Appointment to Faculty Ranks | College of Nursing Faculty Handbook | Kent State University

Appointment to Faculty Ranks

General Criteria for Appointment

The regular full-time academic ranks include assistant professor, associate professor and professor. The College Advisory Committee will be consulted by the dean prior to determining the appropriate rank for a potential new faculty member. All nursing-prepared faculty must meet criteria established by the Ohio Board of Nursing (See OAC 4723-5-10 qualifications of administrative, faculty and instructional personnel for a registered nursing education program).

The following list provides criteria to be used in initial appointment to T/TT Faculty rank. More detailed description of criteria for differing ranks can be found in the Handbook section on reappointment, tenure and promotion.

  1. Assistant Professor
    1. For appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor, a candidate must minimally possess the terminal degree in nursing or a related field.
  2. Associate Professor
    1. Appointment at this rank presumes prior service as an associate professor in a similar, research-intensive institution and significant scholarly achievements. The candidate must possess the terminal degree in nursing or a related field and meet the criteria for promotion to Associate Professor as outlined under criteria for promotion in this section.
  3. Professor
    1. Initial hire to this rank presumes prior service as a professor in a similar, research-intensive institution, achievement of significant recognition in and impact on the discipline of nursing, possession of the doctoral degree in nursing or a related field and meet the criteria for promotion to Professor as outlined under criteria for promotion in this section.

Full-Time Non Tenure Track Faculty (FTNTT) Recruitment and Appointment Process

Candidates for full-time non tenure track faculty positions will be recruited in the manner described in Section 1, “Faculty Search Committees.” Criteria for appointment will be in accordance with the current FTNTT Collective Bargaining Agreement. FTNTT faculty members are hired by the dean in consultation with the CAC. The majority of FTNTT faculty members will hold a doctorate in an appropriate discipline; however, individuals with a master’s degree and an appropriate level of experience can also be considered. FTNTT appointments are made on a periodic basis according to timetables established in the FTNTT Collective Bargaining Agreement. FTNTT faculty are not included under the umbrella of the university policy regarding faculty tenure and FTNTT faculty members are not entitled to any rights with regard to tenure.

Part-time Faculty Appointment Process

When the College cannot meet its teaching needs from the ranks of its T/TT Faculty and FTNTT faculty, part-time faculty appointments will be made from an established pool of qualified applicants not currently on regular appointment at the university. Assistant dean, undergraduate program and associate dean, graduate programs on the Kent campus and BSN coordinators on the regional campuses recruit applications from qualified individuals to fill part time positions and make recommendations to the dean for hire. Normally, for the initial employment of a part-time faculty member, the College Advisory Committee (CAC) shall review candidates and make recommendations to the dean prior to initial hiring and inclusion in the pool. Persons considered for part-time appointment must meet minimum qualifications for the indicated program, including any pertinent Ohio Board of Nursing requirements.

Adjunct Faculty

Adjunct faculty members are appointed to support the educational mission of the College. Adjunct status recognizes leaders in the community who actively facilitate nursing education. To be considered for adjunct faculty status, an individual must have qualifications appropriate to faculty appointment and rank, i.e. master’s degree or higher (or equivalent professional degree, e.g., M.D.). On the Kent campus, adjunct is an unpaid, renewable designation (one-year in length) denoting affiliation with a Kent State University program or department. On the Kent campus, tenure and voting privileges are not applicable. In the Division of the Regional Campuses, the title denotes paid part-time employment status. T/TT Faculty in the CON may nominate candidates for adjunct faculty by submitting a nomination form (Appendix 3.A.) and the candidate’s curriculum vitae to  the dean’s office. Adjunct faculty appointments in the CON are made at the discretion of the dean in the consultation with the CAC.

Visiting Faculty Appointments

Visiting faculty appointments at an appropriate rank may be made when leaves of absence occur or special needs arise and funds are available. A visiting faculty member is typically a faculty member from another institution who is employed by the CON for a period not to exceed one (1) year. In the event that a visiting faculty member is employed in that capacity for a second consecutive year, the visiting faculty member will then be reassigned as a full-time non-tenure track (FTNTT) faculty member.

Teaching Assistants and Preceptors

The College of Nursing employs persons to assist and work at the direction of faculty members. Teaching assistants and/or preceptors provide instruction in the classroom, laboratory, or in clinical settings in which nursing care is delivered to an individual or group of individuals. Teaching assistants and preceptors in the pre-licensure program must meet the qualifications set forth in the Ohio Board of Nursing rules, “Qualifications of administrative, faculty and instructional personnel for a registered nursing education program,” http://codes.ohio.gov/oac/4723-5-10

Graduate Faculty Status

As a doctoral degree granting college, the CON normally requires that all T/TT faculty be eligible for appointment to the graduate faculty as associate or full members.

Membership

Graduate Faculty status affords the privilege to interact with students as a member of the KSU Graduate Faculty. CON faculty must obtain Graduate Faculty status to be eligible to teach graduate courses and participate on graduate student committees. Please note that Graduate Faculty status in not related to professional ranking. (Source: Kent State University Department of Graduate Studies)

Per the KSU Policy Register, the designation of graduate faculty in the CON is either Full, Associate, or Temporary Associate.

Full (F) Member (see note)

  1. Has an earned doctoral degree.
  2. Has a current record of published, scholarly research.
  3. Provides quality graduate instruction and advisement.
  4. Advises master’s and doctoral degree students.
  5. Serves as major advisor, co-advisor, or committee member for doctoral committees.
  6. Serves as voting member of the graduate faculty.
  7. The CON dean and associate dean, graduate programs are “ex officio” full members of the graduate faculty.

NOTE: T/TT faculty are eligible for appointment to full graduate faculty status at the completion of a successful promotion review

Associate (A) Member

  1. Has an earned doctoral degree and provides evidence of great potential for educating graduate students and an emerging pattern of scholarly work. Provides quality graduate instruction in particular, designated courses.
  2. When appropriate, as judged by the graduate faculty committee and associate dean of graduate programs, directs masters’ theses and serves on master’s and doctoral committees.
  3. When appropriate, as judged by the graduate faculty committee and associate dean, graduate programs, co-chairs doctoral committees with a senior faculty member who is a full member of the graduate faculty.

Temporary Associate Member

  1. Has an earned doctorate degree.
  2. Has expertise in the subject matter of the graduate course as evidenced by the faculty member’s transcript, scholarly work, consulting work, special training or work experience.
  3. Teaches specified graduate level courses, or serves on a master’s thesis or doctoral committee, for a specified time period (one term, an academic year, etc.). The temporary designation cannot extend beyond one academic year except in cases when the assignment is for service on a doctoral committee. Upon the completion of the temporary assignment, the designation of temporary graduate faculty member terminates. This designation normally shall not be awarded to full-time tenured or tenure-track faculty members, who would normally hold regular associate or full graduate faculty status.

Emeritus Faulty Status

The CON adheres to the University Policy for conferring emeritus status to faculty members and staff at the time of their official retirement from full-time employment. The policy is located here.

