91制片厂

Current Guidelines (PDF)

Previous Guidelines (PDF)

In accordance with the 91制片厂 Faculty Handbook, the Psychology Department’s criteria for reappointment, tenure, and promotion include three factors: teaching, research, and service. Our criteria reflect standards shared by other highly-selective liberal arts colleges, and we interpret these standards with an understanding that the composition of produced work will differ from candidate to candidate. Nevertheless, we expect that the record of a viable candidate will provide clear evidence of a successful pattern of accomplishments in both teaching and research, coupled with high motivation to sustain this activity throughout the candidate’s professional life. We also expect candidates to be effective and engaged departmental and college citizens. Teaching is the most heavily weighted criterion for reappointment, tenure, and promotion. Scholarship is almost equally important. Service is expected but is not weighted as heavily as teaching and scholarship. 

The Senior Project is a central part of the curriculum in Psychology at Hamilton, and it often provides an opportunity for students to conduct collaborative research with their faculty supervisor. Thus, aspects of this experience might in certain circumstances be evidence of accomplishment in teaching and/or scholarship. Similarly, the supervision of students in summer research might provide evidence of successful teaching, whereas the final product might reasonably be considered in the category of scholarship. 

Candidates for Reappointment 

Candidates for reappointment prior to tenure should demonstrate clear evidence of progress toward the standards for tenure outlined in the next section, especially regarding teaching and scholarship. We also expect candidates for reappointment to meet the criteria for service described in the next section, but we do not require service on college-wide committees. 

Candidates for Tenure 

Teaching 

The Psychology Department expects its faculty to be excellent teachers who support the department’s student learning outcomes by teaching courses at multiple levels of the curriculum, from introductory courses through the Senior Project, before being considered for tenure. 

For all faculty in the Psychology Department across their careers, effective teaching includes the following: 

1. Communicating in a clear and organized fashion; 
2. Incorporating the current state of knowledge and disciplinary practice; 
3. Challenging students intellectually; 
4. Constructively interacting with students both in and outside of the classroom; 
5. Providing constructive and timely feedback on student work; and 
6. Using appropriate and inclusive pedagogical approaches and practices 

The Department will review multiple components of the file as evidence that candidates have met these criteria: 

1. A personal statement in which the candidate reflects on their teaching methods and effectiveness, demonstrating continued growth in teaching, course modifications, and commitment to student learning; 
2. Course materials (e.g., exams, assignments, syllabi) that provide evidence of effective, inclusive, and rigorous pedagogical practices, and that show appropriate adjustments over time; 
3. Peer reviews, based on classroom visits and course material review (see policy in the Appendix); and 
4. Student teaching evaluations, both numerical and narrative, as well as select and random student letters. 

All types of evidence on the above list will be used to evaluate the extent to which the faculty member exhibits the components of effective teaching defined above, with the following exceptions: 

1. We do not expect students to be able to assess whether a faculty member is incorporating the current state of knowledge and disciplinary practice. 
2. We do not expect that classroom observations can assess faculty feedback on student work or faculty interactions with students outside of the classroom. 

In some cases, a file component might contain no evidence about a particular criterion of effective teaching; we will not interpret that absence as an indication that the faculty member does not meet that criterion. 

Scholarship 

The Psychology Department expects its faculty to be productive scholars who have demonstrated a commitment to research and the ability to initiate and maintain an active and independent program of scholarship that goes beyond dissertation or postdoctoral work. Evaluations of the candidate’s program of research will include the number of publications, the quality of individual publications, and the importance of the journals in which the candidate has published. Because the criteria for evaluating the quality of one’s professional activities reflect standards shared by our colleagues at other institutions, and in order to have an independent, objective assessment, the Department’s judgment will incorporate the evaluations of colleagues at other institutions to take into account the broader, shared standards in the academic community. 

Although the Department does not require faculty-student collaboration in research, we recognize the positive features of a research program that incorporates students. Not all faculty-student collaborations result in student co-authorship, and the Department recognizes that the supervision of student research might in some circumstances be more reasonably evaluated as a component of successful teaching. 

1. The primary indicator of a successful program of scholarship is the publication of peer-reviewed journal articles reporting original research. Meta-analyses, literature reviews, and theoretical papers are also highly valued. 
2. Methodological papers, as well as book chapters and edited books, will also be considered as evidence of scholarly activity, although the weight given to these accomplishments will not be as great as that given to peer-reviewed empirical journal articles, meta-analyses, literature reviews, and theoretical papers. In some cases (e.g., for clinical psychologists), active involvement in clinical work may be counted towards evidence of scholarly activity. 
3. Conference presentations, particularly those given at national and international conferences, will also be considered. 
4. Grant proposals, conference organization, and journal editing in the area of the candidate’s specialty will also provide evidence of active engagement in scholarship. 

Service 

The Psychology Department values service, and expects its faculty to engage regularly and effectively in moderate departmental, college, and professional service roles, including the following: 

1. Attending faculty and departmental meetings, college functions (e.g., Convocation, Class and Charter Day, and Commencement ceremonies), and other events sponsored by the Psychology Department; 
2. Serving as an academic advisor to students; 
3. Engaging in departmental service, which may involve organizing departmental events (e.g., information sessions, Senior Project presentations, invited lectures), contributing to curricular and pedagogical development, and performing a variety of departmental tasks (e.g., administering the human subjects pool, serving as advisor to Psi Chi); 
4. Engaging in college service, which may involve serving on committees, serving in administrative roles, and organizing and participating in college events; 
5. Engaging in professional service, which may involve serving as an ad hoc reviewer for one or more scholarly journals, participating as a reviewer for granting agencies, and performing community service (e.g., outreach programs) of a professional nature; and 
6. Being constructive in serving the needs of the Department, contributing positively to the work environment, and promoting the professional development of departmental and college colleagues. 

Candidates for Promotion to Professor

Those recommended for promotion to Professor are, consistent with the Faculty Handbook (2022), “expected to provide distinction to the Faculty as teachers, to have demonstrated sound, continuing growth as scholars, and to serve as leaders of the academic community.” Candidates for promotion to Professor are expected to provide clear evidence of distinction as a teaching scholar. A distinguished record of teaching involves consistently high levels of effective teaching (definition and evaluation described above), in addition to evidence that the faculty member has continued to engage in reflective and iterative growth. Evidence for such growth will be determined in a number of ways, including the following: the candidate’s self-evaluation; the revision of existing courses or development of new ones; and participation in faculty development activities. Candidates for promotion to the rank of Professor should also show continuing high achievement in the area of scholarship and be well-regarded by other scholars in the field. They should also engage in moderate to substantial levels of service to the Department and/or the College. In some cases, a candidate’s professional development, as well as the needs of the department and the college, may have led a candidate, post-tenure, to devote a great deal of time and attention to service. Although such a distinguished record of service will be taken into account, service alone is not a sufficient criterion in consideration of promotion to Professor. 

Candidates for Reappointment in Non-tenurable Positions 

Although faculty in non-tenurable positions are encouraged to engage in research and moderate levels of service to the Department (including academic advising), the Department’s evaluation of them is based solely on their teaching. The teaching of all faculty in non-tenurable positions will be evaluated with the same criteria as those used for untenured faculty in tenure-track positions.