This document is intended to supplement the University-wide description and policies for Lecturer appointments as found in the University Policies of Indiana University. This policy should be read in conjunction with Indiana University’s ACA-18 Regulation of Clinical and Lecturer Appointments. [Amended 3/19/24]
I. Lecturers, Senior Lecturers, and Teaching Professors – Responsibilities and Privileges
According to Indiana University’s Regulation of Clinical and Lecturer Appointments Policy, “Lecturers/Teaching Professors are academic appointees whose primary responsibility is teaching. Lecturers/Teaching Professors’ assigned responsibilities may include research and service only in support of teaching” (University Policies of Indiana University).
At Indiana University East, Lecturers, Senior Lecturers, and Teaching Professors are responsible primarily for teaching. They are responsible for maintaining currency in their discipline and pedagogy, and providing service that supports the academic mission of IU East and their assigned School or program.
In order to be approved for a long-term contract and promoted to Senior Lecturer, Lecturers must be found excellent in teaching and at least satisfactory in service. In order to be approved for and promoted to Teaching Professor, Senior Lecturers must also be found excellent in teaching and at least satisfactory in service. Teaching Professors may demonstrate excellence through some combination of curricular leadership, service in support of learning and teaching, and research in support of learning and teaching.
Policies and procedures for Lecturer appointments at IU East must be in compliance with Indiana University policies and procedures. In addition to consulting the Policy on Lecturer Appointments at IU East, candidates and reviewers for Lecturer long-term contract should also consult the policies for Lecturers in the University Policies of Indiana University. Of particular interest are the policy for Regulation of Clinical and Lecturer Appointments, and the policy for Reappointment and Non-Reappointment During Probationary Period (University Policies of Indiana University).
Lecturers
Lecturers may have organizational and oversight responsibility for the courses which they teach. In exceptional situations, Lecturers may be assigned responsibilities similar to those of Senior Lecturers. In conjunction with the Dean of their School*, they will identify service responsibilities for that School and the campus. Lecturers will receive standard Lecturers’ professional development funds and are eligible to apply for additional funding.
Senior Lecturers
Upon successful probationary review and initial appointment to a long-term contract, Lecturers will be promoted to Senior Lecturer and receive the currently standard raise in salary. Each long-term contract will be for a period of five years. Senior Lecturers may participate in course and curriculum development, have oversight responsibilities for courses, and, where appropriate, may also supervise full- and part-time non-tenure track faculty as assigned by their School. In addition to benefits listed for Lecturers, Senior Lecturers may apply for course release through the normal campus procedures. Senior Lecturers are eligible to apply for up to one semester of paid professional leave during each period of seven years’ full-time service, including time on professional leave, following the completion of the first six years of full-time service.
Teaching Professors
Senior Lecturers have the option to pursue promotion to Teaching Professor at will. Senior Lecturers promoted to Teaching Professor will receive the currently standard raise in salary. Each Teaching Professor contract will be for the period of ten years. Where appropriate, Teaching Professors will participate in course and curriculum development, have oversight responsibilities for courses, and may also supervise full- and part-time non-tenure track faculty assigned by their School. In addition to the benefits listed for Lecturers and Senior Lecturers, Teaching Professors may apply for course release through the normal campus procedures. Teaching Professors are eligible to apply for up to one year of professional leave during each period of seven years’ full-time service, including time on professional leave, following the completion of six years of full-time service since the last professional leave.
*In this policy, “Dean” refers to the Lecturer or Senior Lecturer’s School Dean or the equivalent in the academic unit. “School” refers to the Lecturer or Senior Lecturer’s academic unit.
II. Qualifications
The specific qualifications of faculty hired for Lecturer-track positions will depend on the needs and standards of the School. Minimal qualifications may be:
· An advanced degree in a relevant field.
· Sufficient documented teaching experience within the discipline.
· A commitment to continued professional development in their discipline and in pedagogy.
Note: Lecturer positions do not lead to tenure-track positions. Appointees who have extensive responsibilities for research or creative endeavors outside of teaching should be encouraged to apply for tenure-track positions. Also, creation of a new Lecturer position is not intended to be a means of retaining a tenure-probationary faculty appointee who has not demonstrated the performance levels required for tenure.
III. Contracts and Conditions of Employment
Lecturer contracts are renewable on a yearly basis during a seven-year probationary period. All conditions governing each Lecturer’s initial appointment, yearly contract renewal, and salary for faculty in Lecturer rank must be prepared in advance in writing by the School. All conditions of employment will be made through the normal procedures of each School, in a way that is consistent with all relevant University policies. Lecturer appointments during the probationary period shall be subject to the same policies and procedures with respect to appointment, reappointment, non-reappointment, and dismissal as apply to tenure-probationary faculty during the probationary period. Lecturers will submit the customary faculty annual report and provide documentation as evidence of the quality of their performance. Evidence of excellence in teaching, maintenance of currency in their discipline and with pedagogy, and records of service that supports the academic mission of IU East and their assigned School should be included in annual reports. In the event of non-reappointment, faculty in their first year in Lecturer rank must be given two months’ notice. During the second through sixth year, twelve months’ notice must be provided.
