D. Instructional Faculty (Approved December 2, 2016)
Instructional faculty have the principle goal of providing instruction and support to students. Their primary function is to provide instruction for introductory level courses and those that service the Spartan Studies and are multi-sectioned; however, they would not be prohibited from offering instruction in their fields of expertise at the request of individual departments. Although instructional faculty would be expected to maintain currency in their fields, they would not be required, as a rule, to have a research agenda unless required by external accreditation bodies and/or specific departmental expectations outlined in the instructional faculty’s contract.
Workload, evaluation, and expectations of instructional faculty will be differentiated from other faculty lines at the college level.
Title
Instructional faculty who hold terminal degrees will be given the titles Assistant Teaching Professor, Associate Teaching Professor, and Teaching Professor, while those who do not will be given the titles of Lecturer I, Lecturer II, and Senior Lecturer. Level I Lecturer and Teaching Professor positions have a 1-year appointment, Level II positions have a 2-year appointment, and Level III positions have a 5-year appointment.
1. Instructional faculty members are hired with the understanding that the positions they fill are for a stated term and non‐tenure‐track in nature;
2. Very rarely, and upon request, an Instructional Faculty appointment may be made to a full‐time faculty member who has been on tenure‐track (the faculty member must acknowledge that by requesting this arrangement, he/she is giving up consideration for tenure, and, to be considered, the faculty member's request requires the recommendation of the department chair and the approval of the dean of the college and the provost, in addition to that of the faculty member involved);
3. Faculty members who serve exclusively under Instructional Faculty agreements do not attain tenure at The University of Tampa.
Teaching Professor/Lecturer Evaluation Criteria
1. College of Arts and Letters
a. Teaching
i. Promotion for Teaching Professor/Lecturer positions must be evaluated primarily through teaching merit, even when other criteria, like service and scholarship are considered part of the expectation for an individual position. The committee recommends that a Teaching Professor candidate seeking promotion be evaluated on his/her teaching according to the current categories and criteria outlined in Chapter 4, Section III. A. of the Faculty Handbook. In order for a Teaching Professor candidate to be granted promotion, he/she should demonstrate, through the materials provided in his/her teaching portfolio, that he/she meets or exceeds the standards of teaching excellence that define a Meritorious Teacher as outlined in Chapter 4, Section III. A. of the Faculty Handbook."
ii. A necessary condition for promotion is that a Teaching Professor/Lecturer must demonstrate sustained excellence in the classroom.
iii. Guidelines for a promotion portfolio are listed below, but departments must not evaluate teaching excellence solely on the basis of student course surveys (although these certainly should comprise some portion of the portfolio evaluation). In addition, grade distributions should be accounted for in the evaluation of teaching, as well.
b. Service
i. Service at the departmental level should be expected as part of the promotion criteria, but university service should not be a requirement for all Teaching Professors/Lecturers. The departmental service expectations, if any, are expected to be related to a Teaching Professor or Lecturer’s area of teaching. Any additional service expectations must be made clear and explicit by the department Chair and communicated to the Teaching Professor/Lecturer and the Dean.
ii. If, in certain cases, Teaching Professor/Lecturer’s require greater service obligations – – for example, additional service for a department or additional service at the level of the college, university, or broader community – – then the amount of overall department service expected of the Teaching Professor/Lecturer should be reduced accordingly.
iii. Teaching Professor/Lecturers shall not be required to take on advising responsibilities, although there may be departmental situations where the Teaching Professor job description calls for greater service requirements than the general departmental expectation. Depending upon the stated departmental expectations for Teaching Professor/Lecturers, the Faculty Handbook criteria for meritorious service should apply as criteria for promotion consideration.
iv. If a Teaching Professor/Lecturer chooses to take on additional university service, this can be considered as meritorious.
c. Scholarship
i. Except in cases where program accreditation requires scholarship from Teaching Professor/Lecturer faculty, the hiring of a Teaching Professor/Lecturer does not include the expectation of research/scholarship. Teaching Professors/Lecturers seeking promotion should remain active in their academic fields in such a way that they can remain effective instructors in the courses they teach. This expectation must not be construed to be equivalent to the amount or kind of scholarship done by tenure-track faculty. There is no requirement that a Teaching Professor/Lecturer present original research at conferences or publish.
ii. While scholarship should not be considered as necessary for promotion, scholarship, especially in cases that directly contribute to improvement in teaching or curricular development, should be considered meritorious and contribute to successful promotion for Teaching Professor/Lecturers. The Faculty Handbook criteria for merit in scholarship for tenure track positions can be used as a guideline for promotion of Teaching Professor/ Lecturers.
