Department of Philosophy - Full Handbook

  1. Matters of Department Governance and Related Procedures

    1. Preamble

      This departmental handbook (hereinafter “Handbook”) contains the operational policies and procedures for the Department of Philosophy (hereinafter “Department”) within the College of Arts & Sciences (hereinafter “College”).  The policies and procedures contained in this Handbook shall not conflict with any University Policy of Kent State University, any applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement, or any federal, state or local law.

      The purpose of this Handbook is to set forth departmental goals, the instrumentalities of departmental governance, appointment and employment procedures and regulations, criteria for tenure, for promotion to various ranks, and for reappointment, faculty grievance and appeal procedures, general policies pertaining to treatment of students, including a student grievance procedure, the role of Regional Campus faculty in the Department, and curricular policies.  If a conflict arises between policies and procedures here stated and other policies and procedures including those of the University Policy Register or any Collective Bargaining Agreement in force, policies and procedures having wider authority shall take precedence over those stated here.

      A two-thirds vote of the Department Faculty eligible to vote is necessary to recommend an alteration in the Handbook.  For a recommended alteration in matters pertaining to the Graduate Program to be brought to the Department FAC for consideration, a recommendation must originate with the Graduate Faculty and be recommended by a two-thirds vote of the Graduate Faculty members eligible to vote.

      Before any addition or alteration to the Handbook is officially incorporated into the Handbook, the addition or alteration must be approved by the Dean of the College.

    2. Goals, Objectives, and Mission of the Department

      The Philosophy Department understands its primary functions to be preserving, transmitting, and augmenting the literature, methods, ideas, and issues that constitute the traditions of philosophy. To this end, the Department of Philosophy seeks to sustain an academic environment which promotes the intellectual and professional development of its students and faculty.

      Teaching: The Department is committed to developing and maintaining rich and pluralistic programs of graduate and undergraduate education which advance the goals and mission of Kent State University. In addition to Kent CORE courses that serve the University at large, the Department offers a Major and Minor in Philosophy leading to the Bachelor of Arts degree. The Department also offers a graduate program leading to the Master of Arts degree. The philosophy curriculum provides opportunities to pursue intensive, in-depth study within the discipline of philosophy, with particular attention given to cultivating diverse philosophical methods, perspectives, and modes of analysis, and to exploring their relation to the concerns and interests of other disciplines.

      Research: A commitment to research demands creating and maintaining an intellectual culture in which faculty and students are free to explore traditional and innovative philosophical issues, to generate philosophical results of the highest caliber, and to disseminate the results of this research within and beyond the community of professional philosophers. The Department values original research in philosophy as well as research that promotes best practices in its classrooms. Through its curriculum and its public events the Department strives to bring the fruits of this research to the University community.

      Service: The Department recognizes that communities form around shared values and common projects, and that communities flourish only through the best efforts of their constituents. Departmental faculty and students strive to advance the goals of the College of Arts and Sciences, Kent State University, and the various scholarly organizations to which they bring their talents. Beyond academe, members of the department share their knowledge, skills, and interests in the ongoing enterprises of civil society and government.

    3. Structure and Organization of the Department

      1. Definition of the Faculty

        The terms "Faculty", "members of the Faculty", and "Faculty members" used in this handbook are defined as full-time faculty of academic rank who hold tenured or tenure-track appointments at the University and who, therefore, are members of the bargaining unit as defined in the current Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). Unless otherwise specified, voting rights on departmental matters are restricted to the Faculty. All “Faculty,” “members of the Faculty”, and “Faculty members” in the Department of Philosophy, whether their home campus is the Kent Campus or a Regional Campus, are members of the Department of Philosophy Faculty Advisory Committee (hereinafter “FAC”), and therefore constitute a FAC of the whole.

      2. Administrative and Service Positions

        1. Chairperson

          The Department Chairperson (hereinafter “Chair”) is the chief administrative officer of the Department (see Department Operational Manual) and reports directly to and is accountable to the Dean of the College (hereinafter “Dean”). The Chair is responsible for recording, maintaining, and implementing the policies and procedures stated in this Handbook through regular and thorough consultation with the Department faculty and the Department’s various committees as provided for in the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

          The Chair is an ex officio, non-voting member of all Department committees, and may make appointments as necessary and permitted to Department committees and to the various administrative and service positions in the Department.

          The selection, review, and reappointment of the Chair is the responsibility of the Dean, who consults with the Department faculty on such matters. Procedures for the selection, review and reappointment of the Chair are included in the applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement.

        2. Graduate Coordinator

          The Graduate Coordinator is appointed from among the full members of the Graduate Faculty by the Chair in consultation with FAC. The Graduate Coordinator must be a full member of the Graduate Faculty holding the rank of Associate Professor or Professor. The term of service is established by the Chair in consultation with the FAC, but may be terminated by the Chair, at his/her sole discretion. The Graduate Coordinator chairs the Graduate Studies Committee and oversees the operation and development of the Department's graduate programs. The specific duties and responsibilities of the Graduate Coordinator are determined by the Chairperson in consultation with the Graduate Faculty and FAC and are included in the departmental operating procedures document and referenced in the description of workload equivalents in this handbook (see Faculty Workload and Workload Equivalents in Section III, below).  Though the primary responsibility for the proper functioning of the graduate program rests with the Department Chairperson, the Graduate Coordinator is charged with the day-to-day administration of the graduate program. The Graduate Coordinator administers the graduate program in consultation with the Department Chairperson.

        3. Undergraduate Coordinator

          The Undergraduate Coordinator is appointed from the tenured members of FAC by the Chair in consultation with FAC. The term of service is established by the Chair in consultation with the FAC, but may be terminated by the Chair, in his/her sole discretion.  Though the primary responsibility for the proper functioning of the undergraduate program rests with the Department Chairperson, the Undergraduate Coordinator is charged with the day-to-day administration of the undergraduate program. The Undergraduate Coordinator administers the undergraduate program in consultation with the Department Chairperson.

          The duties and responsibilities of the Undergraduate Coordinator are determined by the Chair in consultation with the FAC. The duties shall be specified in the departmental operating procedures document and referenced in the description of workload equivalents contained in this handbook (see Faculty Workload and Workload Equivalents in Section III, below).

        4. Departmental Representative to College Advisory Committee (CAC)

          A tenured member of departmental FAC will be elected no later than the first new Academic Year FAC Meeting by the members of departmental FAC to serve as the Department of Philosophy representative on the College Advisory Committee for the coming academic year.

        5. Additional Administrative Appointments

          Appointments to other departmental administrative positions are made by the Chair after consultation with the FAC. Appointments will be dependent upon the specific requirements of the position and an individual’s qualifications for the position. Duties and terms of office shall be specified by the Chair and FAC in a departmental operating procedures document. If a workload equivalent is to be associated with the appointment, the position must also be referenced in the description of workload equivalents contained in this handbook (see Faculty Workload and Workload Equivalents in Section III, below).

        6. Non-Academic Staff

          The Department's non-academic staff includes all classified and unclassified staff positions within the Department including but not limited to the Administrative Assistant and secretarial staff. Each position has specific duties as defined in the applicable position description.

      3. Department Committees

        All Department committees are advisory and recommendatory to the Chair. The membership, structure, and function of some of the Department's committees are governed by University, Administrative and Operational Policies and the applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement. The Chair may establish other departmental standing and ad hoc committees in consultation with the FAC. The Chair will welcome requests from faculty members for positions on the Department’s various committees. The Chair, when making appointments to Department committees, will be mindful of the diversity of disciplines within the Department and will consider the expertise and interests necessary for the effective functioning of specific committees.

        The standing committees are: Faculty Advisory Committee (FAC); Curriculum Committee (CC); Student Academic Complaint Committee (SACC); and Graduate Studies Committee (GSC). There are also Ad Hoc Promotions and Tenure Committees, and various other ad hoc committees as needs arise. Though FAC is a Committee of the whole and thus every meeting of FAC constitutes a meeting of the full Faculty, let it be noted that the Collective Bargaining Agreement requires that each Department/School must hold a meeting of the full Faculty at least once each semester.

        1. Faculty Advisory Committee (FAC)

          a.  Membership

          All Departmental Faculty members, including Regional Campus Faculty members who hold a tenure-track appointment.

          The FAC is structured and operates as described in the applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement, Article VI, Section 3.B. The Department of Philosophy FAC is a Committee of the whole full-time Faculty of the Department as defined above in Section A, Definition of the Faculty

          b.  Purpose

          The FAC is convened and chaired by the Department Chairperson to provide recommendations and advise on all academic matters central to the mission of the Department at least once per term or as needed. The Chair, in consultation with the FAC, sets the agenda for the meetings. FAC members may request that items be added to the agenda. Additional meetings of the FAC may be called by the Chair, or upon a request by at least one-half of the members of the FAC. The elected Department Representative to the CAC may also call, set agendas and Chair FAC meetings with the understanding that no Department business may be transacted or represented as having been transacted at such meetings. Matters of concern to the Faculty may be discussed at such meetings and added to the agenda of the next regular meeting of FAC.

