Writing, Literature & Publishing

Teaching

Teaching is a central part of the tenure and promotion process.

Assistant Professors Seeking Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor

We expect evidence of excellence in teaching. Such evidence should include peer and student evaluations (both written and numerical). This may be supplemented by feedback from advisees, mentees, and former students. It should also include a portfolio which would contain a Teaching Statement, course syllabi with clear course assignments, the creation of new courses, and, when applicable, participation in pedagogically oriented seminars and workshops.

Associate Professors Seeking Promotion to Full Professor

We expect that the candidate will have demonstrated continued excellence in teaching with evidence from the years after tenure. Included in the teaching portfolio should be a Teaching Statement, an account of new courses developed, student evaluations, peer evaluations, and syllabi with clear course assignments. Another demonstration of excellence is the range of courses, their focus and expertise, as well as their breadth, versatility, innovation, and experimentation, taught throughout the candidate’s teaching career, whether at Emerson College or another institution.

Scholarly/Creative/Professional Work

In defining general expectations, we believe that demonstrated and ongoing achievement in scholarship, professional, and/or creative work is necessary to enhance excellent teaching in our fields.

Assistant Professors Seeking Tenure and Promotion to the Rank of Associate Professor

The work presented should be primarily in the discipline for which the candidate was hired:

• Creative Writing (including the areas of poetry, fiction, and nonfiction),
• Literature (including the areas of scholarship, criticism, and theory),
• Publishing (including the broader areas of book publishing, magazine publishing, or electronic publishing, as well as the more specific subsets of editing, writing, design and production, marketing and sales, the business of publishing, etc.), OR
• Composition and Writing Studies (including the areas of scholarship, criticism, theory, and pedagogy).

The tenure-seeking Assistant Professor’s body of work should show a trajectory that exhibits the potential for future work that builds on what has been accomplished. We encourage the candidate to articulate, in the Personal Statement, how the body of scholarly/creative/professional work represented in the dossier provides promise of development, enrichment, and creative intellectual engagement for future work.

Promotion to Professor

Only work produced by the candidate since tenure should be considered. Since earning tenure, the faculty member should have demonstrated continued production of significant scholarly/creative/professional work. We recognize that as a faculty member progresses in the career, he or she may seek new challenges and move in new scholarly/creative/professional directions. Thus, as is described in the sections on promotion to the rank of Professor, work in different genres and media may supplement the dossier.

Publications that can be accepted as demonstrating the faculty member’s scholarly/creative/professional work

Books, journal articles, book chapters in edited volumes, and translations. Depending on the expectations defined below for each discipline, a dissertation published after a process of peer review with an appropriate academic or trade press or trade press that publishes academic work can be accepted, as can any other book published after peer review with one of the above named types of press. Both single-authored and collaborative publications can be accepted.

All the work presented as evidence of scholarly/creative/professional accomplishment must have already been published, or be contracted with a completed manuscript, at the time of application for tenure or promotion. Any manuscript accepted for publication, but not yet in print, must be accompanied by a contract for publication, the final completed manuscript, and a letter from the editor indicating anticipated publication date.

With regard to book publication, we must consider the widely recognized crisis in book publishing, and the rise in independent publishers and electronic publishing in all our fields when evaluating a candidate’s work. The stature of electronic journals should be determined in a parallel fashion to traditional print publications. Regardless of venue, the work should have been reviewed and evaluated using a peer-review process and the body of work (whether a book or a series of articles or chapters) should show evidence of significance in the field.

The quality and significance of a candidate’s scholarly/creative/professional work

Quality depends on many factors, such as the content, publisher, prestige of editors and/or of contributors, evidence of impact on the field, and reviews. (See the Faculty handbook 8.2.1 “Assessment of Scholarship and Creative/Professional Work,” for further information.) In the case of a collaborative project (e.g., a jointly written article, a book or journal issue edited by the candidate), the candidate’s contribution must be clearly described. The more substantial the contribution, the more significant the weight that the project will be given, in judging the candidate’s accomplishment.