2. College of Natural and Health Sciences
a. Instructional Faculty Promotion Criteria
i. Promotion criteria for Instructional Faculty includes those outlined in the Criteria for Faculty Advancement section of the UT Faculty Handbook. This includes the sections that describe merit as a teacher and merit in service/student involvement. The category of merit as a scholar will not be required for promotion purposes of Instructional Faculty, but scholarship could be used to support currency in their field of expertise.
ii. Additionally, Instructional Faculty are expected to maintain and demonstrate currency in their field of expertise. Currency in a given field is defined by departmental standards in consultation with the Dean, and will vary by discipline.
b. Annual Evaluation Weights
i. As Instructional Faculty positions are primarily teaching focused, the maximum weight allowed for teaching will be 75%, with the minimum weight being 55%. The maximum weight allowed for service/student involvement will be 45% and the minimum weight will be 25%. The maximum weight allowed for scholarship will be 20% and the minimum will be 0%.
3. Sykes College of Business
The Promotion Portfolio for Lecturers and Teaching Professors
The promotion portfolio for Lecturers and Teaching Professors has four sections:
a. Introductory Narrative
i. An overall narrative regarding the candidate’s teaching, scholarship and service encompassing their employment at UT.
ii. A current curriculum vitae.
iii. Copies of all Dean’s Annual Evaluations as well as annual self-evaluations.
b. Teaching Section
A teaching portfolio should contain:
i. A narrative regarding the candidate’s teaching philosophy and efforts (both successful and unsuccessful) during their employment at UT.
ii. Summative information provided by the Dean’s office regarding aggregate Class Climate scores for the candidate’s department.
iii. All Class Climate reports for all classes over the past 6 years organized by year and semester.
iv. The candidate’s grade distributions over the past 6 years for all classes organized by year and semester.
v. Teaching artifacts that represent the candidate’s teaching effectiveness. Such artifacts should include syllabi, assignments, assessments, grading rubrics, etc.
vi. Any recognitions and awards for teaching the candidate may have received during their employment at UT.
vii. Any evidence or artifacts the candidate has that is reflective of their efforts to teach outside of the classroom. This may include information on internships supervised; independent studies supervised; extra study sessions for students outside of scheduled class hours; field trips; community-based instruction; student mentoring or tutoring, etc.
Criteria for Evaluating a Teaching Portfolio:
The criteria that comprise meritorious teaching is well documented in the UT Faculty Handbook. These criteria will be used for instructional faculty as well. It should be recognized that teaching is the primary function of instructional faculty.
c. Scholarship Section
i. Scholarship Portfolio for Lecturers
Lecturers in COB are expected to augment their professional experience with development and engagement activities involving substantive scholarly activities in their field of teaching. The scholarship portfolio may include peer reviewed high quality publicly available journal articles, textbook chapters, conference presentations, professional development activities, membership and engagement with scholarly organizations, and any other intellectual contributions. We encourage faculty to integrate these intellectual contributions into their teaching. This evidence should be organized by year.
Criteria for Evaluating a Scholarship Portfolio for Lecturers:
Candidates for promotion are expected to be participating faculty who have achieved Scholarly Practitioner status and maintained their intellectual qualifications as defined in COB Faculty Intellectual Qualifications policy for the previous three consecutive years.
ii. Scholarship Portfolios for Teaching Professors
Teaching Professors in COB are expected to be actively involved in intellectual contribution activities in the area of primary teaching responsibilities. The scholarship portfolio may include peer reviewed high quality publicly available journal articles, textbook chapters, conference presentations, professional development activities, membership and engagement with scholarly organizations, and any other intellectual contributions. We encourage faculty to integrate these intellectual contributions into their teaching. This evidence should be organized by year.