        2. Curriculum Committee (CC)

          a.  Membership

          The FAC supplemented by two student members – a second year graduate student and an undergraduate philosophy major (a junior or a senior) – serves as the Curriculum Committee.

          b.  Election of Student Members

          I. The graduate student member will be elected by the graduate students in a meeting held by the Graduate Coordinator in the week prior to the beginning of Fall classes.

          II. The undergraduate student member will be appointed by the FAC. At the first FAC meeting of the Fall semester, the Chair will circulate a list of junior and senior students who have properly declared their major in philosophy. The FAC will nominate a short list of undergraduate students, and then vote on the undergraduate students. On the basis of the FAC’s rank ordering of the students, the Chair will proceed down the list contacting students by email and/or phone till the Undergraduate student member of the CC is filled.

          The Undergraduate Coordinator, who serves as departmental representative to the Arts & Sciences Curriculum Committee, chairs the departmental curriculum committee. The chair shall identify those meetings, or parts thereof, for which attendance by student members is not expected.

        3. Student Academic Complaint Committee (SACC)

          The policies and procedures of the Department Student Academic Complaint Committee (SACC) are governed by University Policy 3342-4-02.3.

          a.  Membership

          Four faculty members plus one student member – a graduate student member if the student lodging a complaint is a graduate student, an under-graduate student member if the student lodging the complaint is an undergraduate.

          b.  Election of Members

          I.   The faculty members shall be elected by FAC from among its members at the first FAC meeting of each Fall semester.

          II.   The graduate student member will be elected from among the second year graduate students by the graduate students in a meeting held by the Graduate Coordinator in the week prior to the beginning of Fall classes.

          III.  The undergraduate student member will be appointed by the FAC. At the first FAC meeting of the Fall semester, the Chair will circulate a list of junior and senior students who have properly declared their major in philosophy. The FAC will nominate a short list of undergraduate students, and then vote on the undergraduate students. On the basis of the FAC’s rank ordering of the students, the Department Chair will proceed down the list contacting students by email and/or phone till the Undergraduate student member of the CC is filled.

           

           

          Once the membership of the committee is constituted, the committee shall meet to elect a chair from among its members to chair the meetings of the committee.

          In the event that a member of the Student Academic Complaint Committee is the subject of or may otherwise be involved with a student complaint, the FAC will select a replacement from the full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty. If the Chair of the SACC is the subject of or may otherwise be involved with a student complaint, the Chair will appoint a member of the Student Academic Complaint Committee to chair the committee and the FAC will appoint an additional member to the committee from the full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty.

          c.  Purpose

          The purpose of the committee is to hear any academic complaints lodged by students and to make recommendations to the Department Chair concerning the resolution of those complaints.

        4. Graduate Studies Committee (GSC)

          a. Membership

          The full and associate members of the Graduate Faculty plus one second year graduate student member. The graduate student member will be elected from among the second year graduate students by the graduate students in a meeting held by the Graduate Coordinator in the week prior to the beginning of Fall classes.

          The Graduate Coordinator is the chairperson of the committee, and will communicate with the graduate student member regarding the GSC meetings or parts thereof for which the attendance of the graduate student member is expected.  

          Every member of the committee, including the graduate student member, is a voting member of the committee.

          b.  Purpose      

          The GSC assists the Graduate Coordinator with the oversight and development of the Department’s graduate program, and to be a consulting body to the Department Chair on matters pertaining to the graduate program. The GSC reviews proposals for new graduate courses, changes in course content and related curricular matters, and conducts periodic reviews of the Department’s graduate program as a whole. The GSC may also assume the role of Curriculum Committee for graduate curriculum. The GSC is responsible for evaluating applications for admission, evaluating and recommending candidates for graduate appointments to the Chairperson, and monitoring the progress and academic performance of graduate students in the Department.

        5. Ad Hoc Reappointment, Tenure and Promotions Committees

          The policies and procedures which govern the Department’s Ad Hoc Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion (RTP) Committees are included in University Policy. Procedural and operational guidelines for the committees are provided annually by the Office of the Provost. The committees review materials relevant to the professional performance of faculty who are candidates for reappointment, tenure, or promotion in rank, and to make recommendations to the Chair on each of these personnel decisions. The recommendations of the committees and the Chair, together with the materials assembled for the committees, are forwarded to the Dean of the College.

          a.  Membership

          As stipulated in the relevant University Policy.

          b.  Purpose       

          To make recommendations to the Chairperson for reappointment, tenure, and promotion of Department faculty. The committee is chaired by the Department Chairperson.

        6. Other Departmental Committees

          The Chair may establish, charge, and appoint the membership of additional departmental standing or ad hoc committees as required by the Department. In establishing departmental committees, naming members and designating a committee chair, the Chair shall consult with the FAC. The Chair will welcome requests and preferences from the faculty before establishing and making appointments to departmental committees.

    4. Role of Regional Campus Program and Faculty

      1. Regional Campus Faculty vis-à-vis Regional Campus Dean/Department Chair

        For the Department of Philosophy, in which there are fewer than five faculty on any Regional Campus, the duties of the Regional Campus Dean are:

        1.      Determine faculty needed in consultation with appropriate Regional Campus faculty.

        2.      Recommend faculty needed and salary ranges for positions to the Vice President for Kent State Systems Integration.

        3.      Participate in recruitment of faculty in cooperation with the Department Chairperson, appropriate Regional Campus faculty, and the Vice President for Kent State Systems Integration.

        4.      Recommend candidates to the Department Chairperson.

        5.      Recommend teaching loads consistent with policy.

        6.      Recommend class size consistent with policy.

        7.      Recommend schedule of classes to the Associate Vice President for the Extended University, after consultation with resident faculty.

        8.      Assign faculty to nonelective committees and other activities associated with operation of the Regional Campuses.

        9.      Evaluate annually the performance of faculty members and, according to policy, nominate for promotion and tenure and recommends other personnel action.

        10.    Recommend salary increases in cooperation with Department Chairperson to the Associate Vice President for the Extended University.

        The duties of the Department Chairperson are:

        1.      Participate in recruitment and act on recommendation for appointments of Regional Campus faculty candidates.

        2.      Stipulate particular courses which faculty will be approved to teach.

        3.      Recommend course content and grading standards.

        4.      Recommend materials, supplies and equipment.

        5.      Recommend examination and test procedures.

        6.      Recommend standards of class size.

        7.      Recommend teaching loads.

        8.      Evaluate annually the academic performance of faculty members and according to policy nominations for promotion, tenure and other personnel action.

      2. Regional Campus Faculty as Members of Departmental Committees

        Regional Campus personnel are included as members of the Departmental Faculty Advisory Committee, Departmental Curriculum Committee, Departmental Ad Hoc Promotions and Tenure Committee, and as members of Department meetings. (See Section C, above, for specifics.)

      3. Teaching Assignments and Load for Regional Campus Faculty

        For Regional Campus personnel, teaching assignments and loads are determined by the Dean of the Regional Campus in question, with consultation with the Department Chairperson. Salary determinations are in the hands of the Dean of the Regional Campus to which the faculty member is assigned.

      4. Criteria for Promotion, Tenure, Reappointment

        As stated in Subsection F under Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion in Section III of this document, the criteria for hiring, reappointing, promoting, and granting tenure hold for Regional Campus personnel.

    5. Faculty Grievance and Appeal Procedures

      University Policies 3342-6-14, 6-15, and 6-16 on Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment, respectively (Addenda A-C of the Collective Bargaining Agreement) and Article VII, Section 2 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement specify the necessary procedures for appealing decisions involving a substantive academic judgment. These include decisions concerning reappointment, tenure, promotion, academic freedom, professional ethics, or sanctions for cause.

      The Collective Bargaining Agreement (Article VII, Section 1) specifies the grievance and arbitration procedures for complaints that do not involve substantive academic judgment. The Department of Philosophy acknowledges and endorses the ideal expressed in the Agreement that “all disputes should be resolved informally, whenever possible, before the filing of a formal grievance” and likewise encourages “open communications so that resort to the formal grievance procedure will not be necessary” (Article VII, Section 1. C. 1.).

    6. Handbook Modification, Amendment, and Revision

      The implementation, modification, amendment and revision of this Handbook is governed by the applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement.

      1. Periodic Review and Possible Revision

        Every five (5) years, the Chair, after consultation with the FAC, will convene an ad hoc Handbook Review Committee. The committee will review the entire handbook and make a recommendation to the FAC concerning any additions or revisions to any sections of the handbook that may be appropriate or desirable. If the committee recommends specific additions or changes, these will be reviewed and evaluated by the FAC. A 2/3 vote by members of the FAC is required for approval of the proposed handbook revision.

      2. Revision in Light of Change in University Policy or Applicable Collective Bargaining Agreements

        Within one semester of any change to any University Policy or applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) that renders current handbook language incomplete or inconsistent with University Policy or the CBA, the Chair, after consultation with the FAC, will convene an ad hoc Handbook Review Committee. The committee will review the changes in University Policy or the applicable CBA and the specific sections of the handbook plausibly affected by the change and make a recommendation to the FAC concerning possible revisions to those sections of the handbook. If the committee determines that revisions to existing handbook language are required, the revisions recommended by the committee will be reviewed and evaluated by the FAC. A 2/3 vote by members of the FAC is required for approval of the proposed handbook revision.

