91制片厂

Of the six current tenure-line positions in Music, only two of them might be considered “traditional” academic appointments, those who teach full-time in musicology or music theory and for whom the usual academic measures of teaching and scholarship might be applied. The other four (three ensemble directors and a composer) spend a significant percentage of their teaching load in the rehearsal room or studio rather than the standard classroom, and often their entire scholarly work is in areas of creative activity rather than prose publications. Even those whose teaching is entirely in the classroom may find that their scholarly work also takes them in directions related to musical performance rather than (or in addition to) writing about music. Thus, scholarship in music may take a wide variety of forms. 

Teaching 

Expectations for Teaching 

Effective teaching is the most important of the criteria for tenure and promotion. The following are general expectations for all teachers in the department across their career: 

• Demonstrates an ability to communicate course content effectively and to challenge students intellectually. For performance courses, this includes musicianship and ensemble skills. Evidence for this can be found through peer observation, student course evaluations, and letters solicited by the Dean of Faculty. 
• Incorporates the current state of knowledge and disciplinary or interdisciplinary practice and pedagogy in courses or ensembles. Evidence for this can be found through the personal statement, syllabi and other teaching materials, and peer observation. 
• Demonstrates continuous growth in design and pedagogical practices in courses or ensembles. Evidence for this can be found through the personal statement, the syllabus and other teaching materials, peer observation, student course evaluations, and letters solicited by the Dean of Faculty. 
• Responds constructively and reflectively to feedback from student course evaluations, class visitations by colleagues, annual reviews by the department chair, or feedback from the Dean and Committee on Appointments. Evidence for this can be found through the personal statement, peer observations, student course evaluations, and letters solicited by the Dean of Faculty. 
• Uses inclusive pedagogical approaches and practices in their teaching. This includes teaching courses with both music majors and non-majors, with disparities in music literacy, or with different cultural musical backgrounds. This also includes teaching about or programming diverse content/repertoire with regard to gender, ethnicity, race, sexuality, class, etc. Evidence for this can be found through the personal statement, syllabi, peer observation, student course evaluations, and letters solicited by the Dean of Faculty. 
• Provides reasonable assistance to students outside of class. Evidence for this can be found through the personal statement, student course evaluations, and letters solicited by the Dean of Faculty. 

Expectations

For Reappointment: 

The candidate should teach some courses/ensembles more than once before reappointment so they have the opportunity to demonstrate “their continuous growth in design and pedagogical practices in courses or ensembles” and to respond “constructively and reflectively to feedback from student course evaluations, class visitations by colleagues, annual reviews by the department chair.” The candidate should “demonstrate their ability to communicate course content effectively and to challenge students intellectually” and should incorporate “the current state of knowledge and disciplinary or interdisciplinary practice and pedagogy in courses or ensembles.” 

For Tenure: 

The candidate should continue to demonstrate “their continuous growth in design and pedagogical practices in courses or ensembles.” The candidate should continue to respond “constructively and reflectively to feedback from student course evaluations, class visitations by colleagues, annual reviews by the department chair.” The candidate should continue to demonstrate their “ability to communicate course content effectively and to challenge students intellectually” and should incorporate “the current state of knowledge and disciplinary or interdisciplinary practice and pedagogy in courses or ensembles.” The candidate should have addressed any concerns about their teaching raised previously and shown an upward trajectory of their effectiveness in the classroom. 

For Promotion: 

The candidate should continue to demonstrate “their continuous growth in design and pedagogical practices in courses or ensembles,” perhaps through the revision of current courses or development of new courses. The candidate should continue to respond “constructively and reflectively to feedback from student course evaluations, class visitations by colleagues, annual reviews by the department chair.” The candidate should continue to demonstrate their “ability to communicate course content effectively and to challenge students intellectually” and should incorporate “the current state of knowledge and disciplinary or interdisciplinary practice and pedagogy in courses or ensembles.” 