In all cases, the candidate is advised to address the significance of the body of work and the value and appropriateness of publication venues in the Personal Statement, and to provide evidence of the peer-review process for each publication.

In judging the substance and quality of our colleagues’ scholarly, professional, and creative work, we will take into account both our collective assessment and the outside evaluators’ reports. External reviewers assessing the significance of the candidate’s work should in general be senior tenured faculty members who do not have a personal, professional, or scholarly relationship with the candidate that would be considered a conflict of interest.

As we determine the substantial nature of the work, we will also consider any honors or awards the work has received, reviews of publications in venues of reputable authority, and other professional recognition, such as citations of published work and course adoption. The academic perspective of the external evaluators should be congruent with the disciplinary orientation of the candidate. Whenever possible, assessments of a candidate’s scholarly/creative/professional production will take into account the objectives, aims, and priorities identified in the candidate’s narrative. For promotion to Professor, a significant shift in scholarly/creative/professional work should be explained in relation to the candidate’s previous work and/or discipline.

Given the time required for writing, revising, and submitting articles, book chapters and book manuscripts, and the often considerable time involved in the processes of editorial review and revision before a manuscript is accepted and a contract issued, we encourage faculty to be continuously engaged in the writing-and-publishing process, in order to build a history of significant publications by the time of the application for tenure or promotion. We encourage all candidates to be mindful of maintaining a balance in their professional development, including all areas of teaching, service, and scholarly/professional/creative work.

In the Discipline of Literature:

For tenure and promotion to Associate Professor

1. A book published or a final accepted manuscript with a contract-in-hand from an appropriate press (as defined above), OR
2. 5 substantial articles, judged as significant in the aggregate, in appropriate peer review journals (with which the faculty member doesn’t serve in an active editorial capacity, other than as an occasional reader of “blind” submissions or as an editorial board member). A combination of several substantial articles in peer-reviewed journals, with several essays published in books/anthologies edited by scholars active in one’s field may be considered equivalent to 5 substantial journal articles. For the essays in books/anthologies, a letter indicating when the book/anthology is forthcoming should be included.

In allowing for 5 substantial single-authored articles, we recognize that these works may vary as regards such aspects as length, degree of originality, and the nature of the candidate’s contribution to the discipline. For example, a shorter article recognized by peers in the field as truly path breaking might count as much as two longer articles, which, while substantial and valuable, might not have as wide an impact in the field. On the other hand, in the case of a collaboratively written article, the candidate’s contribution might or might not be equivalent to the writing of a substantial article. Considerations such as these will guide the reviewers’ decisions. 

For promotion to Professor

1. Evidence of an expanded body of notable scholarly work, such as a single-author book published or an accepted final manuscript with contract-in-hand from an appropriate press (as defined above), OR 
2. 5 substantial articles, judged as significant in the aggregate in appropriate journals (as defined above).

A combination of substantial pieces in different genres and media forming part of a single coherent project may supplement the candidate’s portfolio.

In all cases, concrete evidence that attests to the scholar’s leadership in the field should be demonstrated through continued publishing and also through such supplementary activities as journal editorship, service on boards of academic organizations, journal and tenure review panels. Other ways of demonstrating stature and/or innovation in the discipline may supplement the candidate’s case. Candidates engaged in such activities should make clear the nature of their contributions.

In the Discipline of Creative Writing:

For tenure and promotion to Associate Professor

A book published in hardcover, paper, or electronic format or a final accepted manuscript with a contract-in-hand from an appropriate press (as defined above).

For promotion to Professor:

1. Publication of an additional book in hardcover, paper, or electronic format or electronic publication from an appropriate press (as defined above), OR
2. A final accepted manuscript with a contract-in-hand from an appropriate press (as defined above).

A combination of substantial pieces in different genres and media forming part of a single coherent project may supplement the candidate’s portfolio.

In all cases, concrete evidence that attests to the faculty member’s leadership in the field should be demonstrated through continued publishing and also through such supplementary activities as journal editorship, service on boards of appropriate professional organizations, service on fellowship review panels, and other ways of demonstrating stature and/or innovation in the discipline. Candidates engaged in such activities should make clear the nature of their contributions.

