Components of Evaluation

Scholarship, teaching, and service are essential and critical components of University activity. The originality, quality, impact and value of the work must be assessed.  To assist this process, the candidate shall submit the names of at least five (5) experts in his/her field who are considered capable of rating the candidate’s work based on the Evaluation Components in Tables 1, 2, and 3..  Moreover, the candidate must provide the Ad Hoc RTP Committee with ample descriptive evidence of his/her scholarship, teaching, and service.  A faculty member's specific area of specialization as well as differentials in assignments may be a factor in the scope and time required for scholarship and the resulting publications/outcomes. 

  1. Research/Creative Scholarship

    All faculty members in the School are expected to produce records of scholarship that reflect their disciplinary foci and the attributes of an individual faculty member’s scholarly activity may vary across sub-disciplines.  Indicators of a faculty member’s scholarship record include both quality and quantity of exhibitions and/or published work.   In addition to scholarly publications, creative scholarship, and funded research, other scholarly activities including but not limited to presenting at refereed professional meetings, presenting papers before learned societies, etc. should be considered.

    To achieve “excellent” in the category of scholarship at the time a faculty member stands for promotion, she/he should have established a scholarship program which demonstrates an impact upon his/her discipline.  Component of evaluation for scholarship are categorized and outlined below.

    a.  Recognition.  A TT faculty member’s scholarly reputation is a reflection of the quality, extent, and creativity of his/her research output and is, therefore, an issue that is carefully evaluated for advancement.  To be recommended for advancement, a candidate must provide evidence that his/her work has had an impact on the discipline.  Recognition by professional peers includes, for example, receipts of awards, citations or research, inclusion of images of work in publications, reviews of work in publications, invited lectures, and special honors on any type, including editorship of journals, invitation to service on boards and juries at an international or national level, curating of significant exhibitions, inclusion of work in significant public or private collections, and commissioned work.

    b.  Publications.  Evaluation of publication record will include an assessment of quality and impact on the field, as well as of quantity.  Publication in journals having stringent reviewing policies is more valued than publication in journals that are less rigorous in their editorial control.  The contribution made by publishing a book-scholarly/professional/textbook is judged, in general, on the amount of new content.  Research on teaching, pedagogy, student performance, and classroom instruction as well as external funding are included in this area.

    c.  Exhibitions.  Evaluation of the record of exhibitions will include an assessment of quality and impact on the field.  Exhibition in venues having stringent jury process is more valued than exhibition in venues that are less rigorous in their jury process. Consideration is given to documented showing of original work in solo, invited group/mixed or juried exhibitions and competitions.  Significance of the exhibition may be considered in relation to prestige of the sponsoring organization, venue, curator, juror, and/or inclusiveness/scope e.g., international, national, regional, or local.

    d. Grants.  Evaluation of the record of grants will include an assessment of quality and amount of grants received. Potential for external funding is limited in the fashion field, therefore, grant proposals submitted but not funded, and/or proposals pending may be considered for positive assessment.  However, while valuable, grants do not replace the importance of research dissemination.

    e.  Presentations.  Presentation of papers of original research/creative work will be evaluated according to significance of the venue and sponsoring organization with greater weight given to refereed presentations or peer-invited presentations to scholarly audiences. 

    f.  Related Activities.  TT faculty members are expected to be active participants in the field.  Some evidence of outside professional activity is necessary for advancement.  Examples of such activity would be curating an exhibition, non-refereed publications based on scholarly work, etc.

    Expectations in scholarship for promotion to Full Professor are higher than for promotion to Associate Professor.

    1. Table 1. Evaluation Components for Research/Creative Scholarship

      Scholarship Rating

      Research or Creative Scholarship is defined by:

      Typical Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment


      Associate Professor: Promising record

      with emerging national/international recognition


      Full Professor:

      Sustained record

      with national/international recognition

      Demonstrated significant record of peer-reviewed publications and/or exhibitions.  Presentations at professional meetings with rigorous peer review criteria.  Invitations to give presentations/lectures/exhibitions.  Review of works featured in national/international journals.  Recognition by professional organizations at regional/national/international level.  Recognition of scholarly impact by peers in the profession.

      Very Good

      Defined emphasis and emerging national recognition

      Demonstrated consistent record of peer-reviewed publications and/or exhibitions.  Presentations at professional meetings with peer review criteria. 


      Developing focus and active engagement

      Some Publications and/or exhibitions.  Some Presentations at professional meetings/seminars. 


      Unfocused direction and limited engagement

      Occasional publications/exhibitions or meeting presentations.


      Undefined research program or creative practice

      Few or no publications, presentations, exhibitions, or professional recognition.

  2. Teaching

    The mission of the Fashion School is “To inspire students to become creative and resourceful fashion leader.” Criteria for the evaluation of the teaching can include development and revision of courses, peer evaluations of teaching performance, student feedback, and other relevant documentation. 

    Other documentation information such as written comments from students, colleagues within and beyond the School, College or University administrators shall be considered when available.  Peer reviews and summaries of Student Surveys of Instruction (including all student comments) must be submitted as part of a candidate’s file for reappointment, tenure and promotion.  For tenure-track faculty, the FAC, in consultation with the Director, assigns two (2) faculty members to visit the classes of each probationary faculty member and/or candidate for promotion and generally evaluate the faculty member’s teaching performance.