Evaluation of Teaching 

The degree to which our expectations for teaching are being met is determined in a number of 

ways. None of these stands alone, but each contributes to an overall assessment. In descending order of importance, these include: 

• The candidate’s reflections on teaching in the personal statement and in annual reports. 
• Classroom/rehearsal observations by other members of the department. 
• Additional assessment criteria for ensemble conductors: 
  • Quality of ensemble performance, recognizing always the “starting place,” i.e., the skills that the student members bring (or do not bring) to the ensemble. 
  • Choice of repertoire, including range and diversity of programming and level of difficulty matching but challenging the ensemble. 
  • Enrollments. One must take care in using this as an evaluation tool, for external factors can have significant impact here, beginning with the number, variety, and talent of musicians who matriculate at the college. Nonetheless, the effectiveness of an ensemble conductor, over time, will be measured in part by their ability to create and sustain student interest in the enterprise. 
• Evaluation of course syllabi and materials by voting members of the department and outside reviewers. 
• Student course evaluations and letters solicited by the Dean of Faculty. These can be especially helpful to gauge whether a candidate has addressed over time any issues that have previously been raised. However, there are times when the evaluations reveal biases that should be taken into account. 
• Engagement with pedagogical conversations at Hamilton and beyond (not required, but an asset). 

Peer Review/Classroom/Rehearsal Observations 

Peer review of teaching will include: 

1. A pre-observation conversation in which subjects such as session goals, course goals, pedagogical approaches, and assignments are discussed 
2. Review of available course materials to contextualize the session 
3. A classroom observation of a single class session 
4. A post-observation meeting 
5. Written documentation of the review that addresses the pre-observation conversation and post-observation meeting, review of teaching materials, and observations about various aspects of the class session such as content, clarity, and organization; student engagement; teacher-student interactions; and attention to diversity, equity, inclusion, and access. This written review will be shared with the person reviewed within two weeks of the observation. 

Peer review process: 

1. The department chair (or designated senior faculty member) will make peer review assignments at the beginning of each semester. The reviewer will take responsibility for scheduling on a mutually convenient date. The department chair (or designated senior faculty member) will ensure that the review occurs by the end of the semester. 
2. Faculty in their first semester of teaching will be reviewed for formative purposes only; no written documentation of the first semester review will be generated. 
3. Frequency of observation: 
   • Assistant professors will be observed 1-2 times per semester. 
   • Associate professors will be observed once a year. 
   • There is no requirement that Professors be observed, though they may be if requested by the faculty member or department chair. 
   • Non-tenurable faculty (other than Lecturers hired to teach private lessons) will be observed once per year. 
4. All voting members will have firsthand knowledge of teaching through the peer review process above before voting on reappointment, tenure, or promotion. 
5. The department will reference the written documentation of review (classroom observations, course materials, etc.) in reappointment, tenure, and promotion letters. 

Final Note 

The above guidelines pertain only to the full-time faculty in the department. Lecturers in Music (those who are hired to teach private music lessons) are evaluated by a different set of criteria outlined in the Terms of Agreement letter that accompanies their contract. These Lecturers are evaluated by the department, but not by external reviewers, the Committee on Appointments, or the Dean of Faculty. 

Scholarship

Expectations for Scholarship

The College expects its faculty to be productive scholars and creative artists of high quality, and it acknowledges the benefits of research and scholarship in teaching. Original research and its equivalent expression in the performing and creative arts are the principal forms of scholarship to be considered in reappointment, tenure, and promotion decisions. For faculty who are performers/ conductors, musical performances with students are teaching-related, but performances also function as scholarship, and are frequently the principal (or only) form of scholarship. Further, some faculty produce scholarship in multiple areas. Thus, there are many ways in which effective scholarship can be demonstrated in music. These include combinations of the following: 

• Group A: Original Research, Creative Work, and Public Performances 
• Group B: Peer Recognition 
• Group C: Other Forms of Scholarship and Creative Work 

Items in Group A will have the greatest weight, and items in Group C will have the least weight (this list is suggestive rather than exclusive). 