Lecturers shall be promoted to Senior Lecturers upon their being appointed to long-term contracts following a probationary period. Senior Lecturers can stand for promotion to Teaching Professor as they wish.
IV. Rights and Responsibilities of the Candidate
Deans or those delegated by deans will thoroughly discuss rights and responsibilities with each faculty member to reach an understanding that will maximize the benefit of assignments to both the University and the faculty member.
The faculty member shall also be advised in writing, before or at the time of the initial appointment, of the criteria and procedures employed in recommendations and decisions about reappointment and the award of long-term contract specified in the University Policies of Indiana University. Special procedures customarily employed in the department, School, program, or library unit of the University in which the faculty member or librarian is appointed shall be given to the faculty member in writing, before or at the time of initial appointment. (See “Policies Governing Reappointment and Non-Reappointment during Probationary Period” in University Policies of Indiana University.)
Though the candidate prepares the dossier, the School Dean or supervisor should provide the candidate with supporting materials, guidance, and assistance in dossier development and review. Indiana University’s Regulation of Clinical and Lecturer Appointments policies are in the University Policies of Indiana University.
~~ ~~
~~ ~~
The candidate will be informed in writing about recommendations made at various levels of the review. In cases for negative recommendations at any level for Lecturer long-term contract, the letter shall include a copy of the “Policies Governing Appointment and Reappointment during the Probationary Period” and the criteria for long-term contract from the University Policies of Indiana University to insure that the candidate fully understands his or her rights.
V. Lecturer Long-Term Contract Processes
A. Role of the School Dean during Probationary Period and Dossier Preparation
The School Dean works with a long-term contract candidate continuously throughout the candidate’s time at IU East. The Dean may also choose to appoint a faculty member to work in this capacity if he/she is of commensurate or higher rank for which the candidate is seeking the long-term contract and promotion to Senior Lecturer.
1. The Dean will inform the candidate of School, campus and University requirements for the long-term contract and promotion to Senior Lecturer soon after hiring. The Dean will clarify written documents and explain how the long-term contract process works and will provide the candidate with a copy of (a) Indiana University policies pertaining to Lecturer long-term contracts, (b) Indiana University East policies pertaining to the Lecturer long-term contract, (c) the School policies pertaining to the Lecturer long-term contract, and the School’s lists of examples for excellent work in teaching, and satisfactory work in service for long-term contracts.
2. Annually the Dean of the school will communicate with the candidate about progress toward the long-term contract and promotion to Senior Lecturer. The supervisor’s written annual review will indicate progress toward the long-term contract.
B. Review for Appointment to a Long-Term Contract and Promotion from Lecturer to Senior Lecturer
Lecturers must apply for appointment to a long-term contract by the first month of their sixth year of full-time service within their School. However, they may apply for such appointment at any time prior to that. The Chief Academic Officer (CAO) will notify candidates eligible for appointment to a long-term contract during September of the fifth year of the probationary period. The CAO, in consultation with the School Deans, sets a schedule for the review process. The candidate for appointment to a long-term contract will prepare review materials consisting of all annual reviews, supervisor’s reports from the probationary period, and a narrative explaining how evidence in those reports supports the academic mission of IU East and his/her School. A narrative of 10-25 double-spaced pages is suggested as sufficient to make a case in teaching. A narrative of 5-10 double-spaced pages is suggested as sufficient to make a case in service. The candidate must include additional documents that support the case for a long-term contract. Applicants must demonstrate excellence in teaching and at least satisfactory in service. Criteria for excellence in teaching will be the same as those for tenure-track faculty, and will include evidence of maintenance of currency in the discipline and in pedagogy (for criteria, consult Section B5, “Evaluation of Teaching Activities,” in IU East’s “Promotion and Tenure Policy and Procedures”). The criteria for excellence in teaching are also quoted below.
C. Promotion from Senior Lecturer to Teaching Professor
Senior Lecturers may apply for appointment as a Teaching Professor at will. The CAO, in consultation with the School Deans, sets a schedule for the review process. The candidate for promotion to Teaching Professor will prepare review materials consisting of all annual reviews, supervisor’s reports from time at current rank, and a narrative explaining how evidence in those reports supports the academic mission of IU East and his/her School. A narrative of 10-25 double-spaced pages is suggested as sufficient to make a case in teaching. A narrative of 5-10 double-spaced pages is suggested as sufficient to make a case in service. The candidate must include additional documents that support the case for promotion. Applicants must demonstrate excellence in teaching and at least satisfactory in service.
Criteria for excellence in teaching will include exceptional work in one of the following areas or distinguished work in some combination across each: curricular leadership, service in support of learning and teaching, and research in support of learning and teaching.
Curricular leadership requires the candidate to stay current in pedagogy and their discipline and may include participation in curriculum development, program development, creation and revision of quality teaching materials, authoring of textbooks, programmatic assessment of learning, applied research on teaching within their discipline, and disseminating pedagogical innovations and best teaching practices.