In the Discipline of Publishing:

For tenure and promotion to Associate Professor

1. A book published in hardcover, paper, or electronic format or a final accepted manuscript with a contract-in-hand from an appropriate press (as defined above), OR
2. 5 substantial articles, judged as significant in the aggregate, appearing in appropriate publications, as described above (with which the faculty member doesn’t serve in an active editorial capacity, other than as an occasional reader of “blind” submissions or as an editorial board member). A combination of several substantial articles in peer-reviewed journals, with several essays published in books/anthologies edited by people active in one’s field may be considered equivalent to 5 substantial journal articles. For the essays in books/anthologies, a letter indicating when the book/anthology is forthcoming should be included.
   
   In allowing for 5 substantial articles, we recognize that these works may vary as regards such aspects as length, degree of originality, and the nature of the candidate’s contribution to the discipline. For example, a shorter article recognized by peers in the field as truly path breaking might count as much as two longer articles, which, while substantial and valuable, might not have as wide an impact in the field. On the other hand, in the case of a collaboratively written article, the candidate’s contribution might or might not be equivalent to the writing of a substantial article. Considerations such as these will guide the reviewers’ decisions. OR
3. Significant work in the field of publishing in which the candidate was hired, including the broader areas of book publishing, magazine publishing, or electronic publishing, as well as the more specific subsets of editing, writing, design and production, marketing and sales, the business of publishing, etc., or some combination of such activities. Significant work is demonstrated through a sustained professional practice: the number and range of client commissions, stature of the project (importance to the client, innovative for the client), stature of the clients involved (author, publisher or publication, editor, etc.), distribution (national, if not international), and/or scope of involvement in the determination of the project (ability to influence or determine project details, collaboration with project team, etc.).(1)

For promotion to Professor

1. Evidence of an expanded body of notable scholarly work, such as a single-author book published or an accepted final manuscript with contract-in-hand from an appropriate press, as defined above; or 5 substantial articles, judged as significant in the aggregate in appropriate journals (as defined above), OR
2. Continued engagement in the field of publishing (as described in (iii) above), with evidence of the impact of the work itself and its contribution. Significant work is demonstrated through a sustained professional practice: the number and range of client commissions, stature of the project (importance to the client, innovative for the client), stature of the clients involved (author, publisher or publication, editor, etc.), distribution (national, if not international), and/or scope of involvement in the determination of the project (ability to influence or determine project details, collaboration with project team, etc.). Significant recognition can be demonstrated through having obtained awards, favorable reviews for the work produced, invited presentations or juries, exhibits, and/or fellowships.(2)

A combination of substantial pieces in different genres and media forming part of a single coherent project may supplement the candidate’s portfolio.

In all cases, concrete evidence that attests to the faculty member’s leadership in the field should be demonstrated through sustained professional practice and also through such supplementary activities as journal editorship, serving on boards of appropriate professional organizations, serving on fellowship review panels, and other ways of demonstrating stature and/or innovation in the discipline. Candidates engaged in such activities should make clear the nature of their contributions.

In the Discipline of Composition and Writing Studies:

For tenure and promotion to Associate Professor

1. A book published or a final accepted manuscript with a contract-in-hand from an appropriate press, as defined above, OR
2. 5 substantial articles, judged as significant in the aggregate, in appropriate journals as defined above (with which the faculty member doesn’t serve in an active editorial capacity, other than as an occasional reader of “blind” submissions or as an editorial board member).

A combination of several substantial articles in peer-reviewed journals, with several essays published in books/anthologies edited by people active in one’s field may be considered equivalent to 5 substantial journal articles. For the essays in books/anthologies, a letter indicating when the book/anthology is forthcoming should be included.

In allowing for 5 substantial single authored articles, we recognize that these works may vary as regards such aspects as length, degree of originality, and the nature of the candidate’s contribution to the discipline. For example, a shorter article recognized by peers in the field as truly path breaking might count as much as two longer articles, which, while substantial and valuable, might not have as wide an impact in the field. On the other hand, in the case of a collaboratively written article, the candidate’s contribution might or might not be equivalent to the writing of a substantial article. Considerations such as these will guide the reviewers’ decisions.