Emeriti Faculty as Graduate Faculty Members

The appointment of emeriti faculty as graduate faculty members to assume new responsibilities following retirement is intended to enable continued service as a graduate faculty member where that is desired and as long as the Emeritus Faculty member is able and willing to commit to the obligations of graduate faculty membership. Emeriti faculty may be appointed to associate membership at a level of 2 or 3 and will:

  1. Make a formal written request to the dean to retain graduate faculty status as an emeritus faculty member.
  2. Agree to abide by the standards of accountability that apply to active faculty at the pre-retirement rank.
  3. Be available to students for advising and for committee membership and provide timely critiques of students’ work in the requisite form.
  4. Serve as a co-advisor with an active faculty member.

Role and Responsibilities of the Faculty

The role and responsibilities of faculty are governed by policies pertinent to the role of faculty found within the policy register and the CON handbook. Each faulty member is expected to contribute to the CON and the university according to the terms and condition of his/her letter of appointment. Scholarly activity and service to the CON and the university are expected of each T/TT faculty member. High quality teaching is also expected of all T/TT and FTNTT faculty members. Faculty members are expected to provide students with a syllabus which includes the subject matter to be covered in a course, a listing of assignments and/or reports, approximate dates of examinations, grading standards, attendance requirements and other pertinent details of the class. A template for essential elements of a syllabus is located in the assistant and associate dean’s offices. Student course evaluations are required in all course sections, each semester and will be conducted under the auspices of the dean pursuant to applicable university policies and procedures. Further, faculty are expected to engage in professional development, employ evidence-based teaching strategies and reflect on teaching practice via student and peer evaluations to promote excellence in CON academic programming.

Faculty members who supervise students in a pre-licensure clinical course are guided by the Ohio Board of Nursing Policy Concerning Responsibilities of (Undergraduate) Faculty and Instructional Personnel in a Clinical Setting, Section 4723-5-20 of the Ohio Administrative Code.

Grades

Failure of faculty members to provide grades in compliance with university policy will be considered in performance reviews and reappointment, promotion, tenure and merit decisions.

Faculty Code of Ethics

All faculty members in the CON are expected to maintain the highest ethical standards as teachers, scholars, university citizens and colleagues. The university policy regarding faculty code of professional ethics can be found in the University Policy Register.

Sanctions and Dismissal

A sanction is a documented corrective action in response to a Faculty member’s unsatisfactory performance of his/her duties and responsibilities as a member of the Faculty. (See “Sanctions for Cause” in the Collective Bargaining Agreement [CBA]).  For non-tenure track faculty, see appropriate section in FTNTT CBA.

Faculty Curriculum Vitae

All T/TT and FTNTT faculty members are required annually to provide a current curriculum vitae (CV) in the CON-approved format to be kept on file in the dean’s office. A template for the CV is in Appendix 3.B.

Faculty Leaves

All leaves, sponsored or unsupported, personal or professional, are subject to the approval of the dean and the provost. University leaves include but are not limited to:

  1. Research leaves
  2. Leaves of absence without pay
  3. Faculty professional improvement leaves
  4. Research/ creative activity appointments
  5. Faculty absence and travel policy
  6. Non-tenure track faculty leaves of absence for professional development

Faculty members who will be absent from campus for professional or personal reasons must submit a “Request for Absence Form” to the dean. The request should be made prior to the planned absence and is subject to the approval of the dean. Arrangements for any classes to be missed during the absence must be addressed to the satisfaction of the dean before approval will be granted.

Attendance at professional meetings is encouraged and approved travel expenses incurred in attending such meetings will be reimbursed when approved prior to travel according to the university’s travel policies, subject to the availability of CON funds. In general, greater amounts of support will be granted to meeting participants (i.e. those presenting a paper or chairing a session) than to faculty members who simply attend professional meetings.

Faculty Sick Leave

The dean is responsible for keeping complete records of faculty sick leave; however, faculty members are also required to submit the use of sick leave online after an absence and within the timelines established by the Division of Human Resources.

Outside Employment and Other Professional Activities outside the University

Faculty members may engage in professional activities outside the university provided the activities do not interfere with the faculty members teaching, research, or citizenship responsibilities to the CON or university. Visit the policy register. These activities must not compete with faculty member’s university responsibilities or the faculty member’s employment with the university and must be approved in advance by the dean and the provost or his/her designee.

Each academic year, each faculty member must disclose and seek approval for all outside employment or other professional activities on the form provided by the university. Any outside employment is subject to the Faculty Code of Ethics and the university’s conflict of interest policies

 

Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion of Tenured/ Tenure –Track Faculty

UNIVERSITY GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES

Criteria for reappointment, tenure and promotion (RTP) in the CON are developed in accordance with Kent State University policy and procedures regarding faculty reappointmenttenure and promotion.

The CON follows the timetables, procedures and guidelines for tenure and promotion review contained in the document Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion: A Guide for Administrators, Faculty and Staff, distributed annually by the Office of Faculty Affairs of the Provost’s Office.

Tenured/tenure track faculty members eligible for reappointment, tenure and/or promotion are encouraged to discuss the CON and university guidelines and procedures and their individual goals at regular intervals with the dean.

STANDARD FOR CON REAPPOINTMENT, TENURE and PROMOTION

Criteria for faculty reappointment, tenure and promotion are established in the CON to reflect university standards of scholarship, teaching and citizenship. These criteria ensure development of a faculty able to advance significant nursing and health care research, provide a superior nursing education and contribute to the missions of the college, university and profession.

Scholarship

Scholarship in the discipline of nursing involves the generation, dissemination, or translation of knowledge related to health and other phenomena central to nursing. Scholarship may be evidenced by a sustained, focused and maturing program of original research contributing to advancement of knowledge in nursing, or an in-depth research program integrating content from another discipline with nursing. The originality, quality, impact and value of a faculty member’s scholarly contribution will be assessed. Evidence of knowledge dissemination will be assessed as publication in peer-reviewed journals or related media, seeking/obtaining funding for scholarly pursuits and peer-reviewed/refereed presentations at local, regional, national and/or international professional venues. Other scholarly activities may include, but are not limited to, serving on national grant review bodies or editorial boards.

Teaching

Teaching involves use of effective teaching/learning strategies; reflection on teaching practice; efforts for continuous quality improvement; program and curriculum development and evaluation; and positive self, student and peer evaluation. Teaching may include presentations and publications involving research and/or pedagogical applications in nursing education, receipt of teaching excellence awards, or submission/receipt of training grants.

Citizenship

Faculty members are expected to be active in citizenship, to include service to the university, professional service to nursing and the provision of professional expertise to community entities beyond the university. Contributions beyond minimal participation in CON committees or meetings are expected; simply holding a position as a committee or task force member is not considered sufficient to evidence citizenship. Examples of citizenship activities may include membership on CON and/or university committees, with documentation of contributions made, participating in the conduct or governance of professional organizations and/or serving on community health care facility boards.

