service activities of professional organizations.

II. Timing

Lecturers are appointed initially for three years. After a successful third-year review, Lecturers will be considered for one-year renewable contracts through their seventh year, subject to annual performance reviews. Evaluations and contracts are staggered so that Lecturers are guaranteed a full year of employment following a negative performance evaluation (i.e., faculty have voted against reappointment or promotion).

Candidates apply for promotion to Senior Lecturer in their sixth year. In exceptional cases, Lecturers may seek promotion before the sixth year. Shortened probationary periods may be the result of demonstrated teaching excellence that predates appointment in the Media School or an exceptional record of teaching and service accomplishments in the Media School.

Faculty who earn promotion to Senior Lecturer receive a longer term contract, typically five years (see table below, also at: http://vpfaa.indiana.edu/docs/promotion_tenure_reappointment/ntt-reviewreappoint.pdf).

Those who do not earn promotion will not be permitted to teach full-time in the Media School at IU beyond the term of their contract.

The following structure and activities are designed to support a newly hired Lecturer through the process of promotion to Senior Lecturer:

1. First Year

1.1 Orientation to expectations through first semester meetings with deans and unit directors.

1.2 The Unit Director serves as official mentor for the first year or appoints a mentor for the first year.

1.3 Annual review completed no later than the end of the second semester of employment.

1.4 In-person meeting with the Unit Director to discuss the annual review.

2. Second year

2.1 Annual review completed no later than the end of the spring semester, typically the fourth semester of employment.

2.2 Reappointment decision for the fourth year is made during the spring semester.

3. Third year

3.1 Substantial review completed no later than the end of the spring semester. Lecturers are expected to prepare a dossier for this review. In addition to materials listed earlier (i.e., student and faculty evaluations of teaching, all syllabi and relevant course materials), a personal statement on teaching and service contributions at IU must be included. An effective narrative is likely to include broad goals, specific activities and contributions, and an assessment of growth and accomplishments.

3.2 A positive third year review results in a contract for the fifth year, and allows the candidate to be considered for one-year renewable contracts through their seventh year, subject to annual performance reviews.

4. Fourth year

4.1 Annual review completed no later than the end of the spring semester.

4.2 In-person meeting with the Unit Director to discuss the annual review.

4.3 Reappointment decision for the sixth year is made during the spring semester.

5. Fifth year

5.1 Annual review completed no later than the end of the spring semester.

5.2 Meeting with Unit Director to discuss the material that should be included in the dossier for promotion. The promotion dossier is a more detailed and updated version of the third year review dossier.

5.3 Reappointment decision for the seventh year is made during the spring semester.

6. Sixth year

6.1 Over the summer months before the start of the sixth year, Lecturers prepare their dossiers for promotion to Senior Lecturer.

6.2 The first day of Fall classes is deadline for submitting a promotion dossier to the Unit Director.

6.3 Units have until October 1 to review dossiers, vote, and prepare written assessments of candidates to the Media School deans.

6.4 The Media School Promotion Committee has until November 1 to review, vote, and prepare an evaluative report on candidates to the VPFAA.

III. Contract Renewal Process

Lecturers are hired with the expectation that each will succeed and, after the probationary period, will be promoted to Senior Lecturer.

Lecturers are hired with an initial contract of three years, followed by one-year renewable contracts through the seventh year. Unit directors will follow unit-level review processes, working with unitlevel review committees to facilitate contract renewals and the promotion review of Lecturers.

If a Lecturer’s performance does not meet expected standards, the Lecturer’s contract will be terminated in line with IU faculty policies. Specifically, the Lecturer must be informed at least one year in advance that a contract will not be renewed. Should performance reviews be negative, the implications for employment are as follows:

1. Second and third year 

Should the third year review be negative, Lecturers may stay for their fourth year but their contract will not be renewed thereafter. However, if by the middle of the second year it becomes apparent the Lecturer is failing to meet expectations and it is highly unlikely that the third-year review will be positive, the Unit Director must inform the Lecturer of this trajectory before the end of the second year of employment. Under that circumstance (falling below expectation before the third year review), a Lecturer will not be given a fourth year of full-time teaching in the Media School at IU.