Criteria for Evaluating a Scholarship Portfolio for Teaching Professors:
Candidates for promotion are expected to be participating faculty who have maintained their intellectual qualifications and Scholarly Academic (SA) status, as defined in COB Faculty Intellectual Qualifications policy, for the previous three consecutive years. Recognizing that professors of instruction are hired primarily as teaching professionals, promotion committee members should recognize the reduced scholarship obligation of Teaching Professors compared to tenure-track faculty members.
d. Service/Student Involvement Section (applies to both Lecturers and Teaching Professors)
Like all full-time faculty members, service and student involvement is a substantive component of the workload for instructional faculty. Service is well-described in the faculty handbook as service to one’s department, college, university, community, and discipline. Evidence of such service is typically expressed in committee assignments, service in faculty governance, service on boards and organizations, etc. Student involvement is typically described as engagement with students both academically and non-academically outside of the context of the classroom. Examples of such student involvement include student advisement, student mentoring, and serving as a faculty advisor.
The Service/Student Involvement Portfolio may include:
i. Information on student advising by year, and evidence of student mentoring.
ii. Evidence of committee membership at the department, college or university level.
iii. Evidence of service to one’s discipline.
iv. Evidence of professional service in the community.
v. Evidence of engagement with students outside of the classroom.
vi. Evidence of engagement with student groups, both academic and non-academic.
Criteria for Evaluating the Service/Student Involvement Section of the Portfolio:
The criteria that comprise meritorious service and student involvement is well documented in the UT Faculty Handbook. These criteria will be used for instructional faculty as well; however, recognizing that instructional faculty are hired primarily as teaching professionals, promotion committee members should recognize the reduced service obligations of instructional faculty compared to tenure-track faculty members.
Instructional faculty who are seeking promotion to Senior Lecturer or Teaching Professor are to submit a promotion portfolio utilizing the same timelines and structure outlined above. Candidates should provide sufficient evidence that the high quality of teaching, scholarship and service/student involvement documented in their initial promotion portfolios has not only been sustained, but increased over time and they have excelled in either scholarship or service.
4. College of Social Science, Mathematics and Education
Procedure/Criteria for Promotion in CSSME:
The Promotion Portfolio for Lecturers and Teaching Professors
The promotion portfolio for Lecturers and Teaching Professors has four sections:
a. Introductory Narrative
i. An overall narrative regarding the candidate’s teaching, scholarship and service encompassing their employment at UT.
ii. A current curriculum vitae
iii. Copies of all Dean’s Annual Evaluations as well as annual self-evaluations.
b. Teaching Section
A teaching portfolio should contain:
i. A narrative regarding the candidate’s teaching philosophy and efforts (both successful and unsuccessful) during their employment at UT.
ii. As instructional faculty are hired primarily for their teaching, faculty seeking promotion are encouraged to have periodic peer-review of their teaching, or a comparable process recognized as best practice for their discipline, for formative purposes. Candidates for promotion are required to have a minimum of three (3) peer-reviews of their teaching, for summative purposes, in the two years prior to their application for promotion. These reviews must be included in their portfolio. Peer reviewers should be selected from a list provided by CTL or the College.
iii. Summative information provided by the Dean’s office regarding aggregate Class Climate scores for the candidate’s department.
iv. All Class Climate reports for all classes over the past 6 years organized by year and semester.
v. The candidate’s grade distributions over the past 6 years for all classes organized by year and semester.
vi. Teaching artifacts that represent the candidate’s teaching effectiveness. Such artifacts should include syllabi, assignments, assessments, grading rubrics, etc.
vii. Any recognitions and awards for teaching the candidate may have received during their employment at UT.
viii. Any evidence or artifacts the candidate has that is reflective of their efforts to teach outside of the classroom. This may include information on internships supervised; independent studies supervised; extra study sessions for students outside of scheduled class hours; field trips; community-based instruction; student mentoring or tutoring, etc.