Service in support of learning and teaching extends the Senior Lecturer’s work beyond the classroom, requiring the faculty member to demonstrate pedagogical leadership and mentorship. This may include peer review and mentoring of other faculty, student recommendations and mentorship, teaching-related committee work, student-facing campus service, guest lectures, participation and leadership in faculty learning committees, and leadership in teaching-related societies or organizations.
Research in support of learning and teaching can be demonstrated through receipt of grants for innovation and improvement, published articles, chapters or books on teaching and learning, presentation of scholarship of teaching and learning work, and work with teaching-related scholarly journals.
Candidates for promotion to Teaching Professor may have forms of peer-acknowledgement, such as awards (local, regional, national), that attest to the distinguished quality of their teaching. [Amended 1/24/23]
Dossier reviewers are advised to be aware of biases connected with faculty’s gender, culture, etc. that influence student evaluations of teaching. [Amended 3/19/24]
D. Role of School Promotion and Tenure Committee*ª
The Schools create their own policies for the long-term contract review process that are under the purview of School authority, e.g., whether there is a School Promotion and Tenure Committee and how its members are selected. These policies must be consistent with IU’s and campus policies for long-term contracts. This process may include a School Promotion and Tenure Committee whose role it is to evaluate the candidate with a closer understanding of his/her field of study. When possible, at least one Senior Lecturer will serve on the School Promotion and Tenure Committee when the Committee is considering a Lecturer’s dossier and at least one Teaching Professor will serve on the School Promotion and Tenure Committee when the Committee is considering a Senior Lecturer’s dossier. The Senior Lecturer or Teaching Professor will not serve on the School Promotion and Tenure Committee when the Committee is considering a promotion and tenure dossier. A School may choose to have a separate committee comprised of Senior Lecturers when considering Lecturer dossiers. If there is a School Promotion and Tenure Committee, it should have at least three members. Except for cases of reconsideration, for which a candidate provides additional documentation and/or responses, no person may participate in the review process more than once.
All members of the School’s Promotion and Tenure Committee must have access to the entire dossier. Meetings of this committee shall be in executive session. Members of this committee may not participate or vote by proxy. The School Promotion and Tenure Committee will review and collectively evaluate the complete dossier on the basis of the criteria for Lecturer long-term contracts._ _Only members who fully participated in the committee deliberations are eligible to vote. The School’s Promotion and Tenure Committee completes a written evaluation and recommendation concerning the candidate’s case for the long-term contract. The evaluation must be consistent with campus and University standards for lecturer long-term contracts and must substantiate the recommendation. The evaluation will lead later levels of review to an understanding of the impact of the candidate’s contributions in the areas of teaching and service from the perspective of faculty members in the candidate’s School, and should refer to the School’s list of examples for excellence in teaching, and satisfactory in service. Candidates should note that these are only examples and do not override the criteria given here. The evaluation and recommendation will be included in the dossier and a copy will be sent to the candidate.
* In cases of system schools, the system school review may constitute the School P&T committee review.
ª In cases where there is no School P&T committee, this step is omitted.
E. Role of the Dean during the Review Process
The Dean will read and evaluate the complete dossier including the recommendations of the School Promotion and Tenure Committee, if applicable. The Dean will add his/her written recommendation to the candidate's dossier and send a copy to the candidate. The Dean and/or supervisor will then forward the candidate's dossier to the campus Lecturer Long-Term Contract Review Committee with a letter of transmittal that describes the purpose of the candidacy, e.g., candidate for Lecturer long-term contract and promotion to Senior Lecturer. In the event that a Dean has not supervised a candidate, for example the Dean or supervisor is new, the candidate may request that a senior faculty member or administrator familiar with the candidate’s work write a recommendation to be included in the dossier prior to its submission to the Office of Academic Affairs. At the correct stage of the sequence of review of the dossier, the Dean will write a recommendation. This letter will explain that he or she has not supervised the candidate, and explain how he or she has drawn conclusions from the materials presented in the dossier, including the recommendations in it.
F. Role of the Campus Lecturer Long-Term Contract Review Committee
All members of the Lecturer Long-Term Contract Review Committee must have access to the entire dossier. Meetings of the committee shall be in executive session. Members of the committee may not participate or vote by proxy. The Committee members (1) will read and collectively evaluate each completed dossier on the basis of Lecturer long-term contract criteria, including the recommendations of the School Promotion and Tenure Committee, and the School Dean. (2) The committee's recommendation for or against the long-term contract or promotion will be determined by secret ballot. Only members who fully participated in the committee deliberations are eligible to vote. The Bylaws to the Indiana University East Faculty Senate Constitution, Section VI.B.8, contain additional policies and procedures for the Lecturer Long-Term Contract Review Committee, including how the alternate member is selected each year, and when members are required to recuse themselves from cases. According to the Bylaws, “The faculty member elected each year who has the least seniority shall serve as that year’s alternate; seniority will be determined by time at IUE. The alternate member will have all committee rights and responsibilities except the vote, but will replace any voting member who is absent, becomes disqualified, or otherwise becomes unable to serve. During the second year of the alternate’s term, he/she will become a voting member” (Bylaws, Section VI.B.8.a). The Bylaws also state, “Members who feel unable to render impartial judgment on a case must disqualify themselves from that case” (Bylaws, Section VI.B.6.b). (3) The recommendation of the Lecturer Long-Term Contract Review Committee to the Chief Academic Officer, with a copy to the candidate, will include a written, comprehensive and detailed rationale for the recommendation. The letter will include numerical tabulations of the votes on ratings (“excellent,” “satisfactory” or “unsatisfactory”) in teaching and in service. Lecturers must receive an “excellent” in teaching and at least “satisfactory” in service in order to earn a long-term contract and promotion to Senior Lecturer. The letter will also include a numerical tabulation of the votes on long-term contract (yes or no votes). If there is not a unanimous vote, reasons for the differences in opinion will be included. (4) The chairperson or designated secretary will write notes that summarize major themes of the discussion and provide rationales involved in the decision-making process. These notes and the ballots will then be placed in a sealed envelope and placed in a confidential file in the IU East archives. In cases of appeal or dispute the Chief Academic Officer shall authorize access to these archives.