      3. Review at Request of FAC or Chair

        In addition, the FAC or Chair may request a review of the entire handbook or sections thereof outside of the five year periodic review and independent of any change in University Policy or applicable CBAs. In such a case, the Chair, after consultation with the FAC, will convene an ad hoc Handbook Review Committee. The committee will review the entire handbook or sections thereof as requested and make a recommendation to the FAC concerning any additions or revisions to any sections of the handbook that may be appropriate or desirable. If the committee recommends specific additions or changes, these will be reviewed and evaluated by the FAC. A 2/3 vote by members of the FAC is required for approval of the proposed handbook revision.

      4. Submission of Handbook to the Dean

        If the Chair concurs with a proposed modification, amendment or revision, he/she will recommend the change(s) to the Dean. All modifications, amendments and revisions of the Handbook require the approval of the Dean. In reviewing this Handbook the Dean may request revisions before lending final approval. If these revisions are not adopted by the Department, the Dean shall consult the CAC with regard to the provision(s) in dispute before making a final determination and certifying final approval of the Handbook. Further, the Dean may direct that the Handbook be modified, amended or revised to reflect changes in College or University policy.

  2. Teaching Assignments and Workload Including Workload Equivalencies and Related Procedures

    1. Faculty Workload and Workload Equivalents

      All full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty of the Department are expected to carry a maximum workload of twenty-four (24) credit hours per academic year. All full-time non-tenure track faculty members are expected to carry a maximum workload of thirty (30) credit hours per academic year. (See University Policy Register 3342-6-18) The workload for each individual faculty member is assigned by the Chair with the approval of the Dean. The FAC shall advise the Chair on issues related to teaching assignments, class schedules and the appropriate application of workload equivalents. The Chair shall provide each faculty member with a statement of her/his workload in compliance with the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

      1. Workload Equivalents

        In addition, the Chair may, in consultation with the FAC and with the concurrence of the Dean, assign workload equivalencies for specific duties which are considered essential to the academic mission of the Department. The Department’s expectations and specifications for such workload equivalencies is given in the table below.

                    Table 1. Workload Equivalents

        Title / Name of Assignment

        Load Equivalent

        (Range)

        Frequency

        Description of Duties

        Undergraduate Studies Coordinator

        3-6

        Academic Year

        (Duties are outlined in the departmental operating procedures appendix).

        Graduate Studies Coordinator

        3-6

        Academic Year

        (Duties are outlined in the departmental operating procedures appendix).

        C.A.C. Representative

        3

        Fall Semester

        (Duties are outlined in the departmental operating procedures appendix).

        Kent CORE Course Coordinator

        3

        Academic Year

        (Duties are outlined in the departmental operating procedures appendix).

        Graduate Faculty Program Duties

        3

        Academic Year

        Service in the Graduate Philosophy Program beyond class teaching.

        Graduate Faculty Research Duties

        3

        Academic Year

        Continued research and publication towards enhancing graduate philosophy education.

         

        In the interest of maintaining a high standard of teaching and the desirability of faculty involvement in research and service activities, overload assignments are strongly discouraged. Overload assignments (i.e. workload assignments which total more than twenty-four (24) credit hours per academic year for tenured and tenure-track Faculty and which total more than thirty (30) credit hours for full-time non-tenure-track faculty) will be made only in unusual circumstances. Such assignments require the agreement of the faculty member and the approval of the Chair and the Dean. Overload assignments for full-time tenure-track Faculty shall be compensated at the rate of 1/24 of base annual contract salary for each workload credit hour of overload assignment (see Article IX, Section 6 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement).

         

      2. Teaching Assignments and Course Schedules

        Faculty members are assigned to teach specific courses by the Chair. The primary considerations for course assignments are prior teaching experience, subject expertise, and shared responsibility among the faculty for service and introductory courses. Questions regarding teaching assignments should be addressed to the Chair. The Chair will submit to all members of the Department of Philosophy faculty a Faculty Course Preference form. After considering faculty stated preferences, the Chair will submit to the FAC each Fall term a tentative proposed Academic Year Course Schedule for the next Academic Year. The approved Course Schedule may be altered by the Chair for programmatic needs in consultation with the appropriate Coordinators. In the case of a dispute or request for reassignment a faculty member may request review by the FAC, which will make a recommendation to the Chair.

      3. Summer Teaching Assignments

        The Chair welcomes requests for summer teaching assignments from all full-time faculty members. Summer teaching cannot be guaranteed to any faculty member and most summer teaching assignments are for a partial load. The size, content, and staffing of summer courses are dictated by budgetary constraints and curricular needs. The Department will endeavor to distribute summer teaching opportunities equitably among members of the bargaining unit without regard to academic rank. Faculty members may elect not to accept a summer assignment. See also CBA Article IX, Section 4.

    2. Teaching Assignments and Curricular Development

      1. Course Assignments

        Course assignments are made annually by the Chair after soliciting faculty preferences, consulting with the Graduate and Undergraduate Coordinators concerning programmatic needs and an appropriate scheduling pattern for students to take courses, and finally consulting with FAC concerning a proposed schedule for the next academic year.

        Programmatic needs and an appropriate scheduling pattern in light of these needs is the primary factor in making teaching assignments for an academic year. Towards the beginning of the Fall semester, the Chair solicits faculty preferences concerning courses and times for the subsequent Academic Year. The Chair will make reasonable efforts to accommodate faculty preferences consistent with programmatic needs and appropriate scheduling patterns.

        After consulting with the Graduate and Undergraduate Coordinators concerning programmatic needs and an appropriate scheduling pattern, the Chair constructs a tentative schedule. The Chair then consults with FAC about the tentative schedule. Upon receiving FAC’s advice about the schedule, the Chair finalizes the schedule and reports the tentative schedule to FAC.

      2. Developing New Courses

        A faculty member wishing to develop a new course for the curriculum first should consult with the Chair and the two Coordinators before preparing a Course Catalog Update workflow and syllabus for the proposed course. The Chair submits these materials to the Department Curriculum Committee and upon receiving their recommendation either forwards the proposal to the Arts & Sciences Curriculum Committee or else returns it to the proposer.

      3. Review of Undergraduate Curriculum

        At least once every four years the Department shall review its undergraduate offerings. Recommendations for changes, accompanied by Course Catalog Update workflows and syllabi, shall be brought before the Department CC for action. Upon receiving the Recommendation from the Department CC, the Chair either forwards the material to the Arts & Sciences College Curriculum Committee or returns them to the Department CC for further consideration.

      4. Review of Graduate Curriculum

        At least once every four years the Graduate Program Committee shall review its graduate offerings. Recommendations for changes, accompanied by Course Catalog Update workflows and syllabi shall be brought before the Department CC for action. Upon receiving the Recommendation from the Department CC, the Chair either forwards the material to the Arts & Sciences College Curriculum Committee or returns them to the Department CC for further consideration.

    3. Other Faculty Duties

      1. Advising

        Tenured and Tenure-Track faculty are required to advise and counsel undergraduate and graduate students on academic matters. Individual faculty members are responsible for providing academic counseling to undergraduate students assigned to them and to other undergraduate students who seek such advice, as needed. Student advising at the graduate level is conducted through the graduate student’s Graduate Faculty Advisory Groups or the Thesis Committee and Thesis Advisor. In order to assist in student advising, Faculty members should maintain current knowledge of University, College, and Department programs and requirements.

      2. Final Examinations

        Final exams in all courses must be offered at the time and date specified in the University’s schedule of final examinations. Changes of the time and/or date of a final examination require prior approval of the Chair and the Dean, but in any case, the exam must also be offered at the time scheduled and publicized by the University for those students who desire to take the exam at that time.

      3. Grades and Student Records

        Faculty members must inform students of their progress throughout the semester. Grades are a faculty member's responsibility and should be assigned fairly and objectively. Submission of final grades must comply with University Policy, including but not limited to the deadline for the timely submission of grades. Failure of faculty members to provide grades in compliance with University Policy will be taken into consideration in reappointment, promotion, tenure and merit decisions. Materials used in computing grades (e.g., exams, papers, reports, etc.) should be retained by the faculty member for five (5) years after final grades are submitted. Students have a right to inspect the written work performed during a course and discuss the grade with the faculty member. All members of the Department must comply with all laws and University Policies which govern the privacy of student education records, including but not limited to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). These regulations require, among other things, that faculty members keep thorough academic records and forbid the posting of grades by name, social security number or any other system which might identify a student with her/his education record.

      4. Credit by Examination

        When a student applies to complete a philosophy course by a Department authorized credit by examination, the Chair assigns the making of the exam to a faculty member who teaches that course in the Department.

      5. Faculty Communication

        It is the responsibility of all TT and NTT faculty to keep up to date regarding scheduled events and meetings of the Department. To that end, all faculty are expected to review the notices posted on the Copy Room door in the Department regarding upcoming events, and to attend to notifications emailed to their University email account and correspondence and announcements posted in their individual Department post box.