Criteria for Evaluating a Teaching Portfolio:
The criteria that comprise meritorious teaching is well documented in the UT Faculty Handbook. These criteria will be used for instructional faculty as well. It should be recognized that teaching is the primary function of instructional faculty.
c. Scholarship Section
i. Scholarship Portfolio for Lecturers
Through “instructional development,” a Lecturer enhances the educational value of instructional efforts at the University or within the faculty member's discipline. These efforts are principally oriented at improving teaching (pedagogy). The scholarship portfolio may demonstrate: conference participation, professional development activities, membership and engagement with scholarly organizations, and any other intellectual contributions. We encourage faculty to integrate these intellectual contributions into their teaching. This evidence should be organized by year.
Criteria for Evaluating a Scholarship Portfolio for Lecturers – Unlike the criteria that defines meritorious scholarship for tenured and tenure-track faculty, promotion committee review members should focus less on original research and more on application of existing research. Certainly, in some instances a Lecturer’s portfolio will include original research, publications and scholarly presentations, but that should not be the standard by which the candidate is assessed.
ii. Scholarship Portfolios for Teaching Professors
Unlike Lecturers, Teaching Professors in the College of Social Science, Mathematics, and Education possess terminal degrees for their discipline. Therefore, there is an expectation that in addition to evidence of currency in their discipline, Teaching Professors seeking promotion will engage to some extent in traditional academic scholarship.
Through “instructional development” a Teaching Professor contributes to the educational value of instructional efforts at the University or within the faculty member's discipline. These efforts are principally oriented at improving teaching (pedagogy). The scholarship portfolio may demonstrate: conference presentations, professional development activities, membership and engagement with scholarly organizations, and any other intellectual contributions. We encourage faculty to integrate these intellectual contributions into their teaching. This evidence should be organized by year.
Criteria for Evaluating a Scholarship Portfolio for Teaching Professor:
The criteria defining Scholarship, as defined above, will be used to evaluate Teaching Professors. However, recognizing that Teaching Professors are hired primarily as teaching professionals, promotion committee members should recognize the reduced scholarship obligation of Teaching Professors compared to tenure-track faculty members.
d. Service/Student Involvement Section (applies to both Lecturers and Teaching Professors)
Like all full-time faculty members, service and student involvement is a substantive component of the workload for instructional faculty. Service is well-described in the faculty handbook as service to one’s department, college, university, community, and discipline. Evidence of such service is typically expressed in committee assignments, service in faculty governance, service on boards and organizations, etc. Student involvement is typically described as engagement with students both academically and non-academically outside of the context of the classroom. Examples of such student involvement include student advisement, student mentoring, and serving as a faculty advisor.
The Service/Student Involvement Portfolio may include:
i. Information on student advising by year, and evidence of student mentoring.
ii. Evidence of committee membership at the department, college, or university level.
iii. Evidence of service to one’s discipline.
iv. Evidence of professional service in the community.
v. Evidence of engagement with students outside of the classroom.
vi. Evidence of engagement with student groups, both academic and non-academic.
Criteria for Evaluating the Service/Student Involvement Section of the Portfolio:
The criteria that comprise meritorious service and student involvement are well documented in the UT Faculty Handbook. This criteria will be used for instructional faculty as well; however, recognizing that instructional faculty are hired primarily as teaching professionals, promotion committee members should recognize the reduced service obligations of instructional faculty compared to tenure-track faculty members.
Instructional faculty who are seeking promotion to Senior Lecturer or full Teaching Professor are to submit a promotion portfolio utilizing the same timelines and structure outlined above. Candidates should provide sufficient evidence that the high quality of teaching, scholarship and service/student involvement documented in their initial promotion portfolios has not only been sustained but increased over time.
Teaching Professor/Lecturer Promotion Procedures
1. Instructional faculty at the University of Tampa include the title Teaching Professor for those holding terminal degrees in their field or related fields, and Lecturer for those without terminal degrees. Both categories of instructional faculty have the opportunity for advancement. Instructional faculty at the University of Tampa are hired primarily for teaching. As such, the college rewards instructional faculty who excel in their teaching, and consistently demonstrate their excellence through student and peer review, with promotion and advancement.