G. Role of the Chief Academic Officer
The Chief Academic Officer will make a written recommendation for or against the long-term contract or promotion to the Chancellor, with a copy to the candidate, after evaluating the dossier and the recommendations of the School Promotion and Tenure Committee, the School Dean, and the Campus Lecturer Long-Term Contract Review Committee.
H. Role of the Chancellor
The Chancellor makes the final determination to approve or not approve the long-term contract or promotion to Teaching Professor. The Chancellor will approve or not approve the long-term contract after evaluating the dossier and the recommendations of the School Promotion and Tenure Committee, the School Dean, the Campus Lecturer Long-Term Contract Review Committee, and the Chief Academic Officer.
I. Reporting the Decisions
When the Chancellor’s review process is completed the Chancellor will write a letter notifying the candidate of approval or non-approval of the long-term contract or promotion.
In the event of a negative decision, the candidate will be advised of his/her rights to appeal the decision and referred to the relevant sections in the current University Policies of Indiana University.
J. The Summary Sequence of Review of the Lecturer’s Dossier
The candidate’s dossier will be reviewed in the following sequence:
1. Candidate’s dossier is submitted to the Office of Academic Affairs.
2. Candidate’s dossier is reviewed by the School’s Promotion and Tenure Committee, if applicable. The School’s Promotion and Tenure Committee writes a letter of recommendation to the School Dean. The letter becomes part of the dossier; the candidate receives a separate copy of the letter.
3. Candidate’s dossier is reviewed by the School Dean. The School Dean writes a letter of recommendation to the Lecturer Long-Term Contract Review Committee. The letter becomes part of the dossier; the candidate receives a separate copy of the letter.
4. Candidate’s dossier is reviewed by the Lecturer Long-Term Contract Review Committee. The Lecturer Long-Term Contract Review Committee writes a letter of recommendation to the Chief Academic Officer. The letter becomes part of the dossier; the candidate receives a separate copy of the letter.
5. Candidate’s dossier is reviewed by the CAO. The CAO writes a letter of recommendation to the Chancellor. The letter becomes part of the dossier; the candidate receives a separate copy of the letter.
6. Candidate’s dossier is reviewed by the Chancellor of Indiana University East. The Chancellor writes a letter notifying the candidate of approval or non-approval of the long-term contract.
Analogously with promotion and tenure procedures, reviewers of long-term contract dossiers “at any level may request clarifying information from the candidate,” and should specify a deadline for receipt of the materials.
A candidate who receives a request for clarifying information must respond to the request in writing. The response may provide the clarifying information, refuse to provide the information, or aver that the information is unobtainable. Both the request and the candidate’s response become part of the dossier. The candidate may examine his/her dossier at any time during the review process and, if requested, may also add more documentation or a response to any level of review. In either case, the candidate’s response becomes part of the dossier.
If additional information is sought or received during the review of the dossier at any level, the candidate and all previous committees and reviewers must be notified and given the opportunity to respond to the additional information. The information and the responses shall then become part of the dossier.
Each long-term contract will be for a period of five years. Each Teaching Professor contract will be for a period of ten years.
VI. Lecturer Long-Term Contract Criteria
A. Framework for Judging the Quality of Teaching
The following provides a framework for faculty members to present their teaching and enable evaluators to judge the quality of that teaching. Candidates should address each of the following six criteria. The definitions and examples listed after each criterion are provided only as illustrations of what candidates may address to demonstrate a case for each. Candidates are not expected to address every definition and example. NOTE: These criteria should apply to a wide variety of teaching situations; however, their individual salience will vary depending upon the particular teaching environments involved.
1. Teacher’s Content Expertise: Effective teachers understand their academic field well; and match their instruction to institutional and program learning objectives.
2. Course Design: Effective teachers have a clear purpose that organizes course elements; align activities and assessments with learning outcomes; communicate high but realistic expectations; integrate innovative practices in teaching and learning; and match the instruction to students’ learning needs and interests.
3. Instructional Delivery: Effective teachers use good communication skills; design learning environments that encourage time on task; engage students to use knowledge actively; assess student success in achieving course learning objectives; use an appropriate array of methods; encourage students to work together to learn; and give regular, helpful evaluations of learning.