REAPPOINTMENT

Appointment of faculty is discussed under Appointment to Faculty Ranks. Tenure track faculty members in the CON are reviewed annually for reappointment during the probationary period by the dean and the CON ad hoc Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion (RTP) Committee. At the end of the probationary period, the dean and RTP Committee review the candidate for tenure and, if applied for, promotion in rank. Tenured and tenure track faculty are eligible for promotion in rank according to guidelines specified in the university Policy for Promotion and according to CON criteria indicated below.

Requirement for Reappointment to the Tenure Track

After initial appointment, probationary tenure-track faculty members are reviewed for annual reappointment by the dean and the CON’s ad hoc RTP Committee according to policies and procedures outlined in University Policy 6-16, “University policy and procedures regarding faculty reappointment” and the annual Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion: A Guide for Administrators, Faculty and Staff from the Office of Faculty Affairs in the Office of the Provost. The criteria for tenure in the areas of scholarship, teaching and service and their respective weighting, will be applied during the reappointment review.

The review of a candidate for reappointment focuses on the record of the candidate’s achievements to date with particular emphasis on the previous year and the recommendations in the previous year’s reappointment letter. This record is considered a predictor of future success and addresses the question, “Given the years of service to date and the number of years until mandatory tenure review, is it reasonable to expect that the probationary faculty member will eventually undergo a successful tenure review?” (University Policy Register. Policy 6-16. University policy and procedures regarding faculty reappointment, Item D., “Affirmation Principle”). The hallmark of a successful candidate is evidence of a sustained, focused and progressive pattern of significant contributions to nursing science, excellence as a teacher and substantial service to the profession, college and/or university.

For probationary faculty, reappointment is contingent upon demonstration of adequate progress toward the requirements for tenure, thus each annual review is critical. The faculty member must have established and articulated short and long term goals for meeting these requirements that are consistent with the letters of appointment and reappointment. The expectation is that, given the years of service to date and the number of years until mandatory tenure review, the candidate is making satisfactory progress toward achieving a significant body of scholarship, excellence as a teacher and effective citizenship. Reappointment is contingent upon demonstration that it is reasonable to expect that the probationary faculty member will eventually undergo a successful tenure review.

During annual reappointment reviews, each faculty member is obligated to provide well-documented evidence supporting his/her scholarly achievements, teaching performance and citizenship contributions. This obligation is met by inclusion of:  specific information about article and journal quality, choice of publication venue, funding history and plans, description in the faculty member’s supplementary materials, if any and other evidence of scholarship that the faculty member deems appropriate. In cases of collaborative efforts such as multi-authored publications, the candidate should include a statement of his/her role and degree of contribution to the project. The basis for the annual reappointment review of probationary faculty is the CON’s expectations for a successful tenure decision.

The CON affirms the university policy and procedures regarding faculty reappointment which states probationary faculty members will have the opportunity to establish a mentoring relationship as an aid in satisfying unit and/or regional campus requirements and conditions for tenure. Probationary faculty will, shortly after appointment, consult with the dean of the CON or Dean’s designee to determine the mentoring plan. The mentoring experience will be reviewed during annual reappointment conferences with the dean and as needed throughout the academic year.

Extension of Probationary Period. From time to time, personal and/or family circumstances arise that require a tenure track Faculty member to request an extension of the probationary period. Procedures for applying for an extension of the probationary period, which has been traditionally called “tolling” or “stopping the tenure clock,” are contained in the university policy and procedures governing modification of the faculty probationary period.

TENURE AND PROMOTION

The CON adheres to the university policies for tenure and promotion and the procedures outlined in tenure and promotion guidelines for Kent and regional campus faculty distributed each academic year by the Office of the Provost.

Tenure and promotion are separate decisions. The tenure decision is based on the evidence available to predict the candidate’s potential to pursue a productive career. Tenure conveys confidence in the candidate’s future ability to significantly contribute to the college’s and university’s scholarship, teaching and citizenship missions based on documented past accomplishments. Progress is judged according to the number of years of service of the candidate and as outlined in the initial letter of appointment and annual reappointment letters. Candidates are expected to demonstrate growth in the areas of scholarship, teaching and citizenship congruent with conditions stipulated in their initial appointment and reappointment letters and personal and professional goals documented in the reappointment file. The awarding of tenure must be based on convincing documented evidence that the faculty member has achieved a significant body of scholarship and has provided effective teaching and citizenship (see table 1, 2 and 3).

Promotion is awarded to recognize a candidate’s demonstrated accomplishments completed during the review period. Promotion decisions are based on papers published and grants received, as well as teaching evaluations and service to the university.

A sound ethical approach to all aspects of teaching, research, publication and the academic profession are expected of all who seek tenure and promotion in the CON.

Criteria for Tenure

According to university policy, a minimum requirement for tenure is the terminal degree in nursing or a related field. In exceptional cases, this rule may be modified with the approval of the CON RTP committee, the dean and the provost.

Tables 1 through 3 provide guidelines for the assessment of a faculty member’s performance and a rating scale for use in the evaluation of candidates. For a positive tenure recommendation, the candidate must have met, at a minimum, criteria for “Excellent” in either scholarship or teaching, with “Very Good” performance in the other, and “Good” in citizenship (Table 3).

NOTE: In the Tables, the terms “local,” “state,” “regional,” “national,” and “international,” when used to denote funding sources or presentation venues, refer to the scope of the sponsoring organization or conference, and not the actual geographic region associated with the funding or professional organization.

 Criteria for Promotion

For promotion from assistant to associate professor the faculty member must meet the criteria for an “Excellent” rating in either scholarship (Table 1) or teaching (Table 2), with at least a “Very Good” rating in the other category. Citizenship must at least meet criteria for the “Good” category as outlined in Table 3.

A candidate for promotion to professor must meet the criteria for an “Excellent” rating in scholarship, teaching and citizenship as outlined in Tables 1-3. In addition, the candidate must demonstrate a reputation based on a record of an expanding body of scholarship that has progressed and matured since the last promotion into a highly significant, accomplished and well-recognized research program advancing the discipline of nursing.

INDICATORS OF SCHOLARSHIP FOR PROMOTION AND TENURE

Indicators upon which the assessment of a candidate’s scholarship are based include the quality and quantity of published work, dissemination at local, state, national and/or international professional venues and a sustained, focused record of funding (Table 1). To achieve “Excellent” in the category of scholarship, the candidate will have established a research program which demonstrates a recognized impact upon nursing science.

Indicators for Tenure-Track Faculty Appointed at Assistant Professor Rank

During the probationary period, faculty with a rank of assistant professor should focus their efforts on scholarship in one central and substantive area of research, seeking to establish, by the time of tenure review, a track record of:

  1. Five to six research- related publications in peer-reviewed journals. Publications in other media, such as books, should be of high quality, advance the knowledge in the discipline beyond what is already known and be documented as having been peer-reviewed.
  2. Funding application and receipt from  primarily external sources, culminating in at least one external grant from a well-recognized, national funding source; and
  3. Presentations at local, regional and national/international professional meetings.