2. The duties of Teaching Professor/Lecturer positions inevitably will vary from one department to another, and no “one-size-fits-all” approach can account for the full range of expectations for these positions. Furthermore, it is recommended that department chairs, in consultation with their department faculty, college dean, and other college chairs will be responsible for determining the specific requirements of the Teaching Professor/Lecturer in their respective departments. While acknowledging that the duties of Teaching Professor/Lecturer positions will vary from program to program, departments must not use Teaching Professors/lecturers as de facto tenure-track faculty.
3. It is also important to note that the promotion of instructional faculty members is discretionary and not mandatory. Unlike faculty on the tenure-track, instructional faculty do not need to seek promotion (i.e., it is not an “up or out” system). A faculty member will not be given a terminal contract solely because he/she fails to be promoted
4. Lastly, in cases where program accreditation requirements contradict promotion criteria, the program accreditation requirements will be considered primary.
5. Promotion Procedures:
a. Faculty members must serve a minimum of four years at level one before applying for promotion to level two. Faculty members must serve a minimum of five years at level two before applying for promotion to level three.
b. Instructional faculty members who meet the eligibility for advancement as defined by the Faculty Senate will be informed of their eligibility by the Dean’s office and may choose to seek promotion in that year or any future year; however, the notification will only be made in their first year of eligibility.
c. A promotional portfolio must be assembled by the candidate and submitted to the Dean’s office no later than the first day of classes in the fall semester. The portfolio will include sections in teaching, scholarship, where applicable, and service/student engagement.
d. Once the promotional portfolio is submitted, it will be distributed to the Department Promotion Committee, which must consist of at least three members, one of whom must be elected as Chair at the first meeting of the Committee. All tenured members in the department are eligible to serve on the promotion committee, as well as any instructional faculty who hold the highest rank relevant to rank of the candidate seeking promotion. Eligible committee members are not required to serve and those who choose to not to do so may excuse themselves prior to the initiation of the review at their own discretion. If a Department Promotion Committee is composed of fewer than three members, the dean has the authority to augment the committee with eligible members from other departments within the College.
e. The Department Promotion Committee must complete their review of the candidate’s portfolio and submit their written report and recommendation to their college dean no later than the end of the fourth week of the fall semester.
f. The committee’s written report and recommendation must reflect the strengths and weaknesses of the candidate and reflect the assessment of all committee members. The report should be signed by all committee members and a tally of the votes, both affirmative and negative, will be clearly noted in the report. While abstaining from voting is not prohibited, it is strongly discouraged, as those eligible department members who do not believe that they can objectively evaluate the candidate’s portfolio will have had an opportunity to excuse themselves prior to the initiation of the review.
g. Upon receipt of the promotion committee’s report, the dean will draft an independent report outlining her/his evaluation of the candidate’s portfolio. This report must be completed by the end of the seventh week of the fall semester.
h. If the dean’s affirmative assessment concurs with the committee’s affirmative recommendation for promotion, the process will conclude with the promotion of the candidate. A promotion should be accompanied by a salary increase. If the dean’s assessment indicates denial of promotion, which concurs with the committee’s recommendation for denial, the promotion process will terminate. If the dean’s assessment does not coincide with the committee’s recommendation, both the dean’s report and the department committee’s report will be forwarded to the provost for resolution.
6. Appeals Process:
A complaint alleging inadequate consideration may arise if the evidence establishes a procedural flaw or irregularity in the handling of the application for promotion materials or that the department-level recommendation was unduly influenced by failure of the Department Promotion Committee or the dean to take a required procedural step or fulfill a procedural requirement as delineated in the Faculty Handbook. The appeals process in such an instance is similar to that of a tenure appeal and is described in the Faculty Handbook (p. 4-34).
7. Criteria for Promotion:
The specific criteria for promotion of Instructional Faculty are established by the faculty of the respective colleges. However, as stated above, although the duties of the Teaching Professor/Lecturer position will vary from program to program, departments must not use Teaching Professor/Lecturers as de facto tenure-track faculty, and the criteria for promotion adopted by any department regarding evaluation of Teaching and/or Service and/or Scholarship must be demonstrably different from the corresponding criteria used for promotion of tenure stream faculty.
8. See appendix H for policies and procedures regarding the termination and dismissal of position of Teaching Professor faculty.