4. Instructional Relationships: Effective teachers promote student interest in the subject, learning, and success; effective teachers and students need to know and respect each other; effective teachers acknowledge and adjust to student differences; are fair and impartial in dealings with students; and are open to receiving feedback and adjusting courses appropriately.
5. Course Management: Effective teachers organize face to face and/or online instructional environments well; provide timely feedback; and are available to help students, both in and out of the classroom.
6. Professional Development: Effective teachers hold high standards and engage in ongoing professional development; and show improvement in their teaching through student feedback, peer review, and other appropriate feedback and review methods.
(Note: The criteria above are adapted from the Report of the Task Force on Assessing and Improving Teaching and Learning at Indiana State University, 1998. The full list of subcomponents, descriptions and examples adapted from the 1998 Report of the Task Force on Assessing and Improving Teaching and Learning at Indiana State University is available in Appendix One.)
B. Forms of Evidence on the Quality of Teaching:
1. Every dossier will contain a narrative, which includes a philosophy of teaching, with rationale. Candidates should also relate specifics of their teaching to the criteria for judging the quality of teaching. To do this, candidates will describe in detail up to three courses that they feel best demonstrate the evaluation criteria. The narrative should include details on hurdles, adjustments, and growth with evidence on outcomes and impact on student success. Where appropriate, candidates should note the scholarly foundations for their choice of teaching methods. It is the responsibility of candidates to make explicit the connections between their teaching documentation as evidenced in the selected courses and the evaluation criteria. It will be most helpful if at least one of the selected courses provides evidence over multiple semesters. In the narrative, candidates present an argument that their teaching has met or exceeded the criteria for judging the quality of teaching. For the long-term contract, Lecturers and Senior Lecturers must be found “excellent” in teaching. A narrative of 10-25 double-spaced pages is suggested as sufficient to make a case. Supporting documents must be referred to in the narrative but do not by themselves constitute the candidate’s argument.
2. Dossiers should analyze and reflect on multiple sources of evidence of student learning, success, and achievement of course and/or program learning outcomes. Evidence may include, but is not limited to, classroom assessments such as exams, papers, projects, pre/posttests, portfolios, and exit surveys. A faculty member’s teaching effectiveness should be measured, in part, by student products and performances of their learning. It is acknowledged, however, that factors outside teaching also play a role in student learning, so multiple sources of evidence should be used to evaluate teaching.
3. To ensure faculty provide multiple sources of student learning, every dossier will provide appendices containing the following evidences of the quality of the candidate’s teaching:
(a) Examples of class syllabi, reading lists, examinations, assignments and corresponding samples of student work, summaries of course-level assessment evidence with analysis of outcomes and impact on student success, and handout materials from courses selected in Section VI.B.1 above.
(b) List of courses taught at IU East and their enrollments, organized by semester and academic year. Include details on format (online, practicum, hybrid, lab, face-to-face). Highlight graduate versus undergraduate, study abroad, internships, and Honors courses when appropriate.
(c) At least two peer evaluations of teaching and teaching materials. Peer reviews ideally reflect recurrent visits throughout the pre-long-term contract period from several colleagues within and outside the candidate’s discipline with the intention of leading to the candidate’s reflection and attention to growth. The culminating visit should occur during the period of two years prior to dossier submission.
(d) Faculty must include, at minimum, all student feedback for “up to three courses” that are described in detail in their teaching narratives._ _The student feedback emphasizes students’ comments on their learning, and qualitative feedback on how the faculty member’s teaching and guidance have impacted their learning. Procedures used for collecting the student feedback, enrollment in each section, and number of students responding should be included.
ACA-18 Regulation of Clinical and Lecturer Appointments states, “Because numerical summaries in student course evaluations may reflect cultural biases, and low participation rates may skew results, numerical ratings should not be used as the primary source of data for evaluating teaching. Each campus and unit faculty governance organization shall have a policy for evaluating teaching that provides for qualitative student feedback and other sources of information.”
Faculty members may choose to include quantitative measures of student feedback. Quantitative feedback may be given equal consideration with qualitative feedback. However, quantitative feedback should not be the primary consideration for evaluating the quality of teaching and learning. Qualitative feedback may also reflect biases based on culture, gender, etc. However, biases in students’ qualitative comments are more readily apparent due to context than biases in quantitative feedback. Biases in comments may be explained as biases with contextual evidence, and countered with explanation._ Faculty members may choose to counter such biases with explanation, but are not required to do so.
The nature of the “student feedback” that must be included in annual reports, and in Promotion and Tenure, Clinical, and Lecturer dossiers, is delegated to Schools, which should develop School policies consistent with the campus and IU policies. For example, the student feedback might consist of existing or revised course evaluations, students’ narrative responses to questions about their learning (as suggested by the U10-2022 UFC/ALC Task Force Report of April 2020), midterm student feedback, and/or other. When determining the nature of the “student feedback,” Schools should consider including a judiciously worded statement for students that addresses bias connected with faculty’s gender, culture, etc. For example, information about bias that influences student evaluations of teaching can be placed with instructions for completing the evaluation, or elsewhere on the form. [Amended 3/19/24]
~~ ~~
[Comment: each School will determine the nature of the “student feedback” to be included in annual reports, and in Promotion and Tenure, Clinical, and Lecturer dossiers as described above, revise their School policies accordingly, and send their revisions to the Chief Academic Officer by November 29, 2024.]