    Copies of representative syllabi, tests/examinations, and other relevant teaching materials (such as project descriptions and rubrics, lesson plans) should also be available for review. Faculty members are expected to mentor students when appropriate.  Evaluation of teaching will account for differences in missions and expectations.

    a. Classroom Instruction.  Performance of the TT faculty member in the classroom is an important part of teaching evaluation and includes such characteristics as preparedness, coherence, innovation, interest-level, organization, interpersonal communication, etc.  The quality of course content and student learning experience is also critically important.

    b. Curriculum Development, and Course Design and Revision.  Indicators of active engagement in curriculum development, design, and revision including development of a brand new course, revision of existing course, updating the overall curriculum to maintain currency in appropriate new  concepts, and methods.  Course revision is defined as making a substantial modification to a course such as developing several new laboratories, addition of distance learning options, formally proposing to change course content/format, etc. Teaching related grants also indicate innovation and engagement in curriculum development.  Course or curriculum revision is defined as making a substantial modification in a course or curriculum.

    c. Research Supervision.  The supervision of undergraduate and graduate student research is an integral part of the responsibility of TT faculty members and properly serves as an important area in consideration for advancement.  Graduate TT faculty members are responsible for the educational and professional development of graduate students and are expected to be actively engaged in this endeavor.  The level and quality of supervision and service on committees are also important factors in evaluation of this aspect of teaching. 

    d. Other Indicators.  These could include supervision of teaching assistants, assuring professional and creative learning environment in the studio or classroom, but activity is not limited to the aforementioned.

    Expectations in teaching for promotion to Full Professor are higher than for promotion to Associate Professor.

    1. Table 2. Evaluation Components for Teaching

      Scholarship Rating


      Typical Activities Corresponding to the Assessment


      Innovative teacher; provides leadership in instructional development and maintains high achievement on course evaluation and peer reviews

      Actively participates in curricular development/revisions.

      Demonstrates evidences excellent student evaluations and peer review. Demonstrates instructional creativity and effort. Establishes excellent record of graduate and/or undergraduate students in research and/or creative scholarship.  Receives recognition of educational impact by peers in the institution and profession.

      Very Good

      Innovative teacher; maintains very good course evaluations and peer reviews

      Develops/revises curriculum, establishes good student evaluations and peer review. Demonstrate good record of fostering graduate and/or undergraduate students in research and/or creative scholarship.


      Effective teacher; maintains good course evaluations and peer reviews

      Develops/revises curriculum, establishes mixed (moderate to good) student evaluations and peer review.

      Develops moderate level of fostering graduate and undergraduate research projects and/or creative activity.


      Substandard teacher; meets minimal expectations; below average course evaluations and peer reviews

      Establishes below-average student evaluations and peer review; has limited supervision of student research, limited participation in curriculum development and/or revision.


      Substandard, ineffective teacher; unacceptable course evaluations and peer reviews

      Establishes below-average student and peer perceptions, Receives as a pattern of complaints Have not engaged in curriculum development or research supervision

  3. Service

    A probationary faculty member's and/or candidate’s promotion’s contributions as a University citizen may include service to the School, the Campus, the College, the University, and the Profession as appropriate to his/her status.  The merits of University and Professional service should be evaluated as to (1) whether or not the candidate chaired the committee listed and (2) the importance of the service to the mission of the unit served.  Less tangible components of service include active participation in School events such as faculty and graduate student recruitment, seminars, meetings and seminars, etc.

    As a component of service, faculty members are expected to hold membership in professional societies, attend and participate in conferences and seminars, insofar as such activities enhance their professional competency.  Organizing conferences, seminars, and workshops; reviewing for journals; holding office in a professional organization; serving on professional committees; serving on exhibition juries or as juror; editing or writing for a popular publication or newsletter, etc. will be recognized as impactful service.

    Other components of service are also considered (including public outreach and public and professional service) in decisions and may differ in their importance among faculty members depending on each faculty member’s duties and responsibilities within the School.  Service activities – to the program, division, school, college, university, community, and/or profession – will have increased in significance and visibility over the review period and will have been carried out with recognized effectiveness and cooperation.

    Being an active and useful citizen of the School, Campus, College, University, and Profession is expected and valued; however, service of any magnitude cannot be considered more important than a candidate’s Research/Creative Scholarship and instructional responsibilities.

    Expectations in service for promotion to Professor are higher than for promotion to Associate Professor.

    1. Table 3. Components of Evaluating Service


      Typical Activities Corresponding to the Assessment


      Exceeds Expectations

      Plays significant role (including some leadership) in the division, school, college, university and national/international professional organizations, as evidenced by collegial engagement with committee work and related functions including public outreach.

      Meets Expectations

      Has some participation in the division, school, college, university, and national/international professional organizations, as evidenced by collegial engagement with committee work and related functions including minimal public outreach.

      Does Not Meet Expectations

      Does not engage in division, school, college, university committee work or functions, or does not participate in a collegial manner