Fifth year

Based on negative unit-level evaluation the Unit Director will inform a Lecturer during the fifth year if promotion is unlikely. Lecturers may still prepare and submit a promotion dossier for consideration by their unit and by the Media School Promotion Committee. However, unless those promotion reviews are favorable, the sixth year will be the Lecturer’s final year of full-time teaching in the Media School at IU.

Learn more about lecturer appointments

Major Performance Review and Reappointment of Professors of Practice

I. Description of Responsibilities (modified from the IU Academic Guide)

Professors of Practice are appointees who have achieved distinction in their fields of practice. They bring unique practical experiences and talents that will benefit students and strengthen the reputation of the Media School. The main responsibility of Professors of Practice is teaching, although they may be assigned research, creative and service responsibilities associated with their contributions to student development and placement.

II. Major Performance Review and Reappointment (modified from the IU Academic Guide and from the Office of the Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs)

Professors of Practice are initially appointed for three years. Assuming a successful substantive midterm review, their contracts are then renewed annually through their seventh year in rank at IU. A major performance review will take place before the end of the seven-year probationary period, and if performance is judged excellent, appointees shall be given long-term renewable five-year term contracts.

Criteria for Major Performance Review and Reappointment

1. Teaching

All Professors of Practice seeking reappointment based on a major performance review are evaluated on teaching. The standard teaching load for a Professor of Practice is 2-2.

A four-option continuum is used to rate candidate performance in teaching: Excellent, Very Good, Effective and Ineffective.

Excellence in teaching must be demonstrated at the local—unit and Media School—level.

Excellence in teaching may include–but is not limited to–the following:

1.1 A record of high quality teaching demonstrated by sustained excellence in classroom performance.

1.2 A trajectory of improved teaching skills as shown by various measures of teaching, including student evaluations.

1.3 Keeping course content and mentoring up to date, in terms of new developments in their field of expertise.

1.4 Student involvement in the PoP’s ongoing creative practice and management activity, as apprentices, assistants, interns, or advisees.

1.5 Evidence of peer observation and evaluation of teaching.

1.6 Evidence of successful teaching across the undergraduate curriculum within an area of expertise and, when applicable, in different teaching environments (large and small class sizes).

1.7 Unsolicited letters from students in addition to those solicited by the unit or school.

1.8 Undergraduate and graduate student advising/mentoring activities.

1.9 Teaching awards and other similar recognition of pedagogical excellence.

1.10 Participation in course and curriculum development and innovation.

1.11 Evidence of leadership/participation in the Media School’s instructional goals and objectives

1.12 Development of new teaching materials such as textbooks, cases, instructor manuals, student guides, websites, and videos.

1.13 Participation in teaching and learning activities within the Media School, IUB or peer professional groups. [For examples, see IUB’s Mosaic Active Learning Initiative and the Faculty Learning Communities hosted by CITL.]

1.14 Published peer-reviewed, non peer-reviewed, and invited articles related to teaching.

1.15 Presentations at local, statewide or national/international conferences about teaching.

1.16 Supervision of independent study students.

2. Service

All Professors of Practice are expected to make service contributions although the extent and nature of these contributions may vary based on initial expectations set forward in each contract of employment. A four-option continuum is used to rate candidate performance in service: Excellent, Very Good, Satisfactory and Unsatisfactory. Professors of Practice up for reappointment are expected to be at least Satisfactory in service.

Satisfactory service contributions may include—but is not limited to—the following:

2.1 Participation in service activities that support teaching/learning.

2.2 Membership on graduate student MA/MS committees.

2.3 Supervision and mentorship of AIs with significant instructional responsibilities.

2.4 Involvement in student groups/clubs that support student learning and professional development.

2.5 Development of service-learning components to the Media School’s curriculum.

2.6 Internal or external service awards and grants.

2.7 Participation or leadership in unit, Media School, and campus committees.

2.8 Participation in Media School and IUB activities in support of the teaching mission (e.g., attending commencement, supporting activities related to student scholarship and professional development).

2.9 Development of educational programs, workshops, and other training ventures for Media School constituencies.

2.10 Public service to the community that calls upon professional expertise as a teacher, pedagogical scholar, or practitioner.