_
(e) All annual self-reflections of teaching and learning. A self-reflection of teaching and learning should be included in every annual report submitted for annual review. [Amended 3/19/24]
(f) Summative Reflective Analysis of Peer Reviews, and student feedback. The summative analysis should focus on what trends and interconnections emerge, how the faculty member responded, and how teaching improved as a result of peer reviews and student feedback. The Summative Reflective Analysis may include other feedback and assessment. [Amended 3/19/24]
(g) List of teaching awards and honors, if any; annotated if desired.
(h) An annotated list of professional development activities in teaching and learning, and student success which may include, but is not limited to, professional development, advising, mentoring, peer reviews for colleagues, student achievements, teaching-related faculty learning community participation, study abroad outcomes, service learning impact, Honors course outcomes, student research achievement, diversity course outcomes, and community engagement in and beyond the classroom. Candidates may also include teaching-related research or creative activity.
[Section VI.B.3 amended 3/19/24 to address references to mandatory reporting of numerical data in course evaluations and student feedback (rendered obsolete by UFC).]
A Lecturer’s teaching is SATISFACTORY when it can be demonstrated that the instruction is effective, taking into account the nature of the courses and their role in the mission of the university. A Lecturer’s teaching is EXCELLENT when it can be demonstrated that it is unusually effective or distinguished. The evidence to document excellent teaching must be based on a continuing record of effective instruction and it must also demonstrate how the teaching is unusually effective or distinguished. Lecturers must demonstrate that they are EXCELLENT in teaching and at least SATISFACTORY in service in order to be appointed to a long-term contract.
A Senior Lecturer’s teaching is EXCELLENT when they can demonstrate a record of accomplishment that advances the teaching mission of campus through distinguished work in curricular leadership, service in support of learning and teaching, or research in support of learning and teaching. A Senior Lecturer may be promoted based on exceptional evidence in one category alone or on excellent work across any combination of categories. Regardless of this choice, Senior Lecturers must demonstrate that they are EXCELLENT in teaching and at least SATISFACTORY in service in order to receive appointment as Teaching Professor.
C. Framework for Judging the Quality of Service
School Criteria for Judging the Quality of Service
Criteria for satisfactory service will be established by the School in which the Lecturer serves, and will be presented with the candidate’s review materials. School Deans shall give Lecturers access to their Schools’ service criteria upon their initial appointments. Any School promotion & tenure and/or long-term contract guidelines, and School guidelines for annual reviews, will be presented with the candidate’s review materials, if applicable.
A narrative of 5-10 pages is suggested as sufficient to make a case for satisfactory service. The candidate should include the School’s criteria for Lecturers’ service in the dossier. In the narrative, candidates should explain how their service has met their respective School’s criteria for satisfactory service.
VII. Contract Renewal (after Approval of Long-Term Contracts), Dismissal and Non-Reappointment of Senior Lecturers
Annual reviews of performance after appointment to a long-term contract will follow the same procedures as the annual review of tenured faculty. Contract renewal will be based on continued performance in teaching and service as documented in the annual reviews. Contract renewal or non-renewal will be recommended by the School Dean to the CAO, who will forward his/her recommendation to the Chancellor during the review process in the fourth year of the contract. For Teaching Professors, contract renewal or non-renewal will be recommended by the School Dean to the CAO in the ninth year of the contract.
Dismissal of a Senior Lecturer or Teaching Professor holding a long-term contract which has not expired may occur because of closure or permanent downsizing of the program in which the faculty member teaches; otherwise, dismissal of a Senior Lecturer or Teaching Professor shall occur only for reasons of professional incompetence, serious misconduct, or financial exigency. “Professional incompetence” on the part of a Senior Lecturer or Teaching Professor holding a long-term contract is the demonstrated continuing inability to perform adequately the ordinary duties of teaching and service as expected of Lecturers within the unit. “Serious misconduct” is behavior that constitutes such serious and willful personal or professional wrongdoing as to demonstrate the Senior Lecturer’s or Teaching Professor’s unfitness to hold his or her academic appointment. No Senior Lecturer or Teaching Professor shall be dismissed unless reasonable efforts have been made in private conferences between the Senior Lecturer/Teaching Professor and the appropriate administrative officers to resolve questions of fitness or of the specified financial exigency.
Non-reappointment of Senior Lecturers/Teaching Professors to a new contract term may occur for the foregoing reasons or may occur as well for reason of changing staffing needs of the academic unit’s program. Senior Lecturers and Teaching Professors must be given notice of non-reappointment at least twelve months before the expiration of the contract term.