        1. Email

        Faculty members must use their University email address for all official University communications (sending and receiving), and check their University email at least once each day they are on campus during the workweek.

        2. Post

        Faculty members must check their Department mailbox for communications at least each work day they are scheduled for classes, office hours and Department meetings.

      6. Office Hours

        Faculty members are expected to schedule and attend at least five (5) office hours per week (See University Policy Register 3342-6-18.101). All full-time faculty members are expected to keep five office hours a week which are to be distributed over at least two weekdays. Further, the Chair may determine whether the schedule is suitable when hours are requested beyond the regular office hours of operation.  The office hours shall be posted on the Department office door and on the Department Webpage, and communicated to the Department office as well as to the faculty member's students. If a student, for a legitimate reason or reasons, is unable to meet during the faculty member’s scheduled office hours, the faculty member shall make appointments to meet with the student at an alternate time. A faculty member is expected to keep all Office Hours as posted. A faculty member must report directly to the Chairperson any absence from Office Hours that exceeds 15 minutes, and may not routinely cancel any portion of their posted office hours (posted office hours should be changed so as not to necessitate routine cancellation). Part-time faculty teaching one course in a term will keep three (3) hours per week of office hours. If the part-time faculty member teaches an additional course in the semester, the total office hours per week will increase to five (5) office hours per week.

      7. Absence from Class Meetings

        Faculty members are required to meet all classes as scheduled in the Schedule of Classes unless formal permission for not being in class has been secured. If a faculty member is ill and cannot meet class, the Chairperson must be notified prior to the expected class meeting. Upon return to duty the faculty member must file a sick leave request form. When an instructor must miss classes because of a meeting or a conference, administrative duties, research activities, or other legitimate reasons, he or she must obtain prior permission by submitting to the Chairperson a Faculty Absence Authorization Form.

      8. Participation in University Activities

        Tenured and Tenure-Track faculty members are expected to participate in recruitment programs, graduation ceremonies and other activities which are appropriate to their role as a faculty member in the Department.

      9. Student and Peer Evaluation

        A Student Survey of Instruction (hereinafter “SSI”) is required in each course in each semester and will be conducted under the auspices of the Chair pursuant to applicable University policies and procedures Section IX of this Handbook). Probationary faculty members are required to undergo peer review of teaching during each year of the probationary period. Further, the Chair may establish an Ad Hoc Teaching Excellence Committee for the evaluation of all faculty members being considered for Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion.

      10. Syllabi

        Faculty members are expected to provide students with a syllabus which includes the subject matter to be covered in a course with a brief course description, a list of all required books and articles, an optional list of recommended readings, a listing of assignments and/or reports, approximate dates of examinations, grading standards, attendance requirements, office hours and other pertinent details of the conduct of the class. Further, all syllabi should include statements regarding Student Academic Complaints, Academic Dishonesty, and Accommodations for students registered with Student Accessibility Services. A course syllabus should be provided to all students in a course by the first day of class in a term. Faculty members are required to submit a copy of each course syllabi to the Department in the first week of classes.

    4. Annual Workload Summary Reports for Tenured Faculty Members

      Each continuing tenured Faculty member is to prepare and submit an annual workload summary report for the previous academic year by September 15th (See CBA Article IX, Section 2.D). The annual workload summary report submitted by the faculty member shall be in the form of an annual updated curriculum vitae, a brief summary of the previous year’s professional activities, and the course syllabi for each course or section of course or section of course taught by the Faculty member during the previous academic year. The chair shall add to the report copies of the summaries of course evaluations for each course taught during the previous academic year. The brief summary will include i) a list of research and scholarly activity, ii) a list of Graduate Faculty membership on Advisory Groups and Thesis Committees, and iii) a list of any other professional activities for which the faculty member received workload equivalency. If necessary, the Chair may request additional information from the faculty member to clarify summary information, and the faculty member shall respond in a timely fashion.

      The purpose of this report is to document the workload, including utilization of specified workload equivalencies, for that academic year. This report may be used in planning future workload equivalencies. Any other use of the report requires consent of the faculty member. Modification or revision of the specification and/or application of workload equivalents listed in Subsection A under Faculty Workload and Workload Equivalents above requires the approval of the full faculty of the Department.

  3. Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion Criteria and the Criteria and Processes Relating to Other Faculty Personnel Actions

    1. Appointment and Employment Procedures and Regulations

      1. Faculty Appointments

        1. Visiting Faculty Appointments

          Visiting faculty appointments at an appropriate faculty 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 Department 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 become a full-time non-tenure track (NTT) faculty member.

        2. Full-Time Non-Tenure Track Faculty (NTT) Appointments

          Full-time non-tenure track faculty (NTT) appointments are made on an annual basis (see Subsection A under Renewal of Appointment and Third-Year Full Performance Reviews of Full-Time Non-Tenure Track (NTT) Faculty, below). NTT appointments are not included under the umbrella of the University policy and procedures regarding faculty tenure (University Policy Register 3342-6-14) and NTT faculty members are not entitled to any rights with regard to tenure. The renewal process will be covered below in Subsection B under Renewal of Appointment and Third-Year Full Performance Reviews of Full-Time Non-Tenure Track (NTT) Faculty.

        3. Part-Time Faculty Appointments

          When the Department cannot meet its teaching needs from the ranks of its full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty and its full-time non-tenure track (NTT) faculty, part-time faculty appointments will be made from an established pool of qualified applicants not currently on regular appointment at the University. Normally a part-time faculty member will teach only lower level courses, unless otherwise approved by the FAC and the Chair.

          For the initial appointment to the rank of part-time faculty appointment, a candidate must hold at least a M.A. or an equivalent degree in philosophy to apply to the Chair for consideration. Further, for initial appointment, a candidate must have potential for excellence in teaching.

          For the initial appointment to the rank of part-time faculty to teach only courses in religion, a candidate must hold at least an M.A. academic degree in religion studies. Further, for initial appointment, a candidate must have potential for excellence in teaching.

      2. Tenured and Tenure-Track Faculty Ranks

        The basic definitions of faculty ranks are as follows:

        1. Assistant Professor

          This rank is normally the entry level rank for tenure-track faculty holding the doctorate in philosophy.

          For the initial appointment to the rank of Assistant Professor, a candidate must hold a Ph.D. or an equivalent degree in philosophy.

          Further, for initial appointment, a candidate must have potential for excellence in teaching. Evidence for such potential is:

          a.  Letters of recommendation, and where possible, student evaluations.

          b.  The candidate's submission of class plans, syllabi, requirements, readings upon request of the Chairperson.

          c.  The candidate's performance in reading and defending a paper before the Department.

          d.  The candidate's performance in presenting to the Department faculty a class session on some topic set by the Department; or giving a session of some undergraduate class or graduate colloquium, with the faculty in attendance.

          Finally, the candidate must have potential for writing publishable material. Evidence for such potential is:

          a.   One or more publications.

          b.   The quality of the candidate's dissertation.

          c.   The quality of any manuscript the candidate may submit.

          d.   Letters of recommendation from publishing scholars.

           

        2. Associate Professor

          Criteria for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor are covered below in Subsection C under Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion. A candidate whose initial appointment at Kent State University is to the rank of Associate Professor must possess the Ph.D. or its equivalent in philosophy. Initial appointment at this rank presumes prior service as an Assistant Professor.

          Further, the candidate must have demonstrated excellence in teaching. Evidence for such potential is:

          a.   The candidate's performance in reading and defending a paper before the Department.

          b.   The candidate's performance in presenting to the Department faculty a class session on some topic set by the Department; or giving a session of an undergraduate class or graduate colloquium, with the faculty in attendance.

          c.   The candidate's submission of class plans, syllabi, requirements, readings upon request of the Chairperson.

          d.   Letters of recommendation, and where possible, student evaluations.

          In addition, the candidate for initial appointment at this rank must have a substantial and quality publication record consistent with departmental criteria and evidence for promotion to the rank of Associate Professor (see below, Subsections C and D under Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion). Reviews and letters, solicited by the Chairperson from experts in the candidate's field, are also to be used in assessing the candidate's scholarly record.

           

        3. Professor

          Criteria for promotion to the rank of Full Professor are covered below in Subsection C under Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion.

          A candidate whose initial appointment at Kent State University is to Full Professor must have a Ph.D. or its equivalent in philosophy, should have at least a decade of experience teaching in the field, must have demonstrated excellence in teaching, and must have an excellent sustained publication record. Section V of this handbook should be consulted for the criteria and evidence for excellence in teaching.

          The candidate for initial appointment at the rank of Full Professor must have a substantial and quality publication record consistent with departmental criteria and evidence for promotion to the rank of Full Professor (see below, Subsections C and D under Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion). Reviews and letters, solicited by the Chairperson from experts in the candidate's field, are also to be used in assessing the candidate's scholarly record.

          Reviews and letters, solicited by the Chairperson from experts in the candidate's field, are to be used in assessing the candidate's scholarly record.