For promotion to Professor

1. Evidence of an expanded body of notable scholarly work, such as a single-author book published or an accepted final manuscript with contract-in-hand from an appropriate press (as defined above), OR
2. 5 substantial articles, judged as significant in the aggregate in appropriate journals (as defined above).

A combination of substantial pieces in different genres and media forming part of a single coherent project may supplement the candidate’s portfolio.

In all cases, concrete evidence that attests to the scholar’s leadership in the field should be demonstrated through continued publishing and also through such supplementary activities as journal editorship, service on boards of academic organizations, journal and tenure review panels, and other ways of demonstrating stature and/or innovation in the discipline. Candidates engaged in such activities should make clear the nature of their contributions.

Service

For Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor

Recognizing the obligation of tenured faculty to take major responsibility for faculty governance, we believe untenured colleagues should not be overburdened with departmental service. Beginning in the second year, we expect all faculty to provide service to the department, through service on department committees, and to the College.

For Promotion to Professor

The candidate should have demonstrated leadership in the department and on college-wide committees. Evidence of significant service to one’s discipline is also expected. See the statements for each discipline in sections 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, and 1.2.4.

Civic Engagement Statement

WLP values engaged scholarship and creative work that produces different forms of knowledge and professional or artistic work about, for, and with diverse publics and communities. Engaged scholarship and professional or creative work might take a variety of forms (e.g. contributing new knowledge, synthesizing existing knowledge in new ways, creating new approaches to apply existing knowledge) and be disseminated in a variety of ways. Engaged scholarship and/or creative work is not required for Tenure and Promotion. It may be in included in a candidate's case for Tenure and/or Promotion, but it may not substitute for the standards of scholarship and creative and professional work designated for each area in WLP-creative writing, literature, publishing, and composition and writing studies.

Enclosure

American Institute of Graphic Arts (AIGA) and Design Educators Community (DEC) Statements on Promotion and Tenure of Design Educators. November 30, 2010

Introduction

The purpose of this information resource is to provide guidance to those involved with Promotion and Tenure (P&T) processes of Graphic Design and Visual Communication Design Educators at US institutions of higher learning.

This resource is not meant to address all possible topics and issues related to the P&T process. The provided information should assist in dealing with issues commonly involved in the P&T process, and will provide suggestions on which policies and procedures may be based, at the discretion of the institution.

AIGA DEC can in no way be held responsible for the use of this information within any P&T processes conducted by institutions of higher learning, or in the outcomes of any such processes. The information provided is for advisement only, and must be interpreted by those responsible for P&T processes at individual institutions.

Various Models of Promotion and Tenure

AIGA DEC recognizes that a variety of models for P&T of Design Educators exist in different types of US institutions of higher learning. For example, some private art and design schools do not follow formal P&T processes, but do use a form of annual review and assessment related to continued appointment of Design faculty.

State-supported universities, on the other hand, tend to follow similar P&T processes, but may vary in how much importance they place on the different criteria for evaluation. Likewise, private universities may also follow similar P&T processes, but at times vary widely on how they implement certain aspects of the process.

While there are benefits to the variety of P&T processes conducted, AIGA DEC urges institutions of higher learning to consider the specific needs of Design Educators, and to craft processes that provide objective, fair and balanced evaluations of their contributions to the design disciplines.