Appeal of non-reappointment or dismissal decisions will follow procedures outlined in the IU East Faculty Senate Constitution Bylaws dealing with the Faculty Board of Review, the “Policies and Procedures for the Faculty Board of Review at Indiana University East,” Indiana University’s policy “Faculty Boards of Review: Minimum Standards for Uniform Hearing Procedures,” and Indiana University’s “Policies Governing Reappointment and Non-Reappointment During Probationary Period” (University Policies of Indiana University).
VIII. Responsibilities of the Schools
Each School is responsible for establishing and publishing procedures not specified above. These policies must be consistent with practices, criteria and policies covered in this document, and Campus and University policies.
Upon initial appointment, each Lecturer shall be given access to all applicable policies and criteria for granting of long-term contracts.
IX. Lecturer Dossier Outline
**A. Comments about Dossier Organization**
1. No document should appear in more than one section of the dossier. Reference to the original entry should be made in subsequent sections.
2. Candidates should avoid including in their dossiers any material that is unrelated to the long-term contract.
3. Dossiers should present only work done while the candidate has been in the present rank (Lecturer or Senior Lecturer), either at Indiana University or elsewhere.
4. Candidates should select and limit documentation to only those materials that are needed to prove points made in the narrative. Documents should be labeled to explain their purpose to readers.
The candidates are responsible for explaining the relevance of evidence submitted in their dossiers, evaluation criteria, and to guide the reader through the material by arranging and presenting it clearly. They should remember that some readers will not be familiar with the candidates’ areas of expertise or with the proper weight to be given to some specialized evaluations.
**B. Outline for Electronic Dossier Format**
With electronic dossier submission, candidates upload materials as individual files. Recommendations and statements from official levels of review will be added to the electronic dossier during the process of review.
All uploaded items need to be carefully labeled with names to assist reviewers in immediately understanding each file’s contents and to facilitate clear organization to guide readers (e.g., Teaching Narrative, Sample Syllabi, Course Evaluation Summary, Peer Reviews). The following is an outline for the electronic dossier.
1. General
a. Campus, Department and/or School Long-Term Contract Criteria
b. Candidate’s Curriculum Vitae
c. Candidate’s Statements
i. Letter of Appointment
ii. Introductory Narrative
iii. Teaching Narrative
iv. Service Narrative
v. Annual Reviews and Supervisor Reports
vi. Annotated lists of Teaching Activities, and Service Activities
d. Letters of support from faculty, administrators, students, and others
2. Teaching
a. Forms of evidence on the quality of teaching could include, but are not limited to a list of courses taught, sample course material, student awards and honors, undergraduate research mentoring, student feedback on learning, unsolicited letters from students, evidence of learning outcomes, assessment outcomes, peer reviews, annual self-reflections of teaching and learning, curricular development, professional teaching development, advising, mentoring, peer reviews for colleagues, student achievements, teaching related faculty learning community participation, study abroad outcomes, service learning impact, Honors course outcomes, student research achievement, diversity course outcomes, community engagement in and beyond the classroom, teaching publications, teaching awards and honors (see Section VI.B.2 above). [Amended 1/24/23; 3/19/24]
b. Other relevant evidence of teaching.
3. Service
a. Forms of evidence on the quality of service, with “quality” determined by School criteria.
b. Other relevant evidence of service.
NOTE: The 2015 version of Indiana University’s electronic dossier platform contains a Supplemental-Post Submission tab that is intended to be used in the event that additional information is sought by reviewers of the dossier at any level. Candidates should not otherwise use the Supplemental-Post Submission tab to upload documents.
For an explanation of instances when additional information is sought by reviewers, see Section V.I above.
*Note: Faculty librarians should consult the guidelines issued by the Dean of University Libraries.
X. Severability
If a provision of this policy is held in violation of state or federal laws and regulations, or contrary to Indiana University policy, or otherwise invalid, only the affected part shall be void. This invalidity shall not affect other provisions of this policy which can be given effect without the invalid provisions. To this end, the provisions of this policy are severable.
[Approved by the IU East Faculty Senate, May 4, 2004; Amended Nov. 2, 2004; Feb. 7, 2006; April 3, 2007; April 25, 2017; April 21, 2020; January 24, 2023; March 19, 2024]
Appendix One
The following criteria, including subcomponents, definitions and examples, are adapted from the Report of the Task Force on Assessing and Improving Teaching and Learning at Indiana State University, 1998.
Faculty should also refer to current School promotion and long-term contract policies for Lecturers, the all-IU ACA-18 Regulation of Clinical and Lecturer Appointments policy, and documents such as “Identifying Pathways for Excellence in Teaching.”
As explained in IU East’s Policy on Lecturer Appointments, candidates should address each of the following six major criteria. Subcomponents, definitions and examples are offered only to illustrate how one might demonstrate the case for each criterion. Candidates are not expected to address all subcomponents, definitions and examples.
NOTE: These criteria should apply to a wide variety of teaching situations; however, their individual salience will vary depending upon the particular teaching environments involved.
(1) Teacher’s Content Expertise
(a) Effective teachers understand their academic field well.
A teacher’s knowledge base in a subject area is fundamental to the creation and enhancement of students’ opportunities to learn well. A teacher’s expertise assures that content is current and taught in adequate depth. Competence includes not only content knowledge but also the ability to organize, integrate, adjust, and adapt this content in ways that make it accessible and thought-provoking to the learner.