      3. Graduate Faculty Status

        As a graduate degree granting Department, the Department normally requires that all faculty hired for tenure-track positions be eligible for appointment to the graduate faculty as associate or full members. The Administrative policy regarding graduate faculty is included in the University Policy Register (University Policy Register 3342-6-15.1). Graduate Faculty Status is a meritorious position in the Department.

      4. Recruiting Tenure Track Faculty

        The Department supports the goals of equal opportunity and affirmative action in recruiting and in making appointments to the faculty. The FAC will review the applications for any tenure-track position and prepare a ranked list of the top ten to twenty candidates. A search committee will be appointed by the Chair after consultation with the FAC to interview candidates at the APA. Based on these initial interviews, the search committee will make a recommendation to the FAC that two (2) or three (3) candidates be invited to campus for an interview. After the campus interviews, the FAC will recommend its choice of candidates to the Chair. The FAC’s recommendation is advisory to the Chair, who then makes a recommendation to the Dean. If the Dean concurs with the Chair, a recommendation is forwarded to the Office of the Provost. If the Chair's recommendation is different than that of the FAC, the Chair shall inform the Dean of all recommendations and the reasons for the disagreement.

      5. Roles and Responsibilities of the Faculty

        1. Research and Teaching

          Each Faculty member is expected to contribute to the Department, Campus, College and University according to the terms and condition of his/her letter of appointment. Scholarly activity is expected of all Faculty members, although the extent and/or type of activity may vary with the terms of each Faculty member’s assignment, campus location and Graduate Faculty Status. A Faculty member whose primary or sole responsibilities are undergraduate teaching and undergraduate programs may teach and serve in a greater number and diversity of courses with a larger number of students per semester than a Faculty member who is also a member of the Graduate Faculty. Supervision and direction of undergraduate research projects and theses is part of the teaching function of all Faculty members.

          Faculty members with Graduate Faculty Status are involved in the research and graduate teaching program and are expected to present evidence of their research endeavors as witnessed by publication, proposals submitted for extramural funding, and dissemination of research in various venues as appropriate to the discipline. Activity in professional organizations and the training of graduate students is also expected. Most of the Department faculty members will be either a full or associate member of the Graduate Faculty. All Graduate Faculty members are expected to serve on graduate student committees, participate in extracurricular graduate studies programs, and direct graduate student research.

        2. Graduate Faculty

          All Graduate Faculty members receive workload equivalence each academic year.

          a.  Membership in the philosophy Graduate Faculty includes duties beyond the teaching of graduate-level courses and requires participation in Advisory Committees, Thesis Committees, Thesis Advising, graduate colloquia, the Annual Graduate Student Conference, and other programs equivalent to a 3-hour course reduction per academic year.

            b.   Graduate Faculty are expected to keep active as scholars engaged throughout the academic year in scholarly activity that deepens their awareness of philosophy,  keeps them abreast of developments within the field, and allows constant update of their courses. They are also expected to engage in research to advance and create new knowledge in philosophy, resulting in a sustained record of publications and conference presentations.   Graduate Faculty members are given a 3-hour-course reduction each academic year.

        3. Service to the University

          Service to the University is a responsibility of each faculty member. Department, Campus, College, and University committee or task force membership is expected as a normal part of a faculty member’s contributions. Special or outstanding service above and beyond that which is typical may be considered during the review of a faculty member, but service alone will not reduce the expectations of quantity and quality teaching and scholarly activity. Public service is encouraged and recognized as a part of the professional responsibilities of each faculty member, although contributions in this area can be expected to vary widely due to the nature of the various disciplines within the Department.

      6. Faculty Code of Ethics

        All members of the Department faculty 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 (University Policy Register 3342-6-17).

      7. Sanctions

        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 CBA, Article VIII).

      8. Faculty Leaves

        All leaves, sponsored or unsupported, personal or professional, are subject to the approval of the Chair, the Dean and the Provost.

        University leaves include but are not limited to:

                    1.      Research leaves (see University Policy Register 3342-6-11.8).

                    2.      Leaves of absence without pay (see University Policy Register 3342-6-11.9).

                    3.      Faculty professional improvement leaves (see University Policy Register 3342-6-12 ).

                    4.      Research/Creative Activity appointments (see University Policy Register 3342-6-15.3).

        Leaves of absence on a one-year (or less) basis without pay may be arranged through the Department Chairperson and, with his or her approval, the approval of the Dean of the College, and the approval of the Provost and Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs. Such requests for a leave of absence should be filed not later than the first of March for the next academic year. However, the University can and does recognize "court leave" (see University Policy Register 3342-6-11.5) and does have a defined policy concerning military leave of absence (see University Policy Register 3342-6-11.6).

      9. Faculty Absence and Travel Policy

        Faculty members who will be absent from campus for professional or personal reasons must submit a Request for Absence Form to the Chair. The request should be made at least one (1) month prior to the planned absence and is subject to the approval of the Chair and the Dean. Arrangements for any classes to be missed during the absence must be addressed to the satisfaction of the Chair before approval will be granted.

        Attendance at professional meetings is encouraged and approved travel expenses incurred in attending such meetings may be reimbursed when approved prior to travel according to the University's travel policies and are subject to the availability of Department funds. It is assumed that Faculty members who are applying for travel funding from University Research Council will submit a completed form at least one (1) month prior to the professional travel date for review by the Chair. Requests for Absence Forms and Requests for University Research Council Travel Support which are inaccurate or incomplete will be declined by the Chair. The Faculty member is responsible for submitting all pertinent supporting materials with the application.

      10. Faculty Sick Leave

        The Chair is responsible for keeping complete records of faculty sick leave; however, faculty members are also required to submit the appropriate sick leave forms to the Chair. Sick leave forms should be completed and submitted to the Chair within forty-eight (48) hours after an absence (see University Policy Register 3342-6-11.1).

      11. Outside Employment and Other Outside Activities

        Faculty members may engage in professional activities outside the university provided the activities do not interfere with the faculty member's teaching, research, or service responsibilities to the Department, Campus, College or University (see University Policy Register 3342-6-24). These activities must not compete with University activity or the faculty member’s employment with the University. Continuing employment while under contract for remuneration must be approved in advance by the Chair and the Dean. Each academic year, each faculty member must disclose and seek approval for all continuing outside employment on the form provided by the University. Any outside employment or other outside activities are subject to the Faculty Code of Ethics and the University’s conflict of interest policies. (See, University Policy Register 3342-6-17 and 3342-6-23)

      12. Copyright Restrictions

        All faculty members should be aware of current copyright laws which restrict the copying of published materials. For further information, contact the University’s Office of Legal Affairs.

      13. Academic Misconduct

        The University policy regarding misconduct in research and scholarship and the Administrative policy and procedures regarding allegations and instances of misconduct in research and scholarship are included in the University Policy Register (see University Policy Register 3342-10-07 and 3342-10-07.1, respectively).

      14. Minimum Salaries and Salary Review

        Minimum faculty salaries in each academic rank are specified in Article XII, Section 7 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Faculty members wishing to request a salary review (i) to match a bona fide offer of employment, (ii) to address a salary discrepancy, or (iii) in other unusual circumstances may do so in accordance with Article XII, Section 2 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

    2. Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion

      1. Reappointment

        The policies and procedures for reappointment are included in the University policy and procedures regarding faculty reappointment (see University Policy Register 3342-6-16). Each academic year, reappointment guidelines for Kent and Regional Campus faculty are distributed by the Office of the Provost.

        Circumstances may arise that require extension of the probationary period. The University policy and procedures governing modification of the faculty probationary period is included in the University Policy Register (see University Policy Register 3342-6-13).

        In making a reappointment decision, each member of the Department’s Ad Hoc RTP Committee will render a judgment as to whether, “[g]iven the years of service to date and the number of years until mandatory tenure review, it is reasonable to expect that the probationary faculty member will eventually undergo a successful tenure review” (University policy and procedures regarding faculty reappointment, Section D). 

        1. Necessary Conditions for Annual Reappointment

          1. Documented evidence of suitable progress in scholarship, considering the accumulated years of service.
          2. Documented evidence of suitable progress in teaching, considering the accumulated years of service. 
          3. Documented evidence of suitable progress in service, considering the accumulated years of service.

          In addition to providing documented evidence for each annual reappointment review of suitable progress in scholarship, teaching and service, no later than the second annual review probationary faculty members must also articulate a plan for achieving tenure. For each annual review, candidates should also address any concerns expressed by the Ad Hoc RTP Committee and/or the Chair in previous reviews. Subsection D (below) offers guidelines and examples of acceptable documentation of scholarship, teaching and service, as well as criteria for evaluating achievements in each of the three areas.

      2. Tenure

        The policies and procedures for tenure are included in the University policy regarding faculty tenure (See University Policy Register 3342-6-14). Each academic year, tenure guidelines for Kent and Regional Campus faculty are distributed by the Office of the Provost.

        1. Necessary Conditions for Tenure

          1. Documented evidence that the candidate has achieved a significant body of scholarship and will continue and sustain a program of high-quality scholarship.
          2. Documented evidence that the candidate has achieved excellence as a teacher and will continue and sustain a program of high-quality teaching.
          3. Documented evidence that the candidate has provided effective service and will continue and sustain a program of high-quality service.