Indicators for Tenure-Track Faculty Appointed at Associate or Full Professor Rank

Faculty members who are hired at the rank of associate or full professor because of an established record of scholarship commensurate with the rank will be assessed for meeting a rating of “excellent” in scholarship.

Publications

Publications include: papers in peer-reviewed journals of recognized quality, or in other media suitable for dissemination such as books and book chapters. Publications in media other than journals should be of high quality, advance the knowledge in the discipline beyond what is already known and be documented as having been peer-reviewed. Evaluation of the publication record will include an assessment of quality and impact on the field, as well as quantity. In evaluating publications, order of authorship and quality of journal and presentation venues are considered. In cases of multiple authorship of publications or presentations, an indication in the narrative of the candidate’s relative contribution to the work cited is required.

Grants

“Grants” refers to funding where the role of the faculty member in securing the funding is clearly demonstrated and which is of sufficient magnitude to fully support the proposed research, including funds for supplies, materials and personnel (graduate students, research technicians and/or post-doctoral associates). External grants include, but are not limited to, federal sources such as: NIH, AHRQ, HRSA, PCORI, foundations sources: Robert Wood Johnson, American Nurses Foundation, and professional organizations: Sigma Theta Tau, MNRS (Table 3.D.).  The candidate must demonstrate the importance of comparable funding sources not included here). 

Presentations

Presentations refer to podium or poster presentations that are peer-reviewed and presented to professional organizations and that disseminate findings from the faculty member’s research or advance professional initiatives for the discipline of nursing.

Table 1. Evaluation Components for Assessment of Scholarship

Scholarship

Definition

Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment Score

Excellent

Nationally/ Internationally recognized research program

Record of at least 5 high quality, influential, data-based publications in peer-reviewed journals or books; significant funding with at least one external grant from a well-recognized federal or national funding source, national peer-reviewed presentations and/or invitations to give presentations, expert research-related consultation to federal/state or other organizations, awards, recognition from professional organization.

Very Good

Emerging nationally recognized research program

Record of at least 4 quality, peer-reviewed, data-based publications; growing body of successful foundation or professional  funding building a coherent and promising program of research; presentations at well-recognized meetings with rigorous criteria for paper review.

Good

Active research program

Record of at least 3 quality, peer-reviewed publications, or non-data-based publications; small, primarily internal funding;    few presentations, or presentations primarily at  local or regional meetings.

Poor

Limited or no research program

Record of2 or fewer publications or presentations; no or minimal funding.

INDICATORS OF TEACHING

Indicators of teaching include evidence of reflection about and insight into one’s teaching practice documented in a narrative on teaching and/or a teaching portfolio that encompasses self-evaluation, student survey of instruction evaluations and peer review of teaching (Appendix 3.C); demonstration of creative teaching strategies and use of technology; significant contributions to course content, assignment and syllabi which are shared with others; and service on thesis and/or doctoral committees. Other activities may include research related to teaching methodology/ learning outcomes, presentations/publications related to teaching and learning outcomes, submission of training grants, significant responsibility for program review; and/or active involvement in a teaching-related professional organization. Criteria for the evaluation of the teaching are listed in Table 2.

Documentation of peer review and completion of Summaries of Student Surveys of Instruction (including all student comments) for all courses taught during the review period must be submitted as part of a candidate’s file for reappointment, tenure and promotion. Candidates for tenure undergo a minimum of one peer review annually. Candidates for promotion provide a minimum of one recent peer review within the last year of the application. College of Nursing policies and procedures for peer review are included at the end of this section. Copies of representative syllabi, examinations and other relevant teaching material should also be available for review. Evidence of curricular involvement including significant course revisions, use of external benchmarks and standards, engagement in preparation for accreditation, program grant writing, needs assessments, innovative program development and program evaluation could be included.

Table 2. Evaluation Components for Assessment Teaching

Teaching

Definition

Accomplishment Corresponding to the Assessment Score

Excellent

Innovative teacher; provides leadership in instructional development

Course and curriculum review and revisions based on scholarly and pedagogically sound principles and national educational standards/benchmarks and preparation for accreditation; contribution to development or review of national educational standards; publication and/or presentation of teaching-related projects or research; facilitation and support of research projects for students (undergraduate and/or graduate); excellent student and peer evaluations; instructional creativity; Peer-reviewed teaching portfolio documenting evidence of self-reflection on teaching, use of evidence-based teaching strategies, and external review of excellence; awards, recognition from professional organizations.

Very Good

Innovative teacher

Develop/revise courses, good student and peer evaluations, work with graduate and/or undergraduate students in research, curricular involvement; evidence of self-reflection on teaching and use of evidence-based teaching strategies.

Good

Meets obligations

Good student and peer evaluations.

Poor

Ineffective teacher

Below average student and peer evaluations; documentation of performance complaints.

INDICATORS OF CITIZENSHIP

Evidence of citizenship to the CON and/or university includes contribution to the mission and goals of the CON, university and/or profession. Examples of citizenship include, but are not limited to, membership on college or university committees. Service to community and/or the profession is reflected by active involvement in local, state and/or national professional organizations. Indicators of citizenship are outlined in Table 3. The merits of university citizenship are evaluated as to the candidate’s contribution to the committee and the importance of the service to the mission of the unit served. Other components of citizenship may include active participation in events such as faculty and graduate student recruitment, seminars and meetings. Being an active and useful citizen of the college, campus, university, profession and community is expected and valued; however, citizenship cannot be considered more important than a candidate’s research and other scholarly activity and instructional responsibilities. Expectations in citizenship for promotion to professor are higher than for promotion to associate professor.

Table 3. Assessment of Citizenship

Citizenship

Examples of Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment Score

Excellent

Significant participation in college, campus, university, professional and/or community as evidenced by productive service on committees, active participation in significant events, effectively chairing committees, specific administrative assignments, meaningful public outreach; awards, recognition from professional organizations.

Good

Actively serves on college, campus, university, professional and/or community committees.

Poor

Does not actively participate in significant college, campus, university, professional, or community events.

Summary Table of Criteria for Tenure and Promotion

The following table (Table 4) represents the minimum level of quality for scholarship, teaching and citizenship for tenure, promotion to associate professor and promotion to professor.

 

Scholarship

Teaching

Citizenship

Tenure

Very Good or Excellent (see Note)

Very Good or Excellent (see Note)

Good

Associate Professor

Very Good or Excellent (see Note)

Very Good or Excellent (see Note)

Good

Professor

Excellent

Excellent

Excellent

Note: For tenure, and for promotion to associate professor, the candidate must achieve a rating of excellent in either scholarship OR teaching, with a rating of very good in the other.

Application of RTP Criteria for Regional Campus Faculty

These criteria for reappointment, tenure and promotion apply to both Kent and Regional Campus Faculty. However, the ad hoc RTP Committee recognizes that in evaluating candidates from the Regional Campuses, greater consideration may be given to teaching and citizenship as indicated in the appropriate campus handbook.