(b) Effective teachers match their instruction to institutional and program learning objectives. Indiana University East has a set of learning objectives that defines outcome expectations for all students. Several academic programs have additional learning objectives tied to program review requirements. Faculty integrate their content expertise with these learning objectives to foster learning of the objectives across the disciplines.
(2) Course Design
(a) Effective teachers have a clear purpose that organizes course elements. A teacher needs to provide an organizing framework that orients students to the course’s ideas, materials, and activities that reflect innovation in teaching and learning methods.
(b) Effective teachers align activities and assessments with learning outcomes. Teachers need to demonstrate purpose in the design and delivery of course activities and assessments to ensure that students achieve designated course and/or program and campus learning outcomes.
(c) Effective teachers communicate high but realistic expectations. The goals of a course must be challenging enough to motivate students, yet not so demanding as to overwhelm them.
(d) Effective teachers match the instruction to students’ learning needs and interests. The design of a course must include deliberate connections between the subject matter and students’ needs and interests that engage them in the learning process. Good courses should be designed to help students extract main points and they should incorporate activities that connect learning to applications.
(3) Instructional Delivery
(a) Effective teachers use good communication skills. The ideas and directions presented in class are clear and understandable. Good communicators go beyond clear information delivery to create environments that encourage comfortable, two-way communication between students and teacher.
(b) Effective teachers design learning environments that encourage time on task. An effective teacher uses what is known about how people learn to design productive learning time so that teachers and students spend time on tasks that aid learning.
(c) Effective teachers engage students to use knowledge actively. Learning is enhanced when students are engaged in active learning. Effective teachers can describe specific ways in which their understanding of learning theories and processes shape the design of instructional activities to ensure that students explore the subject thoroughly.
(d) Effective teachers use an appropriate array of methods. Teachers must be prepared to alter instructional methods to suit immediate goals and to accommodate student differences and/or developmental levels. However, it is the aptness of methods that is important to learning, not simply the presence of different teaching techniques. [Amended 1/24/23]
(e) Effective teachers encourage students to work together to learn. Peers are one of the most powerful learning aids. Effective teachers structure activities that use peer relationships to assist in the learning enterprise.
(f) Effective teachers give regular, helpful evaluations of learning. To improve the quality of their work, students need continual, immediate, and helpful feedback. This evaluation system must provide specific information that both confirms knowledge gains and highlights the next steps for improvement.
(g) Effective teachers assess student success in achieving course learning objectives. Effective teachers use a variety of assessment strategies and evaluate direct evidence of student learning to confirm the achievement of course learning objectives. This may include both formative and summative assessment techniques. Assessment results are also used to guide reflection and revision of course design and delivery to promote student growth and success.
(4) Instructional Relationships
(a) Effective teachers promote interest in the subject. The effective teacher finds ways to create student interest and commitment to the learning task. Effective teachers employ strategies of engagement such as, but not limited to individual conferences, advising, mentoring, directing research, leading collaborative research, and other appropriate techniques.
(b) Effective teachers and students need to know and respect each other. At the very least, it is important that students feel welcomed to talk to the instructor. The teacher’s ability to connect with students constitutes a significant factor in learning success.
(c) Effective teachers acknowledge and adjust to student differences. Teachers must be responsive to student differences such as class, race, gender, ethnic and lifestyle backgrounds, and developmental learning stages.
(d) Effective teachers are fair and impartial in dealings with students. Students’ perception that the teacher treats all students fairly is fundamental to the integrity of a class.
(e) Effective teachers are open to receiving feedback and adjusting courses appropriately. The teacher provides, receives, and makes use of regular, timely, specific feedback about course procedures. The teacher develops a reflective approach to teaching by collecting feedback and using it to continually modify the approach to teaching.
(5) Course Management
(a) Effective teachers organize instructional environments well. The way in which the classroom is organized as an environment determines how effectively it will support learning. Course management encompasses a range of issues such as: regular meetings with classes; timely assignment of tasks and return of feedback, and so on.
(b) Effective teachers are available to help students, both in and out of the classroom. Effective teachers understand that learning does not occur only in the classroom. Rather, good teaching requires teachers to engage with student ideas thoughtfully, frequently, and extensively in and outside of the classroom.
(6) Professional Development
(a) Effective teachers hold high standards and engage in ongoing professional development. Good teaching requires that teachers have a rich understanding of pedagogical theory and practice and are able to engage in the on-going development and adaptation of their teaching approach. They use research on teaching and learning as it applies to instruction in their disciplinary field.
(b) Effective teachers show improvement in their teaching through student feedback, peer review, and other appropriate feedback and review methods. Effective teaching evaluation includes multiple measures, not a single instrument or scale of success. As teachers engage in appropriate professional development activities and apply what they are learning in their own teaching, the quality of their teaching and of their student’s learning will improve.
(Adapted from the Report of the Task Force on Assessing and Improving Teaching and Learning at Indiana State University, 1998)
[Amended 1/24/23; 3/19/24]