General Evaluation Criteria for Design Faculty

AIGA DEC urges institutions to construct appropriate means for Educators to document results of their Teaching, Creative Work/Research/Scholarship, Service, and Strategic Initiatives efforts, and for peers to review that evidence in P&T processes. Below are commonly-held standards for each evaluation category:

• Teaching: Evidence of excellence in teaching should be demonstrated by Design Educators in P&T processes. Course syllabi, hand-outs, presentation materials, results of student work, student evaluations of courses, etc. are often presented in this area.
• Creative Work/Research/Scholarship: Evidence of excellence in creative work (including most professional practice activities), research and/or scholarship should be demonstrated by Design Educators in P&T processes. Project work, creative work for exhibition and/or competitions, written papers or articles for publication, conference presentation materials, books, awards, etc. are often presented in this area.
• Service: Evidence of excellence in service to the community, institution and the profession should be demonstrated by Design Educators in P&T processes. Activities associated with community outreach efforts, institutional committee work, service to student groups, service to professional societies, etc. are often presented in this area.
• Strategic Initiatives: Evidence of substantial involvement in initiatives determined to be of strategic value to institutions, such as Collaborative Studies, Interdisciplinary Studies, Sustainability Studies, etc., may be demonstrated by Design Educators in P&T processes. Activities associated with such initiatives are often presented in this area.

Relative importance of the above criteria: AIGA DEC recognizes that institutions may weigh the relative importance of Teaching, Creative Work/Research/Scholarship, Service, and Strategic Initiatives in different manners as appropriate to their various missions. AIGA DEC urges institutions to make such expectations clear to Design Educators at the time of their appointments to academic positions.

A special note on publication venues: AIGA DEC urges institutions to recognize nontraditional means of dissemination of Creative Work/Research/Scholarship activities by Design Educators. Venues typical to other academic fields, such as print-based, peer-reviewed journals, have traditionally held limited opportunities for Design Educators. Emerging means of publication via electronic media should also be recognized as valid outlets for Creative Work/Research/Scholarship activities. Peer-reviewed acceptance procedures are preferred, but recognition of the publication venue and its reach to the field should also be considered.

Specific Evaluation Criteria for Design Faculty Compared to Fine Art Faculty and Communications Faculty

AIGA DEC recognizes that many Graphic Design and Visual Communication Design programs are often paired with the Fine Arts or Communications in administrative structures, such as Departments or Schools of Art, or Departments or Schools of Communications or Journalism. However, AIGA DEC recommends that specific P&T criteria for Design Educators be, whenever possible, considered along with general criteria used for evaluation of these other types of educators.

The goals and outcomes of the typical Design Educator’s teaching and research efforts are often quite different from those of other educators, and must be considered in that context. Results of Design teaching are often specifically practice based, and must prepare students for future roles in the profession. Issues relating to developing student work appropriate for the use of intended audiences often outweigh traditional artistic concerns. Similarly, results of Design Educators’ research efforts should not be bound solely to traditional models of exhibition or publication typical to those employed by Fine Arts or Communications Educators.

Appropriate Roles and Uses of External Evaluations

AIGA DEC recognizes that evaluators from outside of an institution provide an important role in the P&T process, but suggests that their roles be limited to assessment of Creative Work, Research and Scholarship activities only. As external evaluators are not exposed to the day-to-day teaching and service roles of an assessed Design Educator, it is not appropriate for institutions to expect evaluation of the quality of such activities

As well, it is generally not appropriate for institutions to ask external evaluators to render opinions concerning the viability of a Design Educator for P&T, as such opinions are, by their nature, formed via partial information. External evaluators should be provided with any applicable P&T documentation that sets the context of how Creative Work, Research and Scholarship activities efforts are defined and valued by the institution.

AIGA DEC suggests that external evaluators for P&T processes should be chosen from peer Design Educators of higher rank at comparable institutions. Therefore, Design Educators currently at the Assistant Professor level should be evaluated externally by Associate or Full Professors. Likewise, Associate Professors should be evaluated externally by Full Professors only. In some cases evaluators from professional practice may participate in P&T processes, but only if their academic credentials are equivalent to those of external Design Educators of the appropriate rank.

The number of external evaluators solicited will vary in different institutions, but AIGA DEC suggests that the range be from six to eight. Any less can be seen as not comprehensive, and any more may become a burden to other educators and institutions.