FTNTT RENEWAL AND PROMOTION GUIDELINES

PROCEDURE FOR RENEWAL OF APPOINTMENT OF NON-TENURE TRACK FACULTY

The CON employs full-time non-tenure track (FTNTT) faculty primarily to contribute to fulfillment of its teaching mission. According to the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the university and the Full-Time Non Tenure Track Faculty Unit, FTNTT faculty are appointed annually primarily to provide instructional services, with no required committee or other citizenship obligations.

FTNTT faculty in the College of Nursing are appointed to the Instructional Track, unless otherwise noted in their Offer of Appointment letter and thus their reviews are based solely on instructional effectiveness.

  1. Renewal of Appointment

The CON ad hoc Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion Committee (RTP) reviews FTNTT faculty for renewal of appointment during their third year of consecutive one-year appointments. During the third year of appointment, the faculty member is reviewed for a three-year term of renewable annual appointments.

  1. Review Criteria:

The criteria of evaluating FTNTT faculty for recommendation of appointment renewal are based on evidence of teaching effectiveness. Effectiveness of teaching in assigned courses is necessary for renewal of appointment. Candidates seeking renewal of appointment prepare a portfolio of evidence of teaching performance, the contents of which are listed below in Section 3. The CON ad hoc RTP Committee evaluates teaching effectiveness as documented in the candidate’s portfolio according to the following criteria:

  1. The candidate’s narrative highlights teaching activities for courses taught in the review period and demonstrates reflection and analysis of teaching practice, results from student evaluations (both positive and negative), achievement of candidate’s past goals and goals and strategies for future development related to teaching.
  2. All Student Survey of Instruction (SSIs) for each course taught reflect a pattern of positive student learning experiences, as indicated by student evaluation scores in the “strongly agree/excellent” to “agree/good” range.
  3. Other evidence presented and addressed in the narrative document of initiatives to enhance pedagogy in classroom and clinical teaching consistent with teaching assignment, e.g.:
    • Participation in the design, implementation and evaluation of assigned courses
    • Development and maintenance of effective working relationships with clinical agencies and preceptors to facilitate student learning
    • Development and evaluation of innovative teaching strategies
    • Advising and mentoring individual students or groups of students
    • Participating in professional associations or meetings related to education
    • Peer review of teaching activities. Candidates for renewal of appointment should undergo a minimum of one peer review annually. See Appendix 3.C. for College of Nursing policies and procedures for peer review.
  4. Procedure for Performance Reviews:

The CON ad hoc RTP Committee conduct reviews of FTNTT faculty members according to timelines established in the FTNTT Collective Bargaining Agreement. The review procedures follow the detailed “Procedural Guidelines, NTT Faculty Third-Year Review and Annual Appointment” distributed annually by the Office of Faculty Affairs.

  1. Contents of Portfolio:

The materials to be submitted by FTNTT faculty for renewal of appointment are listed in the current FTNTT CBA. In addition, the CON requires the following:

  1. Letter of renewal of appointment from previous term.
  2. An up-to-date curriculum vitae formatted in a manner consistent with CON guidelines (Appendix 3.B.).
  3. The syllabi and other artifacts of teaching for courses taught during the period under review. For co-taught courses, the faculty member should select only those materials that reflect his or her unique or collaborative contributions, with an explanation in the narrative of the contribution.
  4. Student evaluation materials: Evaluation summary reports and individual student evaluations for each course taught.
  5. The narrative should reflect on patterns of evaluation from students for both strengths and areas for improvement
  6. A two to three page narrative of self-evaluation of attainment of prior goals, when applicable, teaching performance, student evaluations and teaching goals addressing the Criteria for Evaluating Teaching Effectiveness outlined above, under “Review Criteria.”
  7. Other evidence as suggested above under “Review Criteria.”
  8. FTNTT Faculty Promotion/ Academic Ranks

The CON dean oversees the election of the Non-Tenure Track Promotion Advisory Board (NPAB) in the fall semester of each academic year. The NPAB reviews applications for promotion in rank from CON FTNTT faculty according to the guidelines in the FTNTT CBA. The NPAB reviews and makes recommendations to the dean regarding FTNTT candidates for promotion.

FTNTT faculty hold appointment and/or are eligible for promotion at one of the following six (6) academic ranks: Lecturer, Associate Lecturer, Senior Lecturer (those without terminal degree whose professional experience and demonstrated performance warrant these ranks); or Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, or Professor (those with terminal degree and whose professional experience and demonstrated performance warrant these ranks).

Standards for Promotion

Per the FTNTT Collective Bargaining Agreement, located using the following link: http://www.kent.edu/provost/faculty_affairs/index.cfm, promotion is defined as recognition of a FTNTT Faculty member’s sustained contributions and distinguished service to the University.  FTNTT Faculty members may stand for promotion in the third year of a cycle of three (3) one-year annually renewable appointments. Promotion is from rank to rank and is sequential.

Only FTNTT Faculty members who have successfully passed one (1) Full Performance Review are eligible to stand for promotion.  FTNTT Faculty members who have completed five (5) consecutive years of employment as a FTNTT Faculty member and one (1) successful Full Performance Review may apply for promotion to the rank of Associate Lecturer/Associate Professor, as applicable, at the time of their second Full Performance Review or with any scheduled performance review thereafter. FTNTT Faculty members who have completed two (2) successful Full Performance Reviews may apply for promotion to the rank of Senior Lecturer/Professor, as applicable, in the seventh year of consecutive employment as a FTNTT Faculty member or any year thereafter.

Candidates are primarily judged in the areas of performance of assigned workload responsibilities and professional development consistent with their assigned track (Instructional, Clinical, Practitioner, or Research) (FTNTT CBA). Most FTNTT faculty in the CON are hired on the instructional track.

Evidence of significant accomplishments in both Performance and Professional Development are required for promotion. Accomplishments and/or contributions in the area of University Citizenship are neither required nor expected, except as to the extent such accomplishments and/or contributions are appropriate to the FTNTT faculty member’s track and/or workload assignments, but will, when they exist, contribute to the bargaining unit member’s overall record of accomplishments.