Group A – Original Research, Creative Work, and Public Performances 

• Publications (as author, co-author, or editor) Scholarly books and monographs 
  • Book chapters 
  • Articles in peer-reviewed journals 
  • Articles or entries in major reference works 
• Performances Conducting off-campus ensemble 
  • Conducting college ensemble 
  • Performance with off-campus professional ensemble 
  • Solo performance (on-campus/off-campus) 
• Original compositions Performances of original compositions on-campus 
  • Performances of original compositions off-campus (including conferences) 
  • Sound art in virtual spaces, such as websites and XR environments 
  • Commissions 
  • Publication of original compositions or arrangements 
• Recordings with national or international distribution and with a peer-review selection process 
• Broadcast presentations, including virtual events and live-streamed performances (as conductor, performance, or of original compositions) 
• Articles, essays, books, compositions, or other creative or performance projects in progress 

Group B – Peer Recognition, such as: 

• Presentation of masterclasses or clinics 
• Invited talks/lectures 
• Public presentation of papers at conferences 
• Grants and residencies 
• Peer and outside evaluation or review of refereed publications 
• Peer and outside evaluation of unrefereed publications or work in progress 
• Peer and outside evaluation of personally published or unpublished compositions and work in progress 
• Public scholarship and intellectual engagement 
• Honors and awards 

Group C – Other Forms of Scholarship and Creative Work, such as: 

• Curating performances and performance series 
• Adjudication of competitions 

Expectations 

For Reappointment: 

The tenured members of the department shall review the candidate’s plans for scholarship. If necessary, the chair, in consultation with tenured colleagues, will advise the candidate about ways to revise the scholarship plan. The candidate’s plan should provide a clear trajectory toward meeting the scholarship expectations for tenure listed below. 

For Tenure: 

The tenured members of the department shall review the candidate’s plans for scholarship. If necessary, the chair, in consultation with tenured colleagues, will advise the candidate about ways to revise the scholarship plan. The candidate’s plan should include completed work from Group A. We do not specify a number of items from Group A; rather, the professional significance of the item will determine its value for consideration for tenure. In the case of performers, conductors, and composers, some performances must take place off campus. 

For Promotion: 

In evaluating a candidate for promotion to Professor, the department places great weight on scholarship in addition to continued excellence in teaching. In order to earn the department’s endorsement for promotion to Professor, the candidate must demonstrate that they have moved well beyond the body of work submitted during the tenure review, again with some work coming from Group A. 

Should the candidate have questions regarding their scholarly plans, they should consult with their department, and their plans should be discussed in their annual reports. 

Service 

The College expects its faculty to contribute to service at the following levels: 

• Department Service 
• College Service 

The College also recognizes: 

• Service to the profession 

Examples of each category of service are listed below: 

Department Service 

• Participating in department meetings 
• Academic advising 
• Evaluation of admission materials (recordings and scores submitted by prospective students) 
• Visits with prospective students 
• Observing colleagues’ classes and rehearsals 
• Observing/evaluating lessons taught by adjunct instructors 
• Serving on tenure track or visiting search committees 
• Overseeing recitals that are not part of a senior project (supervising preparations of program copy and program notes) 
• Maintenance of department website 

College Service 

• Minor Committees – elected, appointed, or ad hoc committees that meet on average once a month or have a temporary charge 
• Major Committees – Academic Council, Committee on Appointments, Committee on Academic Planning 
• Serving as Department Chair or Associate Chair 

Service to the Profession 

• Serving on the board or committees of a national organization 
• Writing book/article reviews 
• External evaluations of reappointment, tenure, and promotion files 
• External evaluations of other Music departments 

Expectations 

For Reappointment: 

The tenured members of the department shall advise the candidate about their service. The primary service prior to reappointment is at the department level. 

For Tenure: 

The candidate shall consult with the department chair regarding their service. Following reappointment and prior to tenure, the candidate should engage in some college-wide service in addition to department service. 

For Promotion: 

The candidate standing for promotion should have significant college-wide and department service, and may also have significant service to the profession. 

---

Approved by COA on 4/10/24