Standards for the Evaluation of Scholarship and Creative Activity | Hugh A. Glauser School of Music Handbook | Kent State University

Standards for the Evaluation of Scholarship and Creative Activity

All faculty of the School are expected to seek excellence in scholarly activity. Indicators on which the assessment of the quality of scholarly activity is based are provided in Table 1.

 

Indicators of the quality of a faculty member’s research and creative activity record include the quality and quantity of performances, exhibitions, installations and published work as well as the faculty member’s success in obtaining extramural funds. All faculty members in the School are expected to produce records of scholarship and creative activity that reflect their disciplinary focus and the attributes of an individual faculty member’s scholarly activity will vary across disciplines.

 

To achieve “excellent” in the category of scholarship at the time a faculty member stands for tenure and promotion, she/he should have established a record of research and / or creative activity which demonstrates continued and sustained accomplishment.

 

Within this context, during annual reappointment reviews, each faculty member who will seek tenure or promotion is obligated to provide evidence supporting his/her scholarly record. This obligation will be met by providing specific information about the significance of performances, exhibitions and installations, article and journal quality and impact, funding history and plans, and description in the faculty member’s supplementary materials of any other evidence of scholarship that the faculty member deems appropriate. In turn, the members of the School’s ad hoc RTP Committee and the Director shall evaluate a candidate’s record in light of the School’s expectations for a successful tenure decision.   

 

Responsibilities of music faculty may include teaching courses in both academic and performance areas. In these cases, scholarly activities may be reported separately or together. Evaluation of such portfolios will be based on the proportion of assigned responsibilities as indicated by load credits.

 

Table 1. Kent Campus Faculty: Evaluation Components for Assessment of Scholarship for Promotion and Tenure.

Scholarship 

 

       Definition

Accomplishments Corresponding to the Assessment Score

Excellent

Sustained focus with nationally/internationally recognized research program, and/or body of creative activity

Demonstrated record of publications1 and grants2, and/or performances, exhibitions and installations, invitations to give presentations, research-related service to federal/state organizations, awards, recognition from artistic and/or  scientific societies3

Very Good

Emerging nationally

recognized research program, and/or body of creative activity

Demonstrated record of publications and ”seed” grants, and/or performances, exhibitions, installations and presentations at well recognized  meetings or venues with rigorous review criteria.

Good

Active research program and/or body of creative activity

Some peer-reviewed

publications or ”seed” grants, some performances, exhibitions, installations or presentations at meetings/seminars

Weak

Limited research program and/or body of creative activity

Occasional publications, performances, exhibitions, installations or

meeting presentations

Poor

No research program and/or body of creative activity

No publications, performances, exhibitions, installations,

presentations, or grants

Note: definitions in footnotes below refer to the meaning of “publications,” “grants,” and “recognition” throughout Table 1.

 

1Publications include: papers in peer-reviewed journals of recognized quality, as well as journals, books, and book chapters. Evaluation of publication record will include an assessment of quality and impact on the field as well as quantity. Papers of exceptional length, impact and quality are given particular consideration. 

2“Grants” refers to extramural funding where the role of the faculty member in securing the funding is clearly demonstrated and which are of sufficient magnitude to support research at a level and duration appropriate for the discipline, including, as appropriate funds for supplies, materials and personnel (graduate students, research technicians and/or post-doctoral associates). “Seed Grants” are extramural grants that are not of sufficient magnitude to fully support doctoral students or are intramural grants. “Seed Grants” should be designed to lead to successful applications for “Grants.” Grantsmanship should be commensurate with the field of research with the recognition that the dollar amount of awards varies among fields. 

3Recognitions from scientific, artistic and scholarly societies include, for example, election to office, editorial board membership, editorship, etc. Service to federal/state institutions includes service on federal proposal panels, site visits, and other research related activities.

See Appendices 5.B and 5.C for additional music criteria for Reappointment / Tenure/ and Promotion