Promotion is based on evidence of “significant accomplishments” in the assigned track. If unsure of the assigned track, FTNTT faculty should verify their assigned track with the College Dean’s office. Per CBA, FTNTT faculty are evaluated on the following:

  • Performance indicators (Teaching)
  • Professional Development to be assessed as it relates to the assigned track
  • University Citizenship (not required)
    • May also be college citizenship (needs to be more than course meetings)
    • Faculty meetings and course meetings are an expectation and are not included.
    • Active membership
  • Research (only if on the research track)

Promotion File Content

Candidates for promotion shall submit a promotion file consisting of at least the following materials:

  • Current curriculum vitae (Appendix 3.B.)
  • Narrative supporting the rationale for promotion (approximately 3-5 pages in length). Suggested format for narrative includes:
    • goal attainment and establishment of goals for next evaluation period. 
    • summary of teaching

summary of student surveys

  • Including both negative and positive feedback from students
  • Negative feedback should be evaluated and addressed with regard to possible changes in teaching strategies, methods and delivery.
  • summary of significant accomplishments to be considered for promotion
  • professional development activities
  • Peer review(s) per College of Nursing policy
  • Summary sheets for Student Surveys of Instruction for candidates who have instructional assignments
  • Workload statements for at least the past three academic years
  • Letters of support for promotion may be included by any FTNTT seeking promotion.  Though not a requirement, letters of support from administrators, program directors, or course coordinators would be considered if provided.
  • Other materials supporting the request for promotion

Promotion File Submission

Promotion files are submitted by the second week of the spring semester in which the FTNTT Faculty member is applying for promotion.  Materials are submitted as directed by the CON Dean’s Office.  Faculty who stand for promotion are evaluated by the CON Non-Tenure Track Advisory Board (NPAB) comprised of three (3) FTNTT faculty from the Kent Campus who, when possible, hold at least the rank of associate professor or associate lecturer and, if applicable, two (2) FTNTT Faculty from the regional campuses who, when possible, hold at least the rank of associate professor or associate lecturer. The dean oversees the election of FTNTT representatives to serve on the NPAB and chairs the NPAB.

For promotion to the rank of Associate or Professor a faculty member must hold the terminal degree in his/her field. For promotion to Associate or Senior Lecturer the terminal degree is not required.

NPAB Recommendation of Candidates for Promotion

Recommendation for promotion is based on the following criteria:

  • Performance: Assessed on the performance of assigned duties and responsibilities associated with the assigned track of the candidate (Instructional, Clinical, Practitioner or Research).
  • Professional Development: Assessed as it relates to the assigned track of the candidate.
  • University Citizenship: Assessed as it relates to the assigned track of the candidate.
  • Research: Assessed on the performance of assigned duties and responsibilities of candidates who are assigned to the Research Track. (Note: Research that results in publication is not a requirement for promotion in the Instructional or other tracks, however, research and/or publications can be submitted by FTNTT Faculty members as an indication of professional development and/or contributions/service to the University or the discipline/profession).

For the purpose of promotion, classification of “very good” or “excellent” in each required area is expected. For promotion to associate professor and associate lecturer, the candidate must have ratings of “very good” in teaching and professional development categories.  For promotion to full professor or senior lecturer, one of the required categories must have an “excellent” ranking.  Additional supporting evidence is considered.  Examples of supporting materials that strengthen promotion consideration include other evidence of good teaching beyond student evaluations, evidence of citizenship at the college, university or professional level, research or scholarly projects and publications. Significant accomplishments include creativity and innovation in teaching.

Evaluation Components of Professional Development for Assessment of Performance of Assigned Duties and Responsibilities (Teaching)

Excellent

Innovative teacher; provides leadership in instructional development

Course and curriculum review and revisions based on scholarly and pedagogically sound principles and national educational standards/benchmarks.

Overall good student and strong peer evaluations, instructional creativity; Evidence of self-reflection on teaching and use of evidence-based teaching strategies.

Very Good

Innovative teacher

Provide input into the development/revision of courses, good student and peer evaluations and evidence of self-reflection on teaching and use of evidence-based teaching strategies.

Meets standard for renewal of appointment

Meets obligations required for renewal of appointment

Good student evaluations; little or no evidence of exceeding obligations for promotion.

 

The following lists are suggestions of things that might be considered for FTNTT promotion. This is not intended to be a checklist of required items.

Performance Indicators

  • Evidence of student learning
  • Years of successful job performance as evidenced by continued employment at the University, three-year performance reviews, etc.
  • Course materials that demonstrate effective and thoughtful course design
  • Positive peer review
  • Generally positive student perception of learning on SSIs
  • Variety of courses that can be taught
  • Developing new courses (both DL and traditional)
  • Developing new sections of courses previously taught
  • Teaching awards or other recognition of effectiveness in performing job duties
  • Significant contributions to the program or college such as creation of a new course, improvements to an existing course, or significant contributions to a program or curricular design
  • Notable innovations in teaching practice such as novel or creative approaches to lecture delivery, evaluation and measurement, or course design
  • Significant contributions to student retention or student success rates (e.g. passage of licensure exams)
  • Directing honors theses, individual investigations, portfolios, etc.

Evaluation Components of Professional Development

Excellent

Education completion and dissemination of scholarly work.

Completed doctoral level coursework (ABD) or completed program requirements for earned PhD or DNP. Podium presentations at state or national conferences. Journal publications or manuscript in revision (author order considered).

Very Good

Continuing education and dissemination of scholarly work.

Maintains certification; attends professional conferences beyond minimum for licensure renewal. Enrolled in a doctoral level program. Conference presentation at the regional or local level. Poster presentations at any level conference. Abstract and newsletter publications. Submission of manuscripts for publication consideration.

Meets standard for renewal of appointment

Meets obligations required for renewal of appointment

Maintains current licensure as an RN; maintains current knowledge of good teaching practices.

 

The following lists are suggestions of things that might be considered for FTNTT promotion. This is not intended to be a checklist of required items.

Professional Development

  • Documented improvement in use of technology in the classroom
  • Evidence of continued learning in the discipline through attendance at conferences, workshops, completion of web based or traditional courses
  • Maintenance of professional certification in some fields
  • Taking additional coursework
  • Earning new degree
  • Earning certificate
  • Participation in workshops
  • Attending or participating in conferences
  • New course development
  • Participation in discipline appropriate professional organizations
  • Incorporating service learning component into a course
  • Use of new classroom technologies
  • Evidence of continual evaluation, assessment and possibly revision of courses taught
  • Creation of significantly new courses or course materials
  • Study and/or training (formal or informal) of emerging subjects/materials which can be incorporated into courses

 

Evaluation Components of Citizenship – Not required for promotion but will be considered if evidence of citizenship is included.

Exceeds Standard

Actively serves on college, campus, university, professional and/or community committees.

Meets standard for renewal of appointment

Not required.

The following lists are suggestions of things that might be considered for FT NTT promotion. This is not intended to be a checklist of required items.

University Citizenship

  • Participating in campus, departmental and university committees
  • Participating in campus activities that promote student involvement in student orientation, brown bag lunch meetings, student organizations, student information events, academic discovery days, etc.
  • Participating in community development activities connected to one’s discipline, or as a representative of the University
  • Participating in AAUP

Summary Table of Criteria for Promotion

 Rank

Teaching

Professional 

Development

Citizenship

Professor/Senior Lecturer

Very good or excellent

Very good or excellent

Optional supporting material

Associate Professor/Associate Lecturer

Very good

Very good

Optional supporting material

For consideration for promotion to senior lecturer or full professor, the candidate must achieve a rating excellent in either teaching OR professional development with a rating very good in the other.

For consideration for promotion to associate lecturer or associate professor, the candidate must have very good in both categories.