              
          Subsection D (below) offers guidelines and examples of acceptable documentation of scholarship, teaching and service, as well as criteria for evaluating achievements in each of the three areas. 

      3. Promotion

        The policies and procedures for promotion are included in the University policy regarding faculty tenure (See University Policy Register 3342-6-15). Each academic year, promotion guidelines for Kent and Regional Campus faculty are distributed by the Office of the Provost. 

        1. Departmental Criteria Regarding Academic Credentials and Experience

          a.   Assistant Professor: Normally an Assistant Professor must have the Ph.D. (or equivalent) in philosophy and will have served five years as Assistant Professor before becoming eligible for consideration for advancement.

          b.   Associate Professor: Normally an Associate Professor must have the Ph.D. (or equivalent) in philosophy and will have served five years as Associate Professor before becoming eligible for consideration for advancement.

          c.    Full Professor: Normally a Full Professor must hold a Ph.D. (or equivalent) in philosophy.

          d.   In extraordinary cases a faculty member may be considered for promotion to the next highest rank with fewer years at current rank. Exceptions to these usual or standard circumstances will be reviewed in accordance with University Policy.

          e.   A non-tenured faculty member applying for promotion in rank to either Associate or Full Professor must undergo a successful tenure review.

        2. Departmental Criteria Regarding Academic Performance and Service

          The Department observes the following as necessary conditions for promotion:

          1. Assistant Professor
            1. Documented evidence of scholarly activity such as an accepted Ph.D. dissertation. 
            2. Documented evidence of teaching, such as a statement of teaching aims and goals, technology utilized, comprehensive syllabi or class plans, peer review and/or student teaching evaluations (if available), and letters of recommendation attesting to teaching experience and effectiveness. 
          2. Associate Professor
            1. Documented evidence of achievement in scholarship beyond that achieved for the rank of Assistant Professor. 
            2. Documented evidence of achievement in teaching beyond that achieved for the rank of Assistant Professor. 
            3. Documented evidence of achievement in service beyond that achieved for the rank of Assistant Professor.
          3. Full Professor
            1. Documented evidence of achievement in scholarship beyond that achieved for the rank of Associate Professor. 
            2. Documented evidence of achievement in teaching beyond that achieved for the rank of Associate Professor.
            3. Documented evidence of achievement in service beyond that achieved for the rank of Associate Professor.

          For consideration of promotion to the rank of Full Professor, evidence must be provided that the candidate’s work has not merely made a positive contribution to scholarship in the area, but has had significant impact. 

          Subsection D (below) offers guidelines and examples of acceptable documentation of scholarship, teaching and service, as well as criteria for evaluating achievements in each of the three areas. 

      4. Evidence

        The quality and merit of scholarship, teaching, and service is assessed in terms of the following criteria. In all cases, it is the responsibility of candidates for reappointment, tenure, or promotion to demonstrate, using the guidelines detailed below, that they have fulfilled the necessary conditions for reappointment, tenure and/or promotion detailed above, as applicable.  Candidates are required to present a thorough and reflective self-evaluation narrative without unduly inflating accomplishments or seeming to duplicate achievement within or across categories.  (See section G below.)

        1. Scholarship

          In evaluating scholarship activities, the Department takes into account factors such as the breadth and depth of the candidate’s knowledge and scholarship in the field; evidence of high-quality research activity; the significance of the candidate’s research to extending knowledge in the field; and the clarity of the candidate’s research project.  
              
          The Department recognizes that activities will vary considerably among individuals and that the quality and merit of these activities should thus be assessed within each candidate’s unique scholarly context, including area(s) of specialization, methodologies employed, and the extent to which the candidate’s work interfaces with other disciplines and with fields outside academe.  In particular, the Department recognizes that some faculty publish in a variety of modes, including single and multiple author books, edited books, book chapters, journal articles, and reviews; others focus upon a single mode, such as journal articles. A publication in a language other than English will be regarded as comparable to a similar English language publication. Furthermore, the ability to publish works in a language which is not native to the speaker provides additional evidence of the candidate's scholarship. 

          Members of the Ad Hoc RTP committee also take into account the specializations and concentrations specified in each faculty member’s letter of offer, if applicable.

          1. Books

            In philosophy, a book is not equal to a fixed number of articles, and a book of a certain number of pages should not be equated to the same number of pages published in a series of articles.

            There are no fixed criteria for assessing the quality of a book or a publisher in the discipline of philosophy. However, not all publishers are equal.  The characteristics of a quality press for the publications of books in philosophy include, but are not limited to, the following:

            • established university academic press, established non-university academic press, or press which serves as the publishing arm of an established academic society
            • external, blind review of the work by established senior scholars in the appropriate specialization, including the possibility of a second level of review by scholars of a similar stature if the book is being considered for inclusion in a series
            • a lengthy and rigorous review period in which the author responds to requests for revision from the reviewers

            Conversely, the following are some indicators that a press is not a quality venue for publishing in the field of philosophy:

            • the publisher conducts most of its reviewing in-house
            • the review process is brief and/or cursory, and/or the author is not required to address requests for revision from the reviewers
            • the press’ contributions to academic scholarship are uneven or questionable

            Works self-published by the author, or which the author pays a press to publish, are not considered evidence of scholarship.

          2. Journal Articles

            The following criteria apply to both traditional and purely electronic journals.

            It is understood that there is no generally accepted ranking of philosophical journals across the discipline. In subfields where official rankings of journals do exist, however, those rankings should be considered authoritative for journals within that subfield. Even in subfields where no formal rankings exist, however, not all journals are equal.  The characteristics of a quality philosophical journal, regardless of subfield, include, but are not limited to, the following:

            • a high number of annual submissions
            • a low acceptance rate
            • a high impact factor, in subfields where such measures exist (it is understood that, particularly in smaller subfields, even the most influential journals will not have a significant impact factor)
            • an editorial board composed of established senior scholars in the relevant specialization(s)
            • reviewers with expertise in the relevant specialization(s)
            • a rigorous and lengthy review process 
            • affiliation with a learned academic society 

            While journals that engage in blind review of submissions are generally preferred, it is understood that some top journals in some subfields publish only invited articles. In addition, journals committed to blind review may also publish special editions featuring invited submissions, or a combination of invited and blind-reviewed submissions. 

            Given that the typical length of journal articles varies significantly by philosophical subfield, it is inappropriate to simply count pages as a measure of a scholar’s output. 

          3. Book Chapters

            Publishing chapters in edited anthologies is a common form of scholarly activity in some subfields of the discipline of philosophy. In the case of scholarly book chapters, the quality of the publisher of the anthology will be evaluated based on the criteria in (a) above.  The language regarding the relative value of invited versus blind-reviewed journal articles in (b) above applies to book chapters as well. That a previously published essay is selected for inclusion as a book chapter or anthology is often an indication of its overall quality and lasting significance. 

          4. Scholarly Translations

            Scholarly translations are crucial to making important research available to a wider audience, both within and outside the academic world. They require a deep understanding of the work in its disciplinary and cultural context. Book translations published by quality academic presses typically undergo the same blind review process as the original manuscript. Because of their importance, translations of previously published philosophical essays and book chapters should be accorded roughly equal weight as a publication in a journal of that quality would be given. A book translation, while generally not equivalent to a single-authored book, should still be regarded as a major accomplishment. 

          5. Scholarly Presentations

            For many, but not all, faculty members in philosophy, a record of invited and/or refereed presentations at academic conferences, symposia, and workshops, and/or lectures at academic institutions, is an important component of their scholarly record.  However, such presentations should be supplemented by an ongoing program of scholarly publication.

            The characteristics of a quality academic conference, workshop, or symposium include, but are not limited to, the following:

            • a high number of submissions
            • a low acceptance rate
            • a blind review process 
            • prominent invited and/or keynote speakers, if applicable
            • affiliation with an established academic society

            The geographical location of a conference should not be taken into account when determining the quality of the conference, or whether the conference is local, regional, national, or international in scope.  For example, a conference held in NE Ohio in which scholars from several countries are participating is an international conference, not a local one.

            In the case of presentations which are not subject to blind review, it is important to distinguish between invited presentations which are based on a scholar’s record and scholarly reputation, and which are thus indicators of the scholar’s impact, and venues at which all submissions are simply accepted without review.

          6. Other Scholarly Accomplishments

            In addition to the categories discussed above, scholarship in the discipline of philosophy can take on the following forms.  While valuable as evidence of scholarly achievement, none of the below are necessary for a successful reappointment, tenure, or promotion application.