2.11 Leadership in service activities of professional organizations.

2.12 Serving as liaison with industry to develop or maintain industry internships, guest lectures and other activities and events that either bring industry to campus or give our students opportunities in the industry at large.

3. Creative practice and management activity

Professors of Practice may be expected to continue their work as creative artists and media practitioners in their chosen fields of practice or to contribute to the management of media industry processes. The extent and nature of these contributions will vary based on initial expectations set forward in each contract of employment.

A four-option continuum is used to evaluate those evaluated on this dimension of activity: Excellent, Very Good, Satisfactory and Unsatisfactory. Professors of Practice who are expected to contribute in creative, professional or management activities are expected to be at least Satisfactory in this endeavor when they go up for a major performance review and reappointment.

Creative and professional activities and management contributions may include – but are not limited to – the following:

3.1 Participate in the creative process (e.g., produce, write, direct, perform, stage, shoot, score, edit) with local, regional, national or international groups or outlets.

3.2 Participate in the distribution of creative work with local, regional, national or international groups or outlets.

3.3 Serve as a management consultant in the creative development process or distribution of creative work.

3.4 Collaborate with media practitioners or media industry leaders in innovative projects.

3.5 Create, organize or head an entity that shepherds the creative process or distributes creative work.

3.6 Publish invited or peer-reviewed papers or participate in presentations about creative works, new techniques or other advances in their fields.

III. Timing

No later than the sixth year as a Professor of Practice, a faculty member will undergo a major performance review in order to receive a long-term contract. Shortened probationary periods may be the result of demonstrated teaching excellence that predates appointment in the Media School or an exceptional record of teaching, service or creative accomplishments in the Media School.

Evaluation of a candidate for a long term Professor of Practice position within the Media School results in an up or out decision: Faculty either receive a longer term contract, typically five years (see http://vpfaa.indiana.edu/docs/promotion_tenure_reappointment/ntt-review-reappoint.pdf) or they will not be permitted to teach full-time in the Media School at IU beyond the term of their contract.

Reappointment decisions are made at least one full year in advance (i.e., the decision to renew a contract for a Professor Practice’s fourth year is made during the Professor of Practice’s second year of work). Professor of Practice therefore are guaranteed a full year of employment following a negative performance evaluation (i.e., faculty have voted against reappointment).

The following structure and activities are designed to support a newly hired Professor of Practice:

First year

1.1 Orientation to expectations through first semester meetings with deans and unit directors.

1.2 The Unit Director serves as official mentor for the first year.

1.3 Annual review completed no later than the end of the second semester of employment.

1.4 In-person meeting with the Unit Director to discuss the annual review.

2. Second year

2.1 Annual review completed no later than the end of the spring semester, typically the fourth semester of employment.

2.2 Reappointment decision for the fourth year is made during the spring semester.

3. Third year

3.1 Substantive mid-term review. Review completed no later than the end of the spring semester. Professors of Practice are expected to prepare a dossier for this review. In addition to materials listed earlier (i.e., student and faculty evaluations of teaching, all syllabi and relevant course materials), a personal statement on teaching and service contributions at IU must be included. An effective narrative is likely to include broad goals, specific activities and contributions, and an assessment of growth and accomplishments.

3.2 A positive third year review results in a contract for the fifth year, and allows the candidate to be considered for one-year renewable contracts through their seventh year, subject to annual performance reviews.

4. Fourth and fifth years

4.1 Annual review completed no later than the end of the spring semester.

4.2 In-person meeting with the Unit Director to discuss the annual review.

4.3 Reappointment for sixth year is made during spring semester of the fourth year. Reappointment for the seventh year is made during spring semester of the fifth year.

5. Sixth year

5.1 Over the summer months before the start of the sixth year, Professors of Practice prepare their major performance review dossiers.

5.2 The first day of Fall classes is the deadline for submitting their major performance review dossiers to the Unit Director.

5.3 Units have until October 1 to review dossiers, vote, and prepare written assessments of candidates to the Media School deans.

5.4 The Media School Promotion Committee has until November 1 to review, vote, and prepare an evaluative report on candidates to the VPFAA.