Promotion Appeals

In the event of a negative recommendation on promotion, per the FTNTT Promotion guidelines, the faculty member has the right to appeal the decision to the next highest administrative officer pursuant to the following procedure:

• If the Dean does not recommend promotion, the faculty member may appeal the Dean’s decision to the Provost.

• Unless reversed by the Provost, the recommendation of the College Dean will stand.

• If the faculty member elects to appeal, the APFA sends the faculty member information about appeals to the Provost and any related procedures.

• The Provost makes a decision on the appeal.

• If the Provost does not recommend promotion, the faculty member may appeal the Provost’s decision to the President.

• If the faculty member elects to appeal, the APFA sends the faculty member information about appeals to the President and any related procedures.

• The President makes the final decision on the appeal.

 

Appendix 3.A.

Kent State University

College of Nursing

 

ADJUNCT FACULTY NOMINATION FORM

Date ____________________________

 

I (name of faculty) ___________________________________________________ wish to nominate

 

(name of candidate) _________________________________________________ for an adjunct

faculty position.

Performance (describe service to KSU student[s]) _______________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Attach resume/CV

Signature of faculty ______________________________________________________________

 

Revised 7/91, 10/04, 10/08, 10/15

 

 

Appendix 3.B.

Faculty Curriculum Vitae Format

 

Faculty Curriculum Vitae

All T/TT and FTNTT faculty members are required annually to provide current curriculum vitae (CV) in the CON-approved format, a template for which is included below, to be kept on file in the dean’s office.

General principles of CV formatting:

  • Write your CV assuming that the reader knows nothing about you, your professional affiliations, or the names of journals or funding sources.
  • Avoid all use of acronyms (e.g. journal titles, conference sponsors, organizational affiliations other than KSU, etc.).
  • Use 1” borders, enter page number in footer.
  • Use consistent formatting for all sections of CV.
  • Use APA format and reverse chronological order for listing of educational institutions, publications, presentations, grant submissions, research, etc.

Below, tables are provided for formatting sections of the CV. Faculty may or may not choose to use tables; if used, make the borders invisible on the CV.

Top section of CV:

Full name, including maiden name if applicable

Full home address

KSU College, department, building, office #

Phone numbers, email address(es)

Language fluency other than English

Jane A. (Doe) Smith

Curriculum Vita

 

Home:

1234 Elm St.

Kent, OH 44242

 

Work:

College of Nursing

Henderson Hall Room

Kent State University

Kent, OH 44242

 

Home phone:

Cell phone:

Work phone:

Email(s):

 

Languages other than English:

 

Licensures and Certifications

 

Type of Licensure or Certification

Licensing or Certifying Organization

Current RN Licensure # and State(s)

 

 

Current Certification(s) & Date(s) of Expiration

 

 

Education

Date of degree completion

Institution & City, State

Degree

Major

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Professional Work Experience

Full-time:

Dates of Employment

Institution & Address

Position (include rank and/or role)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Part-time and

Adjunct positions:

Dates of Employment

Institution & Address

Position (include rank and/or role)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Honors and Awards

Date

Name of award/recognition

Institution/ Organization Name, Location

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funded Research: (Authors/collaborators, submission date, title, funding source, amount, funding period; award number if federal grant; identify your role)

Research Grants under Review: (Authors/collaborators, submission date, title, funding source & period, amount; identify your role)

Unfunded Research: (Authors/collaborators, submission date, title, funding source, amount; identity your role)

Training/Equipment Grants (Authors/collaborators, submission date, title, funding source, indicate if funded, amount requested; identify your role)

Peer Reviewed Publications (APA format)

Bold your own last name; include only accepted, in-press, or published work

Non-Peer Reviewed Publications (APA format)

Bold your own last name; include only accepted, in-press, or published work

Research Presentations (include all authors/presenters, date, organization, location, etc.; include whether peer-viewed or invited) (APA format). Bold your own last nam

Professional Presentations (include all presenters, date, organization, location, etc.) (APA format). Bold your own last name

Honors, Thesis and Dissertation/DNP Project involvement

Date

Your Role

Program & Department

Honors, Thesis, Dissertation, DNP Project, Other?

Student Name

Title of Study

 

 

 

 

 

 

Citizenship / Service

College of Nursing, Kent State University

Body (e.g. committee, task force, council)

Date(s)

Your Role

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kent State University

Body (e.g. committee, task force, council)

Date(s)

Your Role

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Professional Organizations: Include Editorial or Reviewer Activities (editor, editorial board, manuscript or grant review,  RTP reviewer for other university, etc.)

Name, body (e.g. journal, funder, committee, council, etc.)

Date(s)

Your Role

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Community Organization

Name, body (e.g. committee, task force, council)

Date(s)

Your Role

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consultations (list):

Courses taught at KSU (last 7 years):

 

Courses taught

Semester & Year

Name/ # of course

Level (UG, MSN/DNP, PhD)

Online (O), F2F, Hybrid (H)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other:

 

Left or right bottom of last page of CV: List date of revision (month and year)

 

Approved by CAC 12/1/14

 

 

APPENDIX 3.C.

Policies and Procedures for Peer Review of Teaching

Introduction

The purpose of the peer review of teaching is to document teaching performance, including identification of areas of strength and opportunities for improved effectiveness. Peer reviews of teaching are required for inclusion in RTP portfolios. According to the CON Faculty Handbook, candidates for tenure undergo a minimum of one teaching peer review annually. TT or tenured candidates for promotion provide a minimum of one recent peer review within the last year prior to the application. FTNTT faculty are also encouraged to submit peer reviews with their contract renewal narratives. FTNTT candidates for promotion submit a file that includes peer review(s). Faculty are expected to include both the completed peer review document(s) and their reflection of the implications of the peer review(s) in the portfolio narrative. Other purposes of the faculty peer review are to foster unique and innovative qualities in the teacher (within the boundaries of academic freedom), facilitate constructive reflection of teaching between peers and enable faculty to learn from each other’s teaching practices.

Identify a Peer Reviewer

  1. Faculty select a peer from with the College of Nursing, within the University, or from a discipline outside the University. The selection of a peer reviewer is based on the expertise of that individual in teaching and evaluating teaching specific to the context of the course delivery method. Considerations for the reviewer include an objective interpretation of what is observed/read (e.g. classroom, LMS platform, acts of teaching, syllabus, assignments) and the use of valid evidence of the teaching process.

Preparation for the Peer Review; Prior to the review:

  1. The faculty member under review shares with the reviewer a copy of the syllabus that includes a content outline, learning objectives, assignment(s), schedule of classes and the student grading plan for the course
  2. The faculty member under review develops specific, observable goals that address the purpose of the peer review.
  3. The faculty member and peer reviewer discuss the:
    1. Purpose of the review
    2. Goals for the peer review
    3. Course delivery method (online, face-to-face, etc.)
    4. Expectations of the faculty member’s responsibilities if course is team taught
    5. Teaching philosophy of the faculty being reviewed.

Post-Review

After the review, a post-peer review discussion meeting provides a forum share observations from the peer evaluation. This is a collaborative communication to discuss all feedback for the reflection and consideration of the reviewed faculty.