            • election to office in scholarly organizations and societies
            • editorial board membership on journals
            • editorship of journals or of special editions of journals
            • requests to serve as an external reviewer for tenure or promotion files
            • request to serve as an external reader for theses and dissertations, either at KSU or elsewhere
            • invitations to serve as an organizer, steering committee member, or reviewer for academic conferences  
            • acknowledgment as a specialist by federal, state, or private institutions outside academe in fields related to the faculty member’s research, by, for example, invitations to serve as a leader or member of a panel, to conduct site visits, or to serve as a consultant for the institution
            • grants (while external grants generally represent a  more significant scholarly achievement, even internal grants can be competitive; given the difficult and time-consuming nature of grant applications, some credit should be given even for grant applications which are not funded) 
            • fellowships (the language above concerning grants is also applicable to fellowships
            • academic awards (other than grants and fellowships)
          7. Evidence of Impact

            Once a scholarly work has been published, indicators of its influence may include, but are not limited to, the following. It is understood that, in many cases, it can take time for a scholar’s work to achieve such influence.

            • citations and discussions by other scholars
            • indexing in research databases, including those focusing on disciplines other than philosophy, if applicable
            • reviews in scholarly journals (while reviews in more prominent venues carry more weight, all reviews should be considered signs of a work’s influence)
            • translations into foreign languages
            • reprints and subsequent editions
            • awards 
            • invitations the author receives to give lectures and presentations at universities and scholarly gatherings
            • invitations the author receives to contribute to, or to serve on the editorial board of, scholarly journals
            • requests the author receives to review submissions for academic presses, journals, and conferences
        2. Teaching

          Teaching includes instruction at all levels of the undergraduate and graduate curriculum in philosophy, and all other viable forms of instruction. The following are some examples of evidence of successful teaching, not an exhaustive list. All candidates for reappointment, tenure, and promotion are required to provide the items marked with an asterisk in their file for each class taught.

          1. Instruction and Delivery

            1. Representative syllabi from each course (e.g. PHIL 11001), indicating scope of class, class requirements, exam and paper schedule, grading procedure, reading assignments. *
            2. Copies of examinations given in each course, requirements for papers, and any course handouts. * 
            3. Student evaluations, including all numeric data and student comments contained in the SSI Report to the department, from each class the candidate has taught. *
            4. Peer review and evaluation of teaching, including visitation of the instructor’s classes during the time he or she is a candidate for tenure.
            5. Evidence of outstanding achievement, such as teaching awards. The value or weight of any one award will depend upon the review process, and the level of competition (college, university, state, region, or national award).
            6. Honors course contact-hours and additional requirements added to non-honors courses. 
            7. Experiential Learning Requirement (ELR) contact-hours and additional requirements added to non-ELR courses.  

            Teaching Excellence Committee Reports will be included in each candidate’s file by the Chair.

          2. Curriculum Design and Review

            1. Demonstrated significant involvement in curricular development and/or review beyond participation in routine Curriculum Committee or other Departmental service activities.
          3. Advising, Mentoring and Supervision

            1. Participation on Honors and M.A. thesis committees within the Department, as well as Honors, MA, and Doctoral theses outside the Department. 
            2. Other significant student research and career advising.
          4. Professional Development

            1. Publication of instructional software, computer-based instructional materials, or instructor's manuals for software or textbooks.
            2. Organizing and conducting workshops and/or seminars on pedagogy.
            3. Participation in faculty development programs for teaching.
            4. Manuscript reviewing/refereeing for pedagogy journals and/or publishers.
            5. Grant proposal reviewing/refereeing for external granting agencies and foundations focusing on pedagogy.
            6. Seeking professionally reviewed pedagogy research and/or instructional grants.  Extra weight is placed on successfully receipt of grants.
        3. Service

           

          Service activities make significant contributions to the advancement of the educational, scholarly, governance, and collegial goals and missions of the University, College, Campus, Department, or community.  These activities may or may not be tied to a faculty member’s specialization within philosophy.  The following are examples of service and are not an exhaustive list.

          1. Outstanding service to the Department, College, Campus, or University. The activities may include: 
            1. Committee membership or committee Chair positions beyond routine participation in Departmental committees of the whole such as FAC, Grad FAC, Curriculum Committee, search committees, and graduate conference attendance. These additional activities may include MA advising and thesis reading, participation in ad hoc committee assignments or student advising beyond routine assignments.
            2. Participation in undergraduate or graduate student recruitment activities. 
            3. Service to the Department, such as Graduate and Undergraduate Coordinator, or CAC Representative.
            4. Guest lecturing, thesis and dissertation reading outside the Department, or serving as an ad hoc RTP reviewer for other departments.
            5. Serving on university-wide committees or organizations, including (but not limited to) advising for student organizations beyond the Department, Faculty Senate, Regional Campus Faculty Council, IRB, IACUC, Provost’s Advisory Boards, AAUP leadership, and ad hoc University-wide hiring or review committees.
          2. Outstanding service to the community beyond the university which is not representative of the Department, College, Campus, and University including but not limited to:
            1. Service, including membership or leadership in service learning organizations.
            2. Service, including membership or leadership in community organizations such as museums, hospitals, and other organizations.
            3. Service, including organization of regional, national, or international conferences.  
            4. Service, including membership or leadership in national and international professional bodies such as learned societies and federal review panels.
            5. Service, including program review boards, panels, professional mentoring and assessment or student advising activities that take place at other institutions.  

          It is incumbent upon each faculty member to explain the scope, effort, contributory value, and (when necessary) professional contribution of each service activity. 

      5. External Letters of Evaluation

        Beyond the perusal of the candidate’s published works and other documented evidence of scholarship activities by the members of the Ad Hoc Promotion and Tenure Committee, further evaluation of the candidate’s publications and scholarly activities will be solicited by the Chairperson in the form of external (outside the university) letters of evaluation. The Chair will solicit letters according to University policies and procedures.

      6. Regional Campus Application

        These criteria for promotion, tenure, and reappointment obtain for both Kent Campus Philosophy faculty and Regional Campus Philosophy faculty; the Department’s Ad Hoc Promotion and Tenure Committee/Ad Hoc Advisory Committee makes recommendations for promotion, tenure, or reappointment of all members of the Department – the Regional Campuses faculty as well as the Kent Campus faculty. The Department of Philosophy recognizes that in evaluating Regional Campus faculty for tenure and promotion greater consideration may be given to teaching and service as indicated in the appropriate campus handbook. 

      7. Self-Evaluation Narrative

        Each candidate for reappointment, tenure or promotion should submit a self-evaluation narrative, along with the other materials required by university policy and the departmental handbook to constitute a reappointment, tenure or promotion file. A basic purpose of the self-evaluation narrative is to allow a candidate the opportunity to present a composite assessment of the candidate’s accomplishments in scholarship, teaching and service under consideration. This narrative should describe and delineate the candidate’s achievements and contributions, strengths and weaknesses, in the respective areas of scholarship, teaching and service. In this narrative, the candidate is expected to make the case concerning the quality of his/her accomplishments in scholarship, teaching, and service using the criteria in section D above. Candidates are required to present a thorough and reflective narrative without unduly inflating accomplishments or seeming to duplicate achievement within or across categories.

    3. Renewal of Appointment and Third-Year Full Performance Reviews of Full-Time Non-Tenure Track (NTT) Faculty

      1. Renewal of Appointment

        Appointments for full-time non-tenure track (NTT) faculty are governed by the applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement and are made annually. Renewal of appointment is contingent upon programmatic need, satisfactory performance of previously assigned responsibilities, and budgeted resources to support the position.

      2. Annual Reappointment Review and Third-Year Review of Full-Time Non-Tenure Track Appointees

        The following remarks pertaining to the annual reappointment review and the third-year review of full-time non-tenure track appointees are made within the context of the procedures specified in “The Procedures and Policies Governing Review of Faculty: Promotion, Tenure, Reappointment and Non-reappointment” distributed by the Provost’s Office and in the Collective Bargaining Agreement for full-time non-tenure track faculty, Article IX, “Appointments: Terms, Conditions and Renewals.”

        1.   Annual reappointment review and third-year review of full-time, non-tenure-track faculty shall observe the criteria and normal expectations for full-time, tenure track probationary faculty as delineated above in Subsection A.

        2.   Each annual reappointment review and third-year review shall be based on the criteria and expectations for the appointee’s respective role within the unit, which are spelled out in the letter of offer for the appointment.

        3.   The Department recognizes that a full-time, non-tenure-track appointment is primarily a teaching appointment. Annual reappointment review and third-year reappointment reviews will de-emphasize the research/scholarly activity/professional development and service components that are usual expectations for reappointment of full-time tenure-track probationary faculty. However, the departmental expectation is that a full-time, non-tenure-track appointee will supply some evidence of remaining current in the discipline during the time of appointment.

         The following counts as such evidence:

        a.   Participation in departmental Colloquia, conferences, and other academic programs.

        b.   Colloquia and Conference presentations within the Department or outside departmental activities (refereed or not).

        c.    Refereed or invited publications.

         

        4.   Mindful of the evaluations from the Ad Hoc Advisory Committee, the Chairperson forms an evaluation and makes a recommendation which is then forwarded to the Dean, along with the evaluations from the Ad Hoc Advisory Committee.

    4. Philosophy Department Criteria for Graduate Faculty Membership

      Graduate Faculty Status in the Department of Philosophy is a privilege which may be earned by faculty members. An application for Graduate Faculty status will be submitted to the Chair who will present the application to the Graduate Faculty Committee. The Graduate Faculty Committee will consider the application, and make a recommendation to the Chair as to the evaluation of the application for Graduate Faculty Status and rank.