Mid-term P+T reviews

Many institutions conduct a formal review around the mid-point of a P+T process, typically in year three or four of a six-year, probationary period for non-tenured faculty members. In many institutions such reviews are often considered to be a “rehearsal” for the eventual P+T review, and can result in the dismissal of faculty who receive significantly negative reviews. As mentioned above, AIGA DEC urges institutions to make the process of any mid-term P+T reviews clear, including how Teaching, Creative Work/Research/Scholarship, Service, and Strategic Initiatives will be evaluated.

Promotion from Associate Professor to Full Professor

After promotion to the position of Associate Professor with tenure, faculty members will typically go through another evaluation process for promotion to Full Professor. As the number of years occurring between these two P&T processes can vary widely within institutions, AIGA DEC suggests that a clear policy pertaining to the expected time period between reviews be communicated. It is also critical that any expected criteria for promotion to Full Professor be made clear, such as a significant national and/or international reputation in the discipline.

MFA (or Equivalent) as the Terminal Degree; Other Degrees

AIGA DEC urges institutions to recognize the MFA (Master of Fine Arts) and/or equivalent degrees as the terminal degree qualification for US Design Educators, especially in the case of current, full-time appointments. However, some Design Educators may possess graduate-level degrees that were conferred prior to the wider adoption of the MFA as the terminal degree, such as the MA (Master of Arts), or the MS (Master of Science).

In addition, some Design Educators may not hold graduate-level degrees at all, but have many years of full-time teaching experience and peer-recognized professional practice. AIGA DEC urges institutions to recognize the contributions of current Design Educators regardless of degree held, and to provide flexibility on this matter in P&T processes, as appropriate.

Finally, while a small number of Ph.D programs in specialized areas of Design (History, Theory, Criticism, Research, etc.) do currently exist, it would be unreasonable for US institutions to require any degree higher than the MFA or equivalent as a condition of appointment, or as a condition of P&T.

Special Considerations for Community College Educators

AIGA DEC recognizes that Community College or other two-year institutions may not follow formal P&T processes, but may conduct annual performance reviews of Design Educators related to continued appointment. AIGA DEC urges such institutions to interpret the statements included here as appropriate, and to craft processes that provide fair and balanced evaluations of Community College Design Educators and their contributions.

Special Considerations for Part-Time Faculty

AIGA DEC recognizes that institutions may not follow formal P&T processes with Part-Time Faculty, but may conduct annual performance reviews related to continued appointment. AIGA DEC urges all institutions to interpret the statements included here as appropriate, and to craft processes that provide fair and balanced evaluations of Part-Time Design Educators and their contributions. Recognition of long-time service by Part-Time Design Educators should occur by conferring an appropriate title (Senior Lecturer, Adjunct Associate Professor, etc.), and by providing a higher rate of pay in comparison to Part-Time Design Educators with lesser years of service.

Special Considerations for International Faculty in the US

AIGA DEC recognizes that International Design Educators working in the US may have responsibilities beyond the P&T processes typically found in most institutions. As one example, Work Visa restrictions may make paid consulting impossible for International Design Educators, and any P&T requirements for such activities would therefore be unreasonable. AIGA DEC urges all institutions to provide appropriate support to International Design Educators related to Work Visas, Immigration Status, Citizenship, etc., and to appropriately assist with continuation of their employment in the US.

Notes

(1) For design work, see the Enclosure: American Institute of Graphic Arts (AIGA) and Design Educators Community (DEC) Statements on Promotion and Tenure of Design Educators.

(2) If from a design perspective, note the following: Because publishing design work is rarely created for or shown in gallery settings, the traditional rubrics of invitational and one-person shows cannot be applied generally to all design faculty. Further, entry and hanging fees for design competitions and exhibitions can be hundreds of dollars for each piece, raising questions about the efficacy of broad-based submission to garner a few résumé entries. There are still only two refereed design journals in the United States. Their content addresses an array of design disciplines, reducing the odds of publication of graphic design writing and research. Graphic design faculty face the difficult task of securing publication opportunities outside their discipline. As a result, the number of national and international opportunities for peer review are few. Design faculty’s work is thus visible in their professional practice (as defined in In the Discipline of Publishing, For Tenure and Promotion to Associate Professor, #2, above).