Instructions for Completing the Peer Review Process of Teaching

  1. Each criterion is assessed with comments, as appropriate. To strengthen the peer review’s value, the reviewer offers suggestions explaining why the faculty member scored above or below average for each criterion. Any criterion receiving “below expectations” must be accompanied with constructive explanations, examples and recommendations for improvement.
  2. Reviewers provide summative comments at the end of the review that specifically address faculty strengths and suggestions for improvement.
  3. The faculty receiving the review has the opportunity to include remarks on the final document in the “Faculty Comment” box.

At the completion of the post-review discussion, both the reviewer and the faculty being reviewed sign and date the completed peer teaching review.

 

Peer Teaching Review

Kent State University

College of Nursing

 

 

Course Numebr/Name___________________________________________________________

Faculty Reviewed: _________________________________ Rank:________________________

Peer Reviewer:____________________________________ Date: ________________________

Approximate number of students: Graduate ___________ Undergraduate ___________

Course delivery format:

 ______ face-to-face______ asynchronous online ______ synchronous online

______  blended/ hybrid  ______  live online (ex. Collaborate)

Criteria

Below Expectation *

Meets Expectations

Exceeds Expectations

N/A

Comments

*Add comments as appropriate. Items ranked as Below Expectations require additional comments

A. Course Syllabus and Learning Objectives

1. Course syllabus is clear, concise and free of grammatical or typographical errors.

 

 

 

 

 

2. Syllabus is comprehensive and includes all relevant information (e.g., faculty contact information, topic outline, reading assignments, assessment plan and grading scale, course policies, course schedule and project due dates)

 

 

 

 

 

3. Syllabus or most important information (e.g. booklists) is improved to students at least one week before the course.

 

 

 

 

 

4. Syllabus is easy to find for outline courses

 

 

 

 

 

5. Learning objectives in syllabus are clearly written, measurable and appropriate for the class and class level.

 

 

 

 

 

6. Faculty demonstrates a clear connection between the content explored in this class and overall goals and objectives for the course.

 

 

 

 

 

B. Assessment and Measurement

Criteria

Below Expectation *

Meets Expectations

Exceeds Expectations

N/A

Comments

*Add comments as appropriate. Items ranked as Below Expectations require additional comments

1. The grading policy, including the distribution of grades and assignment expectations are clearly stated.

 

 

 

 

 

2. Student learning is assessed fairly with an appropriate proportion of individual and group work grades.

 

 

 

 

 

3. Students receive enough feedback to monitor their success in the course before the midterm.

 

 

 

 

 

4. The content explored during this session is congruent with student assessment.

 

 

 

 

 

C. Instructional Methods/Strategies

1. Course content is based on current evidence.

 

 

 

 

 

2. Faculty presents information in an organized and clear manner.

 

 

 

 

 

D. Learner Interaction and Engagement

1. Students and faculty provide introductions at the beginning of the course.

 

 

 

 

 

2. Opportunities exist for students to socialize and meet classmates (either face-to-face or virtually; e.g. on-line student blogs)

 

 

 

 

 

3. Students are actively engaged in the class according to course participation guidelines provided in the syllabus.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

E. Teaching Strategies

1. The instructional strategies used during this class session are effective.

 

 

 

 

 

2. Faculty is knowledgeable about the topic and well prepared for class.

 

 

 

 

 

3. Faculty actively promotes a positive emotional climate in the class.

 

 

 

 

 

4. Faculty exhibits passion for the teaching/learning process.

 

 

 

 

 

5. Faculty’s philosophy and approach to teaching are reflected in their interactions with students during this class session.

 

 

 

 

 

Criteria

Below Expectation *

Meets Expectations

Exceeds Expectations

N/A

Comments

*Add comments as appropriate. Items ranked as Below Expectations require additional comments

Teaching Strategies (cont’d)

6. Faculty corrects students’ misconceptions and clarifies subject matter.

 

 

 

 

 

7. Faculty encourages discussion and actively participates.

 

 

 

 

 

8. Active learning strategies are applied.

 

 

 

 

 

9. A variety of relevant illustrations/examples are given.

 

 

 

 

 

10. Faculty spoke clearly, audibly and confidently.

 

 

 

 

 

11. Faculty was enthusiastic about the subject matter and effectively held class’s attention.

 

 

 

 

 

12. Faculty made effective use of discussion boards and/or audio/visual aids

 

 

 

 

 

F. Course Technology

1. The physical or virtual environment enhanced the teaching/learning transaction in this class

 

 

 

 

 

2. Effective technologies were used to further the aims of this class and facilitate student interaction.

 

 

 

 

 

3. Sufficient information was provided for students to successfully retrieve electronic reference materials (e.g., electronic reserves, OhioLink, VPN accessibility, etc.).

 

 

 

 

 

4. Course content was organized and easy to locate in online classroom.

 

 

 

 

 

G. Learner Support

Criteria

Below Expectation *

Meets Expectations

Exceeds Expectations

N/A

Comments

*Add comments as appropriate. Items ranked as Below Expectations require additional comments

1. Teaching methods are varied to accommodate various student learning needs.

 

 

 

 

 

2. The online or classroom environment was safe and conducive to learning.

 

 

 

 

 

3. Students were treated with respect.

 

 

 

 

 

4. Assignment instructions are provided with clear deadlines and rubrics for grading

 

 

 

 

 

H. Accessibility

1. Mechanisms were in place to assure that students know how to navigate the on-line learning platform.

 

 

 

 

 

2. Faculty was approachable by students and responsive to their questions and needs within the timeframe set by faculty at the beginning of the course.

 

 

 

 

 

3. Students were instructed about accessing technical and/or writing support.

 

 

 

 

 

Attached Syllabus course description/objectives and content outline with objectives for the class that is being reviewed.

Peer Review Goals:

 

_____________________________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Summary of Faculty Strengths in Teaching (Attach additional page for more page):

Suggestions Related to Teaching, Course Delivery and/or Student Engagement (Attach additional page for more space):

Additional Comments and Recommendations (Attach additional page for more space):

Faculty’s Response to Review:

 

Signatures: ________________________________________________________ Date: ______________

                        (Faculty Reviewer)

 

 

                   ________________________________________________________ Date: _____________

                        (Faculty Reviewed)

 

 

 

Appendix 3.D.

Mechanism

 

NIH

R01

NIH Research Project Grant (Parent)

R21

Exploratory/Development Research Grant (Parent)

R15

Academic Research Enhancement Award (AREA)

K01

Mentored Research Scientist Development Award

K23

Mentored Patient-Oriented Research Career Development Award

K24

Mid-Career Investigator Award in Patient-Oriented Research

 

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)

 

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI)

K99/R00

Pathway to Independence (PI) Award

 

FOUNDATION

 

American Nurses Foundation (ANF)

 

Robert Woods Johnson Foundation

 

PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

 

Sigma Theta Tau International Honor Society of Nursing (STTI)

 

Midwestern Nursing Research Society MNRS