      1. Criteria for Full Membership

        To qualify as a Full member of the Graduate Faculty a faculty member must have fulfilled the following:

        1.   Achieved tenure and promotion in rank to at least an Associate Professor as a Philosophy faculty member at any campus in the Kent State University system.

        2.   Published either:

        a. six (6) articles (refereed or invited), or

        b. one (1) book

        3.   Given four (4) presentations before professional bodies.

        4.   Exhibited good graduate teaching, and performed the duties and responsibilities of a Graduate Faculty member serving on graduate committees (Graduate Studies, Program Advisory, Thesis Advisory and Thesis Defense Committees) and when applicable, as a Thesis advisor.

        A Full Member may:

        1.   At level F-1: Teach graduate course work and serve on master's committees.

        2.   At level F-2: Direct master's theses, as well as Level 1.

        3.   At level F-3: Serve on doctoral committees, and (with departmental approval) co-direct doctoral dissertations, as well as Levels 1 and 2.

        4.   At level F-4: Direct doctoral dissertations, as well as Levels 1, 2, and 3. (Since the Department of Philosophy does not have a doctoral program, full membership at level 4 does not apply unless one has directed or co-directed a doctoral dissertation in another Department.)

        The Graduate Faculty Committee will assess whether the faculty member has fulfilled the expectations stipulated in the list of qualification for Full Membership as a Graduate Faculty and make a recommendation to the Department Chair regarding the application, who will forward the Graduate Faculty recommendation as well as the Chair’s evaluation to the Dean.

      2. Criteria for Associate Membership

        To qualify as an Associate member of the Graduate Faculty, a faculty member must hold a tenure-track position in the Department of Philosophy. The Graduate Faculty Committee will assess the rank of an Associate Member according to the following categories:

        1.  A-1: This status will be recommended for those faculty members with the Ph.D. degree (or its equivalent) who have demonstrated the potential for scholarly research and publication and who have demonstrated the potential for effective graduate teaching.

        2.  A-2: For this status, a faculty member must have, in addition to the above:

        a.   An ongoing research program in areas of expertise, AND

        b.   Published one (1) article in a journal, edited book, or proceedings (refereed or invited), AND

        c.   Made 3 scholarly presentations, refereed or invited.

        3.  A-3: For this status, a faculty member must have, in addition to the above:

                  a.   Published either:

            i.    six (6) articles (refereed or invited), or

                  ii.   one (1) book.

        b.   At least one program presentation before a professional body.

        c.   Exhibited potential for good graduate teaching and thesis advising as both director and a committee member.

        An Associate Member may:

        1.   At level A-1: Teach graduate course work and serve on master's committees.

        2.   At level A-2: Direct master's theses only under exceptional circumstances (as determined by the Graduate Faculty Committee and the Chair), as well as Level 1.

        3.   At level A-3: Serve on doctoral committees, and (with departmental approval) co-direct doctoral dissertations, as well as Levels 1 and 2.

      3. Temporary Associate Graduate Faculty Membership

        The rank of Temporary Associate Member is granted by the Department for a qualified scholar whose participation in the graduate program is desired by the graduate faculty committee for a limited period and for a limited objective. Normally, this status should be assigned for someone to instruct a graduate course for one semester or academic year or for service on a master’s thesis committee, and may include in exceptional cases service as a thesis advisor. Temporary status is granted only on an Academic Year basis. Therefore the rank of “Temporary Graduate Faculty Member” terminates at the end of each Academic Year, but can be reinstated by action of the Graduate Faculty Committee and the Department Chair.

      4. Criteria for Reappointment to the Graduate Faculty Subsequent to an Initial Appointment as Either Associate or Full Member

        Retention of an appointment after an initial five-year appointment requires the that the Graduate Faculty member do the following:

        1.  Exhibit good teaching at the graduate level within the evaluation period, AND

        2.  Serve on thesis committees and, when applicable, as thesis advisor within the evaluation period, AND

        3.  Demonstrate evidence of continued research and persistent scholarly activity within the evaluation period by any one of the following:

        a.  Presentation (refereed or invited) at conferences and meetings of scholarly bodies.

        b.  Publication in a journal, proceedings or edited book (invited or refereed).

        c.  Applying for extra-mural funding.

         

      5. Consequences for Failure to Meet Reappointment Criteria

        1.  If a Full Member of the graduate faculty fails within the evaluation period to meet these criteria, the faculty member will be reduced to a Full Member at the level of F-2.

        2.  If an Associate Member of the graduate faculty at level A-3, A-2, or A-1 fails within the evaluation period to meet these criteria, the faculty will be reduced to a Temporary Associate Member.

         However, as stipulated in Policy Registry 3342-6-15.1 Administrative policy regarding graduate faculty, (see University Policy Registry 3342-6-15.1, Section B.2.a, “In rare instances, and with great caution, the publication requirement may be waived for senior faculty members who have a distinguished record of thesis direction.”

  4. Criteria, Performance Expectations, and Department Procedures Relating to Merit Awards

    Merit Awards are established pursuant to the applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement. Procedures and timelines for determining Merit Awards for any given year shall be conducted in accordance with guidelines issued by the Office of the Provost. 

    When Merit Awards are to be made, a pool for this purpose shall be established for the Department of Philosophy.  Twenty-five percent [25%] of the pool will be used to recognize documented meritorious performance in teaching (including graduate and undergraduate advising), twenty-five percent [25%] of the pool will be used to recognize documented meritorious performance service (including service to the department, college, university, and profession), and fifty percent [50%] will be used to recognize documented meritorious performance in Research. 

    The Chair will submit to the FAC a proposed update of the “Department Procedure with Schedule” and “General Guidelines” for the consideration of the FAC. After FAC has edited and approved the “Department Procedure with Schedule” and “General Guidelines” for candidates to be considered for Merit Awards, the chair will submit to all eligible Faculty copies of the Procedure and Guidelines. Faculty may apply for a Merit award in any or all categories: (i) Teaching (ii)Service, and (iii) Research. 

    Faculty must use the Department of Philosophy Merit Award Summary Form (see appendix) and provide all requisite supporting documentation in order to be eligible for consideration.  If something is not appropriately documented, it may not be counted.  Merit is performance above and beyond job expectations for faculty.  The responsibility lies with each faculty member who applies to demonstrate truly meritorious performance in each category.   Demonstration may take the form of additional materials or narrative that articulates why a performance is meritorious per the criteria contained in the Evidence sub-section of the Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion section of this handbook.

    1. Preliminary Evaluation of the Completeness of the Merit File

      1. The FAC will assess whether the member submitting a Merit file fulfills the eligibility requirements as stipulated in the General Guidelines.
      2. The FAC will assess whether the Merit file submitted is complete according to the Department Merit Sheet Guidelines. All and only Merit files which are judged to be complete and in compliance with the Guidelines will be taken under consideration in the Merit Awards.

       

    2. Preliminary Assessments of the Merit File

      1. In each merit category, the quality and quantity of items included on the Merit Award Summary Form will be taken into account.
      2. Assessment of the quality of a faculty member’s research, teaching, and service performance will be based on the criteria contained in the Evidence sub-section of the Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion section of this handbook.
      3. To ensure that publications are only considered for one merit period, only works that have appeared in print or via online publication will be considered for merit.  
      4. Post-publication recognition (citations, reviews, awards, etc.) that occurred during the merit period will be considered even for works published prior to the merit period.
    3. Review and Rank Order Evaluation of Approved Candidates' Merit Files

      1.  Teaching Category

      1. Review of merit files for Merit Awards
      2. Distribution of ballots for individual rank order of candidates
      3. Counting of ballots and establishment of FAC rank order

      2.  Service Category

      1. Review of merit files for Merit Awards
      2. Distribution of ballots for individual rank order of candidates
      3. Counting of ballots and establishment of FAC rank order

      3.  Research Category

      1. Review of merit files for Merit Awards
      2. Distribution of ballots for individual rank order of candidates
      3. Counting of ballots and establishment of FAC rank order

       

    4. FAC Proposed Allocation of Department Merit Awards to Rank Ordered Candidates

      Ballots with the FAC determination of rank order in each of the categories will be distributed to members of the FAC. Members will divide the total Department “salary pool” for each category among the candidates for an excellence award in that category. Distribution of salary pool funds must be done in whole dollar amounts. The total amount of funds distributed in each category must maintain the FAC rank order of candidates. The total distribution of funds in any category must not exceed the total “salary pool” for that category. Ballots that violate these rules will be discarded from consideration. Completed ballots for proposed allocation of department merit awards of the salary pool to rank ordered candidates must be submitted to the Department Chair in accordance with the applicable Collective Bargaining Agreement and with the procedures and timelines for determining Merit Awards for any given year.

    5. Chair's Preliminary Determination of Merit Awards

      The Chair will report to the FAC the tally of the FAC distribution of the salary pool for each category and will then distribute the Chair’s preliminary determination of merit awards for each category.